A discourse of the terrestrial paradise aiming at a more probable discovery of the true situation of that happy place of our first parents habitation / by Marmaduke Carver ...

CHAP. X.

A farther Prosecution of the same Argu∣ment, and this Stream found at last (sutably to Moses's Description) to be Gihon.

AND now the knot is untied, and both the Head and Out-let of this River is discovered, between which so large a space of ground is interposed, that we may well imagine that in so long a Course it receiveth other waters into it besides those of its own Chanel. And so indeed it doth; for it taketh in the River Choaspes out of Media, also Eulaeus, and out of Susiana another Branch of Tigris, of which we shall speak afterwards. And thus much Strabo hath observed out of Polycletus, who affirmed, Choaspem, & Eulaeum, & Tigrim in Lacum quendam confluere, atque ex eo indè in Mare exire; yet so, as both they, and all other Rivers which they take into them, first meet together in one conjoyned Chanel, which carrieth the name of Tigris; for so he immediately notes that other had affirmed: Sunt qui affirment flumina omnia quae Susiam pervadunt, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in unum Tigridis alveum illabi. And hence proceeded that diffe∣rence among Authors, some ascribing that to one of these Rivers which others ascribe unto another: as, (Ex. gr.) that high esteem which the Persian Kings made of the wa∣ters of Choaspes is by some ascribed to Eu∣laeus, * 1.1 by others to Danubius; for so Giral∣dus, and out of him Ortelius, Tab. Daciae & Moesiae, hath observed, Babylonios Reges ex Danubio (sive Istro) aquas inter gazas re∣posuisse; De Diis Syntag. 17. Which is a remarkable passage, and gives us full assurance of the Course of this River as we have described it. For this Danubius was not Ister, (as they falsly imagine) but the same formerly spoken of, which others have called Diavas, Dijabis, Adiavas, and (Virgil and Plutarch) Hydaspis. But if any haply doubt whether Plutarch's Hy∣daspis were the same with this, because he saith it was fluvius Indiae; they are to note, that the name of India is given by good Authors to divers other Countries besides that famous one vulgarly known by this name in the East: for (to omit examples not so nearly relating to our purpose) the Regions of Assyria and Susiana are (if I mistake not) by the Writers of the Empe∣rour

Trajan's Life called India. Eutrop. Bre∣viar. l. 8. relating his Conquest of those parts, sets it down thus: Seleuciam & Ctesiphontem, Babylonem & Edessios vicit ac tenuit usque ad Indiae fines, & Mare Rubrum accessit: atque ibi tres Provin∣cias fecit, Armeniam, Assyriam, Mesopo∣tamiam, cum his gentibus quae Macedenam attingunt. But none ever affirmed that Trajan conquered the East-Indies. For though, in emulation of Alexander, he rigg'd a Navy in the Persian Gulf, (which Eutrop. (with others) calls Mare rubrum) with a purpose to assault those parts; yet it doth not appear that ever he landed his Army there, having received intelligence, while he was yet in his Voiage, that these Countries had revolted; which made him speedily return to settle those parts, as accordingly he did, and after reduced them into the form of Provinces, as Dion, Cassi∣odorus, &c. testifie with Eutropius. Or if this Testimony be not sufficient, we have another beyond all exception, and that is the Testimony of Nicephorus, who con∣fidently calls Adiabene an Indian Region. Hist. Ecclesiast. l. 9. c. 18. Adiabene verò Regio est Indica ampla & celebris. And hence Theophilus (a famous man born

in this Countrey, and while he was but yet a youth sent Hostage by the Adiabenians to the Emperour Constantine, and by him sent back again as his Embassadour into those Eastern Countries, where he conver∣ted many to the Christian Faith) was by the men of that age usually surnamed Theophi∣lus Indus. Id. ibid. And for the same rea∣son (I think) it was that this same River also got the surname of Indus: for so Plu∣tarch also (though he give another fabulous reason of this Name, yet) plainly testifies that it was called Indus; loc. citat. Which is another great stumbling-block in his Commentator's way, and is not indeed easily to be removed but by the help of this ob∣servation. Assuredly they that fetched the Spring of the River Indus out of the Mountains of Armenia, could mean no other River but this: and that some have done this appears by the Testimony of Sa∣bellicus, Ennead. l. 1. who accordingly af∣firms it; Indus in Armeniae montibus oritur. And we have farther assurance that this was the River, by the Testimony of Dionysius Periegetes, who mentioneth a River under this name running into Choaspes, (or ra∣ther taking in the Stream of Choaspes into its Chanel) and with it watering the whole

