From my editor's comments, it appears to be more leaning towards a question of scale. I think given the tenuous nature of crop yields, even a little goes a long way.
"Don't negatively affect" or "Doesn't do permanent, high cost damage"? It's honestly been so long since I had to read the agricultural devastation debate that I don't recall which argument gets made.
-
-
-
Hm, possibly true, but note Erdkamp, The Grain Market in the Roman Empire (2005), particularly the first two chapters on the structural resilience of peasant subsistence even in the face of narrow margins of subsistence.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.