The conversations and readings of the past week, while revealing the ways in which the digitization of textual data and text analysis can be extremely helpful to historical research, nonetheless show the many limitations of text analysis and, as Lara Putnam noted in Leon Sharon’s “The Peril and Promise of Historians as Data Creators: Perspective, Structure, and the Problem of Representation”, the dangers present in the “decontextualization of data.” This is also reflected in Jo Guldi’s assessment of the analysis of key words present in the transcripts of parliamentary debates which only reveal the dynamics of legislation within the British Isles, and not the British Empire as a whole. Furthermore, as John Markoff noted concerning his study of French parish cahiers, the regional languages of France in 1789, as well as the different terms that could be employed for the same aristocratic privileges, rendered personal, specialized analysis indispensable for the creation of this study, even though it took on a digital medium. In light of these analyses, it is questionable as to whether human analysis can ever be replaced by digital text analysis, as certain elements of data could be overlooked if not considered within a larger base of information.
This is an issue that I come across in my own research, which primarily engages with documents written by French officials in New France for either the Governor-General or the Ministry of the Marine. While I was unaware of this when I first began my research, certain elements of the text can reveal important details to interpreting the documents. This is particularly the case with handwriting, as well as documents that have different dates. One date is the year in which the document was received by the Ministry of the Marine, whereas the other would likely be the day on which it was written. The only way the two dates, and the correct date of the document, can be established is through an analysis of handwriting. Furthermore, handwriting can also reflect which officials had a secretary. More importantly, however, personal handwriting can indicate if an official, who would have otherwise had a secretary at his disposal, was in a location where bringing a secretary was impossible. This was the case with Charles le Moyne de Longueuil, who was the Governor of Montreal and simultaneously maintained a residence in the Onondaga Nation. An analysis of the handwriting in letters from him to the Governor-General of New France or the Ministry of the Marine can therefore show where he was when he wrote those letters, as he would have had a secretary in Montreal.
In light of the readings and the following conversations in class, I am wondering if these nuances, which can be pivotal in the correct interpretation of a document, can be reflected purely through digital text analysis. Furthermore, if they were reflected, would other information present in the document and its composition be overlooked? In this capacity, is it possible for text analysis to become a reliable means to evaluate (or at least summarize) archival sources without human intervention?