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 »
Search

Recent Updates

Peter James

Gilligan, Gary

Gary Gilligan (1957- ) is a British author who has “studied Egyptology, Astronomy and Geology with an almost obsessive passion. When he first came across the theory of catastrophism, he was intrigued by the possibility that the Solar System had undergone recent upheavals due to cosmic chaos.”

Gilligan is arguably the most radical of the catastrophists and ancient chronology revisionists publishing today. Some of his ideas make those of Velikovsky as well as James and Rohl seem somewhat tame.

Among his many extreme claims are (1) Our Moon was only captured in the first millennium BC(a), (2) The Saharan sands, he claims are extraterrestrial in origin [1365], (3) The ancient year had only 360 days(b) and (4) The ancient Egyptian climate was milder than today as indicated by a red sun, rather than today’s yellow disk!(c)

>In a short 2012 paper now republished in October 2022 on the Thunderbolts website Gilligan proposes that the Amazon rainforest is only a few thousand years old. He argues that the Amazon region is today dependent on the 54,000 tons of fine dust received daily from the Sahara and since the Sahara did not exist 6,000 years ago neither did the Amazon rainforest which he says is claimed to be 55 million years old!(d) However, an article from Scientific American (July 7, 2014) also offers an even more recent date for the development of the rainforest, suggesting that “the people of the Amazon from2,500 to 500 years ago were farmers.”(e)<

(a) http://www.gks.uk.com/moon-origin-egyptian/

(b) http://www.everythingselectric.com/forum/index.php?topic=347.0

(c) https://www.wessexresearchgroup.org/download/pdf_can_we_have_our_red_sun_back_please_by_gary_gilligan.pdf

(d) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_rainforest *

(e) https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/amazon-rainforest-is-much-younger-than-commonly-believed/ *

Ancient Chronology

Ancient Chronology is a subject fraught with difficulties(a) as well as the focus of intense academic debate, particularly over the past half-century.

Archbishop Ussher (1581-1656) calculated the date of creation to have been October 23rd 4004 BC(d). Incredible as it may seem, even today (2019), there are still people prepared to give further consideration to his ideas (c)(e).

Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) became the first ‘modern’ revisionist of accepted ancient chronology. His work was heavily criticised and few serious advances were made until the development of  Egyptology following Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt at the end of the 18th century.

Difficulties with details of Egyptian dating slowly accumulated, particularly when endeavouring to align it with Greek, Minoan and other eastern chronologies. The scholarly debates became very public in the middle of the 20th century with the eventual publication of Ages in Chaos by Immanuel Velikovsky and the attempts made to suppress it altogether. The refining of Velikovsky’s theories followed, with important contributions by S. Talbott, Edward Schorr and John Bimson. Some, such as Emmet Sweeney, have accused Velikovsky of being over-dependent on his belief in the inerrancy of biblical chronology.

The Society for Interdisciplinary Studies (SIS)(b) was founded in 1974 and produces regular publications. This was followed a few years later by three important books[229][230][232] by David Rohl and Centuries of Darkness [046] by Peter James,  who also wrote The Sunken Kingdom in which he places Atlantis in Turkey. Rohl & James were in agreement on many details, but fell out over the identity of Shishak (was he Ramesses II or III?). However, prior to that, in the early 1980s, they had published a joint paper which gave the world a first look at their New Chronology. Rohl republished it in 2012(v).

On the occasion of the SIS Jubilee Conference in 1999 a paper by P. John Crowe was presented, which gave a valuable insight into historical revisionism before and after Velikovsky(a).

Gunnar Heinsohn (1943- ) is a Professor Emeritus at the University of Bremen but is also an ardent chronology revisionist, concerned not just with the dating problems of the ancient world(l) but also with difficulties to be seen in the first millennium of the Common Era(m).

One of the most controversial aspects of Plato’s Atlantis story is the old Egyptian priest’s claim that Atlantis was destroyed 9,000 years before Solon’s visit. He also related that Athens, who fought the Atlanteans, was established one thousand years before the Egyptian state or as is more likely, before the foundation of the city of Sais. Apart from anachronisms in Plato’s narrative, the archaeological evidence completely contradicts the dates seemingly offered by the priests of Sais. It is interesting that most of the chronology revisionist debate centres on the second millennium BC which is arguably the most rational timeframe for the destruction of Atlantis based on the Bronze Age references in Timaeus and Critias, provided they are not just anachronistic embellishments.

