Captain Peter Wallace | |
---|---|
Born | before 1630s |
Died | after 1630s colonial Belize (presumed) |
Known for | founding the first English settlement in the Bay of Honduras in 1638 |
Piratical career | |
Type | Buccaneer |
Years active | 1630s |
Rank | Captain |
Base of operations | |
Commands | Swallow |
Peter Wallace (fl. 1638) is commonly held to have been an English or Scottish buccaneer who, in 1638 aboard the Swallow, founded the first English settlement in present-day Belize. Wallace's historicity is debated, first emerging in the 1829 Honduras Almanack; however, several scholars deem him a legendary protagonist of the country's founding myth, rather than an actual historical figure.
In 1638, Wallace is believed to have landed at Swallow Caye aboard the Swallow, with a crew of some 80 British men. This is often regarded as the first non-Maya, non-Hispanic settlement in present-day Belize.[1][note 1]
Wallace became the subject of local buccaneering myths and legends by at least the 1830s, emerging from the 1829 Honduras Almanack.[2] Swallow Caye is believed to be named after the Swallow.[3] Similarly, the 'Belize' toponym is commonly held to be a Spanish-mediated corruption of 'Wallace' or 'Wallis.'[4][note 2][note 3]
The earliest mention of Wallace in print is thought to be that of the Honduras Almanack for 1829, which noted that 'Wallice' was a 'Lieutenant among the Bucaniers who formerly infested these seas [the Bay of Honduras] ... [and who] first discovered the mouth of the River Belize.'[5][6][note 4] The same publication gave further notice of Wallace in 1839, now noting –
Belize owes its origin to a Scotch Corsair Chief of the name of Wallace, a native of Falkland in Kinrosshire. At the time that these formidable pirates were driven from Tortuga, a small island situated a few miles north of St. Domingo [Haiti], Wallace[,] to escape from the just vengeance of the Spaniards[,] fled for security amongs [sic] the numerous islands on the coast of Yucatan and finally settled at the mouth of the River Belize. Here[,] after many vicissitudes both by sea and land[,] Wallace fixed his residence, [and] erected a few log huts and a small fortalice, which stood on the site now occupied by the handsome premises of Messrs. Boitias and Delande.
This information was promptly popularised by John Lloyd Stephens, who, on 30 October 1839, landed in Belize with Frederick Catherwood en route to Maya ruins in Guatemala, further enriched by Justo Sierra O'Reilly on 5 September 1849, and repeated throughout scholarly and lay literature of the 19th century.[9][10][11][note 5] By 1883, an historian described the state of affairs thus –
A halo of romance surrounds the early history of British Honduras, legend assigning this region as the scene of many a daring exploit, many a riotous orgie, in the good old times when the adventurous sons of Albion roamed the Caribbean, partly under the protection of their own dreaded black flag, and sometimes under that of the country of their birth, [...]. The central hero of this romance was a Scottish rover named Wallace, or Wallis, "who so distinguished himself," naively remarks the Honduras Almanac fifty-six years ago, "by acts of bravery and desperation that his name became a terror to the Spaniards."
— Archibald Gibbs in 1883.[12]
A number of competing theories regarding Wallace's identity and arrival to Belize were proffered in the 20th century.[13]
Recent, 21st century literature has tended towards agnosticism regarding the identity and historicity of Wallace.[17] However, some scholars have deemed this trend 'incorrect,' arguing that Wallace is demonstrably apocryphal.[17][21][22] Most notably, historians Barbara and Victor Bulmer-Thomas argued in 2016 that the Baymen George Westby and Thomas Pickstock, and the Jamaican historian George Wilson Bridges, disseminated the account of Wallace's founding of Belize in the 1820s, despite lacking primary sources.[23] They further note, 'an extensive search for a buccaneer called 'Wallace,' 'Wallice' or 'Willis' in the 17th century reveals not surprisingly that there was no such person.'[24] This analysis was further supported by historian Matthew Restall who conducted his own research and concluded that 'if Wallace had existed, there would at least be one mention of him in seventeenth or eighteenth-century sources. But there is not even a passing mention of a Wallace in any of the printed sources from the era.'[25]