Te Papa Tongarewa, the Museum of New Zealand, is a cultural institution located in Aotearoa New Zealand. The museum’s foundational principle of biculturalism appears increasingly inadequate for addressing the fundamental injustices associated with settler/invader colonialism and can be seen as a barrier to achieving a “collective future.” This article argues that Te Papa must discard biculturalism insofar as it does not provide for tino rangatiratanga (self-determination) or mana motuhake (Indigenous sovereignty). Currently, Te Papa promotes Indigenous cultural inclusion and the celebration of Te Ao Māori (The Māori World) within a settler/invader-defined national identity and cultural memory. In the future, a decolonial and tikanga-based (Māori legal and customary practices and system) approach should be implemented at Te Papa.

The Shona people of Zimbabwe hold rich social histories that should be approached as public humanities. This article explores the oral traditions, pre-colonial sociopolitical systems, and the profound impacts of colonial and post-colonial developments on cultural identity to understand the cohesion of the Shona people. The Shona people’s rich culture of myths, folktales, and storytelling serves as a repository of collective memory that preserves the values, beliefs, and cosmologies underpinning their society. In examining pre-colonial Shona governance, this article highlights the decentralised political systems rooted in chieftaincy, kinship networks, and communal land tenure still in practice today. Using a hybrid methodological approach that integrates ethnographic insights, historical analysis, and theoretical frameworks, such as Santos’ (2018) epistemologies of the South, this study positions Shona public humanities within broader debates on African Indigenous knowledge systems and post-colonial identity reconstruction. The analysis extends to the economic practices of agrarian subsistence and long-distance trade, underscoring the sophisticated socio-economic frameworks of Shona society. Despite the challenges posed by industrial encroachment and cultural commodification, a resilient Shona heritage upholds adaptive strategies. A Shona situated approach contributes to broader debates on decolonisation for the preservation of Indigenous knowledge in a rapidly globalising world.

Who has been considered human by the humanities? Along with its emancipatory potential, the humanities have historically also been related to imperial states whose military conquests have implicated the dehumanization of other peoples. Many times, the humanities have offered foundational narratives sustaining imperial projects. This essay takes a constructivist epistemology to explore the concept of humanism, and how it has emerged and changed in different contexts, beginning with the Roman idea of humanitas that focused on civilization to legitimize domination. A critique of colonial Christian humanism reveals how it was used to justify violence against those defined as non or less human, be they women, Africans, or indigenous people. The historical exclusion of many groups from educational institutions and knowledge production shows how the humanities have perpetuated hierarchies of power that, ironically, dehumanized. Movements such as the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, which sought to reform the humanities, continued to favor a Eurocentric culture. This essay advocates for an intercultural approach to the humanities, one that frees itself from imperialism and promotes inclusive dialogues among peoples. This effort must go beyond overcoming Eurocentrism. It must also overcome anthropocentrism to incorporate a more respectful relationship with Nature, recognizing the cultural practices of indigenous peoples, who have maintained a more conscious and harmonious link with beyond human lifeways.

What would an approach to public humanities that centers the principles of LANDBACK, a movement that locates liberation for Indigenous people in “putting Indigenous Lands back into Indigenous hands,” look like? In this conversation with Megan Red Shirt-Shaw, Meredith McCoy, and Elizabeth Rule—facilitated by Jennifer Guiliano and Roopika Risam—the team behind the Landback Universities project explores the possibilities and urgency of public humanities informed by Indigenous ways of knowing, cultural protocols, and the responsibility of universities to undertake repair work to be in right relation with Indigenous communities they have dispossessed. Topics addressed in this conversation include the limits of “decolonization” as a university discourse and buzzword that, at best, results in land acknowledgments—brief statements about the Native nations whose lands universities occupy, typically without any commitment to address the university’s ongoing participation in dispossession; the tensions between diversity, equity, and inclusion and “decolonization,” which undercut very real, decolonial calls for land restoration and the remaking of systems of power on campuses; the ethics of collaborations on humanities-related initiatives with Indigenous communities; and negotiating right-wing politics that curtail opportunities for this work.

