history somme

Authors Avatar

A. I think that source A proves that Haig didn’t care about his men to some extent. Also it is a reliable source as it is from Haig himself. When he writes about how ‘the nation must be taught to bear losses’ this shows he didn’t care  about their lives because when he says ‘losses’ it doesn’t seem like it means much to him, but as we know this obviously did mean a lot to the soldiers and the families and he didn’t seem to realise this. He also mentions how 'No amount of skill on the part of his higher commanders, no training however good, on the part of the officers and men, no superiority of arms and ammunition, however great, will enable victories to be won without the sacrifice of men's lives.' this sounds like he himself is ready for the men to die, like they have no chance of surviving at all, even if they did have all the training and skills etc. like he was sending his men to die. The way he uses the word ‘sacrifice’ sounds to me like the words of someone who knew that thy were going to be large numbers of death and therefore had willing sent them out to die, showing that he didn’t care for the lives of the men. The source then ends with 'The nation must be prepared to see heavy casualties.' This just proves that he knew men were going to die and he didn't seem to want to change his plan which shows that the loves of the men obviously didn’t mean much to him. Through the source I can sense no hint of sympathy to the soldiers or their families having to ‘sacrifice’. Source B can somewhat help to back up my points, it shows how Haig had no idea about what was really happening on the frontline, this could be the reason for his lack of knowledge. But in spite of that he writes about how the first attack was so successful and how it went like 'clockwork' when really loads of men died and it was a complete disaster. Source B not only shows about how Haig didn’t care about the lives of any of his men but also about how he didn’t actually know what was happening, this in turn could have led to more deaths.

B. Both sources B and C give very different accounts of what happened on the battlefields, the reason for this is probably because they were written at different times.  Although written after the war had happened, so it could be exaggerated, I trust source C more than I trust source B for the main reason that it was written by Private George Coppard who was on the frontline at the time whereas source B was written by Haig who as we know wasn’t on the frontline at the time of the war. In source B Haig describes how 'the barbed wire has never been so well cut, nor the artillery preparation so thorough.' But in source C Private Collard says about how the artillery fire 'lifts wire up and drops it down, often in a worse tangle than before'. This shows how Private Collard knew more about artillery and the effects than Haig did. In another part of source B it says how 'All went like clockwork' when actually loads of the men died and it all went terribly wrong. All through source B Haig was telling lies, which he may of known weren’t true, or he may not actually know what had been happening on the battlefield so therefore made up things just so he doesn’t look bad. This can also be used for another reason as to why I trust source C more than source B  because what Private Coppard had said was his own thoughts and opinions and the things in source B that Haig said had not been from what he’d seen but form either what he had heard or from his own mind. However, in a few ways source B can be trusted more because his account was at the time whereas Private Coppard’s was after so his thoughts may be exaggerated. Taking everything into account I still trust source C more as Private Coppard was there so all his thoughts are from what he has seen not from what he’d heard like in source B with Haig.

Join now!

C. Both sources D and E are comical references to Haig and or the Somme and I agree in some ways that they don’t really have much use to a historian studying the battle of the Somme but disagree in other ways. One of the reasons I agree is because in Source D it describes how Haig’s decided that their going to go over the top, then it leads to the other man saying 'you mean are we going to get killed? yes'. To me this source doesn’t really have much use to a historian studying the battle of the ...

This is a preview of the whole essay