What do you think?
Rate this book
One Christmas in Washington
Chronicles the ten days at the end of 1941 during which Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill secretly forged the Grand Alliance, in an hour-by-hour account based on diaries, personal letters, and detailed minutes that places their meetings against a backdrop of the events at Dunkirk and Pearl Harbor. By the author of The Destruction of the Bismarck.
352 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2005
7 people are currently reading
197 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
December 27, 2025
One cannot help feeling for the people of Washington, D.C., in December of 1941, whether civilian or military. The imperial Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on the seventh day of that month had plunged a resolutely isolationist United States squarely into war; and the emotions of anxiety and uncertainty felt across the U.S.A. in those days had to resonate with particular intensity in Washington, the capital city from which the war effort would be directed.
It was a Christmas like no other in Washington – particularly as British Prime Minister Winston Churchill would soon be arriving in Washington to confer with U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt on how best to fight the war in which their nations were now allies – and David Bercuson and Holger Herwig capture well the unique tension of Washington life in those days in their book One Christmas in Washington.
Authors Bercuson and Herwig are both Canadian scholars, writing and teaching at the University of Calgary; in a way, they bring together the North American outlook that Roosevelt held and the British Empire/Commonwealth perspective that motivated Churchill. Accordingly, this account of The Secret Meeting Between Roosevelt and Churchill That Changed the World (the book’s subtitle) sets forth the often-conflicting perspectives of these two leaders in a tough-minded and fair-minded manner.
Bercuson and Herwig begin by going back to the time before Pearl Harbor – a time when F.D.R. understood only too well that public opinion at home in the U.S.A. was strongly against American participation in the war then raging in Europe and Asia:
[H]e…had his finger firmly on the pulse of the nation and knew that the country was deeply isolationist. Three hundred students at his alma mater, Harvard, signed a petition informing the president that they would never “follow in the footsteps of the students of 1917”….At Yale University, 1,486 students and faculty vowed never to go to war, “even if England is on the verge of defeat.” The signatories included Kingman Brewster, a future president of Yale, and Gerald R. Ford, a future president of the United States. (p. 57)
Pearl Harbor, of course, changed all that. Eventually, it was arranged that Churchill would make a risky voyage across the Atlantic to confer with Roosevelt at Washington, and “Thus began the conference that was to be called ARCADIA. The code name was chosen by Churchill, likely in an ironic reference to the mythical land of Arcady, where the sun always shown on pastoral landscapes and shepherds played pipes as they tended to flocks of contented sheep”. It was, as Bercuson and Herwig dryly point out, “a sharp contrast” (p. 101) to the brutal reality of the cruel war then being waged largely in bitterly cold locations like Russia and the North Atlantic.
The major focus in One Christmas in Washington is, of course, on Roosevelt and Churchill; but other major figures are sketched with comparable skill and economy – for instance, General George C. Marshall. Nowadays, General Marshall is usually identified with the post-World War II Marshall Plan that bears his name, and that helped the devastated societies of post-war Western Europe rebuild their infrastructure and establish stable democracies. Yet Marshall also provided important service as President Roosevelt’s chief of staff – as when an overenthusiastic Churchill set forth an unrealistic timeline for American participation in a planned British invasion of North Africa:
General Marshall replied cautiously. In essence, Roosevelt’s chief of staff played a delaying game by raising all sorts of American materiel shortcomings from guns to ammunition….In his steady, steely way, Marshall was placing himself at the center of the Anglo-American strategic debate. (p. 151)
As authors Bercuson and Herwig are Canadian scholars, it is good that they emphasize the Canadian dimension of Churchill’s North American excursion of 1941-42. Leaving Washington’s Union Station for a railroad journey northward to Ottawa, Churchill “did not hang about with [Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon] Mackenzie King as he had with Roosevelt. His trip to Ottawa was necessary, not to confer with Mackenzie King, but because Canada was a loyal member of the Commonwealth and a staunch ally in war. Canadians were deserving of Churchillian inspiration” (pp. 199-200).
And the loyal Canadian allies got just the measure of Churchillian inspiration that they needed, as the British Prime Minister went into the Canadian House of Commons and gave a rousing speech that had the Canadian M.P.’s applauding thunderously and “banging on their desks – a Canadian parliamentary tradition of showing approval for a speaker” (p. 204).
A major sticking point during the Arcadia Conference related to the question of allocations of war material, with neither Great Britain nor the United States wanting to give up too much of the power that each nation held over the process. By early January of 1942, “ARCADIA…hung on a test of will between George Catlett Marshall and Winston Spencer Churchill. No one was quite sure whose side Roosevelt would take” (p. 251).
That standoff led into what may have been the most interesting White House dinner in the entire history of the Executive Mansion. Over the course of the evening of that dinner on January 13, 1942, First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt publicly brought up the issue of internment of Japanese Americans, and Churchill was introduced to novelist Louis Adamic, whose recently published book Two-Way Passage had been harshly critical of British imperialism in the modern world.
And then President Roosevelt, not to be outdone, brought up the American Revolution, the War of 1812, the South African War, and the widely unpopular British policy in India; talked about how he had hated Queen Victoria when he had seen her as a child in London; and “allowed [that] he was not anti-British, ‘now’” (p. 256). Given the circumstances of a dinner like that, it may seem miraculous that the British-American alliance ever went forward.
But go forward it did – and Roosevelt and Churchill, each having taken the measure of the other, both found that they had met a sometimes difficult but nonetheless dependable ally.
As a native Washingtonian, I read with particular interest those parts of One Christmas in Washington that conveyed a sense of life in Washington, D.C., at the beginning of U.S. participation in the Second World War. My mother, also a native Washingtonian, was 7 years old when Pearl Harbor was attacked; she and her mother and father and two sisters lived on Garrison Street, N.W., in the Friendship Heights neighborhood. My father, whose parents relocated from Nebraska to D.C. when he was a young boy, was 8; their home was at 16th and Harvard Streets in Mount Pleasant. Both told me about the dramatic changes that Pearl Harbor and its aftermath brought to their lives as young Washingtonians – the blackout curtains and air-raid drills; the rationing; the streets filling with soldiers in uniform, and government clerks with clipboards, and new arrivals looking for housing.
Yet I recognize that most readers of One Christmas in Washington will turn to this book not for those details of local life, but rather for its treatment of diplomatic history – the forging of the Anglo-American wartime alliance that, over the years, has morphed into the “special relationship” of today. One Christmas in Washington certainly succeeds in that regard.
It was a Christmas like no other in Washington – particularly as British Prime Minister Winston Churchill would soon be arriving in Washington to confer with U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt on how best to fight the war in which their nations were now allies – and David Bercuson and Holger Herwig capture well the unique tension of Washington life in those days in their book One Christmas in Washington.
Authors Bercuson and Herwig are both Canadian scholars, writing and teaching at the University of Calgary; in a way, they bring together the North American outlook that Roosevelt held and the British Empire/Commonwealth perspective that motivated Churchill. Accordingly, this account of The Secret Meeting Between Roosevelt and Churchill That Changed the World (the book’s subtitle) sets forth the often-conflicting perspectives of these two leaders in a tough-minded and fair-minded manner.
Bercuson and Herwig begin by going back to the time before Pearl Harbor – a time when F.D.R. understood only too well that public opinion at home in the U.S.A. was strongly against American participation in the war then raging in Europe and Asia:
[H]e…had his finger firmly on the pulse of the nation and knew that the country was deeply isolationist. Three hundred students at his alma mater, Harvard, signed a petition informing the president that they would never “follow in the footsteps of the students of 1917”….At Yale University, 1,486 students and faculty vowed never to go to war, “even if England is on the verge of defeat.” The signatories included Kingman Brewster, a future president of Yale, and Gerald R. Ford, a future president of the United States. (p. 57)
Pearl Harbor, of course, changed all that. Eventually, it was arranged that Churchill would make a risky voyage across the Atlantic to confer with Roosevelt at Washington, and “Thus began the conference that was to be called ARCADIA. The code name was chosen by Churchill, likely in an ironic reference to the mythical land of Arcady, where the sun always shown on pastoral landscapes and shepherds played pipes as they tended to flocks of contented sheep”. It was, as Bercuson and Herwig dryly point out, “a sharp contrast” (p. 101) to the brutal reality of the cruel war then being waged largely in bitterly cold locations like Russia and the North Atlantic.
