<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0" xml:lang="en" xml:base="https://www.historyextra.com/people/winston-churchill/feed/atom">
	<title type="text">HistoryExtra</title>
	<subtitle type="text">The official website for BBC History Magazine</subtitle>
	<updated>2025-09-03T08:01:04.000Z</updated>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/people/winston-churchill">
	</link>
	<id>https://www.historyextra.com/people/winston-churchill/feed/atom</id>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.historyextra.com/people/winston-churchill/feed/atom">
	</link>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Kavita Puri</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[Kavita Puri on VJ Day: "We don't talk about the war in Asia – which was a messy, complicated conflict"]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2025/09/GettyImages-615306766LEAD-7eb615a.jpg" width="1500" height="1000">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/kavita-puri-on-vj-day-we-dont-talk-about-the-war-in-asia-which-was-a-messy-complicated-conflict/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/membership/kavita-puri-on-vj-day-we-dont-talk-about-the-war-in-asia-which-was-a-messy-complicated-conflict/</id>
		<updated>2025-09-03T08:01:04.000Z</updated>
		<published>2025-09-03T08:00:44.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="20th Century"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Membership"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Fascism"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Hiroshima"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War battles"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[On the 80th anniversary of VJ Day, broadcaster Kavita Puri – presenter of a new BBC Radio 4 series on the Second World War in Asia – considers why this was the conflict’s forgotten theatre]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p><strong>Matt Elton: </strong><strong>Your new series, exploring fighting on the Asian front during the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/">Second World War</a>, is called </strong><strong><em>The History Podcast:</em></strong><strong> </strong><strong><em>The Second Map</em></strong><strong>. Why did you choose that name?</strong></p><p><strong>Kavita Puri: </strong>It came to me after I met a man called Peter Knight, who is now 98. At the time of the Japanese attack on the US fleet at Pearl Harbor [on 7 December 1941], he was a 14-year-old boy living in a terraced house in Bromley, a south-eastern London suburb. He had been following the war in Europe using a map posted on the wall alongside his dresser. </p><p>After Pearl Harbor, he put up another map on the other side of the dresser – a map of Asia and the Pacific. He would sit down every evening with his mum and grandparents to listen to the BBC bulletin, hearing about places for the first time, and about this other war on the Asian front, in British colonies. And he would trace what was happening on that second map. </p><p>So he was now updating two maps in tandem: one covering the war in Europe against the Nazis, and the second encompassing the war against Japan in Asia.</p><p><strong>Why has the war against Nazi Germany come to dominate how we view this conflict, at least partly to the exclusion of the conflict in Asia? </strong></p><p>I think it’s understandable: that war was close by and involved places whose names were more familiar to people in Britain. And it affected people here more directly: Peter Knight had experienced <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/the-blitz-what-happened-how-many-died-blitz-meaning/">the Blitz</a>, for example. So the European war was close to home, whereas this other war was far away.</p><p>It was also a messy, complicated war – and not just because it was fought in jungle terrain, and soldiers were dying of malaria and other diseases as well as in combat. It wasn’t a neat good-v-bad situation, like the war against the Nazis. The war with Japan was essentially about two empires competing with each other, so it’s a much harder story to explain. It also involved a lot of troops from the colonies, as well as from Australia. So again, it’s a story about our empire. </p><p>Historians such as Rana Mitter, who helped me with the making of this series, argue that actually we should see the origins of the Second World War not in the German invasion of Poland in 1939, but much earlier in the early 1930s, with Japanese activities in China. Another aspect of that war on the ‘second map’ that we still don’t talk about much was the fact that the Chinese also fought with the Allies against Japan in some of the major battles.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2025/09/ALAMY-2B00MYPwebready-0993d16.jpg" width="1500" height="974" alt="A black and white photograph of a large group of men in military uniforms riding bicycles" title="Japanese troops cycle through Saigon, c1942. “They were nimble and they moved very, very quickly,” says Kavita Puri (Image by Alamy)" />
<p><strong>So do you think we struggle to see the Asian war as also being a story about the British empire?</strong></p><p>Yes – and I do think that part of the reason we don’t talk about the war in Asia is because many places that were attacked had been part of the British empire for more than a century, and the losses were humiliating. <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/people/winston-churchill/">Winston Churchill</a> said as much when Singapore fell in February 1942, describing it as one of the worst military defeats in British history. A lot of the soldiers who fought and won back places such as Burma [now Myanmar] were soldiers from the empire – and sentiments are complicated by the fact that India then won its independence in 1947. </p><p><strong>In the series, you make the point that the evacuation of Burma isn’t well known. Could you talk us through what happened there?</strong></p><p>Many people think of the war in Asia and the Pacific in terms of two incidents involving the US: Pearl Harbor, and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima on 6 August 1945 and Nagasaki three days later. They don’t really know much about what happened in between. Particularly, one element that’s not often discussed is that British colonies, including Malaya and Singapore, were attacked at almost exactly the same time as Pearl Harbor.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/vj-day-winning-war-east-japan/">VJ Day: turning the tide in the east</a></strong></li></ul><p>Again and again in the oral testimonies, I heard how the British saw themselves as racially superior. I think it was hard for them to understand how their colonies could be overrun by people that they considered inferior. Yet as well as possessing superior tanks and aircraft, the Japanese also used bicycles: they were nimble and they moved very, very quickly. Not only was the loss of Malaya and Singapore humiliating, but it resulted in the capture of around 130,000 British and Indian troops and other colonial and Commonwealth soldiers as prisoners of war. </p><p>Then Japan set its sights on Burma. Rangoon [now Yangon] fell in March 1942, and the rest of the country was lost as early as May. The result was that soldiers had to trek across vast stretches of terrain in a devastating retreat. General William Slim, who later commanded the Fourteenth Army in Burma, described men who were just completely exhausted.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2025/09/TOPFOTO-0035936webready-3a6fee8.jpg" width="1500" height="1151" alt="A black and white photograph showing a small group of people walking across a barren landscape, carrying their belongings on their heads" title="Refugees – many of whom had to flee barefoot carrying anything they could – cross into British lines during the Japanese invasion of Burma (Image by TopFoto)" />
<p>It wasn’t just soldiers retreating, but also colonial civilians – Europeans and Indians, about a million of whom had been working in Burma. Along with some Burmese who were afraid of Japanese reprisals, they headed for India. But the evacuation was quite racialised. White British and European people were given priority and assistance. If you were Indian or Burmese, particularly if you didn’t have means, you were on your own. And that journey was so difficult: it involved walking barefoot with whatever you could carry across very challenging terrain, much of it jungle. You had very little food. You might encounter crocodiles or elephants. </p><p>An estimated 600,000 refugees were on the move but, though it was such a major event, there was so much going on – not only in that region but in the wider war – that this story has often been obscured in popular memory. It was really quite difficult for me to find testimonies of people who had made that journey.</p><p><strong>Why have stories of this event not been told before?</strong></p><p>Partly because most refugees arrived in Bengal, where a terrible famine was developing. If you were an Indian or Burmese person, you were just one of many trying to survive. In addition, that was a tumultuous time in India. There was the famine, the Quit India movement, and the Great Calcutta Killings [deadly riots in 1946], then the violence in the run-up to partition – when, again, millions were on the move, a million people died and two new countries were created. So the story has been obscured in India, even though many Indian nationalists were infuriated at the racialised nature of the evacuation from Burma. It became one of the causes underpinning the Quit India campaign. </p><p>In Britain, too, it’s a very difficult part of our war story to recall: not just the retreat and defeat, but also the racialised aspect undermining the moral underpinnings of empire. </p><p><strong>In the series, you speak to relatives of people held in prisoner-of-war camps, including civilians. Can you tell us about the experiences of Shelagh Brown?</strong></p><p>Shelagh was 25 when the Japanese took Singapore, where she’d been born and had lived all her life. And hers had been a grand life, like lots of colonial families. Before the invasion, Singapore had been largely untouched by the war, unlike Britain. But it was bombed just a couple of hours after Pearl Harbor, and life changed very quickly for her. Even at that point, though, she didn’t think she would have to leave. </p><p>It was only when British soldiers began to cross the causeway, retreating from Malaya, that her family realised things were really serious and tried to evacuate Shelagh and her mother. They got on a small boat, hoping to get to Australia, but were bombed from the air. Shelagh was adrift at sea for 19 hours before Japanese forces caught her and she was interned for the rest of the war. In fact, it wasn’t until six weeks after the war had ended that news reached the internment camp.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2025/09/TOPFOTO-0917695webready-2c046ed.jpg" width="1500" height="1091" alt="A black and white photograph of women sitting around a table, picking" title="Smiles belie the cruel reality of the Kampong Makassar internment camp in the Dutch East Indies. Survivors who experienced trauma often didn’t talk about it after the war. But also, says Kavita Puri, “people didn’t ask” (Image by TopFoto)" />
<p>She died some time ago, but her daughter shared some cassette tapes (never broadcast before) on which Shelagh told her story of survival while being moved from camp to camp. It’s difficult to listen to, particularly because Shelagh’s mother died in the camps, but it’s also remarkable – particularly in how the women kept up their spirits. Shelagh had been in a choir, and her father had been the choir master. So the women formed a vocal orchestra, which was really moving: she said that the notes they were singing were the only free things they had. The Japanese guards would stand outside and listen, and were moved by what they heard. </p><p>Another way that she dealt with the situation was that she somehow got hold of little bits of paper on which she wrote lavish recipes in minute detail, like cakes with 12 eggs. The funny thing is that her daughter said Shelagh had never cooked before in her life, because she had servants in Singapore. But because they were really malnourished, it was just a way to deal with their hunger.</p><p>So it’s an emotionally complicated story. And the stories of women like her haven’t really been well remembered.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2025/09/ALAMY-3A12R6Ywebready-f243288.jpg" width="1500" height="1001" alt="A black and white photograph of a young woman smiling slightly with her arms crossed" title="The London-born anthropologist Ursula Graham Bower led a remarkable guerrilla campaign against the Japanese in Burma (Image by Alamy)" />
<p><strong>Can you tell us about the experiences of Ursula Graham Bower?</strong></p><p>Ursula’s incredible story is told in an interview with her that we found in the archives. A young woman from north London, at the start of the war she was in her mid-twenties, working as an anthropologist in the tribal regions of north-east India near the border with Burma. She was living with a group called the Nagas when Pearl Harbor was bombed, after which she was recruited to work with Naga people gathering intelligence, monitoring what was happening across the border.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/kavita-puri-hidden-histories-south-asian-soldiers-ww1/">Kavita Puri's hidden histories: "Many south Asian diasporic families don’t know of their First World War links"</a></strong></li></ul><p>When the Japanese tried to invade India at Imphal and Kohima in 1944, she found herself on the front line. She cabled headquarters to request weapons – and a box arrived containing grenades and guns – and she used them fearlessly. She was a remarkably brave woman – but so were the Naga people who fought alongside her.</p><p><strong>Military historian Peter Johnston says that the Fourteenth Army was possibly the greatest that Britain ever put into the field. Why don’t we hear more about the story of this ‘Forgotten Army’?</strong></p><p>The Fourteenth Army was formed after the defeats of Singapore and Malaya. It mostly comprised colonial soldiers – predominantly Indians, but also soldiers from west and east Africa as well. By the end of the conflict, it numbered around a million troops. By then, the British had learned lessons about how to lead these soldiers, who were treated much better than colonial troops had been previously. The extraordinary battles that they fought in such challenging terrain, and the conditions that they endured, are remarkable.</p><p>Even at the time, people such as Lord Mountbatten and even the army’s commander, General Slim, joked that it was a forgotten army, fighting a far-away war. Partly, that’s because the Burma campaign and the battles at Imphal and Kohima were fought around the time of the Normandy landings, which of course dominated the headlines. I think there is probably a racialised aspect to it, too. The majority of soldiers in the Fourteenth Army were colonial subjects.</p><p>Equally, I spoke to children of some of the soldiers in the Fourteenth Army, and they didn’t talk about it much, either. After independence, people in India and Pakistan found it hard to remember their soldiers who had fought with the British – that was not the story they wanted to tell about the Second World War. Another factor is that the collection of oral histories hasn’t been done much in India or Pakistan.</p><p>The Imperial War Museum has been trying to gather oral testimonies, but it’s very late now – most of the people involved have died. There are some really important stories that we will never capture now.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2025/09/TOPFOTO-1060579webready-f742b9a.jpg" width="1500" height="1931" alt="A photo of a man dressed in a khaki military uniform and hat, with a pair of binoculars hanging around his neck. In the background, the sky is blue and a blurry group of people" title="General Slim joked that he was leading “a forgotten army fighting a far-away war” (Image by TopFoto)" />
<p><strong>Was there a turning point when people in Britain started to find out about these wartime experiences?</strong></p><p>I’m not sure that ever happened. When I tell people that I’m working on a series about VJ Day, most people ask: what’s that? Or: is that the American War? Yet there are thousands of homes in Britain where a family member was part of this story but didn’t talk about it. </p><p>I was interviewing one 98-year-old veteran, when he said to me: “I’ve got a suitcase in my study. Why don’t you go and have a look?” His daughter said: “I didn’t know about this suitcase.” I don’t know if that generation didn’t talk about it because they saw difficult things, or if they just thought, well, everyone has a war story, what’s the point of talking about mine? Or perhaps because people wanted to hear about the war in Europe. Shelagh Brown’s daughter told me that she was the only one she knew in Chichester who put out a flag for the 75th anniversary of VJ Day – no one else knew why.</p><p>I think broadly people don’t know about the war in Asia, what it was about, why it was a British war, and how our country was connected to it. Yet many south Asians in postwar Britain had their own connections to that war, too, as well as British families.</p><p>One thing I’ve realised making these programmes is that each generation asks different questions about the Second World War. But it’s a race against time to capture these memories – and, it pains me to say, it’s almost too late now.</p><p><strong>How is the war remembered in Japan? Are these kinds of conversations happening there at all?</strong></p><p>It was very important for me to include Japanese voices in the series. I found recorded testimony from a young kamikaze pilot in his early twenties. He was just a kid who was told that he had to undertake this mission. He wanted to do good things for his country, but he also wanted to live. He wanted to get married, have a normal life. </p><p>But, interestingly, Japan doesn’t really remember the Asian war, focusing instead on the war in the Pacific. They see the conflict particularly through the prism of America, because the US rehabilitated Japan very, very quickly after the war. During the Tokyo War Crimes Trials [1946–48], Emperor Hirohito was not part of proceedings, and he built the pacifist constitution in the postwar years. An expert I spoke to for the series observed that it took decades for the Japanese people to talk about the atrocities that their forces committed, and that talking about war memory has become very politicised. But he does say that the new generation is looking at it in a different way.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2025/09/Bridgeman244259webready-47b2ee0.jpg" width="1500" height="1154" alt="A black and white photograph shows a group of British Indian Army soldiers huddled together, preparing weapons" title="British Indian Army soldiers during the battle of Kohima, 1944. This was one of the great Allied victories of the war, but it is not widely known today (Image by Bridgeman Images)" />
