Pages: [1]   Go Down
            Author                                        Posts          (Topic read 55685 times)
Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« on: November 03, 2009, 09:13:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Atlantis, which, as was saying, was an island greater in extent than Libya and Asia, and when afterwards sunk by an earthquake, became an impassable barrier of mud to voyagers sailing from hence to any part of the ocean." (Critias, Benjamin Jowett translation)


Although in Plato's account Solon informs us that Atlantis, an island continent greater in size than Asia and Libya combined, sank beneath the sea in the span of a day, a key discovery detailed below exposes the circumstances influencing this clearly false assumption while also demonstrating the legitimacy of an unsubmerged South America as the possible site of Atlantis.

Brief Overview
  • There are ONLY TWO times in history where we find accounts of a boundless continent surrounding the world's oceans.
  • BOTH occur at the time of SOLON: The Atlantis saga and Anaximander's cosmological theory.

  • I M P L I C A T I O N S:

    1. Solon was distorting the original account to conform to his limited worldview. — Hence the original Egyptian account detailing the plausible sinking of the capital delta island became the unrealistic sinking of an entire island continent. (Note how similarly a limited worldview led Herodotus to discount the tale of a voyage around Africa because he was unable to reconcile the stated position of the sun though it was correct.)

    2. Solon was most definitely referring to the Strait of Gibraltar as the 'Pillars of Hercules'. — In Anaximander's and Solon's worldview, this strait was the pivotal 'narrow entrance' positioned between the 'harbor' like Mediterranean and the 'true sea', Oceanus.

    3. Plato's dialogues were genuine and not fabricated. — Plato adhered to the belief that the world was spherical, but the dialogues clearly convey a much older worldview held by Solon. While obviously not conclusive, it does add to the evidence pool. It is intriguing that Plato would rely so heavily on such an elaborately contrived detail likely lost on many of his contemporaries who shared his worldview. especially as it necessitated the creation of not one, but two continents beyond the pillars where the introduction of one would have itself proven a hard sell.

    4. Solon introduced TWO CONTINENTS beyond the Pillars of Hercules with islands forming a path between. — The two continents were the island continent of Atlantis and a larger continent lying at the opposite end of a path of islands. Today we know that there ARE two large and distinct continents beyond the Pillars, North and South America, and they are accompanied by a set of islands, the Caribbean Islands, laying a very distinct pathway between them.




Atlantis: The Continent That Solon Sank

My approach to deducing Atlantis’ location was based on maintaining the strictest adherence to Solon’s geographical specifications reconciled within the context of contemporary views. An obvious example is when Plato’s dialogues state that Atlantis was “the size of Asia and Libya combined” it is understood that these regions were perceived much differently then than they are today. Asia referred to an area mostly confined to Asia Minor, while Libya was confined to a portion of North Africa. (Obviously the continent of South America falls within this range of being larger than these two combined.)

A finding which shed substantial light on Atlantis came about when I discerned the significance of Solon’s comparison of the Mediterranean Sea with another much larger body of water referred to as the ‘true ocean’ and also Solon’s introduction of a new mysterious 'boundless' continent. Following is the relevant passage from Timaeus with my interpretation of the described landforms inserted in brackets:

Quote
The island [Atlantis/South America] was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands [the Caribbean Islands], and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent [North America] which surrounded the true ocean; 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 this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island [Atlantis/South America] and several others [the Caribbean Islands], and over parts of the continent [North America]." (Timaeus, Benjamin Jowett translation)

If you look at other Atlantis theories that actually attempt to address this passage, you will find most reconcile the ‘true ocean’ and the surrounding continent to our current worldview. Rand and Rose Flem-Ath attempt to validate their popular Antarctica theory by suggesting that Solon was describing the oceans surrounding Antarctica with all continents combined composing the opposite continent which encircled this ‘true ocean’. (Fig. 1)

Figure 1

US Navy's specialized polar projection submitted by Rand and Rose Flem-Ath as proof that the world's continents can be distorted to approach the appearance of a continent surrounding the world's oceans.

