It is undeniable that the technological revolution of the twentieth century has changed the state of knowledge and how we, as historians and humanists, interact with not only the corpora of our fields, but also society at large. This revolution has produced so dramatic a shift in our understanding of society that, according to Wired publisher, Louis Rossetto, the “only parallel is probably the discovery of fire” (Cohen and Rosenzweig 2006). Though computational research in the humanities can be traced to the first half of the twentieth century, the confluence of personal computers and the advent of the internet that began during the century’s latter years, brought about the most drastic change (Hockey 2004). In one short generation, the way we understood and interacted with knowledge completely morphed due to factors like “capacity, accessibility, flexibility, diversity, manipulability, interactivity, and nonlinearity”(Cohen and Rosenzweig 2006). Because of these factors, historical and humanities scholarship have experienced uncharted shifts in methodology. New tools, new methods of access, and new ways of interpreting and presenting information have led to the democratization of the fields and the rise of distinct subfields intent on harnessing these digital methods (Robertson 2016, Ch. 25). Defining and understanding the parallels and distinctions, as well as the strengths and weaknesses, of the subfields of digital history and the digital humanities, and indeed, their respective interdisciplinarity, is paramount for modern scholars to successfully engage with the study of the past and humanity.
The fields of both history and the humanities share relatively similar values, which Lisa Spiro writes in "This is Why We Fight": Defining the Values of the Digital Humanities," promote “access to knowledge and civic responsibility by embracing collaboration, cross-disciplinarity, innovation, participation, and openness”(Spiro 2012, Ch. 3). Though they share similar values, a somewhat varied view of methodological framework and professional best practices differentiate these fields. The subfields of digital history and the digital humanities, however, both are fundamentally methodological approaches to their separate areas of study. Stephen Robertson states in "The Differences Between Digital Humanities and Digital History," that this divergence, and interconnectedness, can be best understood by conceptualizing the subfields “not as a single, all-encompassing tent, but as a house with many rooms”(Robertson 2016, Ch. 25). The use of computational and spatial analysis tools, digitized sources, databases, modeling, visualization, and many more methods can both divide and bridge digital history and the digital humanities but importantly, all these methods serve to deepen our understanding of humanity and our past.
Digital humanities as a methodology “use modern communication skills…supplemented by the creative arts of the imagination and the reflective wisdom of the historical outlook to reach contemporary audiences with interpretations of what it is to be human and what it is to be a responsible citizen”(Gardiner and Musto 2015, 13). Meanwhile, digital history as a methodology “relies on computers and communication technologies to help gather, quantify, interpret, and share historical materials and narratives”(Brennan 2019). Both subfields, then, utilize a growing range of digital tools to access, analyze, interpret, and principally, disseminate research. Both rely on interdisciplinary cooperation in ways that their parent fields did not. Additionally, both hold the promise for exciting challenges and growth to bring history and humanities education to a wider audience.
The rise of the digital age has created many questions and even more challenges for both the fields of digital history and the digital humanities to overcome, including major arguments over topics such as quality and accessibility. How can scholars counter “junk” and misinformation? What types of academic discourse should take place and where are the right venues for that discourse? With scholarly conventions disrupted, how do we reestablish the “unwritten social contracts” present in academia (Cohen and Rosenzweig 2006)? These concerns were not unwarranted, nor were they easily answered. Early digital historians and digital humanists spent much of their time working towards understanding these issues and paving the way for today’s digital researchers to be able to interact with “the traditional historiography” in ways that are only now possible because of the foundations laid by their groundbreaking work (Crymble 2021, 44).
Today, it is difficult for young scholars to imagine a world in which millions of pages of sources are not immediately available with a simple internet search. The limited, exclusionary, and hierarchical systems of historical and humanities research before the digital age has now fully come into view as an institution of history itself. The old infrastructures of gaining and sharing knowledge have been reimagined to utilize digital technology, allowing for new conversations and approaches in humanity's ongoing quest for discovery.
Bibliography
Brennan, Sheila A. "Digital History." in The Inclusive Historian's Handbook. AASLH and NCPH. June 4, 2019. Accessed January 17, https://inclusivehistorian.com/digital-history/
Cohen, Daniel J. and Roy Rosenzweig, "Introduction: Promises and Perils of Digital History," in Digital History: A Guide to Gathering, Presenting, and Preserving the Past on the Web. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006. Accessed January 17, 2023, https://chnm.gmu.edu/digitalhistory/introduction/
Crymble, Adam. Technology and the Historian : Transformations in the Digital Age. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2021.
Hockey, Susan. "The History of Computing" in A Companion to Digital Humanities, eds. Susan Schreibman, Ray Siemens, John Unsworth. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004. Accessed January 17, 2023, https://companions.digitalhumanities.org/DH.
Robertson, Stephen. "The Differences Between Digital Humanities and Digital History." Chapter 25 in Debates in the Digital Humanities 2016. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2016. Accessed January 17, 2023, https://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/read/untitled/section/ed4a1145-7044-42e9-a898-5ff8691b6628
Seefeldt, Douglas and William G. Thomas. "What is Digital History?" AHA Perspectives on History. (May 1, 2009). Accessed January 17, 2023, https://www.historians.org/research-and-publications/perspectives-on-history/may-2009/what-is-digital-history
Spiro, Lisa. "This is Why We Fight": Defining the Values of the Digital Humanities." Chapter 3 in Debates in the Digital Humanities 2012. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2012. Accessed January 17, 2023, https://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/read/untitled-88c11800-9446-469b-a3be-3fdb36bfbd1e/section/9e014167-c688-43ab-8b12-0f6746095335
Comentarios