History under scrutiny

David Irving arrives for the trial at London's High Court

By home and legal affairs correspondent Jon Silverman

The marathon libel action which historian David Irving lost against American academic Deborah Lipstadt has been about history and truth.

And underpinning the trial is what many consider the most heinous crime of the 20th Century - the Holocaust.

However, in his closing speech, Mr Irving, representing himself, said the case was not about the Holocaust but about "his reputation as a human being, as an historian of integrity".

Deborah Lipstadt denies libel

He told Mr Justice Gray that a judgment in his favour did not mean that the Holocaust never happened, merely that in England, discussion was still permitted.

His opponents agree that at the heart of the case is the historian's reputation.

But they deny that his freedom of expression is an issue. And they allege that Mr Irving's agenda is far wider than an academic interest in the Holocaust.

False history

Richard Rampton QC, representing Ms Lipstadt and Penguin Books, called Mr Irving "a liar who had falsified history on a massive scale".

"The wider agenda", said Mr Rampton, was Mr Irving's rabid anti-semitism which "had led him to prostitute his reputation for the sake of a bogus rehabilitation of Hitler."

A number of expert witnesses were called. Professor Richard Evans of Cambridge University, who produced an in-depth report for the defence, said he was not prepared for the "sheer depth of duplicity " he encountered in Mr Irving's work.

Irving is representing himself in the trial

Professor Robert van Pelt, an authority on Auschwitz, told the court there was "a massive amount of evidence that the camp had been used for mass extermination".

And Sir John Keegan, defence editor of the Daily Telegraph, who was called under subpoena by Mr Irving, said the historian's views on Hitler and the Final Solution were "perverse and defied common sense".

Some damage was undoubtedly inflicted on Mr Irving by the disclosure to the court of his private views.

An entry in his diary contained a racist ditty which he had sung to his young daughter.

And in a speech given in London, he said the newscaster, Sir Trevor McDonald, should be confined to reading news about drug busts and muggings.

Mr Irving also lost ground - if not in court then amongst Holocaust deniers - by admitting that he had been wrong when he said that the gassing of Jews in trucks was done "on a limited and experimental basis " only.

This was the first time in 36 years that the Holocaust had been the central issue of a libel case at the High Court. And for that reason, the judgment is likely to be quoted for many years to come.