Bias does not invalidate every fact. Crowgey's own pro-whiskey rhetoric needs the same scrutiny; omissions are not proof of deliberate suppression in every case.
Historiography and notes; supplied 2008 reissue of 1971 work.
Crowgey argues that temperance-aligned historians neglected distilling history and examines omissions or framing in earlier regional histories.
142
138
Historiography and notes
Read against supplied PDF text and images. Locators are PDF screens, not printed pages. Verified means faithful source capture, not independent historical corroboration. Bias does not invalidate every fact. Crowgey's own pro-whiskey rhetoric needs the same scrutiny; omissions are not proof of deliberate suppression in every case.
No access / Whiskey Excerpts Database (USWA)
Evidence
Crowgey argues that temperance-aligned historians neglected distilling history and examines omissions or framing in earlier regional histories.
Location and context
No access; Historiography and notes; supplied PDF screens 138–142. These are not printed-page numbers. Edition: 2008 reissue of 1971 work.
Annotation
Bias does not invalidate every fact. Crowgey's own pro-whiskey rhetoric needs the same scrutiny; omissions are not proof of deliberate suppression in every case.
Verification and use
Bias does not invalidate every fact. Crowgey's own pro-whiskey rhetoric needs the same scrutiny; omissions are not proof of deliberate suppression in every case.
Faithful source capture checked against supplied text and images. This does not mean that every cited-through primary record has been independently verified.
Literature note: 