Final answer:
The information best counters the hypothesis that historical interpretations are objective. Historians' experiences and biases influence historical narratives, and historical events may not be thoroughly documented, showing historical interpretations involve subjectivity.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statements above, when taken into consideration, can best be used as evidence against the hypothesis that historical interpretations are objective (option c). This is because the provided text emphasizes that historians themselves are influenced by not just the facts but by their own experiences, circumstances, and value systems, which can inherently introduce bias. Furthermore, it is acknowledged that there are still areas of history that are poorly documented, refuting the idea that all historical events are thoroughly documented (option a). The text also explains the importance of recognizing the potential biases in both primary and secondary sources, thereby casting doubt on the credibility of sources and suggesting that historians' credibility can be questioned (option d). Lastly, the provided text does not fully support the hypothesis that historical accounts are always biased (option b) because it acknowledges that historians strive to minimize bias, although it cannot be entirely eliminated.