Dark Ages As non-
Latin texts, such as
Welsh,
Gaelic and the
Norse sagas have been analysed and added to the canon of knowledge about the period, and as much more
archaeological evidence has come to light, the period known as the
Dark Ages has narrowed to the point that many historians no longer believe that such a term is useful. Moreover, the term
dark implies less of a void of culture and law but more a lack of many
source texts in Mainland Europe. Many modern scholars who study the era tend to avoid the term altogether for its
negative connotations and find it misleading and inaccurate for any part of the Middle Ages.
Feudalism The concept of
feudalism has been questioned. Revisionist scholars led by historian
Elizabeth A. R. Brown have
rejected the term.
New World discovery and European colonization of the Americas In recounting the
European colonization of the Americas, some history books of the past paid little attention to the
indigenous peoples of the Americas, usually mentioning them only in passing and making no attempt to understand the events from their point of view. That was reflected in the description of
Christopher Columbus having discovered America. Those events' portrayal has since been revised to avoid the word "discovery." In his 1990 book,
The Conquest of Paradise,
Kirkpatrick Sale argued that
Christopher Columbus was an imperialist bent on conquest from his first voyage. In a
New York Times book review, historian and member of the Christopher Columbus Quincentenary Jubilee Committee
William Hardy McNeill wrote about Sale: :"He has set out to destroy the heroic image that earlier writers have transmitted to us. Mr. Sale makes Columbus out to be cruel, greedy and incompetent (even as a sailor), and a man who was perversely intent on abusing the natural paradise on which he intruded." McNeill declares Sale's work to be "unhistorical, in the sense that [it] selects from the often-cloudy record of Columbus's actual motives and deeds what suits the researcher's 20th-century purposes." McNeill states that detractors and advocates of Columbus present a "sort of history [that] caricatures the complexity of human reality by turning Columbus into either a bloody ogre or a plaster saint, as the case may be."
French Revolution French attack formations in the Napoleonic wars The military historian
James R. Arnold argues:
Argentine Civil Wars After the proclamation of the
Argentine Republic in late 1861, its first
de facto President,
Bartolomé Mitre, wrote the first Argentine historiographical works:
Historia de Belgrano y de la Independencia Argentina and
Historia de San Martín y de la emancipación sudamericana. Although these were criticised by renowned intellectuals such as
Dalmacio Vélez Sarsfield and
Juan Bautista Alberdi and even by some colleagues like
Adolfo Saldías, both stated a liberal-conservative bias on Argentine history through the
National Academy of History established in 1893, despite the existence of
caudillos and
gauchos. During the
Radical Civic Union government of
Hipólito Yrigoyen, historians followed the revisionist view of anti-mitrist politicians such as Carlos D'Amico, Ernesto Quesada and David Peña and their theories reached the academy thanks to Dardo Corvalán Mendilharsu. Argentine historical revisionism could reach its peak during the
peronist government. In 2011, the
Manuel Dorrego National Institute of Argentine and Iberoamerican Historical Revisionism was established by the Secretary of Culture, but this one suffered a rupture between
21st century socialists and
nationalists. Three weeks after the
Inauguration of Mauricio Macri, the institute was closed.
Within the United States of America The historian and
American Historical Association member
James M. McPherson has said: On resistance to the works of revised history that present a
culturally-comprehensive historical narrative of the US, the perspectives of
black people,
women, and the
labour movement, the historian David Williams said: After the Second World War, the study and production of history in the US was expanded by the
G.I. Bill, which funding allowed "a new and more broadly-based generation of scholars" with perspectives and interpretations drawn from the
feminist movement, the
Civil Rights Movement, and the
American Indian Movement. That expansion and deepening of the pool of historians voided the existence of a definitive and universally-accepted history, therefore, is presented by the revisionist historian to the national public with a history that has been corrected and augmented with new facts, evidence, and interpretations of the historical record. In
The Cycles of American History (1986), in contrasting and comparing the US and the Soviet Union during the
Cold War (1945–1991), the historian
Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. said: The historian
Forrest McDonald is often critical of the turn that revisionism has taken but admits that the turmoil of the 1960s America has changed the way history was written: In 1986, the historian John Hope Franklin described four stages in the historiography of the African experience of life in the US, which were based upon different models of historical consensus.
