←back to thread

Stone Age settlement found under the sea in Denmark

(apnews.com)
198 points isaacfrond | 1 comments | 29 Aug 25 07:39 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jl6 ◴[02 Sep 25 08:30 UTC] No.45100453[source]▶
> As today’s world faces rising sea levels driven by climate change, the researchers hope to shed light on how Stone Age societies adapted to shifting coastlines more than eight millennia ago.

Unfortunately I don't expect there is any particularly reusable solution to be uncovered. Ancient peoples facing rising tides almost certainly just walked a bit inland and built new huts there. They probably thought nothing of it. They were a far more physically mobile culture, without great dependence on immense, immovable infrastructure - nor on rigid land ownership rules.

Our culture's migration will be entirely different.

replies(8): >>45100671 #>>45100889 #>>45101258 #>>45101308 #>>45101527 #>>45102385 #>>45103267 #>>45112302 #
ehnto ◴[02 Sep 25 09:07 UTC] No.45100671[source]▶
Rigid land ownership seems to be the source of a great deal of our troubles.
replies(2): >>45100925 #>>45101534 #
inglor_cz ◴[02 Sep 25 09:52 UTC] No.45100925[source]▶
Now try non-rigid land ownership, where land and buildings can be expropriated in the name of nebulous greater good.

Been there, done that, it is worse than the alternative. People will stop cultivating anything, because why bother if a random officer can just take things from you at will.

Western regulations about land appropriation are strict for a reason, and they always require just compensation for a reason. That is the only way to prevent powerful people from just grabbing what they want, cloaking the thieving act in word bubbles about common prosperity.

replies(4): >>45100976 #>>45101245 #>>45102243 #>>45102510 #
gosub100 ◴[02 Sep 25 12:30 UTC] No.45102243{3}[source]▶
The concept of borders is relatively new. Up until a few hundred years ago, countries simply didn't have them. Battles would start simply because "we saw those other guys again! Stop em!"
replies(4): >>45103515 #>>45104251 #>>45104517 #>>45106088 #
1. inglor_cz ◴[02 Sep 25 14:22 UTC] No.45103515{4}[source]▶
Control of borders was nowhere near as tight as today, given how underdeveloped technology was compared to today, and in some places (deserts, forests) the border was more of a very wide strip of no-mans land than just a line.

But places like the Roman Empire absolutely had "hard" demarcations in some places, not just standard country borders, but also internal borders.

For example, when Caesar crossed the Rubicon, he legally crossed into Italy by doing so and thus triggered a war. Rome itself had pomerium, a city demarcation whose crossing had legal consequences as well.

If you entered the Roman Empire peacefully, and you had something to tax or apply duties to, you would be confronted with officials in the closest suitable place.

That sounds like border to me.