The major focus in One Christmas in Washington is, of course, on Roosevelt and Churchill; but other major figures are sketched with comparable skill and economy – for instance, General George C. Marshall. Nowadays, General Marshall is usually identified with the post-World War II Marshall Plan that bears his name, and that helped the devastated societies of post-war Western Europe rebuild their infrastructure and establish stable democracies. Yet Marshall also provided important service as President Roosevelt’s chief of staff – as when an overenthusiastic Churchill set forth an unrealistic timeline for American participation in a planned British invasion of North Africa:
General Marshall replied cautiously. In essence, Roosevelt’s chief of staff played a delaying game by raising all sorts of American materiel shortcomings from guns to ammunition….In his steady, steely way, Marshall was placing himself at the center of the Anglo-American strategic debate. (p. 151)
As authors Bercuson and Herwig are Canadian scholars, it is good that they emphasize the Canadian dimension of Churchill’s North American excursion of 1941-42. Leaving Washington’s Union Station for a railroad journey northward to Ottawa, Churchill “did not hang about with [Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon] Mackenzie King as he had with Roosevelt. His trip to Ottawa was necessary, not to confer with Mackenzie King, but because Canada was a loyal member of the Commonwealth and a staunch ally in war. Canadians were deserving of Churchillian inspiration” (pp. 199-200).
And the loyal Canadian allies got just the measure of Churchillian inspiration that they needed, as the British Prime Minister went into the Canadian House of Commons and gave a rousing speech that had the Canadian M.P.’s applauding thunderously and “banging on their desks – a Canadian parliamentary tradition of showing approval for a speaker” (p. 204).
A major sticking point during the Arcadia Conference related to the question of allocations of war material, with neither Great Britain nor the United States wanting to give up too much of the power that each nation held over the process. By early January of 1942, “ARCADIA…hung on a test of will between George Catlett Marshall and Winston Spencer Churchill. No one was quite sure whose side Roosevelt would take” (p. 251).
That standoff led into what may have been the most interesting White House dinner in the entire history of the Executive Mansion. Over the course of the evening of that dinner on January 13, 1942, First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt publicly brought up the issue of internment of Japanese Americans, and Churchill was introduced to novelist Louis Adamic, whose recently published book Two-Way Passage had been harshly critical of British imperialism in the modern world.
And then President Roosevelt, not to be outdone, brought up the American Revolution, the War of 1812, the South African War, and the widely unpopular British policy in India; talked about how he had hated Queen Victoria when he had seen her as a child in London; and “allowed [that] he was not anti-British, ‘now’” (p. 256). Given the circumstances of a dinner like that, it may seem miraculous that the British-American alliance ever went forward.
But go forward it did – and Roosevelt and Churchill, each having taken the measure of the other, both found that they had met a sometimes difficult but nonetheless dependable ally.
As a native Washingtonian, I read with particular interest those parts of One Christmas in Washington that conveyed a sense of life in Washington, D.C., at the beginning of U.S. participation in the Second World War. My mother, also a native Washingtonian, was 7 years old when Pearl Harbor was attacked; she and her mother and father and two sisters lived on Garrison Street, N.W., in the Friendship Heights neighborhood. My father, whose parents relocated from Nebraska to D.C. when he was a young boy, was 8; their home was at 16th and Harvard Streets in Mount Pleasant. Both told me about the dramatic changes that Pearl Harbor and its aftermath brought to their lives as young Washingtonians – the blackout curtains and air-raid drills; the rationing; the streets filling with soldiers in uniform, and government clerks with clipboards, and new arrivals looking for housing.
Yet I recognize that most readers of One Christmas in Washington will turn to this book not for those details of local life, but rather for its treatment of diplomatic history – the forging of the Anglo-American wartime alliance that, over the years, has morphed into the “special relationship” of today. One Christmas in Washington certainly succeeds in that regard.
July 11, 2014
A Meeting like No Other (not your typical office conference!)
A nicely written book that captures momentous events of over 60 years ago. The atmosphere of the meetings are brought out well. The authors do a good job of presenting the other participants besides the two primary leaders (Churchill and Roosevelt).
There was Beaverbrook, Marshall, Hopkins and of course Eleanor - all offering their opinions and having a hidden agenda. For example, Eleanor was dead-set on continuing the "New Deal" policies.
A subtitle to this book could have been "How to Win Friends and Get Them to Enter the War." The American side is initially confused and disorganized at the start of these meetings. Towards the end of the meetings in January, General Marshall sets a stronger organizational or management style platform for future operations: the structure is set for war production and allocation, and for increasing the size of the merchant fleet. Transportation was required to bring all these supplies across the treacherous Atlantic to England and North Africa to bring the Americans directly into the war.
The Americans knew in the long run that they would be providing most of the material and troops, so they began to take a more aggressive role to set-up the structure that met their requirements. The results of this conference, called "Arcadia," set the pattern for Anglo-American cooperation for the rest of the war, and years to come.
