Many scholars claim that Shakespeare' s portrayal of Richard III was extremely inaccurate, arguing that he derived that portrayal from propagandists opposed to Richard III. But these claims are irrelevant for appreciating Shakespeare' s work. The character of Richard III as portrayed in Shakespeare' s drama is fascinating and illuminating both aesthetically and morally, regardless of its relation to historical fact. Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the reasoning in the argument above? ['History is always told by propagandists from the winning side.', "Shakespeare's historical importance puts him beyond the scope of all literary criticism.", 'In dealing with real people, dramatists should reflect their lives accurately.', 'In historical drama, the aesthetic value of the work is not necessarily undermined by historical inaccuracies.']