250 Mr. Carter's "Remarks on Mr. Beke's Papers 



Euphrates*." What the single stream to the Delta was called, 

 whether by the name of the Tigris or of the Euphrates, does 

 not seem very important ; but notwithstanding some discre- 

 pancies, the conclusion from the above authorities surely is, 

 that they have at a very early period, and probably always, 

 united inland somewhere. Dr. Vincent (i.422.) says, " Khorna, 

 I am persuaded, was the grand confluence in all ages." But 

 the large and numerous canals cut in very early times about 

 this country, combined with the many streams of the Delta, 

 have given rise to misconceptions as to the true course of the 

 parent rivers. These streams offer the natural indications of 

 the commencement of the Delta below Bosra, (or Bossora, 

 about 70 miles from the sea,) where, as usual, from the want 

 of slope and momentum, the water begins to multiply its 

 channels. 



If, then, the situation of the Delta, during more than one 

 half of the interval between our time and the Flood, afford any 

 illustration of its state during the other, the presence of the 

 gulf at 300 or 400 miles from its present limit did not preclude 

 the residence of Noah in that vicinity. But Mr. Beke, quoting 

 from Mr. Rich's first memorial on Babylon a statement of an 

 extensive inundation of the Euphrates (continuing for three 

 or four months of the year), infers that the country in the 

 neighbourhood of Babylon, if not occupied by the gulf, must 

 at the time of the building of Babel have been " unfit for hu- 

 man habitation," from its flooded condition. That, however, 

 does not appear to be a necessary consequence. It should 

 seem that there was less rain, and that the waters were not 

 in such excess at an early period (Polyclites ap. Strab. 742. ; 

 Arrian, Ex. Alex. vii. 21.; Herod. Cliol79.; Mela, i. 11.) ;— 

 and the objection would equally apply to the other postdiluvian 



* "Tigris in paludesEuphratisrecipitur." — Justin, lib.xlii. cap. 3. Though 

 Strabo's report of Eratosthenes is of an actual junction of the rivers, a 

 falling together into one, he says of both Tigris and Euphrates, it goes 

 to the sea. (lib. xii. 521. and xi. 522.) Herodotus says the same (Clio 20. 

 Erato 180.) ; and Arrian, we see, though he speaks of the Euphrates 

 disappearing in the lakes or marshes, mentions its mouth. Arrian is above 

 explained. The other statements are true now, that is, both rivers be- 

 ing in the same channel till the waters begin to diverge at Bosra, then 

 passing on partly by the canal to the Khore Abdallah, and partly by the 

 channel to the Delta. Ptolemy's eastern and western mouth of the Tigris 

 indicate exactly the present state of the river. Thus Eratosthenes, Arrian, 

 Mela, Justin, Ptolemy, Pliny, all understood that the distinct course of 

 one river failed. A river into a lake may be considered either as termi- 

 nated there, or continued by a stream issuing at the other end. There is 

 no necessary disagreement of any of them with Nearchus, and if there 

 had been, it could not compete with the plain details of his close personal 

 observation. 



