Psychology, like history, is not generally considered “exact” sciences, and some even argue that one of these disciplines or both of them are not scientific at all. Nevertheless, in this short article, the author invites readers interested in the current state and prospects of historical knowledge to discuss, or, more precisely, to begin a discussion of the question of how and how psychological observations can help in establishing the reliability of historical data. Because without separating firmly established facts from dubious information, random errors and deliberate falsifications, it is really difficult to talk about the scientific nature of the conclusions declared by any science. But the interaction of sciences, as a rule, gives good results and, in addition to solving a specific problem, helps both sides more accurately tune and calibrate their methodological arsenal. For the sake of such a result, it’s worth loading your brain.