1776 is a year very close to my heart, and indeed all British hearts.
It was the year we lost control of Americans and the consequences were apocalyptic – not least for me personally.
Let's be very clear: if it wasn't for King George III's shocking incompetence and weakness, then there would have been no Declaration of Independence, no United States of America, and a Union Jack flag would today be flying proudly over the White House as I, King Piers I, was served my morning tea in the Oval Office by a liveried butler before addressing my people across the country…my BRITISH people, or at a push, my British-American people.
So, 1776 is a very important, and frankly rather depressing year for we Brits.
But it's a considerably more important one for Americans, who wouldn't exist as Americans free from British colonial rule without the events that happened that year.
Indeed, it is the single most important year in America's history because it's the year America effectively began.
That's why the annual July 4 celebrations are always celebrated so fiercely and proudly by Americans, and in a rather more subdued manner back in my home country.
For the vast majority of Americans, it signifies the greatest day in the country's history.
History is the bedrock of any country, good, bad and ugly.
History is what informs, educates and inspires future generations.
As Dr Martin Luther King Jr said: 'We are not makers of history. We are made by history.'
But what's happening in America right now is a concerted effort to rewrite the country's history, led by the New York Times, which has become a hotbed of ultra 'woke' liberal journalism during the Trump political era.
Last year, the paper began the '1619 Project' which it said, 'aims to reframe the country's history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of (The United States) national narrative.'
The interactive ongoing Project was timed to coincide with the 400th anniversary of the arrival of the first African slaves to Virginia in 1619 - and suggests that this date represents the 'nation's birth year.'
It also stated, even more controversially, that the reason for the War of Independence was not a desire to be free of British rule but a desire for slavery to be continued.
In NYT reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones' introductory essay to the 1619 Project – for which she won a Pulitzer Prize - she wrote that 'one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.'
But this extraordinary claim has been hotly disputed by many leading US historians.
In December 2019, five of them - Sean Wilentz, James McPherson, Gordon Wood, Victoria Bynum and James Oakes - sent a letter to the NYT objecting to the framing of the project and accusing the authors of a 'displacement of historical understanding by ideology.' The letter specifically disputed Hannah-Jones' assertion that colonists' desire to get rid of the British was fuelled by a desire to continue with slavery.
Gordon Wood – himself a Pulitzer Prize winner for History - said: 'I don't know of any colonist who said that they wanted independence in order to preserve their slaves. No colonist expressed alarm that the mother country was out to abolish slavery in 1776.'
Other experts tried to make Hannah-Jones correct what they saw as her massively inaccurate rewriting of history.
Leslie Harris, a professor at Northwestern University, revealed she helped fact-check the project and alerted Hannah-Jones about problems but allegedly received no response from her.
Harris said she 'vigorously disputed' the claim that protecting slavery was a major reason why the American Revolution was fought.
'Far from being fought to preserve slavery,' she wrote for Politico, 'the Revolutionary War became a primary disrupter of slavery in the North American Colonies. Lord Dunmore's