Graduation Semester and Year

Summer 2024

Language

English

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy in History

Department

History

First Advisor

Sam W. Haynes

Second Advisor

Paul Conrad

Third Advisor

James Sandy

Abstract

During the 19th century, the Zulu and Comanche were two of the most powerful and dynamic indigenous peoples on opposite sides of the Atlantic Ocean. Both constructed regional powers that opposed European expansion based on their imperialistic nature, not to be confused with European imperialism. Comparing the Zulu and Comanche illustrates how each constructed an imperialistic realm and how their rise to power was connected to their keen use of conquest, diplomacy, and resource management as tools of statecraft in creating their domains. Their domains were created by imperialist expansion based on conquest. However, diplomacy and monopolizing essential regional resources sustained their conquests as part of an imperialist structure. Each conquered territory as a resource and constructed a vast horse and cattle raising system. This dominated the control and access to these critical resources granting the Zulu and Comanche extensive regional economic wealth and power. This offered the Zulu and Comanche the needed resources to resist early European expansion and explained their rise to power as dominant regional entities. Both the Zulu and Comanche initially resisted European expansion. However, their power gradually eroded over several decades as they faced relentless pressure from colonialism and imperialism. It was only after the significant deployment of military resources by the British Empire and United States that the Zulu and Comanche were finally subdued. Comparing their histories shows how each was similar in creating an imperialistic indigenous state capable of resisting early European encroachment. Yet, their subjugation led to two distinct outcomes. Comparing the Zulu and Comanche history also entails comparing the history of 19th century colonialism as relates to the United States and British Empire. This is seen in the difference between the colonial context of the United States and the British Empire during the 19th century. This context differed vastly, relating to the nature of the United States government and that of the British state. Once conquered by the British, the Zulu were faced with the realities of colonialism, in that they were made a subject people laboring for the benefit of the British Empire. But as such, they had a defined position within the new colonial society and were granted some protection as cogs in a larger machine of the British Empire. The Comanche were faced with the realities of settler colonialism as they were pushed to the margins of society, with no place defined for their people to live. As such, there were no protections, and they suffered the loss of status, population, and culture. This was because the British state had the ability and apparatus to enforce policy on the ground, while the United States government lacked this ability. We learn from comparing the Zulu and Comanche that each created an imperialist realm not dissimilar to European societies' practices despite the Comanche's lack of centralization. It is also clear that the outcomes for the Zulu and Comanche were dictated by colonial policy. In that, the British Empire had the structure and control to enforce a system of colonialism on the Zulu as subjects with a defined role and some protections. The United States lacked this ability, leaving the Comanche at the mercy of settler groups, leading to a system of settler colonialism where they lost not just position and land but a massive reduction in population and loss of culture.

Keywords

Zulu, Comanche, Imperialism, Colonialism, Settler colonialism, 19th century, British, America

Disciplines

African History | Cultural History | Diplomatic History | European History | Military History

Download

Available for download on Monday, January 13, 2025

Share

COinS