Fischer presents a detailed and trenchant look at the problems of historical explanation in this fine book. It is certainly one of the best history books I've ever read, although it's not a history book per se, since it's really a critique of the different explanations historians use. Fischer discusses probably about a hundred or more of these, so you probably won't be able to remember them all, but if nothing else, you'll be more alert to the more common and egregious types of historical errors, and overall, the book is a useful analysis and reminder of the problems and difficulties of writing history. In that regard, it's still a very interesting and worthwhile book.

Some of the fallacies I already knew from philosophy, such as the pathetic fallacy, the fallacy of composition, the post hoc fallacy, and so on, which are already well known. But then there are plenty of others with more abstruse names, such as the "the fallacy of the hypostatized proof." My one complaint enters here, since Fischer would have benefited from a knowledge of logic and philosophy, since he sometimes gives names to fallacies that are well known in logic and philosophy by a different name.

But overall, this is one of the best books on the methods and philosophy of history I've read, and it should probably be required reading for every student of history and professional historian alike.

Review of Fischer, _Historians' Fallacies_

This is a much-read classic. It is well-written, well-organized, fair-minded, and packed with ideas applicable to all sorts of discourse in addition to the writing of history. It is also full of wit. An example: "Historical science presently hovers naked and trembling on the edge of quantification, with Clio in the huddled, hesitant posture of September morn." p 104.

Strictly speaking, a fallacy is an error in an inference. Less formally, though, any mistake even in informal reasoning is today referred to as fallacy. Fischer took many of his fallacies (that is, their labels) from others; for example "tunnel history" from J. H. Hexter; "the fallacy of the hypostatized proof" from Perrll F. Payne; "the fallacy of the mechanistic cause" from R. M. McIver; and so on. Others, like the post hoc fallacy, or the confusion of correlation with causation, are in the public domain. But by far the majority of the some 100 fallacies he isolates are labelled as such by himself. Somewhat unfortunately for those in other disciplines, Fischer's examples are without exception from his own field of American History.

Since I like the book so much (and every serious reader ought to have it), I will just mention some negatives.

Fischer's main weakness is an apparent ignorance of philosophy, and it shows up in several places. Although there is a mine of thought in Chapter VI on fallacies of causality, Fischer seems to have no idea what the problem is with causality in philosophy (p 165), but plops down finally in favor of its reality, and necessarily uses it in the remainder of the chapter. (After all, there can be no fallacies of causality if there is no causality.) He deals nicely with the many euphemisms historians use for a sort of "disguised" causality, and, indeed, it seems to me that causality (no matter what it is called) is a sine qua non of any historical writing whatever.

On p.177 we encounter the "fallacy of identity" - the idea that a cause must resemble its effect. Here again he seems unaware of philosophy entirely. This is of course a classic principle. But Fischer is talking about a different idea, which is indeed fallacious, namely the idea that a big cause must have a big effect, and the converse. Oddly, for Fischer, the opposite of reductionism is not emergentism, but "indiscriminate pluralism" ( p 175) - i.e., too many causes.

Fischer also seems to have no conception of metaphysics, and thinks that an infinite variety of logics are possible on the same footing (pp. 263-264). He seems not to realize that "Western" logic has undergone various modifications of the same principles with which it began. Fischer himself, then, can be accused of relativism here and there, though he cites it as a fallacy or at least as wrong-headed.

Fischer is himself fallacious at one point, the fallacy involved being perhaps included somewhere under his categories (though I did not find it): it consists in regarding any trend as a change. On p. 160 he treats Barry Goldwater's thought as expressed in his 1960 _Consience of a Conservative_ as "dangerous" due to various "changes" that had occurred since the 19th century (presumably the source of Goldwater's ideas). One of these was, no doubt, the rise of Communism and the Soviet Empire. But today the Soviet Empire is a thing of the past, and the economic or free-market aspect of conservatism has for the most part won out. So what appeared to Fischer writing in 1970 as a change was merely a trend that didn't even last out the century.

