HISTORY 386. SECTION A. THE MILITARY AND WAR IN AMERICA.

LECTURE #1: ARMIES AND WARFARE IN EARLY MODERN TIMES: GENERAL TRENDS.

•  
• I. Introduction.
  • A) Course Description.
    • 1) Purposes and Objectives of the Course.
      • a) Subject.
      • b) Methodology.
    • 2. Class Schedule and Procedure.
    • 3. Student Requirements.
      • a) Classroom Participation.
      • b) Reading Assignments.
      • c) Examinations.
      • d) Evaluation of Student Performance.
    • 4. Required Readings.
    • 5. Course Outline.
  • B. Why Study History.
  • C. Why Study Military History.
  • D. Aspects of Military History.
    • 1) Economic.
    • 2) Social.
    • 3) Political.
    • 4) Cultural.
  • E. Historical Evidence im Military History.
    • 1) Material.
    • 2) Written.
    • 3) Oral and Visual.
  • F. Factors in the Origins of the Military & Warfare.
• II. Traditional Military Forms.
  • A) Weaponry. Two types of weapons have existed since earliest times, probably initially used in hunting and applied to warfare.
    • 1) Shock weapons. Those weapons that extend or enhance the deadly force of the humans at close contact. These would include: clubs, axes, tomahawks, knives, swords, sabres, spears, halbberds, and pikes. The most important surviving shock weapon today is the bayonet, alothough some might say it is a shovel doing double duty.
    • 2) Missile weapons. Those weapons that are hurled or projected over various distances to inflict destruction upon the enemy: slingshots, boomerangs, javelins, bows and arrows, crossbows, ballistas, catapults, and Greek fire.
    • 3) In addition, various forms of armor or fortification were developed for defense against these weapons, be they shields, breastplates, greaves, helmets for personal protection, or walls, turrets, entrenchments, towers and pallisades for defence of towns or general positions.
    • 3) Up until the late middle ages (ca. 1300), most weapons were powered by human or animal muscle, sometimes enhanced by torsion and other mechanical means. The development of gunpowder began the technological development of modern warfare and the beginning of the ascendency of missile weapons.
  • B) Corps. By corps, I mean the different forces or means of applying armed force. The earliest corps was infantry, those armed warriors fighting on foot. As states and societies became more complex and stratified, so too did the military array. Armed forces had the following corps prior to modern times:
    • 1) Infantry. Those forces fighting on foot, confronting the enemy, inflicting destruction, capturing or defending territory on foot. Depending on the state or society, infantry forces were divided into specialized units or forms.
      • a) heavy infantry. heavily armored men, armed with spear or pike, and swordor battle axe, who engage the enemy directly with shock weapons. The most well known example of this form were the ancient Greek hoplites.
      • b) medium infantry. less armored men, armed with sword, and a form of weapon that can serve as a shock or missile weapon, such as a light spear or javelin, as well as sword. The most well known example of this form were the ancient Roman Legionaries.
      • c) light infantry. lightly or unarmored men, armed with missile weapons (javelins, sling, bow and arrow, crossbow) used to harass the enemy and inflict damage from a distance. The most well known example of this form were the medieval English or Welsh Yeoman archers.
    • 2) Cavalry. Those forces fighting on horseback, or on vehicles or other animals, confronting the enemy, inflicting destruction, capturing or defending territory usually on horseback. Depending on the state or society, cavalry forces were divided into specialized units or forms.
      • a) charioteers. Warriors fighting on board of wheeled, animal-driven vehicles, using them to harass or frighten enemy infantry or engage opposing charioteers. Usually armed with missle weapons. Developed ca. 2000 B.C. Lasted as an effective military arm up to the advent of horseback cavalry ca. 1000 B.C. Later used in ceremonial or sporting events.
      • b) elephanteers. Warriors fighting on top of elephants, using them to harass or frighten enemy infantry or engage opposing elephanteers. Usually armed with missile weapons. Developed ca. 1000 B.C. Were not effecteive against well trained infantry or cavalry. Elephants were easily spooked. Later used in ceremonial events particularly in India.
      • c) cavalry. Warriors fighting on horseback, using horses mobility and force in breaking up infantry formations, scouting, ouflanking enemy, or engaging opposing cavalry. Armed shock and missile weapons. Developed ca. 1000 B.C. Evolved as an effective corp with the development of new equipment and weapons, such as the saddle, bridle, stirrup, armor, lance, and the composite bow. Can be divided into three types.
