Support Atlantis Rising Online by Supporting our Sponsors

Home | Hilly Rose Radio | Store | Online Archives | PDF's | News



UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
  Atlantis Rising
  Atlantis
  Atlantis, according to Platón, was near Gibraltar. Reason itself is not accepted?

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Atlantis, according to Platón, was near Gibraltar. Reason itself is not accepted?
Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 07-06-2002 05:30     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Atlantis, according to Platón, was near Gibraltar. Reason itself is not accepted?

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

======================================================================

The Only Location of Atlantis: Question of Rigor...

==============================================================================


Dear Colegas:

The only location of Atlantis that can be maintained, objectively,
and according to the own words of Plato and other authors of the
Antiquity, is the one of "FRETUM HERCULIS", "Straits of Hercules"
("Straits of Gibraltar", in Latin) or "ATLANTIKOUS PELAGOUS", "Sea of
the Atlántiko" ("Atlantic Gulf", in Greek)

"... The location of Isla-Peni'nsula de Atlantis between Iberia and
Africa, according to the own words of Plato: next to the Straits of
Gibraltar, ahead same, in the lobby of the Atlantic Gulf and near the
regions of the Atlas, Cadiz, Menestheo and Olissipo, never it has
been a thesis or a hypothesis, simply it has been the only location
referred by Plato, and sincerely, to try to maintain another location
would mean, simply, to ignore and to completely despise the text of
Plato and the old sources, besides to see one forced the manipulation
and the use of the argument of the force instead of going to the
force of the argument... " [Cita of the Author]

I wait for, sincerely, that the search of the truth, am where it is,
it is as it is, and it falls that falls, is what it really matters to
most of the members of this List. As also I hope to wake up your
interest, although it only is so that my work is criticized.

Very Warm greetings from "Atlantis-Iberia" of Georgeos Diaz-Montexano

===============================================================

The Atlántida facing Gibraltar, among Iberia and Africa

===============================================================

The Possible only Location of the Atlántida

-------------------------------------------

Numerous they are the locations that have tried to give to the enigmatic civilization atlante. Thus same it has himself it dear to find even in the most improbable places. The certain thing is that the Atlántida has been always truly apetitosa for the majority of the towns of the Ground. However, and for displeasure of many, the Atlántida never was in another point that went not among the Iberian Peninsula and the North of Africa, facing Gibraltar; neither even in the center of the Atlantic one as had thought the majority (included I) of the studious.

The theory of the Atlántida in Spain and its identification with Tartessós seems to have done clear already since ends of the S. XIX through the unjustly forgot Spanish historian Francisco Fernández and Gonzalez, father of the famous one Juán Fernández Amador of the Rivers, who did this theoretical claim of priority of its father to the German one Adolf Schulten, to the one that the own Spanish historians judged it the inmerecida fame if there is been the first one in defending this theory. One must see as we are always with ours! This remembers the case of Marcelino Sanz Sautuola, the first investigator of the famous paintings rupestres of Altamira, who died in the shame if there is been vituperado as falsificador. After Amador of the Rivers, to Schulten and to the arqueóloga Elena Whitshaw all the ones that have defended the theory of Atlantis-Tartessós have not done more than reincidir, save in small details, in the same points. Mention aside deserve some investigators as Mario Roso of Moon -probably the major scientist, creative intellectual and philosopher of the generation of the 98, also unjustly condemned to the ostracismo- Juan G. Atienza, Fernández Sánchez Dredged and Jorge María Ribero-Meneses. All these investigators present a common one denominador, the belief in an Atlántida paleolítica and megalítica, autora of the better paintings rupestres, as the of Altamira, and of the most impressive megalitos, as the of Antequera and the Millares. Although Ribero-Meneses differs of them in which has carried out an a great deal more deep study since the point of view filológico and has proposed like geographical headquarters of what he calls the "primitive Atlántida" to the serranías cántabro-Spanish. To the year 1994 I was convinced that the Atlántida of Platón was found in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, in a nearby point to the Islands Azores as the great majority of the "atlantólogos", while my friend and master in polemics Ribero-Meneses he tried to do me to see the wrong thing that found myself. The it defended that the Atlántida was found in the North of Iberia, but to me me did not they have just to convince some of their linguistic methods of reconstruction, and by ende some of their conclusions. Now I sit down obliged to recognize that, to the less, as for the identification of the Atlántida with the Iberian Peninsula, Ribero-Meneses had the reason. The same reason that the first, that a great deal before, they defended this theory: Francisco Fernández and Gonzalez and their son Juán Fernández Amador of the Rivers.

As buscador of the truth, be which be, be where be and who fall fall, to me alone he interested me to discover the truth upon the done narrados by Platón upon the Atlántida; as well as his true location. The alone reading of the text of Platón instilled me a strong intuition that that could not be could try a mere invention as they intended fundamentar some skeptics.

It did already a great deal of time that had understood that is impossible to carry out a rigorous and serious study in matter of history and arqueología without resorting to the primary fountains, that is to say, to the text in its original tongue; what carried me to carry out old studies of tongues as the Greek, the latin, the Egyptian, the fenicio, the sumerio and the sanskrito, among others. The immense majority of the ones that are dedicated to the study of the past work upon indirect fountains, upon information of second and third hand. In this manner, the errors you committed by the intermediarios are assimilated and trasmitidos through a chain of investigators that write down some over other without be decided to respond, save scarce exceptions, to the first fountain. The authority and competence of the academic specialists ancestors is assumed as something practically out of every doubt and inapelable in most cases, and is there where is, precise, the major danger for the historic reconstruction of the past. And for the search of the to know true.

Thus therefore, swims more to begin the reading of the text in Greek of the Timaios in the work of Platón, where begins the first story upon the Atlántida I noticed me of a gravísimo error of translation. An error, that repeated later to the saciedad -for all the investigators intermediarios that did not translate directly of the Greek or the latin or that did not they dare to carry out amendments to the common translations- I finished for being become a truth incuestionable, that has brought like consequence that a lot thousands of human beings (among the ones that also found me) during a lot time they have been believed that the Atlántida or Island of-That it is what really signifies the name of Atlántida or of Atlantis- was in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. This first error went to translate the Greek word "pelagos", preceding of our voice piélago- as ocean. Originally this Greek voice pelagos signified "marisma", "estanque","laguna", "playa","canal" and "narrow" as it show a good number of words related inside the own tongue helénika, in distant relatives as the lituano and in other that have maintained some historic contact as the fenicia, the Egyptian, and the crafty one or dialect Jewish-Spaniard of the Spain I delay medieval, where pélago followed maintaining the old Greek meaning of "raft" and "reservoir" (Pascual1977). Thus, when the text in Greek said:

"...Tote gar poreusimon ên to ekei "pelagos" : nêson gar for tou "stomatos" eichen ho kaleite, hôs phate, humeis "Hêrakleous stêlas"..." (Timaios 24e)

"...Entonces yes could be crossed that "piélago" : an island, in effect, there was in front of the "mouth" to the one that you call, and they bring to light, the "Be them of Herakles"..."

The first modern translatings of tongues wrote:

"...En that epoch, could be crossed that "ocean" given that it there was an island in front of the "desembocadura" that you, thus you say, you call "Columns of Hércules"..."

I have "underlined" the key words of this passage. The word pelagos appears badly translated in many texts and dictionaries Greek-LATIN AMERICAN as "sea" or "high sea". But ahead I will expose in this middle the study etimológico and lexicográfico that should have carried out to convince me of its true and original meaning of "marismas", "beaches" or of what today we know as "archipiélagos" This study etimológico and linguistic comes to occupy all a chapter in the book that have carried out upon this thesis giving it The Atlántida among Iberia and Africa, facing Gibraltar. Of all ways, if Platón had dear to be referred to the ocean, instead of to a Piélago, simply to have used the Greek voice Ôkeanos.

A test irrefutable that this last translation used by the majority of the contemporary and modern authors is absolutely erroneous we have it in the first translation latina known of the original one Greek of the complete works of Platón. The translation of Marsilio Ficini (1433-1499). In this first version latina reads perfectly as the voice "fretum" substitutes to the Greek "pelagos". The key one "pelagos = fretum".

The same thing is corroborated in the translation latina of the Timaios done by Chalcidio in the century IV d. C. In effect, the key one of "pelagos = fretum" is one of the tests irrefutables that I possess to document my thesis of the Atlántida near the Strait of Gibraltar, that is not but that to corroborate, simply, some of the affirmations that Platón said upon this enigmatic Civilization and that subsequently we will detail.

The first translation to the latin of the original in Greek of all the dialogues and documents of Platón, as has said, was carried out for Marsilio Ficini to mediados of the Century XVI, being at the same time the first impression of the complete works of Platón. "Divini Platonis Operates Omnia", was printed in the shop tipográfico of the Convent of Santiago of Ripoli, in Florencia, among 1482 and 1484. The original that Ficini used for its translation latina nowadays are "disappeared". From there the enormous value that has this first translation, since the Greek version that today know, part of the one that did Aldus Manutius and Framework Musurus in Venecia 1513, some 30 years later, evidently, of the translation latina of Ficini. It wants all this to say that, although I am used to having in consideration both versions, the Greek and the latina, evidently the version latina since the point of view of the rigurosidad would be the but complete and reliable. Of fact, the key most fundamental to locate to the Atlántida I have obtained them thanks to this translation latina of Ficini and to the translation commented of Chalcidio, the oldest one of all the translations latinas existing.

In these translations tests are found so contundentes as this that subsequently we will expose. So much Chalcidio as Ficini utilize a key word for the thesis that are defending as for the location of the Island Atlantis refer to the word latina "fretum", which uses in the same position in which appears always in the Greek version the voice "pelagos". Therefore well, for those of You that they do not be very familiarized with the tongue of the Romen or that do not remember well the lessons of latin of the school I will tell them that "fretum" signifies, exactly, "narrow". ¡Eureka! That is to say, that according to Ficini the Atlantida was found in the same Strait of Hércules. But better we see the following passages of the version latina, so that you can verify it for you same:

"...TUNC ENIM ERAT FRETUM ILLUD NAVIGABILES. INSULAM AUTEM IN ORE MARIS ADITU, QUAM AD EAS ANGUSTIAS, QUAS VOS HERCULIS COLUMNAS VOCATIS..."

"...Because then that Strait was navigable: An Island, in effect, there was in the entrance (or in the step) of the mouth of the Sea, there before those angosturas, that you llamais Columns of Hercules. .."

Chalcidio (disciple of the Akademia of Platón, S. IV d.C.) writes:

"... TUNC ENIM FRETUM ILLUD, OPINOR, ERAT COMMEABILE HABENS IN ORE AC VESTIBULO SINUS INSULAM, QUOD OS A VOBIS HERCULIS CENSETUR COLUMNAE ..."

"... Because then that Strait, according to the opinion, was passable therefore there was in the Mouth and in the Vestibule of the Gulf an Island, that is the Mouth that you consider of the Column of Hercules..."

As you will see, exist some small differences, that in the case of the version of Chalcidio, need still more than the Island Atlantis was found, just to the entrance of the Strait, toward the part of the Atlantic Gulf, that is what signifies that matización of "AC VESTIBULO SINUS", that is to say, "in the Vestibule of the Gulf".

