Despite its importance, then and later, as a focal point for world commercial and strategic calculations, Panama in the nineteenth century remains substantially a historical unknown. In this volume, a young Panamanian sociologist-historian, educated in France and Belgium, seeks to fill in some blanks by examining aspects of the Isthmian ruling class during the eighty-two years of Colombian domination.
For almost three decades after gaining independence from Spain and uniting with Colombia, Panama suffered economic depression. This was especially distressing to the tightly knit, “white” oligarchy of Panama City, which blamed its plight on the restrictive legislation of Bogotá’s centralist governments, and became convinced that prosperity depended on “liberal,” internationalist policies that would turn the Isthmus into a feria comercial. As that elite became more intertwined commercially and legally with foreign elements, it pressed increasingly for a federalist system and provoked several separatist attempts, nearly all aimed at economic revival.
The start of the Gold Rush in California and railroad construction in 1849, and the winning of local rule in 1855, provided an opportunity to test the oligarchical model and achieve the nationalist dream. It never worked. Much of the wealth generated by “la California” either passed through untouched or went to foreign, mostly North American, investors who came to dominate the Isthmian economy. Only in the area of real estate did the relatively unadventurous oligarchy turn a good profit. But, in the process, they witnessed the rise of socioracial tensions as new and old nonwhite groups became more aggressive. Then, in 1869, the boom ended.
French canal building in the 1880s brought only temporary relief, and the Colombian Constitution of 1886 terminated the federalist experiment. Consequently, the urban elite, now joined by their rural cousins, reached the end of the century without either economic or political fulfillment. Alienated from the leadership in Bogotá, they were ready to cooperate with French agitators and American imperialists for another shot at glory. Again they would be at least partially frustrated: those outside the oligarchy, even more so.
The book suffers from wordiness, awkward writing, and imbalance (the post-1849 period merits only 30 percent of the text). The sources consulted and properly footnoted are impressive, however, and the description of the oligarchy, its size, interconnectedness, interests, and ideas is most valuable.
