Enjoy fast, FREE delivery, exclusive deals and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery
Amazon Prime includes:
Fast, FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button.
Amazon Prime members enjoy:- Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
- Unlimited Free Two-Day Delivery
- Instant streaming of thousands of movies and TV episodes with Prime Video
- A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
- Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
- Unlimited photo storage with anywhere access
Important: Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.
Buy new:
$16.95$16.95
FREE delivery: Tuesday, July 11 on orders over $25.00 shipped by Amazon.
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
Buy used: $9.36
Other Sellers on Amazon
+ $3.99 shipping
91% positive over last 12 months
Usually ships within 4 to 5 days.
& FREE Shipping
72% positive over last 12 months
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
In Defense of History First Paperback Edition
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| $7.95 with discounted Audible membership | |
|
Audio CD, CD, Unabridged
"Please retry" | $25.98 | — |
- Kindle
$9.99 Read with Our Free App -
Audiobook
$0.00 Free with your 3-Month Audible trial - Hardcover
$30.96 - $34.2025 Used from $1.99 7 New from $17.75 - Paperback
$9.36 - $16.9552 Used from $2.22 13 New from $10.48 1 Collectible from $8.95 - Audio CD
$27.292 New from $25.98
Purchase options and add-ons
A master practitioner gives us an entertaining tour of the historian's workshop and a spirited defense of the search for historical truth.
E. H. Carr's What Is History?, a classic introduction to the field, may now give way to a worthy successor. In his compact, intriguing survey, Richard J. Evans shows us how historians manage to extract meaning from the recalcitrant past. To materials that are frustratingly meager, or overwhelmingly profuse, they bring an array of tools that range from agreed-upon rules of documentation and powerful computer models to the skilled investigator's sudden insight, all employed with the aim of reconstructing a verifiable, usable past. Evans defends this commitment to historical knowledge from the attacks of postmodernist critics who see all judgments as subjective. Evans brings "a remarkable range, a nose for the archives, a taste for controversy, and a fluent pen" (The New Republic) to this splendid work. "Essential reading for coming generations."-Keith Thomas- ISBN-100393319598
- ISBN-13978-0393319590
- EditionFirst Paperback Edition
- PublisherW. W. Norton & Company
- Publication dateJanuary 17, 2000
- LanguageEnglish
- Dimensions5.5 x 0.9 x 8.3 inches
- Print length304 pages
Frequently bought together

Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Editorial Reviews
Review
About the Author
Product details
- Publisher : W. W. Norton & Company; First Paperback Edition (January 17, 2000)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 304 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0393319598
- ISBN-13 : 978-0393319590
- Item Weight : 11.2 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.5 x 0.9 x 8.3 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #419,162 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #121 in Historical Study & Teaching
- #212 in European History (Books)
- #237 in Historiography (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
The basic reason for this is the author's failure to look outside the tea pot of history writing (and its tempests) for advances in epistemiology, philosophy, and logic as well as sciences. Had he done so, he would have realized that many of his positions are plain untenable. Below but a few - one could extend the excursion to areas as diverse as evolution, consciousness, and anthropology.
Take this statement on p. 110 (which may stand for other versions of the same thought elsewhere in the book): "...interpretations really can be tested and confirmed or falsified by an appeal to the evidence..." Had he read Karl POPPER he would know, that "confirmation" is logically impossible, and that anyone believing this is in the thrall of "confirmation bias". Evidence may disprove a conjecture - I hate the word theory, which is used malappropriatedly in the social sciences (a case of p-envy with respect to physics) - but never confirm. Add to the principle point the fact that history is a middens: facts have been thrown into it pell-mell, and many have gone under, either fortuitously or by design. We may never be sure that all the relevant facts have been preserved or discovered. Finally, the "facts" and "sources" are dodgy at best. When Ranke writes that the sources can tell us "Geschichte wie es wirklich war" - one can only burst out laughing. Wirklich, Herr Professor? Having participated in the construction of archival evidence of my government I know, for one, that the record seldom reflects the motivations of the deciders, and is often only a running screen behind which the real horse-trading of power takes place.
Another example of weak argumentation is the right-wing argument against relativism: "Once postmodernist hyper-relativism's principles are applied to itself, many arguments begin to collapse under the weight of their own contradictions" (p. 190). Self-referential arguments have been debated by philosophers on and off for most of the XXth century. We know by now that they cannot be used to self-invalidate - see the long litany of philosophers who have grappled with it (from Russell, to Gödel, and beyond). Some arguments may simply not be decided - so the argument is inherently insipid. An amusing example of "self-referential statements" that cannot be decided is the note Kant wrote to himself, and found among his papers: "Forget Lampe". Lampe was a servant, Kant had been fond of, but had to fire on grounds of theft.
