Barton’s documents are more of an antiquarian interest than a historical one. And it is irrelevant how large his collection might be. All historians use historical documents and letters. They send an army of graduate student reseach assistants to cull university research libraries and state/local archives, etc. These collections, of course, are many times larger than that of Barton.

Ignorance of what “elitist” professional historians have written is no virtue. As a historian, Barton should show interest in what has been written. He might profit from knowing what errors have been made, where concensus exists, and what still is contested. For him to ignore all this is like a bible college graduate writing a bible commentary and boasting about ignoring “elitist” theologicans like Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Hodge, and Warfield.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/exclusive-historian-david-barton-responds-to-critics-amid-jefferson-lies-book-controversy/

Some factual excerpts from the TheBlaze article:

But Barton told TheBlaze that Thomas Nelson was heavily involved in the book’s editing process. He described a scenario in which editors reached out to him and actively checked his facts out before the book went to print.
“They questioned and we sent them the documentation,” he said, describing a large carton of documents that was, at one point, shipped to the publisher.
Interestingly, when TheBlaze asked Thomas Nelson how much of the book appeared to be problematic and which facts and posited ideas were based in untruth, Thomas Nelson declined to share this information.
…

Barton seemed anything but shaken by the controversy when he spoke via telephone with TheBlaze. He freely answered questions about the controversy and explained that he’s prepared to respond to some of the critiques, while dismissing what he believes is an “elevated level of hostility that’s not really rational in many ways.”
While he stands by his central arguments about Jefferson, Barton isn’t pretending to be immune from error. The historian said that the book has already gone through three or four printings and that there have been word and text changes based on spelling or grammar errors along the way. Also, he addressed a willingness to amend historical items, should they be pointed out and proven wrong by other academics.
…
He went on to explain that if only one percent of the 5,000 facts that were included in his book are incorrect, that would mean that 50 facts could be viably challenged. But he maintained that he and his research staff work hard to verify and back up each and every tidbit he writes and speaks.
While Barton is perfectly willing to fix errors, he believes that many of the items being raised by Throckmorton, among others, are simply overblown and — also — wrongheaded. He says that the next edition of “The Jefferson Lies” will have changes and additions: many of them will include more sourcing to corroborate his claims in the book (and disprove some of Throckmorton’s views).
…
So, what are these supposed claims?
As the media continue to cover the debate surrounding “The Jefferson Lies,” few journalists, if any, have reached out and interviewed Barton about his responses to the specific charges waged by his critics. On Sunday, TheBlaze had extensive conversations with both Throckmorton and Barton, giving both parties adequate ability to explain and refute allegations.
To begin, it’s important to distinguish between the divergent views that Barton and Throckmorton have on Jefferson’s theological views. As reported, Barton has a very nuanced explanation of the former president’s life and a candid response to characterizations that he was an atheist and/or non-believer.
…
Here it is evident that, while Barton sees two different faith experiences coloring Jefferson’s life, Throckmorton sees a more streamlined unitarianism.

===

P.S. to the web editor — I think it would be only fair to start a new thread which would balance the previous accusations. Or at least give a link to this article.