759 replies to this topic

[SlimJim22]

cormac mac airt, on 01 October 2010 - 04:07 PM, said:

Sounds like an excuse for making it up as you go along.


You've obviously been turning a blind eye to Puzzler's past Atlantis threads. She's only found Atlantis a half dozen or more times, in as many places no less.

You were saying?

cormac

Retract those claws. I can totally see where Puzzler is coming from and I've participated in a few in fact I too consider more than one place. We'd be fools not to... Remember no literal Atlantis but undoubtedly there are countless floods and a handful of sea bordering cultures lost to disaster. Why is this not the basis of serious research again?

Just to give you a low down on my current consdierations. I'll order them too.
1)Thera
2)North Africa
3)Spartel
4)Sundaland
5)Black sea
6)Albania
7)North sea
8)Azores
9)South America
10)Croatia
11)Cyprus
12)Atlit Yam
13)Malta

These are places that I think could have a lost civilization or culture and an accompanying flood myth. Which ones Plato had heard of is another story but food for thought.

[cormac mac airt]

Sorry but finding some place that could, even remotely, be misconstrued as Atlantis is a cop-out on what Plato said. And Plato's use of the name is the only reason anyone is even interested. The fact still remains that there is absolutely no evidence archaeologically, geologically or genetically for the existance of Plato's Atlantis or its people, so yes adequate research has already been done. There was nothing there.

Nothing in the above precludes finding or having found a lost culture anywhere, to include in and around the Mediterranean. Sadly, as I've mentioned before, it's also likely that any real history will be swept aside in order to make a 'connection' with Atlantis which would be a great disservice to the actual history of that culture itself. Implications of that likelihood of which can already be found here at UM, amongst other places.

cormac

[cormac mac airt]

Quote

Never ever have we put forward our views as if fact.

Quote

I can totally see where Puzzler is coming from..

Then you can see that what you claimed was, in the least, a fabrication if not an outright lie.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt, 01 October 2010 - 05:29 PM.

[SlimJim22]

cormac mac airt, on 01 October 2010 - 05:27 PM, said:

Sorry but finding some place that could, even remotely, be misconstrued as Atlantis is a cop-out on what Plato said. And Plato's use of the name is the only reason anyone is even interested. The fact still remains that there is absolutely no evidence archaeologically, geologically or genetically for the existance of Plato's Atlantis or its people, so yes adequate research has already been done. There was nothing there.

Nothing in the above precludes finding or having found a lost culture anywhere, to include in and around the Mediterranean. Sadly, as I've mentioned before, it's also likely that any real history will be swept aside in order to make a 'connection' with Atlantis which would be a great disservice to the actual history of that culture itself. Implications of that likelihood of which can already be found here at UM, amongst other places.

Then you can see that what you claimed was, in the least, a fabrication if not an outright lie.

cormac

There is a massive difference between putting something forward as a plausable speculation. I can't guarantee that either of have said this or that IS the case but you are sounding more and more like the spanish inquisition.

I'll say this for the last time - Atlantis is an archetypal lost land, the specifics may have elements of historical truth about them but as a whole it is unlikely it will be found exactly as Plato describes. Does that mean we should just stop looking period. I don't think so because it has caught the imagination in such a way that it engages people about there past. I think you'd find if you gave it a chance that many people will be hooked by Atlantis from sources like Cayce or Blavatsky but in seeking the truth they will read Donnelly and other writers who concentrate on history and how it relates to myth. The end result being a public that is engaged by history and willing to learn from science if only science would appreciate the people that it is ultimately for the benefit of.

Notes: I use science as in the scientific enquiry as it applies to history and archeology. Sorry for confusion. Second the aspects of truth I was referring to from Atlantis were Thera and it's closeness though not perfect to Plato's description. Black, red, white rocks, impassable sea, maritime nation, bull cult, etc.

[kmt_sesh]

The Puzzler, on 01 October 2010 - 09:04 AM, said:

War in Prehistory. Oddly enough in the Qadan culture who I say is an Osiris based culture from 15,000BC, exactly when Herodotus says the Egyptian priests said Osiris was, we find warfare and not a small amount but 40% of the people buried in the cemeteries, yes, cemeteries, died from fatal arrows or darts, warfare was rife in this culture, that is the Osiris culture from attacks by arrowheads.

I'll agree with you on the often violent nature of prehistoric peoples. The old model of a peaceful and utopian prehistoric existence is far outdated and no longer seen as viable.

But the Osiris thing is altogether different. To date, there is no evidence of an "Osiris culture" from before mid- to late Dynasty 5 in Egypt. That is the first time Osiris as a venerated deity can be observed in Egyptian history (that is, c. 2410 BCE at the earliest). All evidence to find definitive proof in earlier periods--and believe me, many people have searched--have failed.

This does not mean the god Osiris was entirely absent from Egyptian culture prior to the middle of Dynasty 5. What it does suggest, however, is that prior to this time, in whatever form Osiris may have existed, he was viewed as a minor deity to the point where no recognizable cult for him can be observed.

Despite what Herodotus may have thought the Egyptian priests were telling him, or indeed despite what he may have invented for his Greek audience, there by no means was an "Osiris culture" in prehistoric Egypt or in the cultures bordering the Nile Valley.

[cormac mac airt]

Sorry Slim, but with the exception of the willfully ignorant using the term, Atlantis IS NOT a catch-all phrase for anything. It's a singular name for a singular place as written by Plato, that's it, nothing more. Anything else is an attempt to claim one's limited knowledge of a given subject is singularly relevant to actual ancient history. It's not.

Bottom line, if you wish to be taken seriously, stop using the word as if it carries some special meaning. It doesn't. Otherwise, it can be reasonably assumed that you are just one more of any number of cranks.

cormac

[SlimJim22]

cormac mac airt, on 01 October 2010 - 06:50 PM, said:

Sorry Slim, but with the exception of the willfully ignorant using the term, Atlantis IS NOT a catch-all phrase for anything. It's a singular name for a singular place as written by Plato, that's it, nothing more. Anything else is an attempt to claim one's limited knowledge of a given subject is singularly relevant to actual ancient history. It's not.

Bottom line, if you wish to be taken seriously, stop using the word as if it carries some special meaning. It doesn't. Otherwise, it can be reasonably assumed that you are just one more of any number of cranks.

cormac

Hey maybe you're right. I'll bare it in mind but I can't restrain the nonsense that enters my head. I am happy for you to say it is nonsense though. You know my reasons for being here and being taken seriously is not high on the priorities at this moment.

My overiding feeling is that narrow definitions put a lot of young people off history. As a result they wander into the fringe and become thoroughly lost. Who can blame them? The internet has the capability of educating people to a level of interest without ignorance but a negative attitude will only propagate support for the fringe. I hope someone can see what I'm saying is true in the real world but I could very well be wrong.

In an attempt to go to crankdom I'll run a new idea by you. Significance of the numbers 8 and 9 and the cults of the egyptians. So as we know it Horus is the first primary deity being of Namer and Aha of the first dynastic period. The Apis bull fits in there somewhere too. This is based around Memphis as the capital?

Following this the unification of Kmt collapses and P'tah becomes the primary god of Tatenen (primordial mound). Sod it, I'll just quote from the article.

Ptah's human form was that of a man in a cloak holding a scepter. Later he was identified with the pantheon of Khemenu, or Hermopolis (el-Ashmunein). The Hermopolitan pantheon, known as the Ogdoad (“the Eight”), was made up of four couples representing primordial chaotic forces. Amun (Amon) and Amaunet were forces of the invisible, Huh (Heh) and Hauhet (Hehet) were forces of infinity, Kuk (Kek) and Kauhet (Keket) were forces of darkness, and Nun and Naunet were the primal waters. In Memphis, Ptah was equated for a time with Nun and Naunet, out of whom was said to have come the creator god Atum. Atum, in the theology usually thought of as the most orthodox, that of Heliopolis, was “the Whole One,” the creator who contained male and female. He was the head and founder of the Ennead (“the Nine”). Atum produced Shu and Tefnut (Air and Moisture), the progenitors of Geb and Nut (Earth and Sky), who were in turn the parents of Osiris and Seth and their sister wives Isis and Nephtys. Horus, as the son of Osiris and Isis, was an added, tenth member of the Ennead.

