> Resource and knowledge flows that were direct consequences of military expenditures Can't agree to that. As noted, correlation isn't causality from or conseq

> Resource and knowledge flows that were direct consequences of military expenditures Can't agree to that. As noted, correlation isn't causality from or consequence thereof. Wikipedia's list of critical tech for industrial revolution is textiles, steam power, iron working, machine tools. That seems reasonable. In context, the key developments of all happened upstream of military use/development (although they had military use, military expenditures were not causal). Take Watt's steam engine improvements. The development was substantially if not entirely civilian. Ran water pumps for coal mining which supported many industries including military, and military use was not critical for development. Possible counter example is Harrison's marine chronometer. Development was militarily supported and spurred on by a naval disaster. However, while contributory, wasn't essential to success of industrial revolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution#Important_technological_developments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution#Importan... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt_steam_engine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt_steam_engine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison