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