>> From the Library of
Congress in Washington, DC.
>> Good morning, everyone.
Has everyone dried off sufficiently?
We don't normally get
rain in May in Washington
so this is a rarity for us.
And so if you've traveled on Shirley
Highway coming up, you probably were
in a massive traffic jam
because we've never learned
how to drive in rain.
No, that's a California thing.
I forgot, it's not in --
[ Laughter ]
This has been an exciting conference
and I want to congratulate Ralph
and the other folks who were
involved in putting this together.
I know John Hessler is involved but
I'm afraid I'll leave people out
and so congratulations to
Geography and Map, Philips Society
for this very thoughtful
and I think the first time
that I can remember a good
array of items on cartography
in general in the 20th century.
So congratulations on that.
There's two things we'll
be working with today
and I think you'll find
them extremely interesting
and related to each other.
One deals with women in
the field of cartography
and the other one deals
with out of space.
I began work in the Geography and
Map Division early August of 1969.
How many of you are over 50?
Don't raise your hands, anyway.
[ Laughter ]
You might remember in July of 1969
a certain little event took place
and we had a black and white
television and we stayed up late
with the camera handy to watch
someone step down from a spacecraft.
And as I began working in '69
in August in Geography and Map,
we immediately moved a month later.
I don't know if it was because
I came or what but they ran
out of space up here on the Hill and
the new building hadn't been made.
This is the one at Madison Building.
So we moved to suburban, beautiful
suburban Virginia to Pickett Street
where the Division
stayed for over 10 years.
But for the first time in
our life, the Geography
and Map Division had
placed all of its materials,
all of its collections on one floor.
It was linear and so you
could walk from one place
to another and see the materials.
And one day, I was in the back and
they were these reams and reams
of maps produced by NASA,
triptychs for the moon landing.
It was a detailed material.
I couldn't believe it and
yet I'd heard on television
that this was the greatest feat
since Columbus had
arrived in America.
And yet what detailed mapping
had been done in preparation
for that voyage impressed me no end
and it's been enlightening
ever since.
I left the Division for about
25 years to be in Hispanic.
In '99, I came back and one
of the first things I ran
into were these two old codgers
back in the single map collection,
Bob Rhodes and Gary North.
And they were working on these
materials that were piled
up in garbage cans and in
lockers, pulling them out
and I said, "What is that?"
And they said, "Well, it's
the material that Jim Flatness
and Ralph had gotten
from Marie Tharp.
And they were working on
putting together what they knew
about the materials.
They would call Marie ever once
in a while and had conversations
to see what she was doing and
what this material is related to.
Those two pieces that I've
just discussed were things
that impressed me in Geography
and Map and they relate
to this morning's session.
First, we have -- I asked
her why if she's retired,
is she still working so hard?
Professor Emeritus, Dr. Judith
Tyner from Cal State, Long Beach.
She was in the business
for over 30-some odd years,
probably 35 years at least.
It's probably going on 40
years now but who's counting?
And she has multiple interests, not
only in women in geography and women
in cartography but tapestry
cartography and GIS.
In fact, she was the one who brought
and sustained GIS at Long Beach.
So she's had an impact in the field
as far as instructing those people
who now work directly
with producing maps
and producing materials
describing places and space.
She has multiple publications and I
was just talking to her this morning
in 2014, the Principles of Map
Design which came out in 2010
by Guilford will come
out in paperback.
She has another publication
coming out in October 2014,
A Map Reader on the World of
Maps , and this in the beginning
of 2015, she's going to have a novel
publication called Stitching the
World .
I could read on and on
about her publications
but that's not why you're here.
You're here to listen to her speak
about the tip of the iceberg,
Marie Tharp and women in mapping
in mid-century, Judith Tyner.
[ Applause ]
>> Judith A. Tyner:
That's so I can see here.
Well, I'm glad to be here and
particularly in this session
because I have another
interest that goes way back.
My master's thesis was
on maps of the moon
and I wrote it before
anybody walked on the moon.
So I guess that makes me the female
version of an old codger now.
So -- Today, first of all,
I want to thank the Library
for -- can you hear on that?
Thank the Library and the Philip
Lee Philips Society for inviting me.
And when they first asked me if I
wanted to, if I could come and talk
about Marie Tharp, I said, "Yes,
I'd be interested in doing that
but that I'd like to
also mention some
of the other women
of the 20th century."
Everybody knows -- well, I make
the assumption that everybody knows
about Marie Tharp but perhaps not so
much about some of the other women.
So it's said Marie Tharp is probably
the best known woman cartographer
of the 20th century.
She is now famous for her mapping
of the world's oceans but until
about the last 20 or so years,
even she wasn't well known
and it was only in her later years
that she received any recognition
and honors for her work.
There were many other women
who worked in obscurity
or were only recently recognized.
So today, I'm paraphrasing Lloyd
Brown who in his Classic History
of Cartography said,
"This is the story
of maps, the men who made them."
I'm looking at the story of maps
in the 20th century,
the women who made them.
Okay. There have been women
working in cartography
since before the 20th
century, of course.
And some, such as Emma Willard
and Sarah Cornell produced school
atlases in the 19th century.
They were well known in their time.
But today I'm going to look
primarily at the impact
of World War II and how it opened
doors to women in the field.
In the interest of time,
I'm only going to focus
on the United States
but we were not alone.
Great Britain, Canada, and
even Germany, were involved
and well, women in mapping.
Okay, right.
The 20th century, especially
the period
of World War II is a watershed in
cartography as we've been saying
but especially in the role of women.
Most people are familiar
with Rosie the Riveter.
She is the iconic factory
worker building planes
and other necessary war equipment
but only recently have even
the Rosie's been honored.
In 2000, the Rosie the Riveter World
War II Home Front National Historic
Park, there's a mouthful, was
opened in the Richmond, California.
And in 2007, my town of Long Beach,
California dedicated Rosie
the Riveter Park adjacent
to the former Douglas Aircraft
Factory where many Rosie's worked.
In fact, I just recently
heard that one woman
who had been there
during World War II and is
in her 90's is still
working for Boeing Aircraft
which is now on that site.
Talk about not retiring easily.
[ Laughter ]
Just last month, six
Rosie's as we see here,
were honored at the White House
and historians have become more
interested in women's war work.
There are a number of books that
have appeared such as Girls
of Atomic City by Denise
Kiernan and most recently,
Soundings by Hali Felt which
tells the story of Marie Tharp.
Women in Cartography, the group that
I'm interested in and who called
"Millie the Mapper," have had
less study and recognition.
And by the way, I was prowling
the gift shop yesterday
and discovered there
is a big display
of things about Rosie the Riveter.
Okay.
As I noted earlier,
a couple of times,
Marie Tharp is the best known
woman in 20th century cartography
and so even though I'm guessing
that many of you are familiar
with her work, I will do a
brief summary of her career.
She was born in 1920 and she
said that she owed her career
to World War II and that she would
not have made her discoveries
if not for the war.
Her father, whom she greatly
admired, was a soil surveyor
and this is his truck with
Marie as a very young girl.
And she often went
with him on his surveys
and she developed an
early interest in maps.
And we see Marie here.
She looks to be -- I've
not been able to find
out exactly how old
she was in this picture
but she looks to be about 12.
And there she is with a plane
table and alidade out in the field.
When she entered Ohio
University about 1939,
the careers that were open to women
were secretary, nurse or teacher.
And as she has pointed
out, she couldn't type.
She couldn't stand the
sight of blood and so
that left teaching even though
it didn't really interest her,
the young Marie.
She changed her major
on a regular basis.
I can relate to that and I
think a lot of geographers can.
I don't know of anybody who started
a degree in geography as a freshman,
I think just even while
I was teaching,
we never had freshmen
geography majors.
We had to lure them in.
So she changed her major frequently.
She was looking for
something that might appeal.
Ultimately when she graduated in
1943, she had majors in English
and Music and four minors.
Her last year, she happened
to take a geology class
and she saw a notice posted for
women inviting them to study
at the Geology Department at
the University of Michigan.
The women were guaranteed a
job in the petroleum industry.
A major impact of the war was that
as men enlisted or were drafted,
traditionally male
departments such as geology
or civil engineering were decimated.
Normally, these departments did
not encourage and in some cases,
did not even admit women.
But in order to survive,
that had to change.
So Tharp went to Michigan and
she became one of the PG girls,
the Petroleum Geology girls.
When she completed her Master
of Science degree in Geology,
she accepted a job in
Tulsa in the soil industry
but she wasn't really
happy with that either.
Excuse me, the oil industry.
She wasn't really happy
with that either
because she couldn't
go into the field.
And the job didn't challenge her.
So while she was in Tulsa,
she picked up another
degree in Mathematics.
After the war, let's see -- in
1948, she moved to New York,
again looking for something
more interesting,
something that would challenge her.
She was hired by Columbia
University's Lamont
Geological Observatory.
Now she was not hired
because of her geology degree.
She was not hired certainly
because of the Music degree.
The main qualification that had
interested Marie's doc [inaudible]
who was the head of the laboratory
was her ability to draft.
He asked, "Can you draft?"
And she said, "Well, yes."
She'd had a drafting class and
so that's what got her hired.
She began working with Bruce Heezen
who was another newcomer to the lab.
And this is Bruce with Marie there.
Bruce went out to sea, taking
soundings and Marie stayed on shore.
Women weren't allowed on Navy ships.
It was apparently considered
bad luck
and I'm not quite sure
what the waves did but --
Marie used methods that were devised
by Armand K. Lobeck and also used
by Irwin Royce to create
a physiographic diagram
of the topography of
the bottom of the ocean.
The stories are very well known
now but Marie noticed a rift valley
in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.
When she showed it to
Heezen, he dismissed it.
He said it was girl talk.
And mostly, he said that because
it would support the theory
of continental drift which was
then considered a crackpot idea.
Well, ultimately, as we now known,
Marie's discovery changed
the face of geology.
And the map that's most --
well, let me go back a minute.
This map is probably not one
that most people have seen.
The one we're most
familiar with is this one.
And this one wasn't actually drawn
completely by Park and Heezen
but was based on their map
and painted by Heinrich Berann
and it's called the
Portrait of the Oceans Map.
Well, Heezen died in 1977.
Tharp continued to work on
the maps until her retirement.
It was not a happy
arrangement with the laboratory.
