October 2007

Family history is front page news

Who’d have thought that family history could become so trendy? The latest government IT f**up is at the Family Records Centre in London.

For years, genealogists and family historians have pored over the massive green and maroon ledgers at the Family Records Centre in London, searching for details of more than 150 years of births, marriages and deaths. But there was anger or outright incredulity this weekend as professional and amateur researchers arrived to find most of the shelves bare.

There will never again be public access to the paper records, the index to where in the country all the births, marriages and deaths were registered, but – as so often with government IT projects – the timetable for the online version intended to replace them has collapsed. According to a spokesman for the Office for National Statistics, which is responsible for the General Records Office, “the present target is to have the online index available by mid-2009″.

I don’t suppose the ONS had allowed for family history becoming the middle-class high-profile hobby of choice, thanks to Who do you think you are? etc. Oops.

More here and here.


What the smart early modernist should be reading today

The latest Carnivalesque is up at Serendipities, great work by Kristine. I haven’t had much time to peruse the carnival yet, but this list of 250+ killer digital libraries and archives looks like a stunning resource.

It’s the 300th [or 360th, or something] anniversary of a neglected landmark in British democratic history, the Putney Debates of 1647. Yes, it’s all very Grauniad, and Tristram Hunt gets awfully excited about it, but don’t let that put you off.

Alternatively, you could try the official fan website of Charles II


Servers behaving badly

I’ve been with my current web host for about three years now and have generally been satisfied. But there seem to have been a lot of outages recently – including this evening – which is the kind of annoyance that gets you wondering if it might be time to move…

Sorry for any inconvenience, dear readers.

(Also annoying: the host has recently removed SpamAssassin from the email facilities, without any warning. Its absence has rather exposed the limitations of Thunderbird’s junk filters when you get several hundred junk emails a week.)

Anyone got any recommendations for hosting services? I need plenty of SQL databases (some cheap hosting services are distinctly stingy on that one), but apart from that my wants are really quite simple: reliable and not too expensive. Not that I fancy the hassle of moving unless I have to.

Now let’s see if the server’s still up and I can post this, eh? [Answer: yes... but veeeeery slooooowly.... Oh dear.]


Some good news

* The announcement of a Humanities Research Network, intended to provide “a comprehensive online resource for research in humanities, providing scholars with access to current work in their field and facilitating research and scholarship”. It’s starting with just three networks: Classic, English and American literature, Philosophy. Let’s hope History follows along soon…

* I posted a few weeks ago that the Arts and Humanities Data Service was losing most of its funding and was in danger of closing. Fortunately, however, King’s College London is establishing a new Centre for E-Research which will take over responsibility for the AHDS next year.

* The 19th-century British Newspaper Website has been launched: “a virtual library of nationally, regionally and locally important digitised British newspapers from 1800 to 1900″, which will be free for folks in UK HE/FE institutions.


Sad blogging news

Mr H. at Giornale Nuovo is shutting up shop.


Eating cute creatures, mmm

Bunnies = Delicious Dinner, says Hugh. Indeed.

I, on the other hand, will be having Bambi stew for dinner tonight.


Argentina 34 – France 10

Third place playoffs boring? Not this one.

Tomorrow either England or South Africa will win the Rugby World Cup. But everyone knows that Argentina have been the team of the tournament.

After all, nearly all their players have to earn their living outside Argentina, and they are the only major nation that doesn’t participate in an annual international tournament.

And yet they both started and finished their tournament with crushing wins over the hosts (and winners of the Six Nations for the last two years – in theory, the best team in the northern hemisphere), and tonight they thoroughly deserved their bronze medals. (What a pity they had to play their worst match of the tournament in the semi-final…)

Talk about exceeding expectations. They’ve been terrific.

Saturday update, after the final: Well, that was pants. (If I wanted to watch a ball being kicked up and down a field, I’d be a footie fan.) South Africa just about deserved the win. Yawn.


Ahem

I didn’t notice the other day that the BBC’s Fanny Hill mini-site has an 18th-century Quiz.

I only got 8 out of 10. Don’t tell my boss.


Discovering History and Memory on the Web

A good piece by Allan Kulikoff in the latest Common-place, on Early American History on the web. It’s relevant beyond American history: for a start, his description of the process of tracking down source materials should be useful for teachers and students looking for useful online primary sources in any historical field. One thing that stands out is how surprised Kulikoff was at just how much he found:

The Internet contains everything from newspapers and magazines to travel accounts, from maps to sheet music, from woodcuts to oil paintings, from novels to critical essays, from the proceedings of governmental bodies to the intimate details of family life. Searchers can find materials on every imaginable topic: Civil War hospitals; the Salem witchcraft trials; Revolutionary and Civil War battles; proceedings of the Continental Congress, the Constitutional Convention, and the U.S. Congress; slave resistance; Indian battles; the abolition and proslavery movements; the beliefs and religious practices of Evangelicals and Unitarians; the Lewis and Clark expedition; westward migration; economic development and immigration; and the writings of Cotton Mather and Walt Whitman, to name but a few. In sum, there are far more primary sources on the Web than in public libraries (except the greatest) and community college libraries, though many fewer than in the libraries of research universities.