I should also mention that while the debates regarding the Bronze Age chronologies rage on, further controversy has arisen regarding claims of duplicated centuries in the first millennium of our era. Leading the charge here are Anatoly Fomenko(k) [1823], Heribert Illig(h)(i)(j) and Gunnar Heinsohn(g). A keen supporter of Fomenko’s work is Garry Kasparov the former World Chess Champion(p). A more critical view of Fomenko’s work is on offer from Stephen Sorensen(s).

Nathaniel Lloyd had written an extensive three-part paper on the history of chronological revisionism(t). This should be read in conjunction with a paper entitled The Glorious Stupidity of Fomenko’s New Chronology(u).

Up to this point, I have outlined some of the problems and theories concerning the accurate alignment of specific events with particular years. A clash of archaeology and accepted history, secular and religious. has generated libraries of debate. However, our problems do not end with the counting of years, but contention has also arisen over the length of the day before the seventh century BC. Evidence is available to show that there was a 360-day year in use around the world in those ancient times.

Some religious sites have proposed that before the Deluge we had a 365-day year, then it changed to 360 days and then reverted to the current 365.2422 days(q). By way of complete contrast Danny Faulkner, a creationist astronomer rejects the idea that the world was created with a 360-day year, although it is a view held by many creationists(r).

William Whiston was one of the first ‘modern’ commentators to conclude that in very ancient times a 360-day year was used(n). More recently, Immanuel Velikovsky devoted a chapter of Worlds in Collision to The Year of 360 Days(o). The Brit-Am movement endorsed Velikovsky’s views in this regard, as does William F. Drankenbring.

(a) The Revision of Ancient History – A Perspective | Society for Interdisciplinary Studies (archive.org) 

(b) Welcome – Society for Interdisciplinary Studies (archive.org) 

(c) https://stevenmcollins.com/archbishop-usshers-chronology-reconsidered-its-possible-impact-for-us-today/

(d) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology

(e) https://www.academia.edu/36854822/Ussher_Explained_and_Corrected 

(f) See  (a)

(g) https://www.q-mag.org/_search.html?req=heinsohn

(h) The Phantom Time Hypothesis • Damn Interesting  

(i) Did the Early Middle Ages Really Exist? (ecplanet.org)  

(j) Jan Beaufort: 30 questions about chronology (cybis.se) 

(k) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_chronology_(Fomenko)

(l) THE RESTORATION OF ANCIENT HISTORY (archive.org) *

(m) https://www.q-mag.org/_search.html?req=heinsohn

(n) https://drvitelli.typepad.com/providentia/2013/11/the-life-and-times-of-william-whiston-part-1-of-2.html

(o) I. Velikovsky, Worlds in Collision, Part 2, Chapter Viii, p.316  

(p) Wayback Machine (archive.org) 

(q) http://xwalk.ca/360vs365.html

(r) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265167051_On_the_Caution_about_the_360-Day_Year *

(s) Fomenko’s New Chronology – Ctruth  

(t) The Chronological Revision Chronicles, Part One: The Fomenko Timeline — Historical Blindness  

(u) The Glorious Stupidity of Fomenko’s New Chronology | Goldwag’s Journal on Civilization (wordpress.com) 

(v) https://davidrohl.blogspot.com/2012/11/ 

 

Sitchin, Zecharia

 

Zecharia Sitchin (1920-2010) was born in Russia and grew up in Palestine where he studied ancient Semitic languages and became one of the few to master the reading of the cuneiform writing of the Sumerians. After studying at the London School of Economics he took up a career in journalism. There are some questions regarding his academic credentials that were briefly explored by Frank Dörnenburg(g).

zechariaSitchinThen Sitchin began to develop his theory of ancient astronauts visiting earth in the past from the planet Nibiru (Planet X) and their colonisation of territory in what is now part of Iraq and the genetic manipulation of humans there. He based his theories on his interpretation of Sumerian cuneiform tablets. He also claimed that Nibiru had an orbit that took it to the outer reaches of the solar system and would return soon.

