(c) Study Sources D and E
These two sources are not about Haig and the Battle of the Somme. How far do you agree that they have no use for the historian studying Haig and the Battle of the Somme?
Source D is a TV series known as ‘Blackadder’. The writers of the series use comedy to stereotype the soldiers. Although the sources are not about Haig or the Battle of the Somme, it is still relevant to historians because it reveals the modern day attitudes towards Haig and the Battle of the Somme. Modern day attitudes portray Haig as a typical Field Marshall, one that never comes to the battlefield but works miles behind the frontline. ‘Clearly Field Marshal Haig is about to make yet another giant effort to move his drinks cabinet six inches closer to Berlin’. All in all, this source is slightly useful because it reveals modern day attitudes towards Haig and the Battle of the Somme.
Source E is a cartoon from a magazine published in February 1917. This means that the cartoon was published during the war. The purpose of the cartoon is to convey the message that the Major-General is always absent. ‘what is the second difference?”. Sergeant-Major: “The absence of the General, Sir.”’ This is a similar message that is conveyed in Source D. attitudes at the time of the war are that generals were never at the frontline. It was published because the public found this funny. This source reveals the attitudes of the people during the war towards Haig and the Battle of the Somme. Thus, both sources are useful to a historian because they both reveal the attitude of the people at that time towards Haig and the Battle of the Somme.
(d) Study Sources F, G and H
Do sources G and H prove that Source F is wrong?
To an extent, I think that sources G and H do prove that F is wrong. Many opinions have come up about Haig’s role and actions during the battle of the Somme. Source F is an extract from a book written by John Laffin - ‘British Butchers and Bunglers of World War’. He argues that a large number of casualties during the battle of the Somme were caused by Haig. Source F is just biased opinions made by John Laffin with a lack of facts, support and evidence. Also, the purpose of the book is to make people look bad and also to entertain the audience. His main motive in making a book maybe to make money. It is no where as serious as source G or H. ‘Haig was as stubborn as a donkey and as unthinking as a donkey’.
Sources G and H talk about Haig’s great performance in the battle of the Somme, he was ‘one of the main architects of the Allied victory’. This is the opinion of a British general who fought in both world wars. Source H is more reliable than source F because the general fought in the war and so has first hand experience of what Haig was like as a Field Marshall.
Although source G is an extract from the German Official History of the First World War, it is based purely on facts, and so makes it the most reliable and balanced source. Even though it is written by German’s, it says that Haig did a good job in weakening German ‘morale’ and ‘ a great part of the best, most experienced and most reliable officers and men were no longer in their place’.
Sources F and H are in need of facts which would support their ideas. John Laffin comments are more personal than those made in sources G and H, John Laffin insults Haig he says that he was ‘as stubborn as a donkey’. This comment is made to entertain the audience and also makes him look unprofessional. Source H is written by a general who fought in the battle of the Somme, this might make us rely on his ideas because he witnessed the battle, but he wrote these 56 years after the battle so his memory might be a bit unreliable. The source is also totally biased towards Haig. All in all, sources G and H are more reliable and have more strengths but we need more evidence to prove F is wrong.
(e) Study sources I and J
Why do you think that Sources I and J differ about the Battle of the Somme?
Sources I and J differ for many reasons about the Battle of the Somme. The main reason being the time at which they were written. In source I, Lloyd George was the Secretary for war, so his job was to compliment soldiers. He only saw a small section of the battlefield, not all of it. One of his many ambitions was to become Prime Minister. If he commented badly about the battle, he would lower British morale and decrease his chances of becoming the PM, so he frequently complimented the soldiers. In source J, Lloyd George was writing after he was Prime Minister. The purpose of him writing was to write his opinions. In his memoirs he tries to shift the blame from himself to Haig, who at the time was dead. Events at the time, such as economic depression and the rise of Hitler, were due to the war. The reason for Sources I and J’s difference is Haig’s purpose at the time. In source I, he is trying to win votes so he can become Prime Minister and this is why he comments positively about the war efforts. In source J, now that he has been Prime Minister, he can write what he truly feels and so, he can blame Haig for the failings of the Battle of the Somme.
(f) Study all the Sources
‘Haig was an uncaring General who sacrificed the lives of his soldiers for no good reason’. How far do these sources support this view?
Source F supports this statement. It is an extract from a book called ‘British Butchers and Bunglers of World War’ written by John Laffin, and states that Haig was ‘as stubborn as a donkey’. He also said that Haig’s principle ‘that guided him was if he could kill more Germans than the Germans could kill his men, then he would at some time win the war’. But, source F - which is an opinion and bears no facts - seems to carry a comic and informal tone. The purpose of the book is to entertain and make people look bad, so it is not a reliable source because it does not express both opinions of Haig.
Source C is another one that seems to support the above viewpoint of Haig. It is written by Private George Coppard who fought in the Battle of the Somme. He says the ‘hundreds of dead were strung out on the barbed wire’. He is obviously expressing the carelessness of Haig’s actions. This is a trustworthy source because he was an eye witness, but his memory may have been affected due to stress.
In source J, Lloyd George was writing after he was Prime Minister. In his memoirs he tries to shift the blame from himself to Haig, who at the time was dead. Events at the time, such as economic depression and the rise of Hitler, were due to the war. He is writing what he truly feels and so, he can blame Haig for the failings of the Battle of the Somme. This source is quite reliable, yet it is not a balanced source.
In contrast to the above sources, source G is an extract from the German Official History of the First World War. This makes it a purely factual account of the war and therefore makes it the most reliable source yet. It states that when at the battle of the Somme ‘its consequences were nevertheless great, particularly as regards morale’. This means that when at the battle of the Somme, Haig crushed the morale of the Germans. Even though this source is written by the Germans, it tells you that Haig did a good job in weakening German morale and killed most of their best soldiers. ‘A great part of the best, most experienced and most reliable men were no longer in their places’. This source clearly opposes the view that Haig was an uncaring general and we can trust it because it is purely based upon facts. It is a reliable and balanced source.
Source A does not support this statement. It is a speech written by Haig where he says that they will have to suffer heavy casualties. The purpose of the source is to prepare the families of the soldier’s for the worst. Haig is being realistic and sensible in this speech because he knows that no battle can be won without bloodshed. Therefore, this source is reliable in saying that Haig did care for the lives of his soldiers.
Another source that opposes the view that Haig was an uncaring general is source H. It is written by a British general in 1973, who fought in both world wars. He says that they were ‘inspired by his determination’ and that he ‘never wavered from his purpose of breaking down the powers of resistance of the enemy’. Although, this source opposes the above statement, it is not totally reliable because source H is wrote 56 years after the battle so his memory might be a bit unreliable and it is also biased towards Haig. It is need of facts and a balanced argument to make it more reliable.
Overall, there are many sources that do and don’t support the statement in the question. The amounts of sources that do and don’t support the statement are equal. But neither side of the argument is reliable enough to come to a conclusion. Therefore, these sources can not support the statement as they need more information and facts to increase their reliability.
Adhal Mahmood 11PL