If you want to read about academic
conflict and how bad they can get,
reading the Hali Felt
book, Soundings ,
is a good place to learn.
But she retired in 1982 and she
formed a small company to sell maps.
Only starting about 20 years or so
ago, she began to be with honors.
The Society of Woman Geographers
gave her A Lifetime Achievement
Award in 1996.
The Philip Lee Philips
Society in 1997 awarded her.
The Woods Hole Oceanographic
Laboratory honored her
as a Woman Pioneer in Oceanography.
She was given the first
Lamont-Doherty Honors Award in 2001.
She was inducted posthumously
into the National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency which used
to be the Army Maps Service
into their Hall of Fame in 2013.
There've been at least two
oral histories of Tharp
which are fascinating reading and
the Tharp-Heezen papers are here
at the Library of Congress.
Now, Tharp is deservedly well-known
but she's the tip of the iceberg.
What of the other women at the time?
What about the 99% of the iceberg?
The women who worked in cartography
during World War II and after?
Tharp, as we saw, got her start
because of the shortage of women
in the Geology Department.
But hundreds of others became
cartographers at least temporarily
because of a two-pronged problem.
First, there was a shortage of maps.
And second, there was a
shortage of men to make the maps.
Even before Pearl Harbor,
the Army recognized that maps
that the United States had
were woefully inadequate.
So in the summer of 1941
before Pearl Harbor,
while we were still
officially at peace,
the Army called upon the Tennessee
Valley Authority to make maps
of the United States' coastal
areas that were perceived
as potential Nazi invasion sites.
After December 7, 1941, the United
States needed maps for two fronts,
and the Pacific Ocean maps were
even more antiquated and scattered
than those on the east coast.
Some of the maps that
were being used were
of old French plantations,
for instance.
So therefore, on December 17th,
10 days after Pearl Harbor,
President Roosevelt signed a bill
that provided additional funding
for the completion
of mapping in areas
that the Army designated
as strategic.
And this was the proclamation.
The agencies concerned will need
a large increase in personnel.
This is estimated at from 1000
to 2000 additional employees
during the next year.
The men should, of course,
be young and able-bodied
and should preferably have
a scientific background
and have completed a short course
especially directed towards
the work.
The plan was for the Army Corps
of Engineers to receive money
and distribute it to
subcontractors including the USGS,
the US Foreign Service, the
Soil Conservation Service,
and the Tennessee Valley Authority,
each of which would produce
maps of designated areas.
The Committee on Education and
Training of the Defense Mapping,
for Defense Mapping, detailed
plans in an open letter
to the newly-formed Congress
on surveying and mapping
which is now Cartography and
Geographic Information Science.
I think that's their current term.
For training, the committee hoped
that the engineering schools would
open courses for both engineering
and liberal arts students.
The five courses that were to be
taken were Topographic Map Drafting,
two courses on Surveying Instruments
and Surveying Field Procedure,
Plane Table Topography
and Photogrammetry.
After completing the courses,
the students could take the Civil
Service Exam and they could earn
from $1440 to $1620 per year.
In the first four months of
1942, 99 courses were approved
at 57 institutions in 30 states.
So it was a real push.
Well, there were two big surprises.
First, there was a growing
tendency for women students
to enroll in the courses.
And in fact, some of the agencies
began to indicate a preference
for women for certain
kinds of work, drafting,
computing and photogrammetry.
And by computing, here of course,
we are not talking desktop computers
or even building-sized computers
but manual kinds of things.
But [inaudible] photogrammetry.
During the course of program of
education, the training courses
in Cartography and Topographic
Drafting had more women
than men enrolled and
Millie the Mapper was born.
The second surprise is that
although the assumption was
that the departments
involved in training would be
in civil engineering or surveying,
and the 14 members on the Committee
of Education and Training were
all professors of engineering
or surveying, in actuality,
some of the departments
were geography departments.
And many of those involved
in mapping
at other government
agencies notably the OSS,
the Office of Strategic
Services, the forerunner
of the CIA, were geographers.
Well, what did the women do?
Now I realize that
you can't read this.
I'm just putting it up here mostly
so that you can see a partial list
of some of the women that we know
of and since I've started working
on this and have been here this
weekend, I've had people coming up
and saying, "Well, do you
know about so and so?"
So I have a little work to do.
By the end of the war, thousands
of women have been involved
in cartographic work at all levels,
drafting, cartographic research,
libraries, training in cartography,
and map reading were all included.
The majority of the
women were employed
in the subprofessional
levels as drafters
and the title would be
something along the lines
of Junior Engineering,
Cartographic, Topographic,
Photogrammetric Draftsman which
was the lowest level to Chief fill
in the blank Cartographic,
Topographic,
Photogrammetric Draftsman,
the highest of the
subprofessional grades.
And although the primary
reason probably
for women seeking these jobs
was the lack of available men.
It was pushed.
But another reason was
the high level of pay,
$1640 a year in 1942
is the equivalent
of about $24,000 plus today.
Now it doesn't seem like
a huge sum but it was more
than most women could
earn at that time.
And it was roughly equivalent
to a beginning draftsperson's
salary today.
The Army Map Service
was the major employer.
And they were the overarching
agency.
In 1940, the AMS employed a
total of 100 civilian employees
and you would put that one up
there because there's no breakdown
on numbers of women
versus men at that point.
But by 1942, they had over 2100
employees, 500 of them were women.
A year later, the number had, the
total had doubled and the number
of women went up fourfold.
The highest percentage of
women was in 1945, 58%.
And then as you could see from the
graph, the numbers dropped in 1946.
The men returned and the women
were partially terminated.
The Army Map Service magazine
at the time was called Reference
Point and it dubbed these women the
Military Mapping Maidens.
Now, any feminist geographer
now would cringe at this title.
But Bea McPherson, who is in her
90's and has just donated a lot
of her papers from this time, she
worked for them at the beginning
of 1943 and she said the women
thought the term was appropriate
and kind of cute.
So times, they can change.
Another major employer
was -- oh, that's good.
All right, there we go.
This is Bea McPherson.
She was being honored as
a Military Mapping Maiden.
Another major employer of women
was the TVA which was operating
under the auspices of AMS.
And beginning in March of '42 which
was three months after Pearl Harbor,
they began training and employing
women in drafting, computing,
cartography and photogrammetry.
By 1944, 230 women
had been employed,
of whom 185 were college women
and they were mostly graduates.
15 women had professional positions.
The OSS whose Cartographic Division
was headed by Arthur Robinson,
who I think many of you heard
of, hired women geographers
to do research work for mapping
and also for photogrammetry.
The military branches also recruited
women for cartographic work.
The WAVES, Women Auxiliary Volunteer
Service, something like that,
and the WACS which was the Army
branch, offered special training
in cartography to officers.
And these are two recruiting
posters from the time.
Does that work?
Well, no. The one on the
left is for a cartographer
and that's exactly what
it spells out there.
And the one on the right was
for a topographic draftsman.
So these women were not
just in government agencies.
They were also in the military.
One notable woman of those
who were not employed
by government agencies
was Edith Putnam Parker.
She was a geography
professor and textbook author
at the University of Chicago.
And she trained cartographers
both male and female
as a part of the Army program.
She also served as the
Educational Director
for the Army Map Service
Corps of Engineers.
Another group that we don't often
hear of are the Map Librarians.
At the beginning of the war, not
only were the maps inadequate,
they were scattered in many
collections throughout the country.
And the War Department was seeking
old maps, city plans, port plans,
anything they could get for all
places outside the United States
to create new maps and
for intelligence work.
The public was asked to donate
or loan maps for the duration
until they could be reproduced.
They were to be sent to Ms. Viola
-- yeah, Viola Klippel of --
was the head of the New York Library
branch of the Army Map Service.
The New York Public Library was
also involved and in addition
to Ms. Klippel were
Clara Egli LeGear
who was a long-time Assistant
Chief of Geography and Maps here
at the Library of Congress,
and Dorothy Lewis,
who was the Map Librarian
for the Department of State.
Women were employed at
professional levels in all agencies
and also began then to participate
in professional organizations.
One such was Elizabeth Herlihy.
She was the Chair of the
Massachusetts State Planning Board.
And she made a presentation
to the Congress
on surveying and mapping in 1944.
And the report on her presentation
which you can read there,
Ms. Elizabeth Herlihy,
the first woman to appear
on a Congress program,
glamorized surveying and mapping.
She covered a broad field of
state planning and pointed
out specific cases with respect to
surveying and mapping information.
She won the attention and hearty
applause of all those present
and even the hardboiled engineers
and surveyors were made to realize
that a woman's place transcends
the boundaries of home.
Well, despite the paternalistic
term of this --
tone of this little
piece that was published,
the reviewer was impressed and her
paper was published as an article
in the 1945 Bulletin
of the American Congress
on Surveying and Mapping .
Well, what happened when
Johnny came marching home other
than the famous Times
Square picture?
By 1944, numbers of women
trained in cartography
and photogrammetry
had made an impact
and postwar possibilities
were being considered.
It had been assumed that the women
would terminate their employment
or be terminated at
the end of the war.
A.O. Quinn of the TVA wrote an
article in the Congress on Surveying
and Mapping Bulletin on women
and surveying and mapping.
In the article, he
reviewed women's training
and their postwar probabilities.
He noted that the utilization of
women in the field had been hampered
because colleges didn't
encourage women to take science,
math and mechanical drawing.
And this forced employers
to provide the training.
However, he felt that the war had
changed the outlook of colleges
and that there would be better
qualified women after the war.
But he said, the call of the
home will still be with us
and the investment of
time and effort involved
in a complete engineering
education is greater than warranted
by the relatively brief space
during which the average girl works
between the end of her schooldays
and the beginning of married life.
He did note that there
was some successful women
who had made this work their life's
careers but in 1944, it was assumed
that women would get
married and that any woman
with a career was not married.
Quinn also assumed that
cartography was an engineering field
and that both men and women
would come from that field.
So what did happen when
Johnny came marching home?
Yes, many women were
terminated usually
because their jobs were given to
men returning from the military.
The graph of the AMS
workers makes that clear.
But there were some women especially
in the professional
grades that made careers.
One of those was Evelyn Lord Pruitt.
She was notable in this area.
She began her career with the
US Coast and Geodetic Survey
as a cartographer and later was
at the Office of Naval Research.
She is probably most remembered
because she coined the
term, "remote sensing".
At the time of her retirement,
she was the highest ranking
woman scientist in the US Navy.
Another notable woman was Carole
Beaver who began her career
with the Army Map Service and
later moved to the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration
where she became the Director
of the Office of Aeronautical
Charting
and Cartography and retired in 1996.
She was an active participant
in the International Cartographic
Association and she became Co-Chair
of the Commission on Gender
and Cartography for the ICA.
Another example of the immediate
postwar period was Frances Hanson.
Frances received a PhD
in 1948 and she worked
as Program Director for the AMS.
The AMS was determined not
to get caught short again.
So they instituted an applied
cartography training program
in 1951.
Dr. Hanson was selected to
be the Program Director.
She not only directed the program
for 25 colleges and universities,
she also developed the
visual and textual materials
to be used in the program.
An indication that not all women had
planned on returning to homemaking
after the war can be seen
in the growing membership
in professional organizations.
And again, I know you
can't read this carefully.
The top is 1942 and
the second one is 1946.
The American Congress on Surveying
and Mapping was founded in 1941.
And as I said earlier,
it later became CaGIS.
There were 163 members
in 1941, all male.
In 1942, four women had joined.
And by 1946, there
were 24 women members.
And on this list, you know,
there's quite a number from the TVA
and lists various agencies
that they worked for.
The American Society of
Professional Geographers
in 1946 had 110 women members,
20% of whom expressed the
interest in cartography.
And the Association of American
Geographers made a preliminary list
of members with a special
interest in cartography.
252 members responded,
40 of them were women.
It would seem unlikely that a
woman would join a professional
organization if she didn't
intend to continue in the field.
So the majority of women
cartographers worked in business
or government, and their positions
ranged from low-level drafting
to supervisory jobs but many
of them did determine to go on.
Now another aspect of 20th
century cartography and women --
excuse me, is the academic aspect.
This is one of the
better known women
in academic cartography, Judy Olson.
By the 1950's, major changes were
taking place in academic cartography
and this was for both women and men.
Before World War II, while
some cartography was taught
in Geography Departments, it
wasn't considered real geography.
Geographers didn't write theses and
dissertations or books and articles
on cartographic subjects with the
occasional exception of something
on the history of cartography
or something on map projections.
Women rarely taught
cartography because many
of the courses were taught
in schools of engineering.
Subjects such as cartographic
design or the impact of maps
on readers weren't considered.
After the war, geographers who had
worked as cartographers returned
and they changed the field.
Arthur H. Robinson who
had been in Washington,
DC with the OSS completed
a PhD at Ohio State
in 1947 writing what is considered
the first true cartographic
dissertation which
was the Foundations
of Cartographic Methodology.
This later became the very
well known book, the classic,
we might say, The Look of Maps .
He became a professor at the
University of Wisconsin in Madison.
All right.
George Jenks was a lieutenant
in the Army Air Corps.
His last assignment was as an
instructor in aerial navigation.
That piqued his interest
in geography.
And so while he was working on
his dissertation at Syracuse,
he met the celebrated
cartographer Richard Edes Harrison
who furthered his interest
in cartography.
He was hired at the
University of Kansas in 1949
and completed his doctoral
dissertation which happened to be
in agricultural geography in 1950.
But George developed the cartography
graduate program at Kansas.
John C. Sherman, who's the only
one of this group who wasn't
in the military, received
his BA in Geography in 1937,
entered Clark University to pursue
an MA and ultimately received a PhD.
Norman Thrower, the fourth of
the group, while only three
or four years younger than
Robinson, Jenks and Sherman,
didn't begin teaching
at UCLA until 1957.
He spent the war years with the
British Army in India working
in mapping and photogrammetry.
At the end of the war,
he returned to England
and joined the Directorate
of Colonial Surveys,
later Overseas Surveys.
It was only in 1947 that he began
his academic career with a BA
in Geography at the University
of Virginia, a PhD with Robinson
at Wisconsin in 1957 but he was
also influenced while at Virginia
by Richard Edes Harrison
and Erwin Royce.
He did a cartography
thesis on cadastral surveys.
These four men were
all early mentors
to women graduate students
in cartography.
While there was a lag between the
first dissertations by men and those
by women, several women wrote
master's theses in cartography
in the early 60's and in 1966,
Mei-Ling Hsu pictured here,
wrote the first cartography
dissertation by a woman.
Had to do with isorhythmic maps.
Her advisor was Arthur Robinson.
The 1970's brought a burst of
activity, okay, for both men
and women with 42 cartography
dissertations during
that time between '69 and '82.
Eleven of them were by women.
And those women became
the first cadre
of female cartography professors
and were also instrumental
in professional organizations,
for example, Judy Olson,
who we saw earlier was the third
female president of the AAG.
Patricia Caldwell was the
president of the American Congress
on Surveying and Mapping.
Most of the PhD's became university
professors as one might expect
but some went into industry
and some worked in both areas.
Barbara Bartz Petchenik
was one of the earliest
who obtained high visibility
in commercial map publishing.
But others founded
their own companies
for cartographic consulting
or specialty map making
such as Patricia Caldwell.
By the end of the 20th century,
companies such as Rand McNally
and Environmental Systems
Research Institute known better
as ESRI had high-ranking
women in service
and supervising divisions
of the company.
Local, state and federal governments
and agencies employed women
in design, in research
and in production.
In 1975, John Walter, who
succeeded Walter Ristow here,
wrote a dissertation on the
emerging discipline of cartography.
In it, he notes not only the
rise of geographic cartography
but also the rise in the number
of professional organizations
and journals in the field.
I've mentioned some of
the organizations already,
Congress on Surveying
and Mapping later CaGIS,
the North American
Cartographic Information Society,
NACIS and the International
Cartographic Association.
Canada had their own,
Great Britain also.
Women have been active in
publishing in the journals
but not only were women members,
they also became officers.
Judy Olson was the
first woman president
of the American Cartographic
Association.
NACIS has had nine female presidents
since 1981 and both the president
and president-elect
of CaGIS are women.
While women gained a foothold in
cartography after World War II,
the woman's movement of the
1960's gave an additional push.
Affirmative action and equal
opportunity employment laws made it
difficult to refuse entry
to graduate programs
or to jobs to qualified women.
There were some inequities
remaining however.
One female cartographer, who
has asked to remain nameless
but that I interviewed at one
point, said that when she went
out to interview for a
job, the interviewer said,
"I have to interview you
because you're qualified.
But I don't like women
in my company."
When I began -- and this
is on a personal note.
When I began my PhD program, a year
after my husband began his program
in the same department; my interview
was quite different from his.
Apparently, the department wanted
to be sure I wasn't just
a bored housewife looking
for something to amuse me.
And so I had some interesting
questions along those lines.
Professional organizations began
to be aware of underrepresentation
in the field and they
did studies on women
in cartography in the
1980's and 90's.
The International Cartographic
Association formed a commission
on women and prepared
a report on gender
and equality in the organization.
The AAG instituted a committee
on the status of women.
Now, where do we stand now?
I did a quick and dirty, no other
word for it, survey of women
in cartographic organizations
in the 21st century to find
out what the current
percentages are.
And even though we're
talking about the 20th,
let's see where we are now.
The numbers of women were -- are
approximations because my data,
the organizations now
are not doing much
in keeping records of
what is the gender.
They're not asking that as much
which is probably a
sign of progress.
And so the data were lists of names.
And so in many cases, I
had to guess at gender.
It's amazing how many names
can be either male or female.
But what is surprising to me is
how consistent the figures were.
As you see these graphs, and then
these two are fairly similar.
The NACIS had 1221 members of
which 355 or 29% were female.
CaGIS had 26% female.
The Cartography Specialty Group
of the AAG has 1206 members
of whom approximately
338 or 28% are female.
Of course, there's a considerable
overlap with many of the same people
of course belonging
to the same group.
Most of the people in the
Cartography Specialty Group are also
in NACIS or also in the
GIS group and so forth.
One aspect of women in mapping that
I haven't discussed because there is
at this point, very little
information is the role
of women in GIS.
We saw the number of women in
the GIS Specialty Group and many
of these women are also
in CaGIS just the same.
In 1999, there was a
group called the Society
of Women in GIS was formed.
I've talked to a couple of friends
who are working in industry in GIS
and they weren't familiar with it
so I'm not sure how active it is.
Part of the problem with knowing
where we stand in this area is
that although GIS has had a
major impact in the field,
it's still new enough that GIS
practitioners are only now looking
at its history.
I only know of one book out
there at the moment that deals
with the history of
geographic information science
or systems, take your pick.
So who were the early
women in the field of GIS?
What role did they play?
And so, I therefore leave this
presentation with a question mark.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> As with our program yesterday,
we'll wait until both speakers
have completed their presentations
to field questions.
Thank you very much, Dr. Tyner.
It's a pleasure to
introduce our next speaker
who is Dr. Philip Stooke.
He's an Associate Professor with
a cross appointment with physics
and astronomy at the
University of Western Ontario.
And his work is just
completely out of space.
His research in the area of lunar
and planetary exploration
and mapping.
He's interested in the history
of cartography especially dealing
with the moon and the planets and
involved with geological studies
of other worlds especially Mars.
He's had a number of books and
articles and chapters in books.
For instance, the International
Atlas of Mars Exploration Volume I
which came out in 2012 and in 2007,
he had a work on the International
Atlas of Lunar Exploration.
He is now compiling a two-volume
Atlas on Mars Exploration.
One of the things that interested
me was this Canadian scientist
from England, in October of
1997, there was an article
in Natural Science which read,
an American spacecraft lost on Mars
for 21 years has finally been
located by a geography professor
at the University of
Western Ontario.
Using a technique of his devising,
planetary expert Philip Stooke
has pinpointed the exact location
of the Viking II spacecraft which
landed on Mars on September 3, 1976.
The discovery could lead
to a more precise mapping
of the planet which
he has been doing.
Today, we'll hear Professor Stooke
Mapping of the Worlds: Asteroids
and Other Non-Spherical
Objects , Professor Stooke.
[ Applause ]
>> Philip Stooke: Thank you.
It's really nice to be here.
This isn't my first visit
to the Library of Congress.
Such a wonderful place and it's
great to share the podium here
with so many wonderful speakers.
So I'm really enjoying my
opportunity to do this.
Yes, I'm talking about
mapping other worlds.
Now the piece that I wrote for the
history of cartography volume was
about lunar and planetary
cartography in the 20th century.
And here I'm going to take one
tiny part of that and expand it
so I can go into much more detail
about this very narrow area.
But it's the area that I did
my PhD and we'll look at that
in quite a bit of detail here.
The background picture on my
slide which we'll go all the way
through the presentation is a
picture of Phobos, one of the moons
of Mars which will
figure quite prominently
in this story as I tell it.
I'm talking about history
so I'm going
to take a chronological approach.
We'll go through and see
how this field has evolved.
I also have an interest in knowing
how new ideas come into being.
How a new idea is developed
and evolves
until it becomes something
practical that can be used.
So I'm actually going to follow
the story of my involvement in this
from the very beginning when
it was just a crude idea
to show how it was developed
into something more practical.
And also, of course, look at
the work of many other people.
A couple of other things
I should say.
I'm using the expression of
world here as a kind of catch-all
to include planets and moons,
asteroids, and comet nuclei.
Comet nucleus is the tiny
world in the heart of a comet.
When astronomers look up at a comet
in the sky, they see a big cloud
of gas and dust but in the middle
of it is a tiny little object,
a world which is really
just an icy asteroid.
So it's another kind of world.
And in this rather loose use of the
word world, I'm including anything
that might be mapped
in the solar system.
And I suppose I should
really even include the sun.
You can make maps of
the sun and people do.
So actually there are quite a lot
of things that could be mapped,
not all of which are
considered frequently by people
who aren't involved in that work.
So I'm also talking about
non-spherical objects then.
So the real focus of this
is about how we make maps
of things which are not spheres.
Now of course, in our
beautiful planet Earth,
it's not a sphere but
it's very close.
It's very, very close indeed.
So if you take the maximum
radius of this solid Earth
and the minimum radius, would it go
from the highest mountain
near the equator to the bottom
of the Arctic Ocean, so that
we're not just looking at height
above sea level but also
the equatorial bulge
and polar flattening.
Those maximum and minimum radii
differ by less than half of 1%.
The Earth is very, very
close to being a sphere.
I'm interested in things
which are quite different.
So this is there -- that's
not quite spherical, is it?
This is an asteroid called Ichikawa.
This isn't a computer rendering.
These are pictures that were taken
by a Japanese spacecraft
a few years ago.
So that is distinctly non-spherical.
How on earth are we going
to make a map of that?
It's certainly going to
challenge our conventional ideas
about how maps should be made.
So this is the kind of object that
I'm going to be concerned with.
Now of course, we have been
mapping spherical objects
for a very long time.
This is one of the
reconstructions of Ptolemy
from a manuscript in
the British Library.
For more than 2000 years, people
have been trying to decide
and to develop methods for
mapping a spherical object
onto a flat piece of paper.
Now actually, you're
going to hear later today
that Ptolemy has passed
away [laughter].
He's dropped off the twig.
He is no more.
But [inaudible] actually,
he's just resting.
[Inaudible] he's just setting off
on a long journey across
the solar system.
So yes, we've been doing
this for a long time,
mapping a sphere onto a plane.
And it was very easy for people
to adapt those ideas to make maps
of other spherical objects.
So these maps of the moon and
Mars, they were easy to work
with because we had already
developed those techniques.
But we ran into problems in 1971 and
1972 when an American spacecraft,
Mariner Nine, entered
orbit around Mars.
This was the first spacecraft
to orbit any other planet.
There had been things
orbiting the moon before that
but this was the first object
to orbit any other planet.
And Mariner Nine gave us the
first detailed photographs of Mars
which is spherical so there
wasn't a big problem mapping Mars.
But it also provided
photographs of these two objects,
Phobos and Deimos,
the moons of Mars,
which are quite irregular in shape.
Never before had we
seen an object which was
so distinctly non-spherical
and here we had two of them.
Perhaps we should just say a word
about why they can be non-spherical.
Earth is spherical because it has
such a powerful gravitational field
that it can squeeze itself
into a ball, into a sphere.
It's flattened a bit at
the poles by rotation.
But basically, its gravity is strong
enough to overcome the strength
of the rock and squeeze
it into a spherical shape.
That applies to the
moon and so on as well.
But if an object is very small,
its gravity is too weak to do that
and so a small object like this,
Phobos is only about 25 kilometers
across in average radius, Deimos
only about half that size.
There just isn't enough
gravity to overcome the strength
of the material they're made of
and squeeze them into a ball.
So a little object like
this can be any shape just
like a boulder on the beach.
Its shape is just an indication
of how it's been battered
by the various forces
that have shaped it.
So we first saw things like
these in 1971 and 1972.
And sooner or later, somebody was
going to have to make a map of this.
Do we need maps of these objects?
We might legitimately
ask that question.
Do we maps of these objects?
But of course, you know,
we make maps of Earth --
well, maps of Earth for
many different reasons
but I suppose we could say you know,
we're trying to organize
our information especially
to make global maps.
We're trying to organize
information about the entire globe
and to represent it in a
convenient graphic like that to help
to plan things, to help to analyze
things, to help to record things.
So we're just as likely to want
to do those kinds of things.
Analyzing data sets, trying
to record discoveries,
trying to organize our
information about a whole object.
We're just as likely to want to do
that for these objects
as for a spherical one.
And if Phobos and Deimos
are not quite spherical,
the situation got much worse as
we explored the solar system.
Look at these objects here.
These are asteroids, very,
very peculiar shapes.
Extremely elongated, often with
large chunks not that often
by impacts, very, very
irregular objects.
I don't see anything on here
about the sizes of them.
They're all small.
They have to be small in order
to be non-spherical like this.
That little one, Ichikawa, in the
lower right, the one that was imaged
by the Japanese spacecraft
is only 600 meters long.
So that's a very small object.
Aida, up above it there,
is 60 kilometers long.
So there's a considerable
variation in size and in fact,
generally speaking, objects
up to about 500 kilometers
across 300 miles, can
be irregular in shape.
And once they get larger than
that, then they tend to collapse
into more spherical objects.
So yes, how are we
going to map these?
And in particular, the kind
of thing that I was involved
with was how we would
develop map projections
that worked for objects like this?
Now, those are asteroids.
These are comet nuclei, also
very irregular in shape.
A comet nucleus is just
an icy asteroid really.
But there are untold thousands
of these things so more
than a hundred thousand
asteroids are known to us.
Today, more than 200,000 probably,
the number goes up so rapidly
that it's hard to keep track.
And they're obviously going
to be millions of these things
in the solar system altogether.
So there's no shortage of
things to make maps of.
Now, somebody, of course,
had to start this work.
As I said, the first pictures
of these non-spherical worlds,
Phobos and Deimos, the moons of
Mars were taken in 1971 and 1972
by the Mariner Nine spacecraft.
Here it is, one of the
pictures of Phobos.
And there's [inaudible],
Tom Duxbury.
It was a person who first made a map
and the map I show there is
the first map ever compiled
of a non-spherical object.
I know it's not perhaps the
greatest map we've ever seen
but this is a sort of you
know, the [inaudible] here.
Perhaps this is the wrong
place to try a gag like that.
I don't know.
But anyway, yes, it's a
[inaudible] map of Phobos.
So how do you go about this?
The world is -- this world of
Phobos is somewhat elongated.
I said, its 25 kilometers
average radius.
It's about 20 by 30
kilometers in its dimensions.
So it's somewhat elongated.
And Duxbury here made an ellipsoidal
grid and laid it over the images,
making very careful measurements.
First, he had to make very careful
measurements of many pictures of it.
There were more than
20 pictures of Phobos.
And actually, that's a good point.
We are generally dealing with pretty
small datasets for these things.
There were about 25 pictures
of Phobos and that was it.
That was all we ever
knew of this world.
And they weren't terribly detailed.
But he made careful
measurements from them
and determined the overall shape
and degree of elongation and so on
and devised a sort
of ellipsoidal model
that would roughly
represent its shape.
And here he's overlaid an
ellipsoidal grid on a couple
of the images at lower right.
And from that, you can transfer
the surface features in a drawing
from grid cell on the body
to grid cell on the map.
But this map projection
there, it doesn't take
into account the non-spherical
shape of this object.
He's just really traced the grid off
a terrestrial cylindrical projection
map there with a couple
of little polar insets.
Transferred the features
onto it and made his map.
So there's nothing in that about map
projections really once you get pass
the initial ellipsoidal grid.
But here we do come to a little
bit of work on that projection.
So Ralph Turner was a
scientific illustrator.
Well, he is, he's not dead yet.
I should say he is a scientific
illustrator and modeler working
at the University of
Arizona in Tucson.
He did develop a new map projection.
He took those same
photographs of Phobos
and made a plaster
model, a physical model.
Basically, he started out with
something that was roughly elongated
in the way that Phobos is.
And then by orienting it to match
the view in an individual image,
he would then sculpt it, cutting
into it a crater, building onto it
with a ridge, until his
three-dimensional model matched the
shape of the object and duplicated
its appearance in all the images.
Then he could put a grid on
that and he made a map of it.
And so we have a couple of
maps here, a contour map
and an illuminated contour map of
the southern hemisphere of Phobos.
It's not a sphere so I
shouldn't really say hemisphere
but I've never been able to come
up with an appropriate
alternative word.
So I'm going to stick
with that expression even
if it's the most bizarrely
shaped object.
So for the southern hemisphere
of Phobos, he made these maps
and of course, corresponding
maps for the north.
And he's used a projection that's
an azimuthal equivalent projection
but he's elongated it so that
it roughly represents the
elongated shape.
And this was the first attempt
to modify [inaudible] projection
to reproduce, to map
the surface of Phobos.
A few years later, a few years
after Mariner Nine anyway,
but about the time that Turner
was doing that work, in 1977,
the Viking spacecraft also
took pictures of Phobos.
Viking was a wonderful mission, the
first landers on the surface of Mars
and two orbiters that maps
the planet in much more detail
than we had before, and
imaged the two moons
in considerably more detail.
And one of the most fascinating
discoveries about Phobos was
that it was covered with a
system of grooves or long valleys
that we see here in a couple of
pictures, still not explained.
We don't really understand.
There are many competing ideas
about how they might have formed.
But of course, they had
to be added to new maps.
So a new generation
of maps was required.
And this is where I first
came into this story.
