Use of national bibliographies as a research resource, rather than a mere information retrieval tool, has proven to be challenging as obtaining valid conclusions critically depends on the overall understanding of the historical context but also on technical issues of data quality and completeness. Biases, inaccuracies and gaps in data collection or quality may severely hinder productive use of the bibliographies as a research resource but scalable solutions to these challenges, and subsequent research cases, have been missing.
Here, we demonstrate how such challenges can be overcome by specifically tailored and openly collaborative data analytical ecosystems that provide scalable tools for data processing and analysis, from efficient and reliable harmonization and augmentation of the raw entries to integration and statistical analysis of national bibliographies. We show how external sources of metadata, for instance, on authors, publishers, or geographical places, can be used to enrich and verify bibliographic information. Such data analytical ecosystems have potential for wider implementation in related studies and other bibliographies. 
We present an analysis of the overall publishing landscape in the period 1500-1800.  Comprehensive harmonization and joint analysis of four large bibliographies has allowed us to assess publishing activity beyond what is accessible by the use of national catalogs alone. Whereas national bibliographies are essentially about mapping the national canon of publishing, integrating data across borders should be managed in a way that takes into account specific local circumstances while also helping to overcome the national view in analyzing the past. Such integration can help scholarship to reach a more precise view of print culture beyond the confines of national bibliographies. 

Bibliographic data science

Challenges in the research use of digital bibliographies

Bias in terms of data collection processes or quality may hinder productive use of the bibliographies as a research resource..

Source code can be made available but bibliographies are not openly available. This sets remarkable limitations of efficient and collaborative research use, and accumulation of knowledge regarding the research use of these digital resources.