[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chris

Also agreed. However the problem with academia in that respect is that as you climb the academic ladder to your PhD and beyond you inevitably focus on narrower and narrower areas of study. With a PhD in particular you have to choose an area in which you can make an original contribution. So someone, somewhere, is going to end up asking questions which, taken in isolation, seem to be interested only in establishing who was the better invader. Their freedom to do that should be respected, and so should the results of their research. It is the responsibility of those engaged in the discipline as a whole to see that the end result isn't a distorted view of history and to challenge those who misuse research to push unsavoury modern political agendas.

Yes, well put. Of course, anyone can & should be able to focus & deep dive into specific aspects of history but these treatise should never be used as a context to misrepresent a wider historical narrative. It is often the case that a niche perspective on a past event is conflated into a justification for a wider program of action.