The Battle of the Somme. By G.Lewis The first major German offensive occurred at Verdun, in 1916 against the French, and not long after, in June of the same year the French were on the brink of defeat. Just as this became apparent, the British launched an offensive of their own, along the River Somme; The British commanders plan of attack was simple. They would basically hit the German army as hard as they possibly could (no surprise there), by firing all their artillery at the German front-lines for several days (about a week), until they had knocked out all the barbed wire, machine guns, and the majority of the infantry, basically everything, thus, weakening the lines sufficiently for The Allies to go over the top and clean up with their guns. For almost a week the Allied artillery fired a huge number of shells into the German trenches. Sir Douglas Haig famously said, "Not even a rat would be alive." When the guns had finished, at about half past seven on the morning of July 1st the Allied soldiers were ordered to go over the top, they didn't however duck and run; They marched slowly and upright and shoulder to shoulder, exposing their chests to the hail of bullets that were about to come their way. The Germans were ready for this attack, and had known about it for a long time, and so had prepared themselves accordingly, digging large trenches, and lowering their machine guns on pulleys. As for the barbed wire, it merely bounced up and down, not a bit had been destroyed. Even as they saw their fellow soldiers fall, the Brits did not duck, for they feared resisting the generals almost as much as they feared the enemy. Officers-Soldiers Killed 993 18,247 Wounded 1337 34,156 Missing 96 2,056 Taken Prisoner 12 573 Total 2438 55,032 As you can see above, the number of deaths on the first day of the Battle of the Somme are horrendous, almost sixty thousand, yet the generals did not stop it there, they carried on until they had accumulated a loss of 420,000 Brits, 200,000 French and 650,000 Germans. These are the worst losses in British history for one single day. Source A: (From Sir Douglas Haigs despatch, 23rd December 1916) This source shows us the objectives that Haig had defined for the Battle of the Somme, It is however dated after the battle had ended, on 23rd December 1916. Rather than actually showing the original objectives it seems to be showing some excuses as to why the commanders made the demands they did. The fact that these were most probably destined for publication is important, as he is not going to admit any kind of defeat to his public. Haigs first two objectives, to relieve pressure on Verdun and to
assist the Allies in other theatres of war by stopping any further transfer of German troops from the Western front, look more like excuses for the failure to gain any real territory. The British army gained, at its most successful point, about 15km, and in other places they gained nothing at all, but it seems likely that the major reason for an offensive is to gain significant ground. Objective three, to wear down the enemy seems to me the most disturbing of the three. Haig famously once said the war will be won when there is two of us and ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
assist the Allies in other theatres of war by stopping any further transfer of German troops from the Western front, look more like excuses for the failure to gain any real territory. The British army gained, at its most successful point, about 15km, and in other places they gained nothing at all, but it seems likely that the major reason for an offensive is to gain significant ground. Objective three, to wear down the enemy seems to me the most disturbing of the three. Haig famously once said the war will be won when there is two of us and one of them, and this confirms to me, that Haig cared very little for his troops. Source B: (Haig communicating to Lloyd-George during the Somme) At this time Haig was not actually the Prime Minister, but the minister of munitions, given the job of dealing with the militaries arms. There are two ways of looking at this source. Firstly we could see it as Haig trying to pass the blame onto Lloyd-George, basically stating that if he had more ammunition then he could do better, however because Lloyd-George is not supplying him sufficiently it is his fault. To me this suggests a lack of flexibility and inventiveness in his tactics, even when he can see they are going horribly wrong. The other way of looking at it is to say that Haig is trying to excuse himself from the situation, saying that it his lack of supplies that are his downfall, rather than his lack of tactics, and that if they got more weapons then they could just step up their fire power, but basically still using the same tactics. We must bear in mind that these two men actually despised each other, and so would be especially eager to pass the blame onto each other. Source C: (Extract of a report sent in December 1916 by Haig to the British cabinet about the effects of the Battle of the Somme) The things we must bear in mind whilst examining this source are that, once again it is after the battle has ended, and was not due to be published. Once again we can see that this source is basically Haig trying to justify his actions in the Battle. The difference in this source is that he actually admits that It is true that the amount of ground we have gained is not great. That is nothing, however he also says that a considerable proportion of German soldiers are now practically broken men and that the German casualties have been greater than ours. It is clear that this source was not for public consumption, as we get to see the more real side to Haig. He does not dwell on the fact that he has gained very little land, but readily talks about how the German losses are greater than the British losses, and that they seem ready to crumble at any minute. This comes as another example as to how little Haig seems to care about the lives of his troops, due to the fact that he is still using the excuse of the war being won on a death count. This source seems adamant as to the success of the battle, it says how we have proved our ability to force the enemy out of strong defensive positions. However the truth was that the barbed wire, trenches and machine guns of the Germans were virtually unharmed, It seems to me that Haig is trying to cover up the failure of the battle, by garnishing the truth a little. Source D: (Extract from a letter written by Lloyd-George to Haig on 21st September 1916 after his visit to the Somme) Before we study this source further we must remember these points. Firstly, that the two men in question had a severe dislike of each other, yet in this report Lloyd-George is praising Haig highly. We must also remember that Lloyd-George was at this time aiming to become PM, and Haig being a very influential member of the