Plausible claims in a elite -level journal

I think my concern is well founded.

If you present a claim merely as "plausible," reviewers may indeed ask:

Why is your explanation more persuasive than competing explanations?

Have you considered the main alternatives?

What evidence favors your interpretation?

That is why strong historical articles usually do three things:

Present their interpretation.

Acknowledge significant alternatives.

Explain why their interpretation better fits the evidence.