In Arlette Frage’s classic work The Allure of the Archives, she discusses the notion of the “brutal” hand of the archivist collecting, storing, and classifying the material in their care. Frage is discussing the utilitarian nature of the archive as a storage facility for access to the past, but no organizing structure can be neutral. We can expand this notion of the “brutal” into a more provocative usage if we are considering the archivist’s hand as an additional force in history preserving but also obscuring history through the acquisitions, descriptions, colocation, and retention practices. Hierarchies and institutional biases privilege access to certain stories over others which can create an obscuring effect despite the best efforts and intentions of archivists. Additionally, the confines of the archival box or folder can belie important nuances of history swept aside to privilege alternate narratives. In this paper I will discuss how digital history allows for a “de-archiving” of valuable material in a way that not only adds to more general accessibility, but also allows for new interpretations, comparisons, and from of analysis. To do this I will provide a brief survey of the trends in archival literature beginning with classics of archival theory, associated movements such as the so-called “New Museology,” and trends into the more recent postcolonial and social justice inspired methods in recent archival literature. Additionally, I will discuss associated trends in digital history and the digital humanities which seek the remediation of primary archival materials to favor access and a grander scale of digital analysis. I will briefly discuss my previous project titled The Recusant Print Network Project as an example, some of the lessons learned from this experience, and how these lessons can be applied to a document analysis project like the Slavery, Law, and Power project.