Keith
A progress report - not good news I'm afraid -
I'm over half way through your list of historians and so far not one single one of them "makes your case" - not one.
What we seem to have is that one historian, or maybe two, agrees with with your point, but either disagrees, or contradicts the other points, or maybe (haven't found one yet) maybe two of them coincide on two points, but either disagree or don't comment on the other.
You appear to have cobbled together a list of historians who may or may not agree with a single point you are claiming, and presented them as a united front who back all your claims.
On this basis you have claimed that "all historians agree with me". This appears to shatter your "historian" claims absolutely on the basis of the list you have provided so far.
I await with interest to see if you produce any historian who agrees with all your points - and if you can show that "all historians" do - welll - what's your favourite charity?
Would start ringing around the hospices now - dead in the water, I'm afraid.
Jim Carroll