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

Latest News

  • NEWS September 2023

    NEWS September 2023

    September 2023. Hi Atlantipedes, At present I am in Sardinia for a short visit. Later we move to Sicily and Malta. The trip is purely vacational. Unfortunately, I am writing this in a dreadful apartment, sitting on a bed, with access to just one useable socket and a small Notebook. Consequently, I possibly will not […]Read More »
  • 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

Shishak

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 that 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).

In 2002, Manfred Bietak and Ernst Czerny, both distinguished Egyptologists edited a collection of 45 papers presented at a SCIEM Conference in 2000 highlighting the problems of synchronising the chronologies of civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the 2nd millennium BC(w).

Gunnar Heinsohn (1943-2023) was a Professor Emeritus at the University of Bremen but was 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) https://www.historicalblindness.com/blogandpodcast//the-chronological-revision-chronicles-part-one-the-fomenko-timeline (new link)

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

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

(w) The Synchronisation of Civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the … – Google Books *

Kaulins, Andis

andis kaulinsAndis Kaulins (1946-2022) was born in Latvia. He studied law in the United States and lectured on the subject at a number of universities there. He later taught law at the universities of Kiel and Trier. His real love would seem to be golf as well as the study and interpretation of ancient megaliths(a) together with their inscriptions and carvings. He has authored a book[423] on the subject of ancient megaliths and their astronomical significance. He was also the webmaster of megaliths.net(c), which is extensive but incomplete!

>Kaulins was greatly interested in the development of writing and published a paper on the subject(d). Additionally, in 1980 Kaulins also published at least two papers on the decipherment of the Phaistos Disk(e). Kaulins had an interest in a wide range of historical subjects including Egyptology, regarding which he offered some unexpected identifications(f);

“The identity of Tutankhamun can be explained as follows:
In my opinion, the evidence is incontrovertible that King Saul = Echnaton (Akhenaten), King David = Sethos and King Solomon = Ramses II with Shishak = Ramses III.

Accordingly, Tutankhamun can only be ATON, i.e. JON-ATHON (“young Aton, young Adonis, “Jaun-(IE)donis”), one of the sons of Saul in the Bible. Saul was Echn-ATON viz. Akhen-ATEN (“old Aton”, old Adonis, “Vec-(IE)Donis”). The other brother was Semenchkare, Biblical Ish-Boshet, who served a short time as Pharaoh before being executed.”<

Dr Kaulins believed that Atlantis did exist and considered two possible regions for its location; the Minoan island of Thera or some part of the North Sea that was submerged at the end of the last Ice Age when the sea levels rose dramatically. Kaulins noted that part of the North Sea is known locally as ‘Wattenmeer’ or Sea of Mud’ reminiscent of Plato’s description of the region where Atlantis was submerged, after that event. He suggested(b) that the Pillars of Heracles were located on either side of a narrow channel that had once existed between Tunisia and an extended Sicily that had included the Maltese Islands. He also believes that in the Central Mediterranean region, Carthage was possibly built on the remains of Tartessos!

(a) http:///www.lexiline.com (link broken)

(b) Pillars of Heracles – Alternative Location (archive.org)

(c) Megaliths Megalithic Sites Standing Stones Megaliths.Net (archive.org) 

(d) (PDF) Ancient Signs: The Alphabet & the Origins of Writing (researchgate.net) *

(e) (PDF) The Phaistos Disc: An Ancient Enigma Solved : Two Corroborative Old Elamite Scripts are Ancient Greek (researchgate.net) *

(f) LEXILINE JOURNAL: Who was Tutankhamun – Jonathon Aton – The Me’il – LexiLine Journal 347 *

Rohl, David

David Rohl (1950- ) holds a degree in Ancient History and Egyptology from University College London. He is a former rock musician and is the author of three best-selling history books[229][230][232] that controversially proposed a New Chronology for the ancient rohl_neweastern Mediterranean and has presented television documentary programmes on the same subject, which have provoked severe criticism(a).

Bryant G. Wood, an American biblical archaeologist, disputes the validity of Rohl’s revised chronology as he sees it as an attack on his belief in the veracity of the Bible(f).

Drawing some inspiration from the work[1388/9] of Reginald A. Walker (1917-1989), Rohl has also argued for the Garden of Eden being situated in what is now northwestern Iran[230]. Equally controversial is Rohl’s claim that the biblical Tower of Babel was sited at the Sumerian city of Eridu[231]. This claim was explored in detail in Yesterday Channel’s, Secrets of the Bible series (S1 E8).

Unexpectedly, he has written an introduction to Andrew Collins’ bestseller, Gateway to Atlantis, in which he expresses his regret for the lack of firm archaeological evidence to support the existence of Atlantis, but is clearly sympathetic to the idea and is somewhat supportive of an Atlantic location.  He repeated and expanded on his views at a subsequent lecture(b).

Rohl also proposed that the Shardana, one of the Sea Peoples, originally came from Sardis in Lydia and later established the Nuragic Culture in Sardinia [232.449]. Recently, Angelo Paratico propounded the same idea during a lecture in Hong Kong in 2004(d). Perhaps more pertinent is a Wikipedia entry which notes that “According to Timaeus, one of Plato’s dialogues, Sardinia and its people as well, the “Sardonioi” or “Sardianoi”, might have been named after “Sardò”, a legendary woman from Sardis, capital of the ancient Kingdom of Lydia in Anatolia.”(e)

Peter James is another high profile historian who has advocated[046] a similar radical revision of the chronologies of the Mediterranean and Near East.>Initially, James and Rohl had jointly researched the flaws in Velikovskian chronology for a number of years, which resulted in a paper(j) written for the SIS in 1982. Rohl has published this document on his website as he “felt it would be useful to republish the ‘first outing’ of the New Chronology theory here since the original paper is difficult to find. It also serves to put the record straight about when and how the revision of the Third Intermediate Period took shape.”<

Unfortunately the collaboration ended when until they had divergent views regarding the identification of the biblical Shishak(c), Rohl favouring Ramesses II, while James opted for Ramesses III, suggested earlier by Immanuel Velikovsky [0039]. James has also written a controversial work[0047] on Atlantis, placing it in ancient Lydia (Turkey). Complicating matters further is a related dispute as to whether the biblical Shishak is to be identified as the Egyptian Pharoah Shoshenq or they should be treated as two separate people!(g) Their original collaborative paper is available on Rohl’s website(h) which contains a number of interesting blogs but appears to have been only active in 2012, with nothing posted since!

Readers might be interested in reading the transcript of a 2009 interview that Rohl gave to Andrew Gough(i).

 

(a)  David Rohl’s Revised Egyptian Chronology: A View From Palestine – Associates for Biblical Research (biblearchaeology.org)

(b) https://www.andrewcollins.com/page/mysteries/drohl.htm

(c) https://davidrohl.blogspot.ie/

(d) https://www.gingkoedizioni.it/is-there-an-association-between-sardis-and-sardinia/

(e) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardinian_people

(f) RohlsChronologyDeconstructed (bibleorigins.net)

(g) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334975146_Shishak_and_Shoshenq_A_Disambiguation

(h) http://davidrohl.blogspot.com

(i) https://andrewgough.co.uk/interviews_rohl/

(j) David Rohl Official Blog *