The ‘donkey who lead millions of hero lions through the Western Front to their deaths is his name.
British Field Marshall Douglas Haig, also known as “boy butcher” in his own lifetime, was convicted of inflicting the terrible casualties during the First World War.
David Lloyd George was the Prime Minister at that time. He even described him as being “brilliant to top his army boots”.
Nick Lloyd (his recent book The Western Front- A History of the First World War was highly praised by critics) argues that Haig merits more sympathy in an article for MailOnline, as Britain celebrates Armistice Day.
According to him, nothing could have prepared an experienced general for the “scale and intensity” of fighting on the Western Front. This was due to unimaginable technological advances that produced a theatreof war’ with ‘industrial’ casualties.
The First World War is still the “Great War” in Britain.
These cemeteries, which lie along the Western Front and run for 350 miles between the North Sea, the Swiss border, are now eternal symbols of terror and killing.
King George V inquired when visiting Flanders 1922 if there would be any’more powerful advocates of peace upon the earth’ than the’massed multitude silent witnesses to war’.
Armistice Day still bears the weight of the Great War’s shadow. This is when we recall the time the guns went silent on November 11, 1918.
The war is often associated with poems and poppies as well as trenches and wire and poetry.
British Expeditionary Force Commander-in Chief Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig (1915-18) is the subject of much discontent.
The ‘donkey,’ which led thousands of hero lions through the Western Front to their demise in mud and water, is his legacy. Britain’s Field Marshall Douglas Haig (or the boy butcher) was once a vile character who caused the horrorous First World War casualties. NICK LILYD, historian and author of The Western Front, has received praise from critics. He argues that Haig merits more sympathy as MailOnline marks Armistice Day.
Haig, like almost all of his contemporaries was not prepared for the intensity and scale of fighting at the Western Front. This is where the three great power (and then four later) met. Pictured in 1916: Somme troops ‘going beyond the top’
He was the infamous ‘boy butcher,’ the chief donkey’ that allegedly condemned millions of men. The wartime Prime Minster David Lloyd George declared him ‘brilliant up to the top his army boots’.
Haig’s popular denigration is understandable.
This helps us understand the horrible casualties as well as the horrific offensives, and allows us to assign blame.
However, this misses so much about the context of war and nature of military operations in 1914-18.
Haig, like most of his contemporaries was not prepared for the intensity and scale of fighting at the Western Front. This is where the three great power (and later the four remaining) met.
This theatre of war was home to millions of soldiers and suffered an industrial level of casualties. The commanders faced a unique challenge.
Haig wrote in 1919 his last despatch in which he argued that the entire war should be seen as one big continuous engagement. Had the British been prepared to fight in 1914, perhaps it would have ended sooner.
This theatre of war was home to millions of soldiers and suffered an industrial level of casualties. This made it a difficult task for commanders. Above: 1916 Somme battle.
Commanders were faced with the same problem: how to make the most of the arsenal and manpower available to them to defeat their enemy. This is an illustration:
Furthermore, the French ally was forced to be allied with them and attacked on the Western Front, even before it was ready.
Haig stated that the’military environment compelled’ us to put in great effort, especially during the initial portion of war, before our strength was fully developed or our army properly trained and equipped.
While these efforts might have proved costly to men, it was impossible not to make.
“The only other option was to not do anything and have our French Allies defeated by the superior numbers of the enemy.”
All commanders had to figure out how to use the manpower and weapons they have to accomplish their goals: take the ground, defeat the enemy.
Nevertheless, the Allied war effort to free more territory than a few kilometres was not successful in the early half of the war (at least, until 1917).
The combination of firepower – rifles, machine-guns and quick-firing artillery – and defensive works – trenches, barbed wire and concrete dug-outs – meant that attacks were usually stopped in no-man’s-land or were only able to achieve relatively narrow penetrations.
On Wytschaete Hill in Belgium, HM King George V was on a Western Front tour on July 4, 1917. He asked when he was in Flanders 1922 if there were’more powerful advocates for peace on earth than this multitude of silent witnesses and the devastation of war’.
