{"title":"THE OLD AND NEW OF DIGITAL HISTORY","authors":"STEFAN TANAKA","doi":"10.1111/hith.12284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This article reflects on the expectations and changes that digital technologies have brought to history, activities that are increasingly codified as digital history. Because of the breadth of digital technologies and communicative media, the contours of a digital history are still unclear, so I frame my discussion with two potential narratives that begin from different ideas that emerged from World War II weapons research. One narrative begins with Roberto Busa and the application of a computer to find concordances in the writings of Saint Thomas Aquinas. The emphasis here is on the application of computer technologies to the practice of history. The second narrative begins with Vannevar Bush's essay “As We May Think” and focuses on digital technologies as a key element in an information system. This beginning invites a parallel between inscription technologies (especially the movable-type press) and knowledge systems. Both narratives imbibe the modern faith in technology to improve; the “new” is better, but the latter better involves humans and societies. Despite important differences between them, both narratives lead to an inquiry into the foundations of our modern knowledge system. In the case of history, the question is whether a knowledge system that was developed in the nineteenth century and designed to encompass and order the world into one system is still apposite in our digital world. I close by suggesting that one such presumption that needs to be reconsidered is the idea of the past as a prior and distant time-form. A shift from “the past” to “pasts” opens history to a broader field of previous happenings and a reconsideration of chronological time, of change, and to other modes of transmission, such as storytelling.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"61 4","pages":"3-18"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hith.12284","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article reflects on the expectations and changes that digital technologies have brought to history, activities that are increasingly codified as digital history. Because of the breadth of digital technologies and communicative media, the contours of a digital history are still unclear, so I frame my discussion with two potential narratives that begin from different ideas that emerged from World War II weapons research. One narrative begins with Roberto Busa and the application of a computer to find concordances in the writings of Saint Thomas Aquinas. The emphasis here is on the application of computer technologies to the practice of history. The second narrative begins with Vannevar Bush's essay “As We May Think” and focuses on digital technologies as a key element in an information system. This beginning invites a parallel between inscription technologies (especially the movable-type press) and knowledge systems. Both narratives imbibe the modern faith in technology to improve; the “new” is better, but the latter better involves humans and societies. Despite important differences between them, both narratives lead to an inquiry into the foundations of our modern knowledge system. In the case of history, the question is whether a knowledge system that was developed in the nineteenth century and designed to encompass and order the world into one system is still apposite in our digital world. I close by suggesting that one such presumption that needs to be reconsidered is the idea of the past as a prior and distant time-form. A shift from “the past” to “pasts” opens history to a broader field of previous happenings and a reconsideration of chronological time, of change, and to other modes of transmission, such as storytelling.
这篇文章反映了数字技术给历史带来的期望和变化,这些活动越来越多地被编纂为数字历史。由于数字技术和传播媒体的广度,数字历史的轮廓仍然不清楚,所以我用两种可能的叙述来构建我的讨论,这两种叙述是从二战武器研究中出现的不同观点开始的。一种叙述是从罗伯托·布萨开始的,他使用计算机在圣托马斯·阿奎那的著作中寻找一致性。这里的重点是计算机技术在历史实践中的应用。第二种叙述以Vannevar Bush的文章《正如我们可能想到的》(As We May Think)开始,重点关注作为信息系统关键元素的数字技术。这一开端将铭文技术(尤其是活字印刷机)和知识系统相提并论。这两种说法都吸收了现代对技术改进的信念;“新”更好,但后者更好地涉及人类和社会。尽管它们之间存在着重要的差异,但这两种叙述都导致了对我们现代知识体系基础的探究。就历史而言,问题在于,19世纪发展起来的、旨在将世界纳入一个体系并使之有序的知识体系,是否仍然适用于我们的数字世界。最后,我建议需要重新考虑这样一个假设,即把过去看作是一个先验的、遥远的时间形式。从“过去”到“过去”的转变为历史打开了一个更广阔的领域,包括以前发生的事情,重新考虑时间顺序和变化,以及其他传播方式,如讲故事。
期刊介绍:
History and Theory leads the way in exploring the nature of history. Prominent international thinkers contribute their reflections in the following areas: critical philosophy of history, speculative philosophy of history, historiography, history of historiography, historical methodology, critical theory, and time and culture. Related disciplines are also covered within the journal, including interactions between history and the natural and social sciences, the humanities, and psychology.