The Earl Haig | |
|---|---|
 Haig in 1917 | |
| Nickname | Butcher Haig |
| Born | (1861-06-19)19 June 1861 Edinburgh, Scotland |
| Died | 29 January 1928(1928-01-29) (aged 66) London, England |
| Buried | Dryburgh Abbey, Scottish Borders |
| Allegiance | United Kingdom |
| Branch | British Army |
| Years of service | 1884–1920 |
| Rank | Field Marshal |
| Commands | British Expeditionary Force (1915–1919) First Army (1914–1915) I Corps (1914) Aldershot Command (1912–1914) Chief of the General Staff in India (1909–1912) 17th Lancers (1901–1903) 3rd Cavalry Brigade (1900) |
| Battles / wars | Mahdist War Second Boer War First World War |
| Awards | Knight of the Order of the Thistle Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath Member of the Order of Merit Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order Knight Commander of the Order of the Indian Empire Mentioned in Despatches Complete list |
| Spouse | The Hon. Dorothy Maud Vivian |
| Children | 4 |
Field MarshalDouglas Haig, 1st Earl Haig,KT, GCB, OM, GCVO, KCIE (/heɪɡ/; 19 June 1861 – 29 January 1928) was a seniorofficer of theBritish Army. During theFirst World War he commanded theBritish Expeditionary Force (BEF) on theWestern Front from late 1915 until the end of the war.[1][2][3]
Haig's military career included service in theWar Office, where he was instrumental in the creation of theTerritorial Force in 1908. In January 1917 he was promoted to the rank offield marshal, subsequently leading the BEF during the finalHundred Days Offensive. This campaign, in combination with theKiel mutiny, theWilhelmshaven mutiny, theproclamation of a republic on 9 November 1918 andrevolution across Germany, led to thearmistice of 11 November 1918. It is considered by some historians to be one of the greatest victories ever achieved by a British-led army.[1][2][3]
Haig gained a favourable reputation during the immediate post-war years, with his funeral a day of national mourning. However he also had some prominent contemporary detractors and, beginning in the 1960s, has been widely criticised for his wartime leadership.[4][5][6] He was nicknamed "Butcher Haig" for the two million British casualties under his command.[4] TheCanadian War Museum comments: "His epic but costly offensives at theSomme (1916) andPasschendaele (1917) have become nearly synonymous with the carnage and futility of First World War battles."[7] Since the 1980s many historians have argued that the public hatred of Haig failed to recognise the adoption of new tactics and technologies by forces under his command, the important role played by British forces in theallied victory of 1918, and that high casualties were a consequence of the tactical and strategic realities of the time.[1][2][3][8][9][10]
.jpg)
Haig was born in a house onCharlotte Square, Edinburgh.[11] His father, John Richard Haig, an alcoholic, was head of the family's successfulHaig & Haig whisky distillery; he had an income of £10,000 per year (£1,160,000 in 2018), an enormous amount at the time.[12] His mother, Rachel (daughter of Hugh Veitch of Stewartfield),[13] was from an impoverished gentry family.[14] The family home wasHaig House inWindygates, Fife.[15]
Haig's education began in 1869 as a boarder at Mr Bateson's School inSt Andrews. Later in 1869, he switched toEdinburgh Collegiate School, and then in 1871 to Orwell House, a preparatory school inWarwickshire. He then attendedClifton College.[16][17] Both of Haig's parents had died by the time he was eighteen.[18]
After a tour of the United States with his brother, Haig studied Political Economy, Ancient History and French Literature atBrasenose College, Oxford, 1880–1883. He devoted much of his time to socialising – he was a member of theBullingdon Club – and equestrian sports. He was one of the best young horsemen at Oxford and part of theUniversity polo team.[19] While an undergraduate he was initiated as aFreemason in Elgin's Lodge atLeven, Fife, taking the first and second degrees of Freemasonry.[20] In 1920Archibald Montgomerie, 16th Earl of Eglinton encouraged Haig to complete his Masonic progression, and he returned to his lodge to take the third degree,[20] serving asWorshipful Master of the lodge from 1925 to 1926.[21] He became an officer of theGrand Lodge of Scotland.[20]
Although he passed his final exam at Oxford (a requirement for university applicants to Sandhurst), he was not eligible for a degree as he had missed a term's residence owing to illness, and if he had stayed for longer he would have been above the age limit (23) to begin officer training at theRoyal Military College, Sandhurst, which he entered in January 1884. Because he had been to university, Haig was considerably older than most of his class at Sandhurst. He was Senior Under-Officer, was awarded theAnson Sword and passed out first in the order of merit.[22] He was commissioned as alieutenant into the7th (Queen's Own) Hussars on 7 February 1885.[23]
Early in his military career, Haig played polo for England on a tour of the United States (August 1886). He would remain a polo enthusiast all his life, serving as Chairman of theHurlingham Polo Association from 1914 until 1922, President of the Army Polo Committee, and founder of theIndian Polo Association.[24][25]
Haig saw overseas service inIndia (sent out November 1886), where he was appointed the regiment'sadjutant in 1888.[26] He was something of a disciplinarian,[27] but impressed his superiors by his administrative skill and analysis of training exercises. He was promoted tocaptain on 23 January 1891.[28]
.jpg)
Haig left India in November 1892 to prepare for the entrance exam for theStaff College, Camberley, which he sat in June 1893. Although he was placed in the top 28 (the number of places awarded by exam) he was not awarded a place as he had narrowly failed the compulsory mathematics paper. He concealed this failure for the rest of his life[29] and in 1910 recommended dropping the mathematics paper as a requirement.[30]Adjutant-General SirRedvers Buller refused to award Haig one of the four nominated places, citing hiscolour blindness, despite Haig having his eyesight rechecked by a German oculist and despite glowing testimonials. It has been postulated that Buller was looking for a rationale to give a place to an infantry officer.[31]
Haig returned briefly to India as second-in-command of the squadron which he had himself commanded in 1892, then returned to the UK asAide-de-camp to SirJames Keith Fraser, Inspector General of Cavalry.[32] Fraser was one of those who had lobbied for Haig to enter the Staff College, and he was finally nominated in late 1894, a common practice in the day for promising candidates. While waiting to take up his place, he travelled toGermany to report on cavalry manoeuvres there, and served as staff officer to ColonelJohn French on manoeuvres. The careers of French and Haig were to be entwined for the next twenty-five years, and Haig helped French write the cavalry drillbook, published 1896.[11]
Haig entered the Staff College, Camberley in 1896, where he was apparently not popular with his peers. For example, they chose CaptainEdmund Allenby asMaster of the Drag Hunt, despite Haig being the better rider.[33][34] Haig impressed the chief instructor, Lieutenant ColonelGeorge Francis Robert Henderson, and completed the course, leaving in 1897. Camberley's old-fashioned curriculum especially influenced Haig, as he was an absorber of doctrine rather than an original thinker. Haig was taught that victory must come from defeating the main enemy army in battle, and that attrition (the "wearing out fight") was merely a prelude to the commitment of reserves for a decisive battlefield victory; traces of this thought can be seen atLoos andthe Somme. Great emphasis was placed on morale and mobility, and onJoachim Murat's cavalry pursuit afterNapoleon'sJena campaign of 1806.[35]
In early January Haig was picked byEvelyn Wood (by then Adjutant-General) as one of three recent staff college graduates requested byKitchener for a campaign in theMahdist War in theSudan.[36] He may have been picked to keep an eye on Kitchener, as Wood invited him to write to him in confidence. Haig needed little encouragement to (privately) criticise his superiors – he was especially critical of Kitchener's dictatorial habits.[37] Kitchener's force was Anglo-Egyptian, and Haig was required to formally join theEgyptian Army, most of whose officers were British. The plan had been for him to train and take command of an Egyptian cavalry squadron, but Kitchener did not want a command reshuffle with combat imminent.[38] Unlike many British officers, Haig believed that the Egyptians could make good soldiers if properly trained and led.[39] Still without a formal position but accompanying the cavalry, Haig saw his first action in a skirmish south of Atbara (21 March). In his report to Wood about the skirmish, Haig commented on the lack of British machine guns. While later criticized for his failure to optimize the use of machine guns, Haig made a special trip to theRoyal Small Arms Factory at Enfield to study theMaxim Gun, and throughout the campaign commented on its worth.[40]
Four days later he was made staff officer ofRobert Broadwood's cavalry brigade. Haig distinguished himself at his second action, the Battle of Nukheila (6 April), where he supervised the redeployment of squadrons to protect the rear and then launch a flank attack. He was present at theBattle of Atbara (8 April), after which he criticised Kitchener for launching a frontal attack without taking the Dervishes in flank.[41] During the latter action Haig risked his life rescuing a wounded Egyptian soldier under enemy fire,[42] an act which moved several officers present to believe Haig should receive theVictoria Cross.[42] After Atbara, Kitchener was given reinforcements and Haig received a squadron of his own, which he commanded atOmdurman (in reserve during the battle, then on a flank march into the town afterwards). He was promoted tobrevetmajor on 15 November 1898.[43]
Haig returned to the United Kingdom hoping for a position at theWar Office, but was instead appointed (May 1899)brigade major to the1st Cavalry Brigade at Aldershot.[44]
Haig had recently lent £2,500 (in a formal contract with interest, worth £400,000 in 2024) to the brigade commander, John French, to cover his losses from South African mining speculations. The loan allowed French to maintain his commission.[45] Haig was promoted to the substantive rank of major on 26 June 1899.[46]
Haig was soon appointed Deputy Assistant Adjutant-General (September 1899)[47] and then Assistant Adjutant General (i.e. chief staff officer) of French's brigade-sized force as it was sent to theBoer War.[48] He took part in French's first battle,Elandslaagte (21 October). French and Haig were ordered to leaveLadysmith as the four-month siege began, to take charge of the new Cavalry Division arriving from the UK. The two men escaped on the last train to leave Ladysmith (2 November 1899), lying down as it passed through enemy fire.[49]
Haig continued to be sceptical of the importance of artillery, basing his opinions on interviews with enemy prisoners.[50] After French'sColesberg Operations to protectCape Colony,Frederick Roberts, newly arrived as Commander-in-Chief, appointed his protégé ColonelCharles Hay, 20th Earl of Erroll, over French's protests, to the job of Assistant Adjutant General of the Cavalry Division, with Haig, who had been promised the job (and the local rank oflieutenant-colonel), as his deputy. Cavalry played a leading role in this stage of the war, including therelief of Kimberley (15 February 1900), which featured a spectacular British cavalry charge atKlip Drift. Haig was briefly (21 February 1900) given command of the 3rd Cavalry Brigade, then made AAG to the Cavalry Division after Erroll was moved to a different job. French's Division took part in the capture ofBloemfontein (13 March 1900) andPretoria (5 June 1900). Haig privately criticised Roberts and thought him a "silly old man".[51]
