The Past and Futures of Digital History

Digital history, specifically in the humanities, is studying the past with the use of technology, which for historians has opened up a new form of methodology as well. (Seefeldt & Thomas, 2009) Since 1995, the use of digital tools has been under discussion throughout the humanities. One of the biggest and most promising fields for the humanities is history. Historians have studied the past primarily through using primary sources that they have perused through and drawn conclusions from, as well as building off of previous historians’ work. This work is very tedious and time consuming, as any historian is more than well aware of. However, this work is rewarding in the end, and contributing to the historiography of the field is a major goal to any academic historian and the primary end-goal of our research. The twentieth- and twenty-first-century have provided historians with the use of digital tools that not only make their researching slightly less tedious and accessible, but also opened up new methodologies and provided academics with a new way of networking and professional discussions. (Ayers, 1999; Seefeldt & Thomas, 2009) This blog posts serves the purpose of discussing how digital tools were used, how they have changed, over time.

To begin this blog post, I want to job more into the As late as 2018, Cameron Blevins would argue that digital tools are still in its inchoate age (Blevins, 2018). This seems somewhat surprising with how many advancements there have been since its genesis, but when considering that the major advancement of technological innovations and improvement (specifically looking at computers), technology really is still in its young age. He would continue to discuss how public history has benefitted more than argumentative field of history, and more specifically teachers and students (Blevins, 2018). Speaking from experience, using digital tools such as videos, models, maps, etc. through the use of a computer has been extremely beneficial to educating students; having a visual can change the students’ perspectives and helps them understand concepts within the historical context [historicism]. With that being said, that is part of the reason why digital tools for teachers and students would actually take precedence of the field of academia (Blevins, 2018).

Moving back into the development of digital tools over time, Vennaver Bush in the 1940s believed that there would be a networked desktop computer called the “memex” that would be of great use for people (Thomas, 2004). This would be of benefit for historians for providing more evidence and improving historical narrative. (Thomas, 2004) In 1999, Edward L. Ayers discusses the beginning of the study of history using technology. He will discuss how history is most benefitted by digital tools because it opens up the argumentative and academic historical field to larger audiences of people easier, also mentioning that it is the “healthiest” way for this expansion (Ayers, 1999). Ayers also discusses how you can have illustrations and media that serve more than their primary purpose, but have hyperlinks that can be used as a “portal” to other maps, which although he didn’t mention this specifically, like GIS (Ayers, 1999).

The aforementioned William G. Thomas goes more in-depth on how digital tools have changed over time. He begins with discussing how in the 1940s the most beneficial use of digital tools was the use of quantitative data; that is more availability or more feasible means to create data such as charts, tables, etc. (Thomas, 2004) This would benefit the 1960s for the use of social, economic, and even political history, and later used for conversation with historians much easier (Thomas, 2004). Thomas also began discussing that in the future of digital tools, we will be able to use things like Geographical Informational Systems (GIS), legal geographies, and 4D models (Thomas, 2004). GIS would be discussed and used in the future, especially during present times. He believes the goals of using digital tools needs to be focused on more investigation, interpreting data, and further analysis and inquiry (Thomas, 2004).

Douglas Seefeldt and William G. Thomas would discuss a lot of what the next phases for digital tools are and the future of digital tools. What does the future of digital tools look like? Seefeldt and Thomas would say that the sources that historians of the future will use will be entirely electronic such as emails, PDFs, podcasts, videos, instant messages, and many more. (Seedfeldt & Thomas, 2009) With that being said, they would argue that this requires new tools and techniques for historians to study, and that teachers should ensure that graduate students are being exposed to these tools (Seefeldt & Thomas, 2009). A prime example of this would be University of Central Florida’s (UCF) history department. The department of history at UCF provides graduate students with classes geared specifically towards digital tools. Even outside of courses that specifically mention them, there are numerous courses that integrate the use of online databases for the students’ research. Just like how the “Dark Ages,” a term which was coined for its lack of sources, historians rely on archaeological and the few written surviving sources; the future historians will have to focus on primarily electronic sources to understand people of the present.

In conclusion, the use of digital tools is extremely important and beneficial for historians to understand and utilize. There is no doubt that this a new skillset that seasoned historians must accustom themselves to, however it is more for than benefit; the large amount of data that social and economic historians can draw using computation or algorithmic expressions is huge, and GIS provides a visual important for both political and social historians. While digital tools began as a type of communication device for academic historians and a tool to expand the field of history, it has developed into a key tool that is essentially required in a historians toolbelt. In the future, technology itself will be not only a tool for historians, but also a part of the large amount of primary sources to be found for the century we live in.