The economic crisis of 1890 and the parallel political upheaval in many ways mark—symbolically—the beginning of modern Argentine history. The collapse of the economic bubble threatened to create havoc in Britain; and Argentina’s first modern political party, the Unión Cívica Radical, emerged from the wreckage. We still have a lot to learn about the nature of the economic system and the functioning of oligarchic political structures during this crucial transitional period.
In writing about Carlos Pellegrini’s role during this era, Douglas Richmond claims that although Pellegrini was president for only two years, 1890-1892, he greatly influenced government policies and had considerable success at restoring financial viability. Richmond also sets out to illuminate three additional topics: the country’s relationship with Europe, the rise of Argentine nationalism, and the relationship between Pellegrini and Julio Roca, the era’s dominant political figure. Despite Richmond’s best efforts, however, Pellegrini remains an important but secondary figure, outshone by others. During his presidency it was Roca who conducted the political dealmaking, for example; including the choice of Pellegrini’s successor. Other politicians also carried more weight, as Richmond’s discussion of events makes clear. Still, an analysis of a secondary figure can illuminate an era; but this does not happen here to the extent that it should.
While the book pivots around Pellegrini, it is not a biography. We learn almost nothing about Pellegrini the man. Nor can we trace clearly his political views and how they changed over time. Even Pellegrini’s ideas are not fully explored. Richmond concentrates heavily on Pellegrini’s two years as president, recounting the efforts made to restore financial soundness and the political maneuverings. But he provides little in the way of context; he does not explain how politics functioned, who voted, or who counted the votes. Instead, big figures operate as if in a vacuum. This may stem from the type of sources used: while Richmond has done an exemplary job of mining the national archives, what he has found are the papers of important men writing to each other. He includes little information gleaned from newspapers, which could have placed the material in a wider context. Some of the generalizations seem careless: for example, Richmond asserts, “foreign-born members of the middle class, frustrated in expanding their businesses or obtaining jobs, eventually became the most important group within the Radicals” (p. 80). Given that few foreigners became citizens and only thereby could vote, this statement is extremely dubious. We also learn little about the book’s other major topics, the development of nationalism and Argentina’s relationship with Europe.
While Richmond tells a good deal about Pellegrini’s presidency, his contribution to our understanding of a vital transitional era for Argentina is somewhat disappointing. He does not present a wide enough vision of the context or a convincing argument for Pellegrini’s overall importance.
