Going about one of my verious study sprees, I came across the city of Helike in Greece. A city that had been destroyed by an earthquake and "swallowed up" by the sea.

Now, the city was destroyed in 373BC, and Playto had lived in that area. So he knew about the disaster, and had later writen about Atlantis a few years later.

There's more to it... Apparently Playto had ticked off the local tyrant, and was disposed of(or rather in an attempted) by a visiting spartan. Playto was brought to a slave auction to be sold, but was bought by someone who reconized him and sent home. This happened in 388BC. When Helike was destroyed, the Spartan was thought to be killed while in the city. The tyrant became scared and asked Playto to not speak badly... (source

Nother bit of information

More info.. and olive oil

Now it is said that Atlantis and Athens were at straights with eachother... as they wern't to happy with eachother. Helike and Athens were in the same position... Which is another corriliation between Helike and Atlantis. Helike was also said to be very advanced technologicaly speaking. Yet another corrilation.

So taking away the mystical, mythical theories and looking at this from a logical archeaological view, the roots of Atlantis does seem to have been a myth that sprang from the real life destruction of a real city. Sure people can argue that Atlantis is on an island, but remember, if Playto was clever enough and imaginative enough to write about Atlantis like he had, it's not a stretch to believe that he took the destruction of Helike, and turn it into an island that disapears forever... like Helike did.

Sounds like a reasonable Idea SC.

Ignoring a lot of Platos obvious embellishments this I suppose is a possible basis for his stories... I still hold that the most likely Idea for Critaeus and Timaeus were as Fables to show what would happen should Greece ever anger the Gods but this is certainly an alternatiive

yeah, personally I agree with this view on Atlantis... Atlantis was a non place, like Narnia etc. with elements of the story taken from the Minoan and Theran cultures, and maybe Helike (sinking, instead of exploding like Thera)...

yes its very plausible, but the whole magic, utopia under the sea aspect added by craxy poeple isn't. they were wiped out, never were or are a utopia. otherwise there probably a city that was sunken by an earthquake. more and more evidence is being found of sunken cities from ancient greece. yeah, i guess that i repeated myself about a dozen times

I think that there probably was a society that was radically more advanced than the people around them. I don't believe that they were space travelers or in any way equal to the technological level of the modern western world. Just think how we would seem like virtual super beings to a group of people from the 1830's.
The average person traveled at a maximum speed of about 10 miles an hour, the speed of a horse.
Candles provided the only light you had when it was night time.
People died from small cuts that got infected.
It took six months to get to California from Virginia and news traveled at about that speed too.
Compare that to us today.
Interstate Speed Limits are 75mph, not that we actually go slow enough to read those signs.
Our electric lights can be seen from orbit and there are few places where they do not wash out the stars in the sky.
An infected cut is seldom more than an inconvienence.
California is a three hour flight from Virginia, and faster if you're on a private jet.
Information circles the planet at the speed of light.
We are only 177 years removed from that generation.

Had a people at the time of Plato known how to harness the power of steam, they would have seemed godlike to the people around them. Another good example is the Romans. Who could really defy that empire? And they were not all that much more advanced than the people around them.

plato wasn't the only one, to mention atlantis, koran acnowleges its existance, and distraction, as well.

On the timeline of things...

The Koran came LONG after Playto lived. Like centuries. Playto wrote about Atlantis just after Helike sank in 373 BCE. The Koran was writen a substancial amount of time afterwards circa 650-656 ACE. So the Koran got it's mention of Atlantis from Playto.


And the way things have been looking, especialy when they found the ruins of Helike.. that the events that sank that city (and that city was considered more advanced then those around it) inspired Playto to write about them.. but add his on twist by renameing the city "Atlantis" as well as taking it off the main land, and putting it on it's own island continent.

i doubt very much, that plato had any influence on wrighting of koran, but let's ask the muslim.

neither belivers nor sceptiks, know for sure, only time will tell.

Well it's a simple matter of evidencial facts.

Fact 1: Playto wrote the story of Atlantis after Helike sank into the sea in 373 BCE.

Fact 2: As posted in my origonal post, Helike and Atlantis has very simularities. Inclueding how advanced they were thought to be, having a long term strife with Athens, and sinking into the sea to which people believed was because they ticked off the gods, along with being the head city of Posiden. (Atlantis was said to be the head city for Posiden which housed his temple. Well, you really can't have two head cities that house your temple now can you?)

Fact 3: The Koran was written in a finalized version with all the writtings of Mohammad in circa 650-656 ACE. Which means that any mention of Atlantis spacificaly would have to of had come from Playto since he was the one that came up with this story in the first place.

that make sence, i do find it strange that only plato talks about atlantis, considering the fact that it was long before plato, ther should be a wrighting from earlyer civilisations, what was the civilization before plato's time, that we have wrightings from, are there any? such developed civilisation wouldn't be missed or ignored.
i also find strang that we have numerous evidence all over the world, that we can't explain, and they don't seem to belong to any civilization that we know of. be it atlantis or anything else, something did exsist before known history, i have no douds about that.

ancient preists used steam, as well as people in plays, to wow audiences.

well we got a responce from muslim;

No because of two reasons, the first, Plato and all the others had some mistakes in their writings i.e scientific mistakes but the Quran doesnt. And second, it was impossible because the Arabs had no idea how to even read or write never the less know who plato was for that matter.

than it would come to koran from other sources, what were those sources. lets find out.

The Koran was written by man and is just as failuble as any other book writen by man. Just because they couldn't read or write (Yet amazingly were able to read and write the koran...) does not mean that they didn't hear about Plato's story of Atlantis. I doubt they were all deff as well.


That and the fact a greek myth is in an islamic myth... just goes into evidence that people will still absorb stories and such into their own culture. Wheither they read, or heard it in some form.

alot of these stories are passed down through oral traditions or storys.

I believe I have found Atlantis!!!!!!!!!!!

email me at atlan7878@gmail.com if you want to know more.

I think that the story of Atlantis is just that - a story... During this period of history there was a lot going on in the Med - lots of fighting between different cultures - Maybe this was Plato's way of disguising another tale - who knows

The Koran nowhere mentions Atlantis in any way shape or form. I don't care what "your Muslim" tells you.

The Koran is available online, you know.

Harte

Astounding investigative work, That was on the History Channel 2 years ago.

Astounding ability to necropost to.

Two years ago I was in no possition to watch the discovery channel. you can tottle off now if you have nothing useful to add.

I wanted to be e-mailed so I didn't have to type everything up, but to show that I know what I'm talking about, I'll type it up here.

First of all, I would like to verify my knoledge on this subject by saying that I have read the texts of "Timeas" and "Critias" written by Plato. I also know that the story of Atlantis did not originate in Greece and was not originally told by Plato. The texts of "Timeas" and "Criteas" is a dialogue, kind of like a casual conversation written down. The story came to Greece by way of Solon in the 500s B.C.. Solon, in turn, got the story from the high preist of Sais, Egypt. The preist, in turn, got the story from texts in the temple of Sais. In the dialogues from Plato (the only known written accounts of the story) A great race, called the Atlanteans, are conquering most of the known world. It says that the Island of Atlantis is past the straights of Heracles and is a link to many other islands which lead to a great continent and, after that, an even greater ocean:


The descriptions give measurements of how big the island is, in stadia.

The story of Atlantis goes like this: The great Atlanteans have already conqured a huge expanse of the known world, described as being the size of Europe and Libya (Libya was the name for all of Africa, not the small country of today). The story goes on to say that the Athenians were one of the few people the Atlanteans had not conquered, so the Atlanteans went out to defeat the Athenians. The Athenians held their ground in the battles, and eventually,

Not only were the Atlanteans drowned in the flood, but so in like manner were the Athenians.

A copy of "Timeas" and "Critias" can be found at the following link if you want to read it: [url="http://www.activemind.com/Mysterious/Topics/Atlantis/timaeus_and_critias.html"[/url]

I beleive the island of Atlantis is in the Azores. It has the correct deminsions and the right topography and described location. Also, there is a current that runs out of the Straight of Gibralter (which I beleive to be the Straights of Heracles) which make it so that you could just drift out of the Straights of Gibralter and run into the Azores.

