A video installation at the National Portrait Gallery that linked former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to the deaths of millions during the 1943 Bengal Famine has been removed from public display following criticism from members of the British House of Lords, including Churchill’s grandson.
The controversy surrounded Persistence, a 40-minute video work by artist Helen Cammock. The installation had been exhibited at the gallery for nearly ten months as part of Artists First: Contemporary Perspectives on Portraiture.
In the film, Cammock drew a comparison between the actions of English statesman Oliver Cromwell in Ireland and Churchill’s role during the Bengal Famine, stating that Cromwell’s mass starvation of people was similar to what she described as the “wilful starvation” of Indians under Churchill’s leadership.
The statement triggered strong objections from Churchill’s supporters. Among the most vocal critics was Churchill biographer Andrew Roberts, who organised an open letter to the gallery. The letter was reportedly signed by more than 50 members of the House of Lords, including Churchill’s grandson, Nicholas Soames.
The signatories condemned the claim as historically inaccurate, describing it as a “barefaced lie” and characterising the film as politically driven rather than fact-based.
Roberts argued that the Bengal Famine resulted primarily from wartime circumstances and a devastating cyclone, rather than deliberate government policy. He maintained that Churchill had instructed his administration to pursue relief measures and seek additional grain supplies to address the crisis.
The Bengal Famine of 1943 remains one of the deadliest humanitarian disasters in Indian history, causing an estimated 3.8 million deaths. Historians continue to debate Churchill’s responsibility. Many Indian scholars argue that British wartime policies aggravated food shortages and that warnings about the crisis were ignored. They also point to decisions that diverted resources elsewhere within the British Empire during World War II.
Other historians contend that multiple factors contributed to the catastrophe, including crop failures, wartime disruption, inflation, transportation breakdowns and administrative shortcomings. They argue that while relief efforts may have been inadequate or delayed, the famine was not intentionally engineered by Churchill.
The Japanese occupation of Burma in 1942 further worsened conditions by cutting off a major source of rice imports. British authorities also implemented a “Denial Policy” in Bengal, confiscating and destroying boats to prevent their potential use by invading Japanese forces, a measure that disrupted the transport of food and essential supplies.
Following the controversy, Cammock chose to withdraw the installation. Defending her work, she argued that artists and cultural institutions increasingly face pressure to conform to external demands. She emphasised that Persistence was intended as an artistic exploration of history, memory and representation rather than a documentary account.
According to Cammock, the project examined questions about who is celebrated in historical narratives, whose stories are preserved, and how collective histories are constructed and maintained over time.
The National Portrait Gallery stated that it respected the artist’s decision to remove the work. The institution noted that the installation had been presented as an artistic response to its collections and archives and that the opinions expressed in the film did not necessarily represent the gallery’s own views.
More than six decades after Churchill’s death in 1965, debates over his legacy—and particularly his role in the Bengal Famine—continue to provoke strong reactions in both Britain and India.
