Excellent discussion on how all of "history" is effectively an exercise in forming opinions based on available evidence. What we learn is a 2-dimensional (at best) representation of what really happened in any given event in history. For example, to represent an impossibly truthful view of the Battle of Gettysburg, you would need to know what *every single participant* did, thought, and wanted both leading up to the actual battle, as well as during the aftermath. This is, of course, pretty much impossible, so we start discarding information. 100s or 1,000s of soldiers are reduced to 'the infantry.' Or, conversely, focus is brought to bear on a certain number of participants, and everything else is pushed to the background (see the approach taken in 'Saving Private Ryan' where the war is ostensibly just a backdrop to the actual action...except during the first 15 minutes...)