Janet Delve, University of Portsmouth, Hampshire, UK

Topic: It is arguable that the dominant discourses in the history of computing are based in no small part on accounts that have gone unchallenged for decades (reminiscent of Mike Mahoney’s ‘insider histories’).  In addition, there are many papers dwelling to a large extent on detailed technical aspects of the field, with little attempt to situate the work in a broader historical context.  It would seem an appropriate time to stop and reflect on our historical methods in the history of computing in relation to two other disciplines: mainstream history, and the history of mathematics.

Argument: The historical methodology landscape of mainstream historians is well-developed and extremely wide-ranging, covering such areas as: the ‘Annales School’, labour history, women’s history, race and culture, nationalism and postcolonial theory, to name but a few of the many to be found on the websites of major British and American universities.  This wide array of theories represents a depth and breadth of historical expertise and experience which can inform the way historiography develops in the history of computing.  Recent work in the history of mathematics reveals a greater awareness of historical methods which may also be applicable to the history of computing.

Evidence: Taking French history as an example, the events of May 1968 attracted various contemporaneous interpretations, which were replaced over the decades as the period was revisited and repositioned in the country’s history.  This contrasts with the single accounts that still pervade the history of computing.  Another exemplar, the field of history and memory has sprung mainly out of the work of two French historians, Pierre Nora and Henri Rousso.  They both consider the interplay of myth and memory, and bring a nuanced approach to the making of history.  Luke Hodgkin considers historicism and ‘presentism’, Kuhn’s scientific revolution, and eurocentrism, amongst other topics, in his introduction to his recent work on the history of mathematics, all of which provide a richer contextualisation for his work.

Contribution to Existing Literature: Bill Aspray, Mike Mahoney and Kenneth O. May have all written dedicated articles on historiography.  This paper will look at progress made in history of computing historiography since their papers, and will consider what we can practically incorporate in this respect from more mature fields.