War, war, what’s it good for? Well, since you ask…

This, from a chapter in “The Cambridge History of Violence” (2020) is rather good. The chapter is by Professor Peter H Wilson.

The key advantage of regular troops was that their tighter discipline allowed them to fight in close-order formations designed to maximise the potential of the available weaponry. Discipline had several roots and its development was a key feature of European warfare in this period. The prevailing idea of a ‘just war’ required ‘proper conduct’ for it to be considered legitimate. Discipline was seen as a way to achieve it, since it enabled the authorities to determine how soldiers fought. Cohesion also protected soldiers’ lives, since most battle casualties occurred once units broke and were attacked or pursued by their enemies. Soldiers also welcomed the legitimacy conveyed by ideas of proper conduct, since they wished to avoid the social stigma associated with murder. Finally, discipline reflected broader ideas of an orderly society.21

Sooner or later you just know I am going to bring it to the question of effective social movement organisations, don’t you now?

There’s then a howler of a typo later in the chapter, but These Things Happen.