No. But then it depends.

Our visions of the past is always narrowed by the sources left behind for us.

Sometimes we might consider information to be 'facts' but our sources also leave us plenty of 'unfounded speculation' and attempts to make themselves look good or something else look bad. There are few uncomplicated sources.

Historians don't make things up though; not good ones anyway. We interrogate and doubt what we read and find and cross check it and verify it against other sources and hopefully come out with some sort of accurate representation or understanding of he past.

Facts are not holy untouchable infallible objects- their very presentation changes their meaning and reading.

Edit; just want to add that this is also why in academic texts you have endnotes or even better footnotes- if you want to call bullshit on someone's work/claim/assertion/presentation of events or facts you can go to their source and see for yourself.