With regards to difficulties in writing the history of computing, the paper “A Trilogy of Errors in the History of Computing” by Metropolis and Worlton (AHC, v.2 no. 1, January 1980, pp. 49—59) may be a relevant read. The lead sentences are: “The critic who investigates the inadequacies of the history of computing is at once faced with an embarrassment of riches. Computer scientists seem determined to confirm the judgment of professional historians that scientists should not be depended upon to produce the histories of their own fields.” and yet further on the authors say: “Computer science is fortunate to have people trained in both history and computing to direct the major project on the history of computing at the Smithsonian Museum of History and Technology, but there is an essential role for the “good amateur” to play in preparing this history. The field is so broad and the professional historians so few that they cannot do all of the detailed work of collecting, organizing, and documenting that is necessary; further, much of the information is known only to the computing pioneers who are, by and large, amateurs in the field of history.” Cheers, Scott