Do cities usually form at the mouth of rivers or closer to the headwaters?

Question

I'm building an earthlike fantasy world, set technologically in the late bronze age. I'm placing major hubs of civilization, and for cities along river valleys would it make more sense for cities first to appear closer to the mouth of the river, or farther upriver? It makes sense to me that since rivers flow only one way, large cities would form by the mouth of a river so that materials and such could be transported downriver, but the Assyrians were located closer to the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates, and Vedic India was closer to the headwaters of the Ganges. In the same vein, how did ancient civilizations travel upriver when it's constantly flowing against you?

Answer 1

There is no rule. Cities generally formed first where there was fresh water as it's critical for life. And where multiple resources are close by.

The Egyptians navigated upriver because the current flows towards the sea, but the wind blows up river, so they floated down and sailed up. So they had cities all up the Nile valley wherever there was a reason and the resources to sustain one.

Major river mouths are estuarial land, they're not particularly suitable for cities as it's often mud flats, and open to invasion from the sea. Which in ancient times means it's open to attack with very little warning. So villages and farming communities are great, not so much cities. Both London and Paris are on rivers, days journey from the sea.

You don't build cities on the best farming or resource laden land. You build them close enough to take advantage of the resources and protect them. Estuaries are very resource rich. You don't generally build them at headwaters because the river is young and wild, therefore difficult to use as transport.

Answer 2

1. "The Assyrians were located closer to the headwaters of the Tigress."

   • It is the Tigris not the **Tigress. No female tiger.

     We call that river the Tigris becaus the Romans called it the Tigris; the Romans called it the Tigris, because the Greeks called it the Tigris or the Tigrēs; and the Greeks called it the Tigris because the Persians called it the Tigrā; the Persians called it the Tigrā because the Akkadians (which were the people whom the question calls Assyrians) called it Idiqlat (Diqlat > Tigrā); and the Akkadians got the name from the Sumerians who called it Idigna. At this point we are already 5,000 years in the past, and we don't know how the river was called before the Sumerians, because History Begins At Sumer.

     It is believed that the Sumerian name means Swift River, which would explain the Middle Persian name Arvand Rud with the same meaning; this means that the river was named by contrast to its very much more calm sibling, the slow moving Euphrates.

   • The original city states of the Sumerian civilization were established on the plain close to the mouths of the Tigris and the Euphrates as they were 5,000 years ago.

     

     ^{Sumerian city states, showing the sea shore as it was then compared to where it is now. Map by NASA, available on Wikimedia; public domain.}

   • The Sumerians were eventually incorporated into the Akkadian Empire, and civilization then moved upwards on the twin rivers, including more and more territory, and eventually it covered all Mesopotamia, both Lower and Upper. The mighty Babylon is still located in the plains, not very far from the point where the twin rivers come very close to one another, but yes, Nineveh is located in Upper Mesopotamia.

     But Nineveh rose 2,500 years after the heyday of Sumer; in fact, the high point of the history of Nineveh is almost exactly midway between the days of Sumer and the modern day.

2. "Vedic India was closer to the headwaters of the Ganges."

   The Vedic civilization spread from north-west to south-east, the point being that it was the headwaters of the Indus and not the Ganges. In fact, the Ganges was the easternmost boundary of the Early Vedic civilization.

   

   ^{Early Vedic civilization. Map by Aniputra7. Available on Wikimedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.}

   The Vedic civilization spread from northwest to southeast because it was the civilization of the Indo-Aryans, who came originally from what is now Afghanistan.

3. "How did ancient civilizations travel upriver?"

   It depends on the specific ancient civilization and on the specific river, but by and large they either rowed or used sails.

   The Ancient Egyptians had it the easiest; the river flows south to north, the wind blows almost always north to south. Win-win.

   The ancient Akkadians also used sails to navigate upstream.

   The ancient Vedic civilization took quite a long time to learn to use the rivers for transport, as the Indo-Aryans came from the mountains, but eventually they adapted and made good use of the Indus.

4. In general, the most important attribute of a river for the ancient civilizations was that it was a source of water. Transport came afterwards, when the civilization had developed and trade began to flourish.

