The Military Revolution: Warfare, Society, and the Rise of the West

Geoffrey Parker and the Military Revolution

Geoffrey Parker's The Military Revolution addresses military innovation and the rise of the West between 1500 and 1800. In this work, Parker examines the changes in the art of war during the military revolution and their numerous consequences for different aspects of European warfare and society. Notably, The Military Revolution was not Parker's original plan. For his dissertation, he primarily wrote a critique of the military revolution, claiming it was a myth. He based his arguments on Michael Roberts' original article and The Spanish Army of Flanders, which he studied for his Ph.D. in the late 1960s. Intrigued by the topic, Parker traveled worldwide in search of valuable information to better understand the military revolution. After twenty years of writing and research, The Military Revolution was published.

Roberts in the 1950s, and later Parker in the 1980s, argue that the military revolution began when gunpowder revolutionized European warfare. This transformation occurred mainly through three mechanisms: the improvement of fortifications, the change in tactics, and the growth of army size. All of these developments later impacted European society, politics, and economics in profound ways. Understanding each component reveals how interconnected military change and state formation truly were.

Fortifications and the Trace Italienne

Fortifications played a vital role in the military revolution. The introduction of trace italienne—or angle bastions—marked a turning point in defensive architecture. The presence of gunpowder made original stone-built castles obsolete, as they were easily destroyed by siege guns, which were huge cannons transported by water. In response to these cannons, Leon Battista Alberti introduced the idea that defensive fortifications should have uneven lines and be star-shaped.

These star-shaped forts featured angle bastions that replaced rounded outworks with angled outworks, advancing defense by allowing them to control larger areas of up to 80 square kilometers. The new forts had shorter and thicker walls, ranging from around six to eight feet wide, and incorporated outworks, ditches, and hornworks to push besiegers further away as soldiers could fire back. To defend the ditches, additional fortifications such as pill-boxes and detached triangular bastions were constructed. The presence of angle bastions meant soldiers could fire at double their previous rate and no longer faced blind spots due to the presence of gun towers.

Scientific and technological advancements led personalities like Da Vinci and Michelangelo to write treatises on proper fortification designs, which were distributed across Europe. However, constructing an angle bastion was extremely expensive, costing around 10,000 British pounds. These improved fortifications also caused longer siege warfare, which then required even more money. The forts were also difficult to keep up to date; Henry VIII of England built 28 forts that were outdated before they were completed. Henry VIII only accepted this reality after the French invasion in 1545. Some military theorists, notably the Lacedemonians, believed that fortifying did more harm than good, challenging the prevailing view of defensive architecture.

Weapons Innovation and Tactical Change

Fortifications improvements were not the only advancements during the military revolution; firearms progressed rapidly as well. It did not take very long for most European nations to abandon their crossbows and longbows. Firearms became prominent in 15th-century Italy and in 16th-century England, accelerated after Charles the Rash's army was defeated by a larger force of pikemen. The first widespread gun was the harquebus, which required no training but was large, weighed around 20 pounds, and required a tripod. It was also relatively ineffective: reloading took a minute or two, and accuracy extended only to about 100 meters, while the archer could shoot ten arrows a minute with accuracy up to 200 meters. Additionally, the harquebus could not be used in windy or rainy conditions, as it was a matchlock fuse weapon.

The wheellock pistol and flintlock musket came later, in the 1550s. They featured internal combustion sparks and fired more often, making the musketeer the master of the battlefield. The Swedes also introduced leather guns, mounted in twos or threes, though they were later proven to overheat. These new guns introduced new battlefield formations, including the pike square, originally a Swiss innovation featuring tightly formed squares of pikemen. Firelocks were later added to defend the pike square. With the advancement of weapons and changes in tactics, pike squares evolved into rectangles to emphasize the ability of army units to work together more quickly.

