To obtain a distribution representing the inferred uncertain knowledge about the parameter directly from the data without access to any prior distribution was the glorious goal that Fisher succeeded in reaching with his fiducial distribution for a scalar parameter, but for vector parameters he got into trouble. He regarded the fiducial distribution as an ordinary probability distribution subject to the usual Kolmogorovian laws for sigma-additive probability measures. Fisher did not develop any mathematical theory of fiducial probability, but chose to illustrate his thoughts by examples. It was soon found that even in Fisher's examples with more than one parameter, there were no unique fiducial distributions, and inconsistencies and paradoxes were identified. After re-visiting Fisher's ideas over 1930–1935, which underlie our confidence distributions, we summarise and discuss the big debate over the fiducial argument, which died out only after Fisher's death in 1962, leaving the statistical community to regard it as badly flawed and Fisher's biggest blunder. The chapter ends with three attempts at saving the fiducial argument. Despite the potential problems with multivariate fiducial distributions, their marginals are often exact or approximate confidence distributions.