Region of Susiana. These are his words in Periegesi,

—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 * 1.2

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And may we not well suppose that this was the remaining Stream of that famous Ri∣ver Gyndes, which Cyrus in his march from Persia towards Babylon cut into so many pieces, because it had drowned one of his beloved white Horses that drew in his Cha∣riot, as it is related by Herodotus l. 1. n. 189, 190. and after him by Seneca De Ira, l. 3. 6. 21? Truely the circumstances of the Story agree so well to this River, (besides the affinity of the Names) that if it were not this, we cannot well imagine where to find it. Indeed it might move some scru∣ple, that Herodotus finds the Spring of this River in Matiana, if we had not observed how confused and large the notion of Mati∣ana is in his Geography; so as it may well be extended even to that place where we also believe the Fountain of this River to be. Besides, it is no unusual thing with Herodo∣tus to be overtaken with that vulgar Er∣rour, which we have observed to be com∣mon to him with others, to mistake adven∣titious In-lets for the native and original Streams of Rivers. But Stephanus speaks

full as much to our purpose as we desire: for he (whence-soever he had it) going about to relate the famed story of Gyndes, (in voce Gyndes) prefaceth it with such a De∣scription of the River as sets it right with our Observation; for thus he writes: Gyn∣des, Assyriorum fluvius maximus secun∣dùm Euphratem. Is cùm Cyri impetum, &c. Whether or no this River were as great as he makes it, (as like enough it might be) yet undoubtedly, if it were a River of Assy∣ria, it could be no other then this that we have described. Others again have called this River Cydnus, and it appears to be the same by the Course that it runs, and Fall in like manner into the River Choaspes, (or Reception of it rather) with whose con∣joyned waters it crosseth the Eastern bor∣ders of Assyria; yet so, as in the way it may seem to shed out of it a little Stream, which falls into that branch of Tigris, that after we shall speak of, not far from the Rivers Lycus and Caprus: the like where∣to being related by Pliny and others of the Fall of Choaspes in like manner into Tigris, it might well enough be the same, these two Rivers having before conjoyned their waters. And the observation of this is useful, to reconcile some differences to be

found in Historians in relating the Battel at Arbela. For Q. Curtius l. 4. saith, that when Darius, being put to flight, was glad to shift for himself, Paucis fugae comitibus, ad Lycum amnem contenderet, quo trajecto, dubitavit an solveret pontem, &c. Arri∣anus De Expedit. Alex. l. 4. seems to call it Bumadus, which is observed to be the same River which Ptolemy calls Caprus. But Justin plainly calls it Cydnus, Histor. l. 11. Suadentibus deinde quibusdam, ut pons Cydni fluminis ad iter hostium im∣pediendum intercluderetur, non ità saluti suae velle consultum ait, ut tot millia socio∣rum hostibus objiciat: debere & aliis fugae viam patere, quae patuerit sibi. And from thence (no doubt) Orosius took an occasi∣on of that gross Errour, when, dreaming of no other Cydnus then that which run∣neth through Cilicia into the Syrian Sea, he took boldness to write, that the last Bat∣tel betwixt Alexander and Darius was at Tarsus; Histor. l. 3. c. 17. And the like mistake, arising from a like misprision, oc∣casioned other Learned men to discredit another Story concerning this River, re∣ported by an eye-witness out of his own knowledge. This was Diotimus, Em∣bassadour from the State of Athens to the

Persian, who delivered it with his own mouth to Eratosthenes, from whom Strabo thus relates it, Geog. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Diotimum Strombichi filium, ducem Le∣gationis Atheniensium, è Cilicia adverso flumine Cydno in Choaspin fluvium na∣vigâsse, qui Susa alluit, ac XL dierum spa∣tio Susa pervenisse; idque ipsum sibi narrâsse Diotimum. Though Eratosthenes had no just cause to except against the Cre∣dit of the Relator; yet he confesses the Relation it self seemed very incredible unto him, because he could not conceive how Cydnus could possibly flow under Euphrates and Tigris, to fall into Choaspes. But if there were not onely a double Cydnus (as by this may sufficiently appear) but also a double Cilicia, (and one of them at the very place where Diotimus took Barge) then (I hope) this wonder will cease. And that there was so, the Author of the Book of Judith may serve for a sufficient witness: for relating the march of Nabuchodonosor's Army under the conduct of Holophernes towards the West,

