"History alone does not answer that"?

I used alone because history contributes evidence but is not the only thing involved.

For example:

History may establish:

• who occupied a site,
• when,
• for how long.

But deciding present legal rights may also involve:

• constitutional law,
• property law,
• treaties,
• statutes,
• human rights principles,
• rules against retroactive disruption.

So history is relevant evidence, but it is not sufficient by itself to resolve every legal dispute.