Thread: How did the Europeans have a strong military in the 19th century?

So the Europeans had a strong military in the 19th century obviously because they were able to take over/imperialize areas in Africa, Asia, India, and the Middle East but what made their military strong and how did their military become strong?

technology, here's a for instance the army of Napoleon met the Egyptian army of Mamelukes at the battle of the pyramids, basically they hadn't changed since they fought the Christian crusaders 700 years previously. with in the space of 30 mins the Bay's army was slaughtered.

This is a big debate among historians. I can summarize three possible interpretations (and I think all three are true, to some degree):

1) From the 1400s to the 1800s, Europe was marked by the rise of nation-states -- basically large countries of culturally similar ethnic groups usually unified by language, culture, and/or religion. Nation-states were aggressively competitive and had an incentive to constantly look to improve military technology in order to gain an advantage over rival nations. As a result, warfare became radically more destructive in Europe over those centuries, with particularly naval forces being vastly more powerful than anything else in the world. This didn't happen in other developed places like the Middle East, India, China, or Japan because by the 1500s all of them were dominated by huge empires (Ottomans, Mughals, Qing, Tokugawa). Unlike nation-states, these big empires had a disincentive for more military technology -- as they weren't really threatened by outside forces (at least until European imperialism), new weapons would more likely have ended up in the hands of domestic rival nobles and would have been use against the imperial dynasties.

2) Industrialization transformed the economy of Europe beginning in the 1700s. Populations were pushed and pulled from the countryside into growing cities, where they increasingly worked in factories to mass produce materials that could be used in war efforts (such as steel). As a result, the economic productivity of most European nations (even very small ones) by 1800 dwarfed the output of virtually any pre-industrial society, even a vast and rich empire like Qing China or Mughal India. Pre-industrial societies simply could not support sustained war efforts (particularly powerful navies of steam warships) like industrialized Europe.

3) Jared Diamond's famous book "Guns, Germs, and Steel" ascribes Western dominance to a legacy of geographical advantages. All the best, most productive crops and domesticated animals began in the Middle East and were easily transplanted to Europe in ancient times, where they thrived in Europe's climate. The Middle East, on the other hand, declined in subsequent millenia as the climate changed. This advantage in crops, animals, and geography meant that Europe would develop very large populations for its size. Large populations with many domestic animals meant they would develop the most virulent germs and, over time, gain some immunities to these diseases. Likewise, large populations over time would be able to produce and refine complex military technologies like guns and steel weapons. When Europeans began to expand around the world in the 1500s, they brought powerful technologies under their control not possessed by many other peoples around the world (gunpowder, high-quality steel weapons and armor) as well as germs not under their control bu devastating to peoples around the planet who hadn't encountered them before (like Native Americans).