Indigenous Studies seeks to affirm the distinct worth of “Indigenous Knowledge” and to question, as colonial, the privileging of Western Knowledge. How should Bruce Pascoe’s Dark Emu be taught, after it has been persuasively criticised by Peter Sutton and Keryn Walshe in Farmers or Hunter-Gatherers? The Dark Emu Debate. Australia’s “culture wars” have encouraged readings that sharply distinguish the two books’ theses, and this paper attempts to soften that polarity. After noting a point of convergence between Dark Emu and Farmers or Hunter-Gatherers? I outline two ways to think about knowledge that may help answer the question: How should Dark Emu be taught? Paul A. Cohen distinguishes among three ways that we can know the past: as event, as experience, and as myth. Martin Nakata considers the relationship between Indigenous experience and university-authorised critique. This paper seeks to draw out what is useful in each author: an acceptance that our thinking about the past is both mythical and critical. We can teach Dark Emu as “myth” without equating myth with error.

Welcome to our ship—a vessel for flow as methodology. While flowing, we think; while thinking, we flow. With the sea as our center, this method expands other-than-human voices in public humanities. Our ship has technology aboard, yet the navigation of tides, currents, and saltwater is guided by ancestral wayfaring methods. Flow (2019–) is a method for fostering collaboration among elders, cultural bearers, children, and more to nurture Indigenous oceanic stories. We decolonize stories by actively restoring “Restorying” oral traditions from the islands we reside on. Embracing the 黒潮 (Japanese: Kuroshio; Chinese: Heichao) Current as our guiding teacher, this article challenges land-centric perspectives by embracing the fluidity of cultural exchanges in Austronesian communities. We navigate toward “Going back into a future of Simplicity” by relying upon strong waves of the past alive in the complexity of the present. We turn (return) to the flow of currents as a mode of connecting with knowledge rooted in native senses of the ocean as “an extension of the land”. Flow shares lessons on how Indigenous practices can facilitate interspecies community empathy and care for public humanities scholars in diverse fields.

How can a single-day cluster of public learning activities contribute to a larger ongoing public humanities agenda? This essay’s co-authors—facilitators of a public lecture and associated activities sponsored by a university academic department—revisit their strategic efforts to provide leadership for the one-day series of interconnected events, anchored in a Native scholar’s public lecture on sovereignty and citizenship. We write from a predominantly white university geographically removed from Native nations’ reservations and lacking a full-fledged curriculum in Indigenous studies. Yet we also write as members of a consortium committed to enhancing reciprocal learning with Indigenous peoples. Thus, we aimed to set this one-day program within our local collaborative’s sustained work to develop curriculum; engage multiple audiences in topics important to Native studies; and foster networks linking students, faculty, and staff with Native community members. In making visible aspects of “doing” public humanities that often remain unrecorded, this case study will assist others interested in taking on public humanities work, whether a small-scale, single-day program or initiatives extended across a long-term calendar. After describing the ongoing work, one university and Native community partners have been carrying out through a Native and Indigenous Peoples Initiative, and situating those efforts in connection with our collaborative’s shared values for community building, the essay revisits event management steps taken to tap into and support that endeavor. Acknowledging successful elements alongside challenges and opportunities not fully achieved, our case study also offers approaches for collaborative evaluation of public humanities programming.

South Dakota, home to nine federally and state-recognized tribes, bears witness to a rich Native American history that predates colonialism. Yet, the representation of Native Americans in institutional archives remains sparse, often curated through the lens of non-Native creators. Addressing this gap involved a collaborative effort among Augustana University, Native American students from a federally funded tribal boarding school, and a regional cultural institution to facilitate the reclamation of archival narratives and the re-presentation of Native American histories through an innovative public humanities initiative. This project aimed to re-present archival material through creative interventions by young Native American artists, adhering to the First Nations principles of ownership, control, access, and possession. By transforming existing archival material into new artworks, the project fostered a deeper understanding of Native American history and its contemporary implications. Public exhibitions of these reinterpretations facilitated engagement with historical traumas and challenged normative perceptions of Native American experiences. The interdisciplinary approach highlighted the importance of Native American agency in curatorial processes, resulting in reflective public exhibitions. This project exemplifies how public humanities research can bridge historical gaps, support cultural recognition, and facilitate the reclamation of institutionalized narratives.