Do historical interpretations need a foundation of facts?

Question

Historical interpretations, to be of any value, must have a solid foundation of observable facts?

Answer 1

Yes you do, Without facts, your Historical Interpretations would be a fake. Look up history books of the time period you want to interpret. And get as many facts as you can so you can interpret most accurately( You will probably have to go through several books to get it right).

Answer 2

Absolutely. Anything less is useless as anything other than myth.

Answer 3

Well, yes, that is true, you need some FACTS, though "observable" facts are hard to come by when you do history.  Obviously you weren't there to see it so you can't call your facts observable.  It is likely that your facts will come from primary sources, accounts from people who were there and who did observe things.  However, even those "facts" can be questionable, as memories can become muddled over time and sometimes people are not as truthful as they could be.  But even very general information, like dates and who was at a certain place or did what at a certain time are all very important to historical interpretation.  It is almost impossible to make judgments about a person, event, statement, photograph, or any other piece of evidence without knowing its context.  Context is really the most important part of doing history, even more so than facts, as context is what allows you to judge their truthfulness.  

Answer 4

Definitely,Yes