Passive voice in the translation of historical documents can have several implications:

1. Reduced Clarity: Passive voice can obscure the subject performing the action, making it challenging for readers to identify the main actors in historical events. This could result in a loss of clarity regarding who was responsible for certain actions.

2. Omitting Responsibility: Passive voice can be used to omit responsibility or disguise the true agent of an action. In historical documents, this can lead to a distortion of facts and events, as it may not accurately portray the roles and responsibilities of different historical figures.

3. Focus on Actions: Passive voice tends to focus more on the actions themselves rather than the doer of the action. In historical translations, this may shift the emphasis away from the individuals involved in particular events, potentially altering the narrative and significance of those events.

4. Accuracy of Conveying Historical Events: The use of passive voice can affect the accuracy of conveying historical events by potentially changing the nuances of the original text. Translating passive constructions into active voice or vice versa can alter the tone, implications, and interpretation of historical accounts.

5. Challenges for Translators: Translators face challenges when deciding whether to use passive or active constructions in historical documents. These challenges include balancing between staying true to the original text and ensuring clarity and accuracy for contemporary readers. Additionally, translators must consider cultural nuances, historical contexts, and the intended audience when making decisions about voice in translations.