In the course of explaining why it had decided to suspend next week’s planned exhumation to give Franco’s family more time to appeal against the decision, the court referred to him as “head of state from 1 October 1936 until his death in November 1975”.

The assertion was met with derision by experts on the period. The British Hispanist Paul Preston, who wrote a biography of Franco, described it as “bollocks”. He said: “The only way these people at the supreme court could think this is right, that Franco was head of state from that time, would be if they thought that the military coup of 1936 was totally legitimate.”

Also with a degree in history, I have a hard time understanding this kind of revisionism. Pretending that he was not ruler of Spain for nearly 40 years doesn't change history. He was literally the head of state for that time and being against everything he stood for doesn't change that fact.

What next? Shall we start pretending that Nazi Germany never existed, since to do so would "legitimize them?" /s