Edward Vaughan Kenealy (1819-1880) was a somewhat eccentric Irish barrister. In his 1867 The Book of God [1354.122] Kenealy attributed advanced astronomical knowledge to the Atlanteans. He described the ‘island continent’ of Atlantis as the ‘pontifical empire of Enoch…….the first and greatest of astronomers.’ ‘From them (the Atlanteans) came all the ancient astronomical knowledge.’
Enoch is considered the grandfather, sometimes the great grandfather, of Noah. He was the seventh patriarch in the book of Genesis. However there appears to be two Enochs in the Bible(d), one fathered by Cain, the other by Jared! He is also regarded as the inventor of astrology, while Eusebius considered Atlas its originator, suggesting that the two were the same person. Lewis Spence in The Occult Sciences in Atlantis frequently touched on the subject of Enoch, equating him with Atlas and telling us that in Arabic and Welsh, Enoch is known as Edris.
One of the many odd details regarding Enoch is that while the patriarchs that preceded and succeeded him are recorded as having lived eight and nine hundred years, he was only given 365 years before being ‘taken by god’ without dying. He has been cited by many as the inventor of alchemy. Enoch is also identified with Atlas by Pseudo-Eupolemus, attributed to a Samaritan source around 300 BC. This suggestion is comparable with the idea of equating the Egyptian god Shu with Atlas.
Eusebius the 4th century bishop of Caesarea wrote that Enoch was Atlas, king of Atlantis (Praep. Ev., ix, 17).
*David Montaigne has proposed that Enoch lived in Atlantis(b) based on the Book of Enoch. In a rather convoluted theory he links Book of Enoch, Pole Shift and Atlantis in Antarctica in order to explain why Enoch wrote that, in his day, at the summer solstice the day had 16 hours of light and 8 of night, which is incompatible with the latitude of Jerusalem. I must point out that Montaigne also prophesised(e) that a pole shift was due in December 2019, followed by Judgement Day!*
Rather oddly, Philip Ochieng, an African writer, contends that Cain was in fact Enoch(a). Equally bizarre is the claim by Zia Abbas in Chapter 8 of his magnum opus that Enoch established Atlantis! Of course, he offers no evidence to support this notion.
In Genesis 4:16-17 it is recorded that Cain was building a city and that he named it after his son Enoch. Thorwald C. Franke has listed(f) a number of reasons why the biblical city of Enoch cannot be identified as the city of Atlantis.
It is quite clear that the interesting but mysterious Enoch has done little but generate wide-ranging speculation including a completely unsubstantiated link with Plato’s Atlantis(b).
The Book of Enoch, also known as 1 Enoch, is a 2nd century BC Jewish religious document whose content is traditionally attributed to Enoch, the great grandfather of Noah. It was lost for centuries but rediscovered in the 19th century and brought from Ethiopia, then known as Abyssinia and translated into English by Archbishop Richard Laurence. This can now be read on or downloaded from the Internet(c).
Noah the hero of the Flood story in Genesis and reportedly the first to plant a vineyard has been suggested by Frank Joseph[108 .85] to have been an Atlantean. However, he is not the first to offer this idea. Cosmas Indicopleustes a 6th century AD theologian and geographer from Alexandria wrote of Atlantis as a large island in the western ocean. He also added a twist to the tale by recording an ancient tradition that Noah had resided on Atlantis!
Another identification, by Robert Bowie Johnson Jr., is that Noah is Nereus in Greek mythology and widely depicted in Greek art(c). Confusingly, it has also been suggested(a)(t) that Enoch usually accepted as the grandfather of Noah were in fact one and the same person.
Nevertheless, Plato’s Atlantis was destroyed by the gods as a punishment for their wickedness, while the same reason is given in the Bible for the obliteration of Noah’s people. Coincidentally, both Atlantis and Noah’s homeland, which was probably located in Mesopotamia, were destroyed by water leading to the obvious suggestion that the two stories are related.
While the biblical account of the Deluge does not stand up to detailed scrutiny(j), the global ubiquity of Flood stories is seldom adequately explained. Some possibilities that occur to me are related to the ending of the last Ice Age, which had watery consequences around the world. While the rising sea level took place in fits and starts, there were more dramatic events during this period such as the huge melt water lake discharges and Heinrich Events that occurred across North America and Eurasia. The effect in the southern hemisphere was less spectacular. Survivors would have been forced to migrate in all directions, bringing their account of these floods with them. Another explanation, but in my view, a less likely cause of global floods would have been a close encounter with a large extraterrestrial body such a promoted by Emilio Spedicato.
Apart from the story of the actual flood, global or otherwise, the detailed biblical account of the building of the Ark along with the gathering of the animals and the voyage itself does not hold water (sorry)(y). Some decades ago, Roger A. Moore offered a forensic study of the account, which, is still impressive(x).
