Here is a definition of it. Seems to me that it falls under the general topic of historical fallacies.
'Intellectual dishonesty is the advocacy of a position known to be false. An argument which is misused to advance an agenda or to reinforce one's deeply held beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence contrary.'
For a further investigation of historical and logical fallacies, see David Hackett Fischer's Historians' Fallacies. It's an excellent reference and should be used when writing about history. It was recommended to me years ago and I have found it more than useful over the years.