Yes, the ethical judgment of historical events can and does change over time, influenced by various factors. Societal values and norms evolve, often reshaped by advancements in moral philosophy, cultural shifts, and social movements. These changes can alter how historical events are perceived and judged. For example, the colonisation of countries was once viewed as a noble endeavour but is now widely seen as oppressive and exploitative. Such reassessments are also influenced by new historical evidence or reinterpretations of existing evidence. Thus, ethical judgments in history are dynamic, reflecting the ongoing dialogue between the past and present societal values.

A historian's ethical standpoint significantly influences their interpretation of historical events and figures. Personal beliefs, values, and cultural background shape how historians perceive and present historical narratives. For example, a historian with a strong belief in human rights may focus more on the injustices in a historical event, while another might prioritise geopolitical or economic aspects. This subjectivity is not inherently detrimental; it brings diverse perspectives to historical analysis. However, historians must strive for intellectual honesty, acknowledging their biases and ensuring they don't overshadow factual evidence. This self-awareness promotes a more balanced and comprehensive understanding of history, acknowledging that multiple interpretations can coexist.

Contemporary political and social movements play a significant role in reinterpreting historical events and figures. These movements often challenge established narratives, bringing new perspectives and highlighting previously marginalised voices in history. For instance, movements advocating for civil rights, gender equality, or decolonisation have led to a re-examination of historical figures and events, sometimes recasting them in a more critical light. These movements can influence public opinion and academic discourse, encouraging a more inclusive and diverse historiography. However, there's a risk of presentism, where current ideologies overly influence the interpretation of historical events. Historians must navigate these influences carefully, aiming to integrate new perspectives while maintaining a commitment to historical accuracy and balance.

Contemporary ethical standards often conflict with those of past eras, leading to challenges in historical interpretation. For instance, practices once considered acceptable or even commendable, such as colonialism or certain forms of punishment, are now widely condemned. This discrepancy arises from the evolution of moral and ethical norms over time, influenced by factors like social progress, philosophical thought, and cultural shifts. When historians apply current ethical standards to past events, they risk anachronism – judging the past by the standards of the present. It's important for historians to contextualise these events, understanding them within their own time to avoid misinterpretation and ensure a more accurate and empathetic understanding of history.

Balancing objectivity and subjectivity in historiography, especially concerning ethical judgments, is a nuanced task. Historians must first acknowledge their own biases and the subjective nature of ethical considerations. This involves critically examining their perspectives and the prevailing ethical norms of their time. Objectivity is pursued through rigorous methodologies, such as cross-referencing sources and acknowledging the limits of one's understanding. Historians should aim to present multiple viewpoints and avoid definitive moral pronouncements on historical figures or events, instead providing a balanced analysis that allows readers to form their own ethical judgments. This approach ensures that historical narratives are informative yet open to interpretation, fostering critical thinking and ethical reflection among readers.