Haig was a British commander during this time who was blamed because of these occasions. Haig was also accused for using the wrong tactics. Haig was also accused for using the wrong tactics and not taking into account big details of the Germans defences. German defenders were on high ground with a good view, their defences were there since the beginning of the war so there dugouts were strong and the barbed wire was more than 30 metres wide making it impossible to penetrate.
Source D is a few sentences from a private who fought on the western front on July 1916. It describes the battle of the Somme as ‘pure bloody murder’ and ‘British manhole shattered in less than six hours’. He also feels Haig should have been hung for what he did at the Somme. This source seems to be reliable as it was written by a private who witnessed the event and how horrific it was. It was also written during that time in 1916. One can argue that this soldier could possibly be biased because of his experiences on the western front. As he was a private it is most likely he saw many deaths of soldiers next to him which possibly clouded his mind to not realise the main achievements of the battles. This source supports the view of General Haig’s bad judgment which caused many deaths of the British army.
Source F is a description of a typical battle on the western front from a war hero, Captain A. O. Pollard, who won the Victorian cross. He describes the battles going on weeks on end to go through barbed wire. He also described men running into uncut wire and many men being mowed down by machine gun fire. He describes how enemy spy planes knew what they were doing so it was impossible to advance more than 4,000 yards. He finally described the soldiers carrying 5lbs of packs which would have made it very hard to advance. This source appears to be very reliable as it was written by a person who witnessed these events and it was written in 1918 which was two years after the event making it a primary source. This source both supports and disagrees with the interpretation of lions led by donkeys. It supports the interpretation as it describes how many soldiers had to deal with difficult conditions and unrealistic tasks made by the generals which were not practiced before hand. But it disagrees with the interpretation as it says ‘Both sides conducted their battles on similar lines’ meaning that other Generals used the same tactics as Haig.
From these sources it shows Haig’s tactics were not the right ones. He made mistakes by underestimating the German defences and not learning from them. He used old fashioned cavalry forces which were mowed down. He also did not think on how his troops would be able to carry all the equipment quick enough not to be killed. One can argue the benefit of hindsight enables us to realise the mistakes he made for example Haig would not have known how hard and long it would have taken for soldiers to carry all the equipment.
Source G shows how wrong he was from a part of the list of dead and wounded on the first day of the Somme. It is possible there were many more dead as the first letter of every soldier begins with B which possibly means there were many more soldiers with a different starting letter of there name. Also the list shows that most of the soldiers who did die were privates who were inexperienced which certainly shows that the officers hid away at the back or they did not fight. This source is very reliable as it is a genuine list of dead soldiers but it is only a small amount of soldiers who did die, so from this source we do not have the total amount of soldiers dead. This source supports the view that the generals caused many deaths of the military.
All these sources agree with General Haig’s tactics causing the many deaths of soldiers and the stalemate. However there are other sources which disagree with the interpretation of ‘Lions Led by Donkeys’.
The first source which disagrees with the interpretation is source B. Source B is a special telegram to the News of the World written by the British Headquarters on the 2nd of July 1916. It is a description of the British 16 mile advance of German trenches. It describes British soldiers with the French braking German defences, capturing prisoners and inflicting loss on the enemy. One can argue this source is censored as it was written by the British Headquarters and could be missing valuable information on the British losses. This source is reasonably reliable as it is a primary source written in 1916 and is most likely that the advance was true as it supports my own knowledge of Haig’s tactics affective in places. This source does not support the interpretation as it shows Haig’s tactics succeeding and the British advancing comfortably.
Source E is from a diary of Sir Douglas Haig and is a description of the first two days of he battle of the Somme it describes the soldiers in good spirits and full of confidence. It describes the first day as successful and his tactics working. This source is reasonably reliable as it was written on the first couple of days of the battle of the Somme. Also it was written in Haig’s diary which he is most likely not to be biased. One can argue Haig possibly could have chosen to leave out information on losses which are valuable information. Also there is a possibility that Haig did not receive the correct or all the information on the German defences and the British losses. This source supports Haig’s tactics and also shows the soldiers are confident and good spirited.
Source H is a memoir by David Lloyd George in 1933-36. It described how he thought Haig was not unequal to the command of an army of millions to deflect blame of Haig. This source supports Haig as the prime minister doesn’t describe Haig as the cause of Stalemate or deaths of many soldiers. This source is reasonably reliable as it is written by David Lloyd George in 1933-36 but George could be writing only to get support as his government kept Haig as a General.
Source I is written by a senior Historian at the imperial war museum from the BBC. He describes how people agree with the interpretation and forget Haig’s success. He tells us how Haig won a dozen major victories during the ‘100 days’ which were the greatest series of victories in the British army’s history. He describes how they were achieved by both the Generals and soldiers. Where the historian has gathered his information is unknown but one can only presume he has not got any biased opinion. I would say this source is reliable as the writer has no need to be biased. This source also supports the view that Haig’s tactics won the British victories as well as losses and also disagrees with the interpretation.
Another piece of information that may possibly be critical in this essay is did Haig have any options but to continue with the war of attrition. The result of the battle of the Somme did accomplish the capture of Verdun and the killing of many high-quality German soldiers. One can argue that this result of the Somme could have been without the expense of many British soldiers by increasing the amount of Generals on the battle field. This could have helped the situation as the generals would have known of any new developments of the German defences and change the attack plan to reduce as much deaths as possible.
Also one can argue that the Generals had very little choice but to continue with the war of attrition. Many Generals were nervous as in the past they only commanded small, experienced armies and had allot to learn about commanding bigger inexperienced armies. Also it is important to remember that the battle was originally planned as an attack by the French army with British support. The British commander, General Haig, actually favoured an attack further north and west in Flanders. One can also argue that Haig did try other tactics to get out of the Stalemate as he tried attacking different areas and brought in the use of the tanks for the first time.
From the sources and my own knowledge I can conclude that the interpretation of ‘Lions led by donkeys is not entirely correct. General Haig did make many mistakes in the war and did not reconsider any tactics which caused many deaths in the battle of the Somme. But it was not Haig’s fault there was a Stalemate as it was only the timing of the war when ammunition was better suited for defence than attack. Haig also made many victories in the History of Britain and during the battle of the Somme the British did capture Verdun and killed Germany’s best soldiers which need to be taken into account. That is why I believe any General of Britain would have had the Stalemate problem. Also Haig did do a good job in places which are clouded by the battle of the Somme.
