What do you think?
Rate this book
Blood and Treasure: The Economics of Conflict from the Vikings to Ukraine
Blood and Treasure is the story of the economics of conflict from the Viking Age to the war in Ukraine.
Wars are expensive, both in human terms and monetary ones. Since at least the 1640s, in the aftermath of the British Civil Wars, the phrase 'blood and treasure' has sought to encapsulate these costs.
Two economic notions, in particular, feature in this incentives and institutions. A rational look at incentives explains even the most seemingly irrational behaviour - and few things are as irrational as war. Crucially, incentives are not formed in a vacuum, they are shaped by the wider social, cultural and political context - the kind of things economists call institutions (i.e. the State). Over time institutions change and with them incentives change too. Together institutions and incentives shape and explain human behaviour. Over the long span of human history, nothing has shaped institutions - and hence economic outcomes - as much as war and violence.
Blood and Treasure examines why Genghis Khan should be regarded as the father of globalisation, how New World gold and silver kept Spain poor, why some economists think of witch trials as a form of 'non-price competition', how pirate captains were pioneers of effective HR techniques, how handing out medals hurt the Luftwaffe in the Second World War and why economic theories helped to create a tragedy in Vietnam. Along the way it considers why some medieval kings were right to arm their soldiers with inferior weapons, takes some management lessons from Joseph Stalin and asks if a culture of patronage and cronyism helped the Royal Navy rise to greatness. It also analyses the changing economic costs of war and ask whether war is always bad for the economy.
Wars are expensive, both in human terms and monetary ones. Since at least the 1640s, in the aftermath of the British Civil Wars, the phrase 'blood and treasure' has sought to encapsulate these costs.
Two economic notions, in particular, feature in this incentives and institutions. A rational look at incentives explains even the most seemingly irrational behaviour - and few things are as irrational as war. Crucially, incentives are not formed in a vacuum, they are shaped by the wider social, cultural and political context - the kind of things economists call institutions (i.e. the State). Over time institutions change and with them incentives change too. Together institutions and incentives shape and explain human behaviour. Over the long span of human history, nothing has shaped institutions - and hence economic outcomes - as much as war and violence.
Blood and Treasure examines why Genghis Khan should be regarded as the father of globalisation, how New World gold and silver kept Spain poor, why some economists think of witch trials as a form of 'non-price competition', how pirate captains were pioneers of effective HR techniques, how handing out medals hurt the Luftwaffe in the Second World War and why economic theories helped to create a tragedy in Vietnam. Along the way it considers why some medieval kings were right to arm their soldiers with inferior weapons, takes some management lessons from Joseph Stalin and asks if a culture of patronage and cronyism helped the Royal Navy rise to greatness. It also analyses the changing economic costs of war and ask whether war is always bad for the economy.
320 pages, Kindle Edition
Published June 5, 2025
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
July 7, 2025
I was somewhat torn about how to rate this book, because on the one hand I liked the content, but on the other, I listened to the audio version and disliked the narration. The author narrates the book himself. Unfortunately he is unable to make the “th” sound in English and replaces it with either a “v”, or more commonly an “f” sound, so that “whether” and “brother” become wevver and bruvver and words like “throne”, “threat” and “growth” become frone, freat and growf. It might be a prejudice on my part, but if I am to write an honest review I can only say I found this absolutely grating. The book would get a 1-star rating from me if I was to go on the quality of the audio version. I’ve therefore rated it on the basis of the content.
The book reminded me a bit of “Freakonomics” in that each chapter suggests an often novel and frequently counter-intuitive explanation for certain historical events, a sort of “Historical Freakonomics”. I should say that I personally found parts of the book unconvincing, but at the same time the author’s arguments are well-made and backed by data, and they got me thinking. I’ve said in other reviews that I enjoy books that provide me with new perspectives. It’s no use just thinking “That can’t be right”. If the reader is resistant to the author’s arguments, he or she needs to come up with coherent reasons.
The first couple of chapters illustrate the overall approach. The book opens in medieval England and the payment of “Danegeld” – regular tribute paid by English kings to buy off invasions from Danish armies. This was obviously a transfer of wealth from England to Denmark, and the money was raised by taxes imposed on the English peasantry. Conventional economics tends to regard taxation as a disincentive to economic activity – why work hard when the State will just help itself to the fruits of your labour? However the author notes that the period of the Danegeld was one of increasing prosperity in England, and suggests that the need to cover the additional taxation actually prompted an increase in productivity amongst the peasantry. Chapter 2 is entitled “Genghis Khan, Father of Globalisation”. It argues that, following their initial conquests, the Mongols imposed peace and stability on the lands under their control, which for a period of about a century made possible an east-west overland trade that gave Europeans a taste for the products of Asia. It further argues that the disappearance of this corridor prompted the Europeans to seek out the sea routes to Asia. Personally, I’m not convinced that the Mongol Empire was a necessary pre-condition for the Age of Discovery. Still it was interesting to listen to the author’s case.
I don’t have the space to go through all the chapters, but will pick out some that I particularly enjoyed. Chapter 4 is headed “How Gold and Silver Made Spain Poor”. This argument, - that Spain’s extractive policies towards its American colonies damaged it in the long term - is not novel, but the author puts a different spin on it. There was a very interesting chapter on the Indian Mutiny/Great Rebellion of 1857, an event I knew very little about, and another on “How the US Civil War Made the Dollar”. I hadn’t appreciated that the US Central Bank had been dissolved in 1836 and from then until the US Civil War, the various states had a common currency but pursued their own fiscal policies. This is currently the situation with the Eurozone and is viewed as the cause of the Eurozone crisis of 2009-18.
One thing to note is that, in discussing conflicts, the author focuses on economic effects and gives little consideration to the “moral” aspects. For example, there is a chapter on the USSR’s “total war” effort during WW2, that concentrates on economic outcomes rather than Stalin’s apparatus of terror. I think this is fair enough in context – the book is after all about the economics of conflict- but some people may not like this approach.
Anyway, there was a lot in here that gave me food for thought. Stick to the written word version though.
The book reminded me a bit of “Freakonomics” in that each chapter suggests an often novel and frequently counter-intuitive explanation for certain historical events, a sort of “Historical Freakonomics”. I should say that I personally found parts of the book unconvincing, but at the same time the author’s arguments are well-made and backed by data, and they got me thinking. I’ve said in other reviews that I enjoy books that provide me with new perspectives. It’s no use just thinking “That can’t be right”. If the reader is resistant to the author’s arguments, he or she needs to come up with coherent reasons.
The first couple of chapters illustrate the overall approach. The book opens in medieval England and the payment of “Danegeld” – regular tribute paid by English kings to buy off invasions from Danish armies. This was obviously a transfer of wealth from England to Denmark, and the money was raised by taxes imposed on the English peasantry. Conventional economics tends to regard taxation as a disincentive to economic activity – why work hard when the State will just help itself to the fruits of your labour? However the author notes that the period of the Danegeld was one of increasing prosperity in England, and suggests that the need to cover the additional taxation actually prompted an increase in productivity amongst the peasantry. Chapter 2 is entitled “Genghis Khan, Father of Globalisation”. It argues that, following their initial conquests, the Mongols imposed peace and stability on the lands under their control, which for a period of about a century made possible an east-west overland trade that gave Europeans a taste for the products of Asia. It further argues that the disappearance of this corridor prompted the Europeans to seek out the sea routes to Asia. Personally, I’m not convinced that the Mongol Empire was a necessary pre-condition for the Age of Discovery. Still it was interesting to listen to the author’s case.
I don’t have the space to go through all the chapters, but will pick out some that I particularly enjoyed. Chapter 4 is headed “How Gold and Silver Made Spain Poor”. This argument, - that Spain’s extractive policies towards its American colonies damaged it in the long term - is not novel, but the author puts a different spin on it. There was a very interesting chapter on the Indian Mutiny/Great Rebellion of 1857, an event I knew very little about, and another on “How the US Civil War Made the Dollar”. I hadn’t appreciated that the US Central Bank had been dissolved in 1836 and from then until the US Civil War, the various states had a common currency but pursued their own fiscal policies. This is currently the situation with the Eurozone and is viewed as the cause of the Eurozone crisis of 2009-18.
