It has been suggested that all historical sources are
subjective from their inception and that authors'
styles, commitments and views determine the bases of
historical writings. Claude Lévi-Strauss has
ventured so far as to claim: “Besides, historical
fact has no objective reality. It only exists as a
result of a retrospective construction undertaken by
people who have lived the events they speak of in a
purely arbitrative sense.” Indeed, historical
narratives are fraught with danger when used as
sources of actual information, for factual accuracy
often does not extend to validity in representation
of events. Formal histories such as dynastic
chronicles were particularly vulnerable to
misrepresentation. They usually were composed either
with the intent of flattering the rulers who served
as patrons of the author's efforts - and, hence,
reflect royal ideology and imperial propaganda - or
as a means of disparaging and vilifying the royal
house