   If you look on a map and consider the position of the great ancient cities, you will find that most of them are located in a fertile plain somewhere on the river. In most cases, the old cities you will find at the mouth of a river are those which were specifically established as ports for overseas trade: Alexandria in Egypt, Marseilles in Provence, Karachi in Pakistan and so on.

   But Rome is not at the mouth of the Tiber, Cairo is not at the mouth of the Nile, Baghdad is not at the mouth of the Euphrates, Paris is not at the mouth of the Seine, and so on.

Answer 3

It depends on many factors where to settle on a river.

The People

• Primary reason for a settlement are the resources available. Large woods, good stone for quarries, fertile soil, animals to hunt or fish, maybe gold or silver - can all make other spots than the mouth or spring more attractive.

• Another strong reason is the level of protection against other people/tribes but also against forces of nature. Allies in the area can be an advantage to stay.

• It could have totally arbitrary reasons, why people decided to stay at a certain spot: A special tree, an Omen of the gods (lightning strike), maybe a vow given to settle at the next river crossing.

• There is also a very pragmatic reason, why you do not want to settle at the mouth... you know, if you are at the end... everybody's shit and piss is coming your way.

  • Therefore the river head was attractive. Always fresh water!

  • In times of war, being downstream means the enemy can dam off the river further up. This is alleviated when sitting directly at the spring. It is a spot of power, worth to control.

The River

• The mouth could be marshland, bad for the stability of houses

• The mouth is close to the sea, which has salt water (mostly full of sediments, muddy and brown, generally not drinkable), which can flow upstream far when floods, spring tides or storms are coming from the sea

• The mouth is usually more open space, giving not that much protection

• On the other hand: A coastline with rock formations that can only be reached by a bridge or drawbridge offers a great deal of protection, but can also be isolating and perilous. Cliffs also serve as a natural barrier. That side does not need to be defended (usually, not always).

• Close to the sea are also great fishing opportunities and a harbor can facilitate trading and wealth for the settlement/area

• If you settle near the spring of a river, you are less prone to get overwhelmed by floods from the mountains in summer when the snow melts

  • Further down the river floods can be disastrous (mostly on rivers with little to no bends)

  • River bends take a lot of speed from the floods, therefore depositing high amounts of debris, but also fresh water, and fertile soil (good for agriculture)!

• Rivers can be dangerously fast/wild or deep or vast. Therefore some shallow place (a ford) might be a good deal. Those were the "bridges" of old times. And on "bridges" (choke points in general) you can take tolls or provide services. Great income!

• If two rivers merge this was/can be also considered a "chokepoint" or "deadend", but if you are surrounded by rivers on three sides, you only need to defend one side (mainly). But you also might need bridges to cross the rivers. Same goes for island formations inside a river.

Transportation Upstreams

Wind: Depending on the terrain, river beds are potentially vast, reaching sizes of lakes sometimes. Meaning: lots of open space and therefore no trees which block the wind. Strong winds enable ships/boats/rafts to have sails which to harness that power to bring them upstream. Sometimes only for a segment of the river, but still beneficial.

Towing: The other option to go upstream are oxes or horses. They are tied with horse collars or yokes for the oxes and ropes to the ships/rafts and then someone had to control the animals to have them do the pulling upstream. Good money for the man who had an ox. This process is named "towing" and by heavy use the "towpaths" formed alongside the river bed. Depending on terrain they were on both sides or only one side. Sometimes the terrain did not allow for oxes or horses, so humans had to do the work. (See pictures (german article); description of Burlak in English).

Rowing: Of course as well.

Answer 4

Cities form where things come together, that may mean a trade route meeting a river, London started because it was where a main trade road hit the Thames river and someone build a bridge, and later an inland harbour. It could be where the costs of two resources come together, Swansea exists in large part because the cost of shipping Coal for smelters during the industrial revolution met the cost of shipping ore, particularly copper ores. The reason rivers and coasts are so often the site of major population centres is that that is where people and food, in the form of seasonal or permanent fish populations come together. Rivers in particular also often offer cheap, at any level of technology, transportation corridors through the landscape. Where those corridors stop, such as Mannheim on the Rhine, are restricted such as at Osney Bridge in Oxford and St John's Lock on the Thames, or pause for some reason such as a ford or portage towns and cities tend to form. This is in addition to spots where land routes intercept the river and where resources are brought to the river for loading and transport.