Conclusion
Scholars have not agreed on a comprehensive definition of the digital humanities, its scope, or even its purpose. It is nonetheless possible to stitch, or perhaps weave, together many of the sometimes-contrasting threads that comprise attempts at defining the field. It seems that any definition must take an expansive view of the subject, and not limit it to any one discipline. As will be shown in subsequent sections, the digital humanities first emerged from textual analysis and the study of texts. Such textual research still underpins much of current DH scholarship. University of London digital humanities scholar Jane Winters writes of the digital humanities: “…it has diversified admirably in the second decade of the 21st century, but as recently as 2004 there could be no argument that ‘it remains deeply interested in text’” (Winters, 2018). But just as the humanities is a broad and wide-ranging term encompassing languages – both ancient and modern, literature, history, classical studies, art and art history, anthropology, religion, philosophy, and human geography (to name just a very few areas), the digital humanities must also be described (as opposed to defined) analogously