DHQ: Digital Humanities Quarterly
2016
Volume 10 Number 2
Volume 10 Number 2
Digital Methods and Classical Studies
Abstract
This essay introduces the articles in the special issue by locating them within current major lines of approach in digital classics.
Introduction
In the 1980s, a classical scholar might have been forgiven for considering
digital approaches ancillary. The pioneering projects of the Perseus Digital
Library and the Packard Humanities Institute might have seemed to simply provide
existing texts in a more accessible form. By now, however, it has become clear
that digital methods are transforming how we understand classical antiquity. At
the same time that Google Books and the Hathi Trust and related efforts have
made the content of millions of books instantly available on the internet to the
public and scholars alike, electronic databases and journals like this one have
opened new horizons by removing impediments of access. As with the study of the
humanities as a whole, so within the field of Classics, new and enhanced tools
continue to come online to facilitate existing modes of teaching and research
and provide new ones.
These efforts are still new enough, however, that the field has not yet fully
adapted to make them easily accessible. Classicists could once keep current by
reviewing the latest journals and reviews, visiting conference bookstands, and
leafing through publisher catalogues. But how would one expect to learn about,
say, the LOFTS
project for the digitization and analysis of fragmentary ancient texts? Peer
review of digital resources exists in some areas of humanities, such as Modnets for
American modernist literary and cultural studies, but not as yet in
Classics.[1] There are other good
starting points, such as the list of digital
projects provided by digitalclassicist.org and the announcements and
conversations on the digitalclassicist listserv.
Digitalclassicist.org has also helped organize a series of seminars in
Berlin, Boston, Göttingen, and London. As elsewhere in the digital humanities,
blogs and Twitter feeds serve as other important channels for sharing
information.
Despite the existence of these fora, there has remained a need to bring digital
classicists together to share techniques and results, and to connect them with a
broader audience of scholars and educators. The Digital Classics Association
(DCA) was created in 2013 in order to advance these aims, primarily in the
United States, which, despite the ongoing work of Perseus and others, has
nevertheless lagged behind Europe in conversations around digital classics. To
help bring these to a wider classics audience, the DCA has organized a series of
panels at the largest gathering of classicists in the world, the annual joint
meetings of the Archaeological
Institute of America and the Society for Classical Studies.
As a contribution to the dialogue among those with digital interests and skills,
it also staged a standalone conference at the State University of New York at
Buffalo in spring 2013, “Word, Space,
Time: Digital Perspectives on the Classical World,” with
presentations on a variety of areas within the study of classical antiquity.
The conference was meant to be maximally inclusive, as indicated by its title:
“Word” stood for texts generally, “Space” for material culture and
place, and “Time” for historical studies. The ecumenical approach meant
foregoing the benefit of drawing together experts in one sub-field prepared to
fully critique one another’s work. It was designed rather to take advantage of
the inherent interdisciplinarity of digital work and create a forum for
conversations across the sub-fields of classics and beyond. The conference
provided a snapshot of important work along this spectrum, which, given the
emerging and ongoing nature of many digital projects, often meant
work-in-progress.
Digitizing Primary Texts
The contributions in this volume, drawn from the 2013 DCA conference,
represent some of the major lines of approach current within the areas of
digital classics.[2] The most fundamental effort is to
continue the work begun by Perseus and PHI in the 1980s of digitizing
materials for reading and analysis. As part of its larger goals, the Open
Philology project is working to add substantially to the Perseus
corpus of Greek and Latin. Complementary efforts are beginning under the
auspices of the Society for Classical Studies, the Medieval Academy of
America, and the Renaissance Society of America, for the construction of a
Digital Latin Library,
which might be considered an expanded and richly augmented descendant of the
long-useful Latin
Library.[3] More specialized efforts have
made considerable progress digitizing texts from beyond the classical era,
including DigilibLT, which hosts many late antique Latin texts, and Camena, which has a Neo-Latin collection. Among parallel efforts
to digitize primary materials in the realm of material culture, a notable
effort is FASTI, a site that
aggregates the records from excavation and conservation of classical
archaeological sites.
Two of the articles in this volume report on ongoing efforts to expand the
fundamental materials available online. They also illustrate how these
efforts often follow in the footsteps of Perseus in creating a rich set of
tools with which to analyze the materials they have digitized. The first of
these efforts is in fact an effort under the umbrella of the Open Philology
project, the Leipzig Open Fragmentary Texts Series (LOFTS). In their
contribution, Monica Berti, Bridget Almas, and Gregory Crane explain how
LOFTS approaches digitizing several sets of classical texts consisting
wholly or partly of fragments or quotations.
The first challenge lies in the selection of texts to digitize. Classicists
have the advantage that the editions of their primary texts, and even some
secondary texts, are often old enough to be free of copyright restrictions.
Among the digital editions LOFTS is producing is one the Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum (Fragments of Greek Historians, or FHG) of Karl Müller. The volumes of FHG were published from 1841 to 1870, and became
the basis of the authoritative print edition of Felix Jacoby, Die Fragmente der
griechischen Historiker, whose first volume appeared in 1923, and
which has been continued now in online subscription format as Jacoby Online. The choice to digitize Müller’s earlier FHG was partly by necessity, since some if not all
of Jacoby is under copyright, and so not available for an open access
edition. This sort of situation is faced by many digital classics efforts.
Classicists may have full and free use of editions of most texts, just not
the most recent editions. As part of the Open Philology project, the leaders
of LOFTS have developed a best-practices strategy for confronting this
problem, which includes signalling differences from more recent editions.
Also, earlier editions, even when superseded in some respects, often have
virtues that later editions do not. The FHG,
for example, is more concise and manageable than Jacoby’s more comprehensive
work.
The second challenge is how to take advantage of the digital medium to enrich
the texts. Addressing this challenge requires answering three questions.
What additional information should be included together with the texts in
the form of XML markup, including Linked Open Data identifiers to allow it
to be identified and used by other resources? How should the marked-up texts
be presented online? And what additional research tools should be joined
with the texts?
The LOFTS team has approached all of these questions in an exemplary way.
They have developed sophisticated methods for representing texts that are
missing author and context, and even (parts of) the text itself, as when it
is known only through paraphrase and reference. LOFTS also integrates its
editions admirably with other resources. The project has used Canonical Text
Services standards to identify texts and parts of texts, so that
they can be easily linked to and analyzed.
The contribution of Caroline T. Schroeder and Amir Zeldes (“Raiders of the Lost Corpus”) describes an analogous
effort at digitization, but one that confronts its own distinct challenges.
The goal of their Coptic Scriptorium project is to develop a digital corpus
of Coptic texts. Coptic is the form of the ancient Egyptian language that
emerged in the Roman period, with a largely Greek alphabet used for grammar
and vocabulary evolved from ancient Egyptian. Critical as they are for the
understanding of late Egyptian culture, as well as the contemporary cultures
of Greece and Rome, many Coptic texts have never been edited and published
at all, much less in digital form. The project they describe thus takes as
its starting point the creation of a collaborative publication and editing
space for presenting these texts.
In both of these projects, the creation of digital editions is supplemented
by tools with which to study them. LOFTS is the integrating its texts with
the emerging Perseids
editing platform for textual analysis and annotation. The Coptic Scriptorium
includes morphological and syntactical tools for language analysis, as well
as with taggers that allow entities within the text to be linked to other
online resources, including those dealing with geographical and
prosopographical information. The conjoining of texts and tools is
characteristic of current efforts in digital classics, again following the
example of Perseus.
Digitizing Derived Textual Information
Separate efforts have been underway focusing just on tools, apart from the
publication of digital texts. One basic task is to derive entities from
texts as independent objects of study, and for use in abstract models. One
set of such entities are unique signifiers in the ancient world. Pleiades has created unique
digital identifiers for all known places in antiquity. These
include not just names of towns, cities, and geographical features, but also
places that are manmade (Hadrian’s wall), mythical (Atlantis), or contested
(the birthplace of Homer). SNAP-DRGN is creating a uniform index with unique identifiers for
ancient people. The Perseus Catalog is creating
an index of all classical texts, using Canonical Text Services standards for the creation of unique
identifiers to refer to texts, textual editions, and specific textual
locations. By using Linked Open Data standards, these projects are
establishing the infrastructure for highly sophisticated queries. In the
future, for example, it should be relatively simple to discover how often
Roman knights are mentioned in connection with Mediterranean ports, or what
parts of foreign lands different Greek authors typically referred to at the
opening of their works.
In his article “Extracting Citation Networks from
Publications in Classics,” Matteo Romanello demonstrates his
method for automatically identifying and extracting canonical references to
classical works in secondary scholarship. Through his efforts, for instance,
one can now gather every reference to Vergil’s Aeneid 3.452 in searchable scholarship, whether the title was
given as “Aeneid” or abbreviated to
“Aen.” or “A.”. Romanello can then demonstrate, by means of network
graphs, the density of reference to certain passages over others. His work
will make it possible to precisely identify trends in scholarship, and
reveal how scholarly conversations have affected how we see the ancient
world.
The contribution of Francesco Mambrini, Treebanking in the world of
Thucydides. Linguistic annotation for the Hellespont Project, takes us back to the primary
sources themselves. Resources like the Classical Languages Toolkit now provide versions of basic and
essential tools for linguistic analysis long available for English, such as
tokenization, part-of-speech tagging, stemming, and even scansion. A need
yet remains, however, for a resource of great interest to linguists as well
as philologists, a set of fully syntactically annotated Greek and Latin
sentences. Mambrini’s paper reports on the Hellespont Project, an effort to
perform syntactic analysis on the text of Thucydides, as a step toward
creating a method for automatic syntactic parsing of ancient Greek
generally. “Treebanking” is the common technical term for full
morphological and syntactical analysis, and based on the treebank they
created, Mambrini and his collaborators set out to answer compelling
questions such as whether there is a general difference between the actions
of the Athenians and the Spartans in the period between the Persian and
Peloponnesian Wars. This is extremely challenging work, as it means trying
to fit precise distinctions to the subtleties of syntax, but the article
shows that real progress can be made.
Large-Scale Analysis
Just as “big data” has followed from digitization
generally, so in digital humanities has the promulgation of digital
resources and first-order tools been followed by attempts at large-scale
analysis. This procedure has been given different names, such as, for
literary studies, the “distant
reading” Franco Moretti contrasts with traditional “close reading,”
[Moretti 2013] or the “macroanalysis” Matthew
L. Jockers contrasts with “microanalysis”
[Jockers 2013]. The promise of large-scale analysis is to gather together in great
numbers elements of works that have been digitized and detect larger or
otherwise hard-to-discern patterns in the form, contents, and locations of
cultural artefacts.
In his contribution to this volume, Matthew L. Jockers himself brings this
larger perspective on the digital humanities to bear in an interpretation of
an aspect of the classical tradition. Here he focuses on the question of
what the distribution of geographical place names in a corpus of 3,500
19th-century American, British, and Irish novels can tell us. After laying
out his methods in ways that can serve as a guide to others pursuing similar
approaches, he comes to a variety of telling observations. These include,
for example, the fact that the Mediterranean is characterized as a more wild
and adventuresome place, described with words coming under the themes of
“Outlaws and Robbers,”
“Female Heroines,”
“Men with Guns.” This contrasts with the characterization of cities and
civilizations situated on the Mediterranean such as Egypt, Greece, and
Jerusalem, which are associated with more sublime themes like “Art and
Beauty” and the “Holy and the Sacred.”
Education
Pedagogy and outreach have been major goals of work in digital classics from
its beginnings. In the 1980s, Perseus and the Vergil Project were
founding efforts to establish texts and study materials for students. More
recently, the Dickinson Classical
Commentaries represent a leap forward in classical language
pedagogy that takes full advantage of students’ increased access to the
internet through phones and tablets. The site successfully integrates
multimedia offerings with traditional pedagogical aids such as customizable
vocabulary lists and live readings by the instructor. The series includes
authors commonly read in the introductory Latin language curriculum (Caesar,
Cicero, and Ovid) as well as those not commonly encountered by
undergraduates such as Callimachus and Sulpicius Severus.
More generally, making basic materials and analytical tools more easily
available to all has provided additional benefits for students. In addition,
teachers have created or adapted new digital pedagogical materials and
techniques for the use of students. Two of the examples presented in this
volume include Jeffrey Rydberg-Cox’s Greek pedagogy site and Rebecca
Schindler’s initiative on spatial literacy.
Jeffrey Rydberg-Cox’s paper reports on his initiative to make self-guided
pedagogical materials freely available for students of ancient Greek. He
adapted John Williams White’s First Greek Book
(1896), a textbook with 80 lessons based upon the language and vocabulary of
Xenophon’s Anabasis, for a variety of mobile
platforms. Sentence alignment exercises, in which users match individual
Greek words with English words and phrases, help students make the
transition from drilling exercises into reading authentic Greek. Spaced
repetition enables students to practice material over multiple sessions. The
initiative has been successful both for Rydberg-Cox’s students at University
of Missouri-Kansas City and other students of ancient Greek. The site
boasted 7,800 unique users in its first twelve months, a significant number
for a less-commonly taught language.
