Douglas Haig - Butcher of the Somme? Documentary
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- For early access to our videos, discounted merch and many other exclusive perks please support us as a Patron or Member...
Patreon: / thepeopleprofiles
Buy me a Coffee: www.buymeacoff...
RUclips Membership: / @peopleprofiles
or follow us on Twitter! / tpprofiles
The script for this video has been checked with Plagiarism software and scored 2% on Grammarly. In academia, a score of below 15% is considered good or acceptable.
All footage, images and music used in People Profiles Documentaries are sourced from free media websites or are purchased with commercial rights from online media archives.
Attributions:
"Evening Melodrama" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License creativecommons...
#Biography #History #Documentary
Hello guys! If you like our work please subscribe to our second channel The History Chronicles ruclips.net/user/TheHistoryChronicles
My Father fought in the Trenches in France, he was born 1899 so he was just a boy , he was badly shot up but managed to get fixed up in a London Hospital and raised 5 boys.
I'm glad he lived a long life. So many other boys his age weren't so lucky.
My great grand father was a sergeant with the cameronians. His reg was one of the first to be sent into France in 1914. He served under Haig at the battle of the Somme. He described Haig as ‘an unlucky man. Tactics and brutality never seen before in war yet he must get the blame for something he never really experienced before. I pity him.’ My great grandfather lived all the way through the war and died in 1957. He wasn’t a conscript or anything, he was a battle hardened soldier who served in the boxer rebellion. Believe it or not he was the middle weight boxing champion of the British army at the time. Helpful when trench warfare was mostly hand to hand combat.
My Great Grandfather died on the Somme. 57:35 Respect to yours, brothers in arms! (Ned - The Gaffer)
@@PeopleProfiles His sacrifice will very much not be forgotten.
Maybe pity the 100s of thousands the stuck up aritocrat sent into lead walls get some perspective lovely story though !!
The song 1916 by motorhead captures the tragedy and heroism of that generation.
@@fullmontyuk every officer in British army !!!!!! Idiots continually putting lead against flesh. No strategy , just wear them down ? Military education a waste. Never used it...... And what ever. If you see them in a different light good for you 👍
Just finished reading the diary of a WW1 war artist - who didn't really like generals.
He talked to lots of squaddies and officers and wrote that Haig loved his men and his men loved him.
Can you name the book
@@saadkhan1128 probably William Orpen - an onlooker in France but could have been Muirhead Bone
I haven't got the books - read them online
As a soldier and a combat veteran my thoughts on the commanders of large scale conflicts like Field Marshal Haig would simply be imagine what people would say about him if he'd lost the war too . The same type of things could easily be attributed to almost anyone in a position of command simply by the nature of the warfare it's really just a matter of scale .
Same background here, I think your take on this is much more grounded and rationalize than most people's. I am curious though what your thoughts are on all of his dismissals on the casualty figures as well as what was happening on the ground (people drowning in mud, having nothing to eat and when they do get something to eat it was green gruel, having artillery be inaccurate, having artillery consistently being virtually useless because of how well and deep the German trenches had been dug, having pilots continually telling them (including Haige specifically) that the artillery was not only futile in regards to killing Germans but also completely useless in regards to destroying the barbed-wire fencing, using the Somme as reference he completely and outright refused all requests for more medics and stretcher bearers, etc?
Again in most theaters and regards I genuinely think that your viewpoint is not just accurate but a lot more grounded and well-founded! But in regards to general Haig specifically, he genuinely seemed like he was inapt at best. But more realistically was far too arrogant to be in that position. Let's be honest if it wasn't for his comments and insights on General Johnson, he never would have been given that position strictly based on his lack of battlefield command experience.
All that said, I'm curious if you feel somebody else in the British military was better suited for that position also?
Glad you made it home to your family buddy!! I sincerely hope you are living a happy and prosperous life, and hope you are able to get full night's sleep more often than not. 🤘
My grandad, from Liverpool, was killed on the Somme, July 1916, he left a widow and 3 young kids, they lived in abject poverty for many years afterwards.
Very sad and not uncommon. That's the establishment for you. The people are expendable cash cows.
Over the top soldier ,'Right behind you sir.'
So nice to have a channel that does research before they post. Great doc. Thank you so much
Haig, in an effort to be less aloof asked a soldier questions like "where did you start the war"? To which the nervous private replied "I didn't start it sir, I thought the kaiser did."
Britain declared war on Germany after having previously bought Belgian "neutrality" ...
@@martinetti123 i dont understand where the whole germany started ww1 nonsense came out of , germany attacked russia cause russia attacked austria-hungary , seems to me germany just helped to escalate it rather than start it
@@mcsmash4905 You don't know much. Read more, study more.
@@graemesydney38 i know enough dont worry i sont buy into revisionist nonsense that wamts to blame germany for everything
@@mcsmash4905 You don't even know enough to spell correctly. Germany was blamed in the Versailles Treaty - so just who is the revisionist here. Too funny. lol
Another very fascinating history lesson. Thank you.
Love From Orlando
Glad to see a balanced and unbiased portrayal of Haig- as you say, neither the best nor the worst Britain ever produced. It's difficult to believe any of his contemporaries could have done better- some of his juniors were certainly EXTREMELY capable, but they were not in position to have taken the role thrust on him in 1915, and it may have done more harm than good to replace him in 1917 or 1918. He was a capable officer, but a product of his time and era. The Great War is primarily a tragedy, in my opinion, because of the men who were on hand to command the armies in those years- I don't believe any of the senior leadership, all products of the Victorian/Wilhelmine eras, could have done any better than what we ended up with, and there are certainly MANY who would have done far worse.
Had he taken on board the success the French had with rolling barrages he could have saved 10 of thousands of lives. But he didn't. That sums the man up.
@@countottovanshanoo822 Easy to save lives when your men watch the artillery barrage and then refuse to leave their trenches. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@@treize6832 If you insist.
It was nice to see mentions of the Canadian contributions that are sometimes overlooked in this type of documentary. My great grandfather was in the trenches and had the "luck" to be wounded just a couple weeks before the Somme which probably saved his life. Thanks for the upload, I hope that you will do more on people on all sides of this conflict that features many interesting personalities.
