In Truth: A History of Lies from Ancient Rome to Modern America

by Matthew Fraser

From ancient Rome to the current Internet age, this sweeping history of ideas explores how different epochs wrestled with the issue of truth and lies. From the ancient Greeks and Romans to the modern era, how have people determined what is true? How have those with power and influence sought to control the narrative? Are we living in a post-truth era, or is that notion simply the latest attempt to control the narrative? The relationship between truth and power is the key theme. Moving through major historical periods, the author focuses on notable people and events, from well-known leaders like Julius Caesar and Adolf Hitler to lesser-known individuals like Procopius and Savonarola. He notes distinct parallels in history to current events. Julius Caesar's publication of his Gallic Wars and Civil Wars was an early exercise in political spin not unlike what we see today. During the English Civil War and the Enlightenment, pamphleteering coupled with the new power of the printing press challenged the status quo, as online and social media does in our time. And "fake news" was already being used by German chancellor Otto von Bismarck in nineteenth-century Europe and by the "yellow journalism" of American newspaper magnates William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer near the turn of the twentieth century. The author concludes optimistically, noting that we are debating and discussing truth more fiercely today than in any previous era. The determination to arrive at the truth, despite the manipulations of the powerful, bodes well for the future of democracy.

448 pages, Hardcover

Published April 7, 2020

About the author

Lives in Paris, former newspaper columnist, editor-in-chief of a national broadsheet, co-host of national television programme. Currently a university professor and butler to a bichon called Hector. Author of five books, most recently In Truth: A History of Lies from Ancient Rome to Modern America.

Reviews

[Andréa]

Note: I received a digital review copy of this book from the publisher through NetGalley.

[Nancy Hudson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very ambitious book that analyzes the relationship between truth and most of the major historical people and events from the time of the Roman Empire to the present. There is emphasis on how leaders, both religious and secular, spun the truth and how those who reported the news, whether by word of mouth, written paper, or the internet facilitated events that often changed the course of history in major and dramatic ways. There is a lot of historical detail in this book and it is over 400 pages long but it is eminently readable and very interesting. I learned a great deal. The only complaint I have is that the underlying theme of truth in society is sometimes lost under the amount of information given. This would be a great text for high school or college history, sociology and journalism classes. The book does need some editing and I would suggest trying to trim the book a bit as there is some repetition. The last part of the book gives a very cautionary look at the so called post-truth era we seem to be living in where truth is not considered real or at least not relevant. That is truly frightening and just in the past day I have heard or read the words “fake news” several times. Does post-truth equal pre-fascism as the author posits? I hope not and I hope the idea of truth and trust remains the basis of strong liberal democracy throughout the world.

Thank you to Net Galley for sending me this ARC in exchange for an honest review.

[Paul Sand · Rating 2 out of 5]

[Imported automatically from my blog. Some formatting there may not have translated here.]

Not sure why I put this book on my get-via-Interlibrary Loan list, but the good folks at the University Near Here procured it from UPenn. I found it to be a vaguely irritating treatment of an important subject. The subtitle claims its sweep is vast. I thought it was more like half-vast, if you catch my drift. For one thing, it only goes back as far as Ancient Rome? What about the first lie? (Genesis 4:9, Cain to God: "Nope, haven't seen Abel lately. When did it become my job to keep track of him, Mr. Omniscience?")

And you know a lot of historical figures famous for powerlust, murder, greed, sexual appetites and perversions, etc.? Well, it turns out they weren't always completely honest either. Shocker, I know.

The author, Matthew Fraser, tells a history of dishonesty starting with the Caesars (Julius, Augustus, Nero, …). He moves smartly along to early Christianity, Charlemagne, Alfred the Great, Savonarola, Martin Luther, Henry VIII, Marie Antoinette, Napoleon III, Bismarck. the Spanish-American War, Ida Tarbell, the World Wars, the Cold War, and (eventually and finally) Donald J. Trump. At a number of places the "Truth" theme gets pretty tangential; what Fraser presents is pretty much plain old historical story-telling, with perhaps a greater emphasis on sex and violence than dishonesty. The history of journalism is also mixed in; its relationship to facts, reality, and respectability is troubled and mixed.

