Attempting to correct and amplify the portrayal of Stephen Crane in journalism history, this paper provides an analysis of relevant works in journalism and other disciplines in order to point out the weaknesses in the journalism historiography and to show how they apparently came about. Evidence is presented from the literature of journalism, showing that the prevailing image of Crane is that of a hotshot literary celebrity who failed as a war correspondent. Other evidence is provided to suggest that Crane was far from a failure, actually one of the best of the group of correspondents reporting the Spanish-American War. The study closes with a call for improved journalism scholarship by means of consistent verification of information, careful assessment of the reliability of sources, proper use of evidence, and greater awareness of relevant scholarship in other fields. It also suggests that journalism scholars must make a greater effort at questioning their assumptions, stereotypes, and predispositions, especially when considering unconventional journalistic figures and phenomena, such as the literary journalist. (Author/RL)