quote:

---

* Plato affirms that the demise of Atlantis took place "9,000 years before the times of Solon". Now, Solon visited Egypt at about 600 BC, which adds to a total of about 11,600 BP (Before Present). Now, this is precisely the date of the cataclysmic ending of the Pleistocene Ice Age, as given by the geologic record. So, we are led to conclude that Plato's date is correct, and that the Greek philosopher indeed knew what he was talking about.

* Strabo, the Greek geographer and historian, tells us that 2,600 years before his time, certain navigants crossed beyond the Pillars of Hercules, and dealt with the Tartessians. Now, these Tartessians — who are often identified with the Atlanteans — had, he affirms, written records of their history that amounted to 7,000 years before their own time. Again, this adds to a date of about 11,600 BP, precisely as preconized by Plato for the Atlantean cataclysm, for Strabo flourished in the times of Christ.

* Arnobius, a Christian bishop of the fourth century AD, told in one of his sermons concerning the catastrophes that have previously destroyed human civilization, that "ten thousand years ago, a vast number of men burst forth from the island which is called Atlantis of Neptune, as Plato tells us, and utterly ruined and blotted out countless nations." Again, the date given by Arnobius turns out to be precisely the one of 11,600 BC. Though Arnobius' relation seems to be based on that of Plato, he had access to sources now lost that apparently confirmed Plato's disclosure in an independent way.

* Manetho, the Egyptian historian, places the start of the dynasty of the "Spirits of the Dead" 5,813 years before Menes, the first king of unified Egypt. Now, Menes flourished between 3,100 and 3,800 BC or perhaps, even earlier, as some specialists claim. Again, this gives a date between 11,000 and 11,600 BC, in close agreement with the one given by Plato. It is quite probable that the "Spirits of the Dead" of Manetho were indeed the survivors of the Atlantean cataclysm, the same dead ancestors that the Romans called Lemures or Lares.

* The Hindu traditions on the Yugas, as well as the similar ones of the Persians, hold that the eras of mankind last about 12,000 years each. On the other hand, these and other traditions maintain that we now enter, in the year 2,000, the final millennium of the present era, which started just after the demise of Atlantis. So, once again, we are led to the conclusion that the Atlantean cataclysm took place between 11,000 and 12,000 years ago.

* The Codex Troano of the Mayas, translated by Augustus le Plongeon, the celebrated Mayanist, recounts the tragedy of Lemurian Atlantis, which sunk away in a terrible cataclysm. It tells that millions of people died in the cataclysm, and that the event took place "8,060 years before the writing of this book." Supposing that the codex was written at about 1,500 BC, the start of the pre-classic Era, when the Mayan (Olmec) civilization sprung, we get a date for the cataclysm of about 11,600 BP. This is in perfect agreement with the date given by Plato. As is known, the Mayas originally came to America from an overseas paradise called Aztlan which sunk away underseas. Aztlan in visibly no other thing than Plato's Atlantis. Except that Aztlan was located beyond the Pacific, rather than the Atlantic Ocean.

* The Ramayana — the book that tells the destruction of Lanka by Rama and Hanumant — affirms that this war took place some 10,000 years before its own times. Now, the experts agree that the Ramayana was written at about 300 BC by Valmiki. Thus, the destruction of Lanka — which is no other thing than the one of Atlantis — took place at about 12,000 BP or so, in fair agreement with the date given by Plato.

* Hindu traditions affirm that the first sangham (poetic academy) lasted for 4,400 years. The second one for 3,700 years. And the third and last one, which ended at about the start of the Christian era, lasted for 1,850 years. This yields at total of 11,900 BP for the start of the sanghams which, tradition holds, began shortly after the Flood. Considering that the Flood corresponds to the cataclysm that destroyed Atlantis, this Hindu tradition on the poetic academics confirms the date of Plato with excellent accuracy.

* The end of the Pleistocene Ice Age — the date of whose closely coincides with the one of 11,600 BP given by Plato for Atlantis' demise — also marks the rise of agriculture, of city-building and of the Neolithic both in the Old and the New Worlds. According to a universal tradition, civilization was brought just about everywhere by white, blond, blue-eyed, titanic giants. These giants are no other than the Atlanteans fleeing their destroyed Paradise and moving into their new homelands in order to make a fresh start. As if to confirm this worldwide tradition, it is at this date that we start to find fossil skeletons of Cro-Magnoid men, so often equated with the Atlanteans. And these are found precisely the sites connected with the rise of the Neolithic and of Civilization

* Arthur Posnansky — the German-Bolivian archaeologist who long studied Tiahuanaco, the site of origin of the Incan civilization of Peru and Bolivia — concluded that this region of the Andes was formerly a seaport which suffered an uplift of about 3,000 meters. This cataclysm happened at about 11 or 12 thousand years ago, precisely the epoch of the Atlantean demise.

* Bruce Heezen, the famous oceanographer of the Lamont Geological Observatory, showed that sea-level underwent a rise of about 100 to 150 meters worldwide at about 11,600 BP. This rise resulted from the meltwaters of the Ice Age glaciers that covered a substantial portion of the continents in the temperate regions of the world and which were up to a few kilometers in thickness. Heezen also pointed out that this rise of sea-level was sufficient to drown most low-lying coastal regions of the planet. In particular, the region that now forms the South China Sea averages under 60 meters or so in depth. Thus, this region — precisely the one which we preconize to have been the site of Atlantis — got submerged by the rising waters, just as affirmed by Plato.

* Turning to Egyptian traditions, the source on which Plato bases his legend of Atlantis. The famous zodiac of Dendera — which was copied from far older versions whose origins are lost in the night of times — indicates that the constellation Leo lay at the vernal point in the epoch of its start. Now, the era of Leo centers at about 11,720 BC, in close agreement with the date given by Plato for the end of Atlantis and the start of the present era. What event but the cataclysmic end of the Pleistocene Ice Age and the consequent demise of Atlantis could better serve for the new start of times marked in that famous zodiac?

* Makrisi, a famous Arab historian of Egypt, affirms that "fire issued from the sign of Leo to destroy the world." This conflagration apparently confirms the above connection between the star of Dendera's zodiac and the Atlantean cataclysm disclosed by Plato. The Arabs conquered Egypt, and inherited its magnificent culture and traditions, and it is quite likely that Makrisi was basing himself on them.

* A Coptic papyrus indicates the same date for the Atlantean cataclysm. According to it: "the Flood will take place when the heart of the Lion (Aldebaran) enters the start of the head of Cancer". In other words, the papyrus affirms that when the vernal point coincided with the center of Leo — an event that took place some 11,600 years ago — the Flood took place, destroying Atlantis and ending the Pleistocene Ice Age, which had lasted for some 2.5 millions of years. In the terrible event, a great many species of mammals and other creatures became extinct all over the world. This fact attests the universal character of the tragedy.

---

Jshsitar, I definitely agree that the Atlantis tradition would have had a hard time being preserved accurately over nine thousand years. I don't agree on Crete as the basis for Atlantis, though, for reasons I already mentioned, although, I suppose it's still possible.

