HOW MUCH WATER THE ROMANS USED DAILY |
One unresolved historical problem regarding water use bears discussion; the quantity of water provided by the aqueducts. In general, data provided by archeological evidence and written accounts fall short of that required for the computation of either per capita supply or per capita use. The cross-sectional areas of the aqueducts are known, but one cannot be sure the conduits ever ran full. Sizing of the channels was probably determined as much by the need for work space as by the volume needed for water. As previously mentioned, it was certainly a rare occasion when the aqueducts were all working at the same time. Another uncertainty is the population of Imperial Rome. No accurate estimate exists for any particular period. It is generally assumed that during Frontinus’ era the population of Rome was approximately one million.
Early opinions on the amount of water delivered by the aqueducts varies from a low of 322,000 cubic meters per day to a high of 1,010,623 (Ashby, 1935). There is also little consensus among more recent estimates. According to Frontinus, the aqueducts served 591 lacus (or major delivery points), and each, on average, delivered 60 cubic meters of water per day.
This figure is considerably lower than all previous estimates, but it is not too low when you consider that Romans could also benefit from water from baths, latrines, and other establishments, as well as from rainwater and the Tiber River. The 67-liters-per-day figure is only water delivered from the lacus. It would seem that for the ordinary Roman, this quantity or water was satisfactory, but not lavish. Contemporary residential customers in the United States require approximately 250 liters per person per day. But comparing Roman water supply and useage rates with contemporary needs is problematic. It is commonly felt that water to ancient Rome was delivered in a constant flow instead of on-demand (as with modern systems).
For example, water flowed through a latrine in one continual stream, not just when flushed as is the case with the modern toilet. Fountains ran night and day. For this reason, to compare a per capita water use figure for Rome with a twentieth-century figure is somewhat misleading.
Arguably the Romans considered water flowing day and night as a particular sign of richness and a high standard ofliving. But this does not necessarily mean that they paid little attention to the storage of water, or to regularizing the water flow. In fact there exists sundry evidence that measures for saving water had been adopted. It is often maintained that the Romans did not make use of taps and similar devices in this distribution net; e.g. Frontinus never even once refers to such objects. But as a matter of fact archeological discoveries have brought forward a large amount of evidence for their use.
The Romans also diverted water into storage tanks. Archaeologists have uncovered large cisterns in Rome, many received water from the aqueducts. Bruun argues that Romans were better water managers than we commonly give them credit for. It is safe to assume that Rome received in impressive supply of water, and that the rich and influential received a disproportionate amount. But the water supply for the common Roman was still sufficient. By historic standards,Roman’s water supply was a very impressive accomplishment.