Atlantis

[Proclus]

Greek believed that "those days" Egyptians (after 3,000 BC) are just offspring of an old civilization exist in the old Egypt. The modern Egypt (after 3,000 BC) for ancient Greeks was a new land...

This is just wrong.

Φοβούμαι τους Έλληνες, που φέρει δώρο. Φοβάμαι επίσης τα ηλίθια ιστορίες από τον Ηρόδοτο!

The stories from Herodotus are not stupid, they are only - sometimes - wrong.

I hope you can imagine the difference.

To make a mistake is not the same as making up a story.

And that's the point.

Besides the fact that Herodotus himself added openly doubts if a story sounded too weird.

Herodotus as father of lies? No. Surely not.

Edited April 15, 2013 by Proclus

[Abramelin]

The most simple things are rarely expressed explicitly, but you can try this one here:

http://www.atlantis-...Proceedings.pdf

Herodotus, Plato himself in an other dialogue (the Laws), and other Greek writers - they all assumed without questioning that Egypt had an age of 10000 years and more. Everybody familiar with ancient texts knows this, it's not a secret. Of course, this assumption of the ancient Greeks is wrong! But they believed it, and so we have to face the fact that the 9000 years of Plato's story are not meant as "fabled" past, but as a real date within the history of Egpyt.

To find this expressed explicitly, I suggest to look into egyptological works, not in works on Plato's Atlantis, because it is painful for skeptical authors to admit this in the context of Plato's Atlantis.

By correcting the age of Egypt we have to correct the date for Atlanits, too. We only do not now, how exactly. Prof. Görgemanns e.g. (not available in English, not in my download center, it's not free) expressed the thought that Plato meant a date near to 10000, so in analogy near to 3000 BC.

Sounds reasonable.

_

Ah, yes, Herodotus. I remember reading his king list of ancient Egypt, going back to a 10,000 years before his time.

[SHaYap]

Ah, yes, Herodotus. I remember reading his king list of ancient Egypt, going back to a 10,000 years before his time.

Come to think of it Abe ... how sure is common consensus that the lists are totally bunk ?

We know part of the list is accurate ... as possibly accurate as we know now.

There is always legends and myths, but the AEs got their calendars pretty spot on, more accurate than the early 'modern' civilization and for a long time too, so too the Meso American calendars.

How sure are we that those dates in question were suddenly not accurate enough for our skeptic beliefs ?

[Abramelin]

Like I have said in another thread, Herodotus wasn't lying or fabricating, he just wrote down on papyrus or whatever what people told him.

He recorded what people told him.

[Proclus]

Come to think of it Abe ... how sure is common consensus that the lists are totally bunk ?

We know part of the list is accurate ... as possibly accurate as we know now.

There is always legends and myths, but the AEs got their calendars pretty spot on, more accurate than the early 'modern' civilization and for a long time too, so too the Meso American calendars.

How sure are we that those dates in question were suddenly not accurate enough for our skeptic beliefs ?

First, the Egyptians had no idea of their own age in terms of years. It was Herodotus the Greek who did this calculation. He made the mistake on the basis of wrong information.

Second: It is important to realize, that, although we know today that the Greeks were wrong, their wrong belief is of importance for the truth status of the Atlantis story. Because the dating of Atlantis relates to the dating of Egypt. If we have to correct the dates for Egypt, we have to correct the date for Atlantis, too. Obviously.

You did get the message? Or is it too complicated?

[cormac mac airt]

First, the Egyptians had no idea of their own age in terms of years. It was Herodotus the Greek who did this calculation. He made the mistake on the basis of wrong information.

Second: It is important to realize, that, although we know today that the Greeks were wrong, their wrong belief is of importance for the truth status of the Atlantis story. Because the dating of Atlantis relates to the dating of Egypt. If we have to correct the dates for Egypt, we have to correct the date for Atlantis, too. Obviously.

You did get the message? Or is it too complicated?

I see what you're trying to do, which still doesn't remove the claim of Atlantis' location from outside but directly in front of the Straits of Gibraltar to elsewhere, nor its alleged control of the Mediterranean up to Italy on the north and the borders of Egypt on the south. And it's not the dating of Egypt that Atlantis relates to. It's the dating of Athens, Greece to Sais, Egypt specifically which the story is dependent on. And Sais was not, by any definition, the oldest city of Ancient Egypt nor even the most important. Even if one were to go with your idea, while this would downsize the timeframe it would also downsize the claimed size of Atlantis to something approaching the size of either Sardinia or Sicily. Yet it wouldn't be either of them as neither country controlled the area the Atlantis story claims and neither country has sunk, obviously. It also doesn't matter how old the Greeks thought Egypt was as it is claimed that the story originally came from Egypt to begin with. So either the Egyptians believed their own country was c.10,000 years old (which is nowhere in evidence) or the Greeks weren't competent in translating Egyptian dates to Greek and got it wrong. And still the idea of Atlantis, by whatever name, is also not evident in Ancient Egyptian myths, legends or recorded history.

cormac

[Quaentum]

I do not agree that platon gave exact location for atlantis. He said it lied outside the medterian past the pillars. Inside the mediterian was one world, quite isolated. Outside was another world ruled by a different culture. You also asume that atlantis is one island, if you use ordinary logic, which seaculture in history only ruled over one island? All seaculture would have ruled over several islands. Perhaps hundreds. Therefor the kingdom of atlantis lied outside the pillars, not their main capital. It lied somewhere else. Also the greeks and egyptians would only have second hand information about atlantis as they themself was not a seaculture, and did not have the ships to travel to atlantis itself. It was a one way highway. The atlantians went to them and concured the mediterian, not the oposite.

Plato said it was in front of the pillars of Hercules. If you can show that the North Sea is or ever has been in front of the pillars I'd like to see that.

I also belive that the bible version of atlantis is the noah and the flood story. He lived amoung the gods, on the coast, in a seaculture. Built a large ship, which means they must have been quite good shipbuilders. It also says it rained in 40 days and 40 nights. This is not correct acording to the earlier sumer version. Therefor we can asume that the word IN does not means time but place. It rained in (location) 40 days and 40 nights. This is cordinates. This means the gods and noah lived around the arctic circel where there in the summer was sun all the time during 40 days and during the winter was dark for 40 days straight. I you travel along the coast from the pillars north you will find the place. If you go to far north it is 50 days, to far south 30 days. It is also a fact that during bronseage and backwards the calendar had 40 days, which fit perfectly for the gods life in the arctic circle. 40 x 9 months is 360 days. This is a very acurate calendar, and easier than today, where some months has 29 days and other 31.

The Bible does not say in 40 days and 40 nights, Depending on what version of the Bible you reference it either says it rained for 40 days or it rained 40 days and 40 nights. The epic of Gilgamesh says The flood and wind lasted six days and six nights. The epic of Atrahasis says After seven days and nights of rain, the flood subsides

In all cases it is a time reference and not a location reference. Changing the context of what is written in an attempt to provide evidence to support a hypoyhesis, not only doesn't support the hypothesis but but eliminates it as evidence.

That ancient texts can have inacuraties, like the position of their capital and local/global flood. Small words can totally change theese things.

You are right so why take as gospel the 40 days/nights of the Bible when the sources the Biblical account was taken from only lists 6 or 7 days? If there were information of a location when the Bible was written, it would not appear in the Bible alone but in other works but such does not seem to be the case.

[SHaYap]

First, the Egyptians had no idea of their own age in terms of years. It was Herodotus the Greek who did this calculation. He made the mistake on the basis of wrong information.

Second: It is important to realize, that, although we know today that the Greeks were wrong, their wrong belief is of importance for the truth status of the Atlantis story. Because the dating of Atlantis relates to the dating of Egypt. If we have to correct the dates for Egypt, we have to correct the date for Atlantis, too. Obviously.

You did get the message? Or is it too complicated?

No not complicated ... just an opinion that 'obviously' here is a huge leap of faith ...

[Quaentum]

Plato states it himself, pretty good proof/indication in my eyes. It should at least not be ruled out. The time period is a time in our human coastal history we know very little about, which leaves much yet to be discovered. But this takes a long time and is ekspensive as all the evidence lies underwater.

The point is that stories can change over time and at least over 11000 years (if his own statements on that matter is correct) small words and translations can change the meaning of text quite drastically.

To look for a place that 100 percent is identical to platons story of atlantis is folish. What is even more folish is to totally dismiss the the whole atlantis story or an atlantis like civilisation, because we dont have hard evidence which 100 percent match all of platons atlantis story.

Looking for something that matches 100% can be foolish but not as foolish as looking for something when the match is 0%

[Abramelin]

Plato said it was in front of the pillars of Hercules. If you can show that the North Sea is or ever has been in front of the pillars I'd like to see that.