I'm reading Plato's the Republic now to try and get a better grasp of his concepts. It's interesting that in this passage he mentions Homer's works. One of the theories behind why Plato never finished "Critias" was because he abandoned it after realizing that it was the story of Troy. The Republic, written before Timaeus and Critias, shows Plato probably knew that already, before beginning either one.

From the Republic:

quote:

---

Again, there is another manner in which, according to Homer, brave youths should be honoured; for he tells how Ajax, after he had distinguished himself in battle, was rewarded with long chines, which seems to be a compliment appropriate to a hero in the flower of his age, being not only a tribute of honour but also a very strengthening thing.

Most true, he said.

Then in this, I said, Homer shall be our teacher; and we too, at sacrifices and on the like occasions, will honour the brave according to the measure of their valour, whether men or women, with hymns and those other distinctions which we were mentioning; also with seats of precedence, and meats and full cups; and in honouring them, we shall be at the same time training them.

---

Here is another quote that shows Plato's philosophy about his distinction between war with outsiders and war among the Hellenes:

quote:

---

And therefore when Hellenes fight with barbarians and barbarians with Hellenes, they will be described by us as being at war when they fight, and by nature enemies, and this kind of antagonism should be called war; but when Hellenes fight with one another we shall say that Hellas is then in a state of disorder and discord, they being by nature friends and such enmity is to be called discord.

(Edited here)

And any difference which arises among them will be regarded by them as discord only --a quarrel among friends, which is not to be called a war?

---

It's interesting that Plato makes the distinction that the Atlantis story is "true" several times, when he says this about the ideal state created in the Republic:

quote:

---

if only this State of yours were to come into existence, we need say no more about them; assuming then the existence of the State, let us now turn to the question of possibility and ways and means --the rest may be left.

Well, and were we not creating an ideal of a perfect State?

To be sure.

And is our theory a worse theory because we are unable to prove the possibility of a city being ordered in the manner described?

---

The point is, Plato would have no trouble saying that Atlantis and ancient Athens were simply a creation of his, if they were a creation. Also, that ideally, the Hellenes, though often fighting among one another, would come together when facing a foriegn opponent (like say the Persians, or the Atlanteans).

Do these themes sound familiar? All the things that Plato experts claim he's trying to say in both Timaeus and Critias, he is already saying (and saying better, too, I might add), in the Republic. He probably would not explore the same exact themes in his next two works. Timaeus, Critias, and Hermocrates (the third in the trilogy if he would have lived), seem to be Plato's attempt at a literal history of the world he lived in: the gods, the universe, prehistoric Greece and (one assumes), the classical times.

It was this 12 year old boy who introduced the "pillars of Hercules" into Solon's story.
(And their connection to the west.)

Before that poetry recital, however, the gates/pillars were in the east.

Here is a link which explains Egyptian mythology of the New Kingdom, from a book named the Book of Gates which was written in the tombs of the Valley of the Kings.

NOTE: the 11th and 12 hours of the night are the times when the sun is slightly below the horizon, a configuration of utopia which orientals call ATALA (opposite the celestial north pole).

quote from: http://touregypt.net/featurestories/bookofgates.htm
By the eleventh hour, we find a bound Apophis and other enemies in the upper register. He is dismembered, and hence rendered harmless. The rope that holds Apophis and his assistants is held by a giant fist emerging from the depths. In the middle register, the dead may gaze upon the continence of the God Re, who's face is making its way in the barque. n interesting aspect of this scene is the reversal of the barque, which may be an allusion to the reversal of time. Before the barque are the stars which will herald the reappearance of the sun god. We find in the lowest register oarsmen of the god, together with the goddesses of the hours; time and energy (rowing). They will propel the barque up into the eastern horizon. Here, the battle in the netherworld is obviously won, for some deities are already announcing he god in the horizon. There cries will be joined by the din of noise that will eventually accompany the rising sun.

Hour Twelve
In the twelfth hour, the sun god finally arrives at the gate "with the mysterious entrance", through which he will the miracle of his rebirth will occur. In the upper register, gods "carry the blazing light". which is obvious from the sun disks in their hands. Stars precede the appearance of the sun, while goddesses seated upon serpents surround and protect the solar child. Before the god's barque lies Apophis, who is fettered. He is held in check by gods with knives and shepherd's crooks in order that he may not impede the sunrise. Just behind him are four baboons, their arms raised in jubilation, who announce the sun god in the eastern horizon. Several motif are represented in the lower register, including crowns that are to be worn as symbols of power when leaving the netherworld. Also, we find the nurses of the newborn sun, while at the same time, Osiris is mourned, for he must remain in the netherworld. This final gate, through which the sun god will emerge onto the horizon, is guarded by Isis and Nephthys, in the form of uraei.

Personally I think that floods (major ones) were caused either by melting Glacial Ice or tsunamis derived from earthquakes or volcanos. My brother (the geologist) says that water was dammed up behind ice (during the Ice Age) and as the ice melted water would gush forth. There is solid geological evidence for this. Flood water have dug troughs across to their flood path. This indicates a broad wall of water surging from a source and hitting the ground as in a waterfall. The net effect of the receding Ice Cap was to raise the sea-level by about 400 feet. Obviously this was world wide. Interestingly some of the major seas and gulfs were not always as they are now. They were smaller or non existent.

Tales of "the flood" were handed down through the oral tradition. In many cased the event was seen as an "act of God." Ironicly, from a legal perspective, they still are. I doubt that man (circa 10,000 B.C.) understood the mechanics of the floods.

The sea rising 400 feet would flood a lot of the world. Some of the flood myths may hve originated with the end of the Ice Age, other were probably based on storms, tsunamis, earthquakes and the like.

It begins:
CRETE

"Some 3500 years ago, a cataclysmic event wiped out the flourishing Bronze Age Civilisation on Crete in the Aegean sea. The obvious culprit is a volcano on the island of Santorini, which is known to have erupted at that time.
The eruption on Santorini must have been one of the biggest bangs in history...The most destructive eruption in modern times occurred in Indonesia in 1883, when a volcano on the island of Krakatoa exploded. But the crater left behind at Santorini is four times as large as that on Krakatoa. Vulcanologists estimate that the ancient volcano ejected 2 to 3 times as much ash and rock.. Parts of the Cretan coast experienced waves up to forty metres high..."
- New Scientist

As you may know some German Anthropologists were interested in Atlantis
and they also considered Minoan civlisation as a key to finding the "lost continent."

"The rise of Knossos continued, until the year 2000 BC, when it was the
principal city in the lands of the Aegean sea. Only three hundred years
later, however, a massive earthquake levelled the city and caused
massive damage to the Palace. This date, 1700 BC, also marked the end of
the one phase in the history of Crete. Though the original palace was
virtually destroyed, the new dynasty work began almost immediately on
the next. The rebuilt Palace of Knossos was created to a far more
elaborate scale: it rose three or four stories high and contained many
extensive rooms and passages, including a luxuriously decorated throne
room. Curiously, many of the paintings and murals that dotted the palace
depicted the sport of bull-leaping, a precursor of bullfighting. The
Minoans of this age were well educated, with a complex mathematical and
philosophical base of knowledge.
The destruction of Knossos came at the hands of the warmongering
Mycenaean civilisation of Greece in 1400 BC. The rest of Crete soon
followed as Minoan civilisation collapsed. Knossos was no more.
Several things had led probably led the Nazis to Knossos. The first
reason was that the hole in the Crete mural had been centred on Knossos.
Also, Knossos was simply the finest, most advanced of all the cities of
Crete - so where else would you look to find influences of Atlantean
culture?
The second was the chronology of Knossos. Plato gave a figure for the
Lost Kingdom existing ten thousand years ago, but as Hermocrates wrote
in his introduction, this could be either one thousand or one hundred
thousand years ago.

