HistoryExtra
type: channel
link: https://www.historyextra.com
description: Home of Britain’s bestselling history magazine and award-winning podcast
date: 2025-03-14T09:18:04.000Z
update period: hourly
update frequency: 1
update base: 2000-01-01T12:00+00:00
items: Winston Churchill: is he still the greatest Briton in history?
items: Why was Spencer Perceval assassinated? Inside the killing of a Georgian prime minister
items: Harold Wilson: 5 facts about the Labour Party prime minister
items: The ex factor: why David Cameron’s return isn’t unprecedented
items: 8 scandals that shocked Georgian Britain
items: John Major: a brief guide to Britain’s prime minister in the 1990s
items: A brief history of U-turns
items: The downfall of Lloyd George
items: From Walpole to Truss: lessons from the 300-year history of the British prime minister
items: The 1922 Committee: the 'men in grey suits' behind 100 years of Conservative leaders

Winston Churchill: is he still the greatest Briton in history?
type: item
date: 2025-03-14T09:17:44.000Z
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Second World War
subject: British prime ministers
description: 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
encoded: In a much-publicised poll in 2002, the BBC asked viewers to rank figures from British history, as part of the television series 100 Greatest Britons. 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 William Shakespeare and Elizabeth I. As is well known, Winston Churchill 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. 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”. 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. 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. 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. He yearned to be a war leader, unl…

GettyImages-102731230-CMYK-9b2d3bd-e1737475112991.jpg
width: 620
height: 413

Why was Spencer Perceval assassinated? Inside the killing of a Georgian prime minister
type: item
date: 2024-10-01T08:35:23.000Z
subject: Georgian
subject: Period
subject: British prime ministers
subject: Evergreen
description: The assassination of the prime minister Spencer Perceval on 11 May 1812 was greeted with celebration as well as dismay. Professor Gordon Pentland explains why…
encoded: How was Spencer Perceval assassinated? It was early evening on 11 May 1812, and the prime minister was running late. He was rushing to get to a session of evidence on a question that had been disturbing his busy government: whether sanctions to counter Napoleon’s Continental System (a form of economic warfare pursued through an embargo on British trade with Europe) were doing more harm than good. Perceval’s mind was probably elsewhere when he was confronted in the lobby by a well-built and well-dressed man, who raised a steel pistol to the prime minister’s chest and shot him at near point-blank range through the heart. A Mayfair solicitor, Henry Burgess, witnessed the event: “I heard a hoarse cry of ‘murder, murder’ – and he exclaimed ‘Oh’ & fell on his face.” Perceval was dead within minutes. Who was Spencer Perceval, and was he liked? Perceval, like most prime ministers, fiercely divided opinion. He had come to politics from a legal background in the 1790s, into the heat and light generated by debates over the French revolution. Perceval was a convinced evangelical, a family man with a fairly inflexible morality and one who embodied the long transition to Victorian ‘seriousness’ by always dressing in black. To some people, he was ‘Christianity personified’, a beacon of true and vital religion in an age when conservatives were lamenting the spread of infidelity and immorality. To others, such as journalist William Cobbett, he was ‘Old Hypocrisy Personified’, a fervent anti-radical who had been involved in some of the reactionary cause célèbres of the age and in the imprisonment of a number of prominent radical leaders (including Cobbett himself). Read more | Is it true that an angry mob of Dutchmen killed and ate their own prime minister in 1672? Perceval came to the premiership in 1809, at a challenging period marked by war and the political instability that had followed the deaths of two political giants, Pitt (Perceval’s mentor) and Fox, in 1806. Given that the …