I have tried that, lol :

http://www.unexplain...25#entry4610025

MAP 4: 8,500 years ago - sea level rises, flooding through the gaps in the hills, joining the North Sea and the Atlantic.

Must have been an impressive sight if there were already sailors present to admire the view.

.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Abramelin

[Proclus]

I see what you're trying to do, which still doesn't remove the claim of Atlantis' location from outside but directly in front of the Straits of Gibraltar to elsewhere, nor its alleged control of the Mediterranean up to Italy on the north and the borders of Egypt on the south. And it's not the dating of Egypt that Atlantis relates to. It's the dating of Athens, Greece to Sais, Egypt specifically which the story is dependent on. And Sais was not, by any definition, the oldest city of Ancient Egypt nor even the most important. Even if one were to go with your idea, while this would downsize the timeframe it would also downsize the claimed size of Atlantis to something approaching the size of either Sardinia or Sicily. Yet it wouldn't be either of them as neither country controlled the area the Atlantis story claims and neither country has sunk, obviously. It also doesn't matter how old the Greeks thought Egypt was as it is claimed that the story originally came from Egypt to begin with. So either the Egyptians believed their own country was c.10,000 years old (which is nowhere in evidence) or the Greeks weren't competent in translating Egyptian dates to Greek and got it wrong. And still the idea of Atlantis, by whatever name, is also not evident in Ancient Egyptian myths, legends or recorded history.

cormac

I imagine how people argued against Darwin's theory when it was new: It must have been the same line of argument: "Yes, yes, if we assume this xxx and admit that yyy then ... but in the end there is too much evidence against it." Well, this self-betrayal happens, if you are not willing to break up the whole puzzle, but only one piece at a time. We can clearly see that the Greeks had a wrong notion in this one respect, you admitted that, so why is it forbidden to ask, whether similar effects exist in other respects? Step by step the puzzle pieces break away from the holy belief of the invented Atlantis.

I repeat myself: Your big mistake is, that you want us to stop searching before it is clear, whether there is something to find! :-)

I suggest again the introductory literature and the download center:

http://www.atlantis-scout.de/atlantis_introduction.htm

http://www.atlantis-scout.de/atlandownload.htm

_

[Proclus]

No not complicated ... just an opinion that 'obviously' here is a huge leap of faith ...

No, no "faith" at all. The correction of the date is even required if Atlantis was an invention!

Because we cannot apply Plato's ancient views to a modern view.

An ancient view can only be applied to an ancient time frame,

and if we translate to a modern timeframe then all dates (invented or real) have to be adapted.

You cannot say that Plato thought with 9000 years (ancient dating) of the end of the ice age (modern time frame),

Plato clearly thought of a date within Egyptian history, not without,

so in order to keep this we cannot imagine a date before 3000 BC. Even if Plato invented it all.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Proclus

[cormac mac airt]

I imagine how people argued against Darwin's theory when it was new: It must have been the same line of argument: "Yes, yes, if we assume this xxx and admit that yyy then ... but in the end there is too much evidence against it." Well, this self-betrayal happens, if you are not willing to break up the whole puzzle, but only one piece at a time. We can clearly see that the Greeks had a wrong notion in this one respect, you admitted that, so why is it forbidden to ask, whether similar effects exist in other respects? Step by step the puzzle pieces break away from the holy belief of the invented Atlantis.

I repeat myself: Your big mistake is, that you want us to stop searching before it is clear, whether there is something to find! :-)

I suggest again the introductory literature and the download center:

http://www.atlantis-...ntroduction.htm

http://www.atlantis-...landownload.htm

_

Wrong, this is based on the assumption that the story of Atlantis is true. One doesn't assume the conclusion, which is what you're doing. But whatever it takes to rationalize Atlantis into existance, right?

My biggest mistake is mistaking you for someone competent enough to know what they're talking about. While it's true that the Greeks believed Egypt had the greater antiquity Plato claims that the tale of Atlantis was given to Solon by priests in Sais, Egypt. And that the story, from the Egyptians, claimed that Atlantis existed 9000 years before Solon's time. He also claims that the priests told Solon the age of Athens and Sais and by extension Atlantis, meaning that Solon didn't have to translate anything as regards the 9000 year date. So if the priests told Solon the story, verbally, then there is no way he could have gotten the date wrong by such a huge length of time. Unless you'd like to claim that Solon was totally incompetent in remembering the details but somehow you're qualified to know what the truth is. I'm not buying it and I doubt anyone else is either. And the above is based on the assumption that the story is even remotely true. Again, one shouldn't assume the conclusion.

cormac

[whitegandalf]

Small words can mean two things, therefor a translation or a oral tradition can over thousands of year loose its meaning.

