According to Wikipedia (indeed not the most trustworthy source, but the SEP article also portraits it this way) the classic belief-justification-truth method of defining knowledge has only been rejected since Gettier-cases. Meaning that, all the way until 1960, the majority believed in a justified true belief definition of epistemology.
It seems rather odd to me. Doesn't justified true belief have a very bold issue with the "truth" criterion, so that you can never really "know" that your justified belief is true (leading straight to some sort of pragmatism, or some sort of post-truth position)? Did it really take that long to figure out that justifying your belief needs "defeaters", reliable sources, etc.?