Increasingly, high-precision GPS/GNSS (global positioning system/global satellite navigation system) based real-time-kinematic methods are being used in the mapping of archaeological sites. However, when utilizing high-precision satellite-based methods for archaeological location purposes, there is a significant but usually unanticipated problem that must first be addressed if accurate measurements are to be made. Simply put, unless proper correction methods are used, horizontal distances between two locations determined by the GNSS method will differ from the measurements that are made by traditional survey methods. This difference between the two measurements is often referred to as the grid-to-ground problem. This article provides a process to address this problem.

Issues of social and economic inequality are increasingly becoming areas of study for archaeologists; however, little work has been done on the uniform application of analytical methods. Here we assess the use of the Gini index for determining wealth inequality in eight Prehispanic central Mexican contexts. We analyze house size at the Late Postclassic sites of Capilco (village), Cuexcomate (town), and Yautepec (city), all in the state of Morelos. Agricultural field sizes for two communities described in a Nahuatl-language census immediately after the Spanish conquest are also analyzed. Our final context is the Xolalpan phase apartment compounds at Teotihuacan. Using these case studies we discuss methodological issues concerning the use of Gini indices to infer social inequality with archaeological data. We find that the Gini index, when applied following the proposed methodological standards, serves as a useful tool for the quantification of inequality across multiple archaeological case studies.

The use of airborne LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) in western Belize, Central America, has revolutionized our understanding of the spatial dynamics of the ancient Maya. This technology has enabled researchers to successfully demonstrate the large-scale human modifications made to the ancient tropical landscape, providing insight on broader regional settlement. Before the advent of this laser-based technology, heavily forested cover prevented full coverage and documentation of Maya sites. Mayanists could not fully recover or document the extent of ancient occupation and could never be sure how representative their mapped and excavated samples were relative to ancient settlement. Employing LiDAR in tropical and subtropical environments, like that of the Maya, effectively provides ground, as well as forest cover information, leading to a much fuller documentation of the complexities involved in the ancient human-nature interface. Airborne LiDAR was first flown over a 200 km2 area of the archaeological site of Caracol, Belize, in April 2009. In April and May 2013 an additional 1,057 km2 were flown with LiDAR, permitting the contextualization of the city of Caracol within its broader region and polity. The use of this technology has transformed our understanding of regional archaeology in the Maya area.

With the ever expanding quantity of high-resolution aerial and satellite imagery available to archaeologists, numerous researchers have sought to address this “big data” challenge by developing automated methods to aid in the discovery and mapping of archaeological sites and features. This paper reviews several notable efforts to create automated discovery tools, including both spectral and object-based approaches, and highlights the difficulties these projects have encountered. Arguing instead for the critically important role of a human analyst in archaeological discovery, I illustrate interim results of an ongoing project that utilizes CORONA satellite imagery to document previously unknown sites in a 300,000 km2 study area in the northern Fertile Crescent. The project is based on what I term “brute force” methods, relying on systematic exploration of imagery by trained analysts, and has now successfully created a database of more than 14,000 sites, some 10,000 of which are previously undocumented. Results of the project highlight the need for human intervention to make any archaeological discovery meaningful, suggesting that imagery analysis, like any act of archaeological investigation, requires an engaged, thoughtful and creative scholar.

For over 40 years, some archaeologists have labored under a distorted interpretation of the 50-year rule in which anything more than 50 years of age becomes “archaeological” and therefore must be recorded and evaluated for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. A reexamination of federal law shows that this is a mistaken interpretation. Data from the Intermountain Antiquities Computer System indicates that, if this practice continues, the number of featureless historical sites requiring documentation in the West will greatly increase at a large expense to the public and that most of these costs will be associated with sites not considered significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture. Solutions are presented that will give archaeologists greater flexibility in recording material culture more than 50 years of age, allowing us to redirect our efforts to resources of greater interest while making the practice of archaeology more defensible to the public. These problems are symptomatic of a larger issue that relates to how cultural remains from the latter part of the twentieth century and beyond will be valued. The discipline of archaeology must begin candid conversations about the relative importance of such recent material culture and its management implications.

In a recent American Antiquity forum (Pitblado 2014), I argued that not only is it possible for archaeologists to engage in ethical collaborations with members of the artifact-collecting public, but that the Society for American Archaeology’s “Principles of Archaeological Ethics” stipulates that we should do so. This is not a message, however, that has fully permeated the archaeological community, which has led to a schism between populations who are often natural allies. This paper starts with that premise: that archaeologists should actively pursue collaborations with the artifact-collecting community with the goal of advancing research agendas, public education, and long-term care of collections in private hands. The paper offers guidelines for establishing and nurturing professional-collector relationships in a way that furthers the directives of legal and ethical archaeological codes. I begin with an overview of the changing nature of professional-collector relationships during the twentieth century, exploring reasons for the divisiveness that has characterized recent decades. I next suggest five steps for establishing appropriate relationships with artifact collectors—and avoiding inappropriate ones. Finally, I describe how I followed those steps to establish a network of collector-collaborators to build the foundation for a Paleoamerican research program in southeastern Idaho and northern Utah.

This research aims to investigate the potential use of three-dimensional (3D) technologies for the analysis and interpretation of heritage sites. This article uses different 3D survey technologies to find the most appropriate methods to document archaeological stratigraphy, based on diverse environmental conditions, light exposures, and varied surfaces. The use of 3D laser scanners and dense stereo matching (DSM) techniques is now well established in archaeology. However, no convincing comparisons between those techniques have been presented. This research fills this gap to provide an accurate data assessment for the Las Cuevas site (Belize) and represents a starting point for the definition of a sharable methodology. Tests in Las Cuevas were conducted to compare both accuracy and density reliability in cave environments using two different techniques: triangulation light laser scanner and DSM. This study finds that DSM is the most economical, portable, and flexible approach for the 3D documentation of archaeological sites today. In fact, DSM allows the 3D documentation process to be done more efficiently, reducing both data acquisition and processing time. Nonetheless, the quantitative comparison presented in this paper underscores the need to integrate this technique with other technologies when the data acquisition of micro-stratigraphy is required.

North American archaeologists working with Native American or First Nations communities, whose culture often forms the basis of the archaeological record, are becoming increasingly aware that they face a differing set of concerns and issues than those archaeologists who work with non-Native communities. Although their work is not as widely reported in the literature, North American archaeologists who have been fortunate enough to conduct research with Indigenous communities in other parts of the world are often overwhelmed by the variety of issues that may crop up. They often find that their experiences highlight the challenges but also the fulfillment involved in working with Indigenous groups. In the following paper, I offer suggestions based on practices that helped to alleviate issues I faced when working internationally. By broadening the discourse concerning working with Indigenous groups, I hope that these suggestions may also prove relevant to improving the practice of archaeology in North America as well.