We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Fischer, David Hackett, Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought (New York: Harper Collins, 1970). In only approximately 300 pages, Fischer surveys an immense amount of background historical literature to point out a comprehensive variety of analytical errors that many, if not most, historians commit. Fischer points out specific examples of faulty or sloppy reasoning in the work of even the most prominent historians, making it a useful book for beginning students of history. While this book presumably did not make Fischer popular with many of his peers, it should be noted that his contributions as a historian have not been limited simply to criticizing the work of others; since 1976, he has published a number of well-received books on other historical topics.
And Fischer published Historians' Fallacies while the ink was still wet on his PhD. I've always wondered if that is why "real" [aka academic] historians don't think highly of his work. That, and he is the most dreaded of animals, a popularizer whose well-written books are read by non-academics. Oh, horror! :)
LittleRed1 is correct. Historian's Fallacies is not as engagingly written as Albion's Seed, but it has passion behind it, for the reasons LR1 suggests: he knew first hand, and was throwing down the gauntlet right from the start.
Assistant Village Idiot