Churchill may not have succeeded in getting all he wanted - he was hoping for a bigger role for British planning and direction; but he did succeed in his overall aim which was to apply the main focus on the destruction of Nazi Germany first ( Japan being secondary).
Although Churchill is eloquent and flamboyant, Roosevelt is seen as having a greater world vision. Both were determined to win the war, but Roosevelt was looking ahead - to the United Nations and, much to the chagrin of Churchill, to the end of British colonialism and the new world emerging from this. Roosevelt had to be very careful to avoid giving the American people the impression that their boys were going overseas to rescue the British Empire. It must also be remembered that it was only until the traumatic disaster of Pearl Harbour that finally brought the American population out of it's hibernation from world events. Before Pearl Harbour, a significant portion of Americans wanted nothing to do with the cataclysmic events in Europe.
Also Roosevelt used more subterfuge than Churchill. Churchill was more open and honest which left him susceptible to attack from opponents.
All this and more is brought out well in this detailed study of this monumental meeting in Washington during Christmas, 1941
A nicely written book that captures momentous events of over 60 years ago. The atmosphere of the meetings are brought out well. The authors do a good job of presenting the other participants besides the two primary leaders (Churchill and Roosevelt).
There was Beaverbrook, Marshall, Hopkins and of course Eleanor - all offering their opinions and having a hidden agenda. For example, Eleanor was dead-set on continuing the "New Deal" policies.
A subtitle to this book could have been "How to Win Friends and Get Them to Enter the War." The American side is initially confused and disorganized at the start of these meetings. Towards the end of the meetings in January, General Marshall sets a stronger organizational or management style platform for future operations: the structure is set for war production and allocation, and for increasing the size of the merchant fleet. Transportation was required to bring all these supplies across the treacherous Atlantic to England and North Africa to bring the Americans directly into the war.
The Americans knew in the long run that they would be providing most of the material and troops, so they began to take a more aggressive role to set-up the structure that met their requirements. The results of this conference, called "Arcadia," set the pattern for Anglo-American cooperation for the rest of the war, and years to come.
Churchill may not have succeeded in getting all he wanted - he was hoping for a bigger role for British planning and direction; but he did succeed in his overall aim which was to apply the main focus on the destruction of Nazi Germany first ( Japan being secondary).
Although Churchill is eloquent and flamboyant, Roosevelt is seen as having a greater world vision. Both were determined to win the war, but Roosevelt was looking ahead - to the United Nations and, much to the chagrin of Churchill, to the end of British colonialism and the new world emerging from this. Roosevelt had to be very careful to avoid giving the American people the impression that their boys were going overseas to rescue the British Empire. It must also be remembered that it was only until the traumatic disaster of Pearl Harbour that finally brought the American population out of it's hibernation from world events. Before Pearl Harbour, a significant portion of Americans wanted nothing to do with the cataclysmic events in Europe.
Also Roosevelt used more subterfuge than Churchill. Churchill was more open and honest which left him susceptible to attack from opponents.
All this and more is brought out well in this detailed study of this monumental meeting in Washington during Christmas, 1941
June 9, 2011
From the fall of France to Nazi Germany in World War II until December 1941, Great Britain and the Commonwealth nations fought virtually alone (Russia was in the war because of a suprise attack by Hitler in violation of treaty commitments, but the Russians had their hands full fighting Germany in the western part of their country). After the attack on Pearl Harbor, the declaration of war by the United States, and the German declaration of war on the U.S. four days later, Churchill saw a golden opportunity. This book concerns the weeks in December 1941 to the middle of January 1942 when Winston Churchill traveled to Washington, D.C. in an attempt to develop a unified war strategy with the U.S. in order to coordinate British-American efforts in defeating Germany and Japan. This conference was nicknamed ARCADIA and the author used diaries, personal notes taken at the various meetings, letters sent by the participants, and official minutes to piece together the behind the scenes drama and negotiations that went on at multiple locations among the President, the Prime Minister, military commanders, and members of their staffs. Churchill had three goals in this visit to Washington: he wanted to maintain a "Europe-first" policy; he wanted to make sure that the U.S. get into the war as quickly and effectively as possible; and he wanted to ensure there was a close synchronization of war tactics and goals. To a large extent he was successful. However, once in Washington Churchill came to realize that Roosevelt and the Americans were going to assume the mantle of leadership and that he was going to be second-in-command. This position he chose to accept in order to facilitate an Allied victory. One of the most fascinating aspects of the book was understanding the increasingly close relationship that grew between Roosevelt and Churchill (which was resented by Eleanor Roosevelt), and how the various personalities surrounding those two individuals liked, resented, worked against, and, ultimately, cooperated with each other. A fascinating study.