Unfortunately there are still many large openings in this 'surrounding continent' and to believe that an ancient civilization just happened to share a similar distorted view of the world is a huge stretch. The above map is a unique modern projection that is extremely complex and exemplifies the capabilities of highly sophisticated mathematics applied to mapmaking. If we were seriously looking for a map projection that distorted the world enough so that a continent appeared to be surrounding a large ‘true sea’, we need look no further than an arctic polar projection map as in the image below. (Fig. 2) This creates a much more appealing concept of a 'surrounding continent' by distorting and exaggerating the size of the Antarctic continent and wrapping it around a truly enormous world ocean. Yet like the Flem-Aths' projection, the distortion may give the appearance of an enclosed sea, but aside from complex projection maps, no reasonable person would ever describe the actual continent of Antarctica as encircling the world's oceans and all other landforms.

Figure 2

A simple polar projection centered over the North Pole which gives the appearance that Antarctica surrounds the world's oceans. Yet like the Flem-Aths' projection, the distortion may give the appearance of an enclosed sea, but aside from complex projection maps, no reasonable person would ever describe the actual continent of Antarctica as encircling the world's oceans and all other landforms.

Jim Allen, who like me, maintains that South America is Atlantis, albeit with the capital city located high in the Andes Mountains, reckons that the ‘true ocean’ was the Pacific Ocean, while Eurasia represents the opposite continent which could be reached via the many islands of the Pacific. (Fig. 3) It seems odd however that Solon's account would include a description of Eurasia which lies exceedingly far from South America, but somehow omit all references to a much closer continent like North America which is just next door and actually attached to 'Atlantis'.

Figure 3

Jim Allen's interpretation of South America as Atlantis with the many islands of the Pacific highlighted to demonstrate a path to Eurasia which Allen considers to be the continent surrounding the 'true ocean'.

Of course each of these theories requires us to make unlikely assumptions, that 1) Solon was directly conveying a description provided by an ancient people extraordinarily well traveled having a similar worldview to our own, and 2) Somehow a collection of multiple distinct landforms can be referred to as being a single unbroken, ‘boundless’ continent that entirely surrounds a large ocean of water.

It becomes clear that these two interpretations of Solon's 'boundless continent' are actually a bit over thought and contrived when you place Solon's description within the context of his era. Having a familiarity with ancient Greek maps, I came to realize that Solon was providing a slightly skewed description of the ancient Greek worldview.

Greek maps were composed of two large bodies of water (Fig. 4):
  • 1) The Mediterranean Sea which is encircled by the three continents of Europe, Libya and Asia, and
  • 2) The much larger 'true ocean', Oceanus, surrounding the three continents.

The only link between these two seas was a small entrance into the Mediterranean known then as the Pillars of Hercules and known today as the Strait of Gibraltar.

Figure 4
Click on image to see enlarged view.

Reconstructions of Homer's (left) and Hecataeus’ (right) world maps, which demonstrate the ancient Greek worldview of two major bodies of water, the Mediterranean Sea and Oceanus separated only by the Pillars of Hercules, or the Strait of Gibraltar as we know it today.

The skewed portion of Solon's description was the inclusion of a continent which was unbroken or ‘boundless’ completely surrounding Oceanus. Solon’s comparison of the two known bodies of water makes it clear that the Mediterranean Sea “within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea,” apparently not a harbor with any such opening or entrance and no large bodies of water beyond it, therefore “the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent.”

As it turns out a contemporary of Solon, Anaximander, theorized that the world was cylindrical in nature and Europe, Libya and Asia sat atop one of its flat surfaces surrounded by Oceanus which in turn was contained by the outer lip of the cylinder, a “boundless” unbroken ring of land. (Fig. 5) Since there are no boundless continents surrounding an ocean in the real world and the only historical descriptions of such a landform lie in a theory formulated in Solon’s time and in an account of Atlantis also from Solon’s time, simple logic dictates that these two boundless continents surrounding a large 'true ocean' were one and the same.

Figure 5
Click on image to see enlarged view.

Anaximander's concept of the world as a cylinder. A view which Solon apparently adopted.

