Lying About Hitler: History, Holocaust Holocaust And The David Irving Trial [Hardcover]

Richard J. Evans (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0465021522 | ISBN-13: 978-0465021529 | Publication Date: March 6, 2001

In ruling against the controversial historian David Irving in his libel suit against the American historian Deborah Lipstadt, last April 2000, the High Court in London labeled him a falsifier of history. No objective historian, declared the judge, would manipulate the documentary record in the way that Irving did. Richard J. Evans, a Cambridge historian and the chief advisor for the defense, uses this pivotal trial as a lens for exploring a range of difficult questions about the nature of the historian’s enterprise. For instance, don’t all historians in the end bring a subjective agenda to bear on their reading of the evidence? Is it possible that Irving lost his case not because of his biased history but because his agenda was unacceptable? The central issue in the trial—as for Evans in this book—was not the past itself, but the way in which historians study the past. In a series of short, sharp chapters, Richard Evans sets David Irving’s methods alongside the historical record in order to illuminate the difference between responsible and irresponsible history. The result is a cogent and deeply informed study in the nature of historical interpretation.

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

As an expert witness for the defense in last year's Irving-Lipstadt trial, Evans (history, Cambridge Univ.) was charged with determining whether David Irving was, as Deborah Lipstadt asserted, a Holocaust denier. Evans spent two years researching Irving's work, tracing his sources, and then evaluating his publications and public speeches. Moving easily from analysis of Irving's abuse of primary documents to a discussion of what constitutes legitimate historical methodology, Evans presents compelling proof that Irving is a Holocaust denier and why he should not be considered a legitimate member of the historical profession. Evans's depiction of the trial and of Irving's behavior in court is followed by an assessment of the implications of the judgment in Lipstadt's favor. Evans's point that some commentators seemed to forget that it was Irving who was attempting to silence Lipstadt, rather than academic historians and "Jewish interest groups" attempting to stifle free speech, is well worth remembering. Evans eloquently argues that what was really on trial was history itself. Fortunately, history won. Ironically, Evans's carefully documented book has not yet been published in the U.K., as Irving's threats to bring a libel suit have already caused one company to drop publication. Highly recommended. Frederic Krome, Jacob Rader Marcus Ctr. of the American Jewish Archives, Cincinnati
Copyright 2001 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Booklist

When Deborah Lipstadt's Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory (1993), a groundbreaking book about the disturbing movement to refute the reality of the Holocaust, was published, one of the writers identified as a Holocaust denier, the Englishman David Irving, sued Lipstadt and her publisher, Penguin, for libel. Although Irving never earned a degree, he has written nearly 30 books about Hitler and other related subjects. His contention, therefore, was that Lipstadt had denigrated his work as a historian by accusing him of distorting the historical record to support his extreme anti-Semitic politics. The defense had to prove that Irving, in fact, had deliberately misrepresented the contents of relevant documents to conform to his sympathetic view of Hitler and his belief that nothing on the order of genocide occurred under Nazi rule. Evans, a Cambridge-based historian who specializes in modern German history, was retained by the defense as an expert witness, and he chronicles his arduous research effort with impressive lucidity. At question was the very bedrock of history: Is there such a thing as historical objectivity? Or, as Evans writes, "How do we know when a historian is telling the truth? . . . Wasn't it all a matter of interpretation?" Sensitive to these conundrums and the high emotional valence attached to the Holocaust, Evans was scrupulous in his examination of thousands of pages of documents, assiduously evaluating Irving's interpretation of such primary sources as Goebbels' diaries, always on the lookout for evidence of inaccuracies and bias. He found plenty, and he describes his discoveries with quiet and contagious excitement. By sharing his vast insider's knowledge and recounting his surreal experiences on the stand as Irving, who represented himself, conducted his chaotic cross-examinations, Evans enables readers to fully appreciate the significance of both Lipstadt's victory and Irving's exposure as exactly what he claimed not to be. There is such a thing as truth, and history, responsibly practiced, will reveal it. Donna Seaman
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 336 pages
• Publisher: Basic Books (March 6, 2001)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0465021522
• ISBN-13: 978-0465021529
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.2 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.3 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (55 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #516,473 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Quintessential Historical Methodology, October 24, 2011

By 

M. Miles "miles120" (Chicago, IL United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Lying About Hitler: History, Holocaust, and the David Irving Trial (Paperback)

If you are interested in understanding how history is "done", then this compelling narrative about David Irving's libel suit against Deborah Lipstadt has got to be on your short list. Evans is an important scholar who is brought in as an expert witness to analyze Irving's attacks against Lipstadt. The trial takes place in England, which has much less restrictive libel standards, and Irving's reckless accusations set the stage for a fascinating examination of what constitutes good historical research.

History has a deep rhetorical lineage, but it nevertheless maintains a discipline and methodological rigor that is subject to criticism from within the profession. Despite what some reviewers have asserted, the Irving trial was not a witch hunt (it was brought by him), and Evans is meticulous in defining how respectable history is performed. Interestingly, the events occur at the beginning of the age of the Web, and Evans documents the role of the echo chamber in granting Irving authority long after he should have been debunked.

