Untitled

Okay, since people have wondered why I've not posted some of my writing here, the reason is, my work mostly involves arcane historical & philosophical subjects that I felt would not be of that much interest to most readers on this site. But, here's an example for you. The beginning of an essay I've been working on concerning the subject of "Atlantis". Hope you find it interesting...

Copyright © 2014
George T. Young

“ATLANTIS” ?

FOREWORD

Simply, this little essay is some wonderings, if you will, resulting from an informal but earnest attempt to look at things re “Atlantis” that are– as they are.

Okay, and just what do I think these are? Well, as far as I can see, after discounting all the fiction and nonsense written about this subject, it boils down to three valid groups of factors:

1. The source material, of course, which is a mixed bag of still extant ancient writings by various (predominantly Classical era) chroniclers and scholars; most famously, Plato.

2. An equally mixed bag of (often-contentious) modern scientific theorizing about the question these ancient writings (foremost Plato’s) have generated.

3. Significant evidence of early civilization(s) in the areas called or associated with "Atlantis" and/or "Atlantians" in these ancient writings.

[Because the extant ancient records re this place/peoples refer to them by various spellings of the Atlantic name (as well as by other connectable names) let me note here first that I will be using Plato’s (translated) terms "Atlantis"/"Atlantians" for this place/peoples as a collective generic throughout in my general discussion here. They have become the universal understood names/terms now used and so the most sensible to utilize for the sake of readability. For this reason is why they are in quotation marks, to distinguish that I’m referring to or considering only the Atlantis/Atlantians as meant in all the ancient accounts (in addition to Plato’s) and not the Atlantis/Atlantians of popular modern writings and imagination.]

Briefly re the above:

1.) Although these places/peoples are called by various names in the source material, depending on author/origin (most variations of the “Atlantic” appellation being Classical sources), it is nonetheless singularly curious they all effectively agree in that they describe and expound on essentially the same places, peoples, and events (excepting for Plato’s cataclysm, the issues with which will be discussed in due course). In all these writings (including Plato’s) “Atlantis”/”Atlantians” are foremost if not solely located to or associated with the Western Mediterranean, particularly the areas of Northwest Africa and the Iberian Peninsula, including Atlantic and Mediterranean islands situated (primarily) in the region of Gibraltar. Moreover (excluding the “issues” re Plato’s histrionics), nothing fantastic or incredible is said of or about these places or peoples. Indeed, they are essentially portrayed as what we would call high Neolithic and/or Aeneolithic cultures, i.e., having agriculture, metallurgy, towns, commerce, megalithic architecture, etc. (Sorry, no mention of anything like “power crystals” or levitation machines.) This gives the extant ancient records re “Atlantis”/”Atlantians” both sense and believability as it puts the earliest time for this place/peoples existence at around 7,000+ years ago. Selected examples of these writings statements vis-à-vis Plato’s will be discussed in the Source Material section.

2.) Although there still has been too little objectively serious scientific research re the  “Atlantis” question, sincere and genuine investigation has nonetheless been done, especially in recent years. Yet, despite the significant new (different) observations and findings in this regard this research has yielded, most of it has gotten stuck focusing on just trying to explain Plato’s story only; most concluding that learning of the Minoans and their demise due to the volcanic catastrophe at Thera/Santorini inspired his fabulously described civilization destroyed by cataclysm. The “attractiveness” of this theory is both understandable and logical, but the problems with it – firstly, that Crete is in the Eastern Mediterranean – are usually glossed over. This matter will likewise be discussed in the Source Material section.

3.) The most evident evidence for prehistoric civilizations in the areas/places connected with “Atlantis”/”Atlantians” by the ancient writers are the monumental Megalithic complexes that exist there; from the British Isles down through France, Spain and into Northwest Africa, and on area located islands like the Canaries, the Balearics, and east as far as Malta. The most famous of these, of course, is Stonehenge (which dates from c. 5,000 years ago), but there are many such sites of similar architecture/construction in these areas/places; some believed to be even older. Significant other examples include sites at Cadiz and Seville, ruins in Morocco, and the enigmatic complex (curiously including a step-pyramid) on the Canaries’ Tenerife Island. Although these sites are not unknown, they have yet to be properly investigated. The celebrated explorer/ archaeologist, the late Thor Heyerdahl, initiated an effort re the Tenerife site, but, predictably, it seems to have generated little traction. The matters/relationships re these sites to our question here will likewise be elaborated on in due course.


RE THE SOURCE MATERIAL

Since the source material re “Atlantis”/”Atlantians” is today (often superciliously) regarded as mere “myths” or “legends” or, at best, as spurious second-hand accounts; and, as the majority of what we have in this regard is of Classical era authorship, indulge me to begin here with these comments.

Regardless of what may be popularly believed (even by educated people) about myth in general (but particularly here re Classical myth, and specifically as it concerns  “Atlantis”/”Atlantians”), these narrations may not necessarily be “factual” in the scientific sense, but they are not the creations of primitive minds or fictions of imagination. Simply, they are largely reporting on what is essentially politico-religious history, based on memoria (“mindful and cared for remembrances”) that had been or were compiled into historia (“learned knowledge about and witful inquiry into the tales and stories of a peo¬ple”). These are often presented in a symbol/symbolic or “mythologized” way in epical form, a common methodology of relating/teaching history in ancient times (e.g., Homer). Seeing them as only “chimerical fancies” is to misinterpret/misunderstand them; thus to trivialize them and so miss seeing their underlying truth, the “esoteric” information they contain if you will. Indeed, Homer’s epics are perhaps the most famous examples of such misjudgment; until Troy was discovered, they were generally regarded as being essentially fabulous.  

