How did changes in the balance of land versus naval balance of power prevent England from being successfully invaded by foreign powers after 1066?

score:-1

Accepted answer

There are plenty of opportunities to argue against the premise of the question here. The exception made for native invaders in particular is not particularly convincing. The "Glorious Revolution" could certainly be counted as a Dutch invasion. Henry Tudor's invasion had signficant Breton support. The Spanish Armada could easily have gone another way, had the weather been more favourable on them.

However, once we get to Napoleon something clearly has changed about the "invadability" of Great Britain. Here we have a brilliant military leader with a significant army on the French coast and more than enough motivation to invade Great Britain - but he doesn't try.

The crucial change between William the Conqueror and Napoleon is how naval combat works. The traditional form of naval combat is that you tie together the ships, and then fight hand-to-hand. A warship will be more in control over whether or not to fight than a troop transport, but will not necessarily have a significant advantage if the fighting happens. However, once cannons become the standard, utterly wrecking the enemies troop transports with your warships becomes an option.

Accompanying the technological development is that a supporting a substantial navy is a significant challenge for a state, and only in the early modern period did European states again reach the required level of centralisation and government budgets.

More post

Search Posts

Related post