• Home
• Project Information
• Fine Rolls
• Style Book
• Commentary
  • Introduction to Reign
  • Introduction to Rolls
  • Originalia Rolls
  • Technical Introduction
  • Heads and Headings
• News
• Help
• Fine of the Month
• Book Publication
• Blog
• Conference
• Podcasts
• Related Papers

1. Medieval history and the internet: the Henry III Fine Rolls Project

At the end of the first phase of the Henry III Fine Rolls Project it seemed appropriate, as the Fine of the Month for April 2008, to publish this review of the project website as it existed between November 2007 and January 2008. It is a study undertaken by Amanda Roper as part of the ‘Materials and Methods’ course of the MA in Medieval History at King’s College London. Amanda has a BA degree in History from Cambridge University and is taking the MA in Medieval History at King’s part time. She is a Senior Policy Advisor in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

1.1. Introduction

⁋1The internet offers opportunities for professional historians and can have an impact on their research including the methods they use for evaluating sources. Here I aim to consider the advantages and disadvantages of sources for medieval history on the web by looking generally at work about history and the internet, examining what questions a historian may ask to evaluate electronic sources and then applying these to the Henry III Fine Rolls Project from the point of view of the user.

⁋2Both primary and secondary sources for medieval history can be found on the internet. However, discussions about the internet and history generally, and digitised medieval sources specificially, are a relatively new area. Books and articles on the subject are often from the perspective of ICT experts and descriptions of the technology itself. Broadly these discussions focus on the design of websites, the technical structure and the organisation of the content. ¹

⁋3The design gives the appearance of the website – what the user sees. How easily understood the page is to the user is dependent on the design. It helps the user understand how to navigate a website and what information to find where. What the user does not see, the technical structure, underpins the design and makes the navigation, searching and organisation of information work. The underlying technical structure should mean that a creator’s particular aim for making a specific primary and/or secondary source available on the internet is achieved. The content is the substance, the information the creator wants to make available. All are vital areas to get right for online sources to be useful and achieve their purpose from the point of view of the user.

⁋4Discussions which give attention to how the internet is being used for online historical resources consider this from two perspectives: the historian as a creator and as a user of online sources. Paula Petrik and Daniel Cohen suggest that for those historians who create digitised resources the main concern is communicating the content. ² Petrik distinguishes two approaches in historians’ use of the internet: delivery mechanism and content system. The delivery mechanism approach is the use of the internet to communicate with other historians, that is, putting articles and information on the web to make it more widely available to specialists. This simply substitutes one form of communication for another – an electronic form of a book, periodical or lecture.

⁋5The delivery mechanism is found in the type of sources provided by museums and libraries such as the British Library online catalogue or British History Online where sources can be searched for and, in the case of the latter, searched within. ³ Both are about providing information and making sources available in an electronic format and they are a valuable way for researchers easily to access historical information.

⁋6In comparison, the content system is more of an active and interactive approach. It at least allows, and ideally encourages, the user to make a contribution. Petrik gives an example of how she uses the content system to support teaching history by including a question at relevant stages on her website and students then e-mail their responses. ⁴ The use of e-mail is a simple but effective form of interaction for Petrik to achieve her aims in the classroom. Other forms are the use of feedback forms, discussion forums or websites where content can be edited by anyone who has access to it (wikis). The latter is perhaps the most interactive form and Wikipedia is a good example of such a website. Wikipedia aims to create an accurate record by allowing users to make changes. ⁵ This carries both a significant risk that the information may not be reliable and the potential advantage of supporting collaboration in historical research, as well as with other disciplines, by making it easier to communicate and discuss ideas.

⁋7Creators of historical online sources at this time are mainly, or mainly involve, historians. ⁶ The approach used depends on what the creator of the source aims to achieve and this is important for the user. The aim of a project needs to both create and manage the user’s expectations.

⁋8I used the term ‘professional historian’ earlier to mean a specialist, an academic, someone who studies history as part of their day-to-day work. However, this term is not necessarily useful in considering a user of online sources. In the context of public history, Ludmilla Jordonova suggests that the definition of professional historian or amateur historian is fluid. ⁷ ‘Public’ she suggests can mean, popular, non-specialist, and for a mass audience. This means that the audience of online sources is potentially very wide compared to that of traditional formats.

