Timeline for In a world where wood is scarce, what are the most important things you need wood for?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 14, 2021 at 8:14 | comment | added | Eelco Hoogendoorn | Note that im not claiming they got their firewood from overseas. Olive branches do just fine as firewood; but lumber suitable for their ambitious ship building projects, wasn't always locally available. One can argue semantics and say shortages do not exist, and supply always meets demand at the market-clearing price, and anyone who wants to argue that, I suppose they can. | |
| Jun 14, 2021 at 8:00 | comment | added | Eelco Hoogendoorn | @John; well I wasnt there myself so some modesty is in order, but ancient Greece is always held up as an example as a for the time extremely specialised economy, highly reliant on shipping for many things. Yeah there is some forest and arable land in the Peloponnese, but drop a random pin in google maps on Greece, and generally speaking you have no business there, even as a goat. As I recall a lot of ships were built with lumber from their northern territories near modern day Bulgaria. They got it in the same way indeed as grain and ore; via the sea, which was the only possible way. | |
| Jun 14, 2021 at 7:34 | comment | added | nanoman | This answer is a little oblique. I think it is implying: The main thing that the Greeks used scarce and expensive wood for was building ships, indicating that this is a need for which there is no good substitute for wood. It would be good to say this directly rather than encode it in "seafaring ambitions". | |
| Jun 13, 2021 at 23:30 | comment | added | John | @EelcoHoogendoorn they did not need to cross the mediterranean to get lumber they just got it from from neighboring rural areas, cities imported lumber the same way they did grain, olives, and ore. which was true for almost all large civilizations. | |
| Jun 13, 2021 at 23:27 | comment | added | John | @EelcoHoogendoorn Greece didn't suffer any worse of a lumber shortage than Rome, . by your logic England suffered a a major lumber shortage because London had to import lumber. If they couldn't afford to import it it might be relevant to the question. the Greeks still built most houses from lumber, burned it for fuel and used it for everything neighboring cultures did. They kept good records of lumber and timber usage they did not suffer a shortage on any scale that would make them look to wood alternatives, their cities just had to pay to import it from satellite communities. | |
| Jun 13, 2021 at 13:26 | comment | added | Eelco Hoogendoorn | Rome isnt in greece... in roman times greece was arguably considered just another province and not really 'far away'; and romans were used to shipping all kinds of bulk commodities around the Mediterranean. In ancient greek times however, the world was a fair bit smaller still. People did cross the Mediterranean but it was still a rather heroic rather than routine affair, and they certainly wouldn't have considered the entire Mediterranean their lumber yard, for any practical intents or purposes. | |
| Jun 13, 2021 at 12:58 | comment | added | John | Greece has plenty of trees, the most common include pine and oak, there are several forests within spitting distance of Rome itself. wood was common enough in Rome to be used in a large scale for housing, Rome timber shortage was mostly a minor thing compared to the shortages of cultures who actually had to drastically change their use of wood. | |
| Jun 13, 2021 at 12:02 | comment | added | Codosaur | There is no hard correlation between Naval power and wood availability. The Ancient Egyptian Navy would be a good example: "While the Egyptians were often a land based population, they quickly proved to master the art of seafaring as they learned its benefits. It can be said that without the successful efficiency of the Egyptian navy, the Egyptian army would not have been able to campaign as long as it wished, and therefore, Egypt's influence over the Levantine region would have been drastically reduced." | |
| Jun 13, 2021 at 10:46 | comment | added | d-b | @PcMan As a Swede I know my history pretty well. Denmark (with little available wood) was the big naval power among the Scandinavian countries, Sweden (with vast forests) was a continental power with focus on the army. | |
| Jun 13, 2021 at 7:09 | comment | added | PcMan | @d-b Sweden never was a big naval power? The Norsemen (which very much includes Sweden) did become a major sea power. Ever heard of vikings? Ever wonder why about 30% of the genetic heritage of the UK is Scandinavian? Sea power allowed raids and conquest for hundreds of years, with the viking being virtually unopposed on the ocean. That pretty much is the definition of being a "major sea power". | |
| Jun 13, 2021 at 3:18 | comment | added | Paul Belanger | maybe the availability of hardwood vs softwood changes the advantage? | |
| Jun 13, 2021 at 0:20 | comment | added | d-b | @ClausAppel Like the Netherlands and UK? But not Canada and Sweden? | |
| S Jun 12, 2021 at 22:20 | history | suggested | Laurel | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
grammar fixes
|
| Jun 12, 2021 at 22:02 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jun 12, 2021 at 22:20 | |||||
| Jun 12, 2021 at 19:56 | comment | added | Claus Appel | So those cultures who have comparatively better access to wood are more likely to become major sea powers. Good point! | |
| Jun 12, 2021 at 19:55 | vote | accept | Claus Appel | ||
| Jun 14, 2021 at 15:27 | |||||
| Jun 12, 2021 at 19:44 | history | answered | Eelco Hoogendoorn | CC BY-SA 4.0 |