Winston Churchill & the Black Dog: Was Churchill Bipolar?

Churchill's black dog is probably the single most repeated fact in popular writing about famous people and mental illness. It appears in every list, every documentary, every article about depression and leadership.

It is also more complicated than the retellings suggest, and it is worth taking apart properly — because Churchill is the case where the gap between what people confidently believe and what the evidence supports is widest.

Where the Black Dog Came From

Churchill did use the phrase. He wrote to his wife Clementine about the black dog being away, and it appears in a handful of other places in his correspondence and in accounts by his doctor Lord Moran.

Two things are usually left out. First, the phrase was not his invention — "black dog" was already common English idiom for a bout of low spirits, used by Samuel Johnson among others. Churchill was borrowing a familiar expression, not coining a private code for a clinical condition.

Second, the references are relatively few. The image of Churchill constantly wrestling a named depression comes largely from one source: the psychiatrist Anthony Storr's essay in Churchill: Four Faces and the Man (1969), which argued that Churchill had a cyclothymic or manic-depressive temperament and that his depression was the engine of his defiance. It is a brilliant, influential piece of writing, and it is an interpretation, not a diagnosis. Everything since is largely downstream of Storr.

The Elevated Side

The case for something like hypomania in Churchill is, honestly, stronger than the case for the depression.

His energy was genuinely abnormal by any standard. He habitually worked until two or three in the morning, dictating to relays of secretaries, then began again after a short night and a nap. He wrote more than forty books while conducting a full political career, and won the Nobel Prize in Literature for the writing he did on the side. He painted over five hundred canvases. He laid bricks. He commissioned and pursued enormous, grandiose schemes with total conviction, some brilliant and some catastrophic.

He was also impulsive, risk-seeking to a degree that alarmed everyone around him — repeatedly trying to place himself under fire in both world wars — and prone to fixed, immovable enthusiasms. The Gallipoli campaign of 1915, which he drove and which cost enormous numbers of lives, is the standard example of the confident grand plan pursued past the point of evidence.

His alcohol consumption was substantial and lifelong, though the popular image overstates it; he drank steadily rather than to obvious incapacity.

The Depressive Side

The evidence here is thinner than the legend requires.

Lord Moran's published diaries — which are the main source, and which caused considerable controversy when they appeared because of the breach of confidence involved — record periods of low mood, particularly in later life and particularly after 1945, when Churchill lost the general election immediately after winning the war, and in his final years as his powers declined.

There are also documented low periods after Gallipoli in 1915 and during the wilderness years of the 1930s, when he was politically isolated and largely ignored.

What is missing is evidence of the kind of incapacitating depressive episodes that characterise bipolar disorder — extended periods in which he could not function. Churchill's output never really stopped. Even during his darkest documented stretches he was writing books, making speeches and conducting a political career. That is not typical of untreated bipolar depression.

It is also worth noting that Churchill's low periods generally have obvious causes: being blamed for a military disaster, being ejected from office, being out of power for a decade, and growing old after the greatest years of his life were behind him.

So Was Churchill Bipolar?

Our assessment: possible, unproven, and considerably overstated in popular writing.

What can be said with reasonable confidence is that Churchill had an unusual temperament characterised by extraordinary energy, grandiosity, risk-seeking and a capacity for sustained output that is difficult to explain conventionally — and that he had periods of low mood, some of them significant, most of them explicable by circumstance.

Some scholars have suggested cyclothymia — a milder, chronic form of mood cycling — which fits the evidence rather better than bipolar I disorder does. That would be consistent with a man who was never incapacitated but never quite level either.

What cannot honestly be said is that Churchill had a diagnosed illness, or that the historical record establishes one. He lived to ninety, held the highest office twice, and produced one of the largest bodies of work of any statesman in history.

Why the Myth Persists

The Churchill black dog story is popular because it is enormously comforting, and it is worth being clear-eyed about why.

It says: the greatest wartime leader in modern history had depression, and it did not stop him — it may even have been the source of his strength. That is a genuinely useful thing to tell someone who is struggling, and we would not want to strip it away entirely. Storr's argument, that a man who had wrestled with despair was uniquely equipped to tell a nation it could survive, is a serious idea and not merely sentimental.

But the version that circulates now has hardened into something less useful: a confident clinical claim, endlessly repeated, that mental illness is a hidden advantage. That framing has a cost. It encourages people to romanticise an illness rather than treat it, and it sets an impossible standard — if Churchill won a world war with it, what is your excuse?

The better lesson from Churchill is simpler and truer: a man with a difficult, extreme temperament did extraordinary work, over ninety years, with the support of a formidable wife, a large staff, considerable wealth, and a great deal of failure along the way.

Frequently Asked Questions