Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 224 posts

Re: List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

#171

Post by lisper »

bromuro wrote: post #136
lisper wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I probably should have used a different word. What I meant was that the last 200 years or so is the first time in history that human civilization has extended across the entire planet simultaneously.

In Australia 200 years ago that “human civilization” perpetuated genocides against the “uncivilized” humans there. Not sure if are the words used the problem here... sure this is a sensitive topic.

I didn't intend to imply any kind of value judgement on whether or not the spread of "civilization" (or whatever you want to call the present state of affairs) is good or bad.

Re: List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

#173

Post by EdwardDiego »

awiesenhofer wrote: post #165

Wow, this is a great example of a rather terrible wikipedia page. Grouping it by continent. No mention of the Middle East at all (Erbil anyone?). Oceania is just a list of every major city in AUS/NZ, even listing 1913s Canberra while omitting basically every other country in the region. Not trying to diminish the work that went into it so far, but it is a great example to always keep in mind how wikipedia works, how…

And on the NZ side, it calls Bluff a city. It's a town (whose population peaked at 3000) near Invercargill, which is itself, only just a city.

https://www.worldhistoryofbluff.org.nz

Re: List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

#174

Post by notechback »

owenversteeg wrote: post #34

What interests me the most is not so much the #1 oldest, but more those cities where the past is still visible, or the city is similar to the same one that stood there thousands of years ago. Specifically, I find Yerevan very interesting. If someone from 2,000 years ago stood there today, they'd certainly realize it was the same city: the same Mount Ararat towering over the city, the same river Hrazdan running by the…

It's a funny table. A mix of historic record (indicating eg most of the Greek cities) Vs archeological evidence of some kind of habitation Vs some myth/oral history. Overall very arbitrary what is and is not considered a city or at starting point.

Re: List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

#175

Post by dntbnmpls »

owenversteeg wrote: post #34

What interests me the most is not so much the #1 oldest, but more those cities where the past is still visible, or the city is similar to the same one that stood there thousands of years ago. Specifically, I find Yerevan very interesting. If someone from 2,000 years ago stood there today, they'd certainly realize it was the same city: the same Mount Ararat towering over the city, the same river Hrazdan running by the…

> Anyone know more of these cities, where it'd be obvious to the ancient inhabitants that it was the same city?

According to your definition if there are recognizable major natural landmarks ( "Mount Ararat", "river Hrazdan" ), then it means nothing has changed since people in the past would recognize it and be able to place themselves. So using your logic, any city near a major mountain, river, etc would be recognizable. So tokyo ( visible from Mt Fuji ) hasn't changed, manhattan hasn't changed ( hudson/east rivers ), seattle hasn't changed ( Mt Rainier ), etc.

Re: List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

#176

Post by saagarjha »

throwaway8879 wrote: post #170
DictumMortuum wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't feel envy about such generalities. To give you an example, my hero and fellow Athenian, Socrates, was killed by his own people. DNA doesn't matter. How you choose to live your life does.

Nitpick. Socrates was given a choice. His decision to kill himself was his own. I'd probably do the same. He was 70+ anyway. A lifetime of annoying dialectic tends to make lots of enemies quickly.

What was the choice? Wasn’t he sentenced to death?

Re: List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

#177

Post by lostlogin »

netcan wrote: post #167
lostlogin wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think that the ‘ploughed salt’ approach is considered true anymore. The articles I want to link to are paywalled but there is a good discussion in the below reddit thread. The tldr is the salt was very expensive. http://www.jstor.org/stable/269786 https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/...

Do you mean the literal salt, or the destruction? I've often wonder about the salt. The salt ritual (or figure of speech) originates in the eastern Mediterranean, which is why it features in the bible. Being Israeli, I always figured the dead sea inspired the idea. I think you'd need a lot of salt to do it literally though. I wonder how the expression got to Rome? Punic culture & language came from Lebanon, and was s…

I meant the literal ploughing in of salt crystals seems not to have happened. The destruction doesn’t seem to be disputed. You have given me a new angle to think on though as maybe that is what was meant? Presumably the concept of salting came from somewhere, but short of breaching sea dykes, I can’t see how it could be done easily.

Re: List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

#178

Post by saagarjha »

lisper wrote: post #119
keiferski wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I didn't mean that the entire earth is as dense as a city. I meant that there are very few places you can go and not be within (say) a day's walk of another human. I mean, isn’t that true for most of Canada, Russia, Antarctica, central Australia, Mongolia, and even large parts of the American West?

You'll be surprised. You can actually use Google earth to explore these regions. Even in what seems at first to be empty space you will find little towns, military installations, vacation lodges. Yes, there are still a few remote regions that are truly untouched by humans, but they are quite rare. Extreme latitudes (Antarctica, Siberia, northern Canada) and the Amazon are probably about it. Numbers are hard to come b…

Relevant: https://what-if.xkcd.com/60/

Re: List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

#179

Post by refurb »

DictumMortuum wrote: post #162
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always wondered how super old cities like Athens and Rome deal with infrastructure. I mean, if you need to install new sewer or cabling systems underground you're dealing with literally thousands of years of stuff under the city, and I'm guessing there is no good documentation for what's there. How do civil engineers know where it's safe to build?

It's typical to see displays such as [1], even in the basements of cafeterias in Athens. This one is from the Syntagma metro station. By the way, in settlements were people are living for thousands of years, they usually build on top of what there was already there. [1] - https://cdn.theculturetrip.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/10...

That's a great example.

There is a museum near the Acropolis where they put a glass floor in and you can look down and see the ruins they've uncovered.

It's really remarkable. Buildings from the past were demolished and new buildings were built on top. It's interesting to look around and realize that you're walking over 30 ft worth of ruins everywhere.

Re: List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

#180

Post by sedatk »

viklove wrote: post #153
riffraff wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that, it's precisely the 21st of April, Rome's birthday just went by :)

Turns out Rome was built in a day. Specifically, the 21st of April.

No, that was the date of launch, along with a keynote from the caesar.
Post reply on HN