Post by Indilwen on Sept 25, 2011 13:05:40 GMT 12
ARCHAEOLOGY NEWSFLASH NO. 267
ATLANTIS
“Just where did it go down?” asked Dale.
“Where did WHAT go down?” I asked.
“Atlantis… that’s what,” responded Dale. He swatted a blowfly and
continued. “Look, I’m hearing so many theories… but how much is
true?”
“You really want it – direct?”
“Sure.”
“The truth is, all we have for Atlantis is a legend.
Yet, where is smoke, there is fire. Legends are usually based on a
core of truth, even if the final story becomes garbled or
embellished.”
We went out under the big oak tree and sprawled on the grass.
“Okay, come clean,” challenged Dale.
“Very well,” I said, “two possibilities are worth noting, in regard
to Atlantis – both of them fascinating.”
Then the thought struck me – why not let you in on the story too,
in this week’s newsletter?
Firstly, there are some similarities between the story of Atlantis
and what we know concerning the pre-Flood world. It is possible that
this story is a recollection of the highly technological world that
was destroyed during the Great Flood.
Secondly, since the tectonic upheavals of the Flood there have been
some violent readjustments as the earth's crust settles back to
equilibrium.
Such releases of stress have included some significant vertical
droppings or raisings of land. (See The Corpse Came Back,
chapter 19.<http://www.beforeus.com/third.php>)
It is quite reasonable, therefore, to presume Atlantis to have been
a real location which suffered submersion since the Flood.
Often Plato is taken as asserting a date of 9,600 BC. That could be
looked at a little more carefully.
There may be good reason to conclude that Plato’s account of
Atlantis referred to a calendar period of 9000 time increments,
which, according to another Greek writing were months, not years as
translated in so many documents.
Several astronomers have also supported the month interpretation for
the 9000 number.
This would fit comparatively well with geological events presumed to
have occurred in the Mediterranean region around 1500 BC.
It has been suggested by some researchers that details in the
Atlantis story are consistent with the geography of nations in the
Mediterranean area around that time.
Not understanding this fact could well have been why Plato located
the event outside the Pillars of Hercules, in the Atlantic Ocean.
The location most often theorized for Atlantis was the Azores, in
the Atlantic Ocean, which fit most closely with Plato’s description.
The Pillars of Hercules to which he referred may be a reference to
Gibraltar.
Furthermore, the Azores, of volcanic origin, consist of the same
geological formations mentioned by Plato, namely red, white, and
black rock, and contain hot and cold springs.
Although small volcanic islands may have risen and sunk within
recent times, however, it has never been proved that a large island
mass has existed in the vicinity of the Azores.
Cores from the bottom of the Atlantic near the Azores show evidence
of vulcanism of a pattern characterized only by land volcanoes.
This may more reasonably suggest small volcanic islands than a large
land mass that sank.
TWO MAIN PROBLEMS: SIZE AND DATE
The main problems in solving the Atlantis riddle are the time factor
and the size of the island described by Plato.
1. THE TIME FACTOR
Plato dates the disaster that destroyed Atlantis 9,000 years before
Solon's time, or 12,000 B.C. But Plato’s dates do not conform to other
evidence.
The Atlantis Plato described is very similar to a Mediterranean type
of culture not noticeably different from that readily understood by
Solon and Plato.
There is also a mention of a war between Atlantis and the Greeks, and
the descriptions of chariots and galleys. The 9,000 [years] is perhaps
not an exaggeration but an error in dating.
2. LAND SIZE
If we are considering an island-based empire in the Mediterranean, the
size of the island or islands constitutes a further problem.
Many authorities have reasoned that if Plato's Atlantis was based on
historical fact, it referred to the island-based Minoan sea-trading
empire of Crete.
The difficulty in this thesis was in reconciling the statistics given
by Plato with the geography of Crete and its associated islands.
The size of the plain, as given by Plato, was three thousand by two
thousand stadia, or roughly 340 by 230 miles. This plain is much
larger than the plain of Messara in Crete, or of any plain on mainland
Greece.
The ditch was stated to have been 10,000 stadia or 1,100 miles long,
and was divided into 60,000 lots of land, each one square mile in area.
The leader of each lot was required to furnish for the war between
Greece and Atlantis one sixth of a war chariot, two horses and riders,
one light chariot, a foot soldier with shield, a charioteer, two
heavily armed men, two archers, two slingers, three stone shooters,
three men, and four sailors to man the ships, of which there were
1,200.
According to this formula, the military forces of Atlantis would have
comprised 1.2 million men, an army far larger than any civilization
could have possibly mustered.
But what if Solon had erroneously translated the symbol for 100 as
1,000? The two symbols in Cretan script are almost identical.
(Dr. Angelos Galanopolous, a Greek seismologist, first suggested this
error in translation as a means to resolve the problem of dates.)
