This statement holds considerable weight. The interpretation and representation of historical events are rarely objective; they are filtered through the lens of the historian's own background, ideological commitments, and the prevailing intellectual climate of their time. Between 1950 and 2000, the English Reformation underwent significant shifts in how it was understood and portrayed. Initially, post-war scholarship often focused on the political and dynastic aspects, emphasizing the power struggles between monarchs and the Catholic Church. This perspective, often influenced by Marxist or revisionist interpretations, highlighted the role of economic factors and social upheaval in driving the Reformation, challenging traditional narratives centered on religious piety. However, the rise of social history in the 1970s and 1980s led to a more nuanced understanding, incorporating the experiences of ordinary people – peasants, artisans, and women – and exploring the Reformation's impact on everyday life. Furthermore, the increasing awareness of gender history and cultural perspectives prompted re-evaluations of female figures like Anne Boleyn and Catherine of Aragon, moving beyond simplistic portrayals of them as mere pawns in political games. The late 20th century also saw the influence of post-structuralist thought, which questioned the very notion of a fixed historical narrative and emphasized the role of language and discourse in shaping our understanding of the past. Therefore, while historical evidence provides a foundation, the interpretation and representation of the English Reformation between 1950 and 2000 were undeniably shaped by the perspectives of those who studied it, leading to a constantly evolving and contested historical narrative. The statement is largely agreed with, although the degree of influence varied depending on the specific historian and their intellectual framework.

The statement that the study of the Holocaust has been profoundly influenced by the availability of new sources is largely accurate. While historical scholarship on the Holocaust began in the immediate post-war period, the discovery and analysis of new sources have significantly reshaped our understanding of this event. Initially, accounts relied heavily on survivor testimonies and official documents from the Allied forces. However, the subsequent discovery of vast archives of Nazi documents – including personal papers, bureaucratic records, and propaganda materials – provided a much more detailed and comprehensive picture of the planning and execution of the Holocaust. The development of oral history techniques in the latter half of the 20th century allowed historians to gather firsthand accounts from survivors and witnesses, offering invaluable insights into the human experiences of persecution and suffering. Furthermore, the increased availability of visual materials – photographs, films, and maps – has enhanced our understanding of the physical realities of the Holocaust, including the construction of concentration camps, the transport of Jews, and the systematic extermination process. The expansion of academic research into previously overlooked areas, such as the role of collaboration and resistance, has also been facilitated by the discovery of new sources. However, it is important to acknowledge that the availability of new sources is not the sole determinant of historical interpretation. Historians must critically evaluate the authenticity, reliability, and context of these sources, and they must also be aware of the potential biases and limitations inherent in any historical record. While new sources have undoubtedly revolutionized the study of the Holocaust, the interpretation of these sources remains a complex and contested process. Therefore, while the availability of new sources has profoundly influenced the study of the Holocaust, it is crucial to recognize that these sources must be interpreted within a broader historical context.

The statement that representations of the First World War have changed dramatically since 1918 is demonstrably true. Initially, the war was largely mythologized through patriotic propaganda, emphasizing national heroism, sacrifice, and the righteousness of the Allied cause. This narrative, carefully constructed by governments and the press, aimed to maintain public support for the war effort and suppress dissent. However, the interwar period saw the emergence of disillusioned perspectives, particularly in literature and art, which challenged the official narrative and exposed the horrors of trench warfare. Works like Erich Maria Remarque's *All Quiet on the Western Front* offered a starkly different portrayal of the war, focusing on the psychological trauma and physical devastation experienced by ordinary soldiers. The Second World War and the Holocaust further impacted representations, leading to a greater emphasis on the war's moral dimensions and the atrocities committed during the conflict. The post-war era witnessed a proliferation of documentaries, films, and memorials that sought to grapple with the war's legacy, exploring themes of loss, trauma, and the fragility of human life. More recently, the rise of new historical methodologies, such as social history and cultural history, has led to a more nuanced understanding of the war's impact on society, including the experiences of women, minorities, and the working class. Furthermore, the development of technology, such as CGI and virtual reality, has enabled new and immersive ways of representing the war, allowing audiences to experience the past in a more visceral and impactful manner. Therefore, the representations of the First World War have undergone a profound transformation since 1918, shaped by a complex interplay of political, social, and technological factors.