This is an interesting perspective. Part of what I love most especially about history is the debate on the reliability of sources. i.e. the primary source for this event has every reason to exaggerate or lie, but if we cross reference what he said with these other, separate events recorded by different people we can weigh what we absolutely know is true with what we believe may be true and come to a reasonable conclusion on what may have actually happened. It's the detective work that goes into trying to shrink the grey area I find fascinating.

I don't know that I would have ever gotten into history if the state just came out and said "yep, it's all figured out and it just so happens that we're always awesome. Here's some dates to memorize."