Det regner ( i ) bergen, it rains ( in ) bergen, det regner ( i ) 40 dager, it rains ( for ) 40 days.

In norwegian the same word ( i ) means two different things, in and for. Therefor it is a part of the bible floodstory can mean two things. Time or place.

Moses also travelled away in 40 days and 40 nights, ( when his people made a golden statue while he was gone) this could also mean he traveled to the kingdom of 40 days and 40 nights. Why else mention nights when you all ready have sayd how many days you have been gone. Who does/ say that today? Makes no sense, unless its a place.

Same with in front of the pillars, this can also mean two tings, outside or in front of. In fact several of translation i have read use the words outside, and not in front of. The greek also saw the outside of the pillars as a seperate world they knew little about. Their own world lied within the pillars. Therefor this is a natural boarder between two worlds and it makes more sense to say outside.

Edited April 17, 2013 by whitegandalf

[whitegandalf]

So, unlike the oral tradition of Troy, this oral tradition of Atlantis left not a scrap in the mythos of the Greeks?

After all, hundreds of scenes from the Iliad and the Odyssey are on display on thousands of artifacts from Ancient Greece.

The Greek oral tradition concerning Troy, was public, while the Greekk oral tradition you claim for Atlantis was kept secret?

Like I said, if you ever read Critias, you'll find that Atlantis was not part of any Greek tradition at all, oral or otherwise. In the fable, written by Plato, Solon was told the story by Egyptians.

Not a single solitary sign of any oral tradition for Atlantis appears in any Egyptian mythos either.

You don't even "know" the subject matter that your posts concern. How is it then that you "know" I have an agenda " to sabotage and destroy every constructive debate and exchange of information on any subject?"

Where have you enganged in any "constructive debate" here concerning Atlantis? You come across a few folks that know a great deal about the matter, and when they point out the error of your ignorance, why, they must be out to quash debate?

And where have you offered any information exchange concerning Atlantis? You make a wild claim about Scandinavia, because islands sank?

That's not information. That's twaddle.

Harte

Ever heard of hyperborea and the titans? Hyperborea was an island, also called the island of light nights, the land north of the north wind, Home of gods. Thought long to lie at the north pole. The days lasted 24 hours, which places it above the arctic circle. Why cant this be part of the atlantis myth? And why does platon mention poseidon and atlas, which are important caracters in both stories?

[SHaYap]

when are bookings available ?

is travel insurance included ?

[AlnilamPhiSiriusly]

when are bookings available ?

is travel insurance included ?

Obviously

[monk 56]

Dear Third Eye,

If i like you it isn't the Kiss of Death unless you go pit bull on me, i like polite debate, i'm a frail human such as you, perhaps many cities have disappeared below the waves...please note rules to this:-

1) Volcanoe mentioned on above links happened 3,500 years ago, not 12,000 years ago, perhaps in that basis a city did slip below the waves....so what, it isn't 12,000 years ago!

2) i love Plato and Greek philosophers, but i'm interested in how to apply religion in a modern concept, and as an astronomer i can't go beyond start of Julian calendar of 1st January 0045BC with any analysis.

3) i have no connection to AlnilamPhiSiriusly!

[Harte]

No, no "faith" at all. The correction of the date is even required if Atlantis was an invention!

Because we cannot apply Plato's ancient views to a modern view.

An ancient view can only be applied to an ancient time frame,

and if we translate to a modern timeframe then all dates (invented or real) have to be adapted.

You cannot say that Plato thought with 9000 years (ancient dating) of the end of the ice age (modern time frame),

Plato clearly thought of a date within Egyptian history, not without,

so in order to keep this we cannot imagine a date before 3000 BC. Even if Plato invented it all.

An absurd statement.

Plato knew the number "3,000." He chose the number "9,500."

Why did do this?

To put Atlantis far enough into the past to remove it from his present-day society, as well as to position it in an heroic time period - the "Golden" past when every Athenian was great.

The idea that we must place Atlantis in 3,000 BC is ludricrous, because Atlantis has nothing whatsoever to do with the founding of Egypt, in fact or in Plato's allegory.

The truth is, Plato's priests of Sais date the invasion of the Atlantians to before the founding of Sais. And, they imply that it was well before.

Solon marvelled at his words, and earnestly requested the priests to inform him exactly and in order about these former citizens. You are welcome to hear about them, Solon, said the priest, both for your own sake and for that of your city, and above all, for the sake of the goddess who is the common patron and parent and educator of both our cities. She founded your city a thousand years before ours, receiving from the Earth and Hephaestus the seed of your race, and afterwards she founded ours, of which the constitution is recorded in our sacred registers to be eight thousand years old.

Timaeus

Let me begin by observing first of all, that nine thousand was the sum of years which had elapsed since the war which was said to have taken place between those who dwelt outside the Pillars of Heracles and all who dwelt within them; this war I am going to describe.

Critias

The idea that Plato "meant" 3,000 years when he plainly said otherwise is ridiculous. Where does Plato link the origin of Egypt to the rise of (or fall of) Atlantis?

Remember, all we have here is Plato's words. We have nothing from any priest of Sais, nothing from Socrates (who was dead before Plato wrote of Atlantis) nothing from the character Critias (or Timaeus,) real or imaginary.

Harte

[monk 56]

Whatever Harte,

I'm just responding to video's given in credit of Atlantis, i note volcano wasn't 10,000 or 12,000 years ago, it is highly likely that a city through a volcano disappeared 3,500 years ago, if that is related to Plato is just pie is the sky!

Edited April 17, 2013 by monk 56

[monk 56]

Please note humour with Pie in the sky with PI, ha ha!

[cormac mac airt]

An absurd statement.

Plato knew the number "3,000." He chose the number "9,500."

Why did do this?

To put Atlantis far enough into the past to remove it from his present-day society, as well as to position it in an heroic time period - the "Golden" past when every Athenian was great.

The idea that we must place Atlantis in 3,000 BC is ludricrous, because Atlantis has nothing whatsoever to do with the founding of Egypt, in fact or in Plato's allegory.

The truth is, Plato's priests of Sais date the invasion of the Atlantians to before the founding of Sais. And, they imply that it was well before.

Timaeus

Critias

The idea that Plato "meant" 3,000 years when he plainly said otherwise is ridiculous. Where does Plato link the origin of Egypt to the rise of (or fall of) Atlantis?

Remember, all we have here is Plato's words. We have nothing from any priest of Sais, nothing from Socrates (who was dead before Plato wrote of Atlantis) nothing from the character Critias (or Timaeus,) real or imaginary.

Harte

And more importantly, IMO, there's nothing from Solon himself.

cormac

[whitegandalf]

The only soft evidence that links thera to the atlantis myth is a volcano blowout and the folowing tsunami. No hard evidence for the theory exist. Plenty of soft evidence against the theory however do exist.

Wrong time

Wrong place, in front of/outside the pillars

Wrong size, atlantis was much larger

No large wood resources on island or region, which are needed to build many ships ( atlantis was in a warmer period with even fewer trees than today)

No large storable food source on island or the region, as farming and animal domestication still was not invented

No finds, after the site was proposed noone has found anything above or under sealevel that relates to atlantis, no underwater structures that can be buildings and temples has been shown on underwater ground scans. If it was there we would have found it.

Edited April 17, 2013 by whitegandalf

[Harte]

The best way of linking Thera to Atlantis is to suppose that Plato may have possibly heard of the devastaion at Thera, and the subsequent devastation by tsunami of much of that part of the Med.

However, the Thera explosion predated Plato by 1300 years or so. We have no surviving oral tradition or written documants that might be used to indicate that the story of Thera survived into Plato's time, so it's unlikely.

The idea of trying to find Plato's "inspiration" for Atlantis is foolhardy as well, since the actual inspiration is well-known, and easily divined for those who don't know it.

Plato's inspiration was his distaste for the society he lived in. All the rest is just stage dressing. It's possible, then, that Thera could have provided some details that Plato inserted into his story. It's much more possible that the destruction of Helike, which happened during Plato's life (and not far from where he grew up,) could have provided the same details.

Harte

[+DieChecker]

Moses also travelled away in 40 days and 40 nights, ( when his people made a golden statue while he was gone) this could also mean he traveled to the kingdom of 40 days and 40 nights. Why else mention nights when you all ready have sayd how many days you have been gone. Who does/ say that today? Makes no sense, unless its a place.

The key statement here is... "Who does/ say that today?", which of course is ridiculous to expect the ancients to have lived by some modern expectation. The fact that several sources mentions days and nights would seem to indicate that saying how many days and nights a voyage took, or how far it was to the next town, would have been common. Judging off what a modern person thinks is naive thinking.