I always did. I also wished to know if you had heard of him. Hence the opportunity for pedantry.

He is called a historian on account of publishing history books. A bit like a newspaper hack being recognised by the same honorarium.

So..... Why is income from publication by some historians fact whilst income from publication by other historians fiction? Or to put it another way, why insult the intelligence of mudcat members by assuming only you are capable of deciding which historian based comment is true or not?

You are as absurd on this thread as you are on the subject of Christians and statistics.

Bugger off to church. It's time you scrubbed up and went to be grateful again.