Unearthing Plato's Atlantis one bite at a time; a recipe for deception

[Hermocrates]

Today's ingredient; Elephants of Atlantis.

What was Plato's real reason for having given us the information that in Atlantis elephants were present?

[Hermocrates]

Unearthing Plato's Atlantis, one bite at a time; a recipe for deception

Today's ingredient; The circular ditch's length, 10,000 stadia.

What was Plato really meaning by giving us the descriptions and dimensions?

I will now describe the plain, as it was fashioned by nature and by the labours of many generations of kings through long ages. It 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 its breadth was a stadium everywhere; it was carried round the whole of the plain, and was ten thousand 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.

Obviously, in geometry, the perimeter of a plain rectangle that is 3,000 in length and 2,000 in width is equal to 2X3000 plus 2X2000, which gives us 10,000. It is logical. But is it logical for Plato to be giving us a circular ditch that without bends, without turns, without horseshoes winds, and all of it one stadia wide and 100 feet deep everywhere and 10,000 stadia long? Try to wrap an ellipse, a geometrical figure of ten thousand stadia perimeter around a 10,000 stadia regular rectangle of 3,000 X 2000 stadia, with a perimeter of 10,000 stadia and a diagonal of 3,605 stadia, let alone one that is a plain with an oblong rectangular shape......Can you?

Perimeter of an Ellipse.
As anyone with knowledge of geometry should know, the perimeter of an ellipse is very difficult to calculate to an exact figure! One can only approximate. However, the approximation is nearly there, and is close enough for our purpose without needing to go to infinity, where we cannot go, yet! As first we need to find Atlantis.

There are many formulas, but here is one that we can use to get a more accurate approximation; so say the math gurus.
P= 3.14159267 times [3(a+b)-Square root of (3a+b)(a+3b]. Where P is Perimeter/Circumference, a is 2,000, and b is 3,000. The plain containing the royal city of Atlantis is stated to be 3,000 X 2,000 stadia by all translations. At least some consistency there.

Do the math, and hardly, will anyone find such a beast, unless it's a river of hope, and one that you can be baptized in. Not however for clearing and washing away sins, but only for baptizing idiots!

Plato had a sign on the entrance of his academy in Athens; "Let no one ignorant of geometry enter this place." How ridiculous for anyone to think that the founder and head of this academy would be, himself,  ignorant of geometry.  If you do, then it is the academy of idiots that you need to attend, and not Plato's. And those kind of idiots do not need to be looking for Plato's Atlantis, but rather, they need to seek out things like; Madam Blavatsky's Atlantis, the abominable snowman, big foot, Peter Pan and Neverland, etc.

When logic and proportion have fallen slowly dead, go to Wonderland, and ask Alice, and whether you ask her when she is short or tall, it does not matter. Or just go and feed your head with the right nutrients; Plato/Socrates.

[Hermocrates]

Today's ingredient; Elephants of Atlantis.

What was Plato's real reason for having given us the information that in Atlantis elephants were present?

What was Plato's real reason for having given us the information that in Atlantis elephants were present?

To reemphasize the great size of Atlantis, as this is made obvious by citing that there, in Atlantis,  was enough food for the most veracious creature, since elephant herds need very large and extensive territory to graze on.  Elephants are biologically and behaviorally made for walking, foraging and inhabiting very large spaces.

To reemphasize the variety of topography making up the very large continent "island" of  Atlantis.  The plain being only a part of it, and not the whole. To make us notice that a plain where elephants roam cannot be possible when that plain is crisscrossed with tons of canals, with tons of horses, (just the military horses for Atlas's are 4X 60,000= 240,000) and with a shitload of people, to say the least. And based on just the number of men fit for military duty (20-40 years of age) (1,080,000) that each lot (10X10 stadia) from only the plain, which contained 60,000 lots,  (surface area of a rectangle 3000X2000=6,000,000 stadia, and 60,000 square lots of 100 stadia each also equals 6,000,000 stadia) had to provide to the royal city's military, besides God knows how many more military age men made up the other "9" military orders. If we just double the 18 men by another 18 women, since we know that basically, human populations  are made up of almost equal amounts of men and women, we already have a plain's population of 2,160,000. What of the other age groups? What of the military men for the other 9 princes' military? And this is just the tip of the iceberg; what about the other populations of the mountains, and hills, and the other territory of Atlantis? 