[I think this point needs to be examined further. Hermocrates is a charactor in Timaeus by Plato.]

The former figure fitted in well with the history of
Knossos, given its rise in 3000 BC and eventual fall in 1400 BC. In
particular, the earthquake which levelled the palace in 1700 BC was
interesting - could it have been an aftershock of the destruction of
Atlantis?
The third, which the Nazis probably hadn't thought of at all, was the
admittedly slim connection between 'tall horns', and the obsession of
Knossos with bullfighting, and indeed the Minotaur legend. Indy thought
about this now, going over his Greek mythology. He'd had always held
that if you sifted through the soil of legend, you found grains of
truth. It was a tenuous link, to be sure, but tenuous was better than
none at all.
The last reason was that Knossos was still a city of mystery to
archaeologists. The site was first excavated in 1900 by Sir Arthur John
Evans, who uncovered the Royal Palace. He and later archaeologists
discovered up to three thousand stone tablets, containing scripts of a
language named (by the archaeologists) Linear A and Linear B. Neither
language had been deciphered, making the contents of the tablets a
complete mystery. Did the tablets contain the distilled wisdom of
Atlantis? Sophia would say yes. Indy wasn't so sure.
The labyrinth of King Minos had not, yet, been discovered. Legend had it
that the layout of the labyrinth was based upon a mural upon the floor
of the Palace. This mural had been found, but not the labyrinth itself.
Sir Arthur John Evans worked the site from 1900 to 1906, and continued
his work in the area until early 1935. Now the Nazis were here, only two
months later. "

Here are two more links: http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/barada/267/Siriusly/sup-plato.html
Http://www.piney/DocPlatoTim.html

The later has the text from Timaeus.

Spurious? Maybe, but keep these facts in mind:

*We know that Poseidon, a sea deity, originally started out as horse god. In the Ramayana, the Atlanteans are referred to as the "Asvins." And we have this meaning for the word 'Asvin' in the Indian language:

quote:

---

The meaning of As'vins (from as'va a horse, Persian asp, Greek ?????? Latin equus, Welsh *eck, is Horsemen. They were twin deities of whom frequent mention is made in the Vedas and the Indian myths. The As'vins have much in common with the Dioscuri of Greece, and their mythical genealogy seems to indicate that their origin was astronomical. They were, perhaps, at first the morning star and evening star. They are said to be the children of the sun and the nymph As'vinν, who is one of the lunar asterisms personified. In the popular mythology they are regarded as the physicians of the Gods. GORRESIO.

---

*We also know that the ocean we call Atlantic was considered a worldwide ocean in Plato's time, there wasn't the distinction between oceans we have now. Bathymetric maps have also revealed that one of the largest sunken areas in the world is in Indonesia.

*We also know that Plato travelled to India as a young man, just as he travelled to Crete and to Egypt. The Ramayana is also typically dated to around 400 or 300 b.c. Plato could have seen the Ramayana in his visit and that could have been the true basis for the Atlantis story, not the story in Sais (or Crete).

The name og Fin-land is actually based on Vin, as in Vin-land, the land of the sanctous vine from the old Allfather - as in the form of Santa Neck-klas - himself.

Follow the route via The Caspian Sea and figure hoe the old silk-route found N Europe and - alas - we may find the old, ancient travel and trade route - between the Maldives and Nort Cape, at the top of todays world.

If the Nordic myths are anyway close to their own origin - this is another interesting link towards the "high north" - as the location of origin of the "gods", - such as the Asvins. Thats also the direction in where to find Mount Meeru, etc.

You say

"*We know that Poseidon, a sea deity, originally started out as horse god. In the Ramayana, the Atlanteans are referred to as the "Asvins." And we have this meaning for the word 'Asvin' in the Indian language:"

I say:
This is free association. You have no facts to back up the assertion that the Atlanteans are referred to as Asvins in the Ramayana. Furthermore there is aboslutely no evidence to connect Lanka with Atlantis. Sri Lanka is a known country aka Ceylon. Whether or not Plato thought the Indiasn Ocean was the Atlantic is besides the point. Lanka is not Atlantis.

You Quote:

The meaning of As'vins (from as'va a horse, Persian asp, Greek ?????? Latin equus, Welsh *eck, is Horsemen. They were twin deities of whom frequent mention is made in the Vedas and the Indian myths. The As'vins have much in common with the Dioscuri of Greece, and their mythical genealogy seems to indicate that their origin was astronomical. They were, perhaps, at first the morning star and evening star. They are said to be the children of the sun and the nymph As'vinν, who is one of the lunar asterisms personified. In the popular mythology they are regarded as the physicians of the Gods."

The "connection" mentioned here is so convaluted that it is beyond further comment.

You write:
"We also know that the ocean we call Atlantic was considered a worldwide ocean in Plato's time, there wasn't the distinction between oceans we have now. Bathymetric maps have also revealed that one of the largest sunken areas in the world is in Indonesia."

I say:
From another post that after the Ice Age the level of the sea rose about 400 feet. This means that land all over the world was submerged. It happend in Indonesia and in Europe. I personlly believe this had nothing to do with Atlantis.

You say
"We also know that Plato travelled to India as a young man, just as he travelled to Crete and to Egypt. The Ramayana is also typically dated to around 400 or 300 b.c. Plato could have seen the Ramayana in his visit and that could have been the true basis for the Atlantis story, not the story in Sais (or Crete)."

I say:

Earlier in this thread someone said the event of the Ramayana days from 10,000 B.C. There is no proof of this and probably no serious researcher who would make such a claim. I will post info on the dating of the Ramayana later. When you say "we know" something, on what basis are you saying this. Do you mean "some people think" or is there hard evidence for what you are saying. Most of what I read here as "we know' is actually conjecture.

You say:
"Those who have studied the Ramayana are divided whether it places this Atlantis in Asia or in it's traditional spot, the Atlantic Ocean"

I say:
Who are "those" people. Are they serious researchers or dreamers? I have never come across any serious scholarship that supports this position. Yet you claim that "those who have studied the Ramayana" are divided on this point. I would say that this is not so.

The Ramayana was first writen down by Valmiki in about 300 B.C. This Sanskrit version told of Prince Rama and Princess Sita. Rama is depiced as a man, fighter and king. A later Hindi interpretation written in the 16th century by Tulsidas depicts Rama as an incarnation of God. The two versions are different. I will look further into a chronology for Rama. Even though the Ramayana is "Mythological", scholars should be able to fix an approximate date for the tale.

Here is a good link for the discussion of Rama's era.

http://www.hvk.org/specialrepo/rjm/ch9.html

It roughly places Rama early in the first millenium B.C.

