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

The First world war - source questions on Field Marshall Haig.

Extracts from this document...


Assignment 2: The First world war - source questions on Field Marshall Haig. Answer A: Source A does not necessarily prove that Haig did not care about the lives of his men. What it suggests is that Haig was to use tactics, which would involve the death of a fair number of men, no matter what their level of training was. It is clear that Haig intended to use the lives of his men to win battles; he says, "Will enable victories to be won, without the sacrifice of men's lives." The source does imply that Haig did not value the lives of his men, with the utmost importance, as winning battles was of a greater priority to him, than the limiting of casualty lists. However, this does not prove that Haig did not care about the lives of his men, despite Haig's obvious casual approach to the death of soldiers. The source also, is primarily a warning note to the public back home, that a war is being fought and there will be casualties, it is not necessarily a true reflection of Haig's attitude to his men's Life's. Answer B: Source B and C are both very different extracts, both have their elements of trustworthiness and of doubt. Source B for example was written during the war, before and after the battle of the Somme. Where as source C was written many years after the event, giving source B slightly more respectability, as it might be a more accurate reflection of events. ...read more.


However, what the general says could be thought of as wrong, quote "Haig's armies, which had complete confidence in the leadership of their commander Haig." It is clear from other sources and from my contextual knowledge that many soldiers had completely the opposite opinion and did not have any confidence in the leadership of their commander Haig. Source G also comes from the official history of the First World War, giving it more respectability. Source F the source which both G and H contradict, comes from the, "British Butchers and Bunglers of World War." Also has no author. Therefore making it more of an opinion than something, which could be used as evidence. Answer E: Sources J and I differ so dramatically primarily because of the time scale involved between the two extracts. Source I was written after the battle in 1916, after he had visited the area. It is a very brief statement on the battle overall, it could be said that source I is not his real opinion and is based upon information that has been reported to him by generals, or that possibly the sources use was to raise morale amongst soldiers and the public. Lloyd George has also not had first hand experience of the battle, as he only visited the battlefield, the source is therefore not a true account of event. Source J on the other hand is written in the 1930's much later, here Lloyd George is writing the source with the benefit of hindsight, and is written as a memoir. ...read more.


Source E is also against Haig, and questions his ability as a general but the source is similar to D in the respect that its purpose is to entertain an audience because it is a cartoon, therefore it to cannot be taken too seriously. Nevertheless, there is an element of truth in what is being said. Source J similarly to the other sources has its problems. It is contradicted by the same man who wrote it in the previous source, source I. In source, I Lloyd George supports Haig but in source J, he is against Haig. Source J does not prove that Haig was uncaring and did not care for the lives of his men. All the sources which are against Haig, do not prove that was Haig uncaring, and did not care for the lives of his men. Only two sources state that Haig was uncaring, but they are not totally trust worthy. The other four against Haig, cannot be fully trusted either and the sources in favor of Haig support him. The sources do support the view that "Haig was an uncaring general who sacrificed the lives of his men for no good reason." Quite a long way, but none of the sources against Haig prove him this. To prove him such a man would involve the use of hard evidence in the form of facts, or examples of Hag blatantly showing himself to be uncaring and a poor general. ...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?

    based his tactics at first), unfortunately did not work, when faced with fearsome machineguns, barbed wire, and a well equipped German army. Another aspect that was in the German's favour was that their trenches had been built suitable for the kind of warfare.

  2. Was General Haig a bad leader, source based

    It is a biography on whether Haig was right to press on with the Battle of Somme. The purpose of this source is for reader to be informed and educated about Haig. This source is quite unreliable, as Duff Cooper's job was to write biographies and therefore is paid for it.

  1. General Haig doesn't care about his soldiers.

    meaning that he was acknowledging the soldiers sacrifice of their lives for the 'good' side. What he says about "No amount of skill...will enable victories to be won without sacrifice of men's lives". This was true then and still is today as we can see clearly with the war in Iraq.

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

    Eventually the main target would be reached, or at least that was the plan, and the offensive would be complete. Many people believe that breakthrough was impractical due to the ineffectiveness of the cavalry in breaching a line. One of these was James Edmond, an Official British Historian, who also

  1. General Haig

    It says that he thinks he was one of the greatest men in the twentieth century and not a callous, uncaring man when in fact he was a very humane man. He also says "When the old soldiers who fought in the war were alive, I never heard a word of criticism from them.

  2. Field Marshall Haig: 'The Butcher of the Somme?'

    Yes. Clearly Field Marshall Haig is about to make yet another Giant effort to move his drinks cabinet six inches closer to Berlin". This may be inaccurate but is they way that many men saw the Battle of the Somme.

  1. Evacuation during WWII - source based questions.

    known as Miss Evans and does not have any children, so therefore she is young and does not really want to have the experience of looking after children yet. Her house is incredibly neat and tidy, as in the extract it states 'Not a speck of dust anywhere,' which is further evidence to prove Miss Evans has no children.

  2. Some people have the view that British generals like Haig were incompetent leaders. How ...

    On the other hand, the source is limited because Liddell Hart was invalided back to Britain in December which means he did not witness the whole war therefore we are not getting the whole picture of how leadership was. We can infer the source and say that the purpose of the source can somewhat make the source unreliable.

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