Part of The Student Room Group

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

Was General Haig a bad leader, source based

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Assignment Part B In this essay I will analyse source C through to L to judge whether there is enough evidence to suggest that General Haig was an efficient and highly skilled soldier who lead Britain to victory during the First World War. I will look at the source provided and suggest whether there is enough evidence to suggest Keegans statement. From the collection of sources I will categorise each one into supports Keegan, neutral or oppose Keegan. I will use my own knowledge along with the sources given to back up my statements. Within the several sources I managed to find four sources that supported Keegan: Source C is a newspaper extract from the Daily Telegraph quoted by Field Marshal Haig's son on November 1998. The main purpose of this extract was to persuade and inform people that General Haig knew what he was doing and was a humane man. When Earl Haig said he never heard a criticism this could be because many people feared General Haig and therefore nobody would cross him. This source is not very reliable as it is consciously biased and is probably exaggerating as General Haig is his Father and therefore he would support and praise him. ...read more.

Middle

Out of the collection of sources I had assessed there are two other sources that were neutral in the response to Keegan's statement: Source J is a news article from the British newspaper 'The Times' published in 1917. The article is the Germans perspective of General Haig. The purpose of this source is to show that even the Germans think that General Haig was a good leader however it could as well be sarcastic as the Germans are trying to say that because of General Haig's mistakes it has benefited the German Army. It suggests that because of General Haig he is the leader that is giving Germany victory to win. Overall this source is not very reliable, as it is sarcastic so the article is not very truthful in saying that Haig had good leadership. Source K is another source that is neutral. It is an article published in a GCSE modern History review in 1998. The article is on whether Haig was totally at Fault. The purpose of this source is to educate teenagers about Haig. Other purposes would be to make money by selling the history book. ...read more.

Conclusion

The documentary shows the events that took place and explains them. The video tries to make us understand that Haig was bad at communicating and had too many ideas that he wished to accomplish however by this ambition made thousands of troops injured. Overall from the collection of sources that oppose Keegan they are generally very reliable sources however there is no evidence that agrees with Keegan's statement. In conclusion I believe that there is not enough evidence to suggest that Haig was an efficient and highly skilled soldier who did much to lead Britain to victory during the First World War. Even though there are four sources that support Keegan they are very unreliable. Also John Keegan was a military historian so we can assume he was looking at the military side of the war which was very successful. Haig needed more weaponry for his soldiers and made them more efficient so that he could accomplished the rest of the battlep. Also if he was a good commander he would of known what he was leading his men into. In addition I believe that there is not enough evidence and we can conclude that Field Marshall Douglas Haig was a failure to the Battle of Somme and he led his troops to disaster. History Coursework Nikita Patel 11S Page 1 of 3 ...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

or


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?

    ways is fair enough, and he certainly could be viewed a 'murderer'. What happened after the war made a definite detrimental affect of his former soldiers' view of him. He returned from the war unscathed, with vast crowds cheering him as he was paraded down the streets.

  2. Why did the General Strike of 1926 take place?

    These industries' export markets were disappearing and employers, including the mine owners, were trying to cut costs further, which again angered miners and the NUM. The miners were not the only employees forced to take pay cuts during this period though; dockers, rail workers, builders and many others were forced to accept lower wages.

  1. Causes of the General Strike

    The first test of the Triple Alliance's strength came when the mine owners regained control of the mines and pay cuts occurred. The miners went on strike on 15th April 1921, and called for the Railwaymen and the Transport Workers to join them, but the Triple Alliance failed to come into effect.

  2. womens crsk history

    When the women done this, the Minister for Munitions, David Lloyd George, saw this as an opportunity and employed the women, as munitions on the Western Front was running short. Many women were now being employed throughout the country. Another reason as to why I agree with the interpretation is because women did work that men had done previously.

  1. Modern history

    This active role brought women as strong, patriotic and adaptable to the eyes of the nation and most importantly the government. Doing these dangerous jobs helped break down the rigid concepts of what were seen as male activities. Women gained a large deal of pride and confidence through their new responsibilities and new standards of behaviour were established.

  2. General Haig

    This suggests that he believes that some historians are getting the idea of his father wrong and is also persuading historians that the war had to be fought to the end by using the phrase 'serious historians'. Meaning, those who do not have that view are not serious about the history of his father General Haig.

  1. Was it his fault? These are the questions I am going to examine in ...

    The Germans had been alerted by the intelligence patrols and artillery bombardments. They sheltered in their dugouts, 30-40 feet below the ground, and waited. They had to be patient and had to be quiet. The Germans were very disciplined and would not give up easily.

  2. Source based work on Haig.

    Forth" was in 1989 which is a long time after the war and so Elton would have got his information from somebody or somewhere as he wasn't even born at the time of the war and he has to gain laughs so exaggerates.

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