During the Old Kingdom fifth dynasty, Atum was displaced by or assimilated with the ancient sun god Re (Pre, Ra), the high god now becoming simply Re or Atum-Re or Re- Atum. As the center of the sun cult in later times, Re was Re-Harakhte (“Re-Horus of the Great Horizon”), the personification of the noonday sun, and was usually depicted as a human with the head of a hawk surmounted by a sun disk. The rising sun was Re as Khepri, the scarab. The evening sun was Re-Atum. Re assimilated the sacred king cult of Horus, as indicated by Horus's title in the so-called Pyramid Texts of the fifth Dynasty as “Son of Re.” Horus's mother in this configuration was Re's consort, the cow goddess Hathor, one of the most important of the ancient line of Egyptian goddesses. The Pyramid Texts were elaborate recordings in royal tombs of hymns, prayers, and lists that reveal much about Egyptian culture at the time, especially about the dominant cult surrounding death and the afterlife, a cult centered on the god Osiris. They also reveal a further accommodation of the solar and sacred kingship cults by describing the king as a god who guards Re in his daily trip across the sky in his solar bark.

Read more: Egyptian mythology - faber, was, Book of Going Forth by Day, kas, ankh, The Book of Two, Ways http://www.jrank.org...l#ixzz118chV5eX

You tell me how accurate this is. If it is true a number of things stand out but I'll keep my point brief. The complexity of the pantheon and philosophies behind the gods harks of a complex predynastic series of cults in the region. Thus I think it is erroneous to take it at face value. Horus was not the original god, he was probably the youngest as the mythology tells us. That would make Osiris older and from the predynastic period but that for some reason the cult had very little following in the early years. Centuries later and his cult has risen greatly in importance and following.

I am not sure how far the Osiris cult really does go back. I'll have to read more about the Qadan culture but that far back is possible. We are so far from understanding ancient culture we can't appreciate how language or society really operated. It is likely that imagery through art and story telling has the longer life span compared to dialects and genetics in the old world. I do stand corrected though and I'm happy to admit a ancient utopia does seem unlikely. What I meant originally was that martial combat on a small scale would have been more favourable to all out tribal conflict but I could be wrong on that too. I still don't think that everyone was at war with everyone but that is just another wild speculation.

So back to the 8 and 9 symbolism. I once mentioned about the 72 conspirators of Seth and if that could be a 8 X 9 equation. I am stepping back from that one and will make a link to shamanism. Surprise surprise, despite what you think it is not my answer for everything though I will openly speculate on a connection when I see one. The Ogdoad is made of four dualities and the Atum is the Whole is One part. You get this eight with a central One in some important places. There is Odin and his eightlegged horse where he becomes one with the world tree and he becomes the central axis. You also have the eightfold path with Buddha sitting under the tree connecting with the absolute. This probably sounds like nonsense but there it is.

I think Plato has incorporated some of this imagery but from a different angle, mainly due to the extensive influences of hellenic culture. The important things as relates to Atalntis is the primordial world of the old gods that is destroyed through cataclysm and yet survives reborn as Athens under the new gods. Also, is the figure of Atlas who holds back the primordial waters of chaos but the burden is too great and from time to time there are incursions of chaos upon the world. We also find this in the nordic tradition with Fenrir and his magickal fetter. Probably elsewhere too.

The thing is that these are archetypal symbols of consciousness as identified by Jung and Eliade. Seems to me that Plato was familiar with these symbols as were other bards and storytellers. Question is whether these people were using mystical experience to gain insight from an archetypal consciousness along the way. It offered as interesting alternative to diffuionism for me. Take it as you like I am not trying to convince anyone or state these things as fact, it is just that it all connects together through symbology.

Circles, triangles, labyrinths, spirals, poles, pillars, trees and death are all symbols that one could attribute to shamanism. There are many more of course because man has been practising shamanism in one way or another for 70,000 years or so. Mysticism is just the same and ancient cultures were highly mystical. No surprise that common symbols arise imo but Plato was writing for a sophisticated audience. It had to be original and work on many levels so that his students could examine them in depth. To look at it in any other way is blatantly wrong imo but you believe what you like.  

He did what he set out to do and more. That is to question our ancient past. Maybe he got lucky as I said before or perhaps there was some inspiration for his writing from the unseen imagination or the Unseen One. I believe that some stories want to be written. The resonance that Atlantis has makes me think it is such a story. Can it be proved either way? Not likely but there are enough historical and geographical anomolies to ignite an interest in science. This is why stories like Atlantis and the research potential it has should be encouraged. It is alright to be wrong because you gain knowledge. For the Atlantis question you are always wrong no matter how you answer but the amount learnt is exponential. That is if you follow logic, which pseudo-skeptics and new agers rarely consider. Middle way is usually the best for advancing in knowledge but science and religion both teach their own versions of truth.

