Development of new instruments for research had far-reaching implications for the transformation of science during the 20th century. Scholars—mainly in the philosophy and history of chemistry—argue that this led to the institution of an autonomous field exclusively dedicated to the design and development of research technologies, namely Instrumentation. Though contemporary instruments are primarily aimed at measurement (so that currently it is common to speak of Measurement and Instrumentation), the emergent field of measurement studies has not extensively explored the implications of the consolidation of instrumentation for our current understanding of measurement and measuring instruments. Bearing this in mind, my presentation aims to introduce key debates that took place in the mid-twentieth century among professional instrument makers, engineers, and scientists concerning the kind of knowledge that underlies instrumentation as an engineering field. Those debates were commonly framed as the issue of the existence and nature of a science of instrumentation (or instrumentation science). The reconstruction of these debates shows that there were different proposals about the scope of such science, but during the 1970s information and systems theory became the dominant epistemic framework. I claim that this framework led to an epistemic approach towards measuring instruments as information machines, that is, conceptualizing measuring devices as primarily consisting of three informational operations: acquisition, transfer, and presentation of information.

This article explores the development and evolution of bird population monitoring methods in the Peruvian guano islands, focusing on the scientific and social implications of these practices. Beginning in the early 20th century, early efforts to assess avian populations were primarily driven by the commercial interest in guano harvesting, which led to the establishment of basic counting techniques. Over time, these methods evolved as ornithologists and ecologists sought to better understand the dynamics of seabird populations in the context of environmental changes, conservation, and the industrial exploitation of the islands and the wider territorial sea. The article traces key technical advancements, including the introduction of more precise statistical and remote-sensing techniques, and examines how these shifts reflect broader trends in the history of science and technology, from field biology to the digital age. By investigating the intersection of technological innovation and ecological management in precarious conditions, this work highlights the pivotal role that bird population monitoring has played in the conservation of the Humboldt Current, one of the world’s most important marine habitats.

Unlike previous studies, which focused on the developments of official astronomical activities in the Imperial China, this research focuses on the ordinary people who have learned astronomy through illegal ways from the 10th century to the 16th centuries. How and why did they violate the ban to get an astronomical instrument? This paper divides the people examined into three groups: the non-governmental scholars taking part in the manufacture of imperial astronomical instruments; the literati and official-scholars who defended the integrity of Confucian knowledge; and scholars without official position who object utilitarian purposes of scholars’ reading made instruments by hand. Through my analyses of these various groups of people, the paper explores the inherent driving force which led them to make instruments. It shows the significance of their production of astronomical instruments, and reveals how knowledge and technology converged and determined the direction into which astronomical instruments developed.

Based on a series of experiments with old media technologies (mainly early sound recording and film projection devices), this paper aims at demonstrating the heuristic potential of a "hands-on history"-approach in media history and history of technology. By introducing the concept of experimental media archaeology (EMA), the paper reflects on the methodological and epistemological challenges of doing hands-on media history inspired by the idea of "thinkering". Thinkering means the combination of playful experimentation with old media technologies with the critical reflection on the phenomenological dimension of historical knowledge production.

By introducing a typology of different types of media archaeological experiments (basic, media-technological, and performative) and modes of experimentation (thinkering simulation, re-enactment, replication, artistic), the paper argues that doing EMA requires careful documentation of the experimental setting and process in order to capture the "hermeneutics of screwing around". Without such documentation, I argue, the traces of experimental "thinkering" cannot be turned into meaningful "data" for historical research.

A specific challenge of doing experimental media archaeology lies in the fact that practices of documentation and the actual doing of experiments happen synchronically and thus interfere with each other. Yet, as it is very hard to “translate” subconscious and embodied practical routines or gestures into text, or to describe them in concrete terms, capturing them through the help of audio-visual documentary technologies is a possibility for making them visible / audible. Finally, the paper will reflect on how to make use of this recorded evidence for producing new historical narratives.