Here is a sample:
"Now, according to Pargiter's reconstruction of the Dynastic synchronisms
of the Puranas, Rama-Dasarathi is about 30 generations or so, earlier
than Krishna of the Mahabharata. But, according to archaeological
evidence to date Ayodhya, the traditional homecity of Rama is not
earlier 8th century B.C., while in Hastinapur and other Mahabharata
sites, PGW culture equated with the Mahabharata pottery by Mr. B.B. Lal
is dated between 110-800 B.C., & the Mahabharata war was fought
according to Lal in 836 B.C., according to Pargiter in 950 B.C. So,
Rama who was not the founder of Ayodhya must have come much after 800
B.C., and should be nearer Buddha than Krishna; especially when many
archaeologists place PGW later than Lal has put it. But, the excavator
of Dwarka and the pioneer of marine archaeology, Mr. S.R. Rao has found
evidence of the submerged city of Dwarka of Krishna, which he would
place not later than 1500 B.C. Dwarka was later than Hastinapur which
was founded by Kuru, while the former was founded by Krishna himself.
All this discussion just points to the insufficiency of the available
archaeological date and lack of consensus among archaeologists about the
period of the Epic-Puranic heroes."
Personally I think that Rama lived some time between 1000 and 750 B.C. This is far removed from any possible connection with Atlantis (according to most theories of its era).

It has been suggested that Plato went to India (as a child?) and may have heard the Ramayana. The obvious question is did Plato understand Sanskrit because there were no Greek versions of this text. If he knew the story, then why did he not write about it using the names and locations found in the original text or (oral version).

There were some historical links between India and Greece (see Alexander). There is a wonderful book called "The Questions of King Malinda" which a philosophical discussion between a Greek King and a Buddhist Monk.

Gwen writes:

"* The Hindu traditions on the Yugas, as well as the similar ones of the Persians, hold that the eras of mankind last about 12,000 years each. On the other hand, these and other traditions maintain that we now enter, in the year 2,000, the final millennium of the present era, which started just after the demise of Atlantis. So, once again, we are led to the conclusion that the Atlantean cataclysm took place between 11,000 and 12,000 years ago."

This information is WRONG!

Here is the CORRECT info!

Krita Yuga 1,480,000 years
Treta Yuga 1,110,000 years
Drvapara Yuga 740,000 years
Kali Yuga 370,000 years

Kali Yuga is believed to have started about 5,000 years ago.

It seems to me that some people are trying to create their own "facts" and "data." Check out the sources for your info.

I am responding to your post, point by point as well, and hope you see my reasoning.

quote:

---

In the Ramayana, the Atlanteans are referred to as the "Asvins." And we have this meaning for the word 'Asvin' in the Indian language:" I say: This is free association. You have no facts to back up the assertion that the Atlanteans are referred to as Asvins in the Ramayana.

---

There is equally no evidence to back up your claim that Atlantis was inspired by Crete as well. My point is Plato, having gone to both places, could have been inspired by either one.

quote:

---

Furthermore there is aboslutely no evidence to connect Lanka with Atlantis. Sri Lanka is a known country aka Ceylon. Whether or not Plato thought the Indiasn Ocean was the Atlantic is besides the point. Lanka is not Atlantis.

---

On this, you seem to say very little but "trust me." Lanka is known as Ceylon, it could have also had a different name in more ancient times. It is irrelevant if the name was "Atlantis," or something similar. The fact remains that sunken cities HAVE been found in that area, unlike, so far anyway, the deepest parts of the Atlantic, which could have very well given a basis for the story.

You'll like this link:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_81164,0003.htm

(I'm not advocating that Lanka was Atlantis myself here, simply playing devil's advocate).

quote:

---

You Quote: The meaning of As'vins (from as'va a horse, Persian asp, Greek ?????? Latin equus, Welsh *eck, is Horsemen. They were twin deities of whom frequent mention is made in the Vedas and the Indian myths. The As'vins have much in common with the Dioscuri of Greece, and their mythical genealogy seems to indicate that their origin was astronomical. They were, perhaps, at first the morning star and evening star. They are said to be the children of the sun and the nymph As'vinν, who is one of the lunar asterisms personified. In the popular mythology they are regarded as the physicians of the Gods."

The "connection" mentioned here is so convaluted that it is beyond further comment.

---

No it isn't. The connection is clear to anyone who has actually READ Plato. Asvins & Poseidon: related to the horse gods. TWIN DEITIES: The Asvin were twin deities, Poseidon and Cleito gave birth to ten sets of MALE TWINS. I didn't think I needed to go into detail to explain that to you.

quote:

---

You write: "We also know that the ocean we call Atlantic was considered a worldwide ocean in Plato's time, there wasn't the distinction between oceans we have now. Bathymetric maps have also revealed that one of the largest sunken areas in the world is in Indonesia." I say: From another post that after the Ice Age the level of the sea rose about 400 feet. This means that land all over the world was submerged. It happend in Indonesia and in Europe. I personlly believe this had nothing to do with Atlantis.

---

That's your personal belief, and you are entitled to it. But one of the greatest arguments for keeping Atlantis in the time period that Plato places it in is PRECISELY because that is when the Ice Age ended, drowning many areas. This may be coincidence, who knows, it could also well be the event that inspired countless flood stories the world over, and the legend of Atlantis. Would that event be powerful enough to inspire oral traditons for so many years? Yes it would.

As for Indonesia, if you look at the map, the rise in the oceans is particularly apparent in that area. Professor Santos would disagree with you as to whether it was or not Atlantis.
http://www.atlan.org/

quote:

---

You say "We also know that Plato travelled to India as a young man, just as he travelled to Crete and to Egypt. The Ramayana is also typically dated to around 400 or 300 b.c. Plato could have seen the Ramayana in his visit and that could have been the true basis for the Atlantis story, not the story in Sais (or Crete)."

I say: Earlier in this thread someone said the event of the Ramayana days from 10,000 B.C. There is no proof of this and probably no serious researcher who would make such a claim. I will post info on the dating of the Ramayana later.

---

Of course, the Ramayana is said to be WRITTEN around 300 to 400 b.c., while the actual EVENTS are said to be taken place around 10,000 b.c., again in accordance with the traditional dating of Atlantis. I doubt you could come up with any DEFINITIVE statement as to when these dates are said to have occurred, because no one knows. Some even consider it pure fiction.

quote:

---

When you say "we know" something, on what basis are you saying this. Do you mean "some people think" or is there hard evidence for what you are saying. Most of what I read here as "we know' is actually conjecture. You say: "Those who have studied the Ramayana are divided whether it places this Atlantis in Asia or in it's traditional spot, the Atlantic Ocean" I say: Who are "those" people. Are they serious researchers or dreamers? I have never come across any serious scholarship that supports this position. Yet you claim that "those who have studied the Ramayana" are divided on this point. I would say that this is not so.

---

First off, I don't need to quote all the names of all the scientists pro and con to repeat a theory. Most scientists aren't interested in Atlantis anyway because, like you, they have already decided it is a pure myth. I take it that "serious" to you would mean someone who doesn't believe in Atlantis, while "dreamer" would be someone who does. That is really a prejudicial argument and also a defeatist one before it begins.

