Chapter 7

Sub^Tle

Chapter 7: Publication – The Fluidity and Challenge of Scholarly Communication in the Digital Age

In Chapter 7 of The Digital Humanities, Eileen Gardiner and Ronald G. Musto tackle one of the most consequential and turbulent domains of the digital turn: scholarly publication. The chapter moves beyond a simple description of new formats to present a profound exploration of how digital publication is reshaping the very nature of scholarly communication, its validation, and its reception. The authors argue that while digital forms often recall the fluid and collaborative practices of Renaissance humanism, they simultaneously clash with the rigid, publicationbased reward system of the modern academy.

The chapter is structured around a detailed taxonomy of digital publication genres, each analyzed for its potential and its pitfalls:

1.  Archives: The authors distinguish between "true" digital archives (comprehensive digitizations) and the more common "representational" archives (curated selections). Using powerful examples like The Valley of the Shadow and The Medici Archive Project (MAP), they demonstrate how digital archives enable collaborative, datarich research that can overturn longstanding historical interpretations, as seen in The Rulers of Venice project. However, they also note that such transformative work often goes unreviewed, leaving it in a precarious position within the academic economy of prestige.

2.  Reference Works, Online Bibliographies, Editions, and Translations: Gardiner and Musto observe that these foundational forms of scholarship, once the pride of humanism, have been devalued in the modern academy in favor of interpretive monographs. The digital realm has spurred a renaissance in these areas, with projects like the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP) and the Digital Latin Library (DLL). Yet, they remain caught in a vicious cycle: they are seldom peerreviewed for hiring, tenure, and promotion (HTP) because they are not considered "original research," and because they don't count for HTP, they are often neglected by scholars at crucial career stages.

3.  Articles: This section provides a critical history of the scholarly article, tracing its evolution from the humanist essay to the "scientific," peerreviewed journal article. The authors brilliantly analyze how digital aggregators like JSTOR and Project MUSE first disrupted scholarship not by creating new forms, but by disaggregating content and revolutionizing discoverability. They explore experiments in "borndigital" articles that integrate multimedia and data, but note the challenges of preservation, consistency, and evaluation. The central question posed is whether the traditional, blind peerreview system can or should adapt to more open, collaborative, and dynamic models of validation.

4.  Digital Monographs: The authors are particularly candid about the difficulties facing the digital monograph, the "coin of the realm" in humanities hiring and promotion. They reveal the stark reality: few scholars would choose a digitalonly monograph, and few publishers offer the platform. Case studies like ACLS Humanities EBook (HEB) and the Gutenberge project illustrate the tension between innovative, custombuilt digital books and the need for standardized, interoperable, and sustainable formats. The success of a project like R. Burr Litchfield's Florence Ducal Capital, which was wellreviewed, is presented as an exception that proves the rule.

5.  Virtual Reality and Beyond: The chapter concludes by looking at publications that transcend traditional genres, such as Rome Reborn. These VR projects are framed as dynamic, collaborative "editions of cities," representing a fundamental shift from publication as a static object to scholarship as an ongoing, cumulative process.

Chapter 7 is perhaps the most urgently critical chapter in the book, as it directly addresses the crisis at the heart of digital humanities: the misalignment between innovative scholarly praxis and anachronistic academic reward systems. Gardiner and Musto masterfully use historical analogy, comparing the current disruption to the shift from manuscript to print, to suggest that what is at stake is not merely new technology, but a fundamental redefinition of the "scholarly artifact."

The authors’ detailed case studies serve as compelling evidence for their central argument: the digital humanities have successfully reinvented the methods and forms of humanistic scholarship, but they have failed to reform the economy of academic prestige. The repeated refrain that groundbreaking digital work goes "unreviewed" is a powerful indictment of a system that claims to value rigorous scholarship but lacks the mechanisms to evaluate its most contemporary iterations.

Furthermore, the chapter prompts a crucial philosophical question: Is a peerreviewed article still the gold standard if its impact is limited to a handful of specialists, while a publicly accessible digital archive or a 3D model educates and inspires thousands? The digital environment, as described here, forces a reckoning with the purpose of humanities scholarship—is it to talk to ourselves, or to engage with the wider world?

In conclusion, Gardiner and Musto present publication not as the final step of research, but as a deeply contested and evolving space. The digital has unleashed incredible creativity, recalling the collaborative and public spirit of the early humanists. However, until the academy develops a habitus for digital scholarship—with robust review processes, sustainable models, and equitable credit for collaborative and nontraditional work—the full transformative potential of the digital humanities will remain constrained. The chapter is both a celebration of what has been achieved and a cleareyed call for institutional and cultural change.

Sub^Tle