Answer:
Bias.
Explanation:
All humans have bias, or a preference in how to view things. However, in a historical setting, what people want to know is the facts of what has occurred, rather than what a historian thinks to have occurred.
For example, a historian may not particularly like, say President Andrew Jackson (a bias), but in fairness, the historian would seek to only state facts, rather than create supposition to only make President Jackson look bad. Of course, if it has truly occurred, the historian can make a hindsight judgement that explains the event and deduce the impact it had on the targeted group as well as historical events.
History, however, is simply the collection and memorials of past events, and should only state facts and what has occurred rather than be entangled by the historian (or author of the history documents) beliefs and opinions.
Learn more about biases, here:
https://brainly.com/question/8305493 - Why is it so difficult to report history objectively?