One thing to note is that, in discussing conflicts, the author focuses on economic effects and gives little consideration to the “moral” aspects. For example, there is a chapter on the USSR’s “total war” effort during WW2, that concentrates on economic outcomes rather than Stalin’s apparatus of terror. I think this is fair enough in context – the book is after all about the economics of conflict- but some people may not like this approach.
Anyway, there was a lot in here that gave me food for thought. Stick to the written word version though.
July 10, 2025
Blood and Treasure: The Economics of Conflict from the Vikings to Ukraine (2025) by Duncan Weldon is a marvellous book that looks at war through an economic lens. Weldon currently writes for The Economist on the British economy.
The book starts with a chapter about the economics of Viking conquest and how the Vikings transitioned to ‘stationary bandits’. There is then a chapter on the economics of the Mongols and how they facilitated trade and how they ran their own empire. The impact of the masses of gold and silver from the new world on Spain is then covered. Weldon also has a chapter on how pirates operated in a meritocratic way. There are also chapters on The British Navy, how the US Civil War helped the rise of the dollar, the incentives of the ace system on the Luftwaffe in World War Two and quite a bit more.
The chapters proceed largely chronologically and have a little bit of connection but could largely stand alone. Weldon does a great job of providing insightful economic analysis coupled with a historical base. He also writes very well.
Blood and Treasure is an excellent book that is very much worth reading for anyone interested in economics, history or warfare.
The book starts with a chapter about the economics of Viking conquest and how the Vikings transitioned to ‘stationary bandits’. There is then a chapter on the economics of the Mongols and how they facilitated trade and how they ran their own empire. The impact of the masses of gold and silver from the new world on Spain is then covered. Weldon also has a chapter on how pirates operated in a meritocratic way. There are also chapters on The British Navy, how the US Civil War helped the rise of the dollar, the incentives of the ace system on the Luftwaffe in World War Two and quite a bit more.
The chapters proceed largely chronologically and have a little bit of connection but could largely stand alone. Weldon does a great job of providing insightful economic analysis coupled with a historical base. He also writes very well.
Blood and Treasure is an excellent book that is very much worth reading for anyone interested in economics, history or warfare.
April 24, 2026
"Blood and treasure" is announced as a history of the economics of conflict, but don't expect some grand theory based on decades of research by the author. Instead, the book is composed of largely stand-alone chapters based on secondary sources. The stories told in those chapters are all entertaining (the book is very well written), sometimes surprising, sometimes enlightening. I have enjoyed some more than others; if I had had to quote them individually, my scores would have ranged from 2 to 4*. Good read, even if you may have heard most of it before if you're interested in the history of warfare and/or economics.
August 22, 2025
finished this in roughly six hours, could not put it down at all
March 25, 2026
Has interesting themes and theses, but each chapter is a liiittle bit too shallow/scattered for them to be argued well. Some details per chapter may be a bit simplistic and losing nuance as well.
April 7, 2026
Książka świetnie opisuje jak ogromny wpływ na konflikty na świecie miała ekonomia, i co najważniejsze jak zmieniało się to na przestrzeni lat: od średniowiecza do czasów obecnych. Jako osoba, która lubi historię, uważam, że jest to książka ciekawa, jednak nie każdy rozdział był na tym samym poziomie.
May 12, 2026
Despite my relatively low rating (well, low for Goodreads where anything other 5-stars is often taken to mean "absolute garbage") I actually liked this a fair amount. It's weaknesses are pretty immediately obvious: it reads more like a collection of (long) blog posts/Substack essays than a coherent whole; each chapter is almost entirely stand-alone; some of the scene setting feels a bit contrived (I'm not sure chapter 13's leading with Oliver Sacks really does much other than to serve a way of introducing the 6-volume history of the Ministry of Munitions during WW1); and you rarely feel like the thesis implied by the chapter title was really proven in anything like a slam-dunk way.
As we get closed to modern history -- roughly chapters 13-17 when we enter the 20th century -- he goes over increasingly well-trod ground that isn't quite as novel or interesting as, say, chapter 4 treatise on Spain in the 16th century.
