Scotland in the late 17th century was in a much diminished economic state—gripped by war, crop failure resulting in famine while the nation was being done down by unrelenting English mercantilism«𝖆»—bringing the kingdom to crisis point. Various solutions were proposed and some explored, however attempts at forging settlements on the American eastern coast (Nova Scotia, New Jersey, the Carolinas) had not gone to plan and were largely unsuccessful.
A man with a plan: A daringly ambitious plan proposed by Scottish financial adventurer William Paterson envisaged the establishment of a colony on the narrow but strategically and logistically important Isthmus of Panama…it was to be a free trade port which would capitalise on the lucrative trade between east and west. The Dumfriesshire-born banker believed that this remote strip of land could hold the “door of the seas, and the key of the universe” which would facilitate the passage of Scottish-made goods across the world [‘Scotland and Darien’ Exhibition (2011), National Library of Scotland, www.nls.uk]. Paterson’s idea was to establish an overland route across the isthmus which connected the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, thus obviating the need for merchant ships to make the long and costly voyage around the southern tip of the American continent«𝖇», a coup for the struggling Scottish economy if it came to realisation.
The Darién Scheme, as it was known, was embraced enthusiastically by the majority of Scots who in large numbers rushed to subscribe to the Scottish venture in central America. Faith in the project rested on the collective hope that it would be provide a way out of the economic morass, an opportunity for the Scotch people to control their own destiny by turning round the country’s flagging economic fortunes, and hopefully a path to prosperity.
The Company of Scots: In 1698, under the aegis of the Company of Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies, the first group of settlers left Scotland and established an outpost called “New Caledonia” (capital: New Edinburgh), in the southern part of modern-day Panama known as the Darién Gap. They were followed by a second expedition in 1699, both failed abjectly to sustain the settlement and by early 1700 it had been abandoned and levelled to the ground.
New Caledonia ’s demise was due to an aggregation of various factors, including poor planning and the vicissitudes of nature. Virtually from the get-go there was problems with New Caledonia…first, incessant rain for weeks on end made it impossible to do anything, then after a short period it became apparent that supplies for the venture were vastly inadequate, threatening the settlement’s viability. Climatic conditions and the geophysical landscape in Darién made the construction of buildings and infrastructure difficult and the colonists also found the land, dense with impenetrable jungle, unsuitable for agriculture. With no homegrown crops the leaders had to resort to trade, which exposed another glaring example of the Darién Scheme’s woeful planning: no money had been allocated to the New Caledonian leadership to purchase essential provisions«𝖈».
Another setback for the colony was the discovery that New Caledonia’s harbour was not as suitable as first thought. The harbour was susceptible to prevailing winds from the Gulf of Darién, which made it hard for trading ships anchored there to depart [Novak, Michael (2018) “On Tartan Tides: The Failure and Legacy of the Darien Scheme,” Political Analysis: Vol. 19, Article 7.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.70531/2474-2295.1043]. The Scottish settlement was also laid low by rampant disease in a tropical climate that was totally unfamiliar to Northern Hemispherers. Malaria, yellow fever and dysentery claimed hundreds and hundreds of Scottish lives in the 18 months of New Caledonia’s existence, contributing significantly to the settlement’s instability to take root.
What this litany of problems and obstacles highlight is the egregious omission by the scheme’s planners in not first reconnoitring the location for the planned outpost. No one associated with the enterprise seems to have ever been to the Gulf of Darién beforehand «𝖉». The Company of Scotland initiated and the settlers signed up for a major enterprise in a place that was a complete mystery to them (Novak).
External factors: England and to a lesser extent Spain were players in the drama, doing what they could to undermine the Scottish venture. The Scots earned the ire of the Spanish kingdom by settling on land deemed to be part of Spain’s empire in the New World. Madrid’s hostility manifested itself in threats of military action and a blockade, culminating in an attack on New Edinburgh, resulting in the expulsion of the remaining Scots settlers in March 1700. The English role in opposing the Darién Scheme was more pervasive. The English Crown and the English East India Company, concerned that if the Scottish colony were to succeed it might endanger England’s established trade routes to and from the Indies, took every available step it could to sabotage the Darién venture from the start…would-be English investors in the scheme withdrew their financial backing; William III proclaimed a blanket embargo on New Caledonia (forbidding the English colonies in North America and the Caribbean from trading with it); Dutch merchants were threatened with embargo if they traded with the Scottish company [‘The Darien Venture’, Mike Ibeji, BBC, (Upd. 17-Feb-2011), www.bbc.co.uk].
Divided we fall: Another important factor in the settlement’s eventual collapse was mismanagement. The colony’s leadership, a seven-man council appointed to govern the fledgling settlement, failed abjectly. Rive with internal dissension and factionalised, the leaders’ constant quarrelling and indecisiveness left the colonists disillusioned and contributed largely to the erosion of any sense of community the New Caledonians may have felt (Novak).
Scotland with Hobson’s choice: The Darién debacle precipitated a severe economic crisis in Scotland, plunging the kingdom into near bankruptcy. The Company of Scotland lost over £232,000 including the life savings of many thousands of ordinary Scots (Ibeji). A crisis ensued. The Panama disaster left Scotland vulnerable to pressure from England which eventually forced it to play its weak hand, signing up to a “united kingdom” which came about by via the 1707 Union Act: Scotland lost its Parliament and was absorbed into “Great Britain” as very much the junior partner to England. With the political union enacted, Westminster (Parliament) picked up the bill for Scotland’s national debt, dissolving the Company of Scotland and reimbursing the Scheme’s subscribers (known as “the Equivalent”)«𝖊».
«𝖆» in the 1690s the Scots were well and truly being worked over by English mercantilism – Scotland had no reciprocal export trade with southern neighbour (it was compelled to buy English goods it needed); its industries, like shipbuilding (once flourishing but now in decline) could not compete with English industries
«𝖇» the plan was essentially a sound one in theory but Paterson and his associates were blissfully ignorant of the mosquito-ridden jungle that such a route would need to traverse
«𝖈» the settlers’ “Plan B”, trading combs, mirrors and wigs with the local native tribes for food, fell flat when the indigenous groups showed no interest in the Scots’ trinkets
«𝖉» it is unclear if Paterson himself ever visited the location in his buccaneering days but if he did, he came away with a grotesquely optimistic and false sense of what it was really like
«𝖊» indirectly arising out of this process, the Royal Bank of Scotland came to be formed
🏴 🏴 🏴