Obviously the elephants mentioning is meant to exclude any foolish, future, notions that someone may have about the location, such as Atlantis having been the Greek island of Santorini before the Volcano making up the entire island exploded/erupted. And where a perfectly flat plain, even as small as 3000 by 2,000 "stadia" could never have been.  Besides, the plain that Plato wants us to envision is not measured by the stadia, as we are miles away from the truth.
 
And ultimately the elephants serve to make logical sense and prove true once the puzzle is correctly put together.
 
To envision the completed puzzle, one has to go the distance, and it's not a mere 50 stadia from the sea.

[Hermocrates]

Today's ingredient; Critias' statement: In the Critias dialogue, Critias states; "All that is said by any of us can only be imitation and representation."

What are we to make of the words, "Imitation" and "Representation," as it relates to the tale of Atlantis being told to Socrates by our dynamic trio? 

What are you trying to tells us, my dear Plato, master of prose and philosopher extraordinary? Who do you think you're fooling? This tale of Atlantis and your ancient Athenians is like a flip of a coin; head, it's true, or tail, it's a myth. All has to make sense, or there is nothing in what you tell us; no ifs, buts, or maybes as all these clever people make it out to be anything but your very Atlantis.  Just as the gods do not fool mankind, as Socrates told us in his Republic, neither can men who are godlike, such as philosophers of the caliber of a Socrates or yourself, my dear Plato, his devout and loyal disciple and pupil. We know that Socrates, and you too, are wanting us to understand and seek the will of the Good.

Just what, who, where, and when my dear Critias, and your two friends, Timaeus and Hermocrates, are meaning to "imitate?" And what is this imitation a "representation" of?

The Grand Passion of Atlantis leads us all to wonder and speculate. However, there are no true hunters to be found, as none have picked up the real "sense" for the hunt. All I can say to those scholars and non-scholars alike, who, with their books and essays, have made Atlantis to be either nothing, or anything and everything, and just about anywhere in place, and in some other time than Plato intended, "you are nothing but hound dogs, crying all the time and you are no friends of Plato." You, those with your suppositions, speculations, and imaginative creation of an Atlantis that never "is" Plato's very own, have never caught the rabbit, Atlantis!

Good will hunting!

[Hermocrates]

Today's ingredient; The Athenian boundaries, attesting to the truth.

"Concerning the country the Egyptian priests said what is not only probable but manifestly true, that the boundaries were in those days fixed by the Isthmus, and that in the direction of the continent they extended as far as the heights of Cithaeron and Parnes; the boundary line came down in the direction of the sea, having the district of Oropus on the right, and with the river Asopus as the limit on the left."

Well! How does this description of the priests' ancient Athens sway Solon, or anyone else, to believe the story? Especially since neither Solon nor any other Greek were aware of such historical information about their beloved Athens? If I remember correctly, ancient Megara had always something to say about it, since its territory was between the Corinth "Isthmus" and Athens. And it was not only the island of Salamis that was the problem between them, even though Solon managed to take it back from Megara, at one time.

Perhaps Solon did a little embellishment on his own, before Plato did his own, as many foolishly believe. It would stand to reason, that Solon, by setting one of the boundaries at the Isthmus, he totally did away with Megara and enlarged his dear Athens!

I hold that, although it does not quite meet logic and reason, it is nevertheless manifestly true that in those days that Plato truly means, the boundaries of Athens are the very proof of it, as I see it. Do you?

[atalante]

Today's ingredient; The Athenian boundaries, attesting to the truth.