Photograph taken by gas-mask wearing men from the British Machine Gun Corps, using a Vickers machine guns during the First Battle of the Somme in 1916
Haig wrote his 1919 final despatch arguing that the entire war should be “viewed as one large and continuous engagement” and that if the British had been better prepared in 1914 for war, the end might have occurred sooner. Above: The statue of Haig at Whitehall
Even with some progress, the poor communication link between forward troops and headquarters at the rear rendered it nearly impossible to transport reserves and reinforcements where they are needed.
The great challenge prompted a revolutionary war in warfare, which historians are only beginning to appreciate.
Haig and the other generals were able to issue orders and lead their armies. However, success depended on new tactics and weapons that took years to develop.
In those early days, there was a simple solution: increase your manpower, stockpile more artillery shells, and mass as much as you can to blow holes in the defenses of the enemy.
It was accomplished at an impressive pace. At Neuve Chapelle in March 1915, the British fired over 60,000 shells – more than had been used in the entire South African War (1899-1902) – in just 35-minutes.
British engineers developed the first tanks. They were deployed at the Somme in September 1916. Above: The Somme tank in 1916
The combination of firepower – rifles, machine-guns and quick-firing artillery – and defensive works – trenches, barbed wire and concrete dug-outs – meant that attacks were usually stopped in no-man’s-land or were only able to achieve relatively narrow penetrations. Above: French antiaircraft guns in the Somme
British artillerymen laden a gun at Somme 1916, with a bomb on it that bears the message “A busting Christmas”
Over a million of these shells were fired by the Somme during a seven-day bombardment in 1916. But munitions weren’t available until 1918 when they were in practically unlimited quantity (with the British firing an average of a million of their munitions per day to assist attacks over the course of the war’s last year).
Relying on artillery was just one stage of a new system of combined arms, which would be used in the last phase.
British invented the first tanks. These were used on the Somme in September 1916.
Photograph of British soldiers enjoying their food, taken in France by an unidentified photographer around 1915
Commanders were faced with the same problem: how to make the most of the arsenal and manpower they had in order to accomplish their goals, which was to conquer the enemy and win. Below, captured German artillery guns on the Somme in 1916
Before their attack on Beaumont-Hamel and the Somme, Picardy and northern France, men of the 1st Lancashire Fusiliers fixed bayonets. 1. July 191
French were well-known for being innovative. In May 1915, they introduced infiltration tactics at the Second Battle of Artois.
This was the true story of the Western Front – a constant process of transformation that changed history and ushered in the modern style of fighting.
Haig made mistakes. Haig was a problem-solver who interfered in areas he wasn’t supposed to.
He still saw the war through the lens of maneuver and breakthrough, even though most of his contemporaries were emphasizing the importance firepower and limited attack.
However, these judgments need to be made in context. Haig, for all his faults, was a strong and reliable figure who was able to work, and continue to work, under enormous pressure – to carry on when others would have given up.
Generals of the Western Front weren’t immune to the costs of war.
Many died or were seriously injured. Many other brothers or sons were killed in combat that they commanded.
Nick Lloyd is the Professor of Modern Warfare in King’s College London. He is located at Shrivenham’s Defence Academy UK. Penguin published his most recent book The Western Front: A History of the First World War.
Haig did not suffer any of these tragedies personally, but he was lucky to lose Johnnie Gough to sniper fire on 1915.
We should not forget the First World War when we are silent on Armistice Day. It was a beautiful war.
Remember it all in its messiness and consider the immense changes and challenges it created.
This is most evident on the Western Front. It isn’t a story about futility and endless slaughter.
It was, in fact, a remarkable feat of courage and innovation for the Allies, which deserves greater recognition.
Nick Lloyd is the Professor of Modern Warfare in King’s College London. He is located at Shrivenham’s Defence Academy UK.
The Western Front, A History of the First World War is the book he wrote (Penguin 2021).