⁋9So, who is a ‘user’ of historical sources on the internet? Authors of books cannot effectively provide information unless they have a target audience in mind. Sometimes that audience may be fellow professionals who are already have a high degree of expertise. Of course, it is perfectly possible for internet sources to be similarly targetted, but that would seem a waste of the potential the internet has for wide access. For sources online a more useful way of considering the ‘user’ is as someone who has an interest in the broad area of the resource but is not necessarily a specialist. This means the wider accessibility achieved by putting a source on the internet needs to take into account expectations about usability which is not dependent on specialist skills such as paleography and Latin, while balancing this with the concerns of professional historians. The user, then, becomes defined by interest in the subject, how much guidance they need and their expectations of the internet.

⁋10Interest in an online historical source can thus be from a range of users: from those who have come across the source after browsing the internet to someone wanting to use a specific source in their research. They need to be able to find out from the website what it is about and how to find the information they are looking for. How much guidance is needed could range from requiring detailed background to the source, how to cite the online information or details about how the website was produced to support the source fully. Easy access to a balance of historical and technical information is important here. The expectations of a user are likely to include the online functionality (navigation, presentation, searchability) and general content such as the historical background mentioned above.

⁋11Professional historians’ expectations of digitised sources may include these general points but their specific needs are perhaps not so clear. The Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) Report Peer review and evaluation of digital resources for the arts and humanities and accompanying survey do provide some indications. ⁸ They focused on resources created by academics in Higher Education Institutions with research council funding and canvassed opinion from the historical, classical and archaeological community. ⁹

⁋12Although not representative of the wider online community and with a relatively small sample (777 responses of which 365 were full responses), ¹⁰ the survey did indicate that the two main issues for professional scholars using the internet were gaining access to electronic sources and the reliability of the content. ¹¹ Concerns about access included the costs and charging, speed of access and general accessibility such as the difficulty in reading long pieces online. Problems with content included coverage such as websites giving a mistaken impression of completeness; accuracy and the lack of academic quality such as poor references. Such standards are expected of printed sources. Searching and navigation were also a source of frustration such as the lack of a full text search or browseability. ¹² Such standards are expected of websites. So, although all history books do not meet what Cohen describes as the ‘gold standard’ of intellectual weight, peer review, footnotes and other references, his point that online sources may never reach this level unless historians make the most of the value the internet can add still stands. ¹³

⁋13The survey also suggests an association between the period historians are researching and the use of online sources. Respondents were asked what their areas of interest were by type, period and geographical area. Figure 1 (below) illustrates that the most popular periods were the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (both 224 responses), followed by the seventeenth (181) and eighteenth (196) centuries. In comparison, responses for the survey categories which covered the medieval period were lower: 500–1000 (110 responses), the eleventh (105), twelfth (110), thirteenth (116), fourteenth (122) and fifteenth (136) centuries. The results do not equate the use of the internet to the period each individual was interested in because the question was not directly linked to how much or what type of information they looked for online. The survey also gives the number of responses not respondents because participants were able to tick more than one box in each category.

⁋14What the responses do suggest is that those researching the medieval period and earlier are less likely to create a demand for sources online compared to those studying more modern periods. Unfortunately, this is a difficult point to substantiate and the responses could just reflect that there are less people doing research on the medieval period. However, there is also the argument that demand can be created by an increased availability of sources online in the first place. This may be particularly true of the twentieth century since some sources originate in electronic format and therefore researchers of that period may be more comfortable using them or at least more familiar with the medium’s advantages and disadvantages. However, the usability of online sources does not mean that the outputs from research which have used them demonstrate their value sufficiently to encourage others to use or fund them. ¹⁴

⁋15From this survey it is doubtful whether, as users, historians have different needs or need to apply different questions for assessing online sources compared to more traditional forms. The points made above are about who created a source, when, for what purpose and identifying the user or audience. These are all important questions for considering the reliability of a primary source or a website. The difference between print and online versions are the expectations of what added value technology can provide on top of scholarly standards expected from sources generally.

1.2. Print versus web

⁋1The usability of a search facility is a good example. With a book there are the contents page and index, with a website there are navigation bars and a search facility. The index of a print version of an English Calendar can vary from a general list ¹⁵ to more than one index separately covering persons and places, and subjects. ¹⁶ The functionality of a website can vary from a full text search for any words to one dependent on keywords much like a book index. Historians, and users generally, expect a comprehensive search facility which helps the speed of their enquiry.

