No, rose-tinted romanticization of history defines heroes as the ones who do not compromise their principles.
Real history has nothing to do with heroism, because it involves countless POVs and huge moral dissonance. For example, Vlad the Impaler is considered a inhuman monster by most of the world, yet Romania see him as the hero who defended them against the rape-and-kill-and-pillage invaders.
As for literature, it doesn't count, because fiction has the uncanny ability to adapt the happenings of the story to the author's beliefs. It's biased. For example, in 24 (not a book, but the principle is the same), the writer is convinced that torture is a great way to combat terrorism, so for the longest time (ie, until the Army itself told him to stop) in the show torture really was the best way to combact terrorism. You never saw Jack torture some guy who really knew nothing and made something up to stop the pain, then use the made-up info to try and disable a bomb and end up blowing up New York.
The big difference is that Batman doesn't try to push anyone else into following his principle.
I call bullshit. Every hero in Gotham, and especially the members of the Batclan, are fully expected to do exactly what Batman tell them to do. He does force his principle on them.