Listened to the Mercatus panel on *How the World Became Rich.* Quick thoughts:

1) The Mokyr remark about the Spanish armada was taken out of context -- whether he believes it strongly or not, the suggestion was just a slightly flippant part of a broader point about the ... ... contingency of the Great Enrichment in the face of shocks. This leads us to

1b) Mokyr's argument that modern economic growth is sustained by increased resiliency to shocks, as a result of its dependence on knowledge, which is hard to kill via persecution and book-burning.

My ten favorite books read in 2022, in chronological order ...

1) Dreadnought, by Robert K. Massie. A moving portrait of the politicians and diplomats who sleepwalked into the First World War, framed within the narrative of the Anglo-German naval arms race. 2) Apologies, one more military history. Meyer's *A World Undone* applies the grace, poignancy, and raw excitement of Barbara Tuchman to the entirety of World War I. Listened to as an audiobook, which is brilliantly narrated by Robin Sachs.

Did not realize that Adam Tooze has a 2007 JEH article on economic growth in fin-de-siecle Bulgaria whose main argument is that Bulgarian agriculture, demographic transition, and mass literacy emerged under the liberal market economy of the interwar era, but there you have it. Indeed, the spread of literacy was remarkably rapid.

For weird technical reasons, I can't reply to Pseudo directly, but I think Inikori's first formulation of the "endogenize everything to trade" thesis is this 1987 essay responding to the Brenner/CT debate.

Trade, not property rights, is the real manna from heaven! In the 'rude state of nature' without foreign trade, pop. growth stagnates, but with it, pop. growth and demand for land increase; falling land abundance => development of private property rights + creation of a landless wage laboring class. Agrarian capitalism is owed to trade.

Eleven of my favorite books on the First World War, in no particular order.

We start with overall histories. G. J. Meyer's *A World Undone* is a fabulous, sad, and gripping narrative account, sweeping from the July Crisis to the Armistice, and from the Somme to the Balkans. 1/ For a relatively rigorous perspective on the war's geopolitics, tactics, and grand strategy, John Keegan's *The First World War* is an exemplar of tight prose and studied analysis. Especially good on the opening battlefield moves in August 1914 and on the tragedy in Gallipoli. 2/

Just realized that I never noted the passing of Sir E. A. Wrigley, the legendary British demographer and economic historian, on February 24. Here's a short thread on someone whose research and writing made a big difference to the way that I think about the Industrial Revolution. For over five decades, Wrigley was a titan among economic historians of Britain's Industrial Revolution—an area where it's hard to stand out. He was a pioneer of quantitative methods in Britain, at a time when the cliometric revolution was mostly an American phenomenon.

Hickel's ridiculous paper is basically a derivative mishmash of shoddy interpretations of EH research.

For example, he suggests that real wages were great until "capitalism" showed up.

But real wages were high in the 14th/15th c. because 30-50% of the population died. Real wages declined because fertility rose with living standards (and not because of enclosure or pro-natal policy, Jason).

Same story with heights, except he cuts off the pre-period. The straight line in Poland from 1640-1840 is also quite funny. Bet it was a linear trend.

The top 5 papers (and some books) assigned in economics classes since 1990, thanks to @opensyllabus (ht @emollick).

AJR win by a pretty big margin, followed by Mankiw-Romer-Weil, Coase, and "The Tragedy of the Commons." Here's 6-11...

My interview at @five_books on a few of my favorite books on the Great Divergence.

Doing this has kind of been a lifelong goal; thanks to @sophiemaynard for making it happen.

fivebooks.com/best-books/gre… @five_books @sophiemaynard The premise is that you only get to pick five books, so obviously, this list is non-exhaustive. Here are a few that I would/should/could have also picked.

*Escaping Poverty: The Origins of Modern Economic Growth,* by Peer Vries

Hadn't finished at the time of the interview.

1/ A thread on my latest blog piece, on why Canada's Belle Epoque infant industry worked—promoting industrialization in a resource-rich economy.

(Also a bit on Imperial Russia in the Canadian mirror) and a quick response to @VincentGeloso). 2/ In 1879, Canadian prime minister John A. Macdonald responded to the "long depression" of the 1870s by implementing the campaign plank that had won him office in 1878: the National Policy, a development program founded on western settlement, railroad building, and protection.

Productivity growth in South Korea and Taiwan was utterly unexceptional by the standards of Latin American developing countries. Accumulation uber alles! Rodrik: "The inescapable conclusion is that the proximate determinant of the East Asia miracle is capital accumulation rather than an increase in industrial TFP."

The latest newsletter is out! It's the first installment in what (I think) will be a two-part series on population growth and urbanization in early modern Britain.

Have a read, and do share/subscribe, if you can. Enjoy!

daviskedrosky.substack.com/p/the-first-po… A preview of what's to come.

Britain's pre-WWI industrial supersession by America and Germany was inevitable: a (long) thread: ⬇️ 1/ The Great Exhibition of 1851 is commonly regarded as the zenith of early British industrialization, with the great Crystal Palace displaying the wonders of British technology before the visiting public. 2/

Glass: the most underrated medieval technology? (thread) 1/ Europeans had been making glass since the Late Bronze Age (and Egyptians even earlier), but despite considerable advances in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, the product was rough and opaque. 2/

Why British financial institutions delayed the Industrial Revolution: a thread. 1/ We've talked in previous posts about two key puzzles about the Industrial Revolution: one, that growth was very slow; and two, that savings rates were comparatively low. 2/

Someone recently asked for a list of the books that I've been listening to while running. So, without further ado:

RUNNING AUDIOBOOK POWER RANKINGS (in descending order): 10. Anthony, David W. The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World

The rating is unfair, because it's better than several ahead. My lack of domain expertise meant I enjoyed parts (esp. first 1/3) more than the whole.

Did energy constraints really stop the Dutch from industrializing? A thread: 1/ In 1650, the most developed country in Europe was the Dutch Republic, not England. High living standards were accompanied and supported by unprecedented urbanization and agricultural productivity. 2/

A thread (and newsletter below) on the role of institutions in British industrialization. 1/ Contrary to some reports, I'm not anti-institutionalist. I strongly believe that even classically Northian institutions—property rights and enforcement agencies—were critical to the emergence of modern economic growth. 2/

Did Britain sacrifice the Industrial Revolution to defeat Napoleon? A thread: 1/ We've long known that growth during the classic IR of 1760-1820 was slow, and that major increases in real GDP per capita did not really occur until the early nineteenth century. 2/

A summary thread and musings on Allen and Wrigley's theory of early pre-industrial urbanization in Britain. 1/ #econhist #EconTwitter #twitterstorians Most pre-industrial societies were caught in a devastating low-level equilibrium trap: they had small cities (in absolute and relative terms) and unproductive agriculture (low crop yields and labor efficiency). 2/

Considering that this poll was taken in a Berkeley history course, I'm mildly shocked! Oh, you get to see my answers, too. That's nice.