        • i) heavy cavalry. heavily armored cavalry, armed with lance or spear, sword or battle axe, who engage the enemy directly with shock weapons. The most well known example of this type were the knights of medieval Europe .
        • ii) medium cavalry. less armored cavalrymen, armed with both shock or missile weapons, such as a light spear or javelin, as well as sword, or bow. The most well known example of this type were the Byzantine stratiotai.
        • iii) light cavalry. lightly or unarmored cavalrymen, armed with missile weapons (javelins, sling, bow and arrow, crossbow) used to harass the enemy and inflict damage from a distance. The most well known example of this type were the Turkic or Mongol horsearchers.
    • 3) Up until Modern times, in different societies and state systems, infantry and cavalry rivaled on another as the most important arm of the land military. In certain times, such as the period 700 B.C. to 300 A.D. in ancient Greece and Rome, infantry was in the ascendency with the hoplite and legionary. In other times, such as the period 300 A.D. to 1400 A.D. in Medieval Europe, cavalry was in the ascendency with the cataphract, knight and horse- archer. The factors in these changes between are complex, but they involve intertwining technological, social, economic and political changes.
    • 4) Other corps, such as naval forces, artillery, engineers, signal, intelligence, and quartermaster, did exist in some of the more sophisticated states and societies of ancient and medieval eras, such as China, Rome, Byzantium, and Islam. These corps were limited to the technology of the particular era. For example:
      • a) artillery was limited to using torsion and weights, such as catapults, ballistas, and onagers.
      • b) naval forces were limited to vessal powered by sail and oar, and the abovementioned weapons.
      • c) signal corps were limited to using buglers, drummers, heralds, semiphor and fire signals.
      • In most cases these other corps were not part of the military array of most armies, but were rather recruited from craftsmen, seamen for temporary periods and were not subject to military discipline. Quartermastring or supply services were usually handled by merchants, suttlers, grooms, servants hired by individual warriors or commanders, or by the camp followers, the rabble of concubines, prostitutes, gamblers, and profiteers who usually follwed pre-modern armies on campaign.
  • C) Recruitment and renumeration. Armed forces were raised and maintained in different ways in ancient and medieval times, depending on the social organization, economy, politcal institutions, and culture of a given state or people. Among the traditional forms of recruitment and renumeration were:
    • 1) Clan and Tribal levies. Probably the oldest form of military recruit-ment, bating back to prehistoric times and still used by clan and tribal societies. In traditional warrior communities, troops are raised through allegieance and obligation to extended family, clan and tribe. Units are mustered and organized according to kinship. Usuallly the term of service was short and the renumeration was booty. A good example of this is the clan armies of Medieval and early modern Scotland.
    • 2) Slave troops and impressment. In some states and societies, certain units were forcibly recruited or impressed from among prisoners of war and subject peoples. These troops became the slaves or property of the ruler or state. Since slavery in the ancient and medieval world was a legal, not a social status, slave troops were usually given the high social status of their master and were maintained in high style. Often the personal bodyguard or elite units who be made up of slave soldiers. A good example of this were the Janissary corps of the Ottoman Empire.
    • 3) Mercenaries. In most ancient and medieval armies, their were always soldiers who would serve voluntarily for pay with specific conditions under their own commanders who would contract their services as a unit. Mercenaries were usually not recruited as individuals, but as units. They had no allegiance outside of their unit, commander and present employer. A good example of these troops are the mercanary companies of Renaissance Italy under their commanders, the condottieri, the contractors.
    • 4) Citizen Soldiers and Militias. In which men owe military service to the state as a duty of citizenship. This can take the form of part time or short term service in a militia, or longer term service. The most well known in ancient times was the Athenian and Roman citizen soldiers.
      • a) In Europe in the middle ages, their did exist a Levy--usually just knight, retainers, and some infantry men at arms. Not a regular or set form of conscription.
      • b) Towns had to supply men for support troops, engineers-craftsmen, but were not considered soldiers.
    • 5) Feudal troops. Men who owe loyalty or military service to a higher authority in exhange for a grant of land or fife. Especially for cavalry, because of the cost of maintainance. This developed in societies which could not afford a army paid in cash. The most well known feudal troops were the European knights of the middle ages.
