We live in a time when truth has been viciously under attack and relativized beyond any coherent meaning. This adds to the important conversation we need to have together back to a semblance of sanity. .

In Truth analyses truth and lie throughout the different eras, from the period of Caesar to the present days. Lie is used here in the broadest sense: myths, tales, superstitions and propaganda also fall into this category. Fraser observes the change from rationality to the idea that truth is subjective and also how that is reflected in the public sphere nowadays. It is an intriguing read, albeit sometimes a bit dry.

However, I did not find the 'Acknowledgements' chapter too elegant: Matthew Fraser points out that he rather wrote the book as a favour to one of his students as she wanted to be his research assistant to secure a stipend. At the time, he was working on a psycological thriller. Don't get me wrong, it is nice of Fraser to have found a way to get this graduate student a stipend - but it's not too nice that he basically says that she was only interested in the money, Is that indeed the whole truth, I wonder? Or is it a well created narrative to make the reader like the author? I don't know. But for a book about truth and lies, it's an interesting question.

Fraser has produced an incredibly learned volume that explodes the myth that we live in a post-truth world and that fake news is a new problem confronting the liberal order. I’m a series of compelling vignettes, he shows how mythmaking and falsification have impacted politics since the dawn of civilization. The book ends with an analysis of Donald Trump as product rather than cause of our current obsession with political lies. Fraser contends that Trump exploited a world in which the concept of truth was being assaulted from a multitude of sides. He may go down in history as a Great Man, if not a good man. Anyone teaching on current events, history, media, or politics would benefit from reading.

Lying and lies in general are pretty interesting to me. That's why I'm a bit biased to this book. There's no book quite like it. I mean none that I know of. This book gives you a thorough history of lying, and you'll get to pick up bits and pieces of fun information about lying that you can share with people in parties.

Thank you @netgalley for my e-ARC of 'In Truth: a history of lies from ancient Rome to modern America' by #matthewfraser. Such a long read, a thesis of sorts on a very particular topic. It read more like a history lesson than analysis of the topic over the course of history: 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. This also was a worthy reflection of this book. Even the reference to Daniel Defoe's dressing up fiction as fact and 'John Locke's notion that human knowledge is gained from perception of our surroundings' is a reminder that lies embedded in popular culture are sometimes taken as fact, and this belief is often accepted as true accounts of history.
Modern historical figures still push their 'campaigns of truth' in order to sell a utopian way of life for all and a version of the truth to sway voters or followers. Part VI referred to 'Guardians of the truth': Fraser referenced Ivy Lee's disregard for fact, and that there was 'no such thing as objective truth". Such a pertinent point to consider. How can we determine what is real, what constitutes truth and whether history is just an irrational record of perception?
Anyone recording the stories if the world needs to act as 'truth tellers, sensemakers and explainers'. We all need to be guardians of fact and objectivity. If the digital age has provided so many more avenues for anyone to report and record whatever whim they have, how and who can we trust to retain and defend ourselves from the lies that masquerade as fact and and the echo chambers we seem to foster? What, as Fraser asks, if we cannot explain nearly as much as we think we can? I yearned for more of the author's questions like this throughout the book.
At times it read more like a thesis or PhD, and I think there is room for some more editing to cull some acute details to bring out more analysis of actions and historical implications. The historical information is very thorough, very detailed, and really provides a wide scope of information about how lies and untruths and twisting the truth are often intrinsic in the recording of history and recording what people should believe as history. This is where I wished for deeper analyses with connections to lessons not yet learned in our modern world.

This is a horrible book! It reads like someone has pasted a series of newspaper columns together. This book is supposed to be a history of truth from 4,000 years ago until today but it is really just a diatribe against President Trump. This author misses completely the fact that almost the entire developed world has recently taken a sharp turn away from globialism toward populism and traditionalism. Since the author lives in France where the yellow vests riot every Saturday one has to wonder how he could have completely missed this truth?

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.

This book was 400+ pages of pure research and so much history. At times the language was a bit convoluted in a way where I had to go back and re-read sections, but overall I found the book smart as well as informative. While I would not consider it leisure reading, and will be eager to listen to it as an audiobook once it is released, I do think this book would be fantastic in a college setting. Someone could probably spend and entire semester unpacking the history spoken about in this book, right up to present day with the 2020 election. I was pleasantly surprised to find that the 2020 election was referenced, but with so much Trump it was hard not to include the race. All I know is that I hope we can steer ourselves away from the path that is so clear laid out, where “post-truth is pre-fascism.”