As noted in the previous chapter, any attempt to discuss the nature of technology is confronted by an immediate problem. Despite a widespread acceptance that the term ‘technology’ refers to something central to modern societies, there seems to be little appetite for the task of either formulating a precise meaning of the term or for prioritising one particular existing usage amongst others. In fact, there is often little agreement about what kind of thing the term technology refers to; it is routinely used to refer to material objects (some, but not all, of which have been transformed by human activities), practical or scientific knowledge, inventions, applied science and knowledge embodied in things (often material objects but not always), particular practices and even social institutions (Faulkner et al., 2010). How is it possible to proceed when such widely different usages of the term are commonplace?

In order to formulate, and in part defend, the definition of technology that underlies the discussion of later chapters, I shall focus upon the circumstances in which the term emerged. More specifically, in this chapter I shall be concerned with accounts by historians of technology that relate to a particular historical episode in which the term ‘technology’ not only underwent dramatic changes in its usage but also became a popular and significant term both in social theory and everyday discourse. In particular, older, more etymologically faithful, understandings of the term began to be transformed around the middle of the nineteen century, giving rise to various overlapping uses which nevertheless started to stabilise in the middle of the twentieth century. In this chapter, I trace out some of these transformations, focusing in particular on the events that prompted changes in the term's usage. I also highlight some continuity throughout these changing usages of the term, arguing that in fact, such usages can be understood as extending existing meanings rather than replacing them.

On a terminological note, most of the accounts to which I refer here have been motivated (sometimes explicitly) with a concern for what Raymond Williams terms ‘keywords’ (Williams, 1976). The main idea here is that when prominent new words come into being, the contests that result in these changed meanings, and the emerging actors who drive these changes, tell us much about the historical forces at play in a particular period.