As the foremost scholar in this field, the late Robert Graves (his, The Greek Myths, is still regarded as the definitive work on this subject), so aptly expounded re this problem: “A true science of myth should begin with a study of archaeology, history, and comparative religion, not in the psycho-therapist’s consulting-room. Though the Jungians hold that ‘myths are original revelations of the pre-conscious psyche, involuntary statements about unconscious psychic happenings’, Greek mythology was no more mysterious in content than are modern election cartoons, and for the most part formulated in territories which maintained close political relations with Minoan Crete…”

(The Minoan connection is significant re our question here, and will be further discussed below.)

Re Plato

The most famous – some might say infamous – ancient reference to a place/people called “Atlantis”/”Atlantians” is, of course, Plato’s; however, there are actually many ancient writings and references concerning peoples/lands/islands in the area of Gibraltar, many dating from before Plato’s time. But since his story factors so importantly in the question of “Atlantis,” it of necessity will concern the major part of the discussion re the source material here.

Inopportunely for earnest research into this question, Plato’s eminence as one of history’s greatest minds has resulted in the general opinion being his is the only ancient record concerning such a place/people; and, largely due to its “fabulousness,” its veracity being regarded dubious at best. Moreover, it is ironically unfortunate that Plato ever wrote about “Atlantis” re why/how he wrote about it, for this has inordinately turned debate of the question into a silly Believers vs. Debunkers game. This has been at the center of the real “problem of ‘Atlantis’” and has resulted in the “proving”/”disproving” of it (Plato’s story alone as written) having become the focus of the question. Thus, there has been a missing of “connections” to the other pieces of the puzzle that, self-evidently to me, would more fully answer the question of this matter.

Unlike the other ancient accounts dealing with “Atlantis”/”Atlantians,” Plato’s is really (was intended to be) an allegory– not a reporting of history per se. This is not to say he invented what he said or that he was being mendacious; rather that he took a bit of literary license with actual historical knowledge for composing what was apparently to be a philosophical parable in epical form. The historicity was subordinate to the moral he wished to impart, to educe.

It seems he was inspired to write his story while visiting at the court of the then tyrant king of Syracuse; supposedly intended to be a work he was going to enter in a poetry contest this ruler is said to have sponsored during Plato’s sojourn there. Evidently, Plato saw this as a clever way to espouse his ideals to this autocrat, and what better way than by using the drama of the archetypal cataclysm as metaphor to ode what happens to a civilization when it becomes corrupt and looses its “divine nature.” In any case, the king reportedly died before the event was to happen and so Plato apparently never finished the work.

Be all this as it may, what has survived is contained in (oddly included split between) his two otherwise essentially conceptual discussions known today as the Timaeus and Critias. It is believed the title was originally intended to be, Atlantikos, i.e., (about) the Atlantic.

The first part is rather brief and essentially, straightforward, being a synopsis reiteration of an account attributed to Solon, the most venerated statesman of Athenian history then. Except for a few “issues” (most significant the age dates given, which we’ll get into momentarily) there is nothing said in this part of his story that is honestly unbelievable or impossible. The rather disjointedly connected second part (reintroduced as a continuation of the retelling of Solon’s record following a lengthy metaphysical digression) is longer and far more fanciful if not incredible in some of its descriptions re the scale of the “Atlantians” culture and feats. (Plausibly, this commentary is the part of his planned romanticizing of them for his intended poem.)

To review concisely: The story as we have it now is presented as being introduced by one of Plato’s company of students (Critias) at a symposium, seemingly as an expedient way of to validate the principles of his teacher’s Republic by giving a “veritable” example of what happens to a civilization when it forsakes “right ideals.” Critias is said to be of the family of Solon, and he testifies Solon learned of this history in Egypt; the record he made of it being preserved by his descendents, to thus be learned by him. Curiously, Critias also says Solon had planned to turn this dictation into an epic poem but died before he could do so. (Dare it be suggested that our dear Plato, at least in part, was going to plagiarized Solon’s accounting for his poem?)

This aspect could well be a literary contrivance in part. Not that it’s untrue, rather that his telling of it like this being a convenient way for Plato to add the prestige of Solon’s name to his intended ode to give it authority, since Solon was far more known and esteemed then than Plato. Regardless, there is no good reason to doubt or dismiss out of hand the source being Egyptian or its essential veracity. Solon did visit Egypt, but so also did Plato (as most Classical era scholars did, being it was the premier place where most of the knowledge then was available to them) and so, he could just as easily have learned about this there himself. Whatever, how/why his story ended up being how we have it now is unclear. It is possible it was done by his students in compiling his writings after his death (feeling it too important to not somehow incorporate) and/or the result of some kind of mix-up by later transcribers.

In any case, that a man of Plato’s means and erudition could have acquired much of the basis for his intended epic from actual historical records that then would have been available to him (from Egypt and elsewhere) would seem doubtless, and so it appears he did. That most of the sources (re this question and so much more) he and the other ancient writers would have had accessible then have been lost, largely due to human madness (e.g., the destruction of the Alexandrian Library) is, truly, one of history’s great tragedies. However, this does not ipso facto make the information they recite gleaned from them de facto untrue or justifiably invalid.

The first part of his story begins as a reporting of an Egyptian account re peoples who lived in the area of Gibraltar and events related to them, occurring in what then would have been regarded prehistoric times to the Greeks (even discounting the improbable age dates given by Plato, which are uniquely singular to his story; for probable reasons to be enumerated on). In most other aspects, this first part is in essential agreement with what is said in the other ancient “Atlantis” related accounts.

It is this, along with the evidence of the ruins/sites in these Atlantic associated areas, that to me seems to preclude any peoples/places/events in the Eastern Mediterranean, like the Minoans/Crete/Thera, being called or thought “Atlantis”/”Atlantians” by any of the authors of the ancient records in this regard.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > More as it happens...