Home › Haig and the Somme › The view from Britain

The view from Britain

People in Britain learned about the Somme from newspapers, a hugely popular film and the casualty lists. After the war, Haig's reputation went through big changes, and the way he's remembered today comes partly from those later views.

What people at home were told in 1916

Newspapers. Reporting was controlled under the Defence of the Realm Act of 1914. A small group of official war correspondents could go near the front, and their reports were checked before they were sent. Early reports of the Somme stressed advances and brave deeds.
The casualty lists. Newspapers printed long lists of the dead and wounded day after day, so no one could miss the scale of the losses. Officers' families were told by telegram, while most soldiers' families got a standard army form in the post.
Whole communities hit at once. Because Pals battalions were made of men from the same town, one morning could devastate a street, a factory or a football team. Accrington, Leeds, Sheffield and Belfast all lost hundreds of men on 1 July.
Heroic stories. Captain Wilfred Nevill of the East Surrey Regiment gave his men footballs to kick across no man's land. The story became famous at home and was turned into a popular newspaper illustration. Nevill was killed that morning.

Source F: the Battle of the Somme film

The official film The Battle of the Somme opened in British cinemas in August 1916, while the battle was still going on. It was a sensation: an estimated 20 million people saw it in its first six weeks. For the first time, people at home saw real footage of the front, including dead and wounded soldiers.

Historians now know that a few scenes were staged behind the lines, including the most famous shot of men going over the top. Most of the film is genuine. You can watch it on the Imperial War Museums website.

Think about: the film was made to keep up support for the war, so it is propaganda. But it didn't hide death, which surprised audiences. It is very useful for how the government wanted the battle seen, and for what people at home actually saw.

How Haig's reputation changed

1919	Haig is made an earl and given £100,000 by Parliament as a reward for victory.
1921	He helps found the British Legion and becomes its president. The poppy appeal raises money for ex-servicemen through the Earl Haig Fund.
1928	Haig dies in January. Huge crowds line the streets of London for his funeral, and he is buried at Dryburgh Abbey in Scotland.
1930s	War memoirs turn against the generals. The wartime Prime Minister David Lloyd George, who had clashed with Haig, blames him in his War Memoirs (1933-36).
1937	A statue of Haig on horseback is unveiled in Whitehall.
1960s	Alan Clark's book The Donkeys (1961) makes "lions led by donkeys" famous. Clark said the phrase came from a conversation between German generals, but no evidence for it has been found. Oh! What a Lovely War mocks the generals on stage (1963) and in a film (1969). John Terraine's biography (1963) defends Haig.
1989	The TV comedy Blackadder Goes Forth shows Haig sweeping up toy soldiers with a dustpan and brush, an image many people still remember.
Since 1990s	Many military historians, such as Gary Sheffield, describe a "learning curve" and give Haig more credit for 1918. Others, like Denis Winter, are still fiercely critical.

Why do views of Haig differ?

When they were made. In the 1920s grief and gratitude were strong. By the 1960s people questioned authority much more. In the late 1960s many official records of the war were opened to historians for the first time.
Who made them and why. Lloyd George was defending his own record as Prime Minister. Comedians and playwrights wanted to make a point about the waste of war. Historians weigh up the evidence, but they still disagree.
What they focus on. Critics tend to focus on 1 July 1916 and Passchendaele. Defenders look at the whole war, including the victories of 1918.

Practice: comparing two views

These two short views were written for this page to show the two sides you'll meet:

View 1: "Haig sent wave after wave of men against machine guns, and learned nothing until it was far too late."

View 2: "Haig took command of an army of half-trained volunteers and turned it into the force that beat the German army in 1918."

How do they differ? View 1 blames Haig for needless deaths. View 2 praises him for building a winning army.
Why might they differ? View 1 focuses on 1916, View 2 on 1918. A writer influenced by the 1960s view would lean towards View 1, while a military historian looking at the "learning curve" would lean towards View 2.
Which is more convincing? Use your own knowledge on both sides, then decide. A strong answer might say View 1 is right about 1916 but ignores how much the army improved by 1918.

Final judgement. Go back to the four possible answers on the introduction page. Which does the evidence support best? Most students who look at all three points of view end up somewhere in the middle: Haig made costly mistakes and accepted terrible losses, but "butcher" is too simple.

Updated 18 October 2026