“Which is what most of you are going to get.”
This shows that the people that’s that he was leading a mass slaughter and didn’t seem to care, this furthers my point of this Source being negative.
Source C is Haigs own views of the Somme there fore holds bias towards him, and in turn is a positive piece of writing.
“(i)”, which is written before the battle justifies the losses that the British army may obtain, and tells the nation that despite the losses the British will remain victorious. I believe that he must hold some uncertainty of the success of the British troops if he is justifying their losses before the battle:
“no superiority of arms and ammunition, however great, will enable victories to be won without sacrifice of men’s lives.”
“(ii)”, which is written the day before the battle, seems to me to try and make Haig look good:
“Several have said that they have never before been so instructed and informed of the nature of the operation before them.”
And also praises there success at breaking the enemy’s barbed wire which again was far from the truth and must be another lie from John Charters:
“The barbed wire has never been cut so well”
“(iii)”, written on the day of the battle is full of lies, as the first day of the battle is well known to have been a disaster and there fore stating that “Al went like clockwork” does not represent Haig in a positive way. But at the time no one was the wiser so this would have shown Haig in good light.
Source D, I believe is against Haig as it shows him to be somewhat insane:
“his belief that he had been chosen by God to serve his country.”
And also shows him to be somewhat idiotic and too proud of himself:
“It was probably this inability to recognise defeat that led to his continuing attacks on the Somme”
But then again this is written by a modern historian in 1989 therefore is not a current account and less accurate.
Source E, is also against Haig and comments on how he was too proud to accept defeat along with the rest of his army:
“the million who would rather die than call themselves cowards”
“Individuals who would rather the million perish than that they as leaders should admit-even to themselves-that they were blunderers…”
But then again the prime minister; David Lloyd George, did show that he had trusted Haig:
“Haig promised not to press the attack if it became clear that he could not attain his objectives by continuing the offensive.”
This trust was not broken there fore in some ways is positive towards Haig.
Source F, is again positive towards Haig; probably because it is taken from his official biography and justifies why it was right to give battle on the Somme:
“To have refused to fight then and there would have meant the abandonment of Verdun to its fate and the breakdown of co-operation with the French.”
This seems to me a perfectly feasible justification.
Source G, to me is positively directed at Haig and says that if anyone else was given Haigs job they would have done no better, and that he could not solely be blamed for the disaster of the battle of the Somme:
“if he had ever been replaced, would there have been anyone better for the job?”
This is written some time after the battle so reflects upon it, therefore is less accurate.
Source H (Haig: BBC TV ‘Timewatch’.), was again very negative towards Haig, and showed soldiers accounts of their personal opinions of Haig and their personal tragedies of the war. One man even stated that Haig was the ‘biggest donkey of them all’. As the people seemed very old the stories could have changed and accounts could have become twisted, this makes it less accurate.
When I weigh out the positive and negative opinions of Haig they match each other, this may be why there is some debate over whether he was a genius or a fool, but I believe that as the majority of positive opinions are that of his own, I must agree with the man on the video when I say Haig was the biggest donkey of then all.
