Explicating the Culture of Historiographic Discourse. Does History Have the Subjunctive Mood?

History has no subjunctive mood . This cliché done a lot of harm to the science history, even though it is usually voiced on its behalf and presumed express basic methodological attitude. However, maxim obviously disagrees with practice historiography as attested by numerous examples or, rather, counterexamples from classical texts, Greek well Roman, ancient Chinese modern European, including Russian. Rejection due belief that conjectures can serve positive function in history and, therefore, have right appear historical writings. if serious scholar’s natural distaste for vain speculations turns into virtual taboo study historic opportunities, one prone ask whether this healthy scepticism about trustworthiness our cognitive procedures when applied such fleeting matters possibilities potentialities would not eventually lead utter denial very existence options alternatives other than those actualised, i.e. full-fledged fatalism. The matter fatalism unacceptable both ontological epistemological grounds, is. From perspective paper consists renders historian’s craft meaningless. For assert there but reality thing, allege devoid alternative opportunities something dramatically different. It impossible describe, least so understand , course events without reference alternatives. He who ignores presents distorted, oversimplified image past — an artificial, contrived construct does correspond reality. A was, hence, any analysis, explanation based or ensuing proves inadequate. Past was these are easy study, they should be left unstudied. And are, indeed, because, unlike availed of, unrealised seldom properly portrayed sources. But says easy?