1. S. Robertson, L. Mullen. Arguing with Digital History: Patterns of Historical Interpretation. – Journal of Social History, 2021, 54, 4, 1005–1022. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/jsh/shab015;  
L. Mullen. A Braided Narrative for Digital History. – Debates in the Digital Humanities 2019. Ed. by L. F. Klein, M. K. Gold. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 2019, 382–388. 
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctvg251hk.34?seq=1 
https://doi.org/10.5749/j.ctvg251hk.34

2. M. Thaller. Controversies around the Digital Humanities: An Agenda. – Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 2012, 37, 3, 10; J. van Zundert. If You Build It, Will We Come? Large Scale Digital Infrastructures as a Dead End for Digital Humanities. – Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 2012, 37, 3: 165–186.

3. C. Blevins. Digital History’s Perpetual Future Tense. – Debates in the Digital Humanities 2016. Ed. by M. K. Gold, L. F. Klein. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 2016. 
https://doi.org/10.5749/j.ctt1cn6thb.29
https://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/read/untitled/section/4555da10-0561-42c1-9e34-112f0695f523#ch26;  
Robertson, Mullen. Arguing with Digital History.

4. R. Ma, F. Xiao. Data Practices in Digital History. – International Journal of Digital Curation, 2020, 15, 1, 14. 
https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v15i1.597

5. J. van Zundert et al. DHBeNeLux: Incubator for Digital Humanities in Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. – Digital Humanities Quarterly, 2017, 11, 4, 
https://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/11/4/000326/000326.html

6. N. Z. Da. The Computational Case against Computational Literary Studies. – Critical Inquiry, 2019, 45, 3, 601–639. 
https://doi.org/10.1086/702594

7. J. Drucker. Humanities Approaches to Graphical Display. – Digital Humanities Quarterly, 2011, 5, 1. 
https://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/5/1/000091/000091.html

8. J. J. van Zundert, S. Antonijević, T. L. Andrews. ‘Black Boxes’ and True Colour: A Rhetoric of Scholarly Code. – Digital Technology and the Practices of Humanities Research. Ed. by J. Edmond. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, 2020, 123–162. 
https://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0192.06

9. M. Thaller. The Need for a Theory of Historical Computing [1991]. – Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung: Supplement, 2017, 29, 193–202; A.-C. Wackerhausen, K. L. Nielbo. Computationally Assisted Conceptual Analysis: What Is It Is, and How to Do It. – International Journal of Digital Humanities, 2022, 3, 1, 51–89. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42803-021-00041-4

10. O. Boonstra, L. Breure, P. Doorn. Past, Present and Future of Historical Information Science. DANS, Amsterdam, 2006, 83. 
https://doi.org/10.26530/OAPEN_353255;  
I. Gregory. Challenges and Opportunities in Digital History. – Frontiers in Digital Humanities, 2014, 1, 1, 1–2. 
https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2014.00001; 
M. Thaller. The Need for a Theory of Historical Computing; B. J. P. van Bavel et al. Climate and Society in Long-Term Perspective: Opportunities and Pitfalls in the Use of Historical Datasets. – Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2019, 10, 6, e611. 
https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.611

11. K. van Es. Unpacking Tool Criticism as Practice, in Practice. – Digital Humanities Quarterly, 2023, 17, 2. 
https://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/17/2/000692/000692.html

12. Hérésies et sociétés dans l’Europe pré-industrielle. Communications et débats du Colloque de Royaumont présentés par J. Le Goff. (Civilisations et sociétés, 10.) Mouton, Paris, La Haye, 1968.

13. C. Ginzburg. I benandanti. Stregoneria e culti agrari tra Cinquecento e Seicento. Einaudi, Torino, 1966; C. Ginzburg. Il formaggio e i vermi. Il cosmo di un mugnaio del ’500. Einaudi, Torino, 1976.

