Originally written to help historians avoid dozens of fallacies, this book is wittier than it ought to be. Engaging to read for non-historians interested in history. Helps those of us who read history for enjoyment and enlightenment to recognize errors made by even the most prominent and respected historians. Fischer spares no one, high or low, though he criticizes respectfully. Fischer takes an empiricist and utilitarian approach that is refreshingly forthright. He is actively hostile to historians who claim to find "stages" in history or impose ideological interpretations on historical events or processes. The historian's task is to solve problems, to ask appropriate questions and seek answers by actually researching the data based on archival and other methods of research. Interpretation is inevitable, but the interpretation should conform to the evidence. Moreover, there is a practical element as well. Writing in 1970, Fischer seemed to be motivated by the nuclear dangers of the Cold War, and he assigns to historians the responsibility of publicly discussing what the mistakes of the past can teach us today, and how solutions that may have worked yesterday are inappropriate to the problems of today. Fischer manages to be funny while being both thoughtful and thought provoking. A gem.

Originally published in 1970.

5/25/2019 2ND READING ATTEMPT - With my second attempt, I made it to chapter 6 of this book for my 52 Bookmark Reading Challenge prompt #24/52 - "Book you never finished"...Still never finished!

It was highly recommended by Dr. Shane Bernard, historian on Avery Island, Louisiana. He claimed it was the most valuable book he's ever read. Great! This was exactly THE kind of book I had been looking for to help me determine a good history book (the truth) verses a bad one (propaganda), since we are having all these problems with the cancel culture and woke leftists trying to cancel out and change history. But, I need to search for another by a different author who writes in a language I can actually understand. On page 285, the author writes regarding a fallacy of many historians, a form of error is…”committed by scholars who never use a little word when a big one will do.” Well, this author could learn from his own writing. You need a dictionary handy just to decipher what it is he’s even talking about. But if you are a scholar, I'm sure you would actually rate this as top-notch. The 1-star is due to my own inadequacy for understanding, not for the quality of this book.

7/22/2018 - 1ST READING ATTEMPT - What the hell did I just read? You seriously need a doctorates degree to read and understand this book! I read through the first chapter a month ago and found it to be way over my head. So I put it down. I actually had it ready to go in the Goodwill box but just couldn't see it go just yet.

I did learn something substantial in that first chapter: That all historians write about history in their own biases and beliefs. Good or bad, right or wrong, their job is to present history to their readers, preferably backing up their writing with empirical proofs, and not their point of views. It is subjective and individual. Wow! I never even thought of it like that before. I've always just simply read and accepted every word in every history book as fact.

Because of this insight, I decided to go ahead slowly and painstakingly try to read through it again and try to gleen at least one important piece of information from each chapter in hopes of learning how to critically read history books, news reports or any other nonfiction piece of work, and to determine if what I'm reading can be a "trusted" source. I found that I'm not smart enough to determine a truth from a lie. But, I did at least learn a little bit about how historians write and the many fallacies that could make or break their reputation as great historians. I was only able to read through half of chapter 6 before totally giving it up for good because I literally couldn't understand one single word they were writing about. It's back in the Goodwill box for the next brilliant mind...

I have been reading Historian’s Fallacies for years. This is no sin; instead a sign of its virtue. Subconsciously or otherwise; I did not wish for the book to end.

Perhaps it’s only flaw is the tendency for over precision which can render it unusable as he tends to split the fallacies, where perhaps it would been better to have illustrations side by side with appropriate distinctions. But his writing is a joy. His footnotes are a joy, his language is exquisite.

Simply, this book will make you smarter. And if that’s not clear; then it will remove a lot of errors. Furthermore, if you’d didn’t know already, you’ll realise that the previous two are not the same thing.

Fischer makes you appreciate history more, write better history and read it better as well and furthermore increase your humility, wishing to lean on your peers just a bit more. A book that is model in fullest sense of the world; it ought to serve as an example of what writing could be, and should be, therefore one’s own writing should follow its example.

History is usually written by the winner or the survivor and colored with their perceptions. The author examines several theories that could be flawed.

This book is an essential read for anyone considering a career as a historian, or even interested in the historical process and wanting to be able to look at historical writing more critically.

I'll agree with the commenter that said the book dragged in places--by the end you can definitely tell he had a length requirement to meet! Still, the first 75% of the book is incredibly useful, even if you just want to be able to shout "Fallacy!" during debates with friends. ;)

Undoubtedly one of the best books I read while making my way through history classes and seminars to a history Ph.D. Witty, highly detailed, and chock-full of interesting case-studies/examples, this book is essential for anyone who writes or reads history. Fischer often spends a lot of time focusing on certain arguments/topics and fallacies related to them, but this is exactly the approach you want when analyzing historical works.

A must read for anyone who wants (or needs) to communicate persuasively. Not a study on argumentation but a thorough treatment of logic flaws that can undermine your thinking. Sounds dry but as a bonus Mr Fischer absolutely crushes a number of historian sometimes in hilarious fashion. You will definitely find yourself thinking more clearly.

This book is very helpful for anyone who is interested in history at a deeper level. He identifies many mistakes that historians make on every aspect of their trade. He has many, many examples, (occasionally from his own books) and with funny and biting commentary.

Although at times I disagreed with him, and he tends toward too academic language and creating terms for things that just need explaining, it is a very helpful book. Many of the things he mentions are things that I see I need to watch for.

Classic text on the methodology of writing history. And humorous too. Fischer takes just about every historian of note--at the time--to task. I can't remember anyone emerging unscathed, including Fischer himself. And, frankly, his list of do's and don'ts is so thorough and pervasive that it may be impossible to write adhering to the "guidelines." While the book is relatively short, it should be read and thought over in short segments, perhaps to the accompaniment of a text illustrating the "faults." This was the first book I encountered in my freshman class on historiography almost fifty years ago.

An essential read for more than students of history. What a privilege it would be to have attended one of the author's courses.

A relevant book on this mistakes historians make in thinking. The book is relevant because is catalogs many of the common mistakes people make in thinking in general. Sure, it's fun to giggle at the mistakes of some pretty big historians, but many of these mistakes are common.

Funny in some places and interesting in others, but it felt far too long.