As Dr. Otis and our readings for this week’s class touched upon, there is an important balance to be struck between digital and physical sources. The two complement one another as they answer different questions and provide us with different kinds of knowledge, yet ultimately serve the overall purpose of expanding our understanding about the past. A physical source can offer the historian further context, while its digitized version can save the historian repeated and costly research trips (Putnam 377-402). Yet despite the convenience that digitization provides, it can also violate the original intent of sources or leave out minority groups or even gloss over the biases or behind-the-scene dynamics that go into archival collections (Moravec 1-6; Ziegler 1-9; Putnam 377-402).
Keeping the benefits and drawbacks of the digital humanities in mind, historians can bring “balance to the force” (yes I am referencing this Star Wars scene https://www.starwars.com/video/you-were-the-chosen-one) by using digital tools and sources to support scholarship where “Digital research…carries us deeper into real-world connection…” (Putnam 402). As the next generation of scholars (or the “Chosen Ones”) we can harness digital tools to help us more productively transcribe, better preserve, and further dispense knowledge about the past, thus capitalizing on the positives of digitization while still using real-world sources (Putnam 377-402; Schöch 1-10; Blaney and Siefring 1-4; Moravec 1-6; Ziegler 1-9).
In my work for the Center for Mason Legacies, I came across the website Colonial Virginia Portraits which was created by a fellow early Americanist at the College of William and Mary. Janine Yorimoto Boldt has compiled the portraits of colonial era Virginians while also providing background context and analysis of these works. Now scholars concerned with the material culture of early Virginia have a more direct secondary source to consult about some of their specific primary sources. For example, I have already used Colonial Virginia Portraits to further contextualize the portrait of Ann Eilbeck Mason while also finding additional contemporary examples and more background information about the significance of portraiture for early Virginians. Interpreting big data into smart data can make the historical process more efficient, while also providing convenient analyses of historical sources (Schöch 1-10). Colonial Virginia Portraits demonstrates how digitization can be used to expand upon our knowledge, making us want to almost jump into these portraits and further understand their complexities (Putnam 377-402; Schöch 1-10; Blaney and Siefring 1-4; Moravec 1-6; Ziegler 1-9).
Looking at our time in class, we experimented with Claude AI and Transkribus to see whether or not AI could transcribe historical documents. Claude AI completely failed when it tried to process an eighteenth-century document from the Myers family archive. Claude was so confused by the appearance of handwritten cursive and printed text compiled on this page that neither one of us understood what the other was trying to get at! Transkribus was a pleasant surprise as it was able to process eighteenth-century cursive with very minimal mistakes. Quite frankly this digital tool did a better job at transcribing than I do considering it took this software minutes to do what normally takes me hours!!
When AI first came out about two years ago, I was so upset as it caused a bit of uncertainty in my college’s history department. With AI rapidly infecting papers and professors unable to tell original versus stolen work, my professors reverted to in class exams. One of the many things I loved about being a history major was that assignments were mostly writing papers rather than taking exams which I have always struggled with, therefore I came to really resent AI and its impact. You could almost compare my initial hostility to the hesitation scholars have possessed in citing digital sources! (Blaney and Siefring 1-4).
The examples of Colonial Virginia Portraits and Transkribus demonstrate how digital tools can be used to further deepen our historical knowledge and how digitization can expand upon real-world sources rather than completely replace them. Keeping in mind the positives and negatives of the digital humanities, we can navigate the endless galaxy of technological possibilities and advancements while harnessing these developments to expand our understanding of the past. And that’s how we’ll “bring balance to the force!” (Putnam 377-402; Schöch 1-10; Blaney and Siefring 1-4; Moravec 1-6; Ziegler 1-9).
Interesting use of Star Wars references! I understand where you are coming from. Balancing the use of digital and physical sources is a labor-intensive task that historians must undertake, much like Anakin was supposed to for the Jedi. I especially liked the language you used when explaining the use of digital sources, and the hope that the interpretation of these sources does not “violate the original intent of sources.” It’s interesting that you had an opposing experience with Claude.ai and Transkribus than I did; I thought that Claude was better at discerning my printed and structured sources rather than Transkribus. However, I see the difference in the source material!
Hi Ally, I love this blog post (and the Star Wars reference)! In a way, the comparison of the next generation of scholars with the cliche of a “Chosen One” encapsulates some of the feelings I felt when doing this week’s readings. While it may feel that this our generation of scholars is meant to fill in the holes of older scholarship and perpetuate the “Global Turn” that is spoken about now, it almost feels like a double edged sword. I say that because while digitization has opened many doors, it can also easily lead to some doors becoming “more closed” than before or, as you and Ziegler mentioned, the widening of already existing blind spots.
Hi Ally! MAJOR points for including a meme, loved the Star Wars connection and the central idea of balance. I think this will be a crucial concept to remember as the development of digital history, and the digital humanities, continues. It would be unproductive to ignore the capacity of new technology, but it is important to remember the positive aspects of a traditional approach to scholarship and use of physical sources.