In short, buy the book. Learn how history is done. And beware next time you hear people attacking historians for partisan positions.

26 of 37 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars The Truth About David Irving., January 13, 2005

By 

Avital Pilpel "classics_lover" (New York, NY United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Lying About Hitler: History, Holocaust, and the David Irving Trial (Paperback)

This book has two parts: The first is the Evan's meticulous examination, as an expert witness for the defense, of Irving's books and public statements, analyzing their value (or lack thereof) as historical research. The second is a more personal account of his experiences during the trial and how it felt to confront Irving face to face.

The first part is excellent. It proves that Irving consistently, indeed almost invariably, bends every tiny detail he can to make Hitler look good and the jews (or allies, or Soviets, etc.) look bad. Every excuse, justification, propaganda, or denial made by the nazis is accepted as gospel truth. On the other hand, all evidence for nazi crimes, including contemporary admissions by the perpetrators, is suddenly subjected to "skeptical analysis" in the name of "historical truth", and then instantly rejected if it doesn't fit Irving's worldview (e.g., that the holocaust didn't happen).

For example--one of numerous ones--when a certain nazi general denied knowledge of the holocaust after the war, that statement is believed implicity; but when the same general admits to other war crimes, Irving writes that he was "afraid" of torture or otherwise coerced into saying it. Or, Irving accepts as gospel truth the claim that "30,000" jews were involved in insurance fraud in 1932, before Hitler came to power--a claim based on nothing more than an antisemitic propaganda speech by a nazi functionary (the real number of ALL those prosecuted for such fraud in 1932, jews and non-jews, was less than 100); but he glibly rejects all surivor's testimony as coming from "ASsociation of Survivor of AuscHwitz and Other LiarS", or "ASSHOLS". Ha-ha.

Such examples can--and are--multiplied indefinitely. This is, in fact, the most important contribution this book makes: it is a thorough analysis of Irving's historical research and conclusions, and a definitive proof that it is totally worthless, not much more than neo-nazi antisemitic propaganda in the garb of "historical research".

The second part of the book is the one that got all the media attention: Evan's experience in the dock as he confronted Irving, and his impressions of the trial, Irving, the media circus around it, and so on. This part is less impressive, for an obvious reason: while, as an historian dealing with the documents, he is in his element as an expert, on the trial and the media around it he is writing as a layman.

Evans is intelligent and articulate as a layman, to be sure, and his observations on the trial and the media coverage are often worth reading. But here he does not tell us something that is really new or could not be skimmed from the (better) newspaper reports of the trial.

So read the book--and read both parts of it. Only remember that the first part is the real "meat" of the book, while the second, his experiences in the dock, is somewhat disappointing and polemical--although understandably so.

6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Irving Exposed For What He Is, August 21, 2011

By 

Richard Hill "WWII Historian" (USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Lying About Hitler: History, Holocaust, and the David Irving Trial (Paperback)

I have studied Hitler, WWII, and the Holocaust for over a decade. I've even read Irving's books, which while not being accurate or serious are entertaining. They remind me of the narrative books now popular about Washington DC where authors try to make you feel like you are in the room while history was being made.

The problem with Irving is he leaves out well known facts and misinterprets often. To me, it seems like Irving believes Hitler and the German side in general has not gotten a fair shake re the historical record. I think most can agree this is true, the historical record of WWII and how things happened leans toward the victors- as it always does. But Irving seems to be out to correct this by swinging the pendulum too far the other way, painting Hitler as he was in 1935- even knowing what he did from 1935 to 1945. The facts Irving leaves out while painting these narratives are ones well known to any historian familiar with these subjects, but I can see how he could easily fool those new to them.

Irving's ultimate vomit of nonsense, that Hitler didn't know about the Holocaust because there is no order to kill all the Jews in the world with his name on it, is truly laughable. Hitler lied about everything in his life, and regularly hid issues he felt the public not ready for. (eg The future plans for destruction of the church, the murder of the mentally retarded or "life not worthy of life")

In addition, Hitler often ordered things verbally, with no paper documents, and Borman Himmler or Speer would follow through. If anyone knows how ridiculous "not finding an order to kill the Jews with Hitler's name on it" would be, it should be Irving. In addition, Hitler regularly read "the brown papers" or the transcripts of numerous wire taps. Literally nothing happened in Germany that Hitler did not know about, as Borman routinely stated.

Re initiation of the Holocaust, all historical evidence points to Hitler handing the ball off to Goering and Heydrich, to "solve the Jewish problem" with "transports to the east" to prevent getting his hands dirty. It's very sad Irving threw always his many talents as a writer and researcher to try and claim otherwise. He has embarrassed himself, and his family. He should apologize, and come clean instead of continuing this charade. He must truly believe everyone to be stupid, to continue along his path of self delusion.