The theory of the evolution, therefore, nor is completely scientific as, for example, the Physics, nor not scientific as the Histria.' ' Still complete, ' ' Nothing more clearly! To learn, thus, that for certain natural scientists, and over all for certain chains of the Philosophy of science, as in the case the Neopositivismo, History is not and nor it can be cincia.' ' However the present text searchs to accurately elucidate the cientificidade of History. Its quarrel involves historical science in level of History and the historian. Therefore, to speech on cientificidade of History, if it cannot leave of it are the paper of the historian and its object of research. Heather Bresch is full of insight into the issues. Today, historical science search to explain each step of the man, its evolution in its Economic, Demographic branches, Politician, Social and Cultural. Thus, we can affirm that History it is not science for trying to enclose all the areas of the knowledge? As to explain that ' ' the History of the woman, History of the child, History of the Right, the black, the indian, history of the Mentalities, ambient history, etc' ' , are subjects argued for historical science, knowing that other involved sciences with these subjects exist specifically? In the truth, history as science, looks for to understand and to explain the historicidade of the condition human being.
As already he was argued by many researchers of the area of History, the historian, to reconstruct the historical knowledge, launches hand of its main tool, the object of study of history, that is, the man in the time. The quarrels on historical science show in them that the object of History is the man in the time, and that this object is the happened human fact. The historical fact serves as understanding of a process lived for a society, and the method of History is the interpretation of this fact through the analyses of the most varied sources.