The late Alan F. Alford was initially an enthusiastic supporter of Sitchin’s ancient astronaut ideas but later recanted(k).

Understandably, his ideas provoked a storm of controversy that lasted until his death and after. For my part, I cannot understand how a race capable of space travel did not teach the Sumerian ancestors a writing system better than cuneiform and a medium better than clay tablets. Furthermore, the idea that the climate of a planet with such an unusual orbit could support the development of an advanced race capable of surviving the consequent extremes of temperature, is something I also find hard to comprehend.

Ian Lawton, the British researcher, wrote a rebuttal of Sitchin’s theories ten years ago(a). Further refutation came from Dörnenburg as well as on the PaleoBabble website(b) of Michael S. Heiser(e), a scholar in the fields of biblical studies and the ancient Near East. Heiser has another website with the blunt title of sitchiniswrong.com, which includes an overview of what he perceives as Sitchin’s errors(l).

Peter James commenting on Sitchin wrote that “He uses the Epic of Creation Enuma Elish as the foundation for his cosmogony, identifying the young god Marduk, who overthrows the older regime of gods and creates the Earth, as the unknown ‘Twelfth Planet’. In order to do this he interprets the Babylonian theogony as a factual account of the birth of the other eleven planets. The Babylonian names for the planets are established beyond a shadow of a doubt—Ishtar was the deity of Venus, Nergal of Mars, and Marduk of Jupiter—and confirmed by hundreds of astronomical/astrological tables and treatises on clay tablets and papyri from the Hellenistic period. Sitchin merrily ignores all this and assigns unwarranted planetary identities to the gods mentioned in the theogony. For example, Apsu, attested as the god of the primeval waters, becomes, of all things, the Sun! Ea, as it suits Sitchin, is sometimes planet Neptune and sometimes a spaceman. And the identity of Ishtar as the planet Venus, a central feature of Mesopotamian religion, is nowhere mentioned in the book—instead Sitchin arbitrarily assigns to Venus another deity from Enuma Elish, and reserves Ishtar for a role as a female astronaut.(r)

In late 2017 and early 2018, a two-part article(i)(j)  by two young researchers, Jason Jarrell and Sarah Farmer added further criticism of Sitchin’s linguistic capabilities. On March 13th 2018, Clyde Winters also published on the same website a further refutation of Sitchin’s ‘ancient astronaut’ interpretation of the Sumerian seals.

In 2021, Jarrell & Farmer wrote a two-part article about the Anunnaki (m)(n), in which they concluded “that rather than making the Anunnaki the equivalent of the “Elohim” who created man in the Book of Genesis; they should more properly be compared to the Nephilim and the fallen angels described in Genesis Chapter 6, 1 Enoch, and other extra-biblical texts.”

Additional scathing criticism came from a Christian website claiming that Sitchin had an agenda coloured by his association with the Masonic Order!

Jason Colavito has also drawn attention(c) to the probability that Sitchin drew on the work of the British Assyriologist, George Smith (1840-1876), but distorted Smith’s conclusions to bolster his own theories.

Sitchin did not address the question of Atlantis directly until 2004 when he devoted a chapter of The Earth Chronicles Expeditions [0963]+, where he considered the Minoan Hypothesis and found it wanting. He did not propose any specific location but suggested that there was a possible transatlantic connection. In the same chapter three, he discusses at some length the Phaistos Disk and a possible association with Atlantis!  However, his broader views did find favour with a number of fringe Atlantis commentators such as the late Rob Solarion, Andrews and Zeitlmair.

Another follower of Sitchin, Thomas Ashmore, has suggested that some of the Annunaki ‘gods’ were exiled to Scandinavia where their deeds were preserved in Norse mythology(d). Further support came from William L. Saylor in a series of articles(o). 

Some of Sitchin’s other books such as The Twelfth Planet [1599]+ and Genesis Revisited [1728]+ are available online.  In 2015, Sitchin’s niece, Janet Sitchin included some previously unpublished material of uncle’s in The Annunaki Chronicles[1238]. A rather negative review(h) was offered by essayist Noel Rooney.

J. Douglas Kenyon, the editor of Atlantis Rising magazine, wrote a review (Issue 5) of Sitchin’s work and its reception by both public and professionals.

As of March 2022, Sitchin’s website was still live.(q)

[0963]+ The Earth Chronicles Expeditions: Journeys to the Mythical Past : Sitchin, Zecharia : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

[1599]+ https://www.academia.edu/36091307/Sitchin_Zecharia_-_The_12th_Planet?swp=rr-rw-wc-28435098  

[1728]+  https://www.academia.edu/28435098/Genesis_Revisited_Is_Modern_Science_Catching_up_with_Ancient_Knowledge_Zecharia_Sitchin?email_work_card=view-paper

(a) See: https://web.archive.org/web/20150924032217/https://www.ianlawton.com/mesindex.htm

(b) Zechariah Sitchin’s Contribution to PaleoBabble – Dr. Michael Heiser (archive.org) 

(c) https://www.jasoncolavito.com/1/post/2012/07/did-george-smith-inspire-zecharia-sitchin.html

(d) Nexus, Dec 2013/Jan 2014, (p.41)

(e) https://www.pdfarchive.info/index.php?pages/He

(g) See Archive 2909

(h) Fortean Times FT342, July 2016 (p.59)

(i) https://www.ancient-origins.net/unexplained-phenomena/anunnaki-revealed-who-were-these-beings-ancient-astronaut-theory-what-do-021716

(j)  https://www.ancient-origins.net/human-origins-religions/zecharia-sitchin-and-mistranslation-sumerian-texts-009442

(k) https://www.eridu.co.uk (link broken July 2018)

(l) https://www.sitchiniswrong.com/sitchinerrors.htm 

(m) Anunnaki Revealed: Who Were These Beings of Ancient Astronaut Theory? – Part I | Ancient Origins (ancient-origins.net)

(n) Anunnaki Revealed: Finding the Nephilim in Myth, Giants Among Men– Part II | Ancient Origins (ancient-origins.net)

(o) The Gods as Architects (bibliotecapleyades.net) 

(p) THE FRAUD OF ZECHARIA SITCHIN AND THE ANUNNAKI LIE – WALK AWAY FROM THE NEW AGE: RETURNING BACK TO CHRIST (blogwithrealrevolutionradio.com)

(q) The Official Web Site of Zecharia Sitchin

(r)  Fortean Times No. 27 (Nov. 1978) & SIS Workshop No. 7, vol. 2, no. 2 (Nov. 1979) *

Turkey

Turkey is the preferred location of Atlantis according to authors Peter James and Eberhard Zangger. In his book[047] James asserts that Plato took the idea for Atlantis from the city of Tantalis, which was located in what is today the Province of Manisa in Western Turkey, just north-east of the ancient port of Smyrna (today’s Izmir). Zangger also opts for Turkey but favours ancient Troy as the original Atlantis[483].

Coincidentally, Çatal Hüyük, one of the world’s oldest cities, is located in Turkey just over 200 km south of the capital Ankara. Like Atlantis, Çatal Hüyük also had a bull cult and a Great Mother Goddess reminiscent of ancient Malta. After decades of work, excavations are continuing at the site(a). Mysteriously, this early city of some seven thousand people apparently abandoned their homes around 5600-6000 BC. They were not the only settlement to be abandoned around this period. Cyprus, Palestine and Syria and more famously Jericho all provide evidence of abandonment at the same time.

Ian Wilson has pointed out that following the Younger Dryas mini Ice Age of around 9000 BC a further mini Ice age occurred between 6200 BC and 5800 BC, a period that coincides with this unexplained desertion of Çatal Hüyük and elsewhere.

However exciting Çatal Hüyük may be, its antiquity would appear to have been overshadowed by the discoveries made at Göbekli Tepe where the site has been dated to 9600BC. Also noteworthy is Asikli Höyük which is 1,000 years older than the Çatal Hüyük settlement on the Konya plain and as the earliest village settlement founded in the Cappadocia region, the site is no less important(b).

>Although Zangger and James have had little support for their Turkish locations for Atlantis, a more recent attempt to situate Atlantis near the west coast of the Asian landmass of Turkey is offered by an American researcher, Joe Plegge. In 2012 Plegge published Turkish Stonehenge: Göbekli Tepe [1909] in which he claims that the two sites share some similar astronomical features. In his Atlantis paper, he reveals how he also sought to link Göbekli Tepe with Atlantis but found no evidence to support this idea. Plegge accepts Plato’s apparent early date for Atlantis of circa 9600 BC even though by his own admission this date conflicts with Plato’s anachronistic references to metalworking, a one-million-man army, horses and chariots. However, for me, Plegge’s use of Paul Schliemann as a source destroys his credibility as a researcher.<  

(a) See: https://web.archive.org/web/20180212032433/https://popular-archaeology.com/issue/september-2011/article/latest-find-at-world-s-largest-neolithic-settlement-a-harbinger-of-surprises-yet-to-come

(b) https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/cappadocias-11000-year-old-settlement-thrills-experts–.aspx?PageID=238HYPERLINK

(c) (99+) (PDF) Atlantis in the Meander Valley, Turkey | Joe Plegge – Academia.edu *

Tantalis (L)

Tantalis is referred to, by Pliny, as the capital of ancient Lydia in western Turkey. It was later known as Magnesium ad Sipylum. Tantalis was apparently named after the legendary King Tantalus, who had remarkable similarities with Atlas; they were both Titans, supported the heavens and had mountains named after them(a).  This powerful city was flooded following an earthquake and is now reputed to be located beneath the now dried-up Lake Saloe. Also note that Atlantis is an anagram of Tantalis – coincidence?

British archaeologist Peter James has identified Tantalis as the original Atlantis and that it was located just north east of modern Izmir (Smyrna). James reached this conclusion[047] after a study of classical writers, comparative mythology and local place-names. Unfortunately, there has, as yet, been no archaeological expedition to confirm James’ contention.

Objections to James’ theory are that Tantalis was:

i) not on an island.

ii) not outside the conventional location of the Pillars of Hercules.

iii) too close to Greece (James raises this objection against the Santorini theory).

iv) not a circular city (?).

N.B. Sardis was also known as the capital of Lydia by the early 7th century BC.

(a) “https://www.jstor.org/stable/262536?seq=2#page_scan_tab_contents

Meropes

Meropes, according to Ignatius Donnelly, was the name applied by the classical writer Theopompus to the inhabitants of Atlantis. This reference is to be found in the works of Aelian (Bk III, Chap. XVIII) that in fact does not mention Atlantis but refers to a huge distant continent that may in fact, as some speculate, have been an early reference to America.>A Swiss Archaeologist, Emil Forrer (1894-1986), was the first researcher to present a comprehensive, interdisciplinary argument to support this assumption that the land of Meropis, located ‘beyond the Ocean’  was a reference to the American continent(a).

Peter James also supports[047.293] the view that Meropes was ‘an oblique reference to Atlantis’,>adding that Meropes may have been an alternative name for Atlas.<

The Greek historian Strabo wrote (Book VII) of an island with an advanced culture called Meropis and its inhabitants Meropes. He also supported the reality of Plato’s Atlantis story.

Jean Gattefossé contended that the Atlas Mountains of North Africa were also known as the Meros. He believed that these mountains had previously bounded a large inland sea that has been referred to as both the Meropic and Atlantic Sea.

*Frank Joseph has speculated that “Merope was probably the name of an allied kingdom or colony of the Atlantean Empire in coastal North Africa, perhaps, occupying the southern half of present-day Morocco” [104.186].

In 1898, the American novelist, H.H. Buckman (1858-1914), published Merope or The Destruction of Atlantis [1557], which uses a fictional account of the final days of Atlantis as a backdrop to what is classified by some to be an early example of science fiction.*

Meropes is also an ancient name for the inhabitants of the Greek island of Kos.

(a) Meropis Research – Atlantisforschung.de (atlantisforschung-de.translate.goog) *

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.<

(a) https://www.knowledge.co.uk/the-sunken-kingdom/

(b) https://www.centuries.co.uk/uluburun.pdf

(c) https://www.centuries.co.uk/replies.htm

(d) https://www.centuries.co.uk/faq.htm

Franklin, Stephen E.

Stephen E. Franklin offers a wide-ranging website(a) which includes a book[1387], as yet unpublished, that ambitiously aims to reconcile the chronologies of the ancient Hebrews, Assyrians and Egyptians. This has been an area of great contention particularly since the writings of Immanuel Velikovsky were published in the 1950s. David Rohl has published a series of books on the subject in recent years with further contributions from Peter James and Emmet J. Sweeney.