"Concerning the country the Egyptian priests said what is not only probable but manifestly true, that the boundaries were in those days fixed by the Isthmus, and that in the direction of the continent they extended as far as the heights of Cithaeron and Parnes; the boundary line came down in the direction of the sea, having the district of Oropus on the right, and with the river Asopus as the limit on the left."

Well! How does this description of the priests' ancient Athens sway Solon, or anyone else, to believe the story? Especially since neither Solon nor any other Greek were aware of such historical information about their beloved Athens? If I remember correctly, ancient Megara had always something to say about it, since its territory was between the Corinth "Isthmus" and Athens. And it was not only the island of Salamis that was the problem between them, even though Solon managed to take it back from Megara, at one time.

Perhaps Solon did a little embellishment on his own, before Plato did his own, as many foolishly believe. It would stand to reason, that Solon, by setting one of the boundaries at the Isthmus, he totally did away with Megara and enlarged his dear Athens!

I hold that, although it does not quite meet logic and reason, it is nevertheless manifestly true that in those days that Plato truly means, the boundaries of Athens are the very proof of it, as I see it. Do you?

You described the boundaries of "Attica", using the words of Plato and Critias. 

[Hermocrates]

Today's ingredient; The Athenian boundaries, attesting to the truth.

"Concerning the country the Egyptian priests said what is not only probable but manifestly true, that the boundaries were in those days fixed by the Isthmus, and that in the direction of the continent they extended as far as the heights of Cithaeron and Parnes; the boundary line came down in the direction of the sea, having the district of Oropus on the right, and with the river Asopus as the limit on the left."

Well! How does this description of the priests' ancient Athens sway Solon, or anyone else, to believe the story? Especially since neither Solon nor any other Greek were aware of such historical information about their beloved Athens? If I remember correctly, ancient Megara had always something to say about it, since its territory was between the Corinth "Isthmus" and Athens. And it was not only the island of Salamis that was the problem between them, even though Solon managed to take it back from Megara, at one time.

Perhaps Solon did a little embellishment on his own, before Plato did his own, as many foolishly believe. It would stand to reason, that Solon, by setting one of the boundaries at the Isthmus, he totally did away with Megara and enlarged his dear Athens!

I hold that, although it does not quite meet logic and reason, it is nevertheless manifestly true that in those days that Plato truly means, the boundaries of Athens are the very proof of it, as I see it. Do you?

You described the boundaries of "Attica", using the words of Plato and Critias. 

Yes I did, I quoted from one of the many English translations. That was made quite evident by me. Anyone that is familiar with Plato's work would easily recognize it as such, even if I had not placed it in quotation marks, and differentiated it in italics. Still, good to see that you took notice. But what is your point? Perhaps you are taking exception that I used "Athens" as the ingredient versus "Attica?" If this is your point, then is it not sort of like in Algebra, where A is equal to B, and C is equal to A, and therefore B is equal to C? Ancient Athens is equal to ancient Attica. Were not the priests, in the dialogue, telling Solon of a "prehistoric" Athens that the Greek themselves were not aware of?

Hint; Solon, or any other educated Greek of his times, or even much earlier, surely was aware of Athens' territory being the Attica boundaries! Do you see? Therefore what in the priest's description lend it to being one of the proofs to make the story "MANIFASTLY" TRUE?  One has to see "clearly" to accurately measure if something is true or false, and also use the right criterion to get to the ultimate true and false. Plato is no mere "mortal" Poet/Philosopher, and great genius, but the epitome of THE crafty FOX, and able to evade 1,000,000 beagle hounds giving chase. And in his writing, he does not merely kill two birds with one stone, as the saying goes, nor just a flock of them, but the entire "aviary race."  No stones of his can be left unturned, no not even a simple syllable set within a word. Plato tells us to bend him, shape him anyway you want, and as long as we love him and understand, he gave us power to turn on his "light" on Atlantis, our love, and all that we want her to be. But of truth there is only one. It's an "American Breed," Atlantis is.

2nd hint; and while you are "looking" don't forget to look at all the other descriptions of "prehistoric" Athens/Attica.

