IT
and the Study of History
Chalong
Soontravanich
Historians in
increasing numbers have enthusiastically embraced information technology as a new
tool of their trade. It is not unlike a pencil and eraser, a notepad, a
typewriter, a calculator, a tape recorder, a camera, a microfilm viewer, and a
xerox machine – each quite a radical innovation in its time – all rolled into
one.
As a research tool,
the advantages of using IT for the study of history are tremendous and research
life for historians has never seemed better. Modern IT provides academics and
students of all disciplines access to most major library and archival databases
to search for books and other relevant materials. Even primary sources and historical
research works previously available only in certain major archives or libraries
can now be accessed, retrieved, and reproduced in full through the internet.
Further, IT has the
capacity to handle huge amounts of data and render quick and accurate quantitative
analyses of statistical records. Many successful mega-research projects on
American economic history and British family/social history, as well as
innovative historical studies using multi-disciplinary approaches, notably
those conducted by the French Annales school during the past two decades, have
benefited enormously from computer technology and IT. One ongoing mega-project
of historical study exploiting the latest IT is conducted by ECAI (Electronic
Cultural Atlas Initiative), a multi-national academic venture based at the
Finally, if sharing
historical data and research findings, exchanging ideas, exploring new
approaches, and creating research networks are considered part of the historical
method, which I believe they certainly are, these can all be comfortably
accomplished through the internet, electronic mail, electronic journal, electronic
discussion forum, and televideo conference.
But is IT simply an innovative research
tool that expands our research network, widens our access to historical data,
and speeds up our final research report with no other revolutionary or possibly
negative consequences for the study of history? Probably not. To my
understanding, there are at least three areas in which the study of history
might be affected, for better or worse, by advanced IT.
The first is the
question of veracity. Basically,
history is an information science. Historians work with information in the form
of historical data or sources (whether text, graphic representation, or
statistical records) to get to the truth of the past. Essentially the work of
historians involves the verification of all available information through
external and internal criticism of their sources in order to establish fact
from fiction and then make some sense out of it through analysis and
interpretation.
This latter part of
historical method is, to my understanding, essentially what is known in IT as
information processing. While historians used to depend on a selected
theoretical model or analytical frame to analyze facts, work on them manually,
and interpret them, they can now in many cases – especially in the fields of
social, economic, political, and military history – use computer software to
process the data according to pre-set parameters.
But what
distinguishes history from other related human and social sciences is the
importance it assigns to the verification of historical data/sources. This is
mainly achieved by subjecting all historical sources to close scrutiny in order
to establish their authenticity and reliability, through reading between the
lines in order to reach the hidden meaning of the text, and through comparison
with other contemporary sources. And while IT is undoubtedly one of the most
advanced and fast-developing technologies, it is also notoriously the least
secure. Within the IT community, there are probably more hackers than bona fide
creators and developers. Historical primary sources, maps, and other graphic
representations, research papers, etc., that are stored in servers for
historians to access are prone to tampering by any hacker with little more than
rudimentary knowledge of computer technology. To date there is no effective
measure to prevent such an incident.
Long before the
advent of IT and for various reasons, all kinds of doctored historical evidence
was created to deceive either contemporaries or later generations of
historians. These were all too often believed to be real by the public and historians
alike. Only after painstaking study by skeptical scholars was the truth
eventually revealed about the Piltdown skull, certain Roman land deeds exposed
by Marc Bloch, and most recently the scandalous Hitler diaries. Perhaps because
historical data is not currently a priced commodity with high monetary value,
no hacker has yet played with the historical data stored in university servers.
But if knowledge of history is essential to any power contest, we can expect
this kind of malpractice to emerge not too far into the future.
The second area of
concern is the so-called information
revolution. Historiography is based on the analysis and interpretation of
available sources. It is believed that the more complete the historical sources
we can access, verify, compare, and analyze, the more accurate truth of the
past we can reconstruct. In addition, a good working historian needs to keep
abreast of the scholarship in his field of study by regularly exchanging
research findings and ideas with colleagues.
No one can deny
that IT has improved accessibility to sources, academic forums, and research
networks. This is reflected in the number of history-related web sites now available,
an unlimited venue for anyone who cares to register his thoughts and impressions
on almost anything. The Gutenberg Revolution of the sixteenth century only
widened access to information, while the
IT revolution has created a space for anyone to produce information. Unheard voices now enjoy the right to be
heard.
But the information
revolution may come to represent a terrifying nightmare for historians. Right
now there are perhaps millions of information sources available through cyberspace.
While insufficient information is a major problem for historians, too much
information or historical data is another. In the latter case, the verification
and comparison of sources and interpretation of data at both the initial and
final stages have to be done by historians themselves. For example, a recent scandal-infested
election campaign in
Practicality aside,
the new freedom of information production will affect the study of history in a
more fundamental way. For too long and in most societies, the writing of
history has been manipulated and monopolized by the privileged few, those
members of the educated elite who wielded political and cultural power over
their own people. Histories of the underclass, minority groups, local
communities, small people, etc., were discouraged, banned, or totally wiped
out. This process has been intensified under the centralized nation-state when
national history is officially sanctioned by the state.
This monopoly of
writing history is being torn down by the new freedom of information
production. Each group, and for that matter each individual, can challenge the
hitherto unchallenged power of the state and participate in the contest for
historical space of its own. New alternative historical sources and conflicting
interpretations will emerge in increasing number and historians have to take
them seriously. This will certainly lead us in new directions of historical
study, with more emphasis on local and regional history and history of the
small people. The conventional national history may have to give way to a new
kind of history, a people’s history, a history that can negotiate with all
these histories on the same footing and accommodate them all. This is perhaps
the most challenging task for historians!
Third is the
problem of technological disparity.
In this rapidly globalizing world, the cost of almost everything seems to rise at
the same speed as technological progress. Labor, housing, education, health,
energy, and ecology are obvious examples. Only the costs of agricultural
produce and IT seem constantly to decrease. In this regard, IT provides to more
and more people at less and less cost easy access to information and a powerful
tool to produce information of their own. Thus it seems the monopoly of
information is being torn apart by relatively inexpensive IT technology.
But is it true that
IT has created equality of information access and information production for
all? Certainly not. In fact, only a relatively small number of people can
afford the use of IT for their work, not to mention in their everyday life. On
the surface, the technology of IT is inexpensive, but in absolute terms, it is
definitely not. IT systems need huge funds and many man-hours of skilled
engineering and technical work to maintain and update information. If we browse
the cyber world we will certainly come across many web sites that have not been
maintained for years!
That’s why in many
parts of the world and in most countries of
How does this technological disparity
affect the study of history in our region? Judging from our poor economic
performance and poor distribution of wealth, the inequality of access will be
much greater, both within countries and among countries of the region. It is
likely that for some time only the elite and the state (using tax money) will
be able to afford the latest and most advanced IT. If such is the case, the
liberation of history following the IT revolution may not happen here and the
monopoly of history by the elite will be even more intense. We need to prevent
that monopoly by thinking of ways to share the use of IT for historical study that
benefits all.
The exploitation of IT for the study of
history is to be encouraged, but with a serious awareness of its many
complications. It is our duty as historians to apply this advanced technology,
to think of its impact on our profession, and to find a solution to inequality
of access.
The author is lecturer in the Department of
History,