• 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'.

Extracts from this document...


"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 A to H to support this interpretation?" Source A supports this claim as it is a positive piece of writing about general Haig, then again it was written by him, therefore is full of lies and deceit. E.g.: "A considerable proportion of the German soldiers are now practically beaten men" His head of intelligence, John Charters, fabricated this information; nether the less this is still a positive piece of writing. Source B, greatly disagrees with John Keegan's view of Haig as it is a very negative poster aimed at Haig's uselessness and how the people at home didn't want him anymore, the text: "Your country needs me... like a hole in the head" Proves this and then written underneath: "Which is what most of you are going to get." ...read more.


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 ...read more.


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. Nic. Locock - 1 - ...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. Dunkirk - Defeat, Deliverance or Victory?

    The dive-bombing Luftwaffe had bombed allied soldiers repeatedly, every man on the beach had seen one of their friends die in the raids so it is no surprise when boats came men were scrambling to get on. Nobody wanted to spend a minute more in hell. Defeat, Deliverance or Victory?

  2. Evacuation in Britain during World War II

    I do not know exactly who created the source. I think the aim of the source was just simply to give information on where the reception area were in the war for evacuees. This source will help me to answer questions like, "where evacuees went", What types of places did they go" ect.

  1. Explain how well Haigs background and military experience had prepared him for command of ...

    destroyed by the artillery, but some intelligence had told Haig, but he would not listen. He went on with his grand attack, and when it stared to fail in many peoples eyes, Haig had his eyes shut, and would not stop his tactics of walking in a straight line, to get aimlessly mowed down by the emerged German machine guns.

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

    and the Fifth Battle of Arras, and drove the Germans back to the Hindenburg line. A particularly strong German salient was then reduced by American troops (September 12-13) in the Battle of Saint-Mihiel, and more than 14,000 prisoners were taken.

  1. Dunkirk - Defeat, Deliverance or Victory?

    If all this death took place in the hands of one pilot, not including bombing, then Dunkirk must of been a complete disaster. This source is first hand from an eyewitness who took a direct part in the killing of the B.E.F.

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

    In 24 hours, the Australian 3rd Division lost 3199 lives. The Germans had received reinforcements and were keeping relatively dry in their pillboxes, while the English were up to their waist in mud. Ammunition was starting to run short, and shells were embedding themselves in the mud, before exploding in cloud of steam.

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

    Also we don't know the descriptions purpose as if it was for a book showing Dunkirk in a certain way he could have altered his account accordingly. Overall Deliverance was an important aspect of the British victory as without certain factors Dunkirk's success would have been seriously limited.

  2. John Keegan, a modern military historian, suggests that Haig was a "highly skilled, effective ...

    The mud, which he makes much of, was only in the latter stages of the campaign, although the mud was indeed created mainly by British barrages. Source K is an interesting contrast to this. Source K is also a modern view, but one which is very much pro Haig.

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