However as Sassoon is an infantry officer he would know how the commanders were viewed as there wasn’t much daytime activity in the trenches the soldiers would discuss these matters. The War could also have continued because the soldiers wanted to do this for their country or were too scared to rebel.
In the poem the poet states “we’re cursing his staff for an incompetent swine” I assume when he says “we’re” he’s talking about the fellow soldiers and this allows us to have insight in what other soldiers told him soldiers often felt Haig and his staff didn’t understand trench warfare and didn’t really care also he says they “slogged” this tells us they didn’t really want to go. I believe poetry is private and personal thing, it can written when ever someone feels emotion and I believe the trench life was getting to the poet and in the heat of the moment he expressed his feelings of anger towards the general.
I believe this source is likely to give an accurate expression of how soldiers to a certain degree of accuracy. The poet was an eye-witness and he lived in the trenches throughout the war the source seems both reliable and useful. Although we must take in account that the poet doesn’t represent all the soldiers just a handful as some thought Haig was ruthless but it was necessary to wear the Germans down.
3. Anthony Livsey wrote source D in 1889 for a textbook. The source describes Haig’s qualities and downfalls in his career. The author says Haig’s biggest downfall was the battle of the Somme and Passchendale where a total of 900, 000 deaths because Haig wanted to continue. The purpose of the source was to mention the great battles of the War so Anthony was looking at Haig as commander with looking at the battles he planned and the consequences of theses battles. In the source Anthony Livsey compliments Haig’s qualities but he feels he misused these with planning battles such as the Somme and Passchendale as they were seen as a huge failure.
Philip Warner wrote source E in 1991 for a biography on Haig. The source mentions Haig as a winner. The author judges Haig as a winner or a loser and believes at the time Haig done as good as he could. He believes the criticism towards Haig is unnecessary as no-one is giving alternatives. Philip Warner doesn’t directly give an opinion on Haig and this may be because there are a lot of different aspects Haig can be looked upon. The writer also looks on Haig and his actions throughout the whole war not just a specific time.
The reason I believe there interpretations are so different because they are both looking at Haig in different perspectives. In Source D they may be a small possibility the author was clouded with emotion and spoke of Haig as being incompetent. The writer of source E is concentrating on Haig and his own involvement in the Battle of the Somme and Paccchendale. Whereas the writer of Source E is looking at Haig as an overall character.
Source E is written for a biography so Philip Warner must have needed to overlook Haig as a leader therefore while writing the source he would have been more logical and not let his emotion run over the facts. This is why Source E is based on more facts rather then opinion. This would increase the chances of the book being sold as a biography as the point is to write about one’s life however both sources are similar in the sense they view him as a commander in different perspectives. Source D however is written for the battles which were conducted throughout the war.
3. Source “F” is a piece of propaganda and an advertisement for cigarettes. Propaganda was used both for recruiting men or leading people to think in a particular view point, it was very effective in influencing people. The advertisement was published in 1915 one year after the war started. The slogan on the poster reads “time for one more” creating the image of War being relaxed and fun. The poster has two main aims one is to sell cigarettes another is for men to join the army.
The poster shows hardly any realistic objects or settings in the poster, the only things the poster has in common with reality are the trenches, gun and the uniform. The trenches were normally infested with disease there was constant firing so any heads sticking out would have been shot before anyone could have the chance to realise. In the source there isn’t anything other then the guns and trench setting to link the poster with the war combat. The trenches were muddy and the weather was always a problem. The reality of the trenches was far from a laid back clean environment. We now know that they were infested with mice, rats and dead bodies heaped upon one another and the stench of blood baking in the sun.
Trenches were deep and often showed men and horses drowning in this much:
The combat on the Western Front was constantly under raids there was firing at enemy lines, soldiers going over the top and constantly artillery barrages were going. This is all known due to knowledge from other evidence and in this poster none of this can be seen.
I don’t think anything can be learnt about the combat at the western Front in world war one as there is no detail or much reality in the poster except the government was desperate for recruits they were willing to lie to the public. However I do believe the source is very useful in understanding how propaganda was used and how morale was kept high.
4. The sources in this assignment help me understand why the war lasted so long to a certain extent. Together they all have themes which contribute to the war. The sources are mentioned below which help me understand the duration of the war.
Trenches were usually two metres deep and were in a zig- zag fashion so they were harder to capture, they were lined with duck boards, the trenches were muddy and the weather was always a problem. The reality of the trenches was far from a laid back clean environment. We now know that they were infested with mice, rats and dead bodies heaped upon one another and the stench of blood baking in the sun. The terrible conditions backed up by source “G”. After the war people were allowed to uncover their versions. Which was nothing like the government led the public to believe during the war. The men suffered from various diseases due to malnutrition and from the filthy conditions they lived in. The soldiers were also aware that they were merely cannon fodder and that the army were not concerned with their lives. If this demoralised, disillusioned mentality was to leave the trenches along with details of the army's current status, not only would information be compromised to Germany it would also destroy the pro-war fever which was well established in Britain. The conditions of trenches and the defensive mechanisms used in trench warfare prevented the war from ending and instead prolonged it. A main reason for this was because the generals did not know how to win the war. So, instead, the generals used old tactics of having more men and more ammunition than the enemy. These tactics rarely worked because of it being easier to defend than attack. Source C also contributes to this as Sassoon in his poetry mentioned the word ‘slogged’ whilst describing the soldiers going towards the trenches this word gives the impression of the trenches being unpleasant.
Once Stalemate had developed it lasted for years and was hard to break out of. As trench warfare was generally surprising for everyone no –one knew what to do and kept bombing each other to wear the enemy down. The First World War was a Total War, industrial war and a war of attrition. At artillery level commanders explored the potential of concentrated fire (the barrage). An example of this bombardment tactic when the British attacked at The Battle of the Somme in 1916 where on the first day alone 57 000 men died. These battles lengthen the war as deep bunkers were built to avoid the war of attrition. This is backed up both by Source A and B as both sources show the affect of the attrition.
The propaganda and Morale had a lot to do with the war lasting so long. Throughout Morale was kept high at war the soldiers would sing and use there sense of humour to entertain themselves and keep there spirits high and keep faith. Even if the morale was low at war the soldiers would continue to fight as they felt this was they’re duty or were too scared to take a stand. Source C is a good example of this, however they felt they continued. The government wanted to portray to the public back home that the soldiers fighting for Britain were enthusiastic and brave. This is because the real information at the time was concealed from the public. Although there was conscription in 1918 there still would have been a lot of propaganda around to make the public feel proud of there soldiers this kept them working hard in the factories so the industries were booming. The home front played a vital role in achieving success this was done by high Morale because of censorship and propaganda. Also before conscription many posters were produced like source F asking for recruits and making war out to be glamorous, because this was so successful Haig new he had backup men so he didn’t mind losing men by trying new tactics. This lengthened the war as people were willing to work harder if the evil Germans were defeated.
Haig was the leader of the army his leadership has been questioned since the battle of the Somme. Some historians believed he was out of touch with his soldiers in the trenches and the soldiers despised him and only continued as propaganda had made the Germans look evil. Source C is evidence to this. In source D Haig was referred to optimistic and constant this may be why he continued the war as he was determined to win the war at all costs. In Source D it says Haig believed he was “chosen by God to serve his country” that probably explains the willpower he had to win the war. This is also backed up in Source E as he won the war.
There was however other factors which caused the war to last longer which are not mentioned in the sources, these are mentioned below.
A reason for the war lasting so long was the failure of the “Schlieffen Plan”. This also helped the war to start in 1914. The Schlieffen Plan was created by Von Schlieffen in 1905. His first step was to invade France via Belgium. They thought it would be a good idea if they too the French ports on their way into Paris. This was decided because if France had no ports then it would make it difficult for Britain to come and help the French or bring supplies. They intended to surround Paris and force the French government to surrender. They expected this part to take forty days and no more. The other aim was to invade Russia. The Schlieffen plan was altogether a disaster and it was unsuccessful for various reasons. Consequently, both sides “dug” themselves “in” and thus the beginning of trench warfare. The failing of this plan meant that the war lasted longer than it could have done if the plan had been carried out successfully.
The war was also lengthened by a failure of attempts to shorten the war e.g. Gallipoli 1915. The plan of Gallipoli was made to try and draw the Germans away from France. The plan, masterminded by Churchill, was to try and take the two “straights”. However, this failed. Had this attempt succeeded, it would have opened up a new route to the Black sea and Russia and drawn the Germans away from the Western Front. If this had happened then perhaps the allies may have won back land and maybe have won the war on the Western Front.
The new weapons in the First World War also helped to make the war last longer, as they added yet more new conditions to the war. Nobody was really sure what tactics to use against them. The British tanks, brought in 1916, during the Somme, failed to make a big impact. The next year in November 1917 at Cambrai, the tanks were improved and managed to break through the German barbed wire but over stretched themselves and got into trouble. Tanks, in order to have any real effect forced new tactics upon the generals and this took many battles and a lot of time to perfect these tactics and thus lengthening the war (eventually in 1918 it was well used and feared). Gas also lengthened the war because nobody was really sure what to do to avoid this incredibly effective weapon. Gas caused many deaths during the war but it was rather unpredictable if the wind blew. However, this only lengthened the war rather than shortened it and caused an even bigger deadlock situation between the two sides. Also the technology slowed the down as there was less war effort.
Other reason the war wasn’t a short war was the fact both armies had huge armies and heavy industries this caused there factories to produce huge quantities of weapons also the generals on both sides were confused by the new situation they had only planned a war of movement with cavalry and now had to develop new tactics for a new kind of war.
