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

Study John Keegan a well respected modern historian, and his views on sir general Haig in the first world war his view on Haig is that he was an 'efficient and highly skilled soldier who did much lead Britain to victory in the First World War'.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Question 3 I have been set a task to study John Keegan a well respected modern historian, and his views on sir general Haig in the first world war his view on Haig is that he was an 'efficient and highly skilled soldier who did much lead Britain to victory in the First World War'. I will now study closely to see if there is enough evidence to support this interpretation using sources and my own knowledge. Firstly I am going to going to look at part of a report written in December 1916, sent by Haig to the British Cabinet about the aftermath of the battle of the Somme, I can clearly see Haig was trying to defend himself he said 'The German Soldiers are practically beaten men' which was true, even Ludendorff the German army commander said 'my army has been fought to a standstill' but when Haig said 'The German casualties our greater than ours' you can see he is twisting the truth, but this source doesn't say much about his efficiency or skills. ...read more.

Middle

The second part was written on 30th June 1916, the day before the attack, he basically says the men are high spirits and confided, and artillery and barbed wire have never been so thorough, by my knowledge I know he was lying, as there was a huge loss of life on the first day, and was trying to make himself look good again. And finally the third part of the source after the big attack, he claimed everything to be going very well, and as I stated before, there was a huge loss of life on the first day, which shows he was clearly lying, this shows him as very inefficient, and it is not a reliable source to back him up as it was written by Haig himself. I am now going to look at a source written by a modern historian Anthony Livesey. He shows weaknesses and flaws of haig in battle, he says "perhaps his greatest failing was his constant, often misplaced optimism, which seemed to stem ...read more.

Conclusion

Nearly there, I have a GCSE modern history report by S.Waburten, it basically says it wasn't all Haig's fault, and he just Contributed to the disaster, this may be true but there is no evidence to support it and again it may show another view to Haig, but is isn't relevant. Finally my last source, a clip from black adder. In the clip Haig is portrayed as a scatterbrain who wasn't really in control when he thought he was, this shows that people even today still see him as the opposite to Keegans view. So using the sources and my own knowledge I can clearly see there is not enough evidence to support Keegans view, he was even nicknamed "the butcher of the somme" and we know Britain was not led to victory as, there was nothing gained by the end of the war but a few kilometres not to mention all the sources are written about the battle of the somme and not the overall war. ...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?

    in reconnaissance to an active role in battles through the dropping of bombs and firing of machine guns. Finally, we see that not only were British tactics often inexcusable, German tactics could be just as bad. Erich Ludendorff was Germany's chief strategist during World War I, and it was he

  2. Dunkirk - Defeat, Deliverance or Victory?

    Another view among historians was that Dunkirk was a victory for the military. The military did very well to hold the port of Dunkirk for long enough so around 340,000 soldiers where saved. Also saving the B.E.F. was considered a major military victory because without them Britain would have been defenceless against the Nazi onslaught.

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

    Whereas previously they had put the majority of their troops in the front line, and only left a few in reserve for defence, now they were adopting the opposite scheme. Ludendorff's new doctrine was to withdraw as many troops as possible from the front line to protect them from British

  2. Evacuation in Britain during the Second World War

    Source B also shows that the process of evacuation was a success. From Source B, it would appear that the children are very happy and there is an orderly process. Even though Source B is probably government propaganda and it cannot tell us how the children really felt or what

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

    Taylor is a very respected historian so we would expect this source to be very reliable and balanced. But he is British, so he could be biased and he is nationalistic. Also he was not there, which makes his writing secondary evidence.

  2. Role of women during the First World War

    Source B does support source C in that women should get the vote, but the suffragettes are not helpful. Source B suggests that women should act like themselves and look respectful like the suffragist drawn on source C. However, source b has a very vague message.

  1. Dunkirk - Defeat, Deliverance or Victory?

    he mercilessly killed thousands of soldiers by spraying them with bullets over and over again. He describes it as mass killing but still not very important in the eyes of Germans. Firstly this says that Dunkirk was no victory for the British, even if it was it wasn't a very important victory at all.

  2. Did The First World War Liberate British Women?

    I think that B6 in comparison to B7 is much poorer. I did not like the source particularly, as although it told you about the event the rest of the information given was weak. It was also not attributed so in comparison to the Times article in B7 an historian would have little use for it.

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