In this critique of twentieth-century American scholarship, is demonstrated a neglected aspect of scholars, and American history. Its historicity or historical non-fiction, and historiography, (history of the written word) together, is what makes a scholar's formula. These perceptions have shaped common assumptions, influenced foreign and domestic policies, and confirms or denies, the duty and obligation of government. All that is written is not American history. Not unlike a social movement, with agents of change, inspiring social progress, western civilization is western civilization, precisely because of its westward movement. Whose social progress is indisputable. Concurrently, systems of law developed. Civil code, or laws of regime authority for example, came and went with emperors and empires. Meaning one must do this or must not do that. Other systems of law reflected the needs, and wishes of the people as a whole. This would be common-law. Meaning, what one ought to do, or not ought to do. Ought is a word central to Greek moral philosophy, which the Romans translated into ethics. However, it was central to America's Founders education, and common-law in general. We begin with thirteen N. American British colonies. A world of European descent, following the demographics of these colonies. The reader, even if well read, will find that while what may have made the American Revolution legitimate, it would soon be robbed of its legitimacy. A sovereign's duty, would become a right, and obligation would be rent asunder.