For those of a certain age, my friend Dave Turrell sent a message under this title on January 24th. On that day fifty-nine years ago, the Great Man departed.  I saved the words for today’s anniversary, six days, later: the interment at Bladon.

Recalling January 30th, Lord Moran reached what Anthony Montague Browne described as “the top of his stylistic form.” As did dear Anthony himself, and the irreplaceable Grace Hamblin.

The poem “At Bladon” was read by Robert Hardy at the gravesite during our penultimate Churchill Tour in 2006. It is today fifty-nine years since Richard Dimbleby made the words indelible.

Charles Wilson, Lord Moran MC PRC

“He was taken at night to Westminster, to the Hall of William Rufus, and there for three days he lay in state, while the people gathered in crowds that stretched over Lambeth Bridge to the far side of the river, to do honour to the man they loved for his valour.

“On the fourth day he was borne on a gun-carriage to St. Paul’s. There followed a long line of men in arms, marching to sorrowful music. With all the panoply of Church and State, and in the presence of his Queen, he was carried to an appointed place hard by the tombs of Nelson and Wellington, under the great dome, while with solemn music and the beating of drums the nation saluted the man who had saved them and saved their honour.

“The village stations on the way to Bladon were crowded with his countrymen, and at Bladon in a country churchyard, in the stillness of a winter evening, in the presence of his family and a few friends, Winston Churchill was committed to English earth, which in his finest hour he had held inviolate.” [1]

Grace Hamblin OBE

“At the end, I went down with the family to the funeral, near his beloved birthplace, Blenheim, and to me that quiet, humble service in the country churchyard was much more moving than had been the tremendous pomp and glory of the state ceremony in London. As the train made its slow journey through the snow-covered countryside on that bitterly cold day, men and women were standing in their little gardens behind their cottages, out in the fields or in the stations as we passed, the men with their heads bared, saying a silent farewell to their hero.

“I thought of these people at home, and I thought of you, and the hundreds and hundreds of letters Lady Churchill received from all over the world. And I pondered on what had made this dynamic but gentle character so beloved and respected—and such a wonderful person to work for. I think what one found first was courage. He had no fear of anything, moral or physical. There was sincerity, truth and integrity, for he couldn’t knowingly deceive a cabinet minister or a bricklayer or a secretary. There was forgiveness, warmth, affection, loyalty and, perhaps most important of all in the demanding life we all lived, there was humour, which he had in abundance.

“I hope I shan’t be infringing any copyright or displeasing anyone if I slightly misquote a passage from one of those many, many letters Lady Churchill had received on his death. It came from a distinguished member of your community here in America, and it has always been in my mind. ‘That he died is unimportant, for we must all pass away. That he lived is momentous to the destiny of decent men. He is not gone. He lives wherever men are free.'” [2]

Sir Anthony Montague Browne CBE DFC

“The procession to the graveyard at Bladon was brief, and we were few in number. We filed past the grave for the last time before it was closed. I was astonished to see a small and not particularly distinguished row of medals lying on the coffin. I could only suppose that it had fallen from the chest of one of the military coffin-bearers, and wondered if it would remain there to perplex archaeologists of many centuries hence.

“We took our departure for London in the freezing dusk…. At the back of my own mind there was the old quotation from WSC himself, of the death of Richard Coeur de Lion: ‘Worthy, by the consent of all men, to sit with King Arthur and Roland and other heroes of martial romance at some eternal Round Table, which we trust the Creator of the Universe in His comprehension will not have forgotten to provide.’

“On the way home, my mind was a blank. I tried to say some silent prayers for that brave and generous soul, but they were choked and confused, and came to nothing. I could not mourn for him: he had so clearly and for so long wanted to leave the World. But I was submerged in a wave of aching grief for Britain’s precipitous decline, against which he had stood in vain. When I reached our flat in Eaton Place it had been burgled.” [3]

“At Bladon”: Robert Hardy CBE

Drop English earth on him beneath
do our sons; and their sons bequeath
his glories and our pride and grief
at Bladon.

For Lionheart that lies below
that feared not toil nor tears nor foe.
Let the oak stand tho’ tempests blow
at Bladon.

So Churchill sleeps, yet surely wakes
old warrior where the morning breaks
On sunlit uplands. But the heart aches
at Bladon. [4]

Credits

1. Charles Wilson, Lord Moran, Winston Churchill: The Struggle for Survival, 1940-1965, Taken from the Diaries of Lord Moran (London: Constable, 1966), 842.

2. Grace Hamblin, “Frabjous Days: Chartwell Memories 1932-1965,” International Churchill Conference, Dallas, 20 October 1987.

