Where did the theory of Atalntis start?

I think the only thing I could say in answer to that is "blind faith". How often have you heard of ridiculous beliefs, actions, and overall consequences that resulted from nothing short of that very thing. It is inexplicably vague, but yet answers any question. To those that would put forth the all encompasing "why", the answer is stated as "faith". It dictates everything and is and has been the driving force for most of the worlds population for thousands of years. There is not any conclusive evidence for Atlantis, there is only a people's firm belief that it is real. This is no different from Heaven, Sheol, or any other world that people will argue into existence. To say that Atlantis does not exist will always be met with a cold shoulder. Many are intrigued by the concept on both sides, but then many are too stubborn to see around their faith. You just can't argue against faith. I've tried. Sound as any argument may be, it will never succeed. Reason inevitably fails in the face of blind faith.

Just today, 8 May 2006,
there is this interesting picture link

there is a mirage off the coast, which seems to indicate land in the misty distance...and as the sun rises the misty foreign land disappears.

here off the east coast, i have witnessed these fog banks before, and imagined such magical, mystical lands of imagination...

who's to say that our distant ancestors had tales & stories originate from their own eras 'AESOP' or 'BROTHERs GRIMM' counterparts?
and the folklore tale of Atlantis gained stature & longevity...eventually finding a PLATO, at the height of the Greek Golden Age, to immorialize the epic myth?

There is a very interesting theory written in the illuminatus trilogy. It basically stipulates that Atlantis did once exist, populated by a race of beings covered in hair, much like apes. They had great intelligence, and were good, cpeaceful, compassionate peoples, with highly advanced technology. However a new race emerged, I think it was actually only one individual, who was hairless, like ourselvs, and he basically destroyed atlantis. He then escpaed, along with some followers, but so did some Atlantians. The war has raged ever since.

I can get more information if anybody is interested. It's a fairly creative story, but then again truth is ofte stranger than fiction, isn't it!!

malacalypse,

The author of the greek work titled Atlantis is Hellanicus, btw, I think I didn't mention it previously. Odd that no one researched it.

I'm the reincarnation of an atlantian. I know what happened and I know where the ruins are.

No you aren't and no you don't.

In this case, it's "drugs are often stranger than fiction."

Wilson was doing a humorous examination of how Americans believe some fairly absurd things and throw them into conspiracy theories. His objective was a type of mind games play with his reading public:
en.wikipedia.org...

This, by the way, is well documented by Wilson himself and by many many others. The Illuminati Trilogy is science fiction and parody.

It's not true.
www.nndb.com...

Here's an interview with Wilson. He mentions the books are "novels" (fiction) and goes on about several interesting things:
www.nii.net...

Succinct and to the point.

Yep.

I have to agree with defcon5 and Stari. The idea of Atlantis was, more or less, started by Plato.

I have to agree with defcon5 and Stari. The idea of Atlantis was, more or less, started by Plato.

There was also an Egyptian temple that was suppossed to have an inscription that was shown to (i believe) lycurgos but this is just a fragmentary memory... i dont actually have many solid memories (even of the past year).

Kiddies,

Atlantis is story told in two ancient Greek works called Timeas and the Critias. Both are documents attributed to Plato. The Critias is unfinished.

Plato was a philospher and is one of the first people in history that we can reference as having an established body of work that is consistent and remains accessable today. Claim of other documents or manuscripts of Atlantis are bogus and silly. They are not worth your time or they only reference Plato's original words. Everyhting else about Atlantis that you have ever heard is conjecture and/or made up. At best all else is theory concocted from one or both of these documnets.

Besides this, Plato is typically revered as having been extremely acurate and trustworthy. He is not a fiction writer. His works match up to history and his mention of things metaphorically is always delvered with such a caveat. His story of Atlantis doesn't have this caveat. He speaks of it as FACT. It is not like him, unless he was speaking in what he thought was truth. And thus a long drawn out cult following has been created. A following that believes he must have been onto something. Otherwise there is absolutly no other reference from antiquity that predates Plato's story. NONE. NOT A SINGLE ONE.

As far as flying machines and so forth, you can blame an American named Cayce. In the early part of the 20th century, this man claimed he was psychic and rebranded what we now know of Atlantis. He claimed to have visions. Bram Stoker did the same thing for vampires. Before Bram vampires never turned into bats. Before Rockwell Santa didn't even exist like he does now a-days in Coca Cola ads.

So if you want the real deal, read the Timeas and the Critias by Plato. Start at the begining and get the info from the source.


[edit on 30-5-2006 by faculae]

Faculae, recall that the series on Atlantis was unfinished. It needn't be any more literal than The Republic. And if it was intended as history, then he was completely off.

Sorry if I wasn't clear.

The point I am making is that Plato used allegories to tell stories. He almost exclusively used metaphor. You are supporting my claim in referencing his 'Republic.' The Atlantis mention in the Timeas or the Criteas is 99.9999% most likely completely made up. It may, in some remote way, resemble an anecdote that was circulating at the time. He possibly wrote about it as a means of proving that the ill-informed reader will often adopt perceived beliefs with little to know cross reference and will later adopt those notions as fact. Religion works the same way, so does government and the sensation of nationalism within its citizenship. It is in complete keeping with Plato's M.O. Further to discount his understanding of mass appeal, manipulation and politics would be to disassemble present day gov't. Gov'ts which are almost entirely founded on his ideals.

Otherwise to assume he wrote down a story verbatim that he heard elsewhere belittles his ability as a philosopher. To do so makes him nothing more that a traveling storyteller.

I think that Plato, more elegantly, used existing concepts and then built on them to create a false history as an experiment in the frailty of the human mind. I believe it is a private satire on religion and myth, a concept that he most certainly battled with himself. It was a way of seeing if people will believe something without any additional backing. And more importantly how and why that happens.

Its obvious after several thousand years that the answer is a glaring, "YES THEY WILL." The inertia of the Atlantis paradigm is to much to stop at this point. The romance is too grand. Its here to stay ... for a long time.

[edit on 31-5-2006 by faculae]

Hellanicus Record Index

Here is the catalogue information to the Princeton Library where the manuscript of "Atlantis" is being kept. I believe it is only about twenty lines or so. Anyway, it mentions a King calld Atland who had seven daughters. These daughters are interrpreted to be the seven islands of the central Kingdom continent. On the link above, you can actually read the fragment, but its in Latin, and I can't seem to find a decent translator that can do the work. If anyone else out there already has the software bought and paid for, I, for one, would love to see the actual work without having to go all the way to Princeton.

The only thing I can say in response to these statements is to read the following link. It pretty much sums up everything that I was wanting to say in response to this.
?Argument of Plato's Atlantis being REAL, not an allegory or attempt at a psychological test
Plato was a man. A philosopher, but also just a man. Why do we constantly have to place him on this eternal philosopher's pedestal? What is wrong with reciting a history? To do so does not belittle your reputation, nor does it make you . The history of Atlantis is an interesting one, why not tell it? If you think about it on a philisophical level anyway, the story is full of sound moral advice for potential superpowers and the concept of war. Seems like a stable topic to me.

It's in Greek, actually, and only the bottom fragment is the one. It's in cursive Greek, at that... I have bad handwriting, but this one needs practice to read.

Either way, I can't translate it. Tried Greek too. If it is a cursive form, I'd love to read it. I have pieces of what it says from others, but its not the same.

Edenkaia,
First, thank you very much for the link to Hellanicus' papyrus. Most excellent!

Now, there is a real problem with Plato "reciting" the "history" of Atlantis. That is that the story, at least as it was told by Plato, cannot possibly be true. The dates are too far gone, and this supposed dominator of the peoples of the Mediterreanean (the Atlanteans) are not mentioned, nor referred to in any way, by the people living in the area that had a written language 2,500 years before Solon was born. Not to mention the complete lack of artifactual evidence, and the utter absence of any "sunken continent" in the position described by Plato.

Other than these small problems, sure, you could call it a "history." But if it's a history, it ain't much of one!



I think that it should be mentioned that the story of Atlantis wasn't the main thrust of the dialogues where it is mentioned. I mean, the Critias is incomplete, so we can't say that for sure in that particular one, but the Timaeus is not "about" Atlantis in any case. This should indicate that it wasn't exactly an "historical recital."

Harte