WOW, 103 pages of posts here. Will try to read all sometime.
There was a pretty good special on Discovery or Nat Geo the other night about Atlantis. Good research.
I always hear - Plato said Tsunamis and earthquakes. Isn't it totally possible that he was passing on a story that was passed on many times before he wrote about it? Some of the theories and locations that had a volcano in it fit in really nice but are thrown out cause Plato didn't mention one.
First, welcome to Treasurenet Stretch! (I hope it is OK to use that as a nickname for you rather than having to type out the full name, but if you prefer I will use the full moniker in future) I hope that this discussion has been at least entertaining reading for you.
Absolutely it is completely possible, however if a volcano were the cause, why would Plato have NOT mentioned it? Doesn't that strike you as odd, to have left out such a dramatic event as a volcanic eruption? Other volcanic eruptions occurred in antiquity, and are recorded for what they are (like the destruction of Pompeii and Herculaneum for instance). It would be pretty remarkable to have left it out, hence the argument that any place that was destroyed by a volcanic eruption can't be Atlantis or Plato surely would have mentioned that major detail.
Side point here but let us not change things by a word, like
tsunamis, which is not mentioned at all by Plato. Truly there
could have been tsunamis and likely were, as they are generally created by major earthquakes, BUT - Plato only said a day and night of
earthquakes and floods. So it is POSSIBLE, even likely there were tsunamis involved, but as he did not mention any giant wave(s) perhaps we should not adopt it as our descriptive term.
Sorry if I seem to be the
wet blanket here, as
I am actually 100% convinced that Atlantis existed, and that evidence already exists but is not being recognized for what it is; also that the embellishments that Plato blended into a much more bare bones story (probably an oral history, akin to the Great Flood myths) are making it
impossible to arrive at a consensus on ANY site, for no place will be found that has the unique architecture, anachronisms (triremes, advanced plumbing, chariots etc) AND be old enough to fit the time period when the Earth really was subjected to global flooding and what can only be termed an apocalypse of epic dimensions. The Atlantis that Plato describes in such detail, almost certainly never existed. We can point to other ancient civilizations which had been destroyed and were almost certainly known to Plato like the Minoan civilization, and Helike, among others, that probably are the source of the embellishments that he then blended into the Atlantis epic. Plus we can compare the scant texts referring to the Atlantian islands by other ancient authors, and there is no mention of any of these anachronisms, only that such large islands existed and were home to an aggressive seagoing culture. Anyway like ten thousand other theorists, I believe I have found the real Atlantis too, and in a place that none seem to be looking. Unfortunately for my pard and pal Don Jose' this site is
not the possible gigantic caldera laying off the coast of the Iberian peninsula which he has proposed here earlier, which IMHO has not been above sea level within the requisite 11,000 time period or so.
Please do continue, coffee anyone? (The genuine article,
sock coffee brewed with the oldest sock in the pack!)
Roy
and pour me up some of that Joe!!!!
