Taking the work on the graphemic and morphemic analysis of the cuneiform texts of Ebla as a starting point, the paper reviews the ‘grammatical’ criteria that make digital coding not only more efficient and dynamic, but also intellectually more in tune with the goal of establishing an argument and unfolding a narrative. This throws light on aspects of software application on the one hand (such as the semantic web) and of the digital humanities on the other, ranging from textual to archaeological data.

At present, the issue of digital epigraphy seems limited to the digitalization of epigraphs by means of the creation of databases. Digital epigraphy, unlike the digital palaeography that in the last few years has known a potential development that is likely to produce very interesting results, still does not have its own defined search line, at least at current research.

Digital editions of ancient texts and objects follow the nineteenth–twentieth century tradition of academic editing, but are able to be more explicit and accessible than their print analogues. The use of digital standards such as EpiDoc and Linked Open Data, that emphasise interoperability, linking and sharing, enables—we shall argue, obliges—the scholarly editor to make the digital publication open, accessible, transparent and explicit. We discuss three axes of openness: 1. The edition encodes dimensions and physical condition of the inscribed object, as well as photographs and other imagery, and should include translations to modern languages, rather than assuming fluency. 2. Contextual and procedural metadata include the origins of scholarly work, permissions, funding, influences on academic decision-making, material and intellectual property, trafficking, ethics, authenticity and archaeological context. 3. The digital standards and code implementing them, enabling interoperability among editions and projects, and depend on consistency and accessible documentation of practices, guidelines and customisations. Standards benefit from training in scholarly and digital methods, and the nurturing of a community to preserve and encourage the sustainable re-use of standards and editions. Ancient text-bearing objects need to be treated as material artefacts as well as the bearers of (sometimes abstract or immaterial) strings of historical text. All elements of the publication of both object and text are interpretive constructs. It is essential that we not neglect any of the material or immaterial information in all of these components, in our scholarly quest to make them explicit, interoperable and machine actionable.

The two volumes of this Special Issue explore the intersections of digital libraries, epigraphy and paleography. Digital libraries research, practices and infrastructures have transformed the study of ancient inscriptions by providing organizing principles for collections building, defining interoperability requirements and developing innovative user tools and services. Yet linking collections and their contents to support advanced scholarly work in epigraphy and paleography tests the limits of current digital libraries applications. This is due, in part, to the magnitude and heterogeneity of works created over a time period of more than five millennia. The remarkable diversity ranges from the types of artifacts to the methods used in their production to the singularity of individual marks contained within them. Conversion of analogue collections to digital repositories is well underway—but most often not in a way that meets the basic requirements needed to support scholarly workflows. This is beginning to change as collections and content are being described more fully with rich annotations and metadata conforming to established standards. New use of imaging technologies and computational approaches are remediating damaged works and revealing text that has, over time, become illegible or hidden. Transcription of handwritten text to machine-readable form is still primarily a manual process, but research into automated transcription is moving forward. Progress in digital libraries research and practices coupled with collections development of ancient writtten works suggests that epigraphy and paleography will gain new prominence in the Academy.

This chapter examines the status of the digital study of premodern spatial documents understood as expressions of local knowledge systems. It investigates the tension between the prevalently Cartesian perception of the world underlying modern efforts of mapping and spatial analysis, and the contrasting multiplicity of premodern spatial epistemologies, which reveal deep, multi-layered forms of representation. The first part summarizes the dynamics in the development of spatial knowledge and offers a gallery of examples showing the complexity of premodern spatial descriptions. The second part evaluates current trends in Digital Humanities and examines the ways in which this complexity is (or is not) addressed. The conclusion emphasizes the main issues that still affect the study of premodern spatial perception and proposes some recommendations.

What are the implications of digital representation on intellectual property and ownership of cultural heritage? Are aspirations to preservation and accessibility in the digital space reconcilable with cultural sensitivities, colonized history, and cultural appropriation?This volume brings together different perspectives from academics and practitioners of Cultural Heritage, to address current debates in the digitization and other computational study of cultural artifacts. From the tension between the materiality of cultural heritage objects and the intangible character of digital models, we explore larger issues in intellectual property, collection management, pedagogical practice, inclusion and accessibility, and the role of digital methods in decolonization and restitution debates.The contributions include perspectives from a wide range of disciplines, addressing these questions within the study of the material culture of Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, and the Americas.

Through the annals of time, writing has slowly scrawled its way from the painted surfaces of stone walls to the grooves of inscriptions to the strokes of quill, pen, and ink. While we still inscribe stone (tombstones, monuments) and we continue to write on skin (tattoos abound), our quotidian method of writing on paper is increasingly abandoned in favor of the quick-to-generate digital text. And even though the stone-inscribed text of epigraphy offers demonstrably better permanence than that of writing on skin and paper—even better than that of the memory system of the modern computer (Bollacker in Am Sci 98:106, 2010)—this field of study has also made the digital leap. Today’s scholarly analyses of epigraphic content increasingly rely on high-tech approaches involving data science and computer models. This essay discusses how advances in a number of exciting technologies are enabling the digital analysis of epigraphic texts and accelerating the ability of scholars to preserve, renew, and reinvigorate the study of the inscriptions that remain from throughout history.

This article advances the thesis that three decades of investments by national and international funders, combined with those of scholars, technologists, librarians, archivists, and their institutions, have resulted in a digital infrastructure in the humanities that is now capable of supporting end-to-end research workflows. The article refers to key developments in the epigraphy and paleography of the premodern period. It draws primarily on work in classical studies but also highlights related work in the adjacent disciplines of Egyptology, ancient Near East studies, and medieval studies. The argument makes a case that much has been achieved but it does not declare “mission accomplished.” The capabilities of the infrastructure remain unevenly distributed within and across disciplines, institutions, and regions. Moreover, the components, including the links between steps in the workflow, are generally far from user-friendly and seamless in operation. Because further refinements and additional capacities are still much needed, the article concludes with a discussion of key priorities for future work.