Douglas Haig, the educated soldier

This excellent book was first published in 1963 and went a long way to rehabilitate the memory of Field Marshal Douglas Haig.  Famous for being the Commander-in Chief from late 1915 until the end of the Great War, Haig was defamed by many after his death.  There were two main reason for this.  One was time, it takes around 10 years following a war before people are in a place to publish their memoirs of war.  Returning to civvy life, finding work, rebuilding family life, and writing their books all takes some time.  Many writing about their life in the trenches did not mention Haig himself, however, their writings were added to those who opposed him.  It was they who had not been popular with the Field Marshall who were keen to disparage his memory, General Allenby, sacked after failing at Arras for instance, was quick to join ex-Prime Minister Lloyd George is attacking Haig and blaming him for the 750,000 deaths incurred during the conflict.  Lloyd George was you will be surprised to hear being economical with the actuality.  I prefer 'lying' myself.  With generous support from his press baron friends the ex-PMs opinion came to dominate the discussion of the war.  Haig himself made no attempt to fix his opinion in anyone's mind, he just filled out his final report and left it at that.  He then spent the years until his death in 1928 seeking to aid soldiers groups in all British Empire nations.  Lloyd George did nothing.  Haig was awarded £100,000 by parliament in 1918 for services to winning the war, but refused to accept this until Lloyd George had grudgingly instituted a pension for his soldiers.  

This book attempted to give Haig's side of the war, and indeed he does come out of it well.  This is not a book dedicated to offering one side of the story, merely the author attempts to get at the truth.  

Haig's early life is covered briefly before his army career.  Then the war is gone into in detail, Mons, Ypres, Loos, and his taking command of an army now 2.5 million strong.  

Details of battles, conflict with French allies, and worse conflict with a London government convinced the failing French generals were better than their own.  This attitude runs through the book.  

The title does fit the image given of a hard working organised leader who goes through his paperwork carefully, seeks the details of all his armies tactics, and at all times attempted to lessen losses while accepting they were inevitable.  Soldiers do not start wars politicians do, only politicians on both sides, if they wish to, can end wars, soldiers merely fight them.  John Terraine's image of Haig is far more complete than that offered by a self-serving politician.  A famed politician who was soon out the door.  

Though this book is large, I would hate to have to carry the hardback, I raced through it as it was easy to read, words flowed and it is no wonder this became a ground breaking book in 1963.  I recommend it to any who wish to know the real Douglas Haig.

Wiki

 

Haig, the Good Soldier

Books regarding Field Marshall the Earl Haig tend to be either all for him or all out against him, few are objective.  Gary Mead in 'The Good Soldier' claims to come at his subject from a point of view of ignorance of the man and therefore objective.  He makes a decent attempt at objectivity it must be said.  At first I thought he was going to be a faithful acolyte but by the end he is clear on the faults in the man as well as his strengths.
Douglas Haig was born on the 19th June 1861 in Charlotte Square Edinburgh.  The address alone indicating the family money!  His father John came from a family of distillers and opened a whisky distillery in Fife, then spent his life drinking much of it!  This in spite of the family being respectable Presbyterian's and his mother keen to ensure bible knowledge and prayers were part of the family life.  How this squared with the distillery is not made clear.  However Haigs religion was not that of a fervent believer.  One General remarked after an Episcopalian service that Haig preferred a service that said 'God is with you' rather than anything else.  His religious influence was deep but not evangelical.  He was devoted to his sister Henrietta all his life, something which rubbed his wife Doris up the wrong way.  Henrietta had a habit of visiting seances and telling her brother that various people, long dead, were on his side, Napoleon was one of them!  How much credence Douglas put into these 'messages' is not clear but he listened to his sister.  No Christian would accept such 'messages.'
Not the greatest intellect Douglas struggled at educating himself.  he was not a 'swot' even 'crammers' did not do much for him and he failed to make much intellectually though he did get into Oxford.  It was not Latin, Greek or maths that appealed, it was action, sports, games and horse riding.  
Cramming and swotting were required when he sought entrance into the army however.  He just made it into Sandhurst but his sheer doggedness and determination saw him end up as top student!  It was the doggedness, the steadfastness shown here that was to be reflected during his army career.  Men of high intellect often surrounded him but the man of action, who could respond to the changing situation was the one who succeeded.
Joining the 7th Hussars, a cavalry regiment with many connections to those at the top and thus influence which could aid his career was a wise move.  Similar knowledge of those he met at army colleges were also the men he later served among.
His active service started under General Kitchener in the Sudan.  Here he was recognised as a talent and later moved to South Africa for the Boer War.  His talent for organisation was later used during the army reorganisation in 1905 when Haig worked alongside those modernising the army.  Such understanding of the needs of the army was a strong point in his favour.
By steadily climbing the ranks of the army bu the Great War Douglas Haig was in command of I Corps (the army was divided into two Corps and one Cavalry Brigade) and endured the retreat from Mons, an inauspicious beginning where his life was endangered on occasion.
Gary Mead does not go into the details of the fighting during the war, he does instead concentrate on Haig at this time.  At the battle of Loos, under Sir John French, and then at the Somme where he himself was commander in chief, the British army fought battles it did not wish to fight.  Both were ordered by the French and on both occasions the British government bowed to what they considered the better army.  They were wrong.
Haig and sir John French when commander in Chief both had the choice to refuse to fight these battles as they would waste men's lives, both continued to obey orders.  Why?  Had they refused they would have been removed and another would certainly have obeyed and taken the blame, both men would have been dumped by the politicians and their careers at an end.  Both men fought the wrong battles either through loyal obedience expected from a 'Good Soldier' but both knew lives would be lost.  It must be said that while the 'Somme' is seen as a disaster more lives were lost at a higher rate at the Battle of Arras, that battle is never mentioned by anyone.    
1917 saw the Battle of 3rd Ypres, Passchendaele!  Starting well and looking on for success the rains came.  It normally rains at that time of year but on this occasion rainfall not seen in a lifetime fell.  The ground became a waste of mud full of holes and wounded men drowned there as the rain fell.  This was not a glorious episode.  There is no doubt Haig knew the conditions, understood the situation yet continued the fight.
Had the rains not arrived as they did it was likely the battle would ave been successful, the high ground taken and a possible advance towards Ostend and the submarine pens achieved.  The mud ended this yet Haig persisted.  
At the beginning of the year Haig made clear to the cabinet the way the war would probably turn out, he was right!  He expected a 'German Push' after which we could shove back at the enemy and return his home.  He knew this was likely but still planned for war into 1919.
The German attack in March that year failed to break the thin British lines.  Pushed back for miles the line held and the German attack ran out of energy.  From then on the exhausted enemy was on the run and the armistice was signed in November 1918.  Haig had won the war, however that was not how he would see it, his army, and allies had won the war, though he would be a very happy man indeed.
Throughout the war, and afterwards, Haigs greatest enemy was Lloyd George the Prime Minister.  His constant interference, his refusal to free reserves, his many attempts to remove the General, all which failed as Haig was the only man fit for the job as all Lloyd Georges men could confirm.  
After the war, Douglas Haig refused rewards until Lloyd George had guaranteed pensions for his men, off al ranks.  Only Haigs insistence on this brought that pension about.  Until his death in 1928 Haig spent his time aiding ex-servicemen, many of whom could not get work as they were disabled.
They had won the war but got little reward.
This book goes into much detail regarding the Field Marshall and I found it tedious at times.  However it gives a good honest objective insight into a strong willed man with vast army experience who obeyed the call and behaved as a 'good soldier.'  Not a charismatic leader, his stability was his strength, especially in dark times.  It is interesting to note that after Lloyd Georges memoirs arrived Haig lost popularity, the media friends of the PM publishing his side of the story.  Haig took the blame for the war dead, yet German generals, French and Italian generals who lost more men, often more incompetently, never received such abuse.  One man alone is responsible for blackening Haigs name and that is the lying, self seeking Prime Minister who shifted responsibility to this general.
Read this book.