<p>Now that few from the generation who lived through those events are still alive, maybe the Japanese today are freer to talk about things they weren’t able to before. For example, when their soldiers came back, they were traumatised and humiliated. They were told not to talk about it. And the children of those families are now opening up about the levels of domestic violence inflicted by some of those men. It can free you up to talk and ask some really difficult questions about your country and the people who led it at the time.</p><p><strong>So many of those who took part in the war in Asia found it difficult to talk about these events – as you say in the series, it’s almost like a confession for them. Is that one reason why it remains obscure in the countries involved?</strong></p><p>It was hard to talk about for lots of reasons, not least the traumatic nature of the events. Whether you were a PoW or a civilian, or witnessed action in battle, it was difficult. So people who came back home didn’t talk – but, also, people didn’t ask. I’ve spoken to family members who were explicitly told not to ask.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/what-happened-europe-after-war-ww2-ve-day-germany/">"The war without an end": what happened in Europe after VE Day?</a></strong></li></ul><p>When one PoW, Maurice Naylor, returned home to Manchester, his family were advised not to talk to him about his experiences – that it would be too much for him. His daughter found some sketches that he’d made. She asked her mother: what is this? And her mother said: don’t ask your father – he was in a PoW camp, and he has nightmares. She thought it had been a Nazi concentration camp, because that was the only kind she knew about. She didn’t even know that there were Japanese PoW camps. So one generation was told not to ask. But I would also say that not only do you need a public space for people to speak, but people also have to know what to ask. If your children are not learning about it in school, and if collectively we don’t know about that history, we won’t know the questions to pose. </p><p>And now, because people didn’t ask, there is often a sense of regret. That’s what I meant by confession. They know something happened. They know a relative saw something, and it was probably not a good thing. I think there is a guilt in not having asked – and now not being able to ask.</p><p><strong>Were there other factors that added to the complications of remembering this story?</strong></p><p>Perhaps one reason is the simplified narrative we tell ourselves about our war: we fought the Nazis, and they were bad; we were good, and we were heroic. And that’s not wrong – but there was also this other war that we fought, and we need to understand that – not least because it touched many thousands of families in Britain. </p><p><strong>This article was first published in the September 2025 issue of <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/bbc-history-magazine/"><em>BBC History Magazine</em></a></strong></p>]]></content>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Emma Mason</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[The history of VE Day street parties]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/VE-Day-revellers-0915ba0-e1746607532216.jpg" width="620" height="411">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/ve-day-street-party-celebrate-pictures-ww2-history/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/ve-day-street-party-celebrate-pictures-ww2-history/</id>
		<updated>2025-05-07T15:38:43.000Z</updated>
		<published>2025-05-07T07:30:38.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="VE Day"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Wartime Britain"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[Millions of people took to the streets of Britain on 8 May 1945 to celebrate VE Day – the day when the German armed forces signed an unconditional surrender, and the Second World War in Europe finally came to an end. Hanging bunting, waving flags, drinking and dancing, the streets were crammed with joyous revellers...]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p>At 2.41am on 7 May 1945, at a schoolhouse near Reims in northern France, General Alfred Jodl, the German chief of staff, signed the unconditional surrender of all German land, sea and air forces wherever they might be fighting. General Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, rang General Sir ‘Pug’ Ismay, Churchill’s chief of staff. “The war is over,” he said. </p><p>“But no official announcement could be made” said Juliet Gardiner, writing for <em>BBC History Magazine</em> in 2005. “Stalin insisted that victory should not be proclaimed until German troops on the eastern front had surrendered to the Soviet general Zukhov in Berlin and the long-awaited news could be proclaimed simultaneously in London, Moscow and Washington.”</p><p>Yet rumours that the war had finally ended soon began to filter through to the British public. “The newspapers are full of rumours of surrender… feeling almost excited… everyone is speculating,” wrote Lyn Murphy, who worked for the director of an electrical manufacturer engaged in war production, in her diary for 7 May 1945. </p><p>“They shouldn’t keep people hanging about waiting like this. The government needn’t be afraid of people going mad, everybody’s very sober about it,” complained a middle-aged man to a member of Mass-Observation, the organisation that compiled reports on British wartime attitudes and morale, which was out in force now that victory was in the air.</p><p>On the afternoon of 8 May 1945, the British prime minister <a href="/period/second-world-war/facts-winston-churchill-prime-minister-speeches-clementine-childhood/">Winston Churchill</a> made the radio announcement that the world had long been waiting for. He announced that hostilities with Germany would cease at one minute past midnight, and that “our dear Channel Islands”, the only part of British territory to have been occupied, “are to be freed today”. After nearly six long years, the war in Europe was finally over.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3432929-4d9bca8-scaled-e1746607596456.jpg" width="619" height="413" alt="Prime Minister Winston Churchill makes his VE Day broadcast to the world, 8 May 1945. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)" title="Prime Minister Winston Churchill makes his VE Day broadcast to the world, 8 May 1945. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)" />
<h3 id="time-to-party-d5b69861">Time to party</h3><p>The celebrations began almost immediately. But there were no official plans for <a href="/period/second-world-war/brief-guide-ve-day-victory-europe-ww2/">VE Day</a> – notice of the public holiday had been so short that most weren’t sure how to celebrate. Gardiner, who later interviewed people who experienced VE Day firsthand, said: “A London window cleaner probably spoke for many when he declared ‘the holiday is the main issue… very few have any definite plans, and these almost exclusively consist of getting drunk.’”</p><p>Most people had expected the church bells to be rung: “I thought they’d be clanging all day long,” reported a Surrey woman, “but there was no signal. Just hanging around… No All Clears, no bells. Nothing to start people off.”</p><p>The weather looked set to be fair – though the papers forecast possible rain later. But even that was a novelty, said Gardiner. Throughout the war it had been forbidden to publish the weather forecast in the newspapers or broadcast it on the wireless, for fear of giving the Germans information that might be useful in planning <a href="/period/second-world-war/the-cruel-cost-of-the-blitz/">bombing raids</a>.</p><p>Some people went to church to give thanks for the peace at hastily arranged services, while others strolled around their local streets admiring the flags and streamers that had been hung out. Children set to work making Union Jack flags with cardboard and crayons.</p><p>Although VE Day was strictly speaking a continental European event, it was celebrated all over the world. In London, more than a million people took to the streets and huge crowds gathered outside Buckingham Palace to see Churchill standing on the balcony alongside <a href="/period/20th-century/george-vi-biography-facts-key-moments-life-king-stammer-guide/">King George VI</a>. The king's daughters, Princess Elizabeth – the future <a href="/period/20th-century/young-elizabeth-ii-life-queen-childhood-princess-how-monarch-royal-family/">Queen Elizabeth II</a> (pictured far left) – and <a href="/period/20th-century/princess-margaret-facts-queen-elizabeth-royal-family-rebel-affair-crown-helena-bonham-carter/">Princess Margaret</a>, appeared alongside them. In Paris and New York, similar crowds gathered along the Champs Elysée and in Times Square.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-1055137514-8c506de-scaled-e1746607697310.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="King George VI and Queen Elizabeth on VE Day" title="King George VI and Queen Elizabeth made eight appearances on the balcony at Buckingham Palace on VE Day. (Photo by The Print Collector/Getty Images)" />
<p>Michael Mason, 13, who had been evacuated from his home in central London to a village in Hertfordshire in 1939 and was still there on VE Day, said: “I caught the early bus… to London. I wanted to spend the day with my mum and dad. The scenes in the capital were incredible. It was one huge celebration. A tremendous wave of pent-up feelings had broken loose. The streets were crammed with joyful revellers.”</p><p>The partying went on into the night: “Crowds surged back to <a href="/period/20th-century/7-memorable-moments-in-the-history-of-buckingham-palace/">Buckingham Palace</a> to call for the king and queen again, lines of conga dancers wove along Piccadilly, revellers jumped into the fountains in Trafalgar Square,” wrote Gardiner. “The police were tolerant, instructed to intervene only when there was danger to life or limb, to let a war weary people go a little wild just for one night. In fact, there was remarkably little trouble or drunken behaviour – partly because most pubs had already run dry by eight o’clock.”</p><p>Majorie Cantwell, who was nine in 1945 and living in Ealing, west London, thought that “VE Day was the best day of my life. All morning we had been collecting things for the bonfire (including an old piano full of woodworm!)… when darkness finally fell we lit our bonfire and placed a Hitler “guy” on the top. It was in the middle of the road so we were all able to dance around it. </p><p>“Later two radios were placed side by side in the window of a nearby house and BBC dance music was relayed into the street. All the grown-ups danced and sang until they were exhausted. When the dance music went off the air, my dad entertained everyone with his banjo and people sang and danced some more. We all went to bed that night tired and happy and I felt that nothing could ever harm us again.”</p><hr><h3 id="look-back-at-the-8-may-1945-celebrations-in-pictures-409eef3b"><strong>Look back at the 8 May 1945 celebrations in pictures… </strong></h3>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3313750-1-177d483-e1746607769852.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Beer van VE Day" title="A van-load of beer passing through Piccadilly Circus on VE Day. The statue of Eros, protected during the war by advertising hoardings, can be seen in the background. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3276265-040cd5d-scaled-e1746607806479.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Canadian troops entertain the crowds in Leicester Square while waiting for the broadcast of the King's VE Day speech, 8 May 1945. (Photo by Topical Press Agency/Getty Images)" title="Canadian troops entertain the crowds in Leicester Square while waiting for the broadcast of the King's VE Day speech, 8 May 1945. (Photo by Topical Press Agency/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3276257-1-1e7f50b-scaled-e1746607885517.jpg" width="620" height="414" alt="A victory street party near Clapham Common, London, to celebrate VE Day. (Photo by Fox Photos/Getty Images)" title="A victory street party near Clapham Common, London, to celebrate VE Day. (Photo by Fox Photos/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3312682-7950150-e1746608155941.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="The residents of Tilloch Street, Islington, London, who organised a tea party in the street for their children at Whitsun. (Photo by Central Press/Getty Images)" title="The residents of Tilloch Street, Islington, London, who organised a tea party in the street for their children at Whitsun. (Photo by Central Press/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-498836763-e7fd3ae-scaled-e1746608288805.jpg" width="667" height="413" alt="Netherfield VE Day street party" title="A VE Day party in Dunstan Street, Netherfield, Nottinghamshire. (Photo by NEMPR Picture the Past/Heritage Images/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-1053635004-6d16d57-scaled-e1746608368962.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Children’s VE Day street party" title="A children’s VE Day street party in a country village, location unknown. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3325640-245ef87-scaled-e1746608441386.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Wife celebrates VE Day news" title="Mrs Pat Burgess of Palmer's Green, north London, is thrilled to get the news that her husband will soon be home for good from Germany. (Photo by Reg Speller/Fox Photos/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-599287126-54ac22d-scaled-e1746608474777.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="VJ Day street party" title="A VJ (Victory in Japan) Day street party at Heaton Park, Manchester, 15 August 1945. (Photo by Manchester Evening News Archive/Mirrorpix/Mirrorpix via Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-2667465-d830d50-scaled-e1746608529604.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="V-shaped table VE Day" title="Children sit down to a victory party at a V-shaped table, given by residents at Kentwell Close, Brockley, in south London. (Photo by Reg Speller/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3400773-00048ce-scaled-e1746608574419.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Victory tea party and concert in Wimbledon" title="A victory tea party and concert is held in Wimbledon, London, to celebrate VE Day, 2 June 1945. (Photo by Bert Kneller/Fox Photos/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-168073389-6dc1103-scaled-e1746608608506.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Paris VE Day" title="People looking at the crowded Avenue des Champs-Élysées from the Arc de Triomphe as Parisians gathered in the streets of Paris to celebrate VE Day, 8 May 1945. (Photo by AFP via Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-498836765-6e46d99-scaled-e1746608650254.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Carlton VE Day street party" title="A VE Day party in Park Avenue, Carlton, Nottingham. (Photo by NEMPR Picture the Past/Heritage Images/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3163094-ae52d7e-scaled-e1746608700684.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Sailors on VE Day" title="Canadian sailors resting in a park during celebrations in London on VE Day. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3416321-1-e58ed42-scaled-e1746608736397.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Tilloch Street Islington VE Day street party" title="Residents of Tilloch Street in Islington, London, during a tea party to celebrate VE Day. (Photo by Central Press/Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-514678800-ec509ab-scaled-e1746608789284.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="VE Day celebrations in Times Square, New York. (Photo by Bettmann via Getty Images)" title="VE Day celebrations in Times Square, New York. (Photo by Bettmann via Getty Images)" />

<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/05/GettyImages-3312678-1-15483f6-e1746608848534.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="VE Day bonfire" title="One of the many bonfires lit to celebrate VE Day. (Photo by Topical Press Agency/Getty Images)" />]]></content>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>HistoryExtra</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[Winston Churchill: is he still the greatest Briton in history?]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2025/01/GettyImages-102731230-CMYK-9b2d3bd-e1737475112991.jpg" width="620" height="413">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/winston-churchill-still-greatest-briton-history/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/membership/winston-churchill-still-greatest-briton-history/</id>
		<updated>2025-03-14T09:18:04.000Z</updated>
		<published>2025-03-14T09:17:44.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Membership"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="British prime ministers"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[Over two decades ago, a BBC poll named the wartime British prime minister as the Greatest Briton. Now, on the 150th anniversary of Winston Churchill’s birth, David Reynolds ponders whether he deserves to remain as top dog in the pantheon of British history]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p>In a much-publicised poll in 2002, the BBC asked viewers to rank figures from British history, as part of the television series<em> 100 Greatest Britons</em>. The poll was in no way scientific, but simply reflected votes – more than 1.6 million of them – from people who chose to contact the BBC, following presentations championing famous individuals ranging back in time from the 20th century to <a href="/period/elizabethan/william-shakespeare-kenneth-branagh-facts-life-plays-playwright-writer-bard/">William Shakespeare</a> and <a href="/period/elizabethan/7-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-elizabeth-i/">Elizabeth I</a>.</p><p>As is well known, <a href="/period/second-world-war/facts-winston-churchill-prime-minister-speeches-clementine-childhood/">Winston Churchill</a> came out a clear first, garnering close to 457,000 votes. Two decades later, as we mark 150 years since he was born, it’s interesting to revisit that moment, and to reflect on how perceptions of Churchill have changed over time – and also on what is meant by historical ‘greatness’. Because Churchill’s craving to make himself ‘great’ lies at the heart of his extraordinary story.</p><p>In the run-up to the BBC poll, politician Mo Mowlam – Churchill’s advocate – insisted that “he was the greatest Briton because he showed the determination and courage to protect Britain from invasion, and without his inspiring leadership the outcome of World War II may have been very different”.</p><p>Let’s unpack that claim a bit. Did Churchill really make such a difference in 1940 – and, if so, how? The answer to the first part is surely: yes – most of all through his energy and drive.</p><p>Although the tempo in Whitehall would have intensified anyway with the end of the ‘Phoney War’ and the German invasion of France, Churchill’s appointment as prime minister had a galvanising effect, dramatically symbolised by his famous red labels stuck on urgent documents: ACTION THIS DAY.</p>
