Although these sources have many values, there are also limitations to them.
Source A, a cartoon from ‘Punch’, only represents one view of Haig, the cartoonists view. The source is aimed at the upper class and well educated people of the time. The magazines aim was to ‘mock’ events that were happening in the war. The source is likely to be exaggerated as many cartoons from ‘Punch’ were. It is not a real scene and doesn’t truly represent what happened. In response to “the absence of the General” and the Generals wining and dining away from the front line, I would say that this quote is completely wrong as, 78 officers died and 146 were wounded while in active service, so many Generals were in fact very close the line of fire.
Source B, the extract from ‘Blackadder’ was written in the 1980’s, and is therefore a secondary source, by 3 men who were very anti-war and anti-government. This source is biased and only in the view of the writers. ‘Blackadder’ was made for the enjoyment of the audience and not primarily to inform the public about Haig. Although the T.V. Programme is partially based on true events most of what happens is fictional and made up by the writers.
Source C, the newspaper interview with Earl Haig, is biased as he is Haig's son. Earl Haig would have defended his father no matter what and is only responding to criticisms made against him. The sources only shows an extract from the interview so it cannot really represent what Earl Haig said, as the Daily Telegraph could have edited the interview and thus only show certain parts of the interview. They could also have mis-interpreted what Earl Haig said. The source is secondary as it was printed in 1998 so it cannot be truly reliable. Haig died in 1928 when Earl Haig was only young, so we have to ask the question, how well did he really know his father? He must not have spent that much time with him as Haig worked most of the time. Despite the amount of soldier’s Earl Haig will have met, not many of them would criticise Haig to his own son. Therefore I think that Earl Haig will not see the true perspective of what the soldiers actually thought of his father.
Question 2: John Keegan, a modern military historian, suggests that Haig was ‘an efficient and highly skilled soldier who did much to lead Britain to victory in the First World War. Is there sufficient evidence in sources C to L to support this interpretation?
Sources C to L do agree with John Keegan’s view of Haig, to some extent.
Source C is an extract from the Daily Telegraph’s interview with Earl Haig it was published in November 1998 and is called “what did the soldiers think?” Earl Haig said “It is high time my father was given credit…” this statement agrees with Keegan's view on Haig. The information in the source is true and as the interview was from the Daily Telegraph, a reputable newspaper the information in the source is likely to be accurate. Earl Haig has seen hundreds of soldiers in his life and most of them probably have complimented Haig so as to not offend Earl Haig.
Part 1 of source E is a diary entry written by Haig prior to the Battle of Somme. In the source, Haig is warning the government that casualties were inevitably going to be high. Haig was actually correct and was aware of the severity of the situation. It is his own notes from the time so the source I primary and it reflects his view of what was happening. However, the source only shows a small amount of his notes and does not show his compassion towards death. Haig thought that if you die you go to a better place, so he thought he was doing the soldiers a favour by letting them go to a better place. The government didn’t tell the public about the brutality of the war and the actual amounts of the casualties even though they were told the truth by the commander.
Source F is a quote from “Great Battles of World War 1” written by the historian Anthony Livesey in 1989, it is therefore a secondary source. It shows the qualities that Haig had: “…shrewd and ambitious and had great self confidence.” These were qualities of a great commander. Anthony Livesey based his book on research and it is supported by his own knowledge. However, it only shows one view and opinion on Haig. There are many different opinions of Haig; some thought he was shrewd while others ambitious. But ultimately he was a product of his time.
Source H is an extract from Haig's official biography written by a family friend Duff Cooper. It says that Haig had to attack at the Somme to relieve pressure at Verdun. Haig was under the authority of the French command, the Battle at Somme was not his idea but it was successful and did save Verdun. This is the official biography and so it is reliable and historically accurate. However, it is biased as Cooper was hired by Haig's family to give a positive view of Haig.
Source J is a German newspaper article translated into English. It was published in May 1917 so it is a primary source. The source is a “German Tribute to Sir D. Haig”. The Germans are complimenting Haig; they say he is certainly one of the ablest generals of contemporary England”. But, he says that Haig still can’t beat the Germans. The source shows what the Germans thought of Haig and the situation and what their tactics were. The source was from “The Times” which is a well respected newspaper. However, the article could have potentially been translated wrong. Its motive is to use positive views of Haig, and to show that the ‘great’ man cannot defeat Germany. This article was to boost Germany and raise morale. It is true that the Germans admire Haig as do many German historians.
Source K is “a modern assessment of Haig”, an article that was published in 1998 which makes it a secondary source. It says that Haig was probably as good as any other leader of the time. It is an assessment, an evaluation of Haig, so it based on research and is most likely accurate. However the article is secondary and only shows one view, the view of the writer S. Warburton. It is true because most historians believed that Haig was as good a commander as anybody else.
Source L is a video representing all opinions of Haig, it shows the good side to Haig as well as the bad side and it also shows people who think there are two sides to his story. Ted Rimmer said that Haig was a capable man and was every inch a general; many people also share this view like Professor Trevor Wilson. Dr. Gary Sheffield however, is ‘on the fence’ about Haig. He thinks that Haig is “far from an idiot” and not a callous or incompetent butcher as people make out. Some people agree with Keegan and think that there was no point Haig being at the front line, he had to be further back to observe the situation and make a rational decision. Various people admire Haig fro wanting to carry on fighting despite what the politicians told him to do.
Sources C to L also disagree with Keegan view of Haig to some degree.
Source D is a poster which is criticising lord Kitchener's famous recruitment poster. It shows criticism of the tactics used and it is accurate as casualties were high, at the battle of Somme for example 57000 lives were lost. However, it only shows one view and is therefore biased. It is critical of Haig and is mocking him. It was used in the 1960’s during the anti-Haig debate, which makes it a secondary source.
Parts 2 and 3 of source E disagree with Keegan. Part 2 was written the day before the attack at Somme. Haig was obviously ‘in the dark about what was happening on the front line as he wrote that “the barbed wire has never been so well cut” but my own knowledge tells me that Germany was far more prepared with the barbed wire and artillery. Haig also wrote “the men are in splendid spirits” which leads me to think that Haig had no proper idea of what was going on at the front line. Part 3 was written after day 1 of the battle of Somme; Haig said it was a “very successful attack” which was far from the truth as there were massive casualties. The source is accurate as it was Haig's own personal opinion and a reflection f his view, it also shows Haig's state of mind. However, the information is inaccurate and Haig was misinformed.