14. E. Le Roy Ladurie. Montaillou, village occitan de 1294 à 1324. Gallimard, Paris, 1975.

15. L. E. Boyle. Montaillou Revisited: Mentalité and Methodology. – Pathways to Medieval Peasants. Ed. by J. A. Raftis. Vol. 2. Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Toronto, 1981, 119–140; D. LaCapra. The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Twentieth-Century Historian. – D. LaCapra. History and Criticism. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1985, 45–69; A. Del Col. Alcune osservazioni sui processi inquisitoriali come fonti storiche. – Metodi e ricerche, 1994, 13, 1–2, 85–105; A. Del Col. I criteri dello storico nell’uso delle fonti inquisitoriali moderne. – L’Inquisizione romana: Metodologia delle fonti e storia istituzionale. Ed. by A. Del Col, G. Paolin. Università di Trieste; Circolo culturale Menocchio, Trieste, Montereale Valcellina, 2000, 51–72; J. H. Arnold. Inquisition and Power: Catharism and the Confessing Subject in Medieval Languedoc. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 2001; C. Bruschi. The Wandering Heretics of Languedoc. Cambridge University Press, New York , 2009; D. Zbíral, R. L. J. Shaw. Hearing Voices: Reapproaching Medieval Inquisition Records. – Religions, 2022, 13, 12, 1175. 
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13121175;  
S. Pihko. The Construction of Information in Medieval Inquisition Records: A Methodological Reconsideration. – I Quaderni Del m.æ.s. – Journal of Mediæ Ætatis Sodalicium, 2024, 22, 1, 165–189. 
https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2533-2325/19030

16. H. Grundmann. Ketzerverhöre des Spätmittelalters als quellenkritisches Problem. – Ausgewählte Aufsätze. Bd. 1. (Schriften der Monumenta Germaniae Historica, 25.) Anton Hiersemann, Stuttgart, 1976, 364–416; R. E. Lerner. The Heresy of the Free Spirit in the Later Middle Ages. University of California Press, Berkeley, 1972
https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520352698; 
G. G. Merlo. Eretici e inquisitori nella società piemontese del Trecento. Claudiana, Torino, 1977; M. G. Pegg. The Corruption of Angels: The Great Inquisition of 1245–1246. Princeton University Press, Princeton, Oxford, 2001.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400824755

17. For a dynamic, processual view of modelling, and a definition of the digital humanities through modelling, see W. McCarthy. Modeling: A Study in Words and Meanings. – A Companion to Digital Humanities. Ed. by S. Schreibman, R. Siemens, J. Unsworth. Blackwell, Oxford, 2004. 
https://companions.digitalhumanities.org/DH/?chapter=content/9781405103213_chapter_19.html

18. The pioneering effort, founded on subject–predicate–object triples, was the manual statement-based data collection workflow that formed part of Roberto Franzosi’ Quantitative Narrative Analysis (QNA) methodology; see R. Franzosi. From Words to Numbers: Narrative, Data, and Social Science. (Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences, 22). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004; R. Franzosi. Quantitative Narrative Analysis. (Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 162.) Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2010. An automated data capture process aimed at extracting the core of what is needed for the analysis of narrative alone (a sequence of subject-predicate-object data statements) is provided by: S. Bastholm Andrade, D. Andersen. Digital Story Grammar: A Quantitative Methodology for Narrative Analysis. – International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 2020, 23, 4, 405–421.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2020.1723205  
The STAR model expands the triple-format data statement (subject–predicate–object) to a quintuple (adding ‘asserter’ and ‘source’) in a way well suited to capturing potentially conflicting assertions for historical databases: J. Baillie et al. Modelling Historical Information with Structured Assertion Records. – Digital History Berlin (blog), 2021. 
https://dhistory.hypotheses.org/518 (25.03.2025); 
T. L. Andrews, M. Deierl, C. Ebel. Gender Assignment as an Event: A Contemporary Approach for the Adequate Depiction of Historical Gender Categories. – Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 2024, 39, 1, 5–12. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqad100

19. M. Thaller. The Need for a Theory of Historical Computing, 196.

20. D. Zbíral et al. Model the Source First!: Towards Computer-Assisted Semantic Text Modelling and Source Criticism 2.0. – Zenodo, 06.08.2022. 
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6963579

21. D. Zbíral et al. InkVisitor 1.4. 24.05.2024. 
https://github.com/DISSINET/InkVisitor/

22. R. L. J. Shaw, T. Hampejs, D. Zbíral. Modeling Systems of Sentencing in Early Inquisition Trials: Crime, Social Connectivity, and Punishment in the Register of Peter Seila (1241–2). – Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History, 2023, 56, 3, 176–197. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/01615440.2023.2270404

23. R. Artstein, M. Poesio. Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics. – Computational Linguistics, 2008, 34, 4, 555–596. 
https://doi.org/10.1162/coli.07-034-R2