It is obviously important to keep a book like this in perspective. Fischer in many cases makes sure to characterize his more renowned targets as "excellent," "great," "having considerable merit" and so on, before citing their fallacies. This raises the question whether much of any history would ever get written (and would be interesting enough to read) if all writers of history managed to avoid all of Fischer's ca. 100 fallacies. Perhaps if each historian believed each of his projects to be the one and only coverage of a period or topic ever to be available to future generations, all this would be a matter of greater concern. Also, some of the alledged fallacies Fischer sees in various historians makes me want to read them - Tacitus for example, or Dionysius of Halicarnasus. It is tempting to ponder, after reading Fischer, the possibility that history itself is simply fallacious, a necessary result of the grand unpleasant concession: "It is surely correct that no historian can know the totality of history as actuality." (p 182)

I've read this book cover to cover once and dipped into it on average once a month over the ten years since I first found it. It sits on my shelf with my other "correctives", such as Orwell's "Politics and the English Language". Fischer makes the same points about rhetoric as Orwell at greater length and with far more wit. But, Orwell is the better writer.

Yes, as one reviewer says, Fischer rants a bit, but amusingly and with dead-on quotations from his victims. One will think twice about the errors Fischer cites, if for no other reason than to avoid Fischer's next edition.

Fischer is quite even handed. The first felon he cites was a professor of mine -- and Fischer's -- as an undergraduate. A more generous critic and historian -- and human being -- one won't find. But there he is.

I cannot think of a better gift for anyone who takes persuasive prose seriously. No writer should be without it.

As with several other people, the biggest complaint I have with this book is that Prof. Fischer hasn't yet followed up with further works on U.S. cultural history.

But what's here is marvelous. Fischer traces the distinctive folkways and religious influence of the four great waves of English emigration to the American colonies, and shows how they combined to make modern USAmerica.

I have 19th century immigrant roots, and have never lived in the South or New England. I can't therefore confirm or dispute what Fischer and the various reviewers say about the distinctive regional U.S. differences that persist there today, and how they go back to the original English immigrants. But as a modern USAmerican from California, I can see the various strands that make up our general culture in each of the four founding regions.

This is a long book, perhaps a bit too long, but I recommend it highly, and since discovering it I automatically read any book Fischer produces. I have yet to read a bad one by him. Now let's have further volumes in the series!

Albion's Seed details the "folkways" of four groups of people that moved from distinct regions of England to the US. The premise is that ther culture of each of the groups persisted and that these cultures provide the basis for the modern United States. The folkways are the cultural beliefs in religion, magic, child raising, family, age,food and other interesting things. Since reading the book I have been asking everyone I spend any time with about their background and quizzing them about beliefs. The book has opened up a whole new world to me about the types of things Fischer discusses in his book. Traces of the cultures he describes are still very much with us and I am finding it remarkable the degree that you can predict the overall pattern of a person's beliefs based on their background. Another aspect of the book is that though it is 900 pages of text, it never got boring to me. By talking about people and how they lived it brings them to life as well as any novel.

This is a book that will appeal most strongly to Americans of British ancestry. Fischer writes at one point of of walking around the countryside in Oxfordshire and feeling that he was home. This is very personal history, both for Fischer and British-Americans. Who according to census returns, given by Fischer, are now an ethnic minority in the USA. Many of the reviewers speak of how it how it explained things to them of their own personal life. I read the book first 7 years ago. It reaffirmed my sense of kinship and affinity with the USA ( and might explain why I was awake at 2 in the morning, 9 pm in Washington, watching the Presidential election coverage on the BBC). It is scholarly and full of fascinating cultural details. It is illuminating on how British culture, institutions and folkways have shaped the USA as it is now. (It's sad that the Scotch-irish seem to have had more influence than the Quakers). This is a book for Anglo-americans to reafffirm their roots. It should also remind English readers how much we have in common and why. I was fascinated to learn how many Cheshire place-names are reproduced in Pennsylvannia including Prestbury where I was born. And would love confirmation that there are people in Pennsylvannia who use or know the meaning of dialect words like nesh, gormless, daddy-long-legs.

