Both Jewish and antisemitic historiography distorted the record by isolating only hostile exchanges.

Evidence

Since then, it has been the common fallacy of Jewish and non-Jewish historiography—though mostly for opposite reasons—to isolate the hostile elements in Christian and Jewish sources and to stress the series of catastrophes, expulsions, and massacres that have punctuated Jewish history just as armed and unarmed conflicts, war, famine, and pestilence have punctuated the history of Europe. … When this Jewish tradition of an often violent antagonism to Christians and Gentiles came to light, “the general Jewish public was not only outraged but genuinely astonished,” so well had its spokesmen succeeded in convincing themselves and everybody else of the non-fact that Jewish separateness was due exclusively to Gentile hostility and lack of enlightenment. — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 17

Categorization

• XREF: Relevant to how minority-community historiography can mirror the dominant narrative’s structure — parallel to arguments about ‘Islamophobic’ vs apologetic accounts of Muslim history.