Who Belongs on a Banknote?: How Britain’s Icons fell out of Favour

 

By Chiamaka J Nnadigwe

The debate over national identity, historical memory, and modern sensibilities has reached an unlikely battleground: the British banknote.

Newly revealed research commissioned by the Bank of England has shown that some focus-group participants described historical figures such as Sir Winston Churchill, Alan Turing, and Jane Austen as "elitist", "divisive," or insufficiently representative of modern Britain. The findings emerged from a 2025 study conducted by market research firm Savanta, months before the Bank announced plans to replace historical figures on future banknotes with images of wildlife.

Among the more surprising observations was a participant's claim that even Turing the mathematician and wartime code breaker widely credited with helping shorten the Second World War carried "imperialistic" associations because of his connection to Britain's wartime victory narrative. Churchill, meanwhile, was viewed by some respondents as emblematic of an older, less inclusive Britain

The consultancy's report went beyond individuals. The iconic White Cliffs of Dover were reportedly flagged as potentially controversial because of their association with immigration debates, while some Victorian-era buildings were viewed through the lens of Britain's colonial past. Jane Austen, one of Britain's most celebrated literary figures, was also among those considered by some respondents to be insufficiently representative of contemporary society.

A Shift in What Britain Chooses to Celebrate

For more than half a century, British banknotes have served as miniature monuments to national achievement. Churchill, Austen, Turing, and artist J. M. W. Turner have all appeared alongside the monarch, turning everyday currency into a gallery of British history.

The Bank of England insists that its decision to move toward wildlife-themed banknotes was not driven by the Savanta research. Instead, officials point to a broader public consultation in which roughly 60% of respondents preferred nature as a future theme. The Bank has also argued that wildlife imagery can help improve anti-counterfeiting measures and offer fresh design opportunities.

Yet critics see something deeper at play.

To them, replacing Churchill, Turing, and Austen with foxes, dolphins, owls, or hedgehogs is more than a design update. It represents a broader trend in which historical figures are increasingly judged by contemporary standards, sometimes reducing complex legacies to a handful of controversial interpretations.

The Inclusion Dilemma

Supporters of the change argue that national symbols should evolve with society. They contend that Britain's increasingly diverse population deserves imagery that feels universally relatable and less tied to historical hierarchies. The Savanta research found that many younger participants wanted banknotes to better reflect modern Britain and its cultural diversity.

Critics counter that inclusion should not come at the expense of historical memory. Churchill's leadership during World War II, Turing's pioneering work in computing, and Austen's literary influence are foundational chapters in Britain's story. Removing such figures, they argue, risks creating a society more comfortable with nature than with its own history.

 A Question Larger Than Banknotes

The controversy highlights a growing challenge facing many Western societies: how to honor historical achievements while acknowledging the complexities and imperfections of the past.

Should national symbols celebrate heroes, landscapes, and wildlife equally? Should historical figures remain despite their controversies? Or should institutions continually redefine public symbols to reflect changing social values?

The Bank of England may simply be redesigning currency. But the fierce reaction suggests the argument is really about something much larger who gets remembered, what a nation chooses to celebrate, and whether history itself is becoming too controversial for public display.

For many Britons, the question is no longer what will appear on the next £5 note. It is whether a country that removes Churchill, Turing, and Austen from its money is preserving its heritage or slowly forgetting it.