⁋2One reason why historians may be more inclined to use sources made available in a traditional way is that it is reasonably safe to assume the source will still be available in five to ten years time. With the internet this is less certain. The AHRC requires digitised sources it has funded to be deposited with the Arts and Humanities Data Service (AHDS) but this has not been enforced ¹⁷ and, following funding changes, the future of AHDS is uncertain. ¹⁸ Changes to websites are easier to make than to print publications but this can make them quite fluid. While creators can make such changes clear by the use of dated pages this does not always happen. Creators also need to think about how historians need to cite such information in their research. In writing this essay I have used articles available online and noted the date I accessed them. However, it has been difficult in some cases to make reference to the date they were written or updated because this information was not available. As a result not all the footnotes include the information usually expected.

⁋3So, for considering the Henry III Fine Rolls Project a ‘user’ is defined as someone who has an interest in history but not necessarily the skills of a professional historian. Such a user has a need for clear information about the creation of the website and the digitisation of the source and the expectation that there will be added value because of the advantages of using an electronic medium. Such a user must be aware that the form in which the website is presented may change or not be available in the future.

2. The Henry III Fine Rolls Project

⁋1 The focus of this discussion is the website and the electronic version of the rolls available between November 2007 and early January 2008. The website has been updated since this period (notes concerning which appear below).

2.1. The Fine Rolls

⁋1The Fine Rolls are the earliest of the Chancery rolls. They recorded offers of money to the king for concessions and favours. For example, by a fine dated 10 October 1219, Osbert Giffard gave the king £5 for permission to have a weekly market and an annual fair at his manor of Aylesford in Kent. ¹⁹ In Henry III’s reign (1216–1272), as with other Chancery rolls, a new set of fine rolls was opened each regnal year. There are 64 fine rolls, one for almost all of the years of Henry III’s reign. Those currently available on the Henry III Fine Rolls Project (as of 4 January 2008) website run from 1216 to 1234 with translated text available as work in progress for 1234 – 1242. ²⁰ In addition the site hosts scanned images of all the rolls from 1216 through to 1248. ²¹

2.2. Aims and objectives of the project

⁋1The Henry III Fine Rolls Project is funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council over three years (2005–2008). The Fine Rolls are in The National Archives at Kew, forming the C 60 series. Unlike other Chancery rolls of Henry III’s reign they have hitherto only been available in two volumes of Latin excerpts published in the 1830s in the original Latin and in a form of type which sought to imitate the original palaeography. ²²

⁋2The project website is openly accessible online at http://www.finerollshenry3.org.uk/. It can be found easily via a search on Google for ‘henry iii fine rolls’, ‘fine rolls’ or ‘henry iii’. A search on Google also throws up other websites which contribute to assessing the authority of the source such as links to King’s College London, an article in History Today and an AHRC IT Methods Network case study. ²³

⁋3The link opens an introductory page (picture 1) which gives details of the funding body, the institutions involved, the aim and objectives of the project, and the directors. This is supported by more detailed information about personnel and the International Advisory Committee of experts in the ‘About the Project’ section of the website. ²⁴ It is useful for this information to be so easily available because it immediately answers the questions of who created the website, why and for what audience.

⁋4The aim of the current project is to make the fine rolls of Henry III’s reign accessible to as many people as possible by publishing both an English translation of the rolls down to 1248 in electronic form with a search facility and indexes on the project’s website and the same translation and indexes in four printed volumes with full in Boydell and Brewer. The website also hosts digitised facsimile images of the rolls. One volume of the printed edition is available (1216–1224) and a second (1224–1234) will be published in June 2008. ²⁵

2.3. Design, structure and presentation

⁋1The design, structure and presentation of the content make the website easy to use. The design is clear and attractive with images in the header. The navigation is straightforward with a logical progression from information about the background to the project and the primary source, through the indexing and images to the Fine of the Month. ²⁶

⁋2The content includes the primary source material, the fine rolls, in translated text and high quality images of the rolls themselves. The secondary source material available includes a historical introduction to the fine rolls written by the project director David Carpenter, a technical introduction and the Fine of the Month feature where a member of the project team or another scholar has commented on material of particular interest in the rolls. ²⁷

2.4. Translation of the rolls

⁋1The list of the rolls on the main translation page includes information which would be helpful to those unfamiliar with medieval sources or using sources in The National Archives as well as to those who regularly use Chancery rolls in their research. It gives The National Archives reference for each roll, for example C 60/8; the regnal year, 1 Henry III; and the dates of the regnal year, 28 October 1216–27 October 1218. ²⁸ To access the translation of a particular fine roll the user simply clicks on a link, they can then navigate through the translation of a roll by browsing or going directly to the month required by using the ‘view calendar by date’ facility.