So it is almost certain that Solon was reconciling the Egyptian account of two large continents in the waters beyond the Mediterranean Sea to his limited worldview depicted in the image above. The problem with this limited view was that the Greeks believed Oceanus was an enormous river forming a continuous stream around the known world with only a few small islands scattered about, but there were no continental landmasses breaching its surface.

Solon could associate the Egyptian's inclusion of an opposite continent (North America) to the outer ring of land surrounding Oceanus, as this would have been the only other continent sized landmass known to be raised above the sea besides Europe, Libya and Asia—this mistaken association explaining the altered description of North America—but how could he reconcile the existence of a continent-sized Atlantis?

The Egyptians described the capital city as an island and they also related “in a single day and night” an island “disappeared in the depths of the sea.” I believe that the island that actually sank was the capital city; falling victim to quakes per the original account that likely brought about tsunamis while the unstable nature of a delta city would have seen catastrophic liquefaction and the rapid subsidence of structures and perhaps the entire island.  Picture the slowly sinking city of New Orleans being suddenly hit by a large quake. The resulting cataclysm would likely replicate the destruction recounted in Plato’s dialogues with a massive city disappearing beneath the sea in a single day. This scenario is far more reasonable than the preposterous and mythical notion of an entire continent sinking beneath the sea in the space of a day.

So why would Solon claim instead that the whole of Atlantis sank beneath the sea? It appears that Solon, unwilling to accept the existence of another continental landmass in Oceanus, was finally forced to believe that the Egyptian account of a sinking island was not limited to the small island capital, but the entire island continent of Atlantis. By interpreting the Egyptian account in this way, Solon would be able to maintain the Greek worldview of an unimpeded ‘Ocean stream’ that now flowed over a submerged Atlantis as in the image above.

In reality, there are no island continents larger than the size of Libya and Asia combined lying beneath the world’s oceans, so if we are to accept that Solon’s account is based on fact and that it was the continent sized landmass described, it seems very reasonable that it was Solon himself who sank Atlantis to fit his preconceptions. If Atlantis truly existed as a continent, then the majority or all of it still sits above the sea and a string of islands likely still lay a path to 'the whole of the opposite continent'.

Figure 6

Solon introduced not one, but TWO VERY LARGE CONTINENTS beyond the Pillars of Hercules with islands forming a path between. The two continents were the island continent of Atlantis and a larger continent lying at the opposite end of a path of islands. Today we know that there ARE two large and distinct continents beyond the Pillars representing the limits of the Mediterranean Sea. They are North and South America, and they are accompanied by a set of islands, the Caribbean Islands, laying a very distinct pathway between them.

-Doug
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 09:01:13 PM by Doug Fisher »

Newbie
*
Offline Offline
Join Date: Apr 28, 2009
Posts: 2


« Reply #1 on: November 13, 2009, 08:59:52 PM »
ReplyReply

well this was a bit of a stretch, a good one, in fact some nice analysis. But the truth is we will have to wait until we find irrevocable evidence of Atlantis. Perhaps through a better understanding of the ancient egyptians and there massive monuments and hidden messages. Homers stories about TROY were considered fiction until it was found. I think we will find Atlantis and in my opinion I think we are getting closer, but considering all the books I have read about Atlantis and the dreams and visions I would surely say that I have more knowledge about who killed Kennedy than I do about where Atlantis and its capital city lie buried, but keep up the good work, I enjoyed the read.
Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2009, 12:15:51 AM »
ReplyReply

dtheiler,

Welcome back stranger and thanks once again for the positive feedback.Thank You

...the truth is we will have to wait until we find irrevocable evidence of Atlantis.

I fully agree with your wait and see approach. I feel I have put forth a very strong geographical match, perhaps the best thus far, but I don't intend to get to the point where I would declare positively that this is THE site.  Besides, I am well aware of the historical hurdles that are set all the higher the further we move Atlantis beyond the Mediterranean.

-Doug

Newbie
*
Offline Offline
Join Date: Dec 02, 2009
Posts: 1


« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2009, 11:34:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello, I just read your article and joined to comment, I am an avid Atlantis 'nut' who spends nearly every waking hour disecting Plato's work to make sense of it all and I have done so for years now, I am very informed on all aspects of Atlantis and have my own theories evolving as time goes on.
I will point out I do not think Plato nor Solon were talking about America as Atlantis even though I found your article very convincing had I not done a tonne of research myself.