Rebecca Schindler’s paper discusses the integration of spatial literacy
skills in the classical studies curriculum. Spatial literacy is now valued
alongside the more traditional skills of writing, numeracy, and critical
thinking. Classical studies has tended to fall behind other disciplines in
terms of teaching spatial literacy, as courses in GIS for classicists are
relatively rarer. Schindler describes how she and her colleagues have
integrated spatial literacy into classical archaeology courses, using
examples from the Collaboratory for GIS and Mediterranean Archaeology (CGMA)
at DePauw University.
Conclusions
Three years after the original DCA meeting, the future of digital humanities
in classical studies continues to look promising. Both philologists and
archaeologists will benefit from a series of new, publicly available
projects. One volume cannot capture the diversity of projects discussed at
the DCA conference, much less the broader field of classical digital
humanities. To enlarge the scope further somewhat, however, we conclude with
a survey of two projects whose leaders presented at the conference but do
not have articles in this volume, to give a sense of other important
directions in the field.
Network analysis has been a major line of approach among digital humanists.
Research in social network analysis considers how associations of
individuals and groups map onto geographical space. Representative of such
efforts is the work of Maxim Romanov on toponyms used in the early Islamic
world.[4] By gathering locating names such as
“Al-Baghdadi” and “al-Basri” from the 14th-century History of Islam written by the Damascene
historian al-Dhahabī on maps of the geography where Islam was born and grew,
Romanov shows how the frequency of mentions of regions changes. From this
information, he is able to sketch a kind of social geography of the early
Islamic world as one indicator of the shifting cultural and religious
importance of different regional centers over the centuries.
Traditional philological studies have also been transformed by the new
digital tools. Neil W. Bernstein described a method for gauging the internal
connectedness, through allusion and intertext, of the works that make up the
corpus of classical Latin epic poetry. Bernstein and his collaborators took
the individual, often subtle borrowings of language from one epic author to
another revealed by the search provided by the Tesserae Project web
tool. They conducted a rigorous, large-scale study that compares
the overall level of intertextuality among authors writing epic.[5] The result was a relatively
objective measure of which authors were most influential in the tradition,
and which on the other hand were most interested in alluding to and
borrowing from the language of their predecessors and contemporaries. The
result is a kind of genealogy of influence that was impossible to conduct
before the advent of digital tools.
The diversity of projects introduced at the DCA meeting reflected the
interdisciplinarity of classical studies, which has traditionally integrated
the study of literary and archaeological sources. So whereas the notion of
“big tent” digital humanities, including not just
developers but users and others, has had to be argued for in the broader
field of digital humanities [Gold 2012], particpants in the
2013 DCA conference demonstrated a strong sense of common purpose in
developing technologies and adapting them for particular ends. The
continuing development of large-scale digital infrastructure in classics
described above should provide an improved common basis for such efforts,
allowing for increased collaboration around existing tools and data
archives, and so easier creation and dissemination of new analytical and
pedagogical applications.
Notes
[1] The most-read journal in classics, the Bryn Mawr Classical Review book reviews, once had a companion
review of digital resources, but no longer.
[2] An account of the origins of digital classics is
provided by [Crane 2004], of digital humanities, by [Hockey 2000].
[3] Like Latin Library, the Lacus
Curtius website is helpful for offering clean, simple texts,
though Lacus Curtius has Greek in addition to Latin, as well as English
translations for many of its texts.
[4] Romanov, M. forthcoming “Toward
Abstract Models for Islamic History.” In The Digital Humanities + Islamic & Middle Eastern
Studies (pdf
of submission).
[5]
Published separately in DHQ: Bernstein, N.
W., K. Gervais, and W. Lin. 2016. “Comparative rates
of text reuse in classical Latin hexameter poetry.”
DHQ 9.3.
Works Cited
Crane 2004 Crane, G. 2004. “Classics and the Computer: An End of the History.” In A Companion to Digital Humanities. Eds. S. Schreibman,
J. Unsworth and R. G. Siemens. Oxford, Blackwell: 46-55.
Gold 2012 Gold, Matthew, ed. 2012. Debates in the Digital Humanities. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Hockey 2000 Hockey, S. M. 2000. Electronic Texts in the Humanities: Principles and
Practice. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Jockers 2013 Jockers, M. L. 2013. Macroanalysis: Digital Methods and Literary History.
Champagne, IL, University of Illinois.
Moretti 2013 Moretti, F. 2013. Distant Reading. London: Verso.