Was Haig really a donkey leading lions?
Was Haig really “a donkey leading lions”?
General Douglas Haig was the commander of the British army during WW1. He was accused of getting soldiers killed, and sacrificing thousands of men just to win the war.
They blamed him because he was the commander and all orders came from him or passed through him. Approximately 900,000 British soldiers died and about 3/4 of these deaths were due to rubbish leadership. The main reason he was blame was because of bad leadership. It was said by Gary Sheffield "Haig was a strange man who was difficult to get along with and very bad at communicating his ideas to other generals, which created confusion." His evidence was during The Battle Of Somme no attacks were strong enough to defeat the Germans as there was a lot of confusion in the battle plan. Another historian, Trevor Wilson also blamed Haig. He argued that "Haig showed extremely poor leadership, especially during The Battle Of Somme." For evidence he gives the example that Haig and another general Sir John Rawlinson argued about how to conduct the battle. As a result different soldiers had different instructions. 420,000 British casualties were caused during this battle due to bad leadership. Wilson wrote several books on this topics including; The Somme and The first world war.
On the other hand some people believed Haig was not a "donkey". They believed he did his job the best way he could and his decisions were justifiable. Some historians who had more positive views of Haig also had evidence to prove their points. For example, John Terraine argued that Haig was a good leader and very successful. His evidence was during The Battle Of Somme Haig instructed the volunteers to walk not run because running would have been less effective. Also the battles Haig fought in were very effective in stopping the German Army. Additionally, Haig introduced cutting-edge weaponry e.g. guns, tanks, planes which helped win the war. These prove Haig played a huge part in defeating the
General Douglas Haig was the commander of the British army during WW1. He was accused of getting soldiers killed, and sacrificing thousands of men just to win the war.
They blamed him because he was the commander and all orders came from him or passed through him. Approximately 900,000 British soldiers died and about 3/4 of these deaths were due to rubbish leadership. The main reason he was blame was because of bad leadership. It was said by Gary Sheffield "Haig was a strange man who was difficult to get along with and very bad at communicating his ideas to other generals, which created confusion." His evidence was during The Battle Of Somme no attacks were strong enough to defeat the Germans as there was a lot of confusion in the battle plan. Another historian, Trevor Wilson also blamed Haig. He argued that "Haig showed extremely poor leadership, especially during The Battle Of Somme." For evidence he gives the example that Haig and another general Sir John Rawlinson argued about how to conduct the battle. As a result different soldiers had different instructions. 420,000 British casualties were caused during this battle due to bad leadership. Wilson wrote several books on this topics including; The Somme and The first world war.
On the other hand some people believed Haig was not a "donkey". They believed he did his job the best way he could and his decisions were justifiable. Some historians who had more positive views of Haig also had evidence to prove their points. For example, John Terraine argued that Haig was a good leader and very successful. His evidence was during The Battle Of Somme Haig instructed the volunteers to walk not run because running would have been less effective. Also the battles Haig fought in were very effective in stopping the German Army. Additionally, Haig introduced cutting-edge weaponry e.g. guns, tanks, planes which helped win the war. These prove Haig played a huge part in defeating the