I'm English, and trust me anyone who knows anything about ww1 and ww2 holds a a lot of respect for Canada and its people, You were always there for us😊
They put you guys up north and us as 1 army. Yes they should mention you as a whole but the truth is when people think America they think all of North America and some South America. People from Europe don't even know where our country line is. They dk the difference between Quebec and Texas
And the Newfoundlanders, at that time not yet part of Canada, lost 710 men -- or 91% -- of their regiment on July 1st alone. Newfoundland sacrificed many more in that battle, and later in the war, earning with blood the title of 'Royal' Newfoundland Regiment, which it proudly bears to this day. It was devastating to the small towns and fishing villages of the small colony, and to this day, July 1st isn't just Canada's birthday, it's Memorial Day.
@@alanaspinall7147 Thanks! Canadians served disproportionately: 650,000 Canadian men and women served, from a population of only 8 million. The Canadians also were the spearhead of the "Last Hundred Days" of the war. The Canadian Corps had grown into the most formidable attack force on the Western front, and its commander, Sir Arthur Currie, would have succeeded Haig if the war had continued. After finally taking Passchendaele, we broke the Drocourt-Quéant line, breached the Canal-du-Nord, and smashed through the vaunted Hindenburg line. And we finished the war where it began, taking the city of Mons on the last day. Not bad for a nation since called derisively by one of our Prime Ministers, "hewers of wood and drawers of water."
@@stevesmodelbuilds5473 The Blue Puttees.
I just want to let you know since November 2020 onward from 12am-2pm you wake me up multiple times during my multiple shifts of consciousness; you’re the narrator to my dreams and morning ritual.
I would really love to see a Kaiser Wilhelm II biography.... He is such an interesting character and I can't believe you haven't done one on him yet....
Keep up the great work. Love all of your other biography's
Read Robert K. Massey's historical masterpiece, 'Dreadnought: Britain, Germany and the Coming of the Great War'. It's available in hardcover, paperback, e-book or audiobook. It's not an autobiography, but goes into great detail about Wilhelm's life and reign -- along with the other giants of the time. It's over a thousand pages, and goes into every detail about the entire period. 😀
I seem to recall reading that he wrote his autobiography (in between chopping down trees) when in 'retirement' in Holland. I believe it showed that he was always right and that nothing was his fault but it may still be worth reading.
@@stevesmodelbuilds5473 Haven't read Massey but The War that Ended the Peace by Margaret Macmillan (Dan Snow's auntie) and Catastrophe by Max Hastings are among a number of excellent books about the run up to WW1 which include a lot about the 'leaders' of the countries involved. Luckily Britain had a King by contract as George V would probably have been as bad as his cousins if he had had executive power - this is not to say that the Liberal Government got it right although although I think they did.
@@Dav1Gv The Irish were lucky they got Lloyd George's negotiations with Mick Collins instead of the thousands of troops (many of them Irish and others from The Empire)that some were prepared to use to crush the IRA who were already comprimised by Collins own admission. GOC Macready(An Irishman)reckoned it would take him six to eight weeks with Marshal Law and fifty thousand men,which The British had easily available. There were upwards of six Irish Regiments in the British Army at that time,and many Irish who had no love of Shein Fein.
There are some interesting vids involving him on the mark felton productions channel
Very well done. Thank you for putting it together 😊👍🍀
Very well presented and enjoyable to learn such detail of WWII.
You got the wrong war, it was WWI
Very interesting... up next from WW1: Arthur Curry and the history of the Canadian Corps?
Julian Byng & Arthur Currie together - the CEF and Canadian Corps.
Glad to hear the brave Canadian army being credited and mentioned here.
"There they stood on Vimy Ridge that 9th day of April, 1917, men from Quebec stood shoulder to shoulder with men from Ontario, men from the Maritimes with men from British Columbia, and there was forged a nation tempered by the fires of sacrifice and hammered on the anvil of high adventure!..."
Lord Byng of Vimy in a 1922 tribute to Canadian Corps troops
@@alexanderkarayannis6425 A splendid army in both WW1 and WW2. One of the greatest blessings for the USA is that Canada is our neighbor to the North.
Indeed so, together with the 2nd. Welsh Fusiliers and the 36th Ulster Division were amongst the most steadfast and courageous on the Somme.
Very fair and accurate assessment of Haig and WW1 itself. Indeed this war was nothing less than an Apocalyptic experience. Esteemed leaders of their day considered that there had not been such a world changing event since The Crusades.
While all of my elders came home from WW2, 3 of them did not come back from WW1. The symbolic shadows of the Somme and Verdun cast a much deeper influence over my life than those from the skies over Britain or the beach's of Normandy.
This video is more balanced than most treatments of the life of Haig. There's a great deal of heat and partisanship over him. In my opinion - and this is ONLY an opinion, mind - he was a general who understood the big things well, but was marked by his incomprehension of the small ones.
First, his grand strategic ideas were sound. The only place where armies supplied from Britain could effectively fight the Central Powers was in northern France and Flanders. Adventures at the other end of Europe could not be decisive. Also, it was not enough to defend and wait for the blockade to bite. The Germans could not be allowed the initiative. He was ready and willing to use new weapons and methods - the tank and the creeping barrage come to mind. And he was right to think that an offensive must be pushed home; that initial gains must be exploited. And that he could not sit idle while the French fought - especially at Verdun. He had to take weight off them. "Bite and hold" was a good idea, and once he had grasped it, he used it.
But... he simply did not understand that there was more to an infantry attack than an advance in lines with the bayonet, after a bombardment. He could not see machine guns and "trench mortars" as anything but defensive weapons - he simply did not comprehend that they could be lightened and carried integral with forward troops for immediate support, and that this alone would ameliorate a lot of his liaison and communications problems. He worsened those problems - his GHQ had only two telephone lines. Most messages were brought by despatch riders on motorcycles, so were many hours old by the time he got them. His staff habitually screened him from unwelcome news, anyway.
