The Author was drawing for Punch magazine, renowned for its critical and comical view of authority. The magazine was designed for the entertainment of their British audience; therefore Punch is a good resource on prejudices of the time. The author’s aim was to amuse the average British person, and considering that about 15-20% of the British population were soldiers, the average British person would at the very least have a soldier in the family. This means that the author would have probably made the cartoon with bias towards soldiers, and would have drawn the soldiers’ views. This would mean that the source would be very useful when studying soldiers’ views.
Should the artist have wanted a second opinion from the generals, he would have had to ask them. The probability that a general would have had an ‘interview’ with an artist, especially one working for a magazine already notorious for its derogatory views to authority, is very low indeed. Therefore, it is very possible that the artist would base his cartoon on the opinions of the soldiers alone.
In conclusion, the artist probably drew the picture for soldiers, based on information given by soldiers, and with no defence from the generals. This would mean that the source ideally presents soldiers’ attitudes to their commanders, and is therefore very useful for this information, assuming that the above assumptions are true. However, to be fully useful, other sources would have to be used to verify these assumptions.
Source B is a quote from a comedy television series. More exactly, it is from the 6th episode of Blackadder goes forth, and was first broadcast on the 2nd November 1989, and presumably written not long before. This means that the scriptwriter (Ben Elton) most probably would have not consulted actual soldiers, nor had been there himself. Indeed, Ben Elton was born in 1959, making it impossible for him to have been a soldier, and anyone he would interview would have to be at least 88, and I doubt that the scriptwriter would go to such lengths. However, what it does do is base itself on common opinions. Since, as I have previously mentioned, the common view was that of the soldier of his family, it would have been based on soldiers’ views. If this was taken alone, it would make the source very useful.
Also, the scriptwriter would have unconscious bias against the generals, simply from the society. Although this may not seem beneficial, it is in fact very useful when studying general views, and these would have their origins in soldiers’ opinions. This means that if the scriptwriter’s unconscious bias is against the generals, then somehow World War One’s soldiers would have had a similar attitude to generals.
However, there is the problem that it is a comedy. The scriptwriter, similarly to the Punch artist, wanted to entertain, ultimately to make money. Blackadder is known for its black, sarcastic humour, and the scriptwriter would have written the script to be as such. This would mean, among other things, exaggerating common views to ridicule a figure, since ridicule is a very effective form of humour. This fact alone makes the source much less useful, as anything said is a strongly exaggerated form of the truth, and as it is comedy, it cannot be taken completely seriously.
In conclusion, the short quote is a blend of common opinion and comedy. This makes it useful when treated as such, i.e. by not treating details too seriously, but by taking into account the general message sent by the text.
Source C is a quote from Field Marshal Haig’s son. This differs from the other two sources primarily in that it is non-fictional. It is a quote printed in 1998, and most probably said not long before. Being Field Marshal Haig’s son, Earl Haig obviously has strong bias towards his father, and therefore opposes the common view that all generals were foolish. When his father was Field Marshal, Haig would have only been a child, and although he may remember those times, he would still only remember them from his father’s point of view. He would therefore not only have conscious bias due to his feeling of loyalty to his family, but would also have unconscious bias due to his father’s bringing up.
Earl Haig mentions what the old soldiers thought. However, he would not have actually talked to them, but would have just heard his father saying this. In turn, Field Marshall Haig would not have had very accurate reports on his soldiers’ attitudes to his plans, for the simple reason that they would have been afraid to say anything bad about them. This stops the source from being reliable for soldiers’ opinions. An unreliable source is rarely useful by itself.
Furthermore, Earl Haig’s purpose in saying this would be to somewhat rescue his father’s reputation; therefore he may have been inclined to bend the truth somewhat.
In conclusion, Earl Haig’s quote is an attempt to rescue his father’s reputation based on unreliable information given to him by his father. It is unreliable, and since a historian can’t tell whether what he says is true or not, it is in no way useful in finding out what soldiers thought about generals, especially Haig.
