John is correct. It is a basic tenet of historians. I learned it in high school. Every author has an agenda. They just do. They have to. They have lives they live, a background of experiences, friends, family, maybe a body of work under their belts. They don't view events in a vacuum. Their views are unique to them and whatever their perspective is lends them a bias. A writer cannot be totally objective if he is human. That should always be taken into consideration when examining one's writings. It doesn't mean the work is not factual, just that the way the facts are presented always has some bias.


