A. M. Eastern wednesday morning. Join the discussion. Sunday night, astronaut scott kelly recalls the voyages into space in his book endurance. He sinlt viewed by nasa administrator charles bolden. Yours was the third servicing mission. Having been part of that mission and having become an official hubble hugger, talk to me about what you believe the legacy of hubble is. Or does it have a legacy . I think its incredible. Its been up there you would know better than i how long its been up there. 27 years. 27 years. To have a telescope. Getting to 30. Doing that kind of science on a daily basis and, you know, letting them get the stuff most of you dont see and the Public Engagement that is provided and let people kind of get a sense for, you know, where we are in the universe which is pretty insignificant. If you consider, you know, those images. I think its been a great success. It was a great First Mission for me. Afterwards sunday night at 9 00 eastern on book tv on cspan2. Winston churchill was awarded the nobel prize in literature for the book the second world war. Up next on American History tv, well take a look at dhuch hichs historian with Andrew Roberts. This is 50 minutes. Ladies and gentlemen, we ended last years conference with a prenztation by Andrew Roberts. And we know winning formula whether we see one. So to introduce andrew this year we have the beautiful katherine cats. Hello. Ill keep my remarks brief in order to maximize the amount of time we have to be informed and entertained by our next and final speaker Andrew Roberts. For those of you who recall the presentation on sir winstons charming nature at last years conference are looking forward to this as much as i have. Amongst the numerous endeavors, Andrew Roberts is the guest curator of the exhibit churchillshakespeare at the library. Hes the author and editor of 19 books which we heard a bit about the last few days. His most recent publication was a biography of napoleon, a short work coming in at just under 1,000 pages. And were all eagerly awaiting his next book, had a what is sure to be the definitive single volume biography of Sir Winston Churchill which will be published next year. So without further ado, on the subject of churchills living history, ladies and gentlemen, Andrew Roberts. Ladies and gentlemen, its a great honor to be invited to address you. And thank you very much indeed katherine for the very kind words. And this morning whether we starmented this morning, David Freeman equated this conference to an opera. The only thing i know about opera is that the opera entails until the fat woman sings. I think that is a rather rude thing to say about me. It could be summed up as punditry and the greatest man in history also chose it as his. More than anything other than a statesman, churchill thought of himself as a historian and moreover, he thought of his roles as statesman and politician almost entirely through the prism of history. He was far from being a model schoolboy jack plum reminds us in his essay. He was willful, self involved and stupid about mathematics or latin. He was well ahead of his class in history and top of examination every time that he took it. He failed, of course, many times but never in history. Indeed, so far from failing, churchill sold more history books than any other 20th century historian and possibly more than any historian ever. And, of course, churchill had to be he was largely self taught. He wasnt born smart. Randal, enjoy that more than anyone else i think. I think it i think it extremely difficult for anyone not born into churchills world or time, jack plum also wrote, to realize what a dominance the past had over all his thinking and action. Difficult, perhaps, but lets try. In his very first formal public speech, the one in near badge in 1987, he made reference to history saying there are not wanting those who say that in this jubilee year our empire reached the height of its glory and power and now that we shall begin to decline as babylons rome declined. Do not believe the croakers built give the light to the dismal croaking by showing by our actions that a vitality of our race is unimpaired. Im not going to do a churchill voice because kevin did that. You can take that home if you like. Churchill liked to compare that British Empire of rome. It gave context and induced pride in the audiences as the comparison is made of the advantages of the former. History is main stay of his writing, thought and speeches. I like to throw a few buckets over the side of the boat into the ocean that is churchills studies and examine what we find about this ever present phenomenon in his life and thought. He didnt use history like other politicians in order to summon up the blood. Instead, he employed it in his in the body of his argument for he truly believed that his generation had a duty to continue britains work which he saw in the classically riggish way of being at the forefront of Human Progress in every sphere. Much of his pognasity stemmed from this belief that britain had a duty to fulfill. And that they would be betraying the forefather its they stepped back from it. And the chinese demanded the port to be returned them in the early 1920s, clutch hill said why should bhelt down or moral capital collected by our forefathers to please a lot of pass fists . I would send a telegram beginning, nothing for nothing and precious little for nothing. The song thats taught him that the essentials in history did not change and he must strive like his predecessors had had a tremendously important infect on him. In december 1986, thank mr. J. L. Anderson for sending him an act in 1808, wrote, it is all one story in spite of every change in weapons from the sheep under wloes bellies they escaped from the cave of sight clubs to the oxon with which they broke the line in the orange free state. If anyone in the audience can tell me how he broke the used oxon, id be delighted to know that. It would be very helpful. For those who like to mischaracterize churchills attitudes towards indians as holy aggressive and unpresident anlt, its important to remember the statement he made in august 1 1909 about the revolutionary who was hanged for the assassination of a civil serve anlt. And his last words had been the only lesson required in india president sent to learn how to die and the only way to teach it is by dying ourselves. Therefore, i die and glory in my martyrdome. Churchill wrote to blunt that dingra will be remembered in 2,000 years time as we remember other heroes and he quoepted last words as the finest ever made in the name of patriotism. The frob dproblem today is not taught in schools, we ourselves dont remember them. As i will straighted llustrated american war of independence had been won by denzel washington. Churchills famous row with king george v over the naming of battleship was about history. The king claimed not to have wanted olivers name immortalized on a battleship because of the brutal repression of the catholic island in the mid 17th century, in fact, it was probably his republicanism which he really took exception. There is moreover the danger of the men giving the ship nicknames of ill conditioned words that rhyme with it. His majesty had been a sailor. Hes not of the old reference. Thats what one might call a hanovarian sense of humor. Churchill argued that pits and they had fine precedence around which historical associations of the greatest moments are gathered. He recalls the two famous statesmen under whom the most marshal xploi marshal exploits of our world is achieved and the defeat of the martyr revifves the glories of the period as the war spike did and ultimately he was a result in 194 but prit and crumb never were. On the day that war broke out on tug 4th of august, churchill can exclaimed, this will be read by 1,000 generations, think of. That the First World War gave churchill many opportunities for calling history and aid during the struggle as on the 23rd of may in which he said in a speech, if the germans are to be beaten decisively, they will be beaten like napoleon was beaten and the confederates were beaten, that is superior numbers along fronts so extensive they cannot maintain them or replace the losses incurred along them. There he was right. But in the previous year, he probably lent on history too much when he planned and supported to the upt most the attempt to for the them out. In 1807, admiral successfully forced the straits by ships alone losing any ten men on the way there and 29 on the way back. It was not a precedence, of course, ultimately. Under water mines didnt exist in 1807. This is one of the times that instead of sustaining clutch hill, his knowledge of history led him astray. In the debate on the report of the kplicommission, churchill s of the true buibunal of historyh was at chamberlains funeral speech. During the hard fought discussions over the intervention in the russian civil war, churchill similarly had frequent recourse to historical parallels on the 29th of july, wl the face of David Lloyd Georges demands that they all be evacuated. The whole episode was a very painful one and to go back into history reminded him of our operations and our desertion of the katalans. He was referring to a boftched effort to open a second front in eastern spain during the napoleon wor napoleon wars. The history was so deep that churchill could assume they would pick up the reference but find it painful one. He mentioned the siege of the desertion and todays cabinet there were literally only two members who would know what on earth he was talking about. Because, of course today we know that the British Empire in india was evil and wrong because were zoonltly taught that in our schools and universities and by the bbc that poor, poor Winston Churchill in his ignorance could not have known that britain was viciously exploiting india and giving absolutely nothing back to her. Mass education has to be mentioned, newspapers, unprecedented amounts of international trade. Standardized units of exchange. Bridges. Obviously universities and roads and aqueducts and docks and things of that. Other than that, absolutely nothing else. The abolition i guess you got to plengs that practice of burning windows and tuggy, of course, the murders of travelers. I suppose we gave them the only incorrupt legal system in the history of the subcouldnt nent and Industrial Development and unprecedented disease prevention projects. But other than that, all one can really mention is the english language and the First National and tell Graphic Communications and two centuries of protections from the russians and the french and afghans and other outside threats including that obviously from Imperial Japan that killed 17 of the philippines population during the second world war. But apart from that, we did nothing for india. In january 1925, churchill noted after meeting the french Prime Minister that he was personally convinced that germany would never acquiesce permanently in her condition of the eastern frontier. The wars of frederick the great as well as those of peter the great had arisen from deep causes and ambitions which so far from having passed away were now associated with great historic memories. Such memories to the fall of may 1930, churchill complains of the anglogerman naval treaty that never since the reign of charles ii this country been so defenseless as this treaty will make it. Of course, he was open to criticism considering he himself had done to the admiral cruiser Building Program in the half decade long chancellorship that only ended the previous year. He had a fashion for old traditions, a great sense of traditions. He said in the speech the other club when churchill died. I think perhaps his ten years out of office when he was writing his life of great ancestor laid the basis for his greatness. Once he finished, he started work on another history book. The history of the English Speaking peoples. He was not writing the books for academic research. It was always with a mote theyve history would be as he put it, helpful as a guide in present difficulties. In 1936, churchill