Plato's Atlantis My Theory

Hi Stacey
Not the central city. But the city where the attack was launched from. They were going to take over Greece, Asia and Egypt "at a blow". This does not mean they were going to gradually take over these countries, it means all at once. Since they already had power up to Italy and Libya, they wouldn't go back outside the straits and re-start all over again.

I'm not saying my theory is correct because I myself can punch holes in it. I was just trying to use logic. If we pretend that Malta is the main base, (remember there was a landbridge to Africa way back) and the Atlanteans came from the North - came across that land bridge, and started taking over the areas WEST of Malta, the scenario still works. The water seems to have been shallower in the Western Med, and perhaps they Started from the land bridge, and moved west. That would also explain how the Amazons, who lived on the west coast, could attack them first. Therefore, Plato could have meant that ORIGINALLY they came from an island in the Ocean (described by the Bock Saga). He may have been jumping back and forth in the story like flash-backs in a movie. I believe the story was more intended as a History of Atlantis than a tale of derring do by the Greeks. There's just not enough information about the battle - names, places, numbers of warriors, that sort of thing. Atlantis supposedly broke up several times, and by the time the priest got the story, it may have been an island, if it originally had been a peninsula.
In light of scientific discoveries, I'd say Malta fits better. Regarding the building of ships, that is. Plato says "the Power" that came from outside the straits - perhaps again, meaning the ORIGIN of the power, but he doesn't say the battle was by ship, and we have no scientific findings of ships so far back in the past.

So to attack Greece and Egypt - two different directions, - at the same time - they had to have armies on both sides of the Med. Now the Med was probably lower then, but even so, they're not going to swim all that distance. Now Plato does say that the Atlanteans had ships in their harbors, and mentions triremes. (Another discordant note in Plato if we try to put all the facts in one place). Whether science is right on the time line or not - triremes weren't developed until about 1000 BC. Therefore, if Atlantis sunk with triremes in her ports, she didn't sink 9,000 years before Solons time.