  

Douglas Haig : War Diaries and Letters. 1914-18

Douglas Haig was given the unenviable task of winning a major war. Haig was a career soldier who through hard work had reached the rank of General and was given charge of one of the two army Corps who left for France in August 1914. Soon after the beginning of his adventure he began to keep a diary, one way to keep in touch with his wife,to whom he sent the manuscript, and an opportunity to express his thoughts, thoughts kept from all others.

By the end of 1915 it had become clear to all that the war would be long and hard. Haig, like all senior men realised that this war would be a 'War of attrition' and the cost would be high. Sir John French's failure led to Haig taking command by December of that year and he had to deal with allies, politicians and the Germans. It is difficult to say which was the real enemy!

The diary contains nothing considered 'revelation,' and for the most part is mostly an itinerary of who he met, when and where. However his comments on eating from the lunch box always gives a 'picnic' like feel. Somewhat unnerving when the troops in the front line were living of stew and hard biscuits! Haig was a Victorian soldier, who believed in the Empire and doing his duty. A tough minded courageous soldier who understood the difficulties the troops faced. He was however convinced discipline, and strict discipline at that, was necessary for and effective army.
Knowing that this was to be a 'wearing out' war he was not surprised by the casualty lists, the top military leaders knew this would be inevitable. But this does not mean he was callous of his men's suffering. His comment at the end of the first day of the Somme battle that 40,000 casualties was to be 'expected' while difficult for us to accept, reveals not indifference to suffering, but a soldiers acceptance of the reality.

Inevitably the diary reflects the war from behind the front line. Haig's reflections of the French allies and the individual Generals, his contempt for the duplicity of politicians, his politicians, and his determination to put his own position aside and just get on with 'winning the war.' Haig had no liking for Lloyd George, Prime Minister from 1916, but understood his importance in winning the war, especially in 1918. But LG was the man who left us with the image of Haig behind the line, uncaring when his men suffered. LG's friends in the press used Haig as an easy scapegoat to avoid the prime minister from taking the blame for 750,000 UK deaths. Let alone the near two million other casualties. Lloyd Georges career being more important than a mere General. Have things changed any?

Haig refused any reward after the end of the war until the government had assured a pension for disabled soldiers. He also made an effort to help such men after the war. In his mind the war was a major siege, in which there was not many battles to be fought, merely a series of attacks in one big battle, lasting front August 4th 1914 until 11th November 1918, the day of the armistice. This major battle Haig won! Working with his allies, and from 1916, often without them, his strength won the war. Haig was never the greatest General, but even Lloyd George at his worst could not find another to replace him. Many mistakes were made, but at no time has any alternative strategy been put forward, not tactics that would have worked, no easy way to victory. In spite of his enemies and in spite of his failings Haig remains a General who deserves a better critique.