Just to address some of Terribulus's odd statements for a minute. (Against my better judgement.)

An interview with Hastings a few months ago in a flight magazine I was reading noted how prolific he has been in his history writing and noted his rather regimented "this much time writing then breakfast, two hours of reading followed by a walk followed by editing earlier notes etc etc." (Not exactly what it said but you get the gist.)

Not exactly in tune with your "retired" and "occasional" make believe is it?

Still, he is a retired hack writing history to make money for his publishers and try to make sure everybody remembers him when he is pushing up the weeds. He seems to have jumped on the idea of revision as a marketing tool. His defence of shooting deserters is about all I will remember him for. His published article saying posthumous pardons are just a stunt and the kangaroo courts were right is about as low as you can get.

Still, the title "historian" isn't protected. Never has been.

As I have had my writing on WW1 published, I'm a historian.

I have been published within the last twenty years, am eminent and Keith has read my work.

Sorted.