A lot of this depends on the definition of "law." It also implicitly depends on what we consider scientific. That is, history may or may not ever be a mathemati

A lot of this depends on the definition of "law." It also implicitly depends on what we consider scientific. That is, history may or may not ever be a mathematical science, but it could be a science or field that just does other things than other sciences. The problem of coming up with laws of history is that we have to decide what kind of science takes history as its object in the first place; what kind of laws would be commensurate with that framing? Is "history repeats itself" the kind of thing that we would call a law if proven adequate to the science? What about "might makes right"? Is "genealogy" an adequate scientific field or methodology, in its own way, on its own terms? What about dialectical materialism? I don't think polling existing history departments or historians will necessarily get you there either.