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

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?

Extracts from this document...


Target 2: Evaluation of an interpretation for sufficiency 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? There are those that believe Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig was 'the Butcher of the Somme', those who would agree with John Keegan's opinion of Haig and those who see arguments for both views. Sources D, F, G and J do not support Keegan's interpretation of Haig. Source D is a cartoon, the cartoonist clearly of the opinion that Haig was indeed 'the Butcher of the Somme'. So while it does not offer support to Keegan's opinion of Haig, the message of the cartoon is the opinion of the cartoonist and not necessarily the opinion of the general public. Source F is not as disparaging of Haig as sources D, G and J, but it is still critical of his actions. Livesey, a modern historian, believes that it was Haig's 'inability to recognise defeat', that led to him continuing his attacks at the Somme and Passchendaele, resulting in millions of casualties. ...read more.


Source E was written by Haig and is therefore a useful source as it is an insight into Haig's thinking as expressed by him. He wrote before the Battle of the Somme that ''The nation must be prepared to see heavy casualty lists'. Saying this before the battle of the Somme, meant Haig knew the losses would be great, and he did not mislead anybody into thinking otherwise. He was an experienced soldier who knew the reality of war was that men had to die for any victories to be won. This agrees with Keegan's opinion of Haig as '...a highly skilled soldier'. Haig would not criticise himself however, and perhaps there are elements of truth in Source G where Lloyd George wrote that there were, '...individuals who would rather the million [soldiers] perish than that they as leaders should admit...that they were blunderers'. He was implying that Haig was one of these 'individuals' and his opinion is perhaps rooted in some truth as after the first day of battle at the Somme, Haig wrote, 'Very successful attack this morning...the battle is going very well for us'. This was not the case as, among other problems, there were 60,000 casualties, 20,000 of those deaths, on the first day of the battle. ...read more.


This clearly agrees with what Warburton wrote in Source K, that it is not as simple as placing all the blame on Haig for the mistakes in the first World war, but that the truth is that a myriad of people can be 'blamed' once you start to make the links. Source L does agree with Keegan's opinion to an extent in that Cooksey accounts Haig's achievements in the face of the problems and complications thrown at him, but at the same time he details Haig's failings as a commander which do not agree with Keegan's opinion. There is not enough sufficient evidence in sources C to L to support Keegan's interpretation of Haig, as there are sources which strongly oppose and support his opinion. Sources K and L are the most valuable sources to analyse and they both also support and oppose Keegan's opinion of Haig. It has to be concluded that while Keegan's opinion of Haig is not incorrect, as there is evidence to support what Keegan believes, there is also evidence which contradicts Keegan's view. Ultimately, there is not enough of one type of evidence in these sources to completely support Keegan's view or oppose it. ...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?

    war compared to the relatively narrow perspective seen from the front line; how much land gained etc. Also, he couldn't get personally involved when in the front lines, as he would not be able to function as general if he did.

  2. To what extent was appeasement justified?

    It must be understood that appeasement was extremely popular both with politicians and the general public at that point of time. The anti-war mindset and the lack of support was not only prevalent in the Britain's empire, but also in the Commonwealth states and the USA.

  1. Dunkirk - Defeat, Deliverance or Victory?

    source is very negative towards the Allies this would suggest that it is reasonably reliable. This source is also one-persons account of the evacuation, so this incident may be an isolated one. Morale was low in the armed forces due many soldiers dying and men not knowing when they would be evacuated.

  2. Defeat, Deliverance or Victory? Which of these best describes Dunkirk?

    The source conflicts with my prior knowledge as it says the Grenadier Guards took their equipment with them when it was usual for it to be left behind. Though maybe not perfectly organised the evacuation was definitely well improvised as it was only decided it would occur 7 days previously

  1. General Haig

    It has lots of dialogue and is a serious account. It actually states about the soldiers views and attitudes towards their commanders. However it is slightly biased because it is written by General Haig's son, which does mean that his son could be backing up and supporting his father and

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

    This would all take months. The Germans now began a race against time to win the war before the American's came. The early part of 1918 did not look propitious for the Allied nations. On March 3, Russia signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, which put a formal end to the

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

    This was especially true, as he believed that people should be proud to die for their country, and therefore could not see why the men were so unwilling to do so in the best of spirits. Haig's supporters even go as far as to say that the Somme was not even a humanitarian disaster.

  2. Haig in sources

    French forces then Germany should of won the war, so it maybe false information. The second is written by Sir Charles Osman, written in 1927. He suggests that the "British and French losses were the same as the Germans at 560,000".

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