[2nd Session], [25.09.2024]

As a new student at the University of Luxembourg, more than a decade after earning my bachelor’s degree, the introductory course to digital history is quite challenging for me. Despite having taken an introductory course on information and communication techniques at ULB with Prof. Dr. Seth van Hooland, I must admit that I am not very familiar with new technologies. I have mostly relied on research using index cards, although I must acknowledge that the first time I accessed a source through the BNF’s online catalog, I was impressed. Not having to go to the precious reserve and wear gloves was a real pleasure and provided me with a comfortable and welcome working environment. The course itself on data and metadata was interesting and opens up possibilities. I see this seminar as a toolbox. I don’t know how to use these tools yet, and it will undoubtedly be a painful learning process, but with an interesting outcome: saving time and not having to manually write a bibliography or footnotes, which is probably more painful than learning the tools. I will end with a question about data and metadata themselves: is having almost exhaustive data always a good thing for historians? Isn’t it the “natural” selection of what has been transmitted to us that sometimes makes the research process interesting? If a document has reached us, it is because it was of some importance. Was there any clear manipulation? Why are they unavailable? This is obviously a question to be approached with caution and nuance, but I sometimes feel overwhelmed by a torrent of information when it comes to digital history.

[3rd Session], [02.10.2024]

The session on web archives allowed me to discover the benefits of tools like the “Way back Machine,” which provides snapshots of websites at chosen periods. This can be useful in historical research to capture a snapshot of opinions at a specific moment. Working in a group allowed us to focus on a specific topic, and it’s always a good exercise to present our ideas concisely to an audience. The other topics presented by fellow students gave me a limited but insightful understanding of the advantages web archiving can offer historians. This can be very interesting for recent history topics, as well as for collecting meta-data to correlate with more traditional research or to critique a previously formulated hypothesis, all while maintaining a certain restraint and critical thinking. Ultimately, I would like to be able to search for information on the dark web to increase my chances of finding material. Web archiving seems to me to be a colossal task, an almost inexhaustible source of information. The real challenge, in this case, will be to effectively question the sources. If a methodological theme on this subject could be addressed, it would be very enriching. This session also highlighted the issue of privacy protection and the right to protect personal data. I was personally surprised not to find any data about myself on the web, which is reassuring, but in the age of social media, it must be quite unusual. This is an important ethical consideration, especially when moving from metadata to microdata.

[4th Session], [09.10.2024]

Working with Impresso has been very interesting for me. Although the tool is still being perfected and I faced quite a few difficulties initially, I have noticed a significant time-saving for my future research. Despite the search field being somewhat limited, having an overview at the metadata level and a very comprehensive Boolean search should make life easier for researchers. I remember sifting through periodicals on microfilms over a 30-year period 20 years ago; it was a tedious task. I believe that using Impresso should be done in conjunction with traditional sampling methods, and as Prof. Dr. Düring pointed out, one must always maintain a meticulous critical approach towards these tools, but the time savings are impressive. Regarding the exercises conducted in class, I started my research alone before joining a group of three working on the League of Nations. We noticed the importance of defining the lexical field used for the search, as the League of Nations is also a football competition. The same applied to my initial research on masonry. I found an interesting article in the Wort, which could be useful for my master’s thesis. As for getting to grips with the tool, this is a first approach that deserves to be deepened, as I still have some difficulties using it. So, it’s learning by doing. Regarding GitHub, I need to get used to the software as it is entirely new to me. However, in the long run, it shouldn’t be a problem given the basic usage that is required of us. Once again, it will be a matter of managing the available time to be as efficient as possible.

[5th Session], [16.10.2024]

The session on interactive maps allowed me to grasp the richness of this resource, but also the complexity of the studied field. Once the difference between maps and GIS was addressed, I realized that the subject was rich but complex. The first exercise regarding the creation of a campus map is also revealing of how our life habits influence our operational mode, highlighting in a way the historian’s cherished difficulty of neutrality. The step-by-step approach is interesting and allows for a very general understanding of how ESRI or QGIS works. The presentation of all these technologies useful to the historian’s profession is certainly fascinating, but also difficult to grasp in 90 minutes. I was fascinated by Jan Månsson’s “World Atlas of Travel Industry, 1860”. The work is considerable, almost exhaustive, intuitive, interactive, and remarkably precise. However, one question bothers me: despite a methodological explanation, we do not have sources to critique the given information, so we have to take Jan Månsson’s remarkable work at face value. Regarding the collective exercise carried out in class, I still notice my technological gaps, but I think that with work, they can be resolved, as StoryMaps has the same interface as PowerPoint. During our first reading, we did not notice the richness of the studied document, and it was by looking at the map intuitively that we were able to appreciate the richness of the studied document.

[5th Session], [16.10.2024] complementary assignment: Why maps?

Regarding the additional assignment on maps and GIS, my attention was drawn to the “Olympic Games” and the details of the marathon course routes. The interface showing the course details and the brief description of each winner is intuitive and easy to access. Female athletes were included in the course from their first participation in the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics. The “living map” aspect offers a pleasant map to consult, and I tended to lose track while navigating the site. It can be time-consuming without necessarily adding value to historical research (rankings and a Google Street View mode map would have sufficed), but it is undeniably pleasant to consult.

Curiosity then led me to Dominique Santana’s work “A Colônia Luxemburguesa” (I started university with her in Brussels, and she was already brilliant). Her work is remarkable, moving, and extremely well-documented. I didn’t notice the time passing, and it was very pleasant to listen to and watch. However, I can’t imagine the amount of work that went into creating this “transmedia project.” It’s a medium that undoubtedly appeals to the new generations by conveying knowledge and historical narratives. I realize that mastering digital tools enhances the practice of the historian’s profession. Although I am starting from scratch, it’s an excellent way to grasp the tools provided by new technologies. Ultimately, I hope to be able to manage these tools

[6th Session], [23.10.2024]

The course on networks, particularly the “Palladio” application developed by Stanford University, allowed me to understand the usefulness of these tools for historical research. I greatly appreciated the articles read in preparation for the session, which clarified the ex cathedra lecture; without them, I would have been completely lost. Once I “understood” the concepts of networks, nodes, relationships, and attributes, the presentation was clear. The marriage example reminded me of the complex organization of my wedding, and having experienced it, it facilitated my understanding. During the presentation, I often thought about the usefulness of this method for resistance networks during World War II, and I was pleasantly surprised to see that I was not mistaken, as it was used as an example during the presentation. Regarding the practical exercises carried out during the session, I was very cautious, aware of my digital shortcomings, by reproducing a wedding party. It is not original, of course, but in my case, it is sometimes better to play it safe. I am still not very comfortable with the interface, but I could see that it worked nonetheless. A diagram allows for a global overview, enriching a historical narrative without cluttering it. The difficulty lies in the choices to be made, but that is the nature of any narrative. The course being an introduction to digital history, it is logical that we cover the topics with an overview. However, it is unfortunate that we cannot, due to lack of time, deepen our knowledge of these tools to develop our skills in the field to sharpen our tools for writing the master’s thesis. That said, it is a matter of choice, as we did not choose the master’s in digital history, sometimes with regret, but we must remain realistic; I would have been completely lost.

[7th Session], [30.10.2024]

During the presentation on October 30th, Ludovic Délépine and Marco Amabilino explored the integration of artificial intelligence with the European Parliament Archives. They explained how to access various documents via the website, for example by year or by topic. They mentioned Karen Spärck Jones and the idea of introducing a tool to count the number of times a word appears in a document, which helps assess the importance of a particular word or document. Other AI pioneers were mentioned, but as the conference was aimed at a more exact sciences-oriented audience than humanities, the historical approach to computing was unfortunately only briefly outlined. They also explained the archiving rules and why only documents from 1952 to 1995 are available. AI is presented as a valuable research tool, but users must remain critical of the information generated by AI. The presentation was informative, although some technical terms may have been confusing for those less familiar with computer language. In conclusion, AI is seen as a tool for understanding history, but it is essential to continue analyzing and questioning the information it produces. The overview provided by technologies in general offers a new vision of history.

Summary of Dashboard Usage, https://archidash.europarl.europa.eu/ep-archives- anonymous-dashboard

The European Parliament Archives Dashboard is an intuitive and visually appealing tool, designed to provide a relatively clear and detailed overview of the documents available online. It comprises five main charts, each offering a unique perspective on the archives. The first chart displays the total number of documents, giving an idea of the archive’s scope. Next, a pie chart categorizes the documents by language, illustrating the contributions of various EU member states. The predominance of French, German, and English is explained by the history of European integration, while documents from the most recent enlargement countries are not yet included as their archives are not accessible. This chart is particularly useful for understanding the linguistic diversity of the archives. Another pie chart classifies the documents by type, with categories such as “oral intervention,” “written question,” and “resolution proposal.” This color-coded classification facilitates quick identification of the types of documents available. The fourth chart, a histogram, groups the documents by year, covering the period from 1952 to 1995. This chronological distribution is essential for researchers interested in specific periods of European parliamentary history. The final chart shows the distribution of documents by start date, with a notable increase in the early 1970s, again reflecting the history of European construction. This visualization helps to understand the evolution and accumulation of documents over time. The records are categorized into seven types: fonds, series, file, title, long title, PE number, and reference code. The current naming conventions, such as EU.HAEU/AC, can be confusing for non-specialized users, but once understood, they allow for a much more comfortable search compared to the paper era. An explanatory legend or table of contents would be beneficial to clarify the content of each fonds and make the dashboard more accessible to the general public. The dashboard also allows users to filter documents by type, language, and year, and offers an “Ask the EP Archives?” feature that enables users to ask questions and receive immediate textual responses. This feature aims to ensure that responses are based on documents from the European Parliament Archives, thus limiting the risk of AI “hallucinations.”

Questions

1. Does working with private, non-European development programs pose an ethical and internal security issue?
2. How does AI handle multilingual documents and ensure translation accuracy? Do you still collaborate with the translation service?
3. Does the thirty-year legal delay pose a democratic problem? As an emanation of democracy, shouldn’t part of the archives be available to citizens within a more “reasonable” timeframe?
4. How is AI formatted to avoid biases and ensure the objectivity of search results?
5. How are documents technically digitized? I imagine this varies depending on the era, but are scanners still used, for example?