World War I German guilt In reaction to the orthodox interpretation enshrined in the
Versailles Treaty, which declared that Germany was guilty of starting World War I, the self-described "revisionist" historians of the 1920s rejected the orthodox view and presented a complex causation in which several other countries were equally guilty. Intense debate continues among scholars.
Poor British and French military leadership The military leadership of the
British Army during
World War I was frequently condemned as poor by historians and politicians for decades after the war ended. Common charges were that the generals commanding the army were blind to the realities of
trench warfare, ignorant of the conditions of their men and unable to learn from their mistakes, thus causing enormous numbers of casualties ("
lions led by donkeys"). However, during the 1960s, historians such as
John Terraine began to challenge that interpretation. In recent years, as new documents have come forth and the passage of time has allowed for more objective analysis, historians such as
Gary D. Sheffield and
Richard Holmes observe that the military leadership of the British Army on the
Western Front had to cope with many problems that they could not control, such as a lack of adequate military communications, which had not occurred. Furthermore, military leadership improved throughout the war, culminating in the
Hundred Days Offensive advance to victory in 1918. Some historians, even revisionists, still criticise the British High Command severely but are less inclined to portray the war in a simplistic manner with brave troops being led by foolish officers. There has been a similar movement regarding the French Army during the war with contributions by historians such as
Anthony Clayton. Revisionists are far more likely to view commanders such as French General
Ferdinand Foch, British General
Douglas Haig and other figures, such as American
John Pershing, in a sympathetic light.
Reconstruction in the United States Revisionist historians of the
Reconstruction era of the United States rejected the dominant
Dunning School that stated that Black Americans were used by
carpetbaggers, and instead stressed economic greed on the part of northern businessmen. Indeed, in recent years a "
neoabolitionist" revisionism has become standard; it uses the moral standards of racial equality of the 19th century abolitionists to criticize racial policies. "Foner's book represents the mature and settled Revisionist perspective", historian Michael Perman has concluded regarding
Eric Foner's ''Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877'' (1988).
American business and "robber barons" The role of American business and the alleged
"robber barons" began to be revised in the 1930s. Termed "business revisionism" by
Gabriel Kolko, historians such as
Allan Nevins, and then
Alfred D. Chandler emphasized the positive contributions of individuals who were previously pictured as villains. Peter Novick writes, "The argument that whatever the moral delinquencies of the robber barons, these were far outweighed by their decisive contributions to American military [and industrial] prowess, was frequently invoked by Allan Nevins."
Excess mortality in the Soviet Union under Stalin Prior to the collapse of the
Soviet Union and the archival revelations, Western historians estimated that the numbers killed by Stalin's regime were 20 million or higher. After the Soviet Union dissolved, evidence from the Soviet archives also became available and provided information that led to a significant revision in death toll estimates for the
Stalin regime, with estimates in the range from 3 million to 9 million. In post-1991 Russia the
KGB archives remained briefly open during 1990's, which helped creation of organisations such as
Memorial, which engaged in research of the archives and search of secret mass burial grounds. After Putin came to power however, access to archives was restricted again and research in this area once again became politically incorrect, culminating with forcibly shutting down the organization in 2021.
Soviet Union and Russia Soviet Union frequently resorted to changing its
official history to suit changes in state policy, especially after splits in the
Bolshevik leadership or change of political alliances.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia was also redacted frequently, with subscribers of the paper book receiving letter to cut out pages e.g. about
Lavrentiy Beria or
Nikolai Bukharin and replace them with unrelated articles. Historic photos were also frequently edited to remove people who later lost trust of the Party. The process of rewriting history of USSR and post-1991 Russia was once again restarted in 2010's after
Russia's first attack on Ukraine and intensified after 2022
full-scale invasion in Ukraine. History school books received significant changes which reflected the changes in the official history narratives: for example, while 2010 books openly mentioned decrease of
life expectancy in Soviet Union caused shortages and insufficient spending on public healthcare, new 2023 books vaguely states that life expectancy has generally increased and instead focused on unspecified "achievements in the sphere of education and science". In chapters on Stalin, he's once again presented as a great tragedy to ordinary Russians and any mentions of repressions have disappeared. Similar changes were introduced in chapters discussing Soviet economy, space program,
Brezhnev,
collapse of USSR,
perestroika and
glasnost, where the phrase "freedom of speech" started to be used in
scare quotes and presented as something harmful.
