[ih] Historiography vs history [was: Re: Internet-history Digest, Vol 62, Issue 32]

[Brian E Carpenter]

Joly,

It's a start but it only scratches the surface.

Also, I don't know who this is:

https://ethw.org/CERN_Creates_World_Wide_Web

but it certainly isn't Tim Berners-Lee.

Regards
    Brian Carpenter

On 03-Feb-25 08:47, Joly MacFie wrote:
> I would put in a word here for the IEEE's Engineering and Technology History Wiki's Internet Category https://ethw.org/Category:Internet <https://ethw.org/Category:Internet>
> 
> Joly
> 
> On Sun, Feb 2, 2025 at 2:34 PM Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org <mailto:internet-history at elists.isoc.org>> wrote:
> 
>     John,
> 
>     There's a clear contrast between what most techies think of as "history"
>     and the historiographical approach where technical details are subordinate
>     to the human, societal and economic context. You're spot on to mention
>     Thomas Haigh in that context. Most of what is discussed on this list
>     is at the "technical details" end of the spectrum. It's like discussing
>     the details of the condensers of early steam engines, not the impact
>     of steam power on the Industrial Revolution. It's a different skill set.
> 
>     If we wanted this list to be more than a repository for factoids,
>     we'd need some real historians here. They mainly live at members at sigcis.org <mailto:members at sigcis.org>
>          Brian Carpenter
> 
>     On 01-Feb-25 14:38, John Shoch via Internet-history wrote:
>      > Noel,
>      >
>      > Your concern about the technical content of computer history puts you in
>      > good company -- with Don Knuth.
>      >
>      > --In 2021 the CACM published a transcript of a talk Don had given 7 years
>      > before: "Let’s Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science." From the
>      > CACM's introduction:
>      > "On May 7, 2014, Don Knuth delivered that year's Kailath Lecture at
>      > Stanford University to a packed auditorium. In it he decried the absence of
>      > technical content from the histories of computer science being written, and
>      > he made an impassioned plea for historians of computer science to get back
>      > on track, as the historians of mathematics have always been."
>      >
>      > https://cacm.acm.org/opinion/lets-not-dumb-down-the-history-of-computer-science/ <https://cacm.acm.org/opinion/lets-not-dumb-down-the-history-of-computer-science/>
>      >
>      > --I had the good fortune to be at that lecture 10 years ago, which is
>      > available on Youtube:
>      > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAXdDEQveKw <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAXdDEQveKw>
>      >       [There is an amusing introduction by John Hennesey.]
>      >
>      > --A year after the talk, in 2015, the CACM ran a response from Thomas
>      > Haigh, arguing the other side:
>      > "In this column I will be looking at the changing relationship between the
>      > discipline of computer science and the growing body of scholarly work on
>      > the history of computing, beginning with a recent plea made by renowned
>      > computer scientist Donald Knuth." ...
>      > "Computing is much bigger than computer science, and so the history of
>      > computing is much bigger than the history of computer science. Yet Knuth
>      > treated Campbell-Kelly’s book on the business history of the software
>      > industry (accurately subtitled “a history of the software industry”) and
>      > all the rest of the history of computing as part of “the history of
>      > computer science.” ...
>      > "To call such work “dumbed down” history of computer science, rather than
>      > smart history of many other things, is to misunderstand both the intentions
>      > and the accomplishments of its authors."
>      > https://cacm.acm.org/opinion/the-tears-of-donald-knuth/ <https://cacm.acm.org/opinion/the-tears-of-donald-knuth/>
>      >
>      > I commend both articles to you.
>      >
>      > John
>      >
>      > PS:  Personally, I tend to come down on the Haigh side of the discussion.
>      > "History" can take many forms when looking at any subject area -- political
>      > history, economic history, business history, social history, technical
>      > history, architectural history, etc.
>      > An example:  some of you may know that Robert Garner is undertaking a
>      > prodigious effort to dig into the technical evolution of the Ethernet (he's
>      > looking at original board designs, simulation equations, timing issues,
>      > etc.  Yet that still leaves room for different historical work on the
>      > techno/political battles of the standardization process (Ethernet vs. token
>      > ring, Xerox/Dec/Intel vs. IBM, IEEE vs. ECMA in Europe, etc.).  I think we
>      > need both.
>      > [Full disclosure:  I served for about two decades on the Board of the
>      > Computer History Museum, which informed my broader view of the
>      > opportunity.  The technical history of computing (and networking) is
>      > important, but will probably serve a narrower audience.]
>     -- 
>     Internet-history mailing list
>     Internet-history at elists.isoc.org <mailto:Internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
>     https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> --------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie  +12185659365
> --------------------------------------
> -