My theory is based on the fact that at one time, the Mediterranean Sea was once dry. In the Ice Age, the water level was so low, that no water passed between the Straights of Gibralter, making the Meditteranean Sea dry (this is proven fact and is excepted by all scientists). This can be proven by the higher salinity levels of the Meditteranean Sea in comparison to the Atlantic Ocean waters. This is what I beleive caused the destruction of the Island of Atlantis in one 24-hour period. If you look at a satalite image of the below, you will see where I outlined (in white) the coast of Atlanits. Dotted lines are extra possible land extentions, and yellow arrows is the current.

e-mail me at atlan7878@gmail.com for picture (just click on e-mail address)

As you can see, the proposed site is surrounded by islands (mountains out of water). It so happens that the dating for the period of Atlantis is at the same time as the end of the Ice Age, a time when sea levels were going from their lowest to a much higher state. Using the same principle as that of the Mediterranean Sea, we can suspect that at one time these mountains kept water out of the plains of Atlantis, making it dry and habitable, like the Mediterranean Sea basin would have been at its dry period. This would also explain how the island was lost. All that would have to have happened is a breach to appear in the mountain pass protecting the plains of the island. Once a breach occured, the whole island would be engulfed by the deluge in no time. This also explains why the waters outside the Straights of Heracles were muddy and impassible, it is because the Island was right in front of the straight and in the path of the current. This would make those waters impassible.

A way to prove my theory may be to collect soil samples from the bottom of the basin. The only problem with this, other than its expense, is that the current could have eroded away the soil layers that could hold the answer to this.

REPLY.

Is my above post "USEFUL" enough for you?

Not really.

And your conjecture about a dry Mediterranean is completely erroneous, as several studies of the sea bed there have shown.

Harte

man,very very interesting.........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messinian_Salinity_Crisis

http://books.google.com/books?id=eDSFkAghU...TsAGQ#PPA178,M1

Both links should bear out the same conclusion: that researchers have concluded that at some point the Mediterranean Sea was, in fact, either completely, or partially, dry land.

Hasn't a city under the sea been discovered though? I remember as a child finding a book in our garage with photos of a ruined city suspended in the water.

I believe you are absolutely correct! There is alot of scientific evidence now that shows it did possess the geological features to be Atlantis. I think it is very conclusive of it being Atlantis as mentioned in the geographical context by Plato. It's on a triple junction of continental plates and it's mountains are the tallest mountains on the planet plus many other examples since the sea levels have now risen, this site linked is one the best I have found.
[url="http://www.goldenageproject.org.uk/survey.html"]

How about this?

http://www.minoanatlantis.com/

Of all the Atlantis theories, either serious or ridiculous, the island of Thera is the only one that:

(1) Suffered a major volcanic eruption and sunk partially into the sea, as plato said

(2) It was a ringed island....

(3) It matches most what Plato said, at least as the escenary of his political theories.

(4) The chronology don't match, though. A small detail, perhaps by a problem of copists.

(5) The name Pilars of Hercules was not exclusive of Gibraltar in ancient Mediterranean times, so that's not a problem at all.

In short, it makes sense to associate Plato's Atlantis to Thera. Perhaps is not a very spectacular theory, but it makes sense.

Plato did not mention volcanoes at all, he mentions earthquakes and floods. Azores is situated on triple junction continental plates. Thera does not make sense in many ways at all when you really delve into it. Wrong chonology, no mention of volcanoes, not outside the Pillars....Azores matches most criteria much better.

as pointed out before, the pillars had been replaced several times. Out of Gibraltar is the most recent place.
About volcanoes, when you have a eruption you also have earthquakes, and I seriously doub that there were survivors from There to tell people what happen. Possibly some traders left the island when it started to shake. When they came back (if they came back) the island as they knew it was gone.
The chronology is not a problem at all, first it can easely be a mistake from the copyst, and second it was widely used in the ancient world to make things (be) seem elder than it was (the worship of the past). In the end Thera fit better than any place in the world.
Because there were a great civ. who was destroyed by a natural disaster (volcano) the island was circular....and part of it sank in the sea.

Well the way I see it Thera doesn't fit at all, there is no mention of any volcano, an earthquake in a major earthquake fault line fits much better, especially in the middle of the Atlantic.
Have you actually read the description by Plato or are you just going on what you have read elsewhere? I have read Critias, Timaeus and the Rebublic over and over extensively and there is no way it is Thera in my opinion. Did you see the link I posted? (you will need to copy/paste it in your address bar) http://www.goldenageproject.org.uk/survey.html

Well i simply dont understand what the azores or the atlantic ocean has to do with Atlantis.
If you see the historical placement of the pillar of hercules, it was between libya and Terresine (Thera) then later it got moved to the straits of sicily and for last under the rule of Alexander the great (long after the famous philosophist) it recived the modern location (strait of Gibaltrar).