Despite all that, the chapters are generally interesting throughout and offer continual reminders of the importance of incentives. For instance, chapter 14 details how the "incentives" offered by the Luftwaffe backfired. Consider the management problem of fighter pilots. You can only take their word for it -- especially given the technology of the day -- that they tried really hard to kill the other side, that they didn't run away at the earliest opportunity, and so on. The Luftwaffe's incentives appear to have increased the productivity of the top 20% of fighter pilots at the expense of making the bottom 80% more likely to get themselves killed.
So while it never quite cohered into something greater than a collection of interesting essays -- and the essays themselves vary a bit in quite how interesting they are -- I still enjoyed my time with this and recommend it to others who are interested in sort of non-traditional views on warfare.
As we get closed to modern history -- roughly chapters 13-17 when we enter the 20th century -- he goes over increasingly well-trod ground that isn't quite as novel or interesting as, say, chapter 4 treatise on Spain in the 16th century.
Despite all that, the chapters are generally interesting throughout and offer continual reminders of the importance of incentives. For instance, chapter 14 details how the "incentives" offered by the Luftwaffe backfired. Consider the management problem of fighter pilots. You can only take their word for it -- especially given the technology of the day -- that they tried really hard to kill the other side, that they didn't run away at the earliest opportunity, and so on. The Luftwaffe's incentives appear to have increased the productivity of the top 20% of fighter pilots at the expense of making the bottom 80% more likely to get themselves killed.
In other words, in the immediate aftermath of a former colleague receiving some positional status, good pilots may have improved their performance substantially, but most pilots were more likely to get themselves killed. The overall impact, across the Luftwaffe as a whole, was a slightly higher victory rate but an even higher exit rate. Among former colleagues of a recognised pilot the overall ratio of victories to losses fell in the month after an award. The net impact was corrosive.
So while it never quite cohered into something greater than a collection of interesting essays -- and the essays themselves vary a bit in quite how interesting they are -- I still enjoyed my time with this and recommend it to others who are interested in sort of non-traditional views on warfare.
February 28, 2026
According to the summary on its jacket, this 2026 book is "a story of how economics can help to explain the motivations of war," but the author actually ranges over a much wider range of topics. Many of the author's statistics and historical notes are fascinating, although the theme of the book is sometimes elusive.
The book begins with the Vikings and moves chronologically from one military action to another over the last millennium. In early chapters, the author focuses on individual "violence specialists" like Eric Bloodaxe, but over time he offers explanations for wars that go far beyond the characters of their individual leaders. For example, he credits Mongol victories to having more horses per rider than the armies that opposed them. In the Hundred Years War, where English longbows repeatedly gained victory over much larger French forces using crossbows, he argues that political and economic forces nonetheless favored crossbows. He also explains why the Spanish economy failed to benefit from the enormous shipments of gold and silver that were produced by its American colonies in the 16th and 17th Centuries.
There are times, however, when the author stretches his economic causation theories too far. For example, it seems unpersuasive to argue that witch trials around the year 1600 can be explained by crop failures that created a surplus of adult unmarried women. It also seems questionable to argue that Luftwaffe pilots in World War II incurred higher attrition than their opponents because they were over-incentivized by medals based on the numbers of enemies shot down.
On the whole, however, this book should be enjoyable for general readers of military and economic history, and the Notes on Further Reading at the end offer some solid recommendations among recently published works of history.
The book begins with the Vikings and moves chronologically from one military action to another over the last millennium. In early chapters, the author focuses on individual "violence specialists" like Eric Bloodaxe, but over time he offers explanations for wars that go far beyond the characters of their individual leaders. For example, he credits Mongol victories to having more horses per rider than the armies that opposed them. In the Hundred Years War, where English longbows repeatedly gained victory over much larger French forces using crossbows, he argues that political and economic forces nonetheless favored crossbows. He also explains why the Spanish economy failed to benefit from the enormous shipments of gold and silver that were produced by its American colonies in the 16th and 17th Centuries.
There are times, however, when the author stretches his economic causation theories too far. For example, it seems unpersuasive to argue that witch trials around the year 1600 can be explained by crop failures that created a surplus of adult unmarried women. It also seems questionable to argue that Luftwaffe pilots in World War II incurred higher attrition than their opponents because they were over-incentivized by medals based on the numbers of enemies shot down.
On the whole, however, this book should be enjoyable for general readers of military and economic history, and the Notes on Further Reading at the end offer some solid recommendations among recently published works of history.
March 13, 2026
I picked this up expecting something dry and textbook-ish, and was pleasantly surprised. Duncan Weldon has written something genuinely engaging, a wide-ranging tour through the economics of warfare that manages to be both intellectually satisfying and a pretty easy read.
The central conceit is deceptively simple: follow the money, and you'll understand war better than if you just follow the battles. Two concepts anchor the whole thing, incentives and institutions, and Weldon uses them as a lens to look at everything from Viking raids to the war in Ukraine. That framing is where the book really shines for me. The way he traces how states build the machinery to tax, borrow, and spend in order to wage war, and how those institutions in turn reshape the incentives of everyone involved, gives you a genuinely useful analytical toolkit rather than just a collection of interesting stories.
And there are plenty of interesting stories. Why did French kings keep fielding crossbowmen when they knew the longbow was superior? Why did handing out medals actually hurt the Luftwaffe? How did pirate ships end up as unlikely pioneers of good HR practices? Weldon clearly loves this material and it shows.
If I had one criticism it's that the ambition of the scope means some episodes get the highlights reel treatment when you'd want more depth. A few transitions between eras feel a bit abrupt too. But honestly, for a book covering this much ground, that's a minor gripe.
Well worth your time, especially if you're interested in how power, institutions, and conflict intersect. One of the more thought-provoking reads I've had in a while.
The central conceit is deceptively simple: follow the money, and you'll understand war better than if you just follow the battles. Two concepts anchor the whole thing, incentives and institutions, and Weldon uses them as a lens to look at everything from Viking raids to the war in Ukraine. That framing is where the book really shines for me. The way he traces how states build the machinery to tax, borrow, and spend in order to wage war, and how those institutions in turn reshape the incentives of everyone involved, gives you a genuinely useful analytical toolkit rather than just a collection of interesting stories.
And there are plenty of interesting stories. Why did French kings keep fielding crossbowmen when they knew the longbow was superior? Why did handing out medals actually hurt the Luftwaffe? How did pirate ships end up as unlikely pioneers of good HR practices? Weldon clearly loves this material and it shows.
If I had one criticism it's that the ambition of the scope means some episodes get the highlights reel treatment when you'd want more depth. A few transitions between eras feel a bit abrupt too. But honestly, for a book covering this much ground, that's a minor gripe.
Well worth your time, especially if you're interested in how power, institutions, and conflict intersect. One of the more thought-provoking reads I've had in a while.
April 25, 2026
There's no real theme or theory running through this book other than each chapter relates (sometimes loosely) to some economics concept. It's a pop-history, airport book. Entertaining but the only thing you might come away with is a funny little "did you know" to tell people down at the pub one day - except I'm not that convinced that some of the theories would stand up to much scrutiny.
The chapters are chronological, and occasionally reference each other, but could otherwise be read standalone. Many of the chapters read like an episode of a quirky science/history podcast (think "No Such Thing as a Fish"), where the author clickbaits you with a counter-intuitive statement/theory that sounds like it can't be true, before then explaining to you why it actually is (except some of them still seem a stretch at best). Other chapters, especially in the latter half of the book are more serious/dry.
The chapters are chronological, and occasionally reference each other, but could otherwise be read standalone. Many of the chapters read like an episode of a quirky science/history podcast (think "No Such Thing as a Fish"), where the author clickbaits you with a counter-intuitive statement/theory that sounds like it can't be true, before then explaining to you why it actually is (except some of them still seem a stretch at best). Other chapters, especially in the latter half of the book are more serious/dry.
November 23, 2025
A good book outlining the linkage between economics / incentives and warfare.
Each chapter is enjoyable in its own (I specifically enjoyed reading about the vikings and the difference in their thinking between raiding and settling as well as the chapters on the Luftwaffe and the royal navy) however the book lacks a bit of cohesion and fails to deliver a clear conclusion.
Having said that, the book is an enjoyable read and allows the reader to make a not every day linkage between conflict and pure economic gain, something which at the end of the day is the reason why most conflicts get started
Each chapter is enjoyable in its own (I specifically enjoyed reading about the vikings and the difference in their thinking between raiding and settling as well as the chapters on the Luftwaffe and the royal navy) however the book lacks a bit of cohesion and fails to deliver a clear conclusion.
Having said that, the book is an enjoyable read and allows the reader to make a not every day linkage between conflict and pure economic gain, something which at the end of the day is the reason why most conflicts get started
January 10, 2026
I read about half the chapters so my review be taken accordingly. The book is reasonably researched and takes a unique view of wars and battles. But I do not feel that a perfect link has been established by the author that wars are guided mainly by economics only. It felt more like a history book, whereas I was expecting it to have propoounded ideas that one may expect from the title. Thats why I left it half read.
But since few books are written on the interplay of the war & economics, one may indeed find it useful if the same interests him. For others, one may not imbibe as much as expected.
But since few books are written on the interplay of the war & economics, one may indeed find it useful if the same interests him. For others, one may not imbibe as much as expected.
January 29, 2026
Interesting enough, the author posits economic factors that affected history throughout the ages - for example, how the Spanish extraction of resources from South America in the long term bankrupted their economy, or how after the Mongol hordes of Genghis Khan had rampaged across Asia and large piece of Europe an empire wide economic system of trade came into being that started what we would call globalisation. As I noted above, it's an economic look at history, not a moral one (further chapters on the Nazi's and Stalin's Russia do not delve into the human consequences of their actions).
October 16, 2025
Alignment of interests
Pirates were more economically fair than many businesses these days. This enabled the crew's interests to align with individuals' interests. This alignment of interests was the key to a successful pirate crew.
Business bloggers might want to have a quick read of this book ahead of their next post.
Pirates were more economically fair than many businesses these days. This enabled the crew's interests to align with individuals' interests. This alignment of interests was the key to a successful pirate crew.
Business bloggers might want to have a quick read of this book ahead of their next post.
January 29, 2026
The author of this book was a former contributor to Britain's "Economist" magazine. As an ennthralling and entertaining book, this is a delightfullly quirky approach to military history. Repeatedly, the author spots the invisible hand behind hostilities, from the Vikings to Vladimir Putin's
invasion of Ukraine.
invasion of Ukraine.
December 1, 2025
Доста добре подбрани теми, разкриващи различни аспекти от икономиката зад някои от най-известните войни и нашествия. Започва малко бавно, но след това набира скорост. Добре написана и обоснована. Определено добро четиво по икономическа история, на една обща основа.
December 23, 2025
Many useful insights from this entertaining book of short chapters. Perfect for a transatlantic flight. Another book that demonstrates the power of economics to provide insights that explains human relationships.
February 14, 2026
Wonderful descent into the incentives and economics of conflict and wars
February 16, 2026
Very interesting little parables about economics during war. Some chapters a bit weaker than others.
March 22, 2026
Blood and Treasure is a lively, intelligent survey book, less a theory of why wars happen than a running argument that war and economics have always been tangled together. Weldon ranges from the Vikings to Ukraine and uses economic ideas, incentives, and institutional logic to reframe military history.
What makes it work is the tone. He is brisk, witty, and very good at turning large historical episodes into clear, memorable explanations. The book seems built around the old rule of “follow the money,” and that gives it real momentum.
The best parts are the odd specific examples and the refusal to treat war as pure glory or pure madness. He is interested in incentives, logistics, state finance, and the strange ways military conflict shapes economic development.
The likely weakness is also built into the concept. An economics lens can explain a lot, but not everything.
What makes it work is the tone. He is brisk, witty, and very good at turning large historical episodes into clear, memorable explanations. The book seems built around the old rule of “follow the money,” and that gives it real momentum.
The best parts are the odd specific examples and the refusal to treat war as pure glory or pure madness. He is interested in incentives, logistics, state finance, and the strange ways military conflict shapes economic development.
The likely weakness is also built into the concept. An economics lens can explain a lot, but not everything.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews