Here you will find information about the bridges in the course of the Qanat Fir'aun.

The bridges were named after the wadis which needed to be crossed or to the respective local situation. The naming of the wadis is uniform according to the maps of the German Palestine Association (DPV) created by G. Schumacher. These maps still have the highest density of information in terms of names and locations. Moreover, over the past 100 years, the place names have either gotten lost, or the old place names, as often verifiable, have been assigned to the next settlement, even if they are several kilometers away from the place of origin.
Furthermore, you find the geolocations in the maps. The bridges also include those buildings crossing the Wadis, which were built as siphon pipes right behind a vertical drop below the river level.

About the presumed procedures:

It must be noted that the structures are usually completely dilapidated, grounded, or destroyed – as it happened to the reservoir at Jisr el Mesari. However, the collection of descriptions from ancient literature, the comparison by using height models - according to the performed high-precision surveying and the SRTM data of NASA -, as well as the "on-site situation" led to plausible statements and reconstructions.
Due to the foundation remains of the abutments and pillars, it is also possible to estimate building details with high reliability. Sometimes, even without any groundbreaking, the statements and theories made here were confirmed. Thus, the previously unknown Wadi Ezra aqueduct bridge, which I found via satellite imagery, could be searched by using GPS and found in the locality. Another of these rare cases deals with the large aqueduct bridge Jisr el Mesari, which was previously located and exactly reconstructed based on elevation data and my analyses. Most recent Google earth satellite images show that it can be found exactly at this point in the currently empty reservoir area east of Dera'a, by regarding the visible remnants of the western abutment and the river pier already described by G. Schumacher.

All these findings are verifiable and, of course, serve as a basis for further solutions.

According to the current state of knowledge, the Roman engineers had to consider the following situation:

1. The aqueduct base is deeper than 4m below ground. In this case, it was tunnelled in a mining way, due to the reason that the tunnel was regarded as static stable because of its overburden and geological overall situation.
2. The aqueduct base is between 4m below ground and the top of the terrain. Here, a channel was built in open construction or rather beaten into the pending rock and covered in a row, vaulted or rather still showered. Nowadays while regarding the ground or aerial photos, mostly ground depressions are to be found, which developed by the subsequent compaction of the backfilling. Fouling features, which can be found for longer periods in other areas, can only be seen in Syria and Jordan at very specific, limited times of the year.
   2.1 A special case could be observed especially here at the Qanat Fir'aun. If the karstified rock did not provide static strength for a tunnel, or if a periodic water-bearing wadi / sink had to be crossed and the aqueduct’s floating level was only up to max. 5m below the top of the terrain, an artificial vertical drop was probably built with a surface similar to a water structure pavement. The aqueduct route was embedded in that vertical drop. In this way, accumulating surface water was drained over the apex of the aqueduct route and the optimal route could be ensured here as well. In addition, a rinsing in the Wadibed and its associated dangers of a tunnel break was avoided.
3. The route runs above ground on substructures (no real bridge ;-)) with a floating level of max. 2.5m above ground. In this case, vault openings were intentionally omitted, since the construction and formwork requirements would have been much higher and the simpler and faster construction of a closed substructure was preferred.
4. At flow level heights between 2.5-3m above ground a brook / wadi is usually crossed. In addition, clear widths from 3m and clear heights usually greater than 2m resulted from common Roman arch forms.
5. In the case of a route higher than 12m above ground, not only several openings are obligatory, but also two rows of sheets have been made one above the other. With the Zeidi-bridge Jisr el Mesari it can be undoubtedly assumed that it is a bridge consisting of three rows of arches; because and according to Gottlieb Schumacher’s specifications it can be assumed as well that the complete height of the bridge was 37m.
6. Pressure lines should also be considered as exceptional cases. Here, the premise was to reach the goal. In terms of height, it was possible to reach buildings which, in addition to a depression, were also separated from the supply line by existing structures or incalculable floodplains. Both occur in the Qanat Fir'aun. On the one hand, the accessibility of the so-called "Hammam Siknany", a Roman nymphaeum of the Kalybe type, is only possible via a pressure pipe, as this is the only way to reach the required height. On the other hand, the incoming aqueduct, at today's Abu el Qantara, was designed as a floor-level channel. According to the bottom of the aqueduct, a more than 600m long substructure with a max. height of 4m would have had built. Here, however, are various cataracts of Wadi Meddan ez Zeidi which upper stream could have led to floods and flash floods.
   As a result, a pressure pipeline, which nowadays can be still verified via the inlet and outlet basin, was constructed. This allowed the all-winter masses of water to drain off the pressure line which laid between the basalt rocks. In this way, a possible accumulation of piers or substructures was avoided. Further information about these structures can be found on the individual subsites.

Considering the Qanat Fir’aun, it should be differentiated between those bridges:

• Valley bridges (up to 3-storey bridges with heights from 10m above the valley floor)
• Wadi-crossings (usually over 150m long bridges, which only have the necessary flood openings in order to cross the river)
• bridges led in vertical drops of the riverbed, (from the proven height level as "normal" tunnel crossing of a wadi; to be excluded and due to the incoming and continuing shafts / substructures positionally clearly locatable buildings) which run just below the present level of the wadis.
• Pressure line / siphon bridges (indicated by indications and heights, characterized by missing building remains, but by existing pools / and / or literature descriptions verified aqueduct route)

For further and additional information you can also use the main menu, or the full-text search, via the main menu "endeavor" ☺️

The order of the bridges corresponds to the position in the course of the aqueduct route. In the content area (right) of each subpage, you also find a link to the directly following Qanat Fir'aun section, regardless of whether it is a bridge, substructure or tunnel.

Next to it, you see a visualization of the Wadi esh Shellale Bridge, based on satellite images (Google), SRTM elevation data (NASA JPL) and survey data from 2003 (Kleb / BAI Wuppertal)

Until November 2009, only one aqueduct bridge was known.

In the summer months of 2009, in order to secure the new tourist building, an excavation was carried out by the Dept. of Antiquities. Here, right under the Ottoman house foundations, burial sites were excavated from the Hellenistic period. During a visit, I noted stone formations at the two edges of the excavation square, which were clearly the pillar foundations, up to the fighter, of a previously unknown bridge. The width and position of the pillars could be clearly related to more distant components, such as the sluice stones and other remains of foundations and abutments.

Undoubtly, it is a solitary built building, which was built before the hitherto known and by S. Kerner documented bridge; since the route of the newly found building runs closer to the city hill (southern course).

In this area, the two bridges have a lateral distance of 63 cm to each other. The clear separation is also visible in the area of the sluice stone which still lies in Situ. Here, the distance is only about 50cm to each other. Other differences between the two bridges are the clear widths, pillar heights, and coarser stone processing at the northern bridge. The southern bridge consisted of precisely carved limestone cuboids. With a vault thickness of 45cm and an average clear span of 3.68m. The limestone pier, 1.60m wide and in the longitudinal axis 1.50m, were built above a pedestral, which was constructed of basalt cuboids. There is an inner offset of 5 cm all-around between pedestral and pier. This new aqueduct bridge is identical in line with the sluice stone already described by S. Kerner. Thus, the long-discussed location problem next to the documented aqueduct clarifies itself. Due to the age, the measurements and the lines of both aqueduct bridges, it can be assumed that they also led different waters to Gadara. Note G. Schumacher, Northern Ajlun (1890) "Aquädukt entlang der römischen Straße“ and the two separate lines on the Gadara map.
While the southern aqueduct was able to carry the spring water of both Qanatsystems and then ended at the western abutment at the sluice stone lying in situ, the water of Schumacher’s channel system seems very plausible for the well-known northern aqueduct bridge. Especially since the cross section exposed by S.Kerner corresponds exactly with the dimensions given by G. Schumacher. The width of the Kerner aqueduct bridge of 3.20m mentioned in various literature and graphically drawn, is based either on transposed digits, or a misunderstanding; because, as the photos by S.Kerner himself unambiguously show and confirm the metrological evaluation, the real width of this bridge and thus also of the guided water canal is pretty accurate 2,38m. Here, not only the ratios of height and width of the double shell exactly match the specifications of G. Schumacher for the gutters along the road, but also the width of the flow channel is identical except for the semicircular brickwork.

The length of the southern aqueduct bridge was about 148m, that of the northern bridge about 170 m.
The height at the entrance to the city system (position of the sluice stone) was 352.18 + 0.50m asl (positive step by Opus Cementicium) for the southern older bridge and about 352.00m asl for the exposed floating level of the northern Kerner aqueduct.
The width of the gutter at the sluice stone corresponds for the southern bridge, not only to G. Schumacher’s measurements documented on the Jisr el Mesari; but also corresponds to my calculation of the amount of water passing through the building. This calculation was confirmed by P. Keilholz using the calculation program Mike 11 and thus provides that this bridge was the real end of the Qanat Fir'aun’s long-distance water pipeline.

Conclusion: The newly discovered bridge can explain many of the previously unresolved problems, such as the exact guidance of the Qanat Fir'aun at the entrance of the Decapolis city Gadara, or the lateral offset of the sluice stone over the previously known bridge.
The southern aqueduct bridge, newly documented here, could have been used, even after increasing the amount of water, through modifications when the Qanat Fir'aun was put into operation.
It is particularly noteworthy that two complete or partially preserved bridge arches are hidden in the rubble of the slope. These aqueduct arches, together with those already described here, could give the most vivid and only aboveground remaining reference to the entire engineering achievement of the Qanat Firaun and thus, would be a new attraction in the archaeological ensemble of the decapolis city of Gadara.

About the distribution of water in Gadara, I refer to the publications of S.Kerner, O.Böser and especially P.Keilholz.
Get a small overview here.

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the remains.

