The problem is there is no simple answer. What is deemed “correct” or “reliable” as history is continually changing. Historians hailed as top quality scholars from 70 years ago now can come across as racist, misogynistic, or homophobic. Our understanding and interpretation of events are continually changing and being updated, much like science.

A good rule of thumb: check the publisher. If the book or article is coming from a University Press or an academic journal then chances are it’s undergone vigorous peer review before being published. If you’re still not sure check for reviews by other academics. There’s whole journals dedicated to history reviews.

As for bias, it’s widely accepted that it is impossible to be completely unbiased. We are shaped by our environment and the context of our time. Even if I, or any other historian, attempt to not interject our own personal opinions our understanding will still be shaped by the time period we’re living in. Case in point, LGBTQ+ History would not have even been a concept of thought for a historian in 1950, but today we see it increasingly incorporated as queer figures continue to be identified.

As historians we love to argue, it is what we live for. Our interpretation of primary sources is shaped by our own personal worldview and often multiple historians looking at the same source will come to very different conclusions. This is okay, it is how we as a discipline continue to generate ever more inclusive and expansive history. Events may be set in stone but the reasons why are never so clear. It is an ever evolving science.

I hope this helped and if not I do apologize. There are whole books dedicated to the philosophy of “what is history” and determining what historians are “correct” is a question full of debate. With historians there’s never an easy answer to anything.

Have you checked out our Books and Resources list? That might be a good spot to start.