It’s all over the Web. And entirely bogus.

After his  retirement, goes the story, Churchill was cruising the Mediterranean on an Italian liner and a journalist asked why a former Prime Minister chose Italian ships. “There are three things I like about Italian cruise ships,” Churchill supposedly says. “First, their cuisine is unsurpassed. Second, their service is superb. And then, in time of emergency, there is none of this nonsense about women and children first.”

Amusing to some, this is anathema to others, including relatives of the Costa Concordia passengers and many embarrassed Italians. It is NOT anything ever said by Winston Churchill. Neither this quotation nor key words from it can be found in digital scans of Churchill’s twenty million published words in books, articles, speeches and private papers. It did appear in a book of purported Churchill quotes which—as invariably is the case when red herring quotations are dragged out—provides neither authority nor attribution.

Incidentally, it is entirely out of character. No one was more gallant toward woman and children than WSC. Nor can I find any record of Churchill cruising on Italian ships. Churchill didn’t take such cruises. He preferred ships that were smaller and more private. Say as about 325 feet—like the Onassis yacht Christina O, which took him on eight cruises between 1958 and 1963.

So who said it?

Some attribute the ships remark to Noël Coward, but reader Nelson Bridwell referred me to the Quote Investigator, which tracks it to travel writer Henry J. Allen in 1917.

A California congresswoman ignorantly compared the sinking of the Costa Concordia with that of the Titanic 100 years earlier. That is historically inane, a disservice to the British crewmen of 1912, and the Italians who struggled to save lives on the Costa Concordia in 2012.

Churchill’s words to his wife about the Titanic serve equally to show how impossible would be his supposed remarks about Italian ships:

The strict observance of the great traditions of the sea towards women and children reflects nothing but honour upon our civilization…. I cannot help feeling proud of our race and its traditions as proved by this event. Boat loads of women and children tossing on the sea—safe and sound—and the rest Silence. Honour to their memory.

(Of course, WSC has been blamed for the sinking of the Titanic, too.)

2) Dogfight under a carpet

Churchill allegedly compared Russian politics to a “dogfight under a carpet.” It was mentioned in The Economist of 17 November 2005: “Like watching dogs fighting under a carpet, was how Churchill described Russian politics. On November 14th the carpet stirred, when President Vladimir Putin announced that Dmitry Medvedev was to become first deputy prime minister.” It seems to be fairly well known. Can you give me the exact quote and a citation? —P.C.

The Economist was unhelpful, providing no attribution, and not even a byline by which one could query the author. Unlike the ships remark, it sounds a bit like him. However, I cannot locate any source. We searched the same compilation as for the ships quotation—books, articles, speeches and published papers. “Dogfight” gets ten hits, all referring to aerial warfare. “Carpet” has 264 hits but none close to the quotation. “Under the carpet” draws a blank. Without further information, we have to conclude this is unsubstantiated.

Coming up: Churchill: Master of Language

“Red herrings” are everywhere, in digital and print media, with no attribution whatsoever. Coming soon from Hillsdale College Press, my new, expanded edition of Churchill by Himself contains nearly 200 of these, which Churchill either never said, or denied saying.

You can, however, refer to the Red Herrings Appendix of the new book right now. I keep the ever-expanding list up to date in four posts starting here.

Further reading

“God, Santayana, Musso and Not Gettng Scuppered,” 2024.

“Clem in the Gents, Huns at Your Throat,” 2024.

“Democracy, Life, Living, Enemies,” 2024.

“All the Quotes Winston Churchill Never Said” (Part 1), updated. (Parts 2-3-4 are linked.)

Q: Did Hitler send Hess?

Peter Padfield, in Hess, Hitler & Churchill: The Real Turning Point of the Second World War, claimed that Rudolf Hess’s May 1941 flight to Britain (generally thought the solo act of a delusional psycophant) was authorized by Hitler. Allegedly Hess had with him a proposal for an armistice with Britain. Germany would withdraw from Western Europe in exchange for a free hand to attack Russia. Is there anything to this? —R.M.N., South Dakota

A: Unproven

Rudolf Hess (1894-1987) had been Hitler’s Deputy Fuehrer until the flight. After the Second World War he was tried at Nuremberg and sentenced to life imprisonment.

According to Padfield’s book summarized by the Daily Telegraph, Hess brought with him a typewritten proposed treaty. Written on German Chancellery paper, it proposed a state of wohlwollende Neutralitat (“well wishing neutrality”) between Britain and Germany. Supposedly, it even disclosed the date for Hitler’s planned attack on the Soviet Union (22 June 1941).

