suggests that Haig was an 'efficient and highly skilled soldier who did much to lead Britain to victory in the First World War'. Is there sufficient evidence in Sources C to L to support this interpretation? There are those that believe Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig was 'the Butcher of the Somme', those who would agree with John Keegan's opinion of Haig and those who see arguments for both views. Sources D, F, G and J do not support Keegan's interpretation of Haig. Source D is a
Douglas Haig Haig was a technical innovator; Haig was an old fashioned fool. Haig was a brilliant strategist; Haig was ignorant. Haig was a great man; Haig was hardly a man. Haig was easily the best man for the job; Haig was obviously the only man left for the job. All these views are shared by different people about Haig, in my essay I will put forward my views about Haig and justifications by referring to the facts. Douglas Haig was born on June 19th 1861. He was the son of John Haig, a wealthy
Field Marshal sir Douglas Haig as The Butcher Of The Somme Sir Douglas Haig was appointed Field Marshal of the British Army in 1915, as no progress had been made since 1914, when the First World War began. Trench warfare was introduced for the first time. Much of the nature of the fighting taking place in the First World War was alien to Haig and his Generals, a cavalry man who served with distinction during the second Boer War. In February 1916 the Germans attacked Verdun again, the
Field Marshall Sir Douglas Haig In this oral assessment I am going to talk about Field Marshall Sir Douglas Haig, Haig was a war leader in the First World War who led the army on few occasions. One of his most memorable battles was the battle of the Somme; in this battle the allies suffered over 2 million causalities and over 500,000 deaths. We may have won the battle and the war, but at a huge cost. In this assessment I am going to try arguing the case that Haig was a fool who cost the lives
Somme but they are written by the same person which was Lloyd George. The two sources however were very different from each other. Source I was written by Lloyd George on the 21st of September 1916 when he visited the battlefield with Sir Douglas Haig. It says that Lloyd George was the secretary for the War at this time of the Somme he was the war leader from 1906-1916. Source J is very negative about the Battle of the Somme when compared to Source I. This was written in the 1930’s; he could
only for the scale of casualties, but also for the mud. Ypres was the principal town within a salient (or bulge) in the British lines and the site of two previous battles: First Ypres (October-November 1914) and Second Ypres (April-May 1915). Haig had long wanted a British offensive in Flanders and, following a warning that the German blockade would soon cripple the British war effort, wanted to reach the Belgian coast to destroy the German submarine bases there. On top of this, the possibility
LIEUTENANT--GENERAL SIR ARTHUR CURRIE (A brief account of the battle of Passchendaele) Lieutenant-General Sir Arthur Currie was the most capable soldier that Canada has produced. Certainly, he did not look like the great soldier he had become. A very tall man, at six-foot-four, he was also somewhat overweight. Through his successes as the Commander of the Canadian Corps, he knew how to delegate authority and stand by the decisions of his subordinates. Currie, however, was not a professional soldier
Haig As a Leader I think Haig was a bad leader who made many critical mistakes during the battle of Passchendaele. From looking at the sources I can see many bad views of Haig as a war leader, although some good views can also be detected. In source A it is evident that Haig always ensured that his army was well equipped by asking the War Cabinet for more ammunition. I also know that Haig was
Haig as a Successful Commander Field Marshal Douglas Haig was one of the most controversial people of the Great War. While he brought eventual victory, he is accused of being responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of young men during 1916 and beyond. I will begin by looking at source C and the opinions of the fighting man on Haig. Fred Pearson was an infantryman that fought under Haig, and so might not have ever met him. His thoughts on Haig are in an angry, annoyed tone, saying
General Douglas Haig deserve his reputation as the “Butcher of the Somme?” as a plentiful amount of historians criticise him for why multitudinous soldiers died during the battle of the Somme, essentially due to his poor battle plan, but alongside every event there is two sides to what has happened. The battle of the Somme arose because the British and French armies were required to relive German pressure off the French town of Verdun as well as gaining an expansion of territory. Haig was chosen to
