Key Factors and Interconnectivity in Military Development

Evaluating the Drivers of Change

A medieval knight in shining armour and a modern drone operator seem worlds apart, but the forces that put them on the battlefield are surprisingly similar. Throughout British history, warfare has been transformed by a complex web of different factors, known as drivers of change. To understand how armies evolved, we must evaluate which factors were most significant and how they worked together.

The Role of the State and Individuals

The state and key leaders are often the most pivotal drivers because they provide the funding, laws, and tactical decisions needed to implement change. In the Medieval period, Edward I changed tactics by using longbows at the Battle of Falkirk (1298) and formalised the Assize of Arms via the Statute of Winchester (1285).

By the Early Modern period, Parliament created Britain's first professional standing army, the New Model Army (1645). Oliver Cromwell's strict discipline and the Self-Denying Ordinance (1645), which introduced meritocracy, secured victory at Naseby.

Later governments drove massive shifts in how armies were organised. The Cardwell Reforms (1868–1874) abolished the purchase of commissions, and during the 20th century, the state took unprecedented control of civilian life to wage Total War.

Science, Technology, and Communications

Scientific study provides the knowledge that leads to physical technology and new methods of communication. These innovations rarely change warfare on their own, as they require state adoption to be effective.

In the Medieval period, the transition from the chainmail hauberk to plate armour responded directly to the lethal power of the longbow. Later, the invention of trunnions made early modern artillery significantly easier to aim and elevate.

Industrialisation brought the precision required for modern warfare. The Bessemer Process (1856) allowed for the mass production of high-quality steel, while John Wilkinson's boring machine (1774) created accurate cannons.

Communications also evolved from heraldry and horn signals used in the mêlée to electronic systems. The Electric Telegraph (invented 1837) was first used in 1854 to connect the Crimean front line to London. By 1935, radar enabled the complex Dowding System to defend Britain from the air.

The Influence of Societal Attitudes

Public opinion, religion, and social structures heavily influence how wars are fought and who fights them. Medieval warfare was dictated by the feudal hierarchy and the code of chivalry, which often led knights to reject "cowardly" long-range weapons.

Conversely, the Early Modern period saw the New Model Army driven by radical Puritanism. In the 19th century, reporting by William Howard Russell exposed the incompetence of elite officers.

This outrage, plus Florence Nightingale’s use of statistics on hospital conditions, shifted societal attitudes. Soldiers became seen as professionals deserving care rather than social inferiors.

In the 20th century, extreme societal pressure drove the adoption of conscription. While the public initially viewed the conscientious objector harshly in WWI, attitudes softened by WWII.

The Limits of Technology: Failed Innovations

When evaluating drivers, a significant counter-argument to the power of invention is technological determinism. This is the flawed idea that new technology automatically changes warfare.

In reality, innovations frequently fail if they lack government funding or societal acceptance. The Puckle Gun (1718) could fire 9 rounds per minute but was rejected because its flintlock mechanism was unreliable and too complex for mass production.

Similarly, the British military officially reverted to muzzle-loaders in 1865 despite having superior breech-loading artillery. Conservative leaders prioritised the cheapness and simplicity of muzzle-loaders for colonial wars over early breech-loaders, which lacked safety features.

Explaining Interconnectivity and Causal Mechanisms

Higher-level analysis requires explaining interconnectivity—how factors intersect to produce a synergy greater than their parts. A clear causal mechanism shows how one factor triggers or enables another to occur.

The decline of the mounted knight was driven by technology (pikes/longbows), societal attitudes (chivalry encouraging fighting on foot), and government pragmatism (preferring cheaper infantry). No single factor caused the change alone.

Professionalising 19th-century military medicine relied on a similar tight causal chain. Communications (the telegraph) allowed William Howard Russell to publish reports rapidly, triggering societal outrage.

This outrage empowered Florence Nightingale and Sidney Herbert. They used science (statistics) to force the government to implement the 1858 Medical Warrant. Without this interconnectivity, the scientific knowledge of hygiene would have remained unimplemented.

Concluding Evaluation: Pivotal Drivers by Period

In the Medieval and Early Modern periods, the State and Individuals were the most pivotal drivers. Military success depended almost entirely on a King's tactical choices or Parliament's decision to fund a professional standing army.

By the Industrial and Modern eras, Science and Technology became the dominant drivers. While the State still provided the necessary funding, the actual nature and scale of conflict were transformed by industrial mass production and electronic communications.