Digital Humanities as a Research Strategy
Typologies of Tools, Workflow Model, and an Example of a Scholarly Edition of a Source Text
Abstract
Digital Humanities, understood not as a separate discipline but as a transdisciplinary research approach, is redefining the ways in which philologists, historians, and cultural scholars engage with sources. The aim of this article is to analyze the functions of modern digital tools in research practices and to demonstrate how technology supports the classical methods of the humanities. The author proposes a functional classification model of digital tools, comprising three categories: automation, aggregation, and augmentation. The validity of this framework is illustrated through a case study of a historical source edition project—the manuscripts of Historiae Sinarum Imperii by Tomasz Szpot Dunin SJ. The article shows how tools such as Transkribus and Classical Text Editor significantly influence the workflow and efficiency of research processes. This work offers a methodological reflection on consciously planning workflows within digitally enhanced humanities. It also discusses the nature and limitations of the source material—17th-century Latin manuscripts—and how these characteristics inform the choice of applied technologies. In the context of current scholarly discourse, the article engages with ongoing debates about the role of digital tools in the humanities. The author employs a heuristic approach, focusing not only on the tools themselves but also on the functions they serve within the research process. The research methodology combines a case study with functional analysis, supported by methodological meta-reflection. The central thesis of the article is that digital tools, when used critically and deliberately, can not only enhance research efficiency but also expand the cognitive horizons of scholars working with archival texts. The article takes an application-oriented perspective and may serve as a starting point for designing one’s own digital research framework at the intersection of philology, history, and cultural studies.
References
Berry, David M. (red.), Understanding digital humanities (London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2012).
Gold, Matthew K. (red.), Debates in the digital humanities (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2012).
Sarkar Dipanjan, Text Analytics with Python. A Practical Real-World Approach to Gaining Actionable Insights from Your Data (New York: Apress, 2016).
Schnapp Jeffrey Todd, Digital humanities (Milano: EGEA spa, 2015).
Smołucha Danuta, Humanistyka cyfrowa w badaniach kulturowych. Analiza zjawiska na wybranych przykładach (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Akademii Ignatianum, 2021).
Terras Melissa, Nyhan Julianne, Vanhoutte Edward (red.), Defining digital humanities. A reader (London–New York: Routledge, 2016).
Warwick, Claire, Melissa Terras, i Julianne Nyhan, red. Digital humanities in practice (London: Facet Publishing, 2012).
Alhamad Husam Ahmad, Shehab Mohammad, Shambour Mohd Khaled Y., Abu-Hashem Muhannad A., Abuthawabeh Ala, Al-Aqrabi Hussain, Daoud Mohammad Sh., Shannaq Fatima B., „Handwritten Recognition Techniques: A Comprehensive Review”, Symmetry 16/6 (2024): 681.
Asundi Ashok Y., Reddy B. Subhash, Krishnamurthy M., „Digital humanities: Concepts, tools and applications”, DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 43/4 (2023): 276–281.
Bronk Andrzej, „Metoda naukowa”, Nauka 1 (2006): 89–153.
Conroy Melanie, „Networks, maps, and time: Visualizing historical networks using Palladio”, DHQ: Digital Humanities Quarterly 15/1 (2021).
De Luca Ernesto William, Fallucchi Francesca, Ghattas Bouchra, Spielhaus Riem, „The digital transformation processes for supporting digital humanities researchers in text analysis”, Journal of Documentation 80 (2024).
Domańska Ewa, „Jakiej metodologii potrzebuje współczesna humanistyka?”, Teksty Drugie 1–2 (2010): 45–55.
Griffiths Rachael M., „Handwritten Text Recognition (HTR) for Tibetan Manuscripts in Cursive Script”, Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines 72 (2024): 43–51.
Homans George Caspar, „The humanities and the social sciences”, American Behavioral Scientist 4/8 (1961): 3–6.
Humphries Mark, Leddy Lianne C., Downton Quinn, Legace Meredith, McConnell John, Murray Isabella, Spence Elizabeth, „Unlocking the Archives: Large Language Models Achieve State-of-the-Art Performance on the Transcription of Handwritten Historical Documents”, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.03340 (2024).
Kajander Anna, Koskinen-Koivisto Eerika, „Digital Humanities in the Age of AI: Reflections on Opportunities and Challenges”, Ethnologia Fennica 52/1 (2025): 133–136.
Kleszcz Ryszard, „Ajdukiewicz: Nauki humanistyczne, antynaturalizm, metodologia rozumiejąca”, Przegląd Filozoficzny. Nowa Seria (2013): 495–504.
Kowalska Małgorzata, „Transkrypcja tekstów w środowisku elektronicznym. Przegląd wybranych narzędzi”, Sztuka Edycji. Studia Tekstologiczne i Edytorskie 10/2 (2016): 65–74.
Ma Rongqian, Dedema Meredith, Cox Andrew, „A dancing bear, a colleague, or a sharpened toolbox? The cautious adoption of generative AI technologies in digital humanities research”, arXiv:2404.12458 (2024).