told his journalist friend that our communications cannot be left at the mercy of so unreliable things as italian friendship. We must retain that command of the mediterranean which my ancestor first established. Later that year he told dana dir of Great Britain and france that those who embody the tradition and revive the force of nelsons fleets and napoleons armies are not in combination be found a helpless prey. But if to these marshal values they add the sovereign conceptions of justice and freedom, then indeed they will be unconquerable. The idea of uniting nelsons navy and napoleons army which were so antagonistic was typically churchillian. He wrote a history book that was a confederate victory at gettysburg. In the speech attacking the munich settlement on october 1838, do the no suppose this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckonning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup. And he carried on speaking and said that we that this cup will be propered to us year by year unless by a supreme accompany of moral health and marshal vigor we rise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time. That knowledge sufficed in him after a lifetime of reading and writing history that britain was not as morally healthy as she had been in the olden time, tormented him. Yet by articulating it, he was able to taunlt tt the british pe to becoming brave and northerlily vigorous and healthy as he and as their ancestors. Its not too much to say that without his historical imagination, this living sense of history, churchill could not have warned britain in the world of what he was to call with another historical analogy a new dark age. Today that analogy would also fall completely flat where any Prime Minister otherwise employed because the dark ages are not at all in britains schools today. After the war started, told a victorious crew of ajax at a celebratory lunch in february 1940 that warrior heroes may look down at nelsons monument looks down upon us now without any feeling that island race lost the daring offer the examples they set faded as the generations succeeded one another. So the very act of going to war has shown the reinterdugs duction reintroduction of marshal vig dwror. While the Norwegian Campaign was being fought, he was somehow able at 11 00 at night to discuss with his Research Assistant bill deacon and his god son1066. Deacon recalled how despite naval signals being brought in by signals as the battle progressed talk ranged around spreading shadows of the norman invasion and the figure of edward the confessor, who as churchill wrote, comes down to us as faint, misty, frail. Deacon went on, i can still see the map on the wall with the dispositions of the british fleet of norway and the voice of the first lord as he grasps with his unusual insight of his positions in 1066. This is no lack of attention to current business. It was the measure of the man with the supreme historical eye, the distant episodes were as close and real as the mighty events on hand. Once churchill became Prime Minister, his use of the past as a tool for working out where britain was in the present became, if anything, even more pronounced. Montgomery recalled how in july 1940 he asked general allen brook whether england had ever been in such dire straits before such as the armada. Yet monty wrote he showed no outward signs of anxiety in public. At a discussion at checkers he observed the stand of the 30th motor brigade and the third world tank regiment that may that the men of calais were the bitter grit that stopped us sorry, that saved us by stopping them as sydney smith stopped napoleon at acre. These references to the napoleonic war in speeches, conversations, books he watched undoubtedly influenced the grand strategy that britain adopted. In them britain had played to her greatest strengths, in this case maritime, and avoided major continental commitments of troops until her antagonist had first blunted and broken his army in the wastes of russia. William pitt and then lord liverpool had played a waiting game, trusting napoleon to overextend himself and in meantime confining himself to privilege cal attacks, only crossing the channel into the netherlands, present day belgium to deliver the crushing blow. They only did that when they judged napoleon was ready to meet his work load. Churchill largely copied that strategy and persuaded the americans to adopt it too with result that hitlers 12 years in power were even shorter than napoleons 15. We have crossed, he wrote, the mysterious boundary which separates the presents from the past. He wrote that in his article old battlefields of virginia in 1929. We have entered the domain of history. And when americas entry into the second word war loomed a decade later, churchill crossed the boundaries several advertisements more to fortify his listeners with the understanding that only history can give. Some say americans were soft, he said. They would never understand the bloodletting. But i had studied the civil war, fought to the last desperate inch. By total contrast, hitler thought the americans too decadent to make a difference on any european battlefield until the year 1970. Churchills speech of september 11th, 1940 included the words we must regard the next week or so as a very important period in our history. It ranks with the days when the spanish armada was approaching the channel and drake was finishing his game of bowls, or when nelson stood between us. Weve read about all this in the history books. But what is happening now is on a far greater scale and of far more consequence to the future of the life and the world than these brave old days of the past. As the canadian diplomatic and diaryist who said theific of that speech on britons, it makes them feel charles richie, he said he makes them feel the living of history. They have the eye of history upon them, have the tangible effect of encouraging them to behave in a better, braver, more noble way, to carry themselves in such a way that for the rest of their lives, they knew that they w