Rapid topographic change measured by high-resolution satellite radar at Soufriere Hills Volcano, Montserrat, 2008-2010

High-resolution satellite radar observations of erupting volcanoes can yield valuable information on rapidly changing deposits and geomorphology. Using the TerraSAR-X (TSX) radar with a spatial resolution of about 2 m and a repeat interval of 11-days, we show how a variety of techniques were used to record some of the eruptive history of the Soufriere Hills Volcano, Montserrat between July 2008 and February 2010. After a 15-month pause in lava dome growth, a vulcanian explosion occurred on 28 July 2008 whose vent was hidden by dense cloud. We were able to show the civil authorities using TSX change difference images that this explosion had not disrupted the dome sufficient to warrant continued evacuation. Change difference images also proved to be valuable in mapping new pyroclastic flow deposits: the valley-occupying block-and-ash component tending to increase backscatter and the marginal surge deposits reducing it, with the pattern reversing after the event. By comparing east- and west-looking images acquired 12 hours apart, the deposition of some individual pyroclastic flows can be inferred from change differences. Some of the narrow upper sections of valleys draining the volcano received many tens of metres of rockfall and pyroclastic flow deposits over periods of a few weeks. By measuring the changing shadows cast by these valleys in TSX images the changing depth of infill by deposits could be estimated. In addition to using the amplitude data from the radar images we also used their phase information within the InSAR technique to calculate the topography during a period of no surface activity. This enabled areas of transient topography, crucial for directing future flows, to be captured.

Strong armies, slow adaptation: civil-military relations and diffusion of military power

Why are some states more willing to adopt military innovations than others? Why, for example, were the great powers of Europe able to successfully reform their military practices to better adapt to and participate in the so-called military revolution of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries while their most important extra-European competitor, the Ottoman Empire, failed to do so? This puzzle is best explained by two factors: civil-military relations and historical timing. In the Ottoman Empire, the emergence of an institutionally strong and internally cohesive army during the early stages of state formation—in the late fourteenth century—equipped the military with substantial bargaining powers. In contrast, the great powers of Europe drew heavily on private providers of military power during the military revolution and developed similar armies only by the second half of the seventeenth century, limiting the bargaining leverage of European militaries over their rulers. In essence, the Ottoman standing army was able to block reform efforts that it believed challenged its parochial interests. Absent a similar institutional challenge, European rulers initiated military reforms and motivated officers and military entrepreneurs to participate in the ongoing military revolution.