Source D is useful to us as it is based on true historical events. Even though truth is exaggerated people know what events are being talked about. Source D is a picture form Black adder once popular war comedy. It is being useful as it shows different opinions about war and General Haig, who in this source is directly referred to as “Field Marshall Haig is about to..” it also gives us some historical facts like “six inches closer to the enemy” it in the funny and sarcastic way explains to us that Britain haven’t gained too much land during Battle Of The Somme.
The only drawback on this source is that it is really sarcastic and truth is really exaggerated so that it does not tell as exact statistics or the real truth word for word. Also it is really biased towards Haig so the truth about General might not be exactly shown, as the person who had been writing this comedy might have wanted for everyone to think badly about Haig.
The second source(source E) is also biased towards Haig but might be more useful as it was not written or drew to entertain as such. So when comparing those two sources we might say that the next source is more of a use to historians.
Source E is a cartoon from a British magazine published in February 1917.It is again really biased like the first source we had look at towards Haig. The cartoon is not so bad as such is the writing after it which is full of biased comments towards the general. On the picture we can see a soldier looking like drawn from Haig’s profile and underneath it there is a piece of text. Also this had been published after the war had been going on for some time and many men had not come home as it was promised. This makes the nation even more sad and angry at Haig, who had failed to bring their loved ones home.
This might be more use to historians as it was not drawn for fun as such so the truth isn’t that exaggerated. It snipe real thing” s at Haig for not being to check the trenches himself “The absence of the General, Sir “.It also criticises him for not telling soldiers what they need to do exactly “There is a difference between a rehearsal and the real thing”.
The drawbacks on this source are that its creator seems not to like Haig and make him look stupid and unspecialised. So there also might be a bit of a truth lack showing Haig from his good side.
I personally think that it is actually useful for historians to study both of those sources as they show different views about Haig. It teaches historians what people in Britain who should support the army and it’s General during the times of war, had actually been saying and showing to the public. It shows historians what people felt as well as what they saw Haig as. So I don’t think we can say that they are useless to historians studying Battle of the Somme.