The Scottish Overseas Empire

William Paterson knew his history. New Scotland (Nova Scotia) had failed catastrophically two generations earlier, but Paterson had the firm conviction that he had learned from the nation’s previous mistakes.

This time, it would be different. This time, Scotland would have an overseas empire, just like the other big players in Europe.

Unlike the previous attempt, this plan centered around trade rather than mere settlement, leveraging Scotland's growing financial acumen.

Paterson’s audacious scheme seemed sensible at the time. After all, he had just helped found the Bank of England, and the numbers seemed like they would work. Paterson and some friends began to devise a way to raise the gargantuan sum of money they’d need.

The concept behind the venture was awe inspiring and mind-bending. The idea was to connect the world’s two biggest oceans together by way of a free trade hub at one of the shortest points—the Isthmus of Darien. In the 1690s, this was a particularly ambitious idea, given the global significance of maritime trade routes and the growing importance of access to the Americas.

Today, the nation of Panama sits where Scotland’s overseas possession once sat, and there’s a pretty famous canal there. Paterson’s scheme did not involve a canal, although canals were well known in Scotland at the time. Instead, the narrowness of the isthmus meant that goods could potentially be transported overland from one ocean to the other more easily than sailing around the southern tip of South America, which was a long and perilous journey.

If Scotland could pull this off, they would ultimately create one of the most important trade hubs in the world. The would control the lion’s share of commerce between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans (unless someone wanted to journey around South America, adding another month or two to the voyage (and plenty of death).

Spoiler alert: Scotland did not pull this off.

Instead, the Scottish expedition faced existential challenges right from the start. Sustaining the settlement—just getting a foothold in the region and surviving—was an important first step, but it was an ugly, uphill battle on a steep, slippery slope.

Diseases in the Americas found virgin immune systems in the Scots. Malaria and yellow fever tore through the population relentlessly, decimating the numbers of settlers.

Whatever provisions they had brought from Europe spoiled in the new, unfamiliar environment (Scotland isn’t known for being tropically hot and humid). A near complete lack of knowledge of local crops virtually ensured there would be no consistent or predictable sustenance. People began to die of malnutrition and starvation, many of them already weakened by disease.

And, while all of this was happening, Spain prepared to act forcefully. You probably already know all about Spain’s colonial empire, by now the largest and most powerful in the world. They were not about to sit this one out.

Spain controlled much of Central and South America, and they naturally saw the Scottish colony as an encroachment on their territory. Isolated incidents where Spanish soldiers and the Scottish settlers clashed led to bigger military confrontations.

Even worse, England provided little to no support for the Scottish venture. They had their hands full with ginger diplomatic relations with Spain, making such a move overly provocative.

So, the colony sat in isolation, steadily eroding into nothingness.

As bad as this failure was, it got a whole lot worse for Scotland.

Based on William Paterson’s reputation and recommendations, the majority of the Scottish nobility and merchant class had invested heavily in the venture. Suddenly, Scotland was on the brink of bankruptcy. Suddenly, Scotland needed England.

England, meanwhile, was pretty all right with this development. They saw an opportunity to stabilize relations with their neighbor to the north for the fist time in… well, ever. Meanwhile, England could kill two birds with one stone: they needed an ally against France.

This is how the Act of Union in 1707 came to be.

For Scotland, the union offered economic salvation. England agreed to assume a significant portion of Scotland's national debt, and promised equal economic and trade opportunities for the Scots.

Understandably, the decision was contentious and faced opposition from various Scottish factions who viewed it as a loss of national sovereignty.

Despite this, the Scottish Parliament, under immense pressure and with the promise of economic recovery, ratified the Act of Union. This historic decision dissolved the Scottish Parliament and led to the creation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, fundamentally altering the course of Scottish and British history.

Were you as taken aback as I was when you learned that Scotland had a colony in Panama? How different would history be if Scotland and England had not joined forces in 1707?