CW

• What impact did the minie bullet have on the nature of warfare?

  deadliness of rifles, extra range/velocity, could travel through 2 bodies, increased accuracy
• Infamous charge of what happened in this war?

  Charge of the Light Brigade
• Bloodiest battle?

  Balaclava 1854- 1200
• How was the CW viewed as a turning point with the importance of public opinion?


  War reporters could show the public the reality of war which had knock on effects on the generals who were then dictated by the publics disapproval of frontal assaults which has high casualty figures
• In the CW how important were generals in deciding the nature of the war?


  Having war reporters and photographers for the first time became a turning point for the influence of public opinion on the nature of warfare. IT can be argued the nature of the war was not so much controlled by the generals anymore due to the pressure the public put on them so that they had to change tactics from frontal assaults that caused high casualty figures
• The CW is a good example of where poor generalship can be overcome by what?

  High quality of soldiers
• Facts about Lord Raglan (British commander-in-

  chief in the Crimean campaign) that show poor generalship in the CW?

  • Battle of Alma 1854: He lacked tactical awareness. He did a straight forward assault up a hill against heavy Russian fire. The British army was victorious and Russian troops retreated, but at a cost at 363 British soldiers and 1,600 wounded. The victory was very much the result of the reliability/QUALITY of British redcoats
  • Battle of Balaclava 1854: Where Lord Raglan gave unclear orders to Lord Cardigan which resulted in the Charge of the Light Brigade.
• Can another factor, lack of organisation, be argued to be more important for the nature and outcome of the CW over bad generalship?

  More men died of cold/infection due to poor organisation than from enemies. Whilst not all a result of generalship, it is a fact that there were boxes of winter supplies unopened due to the wrong names on the paperwork, and a lack of preparation for evacuating sick or injured casualties to the Scutari hospital. Only 2,755 British were killed in action but 16,323 died of disease. However of course this was Raglans failure to organise the army.
• Was Raglans bad generalship at Balaclava determinate for the outcome?

  Where an unclear order by Raglan was confused and as a result there was a charge of cavalry up the valley to capture the wrong guns, but realising that they didn’t have the ability to take or destroy them, they were then forced to ride back down the valley. Overall, about 271 out of the 666 cavalrymen were wounded. The British couldn’t send in infantry without cavalry protection, so the Russians won the battle. Whilst it boosted morale for the Russians, it didn’t ultimately change the outcome.
• How did Britain's superior QS impact the outcome of the battle of Balaclava?


  They were largely professional and well trained and many were veterans so had experience. At Balaclava 'The Thin Red Line' of just 500 British soliders were able to hold off a large Russian cavalry charge
• How did Britain's superior QS impact the outcome of the battle of Inkerman 1854? How did Russia's lack of quality affect the outcome?


  Their odds were 9:1 but they managed to hold off 20,000 Russians. The Russia's lack of quality resulted in accusations of poor discipline and multiple cases where they shot their own men in confusion at both Balaclava and Inkerman
• Synthesis drawn between QS in CW and FRW?

  Where at Inkerman and Balaclava quality prevailed this was the opposite in the FRW where it was quantity
• How does the CW suggest QS was vital to the outcome?

  Other factors were weak and hindering, such as the poor generalship to their victory, showing how QS was vital to the outcome
• Civilian involvement as part of total war?

  With quicker, better technology the citizens could see the horrors of the war in real time so they affected the tactics generals would use to minimise the heavy losses
• Advantages in industry?


  British and French developed railways that led to the construction of Grand Crimean Central Railway (240 tons of food/supplies daily) allowing their troops to undertake 6 bombardments of Sevastopol from trenches. Russia didn’t have capacity in terms of railways to take advantage of their numbers/geography
• Advantages in tech?


  B/F had massive lead over Russia- better rifles (they still had smoothbore muskets and flintlocks) which helped at Inkerman 1854 in Britain holding back the advancing Russians despite 9:1
• Industry and tech impact on nature?

