Latest News
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
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 »
Vidal-Naquet, Pierre
Pierre Vidal-Naquet (1930-2006) was a noted French historian, political 
activist and was also a fervent sceptic regarding the reality of Atlantis. He has frequently written and lectured on the subject with particular reference to the nationalistic zeal that seemed to underlie the theories of so many writers. His recent book [580] presents the radical view that Plato’s Atlantis was actually based on ancient Athens. This work was originally published in French but is now available in an English translation, The Atlantis Story [581].
Thorwald C. Franke has drawn attention to a recent (Oct. 2022) BBC interview with Classics Professor Edith Hall, whose sceptical view of the Atlantis story appears to be strongly influenced by the arguments of Vidal-Naquet. Franke has written a critique of the interview in his Newsletter No. 201(a).
>I found it interesting that Heinz-Guenther Nesselrath, another sceptic, has also written a review of Vidal-Naquet’s book and gave it very weak support, concluding with the following comment(b);
“One puts the book down with mixed feelings: There is no doubt that VN can write very well and that he really knows the things he is talking about, having occupied himself with them for half a century; on the other hand, one can only wonder why he sometimes prefers vague (though often witty) allusions to a clear exposition of things one would like to be informed of, and why he not rarely connects topics with each other that clearly do not belong together (e.g. Frau’s Atlantis theory and the Nazis, or Donnelly’s influential book and the theosophic occultists). All in all, the book could have been better; it looks like something of a missed opportunity.”<