Histories

This paper addresses the knowledge gap on the beginning of the history of contact with extraterrestrial intelligent beings in international astronautics. In the mid-1950s, the world’s space law practitioner, Andrew G. Haley, proposed the concept of Metalaw, the law governing interactions between all beings in the Universe, as he represented the American Rocket Society in the International Astronautical Congress, the single largest gathering of space-faring nations. Haley, with experience in radio communications law dating back to the 1930s, played a pivotal role in pushing for the international allocation of radio frequencies in space. Haley was, too, an agile mediator with the Soviet Union and its bloc, acting across various organizations and forums. This article, in contextualizing Haley’s introduction of Metalaw, shows how the onset of the Space Age coincided with the emergence of a contact scenario involving extraterrestrial intelligence enabled by the corresponding techno-scientific capabilities of the time. It demonstrates how extraterrestrial intelligence discursively addressed outer space regulation as a bone of contention between the two geopolitically divided parts, a regulation upon which the US’s global satellite system would depend. The analysis in this article recounts the birth of the Metalaw concept at the intersection of outer space imaginary, law, international organizations, science and technology, diplomacy, the Space Race, the Cold War, and radio astronomy’s Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence.

This article serves as the editorial introduction to the Histories Special Issue titled “Naval Warfare and Diplomacy in Southwestern Europe in the Middle Ages [...]

This manuscript examines how distinct epistemic attitudes toward singularity and generality have been articulated in medical writing across different historical contexts, offering a conceptual and meta-historical analysis of two enduring genres in biomedical literature: the individualized case report and the systematically aggregated clinical trial. Hippocratic case narratives are considered as a particularly lucid articulation of a mode of inquiry that privileges detailed observation of individual patients, while medieval Aristotelian natural philosophy exemplifies a contrasting emphasis on regularity, intelligibility, and general explanation. Renaissance medical and philosophical traditions are treated as a mediating moment in which attention to anomaly, wonder, and singularity was explicitly re-legitimized within learned medicine. These historically situated articulations are not presented as stages in a progressive narrative, but as recurrent epistemic orientations that are repeatedly reconfigured under different theoretical, institutional, and technological conditions. The paper argues that the tension between attention to exceptional cases and the pursuit of generalizable knowledge continues to structure modern biomedical writing, where case reports remain essential for identifying rare, novel, or anomalous phenomena, while clinical trials formalize strategies for producing reproducible, population-level evidence.