Looking at these pictures, I
wanted to know how the pattern
of grooves was associated
with the overall degree
of elongation of the body.
Do they run from end
to end, for instance?
Or around the waist,
if I can call it that,
the middle of object perpendicular
to the degree of elongation?
Or are they just sort
of randomly oriented?
So I decided to make a
first little map of Phobos.
And how am I going to do that?
Well, it's an egg [laughter].
Yes, cartography in the 20th
century is not all about GIS.
Sometimes, we use eggs [laughter].
So in this case, you know,
you can imagine how
something like this is made.
You know, when people do
this for Easter decorations,
you take one egg, make a little
hole in each end and apply the lips
to one end of it and puff until
you're almost having a heart attack
and you squeeze the egg out
of the other hole into a pan
and you have it for breakfast.
And then when the egg is dried off
a bit, you can make a map on it.
So I did that.
You're just holding the egg and
when you hold it broadside on
and I can sketch on the
details from a broadside image
and then turn it end on
and I can add the details
from an end on image.
And so then I gradually
built up this globe.
This priceless cartographic
artifact is still in existence.
It hasn't been snapped up by any
major collections yet [laughter].
And this is actually the
first time I've ever shown it
to anybody but there it is anyway.
Okay so, anyway, you can make
a map on an egg and I did.
And I actually even had the
temerity to tell you about it.
And I should just add this
like it's such a Russian globe
that it shows actually that
Phobos can be represented
as something vaguely
egg-shaped and I'll talk more
about that globe in a minute.
Now somebody with much more of
an academic credential of mine
at the time, Peter Thomas,
doing his PhD work at Cornell,
made new maps showing the
grooves and other features
that were revealed
in these new images.
He also made a map of Deimos there.
So Thomas made new maps of these
objects and I started to think
at that point, well, maybe I
could do a slightly better job
than that egg thing.
What would these new features look
like if we could map them using
Ralph Turner's projection,
that elongated [inaudible]
projection?
So I started to play
around with that.
And this is, yeah, admittedly
a very crude sketch map here.
It's not very exciting, you know,
but this was just an attempt
to take Turner's map projection
and apply those new features to it.
It shows the overall degree of
elongation of Phobos and maps it
into equatorial hemispheres.
Turner earlier made
polar pole-centered maps
and I made equatorial-centered
maps just
to differentiate them a
little bit from his work.
But it's his projection.
But let's just think of
it just for a second.
This is representing the
elongated shape of Phobos
by making an elongated map.
But what are we going
to do with Deimos?
This is Deimos.
Viking images of Deimos, much
better than the Mariner Nine ones.
It has a very bizarre shape.
It's not at all well
represented just by an ellipsoid.
And in particular, we can see that
it has a kind of faceted outline
with relatively flat areas separated
by quite sharp ridges which run
across the surface in different
places and a very large hollow
in the southern hemisphere, a
remnant of an ancient impact.
So if Phobos which is roughly
ellipsoidal can be represented
on an elliptical map
to indicate its shape,
what do we do with this object?
So I started to think about
modifying the map outline
and the grid within it to
somehow suggest this kind
of shape, and this was the map.
And again, these are
very crude sketch maps
from the early 80's here.
But it represented the
beginning of a concept
that you could somehow
modify the grid
to represent the shape
of this object.
So that was the [inaudible].
So these were published
in a little sort
of popular book about astronomy.
But of course, they're
not very sophisticated
and I did want to try to do better.
So while I was still an
undergraduate at the University
of Victoria in British Columbia,
I did a project and I should say
because this follows on so
nicely from the previous talk,
that the professor who oversaw
this was Patricia Gilmartin,
who's one of people just mentioned
in the previous talk there.
So she oversaw this
research project for me.
I made new shaded relief drawings of
the moons using all the best images
that were available at the time.
I developed a little bit
more of an idea of the shape.
Phobos itself is not
a perfect ellipsoid.
It has lumps and bumps and hollows.
It has a bit of a hollow
near the South Pole and some
of the little bulges elsewhere.
So I was still playing
around with this idea.
How do you modify the outline
to somehow suggest the shape?
Not just this degree of elongation
but finer details of the shape?
So that's what I was doing here
and Pat Gilmartin suggested
that I should submit them to the
National Geographic Society's Award
in Cartography and I did.
And I was the winner.
So I was very happy with that
and it encouraged me to go
on and do this in my PhD.
This is the Deimos map
and again, we can see how
that the South Pole hollow and
to some extent, the flattening
in some areas and the
sharp curvature moving
into another facet are
represented by the grid.
So I'm beginning to
develop this idea
that the grid itself can be
modified to tell us something
about the shape, even
though at this time,
I didn't really know what I
was doing or how I could get
to accomplish this in
any practical manner?
So this was very ad-hoc but
I was developing an idea.
All right, so now we come to
my PhD work and by this time,
Pat had moved on so I was
working with a different adviser.
And an adviser who actually knew
far less about this than I did.
But he -- still he
signed off on the thing
so that was all right [laughter].
So I decided to work with
azimuthal projections.
I like azimuthal projections
because for the spherical Earth,
an azimuthal projection
of a hemisphere gives
you a nice circular map.
So it's showing you the
cross sectional shape.
Perhaps that's not exactly the way
that Lambert imagined what
he was doing but still,
you know, it does work that way.
And so, the top box here, I'm
going to look at equations
in any detail obviously but there
is a capital R in that equation
which is the radius of the globe
that generates the map projection.
All map projection equations look
like this with two equations,
one to give you the X coordinate
of the position on the map
and one the Y coordinate.
And in both of those
projections, there was a capital R,
the radius of the globe
that is generating the map.
You take the entire Earth, this
great big Earth and you shrink it
down maybe until it's 150 millionth
of its size to make a little globe
and that drives the projection
and makes a map on a piece
of paper the size that you want.
So the radius of that
generating globe is capital R.
Now on a sphere, the radius
is the same everywhere.
So R in mathematical terms
or in computer programming
terms is a constant.
It's always the same.
It always has the same value.
But on the objects I'm looking
at where the shape is irregular,
the radius is not a constant.
It changes from place to place.
So somehow or other, this was how I
decided I was going to go about it.
I was going to make the radius,
not a constant, but a variable,
something that could be different
from place to place across the map.
And in order to know what the radius
was, I would have to model the shape
of the object as a big
matrix or array of radii.
So I'd have a great big table and
at every position in that table,
there would be a radius
at a certain point.
And as you go through the
table, you're just mapping
at the different radii
at different places.
So when this is put into a computer
program to generate the projection,
at every point, it has to go and
look up the radius at that location
and that's what the bottom
equation is doing there.
And lo and behold,
we have a projection
that will actually do the kinds
of things that I'm trying to do.
Now, I'm talking about that I'm
modeling the shape of an object
but there are different
ways to do this.
The obvious shape that you
would use to model a shape
of an object is its
actual topography.
But as we've seen from some of those
pictures, the actual topography
of some of these things
can be quite irregular.
So a considerable simplification
of that, of course,
is just an ellipsoidal model as we
were kind of looking out for Phobos.
You overlay an ellipsoid
on the object,
it's sort of relatively smooth but
it indicates how elongated it is.
And there's a special version
of an ellipsoid called
a triaxial ellipsoid
that is used for this kind of work.
So you have actual topography
is one [inaudible] model.
A triaxial ellipsoid is another.
It's a simple shape.
It shows how elongated it is
but it's missing many
fine details of the shape.
And there's a third possible
shape, the convex hull.
A convex hull of a shape
keeps all of the bulges
but it flattens out the hollows.
Sometimes people think of it
as kind of shrinking a balloon
around a shape and it will
still bulge at around the lumps
on that shape but it'll be
flattened across the hollows.
And so these are different ways
of representing the shape of one
of these objects and they all have
their place in this kind of work.
So here's a set of grids of Deimos.
This is Deimos, the
little moon of Mars.
The upper left is the
actual topography.
It's an orthographic projection.
It has a 10-degree grid on it.
And then down below that is an
equivalent projection using this
technique of mine of
making the radius variable
in the generation of the grid.
Because the map projection
illustrates the shape,
I call it a morphographic
projection,
a shape-drawing projection,
if you like.
So that's supposedly an equivalent
projection, the idea there is
that you take the equation
for an equal area
or equivalent azimuthal map and you
just feed in all the different radii
and it distorts it
back to that shape.
In doing so, it loses the equality
of true equivalence or equal area.
It's not too bad but it
loses the precise nature
of that characteristic.
I'll be talking about that
more later in connection
with somebody else's work.
Upper right is a conformal
version of that.
And then down below is the convex
hull version which flattens
out the south polar depression.
It still shows you
the overall shape.
But it reduces the
distortions in this [inaudible]
to some extent using
the convex hull.
So there's different
ways we might do this.
And a couple of finished
maps, that's Phobos.
The image in that map is a
global photomosaic of pictures
from many different spacecraft.
I compiled that mosaic
and I'm going to talk
about compiling mosaics in a minute.
So we have a photomosaic map.
We have a morpographic projection,
morphographic equidistant
in this case although it loses the
true equidistance characteristic.
It's the convex hull of the
shape that is being used
to drive the projection
so they have --
there are the others from my
Atlas of Mars exploration.
And for Deimos without the labels
but it's doing the same thing here.
The two sides of Deimos with
a grid showing the shape
of that object again on the
convex hull of the shape.
So that's the work that I've
been doing along those lines.
And I will talk about making
the photomosaics later.
That's also a photomosaic
of Deimos there.
But there are other ways
to do this kind of thing.
We're not always wanting to
make a global map for instance.
So I've been making global
maps in two hemispheres.
But sometimes, you want to
make it a more detailed map
of a specific area, a
quadrangle map, if you like.
And I think about it as a sphere.
If you make, if you define a
quadrangle, a limited extent
of latitude and longitude
on a sphere
and then you go marching all the way
around the world at that latitude,
all of the quadrangles will have the
same shape around a specific zone
of -- I'm sorry, zone
of latitude as you go
for longitude around the globe.
In one specific zone of latitude,
they all have the same shape.
But that's not going to be
true on an elongated object.
If you make a quadrangle like that
in the middle of the broad side
and then another one at the
end of the elongated object,
they'll be different shapes.
And we see that here with
two quadrangles of Phobos,
a set of maps that I made.