[kmt_sesh]

SlimJim22, on 01 October 2010 - 08:37 PM, said:

In an attempt to go to crankdom I'll run a new idea by you. Significance of the numbers 8 and 9 and the cults of the egyptians. So as we know it Horus is the first primary deity being of Namer and Aha of the first dynastic period. The Apis bull fits in there somewhere too. This is based around Memphis as the capital?

Following this the unification of Kmt collapses and P'tah becomes the primary god of Tatenen (primordial mound). Sod it, I'll just quote from the article.

<<Article Quote>>

Sod it. I love that phrase. I wish "sod it" were used in American English.

Horus is definitely one of the oldest deities in the Egyptian pantheon. We cannot say for certain which deity might be the oldest, but Horus is attested in one form or another well back into prehistory. Narmer and Aha were not the first to use his imagery: prehistoric serekhs feature the falcon form, too. From the beginning Horus seems to have been attributed to both solar worship and to the iconography of the ruler, be he a powerful chieftain or, in pharaonic times, a king.

Horus' chief cult center from earliest times was Nekhen, called Hierakonpolis ("City of the Falcon") by the Greeks. This is deep in southern Egypt. This was an important site for both ritual and inhabitation all the way into the Middle Kingdom, although its primary importance was fading even by the end of the Old Kingdom. Memphis (Mennefer to the Egyptians) originally was not a site of veneration for Horus; Memphis as a city did not exist until it was founded by the earliest kings in Dynasty 1. The cult of the Apis bull was from Memphis, and I believe (off the top of my head) the earliest evidence for that cult dates to Dynasty 1 or Dynasty 2--some time in the Early Dynastic Period, in any case.

There were prehistoric sites of habitation in the Memphite region prior to the dynastic founding of the city, but the chief gods of that region were Ptah and Soker. The founding of Memphis is what brought the prominence of Horus to the north. Kings were referred to as "the Horus," so when the Dynasty 1 kings established the capital at their new city of Memphis, their iconography and veneration of Horus came with them.

There does appear to have been a collapse in Dynasty 2 but Ptah never rose to the status of chief state god. The god Set rose to unusual prominence during the reign of just one king, Peribsen, who called himself "the Set" instead of "the Horus," but that status did not long survive his reign. Horus continued to be probably the most important god of the state, although it's possible Re was growing in prominence, too. The establishment of the capital at Memphis would've brought the kings into more direct contact with Heliopolis (ancient Iunu), which itself was probably founded in prehistory.

Quote

You tell me how accurate this is. If it is true a number of things stand out but I'll keep my point brief. The complexity of the pantheon and philosophies behind the gods harks of a complex predynastic series of cults in the region. Thus I think it is erroneous to take it at face value. Horus was not the original god, he was probably the youngest as the mythology tells us. That would make Osiris older and from the predynastic period but that for some reason the cult had very little following in the early years. Centuries later and his cult has risen greatly in importance and following.

I am not sure how far the Osiris cult really does go back. I'll have to read more about the Qadan culture but that far back is possible...

The quote from the article is pretty decent. The one correction I would make is to the prominence of Re. Although the importance of Re and the Heliopolis cult center took off like wildfire in Dynasty 5, Re had already become significantly important before then. Remember that the son and successor of Khufu, Djedefre, was the first to call himself sA ra, "Son of Re," which alone expresses the growing importance of Re even in Dynasty 4. Khufu, Djedefre, Khafre, and Menkaure all built their pyramids near to Heliopolis, which further reflects the god's prominence at this early time.

As for Osiris, I refer you to my previous post (#590) for the salient facts there. To emphasize, there remains no evidence whatsoever that Osiris was venerated in prehistoric Egypt or among any of the neighboring cultures. And definitely dismiss fanciful notions about the Qadan culture. This was a culture that is dated to about 15,000 years ago, a hunter-gatherer people in northeast Africa. This is the Mesolithic Period, isn't it? I am not expert on the Qadan but as with other people of this period, we simply do not know much of anything meaningful about their beliefs and religions. The most evidence they have left for us is remnants of their lithic technologies. We cannot ascribe Osiris to these people simply because it sounds interesting.

