Hello Chris

Yes this is what I have done now. It's just a shame that we have to take care of that value in two places now
(As a nice side effect we are saving some additional update queries at least.)

As a general note I find it rather unexpected that there is not even a warning about this. Is Envers completely unaware of this annotation?
I just found out "by accident, luckily before going live with the system. If we would not have checked the tables / queries this would have been in production as is, resulting in wrong history. I will now check all history structures.
I would be nice if there is at least a warning output.