The volume Debating Oaxaca Archaeology (Marcus Reference Marcus1990) was published more than three decades ago. Although it was an excellent summation of the research and ongoing debates in Oaxaca archaeology at that time, it is unfortunately most remembered for the vicious tone and insults. Additionally, several key voices were missing from both the volume and the debates they were based on, most notably women, Mexican, and Indigenous scholars.

In response, we organized the Diálogos en Oaxaca Archaeology scholarly collective. We bring together Mexican, Canadian, and American researchers who work in Oaxaca for collaborative and generative dialogue, moving away from the negativity and neocolonial sentiments of the past. By doing so, we aim to redress existing inequities that have adversely impacted research in Oaxaca, not only between these scholarly communities but by extension between scholars and local heritage and descendant communities as well, without whose support our research would not be possible in the first place.

We are pleased to have a diverse group of scholars from diverse backgrounds at different stages of their careers, from graduate students to tenured professors, for this special section. First, Ramón Celis and Stoll explore two anthropological studies in Oaxaca conducted by each author, respectively, in which local people and descendant communities were involved as active participants in the different stages of the archaeological research.

Next, Perez Rodríguez and colleagues provide a comprehensive overview of the archaeological site of Cerro Jazmín, covering 16 field seasons as well as a detailed study of the development of Mixtec society. The article presents a complete picture of the settlement, starting from its earliest occupation during the Formative period and continuing through to European colonization of the region in the sixteenth century.

Berube and colleagues reflect on the importance of reexamining previously excavated archaeological materials. Reevaluating the contents of burial offerings found at Monte Alban, the authors discover new perspectives of artifacts stored for decades in different laboratories. The results of their findings address new research inquiries into the social complexities and changes occurring at Monte Alban from its foundation until its abandonment.

Brzezinski and Hepp explore Mesoamerican ontologies regarding the agency of human and nonhuman actors and the development of these beliefs and practices in Formative period Oaxaca. Contrary to Western Cartesian dichotomies, the boundaries between human and nonhuman entities were much blurrier for ancient Mesoamericans.

Finally, Vidal Guzmán and colleagues examine the persistence of domestic practices at Etlatango in the Mixteca Alta through the concept of the extended house. Incorporating both ancestors, living persons, and material cultures occupying interior and exterior as well as physical and metaphysical spaces, the extended household more closely aligns with Mesoamerican ontologies.

The research presented here shows a welcome increase in collaboration with heritage and descendant communities. However, despite these advancements, issues of inequity remain between the different research communities. While there is more work to be done, we believe the present articles are a movement in the right direction.

Finally, we want to express our heartfelt gratitude to Dr. Geoffrey McCafferty, coeditor of Latin American Antiquity, for reaching out to us and extending the invitation to compile this special section.