government was almost certainly needed as an ally in his race for leadership. I do not perceive this source as wholly reliable, although it is certainly genuine, the reasons above may be more what caused Lloyd-George to use the statement æI can say that the heartening news of the last few days has confirmed our anticipation and hopes that the tide has now turned in our favour. I congratulate you most warmly on the skill with which your plans were laidÆ than true pleasure in what Haig was doing. Source E: (Extract from æMy War MemoirsÆ by the German General Ludendorff, 1919) Source E follows a now familiar pattern, i.e. the general making excuses for his mistakes. This time however it seems a bit stranger, as it is now the defeated General, and so should be seen as a very reliable source. He says in it æthey worked their way further and further into the German lines. We had heavy losses in men and material. As a result of the Somme we were completely exhausted on the Western Front. If the war had lasted our defeat seemed inevitableÆ. Now this actually reinforces what Haig says in his despatch (Source A), by saying that it did succeed in wearing down their forces and exhausting their men. So this just confirms to me, that this is mearly Ludendorff trying to excuse himself from the blame for his part in GermanyÆs defeat. Source F: (From AJP Taylor æThe First World WarÆ 1963) AJP Taylor is a well-respected historian, famous for his often very controversial ideas. However, as with all historians he does hold the benefit of hindsight. He suggests the British morale was very low, that the soldiers had a general loathing for the Generals and only trusting each other and that both sides were tired and very worn out. This source seems to contradict everything that Ludendorff says in Source E, saying that the British forces were not strong at all, and certainly no stronger than the German forces. This goes to back up what I have said previously about Ludendorff only saying these things to reduce the blame on him. However Taylor, unlike the generals has been able to extensively research this topic, see Britain win, and use general hindsight. Thus being able to make a more informed statement, aswell as a less biased one. Source G: (Extract from Marc Ferro æThe Great War 1914-1918Æ 1969) In reviewing this source there are some particularly important points we must remember, the most important being that Ferro is a Frenchman. He may feel a lot of bitterness towards the British, due to the foolish tactics of the Generals, resulting in the deaths of a huge number of French troops. This may make the source biased, and so not hugely reliable, he also, like Taylor has the benefit of hindsight. His main criticism is the foolish assumption of the British generals that the German troops would put up little resistance, and die quickly. He also states that the main impulse for carrying on the battle for so long was the generalÆs ævain gloryÆ, meaning that the GeneralÆs were more concerned about winning for the sake of winning, than they were about their troops. After all this criticism he fails to mention the relief Britain supplied in taking the pressure off them at Verdun, or Somme. I believe that his main intention in this article is to insult the British generals than to give them any credit, or to constructively talk about them. Source H: (Photograph of a still taken from the film æThe Battle of the SommeÆ which was shown to British cinema audiences in the late summer of 1916, while the battle was still going on) This film was issued at the point when people back home were starting to realise what was going on, this film was made in many ways as a means of a smoke screen. I t was to boost morale back at home. I think just by the fact that the government felt it necessary to release something like this proves that the Battle was going extremely badly. If it had been going well then they could have mearly told everyone the truth, by saying that it was going well, however this was not the case. The nature of this film was to say that our soldiers were fighting valiantly, and that we were doing well, the still itself shows some soldiers going courageously æover the topÆ. However it was filmed in a fake location, and involved actors, not real soldiers, so really had no relevance to what was going on. The only relevance that this still has, is showing us how desperately badly the battle was going, that the government needed to release it in the first place. Source I: (Map Showing the Battle Lines of the Somme campaign) This map may not be totally reliable, however it does go to illustrate the point that the battle was a total disaster. It tells us the stupendous number of dead, 650,00 Germans, 420,000 British and 200,000 French and alongside that the amount of territory gained. When compared, the ten or so kilometres gained seem insignificant to the number of soldiers, whose lives were taken for this meagre consolation. Source J: (A British soldiers opinion of the instructions to cross no mans land at a slow walking pace) The key point to remember when looking at this source is that this one point of view is representing hundreds of thousands of soldiers, who all had to face the same thing. So although his opinion that the generals made a huge and wicked mistake is very valid, and likely to be held by a large number of soldiers, many may also disagree. We can see that this source by contrast to the statements made by Haig, Lloyd-George and Ludendorff, talks very negatively about the tactics used. As a soldier he would have been more concerned about his comrades and his own life than of the winning of the war at this point, and so would hold a more personal opinion. The benefit of a source like this is that this man was there in the midst of the action, and experienced the stupidity of the generals first hand, and had to face the consequences. Whereas the others although they are still primary sources, they had no actual involvement in the action itself. Conclusion: The Somme was a disaster, it is very easy to agree whole heartedly with this, the evidence is all there for the taking; the immense loss of life, the pitiful ground gained mad it a total waste. However we must look further into it than this to make an informed decision, although all the previous statements are true, there is also the fact that it did serve to relieve a lot of pressure of the French at Verdun. It also wore down the German soldiers, both mentally and physically; significantly, this helped a great deal in their eventual defeat, thus was a major step in winning the war, and for this reason, makes the Somme a success. It is therefore very difficult to classify the Somme as either a total disaster, or a total success. It is in many ways both of these, a success due to the positive things that came out of it, and a crushing disaster due to the losses that were generated by it.
