The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Pragmatism & discretion: Discipline in the British Army, 1808-1818

Pragmatism & discretion: Discipline in the British Army, 1808-1818
Pragmatism & discretion: Discipline in the British Army, 1808-1818
Military law is poorly understood by comparison with its non-military (i.e. civilian) counterpart. This thesis offers the first detailed overview of military law in the British army at the start of the nineteenth century, exploring its provisions and practices, and how the theoretical framework of the law was imposed in reality. It draws on a wide-ranging selection of material, from works of authority on military law, to court proceedings, trial registers, soldiers’ memoirs and the correspondence of leading figures and stakeholders in the administration of military justice. A core element of this research has been the transcription of a database of 9,227 court martial cases, which will be drawn upon to highlight the army’s prosecution priorities and punishment practices. Throughout it is argued that military law was more nuanced than has previously been recognised, whilst its implementation was underpinned by a pragmatic system of discretionary justice. Military law was consistently applied in a way that was bespoke to the army’s immediate needs, yet the nature of these ‘needs’ varied according to each individual’s position within the army’s command structure. With these diverging priorities, military law was simultaneously pulled and manipulated in multiple directions, with some calling for softer forms of punishment and taking a lenient approach towards certain crimes, whilst others pushed for more stringent measures. Military law was also by no means constant during this period. Competing pressures and conflicting priorities led to a diverse array of agendas which not only influenced how the law was implemented, but also how the law was reformed. It will become apparent that these diverse priorities led to an uncoordinated programme of reforms, with some efforts undermining the intentions of others. However military law did not operate within a vacuum. Throughout the thesis, close reference will be made to discussions and practices within the contemporaneous non-military justice system. Throughout the period under scrutiny, society was experiencing the Foucauldian shift from punishment of the body to punishment of the mind through incarceration. For much of the period, the army bucked that wider social trend in order to attend to its own needs, only embracing solitary confinement from 1817 as a result of growing pressure from senior officials in the army’s administrative structure. Similarly, the growing ‘lawyerisation’ of civilian courts was mirrored by a militarization of the army’s, with an increasing tendency to employ officers with some legal knowledge to officiate on trials, rather than civilian legal experts. It is argued that these trends indicate that whilst the army was willing to be informed by wider civilian practice, military law was applied in a manner which operated on different logic that was shaped by the army’s distinct needs.
University of Southampton
White, Zack
8f3cbe13-0776-46cf-b1ed-4a700b717df8
White, Zack
8f3cbe13-0776-46cf-b1ed-4a700b717df8
Gammon, Julie
fd6d6be9-0cd7-43ee-947f-732609f99807
Brown, David
f993f40f-eea7-4ce3-8ad2-0b80683a5d6c

White, Zack (2022) Pragmatism & discretion: Discipline in the British Army, 1808-1818. University of Southampton, Doctoral Thesis, 302pp.

Record type: Thesis (Doctoral)

Abstract

Military law is poorly understood by comparison with its non-military (i.e. civilian) counterpart. This thesis offers the first detailed overview of military law in the British army at the start of the nineteenth century, exploring its provisions and practices, and how the theoretical framework of the law was imposed in reality. It draws on a wide-ranging selection of material, from works of authority on military law, to court proceedings, trial registers, soldiers’ memoirs and the correspondence of leading figures and stakeholders in the administration of military justice. A core element of this research has been the transcription of a database of 9,227 court martial cases, which will be drawn upon to highlight the army’s prosecution priorities and punishment practices. Throughout it is argued that military law was more nuanced than has previously been recognised, whilst its implementation was underpinned by a pragmatic system of discretionary justice. Military law was consistently applied in a way that was bespoke to the army’s immediate needs, yet the nature of these ‘needs’ varied according to each individual’s position within the army’s command structure. With these diverging priorities, military law was simultaneously pulled and manipulated in multiple directions, with some calling for softer forms of punishment and taking a lenient approach towards certain crimes, whilst others pushed for more stringent measures. Military law was also by no means constant during this period. Competing pressures and conflicting priorities led to a diverse array of agendas which not only influenced how the law was implemented, but also how the law was reformed. It will become apparent that these diverse priorities led to an uncoordinated programme of reforms, with some efforts undermining the intentions of others. However military law did not operate within a vacuum. Throughout the thesis, close reference will be made to discussions and practices within the contemporaneous non-military justice system. Throughout the period under scrutiny, society was experiencing the Foucauldian shift from punishment of the body to punishment of the mind through incarceration. For much of the period, the army bucked that wider social trend in order to attend to its own needs, only embracing solitary confinement from 1817 as a result of growing pressure from senior officials in the army’s administrative structure. Similarly, the growing ‘lawyerisation’ of civilian courts was mirrored by a militarization of the army’s, with an increasing tendency to employ officers with some legal knowledge to officiate on trials, rather than civilian legal experts. It is argued that these trends indicate that whilst the army was willing to be informed by wider civilian practice, military law was applied in a manner which operated on different logic that was shaped by the army’s distinct needs.

Text
24105473 Pragmatism & Discretion PhD History Thesis - Zack White FINAL - Version of Record
Available under License University of Southampton Thesis Licence.
Download (2MB)
Text
ZACK WHITE - 24105473 - Permission to deposit thesis
Restricted to Repository staff only

More information

Submitted date: December 2021
Published date: June 2022

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 467445
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/467445
PURE UUID: 7585c447-ab29-4875-b5bf-fed5527d705d

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 08 Jul 2022 16:40
Last modified: 16 May 2024 04:01

Export record

Contributors

Author: Zack White
Thesis advisor: Julie Gammon
Thesis advisor: David Brown

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×