2.5. Images of the fine rolls

⁋1The images are a great strength of the project because putting both a translation and the original together usually requires a trip to The National Archives, both time-consuming and not possible for some. The high quality images also contribute to the reliabilty of the website. Those studying the fine rolls can check the translation against the image and the reference is there if the user wants to compare it with the original in The National Archives. The combination of the images and the translation increase the value the project has for a wider non-specialist audience because it is not just about the information contained in the fine rolls. For example, anyone who wishes to learn the skills of palaeography or latin translation have an opportunity to practice on real sources in their own time.

⁋2The two main ways a user can find the images are from the translation pages and the images section on the left-hand navigation bar. The translation page of a specific fine roll includes options to view digital images of each membrane, verso and dorse. The introductory page of the images section is helpfully laid out in the same way as the translation pages so the user picks a fine roll and the link goes to the relevant images. ²⁹

⁋3Once viewing an image of a fine roll, the manuscript viewer allows the user to zoom in to all areas of a membrane, as required, from the detail of the bindings to the headings. This does mean that if the user wishes to work from the images alone this is possible. It is easy to move from one to another by clicking on next or using the display of thumbnail pictures for that roll to compare the appearance of different membranes at a glance.

⁋4Usability of the images is slightly affected by the ease of going from the image to the translation. There are ways to do this such as having two windows open or using the back button. However, if a user has browsed around between different rolls they have to go back via the navigation bar on the left to the translation. It would help usability to have a link back from the image of a membrane to the relevant translation, in the same way that users can already go from the translation to the image. ³⁰

⁋5The images are not included in the print version –it would be prohibitively expensive to do so for the quality needed. The capacity for producing high quality images at relatively low cost is a clear advantage electronic sources of this standard have over printed production. From a practical point of view being able to access and view images in this way is convenient because the fine rolls can be studied from home and there is no balancing of weights to keep the document open. Handling the original will remain informative but for those who cannot visit The National Archives everything except size and feel is made accessible by the images.

2.6. Indexing and searchability

⁋1The facility for easily searching a source is one of the main advantages of having it available electronically. The current indexes for the fine rolls (made available in May 2007) cover 28 October 1216 (1 Henry III) to 27 October 1224 (8 Henry III). ³¹ They are similar to a book version and divided into three indexes: person; place; and subject. The indexes in the book version of the fine rolls are largely the same as those on the web. ³²

⁋2The similarity to a book version of a calendar is useful because it is familiar to navigate and straightforward to use with the additional advantage of speed in finding the relevant entries. A trawl through the index by person for ‘Walter of Clifford’, gives two people one of whom died in 1221. The user can then go straight to the relevant fine by clicking on the reference in the right hand column which goes straight to the translation with the entry the user was looking for at the top. The indexes also list the variable spellings in the fine rolls such as ‘Moretain’, ‘Moretein’, ‘Moreton’ for ‘Mortain’. For persons, the index identifies their role (bishop, steward) or relationships (wife, son) where applicable. This creates a cross referencing system which is useful in its current form and may be developed further in the future.

⁋3The index list does not allow a user to click on a name and then all the relevant entries appear which would allow the user to browse through the relevant entries more quickly. However, this is possible if the search facility is used. The search function is for searching the translation. Similar to the indexes, it is divided up into person, place or subject and the user can use more than one of these fields to search, for example, for a person at a particular place. A combined person and place search for ‘Grey’ and ‘Northamptonshire’ finds a fine to the sheriff of that county to delay his demand of Richard de Gray (rather than Grey) until his first account at the Exchequer, having accepted security from him that he will pay the king then. ³³ In comparison separate searches for ‘Grey’ gave twenty-four results and ‘Northamptonshire’ gave one hundred and twenty. The list of references are provided in chronological order and can be printed out which is very useful.

⁋4Turning to a place name search, that for ‘Abingdon’ finds six entries across the fine rolls for 1217, 1219, 1221 and 1223. When these are called up they appear chronologically and can be printed out. Threre is, however, one puzzling feature which is that ‘Abingdon’ does not appear in all the entries. One has to go to the full translation of the roll, rather than the entries as excerpted by the search facility, to see that this arises in the cases where Abingdon is simply the place where a letter on the fine rolls has been attested by the king. It would be worth dealing with this problem, for example by indicating in the indexes and search facility where an entry to a place simply relates to it being where a letter has been attested. ³⁴

⁋5The Henry III Fine Rolls website does not have a search facility or index to interrogate the background material. This is not essential as the user can use the functionality of their web browser and search each page individually if they are looking for something in the secondary material. However, being able to use a computer to search at all does illustrate the point that having a source available electronically adds value by making research quicker.

