Indigenous Agency: Shaping Spanish Colonial Rule in Latin America
It is tempting to assume that Indigenous intermediaries were no longer needed. According to this view, conquests were complete, and new colonial control solidified—leaving no space for native power. However, this ignores the evolving role Indigenous go-betweens continued to play. The empire was not self-sustaining; it was fragile, fragmented, and dependent on Indigenous cooperation. This essay argues that Indigenous agency not only persisted but was central to the colonial order—in law, diplomacy, and culture—and that intermediaries were essential to the functioning and legitimacy of Spanish rule.
The Conquest Was Never Finished: Resistance and Adaptation
Spanish rule remained incomplete. New conquests slowed, but the need for Indigenous allies and negotiators deepened.
1. The Contested Comanche Empire
In the Comanche Empire, as detailed by Hämäläinen, Spanish authority was contested. Comanches traded, demanded tribute, and dictated terms, forcing the Spanish to behave as diplomats. Borderland conquest never truly ended, and Indigenous power persisted. In the south, the Mapuche remained unconquered.
2. Mapuche Power and Frontier Governance
José Zavala’s parlamentos (negotiations) were not acts of Spanish generosity; rather, the Spanish needed agreements to trade and avoid war. With a durable political system, the Mapuche held real power. They were essential for frontier governance.
Intermediaries Within the System: Legal and Cultural Power
Indigenous peoples adapted to imperial structures. Go-betweens were not discarded but became advocates, ritual, and historical mediators.
3. Strategic Use of Legal Tools
In “For the Eyes,” a legal petition by Indigenous nobles, they adopted a Christian voice to denounce abuses. This was not marginalization, but a strategic use of legal tools. The king’s justice could be invoked, proving Indigenous agency was vital.
4. Guaman Poma de Ayala: Intellectual Agent
Guaman Poma de Ayala, a century after the conquest, used Christian rhetoric to challenge the legitimacy of colonial governance. As a cultural and political intermediary, he acted as an advisor to the king. Go-betweens served as intellectual agents, preserving Indigenous frameworks within Spanish institutions.
5. Visual Status and Political Legitimacy
In the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, another strategy emerged: visual representation of status. Nahua allies were represented as co-conquerors, a fusion of Spanish and Indigenous symbols to claim political legitimacy. This demonstrated active participation in imperial discourse, from a local perspective.
Diplomacy and Ritual: Authority Performed, Not Assumed
As military conquest receded, colonial power had to be enacted symbolically. Go-betweens played a key role in this performance.
6. The Parliament of Tapihue (1774)
The Parliament of Tapihue (1774) saw thousands of Mapuche leaders ritualize peace using Indigenous language and custom. Sacrifices, gift exchanges, and oaths were performed in Mapudungun. This signified that Spanish authority depended on recognition by Indigenous peoples.
7. Valverde’s Letter: Dependence on Indigenous Alliances
In Valverde’s 1719 letter, the governor of New Mexico describes negotiating with Apache chiefs, acknowledging that Spanish power depended on Indigenous alliances. Colonial governance still required Indigenous diplomacy to function effectively in the periphery.
The Myth of Irrelevance: Adaptable and Persistent Roles
The idea that go-betweens lost relevance assumes their value was purely military. But in reality, their role shifted and adapted.
8. Collaboration in the Philippines
Kristie Flannery’s work on the Philippines, governed from New Spain, shows that rule was built on Indigenous elites and mestizo administrators, not solely on conquest. This demonstrated the same model of collaboration and ritual diplomacy across the Pacific, disproving the idea that conquest ended power-sharing.
9. Autonomous Indigenous Political Systems
The Miskitu Confederation developed an autonomous Indigenous political system that lasted. The Rabinal Achí, a dramatic performance, dramatizes Indigenous concepts of sovereignty, justice, and punishment. The survival of this ritual form proves that Indigenous authority continued to be performed—even under colonial rule.
The claim that conquest became a negotiated and hybrid system of rule, rather than a project of pure domination, finds strong support when contrasted with the hypothesis that go-betweens lost power after the establishment of colonial centers. In fact, both analyses confirm that Indigenous actors remained indispensable to the survival of the empire. Through diplomacy in the borderlands, legal petitions in the core, or symbolic authority, their roles were transformed, never erased. Far from passive subjects, Indigenous leaders, translators, and ritual specialists were architects of the colonial order, shaping it from within and at its limits. The borderlands did not merely mark the edges of empire; they revealed its fragility, dependence, and constant need for negotiation. Both analyses confirm the same: conquest in Latin America was not an endpoint—it was a process of translation, adaptation, and struggle. Control and conquest were never absolute; Indigenous agency made them possible and constantly redefined their meaning.