The Churchill Series – Mar. 20, 2007

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Here is British historian Robert Blake, who served with distinction during WW II in North Africa and Italy, speaking in 1988 about historian Churchill’s six volume WW II history.

The volumes suffer from one major defect which was in no way Churchill's fault. In fact it affects every account of the war-memoirs, official histories,and biographies written before 1976.

It was only in that year that the official ban was lifted on references to Britain's most important secret weapon. This was code-named as "Ultra." The name was given to the decrypted radio intercepts sent by the Germans on a machine called "Enigma," which they believed to be unbreakable.

The effect of Ultra was enormous. Our knowledge of its details and existence transform the interpretation of many of the critical events in the war. Much of the history of the war had to be - and has been - rewritten since 1976.

To take only two examples, the story of the Battle of the Atlantic is
incomprehensible if one does not appreciate the changing success in efforts to decipher German naval signals. A second example is the deception plan which ensured the success of the invasion of Normandy in 1944.

Neither of these major operations could have been conducted in the way that they were without the detailed knowledge of German reactions and decisions afforded by Ultra. There are many other instances. It is doubtful whether the full truth has emerged even now. None of it could be mentioned by Churchill in his own work on the war.

The secret was amazingly well kept. A great many people knew about it. As a very junior Intelligence Officer at the end of the war even I knew something about it. To keep the matter out of the public domain for 30 years was a remarkable achievement.

Blake added:

But that was a generation less "leaky" and - dare I say it? - more patriotic than is always true today. We believed in our national cause. We obeyed orders. And those who signed the Official Secrets Act did not go back on promises or break solemn oaths, even if they had a grievance about their pensions.

I’m grateful Blake dared to say it; and sorry his assessments concerning patriotism and the keeping of official oaths are, if anything, more true now than in 1988.

Thanks go to the Churchill Centre for making the full text of Blake’s remarks available online here.