There must be something different about the air or water in New Jersey-or at least in certain areas of the state. That is the only conclusion I can come to to when one NJ reviewer(with history honours) describes this book as " absolutely boring," whilst another labels author, David Hackett Fischer, as "cynical." Well, as an Australian with an honours in American history let me say I found Fischer's book absolutely riveting-moving as quickly as Paul Revere, on Brown Beauty, through the New England countryside. As for criticising the current generation, Fischers,comparison with the revolutionary generation is very mild stuff-a passing comment on page 175- that favours the reflective processes of the past generation over society of today. Paul Revere's ride is not just about the night of the epic event to warn the colonists that the Regulars were coming but also about the tensions leading up to the 'shots heard around the world,' and the nightmare journey of the British redcoats on their return from the Battle of Concord, after the earlier skirmish at Lexington-an event that aroused the colonists like bees to a honey pot.Interestingly, Fischer describes many of the British officers, far from being confident after Lexington,as being deeply concerned about proceeding to Concord. History proved them wise judges. Fischer also includes an extensive historiography of Revere and his changing role over the years- from being a mythical hero to being debunked,denied and reviled. Readers can draw their own conclusion on this active silversmith, Whig and Federalist whose long life, (1734-1818), covered some of the truly great moments in American history. Fischer's great narrative brings back all the atmosphere of that seminal period and the reader is virtually transported back to that heady time when Revere rode not only into the dark New England night but also into the pages of history.

As I read the introduction to the book, I found myself wide-eyed that I may be wrong about my knowledge of Paul Revere. The folklore of his midnight ride (and the song) has strongly influenced what I thought. Fischer addresses that, then writes a great narrative to show you the true patriot.

First, I knew that Paul Revere rode to warn the colonists and Dawes rode as well. What I did not know was that they were part of a vast communication network set up by Paul Revere and his colleagues. The reader sees how successful this is (even with Revere being captured) through the explanation and maps of the troop movements.

The book is not a biography about Paul Revere though it does go into some detail about him. This book is primarily about the incidents leading up to the ride and the incidents immediately after. The reader will hear about all the things going on within that span of months. Paul Revere's perspective is not the only one covered.

I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in American history. You will finish the book feeling enlightened.

In David Fischer's book, "Paul Revere's Ride", one gets a sense of a strong and interesting narrative. The book covers Paul Revere and General Thomas Gage's life as well as the events leading up to Paul Revere's famous ride. The book also discussed the Battles at Concord and Lexington. The book went into great detail of both men's lives as well as both sides of the battles. The title of the book was somewhat misleading because Paul Revere took many rides for liberty and did not act alone on his famous ride. It was a very interesting book because it gave both sides of the battles at Concord and Lexington; however, I found that the appendix were too numerous to keep going back to read. There were just enough pictures to maintain the reader's interest. I thouroughly enjoyed reading this book and David Hackett Fischer brought Paul Revere to life with his well organized narrative. One could almost picture Paul Revere on his horse riding down the street.

Fischer wrote _Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in America,_ which is one of the best works published in several decades in comparative and local U.S. history, and in many ways this is a continuation of the "Virginia" section of that book. Which is a bit surprising, since the author is a New Englander and previously showed considerable preference for the folkways of Massachusetts over those in the South. Since I have numerous forebears in Virginia, I was particularly interested in the first three chapters: "Migration to Virginia," "Migration in Virginia," and "Migration beyond Virginia." All of those apply to my people and Fischer's coverage of the in-through-and-out process is first-rate. As before, he's an old-fashioned historian, spending a lot of time describing the concrete experiences of particular individuals and families, not spinning out historiographical theory. This is a must-read for anyone interested in Virginia's first couple of centuries.

