Looking back to go forward
Sept 7, 2016 17:26:05 GMT -7
via mobile
cajunlady87, solargeek1, and 1 more like this
Post by Cwi555 on Sept 7, 2016 17:26:05 GMT -7
In old Europe (read medieval), and parts of Japan and China from the same era, the countryside was overrun with small towns/villages. No explaination is generally given, other than those towns near trade routes, rivers etc. On the whole, the latter explaination covered less than 30%. What of the rest?
Many of them were built that did not have any particular resources in concentration. After puzzling over that, it occurred to me the same scenario played fwd into the early 19th century though not as noticable and definitely dwindling down after WW1. Why is that?
What each of those locations had in common was a general structure of the areas being part of a barony, prefecture, or other such centralized power structure.
Looking a bit deeper into it, many of these locations were ordered built by the baron, magistrate etc. Not just the town, but roads, mills, stores, and other critical infrastructure of the time.
It would appear this was not altruistic in nature. Once people moved to these locations, the government/owner would toll the roads, tax for protection, goods sold, upkeep, so forth. In other words it was an income generator, build it and they would come so to speak. Farmers would move closer rather than being effectively isolated, business's such as furniture makers, money changers, blacksmiths, and so forth would move in.
The common thread was security or promise of security in numbers for the carrot that would draw these people in. Come WW1, the world changed. Large centralized governments stepped in where smaller groups used to be, and the rest is 'history'.
What hasn't changed at the core is the idea of seeking group protection, most times with some form of tax or other payment being required.
I can't see any reason to expect centuries if not millenia of ingrained behavior to change should SHTF. It should be an assumption that it happens should SHTF rather than a 'risk'.
Plan accordingly
Many of them were built that did not have any particular resources in concentration. After puzzling over that, it occurred to me the same scenario played fwd into the early 19th century though not as noticable and definitely dwindling down after WW1. Why is that?
What each of those locations had in common was a general structure of the areas being part of a barony, prefecture, or other such centralized power structure.
Looking a bit deeper into it, many of these locations were ordered built by the baron, magistrate etc. Not just the town, but roads, mills, stores, and other critical infrastructure of the time.
It would appear this was not altruistic in nature. Once people moved to these locations, the government/owner would toll the roads, tax for protection, goods sold, upkeep, so forth. In other words it was an income generator, build it and they would come so to speak. Farmers would move closer rather than being effectively isolated, business's such as furniture makers, money changers, blacksmiths, and so forth would move in.
The common thread was security or promise of security in numbers for the carrot that would draw these people in. Come WW1, the world changed. Large centralized governments stepped in where smaller groups used to be, and the rest is 'history'.
What hasn't changed at the core is the idea of seeking group protection, most times with some form of tax or other payment being required.
I can't see any reason to expect centuries if not millenia of ingrained behavior to change should SHTF. It should be an assumption that it happens should SHTF rather than a 'risk'.
Plan accordingly