A third example is the messy treatment of causation in history. On p. 113 the author makes light of A.J. P. Taylor's view that "tiny causes have vast consequences". Alas for Dr. EVANS, this is indeed so, as complexity theory has proven. If a butterfly can trigger a hurricane in New York (and it might do just that, as we know) it is impossible to go back and identify which butterfly was the culprit. Causation is a fickle master, and there is no easy relation between the two.
The author rejects the idea that "narratives do not exist in the past itself but are all put there by the historian" (p. 120) and points to "the narrative is there in the sources, lived and thought by the people we are writing about: German or Italian unification...". Lived through in the case of Italy? One is left wondering: 2% of Italians spoke the language! Italian historiography is tentatively emerging just now from the nationalist drall that has transformed a civil war after the occupation of the Kingdom of Naples into "banditism". And the mainstream history-writing about WWI still has to face up to the fact that "irredentism" was a sham for a few politicians' ambition to create an empire in the eastern Mediterranean. Even mainstream American history is not devoid of glaring selectivity in the presentation of the "the evidence". The role of slavery in the US Constitution is hardly properly mentioned (or the 3/5 rule); the pivotal role of Spain in the Revolutionary War is seldom referred to, for it detracts from Yorktown; the indirect yet critical involvement of New England in the running of the Caribbean sugar economy is forgotten; and there are more instances of "gaps"...
A final point about "minority issues": reading ancient Chinese history one hardly finds reference to the economic role and importance of silk weaving - yet taxes were partially paid in silk. Textiles in the ancient Mediterranean are hardly an issue for the "ancient economy" - despite the fact that probably over 50% of household effort was devoted to textile production by women. One is left to wonder whether this "oversight" is not linked to the fact most historians are men...
Admittedly many of the claims of the hyper-relativists are fatuous, and best forgotten. Their impenetrable jargon is enough justification for ignoring them. Any "argument from principle" is in any case vacuous, particularly in history, which deals with material reality - albeit a reality long past. But many points are valid, and recent history writing has been leavened and livened by their reflections. History writing hovers precariously between fact and fiction: it is never final or finished - yet it teaches us to understand and cope with humanity's as well as life's unending diversity. There lies its value - and any historian who, honestly, undertakes to illuminate diversity, complexity, and life's contradictions should be encouraged - provided he writes in plain language.
In this delightfully polemical book, Richard Evans does not try to engage the writings of the major postmodernists. Do not expect to find counterarguments to the writings of Derrida, Foucault, Lyotard or de Certeau. It is in the writings of thinkers like Hayden White, Frank Ankersmit, Dominick LaCapra, Keith Jenkins, Elizabeth Ermath, Joan Scott, etc. that the major claims of the postmodernists have been made for history in the English speaking world. It is with their writings that Evans engages in debate. This does not, however, put him in the camp of conservatives like Gertrude Himmelfarb, John Vincent, David Harlan and Keith Windschuttle.
Evans is arguing for a middle position- one that emphasizes the recalcitrance of the "facts", i.e., the historical records. Evans denies that all of history is interpretation and that no one interpretation is better than any other. He believes that careful and honest shifting of the historical record will show some or one interpretations to be better grounded in that record than others. On the other hand, he is excited by some of the possibilities for history that have been opened up by those working historians whose work he admires and who are identified with the postmodern camp, e.g., Simon Schama, Theodore Zeldin and Orlando Figes.
One of the main points of his critique is that Evans feels that postmodernism removes the possibility of any sort of critical perspective- he reiterates the old point that if there is no grounds to prefer one interpretation over another, if there is no such thing as a fact than there is no reason to prefer the views of the standard histories of the Holocaust over those of a denier, e.g., David Irving.
This is not the best of the books I have read recently on historiography. Berkhofer's Beyond the Great Story retains that distinction. It does have the advantage of being very well written, very clear in it's presentation and quite enjoyably feisty. Evans' style is like that of a good lightweight- constantly circling, jabbing his opponents, sensing a weakness and then throwing the combination.
If you think my pugilistic metaphor to be inappropriate, ... for a series of short essays Evans wrote in reply to his many and equally nasty critics. This site is probably the best way to figure out if this book is for you.
As for me, I have come to realize that this is a debate without end. Evans did not really settle anything for me. Neither has anyone else I have read lately. He does give you a lot to think about and he points the reader in the direction of a lot of interesting work done by other people.








