Douglas Haig: War Diaries and Letters, 1914-1918, and: Haig: The Evolution of a Commander (review)

Douglas Haig stands with Neville Chamberlain as one of the two most controversial figures in twentieth-century British history. Both men took difficult decisions in situations which baffled contemporaries. Both were certain they were right. Both arguably laid the groundwork for final victory in their world wars. Neither has ever been forgiven by their countrymen.

Throughout his war, Haig kept a detailed diary, written by hand and sent back at regular intervals to his wife to be copied up. Like many religious texts, excerpts from this diary have subsequently been used to back up commentators' existing beliefs. Either it demonstrates beyond all doubt that Haig was a far-sighted and educated general, or that he was a callous butcher, more concerned with kings and horses than the lives of his men. Those who wished to read the diary relied either on a version published in 1952, heavily edited by Robert Blake and reflecting his interest in political history, or on the archived copies. The diary was itself a subject of controversy: the keeping of manuscript and typescript versions, and differences between the two, leading some to see a conspiracy designed to advance Haig's career or to shield his postwar reputation.

John Bourne and Gary Sheffield have therefore rendered an enormous service to the field by publishing as full as possible an edition of this diary, together with a number of letters from Haig. Sheffield and Bourne would both interpret Haig's command in a more positive light than some other historians—but they do not press their opinions on readers and their editing has had as its aim to produce a publishable volume rather than to support a particular interpretation. Douglas Haig: War Diaries and Letters is well supplied with an introduction detailing Haig's life, explanatory footnotes, appendices and biographical sketches. It clearly indicates divergences between manuscript and typescript diaries.

For those who wish to see it, there is copious evidence here for Haig's capability as a general and leader. Entries show Haig's interest in his men, his recognition of the problems of command on the Western Front (even if he struggled to find solutions), his faith in technology, and his acceptance of the need to bring in civilian expertise to manage the army's logistics. By 1918 Haig had not only recognised that tactical manoeuvre in this war was possible only at the most junior level, but, through the focus of his attention at inspections and training exercises, was part of the British Expeditionary Force's reinvention of itself as a skilled all-arms force.

This volume will not, however, end debates about Haig's character, nor convince those who continue to condemn him. They will find here evidence of Haig's misreading of the confusion of war, of his self-belief obscuring any reasoned analysis of the reasons for failure, and of his appalling prejudices against Catholics in general and Italians, Frenchmen, and Irishmen in particular.

This volume will offer the greatest rewards for the scholar who is able to clear from his or her mind the detritus of previous interpretations of Haig's life. Read in full, rather than in excerpt, Haig's diary gives a remarkable impression of a man of his age (his prejudices, religion and belief in technology were typical of his gender and class) struggling with the difficulties of the First World War. Haig was not a man given to introspection or self-doubt—no Alanbrookian worries over his own competence or the perils his troops were undertaking here—but he did leave a detailed account which can help us to reconstruct the past whilst avoiding psychological anachronism. As a source...