We compare it now with the Greek version that, as already we have aimed, is very probable that leave from the previous translation latina of Ficini:

"... tote gar poreusimon ên to ekei pelagos : nêson gar pro tou stomatos eichen ho kaleite, hôs phate, humeis Hêrakleous stêlas ..." (Timaios 24e)


"... Then yes it could be crossed that piélago: since an island had in front of the mouth to the one that you call, and they bring to light, Be them them of Herakles..."

We see another passage of the translation of Ficini. This time I will not translate I directly, we will do it through the Spanish translation of Gregorio García (1607) upon the same original LATIN AMERICAN of Marsilio Ficini:

"...Porque then that Narrow was navigable: having à laboca, and almost à the door of the Colunas of Hércules, that you are used to calling, an Island.." (Spanish translation of the original LATIN AMERICAN of Marsilio Ficini by Gregorio García, 1607)

Then.. Exist or not sufficient reasons of weight to defend that the Island Atlantis -if existed really, if did not be a matter of a simple fantasy of Platón- alone could be in some very nearby point to the Strait of Gibraltar?

If the Island Atlantis was therefore in the "entrance" or in the "step" same, before the "mouth of the angostura" or "narrow" same, almost to the "door" or "entrance of the Columns of Hercules", ¿how is possible that to today have nobody noticed himself of this key so capital one? How it is possible that all the atlantólogos previous, since the own one Ignatus Donelly, to the one that him is considered the "father of the atlantología", have nobody believed never in the only location of the Island Atlantis that offers Platón? The answer already you have it all. The guilty one of all this confusion was the first one that decided to be guided for the Greek version -and not by the original one latina of Chalcidio or Ficini- and to interpret the Greek voice "pelagos" as "Ocean", instead of as "Narrow" or simply as "Piélago" of marismas and low funds. Or how it is that has nobody thought that if the original voice Greek had been really pelagos why neither Chalcidio neither Ficini they would use in its place the word latina pelagus that in order to account was a voice derived from the same one pelagos Greek.

It is clear that if both used the voice FRETUM, that is to say, "narrow" or " narrow space of sea, among ground and ground by where the sea passes from a side to the other" went because the Greek word of the original manuscripts, that they translated to the latin, permitted this translation. This is pure common sense. Is logical aplastante. Besides, upon disappearing "mysterious" the original Greek version does not remain but remedy that to offer greater validity to a great part of the words latinas used by Chalcidio and Ficini. It is obvious that, is not for scientific do nothing that we manipulate to our convenencia the words of Platón basing on subsequent modern translations that are not but that retraducciones of the original one latina of Chalcidio and Ficini, and of the subsequent Greek versions based on the translation latina of these. Still thus, and supposing that the Greek original voice fuese "pelagos", as has remained manifesto, I create to have shown that the voice 'pelagos' admits correct one more translation than that of "ocean" or "high sea". This translation is that of 'marismas' or "sea of islands of low funds" that would insert perfectly with the definition of 'narrow' that offer Chalcidio and Ficini by means of the voice latina FRETUM. On the other hand, is probable that the Greek voice that to appear in the original one was "porzmos" or well "stenojoría"; both were used to call to the marine straits. Inside the Greek text that has arrived, in concrete in the passage pertaining to Timaios 25ª, we find a clear reference that shows that the strait is the same one piélago:

"...tade men gar, hosa entos tou stomatos hou legomen, phainetai limênstenon tina echôn eisploun: ekeino de pelagos..."

"...Lo that remained, inside the mouth that mention, a narrow port in its entrance seemed: the mentioned piélago. .."

Thus therefore, so much if we use the translation latina of Chalcidio and Ficini, as if we use any of the subsequent Greek versions, the "Pelagos" of Atlantis is the same thing that the "Fretum" of the Atlantic one; which is described as a "Narrow" or "Port with a Narrow Entrance", and whose name is exactly that of the "Be them of Hêraklês" or "Columns of Hercules". Without doubt the present one "Narrow of Gibraltar". To see the following Illustrations:

The Piélago of Atlantis facing Gibraltar:

1.http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/cultura/1f7f47e0.jpg

2.http://www.nautico.net/images/map1.jpg

Thus therefore, the thesis that defend, for years, based on the Greek and latin american texts of the dialogues of Platón, is irrebatible as for the fact that the Island Atlantis that describes Platón, that is to say, the only Island Atlantis or Atlántida mentioned in the Antiquity with that name, if there is existed in reality, only could be where the own texts locate it: in the "entrance" or in theSame, before the "mouth of the angostura" or "narrow" same, almost to the "door" or "entrance" of the "Columns of Hércules". It can be asked but?

On the other hand, one more test that Platón was referring in every moment to an assembly of marismas and archipiélagos we have it in the same passage cited when upon wanting to express the idea to cross utilizes the Greek voice "poreúsimon", which does reference to it related to "to pass" or "to cross for ground", as shows the analysis dictionary-etimológico. If Platón had desired to express the idea to cross for sea or water would be able therefore to have used the voice porzmeúô "to travel by water, narrow or arm of sea".

Only after the sinking of the Island-City and of some part of the archipiélago where wrote down -not of the Atlántida entire- is that the philosopher atheniense utilizes for the first time, in the Timaios, a word with clear marine meaning. I refer to the voice thalattas "sea". The text says thus:

"... hê te Atlantis nêsos hôsautôs kata tês thalattês dusa êphanisthê: dio kai nun aporon kai adiereunêton gegonen toukei pelagos, pêlou karta bracheos empodôn ontos, dn hê nêsos hidzomenê par-ésjeto... " (Timaios 25d)


"... While Atlantis, the island, in the same way, being sunk under the sea disappeared. Because of it now is intransitable and inescrutable the exit by that Piélago (or Narrow), of the mud of the many shoals (or reefs) that are a true obstacle, toward the island there written down next to the tip or extremity. .."


As it can be observed Platón leaves well clear the difference among the word (in genitive) "thálattês" "of the sea" or "of the water" and the word "pelagos", relative to the "water little deep, fangosas and with islands or narrow"; as the water of all the known archi-piélagos nowadays.

As for the location of the Island Atlantis, Platón, by mouth of the Kritias the Smaller one, affirms that in its epoch (S. IV a. C.) said Island "was found still to little depth, next to the tip or extremity..." Probably would be referring to the present one "Tip of Tarifa" or to the "Tip of Trafalgar".

In another passage, upon referring to the Atlantic sea, Platón employs the voice "pontos" (Tim. 25a) that in the tongue helénika is utilized to call to the "seas", while to be referred to what surrounds to the strait and to the island-city of Atlantis uses always the voice "pelagos" that is to say, "piélago"; emparentada with "archi-piélago the one that signifies "the Piélago Old or Main" and that was used to name the assembly of islands of the Sea Egeo. The configuración of this sea is exactly that of a full sea of islands of diverse dimensions, for which we have here a clear evidence of the meaning of "piélago" as a group of islands or small islands surrounded of water, or sea of islands with frequent straits and shoals that complicate the navigation. They felt this that we have inherited in the present geographical terminology, where an archipiélago is a "joint of islands grouped in a surface of sea of a specific extension".

ONE MORE confirmación, if fits, that Platón referred to a "piélago" or "sea of islands" next to the "Narrow of Herakles" we have it in the fact that the majority of the authors from the antiquity upon referring to the water that surrounded to the strait, of the part of the Mediterranean one or Mare Nostrum, they were used to utilizing the denominations of "Piélago Iberian" and "Piélago Baleárico", evidently by theAlready they disappeared that they existed nearby to the Strait, it as has confirmed the marine geology, and that they were called in the antiquity as "Piélago Atlantic" or "Pelagus Fretum".

Of these old Piélagos is conserved at present the "Island of Alborán" and numerous low and banks facing Gibraltar in the vestibule of the "Atlantic Gulf" as the "Low of the Cabezos", of "Camarinal" of "Trafalgar" and the "Bank of Majuan".

In another passage, being referred Platón to the children of Poseidón that governed in the Island Atlantis the following thing says:

"... houtoi dê pantes autoi te kai ekgonoi toutôn epi geneaspollas ôikoun archontes men pollôn allôn kata to pelagos nêsôn, eti de, hôsper kai proteronerrêthê, mechri te Aiguptou kai Turrênias tôn entos deuro eparchontes. ..." (Kritias 114)


"...Todos these and all the of their lineage a great deal of time they lived like arjontes (rulers) of many of the other upon the piélago of the islands, that, besides, and of equal way before they sent; to Egypt and Türrênia (Peninsula Itálica), toward inside, to here, they extended their power. .."

One more time Platón clears up the characteristics of the geographical setting that surrounds to Atlantis. This it is adjusted to that of an archipiélago, what remains perfectly defined with the expression "the piélago of the islands". Subsequently the master one atheniense I need us, more still, upon assuring us that a promontorio of the Island Atlantis arrived to the "Columns of Hércules" and the "region of Gadira". We see this revealing passage:

"... tôi men presbutatôi kai basilei touto hou dê kai pasa hê nêsos to te pelagos eschen epônumian, Atlantikon lechthen, hoti tounom' ên tôiprôtôi basileusanti ... (Kritias 114a) ... tote Atlas: tôi de didumôi met' ekeinon te genomenôi, lêxin de akras tês nêsou pros Hêrakleiôn stêlôn eilêchoti epi to tês Gadeirikês nun chôras kat' ekeinon ton topon onomazomenês, Hellênisti men Eumêlon, to d' epichôrion Gadeiron , hoper t' ên epiklên tautêi onom' a paraschoi. ..." (Kritias 114b)

"... The major and king is that of the one that all the island and the piélago carries his name; the Atlantic one (" Piélago of Atlas"), according to is said has the name derived from this, the first one that was king.. (Kritias 114a)... then Atlas. To the twin or to be that it came later, it corresponded for lot the promontorio (or the heights) of the Island (or Peninsula) next to them Be them of the Heraklios offered by the God to the side (or nearby) of Gadiria that now there that place call for that name, in Helenístico is Eumêlo, in native Gadiro (Gadeiron is the acusativo of Gadeiros, pronounced, according to the norms phonetics of the Greek tongue,Or Gadiro), the one that is very possible that by thus same nickname gave name (to the place); in this way the name was originated. .." (Kritias 114b)

With this passage Platón left well clear through the voice helénica "akras" -that has also the meaning of summit, top, height; tip, promontorio; besides castle and fortress, as the voice latina "arx" -, that a promontorio or some heights of the "island-peninsula" was situated next to the "Be them of Herakles" or "Columns of Hércules", which was also to the side or nearby to the known place in(S. III a. C., or well in the times of scorching Heat, S. V a. C.) as "Gadiria". Name this that was supposed at the same time derived from the name of "Gadiro", the Atlas twin brother. And that the "Gadirikê" or "region of Gadiria" corresponded, more or less, with the old one "Gadir" fenicia and the present province of "Cádiz" is something that nowadays is out of every doubt. Just in case, I have taken myself the molestia to revise all the original fountains acquaintances in heléniko and latin that do reference to this topónimo... and all, without exception, locate this paraje in the proximities of the "Narrow Herakleo" or present "Narrow of Gibraltar". Be worth like example these two contemporary and previous samples to the times of Platón:

1. Orae Maritimae of Rufo Festo Reconcile (Century IV)

"... EST ATLANTICUS SINUS. HIC GADIR URBS EST, {...}, HIC SUNT COLUMNAE PERTINACIS HERCULIS..."

"... In the Atlantic gulf. Here is the urbe of Gadir, {...}, here are the Columns of the pertinaz Hércules. .."

