Resources On The 1619 Project

The 1619 Project, a product of the New York Times, now a television series on Hulu, is a deeply flawed re-telling of American history. It is not simply that one disagrees with the conclusions of the 1619 Project—historians often disagree about conclusions—what is also at stake here is the question of which methods count as history and the 1619 Project has built its foundation on methodological sand. This is not the judgment of an isolated scholar here or there. The quantity and quality of criticism of the methods and factuality of the 1619 Project is unprecedented. Scholars from across the political and cultural spectrum (from the Socialists to the Right Wing) have denounced it as an appalling breach of historical methodology. Below are some resources to help you see some of the problems inherent in the 1619 Project.

  1. The 1619 Project Privileges Narrative Over Facts
  2. Another Salvo (This One From The Left) Against The 1619 Project
  3. Wilfred McClay: The 1619 Project Is Historically False And Morally Corrosive
  4. The 1619 Project Is Bad History and Boring
  5. Stephens On The 1619 Project
  6. National Association Of Scholars: Revoke Pulitzer Prize For 1619 Project
  7. Princeton Historian Rebukes 1619 Project: The Facts Still Matter
  8. Oxford Historian Carwardine: 1619 Project “Preposterous” And “Tendentious”
  9. Guelzo: “The 1619 Project Is Not History; It Is Ignorance“
  10. Twelve Scholars Critique the 1619 Project (History News Network)
  11. Philip Magness, The 1619 Project: A Critique
  12. Leslie M. Harris, “I Helped Fact Check The 1619 Project. The Times Ignored Me
  13. Rich Lowry, Historians Roast the 1619 Project


Subscribe to the Heidelblog today!