The Niger expedition was reconstituted and relaunched under the command of Captain William Gray in 1817. Although it took a different route, it adopted the same methods as its predecessor and met with the same results. Reliant on pack animals to transport its supplies and African rulers to grant it passage through their lands, it ground to a halt when the animals died and the rulers failed to cooperate. A suspicious Bundu regime detained the expedition. Some members deserted; others succumbed to disease. The rest fled to the French trading settlement of Bakel. In a desperate final bid to reach the Niger, Gray led a smaller party to Kaarta, but there too he encountered resistance, forcing his retreat to the coast. Gray’s later career as a settler in Tasmania highlights a key contrast to his experience as an explorer in Africa; unlike Aborigines, Africans held the upper hand in dealing with Europeans.

Volume 2 of The Cambridge History of Global Migrations presents an authoritative overview of the various continuities and changes in migration and globalization from the 1800s to the present day. Despite revolutionary changes in communication technologies, the growing accessibility of long-distance travel, and globalization across major economies, the rise of nation-states empowered immigration regulation and bureaucratic capacities for enforcement that curtailed migration. One major theme worldwide across the post-1800 centuries was the differentiation between “skilled” and “unskilled” workers, often considered through a racialized lens; it emerged as the primary divide between greater rights of immigration and citizenship for the former, and confinement to temporary or unauthorized migrant status for the latter. Through thirty-one chapters, this volume further evaluates the long global history of migration; and it shows that despite the increased disciplinary systems, the primacy of migration remains and continues to shape political, economic, and social landscapes around the world.

Chapter 6 examines the period from 1944 to May 1945. How did chaplains deal with impending defeat? The chaos of retreat brought many challenges. Chaplains witnessed the death throes and killing frenzies of Hitler’s Germany, as atrocities continued to the bitter end. Chaplains ministered to the Wehrmacht amid the destruction of the Jews of Hungary, assault on civilians in the name of anti-partisan warfare, and death marches as concentration camps were shut and guards forced prisoners out onto the road. The physical demands of the chaplains’ work increased as their numbers dwindled and those left lacked supplies of all kinds. Newly created NSFOs, Nazi leadership officers, competed with them for soldiers’ hearts and minds. Yet chaplains found they were more valued in times of defeat. At the front they reminded soldiers of their oath of obedience, while they comforted bereaved families at home. Some Greek Orthodox chaplains were allowed to minister to Ukrainian Waffen-SS men in the Galicia Division. Yet even as chaplains continued to serve, they began quietly to disregard the regime’s will when it conflicted with institutional self-interest, e.g. in appointing new base chaplains.

In the last half of the eighteenth century, the East India Company’s formal armies expanded from a few undermanned garrisons to a sprawling field force of more than one hundred thousand sepoys. How was the Company able to build such a force so quickly, and what drew recruits to the service? This chapter places the Company’s sepoy armies within the wider military landscape of India, focusing on the south where the Company’s earliest military expansion took place. Some of the Company’s first Indian officers, including Muhammad Yusuf Khan, saw its armies as unique professional opportunities through which to circumvent established political and social hierarchies in India. Company officials, though, were uncomfortable with such ambitions and quickly took steps to stymie them. As opportunities for advancement within the Company shrank, though, sepoys looked for more creative ways to realize their aspirations, including deserting the Company to seek further promotions in another army. The interplay between the Company’s ever-growing need for military labor and sepoys’ own desires to capitalize on their value as soldiers radically reshaped the military economy in South India and beyond.

Long before the East India Company’s founding, individual Europeans traveled to India as soldiers. Rulers recruited such men to gain access to new technical knowledge and to demonstrate their cosmopolitan reach. Company officials had long sought to make use of these adventurers as informal diplomatic agents, but had little success until the mid-eighteenth century, when the Company’s expanding political power made such connections valuable to European adventurers. As the balance of power between the Company and Indian states shifted, those adventurers demanded more formal positions within the Company, including as political residents through whom the Company asserted indirect influence over nominally independent states. Their success in implanting themselves as Company agents contrasts with the status of Indian officers and sepoys employed by the Company, who were also active in the fluid military labor markets of India. Rather than seeing such figures as potential representatives, Company officials used their growing corps of diplomat-adventurers to compel Indian states into new treaties criminalizing such movement and thus curtailing the fluidity of South India’s military economy.

This chapter will further explore the consequences of the German troops’ contact with their compatriots. The failure to evacuate the local population from East Prussia meant that they found themselves in Königsberg, an area of operations under martial law where a military mindset prevailed. Soldiers perceived their environment completely differently than civilians and yet the set of military laws to which these men had long adhered became the standard of reference for what passed as ‘normality’. In this major shift in what was considered normal, almost from the very commencement of the siege of Königsberg civilians were ordered to contribute to its defence, thus having to ‘earn’ the right to be protected. In line with military custom, failure to comply was considered desertion and was punishable by death, even though commanders were fully aware that civilians could not accustom themselves to military standards overnight. Since these coercive measures ensured a compliant population, Party functionaries expressed the desire to implement similar legislation on a national level, which took place throughout February and March 1945. This led to a diverse set of perpetrators, which in turn resulted in a dramatic increase in the number of victims among the general population.

Seamen faced both grave dangers and profound uncertainty when considering rebellion. The detailed evidence that we have assembled on dozens of mutinies shows that they resulted from the convergence of long-standing structural grievances among seamen combined with incidental grievances that intensified discontent and focused it on the person of the captain. Rebellious seamen intentionally employed tactics that enhanced coordination and secured the commitment of their shipmates. The occupational culture and social capital of seamen provided them with resources that made mutiny possible.

Chapter 4 examines partisan war participation differences using soldier voting tallies and county-level data on soldier service records linked with election data to test party differences in local military enlistment, desertion, and death. Soldiers in the field voted more for Republicans than did civilians back home. Likewise, Republican places contributed a larger share of local men to fight, those men were less likely to desert once in the ranks, and they were more likely to die in service. Democratic places were less willing to shoulder the mortal burdens of war to preserve the Union by suppressing the assault from their former partisan brethren. Thus, parties substantially organized the war service of their followers beyond the mobilizing power of government. Changes in partisan enlistment gaps over time follow shifts in partisan news support for war – striking evidence of dynamic leadership. Chapter 4 also finds some local partisan influence on African American enlistment and describes women’s war service. In sum, partisanship motivated ordinary Republicans more to save the Union through violent action, even as Democratic partisanship impeded the war.

Marriage was often a way to contain the poverty of women and children and sometimes men.Men were expected to be the family breadwinners, earning enough to feed, clothe and house their wife and children.In reality, poorer women were always obliged to assist in supplementing or securing the family income, as were children. For many women, the desertion of a husband brought them and their children to destitution and they ended up in the workhouse.Desertion could occur at any point in a marriage, sometimes after a couple of days or even years later. The large number of newspaper notices placed by husbands cautioning the public that they would not pay any bills accumulated by their runaway wives testify to the way in which men and women took matters into their own hands to abandon a difficult marriage, without consulting a lawyer or, in many cases, their spouse.Sometimes spouses agreed to a desertion as a way of separating. The evolution of the law throughout the period saw the removal of legal constraints placed upon women granting them, for instance, greater property rights and economic autonomy.By the end of the nineteenth century, the law provided more substantial support to women who were deserted, or separated, particularly in the area of securing maintenance payments.

Internal violence played a crucial role when it came to enforcing order and military discipline and as a deterrent against desertion. For many men in the armed forces violence began with their enlistment. Each Mexican state was obliged to deliver a contingent of soldiers to the federal army. Since recruitment practices were never precisely regulated, some soldiers were enlisted by bounty, while others were forced to serve for several years, as in the case of wrongdoers or vagabonds. Soldiers not only experienced ill-treatment during recruitment but were also subjected to various forms of hardship and abuse as members of military units.

Internal violence played a crucial role when it came to enforcing order and military discipline and as a deterrent against desertion. For many men in the armed forces violence began with their enlistment. Each Mexican state was obliged to deliver a contingent of soldiers to the federal army. Since recruitment practices were never precisely regulated, some soldiers were enlisted by bounty, while others were forced to serve for several years, as in the case of wrongdoers or vagabonds. Soldiers not only experienced ill-treatment during recruitment but were also subjected to various forms of hardship and abuse as members of military units.