Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Demetrios1453" data-source="post: 9020619" data-attributes="member: 6801060">By the way, there are real-life equivalent cities that had late Renaissance-era populations in the hundreds of thousands without any nearby rivers, or even aqueducts. Naples is a good example - it had a population of approximately 150,000 by 1500 and 200,000 by 1600. And it's in a far dryer climate than Waterdeep. Or how about a modern equivalent - New York City (then equivalent to Manhattan) possessed a water supply was solely from wells and cisterns (and some water hauled in by wagon from Brooklyn) until an aqueduct was built in 1842 (the Hudson, East, and all other rivers around Manhattan are tidal, so they're basically salt water - water from the Hudson generally isn't potable until far upstream of NYC, usually around Newburgh, 50 miles or so to the north). The population of Manhattan was 312,710 in the 1840 census, all of whom were getting their drinking water from cisterns, wells, and wagon transport. [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.nyc.gov/site/dep/water/history-of-new-york-citys-drinking-water.page[/URL]</blockquote>