It's true that the precise origins of Osiris are obscure to us. Why he doesn't appear prior to Dynasty 5 is unusual, considering how important he became, and in short order. But also very telling is that prior to this time, we cannot even find evidence for a cult center for Osiris. His primary cult centers were in Busiris to the north and Abydos to the south, where he supplanted other, older gods who had been venerated at those sites long before he existed.

We are obligated to adhere to evidence. Anything outside the bounds of evidence is pure speculation, and without solid grounding, speculation simply is of no real use to us.

[cormac mac airt]

Quote

The internet has the capability of educating people to a level of interest without ignorance...

True, but it’s not the internet’s responsibility to educate anyone. That’s what colleges, universities and libraries are for. While the internet may be a useful tool, if one is attempting to learn various things solely from the internet then they have a fool for a student.

Quote

My overiding feeling is that narrow definitions put a lot of young people off history.

Trying to wade through tons of fringe crap in order to learn about actual ancient history is what puts many off, IMO.

Quote

It is likely that imagery through art and story telling has the longer life span compared to dialects and genetics in the old world.

That’s not true, as genetics runs the entire extent of human history and therefore far predates art and storytelling.

Quote

What I meant originally was that martial combat on a small scale would have been more favourable to all out tribal conflict but I could be wrong on that too.

With most groups of migrating peoples being perhaps a few dozens there would be no such thing as ‘small scale’. Any loss of population would be greatly significant to the further existence of said group.

Quote

So as we know it Horus is the first primary deity being of Namer and Aha of the first dynastic period.

Kmt_sesh has already covered this, but indeed Horus predates Narmer and Aha, well into predynastic times. This would be in and around the area of Umm el Qaab/Abydos well before Memphis was of any religious significance.

Quote

Can it be proved either way? Not likely but there are enough historical and geographical anomolies to ignite an interest in science.

There are just as many to ignite an interest in science without any mention of Atlantis to muddy the waters.

cormac

[kmt_sesh]

cormac mac airt, on 01 October 2010 - 10:48 PM, said:

Trying to wade through tons of fringe crap in order to learn about actual ancient history is what puts many off, IMO.

Well, if you have to wade through tons of fringe crap, you've clearly resorted to a very unreliable source in the first place. Throw it out. Your suggestion about universities and libraries is on the mark. I can't believe I'm going to say this, but hell, forget universities. I fully understand that not everyone has the opportunity to go for higher education, but it's not as though one simply must obtain that higher education in order to be educated. The material to which one turns is what's important. I continue to advise caution against the internet because so much information on the Web is just really bad--uncorroborated, uncited, sloppily researched, not at all researched, or just plain made up. Anyone can publish anything on the internet, which is what I find troubling. Worse yet are the earnest and sincere people who go looking for information and think the internet is the best place to go. It might be the easiest in many cases, but rarely is it the best. Indeed, almost never is it the best.

What I quoted from you above was your response to Slim's statement: "My overiding feeling is that narrow definitions put a lot of young people off history."

I saw this earlier and didn't comment on it, but now I will. At the risk of sounding like an intellectual snob, if a student finds legitimate research to be too cumbersome and the professional literature to be too difficult to comprehend, then that person is likely never going to be up to the task of grasping ancient history in any meaningful way. Maybe this is true for some people.

However, it's been my own experience that this is usually not the case. I have trained numerous docents at our museum, to prepare them to work in our Egyptian exhibit, and I have worked with and taught countless young people in the same exhibit. By "young people" I mean pretty much everyone between the ages of 8 and 18, male and female. And in my years in doing this, it's been my pleasure to have met more promising and intelligent young people than I could possibly count. Many of them express a genuine interest in ancient Egypt, and many are eager to obtain the tools to achieve a better understanding. I keep a suggested reading list of books drawn from my own library and have handed out hundreds of them because almost every day I am at the museum, a kid or his parent asks for one.

People want to learn. Like I said, the material to which one turns is what's important. Give people the right tools, and they will do the job right.

[The Puzzler]

kmt_sesh, on 01 October 2010 - 03:51 PM, said:

A fact I was not aware of, Puzzler. Point in your favor. So in Plato's use of the word "trireme," the generic sense of warship was probably implied. I was being too literal--and straying into something in which I am not expert, which will always trip me up.

