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

"Haig was an uncaring general who sacrificed the lives of his soldiers for no good reason." How far do these sources support this view?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"Haig was an uncaring general who sacrificed the lives of his soldiers for no good reason." How far do these sources support this view? One of the main things about studying sources is interpretation. They way you view a source can very much depend on your own beliefs, or that of others and therefore it is very hard to find a completely true source. Source A in my opinion is more a realistic part of writing from Haig, it does not actually show that he is uncaring, yet to me shows a side of honesty and truthfulness. However, to people that do not view Haig politely, this source could be seen as untactful, insensitive and pessimistic as it comments on the nation losing men when it should really be a moral booster. In my opinion Haig is being honest, he realises that in any war men are lost and he merely states his predictions. There is no actual sign of him being insensitive. Source B as we know now is false and does not represent the truth of the battle in any respective. Yet, Haig was only going by what he heard from intelligence, and he honestly believed the offensive to be effective, he would not have known that so many people died until days later and the sources are written before and on the day of the battle. ...read more.

Middle

However due to the source being made for comical purposes only it cannot be taken completely seriously, however many people very much against Haig would state the fact that in "Blackadder" he is constantly mocked for his choices made in the war. Although, it cannot be taken 100% seriously. The same could be said for Source E however it was written in 1917, during the war and therefore demonstrates that even then many people were against Haig and his was of leadership. The Source suggests that the General's should be on the frontline, however that suggestion is ludicrous, yet many people still believed it. In my opinion the source is slightly harsh, yet its purpose is against Haig and therefore shows him in a bad light, as does Source D. It is rather biased and therefore is not entirely credible because once again it was made for a comical purpose. Source F was written by a noted historian by the name of Laffin, however he was very much against Haig and his writing is against Haig in every way. He suggests Haig as being a "donkey" and committing "criminal negligence." In my view this is not true, however he is very much against Haig and shows him to be ignorant and incompetent. ...read more.

Conclusion

that Haig was very much a different man than what he once believed, and therefore this reflects Haig in a bad light, and shows that maybe he did sacrifice his men for his own benefits. Source can always be interpreted differently and therefore no one opinion can be formed. Every person has different views on Haig and the way he acted. Some sources are very biased against Haig and clearly believe him to be insensitive, and a slaughterer. Others seem to think that he was a brilliant General and his perseverance was a main point of the allied victory. Interpretation is very important, and in general I think Haig didn't do too much wrong. However I do realise that his offensive at the Somme was a disaster, yet he only went on his intelligence and what people told him and therefore the deaths cannot be blamed on one man. Haig is seen in many different lights, and many believe him to be very different than what he was. The sources show all different view point of Douglas Haig, and therefore show a complete picture of him. He was neither a good or bad General, but a mixture of both with good and bad points in his character. Just like every other human being. Ronnie Gunson ...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?

    These failed in entirety, for obvious reasons. It was not only this, but Haig seemed to repeat the bad tactics he had used in battles such as the Somme, and Passchendaele. He was incredibly slow to adapt to new tactics, let alone integrate weaponry.

  2. Was General Haig a bad leader, source based

    The main purpose of the video is to inform and educate people studying the Battle of Somme. It is mostly reliable as it many historians who have studied the battle very carefully give their opinions and facts. They back everything said with evidence.

  1. General Haig

    This source therefore does support Keegan's interpretation of Haig. However, this source is not entirely reliable because Cooper may be linked to the Haig family if they asked him to write it, because of his views on Haig and the battles he commanded, showing that the source is slightly biased.

  2. How important were Haig's tactics in bringing an end to WW1?

    After the Somme, the British had become a much better artillery force, and in the final months of the war, the British became very effective at using artillery. When Haig broke through the Hindenburg line, he had more limited objectives that were more achievable.

  1. Was General Haig a donkey or a great commander?

    commander, as this was the type of head quarter used by leaders during the Second World War. This view might, indeed, have been justified, if it was possible for Haig to receive accurate information at all. However, his intelligence officers, on whom he relied for precise information to include in his battle plans, were less than reliable.

  2. How Far does Source A prove that Haig did not care about the lives ...

    The tone is almost mocking the preparations of the attack and does not have a good word to say about it. Although this seems to be a more truthful account of the offensive it is only truthful to the part of the line that he was fighting on.

  1. Describe the conditions that soldiers experienced on the western front in the years 1915-1917.

    front line, building and repairing trenches, filling sand bags and for most of the time waiting for an enemy attack. "There was not long to wait before an officer appeared with details of the soldiers' duties for the day. Weapon cleaning and inspection...would soon be followed by pick-and-shovel work..." T.

  2. Some people have the view that British generals like Haig were incompetent leaders. How ...

    and out-of-date methods like the infantry charge which resulted in many casualties. These leaders believed that if they did it often enough and with enough men then they would wear the Germans down and eventually break through, which did happen but it cost too many lives.

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