After Roberts had won the conventional war, Kitchener was left in charge of fighting theBoers, who had taken to guerrilla warfare. The Cavalry Division was disbanded (November 1900) and French, with Haig still his chief of staff, was put in charge of an all-arms force policing theJohannesburg area, later trying to capture the Boer leaderChristiaan de Wet around Bloemfontein. In January 1901 Haig was given a column of 2,500 men with thelocal rank ofbrigadier general, patrolling Cape Colony, and chasing CommandantPieter Hendrik Kritzinger. As was standard policy at that time, Haig's actions included burning farmsteads as part of thescorched earth policies ordered by Lord Kitchener as well as rounding up Boer women and children to be placed inconcentration camps.[52]
Throughout the war Haig's sister, Henrietta, had been lobbying Evelyn Wood for her brother to have command of a cavalry regiment when the war was over. French, probably not wanting to part with a valuable assistant, recommendedHerbert Lawrence for the vacant command of the17th Lancers, but Roberts, now Commander-in-Chief back in Britain, overruled him and gave it to Haig (May 1901). As the 17th Lancers were in South Africa at the time Haig was able to combine that command with that of his own column.[53]
As the war drew to a close Haig had to locate and escort the Boer leaderJan Christiaan Smuts to the peace negotiations at Vereeninging. Haig wasmentioned in despatches four times for his service in South Africa (including by Lord Roberts on 31 March 1900,[54] and by Lord Kitchener on 23 June 1902[55]), and appointed aCompanion of the Order of the Bath (CB) in November 1900.[56] He was promoted to the substantive rank oflieutenant colonel on 17 July 1901.[57]
Following the war, Haig leftCape Town with 540 officers and men of the 17th Lancers on the SSGerman in late September 1902.[58] The regiment was supposed to stay in South Africa but in the end returned home sooner than planned, and arrived atSouthampton in late October, when they were posted toEdinburgh.[58] Haig was appointed anaide-de-camp to KingEdward VII in the October 1902 South Africa Honours list, with the brevet rank of colonel.[59]
Haig continued as the commanding officer of the17th Lancers until 1903, stationed in Edinburgh. In October he was then appointedinspector general of cavalry inBritish India, for which he was promoted to substantivecolonel whilst holding the local rank ofmajor general while in his new assignment.[60] He would have preferred command of the cavalry brigade atAldershot, where French was now thegeneral officer commanding, but had first to spend a year on garrison duty at Edinburgh until the previous incumbent completed his term.[61]
Haig's war service had earned him belated but rapid promotion: having been a captain until the relatively advanced age of thirty-seven, by May 1904, when he received his promotion,[62] he had become the youngestmajor general in theBritish Army at that time. He was present at theRawalpindi Parade 1905 to honour thePrince andPrincess of Wales' visit to India. At this time a great deal of the energies of the most senior British generals were taken up with the question of whether cavalry should still be trained to charge with sword and lance (the view of French and Haig). Lord Roberts, nowCommander-in-Chief of the Forces, warned Kitchener (nowCommander-in-Chief, India) to be "very firm with Haig" on this issue, and wrote that Haig was a "clever, able fellow" who had great influence over Sir John French.[63]
On leave from India, Haig married Dorothy Maud Vivian on 11 July 1905 after a whirlwind courtship (she had spotted him for the first time when he was playing polo at Hurlingham two years earlier). She was a daughter ofHussey Vivian, 3rd Baron Vivian and Louisa Duff.[64]: 562
The couple had four children:
Haig had used his leave in 1905 to lobby for a job at the War Office, but the proposal was rejected byH. O. Arnold-Forster, theSecretary of State for War, as too blatantly relying on royal influence.[66]
The Boer War had exposed Britain's lack of a general staff and modern reserve army. In August 1906 Haig was appointed Director of Military Training at theWar Office.[67] The Secretary of State,Richard Haldane, later wrote that Haig had "a first rate general staff mind" and "gave invaluable advice".[68] Although both men later claimed that the reforms had been to prepare Britain for continental war, they created a small professional army within a budget, withconscription politically impossible.[69]
The reforms reorganised the militia, yeomanry and volunteers into the newTerritorial Force. Haig was intolerant of what he regarded as old-fashioned opinions and not good at negotiating with strangers.[70] Haig had wanted a reserve of 900,000 men, but Haldane settled for a more realistic 300,000.[71] Haig's skills at administration and organising training and inspections were better employed in setting up an Expeditionary Force of 120,000 men in 1907. As an intimate of Haldane Haig was able to ensure high priority for cavalry, less for artillery, contrary to the advice of Lord Roberts (now retired). Haig's records of his time supervising artillery exercises show little interest in technical matters.[72]
In November 1907 Haig was moved sideways to Director of Staff Duties.[73] He required commanders to take the staff officers assigned to them (rather than choose their own by patronage) and assigned staff officers to the new Territorial Army. He supervised publication of "Field Service Regulations", which was later very useful in expanding the BEF, although it still stressed the importance of cavalry charging with sword and lance. At this time he was completing a separate work, "Cavalry Studies",[74] and devoting much time to cavalry exercises.[75]
By 1909 it seemed likely that an Anglo-German War loomed and Haig was reluctant to accept appointment asChief of the General Staff in India.[76] He passed the Director of Staff Duties job to his loyal follower Brigadier-GeneralLauncelot Kiggell, to whom he wrote with "advice" every fortnight. Haig, who had been knighted for his work at the War Office back in June,[77] was promoted tolieutenant-general in November 1910.[78] In India he had hoped to develop the Indian General Staff and to organise despatch of theBritish Indian Army to a future European war. The latter was vetoed by ViceroyLord Hardinge. An Indian Corps would serve on theWestern Front early in the conflict, and Indian troops were used in comparatively small formations in the Middle East.[79]
Haig left India in December 1911, and took up an appointment as GOCAldershot Command (which had the 1st and 2nd divisions and the 1st Cavalry Brigade under its command) in March 1912.[80] In May he was appointed colonel of the 17th Lancers, in succession to Major GeneralThomas Cooke.[81]
In theArmy Manoeuvres of 1912 he was decisively beaten by Lieutenant GeneralSir James Grierson despite having the odds in his favour, because of Grierson's superior use of air reconnaissance. At dinner afterwards Haig abandoned his prepared text, and although he wrote that his remarks were "well received",John Charteris recorded that they were "unintelligible and unbearably dull" and that the visiting dignitaries fell asleep. Haig's poor public speaking skills aside, the manoeuvres were thought to have shown the reformed army efficient.[82] In June 1913 he was appointed aKnight Commander of the Order of the Bath (KCB) in the1913 Birthday Honours.[83]
During theCurragh Mutiny (March 1914) Haig urged caution on his BGGSJohn Gough, whose brotherHubert Gough was threatening to resign rather than coerce Ulstermen into a semi-independent Ireland. Haig stressed that the army's duty was to keep the peace. Sir John French was forced to resign asChief of the Imperial General Staff, after putting in writing a promise that officers would not be required to coerce Ulster; Haig respected Hubert Gough's principled stand but felt French had allowed himself to be used as a political tool byH. H. Asquith.[84]
Upon the outbreak of war in August 1914, Haig helped organize theBritish Expeditionary Force (BEF), commanded by Field Marshal Sir John French. As planned, Haig's Aldershot command was formed intoI Corps. In a letter to Haldane (4 August), Haig predicted that the war would last for months if not years; Haig wanted Haldane to delay sending the BEF to France until the Territorial Army had been mobilised and incorporated.[85] Haig attended the War Council (5 August), at which it was decided that it was too dangerous to mobilise forward in France atMaubeuge near the Belgian border, as British mobilisation was running three days behind that ofFrance andGermany. There were no other contingency plans – Haig and Kitchener proposed that the BEF would be better positioned to counter-attack inAmiens. Sir John French suggested landing atAntwerp, which was vetoed byWinston Churchill as theRoyal Navy could not guarantee safe passage. A critical biographer writes that Haig was "more clear-sighted than many of his colleagues".[86]
In his much-criticised memoirs1914, French claimed that Haig had wanted to postpone sending the BEF, which may be partly true given what Haig had written to Haldane. Haig was so angry at this claim that he askedCabinet SecretaryMaurice Hankey to correct French's "inaccuracies". However Haig also rewrote his diary from this period, possibly to show himself in a better light and French in a poor one. The original manuscript diary does not survive but there is no positive evidence that it was destroyed, and it is just as likely that the extant typed version was prepared from dictation or notes now lost.[87] Hankey's notes of the meeting record that Haig suggested delaying or sending smaller forces, but was willing to send forces if France was in danger of defeat or if France wanted them (which it did). Haig predicted that the war would last several years and that an army of a million men, trained by officers and NCOs withdrawn from the BEF, would be needed.[86]
Haig had been appointedaide-de-camp to KingGeorge V in February 1914.[88] During a royal inspection of Aldershot (11 August), Haig told the King that he had "grave doubts" about French's temper and military knowledge. He later claimed that these doubts had gone back to the Boer War but there appears to have been an element of later embellishment about this; Haig had in fact praised French during the Boer War and had welcomed his appointment as CIGS in 1911.[89]
.jpg)
Haig crossed over toLe Havre.[90] The BEF landed in France on 14 August and advanced into Belgium. Haig was irritated by Sir John French, who ignored intelligence reports of German forces streaming westwards from Brussels, threatening an encirclement from the British left. Although II Corps fought off the German attack atMons on 23 August the BEF was forced to withdraw.[91]
The retreats of I andII Corps had to be conducted separately because of theMormal Forest. The two corps were supposed to meet atLe Cateau but I Corps under Haig were stopped atLandrecies, leaving a large gap between the two. Haig's reactions to his corps' skirmish with German forces at Landrecies (during which Haig led his staff into the street, revolvers drawn, promising to "sell our lives dearly") caused him to send an exaggerated report to French, which caused French to panic. The following day 26 August, GeneralHorace Smith-Dorrien's II Corps engaged the enemy in theBattle of Le Cateau, which was unsupported by Haig. This battle slowed the German advance. However, a critical biographer writes that too much has been made of the "moment of panic" at Landrecies, and that the 200-mile (320 km) retreat, over a period of 13 days, is a tribute to the "steady and competent leadership" of Haig and Smith-Dorrien.[92]
