Inference where the evidence has gaps

Historical reconstruction resembles assembling a large jigsaw from a landscape partly hidden by fog. Remembering the landscape from an earlier train journey gives some idea of what lies beyond the fog, while leaving its exact appearance uncertain. History follows systematic rules for gathering and analyzing evidence. The need for jumps that cannot always be proved is one proposed reason history is probably still considered something other than a science. A historian may have evidence on either side of a gap and infer what connects it without possessing the missing middle. The inference can be logical without becoming direct proof. That incompleteness creates both the mystery and the appeal of working through the "mists of time."