About 55m south of the dugged geological trench researched by B. Lucke,

in the Wadi Queilbeh the tunnel of the Qanat Fir'aun emerges for the first time at the daylight since the Wadi esh Shellale Bridge, in order to cross the wadi via a 80 m long and max. 6m high bridge.
B.Lucke could prove with his geological trench, that the Wadi bottom has been filled up , by several floodings or maybe also the collapsed aqueduct portion in this area, with sand and gravel, until 3,5m unto the Level of today.
Analogous to other aqueducts and similar widths, probably only one Arch with a clear span of 4.50m was present. The height of the Channel Bottom was 419.70 m asl.
After that, the aqueduct has distribute his water, still at the western side of the wadi area or latest in the directly adjacent section of the tunnel. A part of the water went to a side channel to Abila of the Decapolis, and the other one continues across many valleys to Gadara.
As geological investigations of the Yarmuok University showed, abutment remains of the bridge still exist in the wadi underground. Some hewn Blocks can be seen partly sunken in the soil of Wadi.
In addition, the southeastern mouth of the tunnel is accessible. As a result, both the location and height of the construction is proved. It can be assumed that at the northwest side, as well as in the Wadi esh Shellale, a basin was once arranged, which has functioned as a settling-basin and also as transfer-basin for the derivation to Abila. This Water was then led through the so-called "Upper Tunnel" to the city area of the decapolis metropolis. Another Aqueduct channel led to the urban area within a slightly deeper horizon, from the source, Ain Queilbeh.
From the beginning of the Hellenistic era to the important episcopal city in Byzantine times, the development of the city area always depended on these water supply systems. Thus, numerous maintenance measures of the systems prove their enormous importance.
The fact that Abila, one of the not explicitly mentioned main places of the region, of Ampeloessa was, described in the enumeration of Pliny within the decapolis, will be explained within the subpage - The Decapolis - .

Further evidence from carried out diggings suggests that the bridge was damaged during a strong earthquake in July 551 AD and the water flushed the valley. However, according to current geological discoveries by B. Lucke, this was not the decisive factor for the several soil changes in the Wadi Queilbeh including the adjoining slopes. For further interesting research results in this context, I refer to B. Lucke & C. Schmidt - Journal of Geomorphology Vol.61.
Once again, an old black and white image helps to analyze the further course (this time: provided by the Dept. of Geography / Jor.). Many of the construction shafts, which are still visible, could be verified on site, though many are completly closed, simply covered, or filled up with concrete. Maybe also some of them are undiscovered in the enclosed plantings of the olive groves.
Particularly noteworthy at this point, is the old road to Abila routed from the main road connection and still awaits further exploration.

Find out more about the course of the Qanat Fir'aun in the direction of Gadara here.

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the wadi crossing.

This riverbed-crossing structure can only be verified by indications.

The facts show incoming and outgoing construction shafts with a height of the aqueduct flowing level of approx. 421 m asl. Here, the Wadi el Abdi had to be crossed. From the distances of the nearest localized construction shafts, a route in the area southwest of the current road crossing al Al - Kharja at a promontory Wadi upwards (about 150m) can be determined.
After surveying the existing road and surrounding area in 2007 and 2009 it was clearly proved, that a bridge of about 80m in length had to be built into the wadi bed or into an artificial sill, just after a natural vertical drop of the river bed, due to this altitude. The satellite image from spring in 2009 on the left shows around the red marked Wadi Crossing, a headland heavily moistened through a different type of soil. It is very likely that the backwater creates such an effect through the remains of the still existing crossing in connection with the soil material in the area of that threshold.

A tunnel construction which would have crossed the wadi much further upstream than mines driven tunnel, is unlikely due to the construction shafts. The same applies to a bridge, which should have been built much further undercurrent of the Wadis with a necessary clear span as a flood passage and a resulting overall height.

In summary, it should be noted that at the marked point, additional geophysical methods can prove the exact location and size of the structure.
Within close proximity, the Khirbet el Abdi exist next to the construction shafts, which overlook the entrance to the lower Wadi esh shellale.
In the following, the aqueduct with construction shafts undercuts the high plateau in the direction of Kharja at a greater distance.

Further information about the section between Al Al and Kharja can be found here.

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the rivercrossing.

Kanatir fok Kanatir,

this is how Consul Wetzstein was explained that such a special contoured bridge crosses the Wadi esh Shellale. This is Arabic and means, arch over arch (unfortunately only the western river Bridge pier remained), the tunnel entrances east and west and a 12 m long plateau, which was the basis of the western abutment and a water settling basin.
During S. Mittmann’s excavation campaign on Khirbet ez Zeraqon, it was presumed that the ruins, or rather the foundations of the bridge, belong to a roman road. Already in 2002 and 2003, the team of the BAI determined by means of geophysical analyses and extensive surveys that both the investigated construction shafts and the bridge belonged rather to the Roman period than to the Early Bronze Age of the Khirbet ez Zeraqon. The project Qanat Fir'aun can basically only be owed to Prof. H. Fahlbusch from Luebeck, who after my first given references to Consul Wetzstein´s Book to him, also believed in an aqueduct. So he decided in 2003 to hand over this project proposal to the University of Darmstadt under the direction of the recognized hydrotechnical professor M. Döring.
In fact, after initial investigations, it became clear that the surveyed remains was really, at roman times an aqueduct bridge.

In several publications, the approx. 5 x 2.50 large brickwork arranged at a distance of 18-22m upstream were interpreted as an abutment of a operation bridge. In the current book about the aqueduct, the unfortunately incomprehensible thesis of an aqueduct bridge from construction phase I is represented. Neither by the much lower altitude of these ruins (which can be seen on those pictures), nor by on-or outgoing construction shafts, can this statement be proven.
In both structures, the river side wall was already broken in 2003, the stretcher and header construction with individual sections, clearly does not extrapolate to a pillar-like construction. The "operation bridge" specified by Böser/Otto at the first shot with a width of 44m clear spade was also represented by M.Döring in 2004. Böser/Otto, however, did not know the real structure on the eastern slope and constructed from the position of the heap of debris a virtual abutment lying parallel to the structure on the west side with the same altitude (therefore also 44m clear spade). However, according to my surveys from 2003 carried out for the BAI Wuppertal, it can be clearly shown that both structures have a clear spade of 40.78 m and the eastern side is 1.80 lower than the western one. Also, both structures are not aligned parallel to one another.

Based on the means of the own taken measurements of total 5000 points, in close proximity of the bridge and by evaluating the images, the following can be constrained for the actual aqueduct bridge:
The lower bridge level stood on 5.50m wide foundations (as the western river Bridge pier still proves), the bridge structure tapered out to about 3.0m wide in the second Level. The exact width of the specus is correspondingly smaller.
The clear span of the main arch can be determined to 10.5-11.0 m by regarding the remaining Bridge pier and the foundations of its opposit in situ.
The suggestion, made by S. Mittmann in 1999, that four to five arches in the lower level and nine in the upper one has existed once a time, can’t be proven.
After the analysis of the structure’s remains on the eastern slope of the Wadi, of the main arch and his clear span, results the height relations (height of the level - vault and low coverage - 1/2 clear span = remaining pier height). In addition to the western and eastern river Bridge piers, only two defined structures on the eastern slope (arch lower level and abutment second level) and on the western slope are clearly visible. (height of the first mentioned 414m asl and 418m asl of the last one mentioned, everything else is hidden in the rubble) At the western end of the bridge, the remaining stone plateau ends to the riverside direction with an arch of the upper row.

This stone plateau widened to 3.70m, carried a settling and transfer basin. It should also be noted that as a rule for structural reasons, the pier position of the upper row of arches were built directly above the pillars, symmetricaly to each other, or over the apex of the underlying arch. Thus, the forces could be derived directly into the arch (pressure on the apex) or just into the piers below. In addition, the same arch spans were important as construction principles. Thus, the very shortaged and expensive resource wood could be used effectively again for the formwork.
To this, the model created on the computer:

The total length, including the basin located at the western abutment, from mouth hole to the other mouth hole of the aqueduct tunnel , was 121m (at the height of the channel bottom the length was 117,03m). The height level of this channel at the western mouth hole is calculated to 426,53m asl.
The total height up to the channel above the wadi bed is 18.25m with the add of the height of the remaining specus and sidewalls of the channel from the channel bottom, is this a complete height of 19,75m (~ 1.50m including cover).
The flow width in the continuing tunnel section was in real ~ 90cm, as the sluice stones at the end of the transfer basin are no longer available is a definitive statement on this, no longer possible, but it was max. two big cubits, which corresponds to ~ 1.07m. According to those basic dimensions the mentioned settling basin was also carried out. Here it seems that special attention was paid to the perpendicularity towards the incoming and outgoing channel. This because that, on the southwest corner of the basin, the edge stone was cutted inside the basin, while at the northwest corner of the basin the opposit edge stone was cutted at the whole lenght to the adjacent stone . ( this one is stolen)

Also, many of the very regularly cut sandstone cuboids were exactly built after that cubit dimension (length often measured 107-108 cm with a width and height of 54.cm). In addition, there are also stone layers with foot and pace dimensions (2 1/2 feet).
The basin, which was 2.16 meters wide and presumably ~4.40 meters long at the western abutment, was sunken downwards by ~ 1.75 meters from the Channel bottom level. According to the measurements,it had a gradient of ~ 6.3% at the bottom against the flow direction of the aqueduct . At its lowest point, like in other discovered basins elsewhere, one or more cleaning openings certainly have had existed.

On the outlet side, the basin has a ca. 1.10 m x 0.55 m deep recess. Here was, like other basins in the literature, a regulation unit with one or more adjustable sluice gates. This recess is filled up with two fallen, or purposely outbroken stones. But those one are clearly not in situ there. Maybe there were also special cuttened Sluice Gate Blocks made from basalt, like at the end of the Gadara Aqueductbridge.
The fact that no one of the numerous researchers have recognized the basin as such, could be caused due the only rudimentary surrounding wall which still exists, and also because of the complete absence of the essential Opus Signinum, as a watertight plaster of such a basin. But looking closely at the overall situation and considering the details, a plausible solution can also be found for this. In the period self-observed by me between 2003-2010, construction material “in good condition”, with weights of several hundred kilograms per block, has "disappeared". In this case, as one can still recognize on some stone slabs of the basin-floor, a special form of the Opus Signinum, with inlayed cuttet stone of a rhomboid structure, has been installed. Either this served for the decoration, for the better cleaning, or for bridging the still visible bumps and joints of the basin floor. It seams clear that those 5-8 cm high stones could be substantially "easier and more efficient" stolen, than those mentioned above. But important is to pointed out, that this Stones left fine structure marks of waterproof mortar on the remaining stones.
Comparable mixed forms of the Opus Signinum also with stone forms as Opus Spicatum, or executed as Opus Sectile, can be found several times in the literature. (similarly, also ground area D in Abila). Likewise the technically identical and in principle similar execution of the basin is found, for example, at the Madradag aqueduct in Pergamon (compare also presentation of this basin by Garbrecht)

Individual surrounding stones with an hemispherical recesses suggest, that there may also have existed possibly a Nuria nearby the bridge, which raised the water of the Wadi esh Shellale to the height of the aqueduct when needed and supplemented this with it.
(Single-carousel: shellale-bruecke-plateau-ost-2003-k.jpg, mauerstruktur-west.jpg, shellale-bruecke8.jpg)
Such a waterwheel rotating on a large wooden beam is not unusual in the region and could possibly also explain the stone structures direct upstream of the bridge. I would be pleased to have a constructive discussion about this position. ;-)

Running along the western slope of the Wadi esh Shellale link to Wadi esh Shellale, the Qanat Fir'aun was led to the sources at Er-Rahub the "Cavea Roob" of Crusader times. here the link to the Cavea Roob / Ain Rahub

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the bridge.

in the village of Abou el Qantara, between Muzeirib in the north and At Turra in the south.

