Why be cautious when judging poorly documented French admirals?

Why be cautious when assessing the French admirals?

Because accessible evidence on several officers is sparse, he does not want to condemn them collectively when individual responsibility remains unclear.

English-language reference material provides surprisingly little detail on several senior French naval officers. French-language material is checked where possible, with the remaining gaps kept explicit. Sparse evidence makes sweeping judgments risky: one poorly documented officer should not become the basis for condemning all the others. The exchange demonstrates source criticism in practice, with confidence in an assessment limited by the quality and quantity of available material.