In any case, as you can see, I'm attempting to answer a question that I though you were putting forth, even though your one sentence comment does not pose a question. But perhaps your one sentence is merely meant as a reply to my "Do you?" In this case you see well, but, apparently, not well enough to get to the strain by expounding on it; what do you see? The prelude is charming, and is already accepted by me—may I beg of you to proceed to the strain?

And while you strain to be specific on what you see, don't be too blind to see that you have still to provide an answer I posed to you on the "Attican" Solon, as to how his law factors in with the Egyptian priests' story of Atlantis?

"Our intention is, that Timaeus, who is the most of an astronomer amongst us, and has made the nature of the universe his special study, should speak first, beginning with the generation of the world and going down to the creation of man; next, I am to receive the men whom he has created, and of whom some will have profited by the excellent education which you have given them; and then, in accordance with the tale of Solon, and equally with his law, we will bring them into court and make them citizens, as if they were those very Athenians whom the sacred Egyptian record has recovered from oblivion, and thenceforward we will speak of them as Athenians and fellow-citizens." 

[Hermocrates]

Unearthing Plato's Atlantis, one bite at a time; a recipe for deception

Today's ingredient; The Hellenes, all of them followers of Athens, their Leader?

"and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes."
Nowhere in the History of Hellas prior to, or during, Plato's lifetime was Athens the leader of all the Greeks. Some of them, yes, but never all!  This idea requires a great deal of thought!

Was this idea of an Athens being the leader of all of Greece, wishful thinking by Plato? Was it something that, perhaps, Solon himself wished, and as such, Plato was only putting forth Solon's "dream" of a unified Greece with Athens at the head? Perhaps! But perhaps not, if the "priests'" story is true.

Again, the way I see it, there is truth, and gold, and silver, and orichalcum in "them" hills, mountains, meadows, plains, rivers, marshes, canals, walls, bridges, temples and palaces, and "circular" indications too, but most of all, in that "unbelievable" great ditch they excavated. And indeed, in Plato's deep and prophetical mind, Socrates' Republic is the leader of the Hellenes, and the main protagonist, left alone in the end, against this mighty and wealthy united states of the kings of Atlantis.

Plato, He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother, and he could be yours too, if you truly understand him. But until somebody else does too, I'll carry him, and we will get there, in Atlantis, but it's a long road.

[atalante]

Today's ingredient; The Athenian boundaries, attesting to the truth.


In any case, as you can see, I'm attempting to answer a question that I though you were putting forth, even though your one sentence comment does not pose a question. But perhaps your one sentence is merely meant as a reply to my "Do you?" In this case you see well, but, apparently, not well enough to get to the strain by expounding on it; what do you see? The prelude is charming, and is already accepted by me—may I beg of you to proceed to the strain?
......

You quoted a statement from Critias 110d that is almost equivalent to saying A = A. 

(But then you focused on Megara; plus some extraneous thoughts about algebra, birds, beagles, "proving Atlantis", and bending Plato.) 

[110d] "Concerning the country..." is a phrase that has confused you.     

A more literal translation for this phrase, from the relevant Greek words ( to peri tēs khōras hēmōn ), would be "Concerning the PERIPHERY of our space...".   
You can look up the relevant Greek words here, by using word study tools:  http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0180%3Atext%3DCriti.%3Asection%3D110d

"The periphery of our space" is then defined in the remainder of your quote from Critias 110d.  Therefore the sentence structure for your quote is almost equivalent to saying A = A. 

[Rennes-le-Château]

Atalante,

I would not waste my time debating with this guy. While we know  you to be a scholar versed in all the various translations of Atlantis, he is not. He is a fantasist who wants to replace the Cayce New Age myth of Atlantis with one of his own: Namely that Plato was somehow a devout Christian four hundred years before the religion even came into being and, in Atlantis, he was actually describing Judgment Day, just like John the Revelator. He also has a tendency to leap to insults when people do not share his warped views on things.  Most posters here have learnt to avoid him like the plague.