The Wadi passes a plain which is mentioned as the Medan plain in the literature of the 19th century. Countless caravans and traders rested here or pitched their camps outside the overcrowded Muzeirib. Therefore, the wadi ez Zedi in this area is also called Meddan ez Zedi and flows, after the numerous cataracts, at Tell esh Shehab on several steep falls into the upper reaches of the Yarmuk.

In the area of today's Abou el Qantara, the Qanat Fir'aun was very probably located within a closed pressure pipe. This is indicated by the inlet basin in the area of the today’s school in Abu el Qantara north of the river, as well as a distribution building built in the 18th century south of the river. This assumption is also based on many reports from travelers, who speak of strongly fluctuating water levels in this area, but who do not mention any of the proven route which exactly run along here or any aboveground structures or ruins. As evidenced in many wadi- or valley crossings for this aqueduct, an artificial vertical drop was often created in the course of the river or the pressure pipe elements were built between the basalt cliffs.

Here in Abou el Qantara and for the first time again, basalt bedrocks move closer together in the terrain formation, and the power of the flowing water is revealed in narrow meanders. Since the height relations would have required at least a 600m long unpressurized bridge (the statement of 300m, in the book Wasser für die Dekapolis , unfortunately neither corresponds to the heights specified there, nor the real topography). Due to the reason that this bridge can’t neither be proven by numerous travel reports nor by ruins etc., the logic leaves no other conclusion than a pressure line . A pressure line in the described and contemplated form is also nothing unusual, considering that the settlement hill of the Decapolis city Hippos and parts of Gadara were supplied with water. In addition, the proven, especially in the winter months occurring floods, upper flow of the crossing, meant a permanent risk of backwater and damage. This could be built in an open pit construction of 480m and is therefore the safest and simplest construction for this topography. For the owner, all the water could easily drained via max. two large basalt pipes comparable to those just mentioned.

The name of the village which was first mentioned on maps from 1930(there just only 2 houses were marked) has the Meaning of "Father of a vaulted structure. (probably the inlet structure at the school and the following pressure line)

Dates:
Inlet approx. 436,5m asl, spout 435,5m asl, maximum height of the siphon 7m. Length in 3D: 480m

The further course of the Qanat Fir'aun can be found at "The Turra Plain".

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the building.

This bridge in the course of the old Hadj Street (also King's Road) was not an aqueduct Bridge.

Located just east of the old main road, this bridge was the only passable route in the vicinity from north to south, especially during the winter time or raining season.
Johann Ludwig Burghardt describes in 1822 the following:

"Wady Om El Dhan [Meddan], coming from the eastward, with a bridge over it, built by Djezzar Pasha. In winter this generally proves a very difficult passage to the Hadj, on account of the swampy ground, and the peasants of the adjacent villages are, in consequence, obliged to cover the road with a thick layer of straw. "

The complete bridge, according to G. Schumacher's description, was 25,30m long and 11,10m wide. It had a main and two secondary openings. The height was, according to the given sketch, 4m above ground. Unfortunately, the bridge, which at that time had already partially disintegrated, is can only be located in ruins nowadays. The satellite image on the left shows south abutment of the bridge which clearly stands out by shadows. The bridge had a great significance for the travelers of those centuries. Due to the today’s boarder, the road between Syria and Jordan does no longer exists. The important trade route from ancient times, was replaced by the border crossings Dera'a and Nasib.

Clermond-Ganneau describes a nearly identical bridge with the same lion / predator ornamentation in Lod, the ancient Lydda. This bridge was unusually wide, with 13m wide in 30m length. It also had three arches and was built according to the inscription of the 13th century. Whether, as Burckhardt reports, the Meddan-ez Zedi Bridge dates back to the time of Jezzar Pasha (circa 1750-1800), is at least questionable due to the poor building construction which was already reported that time. In comparison to each other, the principles and relations of height above ground and arch span, become clear.
Due to the much greater height of over 7m, the bow spans in Lydda were 6,50m and 5m. At the Meddan ez Zedi bridge, these clear spans were 3.70m and 3.60m even both bridges were nearly of equal length.

For information about the section of the tunnel between Dera'a and Muzeirib / Abou el Qanatarah, please see here (link to the Aqueduct Bridge and the tunnel section in Wadi ez Zedi.) You will also find information about the location of the real aqueduct bridge in the course of the Qanat Fir'aun in Wadi Meddan ez Zedi.

Here you can see the exact geolocation of Hadj Bridge.

, is bridged in Dera'a by natural stone arches.

