Islands of indigeneity: Cultural distinction, indigenous territory and island spatiality

Islands are often associated with distinct cultures. Although the island polities that formed during the withdrawal of empire frequently brought together various ethnicities, Indigenous governance and claims to cultural distinction have often remained an ideal for such islands and archipelagos. This paper examines the complex causality behind associations between indigeneity and islandness, discussing how island spatiality fosters: (1) cultural distinction, (2) connections between people and place, and (3) Indigenous territory. We argue that islands are exceptionally fruitful spaces for developing and maintaining distinct ethnicities, due not just to material effects of island geography but also in the manner in which both islanders and mainlanders conceptualise islands as “legible geographies.” Islands can thereby become quintessential spaces for containing Indigenous Peoples, simultaneously sustaining cultural difference while limiting the scope for Indigenous self‐determination. Drawing on cases from the Arctic, East Asia, Oceania and the Caribbean, we highlight the benefits that island spatiality can offer to Indigenous communities as well as the dangerous manner in which island spatiality can encourage essentialisations of Indigenous Peoples and circumscriptions of Indigenous spaces. This paper positions itself as an effort in decolonial island studies. This paper examines the complex causality behind associations between indigeneity and islandness, discussing how island spatiality fosters: (1) cultural distinction, (2) connections between people and place, and (3) Indigenous territory. Islands are exceptionally fruitful spaces for developing and maintaining distinct ethnicities, due not just to material effects of island geography but also to the manner in which both islanders and mainlanders conceptualise islands as “legible geographies.” Islands can thereby become quintessential spaces for containing Indigenous Peoples, simultaneously sustaining cultural difference while limiting the scope for Indigenous self‐determination.