GettyImages-3403885-26fd51b-e1727772963205.jpg
width: 619
height: 413

Harold Wilson: 5 facts about the Labour Party prime minister
type: item
date: 2024-04-11T07:09:46.000Z
creator: Rachel Dinning
subject: 20th Century
subject: Period
subject: British prime ministers
subject: Historical people
subject: TV interest
description: We bring you five facts about Labour prime minister Harold Wilson – from his friendship with Queen Elizabeth II to his achievements in parliament…
encoded: How much do you know about the former leader of the Labour Party? Here we bring you five facts about Harold Wilson… Harold Wilson was the youngest member of the cabinet in the 20th century Harold Wilson, full name James Harold Wilson, was born in Huddersfield, Yorkshire on 11 March 1916. The son of an industrial chemist and schoolteacher, he studied Politics, Philosophy and Economics at the University of Oxford before being drafted into the civil service following the outbreak of the Second World War. He was a keen academic in his early life, but ultimately pursued a career in politics and became MP for Ormskirk in 1945. In 1947, prime minister Clement Attlee made Wilson – then aged 31 – president of the Board of Trade, securing his place as Britain’s youngest cabinet minister since William Pitt the Younger in 1782. Read more | A brief history of the Labour Party Wilson holds a number of other records: he was the first Labour prime minister to be elected for 13 years, following his win at the general election of 1964; he is the longest-serving Labour prime minister of the 20th century; and he won four out of the five general elections he contested – more than any other postwar British leader. He was a “modest” man, according to those who knew him In Wilson’s obituary from the Guardian, journalist Geoffrey Goodman recounted the time he interviewed Wilson shortly after his win at the 1964 election. Upon being asked how he felt, Wilson replied: "I still can't believe it. Just think, here I am, the lad from behind those lace curtains in the Huddersfield house you saw – here I am about to go to see the Queen and become prime minister... I still can't believe it." Wilson's government was responsible for abolishing capital punishment and decriminalising homosexuality Two of the most significant acts to be implemented during Wilson’s tenure as prime minister were the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 – which suspended the death penalty in England, Wales and Scotl…

GettyImages-533897121-0a4c114-e1712821864353.jpg
width: 620
height: 415

The ex factor: why David Cameron’s return isn’t unprecedented
type: item
date: 2023-11-30T17:43:26.000Z
subject: General History
subject: General Modern
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: British prime ministers
description: David Cameron’s recent appointment as foreign secretary raised eyebrows among politicians and public alike. But, as Richard Toye explains, he’s far from the first former prime minister to enjoy a post-number-10 cabinet career
encoded: Rishi Sunak’s decision to appoint David Cameron as foreign secretary on 13 November sparked widespread surprise – even shock. This was partly because Cameron’s time in number 10 Downing Street left a controversial legacy – including the fallout from the Brexit referendum – from which Sunak had earlier distanced himself in an effort to present himself as the ‘change’ candidate. History quiz: British prime ministers But it was also because today we don’t usually expect former prime ministers to return from the political grave. Yet there are plenty of examples from earlier eras of ex-PMs who, having seemingly left the limelight, went on to enjoy successful second acts. The first point to note is that a significant number of premiers, having lost office once, returned as prime minister. The first holder of that role is generally considered to have been Robert Walpole, who acted as de-facto PM between 1721 and 1742. Of the 56 men and women who have followed him, 17 had two or more non-consecutive terms; 15 of these having held office before 1940. In the period before universal suffrage was achieved in 1928, changes of government often hinged less on the vicissitudes of public opinion than on the shifting balance of forces within parliament, and sometimes on the monarch’s relationship with the resident of number 10. A prime minister who lost power was not necessarily terminally discredited; it could make sense for them to bide time, waiting for the chance to return. For example, William Pitt the Younger served from 1783 to 1801, then again from 1804 to 1806, when he died in office. Lord John Russell established the record for the longest gap between prime ministerial terms, serving 1846–52 and again 1865–66. The only prime minister to have served four non-consecutive terms (1868–74, 1880–85, 1886 and 1892–94) was William Ewart Gladstone. In the modern era, Winston Churchill was defeated in the general election of July 1945 and lost a further election in 1950 but won the f…

