the Berasit Hebrew Dictionary

Note - the chapters and verses in the Bible are not original breaks and often do not align with the natural breaks in the text. The first section of Genesis actually spans from Gen 1:1 to Gen 2:4. This second section begins in Gen 2:5

Genesis 2:10-14

A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there. The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

hedeqel and perat are direct transliterations of the Akkadian words “Idiqlat”, and “Purattu”, the names of the rivers we now call the Tigris and Euphrates. The fact that the Hebrew words are based on the Akkadian rather than the Sumerian or Babylonian spellings allows the dating of the book of Genesis as contemporary to the Akkadian period, no earlier than about 4500 years before present.

Gold has been mined in Mesopotamia for at least 6500 years, with some of the oldest known gold artifacts were found in the Varna Necropolis in Bulgaria dating from around 4500 BC. The Sakdrisi site in southern Georgia, dating to at least 3000 BC is the oldest confirmed gold mine.

Kush (aka Cush) is mentioned, possibly referring to Kussara, an ancient Hittite city located in what is now central Turkiye, north of Syria. NOT eastern Africa as is commonly beleived. This mistake might be due to the fact that Nubia was also a gold-producing region, but this was likely long after the Mesopotamian cultures.

The main problem with Genesis 2:10-14 is that the passage is not actually about rivers. This too has been a terrible mistranslation. Anyone with even a passing interest in fluvial geomorphology or process geology can probably spot several geographical flaws in this passage. The passage is typically translated to say that the river “separated into four headwaters” after flowing from Eden. Due to several facts, this statement is geologically, geographically, and physically impossible:

1. the force of gravity causes any fluid such as water to flow downhill until it is blocked by some obstacle
2. rivers tend to merge, not divide.
3. by definition, a headwater is always at the very source of the stream, never somewhere downstream
4. for every river there is exactly one headwater, not two, and certainly not four
5. the processes of erosion and deposition tend to carve out valleys
6. at a certain age within the lifespan of a valley, the riverbed may wander and temporarily separate forming islands, but in such cases the river arms around the islands always join back up to the main river channel.

Perhaps the authors of this section may be given the benefit of the doubt if one assumes that they are simply describing the river from the perspective of someone approaching from the ocean and working their way upstream. This is very reasonable and is in fact the way that most river basins are usually explored. Perhaps they care more about the direction of their own travel than the direction of the flow of the water within the river. That's a perfectly valid perspective. We just have to assume that when we read flowing from Eden, they actually meant flowing through Eden and when we read separated, they really were referring to the confluence of two rivers and the perceived separation of their tributaries as the path of exploration continued up into the highlands. Perhaps this shift in perspective is all that is required to allow a more scientifically plausible description. With these changes applied we may reinterpret the text:

A river watering the garden flowed through Eden; from there it was joined from four headwaters. The characteristic(see shem) of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where [the] characteristic is gold. The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also characteristic. The characteristic of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. The characteristic of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

This definitely seems to make more sense. But keep in mind, we are here to translate and interpret the text in the original Hebrew, not in some manipulated English copy. Returning to the Hebrew text, might a more strict word for word translation improve the situation? Here is a raw translation:

river proceeded Eden drink garden characteristics separate are four chiefs characteristics one Pishon he surrounded the whole Earth Havilah who characteristics gold gold Earth he improvement characteristics bedel stone onyx characteristics river second Gihon he surrounded the whole Earth Kush characteristics river a third the Tigris he travel east of Assyria river fourth he Euphrates

Ancient Hebrew lacks punctuation and can be difficult to follow. Insertion of punctuation and a bit of minor grammatical tweaking produces the following:

A river proceeded in Eden for drink. The garden's separate characteristics are four chiefs:

1. The characteristics of one, “Pishon”; it surrounded the whole Earth Havilah whose characteristics are gold.
   • Gold Earth with improved characteristics; [bedel] and onyx stone.
2. The characteristics of the second river; “Gihon” it surrounded the whole Earth Kush
3. The characteristics of the third river; “Tigris” it travel east of Assyria.
4. The fourth river is “Euphrates”

Please note that each word is still a direct translation from Hebrew. There seems to be more clarity developing due to the removal of a few fallacious presumptions. Still, the identification of the four named rivers warrants further investigation. Of the four named rivers, two are immediately recognizable. The Tigris and Euphrates remain the two great rivers of Mesopotamia, continuing to flow relatively unchanged in their ancient beds. But that is not entirely true, at least not of the entirety of their courses. As recently as 6000 BCE these ancient rivers were drastically different in one regard - they used to be a lot longer. This is because the Persian Gulf did not exist during the last glacial maximum. The ancient sea coast was much farther downstream - approximately in the location of the Strait Of Hormuz, and the ancient versions of the Tigris and Euphrates flowed directly into the Gulf of Oman.¹⁾

In any event, the association of the Tigris with Assyria seems to fit with our understanding of Assyria as a region near northern Iraq. The other two rivers, the Pishon and the Gihon are a mystery. Some evidence exists that the Pishon may be the river now known by some local dialects as the “Uizhun” or “Golden River”. Flowing through Iran, it meanders between ancient gold mines and lodes of lapis lazuli before emptying into the Caspian Sea. If this is the case, out theory of following the four rivers up from the ocean has run into a major problem. The Pishon does not and never has flowed into the Gulf of Oman, nor joined up with the Tigris or Euphrates. The geography of Gihon presents an even stickier problem. Gihon most likely refers to a natural spring near Jerusalem, however it becomes excessively problematic to attempt to find a connection to Kush, which many scholars locate near present day Sudan in northern Africa.

It may be more beneficial to think of the rivers mentioned as the political boundaries of certain districts. In this case it may be the districts themselves that were adjacent. This removes the impossible task of attempting to join rivers. However, this interpretation requires only a minor reinterpretation of two words.

A river proceeded in Eden for drink. The garden's separate characteristics are four {main areas}:

1. The characteristics of one, “Pishon”; it surrounded the whole {land of} Havilah whose characteristics are gold.
   • Gold Earth with improved characteristics; [bedel] and onyx stone.
2. The characteristics of the second; “Gihon” it surrounded the whole {land of} Kush
3. The characteristics of the third; “Tigris” it {lies} east of Assyria.
4. The fourth is “Euphrates”

Four changes have been applied to the text:

1. “Main areas” has been substituted instead of “chiefs”. This is no more onerous than the typical interpretation of “headwaters”. The Hebrew word ראשימ rashim in no way indicates a spring or a river or any type of water feature. Arguably, “main area” is less of a semantic leap than what is commonly accepted in the typical Biblical translations.
2. Whole Earth has been replaced by “the whole land of”, which is commonly done in most translations already.
3. Substituting “lies” in the place of “travels”. Further analysis is required to judge whether this may be appropriate in the greater context.
4. the word “river” has been removed. The Hebrew does include 'nahar' (“river”) so we will want to put them back in, but have temporarily removed them for clarity.

This new interpretation divides the garden into four separate land areas with different characteristics and with boundaries signified by rivers. In such a case, an actual map can almost be drawn, such are the salient features readily apparent.

1. The region of “Pishon”; encompasses “Havilah” and is known for its superior mineral resources of gold, [bedel], and onyx stone.
2. The region of “Gihon” which includes “Kush” (probably including the Levant and the Nile)
3. The region of “ Tigris” bordered on the southwest by the Tigris river, and extending to the Caspian Sea.
4. The region of “Euphrates”: the classic Mesopotamia