| Summary/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.
|