What is the best way to find an objective view of a particular historical event? In fact, what does an objective view even mean in history? While different sides of a conflict may have their own reasons to take action in any negative way against the other, a lot(most?) of the times we do lump some sides as "bad" and some as "good" or "both".

I am struggling with trying to understand if objectivity in terms of history means that you're looking at one event from all perspectives and recounting what each side did without taking a side?

Or does it mean you look at all point-of-views so you'll know who is right or wrong from a very basic moral perspective?

Does reading books from different perspectives of the same event have a better impact on your understanding than talking to several Historians?

I guess my overarching question is that, if you listen to one story from different sides and pick a side that you feel is right, or affected the most, then does that make you biased? Or are you.. objectively right?

I think I've been thinking about this too much and my mind is really muddled.