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

How far was General Douglas Haig Responsible for the Failings of the British war Efforts on the Western Front 1916 - 1917?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How Far was General Haig responsible for the Failings of the British War Effort on the Western Front 1916 - 1917? The British war effort on the western front, 1916 - 1917 are widely viewed as an awful failure. The efforts and tactics of General Douglas Haig have been the subject of many arguments over the past eighty years. Some regard him as the figure who led Britain to victory, whereas others see him as the "Butcher of the Somme" who led thousands upon thousands of men to their death. Whether he is solely responsible or not remains undecided. However, by analysing his mistakes and failures, it may be possible to form a strong conclusion and decide whether or not Haig can be entirely blamed. General Haig was born to a wealthy family in 1861. He was educated at Clifton and Brasenose College, Oxford and entered the Royal Military College at Sandhurst straight afterwards. He fought in the cavalry in battles such as the Boer war. This, it would seem, provided him with the experience to lead troops into battle; but was it the relevant experience that the job required? His old fashioned style of training was not compatible with the development of technological weapons and his out of date tactics did not consider the technology used by the opposition or the onslaught of the arms race. ...read more.

Middle

As no one knew how to fight like this, the old tactics were relied on. This was much the same as the situation with the new weaponry. No one knew how to use these new weapons and a lack of understanding lead to contempt of the weapons. As no one knew how to use them, there was no one to teach the skills. This meant that advances in technology were put aside and the old way of fighting was used against the highly trained Germans. This, also, is not Haig's fault, although he did fail to adapt his tactics after many failed battles. Haig, therefore, only played a small part in this failure. Haig was appointed Field Marshall at the age of 54. This means that his training was extremely out dated (particularly due to the arms race), and this was likely to affect the tactics that he used. His experience was in wars such as the Boer war. These were won easily due to the oppositions lack of organisation and lack of what was then, modern weaponry. This suggests that Haig was not ready for the modern way of fighting. Also, most of Haig's experience was with the cavalry. ...read more.

Conclusion

Is it fair, therefore, to blame Haig completely for these failures? Is it possible to view Haig as a failure considering that Britain did win the war? Some would argue that he was a failure due to the mass loss of life that occurred under his instruction. However, Haig had warned people of this: "... The nation must be taught to bear losses... The nation must be prepared to see heavy casualty lists..." This would suggest that Haig was not a complete failure. It seems that the British people just didn't comprehend the extent of the loss of which they had been forewarned. He cannot be seen as responsible for this. There is sufficient evidence to suggest that Haig was responsible for the failings of the British war effort on the western front 1916 - 1917. However, it is impossible to lay the blame solely on Haig. His superiors failed to act despite the intolerable death toll and despite the loss of life, Haig was allowed to continue using his costly tactics. Also, it is impossible to identify Haig as a complete failure as he did eventually help Britain to win the war. However, his failings were unacceptable and he was unworthy of the gratifications he received when he returned from the war. He was, however, worthy of the title "The Butcher of the Somme". ?? ?? ?? ?? Oliver Newland History Coursework ...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?

    French that they would do whatever was in their power to aid their allies. Haig would have felt it would be necessary to honour the allegiance, as this could be beneficial during and after the war. So, with justification, he called on the tanks to 'surprise [the Germans] to break the stalemate'.

  2. General Haig

    Source C is most useful to a historian because it is the most reliable source out of the 3 and contains more facts than the other two. Source A is limited to historians because it is a picture with speech written underneath about one person's view on soldiers attitudes towards their commanders.

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

    This was finally granted, and on the eleventh hour, of the eleventh day of the eleventh month, the armistice was signed. Although Haig's supporters, when questioned about Haig, can always fall back on the very accurate answer that the Allies actually won the war, his critics will ask whether or

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

    I believe that George had not had all the information in source I and that was the purpose for his change in opinion. I also feel that in Source J, George had been given all the relevant information and consequences of Haigs actions, and that if he had kept to

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

    They could not think of any other form of warfare, except to throw into battle large numbers of men month after month'. Despite what it seems today, Haig's decisions were not as disastrous as we might have thought. His tactics were in line with current warfare techniques of the time, and he had no experience when dealing with machine guns.

  2. Causes of the General Strike

    However leaders of the Trade Union Congress were not totally happy about the proposed strikes and spent the next two days negotiating with the Government and mine owners. When print workers refused to print an edition of the 'Daily Mail' attacking the miners as 'a revolutionary movement', the Government believed

  1. General Douglas Haig Butcher or Hero?

    to ?work with what he had?, such as the fact that they did not have many supplies, the soldiers he were given were mostly volunteers and so were in-experienced, and also the fact that he didn?t want to fight the battle in the first place, and that he was only

  2. How far to do agree that Sir Douglas Haig is to blame for the ...

    and advances in technology required to lead such large assaults.[4]His tactics were outdated, and he refused to adapt to the very different circumstances of modern warfare. With old fashioned tactics against the Germans newly thought up and newly developed tactics, the Brits had no chance of succeeding.

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