When there are a volcanic eruption, usually the place is "haunted" by lots of earthquakes (same thing happen at Pompeij before the 79sc) before the actual eruption (and you should not forget the mediterran sea is also haunted by earthquakes). It's also questionable if the people at that time was able to understand what a volcano was....if you look at Pliny the elder, he had only few hints at he's hand that mount Somma (the ancient name of Vesuvius) was a volcano, and there was a eruption going on. Science as we know today wasent yet to be born and it was carried out only be some individuals who had to struggle against lot of superstition. Just like Galilei had to fight against the church many centuries later.

then you should also understand that Plato got second hand information, from something that happen realistically around 900y more or less from he's birth...that means the story of atlantis had time to mutate from copy to copy and translations (900y are lot of time). Then you should also count in all the changes Plato did to fit the tragedy of AT. into a hellic way of understanding and noneless the changes he did and exagerations (after all it should fit in he's work) so in the end Thera is the best place.

I have changed my mind, I don't think Atlantis existed at all. After studying all the information I have over the last 48 hours with very little sleep, I think I have cracked the story of Atlantis and what Plato is talking about. I have never heard or read a theory such as what I have come up with so I'd love anyones opinion.

The story Plato is telling is a story about Solon himself!

Solon is the main character, the person who he is using as a metaphor for what he is trying to put across via what Socrates has asked of them. (His own idea but forth forth by 'Socrates')

I was studying Solon and came to this conclusion. It is so obvious now.

Solon was an Athenian statesman and poet and lived from 638BC - 558BC.

So from records we can read on his time as a statesman of Athens and his poetry and this is where I found the clues. Look at this Wiki entry anyone who is interested and really read it keeping in mind Pluto's dialogues. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solon

The main clues to me were:

His life is in sync with Socrates dialogue on what he wants to be told.
Plato mentions of the enemy coming 'unprovoked' - this was a key word for me, I felt in Critias telling it had a real meaning, the enemy of the first tyrants and others who blamed Solon for the state of affairs.

According to Solon the poet, Solon the reformer attempted to use his extraordinary powers to establish a peaceful settlement between the country's rival factions:

Before them both I held my shield of might
And let not either touch the other's right.[16]
His attempts evidently were misunderstood:

Formerly they boasted of me vainly; with averted eyes
Now they look askance upon me; friends no more but enemies

Solon handed over all authority and left for 10 years.

"Within 4 years of Solon's departure, the old social rifts re-appeared, but with some new complications. There were irregularities in the new governmental procedures, elected officials sometimes refused to stand down from their posts and sometimes important posts were left vacant. Some people began to blame Solon for their troubles. [23] Eventually one of Solon's relatives, Peisistratos ended the factionalism by force, instituting a new and wholly unconstitutional dictatorship. Solon accused Athenians of stupidity and cowardice for allowing this to happen." - Wiki

So we see that Solon was noble and did good deeds, it was written that the Athenians were also this, by Plato, and also Solon's ancestor was the First King of Athens, but the Athenians (Atlanteans) did not like the new reforms and seemingly 'unprovoked' according to how Solon had thought according to his poetry, made an attack on him, whereby he leaves for 10 years - this is the period Plato talks of where we are 'alive but asleep' and realise what makes us spring into action and fulfil our true path. Which was for Solon: (after he came back)

Solon pretended to go crazy. A rumor spread that Solon had made up some crazy poems and was now totally out of his mind. Then one day he appeared in the marketplace and stood in the speaker's place. All of the Athenians swarmed to hear the crazy man speak. Still keeping up the act of insanity, Solon sang a song of over a hundred verses about Salamis. The poem was so well done that the people forgave him for violating the new law. Before long, the law was repealed, and the Athenians prosecuted the war with greater vigor than ever before. Solon, who meanwhile had recovered, was chosen to be the general to lead them in it. (I fogot to get the website I've quoted this part from, but will and add in)

That part is what Solon does which is what he has found after 'sleeping' - his true form.