May 12, 2014
I enjoyed this book written by two Canadian historians. Much of the material of the book I was familiar with from the many books I have read about World War II. The book did provide a different perspective of the problems faced during Churchill’s trip to the United States immediately after Pearl Harbor. The US was completely unready for war-actually producing fewer planes than was Britain, with a small army, and a population that was, after Pearl Harbor, just awakening from years of isolationism. The meeting was difficult on many fronts. The service chiefs from both countries met but had misconceptions and prejudices about their opposite numbers. Both leaders recognized they needed each other; Churchill was for more knowledgeable about war than Roosevelt. Roosevelt was suave and charming but Churchill had to learn that when Roosevelt nodded and said yes he did not mean he agreed. It was this trip that Churchill made his famous speech to the Congress and to the Canadian parliament in Ottawa. The book provided lots of detail about the difficulties that individuals and services groups had coming to their decisions, which included appointing a single commander of the Allied Command, General George Marshall. Lord Beaverbrook (a Canadian business entrepreneur) who lived in Britain did wonders pushing the United States, Canada and Britain into greater and greater war material production, far beyond anyone’s expectations. I was disappointed that the two Canadian historian authors did not go into more detail about Canadian production of war materials. The book did continue some misinformation about Churchill but generally was correct and informative about Churchill, Roosevelt and George Marshall. Not only did Roosevelt and Churchill develop “A grand alliance,” they wrote the Charter of the United Nation at this meeting. If you are interesting in World War II history you will enjoy this book. I read this book as an audio book downloaded from Audible. Lloyd James did id a good job narrating the book.
March 28, 2016
I read this book during the Christmas holiday season and found it to be very informative. I learned a great deal about the second world war from the research done by the two Canadian authors. Canadians have been raised with Winston Churchill as a WW11 hero but Americans probably less so. I also learned to admire the negotiating skills of President Roosevelt as shown by the meetings held that December in Washington D.C.
May 22, 2023
Not an easy read, but as usual with history, I learned a lot I didnt' know before. The book covers a 3 week period right after Pearl Harbor where Churchill and several of his top military and government leaders came to Washington and met with FDR's top leaders/advisors and they hammered out how the Allies were going to conduct the war. The high level mission of defeating the Axis powers was very clear, but as always the devil is in the details and that is what this book was about. What was fascinating to learn was what Churchill and FDR came to the table wanting and who in the end won out and how they won was enlightening. One just assumes the US and Great Britain just seamlessly and effortless just starting fighting the Axis powers after Pearl Harbor , but that is far too simplistic from what actually happened.
December 28, 2020
An interesting read, and a solid companion piece to The Splendid and the Vile by Erik Larson (just don’t expect that level of energy and engagement). This story picks up where that one finishes, but obviously adds in the back story of Roosevelt and American isolationism. A different time and a different type of White House visit than we’re used to now. Hard to imagine any current president hosting a foreign leader for three weeks, even someone of Churchill’s import. But it’s in the nuance of those exchanges - between FDR and Churchill - amidst the egos and the political pressure and the urgency of a war going badly, where this effort captures imagination and makes the time worthwhile.
June 19, 2016
A splendid book about the five weeks that Winston Churchill spent in the United States after the attack on Pearl Harbor in which he and Franklin Roosevelt planned the strategy by which the allies then defeated first Germany and then Japan in World War II. Churchill moved into the White House and brought with him diplomats, military men and luminaries from the mother country, seeking the aid of the younger, more industrially powerful upstart America; Churchill said that when he learned that the U.S. would enter the war he went to bed and "Slept the sleep of the saved." When asked how long it would it take the allies to defeat the enemy he said, "If we manage it well only half as long as if we manage it badly." This is a very personal book for the Churchill or Roosevelt buff and filled with little historical sidelights, like Churchill's trip to Mount Vernon and the tomb of George Washington on Christmas Eve, 1941. A very good book.
April 27, 2018
The story of the Washington War Conference of 1941-1942 is brought to life in this book. At these meetings, Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt worked out the details of the Grand Alliance between Britain and the U.S. that has lasted to the present. This book knits the details of these discussions with portraits of the players involved. Not just the two leaders, both so charismatic they could easily have drowned out the others. Eleanor Roosevelt, Harry Hopkins, Lord Beaverbrook and George Marshall are among the others whose roles are shown as well. A well-written account of one of the most important of the conferences of World War II.
June 15, 2015
A detailed examination of the important meeting between Roosevelt and Churchill in 1941 to set the direction of the war in Europe. There is a lengthy and interesting retrospective of the careers of both men.
October 6, 2011
Somewhat interesting, but the style was not compelling. I like my historians to know how to write.
June 10, 2013
FDR and Churchill, both at their best. This book flows extremely well, and WWII fans are sure to love it, as I did.
December 8, 2017
What did FDR serve to Churchill every night during the British P.M.' s memorable 1941 Christmas visit to Washington? This fact is one of the fascinating details told in these pages-an annual December read for me. Two great leaders meet in the wake of the devastating Pearl Harbor attack; a British P.M. prepares to address a still somewhat isolationist Congress the day after Christmas. British military staff meet their American counterparts to plot the effort against Hitler. Dry stuff? NO! Overriding a tale of diplomatic intrigue and military strategy is Churchill's unique personality and overbearing presence in the White House. Have you seen The Man Who Came to Dinner? This is that Christmas classic on an international scale. And it is all real. Roosevelt introduces Churchill to FDR's favorite cocktails-well concoctions. Churchill lectures a trusted White House servant on what conditions will be now to meet Winston's comfort and gastronomical demands. Eleanor fumes at the upset of it all as the White House, Washington and the nation prepare for its first wartime Christmas in a very uncertain world. And here is the memorable Christmas Eve White House tree lighting, and Churchill's soaring and beautiful words as he calls for adults to delight in their children's gifts of "Father Christmas." Two great leaders and two powerful personalities wrapped up in a Christmas never to be forgotten.
May 10, 2019
The title of this book kind of says it all. Shortly after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii that drew the United States into WWII, a meeting was arranged between British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and American President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in Washington DC. The purpose was to discuss war strategy and priorities for winning. Each brought into the meeting goals they wanted to set and agree on but they weren't necessarily the same goals. FDR suspected that the British were interested in regaining and preserving their worldwide empire of colonies and he felt that that was not in the US interest. They each had suspicions about each other that they had to feel their way through over the several days that they met. They got to see each others quirks, likes and dislikes as well that are described in some detail. Churchill came into the meetings thinking that, because Britain had done and suffered so much thus far, they were logically the senior partner in this endeavor. FDR, on the other hand, felt that America held all the winning cards with respect to finances, war material production, and masses of still to be trained troops and was therefore the senior partner. It definitely resulted in agreements and plans that ended up changing the world, mostly for the better. Great read for anyone who studies up on various aspects of WWII and would appreciate picking up more details about a crucial meeting for resolving the conflict.
May 7, 2020
A three week meeting between FDR and Churchill in 1941 in Washington, just after Pearl Harbour was attacked, hardly seems like material for a 300 page book yet the authors glean every ounce of significance from it and write a compelling book about the awkward alliance.
It is a very interesting read, delving into the histories and attitudes of the main political and military characters involved.
I have one minor quibble for a book that is so well researched. The authors perpetuate the myth that the march of human progress was set back one thousand years by the fall of Rome. This comment was made in the chapter about Churchill's younger days when he spent his time in India reading extensively. The authors mention that Winston read Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. It is possibly in this context that the statement was made but it should have been qualified as Winston's view as opposed to a historical fact. Historian Rodney Stark has written extensively proving quite the opposite.
It is a very interesting read, delving into the histories and attitudes of the main political and military characters involved.
I have one minor quibble for a book that is so well researched. The authors perpetuate the myth that the march of human progress was set back one thousand years by the fall of Rome. This comment was made in the chapter about Churchill's younger days when he spent his time in India reading extensively. The authors mention that Winston read Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. It is possibly in this context that the statement was made but it should have been qualified as Winston's view as opposed to a historical fact. Historian Rodney Stark has written extensively proving quite the opposite.
October 9, 2022
I bought this book in around 2006 online from a SH bookstore. And just read it 16 years later. Luckily I didn't read it earlier, because I probably would not enjoy it. Even today with so many years of reading, this book is still filled with quite a few rarely used words that I have to make it down and look up online dictionary.
The story by itslef is quite simple, just a recap of Churchill's three weeks stay in DC. But don't underestimate this book. It tells a lot of interesting anecdotes about how white house treats guests, how FRD and Churchill are alike in their unofficial life, and also how the colation was established by many rounds of detailed negations. Devil in details. Fun also in details.
The book put more emphasis on Churchill, maybe, but also covers a lot of things about FDR and Marshall.
This old and short book immediately became one of the best books I have read about WWII. In terms of its history writing skills, I think this book is a bit similar to books by Erik Larson.
The story by itslef is quite simple, just a recap of Churchill's three weeks stay in DC. But don't underestimate this book. It tells a lot of interesting anecdotes about how white house treats guests, how FRD and Churchill are alike in their unofficial life, and also how the colation was established by many rounds of detailed negations. Devil in details. Fun also in details.
The book put more emphasis on Churchill, maybe, but also covers a lot of things about FDR and Marshall.
This old and short book immediately became one of the best books I have read about WWII. In terms of its history writing skills, I think this book is a bit similar to books by Erik Larson.
December 30, 2024
4.5 stars
I loved this, although I was bored at times by the bickering among the various commanders. And I get twitchy when Churchill is praised to the skies and FDR is criticized (this is not the first book where that occurs). Anyway, I need to grow up -- FDR is not some teen idol and I'm not some teen.
On the plus side, I'm pleasantly surprised how much I'm still learning about these two men, the people surrounding them, and the war sitrep in general. This is the first book I've read where the topic of the British Empire (as it stood in WW2) is discussed in some detail.
And as always, I enjoyed the social and personal histories of the personalities involved, including Fala the Informer and Mrs Nesbitt, the worst cook in White House history.
I loved this, although I was bored at times by the bickering among the various commanders. And I get twitchy when Churchill is praised to the skies and FDR is criticized (this is not the first book where that occurs). Anyway, I need to grow up -- FDR is not some teen idol and I'm not some teen.
On the plus side, I'm pleasantly surprised how much I'm still learning about these two men, the people surrounding them, and the war sitrep in general. This is the first book I've read where the topic of the British Empire (as it stood in WW2) is discussed in some detail.
And as always, I enjoyed the social and personal histories of the personalities involved, including Fala the Informer and Mrs Nesbitt, the worst cook in White House history.
August 1, 2017
A detailed snapshot of one of the most crucial months of American involvement in WWII. Ultimately more sizzle than steak, I'm wondering why this piece couldn't have been presented as a longish essay in a historical monthly rather than in hardback. Any editor worth their salt would have told the author as much but judging from the many typos, lapses in grammar, missing pronouns & modifiers, and confusing janky sentences there either was no editor or more likely a very poor one.
April 5, 2018
A great account of the history of the meetings between England and the USA following Pearl Harbor in Washington that ultimately set the stage for cooperation in winning the war. It is inspiring to see the powerful men that came together and were able to work through differences to unify an effort for a common cause. A fascinating read.
January 29, 2019
Powerful... vivid glimpse of the two men and the early stages of their relationship. But... I confess... at moments, quite sad. It had to be a difficult reality for a man like Churchill to deal with. Nonetheless, this book gives some excellent insight, without romanticizing or vilifying the relationship of these two great wartime leaders.
May 28, 2025
I thought this was wonderful. The author had a great writing style that turned history into living history, that told the story of these two great leaders and the events of the Arcadia meetings in a way that made everything exciting and alive. Really informative and incredibly detailed. Highly recommended to anyone wanting to understand the politics of the Allies in WW2.
May 31, 2018
A nice little blip of a story in the grand scale of WWII, but it didn't seem to hold too much new information for me. Possibly because this is detailing the meeting of a few strong personalities.
February 4, 2020
This was the last book that I read on a recent cruise. It was very interesting.
December 20, 2020
Interesting account of the various players and competing interests at stake in forging a unified approach to WWII.
January 16, 2024
Probably a 3.5. Enough personal information to keep me interested.
Read
February 12, 2026review text for 1341
March 29, 2012
Following the Japanese attack of Pearl Harbor on Sunday December 7, 1941 America declared war, entering into World War II. England’s Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who had long sought American assistance, requested immediate face to face military strategy meetings with Commander-in Chief President Franklin D. Roosevelt. An invitation was extended for Churchill and his close diplomatic aides to form a Grand Alliance and spend Christmas at the White House. Churchill’s character traits became evident upon arrival as the bed in the Lincoln Bedroom did not suit him, he strolled the White House hallways searching for the bedroom of his choice. First Lady Eleanor was not enthralled with having the entourages live with them for 14 days, but with war the nation’s priorities came first. The conferences, code named ARCADIA transformed the White House to include a special “map room”. Eleanor once noticed the two world leaders alone in the room and mentioned “They seemed to be having a wonderful time—too wonderful, in fact. It made me a little sad somehow”.