On 25 August the French commanderJoseph Joffre ordered his forces to retreat to theMarne, which compelled the BEF to further withdraw. Haig was irritated by the high-handed behaviour of the French, seizing roads which they had promised for British use and refusing to promise to cover the British right flank. He complained privately of French unreliability and lack of fighting competence, a complaint which he would keep up for the next four years. He wrote to his wife that he wished the British were operating independently from Antwerp, a proposal which he had rejected as "reckless" when Sir John French had made it at the War Council on 4 August.[93]
The retreat caused Sir John French to question the competence of his Allies and led to his decision to withdraw the BEF south of theSeine. On 1 September, Lord Kitchener intervened by visiting French and ordering him to re-enter the battle and coordinate with Joffre's forces. The battle to defendParis began on 5 September and became known as thefirst Battle of the Marne. Haig had wanted to rest his corps but was happy to resume the offensive when ordered. He drove on his subordinates when he thought them lacking in "fighting spirit". Although Sir John French praised Haig's leadership of his corps, Haig was privately contemptuous of French's overconfidence prior to Mons and excessive caution thereafter.[94]
On 15 October, after two weeks of friction between British and French generals, Haig's I Corps was moved to Ypres in Flanders as part of the "Race to the Sea".[95] In the belief that the German northern flank was weak, Haig was ordered to march onGhent,Bruges andCourtrai in western Belgium but the new German Chief of StaffErich von Falkenhayn was trying to do the opposite and roll up the Allied northern flank. I Corps marched headlong into a thrust westward by fresh German forces, resulting in theFirst Battle of Ypres. German forces, equipped with 250 heavy guns (a large number for this stage in the war), outnumbered I Corps by two to one and came close to success. At one point Haig mounted his horse to encourage his men, who were retreating around Gheluvelt, although the town had just been recaptured by abattalion of theWorcesters.[96] Haig cemented his reputation at this battle and Ypres remained a symbolic location in later years. Haig was also influenced by the fact that the Germans had called off their offensive when they were on the verge of success, concluding that attacks needed to be kept up so long as there was any chance of success.[97]
After a fortnight of intense fighting I Corps had been reduced from 18,000 men to just under 3,000 effectives by 12 November.[98] After six days of bickering between British and French generals, I Corps was relieved by French troops; Haig was very suspicious of the pro-French sympathies of Sub Chief of StaffHenry Wilson.[99] French, who had been ordered by his doctor to relieve the strain on his heart, recommended Haig for immediate promotion togeneral. Haig travelled to London on French's behalf to consult Kitchener about the plan to expand the BEF and reorganise it into two armies.[100]
At this point it was thought that the war would end once the Germans were defeated by the Russians atŁódź and the difficulties of attacking on theWestern Front were not yet appreciated. A failed attack by Smith-Dorrien's II Corps on Messines–Wytschaete (14–15 December) was blamed on poor GHQ staff work, and on 18 December, Haig met French, who said he wanted to sack the BEF chief of staffArchibald Murray, whose performance had been unsatisfactory throughout the campaign and promote his deputy Henry Wilson. Haig thought that Wilson had "no military knowledge" and recommended Quarter-Master General"Wully" Robertson. This was also the view of Lord Kitchener, so Robertson received the promotion.[101] Haig received promotion to general on 16 November 1914.[102]
Like French, Haig wanted to push along the North Sea Coast toOstend andZeebrugge but Joffre did not want the British acting so independently.[103] Germany had recently sent eight infantry divisions to theEastern Front, so French and Joffre agreed that a French offensive inArtois andChampagne, should be accompanied by a British offensive atNeuve-Chapelle to be conducted by Haig. At Neuve Chapelle, Haig wanted a quick bombardment and his subordinateHenry Rawlinson a longer and more methodical one. Shortage of shells meant that only a thirty-five-minute bombardment was possible but the small front of the attack gave it the concentration to succeed.[104]
Haig was greatly interested in the potential of aircraft and met MajorHugh Trenchard of theRoyal Flying Corps to organise photographic air reconnaissance and a map of German lines was obtained; aircraft were also used for artillery spotting.[105] Four divisions attacked at theBattle of Neuve Chapelle on 10 March and penetrated 1,600 yards (1,500 m) but no progress was made on subsequent days, as the Germans brought in reinforcements. Casualties were around 12,000 on each side.[104] Rawlinson had wanted to end the offensive after the first day and Haig felt that reserves should have been committed quicker. On Rawlinson's suggestion Haig came close to sacking Major-General Joey Davies until it was found that Davies had followed Rawlinson's orders; Haig reprimanded Rawlinson but thought him too valuable to sack. This may have made Rawlinson reluctant to stand up to Haig thereafter.[106]
Whilst the Germans attacked Smith-Dorrien at theSecond Battle of Ypres (April), new Allied offensives were planned by the French atVimy and by Haig at Aubers Ridge (9 May). It was believed on the British side that the lessons of Neuve Chapelle had been learned – reserves were ready to exploit and mortars were ready to support attackers who had advanced beyond artillery cover – and that this time success would be complete not partial. Theattack was less successful than Neuve Chapelle as the bombardment was over a wider front and against stronger defences; Haig was still focussed on winning a decisive victory by capturing key ground, rather than amassing firepower to inflict maximum damage.[107][108] Attacks (at Festubert, 15–25 May) as a diversion, gained 1,100 yards (1,000 m) over a front of 4,400 yards (4,000 m), with 16,000 British casualties to around 6,600 German losses.[109] Sir John French was satisfied that the attacks had taken pressure off the French at their request but Haig felt that German reserves were being exhausted, bringing victory nearer.[110]
Lack of shells at these offensives was, along withFirst Sea LordJohn Fisher's resignation over the failedDardanelles Campaign, a cause of the fall of theLiberal Government (19 May). Haig did not approve of theNorthcliffe press attacks on Kitchener, whom he thought a powerful military voice against the folly of civilians like Churchill (despite the fact that Kitchener was an opponent of the strong General Staff which Haig wanted to see). French had been leaking information about the shell shortage toCharles à Court Repington ofThe Times, whom Haig detested and which he likened to "carrying on with a whore". French also communicated withConservative leaders and toDavid Lloyd George who becameMinister of Munitions in the newcoalition government.[111]
Haig was asked byClive Wigram (one of the King's press staff) to smooth relations between French and Kitchener. At Robertson's suggestion, Haig received Kitchener at his HQ (despite French's attempt to block the meeting), where they shared their concerns about French. The two men met again in London (14 July), whilst Haig was receiving hisKnight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath (awarded on French's recommendation after Neuve Chapelle) from theKing,[112] who also complained to him about French. Over lunch with the King and Kitchener, Haig remarked that the best time to sack French would have been after the retreat to the Marne; it was agreed that the men would correspond in confidence.[113]
Haig had long thought French petty, jealous, unbalanced, overly quick to meddle in party politics and easily manipulated by Henry Wilson.[114] Haig was increasingly irritated by French's changes of orders and mercurial changes of mood as to the length of the war, which French now expected to last into 1916.[115] Haig still thought Germany might collapse by November, although at the same time he was sending a memo to the War Office recommending that the BEF, now numbering 25 divisions, be equipped with the maximum number of heavy guns, ready for a huge decisive battle, 36 divisions strong in 1916.[116]
The war was not going well – besides thefailure at Cape Helles (landing 25 April),Bulgaria had joined theCentral Powers (Serbia was soon overrun). Allied attacks in the west were needed to take pressure off theRussians, who were being flung out ofPoland. The original plan was to attack in July. At Joffre's insistence the offensive was planned next to the French10th Army at Loos.[117]
Haig inspected theLoos area (24 June) and expressed dissatisfaction with the ground. French and Haig would have preferred to renew the attack at Aubers Ridge.[118] French was dissuaded byFerdinand Foch, who felt that only a British attack at Loos would pull in enough German reserves to allow the French to take Vimy Ridge. French wrote to Joffre saying he was willing to go along with these plans for the sake of Anglo-French cooperation, but then wrote to Joffre again suggesting an artillery bombardment with only limited British infantry attacks. Kitchener listened sympathetically to Joffre's suggestion that in future Joffre should set the size, dates and objectives of British offensives, although he only agreed for the Loos attack for the moment. It is unclear exactly why Kitchener and then Haig agreed to go along with Joffre's wishes – possibly the disastrous plight of the Russians, but it may be that a promise that poison gas could be used may have persuaded Haig. The French then postponed the attack as they picked new attacking ground in Champagne and arranged for extra shelling at Vimy, in both cases because of the very reasons – German-held villages and other obstructions – to which the British generals had objected.[119]
Only 850 guns were available, too few for concentrated bombardment over a frontage far wider than at Neuve Chapelle.[120] There was also argument over the placement of the reserve (including inexperiencedNew Army divisions), which Haig wanted close to the front. Haig had persuaded himself that decisive victory was possible, and it may be that French wanted to keep control of the reserve to stop them being thrown into battle needlessly.[121] French tried in vain to forbid Haig to discuss his plans with Kitchener (on the grounds that Kitchener might leak them to politicians). Battle began (25 September) after Haig ordered the release ofchlorine gas.[122]
The attack failed in the northagainst the Hohenzollern Redoubt but broke through the German first line in the centre. The reserves were tired after night marches to reach the front in secrecy and were not available until 2 pm, but were thrown into battle without success on the second day.[123]
Haig wrote a detailed letter to Kitchener claiming "complete" success on the first day and complaining that the reserves had not been placed as close to the front as agreed and that French had not released control of them when requested. Haig strengthened his case by reports that captured enemy officers had been astonished at the British failure to exploit the attack and by complaining about the government's foot-dragging at introducing conscription and the commitment of troops to sideshows likeSalonika and Suvla Bay.[124]
