Abstract: This report introduces a project to create a critical edition of Peter of Poitier's work, Compendium historiae in geneologia Christi . Composed at the end of the twelfth century, Peter of Poitier conceived the Compendium as a visual aid for teaching biblical history to theology students. Depicting history as a chart in the form of a genealogical graph, it quickly became ubiquitous in the Latin West. Our renewed effort to locate and appraise manuscript witnesses (to date ca. 300) of the Compendium has revealed its unparalleled formal and contextual breadth. Given the work's graphic features and richly varied manuscript tradition, the edition will appear in digital format. This report describes our editorial strategies in the face of the challenges posed by the Compendium's structural, textual, and pictorial variance and, more generally, the medial and graphic aspects of text in the Middle Ages.

Chapter 4, Modelling as media transformation, dwells on the tangible physical forms of models as material and mediated media products expressed and shared in human communication. The forms models take are discussed in terms of configurations of media modalities. This intermedia studies approach, whereby modelling is studied as a media transformation process, complements the semiotic perspective of chapter 3 by revisiting some of the previous examples and integrating them with a variety of heterogeneous models, from archaeology and theatre studies to numerical mathematics, and media transformation processes, including formalisations undertaken in DH research.

Chapter 3, Modelling as semiotic process, refers to model-making as theorised within a semiotic framework. This is complementary to but also in contrast with the common theorisation of the practice of modelling in DH informed by the techno-sciences and computer science in particular. Modelling is framed as a process of signification (semiotic process or meaning making). This semiotic framework allows us to see modelling primarily as a strategy to make sense (signification) via practical thinking (creating and manipulating models). It enables to stress the dynamic nature of models and modelling, and to reinstate in renewed terms the understanding of modelling as an open process of signification enacting a triadic cooperation (among object, representamen and interpreter). Referring to Charles Sanders Peirce’s classification of hypoicons, we reflect on some DH examples of modelling in the form of images, diagrams and metaphors, claiming that a semiotic understanding of modelling could ultimately allow us to surpass the rigid duality object vs. model, as well as sign vs. context.

Chapter 1, Towards a new language for modelling, proposes a selection of lexical ramifications and a semantic excursus on the terms model/modelling. Some etymological reflections on these terms and selected occurrences in the Western history of thought are mapped out. The focus of the chapter is on the history and the polysemy characterising the terms model and modelling with the aim to offer some reflections on their current use, and to foreground the pragmatic elements implied by the concept of model in modelling practices and by the use of language (metalanguage). The underlying assumption is that by analysing this metalanguage, we can acquire a deeper understanding of the practices of modelling and the related processes of conceptualisation, representation, visualisation and communication. In addition, the concept of “pragmatic modelling” (further discussed in chapter 2), is introduced and contextualised.

Chapter 5, Modelling text – a case study, presents a case study examining examples of activities of modelling around the concepts of text and textuality. It qualifies as an anthology, a gallery, an empirical study, and an experiment on finding a different mode of argumentation to “change the launch pad” into future discussions around modelling. In this chapter, models are exposed primarily as specific and situated visual representations we experience when studying and modelling texts. They are presented following a What You See is What You Get approach. The argument takes a different form of expression from the other chapters by discussing models and their visualisations with the presentation of topical quotes extracted from the literature alongside their iconic counterparts, either in their original version or as interpreted visually by the authors and the designers. This effort is in itself an example of modelling as a translation process in action. The chapter spans various disciplines and illustrates different modes of making implicit and explicit models, covering a broad range from theoretical descriptions to concrete applications in the realm of text technologies and knowledge representation. The overall selection for examples aims to offer a “graphical” argument of how different models represent conceptualisations of and perspectives on texts in different ways, illustrating key concepts discussed in the previous chapters, and encouraging the readers to engage with the topic further.

Chapter 2, Modelling and metaphoric reasoning, discusses the act of modelling, especially, its representative and descriptive functions and how it operates within a context which includes a metaphorical language. Metaphors adapt to and at the same time transform this language. The concept of “pragmatic modelling” is discussed further and is connected to how metaphorical language operates in Digital Humanities (DH) as well as other (mainly interdisciplinary) modelling contexts. Furthermore, the chapter exemplifies how metaphors themselves are models of knowledge, as they define the schemes within which specific concepts operate and knowledge is established and expressed. In particular, in a DH context, the use of metaphors can have practical outcomes in how affordances influence data processing, storage, and design, and in how data are presented and interfaces are built. In this chapter, we propose to consider modelling as a creative and usually highly pragmatic process of thinking and reasoning in which metaphors assume a central role and where meaning is negotiated through the creation and manipulation of external representations combined with an imaginative use of formal and informal languages.

This volume presents an exploration of Digital Humanities (DH), a field focused on the reciprocal transformation of digital technologies and humanities scholarship. Central to DH research is the practice of modelling, which involves translating intricate knowledge systems into computational models. This book addresses a fundamental query: How can an effective language be developed to conceptualize and guide modelling in DH? Modelling, with its historical roots, carries multifaceted meanings influenced by various disciplinary contexts. Modelling Between Digital and Humanities innovatively connects DH with the historical tradition of model-based thinking in the humanities, cultural studies, and the sciences. It endeavors to reshape interpretative frameworks by contextualizing DH's modelling practices within a broader conceptual landscape. Through an exploration of digital, visual and data models, the book asserts that DH holds the potential to be a cornerstone of a novel cultural literacy paradigm. By probing the interplay between technology and thought, the book ultimately positions DH as a catalyst for transformative cultural insights.

Italian translation of the Manifest für digitale Editionen

Der Begriff der Rekontextualisierung hat in neueren diskursanalytischen Forschungen zu digitalen Medien einen erstaunlichen Aufschwung erfahren. Die fur digitale Medien charakteristische Moglichkeit, durch serielle Reihungen, Rekombination, Einbettung und Vernetzung digitaler Objekte neuen Sinn zu generieren, wird dadurch auf den Begriff gebracht. Auch fur methodologische Fragestellungen zu digitalen Forschungsinfrastrukturen und digitalen Methoden kann der Begriff der Rekontextualisierung als Leitkonzept dienen. Der Band diskutiert aus interdisziplinarer Perspektive die Potenziale des Rekontextualisierungsbegriffs als Schlusselbegriff digitaler Forschung.

Börge Kiss (Institute for Digital Humanities)​1​, ​✉ ​Daniel Kölligan (Dept. of Linguistics – Historical-Comparative Linguistics)​1[0000-0002-3134-8398]​, Francisco Mondaca (Cologne Center for eHumanities)​1​, Claes Neuefeind (Institute for Digital Humanities, Data Center for the Humanities)​1​, Uta Reinöhl (Dept. of Linguistics – General Linguistics)​1, 2[0000-0003-2829-682X]​ and Patrick Sahle (Cologne Center for eHumanities)​1[0000-0002-8648-2033]

»Modellieren: Denken in Anwendung. Eine Einführung«. In this introduction of the HSR Supplement “Models and Modelling between Digital and Humanities A Multidisciplinary Perspective” we refrain from providing a normative definition of ‘model’ and ‘modelling’ and rather attempt at encircling the current state of the art. In the first instance this chapter provides a very brief overview on modelling as intended as a research strategy applied to scientific fields in the 20th-21st centuries. This overview is followed by a short introduction to modelling in digital humanities, focusing on how modelling has developed into a practical strategy and how it has been theorised. The third part of the introduction presents the scope of the project ”Modelling between digital and humanities: Thinking in practice”. The aim of a project workshop held in 2017, of which this volume collects the proceedings, was to present a multitude of modelling practices from various disciplines together with different theoretical frameworks. The fourth part of this introduction offers an overview of each of the papers in this volume. Finally, a fifth section constitutes the first item of the proceedings as it reproduces an adaptation of the dialogue which was performed to introduce the main topics of the workshop and the scope of the project at the event itself. It serves to illustrate the way we organised the workshop and how the exchanges amongst participants were facilitat-

“Primärmaterial” dieser Ressourcen, also für Datensätze. Im Gegensatz zu traditionellen Forschungsergebnissen der Geisteswissenschaften sind digitale Ressourcen nicht statisch, sondern wandelbar, oft prozesshaft und nicht abgeschlossen. ​Die Kritik der Ressourcen muss die besonderen Bedingungen, Eigenschaften und Folgephänomene digitaler Daten berücksichtigen und eine eigene Form finden. ​Wie sich die Ressourcen wandeln, so muss sich auch die Kritik wandeln, denn 3