<p>Equally important, Churchill took a firm grip on military strategy. Mindful of the confusion and infighting of 1914–18, he appointed himself minister of defence. There was no ministry – that did not come until the 1960s. Churchill simply wanted the authority to deal with the chiefs of staff directly rather than via their politician ministers.</p><p>He yearned to be a war leader, unlike <a href="/period/second-world-war/munich-the-edge-of-war-tries-to-soften-chamberlains-reputation/">Neville Chamberlain</a> – his predecessor as PM – or Lord Halifax, the alternative when Chamberlain lost the support of the Commons. Neither of them had any appetite for such a role, whereas Churchill – a soldier by training – had dreamed of it since childhood.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="/membership/neville-chamberlain-is-underestimated-argues-author-robert-harris/">Neville Chamberlain is underestimated, argues author Robert Harris</a></strong></li></ul><p>Churchill was also an accomplished communicator. Often he’s remembered for his soundbites – ‘fight them on the beaches’, ‘finest hour’, ‘special relationship’ – but these were only the icing on the cake. Churchill regarded his speeches as tools of public education, helping the British population understand what became known as ‘the people’s war’.</p><p>When <a href="/period/second-world-war/adolf-hitler-fuhrer-facts-guide-rise-nazi-dictator-biography-pictures/">Adolf Hitler</a> invaded the Soviet Union on 22 June 1941, Churchill gave a radio address on the BBC about what he called “the Fourth Climacteric”, connecting it to three earlier turning points in the war. He spent hours preparing his speeches in a way that may seem inconceivable now in the days of tweets and social media.</p><p>There isn’t space here to do full justice to Churchill’s impact, but one other point should be mentioned. Most British premiers had received a classical education, informed by Latin, Greek and philosophy; few had any grasp of science and technology.</p><p>By contrast, Churchill loathed the classics but was fascinated by gadgets and science fiction – by the world of HG Wells. That’s why he quickly grasped the value of Ultra – the operation to intercept enemy signals intelligence – and ensured that the codebreakers of <a href="/period/second-world-war/guide-to-bletchley-park-ww2-decryption-centre/">Bletchley Park</a> were provided with an abundance of money and gifted personnel.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="/membership/bletchley-park-britains-wartime-intelligence-factory/">Bletchley Park: Britain's wartime intelligence factory</a></strong></li></ul><h2 id="the-peoples-war-ea61c257">The people’s war</h2><p>Yet there’s another side to the story of 1940 that was not voiced by Mo Mowlam.</p><p>More important than Churchill’s “courage and determination” in protecting Britain from invasion after France fell were decisions during the 1930s by governments of which he was not a part. Key among these was the development of a new generation of fast monoplane fighters – Hurricanes and <a href="/membership/spitfire-supermarine-fighter-ww2-facts-design-history/">Spitfires</a> – linked to the Chain Home system of radar stations giving crucial early warning of when and where enemy bombers were crossing the Channel.</p><p>Churchill was aware of these developments, and contributed to some of the discussions, but these were his ‘Wilderness Years’ when he was out of office. The decisions were made while the ‘appeasers’ were in power – and they were vital in winning the <a href="/period/second-world-war/battle-of-britain-ww2-facts-what-happened-who-won-spitfire-raf-luftwaffe/">Battle of Britain</a>.</p><p>That highlights a deeper point. Technological innovations such as radar and Ultra could have been developed only by an advanced industrial state – by what historian David Edgerton has called the ‘warfare state’ – often neglected in accounts of modern Britain because of a preoccupation with the welfare state.</p><p>The war that Churchill waged was possible only because of a long series of decisions and developments going back to the <a href="/membership/the-industrial-revolution-an-age-of-opportunity/">industrial revolution</a>. This provides a salutary reminder that an intense focus on individual leaders can blind us to structural factors that also shape historical change.</p><h2 id="victory-or-bust-1b05e5dc">Victory or bust</h2><p>Surviving 1940 was one thing; winning the war was very different. Three days into his premiership, Churchill told the Commons that his goal was “victory at all costs”. Yet after the French signed an armistice with Germany on 22 June, that sounded like fantasy. France had been Britain’s principal ally throughout the First World War, its army anchoring the western front.</p><p>Britain was now alone – and there was no western front on the continent of Europe. Britain and its empire – from Canada to India, from the Caribbean to Australasia – made a major contribution to the war, but eventual victory over Hitler and the Axis depended substantially on the Soviet Union and the US. Put simply, the Soviets provided the manpower, the Americans the firepower.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="/membership/1942-churchill-darkest-hour-reputation-public-opinion/">1942: Churchill's darkest hour</a></strong></li></ul><p>Between June 1941 and June 1944 – from the opening of Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union until <a href="/membership/d-day-a-resounding-success-for-the-allies/">D-Day</a> – more than 90 per cent of the German army’s battle casualties (killed, wounded, missing and prisoners) were inflicted by the Red Army.</p><p>The US was the ‘arsenal of democracy’, producing an abundance of munitions and supplies, much of which was shared with its allies through Lend-Lease aid. And the arrival of the US and Soviet armies in Germany in 1945 was a prelude to the <a href="/period/20th-century/cold-war-facts-ideologies-who-won-hot-spy-nuclear/">Cold War</a> division of Europe between these two superpowers.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="/membership/churchill-d-day/">Churchill's evolving perspective on D-Day</a></strong></li></ul><p>Of course, Churchill was no mere spectator in all of this. The stereotype of the ‘bulldog’ can easily blind us to his remarkable skills as improviser. Even before the fall of France, he was assiduously courting president <a href="/period/second-world-war/life-of-the-week-president-franklin-d-roosevelt/">Franklin D Roosevelt</a> with messages, later followed by personal visits to the US. He did the same with <a href="/period/20th-century/josef-stalin-soviet-union-dictator/">Joseph Stalin</a> from 1942, becoming the essential intermediary between the White House and the Kremlin.</p><p>During a photo shoot at the Tehran conference in November 1943, when someone remarked that the <a href="/membership/churchill-stalin-and-roosevelt-the-big-threes-war-of-words/">‘Big Three’</a> looked like the Holy Trinity, Stalin responded: “If that is so, Churchill must be the Holy Ghost. He flies around so much.”</p><p>The PM’s improvisations in shuttle diplomacy helped keep Britain in the diplomatic game – but by 1945, nothing could obscure the fact that the Big Three was more like the Big 2½.</p><h2 id="strategy-for-greatness-d6b80ccb">Strategy for greatness</h2><p>All that being so, the reason why he looms so large in accounts of the war, almost obscuring anyone and anything else, is because of Churchill the historian. We remember him in part because he was utterly determined not to be forgotten.</p><p>That had been true all his life. Right from the start, he had a clear strategy for greatness: hit the headlines as a soldier or a politician, then be sure to write your own account. Deeds and words: both were essential to ensure that his story became history. That’s what he did in the Second World War – a hefty six-pack of volumes published between 1948 and 1954, less than a decade after victory was won.</p>
<p>No other war leader was a serious competitor. Roosevelt died before the war ended; Stalin published no autobiography; and the trilogy of war memoirs by Charles de Gaulle did not appear until 1954–59. So Churchill got into print quickly and in formidable detail, determined to shape the public narrative before others could do so.</p><p>He was careful to say that his work was not history but “a contribution to history which will be of service to the future”, told mainly from the vantage point of <a href="/period/modern/10-downing-street-history-facts-mouser-prime-minister-residence/">Number 10</a>. But the heavy ballast of quotation from his own minutes, memos and telegrams, and the absence of replies (partly to avoid long wrangles about copyright), had the effect, as the cabinet secretary put it, of “creating the impression that no one but he ever took an initiative”.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="/period/second-world-war/did-winston-churchill-adolf-hitler-ever-meet/">Did Churchill and Hitler ever meet?</a></strong></li></ul><p>And the choice of title – <em>The Second World War</em> rather than <em>War Memoirs</em> – enhanced the sense that Churchill’s personal story enfolded the whole global conflict. The hardback sold 2 million copies in Britain and a similar number in the US. And Churchill’s take on the war reached even larger audiences around the world through book translations and newspaper serialisations.</p><p>That was not the end of Churchill’s history-making – only the end of the beginning. Before his death in 1965, he commissioned an official biography, based on privileged access to his papers. His son, Randolph, authored the first two volumes before his own death in 1968; the work was completed by the Oxford historian Martin Gilbert, with the eighth and final volume appearing in 1988.</p><p>The furrows that Churchill had dug through the war were deepened further by 23 volumes of documents, a project started by Gilbert and rounded off by wealthy acolytes in the US. Screen portrayals of the 1930s and the war also kept him centre-stage, initiated by Robert Hardy in the ITV series <em>Winston Churchill: The Wilderness Years</em> in 1981, for which Gilbert was co-scriptwriter.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | </strong><a href="/period/second-world-war/the-churchill-factor-how-one-man-made-history/"><strong>Books interview with Boris Johnson: "Churchill was a tremendous bully in some ways, but we needed a bully"</strong> </a></li></ul><p>Later depictions featured Albert Finney (<em>The Gathering Storm</em>, 2002), Brendan Gleeson (<em>Into the Storm</em>, 2009) and Gary Oldman (<em>Darkest Hour</em>, 2017). Popular biographies took the same approach, encapsulated by Boris Johnson’s entertaining contribution, <em>The Churchill Factor: How One Man Made History</em> (2014).</p><h2 id="creating-an-icon-cf1466e2">Creating an icon</h2><p>As historians Allen Packwood and Warren Dockter have observed: “Churchill the writer played a key role in creating Churchill the icon,” adding that “ironically, in doing so he also raised his own profile to such a level that challenges to his reputation became inevitable.”</p><p>Even before Churchill died, an edited version of the diaries of Lord Alanbrooke, wartime chief of the Imperial General Staff, revealed some of the challenges of working with this volatile genius. Within a year of Churchill’s death his doctor, Lord Moran, went into print with <em>Winston Churchill: The Struggle for Survival</em>, provoking a storm of controversy about the ethics of a physician writing about his patient.</p><p>And in 1970, Robert Rhodes James, formerly one of Randolph’s research assistants, published a biography of Churchill up to the Second World War. In it he argued that, had Churchill died in 1939, his life would have been deemed <em>A Study in Failure</em>. Seen that way, the war premiership stood out as an aberration.</p><p>Like any historical personage, over time Churchill was becoming a figure of controversy, and the mass of documents published by the Churchillians fed the debate, both for and against. In any case, historical perspectives inevitably shift with time.</p><p>Mo Mowlam, his BBC champion in 2002, was born in 1949. For people of that generation, and for those who lived through the war, the conflict still seemed all too present – not least in the urban wastelands and prefab housing that bore witness to <a href="/period/second-world-war/the-blitz-what-happened-how-many-died-blitz-meaning/">the Blitz</a> in many cities, and in the emotional power of <a href="/membership/in-focus-remembrance-day-traditions/">Remembrance Sunday</a>.</p><p>Yet for ‘Gen Z’, born in the late 1990s and 2000s, the Second World War can seem almost prehistoric. Britain today is far more ethnically diverse than the predominantly white country led by Churchill in 1940–45, largely the result of postwar immigration from the former British empire.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="/membership/london-is-the-place-for-me-david-olusoga-on-the-windrush-generation/">“London is the place for me”: David Olusoga on the Windrush generation</a></strong></li></ul><p>Earlier statistics are not precise, but census returns for the past few decades show that the proportion of people in England and Wales identifying themselves as ‘white’ fell from 91.3 per cent in 2001 to 81.7 per cent in 2021, by which time 9.3 per cent of residents described themselves as Asian, 4 per cent as black and 2.9 per cent as mixed race.</p><p>Although many of these people had been born in Britain, they often had a different sense of their heritage from Mowlam’s generation, influenced by parents or grandparents who grew up in the Caribbean or south Asia.</p><p>In recent years, there has been a passionate debate about India’s war. For that nation, the focal wartime trauma was not the Blitz but the <a href="/membership/1943-bengal-famine/">Bengal Famine</a> of 1943–44, which killed perhaps 3 million.</p><p>Causes and contributing factors are complex and hard to balance, including floods, crop disease and wartime inflation in Bengal, the disastrous fall in rice imports after Japan’s conquest of Burma, the slow reaction of the British authorities, and the shortage of shipping in 1943–44 because of the Allied build-up for D-Day.</p><p>But in <em>Churchill’s Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India during World War II</em> (2010), Indian-American journalist Madhusree Mukerjee blamed much of the policy failure on the PM. Churchill’s contempt for what he called (privately) in February 1945 the “foul race” of Hindus was noted by many British politicians and officials of the time, and drove his conviction that Indians were not capable of self-government.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="/membership/untold-story-india-soldiers-prisoners-of-war-pows-ww2/">The untold story of India’s WW2 prisoners of war</a></strong></li></ul><p>The debate was fanned anew by the Black Lives Matter movement in the US and the UK after 2019. Accusations of genocide were levelled at Churchill, and his statue in London’s Parliament Square was daubed with “was a racist”. Churchillians offered robust defence, but the anti-Churchill polemics – often based on ignorance of the detailed story – remind us that heroes can easily be turned into villains as perspectives change.</p><h2 id="a-rival-perspective-27bff3f3">A rival perspective</h2><p>It’s often said that Churchill’s attitude to India was just part of the mental baggage of Victorian England. A glance at <a href="/period/20th-century/clement-attlee-history-prime-minister-labour-facts-achievements-legacy/.">Clement Attlee</a>, his successor as PM in 1945, offers a useful corrective. In fact, examining Attlee’s rise to power provides an intriguing perspective on Churchill’s world view.</p>
<p>Born in 1883 – thus also a Victorian, though eight years younger than Churchill – Attlee grew up in a prosperous professional family in the south-west London suburb of Putney. Whereas Churchill’s imperialist ideology was shaped by service as a soldier on the frontiers of Victoria’s empire, Attlee’s crucible was London’s East End.</p><p>Attlee lived in a social work settlement for nearly a decade before the First World War. This opened his eyes to urban deprivation, but also to the potential of many adolescents in London’s docklands if given discipline and motivation. He became a lifelong socialist.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="/membership/why-churchills-reputation-is-still-on-the-line/">Why Churchill’s reputation is still on the line</a></strong></li></ul><p>Unlike many Labour men of that era, Major Attlee was no pacifist. He served as an officer in the <a href="/membership/battle-gallipoli-anzac-day-australian-australia-turkey-history-what-when/">Gallipoli campaign</a> and on the western front. But he was not an imperial diehard like Churchill, who never set foot in India after the 1890s. Two extended tours around <a href="/membership/revising-the-raj-india/">the Raj</a> with a parliamentary delegation in 1928–29 convinced Attlee that India must follow Australia and New Zealand along the path to self-government and eventual independence. And he acted on that conviction as prime minister in 1945–51.</p><p>With the <a href="/period/20th-century/winston-churchill-top-secret-plans-for-his-funeral/">death of Churchill</a> in January 1965, Attlee penned a reflective tribute, judging him to have been “the greatest leader in war this country has ever known”. Not because he was the greatest warrior or strategist, but because “he was able to solve the problem that democratic countries in total war find crucial and may find fatal: relations between the civil and military leaders.”</p><p>Attlee had in mind the 1914–18 feuds between ‘Frock Coats’ and ‘Brass Hats’, but maybe also the ‘Bonapartist’ tendency of successful war leaders to seize political power. When Churchill put himself before the electorate in 1945 and was resoundingly defeated, he accepted their verdict, despite deep resentment at being kicked out.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="/membership/churchill-the-cry-baby-war-hero/">Churchill: the ‘cry-baby’ war hero</a></strong></li></ul><p>Attlee regretted the fact that Churchill did not retire from politics in 1945. “I had seen enough of him during the war to be sure that, unless there was a war on, he would not make much of a prime minister,” he wrote. Instead, “what Britain required when the war was over was an architect, somebody who could build new parts into our society, and repair damage.”</p><p>Attlee was, of course, positioning himself as the architect trying to repair the damage of two world wars and rebuild British society on socialist lines.</p><p>Both Churchill and Attlee were deeply patriotic, but they differed about the essence of national greatness. For Winston it was the empire, whereas Clem saw imperial overstretch as an outdated burden. Despite the eventual bloodbath over the <a href="/membership/legacy-of-partition-british-india-trauma/">partition of India</a>, Attlee was proud of bringing the Raj to what he saw as a long-overdue end, and of helping transform empire into Commonwealth.</p><p>At home, what mattered for him was the concept of social security he had evolved in the East End, and “the duty of the state to act as the coordinating factor in making all individual effort work for the good of the citizen”. Commonwealth and socialism defined his sense of what it meant for Britain to be great.</p><p>In this piece I’ve emphasised the importance of seeing Churchill in context – against the wider dynamics of the Second World War and in relation to his contemporaries. Back in the 1890s, Rudyard Kipling rebuked those who held a myopic view of English history: “What should they know of England who only England know?”</p><p>Adapting Kipling, we might ask today: “What should they know of Churchill who only Churchill know?”</p><p>By definition, a biography tends to isolate its subject as good or bad. Placing a leader in context is surely the task of any historian. For me, the question of who was the greatest ever Briton makes no sense. But I’ve no doubt that, in his ‘finest hour’, Winston Churchill did win the immortality he craved.</p><p><strong>David Reynolds is emeritus professor of international history at the University of Cambridge. He is the author of <em>Mirrors of Greatness: Churchill and the Leaders Who Shaped Him</em> (William Collins, 2023)</strong></p><p><em><strong>This article was first published in the Christmas 2024 issue of <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/bbc-history-magazine/">BBC History Magazine</a></strong></em></p>]]></content>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Ellie Cawthorne</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[Churchill's prewar crisis meetings]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2024/09/Pod-Katherine-Carter-WL-d39a808.jpg" width="620" height="413">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/churchill-prewar-crisis-podcast-katherine-carter/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/membership/churchill-prewar-crisis-podcast-katherine-carter/</id>
		<updated>2024-09-30T12:31:44.000Z</updated>
		<published>2024-09-25T06:30:59.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Membership"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[Katherine Carter reveals how Winston Churchill hosted crucial meetings at his country home, Chartwell, in the run-up to the Second World War]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p>In the run-up to the Second World War, Winston Churchill's Kent home, Chartwell, was transformed from a cosy country pile to an informal Home Office, as the politician invited influential guests to come for dinner, drinks.... and off-the-record discussions. From 'Lawrence of Arabia' to Albert Einstein, Katherine Carter tells Ellie Cawthorne how these visitors shaped Churchill's views about the looming prospect of war.</p>
<p><strong>Katherine Carter is the author <em>Churchill's Citadel: Chartwell and the Gatherings Before the Storm</em> (Yale University Press, 2024)</strong></p><ul><li><strong><a href="https://uk.bookshop.org/p/books/churchill-s-citadel-chartwell-and-the-gatherings-before-the-storm-katherine-carter/7663762">Buy now on Bookshop.org</a></strong></li><li><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Churchills-Citadel-Chartwell-Gatherings-Before/dp/0300270194/?tag=bbchistory045-21&amp;ascsubtag=historyextra-273712" rel="sponsored" target="_blank">Buy now on Amazon</a></strong></li><li><strong><a href="https://www.awin1.com/cread.php?id=489797&amp;clickref=historyextra-273712&amp;awinmid=3787&amp;p=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.waterstones.com%2Fbook%2Fchurchills-citadel%2Fkatherine-carter%2F9780300270198" rel="sponsored" target="_blank">Buy now on Waterstones</a></strong></li></ul>]]></content>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>HistoryExtra</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[Churchill's evolving perspective on D-Day]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2024/06/Pod-Richard-Dannatt-Allen-Packwood-WL-1-31a125e.jpg" width="620" height="413">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/churchill-d-day/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/membership/churchill-d-day/</id>
