The Indo-European root is _*weyd-_ 'see' > _*weydtōr_ 'seer, knower, examiner' > ἵστωρ. According to Rix's small historical grammar which is the only relevant source I have to hand at the moment Attic has _hVs-_ for _*wVs-_ (V = a vowel), although the only example he gives is ἕσπερος, cf.. Latin _vesper_. He doesn't say whether it is exceptionless but the argument from silence ought to be that it is. (The normal source of Greek _h-_ is PIE _*s-_, but _*y-_ — yod — also gives Greek _h-_ cf. ἧπαρ, Latin _iecur_.)
I note that Herodotus spoke and wrote Ionian which was a psilotic (h-dropping) dialect, which may have influenced the preferred spelling of ἱστορία in later times, but it would seem that _historia_ is actually the spelling, and early on pronunciation, which Atticizing Latin literati would be expected to adopt. Non-psilotic diacriticization of Ionic texts on the other hand is Atticizing hypercorrection from a time when all Greek had become psilotic. Note also that not just English but all Germanic languages write and pronounce _h_ in this word, so the post-medieval consensus clearly is in favor of _h_ as far as Latin is concerned. Over and out from a once-upon-a-time Indo-Europeanist (although mainly Germanicist!) /Benct Den lör 20 aug. 2022 11:24Apostolos Syropoulos via XeTeX <xetex@tug.org> skrev: > > Hi everybody, > > Many readers of this mailing list are > native English language speakers and > the following question is for them. > > Someone claimed that English people (I say > more generally English language speakers) > learn at school why you write history and > not istory. Since I do not know I'd this holds, I > am asking: Is this true? Does someone who > has graduated from high-school know the > reason why this happens? > > Kindest regards, > > Apostolos Syropoulos > > > Στάλθηκε από το Ταχυδρομείο Yahoo σε Android > <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature> >