3. Anthony Montague Browne, Long Sunset: Memoirs of Winston Churchill’s Last Private Secretary (London: Cassell, 1995) 328.

4. Richard Dimbleby read the poem “At Bladon,” by Avril Anderson, in a breaking voice over the BBC on 30 January 1965.

Q: His legacy today?

Peter Baker of The New York Times recently reviewed a new book which delivers some sharp arrows toward Winston Churchill and his legacy. Baker writes that the text labels Churchill  “not just a racist but a hypocrite, a dissembler, a narcissist, an opportunist, an imperialist, a drunk, a strategic bungler, a tax dodger, a neglectful father, a credit-hogging author, a terrible judge of character and, most of all, a masterful myth-maker.” [They forgot white supremacist and Cossack-killer—see comment below. RML]

In addition, during a protest over the killing of George Floyd last year, demonstrators in London targeted the iconic statue of Winston Churchill in Parliament Square. Underneath his name someone had spray-painted the words “was a racist.”

This seems to be an ongoing theme: to demolish a great figure in history looking through a 21st century progressive lens. Despite this harsh treatment, does Churchill’s legacy today remain intact? —B.L., via email

A: Hardly dented

Thanks for your message. I think there is scarcely a dent in Churchill’s legacy today: First because most of the charges are false. Second because they ignore what really matters. Only a small fraction of people believe this stuff. For example, a 2020 Facebook page simply entitled “Winston Churchill” acquired over 20,000 followers in nine months, and almost all the posts are supportive.

I thought Mr. Baker’s review in The New York Times was rather good. Though not terribly learned, it perceptively grasps the essential point:

None of our historical idols were as unvarnished as the memorials we build to them. The question is: What are they being honored for? Which contributions to history do we celebrate?…. Churchill has been venerated despite his manifest flaws, not because of them. Statues in Parliament Square and elsewhere are meant to remind us of his finest hour, not his darkest ones.

Another reviewer, Richard Aldous in the Wall Street Journal, is more comprehensive than Baker. (Transcript available.)

But to deal with this barrage of distortion really takes a specialist, like Andrew Roberts, for the Hillsdale College Churchill Project. (The accompanying cartoon, incidentally, was first published by the Third Reich. It is amusing that the Cancel Culture now views Churchill more or less as the Nazis did.)

Cases for the defense

“There is an implicit conflict of interest between that which is highly viewable, and that which is highly illuminating.” —William F. Buckley, Jr.

The Hillsdale College Churchill Project has been making “the case for the defense” against the fanciful deconstruction of Winston Churchill for years. For over fifty refutations of common charges by highly qualified scholars, explore our “Truths and Heresies” department: https://bit.ly/30xfjWq

Specifically you may find these articles of interest:

“Cambridge: The Racial Consequences of Mr. Churchill: A Review”

“Hearsay Doesn’t Count: The Truth about Churchill’s ‘Racist’ Epithets”

“Stop this Trashing of Our Monuments—and Our Past“

Most of those reading this knows where they were on 9/11/01. A diminishing number remember where they were on 1/30/65. That was the day we of Sir Winston Churchill’s state funeral.

For me it was a life-changing experience. Suddenly, unforgettably, on a flickering black and white TV screen in Staten Island, N.Y., the huge void of England’s grandest cathedral filled with The Battle Hymn of the Republic. He was, they told us, half-American, an honorary citizen by Act of Congress.

That day was the start of my 50-year career in search of Churchill—of what his greatest biographer, Sir Martin Gilbert, describes as “labouring in the vineyard.”

After the funeral…

…I picked up The Gathering Storm, the first volume of his World War II memoirs, and was snared by what Robert Pilpel called his “roast beef and pewter phrases.” It’s biased, as Churchill admitted—“This is not history; this is my case.” But it is ordered so as to put you at his side for the “great climacterics” that made us what we are today.

Churchill’s life spanned 60 years of prominence unmatched in recent history. Of course he insisted that “nothing surpasses 1940.” That was the year Britain and the Commonwealth—“the old lion with her lion cubs” as he put it, “stood alone against hunters who are armed with deadly weapons.” And fought on until “those who hitherto had been half blind were half ready.”

I soon learned there was more to Churchill than 1940. As Martin Gilbert wrote: “As I open file after file of Churchill’s archive, from his entry into Government in 1905 to his retirement in 1955, I am continually surprised by the truth of his assertions, the modernity of his thought, the originality of his mind, the constructiveness of his proposals, his humanity, and, most remarkable of all, his foresight.” All this his funeral remembered.

Visionary and peacemaker

And what foresight. Churchill predicted mobile phones, jet and rocket travel, 24/7 media, genetic engineering. He warned of the dangers of nuclear war, fifteen years before Einstein wrote his famous letter to Roosevelt on the implications of splitting the atom—this alleged warmonger who said of war: “What vile and utter folly and barbarism it all is.”

This same Churchill negotiated the nonnegotiable—a treaty establishing Irish independence. Michael Collins, one of the IRA revolutionaries who worked with him, declared: “Tell Winston we could have done nothing without him.”

In Cairo he helped draw the boundaries of today’s Middle East—an act for which some say we should not thank him. Yet they established a stable Jordan, which is there yet. Vainly he tried also to create a Kurdish homeland, “to protect the Kurds from some future bully in Iraq.” The optimist in him called for a Jewish homeland: He simply could not understand how the Arabs would not welcome Jews who made “a fertile garden” of the land they both inhabited.

***

He fought and lost over Indian self-government. Then he told Gandhi: “…use the powers that are offered, and make the thing a success.” Decades before, Churchill had defended the Indian minority in South Africa, as he had native Africans. “I have got a good recollection of Mr. Churchill when he was in the Colonial Office,” Gandhi replied, “and somehow or other since then I have held the opinion that I can always rely on his sympathy and goodwill.”

As a young reformer, Churchill campaigned for a “minimum standard” guaranteed by the state: “I see little glory in an Empire which can rule the waves and is unable to flush its sewers.” Yet he instinctively feared socialism: “the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.”

His 15 million published words cover more than war and politics. He wrote history, biography, 3000 speeches, thoughtful essays on the nature of democracy, constitutionalism, liberty and the rule of law. He preserved all his archives for historians to pore over. His words can justify any side of an issue.

“The nature of man”

“Since history never repeats itself, the policies Churchill adopted do not provide ready-made solutions now,” wrote the historian Paul Addison. “But Churchill’s writings and speeches are full of reflections and philosophy that offer food for thought. It is rare to dis­cover in the archives the reflec­tions of a politi­cian on the nature of man.”

I only wish the print and digital media would understand this, and thus generate less rubbish. A few corrective facts: Without Churchill, the 1943 Bengal famine would have been worse. Without him, someone might actually have used poison gas on Iraqi tribesmen or German cities. With him, women got the vote. He opposed it at a time when most British women did, and reconsidered when he saw how much women did for the country in World War I.

This man called for “the harmonious disposition of the world among its peoples.” Yet, we are told, he “fiercely opposed to self-determination.” Was the fierce independence Churchill admired in Canadians, Boers, Zulus, Australians, Sudanese, New Zealanders. Kenyans and Maoris a sham and a façade?

And yet he lives on

Churchill would never win office today, I read during the funeral anniversary. A “ruthless egotist,” he “would struggle to be elected.” Was there a great political figure who was not an egotist? No one elected him in 1940. Nobody else wanted the job. And Churchill’s wartime relationships with Allies and the military were very stuff of compromise.

Why does Churchill defy such attacks generations after his funeral? Because, I think, Winston Churchill stands for something. For certain critical human possibilities that are always worth bringing to the attention of thoughtful people. Why? In order to perpetuate things worth perpetuating: Love of country. The fraternal relationship of the Great Democracies. Their heritage of law, language and literature. Our thirst for liberty. Our invincibility when we work together for just causes.

Across the years

In the time since his funeral I learned much of Churchill’s life and thought. The eerie relevancy of his challenges and experiences still call to us across the years. There will always be scoffers, who portray him as a one-dimensional, a man of war, an anachronism. “In doing so, it is they who are the losers,” Martin Gilbert concluded. “For he was a man of quality: a good guide for our troubled present, and for the generations now reaching adulthood.”

Some who miss him lament that there are no Churchills today. Perhaps such leaders emerge only in life or death emergencies. We may be facing one again.

***

This article first appeared in The Weekly Standard online, 23 January 2015.

For the famous rendering of The Battle Hymn of the Republic by the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, click here.

An article in the Christian Post equates President Obama’s absence from the March in Paris with President Johnson skipping the 1965 Churchill Funeral. The Johnson story has gone around a lot lately, but it is neither accurate nor a fair comparison.

President Johnson, suffering from a bad case of flu, sent Chief Justice Earl Warren and Secretary of State Dean Rusk to the Churchill Funeral. In his official statement Johnson said: “When there was darkness in the world…a generous Providence gave us Winston Churchill….He is history’s child, and what he said and what he did will never die.”

The gesture of respect that was Churchill’s long-rehearsed, meticulously planned funeral does not really compare to spontaneous march of world leaders over the atrocities in Paris. Whatever one may think of the lack of high-level Americans in the latter event, President Johnson did act responsibly in 1965.