Miller A., „Text mining digital humanities projects: Assessing content analysis capabilities of Voyant Tools”, Journal of Web Librarianship 12/3 (2018): 169–197.
Przastek-Samokowa Maria, „Czym jest humanistyka cyfrowa? Pole semantyczne pojęcia (zarys)”, Zagadnienia Informacji Naukowej – Studia Informacyjne 54/2(108) (2016): 82–93.
Sánchez Joan Andreu, Romero Verónica, Toselli Alejandro H., Villegas Mauricio, Vidal Enrique, „A set of benchmarks for handwritten text recognition on historical documents”, Pattern Recognition 94 (2019): 122–134.
Singh Sonit, „Natural language processing for information extraction”, arXiv:1807.02383 (2018).
Smołucha Danuta, „Wizualizacja danych w humanistyce – kilka uwag o odpowiedzialności twórców”, Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis. Studia ad Bibliothecarum Scientiam Pertinentia 22 (2024): 641–653.
Solska Ewa, „Nowa Respublica Litteraria? Humanistyka cyfrowa jako metaorientacja współczesnych badań humanistycznych”, Roczniki Kulturoznawcze 7/1 (2016): 99–118.
Antunes Anderson Pereira, „Social network analysis in the history of sciences: Visualising sociability in scientific expeditions with Gephi”, w # noviembreHD. Cuarto Congreso de la Asociación Argentina de Humanidades Digitales (AAHD) (Buenos Aires: Asociación Argentina de Humanidades Digitales, 2021), 13–30.
Berry David M. „Introduction: Understanding the digital humanities”, w Understanding digital humanities, red. David M. Berry (London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2012), 1–20.
Hagel Stephan. „The Classical Text Editor: An attempt to provide for both printed and digital editions”, w Digital philology and medieval texts (University of Michigan: Pacini, 2007), 77–84.
Liu Shuran, Wang Jun, „How to organize digital tools to help scholars in digital humanities research?”, w Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries in 2020 (New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020), 373–376.
Morvillo Alberto, Mecella Massimo, „Integrating multiple knowledge graphs in Digital Humanities”, w ST4DM 2024. Semantic Technologies for Data Management (2024).
Smołucha Danuta, „Fuzje i konwergencje. Narzędzia współczesnej humanistyki”, w Humanistyka współczesna, red. Bogusława Bodzioch-Bryła (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Akademii Ignatianum, 2023), 163–178.
Szpunar Magdalena, „Humanistyka cyfrowa”, w Humanistyka współczesna, red. Bogusława Bodzioch-Bryła (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Akademii Ignatianum, 2023), 129–143.
Digital Humanities Resources for Project Building, https://dhresourcesforprojectbuilding.pbworks.com/w/page/69244319/Digital%20Humanities%20 Tools (dostęp: 04.05.2025). Digital Research Tools (DiRT) Directory, https:// live-digital-humanities-berkeley.pantheon.berkeley.edu/resources/digitalresearch-tools-dirt-directory (dostęp: 04.05.2025). Google Developers, „Multimodal text and image prompting”, https://developers.google.com/ solutions/ai-images (dostęp: 07.05.2025).Keinan-Schoonbaert Adi, „Automatic Text Recognition (OCR/HTR): A LIBER Digital Scholarship & Data Science Topic Guide for Library Professionals” (2025). https://bl.iro.bl.uk/concern/generic_works/c5731f41-22ba-4f64-8391-225ea5c7bda2?locale=en (dostęp: 04.05.2025). Open Greek and Latin Project, https://www.opengreekandlatin.org/ (dostęp: 07.05.2025).TaDiRAH – The Taxonomy of Digital Research Activities in the Humanities, https://tadirah.info/ (dostęp: 04.05.2025). TAPoR, Discover research tools for studying texts, https://tapor. ca/home (dostęp: 03.05.2025).
Copyright (c) 2025 Ignatianum University in Cracow
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Yearbook only accepts materials for publication that are free of all conflicts of interest, and that in no way involve conflicts over authorship, copyright, etc. The Editors will take action against any cases of plagiarizing, ghostwriting1, guest/honorary authorship2, etc. Where co-authored work is concerned, the Author listed first is expected to take responsibility for the submission, and is required to make clear the contributions of all of the Co-Authors involved. In the event of the publication owing its existence to funding dedicated to this purpose, this fact should be made clear: e.g. in any note of thanks/acknowledgement, or in a footnote, etc. Explicit notification should be given of any form of reprinting, with the appropriate evidence of permission to publish being furnished as required. Any impropriety on the part of Authors/Reviewers risks exposing them to appropriate responses from the relevant institutions.
______
1 This term refers to instances of a person who has made an essential contribution being omitted from the list of authors, or from notes conveying gratitude and/or acknowledgement.
2 This occurs when a person who has made either an insignificant contribution or no contribution at all nevertheless appears on the list of authors.
