Does General Haig deserve to be remembered as the Butcher of the Somme?
Does General Haig deserve to be remembered as the 'Butcher of the Somme'? The battle of the Somme took place during the First World War. The war began on the 1st of July 1916 and ended on the 13th November 1916.The First world war was well-known for being history's most 'bloody battles', this was because it lasted for 5 months and on the first day of the battle 19,240 men were killed. Different historians have different interpretations of General Haig. By some, he has been labeled as a 'Butcher' for sending so many men to an early death without any cause .The British army was led by General Douglas Haig; he made key decisions and plans during the battle of the Somme. The aim of the battle was to draw the German army away from the battle of Verdun. To do this, the allied forces were to break through German lines along 25-mile front, north and south of the River Somme in northern France. However Haig was described as a 'hero' and that he was simply just doing his job as a General in the British Army. In my essay I will be debating the interpretations of General Haig made in the battle of the Somme. Many interpretations disagree that General Haig was the butcher of the Somme because of the high death count, Haig's lack of professional qualities as a general; the battle of the Somme only had little success. Haig was in charge because his predecessor Sir John. The
Why did World War One break out in 1914?
Why did World War One break out in 1914? There are many reasons why World War One occurred in 1914, many are complex and remain controversial which is why the matter has been disputed to this day by historians all over the world. My theory is that a lot of those reasons and the trigger factor all links to one thing; the alliance system. The alliance system is what made countries oppose each other and become rivals making it the most significant factor. It had an impact on who supported who when Duke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated. This was only the spark that started war in Europe; there were long term causes that contributed to the war and were the origins. This answer will explain the causes focusing on how they contributed to World War One and what the important links are between them. The Alliances not only contributed to war breaking out; it made the war last longer and become on a much larger scale; major political disputes would inevitably cause a large conflict. The alliances caused suspicion, fear, and tension among nations. The two camps were the Triple Entente (Britain, France and Russia) and the Triple Alliance (Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary). When countries formed alliances with each other it gave them protection, if a country was threatened or under attack then the alliance would come to that country's aid. Countries made an alliance when they both
General Haig and the battle of the somme
History coursework . The message that the cartoonist and the headliner are trying to give is that the British army with its big fist is stopping Germany dead in its tracks and hitting it right on the nose. The expression on the mans face is shocked and bewildered. The cartoonist has drawn a face of the Kaiser Wilhelm II in the line of the western front which is very informative for the British public (since this is a British newspaper) to see what's going on there the face, especially his eyes show he is tired and exhausted with big bags under his eyes. This paper was published on the night of D-day, you could say it was proper gander before D-day to raise moral and show that we are beating the Germans. However there are sources to suggest that this wasn't proper gander and was what the cartoonist was told as in source 4 where it is D day and General Haig has reported "Very successful attack in the morning.... All went like clockwork...the battle is going very well for us and already the Germans are surrendering freely. The enemy is so short of men that he is collecting them from all parts of the line our troops are in wonderful spirits and are full of confidence" which was not true as they had lost 50,000 men with 37,000 men injured and 20,000 men dead that day, it was the worse loss of men in British military history in one day. Another point is that on source A, the
Evactuation Coursework: Question One
Britain in the Second World War: evacuation Why did the British Government decide to evacuate children from Britain's major cities at the start of the Second World War? Evacuation took place in Britain during the Second World War in August 1939. The government decided it was best to evacuate their children for several reasons including, and advance in technology, the expansion of Hitler, the threats made to cities and the failure of the League of Nations. The second world was a completely different war than that of the previous world war. The advance in technology had made the war a much more dangerous war, and not just those who were in battle were killed, many civilians were killed too. It was no longer a war fought on muddy battlefields and new technology had made it a war fought in the air and by sea. Air raids were a huge threat to Britain in 1939, air raids would often take place in large cities and towns and the targets were helpless civilians. The effect of Air raids could be potentially catastrophic and this prominent threat to civilians concerned the government greatly. And the blitz in 1940 proved that they had great reason to be concerned. 60,000 people lost their lives, 87,000 were seriously injured and 2 million homes were destroyed. The advance in technology was a clear indicator to the British government that they should have an evacuation plan. The
Evacuation in the second world war.
Ryan Loversidge Evacuation in the second world war. Source A is quite helpful as it fits in with my knowledge of that time. Photographs are more reliable 'as a camera never lies' but using my knowledge the scene for this one could easily have been staged. It shows all the children walking to the station looking cheerful and waving to the camera. In reality children may have been happy believing they were moving too safer places but not to the extent as depicted (shown) in the photograph. A lot of children would have been distraught having to leave their parents to go to live in strange places. This photograph shows no evidence of distressed children or parents. The picture used may have been a morale boosting exercise for the country, implying that evacuation was an exciting prospect. On the other hand Source B maybe more genuine as this was taken from an interview with a teacher who recalls being evacuated with her pupils. Although this is still the viewpoint of one person, the women had no reason to lie or exaggerate. She had first hand experience and summarised the atmosphere in words that may have more impact as a source. Also it is worth considering that the interview was given in 1988 so her memory may not have served her correctly. It all would depend on what you were looking for. Source C was probably taken to depict a clean and healthy lifestyle and a sense of
How and why did women get the vote in Britain?
How and why did women get the vote in Britain? In 1906 the Liberal Government swept the opposition to one side as they moved into power in a landslide victory at the general election. This gave birth to a new dawn of hope to women the length and breadth of the country as the new Prime Minister, Sir Henry Campbell Bannerman, was in support of the vote for women. Two years later this bright horizon was clouded as Bannerman steps down from the spotlight to make way for Herbert Asquith, who is set against votes for women and claims that there is little support for the idea but asks women to prove him wrong. It is certain the change in the countries leaders left a bitter taste in the mouth of all those fighting for the vote for women as the radical switch in stance on the issue shattered the dreams of the those who had been within touching distance of the goal only twenty four mouths ago. The women striving for the vote had formed two campaigning groups, one; the NUWSS and two; The WSPU, both of which had been in action during the time of Bannerman as well as Asquith. It is fairly safe to say that the two groups were hugely demoralised when the seemingly sympathetic figure of Henry Bannerman was replaced by the daunting brick wall of Herbert Asquith. A wall that would have to be climbed or conquered one way or another. During the time of Bannerman members of the NUWSS had been
Evacuation was a great success. Do you agree or disagree with this interpretation explain your answer using the sources and knowledge from your studies
Gcse history coursework question 2 "Evacuation was a great success". Do you agree or disagree with this interpretation explain your answer using the sources and knowledge from your studies. (15 marks) In the September of 1939 over a million school children living in the larger cities and towns of Great Britain were moved temporarily from their homes to places that the government considered safer usually out in the countryside and the more rural areas. This happened because the British government were worried that when war was declared between Germany, British towns would be targets for bombing raids by aircraft. Evacuation could be considered a success because many poor inner city children who had never experienced the luxury of rail travel before were able to travel from outside inner cities. Even fewer children had been to the countryside. Many of the children thought evacuation would be something of a holiday or a great adventure as they were waiting at the train station singing patriotic songs and once they arrived at their destination they were looked after by caring foster families and many experienced a much better way of life in the countryside. One girl when asked by a local newspaper reporter whether she liked here new family responded, "It was really nice I had never been washed all over before". This shows one good aspect of evacuation. On the other hand many
History why did the british lose so amny lives at the somme
On the 1st of July 1916 the great battle of the Somme began. It was a British offensive against the Germans on the western front. All organised by Sir Douglas Haig on the British side as the British general and Flakenhayn as the German general. It was a lasting war fought in trenches with very little advance on either side. The Germans had planned to attack the French at Verdun so they could ferry through ammunition and heavy guns towards the Somme. They met strong resistance from the French. On the first day 58 000 British soldiers were injured and out of that figure 21 000 were killed. Overall 419 000 soldiers were lost in the Somme battle alone and 650 000 Germans. The battle ended on the 19th of November 1916 with a British victory despite all the men that were lost. There are many reasons as to why so many British lives were lost for example; poor training and bad planning. These are just two of the many reasons. There were many tactics employed by the British such as; to look out for any German artillery by use of plane and then come back and bomb it, to cut the German barbed wire to make for an easy advance towards the German frontline, and kill all the German soldiers by bombing them. The problem was that in reality these tactics didn't work because there was low cloud so the artillery could not be spotted easily. With the low cloud the pilots could not see what they
age and voting
Rationale I have decided to investigate whether there is a clear link between age and voting behaviour. In the 2001 and the 2005 general election it appears that there has been a decline in the younger generation participation in voting. In 2001 the UK hit an all time low in voting and only managed to get a turnover of 59.1%( the lowest in nearly a century). Then in 2005 only 34% of 18 - 24 voted in the election (Denver 2005). I'm concentrating on this younger generation of voters because, due to my age, I have easier access to this particular age group. Also the 16-24 age group bring in the lowest election turnover and are becoming disenchanted by the whole election system. My hypothesis reflects this view as it is "young people are disenchanted with politics" My aims for this project are: * To investigated if young people vote * To find out why young people have became disenchanted * To find out if the lack of political choice is stopping young people from voting From my research I expect to find that the political process has increasingly disenchant young people and that this change in young people's voting is due to the fact they cannot distinguish between the political parties? (212 words) Context 2001 seen the lowest voting turnout since war time Britain when only 59.1% of the population turned up to vote these caused great concern and when this figure only
How different were the reactions of the WSPU and the NUWSS to the coming of war?
How different were the reactions of the WSPU and the NUWSS to the coming of war? When war was announced, in 1914, both the NUWSS and the WSPU were campaigning for female suffrage. Although, perhaps surprisingly, as these were the most violent campaigners, the WSPU stopped their campaign to focus on helping the war effort, the NUWSS did not, and continued to campaign, although peacefully, throughout the war. The government and the WSPU worked together to encourage women to go out to work for the war effort, as they thought that after the war, the female contribution would help gain the vote, and the leaders of the WSPU, the Pankhurst family, were patriotic, the NUWSS also supported the war effort, although it never stopped campaigning for women's votes. It is surprising that the WSPU completely stopped its campaigning to help the war effort, seeing as they used more extreme methods of campaigning than the NUWSS. Helping the war effort did gain them more respect from both the population and the government, whereas before the war they were seen as hysterical by many, and a prime example of why women did not deserve the vote, and an article was printed in the Daily Express saying that the women who were helping the war effort were "women to be proud of". The WSPU also supported conscription, and gave white feathers to men not in uniform. This embaressed men, as it was seen as
