This paper examines how technological and organizational changes transformed warfare between 1815 and 1861, spanning the end of the Napoleonic Wars to the eve of the U.S. Civil War. Drawing on scholarship by Hewitson, O'Brien, and Onorato, Scheve, and Stasavage, the paper investigates three core questions: whether wars stimulated economic development, whether they uplifted marginalized populations through the extension of rights, and how patriotism contributed to new forms of mass military mobilization. The paper argues that army size was shaped by nations' tax and borrowing capacity, while nationalism and democratic rights extension provided critical incentives for mass participation in warfare.
Improvements in warfare played a significant role in the development of the modern state. Armed forces' sizes were determined by individual nations' capacity for borrowing and raising taxes — a factor that was, at times, facilitated by war, weapon production, and the professionalization of armies.
Scholarly discussion on warfare's transformation in the Napoleonic and revolutionary eras revolves around three related controversies: the timing and meaning of a revolution in the conduct of war; the existence of "total" war during or after 1792; and most German states' decision to continue cabinet warfare. The responses to these controversies themselves suggest a transformation driven by more lethal and mobile mass militaries engaged in an apparently endless succession of wars — conflicts that came to bear heavily on the lives of civilians (Napoleonic Wars context; Mark Hewitson, 2013).
A central question is whether the wars were able to stimulate economic development. Leading work in contemporary military history does not adequately account for continuities stretching into the modern age, nor does it sufficiently address the differences apparent between Napoleonic and French Revolutionary tactics themselves. This omission gives readers a misleading representation of nineteenth-century developments (Mark Hewitson, 2013).
The historian Ashton comprehensively studied how the economy was impacted by warfare in the eighteenth century; however, he disregarded the argument that naval and armed forces' spending on weaponry, equipment, and ships provided a major impetus for technological innovation and industrial production prior to 1760 (Patrick Karl O'Brien, 2011). O'Brien's working paper for the London School of Economics highlights how military expenditure intersected with Britain's industrial development in ways that earlier scholarship overlooked.
"How warfare redistributed rights and social status"
"French nationalism and new soldier types"
Armed forces' sizes were determined by individual nations' capacity for borrowing and raising taxes, a factor that was, at times, facilitated by war, weapon production, and army professionalization. Nevertheless, the economic burdens and human costs arising from large-scale war were unexpectedly substantial, with far-reaching repercussions (Mark Hewitson, 2013).
You’re 38% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.