ABSTRACT
To a general reading public the history of the European empires still seems to be virtually synonymous with their military power and with stones of battles in tropical climes; by contrast, academic historians of imperialism now show little interest in purely military history. Campaigns and battles were no doubt frequently the means by which European power came to be exerted over other parts of the world, but, especially from the early nineteenth century onwards, their outcome was generally predictable. If the Europeans were prepared to make adequate efforts, their ultimate success was not usually in doubt. Defeats occurred often enough at the hands of Africans or Asians, but where it seemed worthwhile to do so, at least until the Russo-Japanese War, these defeats were sooner or later avenged. Historians' debates have therefore tended to concentrate not on the means of expansion but on the motives for it: why Europeans should have wished to exert their power or why they should have been drawn into doing so in certain situations. Books on battles are left to decorate that somewhat improbable piece of furniture, the coffee table.
