To what extent did developments in transport revolutionise warfare in the period from 1792 to 1945?
Intro: There is certainly evidence to support the view that developments in transport revolutionised (caused a
radical change) warfare in the period from 1792-85, as they increased the speed, size and supply of armies,
which in turn significantly impacted tactics and strategy on the battlefield. However, it could also be argued that
the developments in transport themselves could only be revolutionary when they were effectively used by
generals and planners.
Paragraph 1: There is certainly evidence to support the view that developments in transport revolutionised
warfare by increasing both the speed, size and supply of armies, leading to significant changes in tactics and
strategy.
● Development of the internal combustion engine was certainly revolutionary, as it provided a new level
of mobility to WW2 (1939-45).
○ While previously, rapid transport of soldiers was limited to existing railroads, the development
of trucks and armoured vehicles harnessed by the German army at the start of World War II
facilitated the revolutionary Blitzkrieg strategy in the defeat of France in 1940, in which a dense
concentration of armoured and motorised military formations broke through the French defense
using fast, powerful attacks before penetrating deep beyond the defensive lines with the great
range and mobility of the vehicles, allowing them to force apart and encircle the more
numerous allied forces which were limited to the inferior railways.
○ On top of this, the aircraft of the First and Second World Wars, powered by the internal
combustion engine, certainly had a significant strategic impact, for example the success of the
D-Day landings in June 1944 owes much to the 21,500 paratroopers that were transported
over to secure the Normandy beach areas by aeroplanes and gliders.
○ Therefore, the development of the internal combustion engine was arguably revolutionary, as it
facilitated the devastating Blitzkrieg strategy in WW2, and the aircraft which used the internal
combustion engine had an important impact on the outcome of a battle.
● Furthermore, the development of steamships meant that larger and more effective armies could more
rapidly be transported to the battlefield.
○ Strikingly, in the Franco-Austrian war of 1859, 70,000 French troops were transported by
steamship to Northern Italy in less than 2 weeks, a journey which previously would have taken
2 months by foot, which in turn impacted the events on the battlefield as the well rested French
could choose where to fight the Austrians and fight them more effectively, as evidenced by the
fact that at the battle of Magenta (1859) the spirited and energetic French defeated the
demoralised Austrians, who were exhausted after a 150km march.
○ Arguably this was a revolution development as it had a long term impact on the course of war
until the end of the period, as evidenced by the fact that on D-Day in June 1944, the ability of
the to quickly transport 156,000 troops across the English Channel allowed them to seize a
bridgehead in Normandy, from which they would eventually be able to advance through Europe
to victory.
● Finally, the development of railways was arguably revolutionary, as they allowed larger armies to be
supplied and rapid movement and mobilisation of troops.
○ For example, in the American Civil War (1861-65) during Sherman's March to the Sea (1864)
the Chattanooga railway line covering 500 miles from Louisiana to Atlanta effectively supplied
Sherman's 60,000 strong army, which would previously have required 36,800 wagons, allowing
the well-supplied troops to cripple Georgia’s economy and significantly contributed to the
Confederate surrender in April 1865.
○ In contrast, in the Napoleonic Wars (1804-15) the fact that Napoleon was unable to supply his
troops with railways meant that during the Russian campaign of 1812 there was an inadequate
supply chain for 614,00 men, significantly contributing to the overwhelming failure of the
campaign from which only 30,000 men returned home.
○ Therefore, the development of railways was revolutionary as they facilitated large armies to
execute daring and destructive campaigns whilst still being adequately supplied.
● Overall, there is strong evidence to support the view that developments in transport revolutionised
warfare, as the internal combustion engine, the steamship and railways allowed armies to be faster,
larger and better supplied, which radically changed the strategy and tactics on the battlefield.
Intro: There is certainly evidence to support the view that developments in transport revolutionised (caused a
radical change) warfare in the period from 1792-85, as they increased the speed, size and supply of armies,
which in turn significantly impacted tactics and strategy on the battlefield. However, it could also be argued that
the developments in transport themselves could only be revolutionary when they were effectively used by
generals and planners.
Paragraph 1: There is certainly evidence to support the view that developments in transport revolutionised
warfare by increasing both the speed, size and supply of armies, leading to significant changes in tactics and
strategy.
● Development of the internal combustion engine was certainly revolutionary, as it provided a new level
of mobility to WW2 (1939-45).
○ While previously, rapid transport of soldiers was limited to existing railroads, the development
of trucks and armoured vehicles harnessed by the German army at the start of World War II
facilitated the revolutionary Blitzkrieg strategy in the defeat of France in 1940, in which a dense
concentration of armoured and motorised military formations broke through the French defense
using fast, powerful attacks before penetrating deep beyond the defensive lines with the great
range and mobility of the vehicles, allowing them to force apart and encircle the more
numerous allied forces which were limited to the inferior railways.
○ On top of this, the aircraft of the First and Second World Wars, powered by the internal
combustion engine, certainly had a significant strategic impact, for example the success of the
D-Day landings in June 1944 owes much to the 21,500 paratroopers that were transported
over to secure the Normandy beach areas by aeroplanes and gliders.
○ Therefore, the development of the internal combustion engine was arguably revolutionary, as it
facilitated the devastating Blitzkrieg strategy in WW2, and the aircraft which used the internal
combustion engine had an important impact on the outcome of a battle.
● Furthermore, the development of steamships meant that larger and more effective armies could more
rapidly be transported to the battlefield.
○ Strikingly, in the Franco-Austrian war of 1859, 70,000 French troops were transported by
steamship to Northern Italy in less than 2 weeks, a journey which previously would have taken
2 months by foot, which in turn impacted the events on the battlefield as the well rested French
could choose where to fight the Austrians and fight them more effectively, as evidenced by the
fact that at the battle of Magenta (1859) the spirited and energetic French defeated the
demoralised Austrians, who were exhausted after a 150km march.
○ Arguably this was a revolution development as it had a long term impact on the course of war
until the end of the period, as evidenced by the fact that on D-Day in June 1944, the ability of
the to quickly transport 156,000 troops across the English Channel allowed them to seize a
bridgehead in Normandy, from which they would eventually be able to advance through Europe
to victory.
● Finally, the development of railways was arguably revolutionary, as they allowed larger armies to be
supplied and rapid movement and mobilisation of troops.
○ For example, in the American Civil War (1861-65) during Sherman's March to the Sea (1864)
the Chattanooga railway line covering 500 miles from Louisiana to Atlanta effectively supplied
Sherman's 60,000 strong army, which would previously have required 36,800 wagons, allowing
the well-supplied troops to cripple Georgia’s economy and significantly contributed to the
Confederate surrender in April 1865.
○ In contrast, in the Napoleonic Wars (1804-15) the fact that Napoleon was unable to supply his
troops with railways meant that during the Russian campaign of 1812 there was an inadequate
supply chain for 614,00 men, significantly contributing to the overwhelming failure of the
campaign from which only 30,000 men returned home.
○ Therefore, the development of railways was revolutionary as they facilitated large armies to
execute daring and destructive campaigns whilst still being adequately supplied.
● Overall, there is strong evidence to support the view that developments in transport revolutionised
warfare, as the internal combustion engine, the steamship and railways allowed armies to be faster,
larger and better supplied, which radically changed the strategy and tactics on the battlefield.