24. M. C. Alexander, J. A. Danowski. Analysis of an Ancient Network: Personal Communication and the Study of Social Structure in a Past Society. – Social Networks, 1990, 12, 4, 313–335. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(90)90013-Y;  
J. F. Padgett. C. K. Ansell. Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400–1434. – American Journal of Sociology, 1993, 98, 6, 1259–1319. 
https://doi.org/10.1086/230190

25. B. Wellman, C. Wetherell. Social Network Analysis of Historical Communities: Some Questions from the Present for the Past. – The History of the Family, 1996, 1, 1, 97–121. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1081-602X(96)90022-6;  
B. H. Erickson. Social Networks and History: A Review Essay. – Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History, 1997, 30, 3, 149–157. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/01615449709601182;  
C. Wetherell. Historical Social Network Analysis. – International Review of Social History, 1998, 43, 6, Supplement, 125–144. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020859000115123

26. C. Lemercier. Analyse de réseaux et histoire. – Revue d’histoire moderne et contemporaine, 2005, 52, 2, 88–112. 
https://doi.org/10.3917/rhmc.522.0088;   
M. Grandjean. Introduction to Social Network Analysis: Basics and Historical Specificities. – HNR+ResHist Conference, Luxembourg, 2021. 
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5083036;  
T. Brughmans. Connecting the Dots: Towards Archaeological Network Analysis. – Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 2010, 29, 3, 277–303. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0092.2010.00349.x;  
T. Brughmans, A. Collar, F. Coward. Network Perspectives on the Past: Tackling the Challenges. – The Connected Past: Challenges to Network Studies in Archaeology and History. Ed. by T. Brughmans, A. Collar, F. Coward. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2016, 3–19
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198748519.001.0001; 
R. Gramsch-Stehfest. Von der Metapher zur Methode. – Zeitschrift für Historische Forschung, 2020, 47, 1, 2–40. 
https://doi.org/10.3790/zhf.47.1.1;  
Handbuch Historische Netzwerkforschung: Grundlagen und Anwendungen. Hrsg. von M. Düring et al. LIT, Berlin, 2015.

27. R. Gramsch. Das Reich als Netzwerk der Fürsten: Politische Strukturen unter dem Doppelkönigtum Friedrichs II. und Heinrichs (VII.), 1225–1235 (Mittelalter-Forschungen, 40.) Thorbecke, Ostfildern, 2013; Maths Meets Myths: Quantitative Approaches to Ancient Narratives, Understanding Complex Systems. Ed. by R. Kenna, M. MacCarron, P. MacCarron. Springer, Cham, 2017. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39445-9;  
M. Hammond, C. Jackson. Social Network Analysis and the People of Medieval Scotland 1093–1286 (PoMS) Database. 2017. 
https://poms.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/documents/110/WHOLE_BOOK_Pt1.pdf (14.05.2025); 
K. P. Fazioli. Modeling the Middle Ages: A Review of Historical Network Research on Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean World. – Social and Intellectual Networking in the Early Middle Ages. Ed. by K. P. Fazioli, M. J. Kelly. Punctum Books, Santa Barbara, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.53288/0374.1.04

28. J. L. Moreno. Who Shall Survive? A New Approach to the Problem of Human Interrelations. Nervous and Mental Disease Publishing Company, Washington, 1934.
https://doi.org/10.1037/10648-000

29. P. Ormerod, A. P. Roach. The Medieval Inquisition: Scale-Free Networks and the Suppression of Heresy.– Physica A, 2004, 339, 645–652
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2004.03.020; 
D. I. Nieto-Isabel, C. López-Arenillas. From Inquisition to Inquiry: Inquisitorial Records as a Source for Social Network Analysis. – Digital Humanities and Christianity: An Introduction. Ed. by T. Hutchings, C. Clivaz. (Introductions to Digital Humanities – Religion, 4.) De Gruyter, Berlin, 2021, 195–212. 
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574043

30. E. Timberlake-Newell. Consigned to the Flames: An Analysis of the Apostolic Order of Bologna, 1290–1307, with Some Comparison to the Beguins/Spiritual Franciscans, 1300-1330. Ph.D. thesis. University of Glasgow, Glasgow, 2012. 
http://theses.gla.ac.uk/3592/1/2012Timberlake-NewellPhD.pdf;  
D. Isabel Nieto-Isabel. Communities of Dissent: Social Network Analysis of Religious Dissident Groups in Languedoc in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries. Ph.D. thesis, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, 2018.