I believe Atlantis does not exist physically at all, believe me, I thought it did for ages but now don't... and did not sink but he is talking about a collective notion of a previous civilization that can be found over and over that 'sinks' as such as we lose any knowledge of it, allegory of the traveller not being able to get there anymore...he introduces Critias as such...like a weary traveller....Troy is ideal example and is probably one connotation of his Atlantis. I do believe however that he has placed it in context of being an island in the Atlantic such as the Greeks saw the island that Hera came from in the West. If you read Book 3 of The Laws you can see the same ideas he brings forth in the Atlantis story placed into a real context, almost like a proto-type of his idea.

OK, but anyways, consider this, true fact...Columbus read some work by Aristotle who had claimed that if you sailed West it would bring you back around to the East..as it does and Columbus, spurred on by this thought did exactly as Aristotle said and also was convinced he had reached The East Indies as we all know...Aristotle also tells us Plato created Atlantis just to sink it and was not a believer of it, now if anyone would know, I reckon it was Aristotle, since he was the closest student to Plato we know of...
the consideration is this...they both knew the world was round, it was put forth by this time but shot down in flames but Plato was no dummy, of course he knew the world was round, he was too astronomically educated not too...
So, consider a round Earth with the known continental area as one...to get to the other side (the opposite side) you would go out West....thru the Pillars, the island Hera came from is there according the the Greeks, which I see as Atlantis, Herodotus in 450BC which is a read you have to read if you have not...he calls the Atlantic Ocean, the Atlantis Sea, so you travel West still past 'Atlantis' in the Atlantis Sea, keep sailing and where would you end up if you did not know the Americas were there...the opposite side of the Continent of course....just as Columbus thought he had done....the boundless continent. Well, that's my views after endless readings and decipherment of it all, you may find it interesting.... Undecided

PS: All ancients believed in Troy, none doubted it at all, it was part of their true history....only modern interpretations changed that..somewhere along the way we disbelieved it but no ancient did, probably because like Plato tells us we all just forgot about it and the knowledge of it was lost through time,  it was always there to them.

PPS: Aristotle was Alexander The Great's teacher and what Alexander did is the exact message that the story conveys. At a time when Greek was very weak and just managed to save themselves from the Persians, he rose and saved Greece from becoming another 'Atlantis'.

and lastly...The earthquake that hit Helike in Plato's time, a Poseidon city imo was the inspiration for Plato...Crete was the inspiration for the description and that he knew about it's early existance from the Egyptians who had regular trade with Mycenaean Crete before it's downfall circa 1200BC.
Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2009, 02:05:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Welcome Puzzler,

I believe Atlantis does not exist physically at all, believe me, I thought it did for ages but now don't... and did not sink but he is talking about a collective notion of a previous civilization that can be found over and over that 'sinks' as such as we lose any knowledge of it, allegory of the traveller not being able to get there anymore...he introduces Critias as such...like a weary traveller....Troy is ideal example and is probably one connotation of his Atlantis. I do believe however that he has placed it in context of being an island in the Atlantic such as the Greeks saw the island that Hera came from in the West. If you read Book 3 of The Laws you can see the same ideas he brings forth in the Atlantis story placed into a real context, almost like a proto-type of his idea.

Not entirely unlikely.

Quote
OK, but anyways, consider this, true fact...Columbus read some work by Aristotle who had claimed that if you sailed West it would bring you back around to the East..as it does and Columbus, spurred on by this thought did exactly as Aristotle said and also was convinced he had reached The East Indies as we all know...Aristotle also tells us Plato created Atlantis just to sink it and was not a believer of it, now if anyone would know, I reckon it was Aristotle, since he was the closest student to Plato we know of...
the consideration is this...they both knew the world was round, it was put forth by this time but shot down in flames but Plato was no dummy, of course he knew the world was round, he was too astronomically educated not too...
So, consider a round Earth with the known continental area as one...to get to the other side (the opposite side) you would go out West....thru the Pillars, the island Hera came from is there according the the Greeks, which I see as Atlantis, Herodotus in 450BC which is a read you have to read if you have not...he calls the Atlantic Ocean, the Atlantis Sea, so you travel West still past 'Atlantis' in the Atlantis Sea, keep sailing and where would you end up if you did not know the Americas were there...the opposite side of the Continent of course....just as Columbus thought he had done....the boundless continent. Well, that's my views after endless readings and decipherment of it all, you may find it interesting.... Undecided