And I should say that many of these
maps are available to download
from NASA's planetary data system.
NASA makes an enormous amount of
material available free to anybody
and on its planetary data
system at the section called
"the small bodies node for
asteroids and other small objects."
I have a set of maps that
are available to download.
So these quadrangle maps are there.
These turned out to have
a special characteristic
which is illustrated here with
a map of the northern hemisphere
of an asteroid called "Gaspra."
And I'm using this as an example
because it's more elongated
than Phobos so it illustrates
this a bit better.
First, it's a polar quadrangle,
if it there is a quadrangle
at the pole, in the middle and
then around that quadrangles
that reach some 60 degrees north
to the equator, mapping
out the surface.
We're going to have partial
photographic coverage
for this object.
But we can see that the one in
the middle of the broad side
and the one that's towards the
end have very different shapes.
But perhaps you get
a sense from the way
that I've put them together there.
If you cut that out and fold it
up and paste those sides together,
it actually makes something
that roughly approximates
a globe of the object.
And I've done this; I think
globes of Phobos and Deimos
and the northern hemisphere
of this asteroid.
So that's actually a
useful characteristic.
So here, using the triaxial
ellipsoid as the shape
but a morphographic
map of that shape,
of that triaxial ellipsoid shape,
they will fold up to make a globe.
Now of course, a globe [inaudible]
should be much narrower than these
which are 60 degrees wide.
But of course, I can do that.
I can make [inaudible]
30 degrees wide,
20 degrees wide, 10 degrees wide.
I can make them at any shape
and the narrower you make them,
the more accurately they
will fold up to make a globe.
So these do have a useful
characteristic there and I'm going
to talk more about globes later.
So there we have another
possible use for this
but this time using the triaxial
ellipsoid as the shape model,
not the convex hull or
the original topography.
Now let's look at what some
other people are doing.
I've been blowing my own
trumpet for long enough here.
So many other people
have worked on this.
This is Professor Lev
Bugaevsky of MIIGaIK in Moscow.
He died a few years ago but he did
a lot of pioneering work on this.
And MIIGaIK is the
Moscow State University
for Geodesy and Cartography.
They have a whole university just
for geodesy and cartography there.
The name comes from the initials,
a previous version of its name
but now it's called the
Moscow State University
for Geodesy and Cartography.
And Professor Bugaevsky here has
modified a Mercator projection
to suit an ellipsoidal
shape model of Phobos
and we have an outline drawing of
Phobos with its craters and grooves
as the map component of this.
So yes, so this has its peculiar
shape because the grid cells,
if we think of the -- let's say the
equator and then 20 degrees south,
this is a 20-degree grid.
Twenty degrees south is closer
to the equator in the middle
of the broad side and it's
farther from the equator at the end
of this elongated object just
because that 20-degree angle
has further to go to get
to the end and so it expands more.
So that's the elongated ends of this
object, the grid spacing is greater
and we end up with this sort
of rather wavy, sinusoidal type
of pattern for the parallels.
So that was his work.
He also developed a way
of defining map project --
globe gores and constructed
this globe.
So this is a Russian globe of
Phobos made using a technique
that he devised for
making globe gores.
So there is a bit of
work going on like this.
This is Marita Wahlisch of the
German Aerospace Center in Berlin.
Using an entire new set of images
from the European Mars Express
Spacecraft and supplementing
that with some NASA images
where theirs were lacking,
a new shape model, a
new topographic model.
So she's made a whole new set
of maps that had been published.
But in this case, not doing
anything with the map projection.
So this is a conventional
map projection
for Earth of Earth's sphere.
It's not modified to take into
account the irregular shape.
So it's still, of course,
perfectly possible to use maps
like that don't take into
account the irregular shape.
Here, M.S. Shibanova
at the Sternberg State
Astronomical Institutes
at Moscow State University has
used a different technique.
This time, the map is just
a mock image is projected
onto an ellipsoid,
a triaxial ellipsoid
and that is just represented
in orthographic projection.
Two views of the opposite ends of
Phobos at the top and two views
of the opposite ends
of Deimos at the bottom
with color overlay representing
the variations in radius.
And we have been looking at
these maps and I've got to point
out that apart from the
map projection work,
there is also the question of
how you actually make that image
in the background that is going
to provide local information
for the map.
So we'll come to that later.
This is Maxim Nyrtsov.
He also works at MIIGaIK and
has visited me in Canada.
Now he's been looking at how
simply modifying a conventional map
projection to account for the
bizarre topography of these objects,
how that distorts the grids.
And we can see here that it has
a very serious distorting effect
on this grid.
Generally speaking, I find that if
I want to minimize the distortions
and the particular distortion I
want to avoid is one where a bulge
that is on the map is so high,
that it actually projects
out beyond lower topography
further out on the map
and we can get a sense of that
happening in the lower right here
and perhaps in one
or two other places.
But you know, there are problems
with some of these techniques
and he's kind of exploring
them here.
So he's looked a lot of
different projections in that way.
Marc Berthoud here works at Yerkes
Observatory, University of Chicago
but did his graduate work
at Cornell a few years ago.
He set about trying
to solve the problem
of how you would make
a truly equal area
or equivalent map of
one of these objects.
He's not using Phobos here as so
many of my other examples have been.
This is the asteroid Eros
which is much more irregular
in shape than Phobos.
And he developed a very
complicated analytical technique
that would allow him to build a map
out from the center towards the
edges in these two hemispheres
but retaining true equal
area in the projections.
The result is a distorted grid
but it does retain
those characteristics.
And then there's Chuck Clark.
Chuck is an architect from Atlanta.
And he's been doing a lot of
work with unfolding shape models.
This particular one always makes
me think of that classic way
that we try to describe
in map projections
in an introductory class.
We say something like, you know,
imagine taking an orange and trying
to get a peel off it
and all in one piece.
And it's going to look
something like that.
And then you know, maybe we
can do something with that
to turn this into a proper map.
So here in this talk,
we've had eggs and oranges.
This is the most nutritious
talk of the meeting [laughter].
But and this one is
designed so that it folds
up into a three-dimensional
model of Phobos.
But Chuck has done
other work as well.
For instance, he's
interested in the idea
of how you would divide the surface.
Where should those dividing
lines be to divide that up?
So with Deimos, for
instance, which has a pattern
of flat facets separated
by sharp ridges,
you could divide it along the
ridges so that individual components
of the map are relatively
undistorted maps of the facets.
Or you could divide it through
the facets to make a map
that shows the ridge pattern
relatively undistorted.
So he's playing around with
ideas like that in a sense
of very interesting work.
Now, I'm going to leave the
question of map projections.
I don't do very much
of that work anymore.
I'm just playing around
a little bit with that.
A lot of my work has moved onto
recording exploration history
for the moon and Mars and elsewhere.
But when I do some work like this,
one of the things I've
particularly been trying to do is
to compile the global photographic
databases that could be put
into projections so other people
can do the projection work
or make the three-D rendered images
of rotating objects and so on.
They can do that.
But some poor sack has to
actually put together the image
that will be projected
onto those things.
And so, I've done some of that.
So this Eros, for instance.
It took a spacecraft called NEAR,
the Near Earth Asteroid
Rendezvous Mission.
It orbited Eros for about a year
and it took about 180,000 images.
Luckily, there's a handy
finding aid for these things.
And I took perhaps five or
6000 representative images
from that large dataset and made
a global photomosaic of them.
This is a very large
mosaic, if you look at it.
You know, it's a digital file
for high resolution mapping.
And it's compiled on a [inaudible]
tedious of projections for something
like this, the simple
cylindrical projection.
But that's because it's a
format that is often ingested
by a mapping program so that
it can then be projected
into whatever form you want.
And of course, it has a very
convenient characteristic
that latitude and longitudes
convert in a simple manner to X
and Y coordinates so you can
easily find out where any point is.
So I compiled a photomosaic of Eros
that other people then
use in mapping.
And now, this isn't a science.
This is an art.
This is a very difficult thing to
do and one of my beefs about many
of the maps that have been
made elsewhere for these kinds
of objects is that actually
the mosaics are very poorly
put together.
So I wanted to actually
try to make something
that was aesthetically
pleasing as well
as scientifically rigorous
enough to use in these settings.
This is another asteroid, Ichikawa.
It's that funny little lumpy
thing that we saw rotating right
at the beginning of the talk.
This didn't need nearly
as many images.
It's only about maybe 25 pictures
pieced together to make this mosaic.
But it is a very irregular shape and
it does actually point out one point
that I hadn't said
anything about this.
But if you think about it, as shapes
become more and more irregular,
as you get further and
further away from a sphere,
you run a very real danger that
the shape will become so irregular
that a radius from the center of
mass so the center of gravity,
if you like, of the object extending
out through the surface
might cut the surface
of an irregular object
in more than one place.
And in fact, that does
happen here on Ichikawa
and there's a little spot, just a
small area which I've had to fudge
by kind of averaging out
the images across it.
I'm not going to tell
you where it is
so you [laughter] but it is there.
So actually, yes, you can have
problems like that and somehow
or the other, we have
to deal with them.
It's not really a new problem.
Of course, it's the problem
that we face when trying
to map an overhanging
cliff on Earth.
And you know, normally we do
that by simply missing
out the overhanging bit.
But you could try to fiddle things
a little bit by tilting the slope
of the cliff so that it's not
quite overhanging anymore.
That's in effect what I've tried to
do here, just in a very small area
to resolve that issue
so that we have a map
that sort of looks reasonable.
For some of these objects, we
don't have global coverage.
And this is another thing here
for the Earth, and for the moon,
and Mars, and so on,
we get used to the idea
that we do have global
imaging coverage
that we can use to make a map.
But for some of these
worlds, we don't.
This was an asteroid
called Mathilde.
It was observed only once by a
passing spacecraft that flew past
in a matter of hours
and the pictures
that were taken were the
only ones that we have
and probably will ever
have for this little world.
And not only that but
sometimes in that situation,
the world rotates quite rapidly.
So yes, maybe we would fly past it
[inaudible] but at least the parts
that were not visible close up
were visible from a distance
in lower resolutions so we can still
fill in some other parts of the map.
But Mathilde rotates so slowly
that that wasn't possible.
There was absolutely no rotation
visible in the entire set
of images that were taken.
So, the images that were taken
are the only ones we have
and they only cover
about 25% of the surface.