Let's look at this: In his poems, Solon portrays Athens as being under threat from the unrestrained greed and arrogance of its citizens.[74] Even the earth (Gaia), the mighty mother of the gods, had been enslaved.[75] The visible symbol of this perversion of the natural and social order was a boundary marker called a horos, a wooden or stone pillar indicating that a farmer was in debt or under contractual obligation to someone else, either a noble patron or a creditor. - There is Plato's story: the citizens are Atlanteans and Solon is Athens. Athens wants more - as does Atlantis also having "already Libya and part of Europe", the symbol of being in debt to a noble or patron was a pillar! that farm inside the pillar was in debt or trying to be controlled by the Atlanteans (the richest citizens whom the farmer owed - the greedy and arrogant ones).

In Timaeus it says: Soc. I should like, before proceeding further, to tell you how I feel about the State which we have described. I might compare myself to a person who, on beholding beautiful animals either created by the painter's art, or, better still, alive but at rest, is seized with a desire of seeing them in motion or engaged in some struggle or conflict to which their forms appear suited; this is my feeling about the State which we have been describing. There are conflicts which all cities undergo, and I should like to hear some one tell of our own city carrying on a struggle against her neighbours, and how she went out to war in a becoming manner, and when at war showed by the greatness of her actions and the magnanimity of her words in dealing with other cities a result worthy of her training and education.
Then: I have told you briefly, Socrates, what the aged Critias heard from Solon and related to us. And when you were speaking yesterday about your city and citizens, the tale which I have just been repeating to you came into my mind, and I remarked with astonishment how, by some mysterious coincidence, you agreed in almost every particular with the narrative of Solon; but I did not like to speak at the moment. For a long time had elapsed, and I had forgotten too much; I thought that I must first of all run over the narrative in my own mind, and then I would speak.

That to me is saying that Plato could see a similarity between what he felt he needed to say according to how Socrates (in the narrative) wants in the story and the story of Solon which having been a great pro-democracy statesman and been "the first champion of the peoples" and: "Solon has acquired a place in history and in folklore through his efforts to legislate against political, economic and moral decline in archaic Athens. Some of his reforms failed in the short term, yet he is often credited with having laid the foundations for Athenian democracy."

Mention of extended families and clans in Solon's time compares with what Socrates says is an ideal state.

Wiki says: "Depending on how we interpret the historical facts known to us, Solon's constitutional reforms were either a radical anticipation of democratic government, or they merely provided a plutocratic flavour to a stubbornly aristocratic regime" - a mention of how Solon's reforms were in line with what Pluto taught!

I could go on forever here but I need to think some more or I'm babbling, I will structure the rest of my theory properly and make another post.

Anyone?

Hey suckers (ill just call u Al cause of ur pic...ur name is too long lol)

A couple of things about your claim

While very intuitive and logical, I do not believe that this is what Plato was meaning when he talked about Atlantis and the information about the history of Solon seems to come solely from wikipedia (a very invalid source)

I wish you would post the rest of your evidence like you said you would so that I would have more to comment on...

In the meantime, I would like to talk more about my theory...

I believe that Atlantis was a real civilization. I dont believe all the stuff about them being able to fly and being very advance, but I do believe that the story is true...i had an earlier post that told my theories outright



C:\Documents and Settings\OWNER\My Documents\My Pictures<------where my pic is

...i dont think i'll ever get that stupid picture posted..it isnt from any website..i made it myself..can anyone help?? its a pic of where atlantis is

OK Odyseus, here's where I'm at, I've waded through heaps of stuff myself and you like me, sound like you are just trying to get to the bottom of it all.

At post #27 here I attached a map by Christian O'Brien, a prominent believer in Azores az Atlantis, I think I also have the web link in case you missed it and I agreed that Azores was geographically spot on and when the sea level was lower it was much like the description of Atlantis.

Between that post and the one above I began to see that no where suited all the criteria and looked more into Plato and his reasons why he wrote it, what is the core of it, it's meaning, I mean, this guy is the number one philosopher in history, and we are to believe he's writing simple political allegory, give me a break.......so

that led me onto another lead, what was he conveying? I discovered that Plato wrote much in riddles, read many books, rejected politics early in his life and was a student of Socrates, following his ideals and exploring them more. When I look at The Apology, The Republic and Timeaus and Critias I see more than just political statements. Wrapped up in history I believe is a story of good turning evil and triumphing over it. I also learnt that it seems Plato was inspired by The Pentateuch and when you read the Old Testament now, you can see much of Timaeus in it.
So then I was convinced Platos narratives are a riddle for us to solve on how a virtuous and just state (of person) can overcome temptation (of sins and immorality) to find the perfect state (of person /or Heaven) through God, which is personified as the good trying to keep us from straying. (The threat that we will be punished if we don't stay on the virtuous track). God does unleash his wrath alot in the Bible when people become this way inclined.



