Current scholarly literature on indigeneity is largely preoccupied with two primary themes: a spiritual connection to the land and the experience of colonial oppression.1 While these frameworks are vital, they often fail to account for indigenous groups that do not fit as neatly into these categories, specifically those who may be exploitative or even perpetrators of colonial violence against other indigenous groups. This project seeks to expand the definition of indigeneity by examining the Comanche Empire as a case study in global agency. As well as arguing this case, this project seeks to double as a call to action for international NGO’s and governments to implement more representative environmental and cultural policies for indigenous communities. For too long they have been seen as ‘separate’ as ‘others’ who were passive in the formation and running of our global colonial system. The Comanche Case highlights that this is a limited perspective, one that keeps indigenous groups on the fringes of global change.
Comanche history, and its modern political legacy, demonstrates how indigenous groups can exert significant agency even within a violent, imperial landscape. This research is not an attempt to demonize indigenous groups nor follow a ‘reverse racism pipeline’; rather, it highlights the complexities of communities that were active participants in the development of the modern world. The current international environmental and political climate is rife with violence, perpetuating the brutal context in which it was conceived by major state actors.
Due to this there is a sentiment that the ‘inherently peaceful’ indigenous groups do not have the experiences nor facilities to be actors in this world; for better or worse change. Although hope for a more peaceful and cohesive climate remain, this project aims to highlight that the world does not need to be ‘perfect’ in its environmentalism or international relations for indigenous groups to hold a leading place on the world stage. To achieve this, I am taking on a multidisciplinary methodology, engaging with historical literature, primary source letters, and insights from anthropologists and international policy.
Central to this is the work of historian Pekka Hämäläinen, who argues that Comanches employed aggressive power politics through a hierarchical intersocietal system, achieving agency on the same stage as the Americans and Spanish empire.2 Whilst his argument is central and important to this argument, I will engage with few criticisms concerning his term ‘reverse colonialism’ as to avoid the trend of demonizing minority groups when exploring their complex relations to violence and colonialism.
The Comanches were a nomadic tribe whose practices also moved between raiding, trading, diplomacy, and enslaving, leaving colonial rivals confused.3 This project explores this “ultimate paradox”: while the Comanches initially adjusted their traditions to accommodate Europeans, they eventually forced colonists to adjust to a world that was foreign, uncontrollable, and increasingly unliveable. The Comanche Empire serves as a counter-case to the narrative of the singular national success story of the United States, representing a continental transformation that enabled the rise of the U.S. with global ramifications.4
A significant portion of the analysis focuses on ‘spatiality’ and ‘placemaking’. Placemaking involves three elements: location, a setting for social relationships, and a ‘sense of place’ that gives it meaning for a group.5 In ‘contested geographies’, the Spanish sought to remake indigenous landscapes, but the Comanches simultaneously asserted their own identity within those same spaces. Physical evidence of this persists in Comanche Marker Trees, such as the Storytelling Place Marker Tree in East Dallas.6
Finally, this project links historical agency to current global ramifications, particularly in the realm of environmental politics. Modern indigenous geographers caution against environmental theories that ignore the intricate relationships indigenous peoples have with water governance and climate change.7 Indigenous knowledges were historically discarded or devalued during the establishment of nations like the USA, Canada, and Australia.8 By reconsidering who gets to decide what is ‘useful’ knowledge, this research highlights that indigenous agency remains a fundamental, if often ignored, component of global development and environmental justice.
Project Proposal- Expanding ‘indigeneity’: a case study and call to action