This book is a most interesting addition to the study of the social history of Latin America in general, and Panama in particular. Published under the auspices of the Seminar on Sociology and Social History of the Universidad Santa María La Antigua, the work was designed to be a “manual” for Panamanian students. However, the author has done a job far beyond his initial intent.
Los grupos populares is a compilation of occupational statistics of a major sector of Panama City, namely the barrios outside San Felipe parish and centered on Santa Ana, Calidonia, Marañón, and Guachapalí, inhabited by those who could not afford San Felipe’s housing and thus partake of its social prestige in the late 1800s. In fact, according to Figueroa Navarro’s charts—more than 40 those barrios had a major function, which was to serve as the transition point of numerous immigrants who came to the city mostly because of the canal construction.
This work is interesting for several reasons. In the first place, the author has exploited seldom-used public and private records to deal with an aspect of history that is greatly needed to comprehend the sweep of the past. As a teaching guide, Figueroa Navarro’s manual could not have been better. Secondly, his methodology has been adapted mostly from the Armales school, attempting to incorporate into our knowledge of the past everything except the inquilinos of presidential residences, a frequent theme of Panamanian historiography and one which Figueroa Navarro wants his students to deemphasize. Then, the comprehensive information about everyday life is clearly presented: who people were, their origin, ethnocultural background, occupation, and living conditions compared with those of the elite; what they looked like, mostly through photographs, and age at death, and, most appreciated, comparative data on the value of real estate in San Felipe and Santa Ana. Additionally, the author includes lean but incisive and welcome comments on his methodology, as well as on the statistics presented.
In brief, Figueroa Navarro, as historian and teacher, has accomplished fully his intention of presenting the social structure of Panama City’s arrabales, confirming once again the dichotomy intramuros-extramuros, a major historical characteristic of the city, and a reflection of the nation at large. My only discordant comment is that the book should have had an index.
