squirrel Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 Have to agree with LB and ianw. A very balanced view and a great insight in to the man himself. First time anything I have read on Haigh confirmed some of my thoughts that he couldn't have been as bad as some authors have made out. And it's a first class read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan_J Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 I've just had a look on the WH Smith website; horrified to see it is £17.50 (a whole £5 more than stated on this thread!). Being true to my Yorkshire roots, before I order from Amazon (£15 plus delivery) does anyone have the url on the WH Smith website in case I'm missing it - or have I just missed the boat? Cheers Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 I`ve just re-read this thread. Considering it`s about a gentleman who inspires strong opinions, may I compliment the contributors on the level of debate? Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoch beard Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 I know, I know ...... I just find DH on my wavelength, would like to have him as a dinner guest, would introduce him to Frank Richards and sit back to listen ...... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> maybe you should invite the 350,000 men who were killed and wounded in the mud of the western front between August and December 1917 and then they could ask why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernardmcilwaine Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 did someone say the present earl haig is DHs son,gawd i hope there aint another war, wiv him in charge of the murder club,bernard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armourersergeant Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 here we go Phil, its warming up!! Arm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 Yes, looks like I spoke too soon, Arm! Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoch beard Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 oh dear ! did i say something again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armourersergeant Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOMMESOLDIER Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 did someone say the present earl haig is DHs son,gawd i hope there aint another war, wiv him in charge of the murder club,bernard <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hi Bernard, Not a helpful or intelligent statement !!! Cheers Tim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armourersergeant Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 In coming, cover!! Arm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 27 July , 2005 Share Posted 27 July , 2005 And Haig of course callously swept toy soldiers up into a dustpan. I think I saw this on a documentary. Amazing that "Dougie" can still inspire this knee-jerk condemnation almost 100 years on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 Could I politely remind Pals that this thread is in Book Reviews? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernardmcilwaine Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 tim,i dont like the man,i have seen many folks describing him as a great leader or military great,he was neither,LBs right,it is a discussion on a book,i wont apologise for my oppinion but i will apologise for making it known on the wrong theme,but speaking of the book,albeit it makes him out to be the bees knees,i dont think there will be any ref to him being a cold hearted b*****d who used mens lives like it was a game of toy soldiers,the cemetarys are full of his little mistakes and theres a lot of cemetarys,thats a lot of mistakes,you talk on the forum every day about the useless waste of life,what professional soldier sends men to fight in a morass,he knew the outcome but still went ahead,this is not a diary,its a haig family snow job,i aint gonna argue with you or any other pal about HIM,he aint worth falling out with good pals over,bernard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 this is not a diary,its a haig family snow job<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I haven`t read the book yet, but hope to do so shortly. Bernard has touched upon a point that concerns me here. To what extent is this diary thought to be as originally written? Modification by family or friends was not unknown in those days! Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 I understand,there are slight differences between the typescript copy and the manuscript copy and Sheffield refers to these differences. The diary does not read like a document designed to buff up the post war reputation of the author. However, I suppose you could argue that if you re-wrote it cleverly , it would not. It is not in a similar vein to French's "1914" IMHO. It has a sense of continuity about it that reflects the stolid personality of the man. Haig is a man who values self control and this is reflected in the diary. His distaste for histrionics from LG, The French etc is very apparent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 The edited diary also makes the point that Haig, who, according to the 'Donkey' school, was totally indifferent to the fate of his men, refused enoblement until he was satisfied that the disabled etc would be provided for financially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 The edited diary also makes the point that Haig, who, according to the 'Donkey' school, was totally indifferent to the fate of his men, refused enoblement until he was satisfied that the disabled etc would be provided for financially. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Which contradicts the version I`ve read - that he refused the earldom till there was a money award big enough to enable him to live in a corresponding style - £100,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 I understand that the titles and cash were doled out on a sliding scale according to rank - Beatty, Jellicoe etc all benefited. I am not sure if Haig could be said to have got more than his fair share but he must have justified being pretty much top of the heap- did he buy his home Bemersyde with the money ? These cash rewards may seem a bit dodgy to us but were normal in earlier times. Wellington bought Stratfield Saye with his hand-out - although I think the money was raised by public subscription. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernardmcilwaine Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 personally i would not read the book because of my obvious dislike for the fool,but anyone who is interested or curious about it should order it through their library first,if you think its worth while then buy it,if its not,then you will have saved good money that would be better off spent on something thats trueful,the haig family know exactly what they are doing by putting a block on the truth,why not print his diary as it was written and let people judge for themselves,warts and all,they have this opinion that he was a great commander,only in their heads and those that didnt lose their g/fathers,uncles etc,the cemetarys are full of our kin but not any of the haigs,ime running out of bog paper so i might just buy it.bernard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 Bernard - I am beginning to suspect that you are not too fond of Douglas Haig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 Surely not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 The following extract is from www.bullyonline.org/stress/ww1.htm :- General Haig, when questioned, declared that all men accused of cowardice and desertion were examined by a Medical Officer (MO) and that no soldier was sentenced to death if there was any suspicion of him suffering shell shock. The Under-Secretary of State for War also and repeatedly misled the House of Commons on this matter. In fact, most soldiers accused of cowardice and desertion were not examined by an MO, and in the few cases where a medical diagnosis of shell shock had been made, the medical evidence was rubbished or ignored and the man was convicted and shot anyway. General Haig not only signed all the death warrants but when questioned later on this issue lied repeatedly. Does the diary shed much light on DH`s attitude towards death sentences or tend to dispute the claim above? Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 28 July , 2005 Share Posted 28 July , 2005 - did he buy his home Bemersyde with the money ? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I understand that the Bemersyde estate was a gift - am I right? Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now