The Evolution of Timber 

The Seed of the Timber Trade

​

            Timber became a global commodity between 1780 and 1835 (Hutchison 2012). During this time, mercantilism was the dominant economic theory and countries were focused on the exportation of goods rather than importation in order to increase global trade of their domestic commodity. Although exporting was the top priority, in order for Britain to fuel their industrial and export efforts, timber was crucial, creating mutualistic relationship between Britain and the Baltic countries. As a result, while there was a large momentum of timber and other raw materials entering Britain, large ships of manufactured goods were being sent to Norway and the Baltics. This relationship between the two regions made each other very dependent on one another for their cooperation to trade. Hutchison highlights the key concept of the “global intimate” in her own words. The global intimate is a perspective of the world with the notion that everything from the global, national, local, and all the physical body there is an interconnected web influencing one another on every level of the spectrum. Through the timber trade, we see how national transactions influenced human geography and culture of the region. Hutchison argues that it is easy to see the trade between these nations as simple transactions of raw materials and manufactured goods between “core countries” and “semi-peripheral countries”, however this would be a false reality of the situation (2012). Core countries are nations that have a large impact on the world economy and generally generate more money with higher levels of education, technology, and manufacturing abilities. In contrast, semi-peripheral countries generate more wealth than peripheral countries but less than core countries while being exploited by core countries and exploiting others themselves. Doreen Massey underlines the global intimate through “time space compression” (1994). Massey explains how through globalization, we lose our sense of local place due to the mixer of cultures in one area. In her article, Hutchinson explains the complexity of the transactions that took place across the North Sea, taking into consideration the individual societies priorities, industrialization, wars, and negotiations that controlled the movement of timber and eventually, transforming and molding the cultures.

​

Sprouting of the Timber Trade

​

The two regions were a part the North Sea-Baltic Trading Zone (Hutchison 2012). In the 17th century, the Dutch, the British, the Norwegians, and Baltics were in all alliance to trade with one another. Although Britain was a core country within the world system theory, they were dependent on the Baltics timber industry. Before the Napoleonic war, Baltic exports sometimes consisted of 10-20% of Britain’s total imports (Hutchison 2012). These imports consisted of mostly timber, iron, and grain.

 

There was an extremely large trade imbalance within this Trading Zone and this was a major problem during the era of mercantilism, in which there was a focus on exporting rather than importing. Because Britain was a core country within this incomplete world market theory, many would assume Britain had the upper hand in this alliance. In reality, Norway had a firm hold on Britain’s economic prospects. Without timber, Britain would not be able to urbanize, continue many of its industries such as mining and trading, nor industrialize (Hutchison 2012). Massey’s piece compliments Hutchison’s idea of the world system theory in that power is what initiates and controls the movement of ideas and resources. However, the power was largely in the hands of the semi-peripheral countries (1994). Due to excessive deforestation, Britain no longer had a reliable domestic source of timber. Initially, Britain did not look to its colonies, such as Canada in North America because the cost of importing from overseas was much more than importing it from the Baltics. While negotiations once kept trade between Britain and the Baltics strong, acts of violence and wars eventually lead Canada to be Britain’s top timber source. During this time, some argue the world was going through a biological regime where a civilizations success was determined by their environment and connections (Marks 2007). In this regard, Britain was able to prosper due to their colonial connections overseas.  Marks discusses colonial capitalism as a way colonies thrived during the 17th and 18th centuries (2007). By exploiting the raw materials in their colonies, core countries were able to have a direct supplier that they ultimately controlled that fueled their industrial industries. In regards to timber, because Britain had many colonies all over the world, they were able to triumph during this time period.

​

Although the timber trade eventually decreased between the Baltics and the Britain, both sides felt the advantages of the exchange of this commodity. Britain was able to rebuild itself after The Great Fire of London in 1688 from the importation of Norwegian and Baltic timber (Hutchison 2012). The timber also helped Britain urbanize, including thousands of homes and even the National Gallery of London. Four loads of timber were needed to build one regular sized house in the 18th century (Hutchison 2012). One of the greatest advantages of this alliance was Britain’s ability to make affordable furniture from durable Baltic timber (Hutchison 2012). Norway and the Baltics benefitted through from the growth of the modern economy (Hutchison 2012). With an increase in household salaries due to a boost of Norwegian and Baltic countries economies, people were able to make economic investments and infrastructural improvements. One of these improvements included waterways. These waterways up mountains and across the region made timber trade more efficient as well as stimulated other sectors of the economy, allowing for easy transportation of goods and people around the country. These investments and improvements opened the Baltic countries up to the world market.

​

Even though Britain eventually shifted their primary timber source to their colony in Canada, Norway used their knowledge on trade to broaden their markets to France and Mediterranean nations. Due to the timber trade, not only were the Baltic and Britain economic systems stimulated, so were colonies in North America and eventually Asia and Africa as Britain sought new sources for their timber across the ocean. Through one commodity, trade was stretched across oceans and people now relied on the world market for their livelihoods that included exotic goods like tobacco, alcohol, and foreign foods such as grain and wheat (Hutchison 2012). The timber trade also transformed human geography. As the timber trade grew in the Baltics and Canada, new jobs and opportunities moved people to timber areas to become lumberjacks and merchants. Massey asks us to not accept this single understanding of a region as either core (dominant) countries or peripheral (dependent) countries. Instead, it is important to understand the deeper relationships and history of a place.

        

​

Bibliography:

• Hutchison, Ragnhild. “The Norwegian and Baltic Timber Trade to Britain 1780–1835 and its Interconnections.” Scandainavian Journal of History 37, no. 5 (2012): 578-599.

• Massey, Doreen. “A Global Sense of Place.” Space, Place and Gender (1994): 146-156.

• Marks, Robert. “The Industrial Revolution and its Consequences.” The Origins of the Modern World: A Global and Ecological Narrative from the 15th to the 21st Century 2, (2007): 95-122.