      • a) Cavalry of feudatories--40 day obligation.
      • b) men at arms--40 day obligation.
      • c) Beyond the forty day obligation, monarch had to pay scutage.
      • d) Feudal recruitment and renumveration was the most widespread form of recruitment in Europe and elsewhere. In an age of cavalry and an agricultural economy, this method of recrtuitment predominated above all the others mentioned above. It also had an political and social effect in that fostered the development of a warrior aristocracy and weak central governments, it also placed a majority of the population, who tilled the soil under the conrol of the knightly class.
  •  
  • D) Organization. The organization of armed forces depended on the complexity and sophistication of the state and society which employed them. The armies of Rome, Byzantium, China and Islam resembled modern armies in their corps, chain of command, overall organization, because:
    • a) They had the bureaucracies, economies, and societies to sustain a regular organized armed force.
    • b) They could use most of the systems of recruitment and renumeration mentioned above.
  • States and societies of other times an places were limited in their resources and abilities to maintain a permanent and complex military organization. In western Europe in the Middle Ages, ca. 1000-1300 A.D. The armed forces of a kingdom was limited to a small royal guard or retainers in peacetime. It time of war a king could call on his vassals and their retinues, feudatories under him, to join, but they were obligated only for forty days service. Beyond the forty days, he would have to pay them a "gift", known as scutage, for longer service. He could suppliment these forces with town militias, if they existed, and with mercenaries who he had to also pay directly. This, of course, was important toward the development of government bureaucracy to collect revenue to pay for scutage or mercenaries. Let us look at the organization of armies in Medieval Europe:
    • 1) Officer Corps. In Medieval Europe, no officer corps existed. Each feudatory aside from his loyalty to the one above him was autonomous in command of the men under him. Each had his own title, granted permanently or provisionally by his superior. Instead of an officer corps, a military caste existed, consisting of knights of various authority, viscounts, counts, earls, margraves, dukes, etc. They would coordingate their activities in war only by consensus, not by command. The knights below them were only obligated for the forty days per year, like they themselves.
    • 2) Chain of command, did not exist because there was no regular officer corps. What existed was a pyramid of authority, with a king on top, his dukes below him, their counts below them, their vassal nobles below them, and so on down to individual knights and levies. The king held no direct command over his army, except through his vassals, their vassals, and so on down the pyramid.
    • 3) Unit Organization-- In medival times little units organization existed in armies except those made provisionally on campaign, on the march and in battle. Men faought under the standard of their liege lords, the feudatories above them.
    • 4) Drill and Discipline-- In medieval times, the knight fought as an individual warrior and participated in charges and battle maneuvers on campaign but was not trained regular to fight as part of a unit. Dueling and internecinie strife was a feature of Medieval armies. Often vassals would desert their liege lords and allies would break up over minor infractions of honor.
  • E) Military Theory and Science. Like the organization of armed forces, the development of military theory and science depended on the complexity and sophistication of the state and society which employed them.
    • 1) Greece, Rome, Byzantium, China and Islam produced which treatises that describe complex strategies, tactics, and organizational systems which can be used even today by modern armies.
    • 2) Theorists like Sun-Tsu of China, Aelian of Greece, Vegetius of Rome, and Maurice of Byzantium presented the principles of war in detail for their times and posterity. Even some societies, such as the Mongols, who had no long written tradtion, developed sophisticated systems of tactics, strategy and organization.
    • 3) Medieval Europe had lost such traditions. Most military science was practical and provisional. rough and ready. The only military treatise known in medieval times was the Roman Vegetius Renatus, weho had written his work in the 4th century during Rome's decline. He tried to revive the infantry tradition of the Roman Legion at a time when Cavalry was in ascendency. His treatise was not applicable and had no connection with real conditions again until early modern times.
  • F) Civil-Military Relations. Why did medieval Europe not have the complex military institutions of earlier or comtemporary civilizations and societies. The answer can also be found in social and economic factors, particularly those that pertain to civil-military relations.
    • 1) State development. Western Cristendom did not have complex state systems and bureaucracies that could organizae and maintain permanant armed forces. Even though politics was dominated by a military caste, the feudatory knights, they were warriors, not soldiers. Learning and bureaucratic duties were maintained by the clergy, which by and large had no experience and penchant for military affairs. Besides an affective armed forces needs an effective bureaucracy, which is fed by revenues. The basic function of the state in ancient and medieval times was defence of the realm.
    • 2) Economic development. Western Europe did not have the economy or society to sustain a complex military system. It was basically agricultural. Knights were renumated for their services with grants of land and bonded peasants to serve them. As long as the economy remained rudimentary and the society was limited to warriors, tillers and priests, their could not be a state system and bureaucracy to develop a complex military. This would only develop with the:
      • a) growth of towns and a class of merchants, tradesmen and secular bureaucrats.
      • b) the development of moneyed economies, from which to collect taxes to pay a bureaucracy and army.
• III. From Medieval to Modern Armies.
  • A) Changes in Military Technology in Early Modern Times. Brought by earlier changes in technology and , development of crossbow and long bow, for example, which could pierce mail and lamellar armor, together with the application of pike/halberd bill to infantry. Also the use of a new form of projectile power, gunpowder.
    • 1) Weapons and Armor. Personal armor reached its height during the period that it became increasingly vulnerable to bow and gun fire, particlarly in Italy. Hand weapons included the mace, the morningstar, pole-axe, etc. With the increasing effectiveness of infantry, pike-men and bowmen, and gunmen, armor became a liability. First the infantry, then cavalry, limited armor to breastplate and helmet, eventually just helmet for the infantry, later that too eliminated. Cavalry becomes lighter, replacing shock for mobility (armed with sabre, perhaps some missle weapons, and light lance). Infantry armed with pikes, bows, later muskets. Pikes replaced by the bayonet in the late seventeenth century.
    • 2) Artillery and Firearms. The discovery of gunpowder, either by Roger Bacon (1240's) or its adoption from the Chinese led to a chemical projrctile power greater than the earlier Greek fire. Used to hurl projectiles from metal tubes made of cast bronze or iron, or segmented wrought iron. called bombards.
      • a) siege artillery. Initially gunpowder weapons were used against fortifications, as siege artillery, replacing catapults and ballistas. Used in the hundred years war against English fortresses by the French. The French were the most advanced at first.
      • b) field artillery. Developed by the end of the 15th-early 16th. Problems with mobility. Artillery often constructed at the siege or battle. First battle wagons of Hussites. Field artillery became effective in the 17th century with the smaller, more mobile Swedish cannon under Gustavus Adolphus. Development of both forms artillery would affect development of fortresses, infantry and cavalry. Brought about the ascendency of a new corps--Artillery.
      • c) handguns. Gunpowder applied to hand-carried cannon in the 15th century, ignited by a match and fuse like large cannon. Later developed into a small-bore weapon with a crooked stock known as an arquebus,
    • 1) The arquebus shot a 1-ounce ball about 100 yards accurately with as great a force as a longbow arrow or crossbow bolt. Could be rearmed an fired at about the same rate as a crossbow, that is slowly--gradually took over.
    • 2) Longbow holds on. Not advantageous. Crossbow and longbow more accurate. Longbow had a higher rate of fire, but was hard to train an expert bowman. The longbow remained the standard infantry weapon in the English army until the end of the 16th century.
    • 3) Arquebus evolved into the pistol and carbine, which was often used by cavalry.
    • 4) Arquebus also evolved into its replacement by the musket, a heavier weapon which could shoot a heavier ball about 200 yards. Needed a reat because of its weight. Later improve-ments allowed it to be carried and shot without a brace.
    • 5) Early muskets were distinguished by different firing mechanisms. Gave a name to most infantrymen--musketeers.
      • a) matchlocks--mechanism which lowered a fuse or match into the pan of powder, discharging the weapon. Difficult to use in rrainy or windy weather. Widely used until the late 17th century. Fuses gave another early term for infantry--Fusiliers.
      • b) wheel-locks--mechanism similar to a cigarette ligher with a cylindrical friction wheel that ignited a spark from flint, discharging the weapon. Ca. 1540's. Delicate and expensive mechanism, not widely used.
      • c) flintlocks--hammerlike mechanism which struck the flint, igniting a spark, and discharging the weapon. early 1600's. Not widely used until the late 17th and early eighteenth centuries. Standard until the development of the percussion cap in early 19th century.
      • d) Firearms and the development of cannon and handguns bring about the ascendency of infantry and the emergence of artillery as important corps.
    • 3) Fortification and Siegecraft. The massive castles of the middle ages were rendered obsolete by siege artillery. The English castles in France, Constantinople in 1453, and Granada in 1492, all fell to the new siege guns. Hastens the establishment of central monarchies in England, France, Spain, and elsewhere.
      • a) New fortification. Developed, first in Italy, involving broad, low hung walls made of materials that could absorb cannon fire. Angular arrow-shaped redoubts armed with cannon to repel sieges with crossfires.
      • b) Siege Warfare. Develops as a contest between besiegers and defenders. Methods of withstanding a siege or capturing a fortress. Offensive methods include trenches, earthworks, palisades, parallels, perpendiculars.
      • c) Vauban of France, ca. 1650's. Develops systems of defense and offence in sieges.
      • d) Sieges brought about the emergence of a new specialized corps--The Engineers.
  • B) Changes in Corps of Early Modern Armies. New developments in technology brought about changes in traditional corp of infantry and cavalry, and hastened the development of new corps--artillery and engineers.
    • 1) Infantry. Modern infantry developes from two sources--pikemen and bowmen.
      • a) shock infantry. Pikemen or spearmen, could be used to defend missile infantry and/ or advance against enemy positions.
        • i) Swiss pikemen--since medieval times fought in phalanx style. Hired themselves as mercenaries. Effective against cavalry.
        • ii) The Swiss were emulated and pikemen or other shock infantry were developed elsewhere. Other shock infantry used halberds, bills, poleaxes and two handed swords, such as the German landsknechts.
      • b) missile infantry. Bowmen and crossbowmen in late middle ages slowly replaced by gunmen--arquebusiers, fusiliers, musketeers. England only replaced bowmen in 1595.
      • c) Eventually by the 17th century, pikemen and gunners fight in conjunction--disciplined by drill. Later the pikemen are phased out with the developmnent of the bayonet. Thus the musketeer provides his own shock in the eighteenth century.
    • 2) Cavalry. Heavy armored cavalry of the knights is rendered ineffective by the coordination of missile and shock infantry in the late Medieval and early modern times. Cavalry becomes lighter and more maneuverable, adopting styles and methods on the fringes or outside of Europe.
      • a) Ottoman Sipahi, Light cavalry of the Greatest power in the Eastern Mediterranean.
      • b) The Stradioti. Mercenary Greek and Albanian light cavalry introduced by the Venetians, used later by the French, English and Holy Roman Empire.
      • c) The Genitores. Spanish and Portugese light cavalry adopted from the hispanic and North African Moslems.
      • d) The hussars. light cavalry of Hungary used by the Holy Roman Empire.
      • e) These and other light cavalry were copied by European armies, just as the Swiss pikemen were imitated.
      • f) By the 17th century, cavalry was armed with sword and perhaps pistol or carbine, and armored only with breastplate and helmet. Only the Spanish or Polish cavalry had lancers.
    • 3) Artillery. Emerged as a new specialized arm and slowly developed into a regular corps.
      • a) Siege Artillery. Cannon used first at sieges, were constructed at the site. Part of the siege works.The French were first, then the Holy Roman Empire, then the Spanish.
      • b) Field artillery develops later. Involved with using cannon against opponents in the field. Hussites try it first in the 15th century, later the French in the 16th century. Swedes under Gustavus Adolphus make field artillery a more maneuverable, effective arm in the 17th century.
      • c) Artillerymen were initially civilian experts--craftsmen and others, not regularly employed and not under military discipline.
      • d) The Swedes under Gustavus Adolphus and the French Under Louis XIV make artillery a regular corps of the army in the 17th century.
    • 4) Engineers. Like the artillery, engineers developed from the new technology involved with fortification and siege warfare.
      • a) Engineers, like artillerymen, were hired as civilian experts--craftsmen and other specialists, and were not regularly employed and not under military discipline.
      • b) Engineers only became a regular corps in the 17th century in French army under Louis XIV.
  • C) Changes in Recruitment in Early Modern Armies.
    • 1) Feudal Levies.
    • a) Cavalry of feudatories--40 day obligation.
      • b) men at arms--40 day obligation.
      • c) Levy--usually just knight, retainers, and some infantry men at arms. Not a regular or set form of conscription.
      • d) Towns had to supply men for support, engineers-craftsmen.