This is an interesting take on the boundless continent, but there are a couple of things that seem problematic. This concept of a lone disk-shaped world composed of Europe, Libya and Asia surrounded only by ocean on a spherical earth might more likely draw the description of a continent bounded by the sea rather than a sea bounded by a continent. Keep in mind that this boundless continent was referred to as 'the surround-ING land' as opposed to 'the surround-ED land'. Of course a miscalculation of the earth's circumference similar to the one Columbus maintained, might attain the reversal of roles you are looking for.

However, Solon was contrasting the Mediterranean as a sea ALMOST surrounded not by one, but THREE separate continents having just named two of them, Libya and Asia. Why would he in the same breath suddenly switch and refer to the world as one continent and boast that it surrounds the true ocean when he had just confirmed that this same THREE continent combination did not even completely surround the much smaller Mediterranean?

Quote
PS: All ancients believed in Troy, none doubted it at all, it was part of their true history....only modern interpretations changed that..somewhere along the way we disbelieved it but no ancient did, probably because like Plato tells us we all just forgot about it and the knowledge of it was lost through time,  it was always there to them.

You make a great point. Modern-day scholars discarded a literal Troy because it did not fit established history, something that actually is prone to change with the latest unearthed findings and the subsequent whims of men. In spite of this, Schliemann pursued the location placing the highest priority on the most basic element of the Trojan saga, the recorded geographical details and other aspects which remain the most physically tangible over time, and in so doing successfully discovered the city. South America as Atlantis may not fit academia's historical view either, but geographically it's the best fit and is too precise to ignore. If you haven't had a chance you may wish to review the main portion of the article which details the geographical similarities of Atlantis and South America: Atlantis: The Land Beyond The Pillars.

-Doug

Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline
Join Date: Jun 22, 2009
Posts: 69


« Reply #5 on: December 17, 2009, 09:47:48 AM »
ReplyReply

A couple of questions about the South American theory:

1.  Does it posit the names, Thule, Tulan, Tile, Tollan, Aztlan, and Atlantis, to be disconnected and/or referring to different lands?

2.  Is Hyperborea considered to also be a different (polar) culture, separate from "Atlantis"?

"By a route obscure and lonely, Haunted by ill angels only,
Where an Eidolon, named Night, On a black throne reigns upright,
I have reached these lands but newly From an ultimate dim Thule —
From a wild weird clime, that lieth, sublime, Out of Space — out of Time." --Edgar Allen Poe
Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« Reply #6 on: December 17, 2009, 11:52:51 AM »
ReplyReply

A couple of questions about the South American theory:

1.  Does it posit the names, Thule, Tulan, Tile, Tollan, Aztlan, and Atlantis, to be disconnected and/or referring to different lands?

2.  Is Hyperborea considered to also be a different (polar) culture, separate from "Atlantis"?

Unfortunately, I haven't taken the time to make any sort of connection, or a clear distinction for that matter, with any of these, but I have always assumed that Thule itself was separate, partially to fit my belief that South America is likely Atlantis while most ancient accounts place Thule high in the North Atlantic above Britain. I believe that Jim Allen in his South American theory delves into the linguistics a bit, specifically addressing the name Aztlan. You can check his website, there is a wealth of very good information there: http://www.atlantisbolivia.org/theatlantistrail.htm

As for me, while I think the linguistic link is intriguing, I am of the mind that Plato's dialogues offer a more reasonable and clear source for the Atlantis name.

Quote
Yet, before proceeding further in the narrative, I ought to warn you, that you must not be surprised if you should perhaps hear Hellenic names given to foreigners. I will tell you the reason of this: Solon, who was intending to use the tale for his poem, enquired into the meaning of the names, and found that the early Egyptians in writing them down had translated them into their own language, and he recovered the meaning of the several names and when copying them out again translated them into our language. My great-grandfather, Dropides, had the original writing, which is still in my possession, and was carefully studied by me when I was a child. Therefore if you hear names such as are used in this country, you must not be surprised, for I have told how they came to be introduced.- Critias

Based on this excerpt from Plato’s dialogues, the original name for these people was likely lost as the Egyptians applied one name and Solon in turn another. My own theory is that the Egyptians used a simple descriptor and not an actual name when referring to these people. This is extremely likely as we know that the Egyptians had a history of doing such. The descriptor that the Egyptians used was most likely ‘sea peoples’. This does not mean that they were the same sea peoples that the Egyptians themselves defeated, although they may have been remnants of the originals.

If the Egyptians described these people as Solon says, a seafaring people living on a large continent outside the Mediterranean, it is an obvious and simple maneuver on Solon’s behalf to apply the Hellenic names ‘Atlas’ and ‘Atlantis’—names associated with the easternmost portion of the known world and the great ocean beyond the Mediterranean—to these people and their land. As the passage above states, Solon "recovered the meaning of the several names and when copying them out again translated them into our language"; 'sea peoples' in the waters beyond the Mediterranean and people of the Atlantis Ocean are a far too convenient match.

While others have suspected the 'sea peoples' as being the Atlanteans, I have not been able to find anyone else making this extremely basic connection. I have to believe someone else has and their work will crop up later in my research.

-Doug
« Last Edit: December 17, 2009, 06:40:00 PM by Doug Fisher »

Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline
Join Date: Jun 22, 2009
Posts: 54


« Reply #7 on: December 21, 2009, 11:29:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Sea people?
1178 BC is date of greatest political changing within Mediterranean due to happened last greatest explosion of Santorini with accompaniment of strong Earthquakes at the continental tectonic boundaries that could destroy important citadel. Troy's high walls have been destroyed by this time. Minoan people decided it was huge wrath of god due to their sin and happened massive abandonment of the small cities and villages within Aegean Sea by ships. Hungry people produced many problems not only within Egypt. Pharaoh decided fighting against different hungry tribes from Aegean Sea (Sea people) and could win easily. In the north of the Mediterranean Sea important news about destruction of the citadel rapidly spread within Greeks and their kings decided to do determinant war against Troy. They knew that destroyed walls can’t defend Troy. Thus the Greeks could win and captured important marine and continental trading ways.
After the deluge about 10500 BC Poseidia became god of the destruction and Earthquakes as well. Poseidia was important god of the Troy and his sculpture with drawing winged horses was in the Troy of course. Thus Poseidia could “help” to win the Greeks and “horse of Troy” became important god of the Greeks as well.
best wishes!
K.M. from Georgia
« Last Edit: December 25, 2009, 11:38:05 AM by K.Margiani »
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline
Join Date: Jun 22, 2009
Posts: 54


« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2009, 12:19:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I forgot important event.  1178 BC is freedom date for Hebrews. Moses could use the huge eruption and earthquakes for freedom of his people that were slaves of pharaohs. Hebrews could overcame reed-sea (Red-sea is bad translation) before attack tsunami that formed by huge eruption in the Aegean Sea. Persecutor army by  Ramesses III (1187-1156 BC), that was Egypt's Last, Great Pharaoh (almost) died by tsunami.
K.M.
Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« Reply #9 on: December 24, 2009, 12:40:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Margiani,

Always interesting posts. I just wanted to point out again, and I don't think that you are disputing this here, that 'sea peoples' is only a descriptor, one which the Egyptians applied to more than just the people whose invasion they thwarted in the 12th century BC.

I also wanted to follow up on my earlier response to ciggy.

I neglected to mention that Iceland and Thule—which was reportedly in the vicinity of Iceland—both fall short of one of Atlantis' basic requirements of having a much more temperate climate allowing harvests twice a year. South America's Mesopotamian Plain which is rectilinear with a 10,000-stadia waterway forming its perimeter—matching precisely Solon's description of Atlantis' Plain—does enjoy two annual harvests.

