From Wolf Hall and Saving Private Ryan to The Crown, 'based on a true story' helps drive the success of a book, film or TV series.  We are critical of historical errors and assume there could be a correct version.  But many argue that there can be no one true story, no correct history.  Not only is 'history written by the victors', but all stories and accounts of events are written from a perspective, highlighting what seems important, interesting or entertaining to the author.  For one person Churchill is a hero, for another a villain.

Should we give up the idea that there can ever be a single true story of events, and abandon the idea of a correct version of the Crown? Should we nevertheless seek to provide accurate accounts while knowing others will declare them false and misleading? Is a triumphant imperial version of British history no less true than the story of colonialism and slavery, or is this an immoral approach that denies the truth and encourages conflict?

Book Tickets Now!