Thanks for correcting me on the publishing date of Bungay's book, Archimedes. I may be wrong but I seem to remember that it was Bungay himself that elevated Bader in his chat to the two bruvs at Cranwell (might have been in the library, though no doubt it is a Media Studies Centre now!). If so, no doubt a genuine slip of the tongue. The mere fact that what he says is generally accepted doesn't mean that it isn't revisionist though. I take your point that isn't necessarily bad, I just get the feeling these days that it only takes the publishing of such a "definitive" book as his to set the new "generally accepted" perceived wisdom.
I have to own up though, it isn't revisionism of the BoB that rankles (I mean, claiming it as a Naval victory is simply "aving a larf"!), but of the Bomber Offensive. Bungay alluded to that from time to time, decrying the Blitz as counter productive (presumably to pressurize the Government into seeking accommodation with Germany), which it certainly was. I felt though that he also meant that the RAF Bombing Offensive, that really got going then, was equally so. In which case I would disagree (and with the "generally accepted" view too). We made it plain that the only accommodation we would accept of Germany was its unconditional surrender. We bombed it to that purpose, ie to achieve victory. We succeeded.