the Geography before the flood is difficult because geography could be significantly altered by the flood of Noah
Some actually put the garden of Eden at Mount Zion
Even geography after the flood is tricky sometimes... 'the city of David' in the OT is refering ro Jerusalem but 'the city of David' in the NT is referign to Bethlehem
Geography could have changed significantly due to the flood
Judging by calculating the timeline backwards from the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BCE, to the times of Genesis, the Flood has been calculated to be 2430 to 2104 BCE, or worse, even earlier than that, depending on how people interpret Exodus 12:40-41:
Exodus 12:40-41 said:
40 The time that the Israelites had lived in Egypt was four hundred thirty years. 41 At the end of four hundred thirty years, on that very day, all the companies of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt.
Do you put the time of 430 years in scenarios:
(A) when Jacob, also name Israel, arriving and staying in Egypt till he died?
(B) or, when Abraham received the covenant?
The reason being, is regarding to Moses' birth, and especially Jochebed, Moses' mother.
The problem is that of line of Levi, in which Exodus 6 that listed Moses' only Levi, Kohath (6:16) and Amram (6:18, 20), and that Amram, and that Amram's wife Jochebed was also his aunt (6:20). Jochebed was the daughter of Levi (Numbers 26:59), born at some time in Egypt.
Numbers 26:59 said:
59 The name of Amram’s wife was Jochebed daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt; and she bore to Amram: Aaron, Moses, and their sister Miriam.
If you think the 430 years referred to scenario (A) Jacob, then Jochebed would have to be at the very least - 261 years old (if not even older than that) when she gave birth to Moses.
261 years is the gap between Levi's death and Moses' birth, if we use 430 years for Jacob settling in Egypt at age 130 and Levi at age 48. Levi lived in Egypt for 89 years.
Jochebed would have to born at any time of Levi living in Egypt (hence the 89-year window).
If you used 430 years on scenario (B) instead (which is the time of Abraham's covenant), then Jochebed would have to be at least 137 years old, if not older. 137 years, again, would be the gap between Levi's death and Moses' birth.
Either ones of these ages, would make Jochebed very old, but scenario A is impossible.
So scenario B is more likely than scenario A, which would date the Flood anywhere between 2340 and 2104 BCE.
But the real problem is with Genesis and Exodus, and how to match the Flood with history and archaeology. And that not possible with any dates.
And according to Genesis 10, the city of Uruk (or Erech) and kingdom of Egypt didn't exist before the Flood, which clearly aren't true, historically and archaeologically.
Both Uruk and Egypt predated 2340 BCE.
2340 BCE is the early part of the 6th dynasty (2345 - 2181 BCE) of Egypt (Old Kingdom). The Great Pyramids of Giza, predated 2340 BCE, built in the 4th dynasty (c 2613 - 2494 BCE), and there are even older pyramids, in the 3rd dynasty.
For Genesis 10 to say Egypt only exist AFTER the Flood, the bible is clearly wrong.
And Uruk was a small village, on the Euphrates, at least 5000 BCE, becoming a modest size town during the 5th millennium BCE, but became the largest city in the world during the 4th millennium BCE, reach its peak between 3600 - 3200 BCE. The 4th millennium temples to An (Anu) and Inanna (Ishtar) are physical testimony of Uruk existence, predating the Flood 2340.
Uruk in 4th millennium BCE, predated the Sumerian civilisation, that started in c 3100 BCE.
Again, this shows that the bible, especially the authors to Genesis and Exodus don't know much about history in Egypt and in Mesopotamia. According to Genesis 10, Nimrod, grandson of Ham, was the founder of Uruk.
History can be a lie, often written by the victors, hence can be subjected to propaganda, but archaeology is about finding physical evidences. And Egypt's pyramids and Uruk's temples to Inanna (Ishtar) and An (Anu) clearly demonstrated Genesis 10 to be wrong.