But, as the discussion shows, these can still be difficult to find. Information multiplies endlessly on the Web; we have rapidly gone from scarcity to abundance. But locating that abundance is often a hit-and-miss affair.

Moreover, there is a thoughtful rumination on what these primary sources, the choices made in digitising history, tell us about history and memory.

Putting materials on the Web is a time-consuming process: they must be discovered, digitized, indexed, and uploaded. Historians, archivists, librarians, curators, genealogists, and institutions like the Library of Congress all put historical sources on the Web. These individuals and institutions have competing interests and hold widely contrasting views of American history. As one looks in detail at Web primary sources, one senses great conflict and contests over the meaning of our past, over the historical memories they wish to sustain or suppress. Who holds the keys to our history—historians, archivists, preachers, politicians, ordinary citizens?

Kulikoff notes how – unsurprisingly – trends in historiography influence the sources put online. The unfashionable, such as ‘quantifiable’ materials like probate inventories, doesn’t get as much attention as images and narrative texts. (Mind you, it doesn’t help that digitising sources like these in a way that will be of real use for quantitative analysis is one of the hardest tasks going: it’s easy to put images of manuscript sources online, but converting them into searchable texts or databases is difficult, labour-intensive and expensive; and you can’t just dip a toe in the water: you’ve got to do them en masse.)

This is not a bad time for historians to be giving more thought to these issues. The Web has achieved some maturity as a serious academic resource, although on the technical side there’s a long way to go. It seems strange to me that you can still encounter people whose understanding of what’s available seems not to have changed since about 1995 (I don’t know whether this is a failure of outreach or whether these are just the unreachable); still, the dinosaurs are in the minority.

Nonetheless, there are many historians who need to become more savvy about how to make history digital; what is possible and may become possible, how to get it done, how to get the money to do it. Learn these skills and you have the opportunity to influence public perceptions of your field as well as contributing to scholarly research.

Digital History: a few Essential Resources

Digital History: a guide to gathering, preserving and presenting the past on the web (also in dead tree format)
Digital History Hacks – Bill Turkel’s indispensable blog
Center for New Media and History
Dan Cohen
Companion to Digital Humanities


When you think of it…

It’s just a surprise it’s taken this long.

BBC4 is screening a new version of Fanny Hill; adaptation by – well, who else could it be? – Andrew Davies.


Weekend promises

Well, for one thing, I promise not to join in the raving just because England beat France by being the slightly less awful team on the night. This does not make them heroes, and although some of them are ugly enough to warrant the label of bulldogs, that comes with the territory. But what bugs me more is the idea that they are ‘underdogs’, just because they’ve spent most of the last four years being rubbish. Teams with the resources and support England have at their disposal are not underdogs. Argentina are underdogs. England are just under-achievers. (Better than being chokers, though, some might say.)

[Update after watching the South Africa/Argentina game: Goddam, the ITV commentary was hilarious tonight. One of them (Will Greenwood, apparently) just could not stop himself from breaking off in the middle of his commentary on the game being played to talk about the England game ('Good pass... and what about that move by Jason Robinson last night then? And JONNY JONNY JONNY!!!') and gloating about the exits of the All Blacks and Aussies, while the other kept trying to lead him back to the matter in hand... except when he forgot and stopped for a quick crow of his own. Who needs unbiased commentary anyway? Priceless.]

Where was I? Oh yes, promises. Real posts in the not-too-distant future! I swear! Maybe even two of them! I’ve been sent a copy of Andrea McKenzie’s new book Tyburn’s Martyrs by the publishers. So I’ll write something about that fairly soon. Man, it’s nice when people send you free things.

I’ve been doing a bit of cleaning and tidying up over on EMR. So I promise to start getting more of those posts out of the black hole more commonly known as the ‘drafts folder’. (If you emailed me months ago to suggest a link and it still hasn’t appeared, that’s where it’s got to…) And I will try to post more events on Early Modern News. I’ve already taken the opportunity to post a CFP for a new series of seminars at the Globe Theatre in London, which may interest some of you.


Good weekend

Even quieter about these parts than usual as I went to visit friends who have just moved into a new place in Glasgow. No internet connection yet. A good area for wifi, but it’s still strange not to have the Joy of Google at hand to answer all those trivial (yet vital of course) ‘Do you remember when… What was that place called… but isn’t X dead… what else was he in then… etc’ questions that come up in conversation. We were all so ignorant before teh Internets, eh?

Anyway, it was a good weekend. The weather was glorious, there was dancing, plenty of good food and we rounded it off with an Ani Difranco gig. Fantastic.


Email troubles

To anyone who has tried to email my sharon at earlymodernweb address today (Friday) and not heard back from me: I buggered something up (don’t know what exactly) and your message may have disappeared into the ether. It seems to be working now. Please try again…


So soon?

Today I got a university email circular that contained the gruesome words: “Web 3.0″.

(Preceded by “… often referred to as”. Which suggests that it isn’t just one rogue email writer who needs to be put up against a wall and shot. There’s a whole crowd of the buggers lurking out there in IT departments.)

Update: did some leisurely googling, because I’m a sad twat. There’s a wikipedia article, naturally. Gently steaming piles of something-or-other.