3 ms·
It depends on where/when, of course - I wouldn't claim that the inhabitants of premodern urban areas never left. But keep in mind that in a world (like the 1st
by benbreen 10y ago
It depends on where/when, of course - I wouldn't claim that the inhabitants of premodern urban areas never left. But keep in mind that in a world (like the 1st century Mediterranean) where the majority of people were illiterate and didn't live in cities or towns, then written sources will tend to be biased toward urban, literate people and their habits. Perhaps it's a stretch to say that "most people didn't venture beyond their village" in the premodern world, but I'd bet money that a statement along the lines of "most people didn't venture beyond a 50 to 100 mile radius around their place of birth" would hold true in most times and places prior to around 1700.
- stinkytaco 10y agoI get that we are talking about a vast majority of people who never traveled, at least not far. But even if they didn't travel, they were not entirely ignorant of the world because there were plenty of people who did travel that they would have encountered regularly. It's a bit like hearing Christopher Columbus sailed to prove the world was round. It makes sense on the face of it for a 9 year old, but once you start breaking it down, it's obvious that statement is somewhere between a gross oversimplification (i.e. he sailed to find a western route to China, which would necessitate roundness) to an outright falsehood. This has largely been my experience with comparing the history I learned to the history I now know.
- Baeocystin 10y agoI'd bet money that that holds true even today. Write off a one-time move to a large city, and I'd be certain of it.