Politics GettyImages-98549094-2f26729-e1733760946446.jpg
width: 619
height: 413

8 scandals that shocked Georgian Britain
type: item
date: 2023-09-18T09:46:44.000Z
creator: Emily Brand
subject: Georgian
subject: Period
subject: British prime ministers
description: Mass-produced newspapers, pamphlets and satirical drawings kept a voracious Georgian public well sated with salacious stories and gossip, but every now and again there would be a scandal that went too far. From royal marriages to ghostly murder enquiries, Emily Brand explores eight incidents that rocked Georgian Britain to its core
encoded: The king’s brother weds a widowed commoner In November 1771, Henry, Duke of Cumberland and Strathearn, handed his brother, George III, a note. In it he confessed his marriage to a young widow, Anne Horton (née Luttrell), in a secret ceremony. The horrified king demanded that the couple leave court, declaring that the alliance of prince and commoner “must inevitably ruin him and distress his relations”. Within days, gossip columns were awash with tales of the duke being “desperately in love”. Wedding prints were published in The Lady’s Magazine, and letters alleged details of Anne’s disreputable father and “eye-lashes a yard long”. “The violence of the duke’s attachment to Mrs Horton has ended in a terrible mess,” wrote one gentleman. “What an event,” gasped another – “the Luttrell Duchess of Cumberland!” On the podcast | Emily Brand shares stories that scandalised Georgian society In the second half of the 18th century, matrimony in the fashionable Georgian world was undergoing a sea change. Expectations of love within marriage blossomed, and members of the younger generation of the upper classes were increasingly defying arranged matches. And when legislation passed in 1753 laid out strict requirements for a valid marriage, including parental consent for people under 21, a trend for eloping to Scotland was launched. For the royal family, an unsuitable match risked damaging foreign alliances and the reputation of the monarchy itself. Cumberland had already proved himself to be a liability: having allegedly married another commoner in secret in 1767, two years later he had been sued for ‘criminal conversation’ with a baron’s wife. After this latest indiscretion, the king took decisive action. The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 forbade descendants of George II from marrying without the monarch’s permission. (The Duke of Gloucester subsequently admitted sheepishly that he had married an illegitimate commoner in 1766.) Later on, the act caused problems for the king’s son, …

GettyImages-924227190-2f2dc83.jpg
width: 620
height: 413

John Major: a brief guide to Britain’s prime minister in the 1990s
type: item
date: 2022-11-09T08:47:49.000Z
subject: 20th Century
subject: Period
subject: British prime ministers
subject: Historical people
subject: The Crown
description: A new fictionalised portrayal of John Major, prime minister of Britain between 1990–97 and the last Conservative in Downing Street in the 20th century, is upon us as Jonny Lee Miller takes on the role in season 5 of The Crown. Richard Toye explores how Major became the successor to Margaret Thatcher, his leadership style – and the real story of his approach to the royals…
encoded: Margaret Thatcher – who served as Britain’s first female prime minister from 1979 to 1990, having won three general elections – was always going to be a hard act to follow, regardless of what people thought of her political decisions. Her successor, John Major, at first achieved surprising success by leading the Conservatives to a record-breaking fourth election victory in 1992. But soon after that unexpected triumph, things fell apart. For the majority of his time in Downing Street he had to battle a succession of crises and internal party enemies. The fact that he was personally liked and respected by many voters was not enough to save him from a landslide loss at the hands of New Labour in the 1997 general election. Read more about the history behind each episode of The Crown season 5: The Crown S5 E1: ‘Queen Victoria Syndrome’ and a second honeymoon The Crown S5 E2: Prince Philip’s ‘keeper of secrets’ and Andrew Norton’s book on Princess Diana The Crown S5 E3: exiled royals and the al-Fayeds The Crown S5 E4: the Queen’s “annus horribilis” and Princess Margaret’s relationship with Peter Townsend The Crown S5 E5 real history: ‘Camillagate’ tapes and a “war council” for the monarchy’s survival The Crown S5 E6 real history: the Romanovs’ murder, and Philip’s “spiritual companionship” The Crown S5 E7 real history: the introduction of Martin Bashir, and a royal education The Crown S5 E8 real history: Diana’s Panorama interview causes fireworks The Crown S5 E9 real history: the divorce settlement between Charles and Diana The road to politics Though he was often dismissively described as “grey” as a politician, Major was born in 1943 to a rather colourful family: his father was an aged, one-time music hall performer and owner of a garden ornament business; his mother was a former dancer. The young Major attended Rutlish School, a grammar school in southwest London, but, amidst his family’s financial troubles, he left with few qualifications. After a few years, he settl…