The failure of Loos was debated in the British press. Kitchener demanded a report and Lord Haldane was sent to France to interview French and Haig.[125] French in turn demanded a report from Haig, in particular his claim to have penetrated the German lines.Lord Stamfordham, the King's Secretary, telephoned Robertson to ask his opinion of French and Robertson conferred with Haig – who was pushing for Robertson to be appointed Chief of the Imperial General Staff – before giving his opinion. The King also discussed the matter with Haig over dinner on a visit to the front (24 October). Haig again told him that French should have been sacked in August 1914. Four days later the King, whilst inspecting troops, was injured when thrown by one of Haig's horses and had to be evacuated to England on a stretcher, which embarrassed Haig. French had his orders releasing the reserves published inThe Times (2 November), with an article by Repington blaming Haig. Haig demanded a correction of French's "inaccuracies", whereupon French ordered Haig to cease all correspondence on this matter,. Haig met with the Prime Minister,H. H. Asquith on 23 November andBonar Law (Conservative Leader) the next day. Rumours were rife that French was to be sacked.[126] Matters had been delayed as Kitchener was away on an inspection tour of the Mediterranean and French was sick in bed. Kitchener returned to London (3 Dec) and at a meeting with Haig that day, told him that he was to recommend to Asquith that Haig replace French.[127]
Haig's appointment as Commander-in-Chief BEF was announced on 10 December and almost simultaneously Robertson became Chief of the Imperial General Staff in London. Haig and Robertson hoped that this would be the start of a new and more professional management of the war.Charles Monro was promoted to GOC First Army in Haig's place, not Rawlinson whom Haig would have preferred, and for reasons of seniority Haig was forced to accept the weak-willedLauncelot Kiggell, notRichard Butler as chief of staff BEF in succession to Robertson.[128] Haig and French, who seemed ill, had a final handover meeting (18 December, the day before the formal change of command), at which Haig agreed that Churchill – recently resigned from the Cabinet and vetoed from command of a brigade – should be given command of a battalion.[129]
For the first time (2 January) Haig attended church service withGeorge Duncan, who was to have great influence over him. Haig saw himself as God's servant and was keen to have clergymen sent out whose sermons would remind the men that the war dead were martyrs in a just cause.[130]
Robertson and Kitchener wanted to concentrate on the Western Front, unlike many in the Cabinet who preferredSalonika orMesopotamia. Haig and Robertson were aware that Britain would have to take on more of the offensive burden, as France was beginning to run out of men, but thought that the Germans might retreat in the west so they could concentrate on beating the Russians. Haig thought that the Germans had already had plenty of "wearing out", that a decisive victory was possible in 1916 and urged Robertson to recruit more cavalry. Haig's preference was to regain control of the Belgian coast by attacking in Flanders, to bring the coast and the naval bases at Bruges, Zeebrugge and Ostend into Allied hands and where the Germans would suffer great loss if they were reluctant to retreat.[131][132]
Lloyd George visited Haig at GHQ and afterwards wrote to Haig, to say that he had been impressed by his "grip" and by the "trained thought of a great soldier". Subsequent relations between the two men were not to be so cordial. Haig thought Lloyd George "shifty and unreliable".[133] Haig had thought that the German troops reported nearVerdun were a feint prior to an attack on the British but theVerdun Offensive began on 21 February.[134] In March 1916 GHQ was moved fromSaint-Omer toMontreuil, Pas-de-Calais. For his residence Haig commandeered Beaurepaire House a few kilometres away.[135]
Haig decided that Verdun had "worn down" the Germans enough and that a decisive victory was possible at once. The Cabinet were less optimistic; Kitchener would have preferred smaller, purely attritional attacks but sided with Robertson in telling the Cabinet that the Somme offensive should go ahead. Haig attended a Cabinet meeting in London (15 April) where the politicians were more concerned with the political crisis over the introduction of conscription.[136]
The French had already insisted on an Anglo-French attack at theSomme, where British and French troops were adjacent, to relieve the pressure on the French Army at Verdun, although the French component of the attack was gradually reduced as reinforcements went to Verdun. Haig wanted to delay until 15 August, to allow for more training and more artillery to be available. When told of this Joffre shouted at Haig that "the French Army would cease to exist" and had to be calmed with "liberal doses of 1840 brandy"[citation needed]. The British refused to agree to French demands for a joint Anglo-French offensive from the Salonika bridgehead. Eventually, perhaps influenced by reports of French troop disturbances at Verdun, Haig agreed to attack on 29 June (later put back until 1 July). It later turned out thatPhilippe Pétain at Verdun was warning the French government that the "game was up" unless the British attacked.[137]
The government was concerned at the volume of shipping space being used for fodder and wanted to cut the number of cavalry divisions. Haig opposed this, believing that cavalry would still be needed to exploit the imminent victory. Most of the fodder was for the horses, donkeys and mules which the BEF used to move supplies and heavy equipment. Discussing this matter with the King, Haig told him that Germany would collapse by the end of 1916.[138] This round of planning ended with a sharp exchange of letters with the Cabinet, Haig rebuked them for interfering in military matters and declared that "I am responsible for the efficiency of the Armies in France". Lloyd George thought Haig's letter "perfectly insolent" and that the government "had the right to investigate any matter connected with the war that they pleased".[139]
.jpg)
From 1 July to 18 November 1916, Haig, who on 15 August was made a Grand Cross of theRoyal Victorian Order,[140] directed the British portion of theBattle of the Somme. Although too much shrapnel was used in the initial bombardment for 1 July, Haig was not entirely to blame for this – as early as January 1915 Haig had been impressed by evidence of the effectiveness of high explosive shells and had demanded as many of them as possible fromStanley von Donop (Master-General of the Ordnance).[141]
On 1 January 1917, Haig was made afield marshal.[142] King George V wrote him a handwritten note ending: "I hope you will look upon this as a New Year's gift from myself and the country".[143] Lloyd George, who had becomePrime Minister in December 1916, infuriated Haig and Robertson by placing the BEF under the command of the new French Commander-in-ChiefRobert Nivelle. The failure of theNivelle offensive in April 1917 (which Haig had been required to support with a Britishoffensive at Arras) and the subsequentFrench mutiny and political crisis, discredited Lloyd George's plans for Anglo-French co-operation. During the second half of 1917, Haig conducted anoffensive at Passchendaele (the Third Battle of Ypres). Haig hoped to liberate the North Sea coast of Belgium from which GermanU-boats were operating, provided that there was assistance from the French, support from Britain and thatRussia stayed in the war.[144]
TheAdmiralty, led byJohn Jellicoe, believed that theU-boat threat could jeopardise Britain's ability to continue fighting. Another objective was to commit German resources to Belgian Flanders, away from theAisne sector in France, where the French mutiny had been worst, to give theFrench Army time to recover.[144] Haig was worried that theRussian Revolution would result in Russia and Germany making peace and forming an alliance. If this happened the German troops located on theEastern Front would be transferred to the west by late 1917 or early 1918, making a decisive victory much more difficult.[145]
The Third Battle of Ypres caused the British far fewer casualties than the Battle of the Somme and the substantial success of the occupation of the ridges around Ypres, the first stage of the offensive strategy and inflicted comparable losses on the Germans, who were far less capable of replacing losses and which contributed to their defeat in 1918.[146]
By the end of 1917, Lloyd George felt able to assert authority over the generals and at the end of the year was able to sack theFirst Sea Lord Admiral Jellicoe. Over the objections of Haig and Robertson, an inter-AlliedSupreme War Council was set up.[147] When the council was inaugurated (11 November), Lloyd George attributed the success of the Central Powers to unity and scoffed at recent Allied "victories", saying he wished "it had not been necessary to win so many of them". His speech angered several leading politicians andSecretary of State for WarEdward Stanley, 17th Earl of Derby assured Haig of his backing.[148] Haig and Pétain objected to a common command, arguing that coalitions work better when one power is dominant, which was no longer the case now that British military power had increased relative to that of France.[149] Lloyd George got his wish to send British forces toItaly, after the Italiandefeat at Caporetto in November.[150] Haig knew that manpower was scarce in the BEF and at home and wrote to Robertson that an offensive at Cambrai would stem the flow of reinforcements to Italy;[151] Robertson delayed the despatch of two divisions.[152]
Plans for a III Corps attack at Cambrai had been proposed as far back as May. Haig had informed theWar Office (5 June) that "events have proved the utility of Tanks".[153] The plan was to trap German troops between the RiverSensée andCanal du Nord, with the cavalry to seize theSaint-Quentin Canal crossings, then exploit north-east. The first day objective was the high ground around Bourlon Wood and Haig was to review progress after 48 hours.[154]
The Third Army attacked at Cambrai early on 20 November with 1,000 guns (using a surprise predictedbarrage rather than a preliminary bombardment) and nine tank battalions.[153] On the first day the British penetrated 5 miles (8 km) on a 6-mile (10 km) front with only 4,000 casualties, limited by blown bridges and the shortness of the November day. The51st (Highland) Division was held up atFlesquières village, which fell the following day. Haig's intelligence chief Brigadier-GeneralJohn Charteris told him that the Germans would not be able to reinforce for 48 hours andJames Marshall-Cornwall, then a junior intelligence officer, later an admiring biographer of Haig, alleged that Charteris refused to have reported fresh German divisions shown on the situation map as he did not want to weaken Haig's resolution.[155]
Haig visited the battlefield (21 November), inspecting the fighting at Bourlon Wood through his binoculars. He thought the attacks "feeble and uncoordinated" and was disappointed at the lack of grip by corps and division commanders and encountering1st Cavalry Division, which had been ordered to fall back, resisted the temptation to countermand the order. At around 9 pm he decided to continue the attack on Bourlon Wood, a decision which has been much criticised but which made good military sense at the time and was supported byJulian Byng, although the political need for a clear victory may have been a factor.[156] The offensive continued but with diminishing returns. Bourlon Wood fell on 23 November but German counter-attacks had begun. Haig arrived at aThird Army planning meeting (26 November) and ordered further attacks the following day but then had to bow to Byng deciding to go onto the defensive. Haig complained that the lack of extra divisions had prevented a breakthrough, a view described by one biographer as "self-deception, pure and simple".[157]
Some of the gains were retaken after 30 November, when the Germans made their first counter-offensive against the British since 1914, using newSturmtruppen tactics. GHQ intelligence had failed to piece together warnings. British casualties had mounted to over 40,000 by 3 December, with German losses somewhat less.[155] One biographer argues that the initial success at Cambrai helped to save Haig's job but another view is that the ultimate disappointment did more damage to Haig's political credibility than Passchendaele.[158][159] Lloyd George was particularly angry at the embarrassing Cambrai reverse, but Haig's support amongst the Army, the public and many politicians made sacking him impossible; a plan that Haig be "promoted" to a sinecure, as generalissimo of British forces, was scotched when Lord Derby threatened resignation.[160]
Asked to provide a statement to theHouse of Commons, Haig attributed the German success to "one cause and one alone ... lack of training on the part of junior officers and NCOs and men", a verdict supported by the court of enquiry which, at Derby's instigation, Haig ordered, although the enquiry also criticised "higher commanders" for failing to enforce defensive doctrine.[161] In a later report to Robertson Haig accepted the blame, stating that the troops had been tired as a result of the attack on Bourlon Wood.[159] Although Haig defended Charteris,[162] he was required to dismiss him. Robertson had arrived at Haig's Headquarters with orders (signed by Derby) for his dismissal, in case Haig refused to do as he was asked. A common criticism is that Haig only accepted intelligence from Charteris (who told him what he wanted to hear) and did not cross-check it with other intelligence.[163]
Over lunch at10 Downing Street with Derby and Lloyd George in January, Haig predicted that the war would end within a year because of the "internal state of Germany".[164] Haig left theWar cabinet with the impression that he thought the Germans would launch small attacks on the scale of Cambrai.[165] Haig recommended that the British draw in German reserves by renewing the offensive around Ypres, which did not meet with political approval.[166][167] By now Haig's 1917 offensives were being criticised in the press and in Parliament, whereJ.C. Wedgwood openly demanded a change of command.[168][169] The purge of Haig's staff continued, with the removal of Sir Roland Maxwell (Quartermaster-General) and Lt-GenLauncelot Kiggell as BEF Chief of Staff.[170]
In January the Cabinet MinisterJan Smuts and theCabinet SecretaryMaurice Hankey were sent to France to discreetly see whether any of the Army Commanders were willing to replace Haig – none were.[171] At the Supreme War Council at Versailles Haig and Pétain complained of shortage of troops, but Haig's political credibility was so low that Hankey wrote that they "made asses of themselves". It was agreed that an Allied General Reserve be set up, under Foch with Henry Wilson as his deputy; Haig was reluctant to hand over divisions and argued against a common command, claiming that it would be "unconstitutional" for him to take orders from a foreign general, and that he did not have the reserves to spare.Alfred Milner thought Haig's stance "desperately stupid".[172]
Lloyd George proposed that the CIGS be reduced to his pre-1915 powers (i.e. reporting to the Secretary of State for War, not direct to the Cabinet) and that the British military representative at the Supreme War Council in Versailles be Deputy CIGS and a member of theArmy Council (i.e. empowered to issue orders to Haig). He offered Robertson a choice of remaining as CIGS with reduced powers or else accepting demotion to Deputy CIGS at Versailles. Derby summoned Haig to London, expecting him to support him in backing Robertson. In a private meeting with Lloyd George, Haig agreed with Robertson's position that the CIGS should himself be the delegate to Versailles, or else that the Versailles delegate be clearly subordinate to the CIGS to preserve unity of command. However, he accepted that the War Cabinet must ultimately make the decision, and according to Lloyd George "put up no fight for Robertson" and persuaded Derby not to resign. Haig thought Robertson egotistical, coarse, power-crazed and not "a gentleman" and was unhappy at the way Robertson had allowed divisions to be diverted. Henry Wilson now became CIGS, withHenry Rawlinson as British military representative at Versailles.[173] Although Haig had been suspicious of Wilson, they gradually established a warily respectful relationship.[174]
By March 1918 Germany's Western Front armies had been reinforced by the release of troops from the Eastern Front.[175] At this point British troops were tired and weakened, and Britishdivisions had been cut in size from 12battalions to 9.[176] Allied intelligence did not fall for German deceptions that they might attack in Italy or the Balkans, but thought that the main attack might fall in the Cambrai-St Quentin sector.[177] Haig inspected theFifth Army (7–9 March) and noted widespread concerns, which he shared, at lack of reserves. As late as 17 March,Edgar William Cox, who had replaced Charteris as Intelligence Chief, predicted that the German Offensive was not yet immediately imminent. By 20 March, deployment of German trench mortars had been reported by deserters, and British artillery began some spoiling fire.[178]
Germany launched an attack,Operation Michael (21 March 1918), with a force larger than the entire BEF and enjoying superiority of 5:1 overHubert Gough's Fifth Army, which were spread thinly over line recently taken over from the French.[179] Haig was initially calm on 21 March, as owing to the communications of the time GHQ was "an information vacuum" where news often took over a day to reach him, and spent much of the day entertaining foreign dignitaries including theUnited States Secretary of WarNewton D. Baker. The Third Army retreated as planned from theFlesquières salient. With three-quarters of the 50-mile (80 km) front under attack, the British troops fought hard and the Germans failed to reach their first-day objectives.[180] However, lacking reserves Gough had to retreat behind the Crozat Canal. 22 March saw the Fifth Army retreat to the Somme; Haig still anticipated further German attacks in Champagne or Arras. The Germans did not initially realise the importance ofAmiens as an objective.[176]
Haig did not speak to or visit Gough until 23 March. That day Haig arranged for reserves to be sent down from Flanders. Formal orders were issued to the Fifth Army to maintain contact with the Third Army to their north and the French to their south.[181] After initial optimism, Tim Travers has written of "panic" setting in amongst senior officers at GHQ on 23 March,[182] and there is evidence that a retreat towards the Channel Ports may have been considered.[183]
Haig had a GHQ Reserve which was massed in the north, 72 hours' march away, to protect the Channel Ports. The French Commander-in-Chief,Pétain, agreed to place two French armies underÉmile Fayolle as a reserve in the Somme valley, but could not agree to Haig's request to send 20 French divisions to Amiens.[184]
24 March was "probably the most traumatic day (Haig) had endured since" First Ypres in 1914. Half of BEF supplies came intoLe Havre,Rouen andDieppe and passed by train through Amiens, making it a major choke point.[185] Planning that winter had left open the question of whether the BEF would retreat southwest or form "an island" around the Channel Ports through which Haig's armies drew the other half of their supplies. A retreat on the ports does not seem to have been decided until some days after 21 March.[186]
This is one of the occasions where doubt has been cast on the authenticity of Haig's diary. For example, Haig's typed diary – probably based on notes prepared in April – describes Pétain as "almost unbalanced and most anxious", claiming that after attending a Cabinet meeting in Paris, where he had been ordered to "cover Paris at all costs",[187] he threatened to retreat on Paris, leaving the British right flank uncovered. Tim Travers argues that Pétain said at the meeting that he would only retreat on Paris if Haig retreated on the Channel Ports, and that Pétain had come away satisfied that Haig would not break contact. In a postwar exchange of letters with Haig Pétain denied that he had ordered a retreat on Paris or had threatened Haig that he might, a recollection whichHerbert Lawrence appears to have supported.[188] It has been suggested that Haig and Lawrence may simply have misunderstood his intentions, and that any factual errors in Haig's diary were honest if mistaken recollections.[182]
Haig's letter of 25 March, sent viaMaxime Weygand, asked for 20 French divisions to cover the southern British flank as the BEF fought its way back "covering the Channel Ports".[189] The letter is ambiguous and does not specifically mention a retreat "to" the ports. Sheffield argues that orders to Third Army were not a precursor to retreat but "a means to an end", pointing to orders for, if needs be, a counterattack onto the northern flank of the German attackers,[182] and also argues that although GHQ had a duty to consider contingency plans, unlike in 1940, evacuation was never actually likely.[190] Wilson claimed that Haig suggested Pétain be appointed Allied generalissimo (which is not consistent with Haig's later claim that Pétain was unwilling to help the British) and that he proposedFerdinand Foch over Haig's objections.[191]
.jpg)
At theDoullens Conference (26 March), Haig accepted the appointment of Foch to coordinate reserves of all nationalities wherever he saw fit. In his typed diary Haig claimed much of the credit for Foch's appointment and to have insisted that he have wider powers over Pétain thanGeorges Clemenceau had wanted to grant him.[189] Milner, who represented the British government at Doullens, recorded that Clemenceau was unhappy with Pétain's recent efforts, but claimed that he himself had persuaded Haig to accept the appointment of Foch; Haig's official biographerDuff Cooper gave Haig the credit but commented that the idea had probably occurred to several participants simultaneously.[192]
After a German offensive near Arras ("Mars", 28 March[193]) was beaten back, between 29 and 31 March the Germans pushed on Amiens. A Canadian brigade took part in an action atMoreuil Wood. Attacks on 4 April (Villers-Bretonneux, east of Amiens) and 5 April on the Third Army front were beaten back by British and Australian forces, although contingency plans were still being prepared to cover Rouen and Le Havre in case Amiens fell.[194]
To ALL RANKS OF THE BRITISH ARMY IN FRANCE AND FLANDERSThree weeks ago to-day the enemy began his terrific attacks against us on a fifty-mile [80 km] front. His objects are to separate us from the French, to take the Channel Ports and destroy the British Army.In spite of throwing already 106 Divisions into the battle and enduring the most reckless sacrifice of human life, he has as yet made little progress towards his goals.We owe this to the determined fighting and self-sacrifice of our troops. Words fail me to express the admiration which I feel for the splendid resistance offered by all ranks of our Army under the most trying circumstances.Many amongst us now are tired. To those I would say that Victory will belong to the side which holds out the longest. The French Army is moving rapidly and in great force to our support.There is no other course open to us but to fight it out. 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 on to the end. The safety of our homes and the Freedom of mankind alike depend upon the conduct of each one of us at this critical moment.(Signed) D. Haig F.M. Commander-in-Chief British Armies in France, 11 April.
Lloyd George demanded Haig sack Gough, and when Haig was reluctant he was given a direct order to do so by Derby.[179] Haig offered to resign; Lloyd George wanted to accept, but the other ministers, and Henry Wilson, thought there was no obvious successor.[190]
During the second major German offensive, "Georgette" in Flanders (9 April), Haig issued his famous order that his men must carry on fighting "With Our Backs to the Wall and believing in the Justice of our Cause" to protect "the safety of our homes and the Freedom of mankind".[195] Just as "Michael" had swept over the Cambrai and the Somme battlefields, won at such cost by Haig's own offensives in previous years, this one swept over Passchendaele although not Ypres itself. The offensive threatenedHazebrouck, "the Amiens of the north", a key railhead through which supplies were brought from the Channel ports.[196]
Foch had earlier refused to send four French divisions to Flanders but now redeployedPaul Maistre's Tenth French Army to the Somme sector, freeing up British forces.[196] During a renewed attack (17 April) Foch drew attention to the valour of the British at First Ypres and refused to send further French reinforcements so as to keep a strategic reserve. 24 April saw a further unsuccessfulGerman attack at Villers-Bretonneux near Amiens, featuring the first tank-to-tank combat. Haig was suspicious of Foch's request to move British divisions to the French sector to free up French reserves, worrying that this might lead to "a permanent Amalgam" of French and British forces. At a meeting on 27 April meeting the dispute was smoothed over, and BritishIX Corps moved to the French sector.[197] On 30 AprilErich Ludendorff called a halt to the Flanders offensive.[198]
Although some American divisions were now serving with the British forces, Haig thoughtJohn J. Pershing "very obstinate and stupid" for refusing to integrate US troops with Allied units.[197] At Abbeville (2 May) it was agreed that in the event of renewed attack British forces would retreat south if necessary and abandon the Channel ports rather than lose touch with the French.[199]
The near-debacle of March 1918 was an object of political controversy. Repington wrote that it was "the worst defeat in the history of the Army".Andrew Bonar Law claimed in a House of Commons debate (23 April) that Haig and Pétain had agreed the extension of the British line, which was not wholly true as in January 1918 the Supreme War Council had ordered a longer extension than Haig and Pétain had agreed between themselves in December 1917.[200] Lloyd George was accused (in theMaurice Debate of 9 May 1918 in the House of Commons) of having hoarded troops in the UK to make it harder for Haig to launch offensives. Lloyd George misled the House of Commons in claiming that Haig's forces were stronger (1.75 million men) at the start of 1918 than they had been a year earlier (1.5 million men) – in fact the increase was caused by an increase of 335,000 in the number of labourers, and Haig had fewer combat infantry holding a longer stretch of front.[201] Haig had opposed Maurice in taking his concerns into public, but was disappointed at how Lloyd George was able to get off the hook with a "claptrap speech".[202] Maurice believed he had saved Haig from dismissal.[203]
.jpg)
By late spring the BEF had taken just over 300,000 casualties. Battalions had had to be brought in from the Middle East. Haig spent time touring his forces in May.[204] Haig's wife reported rumours that he was to be brought home asCommander-in-Chief, Home Forces; when Wilson denied the rumours to Haig, Haig recorded that "no one has been chosen yet!" to replace him.[205]
A third major German offensive against the French on the Aisne ("Blücher"), starting on 27 May, overwhelmed Hamilton-Gordon's IX British Corps which had been sent there to refit after being involved in "Michael" and "Georgette". At a conference at Versailles (1 June) there was friction between Haig, who was worried that the Germans would attack his sector again, and Foch, who demanded that the US divisions trained by the British be moved to his sector to release French divisions. Foch moved French forces down from Flanders, but there was further friction at a meeting in Paris about Foch's request to move British reserves south.[206] Haig threatened to appeal to the British government if he felt Foch was demanding too many British troops,[203] so it was agreed that Haig and Foch should meet more frequently, and in time they developed a good working relationship.[193]
Cooperation improved when the Germans launched their "Gneisenau" Offensive on 9 June. Lloyd George and Milner gave their full support to Foch on moving four British divisions.[207] They told Haig that he should consider himself subordinate to Foch for the time being.[208]
With another German attack imminent, Herbert Lawrence was asked (Haig was on leave in England) to send eight divisions – he sent only two. Haig thought this was breaching an agreement of 1 July that covering Paris and the Somme was to take priority. Wilson consulted the War Cabinet then told Haig to "exercise his judgement" about holding the British line. Haig felt that they would take credit for Foch's victory but might dismiss him if disaster befell the British forces.[207] The German "Peace Offensive" began against the French atRheims on the same day. Haig eventually agreed that the French could useXXII Corps if necessary "for exploitation".[209]
In July and August the Germans were defeated at theSecond Battle of the Marne andAmiens. The latter victory was described by GeneralErich Ludendorff as "The Black Day of the German Army" after mass surrenders of German troops. On 11 August Haig, contrary to the wishes of Marshal Foch, insisted on a halt to the Amiens offensive and launched a new attack on 21 August between theScarpe andthe Ancre. As with his previous offensives in 1916 and 1917, Haig encouraged his subordinates to aim for ambitious objectives, in this case a thrust fromAlbert toBapaume, and this time with more success than in previous years.[210] On 10 September Haig, on a brief visit to London, insisted that the war could end that year and asked Lord Milner (Secretary of State for War) to send all available men and transportation.[211] Milner afterwards shared with Wilson his concerns that Haig would embark on "another Passchendaele".[212]
Haig's forces continued to enjoy much success, but when they began to advance towards theHindenburg Line Haig received a supposedly "personal" telegram from the CIGS Henry Wilson (31 August), warning him that he was not to take unnecessary losses in storming these fortifications. Haig, surmising that the War Cabinet were not forbidding him to attack but might dismiss him if the assault failed, telegraphed Wilson back that they were a "wretched lot" and wrote that attacking the Germans now would be less costly than allowing them time to regroup.[211]
There is some dispute over how much direct operational control Haig maintained at this time, Tim Travers in particular arguing that he allowed his Army Commanders a very free hand, whilst Ferdinand Foch was exerting ever-greater influence over strategy. Haig was irritated that Foch insisted thatHerbert Plumer'sSecond Army remain part of an Army Group commanded by the King of the Belgians, so that the French and Belgians could take credit for liberating Brussels.[213]
Germany first requested an Armistice after the penetration of the Hindenburg Line at its strongest point, St Quentin/Cambrai, on 28 September, and the almost simultaneous capitulation ofBulgaria,[214] and discussions continued until the ceasefire on 11 November. When consulted on terms for an armistice in October, Haig stated that "Germany is not broken in the military sense. During the last weeks her forces have withdrawn fighting very bravely and in excellent order".[215] In private correspondence Haig was more sanguine. In a mid-October letter to his wife he stated that "I think we have their army beaten now".[216]: 316 Haig noted in his diary for 11 November that theImperial German Army was in "very bad" condition due to insubordination and indiscipline in the ranks.[216]: 318 Haig urged moderation, suggesting that Germany only be asked to give up Belgium andAlsace-Lorraine, and warning that humiliating terms might lead to a militarist backlash. Haig suspected Wilson, a staunchUnionist, of wanting to prolong the war as an excuse to subdue southern Ireland by bringing in conscription there.[217] Thedissolution of Austria-Hungary encouraged the politicians to demand stricter terms (although less strict than Foch or Pershing would have liked) and Germany was required to evacuate theRhineland as well.[213] However, once Germany had accepted the strictarmistice terms, Haig suggested Germany be split into independent states at the peace treaty.[218]
Whereas the French, American and Belgian armies combined captured 196,700 prisoners-of-war between 18 July and the end of the war, Haig's forces, with a smaller army than the French, engaged the main mass of the German Army and captured 188,700 prisoners. British daily casualty rates (3,645 per day) were heavier during this period than at the Somme (2,950) or Passchendaele (2,121),[219] because British forces were attacking across the line, instead of being rotated through a single offensive.[220] The military historian,Gary Sheffield, called this, the so-calledHundred Days Offensive, "by far the greatest military victory in British history".[2]
As the BEF's C-in-C, one of Haig's responsibilities was to give the final signature to the death warrants of British andEmpire soldiers (but not Australian—these went to theGovernor-General of Australia) who had been first sentenced to death by Field General Court Martial. Although the bookShot at Dawn (1983), which began the campaign for pardons, says that it is "quite incorrect" to hold Haig solely responsible as he was part of a legal process, by the late 1990s Haig was perhaps best known to the general public because of publicity which implied him to be a brutal disciplinarian—this was not the view of contemporaries.[221] Of the 3,080 men sentenced to death in all theatres,[222] 346 were executed, 266 (77%) were for desertion, 37 for murder and 18 for cowardice.[223] Just over 250 of the executions took place during Haig's time as C-in-C, but only executed men's records survive, so it is hard to comment on the reasons why men were reprieved.[224]
During the war, Haig suffered fromtoothache and sent for a Parisian dentist. Consequently, within months the British Army had hired a dozen dentists and, by the end of the war, there were 831. This led to the formation of theRoyal Army Dental Corps in 1921.[225]
.jpg)
Lloyd George arranged a ceremonial reception for Marshal Foch on 1 December; Haig was asked to travel in the fifth carriage with Henry Wilson but not invited to the reception. Feeling that this was a snub and an attempt to win votes for theimminent election, Haig declined to attend at all.[226] In November 1918 Haig refused Lloyd George's offer of aviscountcy, partly as he felt it was another snub, as his predecessor Sir John French had been awarded the same rank on being removed from command of the BEF, and partly to use his refusal to bargain for better state financial aid for demobilised soldiers. Haig held out despite being lobbied by the King,[227] until Lloyd George backed down in March 1919, blaminga recently sacked pensions minister. Haig was createdEarl Haig, Viscount Dawick and Baron Haig, of Bemersyde in theCounty of Berwick, received the thanks of bothHouses of Parliament and a grant of £100,000.[218][228]
In January 1919, disturbances broke out among troops atCalais, as men returning from leave were expected to return to full army discipline and key workers with jobs to go to (who had often been the last to enlist) were – contrary to Haig's advice – given priority for demobilisation. Haig accepted the advice ofWinston Churchill that exercising his right to shoot the ringleaders was not sensible.[229] For much of 1919, Haig served asCommander-in-Chief, Home Forces, a key position as ageneral strike seemed likely.[230] Haig kept a low profile in this job and insisted the Army be kept in reserve, not used for normal policing.[231] His military career ended in January 1920. Lord Haig arranged for his Dispatches to be published in 1922 as theGeneral Election loomed, although in the end his nemesis Lloyd George was ousted for unrelated reasons.[232]
.jpg)
After retiring from the service, Lord Haig devoted the rest of his life to the welfare of ex-servicemen.[233] Haig pushed for the amalgamation of organisations, quashing a suggestion of a separate organisation for officers, into theBritish Legion which was founded in June 1921. He visitedSouth Africa in 1921,Newfoundland in 1924 to unveil theNational War Memorial, and Canada in 1925 to promote ex-servicemen's interests. Visits to Australia andNew Zealand were being planned when he died. He was instrumental in setting up theHaig Fund for the financial assistance of ex-servicemen and theHaig Homes charity to ensure they were properly housed.[233]
An avid golf enthusiast, Haig was captain ofThe Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews, from 1920 to 1921.[234] He was president of the British Legion until his death and was chairman of the United Services Fund from 1921 until his death.[235]
Haig maintained ties with theBritish Army after his retirement; he washonorary colonel of the17th/21st Lancers (having been honorary colonel of the 17th Lancers from 1912[236]), theLondon Scottish, theKing's Own Scottish Borderers,[237] and theRoyal Horse Guards.[238] He wasLord Rector and laterChancellor of the University of St Andrews.[239]
Haig died in London from aheart attack on 29 January 1928, and was given an elaborate funeral on 3 February.[240][241] "Great crowds lined the streets ... come to do honour to the chief who had sent thousands to the last sacrifice when duty called for it, but whom his war-worn soldiers loved as their truest advocate and friend."[240] The gun-carriage that had carried theUnknown Warrior to his grave in 1920 took Haig's body fromSt Columba's Church, where it had been lying in state, toWestminster Abbey. Three royal princes followed the gun-carriage and the pall-bearers included twoMarshals of France (Foch and Pétain).[240] The cortege was accompanied by five guards of honour, representing theRoyal Navy, theIrish Guards, theRoyal Air Force, the 1st French Army Corps, and theBelgian Regiment of Grenadiers.[240] After the service at the Abbey, the procession re-formed to escort the body toWaterloo station for the journey to Edinburgh, where it lay in state for three days atSt Giles' Cathedral.[240]
Haig was buried atDryburgh Abbey in the Scottish borders, the grave being marked with a plain stone tablet in the style of the standard headstones of theImperial War Graves Commission issued to British military casualties in the First World War.[242]
TheEarl Haig Memorial, an equestrian statue inWhitehall commissioned by Parliament and sculpted byAlfred Frank Hardiman, aroused some controversy and was not unveiled until just beforeArmistice Day in 1937.[243]
After the war Haig was praised by the AmericanGeneralJohn J. Pershing, who remarked that Haig was "the man who won the war".[246] His funeral in 1928 was a huge state occasion. However, after his death he was increasingly criticised for issuing orders which led to excessive casualties of British troops under his command on theWestern Front, earning him thenickname "Butcher of the Somme".[6]
Winston Churchill, whoseThe World Crisis was written during Haig's lifetime, suggested that greater use of tanks, as at Cambrai, could have been an alternative to blocking enemy machine-gun fire with "the breasts of brave men".[247][248] Churchill also wrote that although the Allied offensives up until August 1918 had been "as hopeless as they were disastrous", "Haig and Foch were vindicated in the end".[249] Churchill admitted toLord Beaverbrook that "subsequent study of the war has led me to think a good deal better of Haig than I did at the time. It is absolutely certain there was no one who could have taken his place."[250][251] Churchill's essay on Haig inGreat Contemporaries, written after Haig's death, was slightly more critical, noting the government's refusal to offer Haig employment after 1920, his emphasis on the Western Front and his lack of the "sinister genius" possessed by the truly great generals of history.[252]
Lloyd George was more critical in hisWar Memoirs, published in 1936. He described Haig as "intellectually and temperamentally unequal to his task", although "above the average for his profession—perhaps more in industry than intelligence". Lloyd George's biographerJohn Grigg (2002) attributed his vitriol to a guilty conscience, that he had not intervened to stop the Passchendaele Offensive.John Terraine, writing of the "shrill venom" with which Lloyd George sought to "exculpate himself", called the memoirs "a document as shabby as his behaviour at Calais".[253]
B. H. Liddell Hart, a military historian who had been wounded during the First World War, went from admirer to sceptic to unremitting critic. He wrote in his diary:
[Haig] was a man of supreme egoism and utter lack of scruple – who, to his overweening ambition, sacrificed hundreds of thousands of men. A man who betrayed even his most devoted assistants as well as the Government which he served. A man who gained his ends by trickery of a kind that was not merely immoral but criminal.[254]
John Laffin, an Australian military historian who had served in the Second World War, commented unfavourably on Haig:
Haig and other British generals must be indicted not for incomprehension but for wilful blunders and wicked butchery. However stupid they might have been, however much they were the product of a system which obstructed enterprise, they knew what they were doing. There can never be forgiveness.[255]
One of Haig's defenders was the military historianJohn Terraine, who published a biography of Haig (The Educated Soldier) in 1963, in which Haig was portrayed as a "Great Captain" of the calibre of theDuke of Marlborough or theDuke of Wellington. Terraine, taking his cue from Haig's "Final Despatch" of 1918, argued that Haig pursued the only strategy possible given the situation.Gary Sheffield stated that although Terraine's arguments about Haig have been much attacked over forty years, Terraine's thesis "has yet to be demolished".[1]
Australian historianLes Carlyon wrote that while Haig was slow to adapt to the correct use of artillery in sufficient quantities to support infantry attacks and was generally sceptical that such doctrine had much place in military theory, he was fully supportive of excellent corps and field commanders such asHerbert Plumer,Arthur Currie andJohn Monash, who seem to best grasp and exercise these concepts, especially later in the war. Carlyon also wrote that there was a case to answer, for his support of more dubious commanders such asIan Hamilton,Aylmer Hunter-Weston andHubert Gough.[256]
Critics, includingAlan Clark and Gerard De Groot, argue that Haig failed to appreciate the critical science of artillery and that he was "unimaginative", although de Groot added that he has had the misfortune to be judged by the standards of a later age.[257]Paul Fussell, a literary historian, wrote inThe Great War and Modern Memory:
although one doesn't want to be too hard on Haig ... who has been well calumniated already ... it must be said that it now appears that one thing the war was testing was the usefulness of the earnest Scottish character in a situation demanding the military equivalent of wit and invention. Haig had none. He was stubborn, self-righteous, inflexible, intolerant—especially of the French—and quite humourless ... Indeed, one powerful legacy of Haig's performance is the conviction among the imaginative and intelligent today of the unredeemable defectiveness of all civil and military leaders. Haig could be said to have established the paradigm.[258]
Military historian John Bourne wrote that Haig, although not familiar with technological advances, encouraged their use. He also rejected claims that Haig was a traditionalist and focused only on cavalry tactics.[259] Cavalry represented less than three per cent of the BEF in France by September 1916, whilst the British were the most mechanised force in the world by 1918, supported by the world's largest air force. TheTank Corps was the world's first such force and some 22,000 men served in it during the war. TheRoyal Artillery grew by 520 per cent and the engineers who implementedcombined arms tactics grew by 2,212 per cent. Bourne wrote that this hardly demonstrates a lack of imagination.[260] Other historians, notablyJohn Keegan, refused to accept that the British Army underwent a "learning curve"; despite this example, Bourne wrote that there "is little disagreement among scholars about the nature of the military transformation".[261] Popular "media opinion" had failed to grasp that under Haig, the British Army adopted a modern style of war in 1918.[262]
There is no consensus on the speed of a learning curve. Tim Travers blamed the management of early campaigns on the ethos of the pre-war officer corps, which was based on privilege, with a hierarchy intent on self-preservation and maintaining individual reputations. As a consequence the army was poorly positioned to adapt quickly. Travers wrote that initiative was discouraged and that the ethos of the army was pro-human and anti-technological. The offensive spirit of the infantry, quality of the soldier, rapid rifle-fire and the idea of the soldier being the most important aspect of the battlefield prevailed. The lessons of theRusso-Japanese War and the power of artillery were ignored, which caused costly tactical mistakes in the first half of the war. The tactics that Haig pursued were beyond the mobility and range of artillery, which contributed to operational failures and heavy losses. Travers also criticised Haigand enemy commanders for seeing battle as perfectly organised and something that could be planned perfectly, ignoring the concept offog of war. Travers wrote that top-down command became impossible in the chaos of battle. The lack of attention to lower levels of command in the early years of the war created a command vacuum.[263]
Bourne considered this to be too harsh, arguing that Haig progressed along with other commanders of theEdwardian era in implementing advances in operational methods, technology and tactical doctrine. Bourne also wrote that it was difficult to reconcile the commanders of 1918 with the dogma-ridden, unprofessional, unreflecting institution depicted by Travers.[264][265]
Biographers Robin Prior and Trevor Wilson in theOxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) state:
As a result of his determination to accomplish great victories Haig too often disregarded key factors such as weather, and the condition of the battlefield, placed his objectives beyond the range which his artillery could cover and incorporated in his schemes a role for cavalry which this arm was helpless to accomplish. These shortcomings, it needs to be stressed, were not at all peculiar to Haig. ... But the outcome, too often, was British operations directed towards unrealizable objectives and persisted in long after they had ceased to serve any worthwhile purpose. The consequence was excessive loss of British lives, insubstantial accomplishment, and waning morale.[266]
Haig has been criticised for the high casualties in British offensives, but historians like John Terraine argue that this was largely a function of the size of the battles, as British forces engaged the main body of the German Army on the Western Front after 1916.[267] Although total deaths in theSecond World War were far higher than in the First, British deaths were lower, because Britain fought mainly peripheral campaigns in the Mediterranean for much of the Second World War, involving relatively few British troops, while most of the land fighting took place betweenGermany and theSoviet Union.[219][268] When British forcesengaged in Normandy in 1944, total losses were fewer than on the Somme in 1916, as Normandy was around half the length and less than half the size but casualties per unit per week were broadly similar.[269] David French wrote that British daily loss rates at Normandy, in which divisions lost up to three quarters of their infantry, were similar to those of Passchendaele in 1917, while average battalion casualty rates in 1944–45 (100 men per week) were similar to those of the First World War.[270]
John Terraine wrote:
It is important, when we feel our emotions rightly swelling over the losses of 1914–18, to remember that in 1939–45 the world losses were probably over four times as many ... the British task was entirely different, which is why the (British) loss of life was so different: about 350,000 in 1939–45 and about 750,000 (British deaths, 1 million including the Empire) in 1914–18 ... – ... The casualty statistics of the Great War ... tell us ... virtually nothing about the quality of ... British generals. The statistics show that ... the British losses in great battles were generally about the same as anyone else's.
