War, the Military Revolution(s) Controversy, and Army Expansion

Abstract

One school of thought on European state making argues that discontinuous change in weapons and tactics led to the expansion of armies, and, therefore, states. Others argue that decision makers expanded state organizations to make war for its own sake, not simply because the tools of war changed. Although this controversy is not easily resolved, the empirical evidence indicates that major expansions in army sizes over the past 500 years were almost exclusively related to major wars fought over regional and global primacy. Moreover, the leaders in expanding armies were usually the states aspiring to regional hegemony and their principal opponent. This evidence buttresses the argument for drawing a direct relationship between war and state making—instead of emphasizing an indirect relationship between weapons/tactics and army size.