CHAPTER IX

Of the Red Sea.

Contrary apprehensions are made of the Erythræan or Red Sea; most apprehending a material redness therein, from whence they derive its common denomination; and some so lightly conceiving hereof, as if it had no redness at all, are fain to recur unto other originals of its appellation. [SN: _What the Red Sea is._] Wherein to deliver a distinct account, we first observe that without consideration of colour it is named the _Arabian Gulph_: The Hebrews who had best reason to remember it, do call it _Zuph_, or the weedy Sea; because it was full of sedge, or they found it so in their passage; the _Mahometans_ who are now lords thereof do know it by no other name then the _Gulph_ of _Mecha_ a City of _Arabia_.

The stream of Antiquity deriveth its name from King _Erythrus_; so sleightly conceiving of the nominal deduction from Redness, that they plainly deny there is any such accident in it. The words of _Curtius_ are plain beyond Evasion, _Ab Erythro rege inditum est nomen, propter quod ignari rubere aquas credunt_: Of no more obscurity are the words of _Philostratus_, and of later times, _Sabellicus; Stulte persuasam est vulgo rubras alicubi esse maris aquas, quin ab Erythro rege nomen pelago inditum_. Of this opinion was _Andræas Corsalius_, _Pliny_, _Solinus_, _Dio Cassius_, who although they denied not all redness, yet did they rely upon the original from King _Erythrus_. [SN: _More exactly hereof_ Bochartus _and Mr._ Dickinson.]

Others have fallen upon the like, or perhaps the same conceit under another appellation; deducing its name not from King _Erythrus_, but _Esau_ or _Edom_, whose habitation was upon the coasts thereof. Now _Edom_ is as much as _Erythrus_, and the red Sea no more then the _Idumean_; from whence the posterity of _Edom_ removing towards the Mediterranean coast, according to their former nomination by the Greeks were called Phœnicians or red men: and from a plantation and colony of theirs, an Island near Spain was by the Greek describers termed _Erithra_, as is declared by _Strabo_ and _Solinus_.

Very many omitting the nominal derivation, do rest in the gross and literal conception thereof, apprehending a real redness and constant colour of parts. Of which opinion are also they which hold the Sea receiveth a red and minious tincture from springs, wells, and currents that fall into it; and of the same belief are probably many Christians, who conceiving the passage of the _Israelites_ through this Sea to have been the type of Baptism, according to that of the Apostle [SN: 1 _Cor._ 10. 2.], All were baptized unto _Moses_ in the cloud, and in the Sea: for the better resemblance of the blood of Christ, they willingly received it in the apprehension of redness, and a colour agreeable unto its mystery: according unto that of _Austin_, _Significat mare illud rubrum Baptismum Christi; unde nobis Baptismus Christi nisi sanguine Christi consecratus_? [SN: Aug. in Johannem.]

But divers Moderns not considering these conceptions, and appealing unto the Testimony of sense, have at last determined the point: concluding a redness herein, but not in the sense received. Sir _Walter Raleigh_ from his own and _Portugal_ observations, doth place the redness of the Sea in the reflection from red Islands, and the redness of the earth at the bottom: wherein Coral grows very plentifully, and from whence in great abundance it is transported into _Europe_. The observations of _Alberquerque_ and _Stephanus de Gama_ (as from _Johannes de Bairros_, _Fernandius de Cordova_ relateth) derive this redness from the colour of the sand and argillous earth at the bottom; for being a shallow Sea, while it rowleth to and fro, there appeareth a redness upon the water, which is most discernable in sunny and windy weather. But that this is no more than a seeming redness, he confirmeth by an experiment; for in the reddest part taking up a vessel of water, it differed not from the complexion of other Seas. Nor is this colour discoverable in every place of that Sea, for as he also observeth, in some places it is very green, in others white and yellow, according to the colour of the earth or sand at the bottom. And so may _Philostratus_ be made out, when he saith, this Sea is blew; or _Bellonius_ denying this redness, because he beheld not that colour about Sues; or when _Corsalius_ at the mouth thereof could not discover the same.

Now although we have enquired the ground of redness in this Sea, yet are we not fully satisfied: for what is forgot by many, and known by few, there is another Red Sea whose name we pretend not to make out from these principles; that is, the _Persian_ Gulph or Bay, which divideth the _Arabian_ and _Persian_ shore, as _Pliny_ hath described it. _Mare rubrum in duos dividitur sinus, is qui ab Oriente est, Persicus appellatur_; or as _Solinus_ expresseth it, _Qui ab Oriente est Persicus appellatur, ex adverso unde Arabia est, Arabicus_: whereto assenteth _Suidas_, _Ortelius_, and many more. And therefore there is no absurdity in _Strabo_ when he delivereth that _Tigris_ and _Euphrates_ do fall into the Red Sea, and _Fernandius de Cordova_ justly defendeth his Countryman _Seneca_ in that expression;

_Et qui renatum prorsus excipiens diem Tepidum Rubenti Tigrin immiscet freto._

Nor hath only the _Persian_ Sea received the same name with the _Arabian_, but what is strange, and much confounds the distinction, the name thereof is also derived from King _Erythrus_; who was conceived to be buried in an Island of this Sea, as _Dionysius Afer_, _Curtius_ and _Suidas_ do deliver. Which were of no less probability than the other, if (as with the same authors _Strabo_ affirmeth) he was buried neer _Caramania_ bordering upon the _Persian_ Gulph. And if his Tomb was seen by _Nearchus_, it was not so likely to be in the _Arabian_ Gulph; for we read that from the River _Indus_ he came unto _Alexander_ at _Babylon_, some few days before his death. Now _Babylon_ was seated upon the River _Euphrates_, which runs into the _Persian_ Gulph. And therefore however the Latin expresseth it in _Strabo_, that _Nearchus_ suffered much in the _Arabian Sinus_, yet is the original, that is, the Gulf of _Persia_.

That therefore the Red Sea or _Arabian_ Gulph received its name from personal derivation, though probable, is but uncertain; that both the Seas of one name should have one common denominator, less probable; that there is a gross and material redness in either, not to be affirmed: that there is an emphatical or appearing redness in one, not well to be denied. And this is sufficient to make good the Allegory of the Christians: and in this distinction may we justifie the name of the Black Sea, given unto _Pontus Euxinus:_ the name of _Xanthus_, or the yellow River of _Phrygia_: and the name of _Mar Vermeio_, or the Red Sea in _America_.