Second, it is really odd that you say this, since even MAINSTREAM ARCHAEOLOGY is drifting away from your own hypothesis, which is that CRETE was the sole inspiration for the Atlantis story. That hypothesis has been drifting away for years and is favored these days only by disinterested academics who don't seem to want to do the real work and actual investigation into Atlantis. Most of them haven't even READ Plato, see the Atlantis of science fiction and Edgar Cayce, and don't even know what the whole thing is all about:

Crete's control of the Mediterranean was economic, not militaristic, the geography by no stretch of the imagination matches Atlantis. It's situated in the wrong place, at the wrong time. The cataclysm of Santorini didn't even ruin the Minoan empire, it was still active some two hundred years later. Even if, as you suggest, it served as simple inspiration for the story of Atlantis, all you have there to inspire it are some bull paintings and flush toilets. The Minoan story, also being closer to Plato, was also probably common knowledge and very unremarkable to him. Lanka, beyond the Pillars, was probably much more exotic and enticing for him, and he could have seen the Ramayana just as easily as he could the Pillars of Neith, having visited both India and Egypt.

For any of us to be accurate on the dates, all these ancient civilizations would have had to have a means to tell time, at the time of each of these events, and I'm not certain they all did.

It could be that all the dates, Atlantis, the Ramayana, your Yugas, are all wrong.

What I am sayind in these posts is that it is a waste of time to present inaccurate information. Sites dealing with Atlantis are filled with conjecture passing for fact. There is no factual information in the Ramayana the could lead one to think that Lanka is Atlantis. It is conjecture. There is also nothing in it to date it at 10,000 b.c.- 1.000 b.c. is more likely. The information I have presented on the Yugas is a traditionally accepted version. The information that you have presented is a misreading of the data. Why are you presenting half-baked third hand info for others to sift through? Get your data straight before presenting it.

The information that I presented about the rise of the sea after the Ice Age is FACT. It is not a belief. Similarly the info that I have presented on the approximate number of generations between a 9500 bc Atlantis and Plato is FACT. It is also FACT that oral history gets modified over such long periods of time. Therefore it is reasonable to question all of Platos descriptions.

It is also FACT that Plato did not know about MINOAN civilisation and it is also reasonable to believe that stories (Oral History) of this nearby Bronze Age Civilsation are the basis for Plato's Atlantis stories. I have presented evidence to support this theory elsewhere on this site.

First, until some location is found to be, conclusively to be Atlantis, or unless we find some additional writings telling us that the whole story was a fabrication, ANY location is fair game for it, including sites in the east such as Indonesia and LANKA!

Second, I'm supposed to be the one to have my data in error when you make statements, as "spurious" as this one..?

quote:

---

It is also FACT that Plato did not know about MINOAN civilisation and it is also reasonable to believe that stories (Oral History) of this nearby Bronze Age Civilsation are the basis for Plato's Atlantis stories.

---

That information is...wrong!!

quote:

---

Very little was known about Minoan Crete before the great excavations of Greek and foreign archaeologists that began about 1900, and the discovery of the palaces of Knossos and Phaestos <phaistos.htm>, with their astonishing architecture and wonderful finds. Its history had passed into the realm of legend and remained a distant memory in Greek tradition and mythology. The ancient authors speak mainly of Minos, the king who had his capital at Knossos, and was a wise lawgiver, a fair judge (who therefore judged souls in Hades after his death, along with Rhadamanthys and Aiakos) and a great sea - dominator. Homer calls him "..companion of mighty Zeus..", and Thucydides informs us that he was the first man to hold sway over the Aegean with his fleet, and that he captured and colonized the Cyclades, driving out the Carians, and freeing the seas from piracy. Plato speaks of the heavy tribute that the inhabitants of Attica were compelled to pay to Minos - the historical basis of the myth of Theseus can easily be recognized - and Aristotle attributes his thalassocracy to the geographical position of Crete.

---

To put it bluntly, the Greeks had their OWN myths about Crete, it WAS known to them, all the great writers of their times, and those myths did NOT involve Atlantis. In other words, your whole theory seems to rest on a faulty assumption, like that of most Atlantis skeptics It is as I said, Crete was written about time and again, and therefore, could not have been Atlantis. The Egyptian legend of "Keifu," also refers to Crete, the Egyptians being the other nation involved in the telling of the story. Since both the Egyptians and the Greeks has already assigned their own histories to Crete, it would be redundant to create another. That is a common mistake among the cynics who are simply out to DISPROVE the theory without doing the proper homework on it.

As I also said earlier, the geography also in no way matches that of Atlantis. I think I would take the Sea People over Crete but then, they're wrong, too.

I think I see part of the problem here: you haven't READ Plato! Or have you..? The details of Timaeus and Critias and understanding Plato are crucial to learning any new theory on Atlantis. In other words, you have to read Plato first before you can comment, or even seek to disprove him.

You can't just use the time tested argument that he was a philosopher and therefore, made everything up. A philosopher is a seeker of TRUTH.

By the way, I do hope you take this little disagreement in the spirit that it was intended, and not personally.

Here is an essay written by Andrew Collins, one of the best of the modern Atlantis researchers. He puts forth the case against Crete far better than I could:

quote:

---

Atlantis as Crete or Thera

The idea that Atlantis might be a memory of the fabulous palaces, courts and temples of Minoan Crete was proposed originally in an anonymous letter published by The Times newspaper in 1909 and found later to have been written by an Irish student named K. T. Frost. It was subsequently developed by a number of Mediterranean writers and historians (see reading list) and is today the most academically accepted theory on the origins of the Atlantis legend.

In the opinion of many, Plato constructed his Atlantis account from rumours and stories which circulated the Hellenic world concerning the former existence of the great sea-faring nation which had existed on the island of Crete and in other parts of the Aegean. It has been suggested that the Minoan culture was devastated in the aftermath which accompanied the eruption of Thera and the subsequent tsunamis that would have followed this cataclysmic event in c. 1628, 1450, or 1380 BC, depending on the source consulted. Archaeological evidence shows that ports and cities on Crete, as well as the Minoan town of Akrotiri on Thera itself, were destroyed in the manner alluded to by Plato in his works the Timaeus and Critias, written c. 350 BC.

As further evidence of this theory, it is proposed that the Minoans' fixation with the cult of the bull reflects Plato's statements regarding the bulls that in the Critias are said to have wandered freely in the courts of Atlantis' Temple of Poseidon. Every fifth or sixth year, the princes of the Atlantean islands would come together to swear allegiance to the holy laws. At such times one of these bulls would be sacrificed and its blood allowed to spill on an inscribed pillar made of orichalc, `mountain copper', perhaps a form of bronze.

It is further considered that Plato's account of the naval war between the Atlantean aggressor and the Athenian nation preserves the memory of Crete's oppression of mainland Greece before the fall of the Minoan culture.

All these are attractive ideas which might help explain certain aspects of Plato's Atlantis account. Yet Plato states clearly that Atlantis lay beyond the Pillars of Hercules - mythical rocks which stood at the entrance to the Atlantic Ocean. Moreover, Plato says that Atlantis was situated in front of an `opposite continent' reached via a series of `other' islands by `voyagers' from his own world. He also places the destruction of Atlantis at a date post 8570 BC in the Timaeus and c. 9421 BC in his later work the Critias.

