Skip to main content
The Collation

EMMO: Early Modern Manuscripts Online

The Folger is thrilled to share the news that we are the recipient of a generous three year National Leadership Grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) to create Early Modern Manuscripts Online (EMMO), an online searchable database of encoded semi-diplomatic transcriptions of all Folger manuscripts from the period 1500-1700. 1

That’s the final product, anyway. Getting there is going to be quite an adventure for us, one that we plan to share with you on The Collation at regular intervals once we get up and running next year. We hope that EMMO will expand the textual landscape of early modern England, providing a corpus to explore on its own and to compare to other corpora of print works such as EEBO-TCP.

The most important goal of the project, since we are a library, is access. The transcription and encoding of manuscripts is as crucial to access as is cataloging and digitization. It might even be more so, since manuscripts are slippery and wide-ranging things that tend to defy simple categorization and that are often written in impenetrable hands.

stonley diary, V.a.459

An example of a difficult hand in a very interesting manuscript: a page from Richard Stonley’s diary, for June 18, 1581, in which he describes seeing a dwarf, an extremely tall person, and a baby with a huge head, all on the same day, at the Lord Mayor’s and at the Royal Exchange (Folger MS V.a.459, fol. 3v).

  1. We won’t finish transcribing all of them in three years, but we plan to transcribe as many as we possibly can, and are fully committed to continuing the work as long as it takes.

Comments

What a wonderful development! I do hope the mini-updates will be available elsewhere than just on Twitter. Not everyone loves Twitter. For those of us who teach paleography, access to the images as well as to the transcriptions will be of key importance.

William Ingram — November 26, 2013

Reply

We will certainly be including updates from the EMMO team here on The Collation as well as on twitter! (And, for what it’s worth, our tweets are also visible on the sidebar of The Collation‘s website.)

Sarah Werner — November 26, 2013

Reply

This is so exciting! Congratulations on winning the grant for this important work, and thank you on behalf of all future EM English archive researchers. (Also, love the example you chose!)

Katie Will — November 26, 2013

Reply

This is a very important project but I do have one concern. As you know the transcription of handwriting, especially Secretary hand, is never absolutely cut-and-dried and so the same passage may be rendered slightly differently by two different transcribers. Since, as you say, a large number of the users of this site will not be very expert at reading early hands and will, therefore, have to rely heavily on the transcriptions, my fear is that the transcriptions will become THE rendering of passages simply because it is in type and not hand. I think this is a problem and has any thought been given to how to deal with it? I’m not sure it can be dealt with and so your transcribers bear an even heavier responsibility than they might initially have imagined.

William Proctor Williams — November 26, 2013

Reply

This is a big concern for us as well. A couple of points: All transcriptions will be reviewed and approved (or flagged as “not reviewed” if that is the case), and will always be viewable alongside digital images of the original manuscripts. If people notice mistakes, there will be a mechanism for contacting us and suggesting emendations. Of course there will be occasional slight differences in interpretation since transcription is an art, not a science. Also, we don’t want the transcriptions to replace consulting the original, or to replace the creation of scholarly editions.

Heather Wolfe — November 26, 2013

Reply

That’s awesome news!! I will wait patiently for the next three years. This kind of resource will be so important for my research. Congrats on the grant!

Chelsea — November 26, 2013

Reply

I share Prof Williams’s concern. I’m dealing even today with a proper name that can be read in either of two ways. A transcription should accommodate such ambiguities, and not become (as Prof Williams says) THE transcription.

William Ingram — November 26, 2013

Reply

Yes, it is not our intention to smooth over ambiguities, since ambiguities are interesting and important. We aim to create highly accurate, uniformly consistent, and trustworthy semi-diplomatic transcriptions, while realizing that transcription can be a highly personal and subjective process, and that everyone tends to transcribe a little differently.

Names and most words will be normalized for searching purposes, so regardless of how the name is spelled in the manuscript or appears in the transcription, you should be able to find it using the modern, authorized spelling, at which point you can decide for yourself how it is spelled in the manuscript if the transcription seems off in your opinion.

Heather Wolfe — November 26, 2013

Reply

Just wanted to chime in to say that one of the great things about TEI encoding is that it’s possible to indicate uncertainty. A word or phrase that can be read more than one way can be flagged.

I don’t know how it will end up looking in EMMO, but theoretically, you could press a button and have all uncertain words turn purple. Alternative readings can be indicated, as can degree of certainty, and who said so (again, not sure how far EMMO would go with this, but in theory, you could press a button and see only words that Transcriber X was less than 70% sure about turn purple; the danger, of course, is that Transcriber X could spend so much time encoding every little uncertainty that it takes weeks just to do one page).

Erin Blake — November 26, 2013

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *