> I have never seen anyone use the phrase like this
Maybe look around? If you google “present day Babylon”, you will find many examples of exactly this usage. Present-day Babylon is referring to the region that used to be called Babylon, it has a perfectly clear meaning. I think this usage is in fact more common than referring to something current using the phrase “present day”. You don’t need to clarify present-day Iraq, because Iraq is the name of a current region, so it would be automatically assumed that you mean today’s borders, and far less confusing in your example if you left out “present day”.
Your example has the same primary problem as the article title, it’s mixing two time periods in a confusing way. The term “present day” is normally meant to signify that the sentence is discussing the present, not to invoke the past. That said, your example is slightly better than the title because it starts with “thousands of years ago”, and it’s clear the people drank beer thousands of years ago before you say “present day”.
Edit: BTW, the term “present day” is not really the issue, we don’t need to debate the meaning of those two words. The problem is the larger fragment “people in present day Austria”, which implies by correct and common usage the same thing as “people presently in Austria”. The article title only becomes clear later on, when it clarifies 2700 years ago.
Maybe look around? If you google “present day Babylon”, you will find many examples of exactly this usage. Present-day Babylon is referring to the region that used to be called Babylon, it has a perfectly clear meaning. I think this usage is in fact more common than referring to something current using the phrase “present day”. You don’t need to clarify present-day Iraq, because Iraq is the name of a current region, so it would be automatically assumed that you mean today’s borders, and far less confusing in your example if you left out “present day”.
Your example has the same primary problem as the article title, it’s mixing two time periods in a confusing way. The term “present day” is normally meant to signify that the sentence is discussing the present, not to invoke the past. That said, your example is slightly better than the title because it starts with “thousands of years ago”, and it’s clear the people drank beer thousands of years ago before you say “present day”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Present_day
Edit: BTW, the term “present day” is not really the issue, we don’t need to debate the meaning of those two words. The problem is the larger fragment “people in present day Austria”, which implies by correct and common usage the same thing as “people presently in Austria”. The article title only becomes clear later on, when it clarifies 2700 years ago.