Quote
Twice in the year they gathered the fruits of the earth—in winter having the benefit of the rains of heaven, and in summer the water which the land supplied by introducing streams from the canals." (Critias; translation by Benjamin Jowett [BJ])


Quote
The plain "was for the most part rectangular and oblong, and where falling out of the straight line followed the circular ditch. The depth, and width, and length of this ditch were incredible, and gave the impression that a work of such extent, in addition to so many others, could never have been artificial. Nevertheless I must say what I was told. It was excavated to the depth of a hundred feet, and it breadth was a stadium everywhere;  [the waterway] was carried round the whole of the plain, and was 10,000 stadia in length. It received the streams which came down from the mountains, and winding round the plain and meeting at the city, was there let off into the sea." (Critias [BJ])

The image below is a topographical map of Mesopotamia with the inclusion of measurements in miles, which total up to a 1,200 mile (10,455 stadia) perimeter, only 52 miles (455 stadia) off from Plato's perimetric measurement. Note that all four sides of the rectangular plain are defined by waterways, with only a small 70-mile portion in the north defined by foothills. There are no other rectangular plains in the world larger or remotely close to approaching this size, which are defined by waterways on all four sides.


So perhaps it's coincidence that the world's only 10,000-STADIA RECTANGULAR plain defined by surrounding waterways also has TWO HARVESTS, but the coincidences do not end there.

The capital city was located near where the waters emptied into the sea. If you do the math, the city was 5.7 miles from the plain, 5.7 miles from the sea, and 3.1 miles in diameter. This establishes a very strict parameter, where the plain would have to be located no further than 14.5 miles from where its surrounding waters emptied into the sea and South America's Mesopotamian Plain meets this easily. Compare this to the more popular Mesopotamia in the Middle East which lies 100 miles from the sea and you can see why meeting this parameter is no easy feat.

Below is an expanded list of Solon's geographical specifications demonstrating how well South America fits the Atlantis mold better than any other site in the world:


  • A continent sized island (South American 'nesos' [see article for explanation])
  • Opposite the Pillars of Hercules (The Strait of Gibraltar) and
  • Located in the Atlantic Ocean with
  • Associated islands (the Caribbean Islands)
  • Forming a distinct path to a continent (North America) at the opposite end.
  • Having a lofty precipitous coastline (South America's Brazilian Highlands) transitioning to
  • A flat even rectangular plain (Argentina's Mesopotamian Plain)
  • Located at the center of the island (center of South American 'nesos')
  • Within 14.5-miles of the sea that is
  • Delineated on all four sides by channels of water (the Parana and Uruguay rivers) with
  • A perimeter of approximately 10,000 stadia (10,455 stadia or 1,200 miles actual. Only 50 miles longer than the specified 10,000 stadia or 1,150 miles.) and
  • Oriented with its narrower width extending from the coast inland, and also having
  • A climate conducive to biannual harvests.
  • Pocketed in by mountains to the west (Andes), north, and east (Brazilian Highlands), but open toward the sea in the south with
  • River ways from the surrounding mountain ranges feeding the rivers that flow around the plain, converge, and then empty into the sea in the south. (Rio Pilcomayo, Rio Bermejo, Rio Salado and Rio Dulce flowing down from the Andes in the west. The Parana and Uruguay Rivers dropping down onto the plain from the Brazilian Highlands in the north and the Rio Ibicui, Rio Arapey Grande, and Rio Queguay sourced from smaller mountains in the east, to name just a few.)

So while we can speculate that sites having experienced quakes, flooding or other natural catastrophes are Atlantis, or sites which linguistically seem similar to Atlantis are Atlantis, there is only one site in all the world which actually meets the geographical specifications set forth in the original account and that continent, South America, excels at it.

-Doug

Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline
Join Date: Jun 22, 2009
Posts: 69


« Reply #10 on: February 11, 2010, 06:39:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Posted a new thesis referencing this article here:

http://webanarchy.net/v3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7161&p=73791#p73791

"By a route obscure and lonely, Haunted by ill angels only,
Where an Eidolon, named Night, On a black throne reigns upright,
I have reached these lands but newly From an ultimate dim Thule —
From a wild weird clime, that lieth, sublime, Out of Space — out of Time." --Edgar Allen Poe
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Print
Jump to: