Normal people don't "accept" anything Keith. They consider.

The only people who "accept" either lack capacity or are superstitious, which is basically the same thing.

There is no definitive "history." I was at Orgreave in 1984, and have yet to read an account from any viewpoint that coincides with my own recollection. I am sure any of us could give examples of this. In my professional life, a newspaper once turned my "we cannot comment on individual cases" into about three column inches of comment attributed to me.

If you are impressed by someone being given the (non legally reserved) title of historian, then I'm sure they wouldn't complain. But being a "historian" doesn't stop David Irvine from being a holocaust denier, and doesn't stop Max Hastings from altering his view of the same evidence as his earlier view based on pushing his "opinion."