Description: In early America, interracial homicide—whites killing Native Americans, Native Americans killing whites—might result in a massive war on the frontier; or, if properly mediated, it might actually facilitate diplomatic relations, at least for a time. In Killing over Land, Robert M. Owens explores why and how such murders once played a key role in Indian affairs and how this role changed over time. Though sometimes clearly committed to stoke racial animus and incite war, interracial murder also gave both Native and white leaders an opportunity to improve relations, or at least profit from conflict resolution. In the seventeenth century, most Indigenous people held and used enough leverage to dictate the terms on which such conflicts were resolved; but after the mid-eighteenth century, population and material advantages gave white settlers the upper hand. Owens describes the ways settler colonialism, as practiced by Anglo-Americans, put tremendous pressure on Native peoples, culturally, socially, and politically, forcing them to adapt in the face of violence and overwhelming numbers. By the early nineteenth century, many Native leaders recognized that, with population and power so heavily skewed against them, it was only practical to negotiate for the best possible terms; lex talionis justice—blood for blood—proved an unrealistic goal. Consequently, Indigenous and white leaders alike became all too willing to overlook murder if it led to some kind of gain—if, for instance, justice might be traded for financial compensation or land cessions. Ultimately, what Owens analyzes in Killing over Land is nothing less than the commodification of human life in return for a sense of order—as defined and accepted, however differently, by both Native and white authorities as the contest for land and resources intensified in the European colonization of North America.






Abstract: This paper explores the role of polar meteorological stations in Soviet colonial ambitions during the Arctic geopolitical competition of the 1920s and 1930s, examining their enduring legacies in contemporary Russian Arctic policy. Amidst growing geopolitical interest in the Arctic, these stations became essential tools for asserting territorial sovereignty, collecting data crucial to the development of the Northern Sea Route, and consolidating Soviet control over Arctic frontiers. This research argues that these stations, functioning as instruments of state power, enabled the Soviet regime to extend its territorial claims and political reach over land, resources, and Indigenous populations in this remote region. The paper also investigates how Soviet racialised ideas about Indigenous resilience to harsh Arctic conditions were exploited to justify settler-colonial policies and control over the Arctic environment. In particular, it examines how Soviet authorities framed Indigenous peoples as naturally adaptable to extreme climates, exploiting their perceived resilience to support state-led territorial consolidation and the expansion of state control. The research situates Soviet meteorological governance within the broader context of Soviet settler-colonial policies, which sought to transform nomadic Indigenous lifestyles into permanent settlements aligned with Soviet visions of a ‘fixed’ Arctic, characterised by a stable and predictable atmosphere. Finally, the paper demonstrates how Soviet meteorological governance played a crucial role in conceptualising the Arctic as a space not only to be physically occupied but also to be weathered and controlled, highlighting the continuity between the Soviet Arctic doctrine of the 1930s and contemporary Russian Arctic policy, in which Indigenous peoples are once again perceived as particularly well-suited to climate change.