      • e) Beyond the forty day obligation, monarch had to pay scutage.
    • 2) Mercenaries.
      • a) Hired in companies. Captain controls purse, pay and organization.\
      • b) Infantry Specialists: Bowmen, crossbowmen, pikemen, landsknechts, and others.
      • c) Cavalry Specialists: lances and companies (stradioti, argoulets, Hussars, etc.).
      • d) Regions specializing in Mercanary service, business, economy, society: Switzerland and Albania.
      • e) Kept command down to regiments and companies.
      • f) A liabilitiy in peacetime. Brigandage on land, piracy by sea.
    • 3) Standing Armies.
      • a) Ottoman Empire.
      • b) England.
      • c) France.
      • e) Spain.
  • D) Changes in Organization in Early Modern Armies. The organization of standing armies due to new technology, new arms. Also new state revenues , and social and economic developments changed the organization of the rank and file of armies.
    • 1) The Officer Corps.
      • a) Subordination of the nobility. Made to obey a central authority, to become part of the civil or military administration.
      • b) Mercenary specialists part of the officer corps of an army for the durationof employment.
    • 2) Chain of Command. First rudimentary command structure.
      • a) King=General=imperator=commander-in-chief.
      • b) Constable=second-in-command=lieutenant-general in charge of cavalry.
      • c) Sergeant-Major-General or Major-General. In charge of placing infantry troops, supply, organization, and coordination of units. Sergeant-Majors and Sergeants.
      • d) commanders of Mercenary formations and specialists (artillery, engineers).
      • e) From this evolved the command structure of an army as units becmae larger and fully integrated into armies.
    • 3) Formations and Units.
    • a) bands, hordes--units of cavalry.
      • b) companies--units of mercenary pikemen, gunners, bowmen, and cavalry. Smaller unit a lance.
      • c) Spanish columns--1000-1250 men, consisting of mixed pike, halberd, sword and bucker, and arquebusiers. Commander known as a colonel.
      • d) Spanish later developed larger units known as Tercios of columns, consisting of 3000 men. Shows an increasing complexity of arms.
      • e) Regiments and legions by French. Many of these units still mercenary or proprietary, with a proprietary colonel controlling the purse and command of troops. The regiment is his property.
      • f) Mercenary problems were not solved until the end of the seventeenth century.
      • g) Only the Ottomans, the Swedes, and the Dutch did not depend widely upon mercenary companies until the mid-seventeenth century.
      • h) Gustavus Adolphus organization of the Swedish army, ca. 1630's mirrored modern organization, consisted of:
        • i) squadrons of 408 men (216 pike, 392 musket). Like Battalion.
        • ii) companies (402 men) 4 make a squadron.
        • iii) Brigades--3 squadrons. (like a regiment).
      • i) Specialization of corps: Pikemen and mussketeers in infantry. Hussars, Dragoons, etc. in cavalry.
    • 4) Drill and Discipline.
      • a) Control of Mercenary companies, by establishing proprietary commands and organizing own units--national volunteer or milita forces along with foreign forces, regularly hired.
      • b) Bringing supporting service under regular military discipline--engineers, artillery, surgeons, suttlers.
      • c) Establishing Military law and Military police--France.
      • d) Development of Modern Drill.
        • i) existed in the past (probably in prehistoric times, war-dances). Ancient Greeks and Romans.
        • ii) for loading rifles and weapons.
        • iii) for movement in the field.
        • iv) for making esprit de Corps and obedience.
        • v) Makes warriors into soldiers.
  • E) Changes in Military Theory and Science.
    • 1) Traditional Military Science.
      • a) Vegetius Renatus.
      • b) Real conditions--Chivalric ideals.
      • c) no connection and application.
    • 2) Niccolo Machiavelli.
      • a) No bluff war.
      • b) Real politics, The Prince.
      • c) No rules to war.
    • d) Study of classics
    • 3) Theory and New Warfare.
      • a) Maurice of Nassau.
      • b) Gustavus Adolphus
      • c) John of Nassau (1617--first military academy).
    • 4) Military Schools.
      • a) John of Nassau (1617--first military academy).
      • b) first state schools in Russia and elsewhere.
      • c) Cadet corps and page corps.
  • F) State, Society and the Military.
    • 1) Growth of States and Bureaucracies.
    • 2) Wealth of Nations.
    • 3) Overseas Expansion.