Some years ago, Pastor Bertrand L. Comparet (1901-1983), a staunch racist(w), denied that the Flood of Noah had been a global event(v).
The Flood of Noah has been dated as 3161 BC by Stuart L. Harris(s). >Similarly, Gérard Gertoux places the Deluge circa 3200 BC in a lengthy paper(z). in which he also controversially touches on subjects such as radiocarbon dating, the age of the Patriarchs, the Ice Ages, evolution and more.<
A further development in the Flood story came on January 1st 2010 when it was revealed(b) that a 3,700-year-old Babylonian tablet disclosed that the ark was circular in design and made of reeds!
This claim was made by Irving Finkel, a cuneiform specialist at the British Museum, in his recent book The Ark Before Noah: Decoding the Story of the Flood. Jason Colavito offers an interesting review of the book(d).
There is an unexpectedly large number of books written over the last century on the subject of Noah’s Ark that are listed on a specialist website(e).
One such offering, resurrected by Jason Colavito(f), provides some comic relief with the claim in 1922 by C. E. Getsinger, who wrote that Noah’s Ark was in fact the Great Pyramid(g)! Even earlier, John Taylor (1781-1864) claimed that Noah had built the Great Pyramid! Nevertheless, a recently deciphered fragment of the Dead Sea Scrolls has suggested that the Ark was shaped like a pyramid!(h)(i)
Barry Warmkessel also entered the fray with the suggestion that aliens had been involved in the design and construction of the Ark(r)!
Nevertheless, 2017 finished with renewed interest in Noah’s Ark being generated by media reports(k) of statements emanating from The Geoscience Research Institute, which is sponsored by the Seventh-day Adventist Church, which claims that a 2010 expedition to Mount Ararat in Turkey, carbon dated timbers found there to 4,800 years ago.
The late David Allen Deal was another investigator to propose the Ararat region as the landing place of the ark, with Mt. Judi as the specific location(o). A more recent article supports his ideas(p). The precise location of the biblical Ararat is a matter of continuing and intense debate(q).
The UK’s Daily Mail added, that talking after the initial claims in 2010, Mike Pitt, a British archaeologist, said the evangelical explorers had yet to produce compelling evidence. He said: ‘If there had been a flood capable of lifting a huge ship 2.5 miles [4km] up the side of a mountain 4,800 years ago, I think there would be substantial geological evidence for this flood around the world. And there isn’t.’
2018 began with matters really hitting rock-bottom when an English language newspaper offered the following headline(l) “Turkish academic claims Prophet Noah used cell phone to call his son before flood.” Unsurprisingly, Jason Colavito has covered this story with an interesting blog(m).>Nevertheless, that idea is certainly trumped by the suggestion of Xavier Séguin that the ‘Ark’ of Noah had been a satellite(aa)!<
A light-hearted look at the story of Noah is worth a read(n).
>However, a more valuable offering was a paper(ab) delivered in 2008 to the Sixth International Conference on Creationism in Pittsburgh, PA by Anne Habermehl. She finished her contribution, a Review of the Search for Noah’s Ark, with the following conclusions;
“(1) It would appear that the Ark cannot have landed on Mount Ararat, because scientists have shown that this mountain did not exist until some time after the Flood had ended. (Also, the area that Mount Ararat occupies was probably not yet included in Urartu at that time.)
(2) In light of historical and geographical considerations, Mount Cudi near Cizre, Turkey, is the most likely place where the Ark landed.
(3) It seems doubtful that anyone has actually seen the Ark anywhere in modern times. The alleged sightings all seem to evaporate on careful examination.
(4) It is unlikely that very much of the Ark exists today; it is probable that over the millennia it has decayed, and various scavengers have taken most of it away.
(5) Because of 14C dating problems, it may not be possible to prove that any given samples are or are not the right age to have come from the Ark.
(6) More archaeological work needs to be done if we are ever to reasonably prove the Ark’s landing spot anywhere.
(7) It is probable that no matter what is found in any location, there are those who will remain unconvinced.
(8) Interest in finding the Ark is unabated, and the Ark search will go on.
At the end of the day, we have to face the reality that it may be difficult, or even impossible, ever to prove where the Ark landed. This author would have liked to end on an optimistic note for soon recovery of a largely intact, proven Ark, but this seems unlikely; and this paper therefore ends, in the words of T. S. Eliot (1925): “Not with a bang but a whimper.”<
In March 2019, a paper by Roger M. Pearlman put forward another radical idea, namely, that Göbekli Tepe had been founded by Noah (Noach) and his sons(u).
(g) The Thomson Review, Thomson, Illinois, July 19th, 1922 – p.3
Atlas was the first king of Atlantis and was the son of Poseidon according to the story of Atlantis from Plato. However, in traditional, Atlas was the son of the Titan, Iapetus, often identified with the biblical Japheth, and the nymph Clymene. This apparent contradiction can be explained by the fact that the name Atlas is applied to more than one figure in Greek legends.
