At least in Hegel, IMO, such restriction in the use of the term doesn't seem to be warranted. In understanding this point of view I can see an identity and a distinction. Yes, I support the thinking of a particular role of people. I don't know how to handle this. Let me try to clarify it at least.
Dialectics is comprehensive.
Hegel responded to this in a way that I find convincing. IMO, the materialist responses to these questions are persuasive. However legitimate Annette's problem, for the most part natural sciences have been doing remarkably well while ignoring it in practice. I'd state the question in different terms. Now, to the extent that historical materialism is a theory of human history, its validity results from its ability to reflect phenomena within its restricted, specific object of research.