He never was able to see field conditions as insuperable physical facts. He didn't seem to understand that on the Flanders plain, the more shells hitting an area, the more impassible it became. He saw the bottomless mud as an obstacle to be overcome by sheer determination, not as a barrier as effective as any trench. He was incapable of dissimulation or misdirection. Certainly he amassed artillery in concentrations never dreamed of before, but it never occurred to him to have them fire on the German front, then lift onto targets to the rear, wait until the Germans had come up expecting the infantry assault, and then drop it back on them - repeating ad lib. And he did not seem to understand that guns wear out, and become less accurate as their rifling is eroded.
Above all, he could not stop throwing the good after the bad. He could not free his mind of the insistence that a breakthrough was possible. Initial gains encouraged him to push more and more - on the original line. This was the pattern of the Somme and Passchendaele. It was this that causes the horror that attends a close examination of his performance.
What I find hardest to condone, personally, was his ingenuous denial. He wrote his "final despatch" in 1919, with an eye to his reputation and historical assessment, and in it he stated as fact that the German collapse in late 1918 was due to the attritional slaughters of 1916 and 1917; and that he had not expected a breakthrough in those battles. The latter is a direct lie. The former is very doubtful. Those battles, fought as Haig fought them, so vitiated the British that the German assault in March 1918 very nearly succeeded.
Haig's "backs to the wall" order was merely a desperate plea. Most of his troops were unaware of it at the time. Haig had only a vague idea of where they were, anyway. The battalion and company officers who led troops to hold their ground did it out of sheer courage and determination; the German advance was held at the last gasp as the Germans outran their supplies, and many of them stopped to loot, especially food stocks; and reinforcements arrived from Britain, released by Lloyd George. They had been held up because the Prime Minister was reluctant to give them to Haig to throw away.
After that, Haig was at his best. After 23 March 1918, he was no longer in overall command, and was subordinate to Foch. Nor did he plan or direct the battles of the "Hundred Days". That was done by his subordinates. Haig's role became to approve their plans, supply the means to carry them out - liaising with Foch to do that - and represent their views to Allied High Command. Those duties played to his strengths - organisation, political manouever, and logistics. And those battles were fought against an enemy that was internally collapsing. The blockade _had_ done its work. Despite large gains in the east, Germany was short of food, coal and raw materials of all kinds, and its civilian morale was failing. When the German generals asked for an armistice, they did the only thing possible. The nation and the army were beaten. The pity is that they were allowed to give the impression that they weren't.
After the war, laudatory accounts of Haig's generalship were published, some directly by the government. His fine and, yes, noble work for ex-service charities was much appreciated. And dying in January, 1928 was well-timed, just before the reaction set in. Many of his troops idolised him, never having seen him - after all, they were reluctant to think that they had put up with being incompetently led. But the reaction did set in, nonetheless. The "War Poets" were published. Ex-soldiers - rankers and generals - wrote their memoirs. Thirty years afterwards, the Cabinet papers became public. Lloyd George wrote his memoirs, and Churchill his account. Actual despatches and internal documents were examined in detail. Stage plays and novels depicted the experience of the western front, and the horrors grew. Generations grew up that could not comprehend why or how their parents and grandparents could have put themselves through such agony - and for what?
Of course the reaction was overstated. Calling Haig a mere butcher is too much. He did try to limit his casualties. He was open to new methods, new ideas. He did study his profession assiduously. Nevertheless, he presided over the greatest slaughters ever to harrow a British general, and there is something intolerable about his imperturbable certainty that he had been invariably right. He wasn't. But was he more wrong than anyone else who might have replaced him?
That can't be known. It was never tried. Me - and this is an opinion, remember - I think it should have been.
After reading this analysis, I think it was the most unbiased, multi leveled account of what Haig was all about that I have ever read, despite it's length...Always a delight to read such comments by a well informed and well read commenter on the subject being discussed, you Sir, have said it all...Thank you!...
Not sure if it was mentioned in the video but not forgetting that after the French mutiny they were spent as an offensive force and the British needed to take a far bigger role in the Western front in order to protect them. Also,same applies to the Eastern front and the need to take pressure off the Russian armies,prior to their defeat and revolution. Haig as a general requires full knowledge of the entire war,as he was a relatively small cog in it.
@@Trebor74 as the original commenter said , haig saw the full picture and he was willing to take massive cassualties , which was more or less an advantage in ww1 cause it meant he wouldnt crack under the weight of cassualties
Haig was donkey in a herd of donkeys but still a donkey. The fact that the herd of donkeys included the French, German, Italian, Austrians and the Russians still doesn't change the fact he was a donkey. The fact that he had some strength as a strategic level general doesn't excuse his overall failures. The clincher for me that he was indeed a donkey was that in 1920 he was still advocating that the cavalry was superior to tanks.
@@graemesydney38 and would a brainlet like you have done better? that man along with his subordinate donkeys let britain to victory , he kept is cool in face of horrific casualties cause he knew it was the only way to fight germany , you are just enforcing a myth that was created in the 1960's if anyone is a donkey , its you , i guess its similar to how you said that germany is to blame from ww1 cause it says so on the versailes treaty conveniently ignoring the pre war alliances
Very good documentary based on a very controversial figure. At the end of the day the great war was a massacre on an industrial scale which wiped out a generation of young men. I would love to see a documentary based on the life of Isimbard kingdom Brunel. He was such an engineering visionary in victorian times.
There was a two-parter on IKB about three years ago on Ch5...or was it Ch4?
"Each one of us must fight on to the end." said Haig. I like the "us" bit.
Us being from 5 miles behind the front
That was in 1918 when the Germans were attacking everywhere - which last throw of the dice caused them to lose when the British led the Alleid counter offensive of the Hundred Days (which was just as costly as earlier battles) and where do you expect Generals to be, at the sharp end where they can't command or at a communications hub where they can? Answer please.
Always interested on any background of the victorian era right up to the rebuilding after the end of WW2.a massive change in britain at the time.thanks for these amazing documentaries honing in on the whole picture of generals right across to the common man enlisting to fight for his country.cheers for the upload.
Haig wasn't the first General to be called a 'butcher', I believe General Grant had the same tag during the ACW.
Interestingly, 'Butcher' appears to be a modern, pejorative, nickname for Haig. He was known to contemporaries as either 'Duggie' or 'The Chief'.
I can find only two Great War generals known as 'Butcher' actually during the war, Haking (British) and McCay (Australian)- both apparently due to their roles in the Battle of Fromelles.
Even more interestingly, Arthur Harris was known to his aircrew as 'Butch' during the Allied Bomber Offensive of the Second World War, primarily due to his hard driving manner. This nickname was an affectionate one.
@@henrypulleine8750 Wasn't the French General Charles Mangin given the same nickname by his men?
@@dovetonsturdee7033 I believe so. Though Mangin was generally a very successful commander.
Incidentally, he was the chap who perceptively remarked that in the Great War 'what ever you do, you lose a lot of men...'
Grant was called The Butcher after the final the final devastating assault of the last day. Later in his memoirs he wrote, "I have always regretted that the very last assault at Cold Harbor was ever made. No advantage whatever was gained to compensate for the heavy loss we sustained."
@@henrypulleine8750 Given the level of deaths on the first day of the Somme, how can anyone - other than a Haig cheerleader - not see just how badly this Donkey led the Lions?
At a glance its easy to say he was insane with his tactics but the more you look into it, kind of made sense.
The barrage was supposed to destroy everything, the slow walking was to maintain control of un-blooded new recruits in an assault on empty positions. The whole thing was a bloody mess in the end but it must have seemed like the best choice on paper at the time 🤷♂️
What?
The man who led the largest army in British history to complete and total victory against the German Empire and it's allies. A colossal phenomenal achievement unparalleled in British history.
The right man in the right place at the right time and thankfully modern historians such as Gary Sheffield and Peter Hart have almost entirely rehabilitated him
Don't forget that the British empire also had allies (many more and far more powerful ones than Germany) without which Britain would lose. So put an emphasis on collective effort buddy.
Not really.
@@slobodankopanja2506 Absolutely right. It's amazing that the brits always say : We won two World Wars. Really? Except "We" means you and the french in WW1, you and the americans and the soviets in WW2. Not you alone. Britain couldn't win alone.
@@slobodankopanja2506 Except everything lovablesnowman said in his comment is completely true, this video is assessing Haig (& to a lesser degree the whole BEF), and literally no one said or implied the British Empire won the war on its own....
Any excuse to complain.
We have the 100 year release of documentation which supports his rehabilitation.
Brilliant! Thank you
Whoever made this video was obviously a real fan of Haig. Historically Haig was only moderately successful as a WWI commander. Blaming poor communications is unrealistic as Haig was well aware of the limitations of his comm. systems. Like most of the generals in WWI Haig tried to fight Waterloo all over again and Failed.
Haig knew that he didn’t have the ability to fight a modern war when he met the Australian General Monash who engineered and led the August 1918 breakthrough of the Hindenburg Line. Haig collapsed in a weeping heap on shaking Monash’s hand and it took him until the next day to recover his emotions at realising that he would never be able to have an equal reputation as a competent general.
That's interesting - where did you hear that?
A profile on Monash would be appreciated
Wonderful video as always. Haig is certainly a polarising figure. Would love to see a video on Paul Von Hindenburg
Sir John French wasn't up to the job of British Army commander. Haig was, but will always remain controversial because of the high casualties.
You've forgotten New Zealand! The antipodeans were the ANZAC Corps not the Australian Corps... Retired Australian Officer
Not always... I Anzac and II Anzac Corps existed until the very end of 1917, when I Anzac became the Australian Corps, and II Anzac became XXII Corps. The NZ Division served in various Corps during the war, including the British IV Corps, though much of its service was in II Anzac Corps.
@Tom Martyr Of course when it was formed the Australian Corps (previously I Anzac Corps) was under the command of the highly respected Sir William Birdwood. Monash only took command (on Haig's recommendation) towards the end of May.
By the Autumn the Australian Corps was very depleted and stricken by ill-discipline and some quasi-mutinous behaviour that resulted in its withdrawal from the front lines.
During my time as an officer with the Australian Army, I formed the view that Haig was an incompetent, insane butcher who had no regard for the lives of his men.
When you send that many men to death in battle.
Then no true objective you intended was gained.
That is called a blood bath.
its war , people die , some plans work others dont , and the enemy just migth offensive enough to not do what you expect him to do
You clearly have never lead men in battle
My grandfather, a veteran of Gallipoli and passchendaele would agree with you.
Hopefully, all the people attempting to whitewash Haig will read you comment.
As per the comments submitted by others. Haig was no worse than a great number of the other Generals of WW1 Haig did however seem to suffer from a few cases of Bad Luck. Early in the war he was hindered by a lack of munitions, namely artillery shells, and with the Battle of the Somme campaign the weather of nearly nonstop rain just as the Battle started and on through the next few months of battle was also a massive hindrance to his plans. He was as all who were in command positions in WW1, learning a totally new type of warfare with modern high rates of fire guns, more accurate artillery, the beginning of aerial warfare both in attacking abilities and observation tactics, plus the first wartime use of telecommunications along with early radio transmissions, then towards the end of the war the advent of tanks and their usage. Had he been able to get better munition supplies early in the War, and had the weather during the Somme campaign been more in line with an average summer, Haig might have looked better than how he appeared at the time. He was like most of the General's of that war, he was damned no matter what he did or didn't do. But in overall judgement, Haig did as good a job as what anyone could have been done at the time.
Wonder would u have been so enthusiastic about Haig had u been one of the poor sods being sent out under machine gun fire rifle fire and mass artillery bombardment.These tactics were repeated time and time again with the same results,DEAD bodies lying in various forms of mutilation.Get a grip.
Underrated comment, my conclusion is that Haig was a good General in a bad position basically the amount of BS he was juggling all at once makes it actually impressive that his forces didn't completely collapse under the strain, and obviously he did care about his men but short of retreating or resigning there wasn't much he could do about that, it's a war thousands at the bare minimum were going to die in this case it unfortunately happened to be millions.
rubbish. Compare him to someone like Monash, and you'll that someone with actual talent, progressive thinking and ability can do so much more than Haig
@@therandomnessnetwork1658are you Scottish?