At this point, an aqueduct sub channel of the Qanat Fir'aun was led over the Wadi Zedi. This
channel functioned as a pressure pipe and can nowadays only be detected by a short vertical pipe section in the northern slope of El Kerak hill. Using GPS and by searching for the suspected contour line, it was coincidentally, that I could find that pipe section in 2010 in a newly broken trench.
Further information about the pressure pipe is available here.
As G. Schumacher already had noted, the bridge was probably completely renovated or restored after the 7th century. This is indicated by a stone built upside down under an arch and with a Christian inscription, which would certainly, if at all during the Christian era of the city, not have been used. See also G. Schumacher's illustration Fig. 49 with the note A in the impost area of the bow. (below)

Nowadays, only four of the five described arches are visible or at least partly flown through. The eastern parapet, described by Wetzstein and Schumacher, was demolished without residues and replaced by double-sided narrow parapets to surround the street. In this respect, it is unfortunately no longer comprehensible, whether more pipes or depths within the bridge / parapet had existed.
The above-mentioned spolia, probably with a Christian inscription, can no longer be found in this area due to silting up of the riverbed. The water level recorded in 2009 and 2010 along with the silting up, means that not even the imposts of the arches nor the piles are visible.
Equally incomprehensible is the line drawn in G. Schumacher's ground map / layout plan of the bridge, which shows the aqueduct along the entire length on the western side of the plan as a dashed line. Were there already hints on another pressure pipe?

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the building.

A reconstruction of the bridge over the Zedi east of Deraa from northwest.

The basis for this were the sketches made by G. Schumacher (1898, Der südliche Basan) and the resulting pier positions of the bridge. In conjunction with this description and the 3D terrain model, I have created the reconstruction in February 2009. (see below)
Here, general "Roman building Rules" were also included in the CAD sketch. The thickness of the arch was usually 1 : 10 of the clear span of the arch. As a rule, the pillars or abutments jumped towards the imposts of the arch inwards and the ratio of the pier thickness to the clear span of the arch was usually 1 : 3. (In later aqueducts or lower arches also pillar ratios of 1 : 4 - 1 : 6 of the clear span of the arch were reached). Above a maximum height of 30m above the ground , a third level of arches was built almost unanimously, only because of static reasons. The river piers, which were extended after undercurrent and lengthened with retaining walls (which forced the Zedi river to run between those piers even in the winter months), described by G. Schumacher, were significant at the Jisr el Mesari.

In addition to the Schumacher map, you can see, in the middle of the following photo, the remains of the abutment between the waterfront trees on the west bank. A visualization shows the bridge from northwest in real altitude relation to the water level of the dam.

The procedure for the exact retrieval of the structure:

According to the contour lines of the 3D model and the (but not correct) north direction of G. Schumacher's layout sketch, the area was walked along for several times; but neither remains of abutments nor other indications could be found in 2009 and 2010. This was not surprising, because the real place is located about 350m north of the assumed place. I found the solution by georeferencing old satellite imagery, the map of 1898, and various satellite imagery provided by Google and NASA. The contours of the basalt cliffs and the position of the bridge are identical in all figures. In addition, Google's 2016 footage shows that at low tide, the remains of the river pillar becomes visible. In sum and regarding my pictures with the remnants of the western abutment becoming visible through the waterfront trees, the position of the bridge can be clearly recorded. The visible structures on the aforementioned satellite imagery from 2015 also confirm the overall length of the bridge, as well as the distances given by G. Schumacher.

Arriving at an altitude of 533m asl, the aqueduct sinks in unverifiable cascades over a length of 260m to the beginning of the Jisr el Mesari. Here at the height of the flowing level of 526,5 m asl, the valley crossing has begun in a 50cm wide and, originally at least, 1.50 m high flow channel. Due to the previous steep crash and the change in direction by more than 90 °, there was certainly a pool segment located in front of the bridge, so that sediments could settle and, if necessary, a previous flow cross section could be transferred to the bridge. This bridge cross-section is identical to the bridge in Gadara and adequately sized for the captured water before Deraa. Unfortunately, all of the altitude details in the book "Wasser für die Dekapolis" are completely fictional and both in terms of values as well as the course, the gradient and the position of the bridge are demonstrably wrong.
Following the 526m asl contour line, the aqueduct runs around the peninsula towards the next sub-wadis and then runs from here west to Deraa. Here, it continues.

Already on the Roman road, several kilometers before the Jisr el Mesari, a pressure pipe branched off to Dera'a, find out more here

The most recent satellite images (autumn 2017) show that the residents have taken advantage of the remaining pillar and, by building an eastern abutment, have built a simple bridge to the peninsula. However and as a result, the last remnants of this important building will get lost.

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the bridge.

"a long, beautifully conservated river bridge"

This description of Consul Wetzstein from his travelogue of 1860 has unfortunately nothing in common with the current state. Although it is possible to define the former location of the bridge in the area of a concrete factory, it is impossible to see any old structures in the extensively altered and overbuilt area. The height of the flowing Level (channel bottom) above sea Level (asl) was here at ... 542.5m asl.

Unfortunately, the picture of the AWM on the left does not represent the bridge described by Wetzstein, but it conveys a real impression of the Bridge, which still had existed in the 19th century.

The Qanat Fir'aun leads in the west-southwest direction to the first completely reconstructed Jisr el Mesari bridge. We owe the first mention of the bridge to G. Schumacher. Click here for the next section of the Qanat Fir'aun "it will guide you to the northeast of Dera'a."

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the area.

U. J. Seetzen first described this bridge in 1805.

Largely intact at that time, nothing of the bridge can be found nowadays. However, the upper and lower incoming and outgoing substructions, which were built without arches, still exist. It is striking and can be repeatedly noted in the course of the aqueduct that the bridge was built right-angled to the course of the river. For this purpose, a twofold change of direction was necessary in order to get the necessary orientation of that course back.
As observed on Wadi Ezra, the bridge probably still existed in parts in the 80s of the 20th century. Here and there, the aqueduct was destroyed in favor of a wastewater route which was installed underground along the riverbank. (There are inspection shafts at regular intervals.)

According to the literature, the bridge originally had seven (Wetzstein), at Buckingham over fourteen, arches. Seetzen probably calls 2x7 correctly, which in turn suggests that a middle part was already collapsed at that point. The maximum height above ground was about 7m. The aqueduct bridge with ten arches mentioned by Consul Wetzstein, must have been within a side branch towards Kh. El Ghazale, whose antique name is unfortunately not known.
Once again, it was a bridge corpus made out of two basalt shells with a Opus Cementitium core. The flow width was one cubit, which corresponds in that room to about 53cm.
The height of the aqueduct channel was 548m asl.

The Qanat Fir'aun leads further south. You will get more information about the following section here.

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the bridge.

which is the only wadi of the Qanat Fir'aun still existing in parts.

Within the search for the aqueduct route of the Qanat Fir'aun, I was able to develop, in the years from 2007-2009, a closed three-dimensional terrain model. Starting from the dam discovered in Dilli in 2007, its altitude and other remnants of the aqueduct taken from maps, resulting compulsory points lead in further research to presumable lines of the overall route.
By superimposing satellite images of different ages, further structures could be associated to hitherto unknown aqueduct sections; already described ones could be detected again.
In the further analysis, a structure could be identified on the satellite images, which only could be interpreted with high probability as an aqueduct bridge.

In 2009, it was possible to visit this place east of today's city Sheik Mishkin. No roads were leading to that lost place, but we were able to reach the place by using Gps , walked along Paths and across Fields. So the theoretical work could be confirmed, by finding this Bridge.

The previously completely unknown bridge is about 135m long ,1.80m wide and build upon a Socket of a width of 2,10m. The Construction is made from a basalt shell construction, the Opus Implectum. In this case, it meant regular stone rows of basalt cuboids were built as outer formwork and then filled with Opus Cementitium and large Pebbles, after that both parts where compressed for higher solidity. The remaining structure, with a maximum height of about 8m between the Specus and the wadi bed, has in parts still a 1 ptolemaic cubit wide flow channel (~53.2cm, this corresponds also nearly the much older large Syrian cubit) and was made of hydraulic Concret. (Opus Signinum). So the total hight over the River bed was around 9,50m. During the centuries, floodings and earthquakes has partly destroyed the bridge in the middle,this collapse is about 27 meters wide. Downstreams no stones of the fallen vaults were found, so that on the basis of the height of the bridge, the necessary vault thickness and coverage to the lower edge of the specus could be reconstructed (the actually water - bearing corpus of the aqueduct). It must have been 3 vaults (semicircular arches) with a wide of about 6 to 7m and a thickness of about 50-60 cm. Neither Bridge imposts nor vossoir stones could be found in the brief time. The condition of the front walls in the further course is conceivably bad, due to the reason that the accurately cutted and partially embossed basalt cuboids of the outer shell are still broken out and reused by local shepherds and beduins for enclosures and huts.
In southern direction, the course of the aqueduct could still be documented on the ground surface over a length of 200m, after that the structure could not be found anymore in the ploughed acre.

On the northern side, the incoming route cann't be followed after a bend to northwestern direction at the end of the bridge. However, on the northwestern side downstream at about 40 m distance, a weathered stone setting was found, which can be interpreted as an exedra of a small water sanctuary due to its semicircular shape and accented edges. The assumption that with high probability and in close proximity to the bridge a ford existed, can be confirmed by a, still in the bottom contour recognizable, 20x20m large, almost square structure downstream of the bridge at the southwestern end.

This structure which was aligned direct next to the bridge, formed a small rectangular plateau. Scattered Terra Sigilata (widely used in the Roman military stoneware, usually with a shiny red surface) may indicate a small fort, which served as a protection for the aqueduct as well as for the ford.
A few kilometers north-northwest of the bridge, a comparable situation of a fort directly at the aqueduct line, could be also verified by using satellite images.

The significance of this newly discovered aqueduct bridge is that, that it is the only surviving remains of this Aqueduct of this complexity and height. Many other shorter areas of the aqueduct, which were built on grade, or only 1 or 2 meters above the terrain along the contour lines, are no longer in situ, had been rebuilt, removed or plowed away. In the context of the probable small nymphaeum and the remains of the fort, the local situation is certainly a worthwhile object for future research, in case the political conditions allow it and the destruction will not proceed.
The Qanat Fir'aun leads further south. You will get more information about the following section here.

Here you can see the exact geolocation of the bridge.

Here you will find information about the bridges in the course of the Qanat Fir'aun.

The bridges were named after the wadis which needed to be crossed or to the respective local situation. The naming of the wadis is uniform according to the maps of the German Palestine Association (DPV) created by G. Schumacher. These maps still have the highest density of information in terms of names and locations. Moreover, over the past 100 years, the place names have either gotten lost, or the old place names, as often verifiable, have been assigned to the next settlement, even if they are several kilometers away from the place of origin.
Furthermore, you find the geolocations in the maps. The bridges also include those buildings crossing the Wadis, which were built as siphon pipes right behind a vertical drop below the river level.

