Putting Technoscience in its Place: The places of science production are a major subject in the recent historiography of science (Smith &amp; Agar, 1999; Livingstone, 2003; Lafuente &amp; Saraiva, 2004). Historians have become increasingly suspicious of accounts portraying scientific activity as a placeless mental endeavour belonging to the ethereal realm of ideas, concepts and theories; leaving aside any concern with the low spheres of practices, instruments and facilities. The interest devoted to the magic eureka moment was shifted by thick descriptions of the scientists' habitat (Latour, 1987). By following scientists, Science Studies scholars started to advocate for a replacement of the previous lonely genius by a researcher surrounded by instruments and connected to the society by networks of popularization, patronage and economical enterprises.&nbsp; This was an obvious move for historians of contemporary science studying twentieth century labs, where the financing, management and mobilization of teams of hundreds, sometimes thousands, of researchers are an obligatory component of their stories (Galison &amp; Hevly, 1997). More surprisingly was the use of a similar approach when dealing with Faraday, Lord Kelvin or even Albert Einstein. Suddenly we learned that the mythical laboratory of Faraday in the Royal Institution was a fundamental place not only to understand the development of knowledge on electromagnetic phenomena, but also to follow the environmental problems of nineteenth century London, with Faraday acting as an expert on problems of the pollution of the river Thames or of air quality (Gooding, 1990). Lord Kelvin was directly linked to the enterprise of connecting the British Empire by a network of submarine telegraph cables and it's impossible to talk about his Physics' laboratory in Glasgow without mentioning the British imperial ambitions: Kelvin's theories arose from telegraph cables that wouldn't exist without his theories (Wise, 1988). Finally, Peter Galison dared to relate Albert Einstein theories to his job in the Bern patent office as an expert in electrical devices, putting in connection the theory of relativity with the problems of producing simultaneity by nation-states willing to homogenize their territories by networks of electrically coordinated clocks (Galison, 2003). All the cited cases make clear unforeseen transitions between technology and science, transitions that only became evident after the historian explored the laboratory space. The strong bonding of science and technology that most narratives considered a distinctive feature of contemporary laboratories has a long history which dates back, at least, to the scientific revolution (Jacob &amp; Stewart, 2005). <p>Technoscience seems to be the ideal concept to talk about such reality, for it not only brings together two normally separated realms, but also accepts the constant negotiation between the two (Latour, 1987; Galison, 2003). Quite unexpectedly, the concept perfectly fits the objects that historians in peripheral contexts normally have to face. The hybrid nature of scientists and engineers working outside the central scientific institutions of France, United Kingdom, Germany or the United States, has been currently perceived as a good measure of backwardness. The transdisciplinary biographies of Portuguese men of science, studying Physics and Mathematics while working as engineers tends to be explained by a fragile technoscientific system unable to institutionalize disciplines (Nunes &amp; Gon&ccedil;alves, 2001). Here we suggest instead that the international literature on the most renowned scientific genius (Einstein, Kelvin...) offers new ways to look to Portuguese scientists that go beyond the mere recognition of their backwardness. And by mixing it in an original way with the well consolidated literature on engineers (Picon, 1992; Fox and Guagnini, 1993) the account of Portuguese technoscience may become a groundbreaking case study.&nbsp; Portuguese Technoscience in History More than anything, it's possible to make the objects of study of Portuguese history of science and technology more relevant. After all it is hard to explain the State building effort of the second half of the nineteenth century without considering the central role of the engineers coming out from the Escola do Ex&eacute;rcito (Army School) and the Escola Polit&eacute;cnica (Polytechnic School), both founded in 1837; no one should try to explain the radical reforms of the city of Lisbon at the turn of the century without taking into account the effort of Physics professors of the Instituto Industrial (Industrial Institute - founded in 1852), specialized in electricity issues; the Instituto Superior T&eacute;cnico (Technical Superior Institute - founded in 1911) engineers were not only recognized by their high quality scientific formation, but also for being protagonists of the building effort of the totalitarian Estado Novo (New State) in the 30's; the researchers of the Laborat&oacute;rio Nacional de Engenharia Civil (National Laboratory of Civil Engineering - founded in 1947) became probably the most internationally renowned Portuguese scientists (engineers?) while performing crucial research on dams planned to serve the energy policies of the New State in the 50's. To sum up, the Portuguese institutions of technoscience, as well as their scientists and engineers, should not be described exclusively by their underdevelopment when compared to international ones, for they are fundamental places for anyone interested in understanding Portuguese society. The effort has more to do with explaining Portuguese history through technoscience than with stressing how the Portuguese context of backwardness is responsible for scientific underdevelopment.&nbsp; The strange thing is that although Portuguese historiography has progressively recognized the importance of engineers (Rodrigues, 1999; Heitor, Brito e Rollo, 2004); their institutions never deserved a coherent research effort. After past common endeavours of studying Portuguese engineers' trajectories (see namely the results of the Project Praxis XXI - &quot;Engenheiros e engenharia em Portugal dos finais do s&eacute;culo XVIII a 1931&quot;), the research group finds itself perfectly suited for the task of filling in such obvious void of Portuguese historiography.</p><p>There is to be sure secondary bibliography on some of the institutions we referred to, but most of it is dispersed, lacking connections between them, with a strong tendency towards traditional institutional history considering only educational issues (Carvalho, 2001). Even the Polytechnic</p><p>8.4. Resultados e Repercuss&otilde;es</p><p>8.4. Results and Repercussions</p><p>8.5. Regionaliza&ccedil;&atilde;o</p><p>8.5. Regionalization</p><p>8.6. Tarefas</p><p>8.6. Tasks</p>