Questions Raised by New Memorial Design Proposals for Shockoe Hill African Burying Ground
On July 12, Richmond, VA city officials unveiled for a memorial at the Shockoe Hill African Burying Ground, which was among the nation鈥檚 largest burial sites for free and enslaved people of color, with some 22,000 interments, and operated 1816-1879. An examination of the January 2025 report about the community engagement process that informed the designs and the put forward for a public vote/survey raises fundamental questions about the planning and design process.
For nearly a decade Lenora McQueen, a descendant of Kitty Cary, an enslaved servant of a Richmond family interred at the Shockoe Hill African Burying Ground in 1857, has led efforts to raise the visibility of the historically and culturally important landscape. Her steadfast advocacy and deep personal commitment has attracted a broad coalition of national, regional, and local organizations along with concerned individuals. Among the many results of her tireless efforts has been the site鈥檚 designation as a Virginia Landmark and listing in the National Register of Historic Places in 2022.
The current memorialization project at the site is part of a larger , which encompasses ten acres of the Shockoe Valley. The 鈥渁nticipated components鈥 of the project include 鈥渢he Shockoe Institute, National Slavery Museum, Lumpkin鈥檚 Slave Jail, Mary Lumpkin Event Lawn, The African Burial Ground, National Memorial, as well as The Winfree Cottage, The Shockoe Hill African Burying Ground and the Trail of the Enslaved.鈥
While the January 2025 report does include 鈥減riorities鈥 (e.g. 鈥淩adical Truth Telling and adding context to the Richmond story,鈥 etc. ) and 鈥渄esign goals鈥 (e.g. 鈥淭ell the Story of Place as fully as possible including the history of desecration and how and why The Burying Ground is as it is today,鈥 etc.), what it does not do is articulate overarching principles and site-specific planning and design guidelines that would inform the design and interpretative decision-making. Before suggestions are made about the placement of mounds, sculpture, signage, plant materials, etc., what are the overarching principles that inform the design? For example:
- What is the role of the descendent community in this process and what measures have been undertaken to insure their participation and engagement in the development of these designs?
- Does the descendent community play a role in developing mission and vision statements for the site?
- What is the role of other stakeholders that have been involved to date in preserving, protecting and designating the property?
- How does the proposed work do no harm to this cultural landscape, which is a Virginia Landmark and listed in the National Register of Historic Places?
- What are the metrics for measuring success when creating a commemorative design and interpretive experience?
- Is the public privileged to the same experience as descendants?
Contrast this with the Burial Gound for Enslaved People at Monticello, the home of President Thomas Jefferson and a National Historic Landmark, which grew from the Thomas Jefferson Foundation鈥檚 and engagement with 鈥渁 group of descendants representing the interests of multiple families enslaved鈥 on the site.
The Master Plan for the greater Shockoe Project does have a mission and vision statement listed under the heading 鈥淪tatement of Interpretive Goals鈥 (p. 59); however, it鈥檚 notable that the descendant community, whose import is recognized in several parts of the report, is not listed as either a primary or secondary 鈥渢arget audience鈥 of these interpretive efforts.
There鈥檚 an August 1 deadline for submitting comments about the three design concepts. For each design comments are requested about: 鈥淭he approach to (1) the grounds, (2) the billboard, (3) the gas station?鈥 The results will 鈥渉elp guide the development of a final design proposal for a permanent memorial honoring.鈥 However, to advance design concepts and solicit opinions about specific interventions in the absence of overarching principles about memorialization does raise questions about the process and risks permanent harm to an important cultural landscape.