		<updated>2024-06-11T09:16:06.000Z</updated>
		<published>2024-06-11T09:12:54.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Membership"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[Richard Dannatt and Allen Packwood discuss the prime minister's role in one of the major moments of the Second World War]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p>D-Day was one of the key episodes in the Second World War. But what did Winston Churchill make of the plans for the Allied invasion of Nazi-occupied France? Was, as some have suggested, the British prime minister really reluctant to get involved? And how fraught were relationships between the Allied leaders? Speaking to Matt Elton, Richard Dannatt and Allen Packwood, authors of new book <em>Churchill's D-Day: The Inside Story</em>, discuss the decisions and tensions behind the operation.</p>
<div class="highlight-box">
<p><strong>Listen on the <em>HistoryExtra</em> podcast </strong>
<ul>
 	<li><strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/d-day-churchill-podcast-richard-dannatt-allen-packwood/">D-Day: was Churchill really against the operation?</a></strong></li>
</ul>
</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2024/06/Pod-Richard-Dannatt-Allen-Packwood-WL-1-31a125e.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Winston Churchill. (Photo by Getty Images)" title="Winston Churchill. (Photo by Getty Images)" />
</div>
<h3 id="what-context-do-we-need-to-understand-about-churchill-and-britain-in-the-early-years-of-the-second-world-war-to-make-sense-of-what-was-to-happen-in-the-run-up-to-d-day-f76de972">What context do we need to understand about Churchill – and Britain – in the early years of the Second World War to make sense of what was to happen in the run up to D-Day?</h3><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>Richard Dannatt:</strong> The first thing to consider is the circumstances of how Churchill became prime minister in May 1940. He had recently been present at a parliamentary debate to defend a disastrous campaign in Norway that had taken place in the months beforehand. It had been Churchill’s idea to try and hobble German industry by cutting off the supply of iron ore from Sweden through Norway into Germany – and it had been a disaster. Everything you can think of that could go wrong, had gone wrong – and it's one of the illustrated examples that we use in the British Army staff college about how not to conduct an operation. This – among other things – would continue to play on Churchill’s mind.</p><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>Allen Packwood:</strong> We must remember that Churchill is not <em>elected</em> prime minister in May 1940. He is there, really, because of a Westminster coup to remove Neville Chamberlain.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">Churchill then had to construct a national coalition government, which meant he had to put together a war cabinet containing people who – until recently – had been his rivals or political opponents. This meant he did not enter the war as prime minister in a strong position – and he had to consider carefully how he was going to respond to that.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">We then had the Dunkirk evacuation, and Churchill very famously said that wars are not won by evacuations. But it must have been very clear to him – in 1940 – that the road was going to be a very long, hard one before Britain could return to France.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/churchill-d-day-oppose-against-normandy-overlord-landings/">Churchill and D-Day: did the prime minister oppose the Normandy landings?</a></strong></li></ul><h3 id="one-of-the-things-that-has-often-been-said-to-have-influenced-churchills-approach-to-d-day-is-his-experience-in-the-first-world-war-specifically-the-dardanelles-campaign-1915-16-do-you-th-47b40759">One of the things that has often been said to have influenced Churchill’s approach to D-Day is his experience in the First World War, specifically the Dardanelles campaign (1915-16). Do you think this is overstated?</h3><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>RD: </strong>I think the Dardanelles campaign had a major impact on Churchill. He was the Lord of the Admiralty at the time, and he had come up with the campaign’s concept, which was a bold attempt to try and break the deadlock of the extended trench warfare on the Western Front. You must give him marks for trying to find a new initiative, but – and this is the sadness – although the strategic thinking might have been reasonable, the operational delivery was woeful.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | </strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/first-world-war/gallipoli-what-went-wrong-ww1-campaign-why-failed/"><strong>Dardanelles: 5 reasons why the First World War campaign was a failure</strong></a></li></ul><p style="font-weight: 400">There was also a huge loss of life in the Dardanelles campaign. This, in addition to the Norway campaign, sat heavily on Churchill’s mind in the run up to D-Day. I think it played very much into his overall thinking.</p><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>AP: </strong>The lesson that he took away from Dardanelles was that if you were going to attempt an operation of this scale and complexity then you needed to do it very carefully – and at the right time. You needed to make sure that you had control of all the moving parts, politically and militarily.</p>
<p style="font-weight: 400">We tend to think of Churchill as this bellicose war leader, but actually he was keen to avoid the huge losses of life that had occurred in the First World War. This certainly influenced his strategy and thinking when it came to D-Day.</p><h3 id="to-what-extent-is-it-right-to-say-that-churchill-was-sceptical-of-d-day-36f68da7">To what extent is it right to say that Churchill was sceptical of D-Day?</h3><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>RD: </strong>Churchill knew at some stage that there needed to be re-entry into Europe, but he was very keen on it not being premature. So on the one hand, he was sceptical. But on the other hand, he knew it was inevitable. The big thing was to get the timing and preparation right.</p><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>AP: </strong>This idea of Churchill being sceptical about D-Day developed quite quickly after the end of the Second World War. Eisenhower, when he published his memoirs, described how at one of the big conferences in May 1944, just before D-Day, Churchill had told the gathering that he was hardening on this enterprise, which the Americans immediately took to mean that he had been soft on it up until that point.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">This view has been taken up more recently in popular culture by the movie <em>Churchill </em>(2017). The film starts with Churchill walking on a British beach and recoiling as he has a vision of the sea running red with blood. The implication is that history is going to repeat itself; it’s going be the Dardanelles campaign all over again. The movie then proceeds to show Churchill attempt to obstruct the operation with 48 hours to go – which of course was not the case.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/churchill-the-cry-baby-war-hero/">Churchill: the ‘cry-baby’ war hero</a></strong></li></ul><p style="font-weight: 400">Churchill was also keenly aware of this idea that he was sceptical of D-Day – and he tried to respond to it in his own war memoirs. The key point is that he always knew we were going to have to go back into France, but he knew it should only be contemplated at the right moment when all the necessary preconditions have been met (so when we had the tactical experience, expertise, strategy and equipment required for what was going to be an incredibly difficult operation).</p><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong> </strong></p><h3 id="do-we-know-what-churchill-felt-about-d-day-in-the-run-up-to-the-day-itself-1f079bd4">Do we know what Churchill felt about D-Day in the run up to the day itself?</h3><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>RD: </strong>I think once Churchill had agreed in his own mind that it was going to happen, then he was determined that the operation should be given the best chance of success. He leveraged his convening power as prime minister to make sure that all these different elements were in place – from technical innovations… to planning… to even putting a lockdown in place in the south of England to maintain the security of the operation.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">But we know that Churchill’s had doubts and fears about D-Day. Hence the remark to his wife, Clemmie, the night before, in which he mentioned the possibility of enormous casualties.</p><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>AP:</strong> Another of Churchill’s big concerns in the weeks running up to D-Day was the risk of French civilian casualties.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">The bombing scheme that Eisenhower and the military commanders had settled on was one that targeted the French railway system and marshalling yards. These tended to be in areas of high civilian population density.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">Churchill raised this issue multiple times with the defence committee and the war cabinet. He raised it with Eisenhower and President Roosevelt. His fear was that if the French take these very large casualties, then this might turn them against the Allies.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">He was also thinking of the political ramifications of this course of action, which are that in the post -war world, this might drive a wedge between Britain and France. Ultimately, of course, he didn’t overrule the military commanders, but he did everything he could to try and limit the effect of that bombing on French civilians.</p><h3 id="what-did-churchill-do-on-the-day-of-6th-june-442944cb"><strong>What did Churchill do on the day of 6th June?</strong></h3><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>AP: </strong>Churchill was in Downing Street in the Treasury Annex on the morning of D-Day, poring over the latest maps and charts and receiving the latest reports on what's happening on the beaches. At 12 noon, he moved to the House of Commons to make his first statement. At that point, there was not much he could say; the operation was still shrouded in the fog of war and it was not clear how it was developing. So Churchill left to have lunch with the king, and then visited some of the headquarters on the outskirts of London before coming back and reporting to parliament. The really interesting fact, of course, is that this was not where Churchill wanted to be at all – he wanted to be in the centre of the action itself and had tried unsuccessfully to get himself on board a British cruiser</p><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong> </strong></p><h3 id="what-were-the-repercussions-of-d-day-how-did-it-affect-churchills-relationship-with-for-example-the-us-fb3efb9e">What were the repercussions of D-Day? How did it affect Churchill's relationship with, for example, the US?</h3><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>RD:</strong> Churchill began to realise – once the operations ashore were fully developed – that this was now the beginning of an inevitable switch from British influence to American influence. This meant that his ability to influence subsequent military strategy and higher-level operational objectives were no longer in his control. It was no longer solely a British operation. It was a realisation that the British position was changing and that the Americans position of supremacy was frankly becoming a reality.</p><ul><li style="font-weight: 400"><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/why-churchills-reputation-is-still-on-the-line/">Why Churchill’s reputation is still on the line</a></strong></li></ul><h3 id="tim-benbow-at-kings-college-london-has-written-that-the-d-day-landings-showed-churchill-at-his-best-and-at-his-worst-is-this-a-view-that-you-have-sympathy-with-8395823e">Tim Benbow at King's College London has written that the D-Day landings showed Churchill at his best and at his worst. Is this a view that you have sympathy with?</h3><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>AP: </strong>This is probably a view that I would have some sympathy with.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">I think one of the things that Churchill did well – but isn’t often credited for – is the political work that he did behind the scenes in maintaining the national coalition. In the months before D-Day, he spent a lot of time preparing the country for this huge operation using the convening power of the prime minister to knock heads together, to ensure that production targets are met, to ensure that the artificial harbours needed for the operation are being built, to ensure that the right equipment and tanks are in place.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">I suppose the worst of Churchill might be a certain sort of selfishness and stubbornness, which was certainly evidenced in his insistence that he wanted to accompany the troops across the channel, even though that was clearly not where he should be. I think he found the months leading up to D-Day personally very difficult because he was one of those people who liked to be at the centre of the action.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">I think he also found it difficult to accept the transition to secondary status in the Anglo-American relationship.</p><h3 id="how-would-you-like-people-to-understand-d-day-and-churchills-role-within-it-as-we-mark-this-anniversary-0b2adec7">How would you like people to understand D-Day and Churchill's role within it as we mark this anniversary?</h3><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>RD</strong>: I think Churchill's role in D-Day illustrates most effectively Britain's role in D -Day and Britain's role in the new Europe that was created at the end of the Second World War. Let's face it, if D-Day had failed – and if we had not been able to defeat Nazi Germany and some kind of pact had been formed between Hitler's Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union – Europe would have looked a very different place today.</p><p style="font-weight: 400"><strong>AP: </strong>For me, it's all about complexity and nuance. Too often when we talk about Churchill, we tend to just see that famous image of Churchill as the ‘bulldog warrior’ with his V for Victory salute and a cigar. We think of his speeches. But Churchill was an incredibly complex character; the decisions that he – and others – were taking were incredibly difficult and it's impossible to know if they got it right. In many of these decisions, there was not one right answer, just some incredibly tough choices.</p><p style="font-weight: 400">But I think if you want to understand the world that we inhabit today – and the Europe that we inhabit today – then you must understand the decisions that underpin this and got us to where we are now.</p><p><strong>Allen Packwood is director of the Churchill Archives Centre at Churchill College in Cambridge</strong></p><p><strong>Richard Dannatt is former Chief of the General Staff and member of the House of Lords</strong></p><p><strong>This interview was taken from an episode of the <em>HistoryExtra</em> podcast: <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/d-day-churchill-podcast-richard-dannatt-allen-packwood/">D-Day: was Churchill really against the operation?</a></strong></p>]]></content>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Rob Attar</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[Who moulded Winston Churchill?]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2023/10/Pod-David-Reynolds-WL-448e945.jpg" width="620" height="413">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/who-moulded-winston-churchill-podcast-david-reynolds/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/membership/who-moulded-winston-churchill-podcast-david-reynolds/</id>
		<updated>2023-10-23T09:34:40.000Z</updated>
		<published>2023-10-23T06:32:31.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="20th Century"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Membership"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[David Reynolds reveals how the likes of Stalin, Mussolini and Gandhi left their mark on Britain’s wartime leader]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p>Winston Churchill’s remarkable career saw him interact with many of the other great figures of the age, many of whom had a profound impact on Britain’s wartime leader. Speaking to Rob Attar, Professor David Reynolds examines Churchill’s relationships with the likes of Stalin, Mussolini, Gandhi and Clement Attlee – and considers how these figures left their mark on the statesman.</p>
<p><strong>David Reynolds is the author of <em>Mirrors of Greatness: Churchill and the Leaders Who Shaped Him</em> (William Collins, 2023)</strong></p><ul><li><a href="https://uk.bookshop.org/p/books/churchill-mirrors-of-greatness-david-reynolds/7392457?ean=9780008439910"><strong>Buy now on Bookshop.org</strong></a></li><li><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0BY84WXVN/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i0/?tag=bbchistory045-21&amp;ascsubtag=historyextra-247275" rel="sponsored" target="_blank">Buy now on Amazon</a></strong></li><li><a href="https://www.awin1.com/cread.php?id=489797&amp;clickref=historyextra-247275&amp;awinmid=3787&amp;p=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.waterstones.com%2Fbook%2Fmirrors-of-greatness%2Fdavid-reynolds%2F9780008439910%23%3A%7E%3Atext%3DMirrors%2520of%2520Greatness%2520offers%2520vivid%2Cwhat%2520they%2520saw%2520in%2520him.%26text%3Dage%27%2520ADAM%2520ZAMOYSKI-%2CWinston%2520Churchill%2520followed%2520his%2520own%2520star.%2C%27%252C%2520to%2520gain%2520historical%2520immortality.#:~:text=Mirrors%20of%20Greatness%20offers%20vivid,what%20they%20saw%20in%20him.&amp;text=age'%20ADAM%20ZAMOYSKI-,Winston%20Churchill%20followed%20his%20own%20star.,'%2C%20to%20gain%20historical%20immortality." rel="sponsored" target="_blank"><strong>Buy now on Waterstones</strong></a></li></ul>]]></content>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>HistoryExtra</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[Eat for victory: the British Restaurants of WW2]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2023/01/GettyImages-1331950002-686fd71.jpg" width="620" height="413">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/british-restaurants-ww2-rationing-canteens/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/membership/british-restaurants-ww2-rationing-canteens/</id>
		<updated>2024-07-05T12:07:43.000Z</updated>
		<published>2023-01-20T08:05:23.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Membership"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Wartime Britain"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[As the hardships of the Second World War began to bite, a new network of public dining rooms was established – the British Restaurant. Bryce Evans explores the story of these healthy, economical establishments, and the lessons they could teach us today]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p>Canteen dining often conjures up negative images. This kind of large scale eating might seem grindingly institutional, evoking the worst memories of school dinners: the eternal smell of cabbage and the misery of wet trays. Yet during the darkest days of the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/timeline-important-dates-ww2-exact/">Second World War</a> and the rationing that continued long afterwards, a thriving national network of government-backed communal eating establishments offered not just good-value, healthy food. These British Restaurants were, on the instruction of the Ministry of Food, “centres of civilisation” – spaces for all classes, overcoming the Victorian notion of the public consumption of food as something solely for the deserving poor.</p><p>Established in 1940, British Restaurants were state-subsidised dining rooms offering price-capped, nutritious meals to the public. But the story of wartime communal dining in Britain had actually begun more than two decades earlier, in the latter stages of the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/first-world-war/">First World War</a>. In 1917 the Ministry of Food had established the National Kitchen – a network of more than 1,000 large state-subsidised canteens that functioned until 1919.</p><p>One of the scheme’s key proponents was the pioneering vegetarian, restaurateur, real tennis Olympic medallist and all-round Edwardian man of action Eustace Miles. Writing in the ministry’s 1918 <em>Public Kitchens</em> handbook, he had stated: “At some future time it will be difficult to believe that each household in the country did its own separate marketing, buying small amounts of food from retail dealers a hundred per cent above cost price, that every hundred houses in a street had each its own fire for cooking, and that at least a hundred human beings were engaged in serving meals that could have been prepared by half a dozen trained assistants.”</p><p>That was the old way of feeding the nation. Following the dour, difficult years of the First World War, Miles believed that Britain would surely embrace a brave new world of social eating. And the benefits of state-subsidised communal dining seemed obvious: economies of food and fuel, cheap and nutritious fare, and social cohesion. The National Kitchen network seemed to have made home cooking a thing of the past.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2023/01/GettyImages-1360178342sml-0ac7c8b.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="People queue for food in a state-run National Kitchen, c1918. (Photo by Daily Herald Archive/ National Science &amp; Media Museum/ SSPL via Getty Images)" title="People queue for food in a state-run National Kitchen, c1918. (Photo by Daily Herald Archive/ National Science &amp; Media Museum/ SSPL via Getty Images)" />
<h3 id="nutty-idea-6a98024d">Nutty idea?</h3><p>But it wasn’t to last. Along with other factors, the deadly postwar <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/spanish-flu-the-virus-that-changed-the-world/">Spanish Flu pandemic</a> helped put paid to mass dining on a national scale, as large gatherings of people were deemed unsafe. Miles’s ideas were also ridiculed by no less than the famous author GK Chesterton, who derided his pioneering nut-based energy bar as “nutter” – the first use of this derogatory term in the English language.</p><p>Yet despite the dismissal of his plan as being for the sandal-wearing and the wrong-headed, two decades later Miles’s vision was realised on a much greater and lasting scale with the launch of the British Restaurant system. The name itself was coined by prime minister <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/facts-winston-churchill-prime-minister-speeches-clementine-childhood/">Winston Churchill</a>, who felt that the term “communal feeding centres” smacked of Dickensian poverty or Soviet monotony. While fulfilling the wartime priorities of patriotism, morale and affordable living, these places also had to be attractive places to visit – as a gastronome and bon viveur such as Churchill appreciated.</p><p>In order to overcome an institutional feel, the Ministry insisted on pleasant surroundings featuring specially commissioned artwork: some venues in London even featured paintings loaned from the royal collection at <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/facts-buckingham-palace-queen-king-royal-residence-london/">Buckingham Palace</a>. As with National Kitchens, British Restaurants occupied prime retail spaces on high streets, and featured music, flowers and attractive interior design – and regular inspections for cleanliness and food hygiene.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/when-food-rationing-begin-end-ww2/">Saving food, saving lives: rationing in the Second World War</a></strong></li></ul><p>The British Restaurant’s basic remit was to combat food and fuel price inflation – at the outbreak of the Second World War, the UK was importing two thirds of its food – and boost morale through attractive yet cheap mass urban social-eating spaces. After receiving a start-up grant from the Treasury, local governments were responsible for recruiting paid staff and management teams. Each British Restaurant was to be run on business lines, with instructions to turn over a profit or at least break even. There was a degree of autonomy over menus – but not menu costs, which had to conform to the Ministry’s price structure.</p><p>Under retail guru and minister for food, Lord Woolton, who had made his name at the department store chain Lewis’s, the state worked with private enterprise – most notably the millionaire Russian émigré Flora Solomon of Marks and Spencer – to ensure that British Restaurants looked and felt like attractive commercial premises. Interestingly, a prominent local supporter of socialised eating was the man later held up as a paragon of entrepreneurial individualism: future prime minister <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/how-should-history-remember-margaret-thatcher-legacy-first-female-prime-minister/">Margaret Thatcher</a>’s father, Alf Roberts, who as town councillor was responsible for bringing a communal canteen to Grantham in 1942.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2023/01/GettyImages-3063042-939e748.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="London mayor George Wilkinson (centre left) and food minister Lord Woolton in an air raid shelter, 1940. (Photo by Fred Morley/ Fox Photos/ Getty Images)" title="London mayor George Wilkinson (centre left) and food minister Lord Woolton in an air raid shelter, 1940. (Photo by Fred Morley/ Fox Photos/ Getty Images)" />
<h3 id="a-balanced-diet-155caa5f">A balanced diet</h3><p>When it came to menus, a compromise had to be struck between the Ministry’s nutritionists, who were eager to get British people eating more vegetables, and a general public resistance to healthier fare. So, while the Ministry’s nutritionists attempted to push thick vegetable soups and the “Oslo Break fast” (a version of the continental breakfast), the urge to enjoy comfort food was more pressing. For people suffering the trauma of air raids, it seemed that sausage rolls, fish and chips and chocolate bars were preferable. Eventually, a compromise was struck, with meals devised to resemble the hearty yet healthy “meat and two veg” fare of yesteryear.</p><p>In 1941, the Ministry of Information recruited popular music-hall actor Tommy Trinder to promote British Restaurants. His experience was captured in the short film <em>Eating Out with Tommy Trinder</em>, in which his fiancée and in-laws were treated to a British Restaurant meal by the eponymous star. “Look what you get for four and tuppence!” enthuses the relentlessly upbeat Trinder in the film, continuing: “Blimey – they’re giving the stuff away!”</p><p>Aimed at working and middle-class housewives at a time when the notion of “eating out” would have seemed the preserve of the upper class, Trinder went on to wax lyrical about the quality of the food, its affordability, and the cutting-edge kitchen technology used to feed people en masse. “Now, look, you eat at home… your one oven cooks for four… this restaurant uses four ovens and cooks for 800 people,” he exclaims. “If all these people ate at home like you do, it would take 100 ovens and 100 times the gas or electricity to feed them. And they’d all be peeling the spuds in the old-fashioned way – but here they’ve got a machine that does it all. In go the potatoes, on goes the switch, and off come their overcoats!”</p>
<p>The restaurants gained celebrity endorsements from various other – politically diverse – quarters: writers JB Priestley and Barbara Cartland, to name but two, were enthusiasts. But social eating had its detractors, too. Author Edward Blishen considered British Restaurants “anonymous” places, because of their air of uniformity. That sentiment was echoed by Frances Partridge, a member of the Bloomsbury set, who described her local venue as “a huge elephant house” full of people eating “enormous all-beige meals… beige mince full of lumps, and garnished with beige beans and a few beige potatoes”.</p><p>Such sniffy verdicts belied the restaurants’ success. By 1943, these venues were registering impressive net profits nationwide, suggesting both popularity and long-term viability. For the financial year 1942–43, net profit nation wide was £97,500; for 1943–44, it had soared to £170,000 (between around £3.5m and £6m in today’s money).</p><p>One reason for the National Kitchens’ decline had been that their prices exceeded cheap tea houses such as Lyons. In 1946, by contrast, the Ministry of Food estimated that a standard British Restaurant meal cost one shilling and threepence (customers paid in cash), whereas the equivalent average price in a Lyons outlet was one shilling and tenpence – significantly higher. And yet, whereas National Kitchens raised the ire of the private retail trade by interfering with the sense of fair play associated with the free market, British Restaurants achieved a much better relationship – harmonious rather than antagonistic – with private food retailers.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2023/01/GettyImages-591978482-96578f8.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Waitresses in training for the Lyons tearoom chain, 1945. British Restaurants aimed to match, or undercut, its prices (Photo by Daily Mirror/ Mirrorpix/ Mirrorpix via Getty Images)" title="Waitresses in training for the Lyons tearoom chain, 1945. British Restaurants aimed to match, or undercut, its prices (Photo by Daily Mirror/ Mirrorpix/ Mirrorpix via Getty Images)" />
<h3 id="changing-tastes-26fe6db0">Changing tastes</h3><p>British Restaurants represented just one arm of a greatly expanded wartime public feeding network – something that historians have largely overlooked, focusing instead on the success of the rationing system. They were the most eye-catching form of public dining, but also operated alongside other options such as factory and dock canteens, and emergency feeding in shelters. As such, a British Restaurant acted only as an “eat out” option, never a primary food provider: that was the function of the ration book.</p><p>At their peak there were 2,160 British Restaurants across the country, most on busy urban thoroughfares. The extent to which the British Restaurant became a high-street fixture is illustrated by comparison to the number of McDonald’s restaurants in the UK today – about 1,300. In frequently citing Churchill’s early dislike for the term “communal feeding”, historians have overlooked his later defence of British Restaurants, “which had served a most useful purpose and should not be allowed to disappear”.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/10-tips-for-surviving-on-the-home-front-during-the-second-world-war/">10 tips for surviving on the home front during the Second World War</a></strong></li></ul><p>And yet, as was the case with National Kitchens before them, disappear they gradually did. The British Restaurant outlasted the war, but its numbers were already in decline when rationing was lifted in 1954, and few survived beyond this point. This demise was chiefly due to shifting postwar trends in consumer capitalism. “Eating out” – along with the supermarket – became more accessible and normal for the working class, and restaurants serving foreign cuisine grew in popularity.</p><p>But perhaps the most lingering cultural blow to British canteen dining was delivered by <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/george-orwell-biography-life-1984-books/">George Orwell</a>’s bestselling <em><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/nineteen-eighty-four-history-dystopian-novel-orwell-legacy-adaptations/">Nineteen Eighty Four</a></em>, published in 1949. In his novel’s repressive, authoritarian society, Orwell reimagined the popular BBC canteen, where he ate every day, as a subterranean dystopia in which greyish-pink slop was doled out to obedient queues of “proles”.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/nazi-germany-food-policies-second-world-war-shortages-propaganda-black-market-ersatz-hunger-plan/">The food policies used by the Nazis to maintain control in the Third Reich</a></strong></li></ul><p>Orwell’s prose recalled the nagging utopianism in the language employed by proponents of social eating – a rather preachy tone of civilisational ascent echoed in the 1960s by JG Davies, a leading food scientist, who told London’s Royal Society of Arts that home cooking would disappear by the year 2000. Instead, he confidently predicted, “instant” food, pre-prepared and served in large communal feeding spaces, would be the norm, reflecting profound sociological changes.</p><p>Davies’s observations attracted the ire of restaurant critic Egon Ronay, who protested that “home cooking will never come to an end – unless the way to a man’s heart is through a pill… if this does come about, I am glad I shall be dead by the year 2000.” Ronay (who died in 2010, at the age of 94) need not have worried. Home cooking has persisted and, by the end of 20th century, and with the postwar rise of individualism and consumerism, it was the notion of communal eating that had become rather passé (though has since enjoyed something of a resurgence, thanks to restaurants such as Wagamama).</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2023/01/GettyImages-1360178106-30d84a3.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Home cooking – as seen in a 1939 demonstration kitchen – would die out by 2000, according to a leading food scientist in the 1960s (Photo by Daily Herald Archive/ National Science &amp; Media Museum/ SSPL via Getty Images)" title="Home cooking – as seen in a 1939 demonstration kitchen – would die out by 2000, according to a leading food scientist in the 1960s (Photo by Daily Herald Archive/ National Science &amp; Media Museum/ SSPL via Getty Images)" />
<h3 id="food-for-thought-01747e1c">Food for thought</h3><p>There are, though, surely lessons here for the 21st-century UK. Far from a historical oddity, cheap yet nutritious social eating provided a successful way of combating what is today termed “food poverty”. British Restaurants were popular venues appealing across the classes, and there was much less stigma attached to them than that associated with food bank use today. Though it might be assumed that the political left would champion communal feeding and the right dismiss it, the political reception was more nuanced.</p><p>Examples of its proponents – from Churchill, to Barbara Cartland, to Margaret Thatcher’s father – demonstrate this. Today’s network of food banks (of which there are about 2,500) broadly equates to the number of British Restaurants at their peak. Yet whereas the basic food-bank model perhaps replicates those of the Victorian era, targeted at the poorest in society, the British Restaurant was instead founded on notions of “Food for All” and the “Right to Food”.</p>
<p>Amid today’s cost-of-living crisis, the UK’s recent history of social eating provides an alternative – and arguably more sustainable – model. In other words, an alternative approach to feeding people well lies within living memory. Yet so-called “wartime exigencies” are often quickly forgotten or dismissed – and the experience of communal dining at the British Restaurant is no exception. Writing in her memoir after the war, Flora Solomon reflected that “restaurants existed, and so did communities; but put the two together, and you were introducing a practice so alien to the mentality of the British people it could be likened to replacing the brick walls of the Albert Hall with glass and turning the place into a nudist colony.”</p><p>Solomon and others successfully revived a First World War experiment, establishing the British Restaurant as a supplement to the ration book, with tangible psychological and health benefits. Perhaps it might be time to re-evaluate British canteen dining and its Orwellian image problem, and recognise the social and economic benefits it delivered.</p><p><strong>Bryce Evans is professor of modern world history at Liverpool Hope University and author of <em>Feeding the People in Wartime Britain</em> (Bloomsbury, 2022)</strong></p><p><strong><em>This article was first published in the January 2023 issue of </em></strong><a href="/bbc-history-magazine/"><strong><em>BBC History Magazine</em></strong></a></p>]]></content>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>HistoryExtra</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[WW2 timeline: 20 important dates and milestones you need to know]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2022/06/GettyImages-2694757-cbf5f93-b88f6e0.jpg" width="600" height="455">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/timeline-important-dates-ww2-exact/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/timeline-important-dates-ww2-exact/</id>
		<updated>2024-09-09T14:17:55.000Z</updated>
		<published>2022-05-17T09:02:00.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="20th Century"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Evergreen"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War battles"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[Lasting six years and one day, the Second World War started on 1 September 1939 with Hitler's invasion of Poland and ended with the Japanese surrender on 2 September 1945. Here, we trace the timeline of a conflict that engulfed the world, with expert insight from Professor Jeremy Black and the late Terry Charman on 20 key milestones…]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p><strong>The Second World War was the deadliest and most destructive global conflict in history, claiming the lives of more than 50 million people. Adolf Hitler started the war in 1939 when his German forces invaded Poland.</strong></p><h2 id="when-did-ww2-start-4a94b88a">When did WW2 start?</h2><p>1 September 1939</p><h2 id="when-did-ww2-end-090bd0d8">When did WW2 end?</h2><p>2 September 1945 | <strong>Read more about <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/how-when-ww2-end-ve-day-vj-day-fighting-atomic-bombs-japan-world-europe/">the end of WW2</a></strong></p><h2 id="which-countries-were-involved-dd99263a">Which countries were involved?</h2><p>WW2 involved almost every part of the world. But the key players were the Axis powers on one side (Germany, Italy, and Japan) and on the other side the Allies (France, Great Britain, the United States, the Soviet Union, and, to a lesser extent, China)</p><h2 id="how-many-people-died-15cf0774">How many people died?</h2><p>It has been estimated that 50 million soldiers and civilians died in WW2</p><h2 id="why-did-ww2-happen-b17d3862">Why did WW2 happen?</h2><p>We can now say without equivocation that this was Hitler’s war, <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/why-did-the-second-world-war-happen/">say expert historians</a> including Professor Richard Evans, Sir Ian Kershaw and Laurence Rees | <strong>Read more about </strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/why-did-the-second-world-war-happen/"><strong>why WW2 happened</strong></a></p><hr><p><strong>Read on for a timeline for a list of the most important dates and milestones of WW2…</strong></p><p> </p><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="clash-near-the-marco-polo-bridge-close-to-beijing-7-july-1937-4b615ec0">Clash near the Marco Polo Bridge, close to Beijing, 7 July 1937</h3><p>The triggering of the full-scale war with China that lasted until 1945 began with an obscure clash involving a Japanese unit on night manoeuvres near the Marco Polo Bridge southwest of Beijing on the night of 7–8 July 1937.</p><p>The Japanese felt the nation’s honour had been challenged and sent fresh forces to the region. Hardliners in the Japanese army used the incident to press for a settlement of China on their terms, while the Chinese nationalist leader, Jiang Jieshi, was unwilling to propriate Japan. As a result, an intractable struggle began that greatly weakened both sides.</p><p>Large-scale conflict broke out toward the end of July, and Beijing was occupied on 29 July.</p><p><sup>By Professor Jeremy Black</sup></p>
<div class="highlight-box">
<p><h4>WW2 | The Big Questions</h4>
<strong>Member exclusive |</strong> Historian and broadcaster Laurence Rees explains major moments of the global conflict in this five-part series.
<h4><a href="/period/second-world-war/timeline-important-dates-ww2-exact/">Listen to all episodes now</a></h4>
</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/06/Pod-Big-Qs-WW2-Sq-02ae4d2.jpg" width="600" height="600" alt="Pod Big Qs WW2 Sq" title="Pod Big Qs WW2 Sq" />
</div>
<h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="the-german-invasion-of-poland-1-september-1939-992b6ff6">The German invasion of Poland, 1 September 1939</h3><p>The Second World War began at dawn on Friday 1 September 1939, when <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/adolf-hitler-fuhrer-facts-guide-rise-nazi-dictator-biography-pictures/">Adolf Hitler</a> launched his <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/brutal-blitzkrieg-1939-invasion-poland-start-ww2-roger-moorhouse/">invasion of Poland</a>. The Poles fought bravely, but they were heavily outnumbered in both men and machines, and especially in the air.</p><p>Britain and France declared war on Germany on 3 September 1939, but gave no real assistance to Poland. Two weeks later, Stalin invaded eastern Poland, and on 27 September Warsaw surrendered. Organised Polish resistance ceased after another week’s fighting. Poland was divided up between Hitler and Stalin.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more about the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/1939-when-poland-was-torn-to-pieces/">1939 invasion of Poland</a></strong></li></ul><p>In Poland the Nazis unleashed a reign of terror that was eventually to claim six million victims, half of whom were Polish Jews murdered in extermination camps. The Soviet regime was no less harsh. In March and April 1940, Stalin ordered the murder of over 20,000 Polish officers and others who had been captured in September 1939. Tens of thousands of Poles were also forcibly deported to Siberia.</p><p>By May 1945, and despite his promises to <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/facts-winston-churchill-prime-minister-speeches-clementine-childhood/">Churchill</a> and Roosevelt, Stalin had installed a subservient communist regime in Poland. Back in 1939, Poland’s then-leader Marshal Eduard Smigly-Rydz had warned, “With the Germans we risk losing our liberty, but with the Russians we lose our soul.”</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><ul><li><strong>Read more | </strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/churchill-stalin-and-roosevelt-the-big-threes-war-of-words/"><strong>Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt: the big three’s war of words</strong></a></li></ul><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="germans-launch-offensive-in-the-west-10-may-1940-dfabd087">Germans launch offensive in the West, 10 May 1940</h3><p>The German unwillingness to limit their war to the conquest of Poland and to launch meaningful peace talks meant that the Second World War broadened out. Hitler was eager to profit from the ability Poland’s defeat offered for Germany to fight on only one front and argued that Germany enjoyed a window of opportunity thanks to being more prepared for war than Britain or France.</p><p>Bad weather in the severe winter of 1939–40, caution on the part of the German High Command, and the need for preparations, delayed the attack until May 1940. On 10 May, the Germans attacked Belgium and the Netherlands, both hitherto neutral, and invaded France. They successfully gained and used the initiative, while the French and British suffered from a failure to prepare for fluid defence in depth.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/general-history/monarchy-english-british-timeline/">Monarchy timeline: from Hastings to the Windsors in 122 moments</a></strong></li></ul><p>Germany’s success in its subsequent seven-week campaign transformed the strategic situation in Europe. Victory led Hitler to a conviction of his own ineluctable success, and that of the Wehrmacht under his leadership. Thanks to this victory, the Germans would clearly be able to fight on, and any successful challenge to them would now have to overcome German dominance of Western Europe.</p><p><sup>By Professor Jeremy Black</sup></p><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="the-battle-of-britain-25-july-1940-9ae632b6">The Battle of Britain, 25 July, 1940</h3><p>After France’s surrender in June 1940, Churchill told the British people, “<a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/churchills-greatest-speeches/">Hitler knows that he will have to break us</a> in this island or lose the war”.</p><p>To mount a successful invasion, the Germans had to gain air superiority. The first phase of the battle began on 10 July with <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/luftwaffe-creation-when-nazi-air-force-successes-failures/">Luftwaffe</a> attacks on shipping in the Channel.</p><ul><li><strong>Your guide to the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/battle-of-britain-ww2-facts-what-happened-who-won-spitfire-raf-luftwaffe/">Battle of Britain</a></strong></li></ul>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2018/01/GettyImages-154419555-e13893a-e1638547538773.jpg" width="830" height="568" alt="A Heinkel He 111 bomber flying over the Isle of Dogs in the East End of London, at at the start of the Luftwaffe's evening raids" title="A Heinkel He 111 bomber flying over the Isle of Dogs in the East End of London" />
<p>The following month, RAF Fighter Command airfields and aircraft factories came under attack. Under the dynamic direction of Lord Beaverbrook, production of <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/spitfire-supermarine-fighter-ww2-facts-design-history/">Spitfire</a> and Hurricane fighters increased, and despite its losses in pilots and planes, the RAF was never as seriously weakened as the Germans supposed.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/battle-britain-ww2-myths-facts-raf-royal-air-force-luftwaffe/">6 Battle of Britain myths</a></strong></li></ul><p>The British also had the advantage that the battle was fought over home ground; pilots who survived their planes being shot down were soon back in action, while German aircrew went into ‘the bag’ as prisoners of war.</p><p>The battle continued until the end of October, but essentially it had been won in early September when the Germans diverted their resources to night bombing. Radar, ground crews, aircraft factory workers all contributed to the victory, but it was of the young pilots from Britain, the Commonwealth and Nazi-occupied Europe of whom Churchill spoke when he said, “Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few”.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p>
<div class="highlight-box">
<p><h4>More from us</h4>
<strong><em>HistoryExtra</em> members can explore this topic further with exclusive content from our archives</strong>
<ul>
 	<li><strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/the-battle-of-britain-everything-you-wanted-to-know/">The Battle of Britain: everything you wanted to know</a></strong></li>
 	<li><strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/resistance-second-world-war-podcast-halik-kochanski/">Resistance in the Second World War</a></strong></li>
 	<li><strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/everything-you-wanted-to-know-about-nazi-germany-hitler-ww2-richard-j-evans-podcast/">Nazi Germany: everything you wanted to know </a></strong></li>
</ul>
<strong>Not a <em>HistoryExtra</em> member? <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/join/">Explore our latest membership offers</a></strong>

</p>
</div>
<h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="the-blitz-29-december-1940-c411fc06">The Blitz, 29 December 1940</h3><p>The <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/the-blitz-what-happened-how-many-died-blitz-meaning/">Blitz</a> – an abbreviation of the word Blitzkrieg (lightning war) – was the name given to the German air attacks on Britain between 7 September 1940 and 16 May 1941. London was bombed by accident on the night of 24 August 1940, and the following night Churchill ordered an attack on Berlin.</p><p>This prompted the Germans to shift their main effort from attacking RAF airfields to bombing Britain’s towns and cities. 7 September 1940, ‘Black Saturday’, saw the beginning of the first major attacks on London. The capital was bombed for 57 consecutive nights, when more than 13,650 tons of high explosive and 12,586 incendiary canisters were dropped by the Luftwaffe.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | Lucy Worsley on <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/lucy-worsley-blitz-stories/">Blitz Spirit: the courageous stories of six Londoners</a></strong></li></ul><p>Beginning with <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/coventry-blitz-ww2-facts-why-targeted-how-many-died-churchill-conspiracy/">Coventry</a> on 14 November 1940, the Germans also began bombing other cities and towns while still keeping up attacks on London. More than 43,000 civilians were killed in the Blitz and much material damage was done, but British morale remained unbroken and Britain’s capacity to wage war was unimpaired.</p><p>In Winston Churchill’s words, Hitler had tried and failed “To break our famous island race by a process of indiscriminate slaughter and destruction”.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="operation-barbarossa-the-german-invasion-of-russia-june-1941-eac3cb73"><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/operation-barbarossa-hitlers-greatest-mistake/">Operation Barbarossa</a>: the German invasion of Russia, June 1941</h3><p>Since the 1920s, Hitler had seen Russia, with its immense natural resources, as the principal target for conquest and expansion. It would provide, he believed, the necessary ‘Lebensraum’, or living space, for the German people. And by conquering Russia, Hitler would also destroy the “Jewish pestilential creed of Bolshevism”. His non-aggression pact with Stalin in August 1939 he regarded as a mere temporary expedient.</p><p>Barely a month after the fall of France, and while the Battle of Britain was being fought, Hitler started planning for the Blitzkrieg campaign against Russia, which began on 22 June 1941. Despite repeated warnings, Stalin was taken by surprise, and for the first few months the Germans achieved spectacular victories, capturing huge swathes of land and hundreds of thousands of prisoners. But they failed to take Moscow or Leningrad before winter set in.</p><p>On 5/6 December, the Red Army launched a counter-offensive which removed the immediate threat to the Soviet capital. It also brought the German high command to the brink of a <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/operation-barbarossa-hitlers-greatest-mistake/">catastrophic military crisis</a>. Hitler stepped in and took personal command. His intervention was decisive and he later boasted, “That we overcame this winter and are today in a position again to proceed victoriously… is solely attributable to the bravery of the soldiers at the front and my firm will to hold out…”</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="pearl-harbor-7-december-1941-f736f90f"><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/pearl-harbor-facts-date-live-infamy-franklin-roosevelt-japan-surprise-attack-americans/">Pearl Harbor</a>, 7 December 1941</h3><p>After Japan’s occupation of French Indo-China in July 1941, US President <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/life-of-the-week-president-franklin-d-roosevelt/">Franklin D Roosevelt</a>, followed by Britain and the Netherlands, ordered the freezing of Japanese assets. Many Japanese now believed that there was no alternative between economic ruin and going to war with the United States and the European colonial powers.</p><p>In October 1941, a hardline government under General Hideki Tojo came to power, and preparations were made to deliver a devastating blow against the Americans.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2018/08/GettyImages-50698634-d2fc755-e1638549006167.jpg" width="2582" height="1652" alt="Destroyer USS Shaw exploding during early morning air attack by Japanese on Pearl Harbor on the island of Oahu, near Honolulu. (Photo by Time Life Pictures/US Navy/The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty Images)" title="Destroyer USS Shaw exploding during earl" />
<p>On 7 December 1941, “a date which will live in infamy,” Japanese carrier-borne aircraft <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/pearl-harbor-facts-date-live-infamy-franklin-roosevelt-japan-surprise-attack-americans/">attacked the US Pacific fleet</a> at its base at Pearl Harbor in the Hawaiian Islands.</p><p>Despite warnings, the Americans were caught completely by surprise. Eight battleships were put out of action, and seven other warships damaged or lost. More than 2,500 Americans were killed, while the Japanese lost only 29 planes. Crucially, the American carriers were at sea and so escaped, and the base itself was not put out of action. The following day Congress declared war on Japan, which had also attacked British and Dutch colonial possessions.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/why-when-how-america-entered-ww2-pearl-harbor-roosevelt/">America and WW2: why didn’t the US enter the war sooner?</a></strong></li></ul><p>On 11 December, Hitler declared war on the United States, and <a href="/period/second-world-war/pearl-harbor-hitler-america-most-important-decisive-month-ww2/">the war was now truly a global conflict</a>. The Japanese were initially victorious everywhere, but Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto warned: “We can run wild for six months or a year, but after that I have utterly no confidence”.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p>
<div class="highlight-box">
<p><h4>Pearl Harbor podcast series</h4>
<strong>Member exclusive |</strong> Browse and listen to all episodes in our podcast series on the December 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor
<h4><a href="/www.historyextra.com/podcast-series/pearl-harbor-history-podcast-series/">Listen to all episodes now</a></h4>
</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2021/12/Pod-Pearl-Harbor-FB-2460cb7.jpg" width="1200" height="630" alt="Pod Pearl Harbor FB" title="Pod Pearl Harbor FB" />
</div>
<h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="the-fall-of-singapore-15-february-1942-cdbf9f4c">The fall of Singapore, <strong>15 February 1942</strong></h3><p>The Japanese began their invasion of Malaya on 8 December 1941, and very soon the British and empire defenders were in full retreat. Told previously that the Japanese were no match for European troops, morale among the defending forces slumped as General Tomoyuki Yamashita’s forces moved swiftly southwards towards Singapore.</p><p>The sinking of the British capital ships HMS <em>Prince of Wales</em> and <em>Repulse</em> by Japanese aircraft also contributed to the decline in morale, and panic began to set in among the civil population and the fighting troops.</p><p>British commander Lieutenant General Arthur Percival had hoped to make a stand at Johore, but was forced to withdraw to Singapore Island. The Japanese landed there on 8/9 February, and before long the defence collapsed. To avoid further bloodshed, and with his water supply gone, Percival surrendered on 15 February.</p><p>Churchill described the surrender as, “the worst disaster… in British military history”. More than 130,000 British and empire troops surrendered to a much smaller Japanese force, which only suffered 9,824 battle casualties during the 70-day campaign. Singapore was not only a humiliating military defeat, but also a tremendous blow to the prestige of the ‘white man’ throughout Asia.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="midway-4-june-1942-173798cd">Midway, <strong>4 June 1942</strong></h3><p>For six months after Pearl Harbor, just as Admiral Yamamoto predicted, Japanese forces carried all before them, capturing Hong Kong, Malaya, the Philippines and the Dutch East Indies. In May 1942, in an attempt to consolidate their grip on their new conquests, the Japanese sought to eliminate the United States as a strategic Pacific power.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2016/12/GettyImages-50659712-9d71328-e1638548987425.jpg" width="2551" height="1709" alt="Smoking hulk of the Japanese heavy cruiser Mikuma, which was destroyed during the battle of Midway. (Photo by Time Life Pictures/US Navy/The LIFE Picture Collection via Getty Images)" title="Smoking hulk of the Japanese heavy cruiser Mikuma, which was destroyed during the battle of Midway. (Photo by Time Life Pictures/US Navy/The LIFE Picture Collection via Getty Images)" />
<p>This would be done by luring into a trap the US navy carriers that had escaped Pearl Harbor, while at the same time the Japanese would occupy the Midway atoll in preparation for further attacks. The loss of the carriers would, the Japanese hoped, force the Americans to the negotiating table.</p><p>In the event, it was the Americans who inflicted a crushing defeat on the Japanese. Their codebreakers were able to determine the location and date of the Japanese attack. This enabled US admiral Chester Nimitz to organise a trap of his own.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more about the </strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/how-miraculous-battle-midway-pearl-harbor-america/"><strong>battle of Midway</strong></a></li></ul><p>During the ensuing battle the Japanese suffered the loss of four carriers, one heavy cruiser and 248 aircraft, while American losses totalled one carrier, one destroyer and 98 planes. By their <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/how-miraculous-battle-midway-pearl-harbor-america/">victory at Midway</a>, the turning point of the Pacific war, the Americans were able to seize the strategic initiative from the Japanese, who had suffered irreplaceable losses. Admiral Nimitz described the battle’s success as “Essentially a victory of intelligence”, while President Roosevelt called it “Our most important victory in 1942… there we stopped the Japanese offensive.”</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="alamein-25-october-1942-84b6068a">Alamein, <strong>25 October 1942</strong></h3><p>The North African campaign began in September 1940, and for the next two years the fighting was marked by a succession of Allied and Axis advances and retreats. In the summer of 1942, the Axis forces under ‘Desert Fox’ field marshal, Erwin Rommel, looked poised to take Cairo and advance on the Suez Canal.</p><p>The British Middle East commander General Claude Auchinleck took personal command of the defending Eighth Army and halted the retreat at the strong defensive line at <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/el-alamein-the-line-in-the-sand/">El Alamein</a>. But Churchill, dissatisfied with Auchinleck, replaced him in August with General Harold Alexander, while Lieutenant-General Bernard Montgomery took over command of the Eighth Army.</p><p>Montgomery immediately began to build up an enormous superiority in men and equipment, finally launching his offensive at Alamein on 23 October 1942. By the beginning of November, the Axis forces were in full retreat, although final victory in North Africa was not achieved until May 1943.</p><p>Although Montgomery has been criticised for being too cautious in exploiting his success at Alamein, it made him a household name and he became Britain’s most popular general of the war. Churchill hailed Alamein as a “Glorious and decisive victory… the bright gleam has caught the helmets of our soldiers, and warmed and cheered all our hearts”.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/el-alamein-the-british-empires-last-hurrah/">El Alamein: The British empire’s last hurrah</a></strong></li></ul><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="stalingrad-february-1943-31662a33">Stalingrad, <strong>February 1943</strong></h3><p>The <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/stalingrad-the-crushing-of-the-reich/">battle for Stalingrad</a> began in late August 1942, and by 12 September, German troops of the Sixth and Fourth Panzer Armies had reached the city’s suburbs. Bearing the name of Russia’s leader, Stalingrad had a symbolic significance as well as a strategic one.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2018/08/GettyImages-3364305-0c60d96-e1638547590673.jpg" width="4882" height="3294" alt="1941: Red Army troops storming an apartment block amidst the ruins of war-torn Stalingrad during World War II. (Photo by Georgi Zelma/Slava Katamidze Collection/Getty Images)" title="Stalingrad Attack" />
<p>Throughout September and October, under General Vassili Chuikov, the city’s defenders contested every yard of ground of the devastated city. The Red Army’s stubborn defence allowed General Georgi Zhukov time to prepare a counterattack that was launched on 19 November 1942, and which soon trapped the Sixth Army commanded by General Friederich Paulus.</p><p>Hitler, wrongly assured by Göring that the Luftwaffe could supply Stalingrad by air, ordered Paulus to hold out. He also ordered Field Marshal Erich Manstein to break through and relieve the beleaguered Sixth Army. Manstein was unsuccessful, and on 31 January 1943 Paulus capitulated.</p><p>Of the 91,000 German troops who went into captivity, less than 6,000 returned home after the war. Stalingrad was one of Germany’s greatest defeats, and it effectively marked the end of Hitler’s dreams of an empire in the east.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><ul><li><strong>Read more on the<a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/medieval/worst-military-blunders-battles-mistakes-history/"> top 10 military blunders in history</a></strong></li></ul><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="germans-launch-the-battle-of-kursk-bfe82e55">Germans launch the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/kursk-1943-tanks-battle/">battle of Kursk</a></h3><p>The last major German offensive on the Eastern Front sought to exploit the opportunities provided by a major German salient. They sought to break through the flanks of the salient and to achieve an encirclement triumph to match the Soviet success at Stalingrad the previous winter.</p><p>Still engaging in strategic wishful thinking, Hitler saw this as a battle of annihilation in which superior will would prevail. He hoped that victory would undermine the Allied coalition, by lessening western confidence in the likelihood of Soviet victory and increasing Soviet demands for a second front in France.</p><p>The Germans were outnumbered by the Soviets who had prepared a defence system that thwarted the German tank offensive. After heavy losses and only modest gains, Hitler cancelled the operation that had cost him much strength. Having stopped the Germans, the Soviets were now in a position to counterattack. The Germans were now to be driven back in a near-continuous process.</p><p><sup>By Professor Jeremy Black</sup></p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/must-see-world-war-two-films-schindlers-list-saving-private-ryan-iwo-jima-great-escape/">7 must-see WW2 films, from <em>Schindler’s List</em> to <em>Letters from Iwo Jima</em></a></strong></li></ul><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="d-day-operation-overlord-6-june-1944-f5d6e5d7"><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/d-day-guide-facts-explain-casualties-meaning-success-significance-beaches-normandy/">D-Day</a>, Operation Overlord, <strong>6 June 1944</strong></h3><p>Operation Overlord, the invasion and liberation of north-west Europe, began on <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/d-day-guide-facts-explain-casualties-meaning-success-significance-beaches-normandy/">D-Day</a>, 6 June 1944. That day, under the overall command of US General Dwight Eisenhower, British, Canadian and American troops, supported by the Allied navies and air forces, came ashore on the coast of Normandy. By the end of the day, 158,000 men, including airborne troops, had landed.</p><p>Initially, except on the American Omaha beach, German resistance was unexpectedly light. But it soon stiffened and the Allied breakout from the beachhead area was painfully slow.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2018/01/GettyImages-90431626-3c2cd63-e1638547765463.jpg" width="830" height="529" alt="Troops from the 48th Royal Marines at Saint-Aubin-sur-mer on Juno Beach, Normandy, France, during the D-Day landings, 6th June 1944. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)" title="Juno Beach D-Day Landings" />
<p>The fierceness of the fighting can be gauged by the fact that in Normandy British infantry battalions were suffering the same percentage casualty rates as they had on the Western Front in 1914–1918. Eventually the breakout was achieved, and on 25 August, Paris was liberated. Brussels followed on 3 September.</p><p>Hopes that the war might be won in 1944 were dashed by the Allied failure at <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/arnhem-battle-facts-ww2-history-film-bridge-too-far/">Arnhem</a> and the unexpected German offensive in the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/ardennes-1944-hitlers-last-gamble/">Ardennes</a> in December. It was not until 4 May 1945 that the German forces in north-west Europe surrendered to Montgomery at his HQ on Lüneburg Heath.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p>
<div class="highlight-box">
<p><h4>Read more about the events and impact of <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/d-day-guide-facts-explain-casualties-meaning-success-significance-beaches-normandy/">D-Day</a>:</h4>
<ul>
 	<li><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/d-day-normandy-landings-battle-through-eyes-soldiers-who-were-there-allies-germans/">D-Day: the WW2 battle through the eyes of the men who were there</a></li>
 	<li><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/d-day-why-the-training-was-deadlier-than-the-assault/">Why the training for D-Day was deadlier than the assault</a></li>
 	<li><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/d-day-numbers-facts-figures-casualties-how-many-why-normandy/">D-Day in numbers: 5 infographics that show the big picture</a></li>
</ul>
</p>
</div>
<hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="23-26-october-1944-battle-of-leyte-gulf-376aca3a">23–26 October 1944: Battle of Leyte Gulf</h3><p>The Americans used their naval and air superiority, already strong and rapidly growing, to mount a reconquest of the Philippines from October 1944. That operation helped ensure a naval battle: that of Leyte Gulf of 23–26 October, the largest naval battle of the war and one (or rather a series of engagements) that secured American maritime superiority in the western Pacific.</p><p>The availability of oil helped determine Japanese naval dispositions and, with carrier formations based in home waters and the battle force based just south of Singapore, any American movement against the Philippines presented a very serious problem for Japan. There was growing pessimism in Japan and losing honourably became a goal for at least some Japanese naval leaders. The head of the Naval Operations Section asked on 18 October 1944 that the fleet be afforded “a fitting place to die” and “the chance to bloom as flowers of death”.</p><p>With Operation Sho-Go (Victory Operation) the Japanese sought to intervene by luring the American carrier fleet away, employing their own carriers as bait, and then using two naval striking forces (under Vice-Admirals Kurita and Kiyohide respectively) to attack the vulnerable American landing fleet. This overly complex scheme posed serious problems for the ability of American admirals to read the battle and control the tempo of the battle, and, as at Midway, for their Japanese counterparts in following the plan.</p><p>In a crisis for the American operation, one of the strike forces was able to approach the landing area and was superior to the American warships. However, instead of persisting, the strike force retired; its exhausted commander, Kurita, lacking knowledge of the local situation, not least due to the difficulties of identifying enemy surface ships.</p><p>The net effect of the battle was the loss of four Japanese carriers, three battleships including the Musashi, 10 cruisers, other warships and many aircraft.</p><p><sup>By Professor Jeremy Black</sup></p><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="yalta-the-big-three-february-1945-c213fb46">Yalta: The Big Three, <strong>February 1945</strong></h3><p>Between June 1940 and June 1941, Britain stood alone against Hitler. But then, after the German invasion of Russia and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, she gained two powerful allies. For the next four years Churchill did his utmost to foster ‘The Grand Alliance’ against the Nazis. He even earned the grudging admiration of Nazi propaganda chief Dr Goebbels who said, “…I can feel only respect for this man, for whom no humiliation is too base and no trouble too great when the victory of the Allies is at stake”.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2020/07/GettyImages-103372360-1e4684d-e1638547611167.jpg" width="1024" height="704" alt="The original ‘Big Three’ at Livadia Palace in Yalta: Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin. None of them came away from the summit with everything they had hoped for. (Photo by PhotoQuest/Getty Images)" title="The original ‘Big Three’ at Livadia Palace in Yalta: Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin. None of them came away from the summit with everything they had hoped for. (Photo by PhotoQuest/Getty Images)" />
<p>Churchill conferred with both Roosevelt and Stalin to hammer out strategy and to discuss postwar arrangements. The three men congregated for the first time at Tehran in November 1943. There, and again at their last <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/guide-yalta-potsdam-facts-when-date-why-what-happened-churchill-stalin-roosevelt/">meeting at Yalta</a>, Churchill was conscious of the fact that Britain, exhausted by her war effort, was now very much the junior partner of the two emerging superpowers.</p><ul><li><strong>Opinion | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/britain-stood-alone-ww2-myths-brexit-debate/">Did Britain really stand alone in WW2?</a></strong></li></ul><p>At Yalta, the postwar division of Germany was agreed upon as was the decision to bring war criminals to trial. The future constitution of the United Nations was discussed, and Stalin undertook to enter the war against Japan after Germany had been defeated. But the future of eastern Europe remained a stumbling block. With the Red Army in occupation, the Soviet dictator was disinclined to listen to the views of his two allies.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="the-bombing-of-dresden-13-14-february-1945-4c14dfd0">The bombing of Dresden, <strong>13/14 February 1945</strong></h3><p>At Yalta, an Allied plan to bomb the hitherto untouched city of Dresden was discussed. The reason for attacking the city was due principally to its strategic importance as a communications centre in the rear of the German retreat that followed the Soviet winter offensive of January 1945. It was also believed that Dresden might be used as an alternative to Berlin as the Reich capital.</p><p>The attack was part of a plan codenamed ‘Thunderclap’, designed to convince the Germans that the war was lost. It was drawn up in January 1945, when Hitler’s Ardennes offensive, V2 rocket attacks on Britain and the deployment of snorkel-equipped U-boats clearly demonstrated that Germany was still capable of offering stubborn resistance. Strategic bombing attacks had previously failed to break Germany, although they had proved valuable in reducing its capacity to wage war.</p><p>Now, on the night of 13/14 February 1945, <a href="/membership/podcast-raid-bombing-dresden-ww2-allied-controversy-war-crime-death-facts-statistics/">Dresden was attacked</a> by 800 RAF bombers, followed by 400 bombers of the United States Army Air Force. The bombing created a firestorm that destroyed 1,600 acres of Dresden. Even today it is still uncertain as to how many died, and estimates have ranged from 25,000 to 135,000. Most authorities now put the death toll at around 35,000.</p><p>The scale of destruction, the enormous death toll, and its timing at such a late stage in the war, have all ensured that the bombing of Dresden still remains highly controversial.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="the-liberation-of-bergen-belsen-17-april-1945-4f1751db">The liberation of Bergen-Belsen, <strong>17 April 1945</strong></h3><p><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/bergen-belsen-concentration-camp-holocaust-ww2-history-facts-anne-frank-died-liberated-conditions/">Bergen-Belsen concentration camp</a> was liberated by the British Army on 15 April 1945. The photographs, newsreel films and Richard Dimbleby’s moving BBC broadcast from the camp sent a shockwave of horror and revulsion through Britain. Stories about concentration camps and the Nazi persecution and extermination of the Jews had been circulating since 1933, but this was the first time that the British public were faced with the reality of Hitler’s Final Solution of the Jewish Question – <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/holocaust-world-war-two-facts-deaths-survivors-jews-concentration-camps-died-final-solution/">the Holocaust</a>.</p><p>Even today it is not known for certain when the order to set about systematic extermination of European Jewry was given. But by December 1941, the first extermination camp at Chelmno in German-occupied Poland was in operation, while mass shootings of Soviet Jews had begun in June.</p><p>On 20 January 1942, a meeting of Nazi bureaucrats took place at Wannsee, near Berlin, to discuss the technicalities of the Final Solution. It is estimated that nearly six million Jews were murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators, more than 1.1 million in the gas chambers of <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/auschwitz-facts-history-where-why-how-many-died-significance-rudolf-hoess-ww2/">Auschwitz</a>, the largest extermination camp in German-occupied Poland.</p><p>During the Second World War, Hitler’s racial policies also claimed many millions of non-Jewish victims, including Soviet prisoners of war, those with mental and physical disabilities, gypsies (Roma and Sinti), homosexuals and Jehovah’s Witnesses. The future Archbishop of Canterbury Robert Runcie saw Belsen just after it was liberated. Years later he said,“ A war that closed down Belsen was a war worth fighting”.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p>
<div class="highlight-box">
<p><h4>Learn more about the horrors of the Holocaust and those responsible:</h4>
<ul>
 	<li>12 things you need to know about <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/facts-anne-frank-diary-when-found-died-amsterdam-hiding-how-long/">Anne Frank and her diary</a></li>
 	<li><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/forgotten-trials-the-other-side-of-nuremberg/">Forgotten trials: the other side of Nuremberg</a></li>
 	<li>Experiments in evil: <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/experiments-evil-psychology-holocaust-understand/">the shocking efforts to understand the atrocities of the Holocaust</a></li>
 	<li>Laurence Rees on the <a href="../period/second-world-war/nazis-justify-holocaust/">perpetrators of the Holocaust</a>: “What they told us was, at the time, they felt it was the right thing to do”</li>
</ul>
</p>
</div>
<h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="ve-day-8-may-1945-d225188e">VE Day, <strong>8 May 1945</strong></h3><p>On the afternoon of 8 May 1945, the British prime minister <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/facts-winston-churchill-prime-minister-speeches-clementine-childhood/">Winston Churchill</a> made the radio announcement that the world had long been waiting for. “Yesterday morning,” he declared, “at 2.41 a.m., at General Eisenhower’s headquarters, General Jodl, the representative of the German High Command, and Grand Admiral Dönitz, the designated head of the German State, signed the act of unconditional surrender of all German land, sea and air forces in Europe.”</p><p>After nearly six years, the war in Europe was finally over.</p><p>But while <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/brief-guide-ve-day-victory-europe-ww2/">VE Day</a> marked the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/how-when-ww2-end-ve-day-vj-day-fighting-atomic-bombs-japan-world-europe/">end of the Second World War</a> in Europe, fighting in the far east would continue for another three-and-a-half months. As a consequence, there was always a slightly solemn undercurrent to the celebrations of VE Day.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | </strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/brief-guide-ve-day-victory-europe-ww2/"><strong>What events led to VE Day? </strong></a></li></ul><p>Japan was not finally defeated until after the atomic bomb attacks on <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/atomic-bomb-hiroshima-nagasaki-justified-us-debate-bombs-death-toll-japan-how-many-died-nuclear/">Hiroshima and Nagasaki</a> in August 1945...</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="nagasaki-9-august-1945-b9ed6680">Nagasaki, <strong>9 August 1945</strong></h3><p>On 2 August 1939, <a href="/period/modern/albert-einstein-facts-education-inventions-awards-iq-children-death-birthday-life-die-born-famous/">Albert Einstein</a> wrote a letter to President Roosevelt alerting him to the military potential of splitting the atom. Fears that German scientists might be working on an atomic bomb, prompted the Americans and British to set up the Manhattan Project to develop their own atomic weapon. It was successfully tested in the desert near Alamogordo in New Mexico on 16 July 1945 and the news was flashed to Roosevelt’s successor Harry Truman, who was meeting Churchill and Stalin at <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/guide-yalta-potsdam-facts-when-date-why-what-happened-churchill-stalin-roosevelt/">Potsdam</a>.</p><p>Although the bomb had been conceived with Germany as the target, it was now seen as both a way of quickly ending the war with Japan, and as a lever to apply political pressure on the Russians.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2018/08/GettyImages-906253-71f6855-e1638547642527.jpg" width="2242" height="1492" alt="GettyImages-906253" title="GettyImages-906253" />