2. Periplo of the Sea next to the coasts inhabited of Europe, Asia and Libya" of Pseudo Eskílax. (Century IV a. C.)

"... Europe (1) : I Will Begin as of them Be them of Herakles situated in Europe to the ones that are in Libya and to the large Etíopes. Be them them of Herakles are face to face some of other and are distant among if a journey of navigation. And there is, next to them, two islands that carry for name Gadira. One of them has a City that is away from them Be them of Herakles a journey of navigation. After them Be them of Herakles, situated in Europe, there is numerous factorías commercial of the púnicos, mud, waves and open sea. Libya (111) : "Acros is the name of the city and of the gulf, a deserted island of name Drinaupa, it Being it of Herakles in Libya, the peninsula Abilika and a city in the river and in front of them the islands Gadiras. ... Gadira. "These islands are next to Europe and one of them has a city and Be them them of Herakles are facing them, a that of Libya little high, another that of Europe high. These they are peninsulas situated an in front of the other. Are distant among if a navigation of a journey. .. (112) : "subsequently of them Be them of Herakles for whom sails toward the outside and leaves Libya to the left, there is a great gulf (the Atlantic Gulf among Iberia and Africa) to the Promontorio of Hermes (Tip of San Vicente) ..." [end of appointment]

All the ones that have intended to locate the existence of Atlantis in any another point of the World that do not be in the proximities of the present Strait of Gibraltar, have had to be seen obliged to force the translations of the modern texts so that they could be adapted to their hypothesis preconcebidas. None of them maintains him. Of fact, all the typical arguments are base on: "perhaps Platón what meant was. .." or "and if instead of such, went really which. .." or that another argumentación based on the possible defects of ortografía of Platón or of their copyists, who they would confuse some words by other.

Although these arguments, in some concrete cases, they would be able to be certain, cannot be constituted, under no concept, in the motor one impulsor and guide of any investigation that need to resort to the translation of the original old texts. Evidently would not be this the most scientific attitude.

The precision of Platón to the hour to locate the "Island Atlantis", next to the "Columns of Hércules" (Narrow of Gibraltar) and the "region of Gades" (Cádiz) is so impressively exact that all the ones that have tried situating it in other places of the World, them has not remained but remedy that to be invented that the "Columns of Hércules" never were where always they have been or that they could exist other. When the certain thing is that the 99,9 of the old appointments upon the "Be them of Herakles" or "Columns of Hércules" situate them in the "Narrow" that separated to the great one "Exterior Sea" or "Atlantic Ocean" of the "Interior Sea" or "Mare Nostrum", the present one "Mediterranean".

Who they have tried to establish this absurd one to want reubicar to the "Columns of Hércules" in other points of the Mediterranean one, they have done it to be able to defend at the same time absurd hypothesis upon the Atlántida in other places out of the entorno of the "Narrow of Gibraltar".

From time to time has tried to place to the "Island Atlantis" even in distant and so remote places of the mediterranean and Atlantic area, as for example, "Indonesian". All these authors seem to have forgot also (of very convenient way) that not alone there would be that to change the historic position of the "Columns of Hércules" in the "Narrow of Gibraltar", but also the geographical position of "Gades" or "Cádiz", "Elasippo or Olissipo" (name of the old one Lisbon) and "Meneszeus or Menestheus" (old name of the present Port of Holy María, Cádiz); regions or regions atlantes pertaining to the kings "Gadiro", "Elasippo""Mnêseas", brothers of "Atlas", the first and main king of the "Island-Peninsula of Atlantis".

They are four already the topónimos and geographical points that have detected in the story of Platón and that coincide with places cited by other Roman and Greek authors in an area that covers since the strait of Gibraltar or "Columns of Hércules" to Portugal. Of no way this can be owed to a simple and mere coincidence. Not no place in the ground exists where themselves there they be registado these same names related among if, and in a relatively nearby area.

These cuatros names atlantes: "Atlas" (Mount Atlas), "Gadiro" (Gadir, Gades), "Mnêséus" (Meneszeus), "Elasippus" (Olisippus), referred by Platón, are coincidentes with topónimos that were conserved still in the times of the Roman conquest of Iberia, and in an area that covers since the present one "Narrow of Gibraltar" to "Lisbon".

¡We be sensible! And still there is who intends to seek, not already the Atlántida in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean or in the middle of the Mediterranean one but even in Indonesia? ¡Incredible, but sadly certain!!

The location of the "Island-Peninsula of Atlantis" among "Iberia and Africa", next to the "Narrow of Gibraltar", before same, in the "vestibule of the Atlantic Gulf" and near the regions of the "Atlas", "Cádiz", "Menestheo" and "Olissipo", never has been a thesis or a hypothesis, simply has been the only location referred by Platón, and sincerely, to try to maintain another location would signify, simply, to ignore and to despise completely the textOld fountains, besides being seen one obliged to the manipulación and to the employment of the argument of the strength instead of responding by force of the argument.

We do not forget that it is to Platón, precise, to whom we owe that today we discuss upon the Atlántida, for which we should keep in mind first his affirmations, before that the of any "illuminated" or modern investigator that is passed for the "lining of his trousers" the appreciations and the data that Platón contributes. Not is nobody obvious that does exist nowadays with more knowledge upon the Atlántida that the ones that had in his moment the genial philosopher atheniense.

To try to defend other locations of the "Island-Peninsula Atlantis" (or of Atlas) that do not be the one that clearly refers Platón, in the proximities of "Gibraltar and Cádiz" would signify, without any doubt, to violate the most elementary rules of the scientific method.

Who do not be capable to verify scientifically the historic existence of Atlantis, according to the data that contributes Platón and without manipulaciones, to the less than having the decency of not being invented other "Atlántidas" nonexistent at the expense of to do to remain to Platón as an old forgetful one or as a liar.

I expect that the scientific severity finally dominate in the rational and intelligent minds of all those that we study these facts, that analyze all with depth the data here contributed, and later we remove ours own conclusions.

To the less I have arranged for all the original fountains in which I base my studies so that any can submit to comprobación my conclusions; something that by ethics and principle they should have done all the ones that have tried and try to reconstruct these facts of the past.


All in all:

Does not it exist in the story of Platón original -so much in Greek as in its translation to the latin carried out by its disciple Chalcidio, and subsequently by Ficini- absolutely swims that permit to infer, neither even as a remote possibility, that the "Island-Peninsula Atlantis" [" Nêsos Atlantis" in Greek, "Insula Atlantida" in latin] could be in another place of the World that was not just, to the same side, of the "ColumnsOf the "regions of the Atlas", "Gades" (Cádiz), "Menestheo" (Port of Holy María?) and "Olissipo" (Lisbon). In the "vestibule of the Atlantic Gulf" that is opened facing the "Columns of Hércules".

Any another affirmation or hypothesis upon the location of "Atlantis" in another point any of the ground himself does not maintain in it but most minimum, according to the original fountains.

As for the seismic activity submarine, also tests exist more than sufficient of a strong enough activity under the water of Cádiz, Tip of San Vicente and Gibraltar, that is to say, the region of the Piélago of Atlantis that describes Platón, for which do not there would be neither no need to try to seek another seismic region of the World to try to locate to the Atlántida.

The most recent geological investigations and oceanográficas carried out by scientific Spaniards to I embroider of the ship Hespérides, are giving samples, according to the Dr.Victor Díaz of the River of the Faculty of Sciences of the Sea of the Institute Geominero of Spain one of a highest one sismicidad underwater, "characterized by frequent earthquakes with epicentros in the marine zone and their corresponding tsunamis that reach diverse dimensions", in this same area that haveThe "Piélago of Atlantis".

They have been found to chimneys volcánicas in the marine depths facing Cádiz. Another noticeable investigator the Dr. Luis Somoza Losada (Geologia Marine, IGME) has directed a scientific project of investigation: the "Campaign oceanográfica TASYO 2000". Ship of Investigation Oceanográfica "Hespérides". Some of the results of these investigations have permitted to affirm the following referring to the nearby area to the Gulf of Cádiz:

"...En as much as, the deep structure, have been detected the existence of large cabalgamientos corticales upon the bark oceánica with expression morfológica in the marine fund, what indicates the seismic activity of the area, related to large fenomenos of tsunamis. .."

Upon the great potential intensity of activities sismicas of underwater origin in this area that identify as the "Piélago of Atlantis", where the island of the same name was found and that desapareción due to strong seismos and floods, according to Platón, would suffice with remembering the seismo of marine origin that almost to put an end to Lisbon in the S. XVIII. In individual, in the zone of the Strait of Gibraltar, have registered legends upon ground submerged since the medieval epoch. To the respect, Enrique Gozalbes Cravioto in an interesting job upon medieval and old legends of the Strait says us -being referred to the survival of the disappearance of the Island Atlantis facing Gibraltar to the Arabian authors- the following thing:

"...Es curious the continuity, more or less altered, of this tradition about cities submerged and of the formation of reefs in the zone of the Strait. {... currently the majority of the investigators reject that the myth itself fundamentara in a historic reality; nevertheless a certain tradition of the myth was maintained in the beliefs of the inhabitants of the Strait and of Tarifa in individual. .."

Sincerely, as already I said in another moment, each time turns out to be more difficult myself to understand how is possible that they have written so many thousands of books and tantas, tantísimas, theories upon the location of the Island Atlantis by almost all the corners of the Ground, with it clarísima that always was the reference to its location facing the present Strait of Gibraltar??

I create, as already I have aimed likewise in other occasions, that the fault of all this muddle has been motivated for the fact of not resorting never to the true primary fountains, that is to say, to the oldest texts acquaintances in its versions Greek-greco-latinas. In short, by the lack of severity as for the precision and verification of data in a direct way. The majority of the investigators that has studied the "Atlántida", already they be esoteristas, master illuminated, spirits or ghosts (meaningless any peyorativo), and to scientists, have preferred to be governed for the existing translations of the dialogues of Platón to modern tongues after the centuries XVIII and XIX, assuming them always as correct, when these they were erroneous and inprecisas in very fundamental aspects.

It is able, if wants, by mere whim, by desires to bother, by eagerness of protagonismo or simply by simple competitividad and commerce, to insist in putting the Atlántida where to one the desire give it, whether in Chalk, in the Azores, in the Bahamas, in Cuba, in Mexico, in the Island of Pascua, in Indonesia and even in the Antártida [that has nothing to do with a deformation ofAtlántida as some "sesudo" to arrived to affirm, but is a word created by its discoverers to indicate "the contrary thing or opposite of the arctic one or ártido that is to say, it opposed to the north"].

Yes, by wanting to call the attention and to seem one original, is able until placing the Atlántida in the Moon or in a Planet X. In short, where the real desire give us. As already has said, is to flavor of the consumer. But to the less we should have the dignity and the ethics to recognize that, independently of where would please ourselves that was the Island Atlantis, the pure truth, the objective reality, is that the genial Master one Platón only locates it "next to the Columns of Hércules" (Gibraltar); near the "regions of the Atlas" (Moroccan), of "Gades" (Cádiz), of "Menestheo" (Port of Holy María?) and of "Olissipo" (Lisbon); in the "same mouthAtlantiko", that is to say, among the Suroeste of the Iberian Peninsula and the Northwest of Africa.