I spent quite awhile researching and writing that last post, as is probably evident from how dense it turned out. Is there nothing else on which you would care to comment? You definitely know more about Greek myth than I ever will, Puzzler, but can you argue against the points I have been making about actual Greek history? The more the realities of history are examined, the more unrealistic the tale of Atlantis becomes. I think that's what is critical to address.

How refreshing for someone to admit they didn't know a point.

Mate, time got the better of me but yes, I was thinking of your post and will certainly attempt to have a go at the others.

I think the more realities of Atlantis we can look at OUT of a Bronze Age context the more real it will become...

The more futuristic it has been imagined to be, the less real it seems.

That's why I get particularly irked when people talk about Advantis, you know, the one with levitating crystals etc.

Admittedly it's hard to find a warship or chariot of the time frame but I don't think it's impossible or improbable, I will continue to research this aspect, even if these vehicles were extremely basic in construction.

There was a lot of movement of people and migration and can we be sure it was all done on foot, there is ancient chariot rock art in the Sahara, maybe they didn't have wheels but were more like a sleigh. Like the Trundholm Sun chariot horse. Helios himself and Poseidon have chariots, they are common in myth and this to me seems to signify an ancient role for them, this stuff is hard to dig up admittedly in archaeology. I've managed to get a few good books lately from the Library and around, I have to do more horse research too. Leave this with me and I will return to your other post this arvo and give a few more answers with as much evidence as I can muster up.

Quick spell edit.

Edited by The Puzzler, 02 October 2010 - 04:16 AM.

[kmt_sesh]

The Puzzler, on 02 October 2010 - 04:14 AM, said:

How refreshing for someone to admit they didn't know a point.

Mate, time got the better of me but yes, I was thinking of your post and will certainly attempt to have a go at the others.

I think the more realities of Atlantis we can look at OUT of a Bronze Age context the more real it will become...

The more futuristic it has been imagined to be, the less real it seems.

That's why I get particularly irked when people talk about Advantis, you know, the one with levitating crystals etc.

Admittedly it's hard to find a warship or chariot of the time frame but I don't think it's impossible or improbable, I will continue to research this aspect, even if these vehicles were extremely basic in construction.

There was a lot of movement of people and migration and can we be sure it was all done on foot, there is ancient chariot rock art in the Sahara, maybe they didn't have wheels but were more like a sleigh. Like the Trundholm Sun chariot horse. Helios himself and Poseidon have chariots, they are common in myth and this to me seems to signify an ancient role for them, this stuff is hard to dig up admittedly in archaeology. I've managed to get a few good books lately from the Library and around, I have to do more horse research too. Leave this with me and I will return to your other post this arvo and give a few more answers with as much evidence as I can muster up.

Quick spell edit.

Just one quick question for now and then I'll stop pestering you. For now.

If you want to look at Altantis out of a Bronze Age context, then in what context do you see it? A universal truth in the Mediterranean world is that no sophisticated socio-political state emerged until the Bronze Age.

I didn't even know the "crystal version" of Atlantis went by the name Advantis. That's a new one for me. Believe me, I know you're not implying that. If you were, I wouldn't bother debating you in the first place.

Okay, now I'm done. Really.

[cormac mac airt]

Quote

If you want to look at Altantis out of a Bronze Age context, then in what context do you see it? A universal truth in the Mediterranean world is that no sophisticated socio-political state emerged until the Bronze Age.

Seems to me that since Plato wrote about Atlantis within the context of a Bronze Age society, but placed it in a timeframe that greatly precedes that period in time, that that in itself should send out enough flares to light up the entire night sky. So why are people buying it hook, line and sinker?

And just for the record when Plato mentions "triremes", I myself try to give it the greatest possible latitude for describing seacraft in general, yet it still fails to meet (even remotely) the archaeological remains found thusfar, by several thousand years.

cormac

[kmt_sesh]

cormac mac airt, on 02 October 2010 - 04:45 AM, said:

...

And just for the record when Plato mentions "triremes", I myself try to give it the greatest possible latitude for describing seacraft in general, yet it still fails to meet (even remotely) the archaeological remains found thusfar, by several thousand years.

cormac

I was wrong about the trireme issue and Puzzler was able to demonstrate why. Still, I see your point about the nature of ancient watercraft.

