No abstract

A method is described for identifying the woods of the soft pines of western North America: namely, western white pine (Pinus monticola Doug!.), sugar pine (P. lambertiana Doug!.), limber pine (P. flexilis James) and white bark pine (P. albicaulis Engelrn.). Unique features of P. f1exilis and P. albicaulis are the presence of crystals in the resin canals and dimple marks on tangentially split surfaces, respectively. P. monticola and P. lambertiana cannot be separated absolutely and judgement must be exercised based on a number of macroscopic and microscopic observations. One of the most useful of these observations appears to be the nature of the cross-field pitting between ray parenchyma and longitudinal earlywood tracheids. If thorough examination of a radial section reveals on-Iy a few examples of 3 pits per cross-field in the first formed earlywood tracheids then the sampie is probably P. monticola. However, if a few instances of 4 or 5 pits per cross-field are observed, probably the sampie is P. lambertiana.Resin canal diameter measurements do not provide a viable method of distinguishing these two species.

The challenges of building research partnerships around community mapping are critically reviewed in reference to the politics of heritage and identity among Indigenous Maya communities in highland Guatemala. This paper discusses how the goals and interests of archaeologists meshed with those of indigenous mappers in five communities that chose to participate in the mapping program. Based on responses to a survey about the mapping project, participants report joining in order to enhance self-determination, gain cartographic literacy, and improve life opportunities. Community authority over the project and a broad base of participation (including young and old, male and female) proved essential to the program, which combined traditional practices of governance with new technologies. This paper describes the community organizational model and protocols for selecting features and topics for thematic maps as well as for gaining community consensus on map content. Finally, it reflects on this transmodern approach to indigenous mapping and the future of research partnerships.

No abstract

Mapping constitutes one of the most elemental forms of archaeological practice. Archaeological mapping has evolved from hefty, costly transits to even more expensive computerized total stations, hand-held GPS units, and proprietary mapping software, such as ESRI’s ArcGIS, to visualize and analyze data. Because of the cost and extensive training involved in using this equipment, students have often been left out of the mapping and data visualization process. KoBoToolbox offers a solution to this issue, providing an open source, completely paperless, collaborative workspace for creating and using data collection forms, storing and visualizing data, and sharing those results. This chapter will present the experiences of five archaeologists using KoBoToolbox in diverse settings; case studies include how KoBoToolbox can be used to compile, share, and analyze sixteenth and seventeenth century porcelain; map artifacts, architectural features, and archaeological activity on Michigan State University’s campus; map historic landscape modification in Pennsylvania; and survey and record tombstones to generate a gravemaker inventory of an abandoned public cemetery as a part of a service learning class.