Have you already done a video about Erich von Ludendorff, von Falkenhayn, von Moltke or Paul von Hindenburg?
That would be awesome.
There’s a video on Ludendorff :)
@@calvinh8755
Ah nice.
I check that out.
Please more of ww1 comanders stories im your fan
Saved by Cpt. Blackadder from a pygmy woman with a very sharp mango.
'Hero of Mboto Gorge'
@@controlleddemolition9112 I love Blackadder but no way is it accurate in anyway to the truth.
@@controlleddemolition9112 No it doesn't. Blackadder is not some kind of "scathing" parody of the Western Front which is oh-so funny because it's an exaggeration of the "truth". It is (knowingly or unknowingly, probably the latter) an exaggeration of how people began to view the war in the 1960s. The witticisms of Blackadder have absolutely ruined public perceptions of the First World War to the detriment of everyone who fought in it.
As a Haig myself I approve this video
Why is the question? My great, great uncle William Horsburgh (Black Watch) went MIA at the first battle of the Somme. How could the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand in Sarajevo result in such a massive loss of men on both sides? Treaties and coalitions can result in tragic outcomes. The war in Ukraine today I hope will not contribute to such a dismal outcome.
I like this narrators voice
best summed up by Black adder Goes Forth Melchett: Good man. Now, Field Marshal Haig has formulated a
brilliant new tactical plan to ensure final victory in the
field. [they gather around a model of the battlefield]
Blackadder: Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of
our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?
Darling: How can you possibly know that Blackadder? It’s classified
information.
Blackadder: It’s the same plan that we used last time, and the
seventeen times before that.
Melchett: E-E-Exactly! And that is what so brilliant about it! We
will catch the watchful Hun totally off guard! Doing
precisely what we have done eighteen times before is
exactly the last thing they’ll expect us to do this time!
There is however one small problem.
Blackadder: That everyone always gets slaughtered the first ten
seconds.
Melchett: That’s right! And Field Marshal Haig is worried that this
may be depressing the men a tadge. So, he’s looking to
find a way to cheer them up.
Blackadder: Well, his resignation and suicide would seem the obvious
solution.
A well made documentary. Informative.
You missed the bit where he executed shell shocked soldiers as cowards. Especially the bit where he was doing it 3 days up until the end of the war. He would probably have kept going except he ran out of 'cowards.'
You need to reread your history. First of all their values were different to ours. Secondly some of them in fact many did deserve the death penalty. 3000 were sentenced to death of which 306 were carried out.
@@dulls8475 So Hague did execute people, because of their different values, some of them were branded cowards? Because we have the benefit of better understanding of mental health, we know these people where not cowards and but suffering from PTSD. Glad we agree on that point. And with the benefit of our modern values, Hague is a complete arsehole and this documentary totally neglected the negatives.
Now, telling me to reread history was not really on point was it?
Your statement about people deserving to die actually says a lot about you and I don't want to go there.
Yes, some shell shocked soldiers were executed. Now go and read you medical/phsycological histories, the condition was not understood in WW1 (and only barely in WW2).
Butcher of the Somme is too true, Haig bathed in blood, my grandfather lies in France thanks to him. May he burn in hell forevermore.
burn in hell cause he sent soldiers into certain death in a WAR? some of you people that come here really like to spout nonsense
What? The one you never knew! Calm down, maybe direct your anger at the Kaiser 🤷♂️or maybe the French for insisting on Endless British offensives.
@@ForeverEngland76 Sorry, but how will wrapping Haig in the English flag protect him from the charge that he led Lions into an early grave?
I’ve only just discovered this channel - love it! A suggested subject if you haven’t already done him..
.Sir Thomas Stamford Bingley Raffles
Not even a mention of Mboto gorge, where he almost lost his life to a pigmy woman armed with a sharpened mango.
French was at his best in the Boer War. He was out of his depth here and his dislike of Smith Dorrien was fatal to the British army. SD would have made the better leader of British Forces. You only have to look at his active service experience. It by far exceeds Haig who was in effect a staff officer with all the limitations that carries. Also SD was a soldier Haig was a cavalryman who as the Duke of Wellington stated just want to charge at everything. He thought like a cavalryman not a soldier and it showed with casualties to show for it. Haig was a bad communicator too almost incoherent some have said. His wife was Lady in waiting to Queen Mary so had the ear of the King by the back door another reason for Lloyd George to dislike him. Not one of the greats by any means
I think that is an unfair assessment of Haig, although its refreshing to see someone mention French's record in the Boer war, which was very good. Haig WAS an exceptional staff officer, and that is exactly what the British army needed. He was a theatre commander, at his best directing overall strategy and "managing" the BEF. He did not tend to get involved in tactics, rightly leaving that to corps and army commanders. For me Haig's greatest contribution was his leadership during the German Spring offensive, in which he kept the right flank of BEF fixed to the French army, which guaranteed victory for the allies
Please add more docs of Hitler’s top staff. Fascinating group of men who transformed an entire country in no time.
Several are inbound.
Although i disagree with your attempt to label the Somme offensive as some sort of strategic victory i found the video very informative and enjoyable.
Thanks for the praise. We didn't say the Somme was a strategic victory with respect, we said it took the pressure away from the French at Verdun and along with Verdun greatly weakened the German army.
Ludendorff stated that the Somme broke the back of the German army and was one of the reasons it went back to unrestricted submarine warfare which brought in the Americans
@@Trebor74 the german army was never the same after the somme
@@mcsmash4905 so,it was a strategic victory
@@Trebor74 yes but the results of the somme only became apparent later
If not Haig then who ?
Thank you 👍
Field Marshall Haig is the ultimate example of how it's only the people in charge who get the blame, and not outside factors and subordinate officer's who failed their jobs.
If you haven't seen it yet, you must watch the BBC series Blackadder. In the WW1 series, there are a bunch of General Haig references. The cast is hilarious 😆
one him bieng 35 miles behind the action with his wife and tortoise alan.
it's funny but it's historical nonsense
excellent great visuals I would love you to do a profile on felid marshall blucher and the Prussians not much is known about him I think you would do an excellent job
Well Done!