We do not forget never that, to the moment, the dialogues of Platón [the Timaios and the Kritias] seem to be the first and original only fountains written that it has been conserved upon the Island Atlantis or Island of Atlas.

Copyright: Georgeos Díaz-Montexano, 1996
Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

To expand information in
http://Atlantis.sitio.net/ http://www.elistas.net/listas/atlantologos/

Discovered Atlantis in Gibraltar http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

They discover ruins under the Sea in the Straits of Gibraltar that could be of the Atlantis. The ruins of the Old Civilization of Atlantis could ...


Discovered Atlantis in Gibraltar

They discover ruins under the Sea in the Straits of Gibraltar that could be of the Atlantis. The ruins of the Old Civilization of Atlantis could ...

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

Daffy Duck
Member
posted 07-06-2002 21:17     Click Here to See the Profile for Daffy Duck     Edit/Delete Message
Great material, Georgeos. Thanks.

I see that you acknowledge that your work has made no attempt at validating the actual existence of Atlantis. In respect of that postion, I still wonder if you would subscribe to the notion that Plato's time scale is 'accurate' as well as his geography (i.e., "should be taken at face value") = destruction of Atlantis occurred ~9,000 years before his narrative? You are no doubt familiar with the claims of suppossed 'legitimate' scientist who place Atlantis as island of Santorini, and destroyed by eruption of Thera ~900 years before Plato's narrative. It seems this claim violates both the geographic description of Plato (as you presented), as well as Plato's timeline.

Your thoughts on that?

edit: swapped Thera/Santorini - also, I can't get your links to work: "this page cannot be displayed."

[This message has been edited by Daffy Duck (edited 07-06-2002).]

IP: 209.153.176.107

Catastrophe
Member
posted 07-07-2002 01:08     Click Here to See the Profile for Catastrophe     Edit/Delete Message
"the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia."

This certainly suggests Atlantis was west of the Pillars of Heracles and not at the opposite side of the world.

IP: 194.168.74.152

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 07-08-2002 10:27     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
It estimated Catastrophe:

Of course, the fragment of the text that you quote and that corresponds with the Kritias 114 shows of maera clear that Atlantis was found nearby to the entorno of the Mediterranean one and of Gibraltar. We see the following passages:

"... houtoi dê pantes autoi te kai ekgonoi toutôn epi geneas pollas ôikoun archontes men pollôn allôn kata to pelagos nêsôn, eti de, hôsper kai proteron errêthê, mechri te Aiguptou kai Turrênias tôn entos deuro eparchontes. ..." (Kritias 114a)


"... All these and all the of their lineage a great deal of time they lived like archontes (rulers) of many of the other upon the piélago of the islands, that besides, and of equal way before they sent; to Egypt and Türrênia (Peninsula Itálica) toward inside to here they extended their power. ..."


One more time Platón clears up the characteristics of the geographical setting that surrounds to Atlantis. This it is adjusted to that of an archipiélago, what remains perfectly defined with the expression "the piélago of the islands". Subsequently the athenian teacher I need us more still upon assuring us that an extreme of the Island Atlantis arrived to the Columns of Hércules and the region of Gadira. We see this revealing passage:


"... tôi men presbutatôi kai basilei touto hou dê kai pasa hê nêsos to te pelagos eschen epônumian, Atlantikon lechthen, hoti tounom' ên tôi prôtôi basileusanti ... (Kritias 114a) ... tote Atlas: tôi de didumôi met' ekeinon te genomenôi, lêxin de akras tês nêsou pros Hêrakleiôn stêlôn eilêchoti epi to tês Gadeirikês nun chôras kat' ekeinon ton topon onomazomenês, Hellênisti men Eumêlon, to d' epichôrion Gadeiron, hoper t' ên epiklên tautêi onom' a<n> paraschoi. ..." (Kritias 114b)


"... The major and king is that of the one that all the island and the piélago carries his name; the Atlantic one according to is said, has the name derived from this the first one that was king.. (Kritias 114a)... then Atlas: to the or be that came later, it corresponded the tip more of the Island next to them Be them of the Heraklios offered by the God next to Gadirikê that now there that place call for that name, in Helênistico is Eumêlo, in native Gadiro, the one that is very that by nickname thus gave name (to the place) in this wayHe was originated. ..."

With this passage Platón left well clear that the most distant or extreme tip (the voice helénica akras has also the meaning of extremity, bordering, limit, tip) of the island was situated next to them Be them of Heracles or Columns of Hércules which was also to the side or nearby to the known place in its epoch (that is to say, in the times of Platón) as Gadirikê, whose name was supposedTime derived from the name of its brother twin Gadiro and that the Gadirikê or region of Gadira corresponded, more or less with the present province of Cádiz is something that nowadays is out of every doubt.

Just in case I have taken myself the molestia to revise all the original fountains in heléniko and latin that they did reference to this topónimo and all without exception locate this paraje in the proximities of the Narrow one Heracleo. All the investigators that have intended to locate the existence of Atlantis in any another point of the World that do not be in the proximities of the present Strait of Gibraltar, have had to be seen obliged to force the translations of the texts so that they could be adapted to their hypothesis preconcebidas. None of them maintain themselves in it more minimum. Of fact, all the typical arguments are base on: "perhaps Platón what meant was. .." or "and if instead of such, went really which. .." or that another argumentación based on the possible defects of ortografía of Platón or of their copyists, who they would confuse some words by other.

The precision of Platón to the hour to locate the Island Atlantis next to them Be them of Herakles is so impressively exact that all the ones that have tried situating it in other places them has not remained but remedy that to be invented that the Columns of Hércules never were where always they have been or that they could exist other. The certain thing is that the 99,9% of the appointments upon them Be them of Herakles or Columns of Hércules situate them in the strait that separated to the great Exterior Sea or Ocean of the Interior Sea or Mare Nostrum, the present Mediterranean one.

Cordial greetings of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com
http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

Brig
Member
posted 07-09-2002 15:16     Click Here to See the Profile for Brig     Edit/Delete Message
Georgeos: Got a question. The articles of antiquity, found just in front of the straits of Gibralter, were located on a bit of land not much larger than Mannhatten island in the U.S. How can this be? Plato said the country was quite large, as large as Libya and Asia. To me, beyond the straits of Hercules, would mean simply outside the straits of Hercules, which could include mid-Atlantic or even the Carribean. Am I misreading something?

IP: 64.12.97.7

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 07-10-2002 06:50     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡

The true size of the Atlántida. The third error

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It estimated Colleague:

Not, You have not read badly. The fact is that the common translations upon the dialogues of Platón (the Timaios and the Kritias) are erroneous in very important fragments for the solution of the enigma of Atlantis, as in this case the fragments that do mention of the true size of Atlantis.

As it will be able You to verify subsequently, Platón never said that the Island Atlantis went larger than Libya and Asia gathered or you join. That has been an erroneous interpretation. If it is analyzed in depth the appointments of Platón is verified, facilmente, that Platón never nothing said seemed. Of fact, in the Dialogue of Kritias Platón speaks us some-dimensional most maximum of 3000 stadiums from This to Oste (as of Gibraltar) for 2000 stadiums of North to South. These same dimensions are the ones that offer the geógrafos of the antiquity -contemporary to Platón and previous to this-, for the kingdom or empire of Tartessós, since Gibraltar to Portugal. What it shows that in every case the Island or Peninsula of Atlantis would fit perfectly in the existing hole nowadays in the Atlantic Gulf or of Cádiz that is opened since Gibraltar to the Madeiras, as more remote point.

You abandonment with the data.

Very Cordial greetings of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano

Another of the large meteduras of leg that did that the Atlántida to seem to the arqueólogos academic, geologists and serious investigators a pure invention went the also incorrect translation of the passage where by first time is done reference to the approximate size of the Atlántida. This it is found in the section 24e of the Timeo:

"...hê de nêsos hama Libuês ên kai Asias meizôn..."

And it has been translated in the following way:

"...La Island (Atlantis) was but large that Libya and Asia you join. .."

When in reality its more approximate and literal translation to the meaning of the words is:

"... the Island, at the same time of Libya was and of Grasped (also) owner. .."

What it would be able to be corrected in:

"... the Island Atlantis, at the same time was owner of Libya and of Asia. .."

Or well as:

"... the Island Atlantis, at the same time was But Magnificent that Libya and Asia. .."

As it can appreciate the reader exists a great difference among the traditional translation and mine. It is not the same thing an Atlántida "larger than Libya and Asia you join", what would signify all a continent almost as large as Groenlandia, that an island or peninsula which was "owner of Libya and of Asia" or "But Powerful that Libya and Asia".

This translation corrected not alone is perfectly but credible, but inserts in a correct way with the situation and description of the Peninsula Atlante given by Platón.

The error was produced because all the translations to the use or acquaintances of the texts of Platón are retraducciones of the first translations carried out to the French of the version latina of the Work of Platón carried out by Ficini in the S. XVI. In this version Ficini interpreted the voice helénica meizôn, with genitive, as the comparative or superlative of the voice megas "large". From there the interpretation of "but large that". However, Ficini, and all the authorities in classical tongues that followed, they did not keep in mind first, that this comparative form of the voice megas that is to say, meizôn, would also be able to to have interpreted as "but powerful" or "but magnificent", what evidently would do therefore allusion to its condition of Great Powerful Civilization, what constantly is recalcado in both stories of the Timaios and the Kritias. Another possible one and but creible still translation, that escaped the authors that have preceded me, went that of the voice meizôn as form adjetival and conditional of authority or possession, that with genitive also was used to call to the maximum authority, to the leader or head of something or of someone. Thus we have for example: meizôn kômês "the Governing or Chief of a Village" (P.Oxy. 1.32. Latin letter to to tribunus militum) If we keep in mind the context but nearby to this phrase we will verify that the translation that here defend is adjusted a great deal but to the logical one contextual and to the coherent sense of the narrración. We see the complete paragraph in question:

Tim. 24e
[...] legei gar ta gegrammena hosên hê polis humôn epausen pote dunamin hubrei poreuomenên hama epi pasan Eurôpên kai Asian, exôthen hormêtheisan ek tou Atlantikou pelagous. tote gar poreusimon ên to ekei pelagos: nêson gar pro tou stomatos eichen ho kaleite, hôs phate, humeis Hêrakleous stêlas. hê de nêsos hama Libuês ên kai Asias meizôn..."

Literal translation:

[...] In effect, our writings refer how your city stopped in an occasion the impetuous strength (hybrei) that had advanced, at the same time, above all Europe and Asia, from outside had parted, of the Atlántiko, of the piélago. In that time could be crossed the piélago: An island, in effect, there was in front of the mouth that you, thus you say, they call Stelas them of Heraklês. Certainly, the island, at the same time of Libya was, and of Asia, owner (or the but important, the main one, the but powerful) ..."

Free translation or adapatada:

[...] In effect, our writings refer how your city stopped in an occasion the impetuous strength (hybrei) that had advanced, at the same time, above all Europe and Asia. Had parted from outside, since the piélago of the Atlantic one. In that epoch could be crossed that piélago: An island, in effect, there was in front of the strait that you, thus you say, they call Pillars them of Heraklês. Certainly, the island, at the same time was owner of Libya and of Asia. .."

The use of the advervio "hama" jointly, at the same time, barely", few times appears with genitive. In this sense I create that alone we would be able to accept the interpretation that rectify and I defend, since this form advervial is accompanied of two names in genitive in this passage of the Timaios 24e that here is exposed.

The translation "but large that Libya and Asia gathered" is not correct, in the first place because has been interpreted the advervio "hama" as if was a matter of one of the verbs used to express the action of "to join and to gather", and in second place because the advervio "hama" was alone used in a temporary context, was an adverb of time, not of place or spatial. So that we could obtain the translation that has always been published: "and the Island was but large that Libya and Asia you join" would have Platón, or the one that went that, there to be writing:

ê de nêson symphoretos Libus ên kai Asian meizôn

As it can be observed the voices nêson, Libüs and Asian are in acusativo, and instead of the advervio "hama" jointly, at the same time" there would be that to use the voice sumforetos, "gathered" to the opponent of the original fragment:


"... ê de nêsos ama Libuês ên kai Asias meizôn..."

In this original passage the voice "nêsos" is in nominative and the geographical denominations of "Libüês" and "Asias" are in genitive and preceded of the advervio "hama".

Another test in favor of the translation that propose we find it in another passage the Kritias 108e in which the same passage is repeated, but in this case preceded of the voice helénika basilhs (basilês) "the kings", without in the advervio "hama" and with the inclusion to the end, despés of meizwn (meizôn) of nhson (nêson) the voice used for "island" or "peninsula" in acusativo.


Kritias 108e

"... pantôn dê prôton mnêsthômen hoti to kephalaion ên enakischilia etê, aph' hou gegonôs emênuthê polemos tois th' huper Hêrakleias stêlas exô katoikousin kai tois entos pasin: hon dei nun diaperainein. tôn men oun hêde hê polis arxasa kai panta ton polemon diapolemêsasa elegeto, tôn d' hoi tês Atlantidos nêsou, basilês, hên dê, Libuês kai Asias, meizô nêson ousan ephamen einai pote, nun de hupo seismôn dusan aporon pêlon tois enthende ekpleousin epi to pan pelagos..."

"... We remember above all that have elapsed but of 9000 years since the war, that counts, itself sucitó among the towns that inhabit to this side of the columns of hercules and the of the other part. It is precise that this war since its principle to the end expose you. Of a part was this city that had the command and maintained victoriously the war to its termination. Of the other side they were the Atlántidos of the Island, the soberanos, in effect, of Libya and of Asia, the powerful Island that existed, according to itself has said, any esistió time, but that by the earthquakes sank and an intrasitable légamo is now to pass sailing above all that piélago..."

These traduciones that propose not contravienen at all the rules of the conventional grammar of the Greek archaic, to the opponent, are adjusted in a way a great deal but literal to the context of the text, what does them a great deal but rigorous and next to the reality of the words of the teacher and philosopher atheniense Platón.

As it was used to saying my teacher of anthropology, the famous one paleopatólogo and medical forense cubano, Dr. Ercilio Vento, and great my friend: "if walks for the roof and does "miau" has to be a cat, although always someone would be able to say that is an elephant". And of those that they see elephants by cats we walk exceeded.

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

Brig
Member
posted 07-13-2002 18:33     Click Here to See the Profile for Brig     Edit/Delete Message
This is all very interesting. It takes a bit of time to absorb. I realize that the site, just before the pillars of Hercules was only recently located. My next question is: What sort of artifacts, if any, have been recovered from this site; and has any of it been dated? Better yet, has any form of writing been recovered and what of its nature? Is ongoing research being utilized in this area? I much more readily accept mistranslation of Plato than mistakes supposedly made by Plato.

IP: 64.12.97.7

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 07-14-2002 04:34     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
Dear Mr. Brig:

In effect, according to Plato, Atlantis were, just in front of the Pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar), near Gades (Cadiz) and of the region of the Atlas (Morocco). The words of Plato are very clear on the matter.

Their words absolutely falseadas and have been misinterpreted to conscience to be able to support other absurd hypotheses and theories that they try to place to the Island or Peninsula of Atlantis in very remote places of Gibraltar like Indonesias or America. It is not necessary to go very far to find these theories undocumented that they do not have anything to do with which Plato said in fact. Right here, in this forum, we have some of these absurd and undocumented hypotheses, like for example, those of Mr. Zia Abbas.

As far as the devices recovered in the adjacent area to the Straits of Gibraltar, and that I identify like Atlanteans, these they are almost identical to the used ones by the Towns of End of the known Age of the Bronze like Tartessikós. The associate inscriptions are also of tartessian or ibero-tartessian type.

At the moment we are on the verge of making ours first great scientific expedition to try to locate the rest of the sacred Acropolis of Atlantis, where was the Temple of Poseidôn, or rest of some of the cities or villages, that always according to Plato, were surrounding to the Acropolis. But, like always, it will depend on which we obtain the suitable economic resources. Or I have to date not obtained that no important personality or institution is interested in my discoveries and rectifications on Isla-Peni'nsula de Atlantis.

Warm greetings of Georgeos Diaz-Montexano

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

Brig
Member
posted 07-14-2002 12:25     Click Here to See the Profile for Brig     Edit/Delete Message
I suppose this will sound stupid; but if the artifacts located in the assumed area of Atlantis are almost identical with contemporary bronze age artifacts wouldn't that make these articles too recent to belong to a civilization that was drowned 11,000 or so years ago. I didn't think the bronzeage went back that far. This is counting what we now consider the bronzeage, not what might have gone before a deluge set us all back to square one, so to speak.

IP: 64.12.97.7

cgd160
Member
posted 07-14-2002 13:26     Click Here to See the Profile for cgd160     Edit/Delete Message
Brig I agree with you about mistranslation.

Georgeos, well done, I have a question, what about all the animals, vegitation and ores that Atlantis had, (I feel there is an Indonesian/India connection)

------------------
Know ye not that ye are gods?

Chris

IP: 24.188.190.26

barra
New Member
posted 07-14-2002 13:41     Click Here to See the Profile for barra     Edit/Delete Message
Wow this sounds interesting. After reading so much over Atlantis , i also come to the conclusion that it's got to be located near bahama's islands. When you look on how many shallow reef is surrounding the bahama is seems pretty clear to me . No other place has got that. Besides that , Plato is very clear when he gives directions where to find it . There are many other things why i think it should be there , stretching to the cuba shore even (imagine the size of the original island!!!!! ) I write some down , hoping for some reactions .

1 - Old maps which got atlantis on it , allways point out that it got to be between America and Africa.

2 - Plato says its located in the middle of the pillars of Hercules.

3 - Atlantis had a warm climate (as they could harvest 2 x a year), this goes for the bahama's.

4 - The island was "white " (just as the sand which is found on the cuba bottem, and in the bahama's).

5 - The bahama's got 1 unique charachter, it got calcium carbonate (lime) precipitated from sea water by animals and plants(this is what made the island). Could be a clue , why most monuments are made of lime , maybe they found a way to clay it first , and when it dried up it become rock hard . Anyone got an idea if this would be possible ?

6 - The Bahama islands got a lot of undeep sea surrounding it. If you would add the amount of meters which Atlantis should have sunk after the flood, you would see a massive island(continent even) rise again.
(look at these pictures : URL=http://www.tamug.tamu.edu/cavebiology/Bahamas/satellitephotos.html
(* look especially at this one URL=http://www.tamug.tamu.edu/cavebiology/Bahamas/images/GrBahBk1.html (just like a doplhin ey ? )

7 - The bahama islands are known for their cold and hot water springs. They even found fresh water springs from out the ocean. This was also clearly described by Plato.

8 - They found remains of a sunkens city near Cuba and the Bahama's.

9 - The bermuda triangle is also very nearby. Could this be the wormhole what is suspected it must be ?

10 - Cuba is known to be sank more then once , this is also been reported.

11 - When Atlantis sank the population escaped to different regions of the world to south america and africa (form whereon they moved for some reason to egypt). This also makes sense when you look at the location where the bahama islands/ cuba is located .

12 - Atlantis sank because of an earthquake , the bahama islands are lying on top of a a part of the earth which is know for its movement. Like the authorities said of the cuba site :" it is still sinking, even now "
There are propably many reasons more on which i now cant think of . And Georgeos Diaz-Montexano : i wish i could join you on your excursions, it sounds like the journey of the century for me. When i find some time off i will definalty go to the bahama;s for some diving (im not to far away from it )

greetings

------------------
seek, and dough shall find

[This message has been edited by barra (edited 07-14-2002).]

[This message has been edited by barra (edited 07-14-2002).]

IP: 195.57.148.115

cgd160
Member
posted 07-14-2002 14:35     Click Here to See the Profile for cgd160     Edit/Delete Message
I want to say, the thing I think most poeple are missing is we are not dealing with a singular Atlantis. Atlante was the name of one antideluvian civilization or society or popular resort in those ancient times. What I'm trying to say is all of mankind was advanced not just one or two civilizations. That's why areas all over the world have signs of an Atlantis associated with them. Natural disasters keep sending mankind back to the stone age. It seems the last disaster was extremely devistating. (On a side note, I think the ancient ancestors of Europeans were the least affected be the last disaster. They set out to teach the old ways , that's why we have stories of white gods in odd places.)

------------------
Know ye not that ye are gods?

Chris

IP: 24.188.190.26

NileQueen
Member
posted 07-16-2002 09:38     Click Here to See the Profile for NileQueen     Edit/Delete Message
Aloha Georgeos! I mean, ¡Hola, Georgeos!

You have certainly generated quite a fascinating narrative. You are absolutely right about going to the original sources to get the most accurate translations, as language changes over time. We are definitely at the mercy of our translators.

So you think the cave paintings at Altamira were done by Atlanteans? A reasonable hypothesis. Those murals possess fluidity and charm.

I highly recommend you see the video by physicist Philip Morrison about the straits of Gibraltar/Mediterranean in his Ring of Truth series (I think there is a companion book).

On what do you base your possibility of Menestheo being the Port of Holy Maria?

I have not studied Latin or Greek, but I appreciate you including those passages in your message.

Did you know that there is a French team investigating the Pillars of Hercules this summer? Daffy, Andre, where did I put that link? It may have been a National Geographic news item…
I found it: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/01/0102_020103wiratlan.html

Thank you for sharing your studies with us. You are absolutely right to go to the original sources, especially on a topic as controversial and intriguing as this.

I had trouble with this passage of your text. What do you mean by 'oceanic bark'? What are cabalgamientos? Could you clarify?

"En as much as, the deep structure, have been detected the existence of large cabalgamientos [cabalgador means rider or horseman, suffix -miento means -ment in English; I am not sure what cabalgamientos means] corticales[cortical means outer layer; or bark of a tree] upon the bark oceanica with expression morfologica in the marine fund[sea bottom], what indicates the seismic activity of the area, related to large fenomenos[phenomenom] of tsunamis"


Hasta luego cocodrilo
NileQueen
La Reina del Nilo

IP: 209.43.66.139

barra
New Member
posted 07-16-2002 13:59     Click Here to See the Profile for barra     Edit/Delete Message
CGD160 : Well i think that there are many possibilities. You think that there were more parts of the world just as advanced as atlantis should be . I think different . When i look at the history (or at least what i read about it ) many cultures describe they came from a sinking island. I know The Tolteken did, followed by the Aztecs. The Aztec are even more clear , they said they came from Azt- la (this meand white sands). I read somewhere the Maya described the same. I think its mostly which part we are able to understand, because stories change thru the years. One thing (other subject) i found most stunning, is when you compare the bible,islam,maya,inca,tolteken en aztec you will see many stories which are basicly the same. I prefer the Sumarian story , because they had a explanation that made more sense to me. They described why we found "strange" things all over the world. They also describe a bit about atlantis,stories from the bible , but most of all the Annunaki. The stories bout the gods really did made sense to me (especially comparing to the bible). They said the population of the first Annunaki on Earth started like 450.000 years ago . It has been destroyed by the gods among themself, thru rivalry(this was the adam and eve part), this should be done by a massive destruction weapon (many believe this was the nuclear bomb, green plants and measure of nuclear waves ). The second population was when they choose to work with mankind (in the first population mankind were just slave). This second era is the one after the flood. It also describes for example who RA (of Egypte) could be , he is also described as Marduk . So i think that you could be right, but it could very well be that Atlantis (Poseidon) is the first step towards the solution. But like i said i think its personal which is the one you believe.

IP: 195.57.148.115

Andre
Member
posted 07-19-2002 14:05     Click Here to See the Profile for Andre     Edit/Delete Message
Dear Georgeos.

Very interesting narrative indeed. We may even find a reasonable mechanism that caused the demise of the area. May I first ask some questions.
http://home.wanadoo.nl/bijkerk/atlantis.jpg

On this map of the area of interest I indicated a possible previous coastline with the …dotted line. And I drew five red areas A, B,C, D, E in the Ocean that may have been emerged. To which area would your expedition first go to find the remnants of Atlantis?

If the coast was indeed in the area of the dotted black line, then the Pillars of Hercules would have been far inland instead of at the coast. This would shed a new light on the meaning of them. Your opinion on that?

IP: 212.64.108.183

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 07-20-2002 16:50     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
Dear Andre:

My hypothesis on the possible locations is similar to the areas drawn in the Map that You send.

I send to the Map of reconstruction of the time of Atlantis that I made. To see the following Link:
http://usuarios.lycos.es/Georgeos/presentation.htm

The coast edge that You propose overcomes to many thousands of years (perhaps tens of thousands) before the date in which I consider sank the Atlantis.

I believe that Isla-Peni'nsula Atlantis disappeared at the end of the Age of the Bronze, that is to say, about 900 years before Plato and not 9000 as erroneously it is created.

At the time in which I create it sank Isla-Peni'nsula Atlantis. The Columns of Hercules were in the same position in which they are nowadays.

Warm greetings of Georgeos Diaz-Montexano

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

Brig
Member
posted 07-20-2002 17:23     Click Here to See the Profile for Brig     Edit/Delete Message
Georgeo: Can you , with any degree of certainy, prove that Plato meant 900 instead of 9000 years? We have had so many people, with their own agenda, twist Platos writing in 40 different directions just to prove their point. If Plato was off by that much then maybe he really did just make up the Atlantis story. If he was off on years, then he might have been way off on everything else. Sorry, but I hold with what Plato wrote. I can't see the man being off by that much. If we don't take the story at face value, then why accept it at all? Your arguments sounded really good. But so did several others until the nitty-gritty came in.

IP: 152.163.188.69

Andre
Member
posted 07-21-2002 03:58     Click Here to See the Profile for Andre     Edit/Delete Message
Dear Georgeos, Thank you for your elaboration on the location of Atlantis. Of course the original first words of Plato are the only ones that really matter and we all have been mislead by the erroneous translations. So your investigation makes a great difference and we are very grateful that you are willing to share your results with us.

As Daffy Duck and Brig have indicated, the 900 years versus 9000 years is very interesting and actually essential to a further foundation of the story of Atlantis. So this is a very important key. You have said earlier:

quote:
Kritias 108e
"... pantôn dê prôton mnêsthômen hoti to kephalaion ên enakischilia etê, aph' hou gegonôs emênuthê polemos tois th' huper Hêrakleias stêlas exô katoikousin kai tois entos pasin: hon dei nun diaperainein. tôn men oun hêde hê polis arxasa kai panta ton polemon diapolemêsasa elegeto, tôn d' hoi tês Atlantidos nêsou, basilês, hên dê, Libuês kai Asias, meizô nêson ousan ephamen einai pote, nun de hupo seismôn dusan aporon pêlon tois enthende ekpleousin epi to pan pelagos..."
"... We remember above all that have elapsed but of 9000 years since the war, that counts, itself sucitó among the towns that inhabit to this side of the columns of hercules and the of the other part. It is precise that this war since its principle to the end expose you. Of a part was this city that had the command and maintained victoriously the war to its termination. Of the other side they were the Atlántidos of the Island, the soberanos, in effect, of Libya and of Asia, the powerful Island that existed, according to itself has said, any esistió time, but that by the earthquakes sank and an intrasitable légamo is now to pass sailing above all that piélago..."
I understand that your vision is that a great deal of this text has been adapted to fit to the context of the (other?) text. Isn’t it true that either 900 or 9000 should be clearly different in the text. This is very important.
900 years before Solon brings us to the Santorini/Thera volcanic disaster but how ever violent and big volcanic eruptions may be, it is only a local event and it could not have sunk the “archipel” in front of the Iberian coast without doing much more physical damage to the Mediterranean area in the same time.
On the other hand, 9000 years for Solon or about 11.500 years before present is coincidental with the spectacular mysterious world wide (mondial) ending of the “Younger Dryas”. There are more independent investigations that indicate that 11.500 before present was a geologically a very strange and perhaps violent moment indeed. This was not known at any time when the modern translations of the Kritias were made. So that 9000 years could not have been used to adapt it to geological facts.
So 900 before Solon may have no clear geological meaning to back up the story with evidence while 9000 before Solon is adding a further independent dimension to the very mysterious ending of the “Younger Dryas”. Hence 900 would not help to the credibility of the Atlantis story while 9000 could lead to an explanation that is both acceptable to geology as archaeology. So a detailed research on the 900 – 9000 years debate is very important. What may be your vision on that?

IP: 212.64.108.27

docyabut
Member
posted 07-21-2002 07:09     Click Here to See the Profile for docyabut     Edit/Delete Message
What if Plato was mathematialy wrong and his Atlantis points to Thera. True, there are alot of simularites.However the eruption of Thera that is believed to be four times more powerful than the 1883 eruption of Krakatoa, would not have cause a world wide flood.Unless they were two seperate events.

IP: 205.188.208.136

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 07-21-2002 10:29     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
Dear Mr. Brig:

You one hurries in its valuations on my work. In the first place, I have only said that I think that the correct number had to be 900 years and not 9000.

In order to believe this I have been based on a comparative study which I have made between the Greek language and the Egyptian language of the times in which Solón was in the city of Sais in Egypt.

It is a rigorous study that took to discover to me that Solón could confuse numbers 900 by 9000, for a simple reason that was unnoticed pass, and that is the following one: the pronunciaciones of both numbers in the Egyptian language were so similar between if that until Egyptian a native one could confuse them if did not pay the due attention at the moment of listening.

If it interests to him I can try to make a summary to the English of all this subject.

Of all ways, it is only one hypothesis.

Warm greetings of Georgeos Diaz-Montexano

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 07-21-2002 11:44     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
Dear Atlantólogos:

The suspicion or intuition that Greek wise person Solón could badly have understood the number of years narrated by the Egyptian priests of Sais will now receive appearances of great verosimiltud to raiz of the filológico discovery that I did a pair ago of years on this fact.

Some authors who have tried to grant greater credibility to him to the facts transmitted by Plato in their dialogues of the Timaios and the Kritias have raised the hypothesis perhaps that Solón confused the number of 900 years by the one of 9000.

This intuition always has been based on insconciente or conscious desire to want to aemonizar the story of the Atlantis with the archaeological data that nowadays we arrange like more trustworthy.

A Atlantida of 900 years before Solón would locate to us In the heat of around the 1460 to C. time of the apogee of several Mediterranean Civilizations like the Egyptian, the minoica and very possibly the tartésica of the Southwest of the Peninsular Bronze or atlantean?.

However, this intuition or hypothesis, has not been but that an opportune and of course very conciliadora speculation, since nobody to date had made a philologic study and on the own Egyptian language and the Greek to try to explain this hypothesis. Before continuing we would have to clarify a pair of points:

1. According to the dialogues of Plato, Solón had obtained this data of mouth of the priests of Sais. Critias, the minor, affirms that it conserved in his house writings of Solón, written up in Greek language, where the history was narrated that the priests of Sais had to him counted.

2. At no moment in the dialogues of it clarifies in which language took place the communication between Egyptian priests and Solón.

Let us analyze these two points necessary on the one hand to include/understand since I have gotten to discover the possible key, of the error in the numbers and by another one of the language used in the communication between Solón and the Egyptian priests of Sais.

Let us begin by the possibility that the language used in the interlocution has been the Greek. If this were thus then we would have to completely discard the possibility of error in the numbers since in the Greek language 900 years "etê" would be pronounced like "enakis-ekatón", whereas 9000 years "etê" would be "enakis-khiliá". Literally this would be: "nine times (enakis) one hundred" and "nine times thousands". The hundred is "ekatón" and thousand "khiliás". Therefore since it has been demonstrated it is impossible that Solón has listened to "khiliás" if the priests pronounced "ekatón". Both words, phonological, are opposed in their phonetic structures and is impossible that no human ear can confuse them. Therefore, it has been clear that to have been the helena language the used one in the interlocution between Egyptian priests and Solón is impossible then that the supposed error between the numbers 900 and 9000 can have been produced, that some investigators have intuited.

Then, if the used language were the Greek we will be all in agreement in which it could not of any way to exist an error or a confusion in the sounds or the pronunciaciones of the words. Reason why we would have to accept like valid the numbers of the 9000 years that refer Plato to us by mouth of Kritias, and therefore like disabled person the hypothesis of the possible error or confusion between the pronounced numbers.

Once clarified east point, we can then deduce or now try the following thing: Let us suppose that the language used in the interlocution was the Egyptian.

How it could pronounce Egyptian of the times of Solón these numbers?

First we remember that we are looking for error or confusion in pronunciación of words not in reading of texts, since as we pointed in the beginning in our second clarifying point and introductorio Kritias affirms that it conserved writings of Solón, according to which the priests of Sais had to him counted. Kritias does not say that these writings were in Egyptian language. In fact it clarifies that Solón had translated the names of the Atlanteeans personages to the Greek, by his meaning, in the same way that the Egyptians had done first. The own Kritias had read in many occasions when young these writings of Solón. Of which it is deduced that these were written up in Greek, since Kritias never said to know, and less from boy, the Egyptian language.

If the knowledge of the facts on the Atlantis obtained Solón through the Egyptian text reading, or they are in formal hieroglyphics or palaciegos, in cursivos hieroglyphics or hieratic, also it is impossible that the supposed error between the numbers could be produced since the hieroglyphics, in anyone of their styles, used to represent the hundred and the thousand are totally different and impossible to confuse (to see the comparative table that it appears underneath this attached message or to the same one)

We see, has been demonstrated that to have been the Greek language the used one in the interlocution, as much if it were an oral or written communication, is impossible that it has been possible to confuse the number of 900 years (enakis-ekatón etê) by the one of 9000 years (enakis-khiliá etê) Like it has been also demonstrated that to have used Egyptian texts also it would be impossible that this confusion took place, since both numbers are totally different from the graphical point of view.

If we continued betting by the common sense - and this it says to us almost to shouts that in spite of all these disadvantages the hypothesis of an error or confusion of 900 by 9000 years we continue being most logical single has left a last possibility, that simultaneously it will be our last hope to support this hypothesis: the analysis of the pronunciación in the Egyptian language of these totally different numbers in its graphics.

First he is advisable that clarifies to you that it is practically impossible to know with exactitude as was the pronunciación of these numerical numbers in the Egyptian language of the times of Solón. The Egyptian which he was spoken in the times of Solón was Egyptian the Delayed one of the Dynasties Saitics or Saitas. A form much more evolved of Egyptian contaminated Means and more of foreign, mainly Mediterranean voices.

We only have a trustworthy tool to try to reconstruct as it would be the approximated pronunciación but of these Egyptian words in the times of Solón, I talk about Copto, the last evolution of the old Egyptian language.

The language coptic to summarize it is the Egyptian language of the first times of the Christianity. It is a language enriched with many contributions of other foreign languages like the Greek. From the Egyptian and supported hieroglyphics in copto we can initiate this phonetic comparison with certain solidity. First we will verify what a traditional dictionary of Egyptian language says to us on these numbers: The hundred imagines by the hieroglyphic of a cord in spiral, classified like (V1) and that by convention is transcribed like St (sche or scha); the final t, in this case like in most of the Egyptian feminine voices, it would not be pronounced, which we will corroborate when analyzing its correspondence in coptic. Thousand hieroglyphic represented with of plant or stem of loto on knoll of earth (M12), hieroglyphic that as well was used as fonograma H3 (kha or khscha) Since we have verified from the point of view of the graphics these hieroglyphics do not keep relation nor identity some sufficient one like confusing them, nevertheless from the Egyptian phonetics these numbers if they could be confused on the part of the listener and the more if this he were not expert experimenting of the Egyptian language and its pronunciación by the simple fact of being a foreigner as it were the case of Solón.

Let us analyze a little but deeply these phonetic similarities. Soon we will discover the highest level of confusion that could have generated for whatever not outside native an Egyptian, I even believe that until for Egyptian a same one. The confusion level that could exist between these two words, as is going to verify next, is almost equipable with which could exist before the pronunciación of Castilian words "ciento" (one hundred) and "siento" (I feel) The experts in philology and Egyptian epigraphy have verified that the characters or hieroglyphics that reproduced the sound that is transcribed like S, sch German, ch French - and that is equivalent to ours ch Andalusian as in the pronunciación of "muchacho" (boy)- they were interchanged with certain frequency with the hieroglyphics that reproduced the sound that is transcribed like H and that is equivalent apparently to our Castilian j (kh or ch) or Greek x. This demonstrates that but that a simple j (kh) reproduced an intermediate sound between this and sch german or ch Andalusian(sh of english?)

Up to here it would be sufficient to demonstrate that in the times of Solón and the Saitics Dynasties the pronunciaciones of both words could be lent to confusion, since more likely "sche" (St)"one hundred" could badly be heard like "khscha" or "khsche" (H3)"thousands".

Nevertheless, still we have left coptic like auxiliary tool to verify until degree could be trusted the possibility that these two Egyptian words used, one for the hundred and the other for the thousand, could be confused by whatever did not dominate or the Egyptian language or that it had simply not paid the sufficient attention in listening. We do not delay plus the question and we see that it shows to the language copta on the matter to us: Then nothing less than the confirmation of our analysis.

In copto the pronunciación of both units is so similar that as soon as is different by a simple vowel. Thus we have one hundred is pronounced like "sche" and thousands like "scha"; also the forms were used "schu" for one hundred and "scho" for thousands.

This way we have it number 900 would pronounce in copto like "psis-ên-sche" or "psis-ên-schu", whereas 9000 "psis-ên-scha" or "psis-ên-scho" would be pronounced like.

In the Egyptian conventionally transliterated by the egiptólogos he would be something as well as "pesedje-en-sche" (900 years) and "pesedje-en-kha", that to the light of the arguments that offers to us the language coptic could be corrected in "pesedye-en-khscha".

In conclusion: I believe to have demonstrated that if the language used for the interlocution between Solón and the priests of Sais were the Egyptian (and everything seems to indicate yes that she was this and not Greek it), then that existed a highest probability that the Egyptian words used to denominate to the hundreds and the thousands could be confused among them by any listener, especially if this era a foreigner, of whom nor so at least we know surely until point arrived its knowledge from the Egyptian language.

According to the language used in the interlocution between the Saitics priests is come off the dialogues of Plato and Solón was the Egyptian. However, the fact that the Egyptian words used to denominate to the hundred and the thousand are almost identical in their pronunciación could constitute an indirect test that exactly the language used in the interlocution on the history of Atlantis was fundamentally the Egyptian.

With this discovery I believe that the enigma of the high chronology of Atlantis could be solved at least from the theoretical point of view.

I have always thought that an Atlantis between Iberia and Afrika with a single chronology of 900 years before the stay of Solón in Egypt, that according to seems was in the times of king Amosis II or Amasis (570-526) that is around 1470 or 1500 to C. would fit much but with the descriptions that offer Plato to us of the Atlanteans and of its level of development like civilization.

It is obvious that an Atlantis so organized as a great City Been or Empire at a as remote time as almost 10,000 years before Christ (final of the Superior Paleolithic) it is extremely difficult to accept for any scientific mentality based on the accumulation of data collected by the different auxiliary scientific disciplines from History and Geography.

As or I exposed in my previous summaries one of most serious errors in the interpretation of texts of Plato were the one to affirm that "the Atlantis Island was the more great that reunited Libya and Asia", when in fact Plato what said it was that "the Atlantis Island, at the same time, of Libya and Asia was owner (or Most powerful)" This or has been solved with my demonstrations. Now, from the point of view of the dimensions, no longer the existence of the Atlantis Island is impossible, the one that judging by the data that give Plato would cover, at the most, right the circular space that nowadays constitutes, the Atlantic Gulf that exists from the Gibraltar Strait, between Iberia and Afrika, to the Madeiras.

It is very probable that another one of the great errors has been the one to confuse 900 by 9000 years, although in this case would be an error of the own Solón and not of the translators of Plato.

In short, that I hope to count on the matter on your opinions.

Warm Greetings of Georgeos Diaz-Montexano

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

Brig
Member
posted 07-21-2002 11:47     Click Here to See the Profile for Brig     Edit/Delete Message
OK, understood. Postulates are acceptable here and stand a fair hearing. I will hear your arguments, but at the momment I still stand on the 9000 year basis, unless or until substantial proof proves otherwise. Keep in mind we had a character on here not so long ago that argued that Atlantis was really on Mars and that a conflict between Earth and Mars had resulted in the distruction of Mars. You gotta admit that was a bit far out and he was twisting Plato into as tight knot to prove his point.

IP: 205.188.208.136

Brig
Member
posted 07-21-2002 11:53     Click Here to See the Profile for Brig     Edit/Delete Message
We, some of us, still jokingly refer back to the "Mars" theory when we feel,someone is taking too much liberty with the writings of Plato. This is also why many of us prefer to stay as close to the original intent of Plato as possible. Now if you can actually prove misinterpretation of the original texts of Plato from original Greek to English or whatever, then that is a wholly different story.

IP: 205.188.208.136

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 07-21-2002 13:11     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
Dear Mr. Brig:

Him request, please, that You with me are not confused. I am not charlatan of whom they confuse to the Atlantis Island with extraterrestrial Planets nor.

You seem to be trying that the members of this Forum create that I distort or force texts of Plato when, indeed, which I do is all the opposite.

I have always fought against the falsifications around the interpretations of old texts. If of something it is possible to be accused to me, it is perhaps to be too strict and literal in my translations of original texts of the antiquity.

I usually do not interpret, I prefer to translate. I always defend what the original texts expose. I never put in front what had to be to which really is. But also I must right like investigator to formulate hypothesis or theories on aspects that I consider very possible and logical. License is one that I can allow me and that is not criticizeable, whenever not me aside from the scientific rigor, of the objectivity and the most elementary common sense.

If You read well my messages and my articles and if he is able to understand them of correct way (something truely difficult, since I do not dominate the English) you will verify You as I do not force absolutely anything.

You will verify as I always prefer to go to the force of the argument; never to the argument of the force.

If my last message reads You at great length it will verify as I suppose the possibility of an error of listening of Solón, basing to me on an unquestionable data: the great similarity which they present/display the pronunciaciones of the numbers 9000 years and 900 years in the Egyptian language.

They are so similar between if, that until native an Egyptian it could even them have confused. Imagínese a Greek.

Another very fundamental detail that it appears in my Libro - and which I did not incorporate in my previous message is the following one: As much in the Timaios as in the Kritias one affirms that, still in the times of Plato or of Solón navigation by the places in front of the Columns of Hercules or Straits of Gibraltar "was very dangerous, due to the amount of mud that the Island had deposited after submerging under the sea".

How it is possible that to date nobody has been noticed of this so fundamental detail?

Perhaps it would be necessary to be a genius to occur one tells that this simple detail demonstrates that the collapse of the Atlantis Island had happened in a recent time?

How to explain that still in the times of Solón or Plato enormous amounts of mud existed deposited by the collapse of an Island that supposedly had submerged 9000 years before?

How it is possible that somebody can believe this incongruencia?

The only way possible to admit that in the times of Solón or Plato still great légamos of mud, low stumbling blocks and caused by the collapse of Atlantis existed and that these you would impedieran navigation, is also admitting that the Island had sunk in a date relatively near the times of Solón or Plato.

If it is practically impossible to accept that an Island later sinks under the sea, and several hundreds of years mud - and everything what an event thus can deposit still follows almost in the surface and preventing navigation, because we imagine if this fact had happened nothing less than 9000 years.

This is simple common sense. And my discovery of the great existing similarity between the Egyptian pronunciaciones of the phrases 9000 years and 900 years could explain of satisfactory way this great contradiction.

On the other hand, the descriptions that give Plato of the Atlantis Island are very similar to the one of Cities-States de of end of the Age of the Bronze and Principles of the Age of the Iron. What also it agrees with the possibility that instead of 9000 years before Solón or of Plato they were really 900 years.

Warm greetings of Georgeos Diaz-Montexano

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 08-12-2002 05:21     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
Atlantis, according to Platón, was near Gibraltar. Reason itself is not accepted?
The Only Location of Atlantis: Question of Rigor...

Dear colleagues:

I verify that some of You you even follow believing in locations of distant Atlantis the only point indicated by Plato that is, near the Straits of Gibraltar, between Iberia and Mauritania.

Your mention several pages Web and several hypotheses on the subject of Atlantis. Nevertheless, not yet well if You know my discoveries respect to the Atlantis Island de Plato, according to the direct readouts of the dialogues of Plato, in your greco-Latin original versions.

I suppose that no. Otherwise he would be incomprehensible that continued You, nonsingle without modifying some fundamental errors (taken from other authors and other pages), but even without mentioning, not even by means of a brief annexed commentary my rectifications of these errors.

These errors I have discovered them after a deep study, based on the reading and direct translation of the dialogues of Plato the Timaios and the Kritias, on its original and older versions written in Greek language and Latin.

These errors have been the main cause of which still thousands exist or hundreds of thousands of people in the World who create that Isla-Peni'nsula Atlantis was a super Continent located in means of the Atlantic Ocean (or same America) or that is considered that the Atlantis Island could have been the old Aegean island of Thera, Kreta or same Indonesia.

Such errors do not have to be considered like other theories or hypotheses, as valid as it they could be the cradles in the correct translations of original texts of Plato, like mine.

All the hypotheses that tries to locate to Isla-Peni'nsula Atlantis in any remote and distant point of the surroundings of the Straits of Gibraltar, between the Iberian Peninsula and western Africa, are simply erroneous, since translations and erroneous affirmations of original texts of Plato are based on.

They are erroneous because they are based on words that Plato never what said and in suppositions of the quizo type "perhaps Plato to say this and not said". I have demonstrated of irrefutable way the existence of such errors. In fact, to date nobody has been able to refute my rectifications of the true words of Plato, since for it they would be had first that to refute like false the meanings of the main dictionaries and lexicones of at the moment existing classic languages in the academic and university World.

I have demonstrated - by means of the direct readout of texts in Greek and Latin of the dialogues of the Timaios and the Kritias de Plato the following errors of translation or bad interpretations of texts of Plato:

1. That the atheniense teacher never said that to the Nêsos (Island or Peninsula) of Atlantis (or Atlas) outside a Continent or greater Island "(in size) that together Libya and Asia" All the contario. Atlantis always were described like a Nêsos that is, a "Island" or "Peninsula", and true palbras of Plato expresses that this Nêsos Atlantis was "huger (in being able) or more fertile and producing than Libya and Asia". In fact, Plato gives maximum dimensions of the ATLANTIS Island of about 3000 stages of length per 2000 of wide. Composed by 60,000 districts, each one of 100 stages. Exactly the same dimensions that give the old geographers for the kingdom of Tartessós or the Bética (south-western Andalusia; dimensions approximately similar also to those of the region of Lusitania (Portugal) or to the dimensions of the Island of Ivernia (Ireland).

2. Plato said either never that ATLANTIS more was "alla '" of the Columns of Hercules but "together", "before" or "ahead" same of the Columns of Hercules. According to the own words of the neoplatonic disciple of the Academy of Plato, Chalcidio (S. IV d. C.), the Atlantis Island was in "the same mouth of the Straits of Hercules, in the lobby of the Atlantic Gulf or Gulf of Cadiz". Let us consider that this is the first translation to Latin (well-known) of the dialogue of the Timaios de Plato, written in Greek attic. Let us see its own words:

"... TUNC ENIM FRETUM ILLUD, OPINOR, ERAT COMMEABILE HABENS IN ORE AC VESTIBULO SINUS INSULAM, QUOD OS A VOBIS HERCULIS CENSETUR COLUMNAE ..."

"... Because then that Straits, according to the opinion, was passable because there was in the Mouth and the Lobby of the Gulf an Island, that is the Mouth that you consider of the Columns of Hercules... "

3. Plato never said that Island ATLANTIS had sunk 9000 years before his time, but that the wars between the Mediterranean atlantes and towns had begun about 9000 years before (I have demonstrated in addition that this date, probably, badly was listened to by Solón - due to the great similarity of pronunciación that existed between numbers 9000 and 900 in the Egyptian language and that really could have been 900 years the correct number) Plato, Kritias Menor or Solón, never mentioned the date in which the collapse of Isla-Peni'nsula ATLANTIS took place. As they either did not specify that Isla-Peni'nsula had sunk all single whole or the Acropolis or Sagrada Island where was the Sacred Temple dedicated to Poseidôn and Kleitos.

4. Plato never said that the cause of the collapse of the Atlantis Island was a volcanic eruption but by a series of earthquakes or seismos of marine origin that caused great floods or a cataclysm.

In broad strokes these are the main errors that have caused that everybody looks for Isla-Peni'nsula Atlantis until in the most distant and remote places of the Straits of Gibraltar like Indonesia, the Caribbean, the mountains of Bolivia in the $andes or the Antártida. These are the main errors that still continue perpetuating all those that writes on the Atlantis Island.

Dear investigators of Atlantis, I do not request to him that they recognize my theories or my hypothesis. It is evident that You are free of reconcer only the hypotheses that they like more.

To only I request them that rectifications of the errors recognize You them that I have discovered and mentioned in this message and for it you only must verify it going to the original sources in Greek or Latin.

I request to you that verify Your the rigor of my rectifications and discoveries. Since I have already written to other colleagues, equally interested in the Atlantis, only one person who does not interest the search to him of the truth, she is where she is, she is as she is and she falls that falls; a person who to only interest him to disclose the theories and hypotheses that please to him, without concerning the minimum truth to him, the reason, and the common sense, could continue contributing with this ceremony of the confusion; perpetuating errors, silly things, deceits and until manipulations on the true words of Plato.

And I create who, this am not your case. Like example of to where they arrive the falsifications on Isla-Peni'nsula Atlantis and true palbras of Plato I will mention a case to you which he is tragic and comedian simultaneously, of not saying grotesco.

The example that I am going to put I believe that very it is known by most of You and whom have studied on Atlantis. I talk about to the existence of "... the palm-trees, coconuts, rose woods, incense trees, pineapples, bananas ..." in Isla-Peni'nsula de Atlantis. This Details of the flora of Atlantis is used by many investigators but mainly by the famous and prestigious academic Arysio Nunes dos Santos, college student do to be able to defend their hypothesis of Atlantis in Indonesia.

Then it is that never Plato mentions in his dialogue of the Kritias not at all similar to the "... palm-trees, coconuts, rose woods, incense trees, pineapples, bananas..."

Plato, by mouth of Kritias, only mentions "perfumes or essences that are extracted of plants and flowers".

This example is one more a test of so many than I have that they demonstrate as all the hypotheses on Atlantis in other points of the planet (far from Gibraltar) are absolutely erroneous, because they leave from erroneous translations, manipulated and until invented, like the example that I finish putting.

But most incredible of all this it is that all the investigators who defend these absurd and undocumented hypotheses obtain to manifold recognitions, honors and until successes of sales with their improbable ones and forced hypothesis, whereas my discoveries not even are considered like publicables by no publisher, and reason why I see until in the own forums in which I participate or ignore my demonstrations while the debates are continuan and the discussions you exceed other absurd hypotheses and undocumented or until it is expelled to me without explanations of the Forums, as it happened to me with the Forum of the famous Graham Hancok, where after publishing several messages in the same one expelled to me without explanations and until they blocked the IP to me so that it did not return to give me of discharge in the Forum again. How sad reality!

I only hope that in this Forum it does not happen to me the same. I wait for a positive answer of your part. As well as that does You honor to the truth, it is where it is, it is as it is and it falls who falls.

If they do not wish to recognize my name nor my merits, it does not matter. It would be enough to me whereupon single objective results of my rectifications, that I insist are not hypothesis nor theories, but concrete data and irrefutables facts and that recognized You them they can be verified.

Friendly greetings of Georgeos Diaz-Montexano

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

Smiley4554
Moderator
posted 08-13-2002 08:37     Click Here to See the Profile for Smiley4554     Edit/Delete Message
Georgeos, what is being said is that most of us, at the present time, prefer to relate to the Critias/Timaeus, and the writing, by taking them in a literal sense. The reason is that it is the only known account of Atlantis/Athens war. Everything else is speculation, and trying to make the account "fit in" with other places around the world.

It is possible that 900 years could be the correct years if there was a misunderstanding of the pronunciation.

The reason that I would hesitate about the error in pronunciation is really three-fold:

1. The daughter of the founder of the ancient civilization on Santorini (Akrotiri) doesn't believe that it is the site of Atlantis, which would be about the only area corresponding to a cataclysm around 3500 years ago.

2. Santorini is within the Pillars of Heracles.

3. Plato referred to the time-line not once, but 3 times. I find it extremely difficult to believe that someone could have not understood the pronunciation of a word (considering these learned people of the time) three times during the recitation, and because of this respected position, if it was misunderstood, a question would have been asked for clarification which is highly possible that it was asked. The learned people of that time spoke to others in other countries in one, if not many, languages.

As far as I can tell, the possibility of the time-line is the only part of what you have said which does not correspond w/the belief that Atlantis is in the Atlantic.

IP: 67.203.94.128

Tom Hebert
Member
posted 08-13-2002 09:06     Click Here to See the Profile for Tom Hebert     Edit/Delete Message
Kim,

As you pointed out, the time factor would be a major bone of contention for many of us who desire to be true to Plato, and I have already expressed my objections to this in another thread.

But another problem is that he does not believe that Atlantis was continental in its magnitude. In my opinion Atlantis had to be that large in order for it to measure up to the greatness described in Plato's writings.

Aside from those two major objections, I would agree with you that he certainly does make a good case for Atlantis being located in the Atlantic.

Tom

IP: 209.49.118.18

Catastrophe
Member
posted 08-13-2002 10:21     Click Here to See the Profile for Catastrophe     Edit/Delete Message
Re: Santorini / Thera

James W Mavor wrote a book called "Voyage to Atlantis" in 1969 proposing Thera. First proposed, I believe by Dr. Galanopoulos. Mavor offers dates around 1450-1400 BC. Other dates are offered but some are indirectly obtained from 'doubtful' chronology bases. Wood from a tree buried in pumice gave about 3500 yrs old and from Phira quarry as 1750-1520 BC, but carbon dating may not be reliable around volcanoes.

The Third International Thera Congress in 1989 favoured 1680-1670 BC and iirc there has been some ice core data (around Norway?) not far away from these dates.

Personally, I am not convinced by the 900/9000 mixup. For one reason if you had such easy mistakings measurement/commerce/taxation etc., would be a total mess.

Dendrochronology and radiocarbon dating gives 1628/7 BC
http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/thera/thera.html

------------------
We think ourselves unhappy when a comet appears, but the misfortune is the comet's
Bernard de Fontenelle
The Plurality of Worlds (Paris 1686)

IP: 194.168.74.90

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano
Member
posted 08-14-2002 18:37     Click Here to See the Profile for Georgeos Diaz-Montexano     Edit/Delete Message
"A list of the excessive declarations on the Atlantis would be an absolutely good document for the study of the human stupidity" (Franz Susemihl, 1856)

------------------
"International society of Atlantología Scientific" The first one and only List upon the scientific study of the Atlántida in Hispanic tongue dedicated exclusively to the study and to the scientific discussion upon the historic existence of the Civilization of Atlantis and its possible location in the only point in which situates it Platon that is to say, "next to the Columns of Hércules (Gibraltar) and the region of Gades (Cádiz)". All the information upon the Atlántida: the complete dialogues of Platón in its original versions Greek-greco-latinas; and other old texts in other tongues as the Egyptian, where reference is done to the Atlántida facing Gibraltar among Iberia and Africa. The scientific but recent investigations and rigorous in matter of geology and arqueología that permit to show that if the Atlántida existed really alone could be in algun point among Gibraltar and the Island Madeira.
The Theories and Contents of this place Have Been Rewarded for the Prestigious Entries of E-Listas.Net, Monografías.Com and Recognized by the MSN of Microsoft.
The Investigations of Georgeos Díaz-Montexano Sánchez recognized by the Agency of Press and the Department of Education of Microsoft.
It reads the article and later returns if you desire to expand information. ¡We will be expecting you!

Georgeos@ArchaeoTour.com

http://usuarios.lycos.es/atlantisiberia/index.htm

IP: 80.33.6.35

All times are MT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Atlantis Rising Online

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.38b
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998 - 1999.

Let us know if you want to start a new topic or become a moderator for a topic.