David Irving

David John Cawdell Irving (born March 24, 1938) describes himself as a self-taught historian who, from the late 1960s to the mid-1980s, was a leading British author on World War II with works such as Hitler?s War and The Destruction of Dresden. Irving is also one of the most accomplished and successful proponents of Holocaust denial. In the mid-1980s, he started openly associating with neo-Nazi and extremist groups, and his reputation began to wane. In the late 1990s, he sued the prominent Holocaust historian Deborah Lipstadt for having listed him as a Holocaust denier in her book Denying the Holocaust. After a much publicized trial, Irving lost the case and was found to be a Holocaust denier by the court.

Holocaust denial and libel suit

By the mid-1980s, Irving began lecturing to far-right groups such as the German Deutsche Volksunion, associated himself with the anti-Semitic Institute for Historical Review, and began making statements that moved him from murky to clearly revisionist territory. For example, he denied that Nazis systematically exterminated Jews in gas chambers during World War II and claimed that The Diary of Anne Frank was mostly a postwar forgery by her surviving father. In 1988, he testified for the defence at Canadian-based Holocaust denier Ernst Zündel?s trial. There, Irving enthusiastically supported self-styled ?execution expert? Fred A. Leuchter?s report that claimed there was no evidence for the existence of gas chambers at the Auschwitz concentration camp. Irving went so far as to self-publish Leuchter?s report in the United Kingdom and write its foreword. In his 1991 revised edition of Hitler?s War, he removed all references to death camps and the Holocaust. In November 1994, Irving spoke at an event sponsored by the American neo-Nazi Liberty Lobby, with the former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke in attendance.

Related Topics:
1980s - Deutsche Volksunion - Anti-Semitic - Institute for Historical Review - Nazi - Jew - World War II - The Diary of Anne Frank - 1988 - Canadian - Ernst Zündel - Fred A. Leuchter - Gas chamber - Auschwitz concentration camp - United Kingdom - 1991 - Death camp - The Holocaust - 1994 - Neo-Nazi - Liberty Lobby - Ku Klux Klan - David Duke

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In 1998, Irving launched a libel suit against Deborah Lipstadt, and her publisher Penguin Books. In her book Denying the Holocaust, Lipstadt identified him as a Holocaust denier, falsifier, and bigot, and stated that because of his skillful manipulations and distortions of real documents, Irving was one of the most dangerous proponents of Holocaust denial. Though the author and publisher were American, Irving launched his suit in the United Kingdom, where the burden of proof in libel cases is on the defendant, and not, as in most Western jurisdictions, on the plaintiff. As explained by Justice Charles Gray, the judge in the case, in his judgment:

Related Topics:
1998 - Deborah Lipstadt - Penguin Books - Charles Gray

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

:4.7 As I have already mentioned, the burden of proving the defence of justification rests upon the publishers. Defamatory words are presumed under English law to be untrue. It is not incumbent on defendants to prove the truth of every detail of the defamatory words published: what has to be proved is the substantial truth of the defamatory imputations published about the claimant. As it is sometimes expressed, what must be proved is the truth of the sting of the defamatory charges made.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Irving decided to represent himself. During the trial he ignored most of the evidence against him and instead decided to focus on what he said was his ?right to free speech,? a matter which was not a subject of the lawsuit, where the issue was whether or not Lipstadt?s book had defamed Irving?a particularly ironic turn of events as it was Irving who was challenging Lipstadt?s freedom of expression. American evolutionary psychologist Kevin B. MacDonald was one of the only people who testified on Irving?s behalf.

Related Topics:
Defamed - Evolutionary psychologist - Kevin B. MacDonald

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Lipstadt and Penguin hired the respected British lawyer Anthony Julius to present her case, and retained Professor Richard J. Evans, acclaimed historian and Professor of Modern History at Cambridge University, as an expert witness. Evans spent more than two years examining Irving?s work, and amassed evidence of Irving?s misrepresentations, including that Irving had knowingly used forged documents as sources. While some historians had previously noted some of Irving?s errors and omissions, his work had not previously been the focus of such a lengthy, in-depth examination as it received by Evans. Evans? final assessment of Irving?s work was both blistering and damning:

Related Topics:
Richard J. Evans - Cambridge University

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

: Not one of books, speeches or articles, not one paragraph, not one sentence in any of them, can be taken on trust as an accurate representation of its historical subject. All of them are completely worthless as history, because Irving cannot be trusted anywhere, in any of them, to give a reliable account of what he is talking or writing about. ... if we mean by historian someone who is concerned to discover the truth about the past, and to give as accurate a representation of it as possible, then Irving is not a historian. http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.org/evidence/evans006.asp

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In his closing statement, Irving claimed to have been a victim of an international, mostly Jewish, conspiracy for more than three decades. At one point on March 15 2000 during the course of Irving?s closing argument he appeared to refer to the Judge as ?Mein Führer? (page 193 of the transcript).

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Justice Charles Gray, the trial judge, praised Irving?s ?thorough and painstaking research into the archives? and commended his discovery and disclosure of many historical documents. He also noted Irving?s intelligence and thorough knowledge of World War II history. However, he that:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

:Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence; that for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews; that he is an active Holocaust denier; that he is anti-Semitic and racist and that he associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism.

Related Topics:
Hitler - Anti-Semitic - Racist - Neo-Nazi

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Irving lost subsequent attempts at appeal, and in light of the evidence presented at the trial, a number of his works which had previously escaped serious scrutiny were shown to be irredeemably flawed, and what remained of Irving?s reputation as a historian was destroyed. As a result of losing the case, he was also liable to pay the substantial costs of the trial, which ruined him financially and subsequently forced him into bankruptcy.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Most academic historians have little sympathy for Irving and his revisionist claims. During the trial, prominent British historian Sir John Keegan stated: ?I continue to think it perverse of you to propose that Hitler could not have known until as late as October 1943 what was going on with the Jewish people,? and later stated that Irving?s view ?defies common sense? and ?defies reason.? This echoed Keegan?s 1996 statements in his work The Battle for History, in which he wrote ?Some controversies are entirely bogus, like David Irving?s contention that Hitler?s subordinates kept from him the facts of the Final Solution, the extermination of the Jews...? After the trial, Keegan elaborated on his view of Irving, praising him for his understanding of Hitler?s military strategy, and in an April 12, 2000 article in The Daily Telegraph, stating that Irving had an ?all-consuming knowledge of a vast body of material? and ?many of the qualities of the most creative historians,? that his skill as an archivist could not be contested, and that he was ?certainly never dull.? However, Keegan doubted that even Irving took himself and his claims seriously.http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/polpen/dirving/dtjk000412.html

Related Topics:
British - John Keegan - 1943 - 1996 - April 12 - 2000 - The Daily Telegraph

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In a six-page essay in The New York Review of Books, Gordon A. Craig, a leading scholar of German history at Stanford University, noted Irving?s claims that the Holocaust never took place, and that Auschwitz was merely ?a labor camp with an unfortunately high death rate.? Though ?such obtuse and quickly discredited views? may be ?offensive to large numbers of people,? Craig argued, Irving?s work is ?the best study we have of the German side of the Second World War,? and ?we dare not? disregard his views.

Related Topics:
The New York Review of Books - Gordon A. Craig - Stanford University

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

:(For the text of the judgment, see on Wikisource.)

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~