I just put up a question about a relatively obscure branch of literature study, philology. It didn't have a tag and I have the rep to make one, so I did. However I was unsatisfied by some of the other tags available but wasn't so sure they were needed/relevant - so I thought I'd ask the community.
Philology is a combination of linguistics, literature and history. I used the history-of-literature tag for the question but I'm not really sure that it's correct. Actual tags for "linguistics", "history" or even "language" seem more meaningful but they're obviously different, yet related, academic disciplines.
I would argue they were relevant as stand-alone tags because the subjects are closely allied with the study of literature. It's often hard to properly understand a text without knowledge of history or language, so it seems reasonable to think questions focused on these more specialist areas would be relevant in the future.
The other thing I wanted was some sort of "academia" tag. This is more vague and I'd be far more understanding of its rejection. But it struck me that while we're aiming at an "expert" standard, we do have a tiny minority of questions that ask about fairly obscure streams of academic study which a general reader, however dedicated, may never have heard of. Philology is one. Others are literary theory and intertextuality.
Is it worth having some sort of meta-tag for these high-level questions? Or should they stay simply tagged with the name of their relevant specialty?