Public Archaeology and Power

In 1956, Mortimer Wheeler argued that “It is the duty of the archaeologist, as of the scientist, to reach and impress the public, and to mold his words in the common clay of its forthright understanding” (Wheeler 1956, 234, quoted in Richardson and Almansa-Sánchez 2015, 195). These themes were taken up again decades later by Charles McGimsey (1972) in his muchcited volume Public Archaeology. Publications on the topic rose in subsequent years (e.g., McManamon 1991; Merriman 2004; Schadla-Hall 1999), with more recent authors more likely to use the related terms “collaborative archaeology” (Colwell 2016) or “communitybased archaeology” (e.g., Atalay 2012) in discussing public and civically-engaged approaches. This shift in terminology is also reflected in the Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage, which published its first volume 14 years after the journal Public Archaeology was founded in 2000. Greater attention to “community-based” and “collaborative” approaches signals more than a linguistic turn; it reflects archaeologists’ increasing recognition of the power dynamics of how archaeological knowledge is constructed (e.g., Schmidt and Kehoe 2019). More archaeologists are now pursuing a vision of the field in which the research process is democratized and communities, especially descendants, have a say not just in how archaeological knowledge is disseminated but also in how it is produced—including which questions we ask in the first place. This special issue focuses on the role of power in public approaches to African diaspora archaeological research. There is little current consensus on the meaning or parameters of “public archaeology,” as the term has been applied in a wide variety of contexts (Richardson and Almansa-Sánchez 2015). Nonetheless, moving beyond insular “siloed” research approaches is increasingly recognized as crucial. For example, a recent call for anti-racist approaches in archaeology noted the importance of positioning community engagement as more than an “afterthought” in the time of Black Lives Matters (Flewellen et al. 2021, 238). These issues become even more critical and complex when we consider that projects in African diaspora archaeology are often headed by white practitioners. This special issue explores these complexities through three diverse views of what equitable approaches to public engagement in African diaspora archaeology might look like. Kayeleigh Sharp,Mary McCorvie, and Mark Wagner explore the use of XRchaeology, a web-based augmented reality approach, in educating the public about Miller Grove, a free African American community in Southern Illinois that was settled before the Civil War. Miller Grove’s history highlights the role of free African Americans in aiding those escaping from slavery in southern states; the site can thus counter popular “Underground Railroad” narratives which tend to center and overemphasize white “conductors.” However, Sharp et al. work to do more than tell a new story about Miller Grove or the Underground Railroad more broadly. They want those who engage with the site and its history to weigh available material, spatial, and historical evidence to reach their own conclusions—that is, to learn to think like an archaeologist. An augmented reality experience can help bring the site to visitors who