he tells us, Chap. 2. 21. that they went forth of Ninive three days journey towards the Plain of Bectileth, and pitched from Becti∣leth near the Mountain which is at the left hand of the upper Cilicia. It is more evi∣dent then can be denied, by the sequel of the history, that the Mountain which is here said to lie on the left hand (i. e. to the North) of the Region called Cilicia, was that part of Mount Taurus that boun∣ded Mesopotamia and Assyria on that side; and the Plains of Bectileth are supposed by Junius to be the Plains that lay about the City Bithias not far from Samosata. But whether that were so or no, (for it may well be doubted, because Bithias lay more then three daies journey from Ninive) yet cer∣tain it is, that hereabouts (and nearer Ni∣nive) Ptolemy sets the Region Calacine, which Strabo calls Chalachena, and both of them might as well every whit have called it Cilicia, (for so Pliny calls some of the Inhabitants of those parts Silices, or rather Cilices) which is indeed no other then that Region whither the captive Isra∣elites were translated when they were led away into Assyria, which 2 Kings 17. 6. is called Chalach, and had its denomination from the City Chalach built by Nimrod,

Gen. 10. 11. near (as may seem) to the ut∣most North-west border of Assyria, where we have formerly found this River to make its Division. And the reason why this Apo∣cryphal Author calls this Region the upper Cilicia was, (in all probability) with rela∣tion to that other better known in the West, that lay upon the Recess of the Syrian Sea; which had (no doubt) both its name, and the reason of it, from the same Hebrew Root with this. And so it appears plain∣ly, that howsoever this report of Diotimus hath hitherto passed for little better then a prodigious Lie, yet it is indeed a remarka∣ble Truth, and gives us full assurance of the Course of this River in the same man∣ner that we have set it. I might here far∣ther adde something concerning another name of this River, taken up (as seems) in after-times; and it is Zirma, Corma, Somra, and Samura. For Agathias finds it on the North of Assyria under the name of Zirma, Hist. l. 4. When it crosses the East of that Region, Tacitus calls it Corma, Annal. l. 12. When it runneth through Susiana, Benja∣min in Itiner. calls it Somra and Samura. Which to be the same River with this we speak of, appears by the answerable Course that it held. But having already tired my

pen in this tedious search, and come at length within view of that which was sought after, I willingly supersede from that needless labour. For who is there now that in those corrupted names of Cydnus, Indus, and Gyndes, may not easily discern the mis-shapen lineaments of the name Gihon, which Moses makes one of the four Rivers of Paradise? And if upon this ground we take leave to suppose the name Oena (which Ammianus gives it) to have been anciently either written or pronounced Geona, none (I think) can justly challenge it for an over-bold conjecture. However, certain it is that divers of the names given to this River have been by others applied to Gihon. Geog. Nub. expresly calls that River which others call Cydnus by the name of Gihon; as Scaliger also notes, who farther observes, that Gihon (a River run∣ning to the South of Hierusalem, 2 Chron. 32. 30.) is also by an equipollent Synonymon called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Siloach, Nehem. 3. 15. which by a little corruption in after-times became 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Jo. 9. 7. and being put into the form Pyhal becomes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shullach, Obad. v. 1. So near to which both in sound and signification is the ancient name which Plu∣tarch gives this River, that as they agreed

in the one, it may well be supposed they agreed in the other also. For the most an∣cient name of Tigris (as he tells us) was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or, as Eustathius in his Comment upon Dionys. Perieg. hath it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which to have continued to this upper Stream we speak of, called by Plutarch Hydaspis and Indus, appears by the same Authour, (cap. de Indo,) where he affirms it also to be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is either no more then the former radical word with a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hee∣mantick prefixed before; or else it is far∣ther compounded of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which in composi∣tion as well as construction becomes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and is by the Aegyptians (as Josephus) and the Syrians also (as Scaliger saith) pronounced 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and signifies Aqua, or Syn∣ecdochi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Fluvius; so that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is but aqua, or fluvius Solos or Solax, or ra∣ther Sulach: for that the true Radix of this word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which among other acceptions signifieth Dimittere and Dejicere, Plutarch himself hath put us out of doubt, who, undertaking to interpret this word, saith that it signifies 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And I doubt not but this was that River Silus, which, meeting with the Streams of Eulaeus, ran together with it into the Sea. Indè flumen Silum à Montibus Persarum ve∣nientem

recipit, pòst in Mare emittit. D. Mar. Niger, Geograph. Asia Com. 5. Yea (that all occasion of doubt may be taken away) the famous name of Nilus (which was generally believed by the Ancients to be Gihon) is found also to be given to this River: For Joach. Vadianus hath obser∣ved, that from the time of Moses, even to the time of Alexander, Indus was gene∣rally believed to be Nilus. Upon presum∣ption whereof it was, that Alexander pre∣pared a Navy in Indus with a purpose to pass into Aegypt, as hoping by its Stream to sail into Nilus; as Strabo testifies Geog. l. 15. But herein was his mistake, that he sought that before him which was behind him, not knowing (as it seems) that that name was intended to this River, which by good authority we have already proved to be called Indus. The place of Vadia∣nus is in his Appendix, containing an ex∣plication of some places in his Commenta∣ries upon Mela, which, because it is per∣tinent to this purpose, we shall here describe in his own words. Sed de Indo, inquis, Moses non meminit. Geon enim, ut Augu∣stin. lib. super Gen. 8. interpretatur, Nilus est per omnem Aethiopiae terram fluens. Agnosco equidem Augustini interpretatio∣nem.

Constat tamen à vetustissimis, usque Alexandri & Artaxerxis tempora, dubita∣tum fuisse, diversúsne esset à Nilo Indus, an idem Amnis: id quod Aristoteles scri∣ptum reliquit, &, libro 15, memoriae pro∣didit gravis imprimis Author Strabo: ut rerum & humanarum & divinarum peri∣tissimum Mosen eâ causâ Indum praeteri∣isse existimare debeamus, quòd populari su∣orum temporum historiâ in Nili nomine In∣dum comprehendi videret. And (I think) Eucherius was of this mind, as he is quoted by August. Steuchus Eugub. Cosmopoeiâ in Gen. c. 2. Eucherius noster, vide quàm rectè, Phison ait est Ganges, qui nunc est Nilus. For Ganges with him is no other then Gyndes, (cut by Cyrus) even as it is noted in S. Austin also, relating that story De Mirabilib. S. Script. l. 2. in the Text it is called Gyndes, in the Margent Ganges; and was the same River with Indus; the names onely being differently pronounced by different Nations, as Epiphanius hath observed, lib. De 12 Gemmis. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Phison autem apud Graecos Indus, apud Barbaros Ganges vocatur. And that the name of Nilus should be given it, is nothing strange,

not onely in regard of the amplitude of its signification, (for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is no more then Tor∣rens or Rivus, and so may be indifferently applied to any River;) but also in regard of the great similitude that was betwixt that in Aegypt and this. For as that Nilus, not far from Memphis, parting it self into two main Branches, (out of which others were drawn) watered all that Countrey which from the form of the Greek letter is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: so this River also, dividing itself into two Streams, watereth the whole Land of Assyria. Sextus Rufus in Trajano; Pro∣vincias fecit Armeniam, Mesopotamiam, & Assyriam, quae inter Tigridem atque Eu∣phratem sita irriguis amnibus instar Ae∣gypti foecundatur. But above all other, the Testimony of Pausanias is most re∣markable, who hath delivered us an ancient Tradition of the Original of Nilus so fully consonant to what we have delivered, that it self alone may not unjustly be deemed sufficient to justifie all or most that hitherto we have observed. The place is in Co∣rinthiacis, sive lib. 2. Quin & Nilum fa∣ma est Euphratem esse, qui ubi Paludi im∣mersus diu latuerit, supra Aethiopas Nilus evadit. This is so exact a Commentary upon Moses, that no Divine (which I have

read) hath afforded us a better. For here Nilus, (that is, in the language of the Anci∣ents, Gihon, and was indeed a Stream of that River which vulgarly passed under the name of Tigris) is expresly affirmed to be the same with Euphrates; not onely be∣cause the name Perath was applied to it, (as hath been observed out of Hesychius) but because, as Moses affirms, they sprung to∣gether out of the same Fountain, and for some space ran so near together, that oft-times their waters touched each other; after which, separating themselves, this Ri∣ver dives under fenny Lakes and Marishes, (just as the fore-cited Authors write of Tigris) and then springing up again, it takes the name of Nilus, (saith Pausanias) and watereth the Land of the Aethiopians. Could any thing have been delivered more consonant to the Sacred Story then this? For is not this the very Characteristical note by which Moses describes this River to us? Gen. 2. 13. And the name of the second River is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole Land of Aethiopia, saith our English Translation, with the Septuagint and others. And they might well enough translate 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Aethiopia, it being well known and granted that

Cushites and Aethiopians are the same. Joseph. Antiq. Jud. l. 1. c. 7. Ex quatuor Chamae liberis, Chuso nihil detrimenti tempus attulit. Aethiopes enim, quibus praefuit, nunc quoque tam à seipsis quàm ab Asianis omnibus Chusaei nominan∣tur.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Aelian. Hist. var. l. 12. c. 40. Plin. l. 6. c. 27. p. 263.
• * 1.2

  Simul ad ortum Solis cunctae gentes, con∣cussae bello, quae inter Indum & Euphra∣tem amnes inclytos sunt; atque imperati Obsides Persarum Regi no∣mine Cos∣droe. Sex. Aur. Vi∣ctor, in vi∣ta Trajani.