Time<\/strong> and Place<\/strong>: Friday, 02.07., 09:00\u201309:20, <\/strong>Room 2 Amongst the methodologies generated from first-wave Digital Humanities was historical social\u00a0 network analysis (HSNA). HSNA can treat people as nodes and then capture and analyse the links\u00a0 and types of connection between them, both at a certain moment in time and longitudinally. Gould in 2003 noted that HSNA can consider concrete structural relationships as well as less concrete\u00a0 connections and therefore can reveal dense cliques where every person is in relationship with all\u00a0 others, as well as those on the peripheries. Further, to which Gould identified that is important for\u00a0 users and readers of HSNA to consider that few networks are fully or capable of being fully worked\u00a0 through. (Gould 2003, 241) Interestingly, such descriptions can also be layered onto Digital\u00a0 Genealogy especially once the desire to privilege notions like lineage, household and conjugal family\u00a0 groups are stripped away. Consequently, a merging of Digital Genealogy as a research system and\u00a0 reformatting of data with HSNA as a means of interpretation is a natural fit and creates a second wave Digital Humanities methodological device under the terms set by Pressner et al (Schnapp,\u00a0 Presner, and Lunenfeld 2009, 2012) <\/em>.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The potential for a combined methodological construction of genealogy and network analysis to\u00a0 break down official records, reassign them to individual people across their lifetimes and establish\u00a0 the network linkages that force the bureaucratic population record to give up further additional data\u00a0 on a mass scale is immense. The obvious qualitative implications derived from the recovery of\u00a0 prosographical studies mapping and plotting people as they move between the ever-varying\u00a0 conjugal family units and household groups is clear (Bloothooft 2010). But the generative qualities\u00a0 of the combined method of further interrogating the records to understand how the enumeration\u00a0 districts cut across functional communities and gave shape to statistical communities are less well\u00a0 appreciated. The interpretative necessity for such a breakthrough is clear when it is understood that\u00a0 it is the statistical communities established by the bureaucracy that has come to shape western\u00a0 theorisation of the individual, family and nuclear household. The paper will initially discuss the\u00a0 struggle to unlock the potential of Digital genealogy and HSNA through an understanding of the\u00a0 stalled three-party conversation between data visualisation\/analysis, genealogy and academic\u00a0 history and then consider the detail of the British bureaucratic record that has yet to be unlocked for\u00a0 nineteenth-century social network recovery.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Experimentation with modern genealogy has become somewhat of a rite of passage for scholars of\u00a0 data visualisation and interactive analysis. The reasons for this are clear, as genealogy creates\u00a0 complex, ramified and simultaneously sprawling visualisations of relationships primarily between\u00a0 people. The endurance of the family tree as the basic model for the visual expression of these\u00a0 relationships presents as timeless, definitive and expected. Unfortunately, it is also deterministic,\u00a0 ideological and pre-determining of analysis. Modern genealogy though ought not to be\u00a0 automatically bound in such ways given that the digital tools release the various locks that hold\u00a0 genealogically based analysis in the family tree form. Unfortunately, the scholarly conversations\u00a0 which data visualisation specialists have been part off have been predicated around an orthodox\u00a0 view of lineages, households, nuclear families and the like rather than an understanding of socio anthropological ideas of reciprocity in society, mutuality of connectivity and social habitus.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The broad community base of western genealogy, looks to the academy of history for guidance as to\u00a0 what is valuable and valued; and has classical been informed directly and indirectly, that lineages,\u00a0 family household groups and patri-connectivity followed by the coalescence of the superior nuclear\u00a0 family were the tropes to find, explore and exhibit. Consequently, when data visualisation and\u00a0 analysis reached out to both historical and genealogical communities to understand how their\u00a0experimentations might contribute, what they were told was; connectivity and visualisation of\u00a0 conjugal family household groups and predominately male lineage relationships were not just\u00a0 fundamental but pre-eminently foundational to Western society. These values have been put into\u00a0 place again and again in such programmes as Timenets, Geneaquilts, Kinship Britain and\u00a0 GenealogyVis. Indeed, the choice of nomenclature followed by Borges, the Contextual Family Tree\u00a0 visualisation for his effort in the field sums up the problem. What is repetitively created are data\u00a0 visualisation tools that respond to a medieval method to control land and titles which is then applied\u00a0 over all of society and a system predicated to the socio-cultural markers of the western middle\u00a0 classes rather than functional cultural-economic markers of the broader society. Indeed, it should be\u00a0 argued that western genealogy, unlike fields such as biology and linguistics, currently presents as\u00a0 immune to discourses on the traps created by eighteenth and nineteenth ideologies of pedigree and\u00a0 development (Gontier 2011, 515-538).\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n As the classic approach to genealogy informed by academic history has downplayed varied parts of\u00a0 the bureaucratic text and process, the three party-conversation has not resulted in a technological\u00a0 approach that understands a society that (i) valued horizontal relatedness (ii) fostered reciprocity\u00a0rather than the transfer of tangible and intangible assets. Consequently, the identity of witnesses of\u00a0 marriages, the juxtapositioning in the record of related people, the very assignment of individuals to\u00a0 households has been kept out of the digitisation and algorithm systems employed by commercial\u00a0 visualisation of genealogy, leaving the prosographical outputs of Digital Genealogy impoverished. An\u00a0 application of second-wave Digital Humanities generative and interpretative demands via HSNA could shift the current scenario with a understanding that it is now possible to recover the webs of\u00a0 relatives that surrounded individuals from multiple socioeconomic situations, not just the elites and\u00a0 middle, and then interrogate those webs with network analysis; with an appreciation of who was\u00a0 enumerated on the same page or in the same enumeration district and how those districts sat within\u00a0 the landscape, built environment and transport system.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The paper will examine the potential to use historical network analysis and genealogical\u00a0 methodology in combination and simultaneously explore how the imposition of established\u00a0 ideologies of what is valued continue to oppress the prosographical and data extraction processes.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bibliography<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n Bloothooft, Gerrit. „Data Mining in the (Historic) Civil Registration of the Netherlands from 1811- Present.“MNHN, 2010. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Gontier, Nathalie. „Depicting the Tree of Life: The Philosophical and Historical Roots of Evolutionary Tree Diagrams.“ Evolution: Education and Outreach <\/em>4, no. 3 (2011): 515-538. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Gould, Roger V. „Uses of Network Tools in Comparative.“ Comparative Historical Analysis in the\u00a0 Social Sciences <\/em>(2003): 241.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Schnapp, Jeffrey, Todd Presner, and Peter Lunenfeld. „Digital Humanities Manifesto 2.0.“ Retrieved\u00a0 September <\/em>23, (2009): 2012.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Iain Riddell Time and Place: Friday, 02.07., 09:00\u201309:20, Room 2Session: Kinship and Geneaology Amongst the methodologies generated from first-wave Digital Humanities was historical social\u00a0 network analysis (HSNA). HSNA can treat people as nodes and then capture and analyse the links\u00a0 and types of connection between them, both at a certain moment in time and longitudinally. Gould in 2003 noted that<\/p>\n
Session<\/strong>: Kinship and Geneaology<\/p>\n\n\n\n