Page:Philological Museum v2.djvu/198

188 188 On the Position of Susa, else in his description of Susiana^ that there was not a stone 171 the province^ unless Mr K. collects this from what he says of the rugged mountains that separate Susiana from Persis,^ Still after all the abatement which must be made on ac- count of the manner in which Strabo expresses himself, which implies that all his authorities were not agreed on the subject, it may be admitted that Mr Kinneir has strengthened Major RennePs case by this observation. But on the other hand he has nothing to oppose to Dr Vincent'^s argument about the citadel of Sitsa^ which Strabo and others speak of, and of which there seems to be no trace at Shus: and to meet the objection drawn from the voyage of Nearchus, he is forced to contend that the Euleiis and the Choaspes were two dif- ferent rivers. He says : " If we admit the ruins of Shus to be those of ancient Susa^ the Kerah will correspond to the description of the Choaspes^ but not to that of the Euleus: for the latter entered the gulf by a channel of its own, whilst the Kerah flows into the SJiat-ul-Arah. As it is not however ascertained that the Choaspes and Euleus were the same, &c." Hence the sense in which he understands the statement that Nearchus sailed up to Susa^ is this, " Ne- archus might have ascended either the Abzal or the Karoon^ without entering the Shat-ul-Arab ; and certainly could not have done so by the Kerah^ which meets that stream be- tween Bassora and Kornal' But this circumstance will not be much in favour of Dr V.'s assumption ; for the ruins of Shus approach within a few miles of the Ahzal : and we are uncertain whether the Euleus flowed to the east or west of SusaS'' These few miles, it must be remembered, ac- cording to the passage above qvioted from Mr K., are as many as seven or eight. - 7rapefX7rL'7rT€L opeivr) i-pax^Ta Kal d'wo'TOfxo^ /neTa^v tcov Eovaiwv Kai Ttj^ Hep- crLSo9. ^ In the "Life of Alexander the Great," the Euleus is spoken of as the same river with the Choaspes^ the modern Kerah (p. 352), and yet Alexander is made to enter the Persian Gulf by the main channel of the Karoon (p. 350); which is meant for a translation of Arrian's accomit that Alexander KaxeVXet KaTci tov 'EvXalov 'TTOTafjidu (J09 eirl ddXaara-av^ VII. 7. How the author reconciles these two statements I am at a loss to imagine. As to Mr Kinneir's explanation, it should be compared with the expressions of Arrian, Ind. c. 30. KaTaar^iiaat, n-6 vavTiKov e§ SoT'cra — eo"TC (TOL rrtoa? Kai-a(TTrj(Ta) ev Soucra Tas vea^»