I’m not doubting your translation, Nikas. So then if you’re correct in you theory the Atlantis was much smaller than a continent, (as the popular conception of what Plato meant), and was located south west of Malta, then it would seem that a mistranslation started the whole “myth” of Atlantis being in the Atlantic Ocean.
Forgive me for not getting out my copy of Plato’s dialogues, but it seems to me that if memeory serves me correctly, the Priests of Sais, seemed to imply, (at least in the popular translation), that the Atlanteans endangered all the people of the Mediterranean, and came from outside the area. How does the ancient Greek translation differ in this part. Also I’ve gone on your web site, and I’m not sure I understand the graphics you display. It seems like they’re trying to say that when Atlantis sank, the terrain of the whole area inside the current straights of Gibraltar changed. Would you elaborate on what that is all about?
There are many that contend that Plato made the whole tale up, and used it as an allegory for a utopian society. Even his own student Aristotle apparently thought that about him. I however think that almost everyone misses the whole point of the dialogues. Plato’s leaving the dialogues unfinished only adds to the speculation. I personally believe that even Aristotle didn’t get Plato’s drift, and Plato abandoned what was and still is a very unpopular theory,… the theory of destruction, which the Priests of Sais introduce at the very beginning of the dialogues. But everyone seems to think that the myth of Atlantis is the point of the story, when I don’t see it that way. I believe what Plato was driving at was that as perfect and utopian as Atlantis was, it was all wiped away in a fortnight, and that is the fragile state of our human endeavors.
And Qoais, feel free to jump in here, as I know that this is much more your expertise than mine, LOL.
Here’s the problem I see with your theory, Nikas, (and bear in mind that I’m not saying you’re wrong, or being critical of it)… It implies that Plato started the ball rolling on a total misconception that Atlantis was a large landmass in the Atlantic Ocean. If that were true, (and again, I’m not saying that it isn’t true), then it would mean that all the people that have written about Atlantis, (people like Otto Muck, Donnelley, Berlitz, etc), were all acting under a misconception. The “myth” of this Island Continent has been perpetuated for over 2,000 years then. And it is my observation that lies don’t live on, only the truth endures. So I have a problem in thinking that all these people could have been duped into a falsehood, and despite all their instincts, spend years researching and trying to discover something that was a misinterpretation of the ancient Greek writings.
Here’s another problem I have with your theory, (and again you asked for a challenge, so please take this as such and not as an attack on what you might believe, for I totally respect your theory, and that you may in fact be correct while others could have been wrong):
Plato is not the only source of this myth. It exits even more prevalently in the writings of the Hindu and Buddhist traditions. Those far eastern traditions of a continent in the Atlantic that sank, (as well as an ever older one in the Pacific Ocean that also sank), are most probably even older than Plato’s account of Atlantis.
Then there are the American Indian legends of them having come from and large island in the Atlantic Ocean that sank, (not from China by route of the Bering Straight, LOL). And here we might add in Charles Berlitz’s observation that all the ancient peoples name for the Atlantic Ocean has the same root word in all four corners of that ocean, this not being a myth at all, but a very odd coincidence.
Lastly we need to mention Edgar Cayce’s readings on Atlantis, which if your theory is correct, than he made innumerable medical diagnoses correctly, but was totally wrong in regard to Atlantis.
But as you mentioned earlier, “truth is stranger than fiction” so perhaps there is yet another understanding to an even larger “truth.” Perhaps Plato was referring to an Island state off the south west coast of Malta that sank, and it is this civilization that was in conflict with Ancient Greece. It does stand to reason that earthquakes in the Mediterranean would sink landmasses in the Mediterranean Sea at the same point in time. But perhaps at an even older point in time there was a technologically advanced civilization on a continenent in the Atlantic Ocean that sank, leaving only legends and former name… Atlantis, a name that seems to trigger a “race memory” in many people. And perhaps this island state southwest of Malta, took on the name of this long forgotten people as their own.
And so I present to you the possibility that while your theory may be correct, that it may not tell the entire story… a story that Plato did not fully comprehend himself.
Please take what I have written in the spirit that it was intended. Again I mean no disrespect to your laudable theory. But if you find some resistance to your belief on the part of other’s, than what I’ve stated here is perhaps why you might meet with some criticism of it. I’ve only stated the obvious. You are among friends here, (this is not AR, LOL), and we all have our own pet theories that will certainly meet with criticism. And yes Robert0', I too want to know just when was the Antarctic warmer?
Mike