31. J.-P. Rehr. Vidit Cum Hereticis: Remapping Networks of Accusations at the Great Inquisition of Toulouse, 1245–1246. 2nd-year thesis. Université Lumière Lyon 2, Lyon, 2018; J.-P. Rehr. Re-Mapping the ‘Great Inquisition’ of 1245–46: The Case of Mas-Saintes-Puelles and Saint-Martin-Lalande. – Open Library of Humanities, 2019, 5, 1, 1–52. 
https://doi.org/10.16995/olh.414

32. J. L. Estévez, D. Salihović, S. V. Sgourev. Endogenous Dynamics of Denunciation: Evidence from an Inquisitorial Trial. – PNAS Nexus, 2024, 3, 9, pgae340. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae340

33. D. Zbíral et al. Gender, Kinship, and Other Social Predictors of Incrimination in the Inquisition Register of Bologna (1291–1310): Results from an Exponential Random Graph Model. – PLOS One, 2025, 20, 2, e0315467. 
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315467

34. For example, A. Mertel et al. Historical Geocoding Assistant. – SoftwareX, 2021, 14, 100682. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2021.100682

35. R. L. J. Shaw, K. Sikk, D. Zbíral. Toponymic Surnames and the Spatiality of Heresy Prosecutions: Peter Seila’s Register of Sentences from the Quercy Region (Languedoc), 1241–1242. – Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 2024, 11, 1, 1–14. 
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02689-z

36. K. L. Nielbo et al. Quantitative Text Analysis. – Nature Reviews Methods Primers, 2024, 4, 1, 1–16. 
https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-024-00302-w

37. P. DiMaggio. Adapting Computational Text Analysis to Social Science (and Vice Versa). – Big Data & Society, 2014, 2, 2, 205395171560290. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951715602908

38. F. Moretti. Distant Reading. Verso, London, New York, 2013.

39. I. Gregory. Challenges and Opportunities in Digital History.

40. For a useful recent review, see C. Backerra. Source Criticism for Cultural History. – Rethinking History, 2024, 28, 2, 194–216. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/13642529.2024.2361214

41. F. Fischer. Digital Corpora and Scholarly Editions of Latin Texts: Features and Requirements of Textual Criticism. – Speculum, 2017, 92, S1: S265–S287. 
https://doi.org/10.1086/693823

42. K. van Es. Unpacking Tool Criticism as Practice, in Practice.

43. S. de Valeriola. Can Historians Trust Centrality? Historical Network Analysis and Centrality Metrics Robustness. – Journal of Historical Network Research, 2021, 6, 1. 
https://doi.org/10.25517/jhnr.v6i1.105

44. M. Huisman. Imputation of Missing Network Data: Some Simple Procedures. – Journal of Social Structure, 2009, 10, 1, 1–29. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7163-9_394-1
https://www.cmu.edu/joss/content/articles/volume10/huisman.pdf;  
R. W. Krause, M. Huisman, T. A. B. Snijders. Multiple Imputation for Longitudinal Network Data. – Statistica Applicata: Italian Journal of Applied Statistics, 2018, 30, 1, 33–57. 
https://research.rug.nl/en/publications/multiple-imputation-for-longitudinal-network-data;  
R. W. Krause et al. Missing Network Data: A Comparison of Different Imputation Methods. – 2018 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), August 2018, 159–163. 
https://doi.org/10.1109/ASONAM.2018.8508716

45. K. A. Henry, F. P. Boscoe. Estimating the Accuracy of Geographical Imputation. – International Journal of Health Geographics, 2008, 7, 1, 1–10. 
https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-7-3

46. P. Tran, S. Arlei. History as a Data Science: Missing Data Imputation on the the Slave Voyages Dataset. – Proceedings of KDD Under- Graduate Consortium (KDD-UC ’22). ACM, New York, 2022; R. Spicer et al. Predicting the Past: Imputation of Historical Data. – OSF, 20.07.2023. 
https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/9gpwf

47. For another defence of digital history against such lines of criticism, see F. Jannidis. Digitale Geisteswissenschaften: Offene Fragen – Schöne Aussichten. – Zeitschrift Für Medien- Und Kulturforschung, 2019, 10, 1, 63–70. 
https://doi.org/10.28937/ZMK-10-1_5