Just finished reading MacGregor Knox and Williamson Murray's edited compilation The Dynamics of Military Revolution. Williamson Murray and MacGregor Knox have made many other great collaborations, and this is no exception. The topic of "military revolutions" and "revolutions in military affairs" is fraught with the legacy of the 1990s technoculture and Transformation boondoggles, and Knox and Murray and their contributors gainfully rescue the concept from technological determinism. Of particular note is Holger Herwig's chapter on 19th century to early 20th century naval policy and strategy and Mark Grimsley's chapter on the American Civil War.
I found the discussion of the two components of our modern understanding of revolutions in military affairs particularly helpful when re-reading Geoffrey Parker and Clifford Rogers. The contrast between the materially-oriented approach and a more holistic approach is important to understand when looking at Parker's claims about the trace italienne and Michael Roberts' initial argument about the Dutch and Swedish adoption of linear tactics, smaller units, and a higher ratio of shot to pikes.
Posted by: Mil_historicus | December 23, 2010 at 09:16 AM
Was about to hop on a plane so it's a bit of a quickie review.
I prefer the holistic approach, although it's a little bit frustrating to see most of the historians claim that they're not doing a RM/RMA analysis in their opening paragraph and then go ahead and do it.
Posted by: A.E. | December 23, 2010 at 08:43 PM
And it's still evolving.
Posted by: Jack R. | May 26, 2011 at 07:49 AM