Books
Click on any of the books covers below to either buy or get more information on Amazon
Articles
Click on the links below to read the full article
The King’s touch
“Of course you’ve read Marc Bloch on this?”
I was tempted to say “Yes” but it was never a good idea to bullshit Christopher Hitchens, who’d read everything.
We were well into a languid, discursive Dupont Circle lunch. The kind that left me muddled and sleepy and Hitchens ...
By 10pm on the night of 9th June 1983 BBC Television centre was humming. In Studio Two, amid a beige version of the set from Alien, David Dimbleby and Robin Day were about to start the election results show, though everybody already knew Thatcher was going to walk it.
I was in the studio next ...
Not every distinguished historian announces his arrival by the roar of a V8 engine, but Robin Prior is no ordinary historian and - for me at least - this was to be no ordinary lunch. I was planning a new book, the final volume in my Finest Hour trilogy about Britain and its empire in WW2. I ...
Author Interviews
What first attracted you to the period or periods you work in?I was a 60s child and brought up on Airfix models, the Air Training Corps and Victor comics, so the Second World War obsessed me, especially the Battle of Britain. When I was about 40 the BBC asked me to make its big 60th anniversary series of 1940 and that inspired me to write my first book.Can you tell us a little more about how you research? Has the process changed over the years?There’s no substitute for fresh sources and first hand testimony. In the past that meant a lot of face to face meetings and hours in libraries and archives. I still do some of this but the internet – an especially social media – has made things a lot easier and faster. Many of the best stories and people in my latest book came from interactions on Twitter/X and the help of enthusiastic strangers.The common phrase is that history is written by the victors. Do you think this is true?Yes and its something we should all bear in mind when assessing contradictory accounts.Are there any historians who helped shaped your career? Similarly, can you recommend three history books which budding historians should read?My Batley Grammar School history teacher, Stuart Archer.My Cambridge history supervisor David Cannadine.My friend James Holland.If you could meet any figure from history, who would it be and why? Also, if you could witness any event throughout history, what would it be?Churchill, of course! And to have been present at Trafalgar – though not THAT close – would have been incredible.If you could add any period or subject to the history curriculum, what would it be?Much more on ancient Greece and Persia.If you could give a piece of advice to your younger self, either as a student or when you first started out as a writer, what would it be?Do give up the day job. I loved my TV career and it earned me the money to be able to write full time now, but I suspect that I could have stopped it a decade ago and written four more great books!Can you tell us a little bit more about the project you are currently working on?A colourful, exiting and warts and all account of Britain and its empire in 1945, that reveals new – or very little known – stories of what I call ‘imperial muscle memory’ whilst also honouring the generation that achieved that vital victory. I’m very pleased that historians on opposite sides of what we crudely call ‘the culture war’ over imperial history have found encouraging things to say about the book so far.
Great to have you in the interviewee’s chair for once, Phil. So 1945: The Reckoning has, a few months ago, celebrated its 1st birthday. It was the culmination of a kind of trilogy on Britain and the Second World War. What drew you to the final year of the war, and why did it require a book of its own after Finest Hour and End of the Beginning?There’s so much happening in the final months of the war – and in the month immediately following it – and some of it doesn’t sit very easily with the way we like to think of Britain’s heroic role in WW2. So I thought that the time had come to complete my trilogy with something that did indeed focus on heroism - and I have described the whole series of books as an extended love letter to the generation that won the war - but also explored some of the more complicated and difficult stories, and try to find a way to reconcile it all and really capture what the war meant and what Britain’s place in it meant too.In between the second and third book many years had passed while I busied myself with my TV career. One of the things that happened was the Black Lives Matter movement of 2020, and the somewhat anguished and overheated conversation that resulted about the past, especially Britain’s past. Which statues you should stay up, which should come down. And how, especially, we should remember the empire.And empire is central to my book of 1945, and I think the idea of empire, and the fate of empire, is essential to any understanding of Britons role in the war and place in the world.Many of us would see 1945 as this triumphant procession, for the Allies at least, yet your book focuses on uncertainty, rival visions for the post-war future, and, ironically, the beginning of new conflicts. How did your impressions of the war’s conclusion change during the research process? What are the things that I'm proud of is that the book received generous praise from academics are opposite sides of the great debate about empire. Nigel Biggar, a conservative historian who likes to defend the imperial legacy, said warm words and so too did Alan Lester, an academic who generally takes a very different view of empire - and how it should be remembered - to that of Nigel. I don't think Alan will mind me saying that some of the things I found out about the machinations of colonial policy conducted from London in 1945 where a surprise to him. They were certainly a surprise to me.The full details of what took place in Indochina, the Dutch East Indies, Borneo, and arguably Malaya too do not sit comfortably with the professed war aims of the British government, as famously expressed in the Atlantic Charter. That published commitment to a future world free of coercion and committed to self-government was often compromised by actions motivated by a more traditional fashioned idea of colonial