So far, this essay, through the various arguments and examples mentioned above, has advocated the view that historical truths are subjective and not objective in nature. However, as mentioned in the introduction, it would be delusive for one to claim that all historical truths are subjective for the objectivity of some historical truths is indisputable. A good example would actually be the Holocaust. The Holocaust is a historical event which is detached from the subjectivities of scholars for no historian can dispute as to whether the holocaust took place or not, due to the availability of immense evidence. On the other hand, although this essay accepts the view that all historical truths cannot be subjective, there are very few truths which are objective in nature. One may even state that events, such as the Holocaust, are "survivors" of the "subjectivist challenge". Hence, any argument that claims historical truths are objective are generally weak for most historical truths are stuck' in the quagmire of subjectivity.
Subjectivity is not a bane in historical scholarship. It is actually useful for a historian's subjective judgement is needed to create