When they were built, those rivers were the best way to move resources into and out of the city, often by barge or steamboat. Also, they used to be heavily relied on for waste removal, though thankfully in the last century or so people realized that maybe it was a better idea not to dump toxic sludge into them and have a bright orange river flowing through your neighborhood.

I also think you'd find the further west you go in America, the fewer rivers you'll find in cities, as they're newer, and other transportation methods were often relied on (or there's just fewer rivers and they had to build SOMEWHERE). Cities along rivers is hardly unique to America though; see London, Paris, Berlin, Rome, Cairo, Khartoum, and a whole bunch of cities along the Ganges in India and the Yangtze in China, just to name a few examples.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

There are fewer examples in Palestine, perhaps due to the geography (and general limited supply of rivers), but there are at least a few cities right on the Jordan river, including Amman, Beit She'an, Pella, and Jerash.It's notable that Al Quds is not on a river, but it would appear that there's a degree of military strategy that may be to call out for this and some other cities being on high ground, particularly when the military realities of ancient warfare are considered, though even for infantry operations today (even if sometimes the best warriors do happen to come up from under the ground, rather than the high ground).

Worth noting of course is that rivers and high ground aren't always mutually exclusive, when you're lucky enough to find a spot that is on or near hills that are carved through by a river. But it is also worth noting that cities without rivers were far less likely to get raided by vikings from 793-1066...