The author notes the holiday atmosphere with smell of evergreens and decorations of holly. Most late afternoons revolved around FDR’s famous Orange-Blossom Special coctails. Many formal dinner menus are described in detail and mention is made of gold utensils from the Cleveland administration. Following dinner, conversation continued in other smoke filled rooms with a relaxed atmosphere that included FDR inhaling Camel cigarettes through a holder and Churchill puffing on his eight-inch Coronas. An assortment of fine liquor was always at hand including scotch, bourbon and brandy sniffers.
Churchill along with the Roosevelt’s in a 1941 Christmas setting during WWII is an amazing piece of history that is well written.
The author notes the holiday atmosphere with smell of evergreens and decorations of holly. Most late afternoons revolved around FDR’s famous Orange-Blossom Special coctails. Many formal dinner menus are described in detail and mention is made of gold utensils from the Cleveland administration. Following dinner, conversation continued in other smoke filled rooms with a relaxed atmosphere that included FDR inhaling Camel cigarettes through a holder and Churchill puffing on his eight-inch Coronas. An assortment of fine liquor was always at hand including scotch, bourbon and brandy sniffers.
Churchill along with the Roosevelt’s in a 1941 Christmas setting during WWII is an amazing piece of history that is well written.
December 25, 2012
Christmas 1941 was a difficult time in Washington, D.C. The people of the Nation's Capital did their best to make merry -- not an easy task, since the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor eighteen days earlier had forced the United States into the Second World War, and had created profound feelings of uncertainty and fear throughout American society. Against that tense backdrop, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and a group of his top advisers traveled from London to Washington to confer with U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt on the formation of an Allied grand strategy for fighting and winning World War II. In One Christmas in Washington, David Bercuson and Holger Herwig tell the story of how the “Arcadia” conference convened by the American and British leaders succeeded against all odds in forging a grand alliance and establishing a unified war effort. Some of the minutiae of the often tense negotiations might be of interest mainly to dedicated students of diplomatic history. Yet Bercuson and Herwig do a fine job of bringing to life the place and time they write about, and sketch well the complex relationship between Roosevelt and Churchill. A fine, thoughtful, evocative book.
January 1, 2013
It’s easy to forget, post 9/11, how an earlier and singular event forever changed the course of history. This is the fascinating account of the series of meetings, named ARCADIA, that took place in Washington over the Christmas holidays after the December 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt and Churchill along with their top advisors (most importantly George Marshall) were able to overcome huge differences in opinion and bow to each others better judgment to achieve a monumental coalition called the “Grand Alliance“. When there was the “realization that they had no choice but to fight this war as allies, they began to find common ground”. Out of these conferences came the extension of Lend-Lease, the Combined Chiefs of Staff and the charter for the United Nations. The politicians of today would be well served to learn about finding common ground by re-visiting this short period in history when two great leaders put aside their differences to work toward a greater good.
March 27, 2012
Being a History Major, I love reading non-fiction history books :)
This kept me intrigued to the end, however there were a few themes in the book that severely hurt it's rating, IMHO.
The book was a little too flattering regarding Franklin Roosevelt's reaction to the attack on Pearl Harbor (not to mention his general performance as President). There is barely any mentioning of the writings that suggest Roosevelt was arguably one of the worst American presidents that has ever lived, and there are scores of them.
Also, Anglophobia is rife throughout this piece, and becomes immediately apparent. If you didn't know any better, you'd think it was written by a German historian!
On the other hand, the documented interactions between FDR and Churchill are very interesting and well written. Descriptions of Churchill's eccentricity are priceless.
Definitely, worth checking out, if you're into Second World War writings (and you are an American, of course :)
This kept me intrigued to the end, however there were a few themes in the book that severely hurt it's rating, IMHO.
The book was a little too flattering regarding Franklin Roosevelt's reaction to the attack on Pearl Harbor (not to mention his general performance as President). There is barely any mentioning of the writings that suggest Roosevelt was arguably one of the worst American presidents that has ever lived, and there are scores of them.
Also, Anglophobia is rife throughout this piece, and becomes immediately apparent. If you didn't know any better, you'd think it was written by a German historian!
On the other hand, the documented interactions between FDR and Churchill are very interesting and well written. Descriptions of Churchill's eccentricity are priceless.
Definitely, worth checking out, if you're into Second World War writings (and you are an American, of course :)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews