An A-Z Guide To The Search For Plato's Atlantis

Latest News

  • Joining The Dots

    Joining The Dots

    I have now published my new book, Joining The Dots, which offers a fresh look at the Atlantis mystery. I have addressed the critical questions of when, where and who, using Plato’s own words, tempered with some critical thinking and a modicum of common sense.Read More »

Recent Updates



The Nazca Lines of Peru>were systematically studied by Toribio Mejia Xesspe, a Peruvian archaeologist, beginning in 1926, but the geoglyphs only gained widespread attention when pilots flew over them in the 1930s.

Paul Kosok (1896-1959) was also claimed as the first to carry out a professional study of the Nazca drawing in 1939. He was assisted a year later by Maria Reiche (1903-1998) who devoted the rest of her life to the study of Nazca. Kosok continued his research there until 1949.

The purpose of the geoglyphs has generated reams of commentary, from the nonsensical of von Däniken to the more profound of Reiche.

“In the late 1960s and early 1970s, however, other researchers, including American astronomer Gerald Hawkins, examined the Nazca Lines and disagreed with the astronomical explanation for the geoglyphs. They also poked holes in other far-out explanations, such as those relating to aliens or ancient astronauts(f).”<

However, for sheer complexity, I must direct you to the work of Czech-Canadian Jiri Mruzek. He has managed to link the Monkey geoglyph at Nazca with the layout of the Giza pyramids and a 14,000-year-old cave drawing at La Marche in France; all under the banner of  ‘Seal of Atlantis’!!!(a)

In 2018, it was announced that another fifty Nazca style geoglyphs had been discovered in the adjacent province of Palpa(b). This number was subsequently increased to 142(c).

In February 2020, Frank Maglione Nicholson, Ken Phungrasamee & David Grimason, collectively known as The Nazca Group(d), published The Nazca Great Circle Map Hypothesis. Their claim is that “The lines and geoglyphs carved into the Nazca plateau represent a map of the Earth. The map is a Great Circle Map: a gnomonic projection with the center of the Earth as its cartographic view point. Each line on the Nazca Plateau represents a great circle of navigation centered at the center of the Earth and encircling the entire planet. The majority of the lines on the Nazca Plateau radiate from five loci of origin called radial centers.”

Another 2020 article(e) by Laszlo Arvay concluded that “the Nazca Plateau could be the largest astronomical atlas in the world. If that is so, Paul Kosok was right after all and on a much greater scale as he ever thought possible.”






(f) Nazca Lines – HISTORY *

James, Peter

Peter-jamesPeter James (?- ) graduated in ancient history and archaeology at Birmingham University and engaged in postgraduate research at University College, London.

James came to public attention when, in collaboration with Nick Thorpe,  Nikos Kokkinos, Robert Morkot and John Frankish, he authored Centuries of Darkness [346] in which he explored the problems of the chronology of the Mediterranean and Near East in the second millennium BCIt generated much controversy, which continues as the authors’ website(c)(d) demonstrates.

The following years saw the production of an impressive three-volume work by David Rohl[229][230][232] offering similar ideas on a New Chronology for the region. In fact, James and Rohl had collaborated until they had divergent views regarding the identification of the biblical Shishak, Rohl favouring Ramesses II, while James opted for Ramesses III.

James has also been studying the Atlantis question since the early 1970s. Paul Dunbavin recounts that James had originally favoured Megalithic Britain as Atlantis. Francis Hitching in The World Atlas of Mysteries[307] notes how James calculated the date of the demise of Atlantis as 3600 BC. He arrives at this by accepting the commonly agreed date for the beginning of Egyptian civilisation of 3100 BC. He then adds the 1,000 years, which Solon was told by the Egyptian priests, was the time that had elapsed between the Atlantean Athenian war and then arbitrarily subtracts 500 years to compensate for an assumed nationalistic exaggeration of Egypt’s antiquity; a habit common to many ancient kingdoms.

However, when he finally published his work on the subject, The Sunken Kingdom [047], he controversially offered a site in Anatolia in western Turkey as his preferred location for Atlantis. Unfortunately, he has been unable to obtain permission from the authorities to dig at the site and hopefully substantiate his theory. The book is supported by a website(a).

>A few years earlier, Eberhard Zangger published The Flood From Heaven, in which he also placed Atlantis in western Anatolia, specifically in Troy. James offers a few critical comments including what he considers a major weakness in Zangger’s theory, namely that Troy did not ‘sink beneath the waves in a single day and a night’. [p.201]<

James was highly vocal in disputing the dendrochronological dating of the Uluburun shipwreck discovered in 1982 off southwestern Turkey. The initial date given was 1315 BC, later revised to 1305 BC but due to a lack of bark on the piece of wood tested a definitive date was impossible. Even if the bark had been attached it would still only have provided the date that the tree had been felled not the date of the shipwreck(b). Subsequently, the more imprecise radiocarbon dating gave a date of ‘around’ 1300 BC.

James is also co-author, again with Nick Thorpe, of Ancient Inventions [757], which is a 672-page tome that offers a fascinating account of the inventive capabilities of ancient civilisations. In this 1994 book, he comments that “Plato’s yarn is largely a work of fiction” [p.455], >which makes you wonder why, just a year later, he published The Sunken Kingdom!<

>Seven years later James and Thorpe teamed up again to compile Ancient Mysteries [1922], which covers familiar subjects, such as Nazca, Sodom & Gomorrah, the Vinland Map and the Maya.<