About the presumed procedures:

It must be noted that the structures are usually completely dilapidated, grounded, or destroyed – as it happened to the reservoir at Jisr el Mesari. However, the collection of descriptions from ancient literature, the comparison by using height models - according to the performed high-precision surveying and the SRTM data of NASA -, as well as the "on-site situation" led to plausible statements and reconstructions.
Due to the foundation remains of the abutments and pillars, it is also possible to estimate building details with high reliability. Sometimes, even without any groundbreaking, the statements and theories made here were confirmed. Thus, the previously unknown Wadi Ezra aqueduct bridge, which I found via satellite imagery, could be searched by using GPS and found in the locality. Another of these rare cases deals with the large aqueduct bridge Jisr el Mesari, which was previously located and exactly reconstructed based on elevation data and my analyses. Most recent Google earth satellite images show that it can be found exactly at this point in the currently empty reservoir area east of Dera'a, by regarding the visible remnants of the western abutment and the river pier already described by G. Schumacher.

All these findings are verifiable and, of course, serve as a basis for further solutions.

According to the current state of knowledge, the Roman engineers had to consider the following situation:

1. The aqueduct base is deeper than 4m below ground. In this case, it was tunnelled in a mining way, due to the reason that the tunnel was regarded as static stable because of its overburden and geological overall situation.
2. The aqueduct base is between 4m below ground and the top of the terrain. Here, a channel was built in open construction or rather beaten into the pending rock and covered in a row, vaulted or rather still showered. Nowadays while regarding the ground or aerial photos, mostly ground depressions are to be found, which developed by the subsequent compaction of the backfilling. Fouling features, which can be found for longer periods in other areas, can only be seen in Syria and Jordan at very specific, limited times of the year.
   2.1 A special case could be observed especially here at the Qanat Fir'aun. If the karstified rock did not provide static strength for a tunnel, or if a periodic water-bearing wadi / sink had to be crossed and the aqueduct’s floating level was only up to max. 5m below the top of the terrain, an artificial vertical drop was probably built with a surface similar to a water structure pavement. The aqueduct route was embedded in that vertical drop. In this way, accumulating surface water was drained over the apex of the aqueduct route and the optimal route could be ensured here as well. In addition, a rinsing in the Wadibed and its associated dangers of a tunnel break was avoided.
3. The route runs above ground on substructures (no real bridge ;-)) with a floating level of max. 2.5m above ground. In this case, vault openings were intentionally omitted, since the construction and formwork requirements would have been much higher and the simpler and faster construction of a closed substructure was preferred.
4. At flow level heights between 2.5-3m above ground a brook / wadi is usually crossed. In addition, clear widths from 3m and clear heights usually greater than 2m resulted from common Roman arch forms.
5. In the case of a route higher than 12m above ground, not only several openings are obligatory, but also two rows of sheets have been made one above the other. With the Zeidi-bridge Jisr el Mesari it can be undoubtedly assumed that it is a bridge consisting of three rows of arches; because and according to Gottlieb Schumacher’s specifications it can be assumed as well that the complete height of the bridge was 37m.
6. Pressure lines should also be considered as exceptional cases. Here, the premise was to reach the goal. In terms of height, it was possible to reach buildings which, in addition to a depression, were also separated from the supply line by existing structures or incalculable floodplains. Both occur in the Qanat Fir'aun. On the one hand, the accessibility of the so-called "Hammam Siknany", a Roman nymphaeum of the Kalybe type, is only possible via a pressure pipe, as this is the only way to reach the required height. On the other hand, the incoming aqueduct, at today's Abu el Qantara, was designed as a floor-level channel. According to the bottom of the aqueduct, a more than 600m long substructure with a max. height of 4m would have had built. Here, however, are various cataracts of Wadi Meddan ez Zeidi which upper stream could have led to floods and flash floods.
   As a result, a pressure pipeline, which nowadays can be still verified via the inlet and outlet basin, was constructed. This allowed the all-winter masses of water to drain off the pressure line which laid between the basalt rocks. In this way, a possible accumulation of piers or substructures was avoided. Further information about these structures can be found on the individual subsites.

Considering the Qanat Fir’aun, it should be differentiated between those bridges:

• Valley bridges (up to 3-storey bridges with heights from 10m above the valley floor)
• Wadi-crossings (usually over 150m long bridges, which only have the necessary flood openings in order to cross the river)
• bridges led in vertical drops of the riverbed, (from the proven height level as "normal" tunnel crossing of a wadi; to be excluded and due to the incoming and continuing shafts / substructures positionally clearly locatable buildings) which run just below the present level of the wadis.
• Pressure line / siphon bridges (indicated by indications and heights, characterized by missing building remains, but by existing pools / and / or literature descriptions verified aqueduct route)

For further and additional information you can also use the main menu, or the full-text search, via the main menu "endeavor" ☺️

The order of the bridges corresponds to the position in the course of the aqueduct route. In the content area (right) of each subpage, you also find a link to the directly following Qanat Fir'aun section, regardless of whether it is a bridge, substructure or tunnel.

Next to it, you see a visualization of the Wadi esh Shellale Bridge, based on satellite images (Google), SRTM elevation data (NASA JPL) and survey data from 2003 (Kleb / BAI Wuppertal)