the organization and education of military engineers during the eighteenth century
University of Portsmouth
2007
Ph.D.
University of Portsmouth
2007
This thesis examines the organization and education of military engineersin the `long eighteenth century'. The period from 1789 to 1815 is addressed in particulardetail, as it encompasses the creation of the Ecole Polytechnique, the Royal MilitaryCollege, Royal Engineer Establishment, and other important changes driven by wartimeexpediency. A modern definition of military engineering is used to develop a wideranginganalysis of the entire discipline, rather than the activities of particular militaryunits. Austrian, British and French methods are compared to assess the influence ofalliance and enmity in the context of both continental and maritime strategy. The extentto which imitation and innovation were employed is used to establish processes ofknowledge acquisition in technical corps in order to see if one state led the field.The growth of corps of engineer officers and their progress towards militarystatus in the first half of the century is examined alongside their relationships withvarious other corps contributing to engineering capability and the need for engineeringknowledge within army staff structures. The employment of both officers and soldiers indepartments of Quartermasters General is explained to correct previous misconceptionsabout Britain's Royal Staff Corps and the different titles used to define the roles ofsoldier engineers. Civilian education and military training systems are analysed in termsof their immediate practical value to the military capability of each state rather thanagainst a theoretical knowledge-base advocated by authors of pedagogical texts.France, although widely accepted as the leading exponent of militaryengineering and state-organized education, was not widely imitated by Austria andBritain who, largely independently, developed organizational models to meet their ownspecific sociological and geo-strategical requirements. Austria made particular advancesin bridging and mobility whereas Britain developed a strong staff system, supported bysound technical training, which gave their engineer departments particular strengths.This study makes important contributions to understanding the role of organization andtraining in developing military power in the eighteenth century.