Three trends shaped early modern political development: (1) a shift from decentralized power and authority toward centralization; (2) a shift from a political elite consisting primarily of hereditary landed nobility toward one open to men distinguished by their education, skills, and wealth; and (3) a shift from religious toward secular norms of law and justice.
One innovation promoting state centralization and the transformation of the landed nobility was the new dominance of rearms and artillery on the battle eld. The introduction of these new technologies, along with changes in tactics and strategy, amounted to a military revolution that reduced the role of mounted knights and castles, raised the cost of maintaining military power beyond the means of individual lords, and led to professionalization of the military on land and sea under the authority of the sovereign. This military revolution
favored rulers who could command the resources required for building increasingly complex forti cations and elding disciplined infantry and artillery units. Monarchs who could increase taxes and create bureaucracies to collect and spend them on their military outmaneuvered those who could not.
In general, monarchs gained power through the corporate groups and institutions that had thrived during the medieval period, notably the landed nobility and the clergy. Commercial and professional groups, such as merchants, lawyers, and other educated and talented persons, acquired increasing power in the state—often in alliance with the monarchs— alongside or in place of these traditional corporate groups. New legal and political theories, embodied in the codi cation of law, strengthened state institutions, which increasingly took control of the social and economic order from traditional religious and local bodies. However, these developments were not universal. Within states, minority language groups retained a more local identity that resisted political centralization. In eastern and southern Europe, the traditional elites maintained their positions in many polities.
The centralization of power within polities took place within and facilitated a new diplomatic framework among states. Ideals of a universal Christian empire declined along with the power and prestige of the Holy Roman Empire, which was unable to overcome the challenges of political localism and religious pluralism. By the end of the Thirty Years’ War, a new state system had emerged based on sovereign nation-states and the balance of power.