The New History and the Old

The simple act of stating a thesis and providing evidence to support the thesis has gone astray. Author motive and author bias, and sometimes author ignorance undermine New History. 

The smallest of fact, a string of semi-related facts, a collection of well-known semi-truths, each can drive author acclaim. Evidence and interpretation take a back seat to feelings and guesses. Himmelfarb applies pressure to these poorly constructed thesis to shine the light on their (significant) blunders.

Confirmation bias, theory tenacity, and just plain personal agenda are rampant. The task of selecting and honing a thesis, curating appropriate facts, and presenting evidence, both pro and con, appears to be lost on the new historian.

Himmelfarb proves that it is often a long fall from Master to Disciple to Epigones and challenges the reader to take up the burden of critical reading.

A similar exercise to evaluate and criticize the current media (social or otherwise) would prove interesting...and don't get me started on Artificial Intelligence! ~Xolo