2.7. Secondary source material and background information

⁋1The website includes useful secondary source material and background information. The historical introduction to the fine rolls describes their format, purpose and use during Henry III’s reign and background to the availability of the rolls to scholars and non-specialists. The details which give this source authority – author and footnotes – are included. Detailed background information about the project is also provided. ³⁵

⁋2The technical introduction describes the technology and specification standards that have been used (XML and TEI) ³⁶ and the relationship modelling approach being applied to deliver both the indexes and the search facility. As the page makes clear this is written for non-technical readers and this adds to the authority and reliability of the website since the data organisation behind what the user sees is no longer a ‘black box’. The description of the ontological methodology that has been applied would be recognised by many researchers who have looked for the relationship between individuals or searched into subjects such as markets by trawling through indexes of English calendar volumes.

⁋3This is the one section where the importance of historical and computing specialists working together is alluded to and the potential for using methods from both areas of expertise is suggested. For example the diagram of the distribution of relationships mentioned in the fine rolls is useful both for the technicality of the relationship modelling but could also be used by a researcher to identify and illustrate the most common (father/son) or least common (aunt/niece) relationship represented within the fine rolls. ³⁷ Also included is discussion of the sustainability of the technology used and how it may be developed in the future both for the fine rolls and other projects.

⁋4The next background section, the progress update, ³⁸ is helpful for the user to know what stage the project has reached and what may not be available. Unfortunately, this does not appear to be completely up-to-date because it refers to results to be launched on 22 May 2007. If a user if focusing on the fine rolls themselves this does not have such an impact since both the translation and the images introductory pages clearly state what stage those aspects of the project have reached. However, part of having information online is the convenience of it being as up-to-date as possible and this can, even though less likely with the Henry III Fine Rolls Project, affect how reliable and sustainable a user believes a source to be.

⁋5The style book provides the user with useful information which can help them become familiar with how the primary source sections of the website work. This helps manage a user’s expectations and alongside the help facility provides assistance in making the most out of the electronic versions of the primary sources. Unfortunately, citation of the secondary and background material is difficult because there is no date or version control on the specific page. There is no way for the user to know that a page has been updated and may need re-reading. Instead, the date on the webpages appears to refer to whenever the user accesses the site. ³⁹

2.8. Using the Henry III Fine Rolls Project in Research

⁋1The Henry III Fine Rolls Project has been used in research by historians and some of the outcomes are included in the Fine of the Month section of the website. This is where members of the project team or other scholars are encouraged to comment on material in the fine rolls. There are twenty-four brief pieces (as of 6 January 2008) on such subjects as ‘Uncle and niece: the disputed Huse family inheritance’ (Paul Brand) and ‘Evidence for the Four Knights system’ (Julie Kanter). This is consistent with more traditional ways of communicating historical research –simply providing access – but the Fine of the Month Competition also uses the online medium to encourage use of the source and participation in the project.

⁋2The Fine of the Month Competition encourages scholars other than those directly involved in the project to contribute by offering a a prize for their contribution after evaluation by the International Advisory Committee. ⁴⁰ Of the twenty-five pieces currently available (January 2008) from December 2005 to January 2008, eight are by historians from outside of the project which shows the potential for wider participation. The contributions also show the advantage electronic sources provide in saving time trawling through records since two of the contributors were studying MAs in medieval history at the time ⁴¹ and it could be argued that MA students have less time than other researchers.

⁋3The Fine of the Month Competition does make the project more than Petrik’s suggested delivery system without having to moderate resource intensive wikis. It shows both the potential of online sources for sharing information and potentially encouraging involvement and collaboration in historical study. However, what is not included in the commentaries is how each scholar used the electronic version to make a difference to their research. This would provide evidence of the value the internet can add to historical research and perhaps encourage its use even when print formats become available.