<p>Although the Japanese were warned that if they carried on fighting their homeland would face “utter devastation”, they continued to resist with their usual fanaticism. Thus, the first atomic bomb to be used militarily, codenamed Little Boy, was <a href="/period/second-world-war/atomic-bomb-hiroshima-nagasaki-justified-us-debate-bombs-death-toll-japan-how-many-died-nuclear/">dropped on Hiroshima</a> on 6 August 1945.</p><p>An estimated 78,000 people died and 90,000 others were seriously injured. Three days later a second bomb, Fat Man, was dropped on Nagasaki causing a similar loss of life.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><hr><h3 class="listicle__title heading-3" id="japan-surrenders-2-september-1945-96293cf6">Japan surrenders, <strong>2 September 1945</strong></h3><p>The dropping of the atomic bombs brought about the quick acceptance of Allied terms and Japan surrendered on 14 August 1945. Japan publicly announced its surrender on 15 August 1945. This day has since been commemorated as Victory over Japan – or ‘VJ’ – Day.</p><p>But the official surrender documents were not signed until 2 September, which is considered <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/vj-day-winning-war-east-japan/">VJ Day</a> in the USA. The formal surrender took place on USS <em>Missouri</em> in Tokyo Bay on 2 September 1945, six years and one day after the Germans invaded Poland. The Second World War was officially over.</p><p><sup>By Terry Charman</sup></p><p><strong>Jeremy Black is a professor of history at the University of Exeter who specialises in British and continental European history. His publications include <em>The Age of Total War, 1860–1945</em> (Praeger Publishers Inc, 2006) and <em>World War Two: A Military History</em> (Routledge, 2003)</strong></p><p><strong>The late Terry Charman was a senior historian at the Imperial War Museum London and the author of <em>Outbreak 1939: The World Goes to War</em> (Virgin, 2009)<br></strong></p><p><em><strong>These WW2 dates first appeared in </strong><a href="https://www.historyextra.com/special-editions/"><strong>BBC History Magazine's Collectors' Edition 'The Second World War Story'</strong></a></em></p>]]></content>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>HistoryExtra</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[1942: Churchill's darkest hour]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2022/03/1942collageHR_2-7d722f9.jpg" width="620" height="413">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/1942-churchill-darkest-hour-reputation-public-opinion/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/membership/1942-churchill-darkest-hour-reputation-public-opinion/</id>
		<updated>2024-08-13T11:44:41.000Z</updated>
		<published>2022-03-29T11:12:22.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="20th Century"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Membership"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[If 1940 was the year in which Winston Churchill’s reputation was forged, 1942 was the one in which it was almost destroyed. Taylor Downing chronicles a terrible period for the prime minister – both on the battlefield and in the court of public opinion]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p><strong>Listen to this article:</strong></p>
<hr><p>On Saturday 14 February 1942, Japanese forces advanced to a point just a few miles from the city of Singapore. But in a corner shop in the Yorkshire town of Dewsbury, the conversation was about events much closer to home. Two days earlier, three large German warships, the Scharnhorst, Gneisenau and Prinz Eugen, had sailed up the English Channel and passed through the Strait of Dover in broad daylight. It was the one topic every customer in the Yorkshire grocery store wanted to talk about. “What have they been doing to let them ships escape? They’ve made fools of us, haven’t they?” exclaimed one woman.</p><p>The fact that Britannia no longer seemed to rule the waves – could not even stop German warships from passing within a few miles of the white cliffs – caused indignation. “By gosh, it’s time we bucked up, what with one thing and another – there’s only the Russians doing owt,” commented one male customer. “They wouldn’t have let them slip, you can bet.” Meanwhile, a woman complained that “it happened under our noses”.</p><p>These words were noted by the sales assistant, who was keeping a diary for Mass Observation, the social research project that recorded everyday comments by people across the land. Such remarks, plus other data, were used to provide regular assessments of morale for the Home Intelligence unit of the Ministry of Information. Today, Mass Observation records offer a unique insight into the concerns and attitudes of British people throughout a tumultuous year of the war.</p><p>A series of blunders and abysmal communication failures had allowed the German warships to pass within a few miles of the English coast. It was a humiliation for the Royal Navy. The press erupted in outrage, and the normally loyal <em>Daily Mail</em> led the charge with an attack not just on the government but specifically on the prime minister, <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/facts-winston-churchill-prime-minister-speeches-clementine-childhood/">Winston Churchill</a>. Up to this point, most government criticism had avoided attacking Churchill himself. But now the <em>Daily Mail</em> asked: “Is it any longer true to say that we trust the prime minister, though we do not trust the government?”</p><ul><li><strong>Listen | <a href="/membership/1942-churchill-darkest-hour-podcast-taylor-downing/">Taylor Downing chronicles the events of the year 1942, which he contends was Britain’s lowest moment in the Second World War</a></strong></li></ul><h3 id="singapore-surrenders-bc3ac346">Singapore surrenders</h3><p>More bad news arrived that same weekend. After two months of retreat down the length of the Malay peninsula (what’s now mainland Malaysia), on 15 February the supposedly impregnable fortress of Singapore capitulated. Almost 100,000 British and imperial troops yielded to a far smaller Japanese force. It was the largest surrender in British history.</p><p>No one could hide a sense of shame – including the prime minister, who later said that the fall of Singapore was “the greatest disaster to British arms which our history records”.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2022/03/GettyImages-514697516sml-20d9729.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="Japanese troops advance through Burma (now Myanmar) in 1942" title="Japanese troops advance through Burma (now Myanmar) in 1942, following their invasion. (Image by Getty Images)" />
<p>On becoming prime minister in May 1940, Churchill had also appointed himself minister of defence. Every aspect of Britain’s military performance came under his supervision. He was responsible for the strategic direction of Britain’s war effort, so could not escape blame when things went wrong.</p><p>On a Royal Air Force (RAF) base at Digby in Lincolnshire, a young Women’s Auxiliary Air Force (WAAF) officer detected a new tone among her colleagues after the surrender of Singapore. As a Mass Observer, she dutifully wrote down what she heard. “Up to now,” she recorded, “the government has been criticised often, but always with the reservation ‘Churchill’s all right’. But now Churchill is condemned with the rest.”</p>
<p>As one young WAAF said: “A month ago, if people had been talking about Churchill like this, we’d have called them fifth columnists, but now...” One of her friends said: “It’s time we had a new government – Churchill’s taking too much upon himself these days.” Another was reported as saying: “He roared all right in his time, but he’s outlived it.”</p><p>Churchill was thrown into a mood of despair by the disasters of that fateful weekend. After a cabinet meeting on 16 February, Foreign Office civil servant Sir Alexander Cadogan wrote in his diary: “PM truculent and angry – and havering [vacillating].” The next day, Churchill told the House of Commons that he would not allow a debate on the fall of Singapore, aiming to avoid a public discussion at such a tense time “in a mood of panic”. MPs were outraged. Labour MP Frederick Bellenger told the prime minister that “there is in the country, and indeed in the house at the present moment, a feeling that we have not got the right kind of persons to direct this war to a satisfactory conclusion... we have not got the right kind of government.” At this, the house cheered.</p><p>“Papa is at a very low ebb,” Churchill’s daughter Mary wrote after a private lunch with her father later that month. “He is not too well physically and he is worn down by the continuous crushing pressure of events. He is saddened – appalled by events.”</p><h3 id="outclassed-again-bcb1613a">Outclassed again</h3><p>The military disasters continued throughout the spring of 1942. In Burma (Myanmar), British and imperial troops were once again totally outclassed by mobile Japanese forces. After the capture of Rangoon on 9 March, British-led troops retreated 900 miles across jungles, mountains and ravines. When they crossed into India at the beginning of May, they looked as “gaunt and ragged as scarecrows”, according to their commander, General Slim. It was called the “longest retreat” in British history, and it left the Japanese at the gates of India.</p>
<p>When a Japanese naval task force of five carriers and four battleships sailed into the Bay of Bengal at the start of April, panic ensued. In three days, 23 merchant ships sailing between Madras (now Chennai) and Calcutta (Kolkata) were sunk. Many began to fear that an invasion of India was imminent. An Eastern Fleet was hastily assembled but it was no match for the Japanese navy and their dive bombers, known as “Vals”. Two British heavy cruisers were sunk off Colombo in Ceylon (Sri Lanka), and a light carrier and a destroyer went down outside Trincomalee. All of the ships were lacking effective fighter cover. The admirals seemed to have learned nothing since the loss of HMS Repulse and the Prince of Wales four months before – sunk by Japanese bombers in the South China Sea with the loss of hundreds of lives.</p><p>Churchill was plunged further into despair by the devastation inflicted by the “Vals”. When RAF bombers failed to score any hits on the German battleship Tirpitz, lying up in a Norwegian fjord, he sent an angry note asking for an explanation of “how it was that 12 of our machines managed to get no hits as compared with the extraordinary efficiency of the Japanese [air] attacks?”</p><h3 id="under-siege-e10fadda">Under siege</h3><p>Back in the Mediterranean, the island of Malta was under intense siege. In the early months of 1942 the British naval base was put out of action, and the cruiser squadron and submarine flotilla based there withdrew. Continuous air raids – sometimes more than a dozen in a day – devastated the island’s three RAF airfields. The city of Valletta was pulverised, its narrow streets reduced to rubble, and many of the island’s architectural jewels were destroyed. One convoy bringing supplies had to turn back. Three vessels of another convoy finally got through, carrying vital supplies of food, ammunition and fuel. But as Maltese dockers unloaded these ships, the Luftwaffe attacked again – and within 72 hours all three vessels had been sunk, with most of their precious cargo lost.</p><p>Supplies did, however, continue to reach the Eighth Army, which was contesting the see-saw desert war fought up and down the Libyan coastline. A huge base was built up around Gazala and Tobruk, with vast amounts of fuel, rations and ammunition. Infantry units were brought up to strength, and armoured brigades were re-equipped with new tanks including American Grants. In Cairo, General Claude Auchinleck waited for supplies to arrive but his foe, German general Erwin Rommel, was less patient.</p>
<img src="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2022/03/2BWC05J-f46a3e1.jpg" width="620" height="413" alt="A field gun bombards German tanks during the second battle of El Alamein, an Allied victory that turned the tide of the war in the desert. (Image by Getty Images)" title="A field gun bombards German tanks during the second battle of El Alamein, an Allied victory that turned the tide of the war in the desert. (Image by Getty Images)" />
<p>On 26 May, he launched an offensive at Gazala. At first it faltered, and there was an opportunity for a counter-stroke that could have smashed the German and Italian forces. But Eighth Army commander General Neil Ritchie hesitated and, by the time he attacked, Rommel had reorganised his position. By 8 June, 220 British tanks had been knocked out, including many of the Grants. Churchill cabled Auchinleck from London: “Retreat would be fatal. This is a business not only of armour but of willpower.”</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/the-special-operations-executive-churchills-secret-army/">The Special Operations Executive: Churchill's secret army</a></strong></li></ul><p>Sadly, the necessary willpower was lacking. Ritchie led a retreat to the Egyptian border but ordered <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/8-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-tobruk/">Tobruk</a>, well supplied and garrisoned, to hold out, as it had done the previous year. Rommel had a different idea. On Saturday 20 June, he launched an assault on the garrison. Following a shattering air raid, his engineers advanced to clear mines for his panzers. By afternoon, they had reached the harbour. The following day, the British surrendered. In 1941, Tobruk had held out defiantly for eight months. In June 1942, it collapsed in just one weekend.</p><p>Churchill was at the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/21st-century/white-house-facts-president-usa-american-history-when-was-built-washington-rooms-donald-trump-fire/">White House</a> with <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/life-of-the-week-president-franklin-d-roosevelt/">President Roosevelt</a> when the news came through. Some 33,000 British-led troops had surrendered to an Axis force of perhaps half that size. Churchill was shattered. “This was one of the heaviest blows I can recall during the war,” he later wrote, adding: “Defeat is one thing. Disgrace is another.”</p><h3 id="summer-of-discontent-37e2b41a">Summer of discontent</h3><p>Across the country, faith in Churchill’s leadership was crumbling. Mass Observation reported that July was “a month of discontent and disappointment”, recording a 55-year-old man as saying that: “We’ve made a balls of it everywhere.” A middle-class woman keeping a diary for Mass Observation in Hampshire recorded a neighbour saying that “she thought we would be under German rule here before too long”. Another friend “pleaded guilty to having lost faith in Churchill”.</p><p>The military debacles created a major political crisis for the prime minister and his government. One MP picked up “an atmosphere of disappointment, bewildered rage and uneasiness” in the house. A vote of no confidence was put down. The Labour MP Aneurin Bevan summed up the mood of many with a memorable aphorism: “The prime minister wins debate after debate and loses battle after battle. The country is beginning to say that he fights debates like a war and the war like a debate.” Despite the rhetoric, Churchill easily defeated the no confidence vote.</p>
<p>However, a credible alternative leader had emerged. Sir Stafford Cripps was an austere figure and an able communicator who captured the mood of the nation at this point of the war. Moreover, having been ambassador in Moscow until the beginning of the year, he cleverly associated himself with heroic Soviet resistance to the German invader, in contrast to repeated British failures. Mass Observation recorded that he was seen as “the first alternative leader-figure since the fall of Chamberlain”.</p><p>With a new offensive due in Egypt, Churchill desperately needed a military victory. Brendan Bracken, a close friend and supporter, said to a colleague: “If we are beaten in this battle, it’s the end of Winston.”</p><p>After a tense few months, though, Churchill finally got what he needed. In early November, Montgomery’s Eighth Army smashed the Axis forces at <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/el-alamein-the-line-in-the-sand/">Alamein</a>. Four days later, in a campaign dubbed Operation Torch, US troops landed in French North Africa (in what’s now Morocco and Algeria). The fighting in the desert was a long way from being over but victory looked increasingly certain. Churchill’s standing quickly revived, and by mid-December a Gallup poll recorded that satisfaction with Churchill’s leadership had been fully restored.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more | <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/churchill-the-cry-baby-war-hero/">Churchill: the ‘cry-baby’ war hero</a></strong></li></ul><p>It was an upbeat end to an awful 12 months. 1940 is usually viewed as Churchill’s most difficult year as prime minister, marked by the fall of France, the Battle of Britain and the Blitz, but in fact it proved to be his “finest hour”. It’s often imagined that from that point he enjoyed plain sailing along the long, slow route to victory in 1945. But that was not the case. Churchill’s blackest hour came in 1942.</p><p>When, in 1950, he dictated his memoir-history for this period of the war, he described the long run of disasters in 1942 as “galling links in a chain of misfortune and frustration to which no parallel could be found in our history”. He reflected that, if he had been dismissed during the year of military disasters, he would then “have vanished from the scene with a load of calamity on my shoulders”. But Churchill survived. Military victory brought a revival of his political fortunes. As he later wrote: “Before Alamein we never had a victory. After Alamein we never had a defeat.”</p><p><strong>Taylor Downing is a writer, historian and broadcaster. His latest book is<em> 1942: Britain at the Brink</em> (Little, Brown, 2022)</strong></p><p><em><strong>This content first appeared in the April 2022 issue of <a href="/bbc-history-magazine/">BBC History Magazine</a></strong></em></p>]]></content>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Rob Attar</name>
		</author>
		<title type="html"><![CDATA[1942: Churchill’s darkest hour]]></title>
		<media:thumbnail url="https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2022/03/Pod-Taylor-Downing-WL-dae990c.jpg" width="620" height="413">
		</media:thumbnail>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.historyextra.com/membership/1942-churchill-darkest-hour-podcast-taylor-downing/">
		</link>
		<id>https://www.historyextra.com/membership/1942-churchill-darkest-hour-podcast-taylor-downing/</id>
		<updated>2023-10-06T13:02:35.000Z</updated>
		<published>2022-03-29T10:48:23.000Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="20th Century"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Membership"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Period"/>
		<category scheme="https://www.historyextra.com" term="Second World War"/>
		<summary><![CDATA[Taylor Downing chronicles the events of the year 1942, which he contends was Britain’s lowest moment in the Second World War]]></summary>
		<content><![CDATA[<p>Historian Taylor Downing chronicles the events of the year 1942, which he contends was Britain’s lowest moment in the <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/timeline-important-dates-ww2-exact/">Second World War</a>. Speaking to Rob Attar, he revisits some of the disasters that befell the country that year and highlights the crucial victory that transformed <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/facts-winston-churchill-prime-minister-speeches-clementine-childhood/">Winston Churchill</a>’s fortunes.</p><ul><li><strong>Read more from Taylor Downing how <a href="https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/1942-churchill-darkest-hour-reputation-public-opinion/">how 1942 affected Churchill's reputation</a></strong></li></ul>
<p><strong>Taylor Downing is the author of <em>1942: Britain at the Brink</em> (Little Brown, 2022)</strong></p><ul><li><a href="https://uk.bookshop.org/books/1942-britain-at-the-brink/9781408713709" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer"><strong>Buy now on Bookshop.org</strong></a></li><li><a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/1942-Britain-Brink-Taylor-Downing-ebook/dp/B0946K2Q8L?tag=bbchistory045-21&amp;ascsubtag=historyextra-205057" target="_blank" rel="sponsored"><strong>Buy now on Amazon</strong></a></li><li><a href="https://www.awin1.com/cread.php?id=489797&amp;clickref=historyextra-205057&amp;awinmid=3787&amp;p=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.waterstones.com%2Fbook%2F1942-britain-at-the-brink%2Ftaylor-downing%2F9781408713709" target="_blank" rel="sponsored"><strong>Buy now on Waterstones</strong></a></li></ul>]]></content>
	</entry>
</feed>