Johnmajorlead-0558d79.png
width: 620
height: 413

A brief history of U-turns
type: item
date: 2022-10-21T08:37:33.000Z
creator: Dr Seán Lang
subject: General History
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: British prime ministers
description: Any politician will sometimes change course, but a full-blown U-turn can be a risky undertaking, as these five key historical examples demonstrate
encoded: Wellington and Catholic Emancipation, 1829 By the 1820s, most of the old restrictions on Irish Catholics (and, indeed, Catholics elsewhere in Britain) had been removed, but they were still debarred by their faith from sitting in parliament. Irish nationalist demands for Catholic emancipation were loud, but for Tory backbenchers the exclusion of Catholics from parliament had become a talisman guaranteeing the apparent superiority both of the Protestant religion and of parliament itself. So it was with incredulity that, in 1829, parliamentarians greeted an emancipation bill presented by the impeccably Tory and protestant Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert “Orange” Peel. Their hand had been forced by an Irish Catholic lawyer, Daniel O’Connell, who – because there was nothing stopping Catholics standing for election – had stood successfully in the 1828 County Clare byelection. Given his enthusiastic mass Catholic support, Peel and Wellington feared serious disturbances in Ireland if he were to be denied his seat, hence the emancipation bill. Although the bill passed, Wellington and Peel’s U-turn disgusted the Tories, making them even more determined to resist upcoming proposals for parliamentary reform. It was a futile stand, which brought down Wellington’s government and effectively kept them out of power for ten years. Robert Peel and the Corn Laws, 1846 Received wisdom was that the Tory party stood for landowners and for protecting against the cheap import of grain. That was until, in 1846, the Tory prime minister Sir Robert Peel repealed the protectionist Corn Laws and allowed foreign corn to flow freely into the country. The Corn Laws were of enormous symbolic importance, because their repeal signalled Britain’s decisive move away from protection towards free trade. Peel had been slowly won over by the arguments of the Manchester-based Anti-Corn Law League, a radical middle-class movement that held little appeal for his conservative landowning backbenchers. The impe…

GettyImages-3293457-2bc9fc5.png
width: 620
height: 413

The downfall of Lloyd George
type: item
date: 2022-10-19T10:03:44.000Z
subject: 20th Century
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: British prime ministers
description: Following the First World War, Prime Minister David Lloyd George was ‘the man who won the war’, with wide approval to continue his leadership of a post-war coalition. Yet rifts and crises were to follow, as Great Britain entered a new decade. Stuart Ball explores the factors that led to the resignation of the Prime Minister in 1922…
encoded: One of the most dramatic and significant Prime Ministerial downfalls took place a century ago, on 19 October 1922. At a meeting held at the Carlton Club on 19 October 1922, Conservative MPs decisively rejected the advice of their party leaders to continue the coalition led by the Liberal Prime Minister, David Lloyd George. He resigned immediately after hearing the news, and never held office again. Lloyd George had become Prime Minister in December 1916 after ousting Herbert Asquith, who had been the premier of a Liberal government from 1908 to 1915, and then led a wartime coalition. Lloyd George’s new coalition was supported by all Conservative MPs, about half of Liberal MPs, and – until the end of the war – the small group of Labour MPs. After dark days in 1917 and 1918, when victory finally came in November 1918 Lloyd George was at the height of his power and popularity. He was 'the man who won the war', and the Conservative Party leader, Andrew Bonar Law, told Lord Beaverbrook that "he can be Prime Minister for life if he likes". There was no opposition within the Conservative Party to continuing the coalition into peacetime, as there were many difficult problems to be faced. The general election of December 1918 was a landslide: 529 coalition MPs were returned (382 Conservatives, 133 Coalition Liberal supporters of Lloyd George and 14 from minor parties), whilst the opposition was only 57 Labour MPs and 28 Liberal followers of Asquith. Read more | Five of the greatest downfalls of the past 100 years The problems began in 1920. Lloyd George’s attempt to secure his power base by encouraging the ‘fusion’ of the coalition parties was blocked, ironically by his Liberal followers who feared losing their identity. More importantly, the post-war economic boom collapsed, and the following recession produced two crucial effects. Rising levels of unemployment boosted the rise of the Labour Party, whilst the middle classes, under pressure from the great increase in taxatio…

