Why should a historian suspect bias in General Gage's statement about the causes of the 1770 Boston riots?

General Gage's position as a military leader during the conflict in Boston suggests that he may have a vested interest in portraying the actions of the soldiers in a favorable light. As the commander of British forces in North America, his duty would be to justify and maintain military authority, which could lead him to present a biased account that defends the soldiers' actions and downplays any culpability on their part. This potential for bias is compounded by the political tensions of the time, where narratives were shaped by the party in power to support their actions and suppress dissent.

Historians must critically assess statements made by individuals in positions of authority, as these individuals often craft narratives that align with their interests or the interests of their constituency. The possibility that Gage's statement is influenced by his role underscores the importance of evaluating sources carefully and considering how personal or professional stakes can affect the reliability of their accounts.