The article by Gibbs and Owens is an interesting exploration of the ways in which data can be used for historical research.  I was most intrigued by the point that data informs historical questions and, if allowed flexibility,  can become the framework in which history is built.  This framework goes back to our earlier ideas of traditional vs. digital infrastructure and highlights similar issues (both positive and negative)

I agree that the use of data can be a valuable tool to the academic and can help to guide research in ways that have not or even cannot be applied to traditional research methods.  Gibbs and Owens state, “In particular, work with data can be exploratory and deliberately without the mathematical rigor that social scientists must use to support their epistemological claims. Using data in this way is fundamentally different from using data for quantifying, computing, and creating knowledge as per quantitative history.”  I appreciate the idea of data as exploratory and believe that it is fundamental to the evolution of our profession.

Exploration is, I think, central to our own use of databases;  the database has informed me of connections I might not have otherwise seen.  This is helpful when looking at archival materials and forming research questions.  Traditional academics have always, I would argue, used primary source materials to frame their argument.  The database allows this sort of exploration on a Macro level and helps the historian to escape personal bias, while augmenting his/her own research interests.

It is important to note that these measures (i.e. the incorporation of data methods) are necessary within our field.  I believe that the historian must use data tools in order to function proficiently in a world in which there are “digitally born” primary sources.  This incorporation, however, should not lead to the “undressing” of scholarship.  There is a fine line in each of the articles that we have studied and it is the academic’s job to learn to handle these new digital tools in a way that continues to help, not hinder, the professional practice of history.