GettyImages-515125814-3b3aecb.png
width: 620
height: 413

From Walpole to Truss: lessons from the 300-year history of the British prime minister
type: item
date: 2022-09-05T13:01:45.000Z
subject: 20th Century
subject: 21st Century
subject: General Modern
subject: Georgian
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Victorian
subject: British prime ministers
description: Three centuries after its inception, Sir Anthony Seldon charts how the office of prime minister has defied hostile monarchs, a scandal-hungry media and two world wars to become the beating heart of Britain’s body politic
encoded: Listen to this article: The history of the British prime minister, 300 years old in April 2021, is riddled with mysteries, in large part because no one has joined together all the dots. It is nearly 50 years since someone tried, when historian Robert Blake wrote a book that discusses the office and its holders going back to the beginning. We have biographers who dive down deep shafts into the ground to mine everything about an individual prime minister, but sometimes know little about who came before and after. History has become segmented by period and specialism. Some know a great deal about the early 18th century, or the mid-19th century, about economic or cultural history, but few take the long view. Rare are historians like Jeremy Black, or journalists like Daniel Finkelstein, who have a rich understanding of the entire 300 years of British prime ministers. In place of a wide horizon, we have gone in for polls, plenty of them, ranking prime ministers from “first” to “last”, as if they were artists whose work we can see now, or footballers who have scored a given number of goals. We attempt to determine a prime minister’s “greatness”. But great at what? Everyone knows about Winston Churchill’s achievements. But what about William Pitt the Elder (PM from 1766–68) or Earl Grey (1830–34), both of whom were considerable figures. Polls are fun but we should not treat them as a substitute for serious analysis. In The Impossible Office? The History of the British Prime Minister, the book I wrote to coincide with the April anniversary, I have sought to answer seven questions – and I’ll attempt to do so here... When was Britain's first prime minister? So why did the office emerge in 1721? When King George I asked Robert Walpole to be First Lord of the Treasury and chancellor of the Exchequer in April 1721, no one at the time saw it as a major constitutional innovation. No one used the term “prime minister”, except as a term of abuse (because it seemed to usurp royal prer…

GettyImages-588454118-a780f2c.jpg
width: 620
height: 413

The 1922 Committee: the 'men in grey suits' behind 100 years of Conservative leaders
type: item
date: 2022-07-22T12:03:21.000Z
subject: 20th Century
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: British prime ministers
description: The 1922 Committee is the parliamentary group that sets the rules for how Conservative Party leaders are be chosen. David Thackeray, Associate Professor of History at the University of Exeter, explains how this influential group has shaped British politics over the last century…
encoded: What is the 1922 Committee? At its core, the 1922 Committee is a group open to all backbench Conservative MPs that provides a means for backbenchers to discuss policy and communicate their views to the Cabinet – but in recent decades it has become well known for the role it has played in transitions in Tory leadership. It does this through taking informal soundings of MPs or, since 1965, through organising formal leadership contests. While backbench committees had been a common feature of Conservative politics before the First World War, they had often been associated with factional disputes, which led to the party losing three consecutive elections from 1906. By contrast, the 1922 Committee provides an inclusive means for backbenchers to air their views and help shape party policy. From Walpole to Johnson: lessons from the 300-year history of the British prime minister Three centuries after its inception, Sir Anthony Seldon charts how the office of prime minister has defied hostile monarchs, a scandal-hungry media and two world wars to become the beating heart of Britain’s body politic While the 1922 Committee is best known for its role in Conservative leadership contests, it has also hosted a number of important speeches by party leaders, and it has become common practice for the party leader to give an annual speech to backbenchers at the end of the parliamentary term. The most controversial of these was delivered by Margaret Thatcher during the early months of the miners’ strike in July 1984. She was reported as saying that “we had to fight the enemy without in the Falklands. We always have to be aware of the enemy within”. It was a barbed reference to the miners’ unions. While the speech proved highly divisive when it was subsequently reported, private papers released in 2014 indicate she intended to make similar comments at that year’s party conference in Brighton. However, following the IRA bombing of Thatcher’s hotel, her speech was hastily rewritten. When w…

R82TXJ-e0de47a-e1658491133793.jpg
width: 620
height: 413