• 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...

Introduction

"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.

Middle

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.

Conclusion

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

    Many of these battles, especially the well-documented victory at the Hindenburg Line, an apparently impregnable line of German trenches, were not simple walkovers. Although it is true that the German army was in disarray, and morale was at an all time low, these defences, that had stood un-breached for years,

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

    number of troops originally on the beach, it may not seem like a lot of men were actually saved. Because this source is by Churchill the nation would believe him because they trust him. Source 9 is written by Allan Bullock in a book called 'Hitler and Stalin'.

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

    Britain would have then stood alone, a position from which they would have been very unlikely to win the war. However, this source was written by Haig's son, in defence of his father's actions in the First World War, so needs to be treated with caution as it is biased.

  2. Dunkirk - Defeat, Deliverance or Victory?

    German morale was at an all time high, and a retreating B.E.F wasn't exactly going to harm this. The first defeatist source is a picture taken at the beaches of Dunkirk in which trucks are built onto the sea to facilitate the evacuation, some may see it as brilliant improvisation

  1. Evacuation in Britain during World War II

    After my evaluation of this source I think that it is a reliable source to answer my question of "Why did Britain start evacuation?". Source three is a written source which is secondary because it was written after the war just naming where the reception areas were.

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

    arrogant man, and that he believed that without him, the country would not survive. This proves that Haig was an efficient and highly skilled soldier, as Britain would not accept any less in their fight for, eventually, their survival. Source E assists the fact that the commanding officers, the men

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