FIELD MARSHALL HAIG: 'THE BUCHER OF THE SOMME'?

Authors Avatar
FIELD MARSHALL HAIG: 'THE BUCHER OF THE SOMME'?

Question A

Study sources A and B

How far does Source A prove that Haig did not care about the lives of his men? [7]

Source A was written by Haig in June 1916 before the battle of the Somme began. It may have been produced to boost the moral of soldiers and people at home. Ostensibly this source seems quite uncaring and brutal but in my opinion he is being realistic. 'No amount of skill on the part of the commanders...however great, will enable victories to be won without the sacrifice of men's lives.' This quotation may seem quite cold and perhaps he is trying to take the blame off himself by saying that the death of soldiers wasn't due to incompetence but it was necessary.

Source B is almost definitely not reliable. It was also written by Haig about the battle and says that the first day of battle went well. 'The men are in splendid spirits'. This is clearly not true. I know from my own knowledge that there were 57,000 casualties on the first day. This complete lie may be due to the fact that Haig wanted to keep people's moral up at home or might be because Haig himself was being misinformed. He was no where near the front line and had to rely on his generals who were scared of upsetting Haig and told him a rosier version of events.

We cannot trust source B so should we trust source A? I do not believe so. I believe that Haig is lying to make whoever reads these sources think a certain way about the war; he tries to say that the war is going well which it quite blatantly isn't and tries to shift the blame from himself about the loss of soldiers' lives. Therefore, I think source A does prove that Haig did not care about the lives of his men to an extent. He says in source A that deaths were inevitable and it is all to 'enable victories to be won' and comes across as if he is being uncaring but quite realistic. However, I think that this source could be interpreted as just Haig making excuses. Source B proved that he is not trustworthy so Source A can only be trusted up to a point.

Question B

Study sources B and C

Which one of these two sources do you trust more? [8]

Source B is not trustworthy as it says that the first day of attack was successful, I know differently- there were 57,000 casualties that day. Haig was no where near the front line and cannot have got an objective view of the attack, whereas source C was written by a soldier who was actually present at the attack. However, Source C was taken from an interview years after the battle and events may have been exaggerated. Whereas source B was written on the day of the battle and would be clearer in Haig's mind.
Join now!


Source C tells us the commanders were incompetent and did not understand the warfare, for example 'Any Tommy could have told them', but is perhaps not very reliable as the tone is extremely bitter, for example, 'Hundreds of dead were strung out on the barbed wire'. Source B tells us about the outcome of the battle but it is overly optimistic, for example 'Very successful attack this morning'. All my own knowledge refutes these claims and I know that this is wrong. For example there were 57,000 casualties and 20,000 killed on the first day, this does not ...

This is a preview of the whole essay