glory and economic advantage.One thematic dissonance that is observable is the marked tension between Britain's stated wartime ideals – self-determination, freedom and the Atlantic Charter – and the realities and direction of imperial policy, particularly in Asia, by the time the war ends. Why did you feel it was important to dig into those contradictions? I wanted the book to balance real achievements that modern Britons should rightly feel pride in with those other darker stories. That's because I do like my history to be ‘warts and all’. And I think it's hard to have the one without the other. Without the enormous power and depth of material and manpower that the empire provided, it's hard to imagine Britain achieving any of the many great things that it did, notably in the heroic year of 1940. Put bluntly a rather ruthless attitude to the exercise of power, for which Britain was rather famous, was a necessary part of the effort that delivered victory over Japanese militarism and German fascism. Trying to get my head around both sides of that equation is partly why I wanted to write this book.You recount much of the narrative through individuals, rather than nations or governments, particularly the respective trajectories Subhas Chandra Bose and Kodandera “Timmy” Thimayya. What made this pair such neat guides for understanding the dilemmas, both moral and political, facing India during the war and afterwards? Timmy and Bose make an almost perfect matching pair. Both came from well off, well-educated Indian families and were destined for high office, whether in the bureaucracy or the military of the British Raj. Both were also committed nationalists, believing that India's future lay as an independent nation and that it should happen quickly.Bose’s position as a leading nationalist politician, famous the world over, is particularly fascinating. He could quite easily have been the leader of a newly independent India, and was predicted to be so by many people all around the world. But, in my opinion, he was tempted by the glamour of the age of dictators, seeing himself as a transformational figure at the head of a paramilitary society somewhat along the lines of Stalin or Hitler.Timmy was very torn by all of this which makes him a very interesting person to write about. His own brother decided to follow Bose, meaning that the two men could easily have ended up fighting each other in Burma.Timmy was a friend of leading nationalist politicians and the Nehru family, and several times in his career came close to leaving the army over the question of independence. But deep down he loved the institution and he saw in it something essential for the future of India. He believed that a strong military under an increasingly Indian officer corps, something he could help build, would be an essential part of the skeleton of a new nation, and in that I think he was right.Your portrayal of Bose, a figure who today still raises as many eyebrows as questions, is particularly nuanced. He is celebrated by many as a hero of Indian independence, yet you also explore his alliances with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Will you always find it difficult to offset that fervent commitment to independence with criticism of the choices he made and company he kept? Bose is more popular now than he's ever been. Perhaps that's because as we move away from the times in which he lived, it's easier to take a simplistic view. He stands as somebody passionately committed to independence who would and refuse any compromise, in an age of TikTok history that makes him easy to admire to a younger generation who don't have to live in the times that he lived him, or deal with the consequences.In the 1940s Bose considered it necessary to form an alliance with Hitler and his leading ministers, including architects of the Holocaust. He also chose not to speak out against the terrible crimes and abuses that he knew were taking place in Nazi occupied Europe because ‘it is none of our concern’. Then later he allowed himself to be an effective servant of the Japanese military even speaking in Nanking, the site of a notorious massacre of Chinese civilians by Japanese troops, on the benefits of pan-Asian values.Bose was a better propagandist than he was a General, and in the long game that propaganda paid off. That's why today on Indian social media someone like Timmy is frequently called a mercenary or a collaborator, which I think is a very great shame, whereas Bose is held up as the true driving force of Indian independence. This is one of the many ways in which history can be quite annoying!One of the most striking sections of the book examines Britain's role in post-war Indonesia and Indochina – episodes that have remained almost unknown here. Why do you think these stories have more or less disappeared from collective memory? Because such naked displays of colonial ruthlessness do not sit well with how we like to remember Britain’s role in the Second World War. But I consider it important to include them because they're all part of the bigger picture. I also think it helps people understand that modern Indonesians or Vietnamese might not automatically regard Britain as a wholly benign force!The debate over imperialism, colonialism and their collapse in the remainder of 20th century still rears its head as one of the most contentious areas of historical debate today. 1945: The Reckoning seems determined to avoid nostalgia and condemnation. Was keeping a cool head a clear objective from the outset? I just wanted to strike the right balance for me. I do feel that Britain played an enormously positive role at a turning point in human history. But that's not all it did, and some of what it did reflected deeper historical traditions that we shouldn't forget because they affect how the outside world still thinks of us.And what’s next? Any titles we’re likely to see in the near future? Or are we keeping you too busy with podcasts…?I'm now writing a new WW2 book which I hope will emerge in about a year's time and this time I'll be painting on a much smaller canvas.I'm looking at a single event over the course of about 10 days, at the height of the Battle of the Atlantic, and blending an action backed account of war at sea with the relationships of some of the key people involved, including a rather consequential love affair!
