Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
Este trabajo aporta información acerca de la cronología y distribución de las mayólicas panameñas, a partir de los datos obtenidos en las excavaciones que se realizan en Panamá La Vieja (1519–1671) y en otros sitios coloniales del continente. Incluye una referencia a los aspectos estilísticos de los tipos definidos, y analiza la incidencia de cada uno de ellos en perspectiva diacrónica. Nuevos datos de localidades con mayólica panameña, permiten circunscribir su distribución a la vertiente pacífica (desde Guatemala hasta Chile), contribuyendo a la verificación de la hipótesis enunciada por Florence y Robert Lister (1974). El trabajo intenta explicar la ausencia significativa de mayólicas producidas en la ciudad de Panamá (costa pacífica del istmo), en las localidades de la costa atlántica, en contraposición a la constante presencia de cerámicas europeas en la ciudad de Panamá (las cuales, durante el auge de la industria local, alcanzaron frecuencias de alrededor del 20%). Tal situación no podría ser entendida tomando únicamente en consideración el alto costo de los fletes transístmicos (los cuales afectaban por igual ambas vías): ante el mismo valor agregado, resultaba socialmente deseable adquirir las mayólicas europeas en la ciudad de Panamá, mas no las panameñas en Portobelo. Resulta clara la existencia de valoraciones sociales diferenciales entre las mayólicas locales versus europeas, modeladoras de preferencias estéticas y hábitos de consumo.
The Panamanian production of majolica has been a theme of interest in American historical archeology for a long time. This paper provides information about its temporal and spatial associations, based on data obtained from excavations at the site of Old Panama (1519-1671), and in other colonial sites of Latin America. It includes a brief summary of stylistic aspects of the three Panamanian majolica types, Panamá Liso, Panamá Polícromo, and Panamá Azul sobre Blanco, and draws on data from controlled stratified contexts to analyze the chronological placement of each style. Panamá Liso, the only Panamanian type present in the earliest contexts so far known (at the end of the sixteenth century), maintained its presence throughout. Starting at the beginning of the seventeenth century, Panamá Polícromo and Panamá Azul sobre Blanco appeared and increased in frequency. At the end of the occupation of Panamá La Vieja, these three Panamanian types represented 80 percent of the total of tin enameled earthenware. New data on the presence of Panamanian majolica at other sites indicate that it was distributed along the Pacific watershed (from Guatemala to Chile), supporting the hypothesis proposed by Florence and Robert Lister in 1974. This paper will attempt to explain the absence of majolica produced in Panama City (located on the Pacific coast of the isthmus) in areas of the Atlantic coast, in contrast to the presence of European tin enameled earthenware in Panama City (which at the height of local industry, reached frequencies of about 20 percent of the total of ceramics of that category). This situation cannot be explained by the high cost of transisthmian cargo shipments alone (which was the same for shipments in both directions). Rather, it was socially desirable to acquire the European majolicas in the city of Panama, but not Panamanian majolicas in Portobelo. Clearly there were differing social values at play between local and European majolicas, shaping esthetic preferences and consumer habits.