3. Conclusion

⁋1The Henry III Fine Rolls Project demonstrates how historians can use the internet for more than just delivering information. It also shows that it can be also more than a content system. The quality of the information and the opportunities to participate by contributing comments makes the website more than a useful search facility. This does not mean, however, that historians need to approach online sources differently to printed or original sources to check their authority, or reliability. Expectations of scholarly references can also be met. What is different are expectations of usability particularly the advantages of a thorough search facility. For those creating historical sources online the difference is thinking about the ‘user’ – a more active term than the ‘audience’ for print versions.

⁋2The Henry III Fine Rolls Project website is likely to continue to exist as long as King’s College London is content to host it. The ideal for the future is the potential that it could interact with other, yet to be created, online medieval sources and, in turn, allow computing to add another layer of value to the analysis of historical sources. ⁴² However, what will help keep this format available and lead to the creation of new online sources are an increase in historians’ willingness to use an electronic version and provide evidence of the value it can add to research. History on the internet can only be as good as historians want to make it.

4. Bibliography

4.1. Primary Sources:

• Calendar of the Fine Rolls of the Reign of Henry III (http://www.finerollshenry3.org.uk/). The National Archives and King’s College London. Accessed between November 2007 and January 2008.
• Paul Dryburgh and Beth Hartland (eds.), Arianna Ciula and José Miguel Vieira (technical eds.), Calendar of the Fine Rolls of the Reign of Henry III [1216–1248]. I: 1216–1224 (Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, 2007). Calendar of the Liberate Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office, Volume IV 1251–1260 (London, 1959), pp. 539–695. Calendar of Patent Rolls of the Reign of Henry III Preserved in the Public Record Office AD 1225–1232 (London, 1903), pp. 529–650.

4.2. Secondary Sources:

4.2.1. Books:

• Ludmilla Jordonova, History in Practice (New York, 2006)
• Final Recommendations and report of the “Peer review and evaluation of digital resources for the arts and humanities” project, AHRC, ICT Strategy Project (September 2006), http://www.history.ac.uk/digit/peer/index.html.
• Online survey report for the “Peer review and evaluation of digital resources for the arts and humanities” project, AHRC, ICT Strategy Project (2006) http://www.history.ac.uk/digit/peer/index.html.

4.2.2. Articles:

• AHDS, ‘AHRC announcement’, http://ahds.ac.uk/exec/news/ahrc-news-may07.htm, May 2007. Date accessed: 03 January 2008.
• ‘Abstract: ALLC Panel: Digital Resources in Humanities Research: Evidence of Value’, http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dh2007/abstracts/panel_235_allc.pdf, From the 19th Joint International Conference of the Association for Computers and the Humanities and the Association fo Literary and Linguistic Computing at the University of Illinois, 4 June – 8 June 2007 (http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dh2007/). Date accessed: 4 January 2008.
• David Carpenter, ‘The Henry III Fine Rolls‘, History Today, Volume 57, Issue 5, May 2007 (http://www.historytoday.com/dm_linkInternal.aspx?amid=30238306), pp. 3–4.
• ‘Case studies in advanced ICT methods: The Henry III Fine Rolls Project’, AHRC ICT Methods Network http://www.methodsnetwork.ac.uk/resources/casestudy10.html (accessed 22 November 2007)
• Daniel J. Cohen, ‘History and the Second Decade of the Web’, http://chnm.gmu.edu/resources/essays/d/34 (Originally published in Rethinking History Vol.8, No.2, June 2004, pp. 293–301).
• King’s College London Research Projects: The Fine Rolls of Henry III http://www.kcl.ac.uk/schools/humanities/history/research/proj/henry3.html.
• Neil Grindley, ‘Digital Tools and Electronic Texts’, A Methods Network Working Paper, (June 2007), AHRC ICT Methods Network http://www.methodsnetwork.ac.uk
• Paula Petrik, ‘History and new media: designing history’, http://www.archiva.net/pdf/AHA_1997.pdf (adapted from a paper given at AHA 1997).
• Matthew Woollard, ‘Digital resources: challenging use or users' challenge?’, http://www.history.ac.uk/digit/woollard.html Examining the impact of digitization upon scholarship in the humanities, Proceedings from a conference held on 7 July 2003 at the Institute of Historical Research.

4.2.3. Websites:

⁋1The websites below were accessed at different times and this is acknowledged in the footnotes. The organisation(s) with responsibility for the specific sites are in brackets:

• British Library http://www.bl.uk/ (British Library)
• British History Online, http://www.british-history.ac.uk/ (Institute of Historical Research and the History of Parliament Trust)
• Wikipedia History Portal, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:History (Wikimedia Foundation)