How can exploration narratives be refashioned around Indigenous voices and perspectives? Each scholar on this proposed panel seeks to answer this fundamental question, which grew out of our participation in Bloomsbury Press’s series The Cultural History of Exploration. Our answers disrupt, interrupt, and entangle stories that historians have often chosen to embed firmly in colonial projects with Indigenous actions and agendas. We also highlight how European explorers often cooperated across what otherwise appear to be fixed and impermeable imperial boundaries. The four contributions to this panel span the years from 1450 to 1900, when exploration had its greatest impact, and, contextually, they reflect its global reach. Using different approaches, the contributors counter-read the current narratives for the specific exploration histories that their papers discuss to construct new narratives in which Indigenous perspectives play a major role. Leading off with 15^th- and 16^th-century exploration projects, Lydia Towns turns the tables on how explorers acquired knowledge in her presentation. Instead of producing objectifying knowledge of subordinated, Indigenous others, she reveals that, working cooperatively with one another, explorers brought back information that Indigenous peoples had helped mediate. Douglas Catterall’s paper on far eastern Siberia c. 1700-1800 demonstrates that, unable to exclude each other from far eastern Siberian lands, Russian and Indigenous actors ultimately had to acknowledge each other, a reality that intersected in and transformed Russian-sponsored expeditions to Siberia. Continuing this theme of two-way interactions, Dane Kennedy looks at British expeditions to 19^th-century Sub-Saharan Africa and Australia. He invites us to think of Indigenous peoples as exploring the British just as much as the British sought to understand them, once again upending stories of discovery as we have known them. Rounding out the panel, Steffen Wöll treats us to a visual archive of imperial projects, showing how colonizer and colonized deployed visual artefacts in confronting each other’s (mis)conceptions. His paper helps us to see how the views and interactions of colonial and anti-colonial constituencies manifested themselves physically in ways that, in many cases, remain with us today. Collectively, the panel establishes that, going forward, narratives of exploration can and must bring in the voices of those often portrayed as the explored. It also suggests that broadly transnational frameworks may need to become more central to the practice of exploration history in order for the field to develop dynamically.