Message #2898

[Boreas]

Over the last 300 years the Europeans have learned to know "History" as a "mere science" - rather than a combination of a declining number of documents, traditions and common folklore. Before that we have had a period of well over 1.000 years; where the subject of history was strongly influenced by - or entirely based on - religious postulates.

When the scientific approach gained ground and the modern Academy arouse - we finally came about to search and study the pre-religious literature that still existed. Retrospect we might even say that when modern (western) philosophy developed into modern science, it was based on not only the historical information  of Herodotos, Homeros and Platon - but also on the philosophy and scientific principles expressed in the old, pre-religious texts from Greek Antiqueity.

As European science progressed - throughout the 19th and 20th centuries - it revealed a picture of the entire Mediterranean and Asian area, that finally established solid proves of an old Antiquety that were considerably more "advanced" than any school-book from the 19th century would even hint. Sir Mortimer Wheeler and the lads of Royal Society completed the excavations of old Egypt, Sumeria and Indus - concluding they were all "advanced cultures" that had grown into different "great civilizations" - during the first decades of the last century. But not before the 1950-ties did their conclusions become "scientifically accepted" and part of the "curriculum" of western  academia.

Before the revolution of modern archeology all history was based on sources linked to oral traditions - from which it had become written material. Thus, at the basis of all Greek pergaments, Egyptian papyrus and Sumerian stelas we have a much older and genuine way of keeping traditions and historical records - based on museum collections and oral recitation.

The development of writing is a subject not yet adequately covered by modern researh, but so far we know that the efficency and rationality of the old writing-methods were strongly limiting the possibility and probability of writing a book - as long as every page have to be created out of a specific quality of blue clay, before it is burnt and stored.

Using calf-skins we find the oldest European documents to reveal a technique of duplication that may indeed indicate a strong connection between the first agriculture and the first production of written dokuments. Developing pergament and papyros could then make significant contributions to the spread and use of writing. Today we know that they collected numberless pages of the old stories, traditions and knowledge - expressing a very scientific approach.

Thus it is fair to say that "rational, scientific thinking" was the mere basis of Greek academies, as well as Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Indian "temple-schools". Today we can even link this period - called "Antiquity" to the spread of Agriculture and Bronze. Moreover - today we may even view the re-discovered houses, buildings, monuments and palaces - as they started to develop already 9.000 to 10.000 years ago.

One may add that modern Geology and space technology have presently revealed that the levels of the world oceans indeed have grown - with some 120-160 metres - at the end of ice-time. Which - they say - ended about 10.000 years ago.

Unfortunately, the old schism between "religion"/"superstition"/"belief" on one side and "science"/"understanding"/"knowledge" on the other hand are still leading many a good scientist somewhat astray when it comes to interpret old sources. Thus modern historians - in their quest to be "scientific" - refuse to look at the old myths as "anything but imagination". Such an attitude is obviously NOT scientific - since the truth about the old myths can only be found by examining all the facts - old ones as well as NEW ones.

Since the recent conclusions from modern Geology, Glaciology, Hydrology and marine Biology all add up to conclude a "sudden and substantial rise" in the worlds oceans of more than 120 metres - "between 10.000 and 13.000 years ago" - there are no scientific reasons left to dismiss the many flood-stories.

Which leads us to the first rock-solid proof of a certain connection between Myth and History. Wheter it is Mayan, Aztec, Greek/Egyptian, Sumerian or Indian myths - they all link in to the world-wide legend about "The great flood". Whether Noah was landing on Arafat is still to be seen - but we already know for a certain fact that the world-wide flood is based on the real story. The same conclusion will then hit Plato's Atlantis - as well.

There is a major difference though, between the Egyptian/Greek and the Arab/Hebrew legend. While the bible-story says that ONLY Noa and Sara survived - Platon's legend says that ONLY the "Atlanteans" were suffering from the flood.   

Combine these facts with the rest of what is today known about the surprising age and the tremendous beauty of the first great palaces in the Mediterranean area - and we have to stretch back to the period of the great flood to fine a time-line that is old enough to allow the first steps of the agricultural scociety - established some 9.000 years ago - to develop into the "world-wide" culture we see spreading during the "neolithic revolution".

Researching the issue of Atlantis in a scientific way and manner can only lead to scientific explanations of the history we already know. Obviously. Thus it may help to know that Solon, Critias and Plato was neither devoted priests nor re-born politicians, but solid philosophers and hard-working "Keepers of Knowledge". Today we may add modern sources of information and say that "A Atlantean culture" did spread around the Mediterranean already 9.000 years ago.

The structure and the culture they spread can be recognized in ALL the old agricultural civilizations of Antiquity.  At some later point - as many of these cultures were in their prime - they got invaded, sacked, burned and destroyed. Even to the point of ethnicide. Thus we may adress the Troyan wars - once again - to find the big change in the Mediterranean culture, where the entire area experienced that a millennial old, monumental culture were invaded, destroyed and overtaken. The archaeologists call this the "period of the burnt cities", that reached the Greek Mesopotamia already 1.800 BC. 600 years later the "wave of war" reached the Mediterranean Greece, introducing "The Dark Ages" of Greek and Egyptian antiquity (1.200 B.C to 400 B.C.).

What came out of the darknes was the fragment of the old culture was Solon, Plato and Aristotel - and the question of whether a "pre-dark-age-culture" really had existed. Today we do not have to discuss that question anymore. The spread of agriculture, monumental structures, art, biology, chemistry and maths - are well documented today. Along with the maps of the first "human migrations" it concludes that a period of "Classic Antiquity" did exist in the Mediterranean and Eurasia - that coincide with Plato's Atlantis in both time and space, as well as form and culture.

Since the birth of Bronze Age goes back to the time of Agriculture, it is impossible to form a leading, initial culture - based on an agriculture and a monumental culture that sailed the oceans, produced ceramics and metals and established continental trade-routes - in time to get it spread into Harappa, Ur, Catal Huyk and Knossos. Not to forget Asturia, Stonehenge, Aztlant and  Titicaca.

If we really consider Atlantis to have been existing, these are all remains from the Atlantean culture. Which excludes any beginning later than the fully developed city-structure of Catal Huyk, some 9.000 years old.