You know when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the church door? Yeah, that probably didn't actually happen. As a very poor Lutheran, I'm ashamed to say I didn't know that.

Fraser's coverage of the modern era focuses on Trump; he really despises Trump. ('m no fan myself, but really…) The book was published in early 2020, which means it misses a lot of recent stuff involving Biden, the 2020 election, Covid, … His analysis of the 2016 election is spun as a victory for the "post-truth" era; he neatly avoids mentioning an important factor: Trump's opponent. Hillary doesn't even rate an index entry of her own, but anyone who was paying attention knows that she had her own honesty problems. Overall, the adjectives that kept coming to my mind when reading the last couple chapters were "simplistic", "repetitive", "unoriginal", "clichéd", etc.

The book is marred by sloppiness. I caught a few minor typos. On page 134, Oliver Cromwell's death is pegged as (both) 1558 and 1658 in the same paragraph. On page 194, the quote "A lie can get halfway round the world while the truth is still getting its shoes on" is attributed to Mark Twain; almost certainly untrue. (Ironic, that.) On page 290, a paragraph about James Bond identifies the evildoing SPECTRE as a "Russian spy agency"; even a glance at the relevant Wikipedia page could have told the author that it was a fictional criminal organization unaffilated with any country or ideology.

I'm a casual reader; when I notice such blunders, it's a safe bet there are more.

And there's just plain old bias. For example (page 311), describing Fox News as "right-wing" while MSNBC merely offers "a more left-leaning perspective". Fraser is scathing on Heidegger's Nazi affinities; Hannah Arendt is dinged for her apologies for that sordid record. But Fraser's heroine for "truth" is Ida Tarbell, crusader against Rockefeller and Standard Oil; her moon-eyed praise of Mussolini goes unmentioned.

Fraser's lionization of Ida Tarbell brings up another problem with "truth"; her broadsides against Standard Oil were (at best) misguided, especially her criticism of Standard's alleged "predatory pricing." A world of "facts", carefully selected and assembled under the guidance of narrative, is no substitute for (in this case) careful and skeptical economic analysis. I don't think this occurs to Fraser at all.

[Marles Henry · Rating 3 out of 5]

Thank you Net Galley for my e-ARC of 'In Truth: a history of lies from ancient Rome to modern America' by Matthew Fraser. Such a long read, a thesis of sorts on a very particular topic. Lies. Untruths. Fraser's description of Julius Caesar was quite accurate and reflective of this book in its entirety: the amalgamation of history, legend and myth often maketh the lie. "We believe it, and keep repeating it, because we want to believe it's true." When I read Charlemagne dictated his conquests to aides, and how many historical narratives have glossed over the darker facts of history, it was hard not to think about how history keeps repeating with all of the 'fake news' at our fingertips.

[Stephen Sorensen · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book does well to stick to its title by covering a history of lies from Ancient Rome to modern America but it does so in a long-winded fashion that I did not care for too much. The amount of background information given for each case of deception heavily outweighs the amount of attention given the acts of deception themselves.

I can see myself returning to this book maybe to make some graphs or simplified timelines but I doubt I'll ever sit down and read it cover to cover again uninterrupted by other reading.

Overall it's a decent book but too much fluff, not enough substance for my taste.

It has end notes and an index. No bibliography.

[Gerry Connolly · Rating 5 out of 5]

In Truth is Matthew Fraser’s treatise on the role of big lies in history ( veni, vidi, vici; let them eat cake; I cannot tell a lie). From Julius Caesar through medieval times to Martin Luther to Napoleon and the two world wars he dissects the propaganda that drove kings, popes, armies and movements. The Trump era has refined false facts and disinformation to a fine art. With social media these lies go viral with a credulous audience and with great impact. Reversing these dynamics is the fight of and for democracy. Fraser’s introductory essay is a classic piece of exposition.