This article proposes two important points about genealogical software: (a) Not all such software need necessarily be complicated or address high level theoretical issues, and (b) diversity of data, processing, and infrastructure means that it is particularly desirable that scholars begin to understand software tools as utilities that should have flexibility, including platform independence built into the design from the outset. Following a discussion of high performance packages used by White and Houseman to analyze social networks from marital data, the authors present examples from their research that suggest that even apparently trivial, nonanalytic tasks that form part of the process of preparing data for higher end analyses may yield exciting and productive results. The authors conclude with a statement on the nature of e-science in anthropology and the implications for the types of software that will be most useful.
Bagg, J., Fischer, M. D., & Bharwani, S. (2000). Dynamic approaches to encoding historical documents. Retrieved August 16, 2005, from http://www.anthropology.ac.uk/NotaryXML/
2.
Ballonoff, P. (2000). Notes toward a mathematical theory of culture. Retrieved August 5, 2005, from http://real.anthropology.ac.uk/Papers/index.html
3.
Batagelj, V., & Mrvar, A. (1998). Pajek: A program for large networks analysis. Connections, 21, 47-57.
4.
Batagelj, V., & Mrvar, A. (2001). Networks/Pajek: A program for large networks analysis. Retrieved August 4, 2005, from http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si/pub/networks/pajek/
5.
Bradley, N. (2000). The XML companion. Harlow, UK: Addison-Wesley.
6.
Chit Hlaing, F. K. L. (2005). On the “globality hypothesis” about social/cultural structure: An algebraic solution. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 36, 7-8.
7.
Cucchiari, S. (1981). The bow and the burden strap: A new look at institutionalized homosexuality in native North America. In S. Ortner & H. Whitehead (Eds.), Sexual meanings: The cultural construction of gender and sexuality (pp. 31-79). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1951). Kinship and marriage among the Nuer. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
9.
Fischer, M. D. (1999). Representing kinship. In M. D. Fischer & D. Zeitlyn (Eds.), Experience-rich anthropology: Resource guide and sampler CD for teachers and students (pp. 33-37). Canterbury, UK: CSAC.
10.
Fischer, M. D. (2005). Kinship editor. Retrieved August 16, 2005, from http://rite.anthropology.ac.uk/tools/KinshipEditor
11.
Fischer, M. D., Kortendick, O., & Zeitlyn, D. (1996). The APFT Content Code System. Retrieved August 30, 2005, from http://lucy.kent.ac.uk/Rainforest/3C3accs_TOC.html
12.
Fischer, M. D., Lyon, S. M., & Read, D. (2005). Introduction: Cultural systems. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 36, 7-8.
13.
Houseman, M., & White, D. R. (1998). Network mediation of exchange structures: Ambilateral sidedness and property flows in Pul Eliya. In T. Schweizer & D. R. White (Eds.), Kinship, networks, and exchange. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Hutchinson, S. (1996). Nuer dilemmas: Coping with money, war, and the state. Berkeley: University of California Press.
15.
Leach, E. R. (1961). Pul Eliya. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Leaf, M. J. (1972). Information and behavior in a Sikh village: Social organization reconsidered. Berkeley: University of California Press.
17.
Leaf, M. J. (2004). Cultural systems and organizational processes: Observations on the conference papers. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 35, 289-313.
18.
Leaf, M. J. (2005). The message is the medium: Language, culture and informatics. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 36, 7-8.
19.
Lyon, S. M. (2004a). An anthropological analysis of local politics and patronage in a Pakistani village. Lampeter, UK: Edwin Mellen.
20.
Lyon, S. M. (2004b). Modeling context in Punjabi conflict resolution: Social organizations as context agents. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 35, 193-210.
21.
Lyon, S. M. (2005a). Culture and information: An anthropological examination of communication in cultural domains in Pakistan. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 36, 7-8.
22.
Lyon, S. M. (2005b). In the shadow of September 11th: Multiculturalism and identity politics. In T. Abbas (Ed.), Muslim Britain: Communities under pressure. London: Zed.
23.
Read, D., & Behrens, C. (1990). KAES: An expert system for the algebraic analysis of kinship terminologies. Journal of Quantitative Anthropology, 2, 353-393.
24.
Read, D., & Fischer, M. D. (2005). KAES—Kinship algebra expert system. Retrieved August 13, 2005, from http://kaes.anthrosciences.net/
25.
Rieber, R. W. (1989). In search of the impertinent question: An overview of Bateson’s theory of communication. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), The individual, communication and society: Essay in memory of Gregory Bateson (pp. 1-30). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Sillitoe, P. (1988). Made in Niugini: Technology in the highlands of Papua New Guinea. London: British Museum Publications.
27.
Sillitoe, P. (1996). A place against time: Land and environment in the Papua New Guinea highlands. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic.
28.
Sillitoe, P. (2000). Social change in Melanesia: Development and history. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29.
White, D. R., Batagelj, V., & Mrvar, A. (1999). Analyzing large kinship and marriage networks drw, Vladimir Batagelj and Andrej Mrvar. Social Science Computer Review, 17, 245-274.
30.
White, D. R., & Houseman, M. (2002). Taking sides: From coherent practice in cohesive neighborhoods to macro organization. Retrieved August 5, 2005, from http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/drwhite/TakingSides4.pdf
31.
White, D. R., & Jorion, P. (1992). Representing and computing kinship: A new approach. Current Anthropology, 33, 454-463.