Counts Maurice and William Louis of Nassau, commanders of the Dutch army, developed a revolutionary plan: deploying two rows of musketeers to the battlefield and introducing the volley technique, in which one row of musketeers fires while the other reloads. This formation made it crucial for armies to spread out during battle to maximize the volley effect and minimize their targeted area. The revolution in tactics meant that infantry replaced cavalry, and gunners and musketeers replaced feudal knights. In general, all soldiers became more disciplined.

This shift did not mean cavalry and knights immediately became extinct. There were instances, such as Gustavus Adolphus' use of cavalry to break softened lines, where traditional forces remained tactically valuable. Cavalry also lasted longer in Eastern Europe due to vast spaces and the lack of centralized state apparatus. In the West, however, gunpowder spread quickly, making cavalry increasingly ineffective and rendering the feudal knight obsolete.

Naval Warfare and European Expansion

Not all troops were required to fight on the battlefield, so more forces were needed to defend civilians and garrison towns. Some troops were kept in garrisons, as it was cheaper to maintain them there. To maintain an army of troops, however, they required 45,000 pounds of bread and 30,000 pounds of meat every day. Depending on their location, troops either carried their weekly meals on their backs or had them transported by water. The army also maintained selectively-bred horses that were very large and costly to keep.

Between the great discoveries of 1490 and the introduction of railways in 1840 was the golden age of sea power. Naval warfare became a crucial dimension of the military revolution. Naval warfare began with oar-powered vessels equipped with a few cannons that required slaves to row. Sails were later introduced, making more space for cannons and enabling the presence of multiple gun decks. Ship-borne artillery gave way to the naval guns, and standard galleys were soon replaced by the Venetian galleass.

The Venetian galleass, however, required a large crew and could only carry 400 men and their food and supplies. This meant they could not stay at sea for long and had to remain within a limited range to restock supplies. The emergence of heavily armed sailing ships between 1450 and 1650 increased ship size without a proportional increase in crew numbers. They were equipped with weaponry like handguns, so the ship could be defended with fewer men. Henry VII later introduced smaller ships with less superstructure and more guns, making them more durable and maneuverable.

Societal and Political Consequences

These ships not only helped in warfare but also facilitated trade and enabled European nations to reach multiple Asian countries such as India, Japan, and the Philippines. The winners in the early modern naval arms race were the Dutch during their golden age in the 17th century. The Dutch were excellent organizers and ship designers, possessed a strong merchant order, and owned more than 300 vessels that allowed them to engage in international trade and extend European influence globally.

The military revolution did not only result in advantageous developments; there were significant logistical problems as well. The main challenge was the ability to maintain an army of thousands or hundreds of thousands of men and supply it with food and equipment. Governments also had to maintain and defend forts and garrisons, which cost them enormous sums. Louis XIV spent 75 percent of revenue on war, Peter the Great spent 85 percent, and the English Republic in the 1650s spent 90 percent. When governments could not handle war supplies from their own resources, they either turned to foreign loans with high interest rates, sold their assets, hired private contractors, or used their tax revenue.

This taxation was part of a contribution system and was levied on civilians within a certain radius of the army's presence, affecting society directly. This change in society, however, subsequently transformed European governments from feudal systems to modern states. The revolution in tactics and machinery also hinged on which forces were best trained. It was also very difficult to move an army from one location to another and keep track of all personnel in any given force. Recruitment was sometimes considered a logistical problem, especially when it was forced, conscripted, or involved paying foreign fighters for their loyalty. To reduce soldier desertion, plunder and booty were considered enrichment rewards, even though they were known to harm the civilians who were threatened and besieged.

Conclusion: Legacy of Military Transformation

The military revolution is important in European history and in the broader revolution of warfare because it marked the introduction of gunpowder and all the changes that came with it. In relation to warfare, it introduced new fort architecture, new tactics, new artillery, new sea power, and larger armies. This revolution in warfare consecutively transformed European society, which had to manage the increase in army size and maintain all the supplies required. This social change, in turn, transformed European governments from feudal systems to modern, merchant states.