Abstract
The British Army during Victoria’s reign has been portrayed as an institution standing awkwardly next to British society. Legal authorities and academics have used military law as an example, noting the military’s “capricious” legal processes in contrast to the predictable civilian experience. Rather than understanding military legal processes though, academics tend to focus on discipline or penalties foreign to today’s mind. This article draws evidence from centuries of legal development and late-nineteenth-century sources to demonstrate a far greater commonality between civilian and military legal experiences. The military’s legal tradition describes, in part, the military’s position as a rare example of a truly “British” institution.
Read the full article
Members: read on EBSCO
Use the access code from this quarter's member email. Every issue since 1937 is online, with no embargo.
Lost your code? Email jmhsmh@vmi.edu or sign in at the EBSCOhost member login.
Not a member? Buy this article
A PDF sent by email from the Journal office during business hours, $10.
Through a library: sign in with your institution
Full text is in EBSCO's America: History and Life with Full Text and Historical Abstracts with Full Text, and through EBSCO Discovery.
Join: read everything, every year
Membership includes the printed journal and full online access to the archive.
Cite this article
Ian S. Kelly, “No Settled Principles? Military Law in the Late Victorian Army,” The Journal of Military History 87, no. 2 (April 2023): 322–344.
