Fact check: Opposite to histories being written by victors, what are the examples of histories that are written by losers?

1. Summary of the results

The analyses strongly challenge the premise that "history is written by victors." Multiple concrete examples demonstrate how defeated groups have significantly shaped historical narratives. Key examples include:

• The Peloponnesian War, where Athenian historians documented the conflict despite Sparta's victory ^{[1] [2]}
• The Fall of Constantinople, with Greek scholars creating accounts of Ottoman brutality ^[1]
• The American Civil War and the Lost Cause movement ^[1]
• The Vietnam War, dominated by US documentation despite their defeat ^[1]
• The Biblical accounts during the Babylonian Captivity ^{[1] [2]}

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual elements emerge from the analyses:

• Historical narratives are more often shaped by those with literary and documentation capabilities rather than military victors ^{[2] [3]}
• During political transitions, like in Russia during perestroika, historical narratives can be actively contested and rewritten by previous "losers" ^[4]
• Alternative history narratives, such as hypothetical Confederate or Nazi victories, represent attempts to explore non-victorious perspectives ^[5]
• Historical narratives serve a crucial role in transmitting cultural memory and maintaining psychological equilibrium across generations ^[6]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question's premise contains several problematic assumptions:

• It oversimplifies the complex nature of historical documentation, failing to acknowledge that historical narratives are often shaped by those with literacy and documentation skills rather than military success ^[3]
• Different cultures can produce vastly different accounts of the same events, as demonstrated by varying perspectives on figures like Alexander and Genghis Khan ^[3]
• The concept of "winners" and "losers" in historical narrative creation is overly simplistic, as historical documentation often depends more on cultural and literary capabilities than military outcomes ^[2]

The analyses suggest that readers should approach historical narratives with critical awareness, understanding that multiple perspectives can coexist regardless of military outcomes.