Scholars, such as by Greek geologist A. A. Galanopoulos, get around this dating problem by suggesting that the dates and measurements given in the Timaeus and Critias are wrong. This is due to a mistranslation of the assumed Egyptian texts shown by an old priest in the temple of Sais in the Nile Delta to Solon, whom Plato asserts learnt of the story of Atlantis following a visit to Egypt in c. 570 BC. In the process, the famous Greek statesman somehow managed to confuse the hieroglyph that denotes the number 100 with the character representing a figurative value of 1000. If this were so, it would change the date implied for the foundation of Athens from 9000 years before Solon's visit to just 900 years, giving a revised date of c. 1470 BC, close to the traditional date of c. 1450 BC for the Thera eruption. Although this might seem like a neat and logical solution to both the problem posed by the very early time-frame suggested for the destruction of Atlantis and the unimaginable dimensions of Atlantis' city and plain outlined in the Critias, this argument is seriously flawed. Those Egyptologists who have taken time to examine the problem assert that no such confusion can have occurred. The hieroglyphs used to denote the numerical values of 100 and 1000 are visually quite different. Solon - or anyone else for that matter - could not have made such a mistake. This is made clear in an important essay on the links between Egypt and Atlantis by J. Gwyn Griffiths, who points out:
If we assume a hieroglyphic form of the prototype, there seems to be very scanty ground for the proposal, since the normal forms for 100 and 1000 are so sharply distinguished.

Furthermore, we know from Plato's final work, The Laws, which appeared in c. 347 BC, that he really did intend to mean thousands, as opposed to hundreds, of years, for here he states that Egyptian art goes back 11,000 years. Since Solon does not feature in The Laws, we can say that this early time period was not determined from a misreading of Egyptian numerals. These early dates almost certainly derive from Egyptian king-lists, like the Royal Canon of Turin, which speak of divine and semi-divine beings who ruled for many thousands of years before the appearance of the first mortal pharaoh around 3100 BC. It was these mythical reigns that defined the greater antiquity of the Egyptian civilisation, and not those of the dynastic kings.

We also now know that although the Thera eruption devastated the Aegean and caused tsunami waves which wrecked towns as far as the eastern Mediterranean, it did not destroy the Minoan civilisation of Crete. This continued on for several generations after the catastrophe and was superceded by the later Mycenean peoples from mainland Greece.

For these reasons alone, Plato's Atlantic island could not have been Crete, Thera or any other location in the Aegean. Nor could it have been placed on the Turkish mainland in the time-frame of the Thera eruption as has been proposed by at least two authors (James and Zangger) in recent years.

Reading list
James, Peter, The Sunken Kingdom: The Atlantis Mystery Solved, 1995, Pimlico, London, 1996
Luce, J.V., The End of Atlantis: New Light on an Old Legend, 1969, Thames and Hudson/Book Club Associates, 1973
Mavor, James W., Voyage to Atlantis, Souvenir Press, London, 1969
Galanopoulos, A. G., & E. Bacon, Atlantis: The truth behind the legend, Nelson, London, 1969
Zangger, Eberhard, The Flood from Heaven: Deciphering the Atlantis Legend, Sidgwick & Jackson/Book Club Associates, London, 1992

---

Thank you for the article.

The researcher brings out some interesting points. However I have adressed most of these already.

I'll grant it that the Greeks of Plato's time might have had sketchy info on the Minoans but this does not mean that they did not put together the Atlantis story based on hearsay info that was really Minoan in origin. The article falls back on the usual approach used to attack any Mediterraneam base for Atlantis. It goes for the "beyond the Pillars" and "9,000 years earlier" line. I have addressed this. 9,000 years of oral history would disort all the facts and "beyond the Pillars..." just means Plato didn't know where it was. The description that Plato gives for Atlantis, if it is derived from 9,000 years of oral history, is bound to contain error (the same goes for 1000 years). So, if the description does not match Crete, that is neither here nor there! The article does point out the parallels between Minoan Civilsation and Atlantis. The former fact, the later is historical fiction.

I also disagree with your assertion that any place could be Atlantis. Many of the theories presented claim that Atlantis is a sunken continent some 1 to 2 miles below the sea. Any good Geologist will tell you that no continent has sunk in the past 12,000 years.

Here is a reference book on the topic:
UNEARTHING ATLANTIS: AN ARCHEOLOGICAL ODYSSEY
by Charles Pellegrino
York, Random House, 1991, 325 pp. with Bibliography and Index, $23.00

The book argues for the case that the Minoans were the Atlanteans mentioned by Plato and that the eruption of Thera (which means "fear" in Greek) was a contributing factor to the demise/myth.

--
I am aware of the differences between the historical demise of the Minoans and the "fictional" demise of the Atlantians. Fiction often makes a better story!

Read Plato on story telling:

From Plato's Republic:

"[Republic 376] In this education, you would include stories, would you
not?… These are of two kinds, true stories and fiction. Our education
must use both and start with fiction. . . . And the first step, as you
know, is always what matters most, particularly when we are dealing with
those who are young and tender. That is the time when they are easily
moulded and when any impression we choose to make leaves a permanent
mark (Desmond Lee translation).

Later, Plato writes, prefacing the "Myth of Blood and Soil,"

[Republic: 414 b-c] "Now I wonder if we could contrive one of those
convenient stories we were talking about a few minutes ago," I asked.
"Some magnificent myth that would in itself carry conviction to our
whole community, including, if possible the Guardians themselves. . . .
Nothing new-a fairy story like those the poets tell and have persuaded
people to believe about the sort of thing that often happened 'once upon
a time,' but never does now and is not likely to: indeed it would need a
lot of persuasion to get people to believe it" (Desmond Lee
translation)."

I think the Atlantis story was told to exemplify some of the ideas found in the Republic.

quote:

---

It goes for the "beyond the Pillars" and "9,000 years earlier" line. I have addressed this. 9,000 years of oral history would disort all the facts and "beyond the Pillars..." just means Plato didn't know where it was. The description that Plato gives for Atlantis, if it is derived from 9,000 years of oral history, is bound to contain error (the same goes for 1000 years).

---

True, if the story was passed down from oral tradition alone, it would be bound to have errors. Yet, as explained in Timaeus:

quote:

---

And whatever happened either in your country or in ours, or in any other region of which we are informed-if there were any actions noble or great or in any other way remarkable, they have all been written down by us of old, and are preserved in our temples. Whereas just when you and other nations are beginning to be provided with letters and the other requisites of civilized life, after the usual interval, the stream from heaven, like a pestilence, comes pouring down, and leaves only those of you who are destitute of letters and education; and so you have to begin all over again like children, and know nothing of what happened in ancient times, either among us or among yourselves.

As touching your citizens of nine thousand years ago, I will briefly inform you of their laws and of their most famous action; the exact particulars of the whole we will hereafter go through at our leisure in the sacred registers themselves.

---

Plato even mentions how the Egyptian records were preserved:

quote:

---

at such times those who live upon the mountains and in dry and lofty places are more liable to destruction than those who dwell by rivers or on the seashore. And from this calamity the Nile, who is our never-failing saviour, delivers and preserves us.

---

Traditionally, the Temple of Neith is one of the temples thought to have held the Atlantis story, and it's existence is fact, but it now lies in rubble. From the Egyptian register, Solon is said to have created his own writings. Since we have already established that the Egyptian symbol for '100' is different from that of '1000,' he could not have gotten the time period wrong. Equally, there could be no dispute on where the Pillars of Hercules were, as ALL ancient sources agree that they were where the modern Straits of Gibraltar are. All these things taken into consideration, the story passed down for so long a time is not as incredible as it might first sound.

quote:

---

The article does point out the parallels between Minoan Civilsation and Atlantis.

---

The parallels are as follows: a sea faring nation that held economic sway over the Mediterranean, dealt with both Egypt and Greece and had bull paintings. Crete was not an empire along the lines of Atlantis, though, and the similarities are really superficial at best.

Here are the traditional arguments for Crete being Atlantis:

(1) Plato meant to say "in the middle of Asia and Libya," not greater than.

(2) He was referring to pillars in Greece, not the Straits of Gibraltar. (already discussed)

(3) Solon mistook the Egyptian symbols for '100,' and '1000' (again already discussed).

Which leaves the geography of Crete and Santorini, which, in NO WAY matches that of Atlantis. Santorini is a fraction of the size of the capital city of Atlantis, there is no large rectangular plain and the mountains also do not match. We don't even know for sure what Santorini's meaning actually was to the Minoans. Not only that, of course it's still inside the Mediterranean, the main point:

quote:

---

This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent.

---

In no way can this description be mistaken for the island of Crete, especially given the factors I outlined.

quote:

---

I also disagree with your assertion that any place could be Atlantis. Many of the theories presented claim that Atlantis is a sunken continent some 1 to 2 miles below the sea. Any good Geologist will tell you that no continent has sunk in the past 12,000 years.

---

That is a generalized argument that takes more into consideration, Edgar Cayce's work than Plato's. Plato does not mention "continent," he mentions a large island. Libya and Asia were not what we think of them today, very little of Asia was even known to the west for one thing at the time, hence it was more along the lines of something smaller. A large island still could be submerged in the Atlantic, with only the tops of it above the sea. Many ancient civilizations were drowned when the Ice Age ended, ancient people tended to build by the sea.

quote:

---

Here is a reference book on the topic:
UNEARTHING ATLANTIS: AN ARCHEOLOGICAL ODYSSEY
by Charles Pellegrino
York, Random House, 1991, 325 pp. with Bibliography and Index, $23.00

---

I have the book, in paperback, along with two other good books on Minoan theory: "Voyage to Atlantis" by James Mavor and "End of Atlantis," by J. Luce. They are, all three, very good explorations into Santorini and Crete, but all three authors have only a passing interest in Atlantis and have to put so many disclaimers on their work to make their theories work to get them to work (listed above), that it's almost comical.
I'm not saying that Minoan Crete is not a fascinating topic worth studying, just that it's not Atlantis. I can't stress enough that Crete was KNOWN to the Greeks. Other writers of Plato's time, Aristotle and Plutarch, for instance, discussed Atlantis as a separate entity, unconfused by any case of possible mistaken identity. The ancient people were far smarter than we give them credit for. The works of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle formed the entire foundation for western thought.

quote:

---

I think the Atlantis story was told to exemplify some of the ideas found in the Republic.

---

And yet, Plato also had the Republic, he did not need to make the same points again. I liked your Plato quotes, but feel they were taken a bit out of context. The quotes also seem to press the point I was trying to make earlier which is that Plato, having no problem with saying something is a fiction when it it truly is, would not insist time and again that the Atlantis story were "true" if it were not:

quote:

---

From Critias:
"Concerning the country the Egyptian priests said what is not only probable but manifestly true..."
From Timaeus:
Critias: "Then listen, Socrates, to a tale which, though strange, is certainly true, having been attested by Solon, who was the wisest of the seven sages..."
Concerning the war between Athens & Atlantis:
Socrates: "And what is this ancient famous action of the Athenians, which Critias declared, on the authority of Solon, to be not a mere legend, but an actual fact?"
Socrates: "And what other, Critias, can we find that will be better than this, which is natural and suitable to the festival of the goddess, and has the very great advantage of being a fact and not a fiction?"

---

Regarding the Minoan theory and Atlantis, the topic is outside of mainstream scholarship and it is understanding that serious scholars would qualify there findings and see there contibution as part of a work in progress. This is the sign of good research. Here and elswhere on the net we find many examples of bad scholarship and self-promotion. I have been writing on this topic for a few years now and debating anyone who likes. I am doing this as a hobby.. for fun. One thing I do not do is use the site as a dumping ground for half-baked and spurious(unchecked) information.

quote:

---

In your last post you claim that the story of Atlantis was preserved in written for for over 9000 years. And you use a preference form Plato to back this up. My point is that Plato was telling a story and used such tools to make the story more believable. Even "Once upon a time" is really a lie if you take it literally. If it was preserver for 9000 years, what language was it written down in--what script.

---

The language came from EGypt, Jshsitar. It would have been hieroglyphics, though initially, the story might have been told through oral tradition. If we are to believe Egyptian history, as Egyptians tell it, not Egyptologists, it is far older than it is believed.

quote:

---

Even the writting of the Minoans is not understandable to current scholarship. Unless you can prove otherwise..

---

No, Linear B has been deciphred, yet Linear A has yet to be. It is interesting, though, that what has been deciphred bears little resemblance to anything spoken of by Plato. The Minoan had a name for Poseidon, "Lord," but their main deity seems to have been a goddess, who plays more the lines of an Earth Mother, like Gaia. They seemed also to be a more artistic, rather than a militaristic people. Also, none of the landmarks mentioned in Critias for Atlantis have been found there - not temple of Poseidon, no sacrificial altar stone, where the bull was sacrificed.

Incidentally, the main thing to recommend Crete as Atlantis, bull worship, took place throughout the Mediterranean for THOUSANDS OF YEARS before Crete was even SETTLED. The cave paintings of Altamira show bulls, and they are also presence in the culture of Catal Huyek.

In regards to "written records," Plato also mentions that the calamity that befell Atlantis wiped out all writing. This has been said to have happened many times over the ages.

quote:

---

Regarding the Minoan theory and Atlantis, the topic is outside of mainstream scholarship and it is understanding that serious scholars would qualify there findings and see there contibution as part of a work in progress. This is the sign of good research.

---

No, it isn't, its a sign of SLOPPY research. Most of the "scholars" who try and link Plato and Crete to Atlantis haven't even read Plato, they don't take into account that Plato and many others had already visited Crete, that the Greeks already had their own legends of the Minoans, and that they don't even know enough about Crete to make that kind of judgment on it. It's attractive to them because Santorini was a circular shaped island that was blown away by a volcano: culture, size, geography, history, time and location, YOU NAME IT, it doesn't MATCH!

quote:

---

Here and elswhere on the net we find many examples of bad scholarship and self-promotion. One thing I do not do is use the site as a dumping ground for half-baked and spurious(unchecked) information. Most of the info you provided linking the Ramayana, Yuga cycles etc and Atlantis... falls into this category.