Instead of 9,000 years, we would have 900 years before Solon. The
disaster would have occurred about 1500 B.C.
If the size of the plain were reduced by a factor of ten, to 34 by
23 miles, it would approximate closely the size of the plain of
Messara on Crete.
It has been reckoned that the Royal State of Atlantis, and the
Citadel, or Capital, refer actually to two islands; the larger
would be Crete and the Island of the City would be Thera.
Again, reduced by a factor of ten, the dimensions given by Plato
fit Thera almost exactly.
Reduced by ten, the 60,000 lots become 6,000; 1,200 ships become 120
ships, and the size of the army is reduced to 120,000 men, which
would conform with the kind of military power exercised in the
Mediterranean in the second millennium B.C.
These figures would seem to make sense in connection with the Minoan
sea empire of Crete, with its capital city on Thera.
Further, it has recently been found that around 1500 B.C., a
colossal volcanic eruption occurred on the island of Thera, which
completely destroyed the center of the island.
The ensuing tidal waves, earthquakes, and deposits of volcanic ash
wrought havoc throughout the entire Mediterranean basin, Egypt, the
Palestine coast, Turkey, and mainland Greece, and virtually
destroyed the civilization of Crete.
A FOURTH-HAND ACCOUNT
From our distance in time it is impossible to be certain as to the
authenticity of the Atlantis legend or the precise time of the
destruction of this legendary kingdom.
However, there are reasonable grounds for placing the event
(assuming it occurred) within the post-Flood era.
Plato told the story of Atlantis, an island “beyond the Pillars
of Hercules” (Gibraltar), which sank suddenly below the sea
about 9,000 years earlier.
Plato wrote his story around 360 BC. He received the story
fourth-hand, before writing it down. Plato’s version is the
sole source of the account.
About 600 BC, an Egyptian priest told it to the Greek Solon
(638-559 BC). Solon told it to young Critias (his grandson)
when he was a ten-year-old boy. Young Critias eventually
retold it to his friend Plato.
ALTERNATIVE DATES FOR ATLANTIS
If there was a tenfold discrepancy in the translation of the
Egyptian scripts by Solon, then the symbol representing 100
was rendered as 1000.
The same sort of confusion in modern times is seen in the
contrast between the American billion (a thousand million)
and the English billion (a million million).
This cutting of all figures used in Atlantis to 1/10 of their
value, would enable Atlantis to fit into the Mediterranean.
Plato, confused by the exaggerated figures of Atlantis, was
forced to place Atlantis outside the Pillars of Hercules
because it would not fit into the Mediterranean.
Immanuel Velikovsky makes this pertinent observation:
“Critias the younger remembered having been told that the
catastrophe which befell Atlantis happened 9,000 years
before. There is one zero too many here…. Numbers we hear
in childhood easily grow in our memory, as do dimensions.
"When revisiting our childhood home, we are surprised at the
smallness of the rooms – we had remembered them as much
larger.
"Whatever the sources of the error, the most probable date
of the sinking of Atlantis would be in the middle of the
second millennium, 900 years before Solon, when the earth
twice suffered great catastrophes….” (Immanuel Velikovsky,
Worlds in Collision. p. 152)
Whether or not Velikovsky’s final conclusion is correct,
his reasoning is plausible.
According to Robert Charroux, “Constant Basir, referring to
the Melpomene of Herodotus, mentions someone who, in 2350
BC, visited both the mainland of Atlantis and a maritime
Atlantis.” (Robert Charroux, The Mysterious Unknown.
p. 119)
An ancient history book, the Oera Linda Boek, dating
primarily from AD 803, but added to for 500 years, bears
this postscript:
“Written in Liuwert (Ljuwert) in the 3,499th year after
Atland (Atlantis) sank, or 1256, the year of the Christian
reckoning.” This placed the sinking of Atlantis in 2244 BC.
The Egyptian priest claimed that Atlantis existed (and
perished) before the beginning of Egyptian civilization.
This could adequately explain the excessively early date
given for Atlantis’ destruction.
Careful research supports a date for Egypt’s founding which
is very soon after that given in the avove mentioned Oera
Linda Boek for the destruction of Atlantis.
On the other hand, it should also be borne in mind that all
the ancient kingdoms were fond of exaggerating their
antiquity in competition with each other….
The Egyptian method was by adding up the number of years in
the reigns of all their kings, as preserved in the
king-lists.
As several kings had reigned simultaneously in various parts
of Egypt on many occasions, this totting-up led to wildly
inaccurate figures.
The Greek historian Herodotus, visiting Egypt a mere 150
years after Solon, was given by this method an authoritative
date of 12,040 BC for the founding of Egyptian civilization.
SOURCE: info@archaeologyanswers.com