An emerging facet of indigenous GIS use is its cartographic output. The representation of indigeneity on the products of GIS – the symbols and orthography presented on maps in itself requires attention by indigenous mapmakers. These cartographic issues, touched upon in the Hopi and Zuni examples (page 40), are not only technical in nature. They also reflect the dominance of non-indigenous or mainstream geographic authorship of maps and the changes that will need to be accommodated by nation-state geographic boards or their equivalent agency.121 Louis, an indigenous Hawaiian cartographer, has also investigated these linguistic
control issues as well as some of the practical issues relating to indigenous Hawaiian cartography.122 One that has obvious relevance to M
āori cartography is the treatment of place
names with geographic features as a component in their Hawaiian names. The tautological example given by Louis, was the treatment of Ka Lae Point (lae meaning point in Hawaiian). Thus, Ka Lae Point would translate as Ka Point Point. For Māori cartography, similar
discussion would need to be made by those considering the cartographic, linguistic and
121 For a discussion on cartographic mapmaking myths see Monmelier, M. (1996). How to lie with maps, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press
orthographic treatment of the Waimakariri River (River Cold River), or Lake Rotoma (Lake Lake Warm).
Consider too, the placement on a map of some of the original, and much longer, Māori place names - such as Te Moana i kaitaina a Te Rangitakaroro, (Lake Okataina) and Te Rotorua nui a
Kahumatamoemoe (Lake Rotorua). These corrected place names have recently been approved for change in principle by the Government although they remain subject to final approval from the NZ Geographic Board.123
Figure 9: Rotorua place name changes124
The cartographic focus will inevitably shift from how can the software programmer increase the number of characters available for the label text string or what will be accepted/acceptable by the New Zealand Geographic Board to the more fundamental one of scale - how can we fit it all on the map? Consider how those of Takitimu would choose to represent “Taumata whakatangihanga koauau o Tamateapokaiwhenua ki tana tahu”, or another version, “Te Taumata whakatangihanga koaua o Tamatea ure haea turi pukapihi maunga horonuku pokaiwhenua a ki taarahu”. A solution could be as Louis offers - to use ellipses to indicate there is a fuller name than that indicated on the map (e.g. “Te Rotorua…”).125 Using GIS properties, technicians are able to choose at which scale
more of the name becomes visible in the layer. The following series of figures illustrate the use of ellipses.
123 Te Arawa Lakes Deed of Settlement: Cultural Redress Schedule, Part 4: Place Names. p. 96
124Rotorua Place Name Changes. (2004, 19 October). NZ Herald. Retrieved from http://www.nzherald.co.nz
Figure 10: Lake Rotorua/ Te Rotorua…
Base map: 1:500,000 Topomap, Crown Copyright
Figure 11 shows the output at 1:250,000 scale.
Figure 11: Rotorua/Te Rotorua nui a …. Base map 1:250,000 Topomap, Crown Copyright
The final figure in this series shows the output at 1:50,000 scale where the entire placename is able to be viewed.
Figure 12 Lake Rotorua/Te Rotorua nui a Kahumatamoemoe Base map: 1:50,000 Topomap Crown Copyright
Toponomy, the study of place names, also needs to be considered in this context. There is a growing field of interest in toponomy. The United Nations Group of Experts on Geographic Names (UNGEGN) regularly run conferences and training programmes in toponomy.126
Correct place names and the correct spelling of those place names can be problematic for indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. There are also times when there is tension between indigenous peoples themselves. Neighbouring hapū, for example, have disagreed about
name changes to shared boundary markers such as mountains or rivers or towns. Usually these disagreements have occurred in a forced climate of compromise with one hapū typically
disgruntled with the negotiated outcome. Again, using a potential solution offered by Louis for an Australian Aboriginal instance, a successful outcome could be to not choose one preference over the other but have both names drawn on the map using colour to differentiate hapū preference.127
As indicated by McDowall (page 41) and Louis (see above) the possibilities for indigenous cartography to personalise their representation of landscapes, to change or ignore standardised western cartographic map representation are increasing.
Three examples are provided to illustrate the changes that have begun to emerge in indigenous cartography. The first map depicts the epic Lenni Lenape journey of almost one hundred generations of migration from central Siberia to what is now known as the east coast of North America. The second and third maps illustrate the changes the Māori contribution
126 A September 2005 UNGEGN training conference in Indonesia will discuss the UN role in the standardisation of
geographical names amongst other subjects.
has to the indigenous cartographic pallet. Both maps communicate an ancient narrative in a non-cartesian representation.