A fascinating history of migration to, within, and from Virginia, the Old Dominion. The "to" begins with the English colonization at Roanoke (the lost colony) and Jamestown. "Within" is movement of colonists to various parts of the region, including the tidewater, piedmont, southside, northern neck, and "the valley" (Shenandoah). And "from" is the movement of Virginians to all parts of the country, south, north, but mainly west. What happened to Virginia, the most populous and prosperous of states during the early U.S. Republic? Why the decline after four of the first five presidents were Virginians (Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe)? Part of the reason was a great migration west, both northwest and southwest. Why? The land was depleted from generations of farming, and there wasn't enough land for the growing population. But Virginia's emigrants and their descendants had great impacts on other territories and U.S. history: Daniel Boone and Simon Kenton, William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor, Stephen Austin and Sam Houston. The authors use Turner's theory of the frontier as the backdrop for a vivid portrayal of Virginia and U.S. history. One weakness is a section of name-dropping about now unknown families who migrated west. Other than that, a lively story recommended for those interested in Virginia and U.S. history. Plenty of pictures and maps--the book accompanied an exhibit at the Virginia Historical Society in Richmond.

After reading Albion's Seed I was eager to read more about the English folkways. This book expands on that with information about German folkways and African folkways. This books gives a sense the people that expanded westward. There is also a philosophical current about the nature of historial inquiry. He addresses various ideas about frontiers and shows that the process of expansion is not open to one-size-fits all explainations. Though Fischer depricates purely materialist explainations of history, the interplay between the cultural values of the Virginians and the physical limitations of the land is a compelling explaination of the westward expansion.

A typical academic's expansion of an idea that might have made an interesting magazine article, but produced a dull book. It's virtue is a comprehensive picture of economic activity over most of recorded history. Even that suffers from the author's politically biased views of the last half century.
Sometimes, when it's "publish or perish", perishing seems an attractive alternative.

Utilizing a very long telescope, one that sees back into the Dark Ages, Brandise University professor David Hackett Fischer investigates the history of price changes to expound on a fascinating theory that can possibly foretell nothing less than the future of the United States, whether we're headed for an era of greater prosperity, or a catastrophe like that of the Great Depression. By examining the prices people paid for goods throughout history, four price-revolutions, were identified, where inflation grew in intensity strong enough to destabilize society. After each crash came a long period of comparative price-equilibrium, when countries experienced growth in culture, such as during the Renaissance and the Enlightenment. Fischer's book looks intimidating: its 536 pages is studded with charts showing the flucturation of prices throughout history. But Fishcher devotes only 258 pages to an analysis of prices waves; the rest of the book is taken up with appendices and essays on side issues. And the 258 pages contains 105 charts, further reducing the amount of reading needed to grasp the main points. Fischer retells history during the four waves, and there, except for the occasional burst of economic jargon, the text is compelling, and the theory well worth considering. -- Bill Peschel

Fischer's book takes in a long view of basic economic history. It covers the period from roughly 1200 AD to present, using data from England, Europe and the United States. The book sizes up what has taken place economically, socially, etc. and it discusses some basic relationships. A great contribution of the book is that it becomes apparent to the reader that long term effects are frequently completely invisible to people coping with present economic situations. For example, many well-intended fiscal policies are counter-productive or produce neutral effects for this very reason. Another great supporting contribution of the book is that Fischer is well aware of the various schools of economic thought. At many places in the text, he points out weaknesses of certain theories; in his appendix he summarizes by showing that no existing single theory fully explains actual historical events. Another great contribution is the appendix itself. It comprises half the book, and contains a massive bibliography, with further elaborations on social issues, crime, disease, divorce, contrasts in economic theories, wealth distribution, and more. Most of the references are of high scholarly quality. There are a few shortcomings in presentation, but these are details. For example, Fischer occasionally makes asides which would be more effective if they were concise summaries. Also, some of his graphs have peculiar scaling. The reader must exercise care in interpreting them. Nevertheless, ... Fischer's work is an excellent overview of economic dynamics, and is highly recommended for obtaining a well-rounded perspective.