Summary:

Marjatta Aittola, Karelia as a periphery of St. Petersburg in the 1700s and early 1800s as depicted in European literature

The conceptual pair centre–periphery did not yet appear in the literature of the period under study, although several authors observed their significance in the interaction between Old Finland and St. Petersburg from about 1735 on. St. Petersburg as a strong centre and the peripheral nature of the Karelian regions became apparent to them. C. R. von Berch, in particular, took notice of the dissimilarity of religion in Old Finland, while A. Burja noted the language difference. Hülphers viewed Old Finland as economically unprofitable for Russia. Disparity between the social conditions of the regions—evident as a lack of freedom in the land-grant regions of Old Finland—became apparent to B. Saint-Pierre. Like A. Burja, he also criticised Russian rule. E. Laxman took notice of the small amount of industry in Aunus.

 The scarcity of natural resources in the St. Petersburg area was clearly depicted in literature. Indeed, most authors described commodities brought from the Karelian regions to St. Petersburg—primarily marble and granite for construction as well as food supplies. German P. Friccius considered Old Finland—before its annexation to autonomous Finland in 1812—an economically unprofitable, albeit strategically important, region for Russia. According to the image portrayed by most authors, St. Petersburg appeared to remain as the focal area—the beneficiary of interaction and the area towards which the direction of influence primarily pointed.