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

How useful are sources A,B and C to an historian studying the attitudes of British soldiers to their commanders during the First World War. Use sources A-C and knowledge from your studies in your answer.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Question 1: How useful are sources A,B and C to an historian studying the attitudes of British soldiers to their commanders during the First World War. Use sources A-C and knowledge from your studies in your answer. Source A: The British magazine "Punch" is intended for an audience of a younger generation rather than an older generation. The source tells me that the general wasn't a very good general and that the real thing was completely different from a rehearsal. Because usually magazines exaggerate the truth a bit this doesn't make the source completely reliable. So I don't know how much of the truth is in the cartoon. This magazine didn't really like General Haig. It was written at the time of the war in 1914. We don't know an exact date because it does not say. I think this may be biased because it doesn't sound like they like the General. I think this source has some knowledge but not that much because there is little information apart from they are about to attack and going through the procedures and some slight comedy at the very end. I don't think the soldiers liked the Generals that much because of the quote in the cartoon that says, "The absence of the General, Sir." I think soldiers did revolt a bit. ...read more.

Middle

A total of 620,000 British soldiers were killed for just a few miles of territory. Haig had wasted all these lives and the German lines had not been broken. The bombardment had been useless and had just warned the Germans about the attack. But to be fair to Haig trench warfare was new to everyone at the time and no one really had any idea about how to cope with it. This source cannot be useful because it is clearly biased. Question 2: John Keegan, a modern military historian, suggests that Haig was an "efficient and highly skilled soldier who did much to lead Britain to victory in the first World War" Is there sufficient evidence in sources C to L to support this interpretation? Use the sources and your own knowledge to explain your answer. Source C is telling us that this opinion is bias because it is written by Earl Haig, the son of Field Marshall Haig. He probably did not like it that all these bad things were being said about his father. We cannot make this useful sufficient evidence. He is saying that his father should have been given credit for the job he did and the victories he achieved. But is he just saying this because he loves his father? Source E supports the view of John Keegan. ...read more.

Conclusion

This though does not support John Keegan's view. This evidence has a point that cannot be sufficient. The source suggests that Haig killed millions of people in the war but the Army men already knew that millions were going to die. Source D suggests it. The Prime minister blames Haig for pressing the attack even though it became clear that he couldn't attain his objectives by continuing the offensive. The source was written after the war. Source H: This source supports Keegan's view but again we cannot use this evidence as it is bias because the author, Cooper was asked by Haig's family to write this. This source tells us that if Haig had not have gone ahead with the attack then that would have meant abandonment of Kerdun. Source J: This source does not support Keegan's view. The source is telling us that Haig's army cannot match the Germans. The article was quoted from a German Newspaper so as this newspaper would try and build up Germany's hopes this cannot be used as sufficient evidence. Source K: This source is supporting John Keegan's view this source says that blaming Haig as an individual for the casualities is putting too much burden on one man. This source is not bias and has no at all reason to be. Even though this source does support Keegan it also does blame Haig's numerous mistakes leading to the half a million casualties suffered by the allies at the end of this source ...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. Marked by a teacher

    What Were the Consequences of the First World War for the British People 1914 ...

    4 star(s)

    A lot of the changes were just natural progressions which would have happened anyway. For instance you could argue that women would have won the right to vote regardless. Before the war the suffragettes (led by Emmeline Pankhurst) and the suffragists (led by Millicent Fawcett)

  2. Haig in sources

    to the Germans where the attack was coming from and that there was going to be a big offence. Haig wrote "... the barbed wire has never been so well cut." But when the men went over the top they faced machine gun fire and tangled barbed wire, Haig's prediction didn't come true.

  1. How useful are sources A, B and C to an historian studying the attitudes ...

    Source C is biased not because it was written by Haig's son (however I'm sure that is part of the reason for his view) but because it does not refer to any hard evidence for the reasons it puts forward, it is an opinion rather than a view.

  2. Styal Mill - Study sources A, B, C and D. Which of these sources ...

    We know this because it says "Mr. Greg pays doctor Holland for all the medicine and for coming out." Which may suggest why they had little sickness as they could be treated. The final limitation of the source is that the extract is only based upon styal mill, where as the question asks about all mills in

  1. Why do sources A to F differ in their attitudes to the evacuation of ...

    because there would not have been emotive music in real life; also the music affects the audience's feelings making the evacuation process seem worse. The source is also unreliable because actors are used to show the evacuation process. The actors probably did not experience evacuation themselves, therefore, parts of the

  2. John Keegan, a modern military historian, suggests that Haig was an 'efficient and highly ...

    In fact the whole of the Somme was a disaster- Haig gained so little territory that, after the battle he had only just about gained the amount of land that he had planned on the first day. Showing us that he was over confident, na�ve and extremely optimistic.

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

    From the sources I have chosen, I am able to understand that historians believe that if leaders like Haig tried other tactics and participated more in the battle then it wouldn?t have ended in such a disaster. I think based on the amount of people who died just on the first day that this interpretation is a valid one.

  2. How useful and reliable are these sources in explaining how womans lives were affected ...

    This means it is very useful as it provides us with key facts contributing too many people?s understanding of the events that occurred during the First World War in Britain. As the majority of men were in the army, women were taking over men?s jobs.

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