Balance of Power and the Military Revolution
הוצג| English | משמעות |
|---|---|
| partition/pɑːˈtɪʃn/ | חלוקה (של שטחים) |
A competitive state system
- The competitive state system led to new patterns of diplomacy and new forms of warfare.
- After 1648, dynastic and state interests, along with Europe's expanding colonial empires, influenced the diplomacy of European states and frequently led to war.
- Three interests in the CED's list: dynastic, state, and colonial — and they do not always point the same way.
Select all the interests the CED says influenced diplomacy after 1648.
רמת קושי 2/5 · 140 מטבעות + בונוס קטן בהשלמה הראשונה היום
They do not always point the same way.
Poland: what failure to centralise cost
- The inability of the Polish monarchy to consolidate its authority over the nobility led to Poland's partition 瓜分 by Prussia, Russia and Austria, and its disappearance from the map of Europe.
- The CED states a direct causal link between an internal failure and an external outcome.
- So 1.1's varying degrees of centralisation has a limiting case, and this is it.
Military costs, diplomacy and territorial rivalry shaped the balance of power
The CED links Poland's partition directly to...
רמת קושי 1/5 · 100 מטבעות + בונוס קטן בהשלמה הראשונה היום
It is the limiting case of 1.1's varying degrees of centralisation.
The military revolution
- Advances in military technology led to new forms of warfare, including greater reliance on infantry, firearms, mobile cannon and more elaborate fortifications.
- All financed by heavier taxation and requiring a larger bureaucracy.
- So a military change becomes an administrative change, which is why this subtopic explains 3.7's absolutism.
Diplomacy, military change, or fiscal consequence?
Sort each element of the balance of power.
Select all the new forms of warfare the CED names.
רמת קושי 2/5 · 140 מטבעות + בונוס קטן בהשלמה הראשונה היום
All financed by heavier taxation and requiring a larger bureaucracy.
The military revolution is a fiscal and administrative change, not only a technical one. The CED's sentence ends all financed by heavier taxation and requiring a larger bureaucracy — which is precisely why a change in warfare produced a change in the form of the state.
The military revolution tipped the balance toward states able to marshal sufficient ____.
רמת קושי 1/5 · 100 מטבעות + בונוס קטן בהשלמה הראשונה היום
So the balance of power is a function of fiscal capacity.
Who could afford the new warfare
- New military techniques and institutions (i.e., the military revolution) tipped the balance of power toward states able to marshal sufficient resources for the new military environment.
- So the balance of power is not only diplomacy — it is a function of fiscal capacity.
- A state that cannot tax cannot field the new armies, and Poland is the CED's own illustration.
The military revolution was only a change in weapons and tactics.
רמת קושי 1/5 · 100 מטבעות + בונוס קטן בהשלמה הראשונה היום
False. It was also a fiscal and administrative change, which is why a change in warfare produced a change in the form of the state.
Two objectives, one mechanism
- The balance of power objective asks how states tried to maintain equilibrium; the technology objective asks how technology contributed to it.
- They meet in one mechanism: new warfare costs more, so the balance shifts toward states that can raise more.
- Naming that mechanism answers both objectives in a sentence.
A state that can assess and collect a land tax annually can keep a permanent infantry force; one that must ask an assembly each time cannot. Within fifty years the first has a standing army and the second has neighbours who do. Poland is the CED's example of where that ends.
The competitive state system led to new patterns of diplomacy and new forms of warfare, driven by dynastic and state interests along with expanding colonial empires. Poland's monarchy could not consolidate authority over the nobility, leading to partition by Prussia, Russia and Austria. The military revolution — infantry, firearms, mobile cannon, fortifications, all financed by heavier taxation and requiring a larger bureaucracy — tipped the balance toward states able to marshal resources.