Atlas is usually portrayed kneeling with the world on his shoulders. However, the earliest known statue of Atlas, the 2nd century Farnese Atlas(c), which is a Roman copy of an older Greek statue, has the sky is represented as a sphere with a map of the stars and constellations known to the Ancient Greeks, which they represented as objects, animals and mythological creatures and characters. 16th century cartographers assumed that the globe represented the Earth, not the sky and since then it has been depicted accordingly.
Edwin Björkman noted the opinion that the name Atlas does not have a Greek root but is generally thought to have a Semitic origin. He also suggested the possibility that the name may have been derived from one of the Greek words for sea, thalassa.
However, Peter James points out[047.190] the name has a clear etymology in the Greek root ‘tlaô’ which can mean ‘to bear’, ‘to endure’ or ‘to dare’. Atlas has also been identified with both the Egyptian god Shuand the biblical Enoch, the latter being a more controversial concept. Lewis Spence went further and identified the meso-American deity, Quetzalcoatl, with Atlas!
A somewhat more conventional view was offered by Thorwald Franke who has written a convincing paper(a) identifying Atlas with king Italos of the Sicels, who gave their name to Sicily and were one of the earliest groups to inhabit the island.
A more radical view has been put forward by Brit-Am writer John R.Salverda, who claims that the biblical Adam is the Atlas of Plato’s Atlantis narrative. A similar theory was proposed by Roger M. Pearlman in a 2018 booklet . In this small, difficult to read, book the author suggests, a linkage between the destruction of Sodom & Gomorrah and Atlantis, places Atlantis in the Jordan Valley and equates Abraham with Atlas – “ If Atlas as described in Plato’s work was based on a historic figure, Abraham alone meets key criteria.”*In a more recent paper(d), Pearlman suggests that Göbekli Tepe was founded by Noah (Noach) and his sons!*
Moving further east, the Hittites had an equivalent if not original version of Atlas in the form of Tantalus. The Hittites in turn may have developed the identity from the Hurrian god Ubelleris. It was this Anatolian figure that led Peter James to his conclusion that Atlantis had been located in Turkey. Tantalus had a son Pelops, whom some consider Phrygian and according to Herodotus the Phrygians were the oldest race on earth.
An even more extreme idea has been proposed by Sean Griffin that the yogic concept of Kundalini is contained within part of Plato’s Atlantis story(b). Griffin begins his explanation by pointing out that Atlas is the medical term for the 33rd vertebra of the human spine!
Zia Abbas, according to his own website(a), is a computer scientist and works as a freelance software engineer and consultant for many companies. He is the author of Atlantis: The Final Solution in which he claims to prove that Plato’s Atlantis is to be found in the South China Sea. The core proposal of this book is that Atlantis was located on the continental shelf in the South China Sea, known as Sundaland, which was exposed before the end of the last Ice Age, when it was inundated as the glaciers retreated. According to Abbas, this large landmass contained the original Atlantis and was known as Idress. It is quite probable that early urban settlements did exist along the coast and at the river mouths of Sundaland, and were subsequently flooded. However, it is quite improbable that the flooding of these towns and villages were the inspiration for the Atlantis of Plato. Remember that at the same time, similar inundations were taking place much closer to home in the Mediterranean and the Atlantic and these events are more likely to have been remembered in the legends and myths familiar to Plato. The prehistoric flooding of the Sundaland region is covered extensively in Stephen Oppenheimer’s Eden in the East.
Abas is no trailblazer, as the idea of Atlantis in this region has been advocated since 1997 by investigators such as the late Professor Arysio Nunes dos Santos(b) and William Lauritzen(c). Abbas’ theory is just a poor rehash of their ideas and his particular book has done little to advance their acceptance.
On the first page, Abbas claims that Atlantis was a republic, which seems rather strange for a confederation ruled by ten kings. He states that Athena was a ‘god’ of Atlantis, a claim that would have surprised Plato. Abbas also asserts that Atlantis is to be found in the Old Testament under the name of Enoch!
Further incongruity is encountered when we find that Abbas’ website includes a technical paper on Gravitation and Special Relativity.
This book is high on speculation and low on science. For many, the author’s credibility will completely vanish as soon as they encounter references to reptilian aliens a la David Icke, artificial structures on Mars or a hollow Earth. This is all a far cry from the Dialogues of Plato and probably explains the poor reviews that the book has received. Abbas also provides a website(c) that does very little to add to his cause.
*There has been little heard from Abbas in recent years, when the Atlantis in Sundaland theory has been advocated more strongly by dos Santos and Irwanto.*
(c) https://www.geocities.com/zia abbas/index.htm