Terrorism and Morality by Haig Khatchadourian In “Terrorism and Morality,” Haig Khatchadourian argues that terrorism is always wrong. Within this argument, Khatchadourian says that all forms of terrorism are wrong because the outcome deprives those terrorized of their basic humanity. To this end, Khatchadourian says that even forms of terrorism that are designed to bring about a moral good are wrong because of the methods used to achieve that good. Before Khatchadourian spells out why terrorism
Sir Douglas Haig was born on the 19th June 1861. The Field Marshal was very highly ranked in the duration of The Great War. Haig was a British soldier and a senior Commander of The British Expeditionary Force from the year of 1915. General Haig is notorious for commanding the Battle Of The Somme and also renowned for the third battle of Ypres and various other victories leading to The Triple Entente’s victory of WW1. After the war, Haig was made an Earl and also received gratified thanks from both
Blaming Haig for the Slaughter of the Somme 1. Source A is a balanced source. It is from a book called Field Marshal Haig, which was written by the historian Philip Warner in 1991 makes this source Secondary Evidence because it was written some time after the war. It contains both pro Haig and also anti Haig parts. Here are some of the pro Haig points, "If the criterion of a successful general is to win wars, Haig must be judged a success". This statement praises General Haig in the way
The Real Rochester in Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre John Wilmot, the second Earl of Rochester was one of the most infamous rakes from the Restoration period. While Wilmot’s debauched lifestyle was well recorded, his deathbed conversion became even more popular. Through these early biographies and the poetry written by Wilmot, Charlotte Bronte became familiar with this historical figure. Bronte modeled her character of Edward Rochester on Wilmot. There are many instances in the novel Jane Eyre
Learning in the Key of Life, is about power: the power to know about the world around you and the people near and far from you. Education is culture, passed down from one group of people to another. We learn about these people through the humanities. Earl Shorris, a teacher for lower-class students quoted in the article Spayde wrote, said to his students on the first day of class, "You've been cheated. Rich people learn the humanities; you didn't. The humanities are a foundation for getting along in
interpret is "They’re Not Your Husband." Carver actually tells us quite a bit about Earl and Doreen if, once again, we are willing to look for the hidden clues. Earl is a salesman who is currently unemployed. He is looking for work, and he does find a sales job, but not a paying one. When he overhears two of his wife’s customers commenting on her "fat ass" (Magee), and saying, "Some jokers like their quim fat" (Carver 45), Earl realizes who his next sales pitch will be aimed at. Not wanting to be considered
The Importance of the Earl of Kent in King Lear The Earl of Kent plays a small but important part in Shakespeare's play King Lear. From the beginning scenes to the end we see a minor character that is used to show the values that Shakespeare believed in. Whether Kent is an example of the dutiful servant or plays the intermediary between Lear and Cordelia he is essential to the functioning of the plot. The role of Kent is important because of the use Shakespeare has for his character in
The Earl of Gloucester's Castle Enter EDMUND, with a letter. EDMUND Thou, nature, art my goddess; to thy law My Services are bound. Wherefore should I Stand in the plague of custom, and permit The curiosity of notions to deprive me, For that I am some twelve or fourteen moonshines Lag of a brother? Why bastard? Wherefore base? When my dimensions are as well compact, My mind as generous and shape as true, As honest madam's issue? Why brand they us With base? With baseness
Watching God Seraph – page 153 So, calling soothingly to Earl, Jim started from the south border of the sink hole and began to pick along to where Earl stood braced between two great cypress trees. Earl’s face was cold and unrecognizing. Jim caught hold to vines and shrubs to keep from slipping off the precarious footing into the water, and said nice things to Earl and kept going. He was a good half way along the dangerous route when Earl stepped forth and leveled the rifle and took aim. Eyes
Nebraska, the son of Louise and Earl Little. In 1929 their house was firebombed by racists while the whole Little family was in the house. It was night and all of them were sleeping. Probably these racists were Ku-Klux-Klan members. The incoming police and firemen didn’t even try to save the house and all of them watched the house burning down. After all that the police arrested Earl Little on suspicion of arson and for carrying a revolver without permit. Earl and Louise Little were followers