E'DEN (HA_ 'Eden, delight). According to the bildical account, the first residence of man. On the supposition that the narrative in Genesis describes a real country, endless views have been brought forward in regard to the situation of Eden. dosephus and several of the Fathers con ceived, that Eden was a term denoting the entire region between the Ganges and Nile. Calvin, and others. have. with -light differences of detail, decided in favor of Kornai] in Babylonia. not far from the Per sian Gulf ; Ryland. Calmet, Hales, Faber.
l'ye Smith, in favor of Armenia, near the sources of the Tigris and Euphrates; Le Clem, in favor of the region near Damascus, while even Australia and the North l'ole have been advo cated. The description in Genesis (•h„ ii.) points unquestionably to southern Babylonia, but the geographical notions I if the writer are confused, and he has complicated his description of Eden by introducing mythological conceptions, found among other peoples, of a great river which forms the source of all the larger streams. He knows of four such streams, the Tigris, Eu phrates. Gillum and Pishon. Ile is well ac quainted pith the first two, but has only hazy notions of the latter. It is quite likely that he intended the Gihou for the Nile, as dosephus al ready has it (Ant. i. 1-3), and if it be recalled that many centuries later Arabic geographers supposed the Nile to have its rise in India, it is not strange to find a writer of the seventh cen tury n.c. placing the source of the Nile in Baby
lonia. The Pishon, which 'encompass,' the land of Havilah, i.e. southern Arabia, may be after all, as seems most natural, the Arabian Sea ; and since the Persian Gulf is in cuneiform in sc•iptions called a 'river.' it is not improbable that a writer who had only heard of southern Arabia should call the body of water flowing around it a river. However that may be, the original habitat of mail for the biblical writer is in the same region in which mankind dwells before the dispersion. it has been supposed that Edinnu was the 'Sumerian' mune of the plain of Babylon, but this is doubtful, though the identitieation of Eden with Edinnu may be ad mitted. Of the vast literature on Eden, but lit tle is of value at present. it will he sufficient to refer to Delitzsch's work Tug Arts Pat-miles? (1tiSI), althoneb his theory of the identification of Gilion and Pishon with two of the canals if Babylonia is not tenable. Sec also the Com mentaries on Genesis by Dillmann. Holzinger, Strack, and more particularly that of Gunkel (1900).