Soviet intervention in Afghanistan in 1979 which was presented as Soviet contribution into the fight against radical Islamism, completely contradicting both Soviet and post-Soviet narratives. Also, since 2014, Russian law enforcement started to prosecute public statements which do not comply with the current version of Russian history. Article 354.1 of
Criminal Code of Russia which makes "rehabilitation of Nazism" a crime has been applied both to actual statements praising
Nazism, but also to statements which recalled
Nazi-Soviet cooperation 1939–1941 or
Soviet war crimes conducted in other countries. In some cases article 20.3 of
Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses is also being applied in these cases.
Guilt for causing World War II The orthodox interpretation blamed Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan for causing the war. Revisionist historians of World War II, notably
Charles A. Beard, said the United States was partly to blame because it pressed the Japanese too hard in 1940 and 1941 and rejected compromises. Other notable contributions to this discourse include Charles Tansill,
Back Door To War (1952); Frederic Sanborn,
Design For War (1951); and David Hoggan,
The Forced War (1989). The British historian
A. J. P. Taylor controversially argued that Hitler was an ineffective and inexperienced diplomat and did not deliberately set out to cause a world war.
Patrick Buchanan, an American
paleoconservative pundit, argued that the Anglo–French guarantee in 1939 encouraged Poland not to seek a compromise over Danzig. He further argued that Britain and France were in no position to come to Poland's aid, and Hitler was offering the Poles an alliance in return. Buchanan argued the guarantee led the Polish government to transform a minor border dispute into a major world conflict, and handed Eastern Europe, including Poland, to Stalin. Buchanan also argued the guarantee ensured the country would be eventually invaded by the Soviet Union, as Stalin knew the British were in no position to declare war on the Soviet Union in 1939, due to their military weakness.
Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki The
atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have generated
controversy and debate. Historians who accepted President
Harry Truman's reasoning in justifying dropping atomic bombs to force Japanese surrender end of World War II are known as "orthodox," while "revisionists" generally deny that the bombs were necessary. Some also claim that Truman knew they were not necessary but wanted to pressure the Soviet Union. These historians see Truman's decision as a major factor in starting the
Cold War. This perspective asserts that Truman ignored or downplayed predictions of casualties.
Cold War Historians debate the causes and responsibility for the
Cold War. The "orthodox" view puts the major blame on the
Soviet Union, while a "revisionist" view puts more responsibility on the United States.
Vietnam War America in Vietnam (1978), by
Guenter Lewy, is an example of historical revisionism that differs much from the popular view of the U.S. in the
Vietnam War (1955–75) for which the author was criticized and supported for belonging to the revisionist school on the history of the Vietnam War. Lewy's reinterpretation was the first book of a body of work by historians of the revisionist school about the
geopolitical role and the U.S. military behavior in Vietnam. In the introduction, Lewy said: Other reinterpretations of the historical record of the
U.S. war in Vietnam, which offer alternative explanations for American behavior, include
Why We Are in Vietnam (1982), by
Norman Podhoretz,
Triumph Forsaken: The Vietnam War, 1954–1965 (2006), by
Mark Moyar, and
Vietnam: The Necessary War (1999), by
Michael Lind.
Chronological revisionism It is generally accepted that the foundations of modern
chronology were laid by the humanist
Joseph Scaliger.
Isaac Newton in his work
The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms made one of the first attempts to revise the "Scaligerian chronology". In the twentieth century the "
revised chronology" of
Immanuel Velikovsky can be singled out in this direction, perhaps it initiated a wave of new broad interest in the revision of chronology. In general, revisionist chronological theories suggest halving the duration of the
Christian era, or consider certain historical periods to be erroneously dated, such as
Heribert Illig's
Phantom time hypothesis or the materials of the "
New Chronology", a proposed revision of eras by academician
Anatoly Fomenko, albeit one widely rejected by mainstream scholars as
pseudoscience. ==See also==