Mathilde is marked by
very large craters,
the floors of which were
mostly in deep shadow.
So, areas that should
have been visible
from a purely geometric
point of view,
thinking about where the
son was were not visible
because they were deep
down in these craters.
This is a shaded relief
representation
but I know it's not a very
sophisticated shaded relief
but it's the best we have at
the moment because we get used
to the idea that shaded relief
ought to be generated by computers
from high resolution
digital innovation models.
Nobody wants to do shade
relief by hand any more.
But actually, we don't have accurate
shade models for this object.
We didn't get good stereo coverage.
There are very few images,
so really all you can do
to make a shaded relief
is to look at the features
in the images and try to draw them.
So, limited coverage is one of
the issues we have to deal with
and there are several
other objects like this.
So, there's quite a bit of work
to do around the solar system.
I'm only scratching
the surface of it here.
Just putting together basic
image datasets that can be used
for mapping and other analysis,
there's far too much
of this for me to do.
I've got other things to do.
So, I'll have to leave
that for somebody else.
But a lot of these objects
can be mapped this way.
And here, I'm going to show a few
final slides of a new match made
from some of those mosaics.
So, this starts with the
asteroid, Eros, Asteroid 433 Eros.
It was the first of those
big rectangular maps
that I showed just a
few slides ago and here,
I'm using the morphographic
approach again
and the triaxial ellipsoid
shape model.
So, I take a triaxial ellipsoid
that represents this
very elongated object.
Eros is about 30 kilometers
long, but it's only about six
or seven kilometers across around --
you know, diameter
across its middle.
So, it's very elongated and
considerably irregular, you know,
as well as being elongated
in that way.
So, I made the global photo
mosaic and here I'm mapping it
into two hemispheres, Northern
and Southern Hemispheres and here
in Eastern and Western Hemisphere.
So, it's the same body.
I know when you look at a map like
that that you might think, "Well,
that looks a bit like, "Mollweide
-- mollweide projection."
But for mollweide with taking a
spherical object like the earth
and mapping 360 degrees of
longitude into an ellipse.
These ellipses are 180
degrees of longitude
on this very elongated object.
If we tried to make a
mollweide like that,
this thing would be ridiculously
long and sausage shaped.
I don't think it would
look very nice,
so I'm not going to attempt that.
So, that's Eros and here
the same -- excuse me --
the same [inaudible] color.
That was the asteroid imaged
by the Japanese spacecraft.
I showed the cylindrical
projection of that and here,
it's mapped onto the Northern and
Southern Hemispheres and here,
Eastern and Western
Hemispheres -- excuse me --
pretty much the same shape degree
of elongation even though
Itikawa is only 600 meters long
and Eros is 30 kilometers long.
But the same basic approach
works for both of them;
of course it's dependent of scale.
An artist -- I thought
by saying something
about the status of
this kind of work.
If a planetary topography
for spherical objects
in the solar system, so far
other than the earth and the sun
and the kind of late maps of the
sun, people do but other than that,
25 spherical objects in the solar
system have been mapped so far
and we'll get three more next year.
Those 25 objects run from Mercury
through the planets and of course,
we can make maps of
Jupiter, Saturn, and so on.
They're covered with clouds but
if you make meteorological maps
of them, showing clouds of
any instance as well as maps
of other things, temperature,
and magnetic fields and so on.
So, we do make maps of the gas giant
planets but also many of their moons
and we'll get three more
of these things in 2015.
Pluto will be visited
by a spacecraft
for the first time next year,
in the summer next year.
The New Horizon spacecraft
will fly past Pluto
and take many close-up images
and it has a big moon
that's also spherical.
So, that will be mapped and
also Cereus, the first --
the largest asteroid which is
nearly 1000 kilometers across,
big enough to be spherical and
it will be visited starting
in about January of next year.
So, 25 spherical worlds now,
other than the earth and the sun,
and three more next
year, quite a lot.
But for non-spherical worlds,
now, here we have a little bit
of an issue because you have to
decide then, "What am I going
to include in a list of
non-spherical worlds?
How far down the line of
low-resolution and few details
and considerable uncertainty,
how far am I going
to push this before I say that
the world isn't really mapped
in a useful manner?"
When I look at this, I think that
30 or 40, depending on how you want
to define it, roughly 30
or 40 non-spherical worlds
in the solar system have been mapped
with a reasonable degree of detail.
That means that we know
the shape reasonably well.
We're got a reasonable amount of
detail and images or the datasets
and maps have been made of them.
So, we've got about 30 or
40 and there're lots more
with very low resolution datasets.
We'll get five more of these
smaller objects next year as well
as solar system exploration
continues.
So, there I will leave
it and I thank you
and I hope you enjoyed that.
[ Applause ]
>> And Dr. Tyner, if
you would come up.
Thank you both, wonderful
explorations
into photographic expression
and cartographers in
this morning session.
And I think we're now open for
any questions from the audience.
Yes, please?
Here's one.
We have a microphone coming.
>> Well, since I have a mic
in my hand, Professor Stooke,
my question is, "Has anyone
tried to make a model of one
of these non-spherical objects
with a 3D printer [laughter]?
>> Philip Stooke: Yes [laughter].
Yes, actually lots of work
like that has been done.
I have a colleague in Turkey who's
been doing that kind of work.
I just noticed -- now this has
nothing to do with the asteroids
and things -- well, actually,
I guess it does have a tenuous
connection with asteroids
and I just noticed
it a few weeks ago,
that the jet propulsion laboratory
had made a three-dimensional model
of a meteorite that had been found
on Mars by one of the Rovers.
The Rover photographed the asteroid
from many different orientations.
There was enough stereo information
to make a 3D map of the whole thing,
you know, a 3D model of the
whole thing, and they run it
through a 3D printer and
reproduced this iron meteorite
from the surface of Mars in the lab.
So, now that's not an asteroid
but I guess it was originally
because of course,
iron meteorites --
any meteorites actually came
from asteroids originally.
So, but yes -- yes,
people have done that.
So, it's perfect technology for this
kind of work as you can imagine.
>> Dr. -- is this on?
Dr. Stooke, I was going, in fact,
to ask you about the 3D printer
but let me raise two other issues
as to a possible extension of this
into some practicable
aspects of cartography.
One thing would be the
possibility of let's say of kind
of a three-dimensional video
fly-by and another thing here too,
is the ability to impose
a grid on these features,
then confers the ability
to impose coordinates
which then allows the possibility
for adding geographic feature names.
Is anything happening
or likely to happen
in the near future
along those lines?
>> Philip Stooke: Actually, we've
been doing those things for years.
I just forgot to mention
that [laughter].
Yes, so let's see,
where should I begin?
Well, first of course, feature names
-- there are lots of feature names.
There is an international body
that assigns official feature names
to bodies around the solar system,
part of the International
Astronomical Union
and the U.S. Geological
Survey coordinates that work
for planetary and, you know
extra-terrestrial examples.
So, they have a website that shows
all of those things and then I work
with them sometimes and
some of my maps are used
on their website as name indexes.
So, yeah, certainly names are being
applied to many of these things.
I didn't really get into
that when I was talking
about that but what else can I say?
People have made 3D visualizations
of these things rotating
or duplicating a fly-by and we're
just getting to the point now
where dedicated 3D GIS
environments are being created
for non-spherical objects.
There's an excellent one
for the asteroid Vesta
which was mapped a couple of years
ago by a NASA spacecraft called Dawn
which is now on its way to
Cereus, the biggest asteroid
and went up there in January.
So, a sort of 3D GIS environment
designed for a non-spherical object.
And when I, you know, when I sort
of say GIS environment designed
for non-spherical objects, I mean
so that you can put a pointer
in one place, and a
pointer in another place,
and get an accurate measurement
across this irregular shape,
those kinds of things and, you know,
designed buffers [inaudible]
equal width around a line on --
an irregular shaped
line kind of thing.
So, lots of work like
that is being done.
>> [Inaudible] Dr. Stooke, I
appreciate that you introduced us
to this flying extra-terrestrial
[inaudible] or what the asteroids
or this objects [inaudible].
My question is, "We have seen it
and I guess other researchers
can also see it.
What then is your customer base
for a map of such an object
and what do they look for in
such a map what they can't find
in the photographs and in
manipulation of the photographs?"
So, what is the purpose of a map?
>> Philip Stooke: Yes, good point.
I'll just give one example
that illustrates that.
The photo mosaic that
I made of Eros,
the asteroid 30 kilometers
long, a very elongated asteroid,
imagine something hits
Eros, a small space rock.
It digs a little crater and
pieces fly off in all directions.
Some of them might escape
Eros, but others will fall back
onto the surface and make their own
pits or their marks on the surface.
And if we wanted to map them,
find out where they are,
well we would need
some kind of global map
which we could locate features of
interest and trace them back to see
where they might have come
from, that kind of thing.
And I was asked to provide
the map to do that analysis.
So, the first order
of usefulness for all
of these maps is geological
investigation of the objects
where the stage of trying
to understand their geology
and perhaps other aspects
such as the availability
of resources and that kind of thing.
There are people interested in
the idea of in the distant future
of mining asteroids and
extracting resources from them
and they would need maps and so on.
And so, yes, of scientific
research primarily but I would point
out that it is the policy of
this nation that the next objects
that an astronaut sets foot
on will be an asteroid.
And that is current space policy,
I don't know how it will stand up
but as a stepping stone to Mars,
the idea is that a person will
visit an asteroid sometime
in the next decade as preparation
proceeds for sending people to Mars.
And those people will need maps
as well to plan their activities
and to figure out where
they are, I guess.
I know, but because these
things are irregular shapes,
just having the raw
images isn't enough.
You've got to have something
that organizes that information
on a global scale, so the
maps do have applications.
>> Of course, in the
first Star Wars movie,
I believe there was an
encounter with asteroids too,
where they hid behind them so it's
nothing new, I'm sure [laughter].
Dr. Snyder -- Styer, I
have a question about --
and I don't want to bias the
question too much, but I was taken
by the federal government interest
in bringing on women cartographers
and not as taken with
private industry.
Maybe I'm misreading some of the
data, but I was just wondering
if there was a stronger impetus in
the beginning in the hiring of women
from the federal government
standpoint,
or from a state government
standpoint
with academia in industry itself.
>> Judith A. Tyner: Well partly,
I have not found good data on it.