---

To which I say (still), unless Atlantis is proven deinitively to have been one thing or another, have existed or not existed, anything is fair game. There's no question a lot theorists are"reaching" in an attempt to prove an Atlantis connection, but I don't think that the Indian writings yet fall into that category.

I also remind you that you still haven't provided any information about what era that the Ramayana was said to have taken place in and that, on the possibility of Lanka being Atlantis, all you seem to say is "trust me." We probably agree in that it was written in 300 or 400 b.c., but I can't see anything in that writing iself that SPECIFICALLY gives a reference to it's time frame.

In terms of this site being a "dumping ground," well, that's to be expectd when it come to Atlantis, I suppose. But one might also say that bringing up the Minoan theory is no better, as the connections with that being Atlantis are "spurious," at best.

My point on dumping is still valid. You posted a list of alleged reference to Atlantis that, from what I can see, are pure congecture mixed with false information. Most of this was geared towards backing up the 9000 year prior theory.

quote:

---

As for Scholars who hold to a version of the Minoan theory not reading Plato... give us a break. Everything does not have to match Plato for reason's already given above. It is my view (and those of many others) that Plato was writing historical fiction and creating an image of a civilisation by drawing from recent history not from 9000 years pior to his time.

---

Jshsitar, these are the elements that do not match Plato's account:

Culture, size, geography, history, time and location

We might as well be talking about a different place. It has always been academic propaganda that Atlantis and Crete are even an approximate match. As I have said before, the Greeks already had their own myths of Crete that bear no resemblance to Atlantis. Equally, "the Pillars of Hercules," can only refer to the Straits of Gibraltar. And it doesn't matter how many academics still support this view, once upon a time, the best scientists all believed that the world was flat as well. Clearly, the scholars who came up with Crete as Atlantis in the first place hadn't even really studied Plato.

As for "dumping," I still maintain, until someone conclusively finds Atlantis, or proof of it's nonexistence, we don't really know what is exactly related to it and what isn't.

I have not always been interested in Atlantis. In a way, I am not all that interested in it now. I started posting on this topic about two years ago as a result of, or in reaction to, information that was being posted on Farshores. I was enganged in a debate with another poster who held to the Atlantis in the Atlantic theory. The course of the debate led me to the views that I now hold. I think the Santorini/ Minoan Teory makes the most sense. I would say that I did not have a theory prior to about two years ago, except for the fact that I did not believe the Atlantic theory, nor did I believe Plato's description was accurate. I also did not believe the 9000 years part and would have been inclined to argue for an Atlantis in the Mediterranean.

As I have posted earlier, from my point of view, little really has to "match" Plato's description. Rather I am interested in the general setting, the disaster aspect and the culture depicted. I think that there are several "matches" in a general sort of way. Likewise if we interpret Plato's writings as an assortment of clues derived from hearsay, then, to me this points to a location that is relatively nearby and one that had reached a Bronze Age level of sophistication. I do not think that Plato had all the answers. He took bits of info from various sources and wrote a work of historical fiction to try to depict a culture that was compatible with the views he expressed in "The Republic."

[This message has been edited by jshsitar (edited 12-23-2004).]

[This message has been edited by jshsitar (edited 12-23-2004).]

Just an update on RAMA and Atlantis etc.

The Ramayana was first writen down by Valmiki in about 300 B.C. This Sanskrit version told of Prince Rama and Princess Sita. Rama is depiced as a man, fighter and king. A later Hindi interpretation written in the 16th century by Tulsidas depicts Rama as an incarnation of God. The two versions are different. I will look further into a chronology for Rama. Even though the Ramayana is "Mythological", scholars should be able to fix an approximate date for the tale.

Here is a link for debate on Rama's Birth date etc. http://www.hindunet.org/alt_hindu/1994/msg00584.html

here a more scholarly link http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Pantheon/4789/Articles/General/hindu_chronology.html

The former link suggests that Rama was born in 7323 B.C.
It draws infor from astrological observations, lineages etc. as found in the Ramayana.

The latter suggests that he lived after 1500 B.C. It compares the defeat of Ravana by Rama to the subjugation of the Dravidian peoples by the Aryans. The latter are believed to have entered the Indian sub-continent around 1500 B.C. This is controversial.

It should be noted that both perspectives are biased.
The former promotes a Hindu Nationalist agenda and the later is Rationalist

Thank you for sharing your beliefs on Atlantis with me. I didn't believe that you were ever interested in the literal interpretation of the story but wanted to be sure. I don't hold that against you, I believe that there should be room for every different viewpoint here.

A word about the recent tsunami tragedies in Lanka and Indonesia. I think it should tell us all just how fragile life is and just how we have always been at the mercy of the elements throughout any time, even this, supposedly the most advanced of times. Of course, I'm praying for them all.

quote:

---

Just a quick reference to your assertion that scholars that hold to the Minoan theory have not studdied Plato. I think what you mean is that they have not come to the same conclusions as you have. I am sure that they have read the same written material. I have mention the "Pillars of Hercules" in another post. It only means that he did not know where it was. Or he did not want people to know he was talking about Crete!!! Maybe its a classic case of plagerism avoidance!

---

Here is another article you might wish to give your opinion on:

quote:

---

THE SANSKRIT WRITINGS

The Sanskrit writings of ancient India contain detailed accounts of Atlantis, and even assert that Atlantis was destroyed as the result of a war between the gods and Asuras (recalling the war between the gods and the Titans). Present day scholars are so steeped in Greek and Roman (western) culture that Indian sources are too often ignored.

A passage in Sanskrit from the Mahabharata

The Vishnu Purana (2000 B.C.), the oldest of the Hindu Puranas, speaks of Atala, the "White Island," which is one of the seven dwipas (islands) belonging to Patala (Book II, chaps. i, ii, and iii). The Purana locates Atala geographically on the seventh (heat, or climate) zone, which according to Col. Wilford (the translator) is 24 to 28 degrees north latitude: which puts it in the same latitude as the Canary Islands just off the North African coast.

At least one "authority" has attempted to identify Atala with Italy, but Italy is not an island. Also, Italy is 38 to 45 degrees north latitude. Moreover, I fail to see how the "Western Ocean" mentioned could be the Mediterranean, when the Karna Parva of the Mahabharata clearly describes Africa as comprising that Ocean's eastern coastline. If the ocean mentioned is indeed the Atlantic Ocean, then the west shore of Africa would make up part of its eastern shorline. Col. Wilford rightly calls Atala, "Atlantis, the White Island" (Wilford, 1808).

The terms "Atala" and "White Island" are used also by the Bhavishna Purana. Here it is stated that Samba, having built a temple dedicated to Surya (the Sun), made a journey to Saka-Dwipa "beyond the salt water" looking for the Magas (magicians), worshippers of the Sun. He is directed in his journey by Surya himself (i.e., journeys west following the Sun), riding upon Garuda (the flying vehicle of Krishna and Vishnu) he lands at last among the Magas.

The Mahabharata contains more than one account of a powerful islandic empire in the Atlantic which sank to the bottom of the "Western Ocean" following a horrendous war. As in the Vishnu Purana, it is called "the White Island, Atala" (which can be linked linguistically with the word "Atlantis"). Atala is described as an "island of great splendour,