Hello Gautam – a year on from publication, it seems the perfect opportunity to talk to you about The Forgotten Indian Prisoners of World War II: Surrender, Loyalty, Betrayal and Hell, our Book Club pick for August. What first drew you into the history of the Indian POWs in Singapore and Malaya?I wasn't actually looking for you know anything, to be honest. The way it started was that I collect first editions and maps and prints and paintings and, a little over four years ago to the day, I bought a manuscript at auction in the UK. I call it the book that changed my life!It was a manuscript made in Changi Prison in Singapore by a Briton and an Australian. They were two of the civilians who were interned by the Japanese along with the POWs in Singapore. And they got together and they started publishing a newspaper every day which is called the Karikal Chronicles, named after the building they were first interned in, and after that it was called the Changi Guardian when they shifted to Changi Prison itself in March 1942.They published this for the next 18 months and they had about one issue every two days. It was quite a job. And it was incredible – it's like an unofficial history of the civilian internees, of their life within the jail, written almost every day.This manuscript really piqued my interest. The first thing that interested me was the word internees in the auction description, because I know what a summer intern is, but I didn't know what an internee was. And I discovered that they were the term used for the civilians who were imprisoned by the Japanese.So this document, which really is a piece of fantastic history, is lying in the cupboard just here actually, because this is the coolest part of the house. So all important documents are kept here.The book explores the very difficult decisions faced by Indian prisoners after the fall of Singapore. Why did so many choose to join the Indian National Army (INA) and ally themselves with Japan?I had always been puzzled about the decision these soldiers took. Because to me, allying with Japan was not the right thing. Japan was not a good ally. It was just another master, in my opinion, a worse master than Britain was then. And I wanted to understand why these soldiers took this decision.In those 70 days of the campaign, the soldier had seen the collapse of the British Empire before his eyes. The British had been roundly defeated, not just in Malaya and Singapore, but they had heard about all the other places: Philippines, Hong Kong, and what have you. And they saw the military superiority of the Japanese, the confidence of the Japanese, and compared it with the military inferiority of the British Empire and the collapse in morale of not just the Indian troops, but also the British and Australian troops who were with them defending Malaya.And these soldiers had come from India, where Gandhi had been building up this feeling of Indianness, of opposition to British rule. And so this feeling of independence is also there. And then the Japanese tell them: ‘Look, we will support you in attacking India to overthrow British rule in India.’Yet the Japanese were committing atrocities around them. How did the prisoners reconcile the promise of Indian independence with what they were witnessing?It was not happening far away in another part of the city, it was happening right in front of them. Many of them witnessed the murders, many of them witnessed the rapes, and if they had not personally witnessed it, they would certainly have known within a few hours that this is what is happening. So the atrocities were atrocious. I mean, atrocious is too mild a word, but you know, I can't think of a better one. The atrocities were very severe.And this was another part that I was trying to understand: no matter how nationalist you feel, you have to know whom you are allying with, and you could see before them what the Japanese were doing.But at the end of the day, it was the choice that they were given: they were told that either you join us or else. And the ‘or else’ was a very scary ‘or else’ because they had also witnessed the Japanese killing of prisoners, Indian, British, Australian prisoners, being shot, being bayoneted, being beheaded.And that is what they feared. So I would say that the men who agreed to join the INA, they saw all this. Even someone who was uneducated, even someone who was illiterate, would have known that this was going on. And he had these two choices before him: join the Japanese and hopefully free India, or become a POW and live with the chance of being shot, bayonetted or beheaded. Given this, one can understand taking the first option, but that involved the danger of what would happen when the Japanese reached India.Did your research change your understanding of why some men joined the INA while others refused?Yes. I was still puzzled about this. And then I found one – actually it was written in various reports by the British officers who were interrogating the Indians. And they wrote – I was very surprised to read this – that this was the only choice that the soldiers had before them, to join the INA.In fact, many British officers of the Indian Army sent smuggled messages out to their men saying, “Don't resist, just go ahead and do it”, and the interrogators