This -- it's not always easy to
come by and even the information
that I got from the various
organizations by calling them,
they're just not keeping
those kinds of records.
And so, I suspect though, that
government was earlier because first
of all, the war-time experiences
that there were more women
and so they had experience
with them and perhaps,
not quite as [inaudible] bound
as some of the industries were.
But I don't have good data on that.
Yeah. I wish I did.
>> I didn't want to
set you up [inaudible].
>> By the way Clara LeGear, who
was mentioned, was at Geography
and Map was the bibliographer
in most cases,
but historical cartography
and started there
at the beginning of
the 20th Century.
She was with Phillips at
the very beginning, yeah.
Any other questions?
>> Yes, I'd like to return
to the subject of Maria Tharp
and was a fascinating person and
deserves all the honor she received
but I think that her cartography
and that of Heezen, etcetera,
should really be embedded more
fully in the history of cartography.
And in that context, the
statement often repeated
that she was the first person
to recognize the Rift Valley.
However, many times its repeated
doesn't make it true, and in fact,
you know, the major structure
of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge system
goes way back into the 19th Century
with data from the HMS Challenger
and so on and that that whole story
of the discovery of
the major structure
of the major salient features of
the earth, of the ocean basin based
on really sparse data
and a whole lot
of imaginative geophysics
is really, you know,
that's a really good story.
But -- and it, you know,
she is a part of that story
but it's a really big story and in
particular, the standard reference
on this now, I would say, is by
a woman herself who is a pioneer
in Earth Science History
and that's Naomi Oreskes
and the book is the The
Rejection of Continental Drift .
>> Judith A. Tyner: I can't
really argue with you there.
In the readings that I have done
of Marie Tharp's world history
and so forth and she certainly
is a deserving woman as you say.
I have the sense that much of the
story is generated by Marie herself.
Everything that I have read about
her discoveries, and so forth,
all seem to be coming
from one or two interviews
and there's never anything
else mentioned of them,
so -- I'm not quite sure.
I would like to see someone do some
more research on that aspect of it.
>> Although on Marie's behalf,
she is interpreting data
that is being derived and I think
that was the point I remember was
that rather set-to back
and forth with Heezen
on how you interpret that data.
But I know what you're
saying, Johnson [phonetic].
Yes?
>> Yes, this is also a
question for Dr. Tyner.
I'm just wondering if you've
done any comparisons of the data
that you have on women in academic
Geography and how that compares
to other academic disciplines
during the post-war period and --
or also to other technical
disciplines
such as Engineering
more broadly and so on.
Are these comparable or is there
the rate for women in cartography,
or academic cartography
higher or lower?
Do you have any sense of that?
>> Judith A. Tyner:
That's a good question.
No, I don't have a good sense of it.
I have not come across very
much along this line and so,
for today of course, I was
focusing on cartography but I think
that it's certainly something that
should be done, should be looked
at because say Engineering,
Civil Engineering, Geology --
I don't know, although I would think
that somebody is doing
something on it.
I have not come across anything
on it but that's a good question.
I'd like to know more myself.
>> Yes?
>> Question for Dr. Tyner --
you identified and acknowledged four
gentlemen that you said were mentors
and didn't really elaborate
very much on them.
Could you tell us just briefly some
of what they did to
help open the door?
>> Judith A. Tyner: I can
speak primarily for myself.
One additional mentor who was not
on there is a man who got a lot
of women started but in his early
days, did not supervise PhDs
and that's Richard Dahlberg.
These men, for whatever
reason and I suspect it's
because they were working with
women in the field during the war,
they had a sense that maybe women
were capable of doing these things.
But they were very supportive.
As I said, I could
speak mostly for myself.
I started working with Dick
Dahlberg for my Master's thesis
and I had a topic that was
considered off the wall
in a Geography Department because
it was mapping the moon, as I said.
And Dick, instead of being
dismissive of this, told me --
well, sort of dismissive
at first, I guess, said,
"You're not going to
find any information.
If you do, it's going
to all be classified
and there's just not
much you can do with it."
But he said, "You know,
go ahead, look.
See what you can find."
So, I went to the library and
I went through a bunch of books
and found some remarkable
books in the open stacks
of the library that
went back to 1651.
Why they let a beginning
Master's student check this book
out [laughter] I have no idea.
It wouldn't happen now, but I
took them and I dropped them
on Dahlberg's desk and I
said, "Here's what I found."
And he said -- and I will
quote, "I'll be damned.
Go ahead [laughter]."
Unfortunately, he left UCLA before I
finished but Norm Thrower came along
and was equally supportive,
encouraging and even
when I was coming back for my PhD,
he had been pushing me to come back,
wanting me to come back,
and worked with me,
helping me to get my first
article published and so forth.
And from what I have heard from
the others from Pattengill/Martin,
from Judy Olsen, from Mai-Ling Shu,
it was a matter that these men --
and I'm not quite sure why --
I have some other suspicions,
were just incredibly
supportive of students
but they didn't have any
biases against women students.
Now, in part, it could be that
at least in the case of some,
they had daughters themselves.
Norman Thrower had three daughters.
He also had a wife
with a Master's Degree.
He was used to women being
in [laughter] high positions,
let's say [laughter].
So -- but this was the main thing
that has come across for all
of us is that these were
men who did not see us
as any different than
any other student.
We were treated the
same and I at least --
and I'm sure the others
-- appreciated that.
>> You know, Dr. Stooke, I was
interested in the work you're doing
on Atlas of Mars but --
and also these objects.
Do you think there
will ever be a time
when they'll be an atlas showing
the refuse from the space activities
in space that will help
guide intergalactic
or interplanetary movement?
In other words, I understand
there's a lot of refuse
out there that's been
thrown off of ships,
derelict satellites, etcetera.
Is there an effort to also
categorize, create an atlas of these
or an active map of
these particular objects?
>> Philip Stooke: Yes, okay,
so this material is often called
space debris, artificial debris
in orbit around earth
and it is a problem.
Every now and then,
the space station has
to be maneuvered a few kilometers
above or below its current location
to avoid the collision
with a little object.
Big military radars on the ground
that constantly tracking these
things and there are perhaps 16
or 1000 or so objects that are
being tracked all the time.
They vary from things like I say,
a wrench that an astronaut dropped
out of the payload bay
of the space shuttle --
that has been known to happen --
to debris created when
two satellites collide,
sometimes accidentally,
sometimes deliberately.
There have been deliberate
crashes of objects as tests
of space weapons for instance.
So, there's a lot of debris out
there and it is constantly tracked
and we know where things are all
the time, at least the things
that are big enough
to track like that
so that they can be
avoided if necessary.
It's not really something that one
would publish an atlas of [laughter]
because these things are in orbit
and they're moving all the time
and in different positions
relative to each other all the time.
But we do track them.
It sounds like a bad
situation but it is one
which ultimately is a
self-correcting one because objects
in low-Earth orbit are not really
above the atmosphere
as we tend to think.
They're within the outermost
part of the atmosphere
and friction gradually
slows them down.
The International Space
Station itself drops two
or three kilometers
every year from its orbit
and if we just let it go on,
it would come down one day,
but we don't let it go down because
every time a cargo spacecraft
[inaudible] joins on it, the
cargo is unloaded before it leaves
and burns its thrusters
or its maneuvering rockets
to push the station up
a few kilometers again.
So, that is repeatedly done to boost
the orbit of the space station.
But of course, that's not being
done for all these little bits
of space thievery so they will
eventually all drop out of orbit.
They burn up in the
atmosphere just like millions
of meteorites every
day and eventually,
if we would just stop making
new debris [laughter],
we all know how good we are at
looking after our environment.
But if we would just
stop making new debris,
the situation will eventually
correct itself so we are mapping it.
We know where things are.
I'm not planning on publishing an
atlas of it anytime soon [laughter]
and one day, with any
luck, there won't be any.
>> Any other questions?
>> I have a question for Dr. Tyner.
I know you've done research
with early women cartographers
and since Alice Hudson and there's a
recent book on women cartographers.
In terms of early women
cartographers, the, you know,
pre-19th Century, do you foresee any
groundbreaking work in the future?
It seems to be a very
difficult area to research.
Sometimes, there are names mentioned
when people are researching
printing history
because women have printed
books as well as maps.
So, could you speak more to that?
>> Judith A. Tyner: [Inaudible]
cobbled that last part.
Could you repeat it?
>> Well, I know that there have
been some kind of periphery ways
of finding women -- not
necessarily women cartographers
because they're not
usually defined that way --
but women printers who have
printed books but also printed maps
or were book sellers
who also sold maps
but if you foresee any additional
research in this area or --
>> Judith A. Tyner: I would
like to see and would hope
to see more research in this area.
In the course of doing some
other research that I'd done
on another aspect of
women in cartography,
I stumbled across a quote by a
woman -- I can't say it exactly,
but it's something along the line
that doing research on women is not
so much a focused plan but that
you find things fortuitously.
You stumble across them and
I don't know if Alice --
I think agrees with me on some
of these that you find a name
in a margin but there's
nothing else said.
You stumble across a
name and just to get
to a slight pet peeve
that I have now.
Back in the early days, one of the
reasons we didn't know if a map
or something was done by a women
is that they used the initials
and so you would have E.
Collis, which was Eliza.
But you might not know that just
from looking at the map and one
of the reasons is at first
engravers and cartographers --
that was just the convention.
You put your initials on them.
But another is that with
women, they were more likely
to put their initials
on because that way,
someone wouldn't dismiss
the map, "Oh, it's only --
it was only done by a woman
so it couldn't be any good."
Today, we have a similar
thing in bibliographies;
the current bibliographical
style is for people
to put the author's initials and
name -- initials and last name.
This makes it difficult if
you're doing any research
on more modern things.
If you don't know who a -- you know,
who N. Smith is, you don't know
if it's Nancy or Neal,
especially if you've just come
across maybe one article
by this person
and so it's a very similar thing
and it hinders research even
into this period of finding
what women have done.
But I'm hoping that the work that
Alice has done and some of my work,
that maybe this is opening the doors
and there will be more works out on
with an N not just cartography
but other fields as
we mentioned earlier.
>> You know, with that
I'm going to wrap up here.
Its 11:30 and the next session
begins, I believe, at 1:30
but first, let's give
both presenters --
[ Applause ]
>> This has been a presentation
of the Library of Congress.
Visit us at loc.gov.