Not one colonizer and not one frontier
Discussions of colonial history often speak of “Europeans” as a single force. For Apache peoples there were several, arriving at different times, in different places, and with different goals. Spain was the closest and longest-lasting presence, ruling from Mexico City and holding provinces in New Mexico, Texas, Coahuila, Nueva Vizcaya and Sonora. France, based in Canada and later Louisiana, mostly reached Apache neighbours through trade on the Mississippi valley and the eastern edge of the plains. Later, the United States and independent Mexico took over. This article compares how the first two powers affected Apache groups, with the caution that “Apache” itself covers many separate nations.
Because source material is uneven, any comparison involves some guesswork. Spanish records are plentiful. French records on Apache groups are thinner and often second-hand, and several group names in them are debated.
New Mexico: Spain as a close neighbour
In New Mexico, Spanish colonisation from 1598 placed Apache groups beside Pueblo villages and Hispanic settlements. Relations here included regular trade, as seen in the exchanges between plains and mountain groups and Pueblo communities. They also included raids and Spanish expeditions, along with captive-taking on both sides. Apache groups such as the ancestors of the Jicarilla and Mescalero lived near the colony, so they felt the effects of livestock herding, farming expansion and Spanish campaigns directly. The Pueblo Revolt of 1680 briefly pushed the Spanish out of the province, and the period that followed saw shifting alliances among Pueblo, Apache and Spanish communities.
Texas and Coahuila: a later and thinner Spanish presence
Further east, Spanish control was weaker. Texas was only lightly settled until the 1700s, and Spain’s chief motive there was in part to counter French activity. Lipan Apache communities of the Texas plains and hill country dealt with missions, a few presidios and traders. Their relations with Spain moved between agreements, such as the 1749 peace at San Antonio, and episodes of open conflict. Spanish officials hoped to use Lipan alliances against Comanche and other groups, which tied Apache fortunes to wider rivalries. The Lipan Apache history article covers this in more depth.
France on the eastern edge
French explorers and traders entered the Mississippi and Missouri valleys in the late 1600s and 1700s. In 1685 the explorer La Salle established a short-lived colony on the Texas coast, which alarmed Spain and prompted its expansion into the region. Later, French traders worked with Caddoan and Wichita peoples on the plains edge, supplying guns and other goods. Because these groups were often rivals of Apache nations, this trade could leave Apache communities at a disadvantage in access to firearms.
French records also mention people called “Padoucas”, who lived on the central plains and who in 1724 were visited by a French officer, Étienne de Bourgmont, who sought an alliance. Many scholars connect the Padoucas with Apachean groups, particularly the people later called Plains Apache, but the identification is debated. Whatever their exact identity, French contact with them seems to have been short and mostly about trade and diplomacy, not settlement. After 1763 French claims in the region passed to Spain, which then had to deal with the trade networks France had built.
Comparing the two powers
Putting the two together, a few contrasts stand out.
- Land and settlement. Spain claimed territory and tried to settle it with missions, presidios and ranches, so it pressed directly on Apache land. France, with few settlers on the plains, mostly sought furs, hides and alliances.
- Religion. Spanish missions aimed to convert and relocate Native communities, a project that Apache groups largely resisted. French missionary activity on the southern plains was limited.
- Trade goods. Both powers’ traders brought metal tools, cloth and firearms. Access to guns became a source of anxiety and rivalry, particularly when enemies of Apache groups had better supplies.
- Captives. Both Spanish and French settlements participated in the broader captive trade of the continent. Apache people were among those taken, and Apache raiders also took captives.
- Diplomacy. Both powers tried to use Native alliances against rivals, and Apache leaders at times sought alliances of their own.
Shared effects
Despite these differences, some effects were common. Horses and livestock changed Apache economies, which the discussion of the Southern Plains horse era explains. Epidemic disease affected many Native communities, though its timing and toll among specific Apache groups are hard to document. Competition among Native nations for trade and hunting grounds intensified, which fed into the conflicts of the 1700s.
Apache leaders were not passive. They chose among trade partners, made and broke agreements, and moved camps to avoid danger or find opportunity. Reading the record that way avoids the older picture in which Apache peoples simply “resisted” colonisers. The longer-term picture of Spanish rule is explored further in the article on the Spanish and Mexican empires’ impact, and the arrival of the United States brought another phase entirely.