say the question should not be asked as to why some joined the INA. Instead, the question should be asked why some did not.And that was a very surprising piece of history for me to read.What happened to those who did not join the INA, and to the men who did?It was a very difficult time for both sets of men, the INA men and the non-INA men. The non-INA men were unhappy that they had endured all this under Japan and suddenly they come back to India and they felt that they had done the right thing by not joining the INA. And now suddenly they come back to India and it is the INA men who are the heroes in the eyes of the people.The INA men also faced a very rough time because they were, of course, not allowed to rejoin the army. And they suddenly didn't have any employment and they had to find their way around.Some of the more educated senior officers were taken on by Nehru, India's first Prime Minister. They were made ministers, ambassadors, Members of Parliament, and so on. Mohan Singh was member of parliament with the Congress party for 10 years. So that's how at least some of them played a role in India after independence, but it was a difficult time for both sets of men.The book also follows those who escaped from Singapore and those who were sent to labour camps in Papua New Guinea. What did their experiences reveal?There were two great escapes from Singapore. These were quite incredible. One set reached India on the 2nd August 1942. And they were the first people to tell Delhi and London what was going on in Southeast Asia.There were three South Indian soldiers, led by Lt MM Pillai, Bombay Sapper, and when they left Singapore they had six hundred rupees and the name of one man in Penang, who helped them to cross the border into Thailand and gave them the name of another South Indian in the first town in Thailand. And then they went to that man and so on and so forth. The South Indian contact hopped to Burma and then finally to India.And then, of course, those Indian soldiers who were in Japanese labour camps for two and a half years in Papua New Guinea. There were 17,000 of them who were sent to Papua New Guinea. 3,000 of them died en route. 14,000 arrived and only 6,500 were alive when the war ended.India owes a great debt to the Australians who liberated them. They held 100 trials for war crimes and atrocities against Indian POWs. This is again something that I didn't know, and I realize that people in India also didn't know. And as I say, my chapter title is ‘The Debt that India Owes to Australia” because indeed we do.One of the most striking aspects of the book is its attention to the families left behind. How important was it to tell the story of the ‘waiting wife’?One day while I was talking to the son of a soldier, after 15 minutes, he says, “Gautam, you've only asked about my father, you've not asked about my mother.” So then I asked him, What happened to your mother?And he said that she was all alone. She had no news of my father, and she had to look after young children. And when he just walked back home one day and was maybe expecting a wondrous welcome back, but she beat her hands on his chest and said, “How could you leave me like this for so many years? And do you know how difficult it has been for me to look after these young children without you here, without news of you?”So I say that the story of a soldier is not just a story of what happened to him, but also the story of what happened to his waiting wife, as I call her. And that's a very important part that I did not realise.And this applies to any soldier in the world, of course, not just to Indian soldiers.What surprised you most during your research?I think there were two things. One is about how history is remembered or told after the fact. So, for example, the fact that no one in India has heard of Captain Mohan Singh, that he was the first commander and creator of the INA, that's just one example.There are many other examples, not just in Indian history, but history across the world of how there is a modified telling of what actually happened. So that is something that I knew about, but I had not experienced it in such vivid detail as I did when I researched Mohan Singh.The second thing was the bravery of the ordinary soldier living every day. Because every day is a very difficult day, especially if you're a prisoner. And you may not win a Victoria Cross or a Military Cross for it, but they really undergo a very difficult time.And I'm not saying being a prisoner is braver than being active service. But what I'm trying to say is that, being a prisoner, you have to be a very brave person to actually endure that and come back sane.Finally, what has the experience of researching this book taught you about history itself?My book is really not about military strategy and battles. It's more about the lives of the prisoners and the telling of history. So I would say these two things were very important. These two things really stood out to me in my research and the telling.And, lastly, I would say I just fell in love with archives. I didn't know how fantastic they could be. And the thrill of the chase and the joy of finding that one piece of tiny information that you just hope for and it suddenly jumps out at you in the face is just incredible.
