4 ms·
Public access to beaches and waterways is an ancient idea - Institutes of (Emperor) Justinian in the 6th century are often cited: By the law of nature these th
by benjohnson 12y ago
Public access to beaches and waterways is an ancient idea - Institutes of (Emperor) Justinian in the 6th century are often cited:
By the law of nature these things are common to mankind, the air, running water, the sea, and consequently the shores of the sea. No one, therefore, is forbidden to approach the seashore, provided that he respects habitationes, monuments, and buildings which are not, like the sea, subject only to the law of nations.
2. All rivers and ports are public; hence the right of fishing in a port, or in rivers, is common to all men.
3. The seashore extends as far as the greatest winter flood runs up.
- yummyfajitas 12y agoAlso, we should strip citizenship from anyone who is not a Christian, and punish participation in pagan rituals as severely as murder. This is an ancient idea - Institutes of (Emperor) Justinian in the 6th century are often cited. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_Juris_Civilis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_Juris_Civilis If you want to appeal to authority rather than answer the question, pretty much any Roman emperor makes an odd choice.
- KC8ZKF 12y agoIt's not an appeal to authority. "Because Justinian said so, and he's emperor so he should know." is an appeal to an authority. But here, Justinian's argument is given. Seas and rivers are part of the commonwealth, so nobody should be denied access.
- yummyfajitas 12y agoWhat is Justinian's argument? He doesn't actually mention the "commonwealth" at all. He merely appeals to the "law of nature". In any case, if there is some principle underlying Justinian's edict, what is it? How did he determine that the sea is part of the "commonwealth", but that a mountain or someone's house is not? This is hardly explained in the given quote.
- KC8ZKF 12y agoThis doesn't really answer your question, but I think it's interesting to note that Institutes of Justinian are doing two things here. First, they are announcing to the Romans that the seas and running waters are part of the commonwealth. Second they are making the seas and running waters part of the commonwealth. They are simultaneously making a declaration and changing the world to fit that declaration. In short, seas were part of the commonwealth because Justinian said so. An <ahem> appeal to authority. But an appeal that Justinian made, not benjohnson.
- vidarh 12y agoHe did answer the question: This has a very long historical precedent. That we continue to accept some historical precedents as good, but have discarded others is not at all odd, and does not invalidate the historical importance placed on access to waterways just because the same people also had lots of ideas we consider idiotic today.
- yummyfajitas 12y agoIf "a very long historical precedent" were sufficient to justify a policy, it would also justify the policies you wish to discard.
- vidarh 12y agoI have not suggested they were sufficient to justify a policy, nor does the reference to Justinian appear to have done so. A long historical precedent is however sufficient to explain it's modern day existence, which is what happened here. You appear to have an uncanny ability to read far more into messages than what were intended.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]