Panel discussion

The indigenous peoples of the Americas have always fit somewhat uncomfortably into histories of the early modern Atlantic, especially those that emphasize the commercial and geopolitical structures of European empires. Studies of Atlantic migrations, communications, trade, and cultural exchange naturally emphasize European and African influences far more readily than Amerindian ones. Recent histories of the North American continent, on the other hand, assert the centrality of Indians at the expense of understanding the imperial networks that they grappled with as colonialism transformed their world. I will contribute to the panel discussion by exploring the extent to which we can integrate Amerindians into histories of Atlantic states and vice versa. As an example of the challenges—and potential payoffs—of doing so, I will examine the relationship between Native geopolitics and French state patronage networks. We know that Indians demanded concessions from French colonists in pursuit of independent agendas. We know that French imperial administrators utilized their Atlantic connections, including Indian diplomacy and trade, to access and expand networks of state patronage. But we know almost nothing about the connection between the two. How did Indians’ agendas influence the fortunes of state operators, thereby shaping the empire itself? How did French agents structure state interests to profit from Indians’ actions—especially those that seemed to thwart French ambitions? Rather than a contest (or even a middle ground) between two discrete interests—one French and one Native—can we rethink these relationships to see the interdependence of the indigenous and the imperial in the early modern Atlantic? Is writing such a complex and cumbersome history practically feasible?