Ed, I was considering a situation where there is a consensus among the historians.
On the issues I raised there is, although the previous generation of historians did not all agree.

Back in the 60s and 70s I held views like those expressed by others here.
Now, like any normal, intelligent, open minded person, I accept what the historians now say.

That was my point in the op.
Why would any non historian not believe the historians on history?
But Jim is right.
We have not convinced anybody however many historians we quote.
You all cling to the old myths debunked by historians decades ago.
To me that is irrational, or politically motivated.