Why is History considered a science and an art?

answers1: Although many universities organize their History Department
within the "School of Social Sciences," it's not really a great fit.
The "Social Sciences" are the products of a specific time and place
during which the "scientific method" was applied to human behavior.
That is, Psychologists, Sociologists, Anthropologists and Political
Scientists were applying data to test hypotheses about human behavior.
And those tests should be replicatable by other researchers. History
isn't done that way. For one thing, history is as old as human
civilization, and isn't a product of the 19th Century. Second, it's
more "art" than it is "science." A good historian is, first, a good
storyteller. Although history should be based on empirical fact, it
isn't data-driven. So although it may deal with similar subject
matter, history is more akin to literature and art than it is to the
social sciences.
answers2: History involves facts, and facts are the domaine of science. <br>
But history always involves interpretation--an art. <br>
Read any history book, and the two will be mixed. Whenever you find a
generalization, you'll find interpretation and "art." <br>
There's always a person and an opinion in the background of every
history discussion.