Introduction: history in the digital age

History, as a field of enquiry, is standing on the edge of a conceptual precipice. Since the popular advent of the World Wide Web in the mid-1990s, scholars have been drawing attention to the potentials and pitfalls of electronic resources in historical study. Seamus Ross has recognized that ‘the growing dependence of society upon digital information will change the fabric of source material available to historians’.' For Terry Kuny, ‘we are moving into an era where much of what we know today, much of what is coded and written electronically^ will be lost forever. We are, to my mind, living in the midst of digital Dark Ages’ William J. Turkel has argued that ‘the use of digital sources ... completely changes the landscape of information and transaction costs that historians have traditionally faced’.̂ And yet others still have suggested that historians are facing a fundamental ‘paradigm shift’ in our understanding and practice of traditional h isto ryT his book argues that whilst the digital age is affecting all who practice and study history professionally, historians do not need to learn new technologies or computer codes; they do not need to become computer scientists. Indeed, I would argue that part of the problem thus far has been too much emphasis on historians becoming something they are not; to the detriment of the fundamental skills and expertise that is the craft of the historian. This misplaced emphasis has had the consequence that the majority of historians, whilst aware of some of the challenges the digital age is creating, are not actively engaging with these very fundamental issues. Instead the challenge of the digital age is ‘relegated to more marginal professional spaces to casual lunchtime conversations or brief articles in association newsletters’ in the words of Roy Rosenzweig.^ For the most part this discourse has been disparate, and between information professionals, archivists or ‘digital historians’, those historians directly interested in technological innovation and practice in their scholarship, rather than the vast majority of traditional historians. Students studying history at university are now themselves digital born, and take for granted that resources and com­ munication not only are, but should be, available online. There is, to a certain degree, a generational divide between students and teachers, although this is not as simplistic as it sounds since established scholars have a much deeper tradition of historical rigour from which to draw. We find ourselves then in an odd History, as a field of e ir , i e tual p recipice. Since the popular a t i t id-1990s, sch olars have been dra ing atte ti t t f l ctronic r esources in historical study. e t 't r ing dep endence of society upon digital i ri f source aterial available to historia s'.' ' i into an er a where much of what e kno t , ritte electr onically, will be lost forever. , i st f digital ark Ages'. William J. Turkel has ar ' r es ... co pletely changes the landscape f i f t t t historia ns have traditionally faced' .3 t t at histori ans are facing a funda ental ' r i ' t i and pra ctice of traditional history. Thi i ital age is affe cting all who practice and stud i t t need to learn new technologies or c t t eco e co puter scientists. Indeed, I l l t s far has b een too much emphasis on hist ri t; t the detr i ent of the funda ental skills t f t e historia n. This misplaced e phasis has t j rit of his torians, whi lst aware of s t l is creating, are not actively engaging it t . I stead the chal lenge of the digital age is 'rel t i l spaces t o casual lunchtime conversatio s r i l tters' in th e ords