• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Field Marshall Haig: 'The Butcher of The Somme'?

Extracts from this document...


9.3.1 The First World War. Field Marshall Haig: 'The Butcher of The Somme'? A) Study sources A and B. How far does Source A prove that Haig did not care about the lives of his men? Source A is a piece of writing by Haig suggesting that the nations will have to bear heavy losses in order to obtain victory. It is quite possible that this was an attempt to justify the attack he was about to commit so many of his men to. Haig writes that no matter how much equipment and training the army has it will still suffer losses. This cannot however be taken to mean that Haig did not believe in giving his troops every advantage of arms and numerical superiority. It is quite possible that after the experience of the French army at Verdun, Haig knew there would be high casualty figures. Therefore source A is probably designed to cover himself in the political side of things, as it is so ambiguous as to be able to mean several things at once. He held a very senior rank and to get there would require political as well as military skills, this piece can be shown as saying that Haig wants to give his men every advantage to crush the enemy, but in addition to this there is the clear message that to do so will inevitably cost lives. Source B on the other hand is a piece he wrote on the day before, and on the day that the attack at the Somme was launched. ...read more.


Coppard's piece is also only the experience of one man. It was not necessarily the same all the way up and down the line. However the facts concur with Source C, there were huge casualties, and Coppard tells us about them. Haig says the attack was a success. Yet the only success anybody else seems to think it could have been was with regards to how many of Germany's experienced men it cost them. The evidence is greatly against Haig's report in this instance, and so I conclude that source C is the most reliable as it concurs with what can be proven as fact, that being that large casualties were sustained, the wire was uncut, and that with better preparation many casualties would not have been incurred. C) Study Sources D and E. These two sources are not about Haig and the Somme. How far do you agree that they have no use for a historian studying Haig and the Battle of the Somme? Sources D and E are both comical and are both intended to make people smile as their primary objective. However source E is a politically motivated cartoon from the time, and will also have the intent of putting across a drinks cabinet in Blackadder's opinion. To a historian studying Haig and the Somme, both sources would be of considerable use. They both show popular opinions about Haig, one at the time of the event and the other 80 years later. ...read more.


It is also a possibility that by the time he wrote it, his own memories had become influenced by those of others. And if he rose to the level of General, some of his superiors while he rose through the ranks were most likely supporters of Haig, and would have planted their opinions alongside his own. He begins by saying that the German armies were broken by the courage and resolution of Haig's armies who had complete confidence in him. If this is to be taken at face value, then it is only fair to say that the men would not have had faith in Haig, if he were the donkey portrayed in source F. He also writes that if Haig had not had the moral courage to shoulder the burden of the attack, the war would have turned into a disaster. This is an admission that Haig had to choose between the loss of life his armies suffered, and the loss of the war, and ultimately more loss of life. However that it supposedly took him moral courage to do it does show that Haig thought about it, and that he cared about it. So he was not a stubborn unthinking donkey, who willingly sent his troops to the slaughter. Both source G and H disprove source F.valid political point. Both however agree that Haig would send his men to attack while he was happily tucked away, probably by his ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Britain 1905-1951 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Britain 1905-1951 essays

  1. General Haig - Butcher or Hero?

    There seems to be a degree of scorn, with the remark 'Sadly [sarcasm], twenty-eight broke down before they reached the battle area'. Evans is blatantly mocking Haig's ignorance of the fact that the tank had never been previously tested. '...and were soon bogged down or knocked out'.

  2. Does Haig deserve the title 'The Butcher of the Somme'?

    against that kind of bombardment, and that's why our wars last weeks rather than years. But in Haig's day, warfare was only just evolving out of basic guns, cavalry charges and swords and shields, not long after the bow and arrow.

  1. Was Field Marshall Haig the Butcher of the Somme

    and even if Rawlinson had gone ahead with his ideas he had the chance of being shot to death by Haig. Rawlinson's plan was called "bite and hold". The idea of this plan was to smash the German frontline and then bombard and pulverize it with artillery, then move methodically through the trenches.

  2. Field Marshall Haig: 'The Butcher of the Somme?'

    Coppard has no reason to lie either, as the war is over the truth can be revealed. Finally, Coppard was situated at the front line, so his opinion is a clear secondary source of what went on, unlike others who were told what was happening.

  1. Does field Marshall Haig deserve his title as the Butcher of the Somme?

    Even though this made them easy targets. He didn't believe in modern tactics, where a group of men run forwards then another group covers those men. So men were under cover for longer and could use the element of surprise as a weapon.

  2. Field Marshall Haig "The butcher of the Somme"? - source related study

    Also source B was write for the public to read and the public wanted to hear that all was going well and as planned due to the fact that there loved ones were taking part in the war. Source C is a personal account told for one purpose which was to reveal the truth.

  1. Was Haig the butcher of the Somme?

    to send the men into battle if he didn't understand the new ways of war. Plus that that many died, to gain almost nothing at all. In this war it was like he had sent the soldiers to war casually, as if he had knew that his loss would be worth something no matter how severe the losses were.

  2. Source based work on Field Marshall Haig: 'The Butcher of the Somme'?

    This must include Haig as he was a general at the time. Satire is a useful way to gauge public feeling, I am sure that in the future people will use tapes of programes such as "Have I Got News for You" to find out what the people's views are now, so I think that both these sources are useful.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work