Based on this modern re-interpretation it would seem that while the attritional battles of the Somme & 3rd Ypres were necessary, it seems to me that as winter approached & the weather deteriorated, Haig should have disengaged a few weeks earlier in order to minimise his losses?
You maybe right.
This is a really interesting question. In the case of the Somme the final offensive, the Battle of the Ancre in November was almost wholly successful at first, and large stretches of the German line taken. However, this attack was made, at least in part, to provide a clear success prior to the Chantilly Conference. In that sense there was certainly political, if not clear military justification.
The situation at 3rd Ypres is more complex. The three great victories of September and October (Menin Road Ridge, Polygon Wood and Broodseinde) had caused significant loss to the Germans and there was a very real possibility of one final push would reap considerable rewards. Haig was certainly justified in continuing the offensive at that point. However, once it became clear that the appalling conditions, and the difficulties in getting sufficient artillery support, meant that offensives were unlikely to succeed he was left in the impossible position of carrying on to secure the high ground on the Passchendaele Ridge or, leaving his men holding inadequate lines in the waterlogged valleys over the winter.
It is very easy with hindsight to criticise!
Haig has had a bad rap but since John Terraine he has been largely rehabilitated. Haig was in great part the architect of the victory of 1918, when the British Army was at the bestbit has ever been.
he does not deserve such rehabilitation. He was a pompous fool who was vastly incapable of the role he was in. Compare Hague with his sentimental and delusional attachment to cavalry (and the use of the saber!) to someone as competent and forward-thinking as Monash, who basically invented modern combined arms.
@@stonem0013it must however be said that British Cavalry managed to capture 40% of all prisoners taken by the British during the hundred days despite being only 3% of the BEF at thus point.
@@t.wcharles2171 yes, because they were used for the very easiest roles where resistance was already exhausted. That was one of the few uses for cavalry at this stage
@@stonem0013 doctrine maintained that once an enemy was in retreat the cavalry would have been used to turn retreat into rout which meant the enemy was unable to take up advantageous positions and resist the advance of the allied forces.
@t.wcharles2171 yes, Haig constantly brought cavalry forward for years in anticipation of a break through that never happened. The cavalry were extremely expensive throughout the war but generally gave negligible benefits. The 100 days was won by infantry.
This documentary has changed my view of General Haig to the point where if I were still a drinking man I could enjoy a shot of Haig & Haig.
Thanks for a well balanced over view of his life.
Until now I saw only Lloyd George's point of view and didn't understand how he could stay the top dog for so long
This is the butcher that was killing soldiers that were shell shocked calling them cowards.
I found the video informative and reasonably fair. Just read "Elergy", an account of the Somme written by Andrew Roberts. I can recommend it.
In his time, he was described as the best ever Scottish General, in that he killed the most Englishmen...and did a great deal to wreck the British Army as well, by his actions and decisions...says Norman Stone in his short History of the conflict that defined the Europe of our time, and to this day...A bit harsh, but true, nonetheless...(statistically speaking, at least)
I concede as a Scotsman that beyond Bruce we did not produce many competent generals. Haig was however competent.
@@keithmuir5077 Perhaps a bit too harsh. Scottish soldiery when fighting as part of Britain was never in doubt. On the level of high command it produced Ralph Abercromby, John Moore, Colin Campbell, William Inglis, Haig of course. I'm sure there's more.
@@skibbideeskitch9894 Forgive me but you miss the point we have produced almost no one except Leslie and he was overridden with an understanding of Strategic warfare that ultimately wins wars. Bruce was the last one to do that
@@keithmuir5077 British, nothing to do with Scotland!
Around ten days back I had no idea who is Douglas Haig. I was watching a old black and white movie "Lancer Spy" and there were two potraits, and I inquired in the comment section and I was told one being Douglas Haig.
Very interesting and well researched but I found the background music distracting and quite unnecessary.
If Britain and the allies had not opposed the German invasion, what would have happened ?
No wonder Haig couldn't recognise the true human cost of his strategies, he couldn't pass the staff officer school entrance maths exam. Lol 🤣
Didn't realise his father was the owner of the distillery that would go on to become Haig Club.
There is what happened and there is what's written about what happened. WWI was warfare of an entirely new nature. No commander wants to have high casualties but the nature of the conflict inevitably resulted in slaughter on an industrial scale. It was essentially a static war of attrition. The side with the most resources (manpower, munitions, logistics) was going to eventually win. I don't see how anyone could be a commander in such a conflict and hope to win without being willing to utilize the necessary resources. That meant troops were going to die... on both sides.
Haig's popularity in the years after WWI, despite the levels of carnage tells me that the people back then understood what was necessary to win that war. Later generations could look back and just concentrate on the losses, mutter about the futility of war in general and blame Haig for those losses. The fact that Haig's tactics finally won WWI gets lost in the mutterings.
Haig didn't seem to be all that much different from all of the other top Generals whether on the Allied side or the Austro-German side. All of the Generals from both sides sent vast quantities of men over the top into machine gun fire and artillery. No worse or better when looking at the overall methods used by all of the Armies involved from which ever side.
Incorrect. General Monash proved to the High Command how to fight and win WWI with combined arms, low casualties and holding captured ground at Hamel and then the August 1918 breakthrough of the Hindenburg Line.
haig did not even realize that multiple machine gun nests could be a problem for men, sending about half a million men to their pointless deaths again and again.
Haig gets a bad rep. But people forgot that his main success was acctually training and equipping a large army. Mainland European nations used conscription and had large reservist forces even in peacetime. France was able to call up 2 million men with army training within a few months of the war starting. Britian couldn’t do that, its regular army and reserves only numbered 500,000 at the beginning of the war with over half that guarding the empire. Yet by the end of the war Britain fielded 3 million men who were better equipped and trained than any other European nation. The unfortunate truth was the war was always going to be a war of attrition and so millions of men were going to die. ‘Oh but he ordered his men to walk into machine guns’ yes because they had to practise how to do rolling barages and the artillery crews weren’t skilled enough to do it with infantry running. Haig was despite common misconception quite popular with the men. More people went to haigs funeral than princess dianas and he spent the year after the war campaigning for better pensions and support for the men who had fought for him. His reputation was ruined historians like A.J.P Taylor who frankly is an insult to the name historians as he saw all of history through his contemporary political bias. Was haig the most talented man to ever live ? No he wasn’t but he did a solid job in difficult circumstances.
Alright boy's, third times a charm- Douglas Haig
Love the well researched content and the narrator, he is very professional but I would like to audition for the role as my voice better suits the serious historical subject matter, whereas, the current narrator would be great for Saturday night live entertainment shows on ITV.
Email us.
The De Gaulle profile looks vey interesting. How about a profile of Paul Reynaud PM of France in the extremely challenging time of May 1940?
You have a wide range of means of contacting you on the you tube about page but it would be great to see an email address too.
Unlike millions of his men, he lived long enough to get to learn from his errors and slowly at that.
Another man of privilege who's wealth got him on the fast track to being the top guy. Makes me wonder how well the 2nd place Sandhurst graduate would have performed.
Respect for what he did for veterans after the war.
“Every position must be held to the last man. There must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall, and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end”
Douglas Haig
Which wall was his back against ?? certainly wasn't to be found anywhere near the front. This mans massiah complex cost the lives of thousands of men who had no choice but to follow orders or be shot. This man deserved a life sentance in prison, not a pat on the back.
@@hamishpriest Mate he actually cares for his men
@@ethanramos4441 Sorry am i mistaken or is the word 'Butcher' in the title. Now why would the word butcher be attached to someones name if they weren't a butcher by trade ? You can kiss the mans arse as much as you want. After the Battle of the Somme many men didn't even get the chance and those that did, many didn't want too.
@@Pfsif If you were in command,what would you have done diferently? At his funeral, thousands of his soldiers came out to show respect.
@@hamishpriest Oh did ya not notice the question mark on the Somme Haig deeply cared for the lives of his men in fact after the war Haig dedicated his life in helping out ex servicemen. The idea of him being incompetent commander is false because of David Lloyd George he didn’t fully trusted or liked Haig.
Haig may not have been Britain's best general ever, but he was the best they had at the time (otherwise you can be certain that David Lloyd George would have replaced him), and he won a very difficult war. What more could we have expected of him?
Two cousins fall out, millions of normal folk die as a result, then I watch this for an hour trying to explain why it was all worthwhile. This solved nothing and created WWII. And we wonder why countries have revolutions 🙄
keep that hindsight in check
Inhuman bastard Haig troops were cannon fodder to him.
Odd, then, that thousands of the soldiers from the British Great War army lined the streets of London when his coffin passed by in 1928. Indeed, it is estimated that over a million people turned out.
Things I recall reading re- Haig who was still claiming he could have won it with "Horse and sword" in 1926. The Newfoundland Regiment had 68 answer roll call one day The day before there were over 800 and they were ordered to walk( while sky lined ) into the enemy. In 30 min. the regiment was done. Haig managed the press and the release of casualty lists preventing getting sacced.
Actually, you are misunderstanding a quote he made to a conference of veterinarians. He did not suggest that wars could be won with horses and swords. In reality he was a keen adopter of new technology, under his leadership the BEF became a highly effective, modern instrument of war that did more than any other army to win the Great War.
@@henrypulleine8750 Debatable that last part .
@@princesofthepower3690 Well, everything is debatable!
But I think that the evidence shows just how effective and efficient the British Army was by 1918, and how they played the greatest role in the final defeat of Germany.
To give just one example, in the Advance to Victory the BEF alone took 188,700 German prisoners and captured 2,840 guns. The other three allies (France, Belgium and America) combined took between them 196,700 prisoners and captured 3,775 guns.
Haigh was absolutely in love with technology, he was an early adopter of air scouting and arming the cavalry with machine guns.
He was also an early proponent of tanks in order to limit infantry casualties.
The downside was that he was an optimist and liked to try out these untested technologies before they were ready and problems with tactics using them.
What he wasn't responsible for was local regimental tactics, he allowed each army commander and corps commander to take strategic command and tailor their tactics to local conditions. Unfortunately some of those local commanders didn't have the imagination or flair, add that to technical limitations with huge expansion of weaponry with unskilled workers producing munitions and the first use of a mass army with novice officers, untested men and new tactics and you're going to get problems.
He was also a cavalry officer at heart, useful since that was the only way to move armed groups quickly around the battlefield until the 1920s, not by charging the wire on horses but by quick moves to take strategic positions, defending them with rifles and machine guns and waiting for the infantry to catch up or if there was a possibility by breakthrough and attacking the German supply lines, causing the horsey version of blitzkrieg.
Haigh has his problems but he's one of the more intelligent and forward thinking senior officers of the war.
@@voiceofraisin3778 Spot on.
Was he ever held accountable for all the dead heroes from the Somme?
its war , people die , the only thing you can do is take away titles , its one thing to suffer high losses because of the nature of war but its completely different to intentionaly send people to die cause you like that , and thats what a lot of morons think haig did
history has remember the somme badly for it's first day but the somme offensive as a whole was a strategic success
In fairness to Haig and Joffre in the first World War1 and the awful death toll and the casualties, they couldn't have foreseen the awful nature of war from then on, but they should have seen it much earlier than they did, and should've been brought to account for its losses, and been sacked
I think Hague did the best anyone could have done under the circumstances! All the leaders in that war seemed to be learning on the fly because there had never been a war like WWI. I don't know any prominent military leader that didn't have failures as well as successes.
but most people conveniently forget that and just shout **butcher of the somme** cause thats what armchair generals do
I’d say you are right on the mark John. Well said. 👍
@@mcsmash4905As for 'Lions led by the donkeys'? Not that anyone would attempt to re-write history or paint Haig as some kind of mis-understood hero?
@@antispindr8613 people on both extremes are idiots , people sho scream butcher haig ignore the realities of for for the sake of emotions while those who call him a hero are idiots of a slightly different kind
An excellent biography. This taught me a new respect for Haig. Trust that slippery politician, Lloyd George to discredit Haig, a pity that the politicians are not sent to fight the wars.
What about General Melchett and Captain Darling? 30 miles behind the front line for the big push.
So? This was a comedy, not history.
