Yes, it's become something of an intellectual fad in recent years to de-bunk the history which most everyone previously accepted.  I suspect that certain historians were in part just getting bored -- and in part wanting to re-interpet historical events based upon current intellectual faddish thinking (read: political correctness).  Oh, well......every age that's come & gone was always been convinced that they were far, far superior to their primitive ancestors.

Da Vinci did many things in his lifetime.  I've yet to see a claim that he ever flew.  I have heard claims that Japanese ninja used the equivalent of hang-gliders in centuries past.  But insofar as I know the "facts" involved are just that: claims.  Much like Bell's "flight".

The flights of Dec. 17, 1903, by the Wrights at Kitty Hawk happened just nine days after Langley's last failure. The event was unreported and mostly unnoticed. What the public knew was that $50,000 of their tax money had been wasted by Langley's fiasco. It would be almost another five years before powered flight would be demonstrated to the skeptical press and public.

http://www.memagazine.org/flight03/trialby/trialby.html

It's only possible to make things look silly when they are silly.

I'd say that being the first successful flyers allows the Wrights to claim to be the inventors of the device involved.  Regardless of who the other also-rans happen to be.  The also-rans didn't succeed first.  The Wrights did.

Quote - the facts i think lay with the dates of the first recorded flight.

True.  One could conceivably claim that the first Brooklyn-bridge jumper enjoyed a successful flight.  I suppose.

Something To Do At 3:00AM