Changes

The work has been roundly criticized,<ref>Lowry, Rich (January 3, 2020). [https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/1619-project-top-historians-criticize-new-york-times-slavery-feature/ Historians Roast the 1619 Project]. ''National Review''. Retrieved January 5, 2020.</ref> including by prominent historians James Oakes  of the City University of New York,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/11/18/oake-n18.html An interview with historian James Oakes on the New York Times’ 1619 Project]</ref> Gordon S. Wood  of Brown University,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/11/28/wood-n28.html An interview with historian Gordon Wood on the New York Times’ 1619 Project]</ref> Victoria Bynum of Texas State University,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/10/30/bynu-o30.html Historian Victoria Bynum  on the inaccuracies of the New York Times 1619 Project]</ref> James McPherson of Princeton University,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/11/14/mcph-n14.html An interview with historian James McPherson on the New York Times’ 1619 Project]</ref> Oxford historian Richard Carwardine,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/31/carw-d31.html Oxford historian Richard Carwardine on the New York Times’ 1619 Project], ''World Socialist Web Site''</ref> and Sean Wilentz of Princeton University.<ref>[https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/1619-project-new-york-times-wilentz/605152/ A Matter of Facts]</ref>   

The work has been roundly criticized,<ref>Lowry, Rich (January 3, 2020). [https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/1619-project-top-historians-criticize-new-york-times-slavery-feature/ Historians Roast the 1619 Project]. ''National Review''. Retrieved January 5, 2020.</ref> including by prominent historians James Oakes  of the City University of New York,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/11/18/oake-n18.html An interview with historian James Oakes on the New York Times’ 1619 Project]</ref> Gordon S. Wood  of Brown University,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/11/28/wood-n28.html An interview with historian Gordon Wood on the New York Times’ 1619 Project]</ref> Victoria Bynum of Texas State University,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/10/30/bynu-o30.html Historian Victoria Bynum  on the inaccuracies of the New York Times 1619 Project]</ref> James McPherson of Princeton University,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/11/14/mcph-n14.html An interview with historian James McPherson on the New York Times’ 1619 Project]</ref> Oxford historian Richard Carwardine,<ref>[https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/31/carw-d31.html Oxford historian Richard Carwardine on the New York Times’ 1619 Project], ''World Socialist Web Site''</ref> and Sean Wilentz of Princeton University.<ref>[https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/1619-project-new-york-times-wilentz/605152/ A Matter of Facts]</ref>   

Historian Leslie M. Harris has also criticized the project.  Harris was one of the historians who was consulted by the ''Times'' during development of the 1619 Project.  She wrote in Politico that despite her warnings as to the historical inaccuracy of the idea that the 13 colonies went to war to protect slavery, that the ''Times'' was more interested in its narrative than it was with the facts, so it ran with the story anyways.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/03/06/1619-project-new-york-times-mistake-122248 I Helped Fact-Check the 1619 Project. The Times Ignored Me.], [[Politico]]</ref>

Historian Leslie M. Harris has also criticized the project.  Harris was one of the historians who was consulted by the ''Times'' during development of the 1619 Project.  She wrote in Politico that despite her warnings as to the historical inaccuracy of the idea that the 13 colonies went to war to protect slavery, that the ''Times'' was more interested in its [[narrative]] than it was with the facts, so it ran with the story anyways.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/03/06/1619-project-new-york-times-mistake-122248 I Helped Fact-Check the 1619 Project. The Times Ignored Me.], [[Politico]]</ref>

Another scholarly rebuke was from Princeton historian Allen Guelzo, who criticizes the misrepresentative 1619 Project, finding that it presents:

Another scholarly rebuke was from Princeton historian Allen Guelzo, who criticizes the misrepresentative 1619 Project, finding that it presents: