What_Is_Military_History

What is military History' When thinking of military history, epic battles and wars that changed the face of the world as we know it today first come to mind. It is true that military history is a lot to do with studying warfare but it is more complex than this. In this essay one will firstly have to look at what military history is and where it originated from' Secondly it is important to look at the other areas that have intertwined with military history, these being political thought, economics and link between military history and society. Lastly what is military history today and does it have any practical value. Military history is the history of war. The history of war can be summarised through various sub groups. Firstly there is the campaigns and battles of war. Secondly leaders and leadership skills during these battles. Thirdly military institutions and formations. There are wide misconceptions that military history is just about war and this is one of the main reasons military history is ridiculed however it is not just about this. One can take Ireland as an example apart from fighting for its independence which is categorised as the ‘Irish Revolution’ it has not fought in any wars or had any decisive battles that can be recalled in the history books however this does not mean it is not written about in military history. The Irish defence forces as an institution in Ireland is very important part of our military history. Fourthly military history is the study of war and how it has shaped society and more importantly how it reacts with society today. Lastly when looking at military history it is important to note the overlap with the economy and politics. Military history is one of the oldest fields of History. In order to explain what military history is its origins need to be traced. Older military history was more interested with battles and the campaign of war. The origins of military history can be traced as far back to the period of the Greeks and the Romans. They used history as a way to learn from past mistakes and for a way to make sure that they did not re-occur something that is done in the present day. Stephen Morillo quotes ‘ The Greeks saw history as, like medicine, a search for causes of current events (though as in medicine and other areas of Greek life, rationality coexisted with ‘irrational’ and religious traditions that have often been underemphasized), and drama, philosophy and poetry’. In both Greek and Roman times military values and a warrior ethos dominated political life and culture. China also had some of the earliest writings of military history. The Art of War by Sun Tzu was influenced largely by Chinese military examples. He used these examples to illustrate his principles. Sun Tzu’s The Art of War is still used to this day as a primary military text in military study and is also used in other areas such as sociology and politics, so this shows how important earlier writings on military history are to this day. The Ancient world definitely influenced military writings which progressed to the traditional world. As the world changed so did military writing, as the ancient world subsided and the traditional world emerged new military writing followed this. Medieval Europe and the rise of Christianity gave way to the military aristocracy. Military writing from the Romans and Greeks had been questionable and gave little or no details of battles and the stories of these battles were usually passed by word of mouth among friends. A clear turning point in military writing was the revival of the economy Western Europe this gave way to the re birth of royal power and in turn lead to the idea chivalry among men. Literacy improved giving way to a long line classical authors writing about war and what their views were on the subject. Churchmen and monks also dominated history writing during this period and clerics were used by royal courts to re account details and military histories. Early military history focused more on the battles and campaigns of war. With the stories of immense battle the important role of the leader emerged. Leaders and the role of leadership in military history changed over time in military writing. Although good, bad and mad leaders are re called throughout military history there was a greater respect given to leaders in ancient times and in the traditional world at times as a hero figure. In the ancient world the term ‘great warrior’ emerged, leaders such as Xenophon in Greek times to Julius Caesar in Roman times were respected public figures. This term ‘great warrior’ can also be seen in early Western Europe with figures such as William the Conqueror and his conquest of England in 1066. William the Conquerors crusades hugely influenced military writings at the time. This idea of the great warrior did not last for long as military history was influenced hugely by western Europe and the first crossover of intellectual writing on military history emerged which changed the outlooks of many on war. Most notably Niccolo Machiavelli, his ‘ The Art of War’ which hugely focused on this idea of virtue asked questions of soldiers and their spirits and that wars should not be fought unless there was a chance of victory, he highlighted that one person could not win a war. ‘Never lead your soldiers to battle if you have not first confirmed their spirit and known them to be without fear and ordered; and never test them except when you see that they hope to win.’ Machiavelli classic works which also include ‘the Prince’ and ‘ the discourses on livy’ saw the first connect between intellectual thought and military history, a trend that is present to this day when studying military history. Western Europe continued have huge influence on military writings. The printing press which was invented in 1453 allowed for a huge rise in printed material which now reached a wider audience. The Enlightenment provided a new set of transformations and changes in military history. The focus on battles and leaders shifted and new ides of military technology emerged as well as theories on war through intellectual thought. The scientific revolution of the mid-seventeenth century also marked an end to the wars being fought about religion and a more cultural based military history emerged. State power now started to come to the forefront and countries now focused on their own military traditions. This Enlightenment gave way to more intellectual writers such as John Locke and Edward Gibbon whose ‘Decline and fall of the Roman Empire’ is seen as one of the most influential pieces of early ‘modern’ military history as it criticises the use of primary sources and their reliability. The Enlightenment also showed the first real writings on how negative war can be and shifted away primary writing on warfare. While historians did not focus primarily on military history during the Enlightenment there was still huge interest in it. The military memoir emerged and more focus was put on the life of military men an area that had never really been discussed as it was usually wars and the leaders that was the focus of military history. Raimondo Montecuccoli had the first most notable memories he wrote several works of his experiences during his extensive military service. The Enlightenment directly influenced change in the Nineteenth century as well. The events of the French Revolution and the wars of Napoleon marked yet another change in military writing. The idea of Nationalism emerged a term that would be prominent in military writing for the next two centuries. Napoleonic warfare gave way to new advances in strategy and through the French Revolution the creation of revolutionary armies changed the outlook on war. The Industrial Revolution also had long term effects in changing war in the nineteenth century. Karl Marx’s ‘ The Communist Manifesto’ was the first text linking the war and the economy and outlined how important a good economy is to succeed in war. The idea of Nationalism and the new idea of communism that emerged in the nineteenth century meant that the military writing of the next few decades was more theoretical analysis than that of military writings on war. Two of the most prominent figures to emerge at this time were Carl Von Clausewitz and Antoine Henri Jomini. Instead of talking in a narrative sense about warfare, they put forward theories on how war should be fought and they did this through their own experiences after having being directly involved in war, Jomini being a Swiss officer who fought in both Napoleonic Wars and Clausewitz being a Prussian officer who fought against Napoleon. In the mid nineteenth century military history became a professionalised field with academics focusing on history as their profession. Leopold von Ranke trained historians in how to use primary sources through seminars in Berlin University. His practices soon spread to prominent universities in England, France and the United States. Hans Delbruck who was a student of von Ranke was the first to write extensively on the correlation between military organisations and social and political organisations in his works‘ The History of Warfare in the Framework of Political Framework’. After World War I and World War II the quality of military history was criticised although it was popular among the masses this lead to poor writing as many military writers were driven by money. This gave military history a bad reputation and military history was also criticised for glorifying war. Military history as we have seen in the first few paragraphs of this essay has hugely changed over time. Military writing which started of as mainly narrative and interested with epics battle and charismatic leaders has changed and has intertwined with politics, the economy and intellectual thought. The theory of war is very important when studying military history. As a growing field, military history is also practiced by historians with philosophical and methodological backgrounds. The main focus of their study being causation. The traditional view of causation was of the decisive battle and this theory of the ’Great man’, meaning that war was caused due to battles and one clear leader. Leo Tolstoy’s novel on ’ War and Peace’ points out however that one person alone cannot influence the outcome of war. In the last fifty years the idea of the ‘ Great Man’ has feel to the background and the process of putting war in its social and political context has come to the forefront for military historians. Michael Howard one of the leading professors and writers in the military history field who was hugely influenced by Delbruck stated in his book ‘ War in European History’ , “ To abstract war from the environment in which it is fought and study its technique as one would those of a game is to ignore a dimension essential to the understanding, not simply of the wars themselves but of the societies which fought them. The historian who studies war, not to develop norms for action but to enlarge his understanding of the past, cannot be simply a 'military historian', for there is literally no branch of human activity which is not to a greater or lesser extent relevant to its subject.” Howard along with Morrillo both believe that conceptual frameworks are very important in studying military history today. Military history and its relationship with society has also been a much bigger issue in the last fifty years and the moral implications that come along with studying it. Michael Howard’s article ‘ The use and abuse of military history’ looks at this point exactly.Howard points out that it is important to find out exactly what happened in the past. The work of the military historian is to understand the uniqueness of the event and how that event fitted into society and what effects it had on that society. Howard also points out that it is the military historian’s job to find out fact from fiction for example they need to be able to figure out if a source is reliable. An eye witness returning from war or writing letters home is obviously going to be somewhat bias. The eye witness might also try to get greater sympathy by over exaggerating events. Also a certain sense of loyalty may lead soldiers to leave out certain important points of information and they are also psychologically damaged so their accounts cannot be fully trusted. The military historian more than other historians had to create order out of chaos and find out what actually occurred as opposed to what might have happened. Military history and its relationship with society and the criticism that goes with that is a big question in the present day. However military history is seeing as a tool to assess previous wars and learn from previous mistakes. As Howard points out war is intermittent unlike politics, administration and the economy which is continually changing with new policies and processes. War is associated with either success or failure and the way to be best prepared for war is through military reading and strategy, it is not possible when a country loses a war for them to simply bring in a new policy on how to fight war correctly, ‘ War is a distinct and repetitive form of human behaviour’. Military history is not just studied by history students in colleges and Professors in the field of military history it is widely studied among soldiers and army personnel. Sometimes the idea of war and the reality of war are two completely different things meaning that soldiers on the ground are completely unprepared as to what they are about to face. The use of military history within the army is increasing and gives soldiers a sense of security as they know more as to what could happen in the field. President George Bush was openly criticised when he started a war with Iraq quickly as a means of revenge, as a result of this American and British soldiers were hugely out of their dept when they were put into the field. The culture and the language in Iraq was nothing like that of Western culture and as a result the soldiers were not able to communicate with the locals let alone try and get them on side. Also if a war is not occurring a professional solider is compelled to read and learn about wars of the past as its their profession and this will make them more prepared to deal with war if it occurs. Howard states that there are three general rules that a military professional should consider when studying wars of the past. Firstly it is essential for the professional to look at the historiography of war, very similar to what a historian or a student would do, finding out how warfare has developed over time. In finding out what has changed over time will it be necessary to see what has stayed the same. Secondly it is necessary to look in dept at certain events sort of similar to a case study that a student or historian would carry out to form a coherent argument. Lastly and the most important is the context in which the war happened. As we have seen throughout the essay war does not simply happen due to a decisive battle and great leader, its normally a long rooted conflict that results in war. Therefore it is the nature of the society fighting wars that needs to be understood. What is military history' This question is a bit daunting at a first glance as its hard to explain military history in one clear definition. The history of war and conflict is a good definition however its is important to note that military history is not one dimensional. How war and conflict has effected societies, their cultures, economies and their relationships with the international world is a very important aspect of military history. Only through military history is it possible to understand existing good relations between countries and more importantly hostilities that may occur between certain countries. The crossover between intellectual thought and politics is also a very distinct part of military history. Prominent thinkers such as Marx, Locke and Machiavelli had huge influence on military writings. This thinking eventually lead to military professionals putting forward opinions and theories on war such as Jomini and Clausewitz. Military history and its relationship with society may be somewhat volatile as there are critics that say it only glorifies war. This is not true and military history is a very useful tool for military professionals to be more equipped to carry out their job and gives them an added sense of security when they are going into a very unfamiliar situation. Military history has had to adapt over time due to so many changes as the world has developed. Although it might not be one of the most respected areas of history it is definitely one of the most interesting and is an important field of history for today and the tomorrow. Dr David Murphy lecture notes. Dr David Murphy lecture notes. Dr David Murphy lecture notes. Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Machiavelli, Niccolo, The art of war ( London, 2003), edited by Christopher Lynch. Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Morrillo, Stephen, What is military history ( Cambridge, 2006). Strachan, Hew, Michael Howard and the dimensions of military history ( London, 2002) available at Liddell Hart centre for military archives, http://www.kcl.ac.uk/lhcma/info/lec02.shtml ( 10 December 2009). Howard, Michael, The use and abuse of military history ( Britain, 1961) available at Journal of the US Army war college, Vol XI, No.1, pp9-14, http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_2/CAJ_vol6.2_06_e.pdf. Howard, Michael, The use and abuse of military history ( Britain, 1961) available at Journal of the US Army war college, Vol XI, No.1, pp9-14, http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_2/CAJ_vol6.2_06_e.pdf. Howard, Michael, The use and abuse of military history ( Britain, 1961) available at Journal of the US Army war college, Vol XI, No.1, pp9-14, http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_2/CAJ_vol6.2_06_e.pdf. Howard, Michael, The use and abuse of military history ( Britain, 1961) available at Journal of the US Army war college, Vol XI, No.1, pp9-14, http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_2/CAJ_vol6.2_06_e.pdf. Howard, Michael, The use and abuse of military history ( Britain, 1961) available at Journal of the US Army war college, Vol XI, No.1, pp9-14, http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_2/CAJ_vol6.2_06_e.pdf. Howard, Michael, The use and abuse of military history ( Britain, 1961) available at Journal of the US Army war college, Vol XI, No.1, pp9-14, http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_2/CAJ_vol6.2_06_e.pdf. Howard, Michael, The use and abuse of military history ( Britain, 1961) available at Journal of the US Army war college, Vol XI, No.1, pp9-14, http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_2/CAJ_vol6.2_06_e.pdf.