Journal of Arizona History

Composed of five chapters, an introduction, and a brief conclusion, The Intimate Frontier examines the "factors that shaped the intellectual and quotidian conceptions of friendship" on the northern frontier of New Spain (p. 4). According to the author, the logic, rhetoric, and emotion of friendship was foundational to the creation of the Spanish Empire in Sonora. Chapter one, entitled "An Ideal Friendship," ranges from ancient notions of friendship (Plato, Cicero, Seneca) and the middle ages (Aquinas, Cervantes, Vega) to a discussion of notions of friendship Spanish settlers carried with them across the Atlantic. Like other European colonizers, the Spanish in Mexico required settlers to Christianize and "civilize" the Indigenous population. In addition, they codified friendship into the Laws of the Indies (first enacted in 1513). By combining love and amity with the threat of violence, the Spanish believed the local Natives would "respect them and desire their friendship" (p. 57). The Spaniards used friendship for practical reasons (gaining local knowledge) and strategic purposes (military domination). Friendship became a useful tool in the colonial project; as "a subtle form of subjugation" the colonizers crafted specific relationships steeped in power, violence, and obligation. Differentiating between indios amigos (friendly Indians) and indios enemigos (unfriendly Indians), the Spanish, like many colonizers, used locals to consolidate their control.

Chapter two, "Civilizing the Frontier," concerns the triangular relationship between friendly Indians, missionaries, and soldiers. The well-known contentiousness between the military and the church is recounted here as the efforts of the New Spanish government to extend their dominance into the northern frontier as well as develop relationships with local Indians based on the concept of "Christian friendship." Friendship as part of the civilizing process relied on the aid of friendly Natives to capture the landscape and access its wealth. The Jesuits had their own concept of friendship based on religious conversion, with baptism as sincere evidence of friendship by Indians. Both these practical and idealized notions of friendship mediated the harsh realities of frontier society. As the author argues, "without the development of interethnic alliances and friendships, the frontier would have been a wasteland of violence and hardship" (p. 95). [End Page 693]

"The Many Faces of Betrayal" (chapter three) investigates the friendships of missionary Eusebio Francisco Kino with two other men: one creole (Don Carlos Sigűenza y Góngora) and the other Spanish (Francisco Xavier de Mora). Kino (whose exploits have been recounted by many) clashed with both men; Sigűenza, who hoped to form a close relationship with a fellow mathematician and share intellectual endeavors, felt betrayed when Kino challenged his academic writing. Mora believed Kino betrayed his duties as a Jesuit; he seemed more interested in leading expeditions than in saving souls. The relationship between a Pima Indian named Oócaqui (called El Canito by the Spanish) and colonial authorities is showcased in the fourth chapter ("Internal Enemies"). It demonstrates how ties of friendship broke down when a "friendly" Indian led a rebellion against his former allies. Coming in the wake of the Pueblo Revolt of 1680 and fears of a conspiracy in 1681, El Canito's betrayal violated Spanish conceptions of amity and alliance. The final chapter, "The Paradox of Friendship," traces the friendship of Luis Oacpicagigua, a Pima Indian and governor of Sáric, and Diego Ortiz Parilla, governor of Sinaloa y Sonora province. Their relationship became a pivotal issue when Oacpicagigua led the Pima Uprising of 1751. As in the previous chapter, this one demonstrates the fragility of friendship between colonizer and colonized, even those who willingly worked for the Spanish to negotiate relationships and gain advantages amid the turmoil and violence of northern New Spain.

While the author acknowledges his debt to Albert Hurtado's work (and echoes the title of Hurtado's book on early California, Intimate Frontiers), Martínez's book lacks Hurtado's careful study of gender, agency, and intimacy. The intimacy discussed in this book is solely about men (mostly privileged ones) and friendship; the author concedes that "the feminine voice" is absent due to his interest in masculinity (p. 14). However, the gendered experience of men as an analytical category deserves further elucidation. When it is discussed, it primarily concerns Spanish or creole men. For example, in the discussion of El Canito's interrogation, Martínez describes how the Spanish continued to torture him because they were unconvinced by his confession and because of Spanish ideals of manhood. The author concludes that "no male leader worth his salt could cave to fear, not on the Spanish frontier where masculinity and valor were the most important attributes of [a] successful leader" (p. 133). This presumes a Spanish concept of manhood; however, what of Native modes of manhood that influenced El Canito? How had his allegiance to the Spanish impacted Indigenous masculinity? Was his disloyalty an assertion of the traditional manliness of Native men? The discussion of Oacpicagigua in the last chapter suffers from the same [End Page 694] inattention to the masculinity of Indian men. While the author argues that Luis adopted Spanish ideals of masculinity because of his alliance with the colonizers, the evidence for this is unclear. Had he imbibed Spanish notions of manhood because he adopted Spanish dress and weapons, and drank chocolate? As many studies in early America have shown, Native groups adopted some aspects of European society, such as Christianity, but crafted a syncretic version that combined Native traditions with Europeans forms. It is possible that friendly Indians did something of the same in terms of masculinity. Was Oacpicagigua's "betrayal" a rejection of Spanish notions of friendship or rather a combination of Spanish concepts of manhood with Native ideals of male leadership and obligation? We will need to rely on other scholars to answer these questions.