Digital humanities, digital methods, digital history, and digital outputs: History writing and the digital revolution

Abstract

AbstractWhile the term “digital humanities” appears inclusive, its exact meaning remains unclear and its early association with studies in English Literature means the term has already been partially superceded by “digital methods.” However, that renaming is problematic as it emphasises the research tools used while the field itself is adjusting to include new methods, new topics, and new types of production, not just new ways of working with existing materials. Historians have long been alert to new tools as they become available to researchers. However, even as historians have revelled in the increased access to primary sources provided by digitisation and have analysed the opportunities that access offers, they have been aware of the unevenness of the digitisation process and the gaps it both creates and disguises. Issues of copyright and the ethics of creating public access to private lives have also caused historians concern. More recently, discussion about the evaluation of digital scholarship has begun. Often purely digital outputs are not formally recognised by their authors' institutions, despite having a significant online presence and contributing to scholarship. In parallel with being concerned about fairly assessing the work of peers, historians have also begun to consider how to teach (and assess) the digital skills now expected of history graduates.