The submerged Neolithic city most possibly belonged to the pre-historic remains of ancient Hvar civilization located in Croatia.
The submerged Neolithic city most possibly belonged to the pre-historic remains of ancient Hvar civilization located in Croatia.
A settlement isn’t even close to a city. A settlement isn’t even a village.
Also, you need to read your own article. This is the very first paragraph:
That links to the Bradford article I linked to.
Strictly-speaking, there’s no generally-accepted international definition of “city”, something which surprised me a bit.
This has come up for me in the past in several interesting ways:
China tends to define “cities” using a dramatically-more-expansive definition than what the US or European countries would. China does have cities with very large population, but this definition tends to result in things that in the US would be treated more as entire regions being treated as cities.
kagis for someone talking about this
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/when-we-mention-city-china-what-talking-xianwei-zhang
If you want to write code to render a map, which I was doing with OpenStreetMap data the other day in R, you can’t just easily say “X is a city and Y is a town”.
The US doesn’t even have any kind of accepted definition across states (or, in at least for the few states that I’ve looked at, an official definition within a given state).
This paper is not definitive, but discusses what archaeologists mean when they talk about a city: https://www.brepolsonline.net/doi/pdf/10.1484/J.JUA.5.120907
And again, the information came from the University of Zadar, not of Bradford.
https://www.facebook.com/unizd/posts/pfbid02sn75brvNKh4JPfReAgDDrvJ6B93tY6uoKwAd71FLKLBrSLZn3KatnbniwPapMUunl
Here’s a link to their facebook post where they told everyone about it.
You can absolutely criticize the sensationalism of them using the word city in the good.is article and I agree. But to say that it is a “total fabrication” when there’s roads, tools and signs of human habitation is a bit of a stretch.
Roads, tools and habitation are signs of humans. They are not cities. There are roads, tools and houses on farms. Farms are not cities. The city part was just a lie.
Just glancing at the two articles that were posted, they seem a bit different from each other, OPs definitely has a clickbaity title, but it does mention multiple settlements. Is that a city? Not by today’s standards, nor the standards of any other well recorded period of history… times change though. The town I live in has a population of roughly 250k or so but is not much of a city at all, village would be more appropriate for what is available in my mind. We have food and junk shops, but no real services… Its a bit of a shithole town though.
Thank you both for having enough discourse in the comments to make me engaged enough to learn about some ancient shit! Thanks!