There is a British Legion close to me which is still called "Haig House"
They... just... didn't... know... any... better... 😥
There were many Generals in the war who rose on their competence. He should have been replaced.
Where was he when he ordered men over the top?
I do feel for him and his reputation on the somme. He was told the artillery would do most of the work getting rid of the wire but they'd transported shrapnel instead of HE shells. Plus walking to the enemy trench wasn't such a bad idea Considering the heavy equipment they were carrying
‘Fight on to the last man, with your backs against the wall.’
Hilter, or Hague?
Both!
@@mamavswild most commanders were like this during history in desperate times.
When you launch the biggest bombardment in history, see and hear it's effects,why would you think it'd fail? Also,the Somme was the first major battle of the vastly increased British army. The army needed to find its feet. In war that costs.
They did not walk to the enemy trenches, profound myth.
@@davewolfy2906 I read the Ulster division sprinted towards the enemy.
E. M. Forster, author of the Hornblower novels, wrote “The General”, about a British officer who at the apogee of his career finds himself in corps command on the Western front. The book traces his career to arrive at that point, his bafflement at the development of the battle and his subsequent life. While you know you are reading fiction, you also realize the book contains much truth.
I think you mean C S Forester. E.M. Forster wrote 'A Passage to India', amongst other books.
An interesting book but it contains one great fallacy. At one point the author says if was like savages who only knew nails trying to pull out a screw and says if they had only turned it then it would have been easy. This is rubbish (an influence of Liddell Hart?). There was no way to ;'turn the screw' of trench warfare - look at the history of fighting on every major front.
Great and fair video on a figure opinions differ vastly on, also the narration was very good and held attention. Great vid!
One has to ask, if Haig was incompetent, a donkey leading lions (or a butcher) then it would naturally apply to every single senior General and their subordinates of every other country participating in this war. The difference being, Haig came out on the winning side.
The reality is that on a per capita basis the British and CW armies were the safest to be in.
I see lots of comment about inability of all to be decisive but no comment about fundamental management principles. You cannot manage an outcome and the process
For clarification though the Italian were defeated in certain battles, they actually overcame the Austro-Hungarian Army during WW1. If they had not then a southern front would have opened in France out flanking the British Imperial Forces and the French in the north
@@alasdairmmorrison74 The Italian And Austrian Armies had fought to a standstill , so the allies supported Italy in a last final attack led by the Italian General Diaz which inflicted a massive defeat on Austria who surrendered. Therefore as I said the Italians were not overcome by the Austro-Hungarian Empire and held the mountain passes.
WW1, the war with no "good" guys. It was the bonfire which set the world of Empires aflame. Haig had difficult choices. At the time, the attrition seemed absolutely necessary, but it was a horrifying loss of life.
@@aaropajari7058 I'm sure they thought so, and whilst they were the victims of the conflict, many were volunteers who chose to go "for king and country"
@@aaropajari7058 completely agree.
There were good guys in WW1
The British
But that doesn't fit your narrative does it comrade
@@darkjudge8786 I am British and certain do not consider them the "bad guys" in any way, and if you were weighing up which side was least bad, Britain would win, but that doesn't make them the good guys. Britain was drawn in by treaties and a desire to keep Germany in check (particularly regarding their Navy), so regardless of the breach of Belgian neutrality, Britain would probably have found an excuse to go to war.
@@fullmontyuk Most commanders did a more than decent job. We are talking about men who were trained with the idea that the pinnacle of warfare was the cavalry charge. Suddenly they were in a new age and everything they knew about warfare was obsolete. The big misconception is that they "just send men over the top", expecting different results while doing the same. This just isn't true, the commanders came up with new strategies, creeping barrage, stormtrooper to name a few. Problem was due to modern weapons, defence stategies overcame the offensive strategies, specially artillery was devastating during ww1, it was the big killer. And one of the often overlooked aspects of the war was field communication, battlefields were to big to overlook from a hill (like Napoleon did) and radio and telefoon was in it's infancy. They had telefoons, wired and during attacks useless because the wire would damage and break. So runners and carrier pigeon were reliable modes of communication, I think you see the problem.
Haig was an out of touch murderer, as were a lot of his officers. What he did afterwards was out of guilt.
Ned
Your great grandfather rests in peace as does my great uncle Arthur (55 Bn AIF, Polygon Wood 1917)
Lest we forget
Thanks to both of them and to 'Mum's first boyfriend' who I saw commemorated by a poppy on the Arras Memorial to the Missing.
Haig persisted in outdated infantry tatics resulting in terrible slaughter. Lloyd George wanted to sack Haig, but the General had influential friends.
I tend to concur with Loyd-George's appraisal; Haig eventuated as something of a British "Dud". The tables were turned on Germany as the result of more aggressive independence being taken by the Canadian and Australian Corps at around Christmas 1917. It was then that Monash used his initiative to exploit the first use of combined weaponry ( air surveillance, armour supported with infantry ) to break out of Haig's staid, slog-on approach hitherto used in the campaign.
Not really true. By 1917 and into 18 the British and commonwealth armies had become very effective for a conscript army. The Allied artillery had become very proficient. The Canadians and Australians had the largest artillery attachments of all the divisions. The majority of the experienced German army had perished at the Somme and Verdun. This gave them a huge advantage. It was not aggressive independence. It was the accumulation of knowledge and having the freshest divisions that put them at the front. It is also of interest that the division that captured the most guns and advanced the furthest was an English division who also had the extra artillery allocation. Monash only did what Curry had done before him. Curry was influenced in his tactics by Plummer. lets not forget Field Marshal Julian Byng who had the greatest influence of them all on Vimy ridge.
Lloyd George is the most duplicitous, dishonest politician the Uk has ever had.
Bliar could challenge that title.
Then surely it was Lloyd George’s responsibility to replace him as the BEFs commander.
Yes despite everything britain ,Australia, and no and India .We won yet again! Together we can’t be beaten
Meant of course nz
And canada
McSmash,Maybe you should start studying what really happened, total incompetent to deal with that sort of war sending tens of thousands to a needless death.
good thing we have armchair generals like yourself to lecture us , go touch some grass before you continue with more of your emotion fueled rants