The fact that Haig stayed in some form of military leadership throughout WW1 immediately tells you that he must have been successful to stay in such a high-ranking position to the end of such a big war. In his second year, he was in charge of one of the bloodiest battles in British warfare: the Somme, which was probably Haig’s worst battle. - Already it sounds like he was a poor strategist and even ignorant-. In the battle of the Somme Haig’s plan was to launch a massive artillery attack on the Germans, and then British troops were supposed to be able to easily walk across no-man’s land – ambitious to say the least. However, a week before the attack a German concrete dugout was captured. This showed the British that the German defences were well built and safe. Nevertheless, the British plan of attack did not change. This makes Haig sound ignorant, however, Haig’s intelligence sources have often been questioned.
“The selection of leaders from pre-war professionals was likely to produce a rich crop of mediocrities. Put bluntly, the nobility and gentry used the army as a dumping ground for their stupid children,” Denis Winter, Haig’s Command – A Reassessment, 1991.
Many people criticise Haig for being so far away from the frontline in the Somme. However, there is no point in being on the frontline for a leader, because he cannot see everything that is going on and he might be killed or injured which is pointless because he needs to plan the military strategy. Therefore, Haig was not (necessarily) uncaring.
When the battle of the Somme started, the artillery failed to remove the barbed wire as it was supposed to. Men were sent over the top, to walk straight across no-man’s land – as had been planned. Most of them died. However, Haig continued to send more men over the top – to their deaths. Surely, no matter how unreliable Haig’s intelligence was, he must have known that he was sending men to their deaths. Yet, he continued to do so. Until the pressure being put on him by the public and MPs back at home became too much, and he called off the attack. But what drove him in the Somme in particular, were firstly his religious principles. Haig did not see the bad side to death. He believed that everyone was fighting for god, and that they would go to heaven if they died. But what he failed to realise was that his soldiers did not mostly share this view. Also, an aim of the Battle of the Somme was to create a diversion for the French, from Verdun. And it did work. The Germans did pour men into the Somme, and even the figures show that the Germans had more casualties than the British.
Continuing on the subject of the figures, the public is horrified by each death they are told about. In warfare, people are going to die, however, in a large scale, out of proportion war like WW1; many people are going to die. Haig’s tactics did work in a way, but at a cost, because the majority of the public saw: 420 000 British deaths, not 450 000 German deaths. The fact is that most of WW1 was fought by means of attrition. Any ambitious campaigns were likely to result in large casualties, but if there was a chance of gaining an advantage, and in the case of the Somme, helping the French at Verdun, the chance has to be taken. Therefore, I believe that there is the aspect of the public not looking in context to the situation.
Many people accuse Haig of being too old fashioned. Haig was not used to modern warfare. However none of his fellow military leaders were either, and Haig tried his best in situations that he had never come across before. A good example of Haig’s keenness for new ideas was his enthusiasm for using tanks, and later, developing airplanes. Haig believed that tanks would play a major role in warfare, and this is best shown in 1918. Germany’s economy was close to collapse, Haig wanted one last huge push, it was made, and by Haig’s interest in tanks, 150 were used. The German army collapsed due to the outbreak of revolution and the collapse of its economy. However, had the German economy not collapsed, almost all historians agree that tanks would have had the key technological advantage, needed for ending the war. Haig was on the right lines.
His leadership skills were impressive. He had much experience, in a world where warfare was changing very rapidly. Some argue he was not very good, but he was better than the rest. He was keen on some technologies. At the Somme, his principal aim was to help out the French at Verdun. He succeeded, and if you look at the figures, more damage was inflicted to the Germans than to the British. His main fault though, was to believe that all his troops shared his views about death. I believe that Field Marshal General Sir Douglas Haig earned the title of Earl and the £100 000 given to him given to him by King George V and the government. And that he was a hero, not a leader who unnecessarily butchered his own men.
