Greetings Joe, (and everyone, not intentionally snubbing you good folks, just addressing this reply mainly to our amigo Cactusjumper Joe)
Cactusjumper wrote:
As an aside, Plutarch also firmly believed in the existence of the magical island of Ogygia and the Isles of the Blest.
I would add as an aside that Ogygia was not necessarily "magical" in any way but very likely another name for a land that lay west of Europe, as can be shown in several ancient texts including geographical works. (Some have identified Iceland as Ogygia, and others Greenland, for instance.) The name "
Isles of the Blest" also were given "magical" attributes by poets, but as a geographic place name for real islands is no great stretch of the imagination any more than the fact that we have a mountain range named the "Heaven" mountains, which are certainly high mountains but no one actually thinks it is the location of a real Heaven. The mountains are very much real however fanciful the name.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
I believe the name "Atlantic" is actually based on the translated Greek name for the "Sea of Atlas", and not directly tied to the name, Atlantis. Herodotus did not mention Atlantis by name, but did mention "Mount Atlas". As far as I know, he does not add to the myth of Atlantis in any way. I believe that saying he mentioned Atlantis is not supported by any translation of his work, other than translations based on wishful thinking
I would direct you to the Greek text of a portion of Herodotus' Clio (History, Bk I, 202) where the name Atlantis is spelled out exactly.
It is usually translated into English differently, saying "Atlantic" where the original actually says Atlantis. As you are fond of pointing out,
history is changed one word at a time. No "wishful thinking" is needed, but we have a prime example of why it is sound policy to always obtain the original version in the original language when possible in researching anything historical, and thus be able to check what the English translators have done.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
The Egyptians, who were prolific writers of their history, made no mention of Atlantis or any other destruction of an island....by any name. Such a destructive force should have been mentioned in the historical accounts of Sais, but is non-existent.
Well according to Plutarch and Plato, the Egyptians did have such records in the past, and (allegedly) the philosopher Crantor found the very pillars upon which the story was recorded. You seem to be ignoring all other references to Atlas and the Titans, which are found among many other ancient sources with some pre-dating Plato considerably. One could make the case that those Titans are one and the same with the Tityans mentioned in Phoenician histories, or that the Great Flood of Noah is the same event described by Plato - pointing to such similarities as the ten kings vs ten patriarchs, a record being inscribed on two columns, etc. However among the body of texts existing TODAY, we have no Egyptian records and specifically not golden columns.
A side note (observation) but if the columns were made of actual gold or bronze, it is quite understandable why they should have vanished into legend as they would make tempting targets to be seized and melted down for the boullion content. Egypt has after all been repeatedly conquered by foreign powers, so perhaps this would not surprise anyone?
Cactusjumper also wrote:
Athens, which fought against the kings of Atlantis (in the story), creates a problem for authenticity. The first traces of Greek civilization, only go back to around 3,000 B.C. Plato's timeline will not work.
I would point out that Plato did explain that Solon had changed the names from the original story, which would likely mean that his use of the name "Athens" was in order to make it readily identify with his Greek readers, the actual name of any culture then (9,500 BC) was almost certainly not Athens, in fact the people were very likely NOT Greek. According to Plato, the remains of such an ancient culture in Athens (or the vicinity) had long been erased by time and the elements. Remember he did not attribute any marble cities or vast temples to his ancient Athenians, from his description their most complex architecture might well have been quite simple wooden structures.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
My memory is not so good anymore, so in order to discuss Atlantis with a modicum of intelligence, I have to open a few books. It's a wonderful debate, and well worth the effort......at least for me.
If you would like to continue, and at some point would like to switch sides, I would enjoy taking your side of the debate. I have purposely shortened this post.
Well Joe you have certainly given every appearance of discussing the subject with more than a "modicum" of intellect, and I do envy your personal library. (I do wish I could get at my own books too, but with more hard work and a little luck that day is at least on the horizon! I just HOPE to find everything intact, with no mouse-nest or water damage in there.) I too very much enjoy the discussion (even far-fetched ideas) as a pleasant diversion and certainly more entertaining than anything available on broadcast television. *Having a very rainy day here in SD, which is a "day off" completely for me - which explains how I am able to be here blabbing during the middle of the day.*
I would happily continue the debate, and will take the opposing side (it is far easier to argue against it, than defending Atlantis IMHO) to test your mettle on the subject. (Real de Tayopa and anyone else interested is also welcome to assist in defending Plato's island empire story.)
your friend,
Roy ~ Oroblanco
PS EDIT added later, just for clarification, when Herodotus used the name Atlantis specifically, it is in the identification of the Atlantic ocean -
In Greek the meaning of the name Atlantis is: Island of Atlas. Hence in his passage mentioning Atlantis,
the correct English translation (of his words "Thalassa 'n Atlantis") would be "the sea of the Island of Atlas" - NOT "Atlantic Ocean" which is how most English translations have it, or at least every one I have found thus far. Changing history one word at a time is highly productive for those who practice it, in this particular instance they only needed to swap out
ONE LETTER!