The narratives are not casual conversations, they are in depth riddles with in depth allegory, it's not a geography lesson imo. Socrates died near 40 years before Plato wrote them, he had plently of time to think about this after Socrates death and it all ties in with Socrates death and what Plato learns from it all. Critias can be seen as not even a person there being told anything by Solon. Plato has found out himself about the stories that Solon heard, 'Critias' is just a character that is telling a part of the story.

By applying both the Bible and Plato into history, back to your thoughts, I do think that Azores could indeed have been an island that made it accessable to get to South America and beyond. We know the sea rose enough to flood the Black Sea which was a freshwater lake overspilling the Bosphorus. This would have taken considerable flooding also flooding the Crimean Peninsula, which I also think is 'Atlantis'. East on the Peninsula is some interesting archaeological discoveries being made. I did link to a site for that too. See, I believe Plato has interwoven numerous ancient histories together as one also enmeshed by Solon's life and story and who Solon embodied (the true wise one). So, I agree that the Azores could have been known of but even Plato had trouble conceiving of anyone having sailed the tip of Africa as Herodotus makes mention of, so that he would be so willing to accept a story of a lost, advanced culture that was sea-going as much as the residents of Atlantis would have been is something that makes me wonder.
Let's look at this:

In the first place the Acropolis
was not as now. For the fact is that a single night of excessive
rain washed away the earth and laid bare the rock; at the same time
there were earthquakes, and then occurred the extraordinary
inundation, which was the third before the great destruction of
Deucalion.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/plato/critias.htm

Deucalion is equated with Noah since he also builds an ark to save his family from the Flood, which would be the great destruction of Deucalion mentioned, so we can see that the extraordinary inundation that was NOT the Flood of the Bible. This night of excessive rain that came after an earthquake that followed a heavy downpour which had enough power to wash away the dirt around the rocks of the Acropolis - in my opinion is the flooding of the Black Sea approx 7000 years ago. The backflow from the opening of the Bosphorus would have been catastrohic, leading me also to think this is what Plato speaks of when he mentions the priests have said that only the mountain people who didn't really have writing anyway were left, hence why Greece doesn't have any old legends (pre-Black Sea flood). He also mentions how Greece is but a skeleton of itself, also telling us how the dirt has flowed down from the mountains from the huge deluges over time and then the edges of Greece have fallen into the sea. The rising of the Mediterranean would do this. A declination of the Heavens....conflagrations (destructive fires, volcanoes) are recorded as myth, but true history says the priest. Quite frankly, I think in translations of time etc, no one really knows whether it rained or the 'waters came up from below' in any of these ancient histories. I do think that the Flood of Noah is the Deucalion deluge and the one mentioned in Timeaus as the Black Sea flood. The Black Sea flooding heralded in many new cultures and changes. I could see Azores being flooded then but there is no indication of any culture being in Azores. The only people out of the Straits that I believe could have had a mention was the unknown Sea People, which by the way, has a story connected that the Ekwesh of them were apparently circumcised, leading some to think they are ancestors of Hebrews who followed on this practise.
Since Plato was using the Old Testament to base his story on linked with history and Greek myth, I can see how many of the stories have intertwined and now is difficult to distinguish one from another.

So apart from a geographical location can you tell me what else makes you think Azores is Atlantis?

I think it is even based in Plato developing a more 'one god' way of thought rather than the paganism of Zeus et al. His Timeaus is very aimed at this line of thought. Zeus, Poseidon and many of the Greek gods were immoral to the extreme and Plato's God ideals seem to point to him making a comparison between 'old' religion and a 'new' one to establish itself firmly...keeping in mind, when it did, it was spread by many Greeks.
Here's a great website on Philo of Alexandria and how he is the forefather of Greek/Hebrew religious philosophy of th etime.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/p/philo.htm

By the way, I have heaps more views on this whole thing, in all my recent posts on the 3 other Atlantis threads going and have my own topic on Plato, Solon and Atlantis plus I'm trying to do an overview on my Blog here...whew. I am updating my thinking each day with new things I learn and am happy to keep listening to what you have to say on this, like I said before I think geographically Azores sounds good but my mind is saying Atlantis is an allegory for something else, Sin, Hell, Paganism, immorality, temptation......