30

It would use the heck out of that river. Cities have always shared rivers. Rivers are long and they have the things people need. A river is an excellent place to site a city. Look at all the cities on the Mississippi River and its tributaries. https://www.americanrivers.org/river/mississippi-river/ Moving water, air and life can do a lot to clean up ...


23

A Roman engineering solution to the contamination problem would be to build an aqueduct that draws water from upstream of all villages and runs parallel to the natural stream. Citizens could draw clean water from the aqueduct and dump their waste into the natural stream. Dumping waste into the aqueduct would be punishable by drowning. A set of weirs at ...


22

It would probably dump some wastes in it as well, but this got me concerned: what about those who would use the water further downstream? What!? Dumping our precious waste in the river? Who would be so ignorant to do such a thing? Solid waste is useful. Food scraps feed animals (specially pigs and goats). Human and animal excrement works as a fertilizer. ...


6

In the past, some works were very polluting, and usually caused a lot of hatred in the villages downstream. Tannery, pork meat processing, dyeing used to leave a lot of substances in the waters. Other activities (such as bathing) didn't pollute the rivers in perceptible way (at least, not according to the standards of the period), particularly if the town is ...


6

Frame challenge: whatever policy you suggest, no matter how much evidence or argumentation you'll have for the policy, it won't make a difference. Why? She won't be listened to. 17th century society was very paternalistic, the ruling men of that age wouldn't listen to a women's ideas about such matters. A simple historical example of such a policy would be ...


4

Your call, a fictional country can have any sort of practical or impractical arrangement. Generally speaking, the distinction of "head of state" and "head of government" is to disconnect mostly ceremonial duties from the day-to-day business of government. Major states will have enough work to keep two people busy. A careful distribution of authority can ...


3

So who says he just started gathering followers after the apocalypse? Maybe he had a cult going when the end happened, hell maybe he predicted it (or something close enough he can pretend). If he had already been stockpiling loyal cult members and supplies then once the apocalypse happens he's in a great position to take over. He's probably got a ...


3

We handle it today by purifying the water before putting it back into the river. This is still possible in medieval times. No one did it but there is no reason you can't build a sewage treatment facility. Most of it is just separating out solids and giving anything in it enough time to breakdown. You may be interesting in something called biological ...


2

The brief answer is - in most cases they would historically have not cared - either at the source of the pollution of downstream. Up until the present day people will (apparently) happily both utilise water sources which are utterly unfit for purpose for drinking, cooking, washing clothes and themselves. And people will pollute water that they and others ...


1

Very plausible. This has happened numerous times in asian history, great empires fracturing after a great defeat or civil strife. look at china and middle east most of it will be there. While knowledge wasnt wiped out, talented people got killed, people who knew how to administrate,lead and execute orders. You could say that leaders are easier to replace ...


1

I really don't see that you actually have a problem here. Dictatorships almost always form around a cult of personality, and the more pressure the population is under, the more quickly they can form. All you need is the Dictator to accumulate just enough power to create a safer place for people to be than wherever they were, and they'll flock to him. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible