Callum Chinn, now in his final year studying history at Portsmouth, wrote this blog piece for the second-year Introduction to Historical Research module last year. In it, he examines a letter written by Winston Churchill in July 1944, and what it reveals about the allies’ knowledge of and response to the holocaust.
The twentieth century witnessed one of the most horrific atrocities of all time, the mass murder of Jews by the Nazis across Europe; known worldwide as the Holocaust. With a ‘recent estimate that 5.4 million to 5.8 million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust’, it raises questions about the speed of the allied response to the situation, whether there could have been an intervention at an earlier stage to prevent such large-scale deaths. [1] A private letter dated 13 July 1944 from British wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill sheds light on this issue. The document is a response to a letter received from Lord Melchett, a former Conservative politician, who warned of the mass murder of Hungarian Jews by the Nazis. It describes the actions which Churchill took in response to the letter, and the overall actions he felt would help stop the atrocities being committed. Historians often appreciate the value of letters as historical sources. However, they are also a complex communicative source to understand. [2] Dobson and Ziemann feel that letters can be a ‘troublesome genre’ however are also of the opinion that they are useful due to their intimate nature. [3] For this reason, the source is interesting to analyse as a historian. It shows Churchill in a more personal, informal light than previously seen.
Selection of Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz II-Birkenau around May 1944. Auschwitz Album, Yad Vashem, donated by Lili Jacob (later Lili Jacob-Zelmanovic Meier), a survivor.
In assessing the usefulness this source to historians, the first thing to note, as with any letter, is the relationship between those interacting. In this case, it is evident to historians that there is a close relationship between Churchill and Lord Melchett, with Churchill referring to him as ‘My dear Henry’. [4] However, it is also interesting to note that the letter becomes more formal as it proceeds, signed off with ‘Yours Sincerely’. [5] The fact that even in letters to his close friends, Churchill speaks formally, highlighting to historians the tough political character of Winston Churchill. He is illustrated as a man from an aristocratic background who described how his whole life ‘had been a training for the high office he had filled during the war’.[6] Similarly, an interesting element of the letter to note is the date, which it was written, July 1944. Only a year before the close of the war, and with the mass murder of Jews beginning ‘in the late summer of 1941’, it appears that the letter of warning from Lord Melchett may have arrived rather late for Churchill to have much effect on the events referred to. [7]
Winston Churchill in 1944
This letter would be useful for historians studying the view that Britain’s intentions were selfish throughout the war, not humanitarian, namely by not helping the Jewish people during the holocaust. Churchill’s words almost confirm this view, where he states that ‘the principle hope of terminating it must remain the speedy victory of the Allied Nations’, referring to the elimination of those persecuting the Jewish people. [9] The Prime Minister would have known at the time, a month after the successful D-Day landings, Britain’s progress on the European front would be the primary hope for ending the war and therefore the mass murder of the Jews. However, the limitation of using this as a view to determining the attitude of Britain towards the holocaust is that it almost seems like a premeditated, mechanical response, not the kind of response you would expect in a personal letter. On the other hand, linking back to the character of Churchill himself, he once stated that ‘I very rarely detect genuine emotion in myself’, and this perhaps answers the question of why such a personal letter to a close friend in Lord Melchett comes across so formal and emotionless. [10]
Memorial on the Danube river in Budapest to the genocide of Hungarian Jews between 1944-5. Photo by Dennis Jarvis from Halifax, Canada, Wikimedia Commons.
With Britain being one of the major powers in the Second World War, the onus for liberation of these extermination camps during the holocaust naturally fell on British shoulders. Historians have argued that Churchill knew about the events long before it was publicly addressed, and therefore could have intervened at an earlier stage. This source would be appropriate in disproving the view that action could have been taken quicker, as by stating that ‘I have forwarded your letter to the Foreign Secretary’, Churchill appears almost powerless to stop the massacre of Hungarian Jews.[11] Linguistically, the use of ‘fear’ in his response evidences his feelings on his inability to help and provide Lord Melchett with the positive response he would have desired. [12] Martin Gilbert’s view echoes that of Churchill’s response, in that he felt that the allies were powerless throughout large periods of the holocaust, due to German military superiority coming at times where Britain were at their weakest.[13] With the use of hindsight, we know that Churchill did in fact have some power to stop the murder of Hungarian Jews, as throughout 1944 the Allies pressured Hungary into stopping Jews being deported. Threatened with the bombing of Budapest, Hungary refused to deport 100,000 more Jews to concentration camps. [14] This shows a further limitation of using this letter as a source, as the information contained presents Churchill as powerless to help the situation when history evidences that this was not so.
Analysis of this letter allows insight into the power of Churchill during the Second World War, and also enables historians to experience a sense of his character through the intimate nature of a personal letter. As much as it is a useful insight into whether Britain could have intervened earlier in the murder of Hungarian Jews, it has its limitations due to the fact that letters do not always contain the full range of information and context from the time. Historians would benefit from studying a variety of personal letters from Churchill on the topic, in order to gain a more concise insight into the situation.
Primary Source:
Winston Churchill letter to Lord Melchett, 1944. Retrieved From: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/holocaust/churchills-reaction/
[1] Lewi Stone, “Quantifying the Holocaust: Hyperintense kill rates during the Nazi genocide.” Science Advances 5, no. 1 (2019): 1.
[2] Regina Schulte and Xenia Von Tippelskirch, Reading, Interpreting and Historicising: Letters as Historical Sources. (Florence, European University Institute, 2004), 5.
[3] Miriam Dobson, Benjamin Ziemann, Reading Primary Sources: The Interpretation of Texts from Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Historians. (Abingdon, Routledge, 2008), 58.
[4] Winston Churchill letter to Lord Melchett, 1944. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/holocaust/churchills-reaction/
[5] Winston Churchill letter to Lord Melchett, 1944. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/holocaust/churchills-reaction/
[6] Andrew Roberts, Churchill: Walking with Destiny. (London, Puffin, 2018)
[7] Christopher Browning, The Origins of the Final Solution. (Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 2004), 1.
[8] Louise London, Whitehall and the Jews, 1933-1948. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003) p.1
[9] Winston Churchill letter to Lord Melchett, 1944. .https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/holocaust/churchills-reaction/
[10] Martin Gilbert, Churchill: A Life (New York: Random House, 2000), 88.
[11] Winston Churchill letter to Lord Melchett, 1944. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/holocaust/churchills-reaction/
[12] Winston Churchill letter to Lord Melchett, 1944. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/holocaust/churchills-reaction/
[13] Martin Gilbert, Auschwitz and the Allies: A Devastating Account of how the Allies Responded to the News of Hitler’s Murder (New York: Rosetta, 1981).
[14] Gilbert, Auschwitz and the Allies.
No comments yet.