[stand watie]

untrue. there are certain FACTS that all REAL historians agree with.

REVISIONISTS of the leftist/statist/fascist sort don't even agree WHAT happened, much less why. what they do is LIE about uncomfortable facts.

once again, (SIGH!) all traditional historians were either neutral or PRO-dixie, untilm the rise of the FALLACY of revisionist historiography.

free dixie,sw

[capitan_refugio]

Facts, yes. But when participants write the "history," it is by nature going to contain the writer's bias. Davis and Stephens were participants, just as Grant and others who wrote memoirs and histories from their own perspective.

I suppose we can agree Davis, Stephens, and Grant were not "traditional historians." Since I don't care much for the Ivy league types anyway, I can probably agree with you about them. But who are the "traditional" historians that you refer to?