Whether objectivity in the understanding of history is achivable? Putting  in another way, whether it is possible to account a historical event purely objectively, and free of one's own values, attitudes, and interests? Whether it is possible to have a "complete history'' and a complete explanation of any historical matter? If it is not possible, then it necessarily leads to a relativistic approach which finds any historical narrative acceptable? Are there any criteria according to which one could compare truthfulness of various historical narratives? The present study approach these questions hermeneutically. However, not all hermeneutical approaches answer them alike. Denying the relativist approach, this study attempts to analyze historicity of the human understanding and that of the interpreter him/herself.