In October 2000 an expedition of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, working at Abydos, excavated the remains of fourteen boats about a mile to the north of Umm el Qaab. The boats were found in among the ancient temple-like enclosures for the mortuary cults of the earliest kings. At first it was thought that these boats were buried for the great king Khasekhemwy, last monarch of Dynasty 2, but subsequent examinations and their proximity to an even older monument known as the Western Mastaba have enabled archaeologists to determine that these boats actually date to Dynasty 1 (O'Connor 2009: 185).

This means the boats are around 5,000 years old. They are the oldest plank-built boats ever found. The boats are all around 80 feet long and all have shallow drafts, so they were not very big. They were riverine vessels, in other words, but that's true of almost all boats known from pharaonic Egypt (although some later boats were also used for coastal sailing).

The Abydos boats are fascinating in and of themselves, but they also demonstrate the limitations of water vessels in the very early Bronze Age. This is a considerably long time before the hardier vessels we see built by folks like the Phoenicians, who were the first true Near Easterners to master open-sea travel.

[The Puzzler]

kmt_sesh, on 01 October 2010 - 06:37 PM, said:

I'll agree with you on the often violent nature of prehistoric peoples. The old model of a peaceful and utopian prehistoric existence is far outdated and no longer seen as viable.

But the Osiris thing is altogether different. To date, there is no evidence of an "Osiris culture" from before mid- to late Dynasty 5 in Egypt. That is the first time Osiris as a venerated deity can be observed in Egyptian history (that is, c. 2410 BCE at the earliest). All evidence to find definitive proof in earlier periods--and believe me, many people have searched--have failed.

This does not mean the god Osiris was entirely absent from Egyptian culture prior to the middle of Dynasty 5. What it does suggest, however, is that prior to this time, in whatever form Osiris may have existed, he was viewed as a minor deity to the point where no recognizable cult for him can be observed.

Despite what Herodotus may have thought the Egyptian priests were telling him, or indeed despite what he may have invented for his Greek audience, there by no means was an "Osiris culture" in prehistoric Egypt or in the cultures bordering the Nile Valley.

lol I made that name up Advantis...you like it?

I see it in a context of it being what happened when Plato says it did, according to the Priests interpretation of their timeframe of their events.

That's not a cop-out. It means I think what Plato has described is generally what he has truly thought and been told it was like.

It's hard not to embellish a telling of something today without incorporating aspects of what we know of.

I don't think Plato did this but Solon or Critias. As I pointed out this was told at an Apaturia festival and it was sung as a poem when Critias heard it. I accept this may not be the real way Plato heard the tale since the whole story is a 3rd person narrative but maybe Plato himself heard this same story as a child for all we know, at an Apaturia festival. Plato probably knew the embellished version himself if so which was NEARLY in the words of Solon, but not quite.

This does not take away from em looking for what Plato described, with some poetic license attached, which came from the only known source in Greece, the telling of it at Apaturia via old Critias who heard it from Solon himself. I thought once Plato may have got the story himself from Egypt but I don't think so because they would not have been the same priests spoken to nor given the telling in the way the priests who told Solon would have.

I've been at this for years kmt and twisted and turned it and looked at it at every possible angle and time frame.
I said before I think it could be when Athena and Poseidon vied for Athens and Poseidon as he stabbed his trident into the ground created a huge flooding of Attica. This followed the War of Athens and Eleusis. This seemed to be in the Bronze Age and for a long time I did indeed place it in the Bronze Age but the more I looked and disected it seemed this timeframe of the Gods was not actually in the Bronze Age contrary to where we place them, as what, Mycenaean times stories. Well, I don't think they are now, I actually think they are very, very ancient and these myths contain stories of what went on c. 9000-8000BC when Plato is putting them, down to around 4000BC. There is very little evidence for much in the myths...

Seems people of Europe arrived in Africa after the glacial melt and they may have been people from Greece who settled in the Delta area, the story of Io sort of confirms this travel. From Greece to Egypt, very early Egypt too, with a cattle cult, this people mixed with Poseidon, produced the Phoenicians, and headed back into Greece via the Danaus line of Danae's father, then they come back to Egypt and Libya.

Gobekli Tepe highlights some of the same issues I think Atlantis faces:

At present, Göbekli Tepe raises more questions for archaeology and prehistory than it answers. We do not know how a force large enough to construct, augment, and maintain such a substantial complex was mobilized and paid or fed in the conditions of pre-Neolithic society.
http://en.wikipedia....i/Göbekli_Tepe

Edited by The Puzzler, 02 October 2010 - 05:31 AM.