Source A
This is an extract from Sir Douglas Haigs despatch published on the 23rd of December 1916 after the Somme had ended. It sets out three of Haigs objectives which were (1) To relieve pressure at Verdun, this was accomplished. (2) To assist our allies in other theatres of war by stopping any further transfer of German troops from the Western front, this is obviously referring to the desperate situation of the Tsar in Russia even though this was accomplished the Tsar still fell a year later. (3) To wear down the strength of the forces opposed to us, this was achieved as shown by Source E which is an extract from a German General called Ludendorffs memoirs, this says that as a result of the battle of the Somme the German army had been completely exhausted and that if the war lasted defeat would be inevitable. But this had only been achieved through huge losses putting the British army in a similar state. But in this despatch Hiag fails to mention the fundamental fourth objective. This was to break through the german lines and to push onto Germany. This obviously never happened so as this despatch was published to justify himself and the huge losses at the Somme to the British public this objective was neglected.
Source B
This is an extract from one of Haigs communications to David Lloyd George who at this time is not yet the Prime Minister but the Minister of Munitions. The communication shows Haig asking for ‘More guns’ ‘More shells’ ‘More men’. This clearly shows how desperate Haig is and shows us how badly things must be going at the Somme front because Haig already had more than enough men and firepower to accomplish what he planned to do. This communication shows how incompetent and how unimaginative Sir Douglas Haig was; it shows that he has no alternative plans just more of the same to be thrown at the German lines with no regard for the heavy loss of life that was occurring on a daily basis. But we must not be too judgemental because communication back from the front was poor and a lot of the time the generals under Sir Douglas Haig sent reports back that made it look like the Germans where on the brink of collapse therefore making Haig believe that all that was need was one last big push.
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) This again is after the Somme had finished, but this time unlike Source A this report would not be sent for publication, so this is Haig trying to justify himself only to the British Cabinet and not the entire British public. Therefore more of the truth comes out but it is still covered in a veil of lies. The report is typical Haig; in it he admits that very little ground was gained but he then just dismisses this fact, even though it was one of the prime objectives by saying, ‘This is nothing’ he obviously does this so that he can bypass the subject. He then goes on to say how we have proved our ability to force the enemy out of strong defensive positions, this may be partly true for particular parts of the Somme front, where the Germans were caught unaware. But on the front as a whole Trenches, barbed wire and machine guns were left relatively un-harmed meaning huge losses were amounted for hardly any or no ground. It seems to me that Haig is trying to cover up the truth. In the final sentence of the report Haig says ‘The German casualties have been greater than ours’ this for Sir Douglas Haig means in the war of attrition that he plays the Somme was a victory because more of the enemy troops lie dead in the mud than of our troops. Source E supports Source C in the view that, ‘A considerable proportion of the German soldiers are now practically beaten men.’ Source E an extract from a German General Ludendorffs memoirs says that,’ As a result of the Somme fighting we were completely exhausted on the western front , this supports what Haig says in the first sentence of his report because even a German General in his memoirs is writing that the Germans are worn down and exhausted. So at least here Haig is right.
Source D
(Extract from a letter written by Lloyd-George to Haig on 21st September 1916 after his visit to the Somme) Haig and Lloyd George disliked each other. But here Lloyd George praises Haig for the one thing he hates the most, the way in which Haig conducts battle, Lloyd George in his memoirs even condemned Haig as incompetent, a person who medalled with people’s lives. The reason for this praise is at the time this letter was written Lloyd George was running to be prime-Minister as Asquith had resigned after his son died on the Somme. But Lloyd George being a Welshman from humble backgrounds was at a disadvantage and so needed allies like Haig who were in the Establishment and had friends in high places who could sway the vote for Lloyd George in his attempt at replacing Asquith and becoming Prime-Minister. Lloyd George writes this letter after his visit to the Somme but it would have been most likely that Lloyd George would have only seen a very small proportion of the entire 18 mile. Also Lloyd George would have also only seen select areas were the battle was going well. Really this source is quite unreliable because we don’t really know if Lloyd George is really praising Haig or just manipulating him in sights of his own political ambitions.
Source E
Source E- Extract from My War Memoirs by the German General Ludendorff, published in 1919 this piece is evidence from after the event, secondary evidence. Therefore it doesn't carry so much judgement with it but Ludendorff was a key member of the German army. This piece is a justification of his part in the German war effort and tries to justify his part in the defeat of Germany. The piece is also written in the recent light of the Treaty of Versailles and he is trying to show how unfair it was on Germany by showing in his memoirs that Germany was just as damaged as Britain or France in the War. After the war Ludendorff fled to Sweden where he wrote these memoirs and many other books mainly about how the unbeaten German army had been ‘stabbed in the back’ by left wing politicians. He later became one of the first Nazi party members. This source also shows that the Somme wasn’t a complete disaster because in this source Ludendorff says, ‘As a result of the Somme fighting we were completely exhausted on the western front. If war lasted our defeat seemed inevitable.’ This statement obviously supports objective 3 in source A. Although this Statement is from only one person it is still reliable because of his rank in the German army.
Source F
(Extract from A.J.P. Taylor, The First World War, published in 1963) A Prominent British Historian, he shared the same view point about the Somme and Haig as Lloyd George did. He famously said, ‘British Soldiers in the first World war were lions led by donkeys.’ i.e. the soldiers were courageous but were led by incompetent generals. A.J.P Taylor was a well known left wing Historian who didn’t admire the Establishment and was famous for his controversial texts, which lost him a top job at Oxford University because the Establishment favoured a lesser historian over him. This source was published 45 years after the war had ended, so A.J.P Taylor would have had the benefits of hindsight and he would have had access to archives to aid his analogy of the Somme. In this source A.J.P. Taylor writes, ‘Idealism perished on the Somme.’ What he means is the eagerness to fight died because before the Somme soldiers thought that they were fighting for a cause; but after four months of fighting over scrapes of ground losing thousands of men every day soldiers lost faith in their cause and their Generals. This source partially support objective three in Source A, (Haigs despatch) by saying that the German army was worn down but not to the point of crippling. But it also says that German spirit was not the only one to suffer as the British were worn down also, i.e. ‘Idealism perished on the Somme.’ This Source appears to slightly contradict Source E because Source E gives a picture of the ‘entente’ forces completely dominating the Germans but Source F shows a different picture were each army is as worn down as the other. Also Source F is most probably a more reliable and realistic picture with less bias present (due to the ability of hindsight and access to archives.)
Source G
(Extract from Marc Ferro, The Great War 1914-18 1969.) Marc Ferro was a Marcist French man. He had the French view that Britain was not pulling their weight on the Western Front between 1914-16. You could almost say that he was anti-British; these factors linked together could produce a great amount of bias in this Source. In Source G, Ferro states that the Somme offensive was, ‘Almost useless from the military view point.’ But he was wrong because the Somme Offensive did help in a number of theatres of War. It almost certainly relived pressure at Verdun therefore aiding the French and it would have stopped the transfer of troops from the Western Front to the Eastern front, therefore reliving Russia. It is clear that just from these points being excluded and brash statements made, such as the Somme being ‘Almost useless from the military view point.’ That there is a great deal of bias here and that this Source is not reliable because it only shows one side of the story. But at the same time he does have the help of hindsight and there is some truth in his criticisms like when he criticises the foolishness the British generals (in particular Hiag) showed with the assumption 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 general’s vain glory, meaning that the Generals were more concerned about winning for the sake of winning, than they were about their troops.
Source H
(Photograph of a still taken from the film The Battle of the Somme which was shown to British cinema audiences in the late summer of 1916, while the battle was still going on.) This was a staged event/or a fake. It was made behind the front line for the British audiences at home. This film was made to be a means of a smoke screen, to boost moral at the home front .The very fact just to the need to show the British audiences at home a movie about how the Somme was going suggests things were going badly because if things were going well why would they bother to make a film about it. Also this film was aired when there was a general rumbling amongst the people at home as every day the lists of the dead grew and grew. The sheer need to do this supports the statement about the British Offensive being ‘doomed’. But because this still is a fake it does not accurately represent what was going on at the front. So the Source in itself is unreliable and should not be used to represent what was going on at the front. The only real relevance that this still has is in showing us how desperate the government was and how badly the battle was going.
Source I
(Map Showing the Battle Lines of the Somme campaign) This map may not be totally reliable in view of its authenticity, but it does show just how little ground was gained for the huge loss in human life as we know this to be true it suggest this map to be accurate. 420,000 British and 200,000 French and not forgetting the 650,000 German soldiers were either wounded or killed and only 10km was gained which seems almost insignificant alongside the amount of loss in human life. Source I shows why Haig left out the fundamental fourth objective of breaking through the German lines, gaining ground and pushing onto Germany in Source A. Because it never happened and it would have been embarrassing for Haig to say that we gained 10 km when he was supposed to gain more than that on the first day. So it was just left out of the despatch, otherwise there would have been uproar.
Source J
(A British soldier’s 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 is only one view from one soldier but it is most likely that a great many other soldiers on the front would have felt the same. So 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, but some may have different view points to this soldier. This is the view of a front line soldier, who would be seeing things in the terms of futile loss of life, loss of friends or family and he would be experiencing the military cock-ups of officers first hand. For this lone soldier it would be very difficult to see this offensive in the terms of relieving pressure in other theatres of war along the Western front at Verdun and on the Eastern front. But we have to remember that this soldier is there in the thick of the action which would make this source reliable but could add bias towards the generals, but who would blame him. This final source clearly supports the statement, ‘The British offensive on the Somme was doomed to be a disaster from the start and should never have been launched’ because the soldier is writing about what a wicked and huge mistake the generals had made on the first day of the Somme, with the orders to walk across no-mans land.
Conclusion
After evaluating all the sources and considering the statement ‘The British offensive on the Somme was doomed to be a disaster from the start and should never have been launched’ I have decided that this statement cannot be taken at face value, because the Somme was not a complete disaster as it did relive pressure at Verdun and on the Eastern Front. But it was a disaster in the fact of the sheer number of casualties in comparison to the area of land gained. The Somme was 2 years in the making and ten minutes in the destroying these sources show the accounts of generals, soldiers and politicians but there are only ten sources to evaluate; for a huge controversial topic like the Somme this is not enough and to get a clearer picture we would need to analyse far more sources because these few only give a limited picture. The number of casualties and the incompetence of the generals was unredeemable but to say the Somme was an out and out disaster would be wrong as without it the Germans may have broken through at Verdun and taken France, and ultimately won the war. The Somme taught the British army many painful lessons but an army of volunteers went into the Somme and an Army of war hardened soldiers came out, also many new tactics were invented such as the ‘creeping barrage’ and tanks were used for the first time. The lessons taught at the Somme were hard ones but out of it came a new format in the way the war was fought and two years later Germany had been defeated.
This coursework got full marks!
