History is always written by the victorious?

The winner has the power and concrete level dictates its rules, but the level of "reality", the loser is more source of any aberrations. Not always, winners make progress sometimes can bring disaster: to think Pol Pot and the short, but his tragic victory. The winner was Alexander the sake of victory, happy son of a Persian king. And what we animates an army is leader enthusiasm and charisma. Seeing how quickly and totally Hitler managed to change a people somewhat apathetic, but also wise and Germans, in a crowd full of adoration even sure I would say it's something magical in the personality of the great leaders of armies. Perhaps the winner will always write history,that's them all the necessary tools remain, while the loser is almost completely reduced to silence. But as you said, very wise phrase,"winners and losers Have Their Own Way in Remembering things."Thanks.

Very true. History is written by both sides in terms of political goals, and ideas that they promote that system. Each tries to convince followers that their actions were justified at the time, and can not conceive of another course of historical events, without the influence and imprint of their thought. No one disputed the intellectual capacity of one of the parties, only the military component compassionate, physical force, repression and the imposition of a social order. Because in fact here we come, history is not written by victorious, but imposed at some point in its course, the victors at that time, to her followers across generations(history being cyclical).Thanks.