Mr. Padfield is an accomplished contrarian, but this is a curious thesis. Hess himself claimed to be looking for anti-Churchill elements in Britain. He sought out the Duke of Hamilton, who was anything but, and notified Churchill.

First-person testimony from those around Hitler, such as Albrecht Speer, was to the contrary. Speer wrote that Hitler was furious when informed of the Hess flight. Hitler stripped Hess all his offices. He ordered Hess  shot on sight if he ever returned to Germany. Readers of the book please comment.

This is not to say Hitler might not have welcomed an arrangement leaving him a free hand in the east. It is well known that he hoped for some kind of stand-off with Britain after the fall of France, and was never keen about invading England. But surely he was smart enough to know he’d never get that from Churchill, who was firmly in power by May 1941. (See “Churchill on Peace with Hitler, my next post, on March 25th.)

Peter Padfield

Titanic followers know Peter Padfield as author of a convincing book, The Titanic and the Californian. Defying most accounts, Padfield exonerates Captain Stanley Lord of the Leyland liner Californian, who supposedly remained immobile in an ice floe within visual range of the sinking Titanic in April 1912. Padfield used naval technology and a battery of measurements to argue that Californian was nowhere near that close. His book is the leading text of the “Lordites.” They claim Captain Lord was wronged, notably by Walter Lord (no relation), author of the 1956 bestseller, A Night to Remember.

Trivia: Lennoxlove

In the 1990s I hosted a Churchill Tour visit to Lennoxlove, seat of the Dukes of Hamilton and Brandon.  Visitors will find a small museum containing Hess flight memorabilia. Astonishingly, the house itself containas the death mask of Mary Queen of Scots!  Click here and go to minute 24.

Per the previous post, I append for reader comment the contents of my next book, Winston Churchill, Myth and Reality: What Churchill Stood For.

I have written on most of these matters in the past; the book recasts it afresh. I also acknowledge and cross-reference the work of experts who know far more than I, particularly in the fields of genealogy and medicine. I would be glad to hear your thoughts; please use the “contact” page.

The historian David Stafford wrote: “Myth only develops and takes hold when the time is right, and the climate has long been ripe for the emergence of myths about a wartime hero who stood firm against a totalitarian foe and smote an evil empire.”

Churchill myth is born both of exaggeration and criticism, created either to glorify the record or to belabor it. The former I suppose is somewhat less harmful, born of ignorance. The latter obfuscate the record and distract us from the truth, sometimes intentionally.

Paul Addison wrote, “Paradoxically, I have always thought it diminishes Churchill to regard him as superhuman,” Yet Professor Addison has no doubt about Churchill’s greatness. The most memorable words on that subject were by Churchill’s official biographer, the late Sir Martin Gilbert:

In every sphere of human endeavour, Churchill foresaw the dangers and potential for evil. Many of those dangers are our dangers today. Some writers portray him as a figure of the past, an anachronism, a grotesque. In doing so, it is they who are the losers, for he was a man of quality: a good guide for the generations now reaching adulthood.

The aim of this book is to skewer the most popular allegations about Churchill, to offer readers what he really thought and did, sometimes about matters that are still on our minds today—for as Twain wrote, history never repeats; but sometimes it rhymes.

Youth: Lady Randolph’s indiscretions…The parentage of Jack Churchill…The Menace of Education….The death of Lord Randolph…Women’s Suffrage.

Young Parliamentarian: The loss of  the Titanic…The unpleasantness on Sidney Street…”The sullen feet of marching men in Tonypandy“…Irish independence.

World War I: Warmonger image, peacemaker reality…Defense of Antwerp…Dardanelles and Gallipoli…Sinking the Lusitania…Chemical warfare...America’s involvement in the Great War.

Between the World Wars: “Taking more out of alcohol”…“The foul baboonery of Bolshevism”…Trial by Jewry…”Half-Naked Fakir“…”The Truth About Hitler.”

World War II: Broadcasting the war speeches…Refugees and enemy aliens…Torture as tool or terror…Bombing of Coventry…Pearl Harbor…The Holocaust…Famine in Bengal…Destruction of Monte Cassino…Overtures to Mussolini…Feeding occupied Europe…Firebombing Dresden.

Postwar Years: The fate of Eastern Europe…Nuking the Soviets…The Conservative Party…”Only to have accomplished nothing in the end.”

Appendix: “Things That Go Bump in the Night” (so far-fetched that they defy categorizing). Converting to Islam…A life twice-saved by Alexander Fleming...Engineering the Wall Street Crash…The myths of the Black Dog and an unhappy marriage.