He also wrote that British perceptions were coloured by the terrible losses of1 July 1916, during which the British Army sustained 57,000 casualties, but that it should also be remembered that the British never suffered anything like the losses ofJune 1916, when theAustro-Hungarian Army experienced 280,000 casualties in a week, or ofAugust 1914, when theFrench Army lost 211,000 men in 16 days, or ofMarch and April 1918, when the Germans lost nearly 350,000 men in six weeks, or1915, when Russia suffered 2 million casualties in a year.[271]
Total British First World War deaths seemed especially severe as they fell among certain groups such asPals Battalions (volunteers who enlisted together and were allowed to serve together) or the alleged "Lost Generation" of public school and university-educated junior officers. British deaths, although heavy compared to other British wars, were only around half those of France or Germany relative to population.[272]
Denis Winter wrote that Haig protected his reputation by falsifying his diary to mislead historians. Barring a few disputes over contentious meetings, such as the War Council of early August 1914 and theDoullens Conference of March 1918, "the overall authenticity of Haig's diary is, however, not in doubt", not least because of the frequency with which its contents have been used to criticise him.[273] John Bourne wrote that "Winter's perceived conspiracy would appear to be one of the least successful in history. The falsification of his diary seems equally inept, given the frequency with which its contents are held against the author's competence, integrity and humanity, not least by Winter himself."[274]
Winter wrote that Haig and the British Government had conspired with the Official Historian, BrigadierJames Edward Edmonds, to show Haig in a better light in the OfficialHistory of the Great War. These claims were rejected by a number of historians, including Robin Prior andCorrelli Barnett. Barnett's comments were supported by John Hussey and Jeffrey Grey of theUniversity of New South Wales, who wrote that:
A check of the documents cited in the Heyes papers, collected for [the Australian Official Historian] C. E. W. Bean in London in the 1920s, and in the correspondence between Bean and the British Official Historian, Sir James Edmonds, not only fails to substantiate Winter's claims but reinforces still further Barnett's criticisms of (Winter's) capacity as a researcher ... includ(ing) ... misidentification of documents, misquotation of documents, the running together of passages from different documents ... and misdating of material..(including) misdat(ing) a letter by seventeen years ... to support his conspiracy case against Edmonds.[275]
Donald Cameron Watt found Winter
curiously ignorant of the by-no-means secret grounds on which the Cabinet Office, or rather its secretary, Lord Hankey, initiated a series of official histories of the first world war and the terms which were binding on the authors commissioned to write them.[276]
Winter wrote that Edmonds did not canvass the opinion of veterans, which was untrue – some volumes were sent to 1,000 or more officers for their comments, as well as being checked against unit diaries down to battalion level – in some cases entire chapters were rewritten (or in the case of Passchendaele, the volume was rewritten several times in the 1940s, during disputes about the roles of Haig and Hubert Gough, who was still alive). Winter quoted, out of context, Edmonds' advice to his researchers to write a draft narrative first, then invite interviewees to comment over lunch: Andrew Green, in his study of the Official History, wrote that this was done deliberately, for memories to be jogged by the draft narrative and that senior officers were more likely to be frank if approached informally.[277]
Haig appeared as himself in the filmsUnder Four Flags (1918) andRemembrance (1927).
Haig has commonly been portrayed as an inept commander who exhibited callous disregard for the lives of his soldiers. Sometimes the criticism is more against the generation of British generals which he is deemed to represent, a view aired by writers such asJohn Laffin (British Butchers and Bunglers of World War One) andJohn Mosier (Myth of the Great War).Alan Clark's bookThe Donkeys (1961) led to the popularisation of the phrase 'lions led by donkeys' to describe British generalship.[278] A critical biographer finds "no evidence of widespread contempt for Haig; the claim that ordinary soldiers universally thought him a butcher does not accord with their continued willingness to fight".[279]
Haig was played byJohn Mills in the 1969 filmOh! What a Lovely War, in which much of the dialogue is taken fromThe Donkeys. He is portrayed as being indifferent to the fate of the troops under his command.[280]
In the 1989BBC comedy seriesBlackadder Goes Forth, Haig, played byGeoffrey Palmer, makes an appearance in the final episode. Referring to the limited gains made during the 1915–1917 offensives, Blackadder says: "Haig is about to make yet another gargantuan effort to move his drinks cabinet six inches closer toBerlin".[281]
In the 1985 Australian television mini-seriesAnzacs, Haig was played byNoel Trevarthen as a cold and aloof man whose scepticism about the fighting abilities of the Australian and New Zealand troops arriving on the Western Front in 1916 was aggravated by the conduct of the Australians behind the lines. The series also portrayed British prime minister Lloyd George having a strong dislike of Haig and wishing to see him removed from command in 1917.
| Country | Date | Appointment | Ribbon | Post-nominal letters | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
British honours | |||||
| United Kingdom | 27 September 1901 | Companion of theOrder of the Bath |  | CB | [282] Promoted to KCB in 1913 |
| 1904 | Commander of theRoyal Victorian Order |  | CVO | [64]: 562 Promoted to KCVO in 1909 | |
| 25 June 1909 | Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order | KCVO | [283] Promoted to GCVO in 1916 | ||
| December 1911 | Delhi Durbar Medal (Silver) |  | [284] | ||
| 12 December 1911 | Knight Commander of theOrder of the Indian Empire |  | KCIE | [285] | |
| 3 June 1913 | Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath | | KCB | [286] Promoted to GCB in 1915 | |
| 3 June 1915 | Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath | GCB | [287] | ||
| 15 August 1916 | Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order | | GCVO | [288] | |
| 31 July 1917 | Knight of theOrder of the Thistle |  | KT | [64]: 1720 | |
| 3 June 1919 | Member of theOrder of Merit | .svg) | OM | [289] | |
| Queen's Sudan Medal |  | [290] | |||
| Queen's South Africa Medal |  | [291] clasps:Paardeberg,Driefontein, | |||
| King's South Africa Medal |  | [292] clasps:South Africa 1901,South Africa 1902 | |||
| 1914 Star and clasp |  | [293] | |||
| British War Medal |  | [293] | |||
| World War I Victory Medal |  | [293] | |||
Foreign honours | |||||
| Khedivate of Egypt | 1898 | Khedive's Sudan Medal |  | [290] with clasps:The Atbara,Khartoum | |
| France | 15 May 1915 | Grand Officer of theLegion of Honour |  | [294] Promoted to Grand Cross in 1916 | |
| 24 February 1916 | Grand Cross of theLegion of Honour |  | [295] | ||
| Belgium | Grand Cordon of theOrder of Leopold |  | [296] | ||
| Kingdom of Italy | 14 September 1916 | Knight Grand Cross of theOrder of Saints Maurice and Lazarus |  | [297] | |
| Kingdom of Montenegro | 31 October 1916 | 1st Class of theOrder of Prince Danilo I |  | [298] | |
| Obilić Medal in Gold | [298] | ||||
| France | 21 April 1917 | Croix de Guerre |  | [299] | |
| Russian Empire | 1 June 1917 | 4th Class of theOrder of St George |  | [300] | |
| Belgium | 11 March 1918 | Croix de guerre |  | [301] | |
| Kingdom of Serbia | 10 September 1918 | Knight Grand Cross of theOrder of the Karađorđe's Star with Swords |  | [302] Military division | |
| Empire of Japan | 9 November 1918 | Grand Cordon withPaulownia Flowers of the Order of the Rising Sun |  | [303] | |
| Kingdom of Siam | 16 November 1918 | Knight Grand Commander of theOrder of Rama |  | [304] | |
| United States | 1918 | Army Distinguished Service Medal |  | [305][306] | |
| Kingdom of Romania | 20 September 1919 | 1st Class of theOrder of Michael the Brave |  | [307] | |
 |
|
| Date | School | Degree |
|---|---|---|
| 1919 | University of Edinburgh | Doctor of Laws (LLD)[309] |
| 11 July 1919 | University of Aberdeen | [310] |
| 8 May 1919 | University of Glasgow | Doctor of Laws (LLD)[311][312] |
| 25 June 1919 | University of Oxford | Doctor of Civil Law (DCL)[313] |
| 1920 | University of Leeds | Doctor of Laws (LLD)[314] |
The Argentine football clubClub Atlético Douglas Haig, founded 1918, is named after Haig.[323]
In August 1920, theGreat Central Railway gave the nameEarl Haig to one of their new4-6-0 express passenger locomotives. It carried the name until October 1943.[324][325]
Earl Haig Secondary School inToronto was named after Haig.[326] A species ofcottage tulip, "Marshal Haig", is named after him.[327] TheHundred of Haig, acadastral unit in South Australia, was named after Haig in 1918.[328]In the early 1920s, several years before his death, a new road ofcouncil houses inKates Hill was named Haig Road.[329] Other roads named in honour of Haig includeHaig Avenue inSouthport (and the football ground ofSouthport F.C. that was situated there);[330] Haig Avenue inMount Roskill, Auckland;[331] Haig Road in Singapore;[332] and General Haig Street inNew Orleans.[333]
...whose name is a strange homage to Sir Douglas Haig...
... The original school was built in honour of Field Marshal Douglas Haig, 1st Earl Haig (1861–1928)
The ground was renamed Haig Avenue (after Earl Haig) in 1921
The road is named after Douglas Haig, 1st Earl Bemersyde, the commander-in-chief of the British Expeditionary Force in France from 1915 to 1918.
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
