started to be a review, but I just have to know . . .

A Desperate Fortune - Susanna Kearsley

this is a historical fiction . . . .

 

ok: totally off the subject of book review for just a moment, and on to the subject of grammar.  

 

Used to be (probably like half a century ago or something like that) that proper grammar was "an historic," or "an historical."  [No idea why -- maybe because the H was hard to hear or something?  Or because snobby people are snobby?  I dont know.]

 

But I have a feeling this is no longer true.  Modern day usage may dictate otherwise.  Or if we say "a historical" are we revealing ourselves to be nothing but grammar morons?

 

anyone care to weigh in on the correct usage?

 

an historical?

 

or a historical.

 

please offer an opinion, because, you know, I want to make sure I'm using it modernly.

 

thank you.