3 ms·

I think it is pretty conceivable that structural lumber could have been more expensive than bricks in the past. Before modernity, there was scarcely enough food

by xyzzyz 5y ago

I think it is pretty conceivable that structural lumber could have been more expensive than bricks in the past. Before modernity, there was scarcely enough food for everyone, so using it for something like forest would have been relatively expensive. For this reason, today more Europe is covered with forests than in 1700. On the other hand, bricks only need small amount of land for extraction of substrates, and some fuel, which didn’t have to be prime firewood like we’re used to now, but more like thin twigs from coppiced trees.

Someone 5y ago
I doubt food scarcity, when it occurred, was for lack of land. Also, not all forest land can be used well for agriculture, and if there wasn’t much forest, there weren’t many twigs, either. IIRC, bricks became popular because wooden house were forbidden in dense cities, and clay beat stone in availability/price/suitability (wouldn’t know which) Certainly, after London burnt, “much of the old street plan was recreated in the new City, with improvements in hygiene and fire safety: wider streets, open and accessible wharves along the length of the Thames, with no houses obstructing access to the river, and, most importantly, buildings constructed of brick and stone, not wood.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_London#Aftermath https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_London#Aftermath)
- xyzzyz 5y ago
  > I doubt food scarcity, when it occurred, was for lack of land. Food scarcity was a constant reality of premodern times. I’m not talking about occasional famines, where people literally died en masse, but rather about normal times. The food had to be scarce, otherwise the population wouldn’t have been a small fraction of the current one. > Also, not all forest land can be used well for agriculture, Sure, but back then people used even marginal lands if at all possible, precisely because of land scarcity. Ever seen those terraced farms on mountain slopes in China? We don’t do that anymore, but it made sense back then. Moreover, land that wasn’t good enough for farming was mostly used for animal grazing, not forest. > and if there wasn’t much forest, there weren’t many twigs, either. No, as I said, you can get twigs from coppiced or pollarded trees, which yield more fuel per acre than normal forest, but don’t yield any structural lumber.

by xyzzyz 5y ago

Someone 5y ago

I doubt food scarcity, when it occurred, was for lack of land. Also, not all forest land can be used well for agriculture, and if there wasn’t much forest, there weren’t many twigs, either. IIRC, bricks became popular because wooden house were forbidden in dense cities, and clay beat stone in availability/price/suitability (wouldn’t know which) Certainly, after London burnt, “much of the old street plan was recreated in the new City, with improvements in hygiene and fire safety: wider streets, open and accessible wharves along the length of the Thames, with no houses obstructing access to the river, and, most importantly, buildings constructed of brick and stone, not wood.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_London#Aftermath https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_London#Aftermath)

xyzzyz 5y ago
> I doubt food scarcity, when it occurred, was for lack of land. Food scarcity was a constant reality of premodern times. I’m not talking about occasional famines, where people literally died en masse, but rather about normal times. The food had to be scarce, otherwise the population wouldn’t have been a small fraction of the current one. > Also, not all forest land can be used well for agriculture, Sure, but back then people used even marginal lands if at all possible, precisely because of land scarcity. Ever seen those terraced farms on mountain slopes in China? We don’t do that anymore, but it made sense back then. Moreover, land that wasn’t good enough for farming was mostly used for animal grazing, not forest. > and if there wasn’t much forest, there weren’t many twigs, either. No, as I said, you can get twigs from coppiced or pollarded trees, which yield more fuel per acre than normal forest, but don’t yield any structural lumber.