Historians are record-keepers of history, they are not arbiters of ethics, spirituality, and guidance. Statues of people are not meant to teach us about those people per se, but rather hold to us an example of exceptional attributes of those people that should be considered timeless so that we can follow them into the future. The determination of relevance in this context is not something that should be ceded to historians in any capacity other than to simply confirm or reject that the specific attribute that we appreciate in a figure is based on a historical accuracy. Did Lincoln free the slaves? Yes. Did Washington help lead a revolution? Yes. These are easy questions. The distinction between history and historical memory is not lost; based on an accurate history, we can highlight good attributes use them to reinforce timeless principles that we'd like to continue to carry through time.