  Allowed siege tactics to be used. Russia couldn’t take advantage of its superiority in numbers as lacked railways to get to war zone quickly. Brits used Russias reliablity on flintlock to stop advance
• Industry and tech impact on outcome?


  Able to take Sevastopol and force Russia to make terms. Allies could sustain war which helped them win
• How did transport affect the nature of the CW?

  Railways meant that supplies could be taken to the battlefield more easily. For example during the Crimean War the Allies constructed the first purpose built railway for military purposes of over 25 miles of railroad linking the port at Balaclava to the front line at Sevastopol. This allowed the allies to maintain their siege by supplying them with over 250 000 tonnes of resources per day.
• How did communications affect the nature of warfare?

  The use of telegraphs meant that public opinion now had to be considered in strategic decisions. For example during the Crimean War newspaper reporters such as W.H. Russell in the Times reported back to the British public the poor coordination, leadership and command of British forces – eg the Charge of the Light Brigade. The realities of the war helped shape public opinion and led to the fall of Aberdeen’s government in 1854 – also led to the greater adaptation of meritocratic system of promotion based on talent and performance.
• Interconnected developments that led to the modern infantry rifle- percussion cap, minie bullet- nature and outcome?

  Percussion cap 1820- reliable firing, eliminated 20% misfire rate of previous flintlock system which increased infantry firepower. 1839 British use it in CW whilst Russians use old flintlock system. Inkerman 1854 allies outnumbered at least 5:1 but win because of percussion cap. Minie bullet overcame rifled muskets difficult time wasting reloading by easily dropping down the barrel and expanding on fire to fit the grooves- 5x more accurate than smoothbore muskets, cheaper.
• Impact of minie bullet and percussion cap?

  Greatly enchanted firepower of defender. Minie bullets increased velocity could now penetrate more than one person. Huge impact on nature of CW, allies could engage enemy at far greater distances eg Alma 1854 British forced Russians into retreat s their rifles kept them at bay from over 1200 paces whereas Russians had to be 300 paces to engage
• Alliance and impact?


  France, Britain against Russia. Had no huge impact – the Allies did not conduct many joint military operations. Russian defeat mostly due to their poor organisation, numbers and geography. They had little coordination as they were fighting different causes
• Summary of conscription?


  The Russians conscripted serfs during the CW which cause many internal problems. Their economy suffered because the workforce was depleted (especially as there was no limit to the length of conscription). The British avoided conscription throughout the conflict and instead maintained use of their smaller, professional army. They also made use of mercenaries from Switzerland, Germany and the Italian states
• Impact on outcome?


  One of the key reasons for Allied victory in the CW was because of their superior quality of soldiers eg the Thin Red Line of 500 British soldiers during the Battle of Balaclava that managed to withstand a Russian cavalry attack, proving pivotal to success in the battle, also at the Battle of Inkerman the British managed to defeat the Russians despite being outnumbered at least 9:1
• Who were Fenton and Russel? Impact?

  Russel was a professional war correspondent known for authentic, factual and often damning articles because he lived on the battlefields first hand- influencing public opinion massively. Fenton was a war photographer, staged for propaganda. The fact this harsh reality could be sent back in days/hours- first time people could hear it and become wise to it
• Impact of war on public opinion?

  Narratives of horrific conditions endured by soldiers, the poor leadership and lack of direction caused a loss of public support for gov and war. They're more aware of the war. Lord Aberdeen’s gov ends up falling and he resigns because of this
• The impact of popular opinion on the war?

  Lord Raglan was forced to make key decisions, he sent more troops to areas where the army was weak and ordered more winter boots for infantrymen. Raglan was concerned strategy and plans were being leaked and that their enemies would find out. Strategy and tactics changed taking public opinion into account
• The impact of popular opinion after the war?

  Start of meritocratic system being implemented- soldiers and generals are promoted based on skill. Although this was more of a slow burner
• How did economic factors contribute to Russian defeat?

  Economically backward, poorer than combined Britain and France, made a sustained war effort difficult to comprehend and they couldn’t resource soldiers