In Astronomy, especially, it is clear that history matters because some of the important
"data" go back to Ancient civilization(s). Throughout the history of astronomy, the
history of astronomy has played non-trivial roles in episodes of the science. (I don't
think it is a coincidence that Adam Smith wrote a history of astronomy. His comments about
how data works in astronomy are less studied than his remarks about beauty, and this is a
shame.) In sciences that describe change/patterns/evolution over time history will be
relevant in non-trivial ways. In my paper at the Porto symposium, I make some general
claims about the historical nature of evidential arguments/success that offers support
support for Bianchi's claim that history matters for all sciences.
  
Eric Schliesser