Franklin’s book has chapter 8(c) devoted to the Garden of Eden and  Atlantis where he maintains that the 9,000 ‘years’ of Plato refer to the three ‘seasons’ in the Egyptian year, an idea that seems to be gaining acceptance (see Radek Brychta, Rosario Vieni and Axel Hausmann).

>This reassessment of Plato’s years enabled Franklin to claim that Athens was founded circa 3565 BC and Sais circa 3231 BC. Coincidentally the latter date is very close to the generally accepted time for the establishment of pharaonic Egypt.

Franklin has claimed that the Phaistos Disk is a king-list of Cretan rulers and also that it has a calendrical function(d).

Some years ago Franklin published a book on the origins of the Tarot deck. Its subtitle was A Study of the Astronomical Substructure of Game and Divining Boards [301]. This can be downloaded for free from his website(b).

>He has also engaged in the Shakespearean authorship controversy.<

(a) https://neros.lordbalto.com/

(b) https://neros.lordbalto.com/AppendixC.htm

(c) https://neros.lordbalto.com/ChapterEight.htm

(d) https://neros.lordbalto.com/ChapterFourteen.htm

 

Crete

Crete was until recently thought to have been first settled around 7000 BC. However, excavations at nine sites in 2008 and 2009 have revealed double-edged hand axes dated to “at least” 130,000 years ago. This discovery has suggested(a) that Stone Age man had developed seafaring abilities.

There is a general consensus Crete was known as Keftiu by the ancient Egyptians.

Sir Arthur Evans, knighted for his archaeological finds on Crete, excavated at Knossos from 1900-1905 leading to the discovery of the famous ‘palace’ there. Evans saw Knossos as an administrative centre although it had no defensive features, which might be expected. In the 1970’s Hans Georg Wunderlich (1928-1974) following the views of Oswald Spengler, proposed in The Secret of Crete[826] , that the ‘palace’ was in fact a mortuary temple. This idea has more recently been considered by the late Philip Coppens(c).

As early as 1910 the Rev. James Baikie suggested Crete as the location of Atlantis. A year earlier K.T. Frost outlined parallels between Atlantis and the Minoan empire. In the 1920’s Joseph McCabe a former Catholic priest was also convinced that Crete was the location of Atlantis. More decades were to pass before Dr Angelos Galanopoulos developed the idea further[0263][0264]. There has been doubt that the decline of the Minoan civilisation in the 2nd millennium BC was linked with Theran explosion. Nevertheless, Bacon and Galanopoulos admit that a Minoan explanation for the Atlantis story ‘is correct in all points’ except date, dimensions and location of ‘Pillars’! Many commentators have added reasons to support the Minoan Hypothesis.

 

Crete3James Mavor records[265] how a stone was discovered on Thera with the name Eumelos inscribed on it in archaic Greek. However, it would be unwise to read too much into a single isolated object.

J. V. Luce lists a number of interesting similarities between Crete and Plato’s description of Atlantis[120].

*Atlantis was the way to other islands. This is an accurate description of Crete as the gateway to the Cyclades and Greece.

*The palace of the Atlanteans is on a low hill 50 stadia inland and near to a fertile plain is a good description of Knossos.

*The description of the land fits perfectly with the southern coast of Crete.

*There were bulls hunted without weapons, which is characteristic of Minoan Crete.

*The construction of the buildings matches Knossos.

Rodney Castleden[0225] uses statistics to demonstrate that Minoan Crete was closer to Plato’s description of Atlantis than previously thought.

Marjorie Braymer[198] highlights the fact that the Cretan Mesara Plain is oblong in shape and one tenth of the dimensions of the plain mentioned by Plato. A fact that gains in importance if a tenfold exaggeration of the dimensions by Plato is accepted.

J. G. Bennett has gone further and argued strongly for a linkage of the destruction of Minoan civilisation, with the Flood of Deucalion, the Biblical Exodus and the obliteration of Plato’s Atlantis. Bennett quotes Plato’s Laws (705.15), which speaks of a significant migration from Crete, as evidence for a major catastrophe on the island.

In April 2004, a BBC Timewatch programme looked at a possible link between Crete and Atlantis focussing on evidence of ancient tsunami damage on the island that they linked to the eruption of Thera. This idea has been refuted by W. Shepard Baird who offers a pyroclastic surge as a more credible explanation(b). In 2010, the BBC broadcast another documentary supporting the Minoan Hypothesis, although not very convincingly in the opinion of this compiler.

On the other hand, Peter James points out that there is no connection in Greek mythology between Crete and Atlas. Further objections include the fact that no ancient canals have been found on Crete, the island did not sink and the failure of Plato to simply name Crete as the location of his Atlantis,*even though it was well-known to the mainland Greeks.*

Recently Gavin Menzies has, unsuccessfully, in my view, attempted to breathe new life into the Minoan Hypothesis in The Lost Empire of Atlantis.

An even less impressive effort to support a Minoan Atlantis is a slender work  by Lee R. Kerr entitled Griffin Quest – Investigating Atlantis [807], who also published an equally useless sequel, Atlantis of the Minoans and Celts[1104].

(a)  https://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/003678.html

(b) https://www.minoanatlantis.com/Sinking_Atlantis_Myth.php

(c) https://www.philipcoppens.com/crete_dead.html (offline Mar. 2018 see Archive 2133)

(d) https://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/204059231?searchTerm=Atlantis discovered&searchLimits=

Baillie, Mike

Mike Baillie is an Emeritus Professor of Palaeoecology in the School of Archaeology and Palaeoecology, Queen’s University, Belfast. He is a dendrochronologist[113] of world renown, who outlined in his recent book [111] the evidence for catastrophic encounters with asteroids or comets over the past five millennia that opened a whole new chapter in the search for the truth about our past. Baillie ascribes these events to 2354-2345 BC, 1628-1623 BC, 1159-1141 BC, 208-204 BC and 536-545 AD. He touches on a number of Baillielegendary and historical events such as the Deluge, the Exodus and King Arthur, but seems to studiously avoid any direct reference to Atlantis. Nevertheless, his theory in conjunction with the suggestions of writers such as Emilio Spedicato enhances the possibility of the destruction of Atlantis being a consequence of a more widespread catastrophe.

In 2004 it was revealed that a very large comet or asteroid, estimated to be ¾ of a mile in diameter, crashed into what is now Germany. The date is calculated at 200 BC, which coincides with one of Baillie’s dated catastrophes. A crater field stretching from the town of Altoetting to Lake Chiemsee is all that remains today.

Perhaps even more relevant to our study was a PowerPoint presentation(b) from Baillie to a Quantavolution Conference in Athens in 2011, which offered compelling evidence for a catastrophic event in 2345 BC. His data reinforces the work of George Dodwell who demonstrated with his study of ancient gnomons, decades earlier, that something dramatic happened to the rotational axis of the Earth in 2345 BC, which is possibly the same 2346 BC encounter with a comet proposed by William Whiston in 1696. At the same conference Baillie also presented evidence for dating the eruption of Thera to 1628 BC.

Baillie is also co-author with Patrick McCafferty of a fascinating work[112] that reinterprets some of the heroes and gods of Celtic mythology as a coded account of our ancestors’ observation of a close encounter or impact of comets with the Earth. However, Baillie’s books should be read in conjunction with an equally compelling volume[148](a) by David Talbot and Wallace Thornhill who offer a complementary but rather than conflicting interpretation of early man’s perception of highly visible cosmic events. Talbot and Thornhill have linked ancient myths and thousands of petroglyphs with their view of an electric universe, where large-scale plasma phenomena were witnessed and recorded by preliterate man. Their book has drawn extensively on the work of Dr. Anthony Peratt, who has gathered and classified an enormous database of petroglyphs from all over the world(d) that are apparently a record of celestial demonstration(s) of plasma physics.

Nevertheless, Baillie also has his critics, particularly in relation to his attitude towards proponents of the ‘New Chronology’ such as Peter James and David Rohl(c).

(a) www.thunderbolts.info

(b) https://www.qconference-athens-2011.grazian-archive.com/the2345topicmbai/index.html

(c) https://www.cokenais-soas.com/CAIS/Religions/non-iranian/Judaism/Persian_Judaism/book6/pt1.htm (half way down page) (link broken) *

(d) https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1265340