😀👇𝐑𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝟐 𝐨𝐟 𝟐:

As left of yesterday with the numbers as given by Frontinus, ‘14,018 quinariae; 71% went to the city while of the remaining 4,063 units over 50% of these went to private individuals’. This highlights the problems that was faced in the Roman Empire in that most of the population was receiving the least amount of water. The rural locations often relied on the collection of rainwater, having induced methods of the roof run-off system where volumes of water that were not soaked by the roof tiles (with typically 5-15mm absorbed) found the excess water to be drained into underground cisterns. Though, it must be said that this venture was mostly for private individuals with private homes who availed of this. The urban aqueducts for the non-private citizen for the most part were off limits and those in rural areas needed to construct their own methods of water distribution. Essentially the aqueducts served the cities and if they were carried over the land and farms of others they still did not benefit from these. However, Frontinus, stated that some rural residents paid for the right to tap into the passing aqueducts but due to the location of the farms most were still unable to draw from these.

To judge the success of the rural water infrastructure against its urban counterpart would depend on how the construction methods were readily available to the rural people of the time. The superstructures of the aqueducts which served Rome were suitable and served those living there, while the population and size of the rural areas outside of Rome were vastly different and each case needed to be addressed differently. Where some individuals could suffice with one or two cisterns some did not and needed to resort to small-scale aqueducts or conduit systems.

Let me know if you wanna know more, or about a specific aqueduct. 📗✍