Ok-disaster2022 t1_j7cy5qn wrote
Reply to comment by duncan345 in Lead Plates and Land Claims in North America and Europe: When did the practice begin of burying lead plates to establish ownership of land, and why did it die out, and was it ever used successfully in a court of law to establish ownership? by whyenn
They've actually needed to start updating coordinates of the markers due to continental drift in some places. They can be off by centimeters which can be ginormous legal fights.
The idea of markers to track boundaries goes back thousands of years. There are Biblical laws about not removing boundary markers.
Sunnyjim333 t1_j7dl9vn wrote
There are field bounderies in England that have been the same since the Iron Age. I love looking at old maps and seeing roads that have been there for 160 years (In the USA that is a long time).
Sawendro t1_j7e80n6 wrote
Can I interest you in holloways? Paths used so much they've created, basically, open tunnels over the years.
francenestarr t1_j7ea2bo wrote
Thank you!!!!
Anathos117 t1_j7e2hgp wrote
> 160 years (In the USA that is a long time).
In some parts of it, maybe, but hardly all of it. There's a street in my town that's 400 years old.
Sunnyjim333 t1_j7e2vtx wrote
Too cool, I like seeing Roman roads that are made better than our pothole riddled tracks we call roads.
dryingsocks t1_j7eaxmm wrote
to be fair, the heaviest vehicle during roman times was a ox cart. with cars becoming heavier and heavier they put more wear on the street than romans ever could
PhasmaFelis t1_j7ely23 wrote
Roman roads are interesting. Astonishing engineering, a really well-built stone road can last for millennia.
But you wouldn't want to drive on one. Stone pavers give a hell of a rough ride at any real speed, and stone is deadly slick when it's wet. For cars you really need something that's very smooth and slightly tacky, and unfortunately asphalt is the best we've come up with so far. I'll take dealing with potholes over a 30MPH top speed.
(And if we did drive on Roman roads, I don't think they'd last so long under regular 18-wheeler traffic.)
Sunnyjim333 t1_j7gevlv wrote
Side note, Illinois was experimenting with a cork surface. We drove on some on Interstate 55, it was a smooth ride at the time. This was in 2017.
Sunnyjim333 t1_j7e3l2f wrote
The USA is still a "young" country. We have a poor sense of time here. If a building is 50 years old it is ancient. Sadly we do not build to last. Many old beautiful buildings are torn down for parking lots, mass transit is abysmal. You have to have a car to do any traveling, walking is not possible, stores are too far apart.
[deleted] t1_j7ebk8s wrote
[removed]
maaku7 t1_j7eu7py wrote
You can get up to about 250 years old on the west coast, e.g. the California missions. There is literally nothing older than that since AFAIK no indigenous buildings have survived that long.
At least not in California. I wonder if the PNW has some longhouses or something.
YouTee t1_j7evtdc wrote
I think the cave dwellings in New Mexico are one of the oldest surviving human habitats in North America.
Maybe some of those mounds in... Kansas? Too
maaku7 t1_j7ewbr6 wrote
New Mexico is not on the west coast ;)
But yeah those are good additions to the list. I've seen the Pueblo buildings and they're impressive.
Of course if you go further south, there are tons of stone buildings and pyramids in Mexico and Guatemala.
Purplekeyboard t1_j7exgma wrote
In Seattle, a 100 year old building is a historic landmark.
Synensys t1_j7e3f5a wrote
The change in earths magnetic field direction has lead to a shift in thr direction of New England's famous stone field border walls.
ThisOriginalSource t1_j7e4ri8 wrote
Can you share more information about this, or a source?
noahjsc t1_j7eb47h wrote
I can explain this a bit as I learned a bit of orienteering from youth groups/military experience. So when working with a compass you have to actually modify the declination a bit. All this is rotating the angle markers. To determine that requires a little bit of math. This is because True North location actually moves over the years. So what he's stating is that the bearing to the location has shifted. As if you had a compass set to 0 declination which means 0 points at true north the bearing would be different.
​
Quick explanation on what a bearing is. So when using a map the lines straight north are considered 0 degrees. East is 90, South is 180 and West is 270. So by drawing a line from one point to another you can use a protractor or other angle measuring tool to determine the angle.
​
If the map is new and set properly to true north there is no declination set on the compass. So what you do is you rotate the right so that the angle you determined from the map is set to the front of the compass. You then rotate the compass(typically by moving yourself as you point it outwards from your body) till the north on the magnet and north on the reading align. You then know you are pointing at your bearing.
​
With declination you have to adjust that angle a bit(usually compasses have a key to do it so you don't have to adjust on calculation). So on an old map you calculate declination and then when you shoot your bearing you'll still be pointed to the right location. However if you didn't calculate for declination cause true north moved you'll be facing a few degrees off.
​
I'm sorry if this explanation is confusing. It's typically best done with a physical compass and map to show what i'm talking about. I tried my best to do it in writing.
tropic420 t1_j7eel75 wrote
A physical compass and 2 or more maps of the same area some years apart, it would seem
Synensys t1_j7fy7ne wrote
The basic idea is that magnetic north moves around over time (magnetic north and the north pole are not the same location). So if your boundary line is defined as a north south line, and you look at a compass to figure out where to put your wall, over time the direction that wall points relative to older walls, will change.
So present day scientists can use the orientation of the walls to track changes in the location of magnetic north pole.
https://theconversation.com/old-stone-walls-record-the-changing-location-of-magnetic-north-112827
fertdingo t1_j7dl35a wrote
I would think earthquakes would be more problematic.
ElJamoquio t1_j7dm1lm wrote
What's the difference?
oldguy_on_the_wire t1_j7e2tbr wrote
Not the one you asked, but continental drift is a very slow process and would likely move all the land around the marker identically, with the net effect of no difference.
An earthquake OTOH would have the definite possibility of moving the marker itself thus changing the boundary lines.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments