> Who is supposed to be the historical record keeper, at this time, when trust in record keepers is at an all time low?

All of us.

I don't think we need to get hung up on 'who', not really. I mean with regard to historical sources, how we do know that these were always 'true' reporting and not (deliberately or otherwise) untrustworthy, at best misunderstood, by whoever wrote them because they may have not had all the informarion or reporting second/third hand or an agenda.

Sometimes it isn't necessarily what is written as much as it is who wrote it and when and under what circumstances.