American history vs. Chinese history

I often hear studying American history is easy compared to Chinese history because of the relatively shorter time span covered by the former. Even so, one might consider the following observation about how American history has been simplified.

FROM
"The Social Sciences and Historical Synthesis" by Thomas C. Cochran in The Varieties of History, Edited by Fritz Stern

By taking the written record what was easiest to use and most stirring from a sentimental or romantic standpoint, that is, the record of the federal government, the American historian prepared the way for one of the major misconceptions in American synthesis: the primary role of the central government in our historical development

The realistic history of nineteenth and even early twentieth century politics, therefore, whether viewed from the standpoint of political parties or of the community, should be built around states. This, of course, imposes an enormous burden on the historian. The situtations in from 13 to 48 [written in 1948] states cannot be adequately described in a unified narrative . . .