As a matter of fact, now it seems that Arabs named Al-Andalus not on
Vandals, as was speculated earlier but on the legend of Atlantis. They
seem to have got pretty clear the association Gades-Atlantis.
The city is now actually called Cdiz, except for the inhabitants that
say it K'i (KAH-ee). Cdiz is also the oldest continuously inhabited
city of Western Europe and it was apparently the first colony that
Phoenicians stabilished at all. Why did they cross all the
Mediterranean to stabilish an outpost precisely there? Obviously
because there was much bussiness to do in that region.
In this sense, we should not forget that Phoenicians are probably a
Semitic by-product of the mostly Hellenic Sea Peoples. It is possible
that the knowledge of the Hesperides and its reaches, travelled with
them.
Maju, here is some evidence of a culture before the Greeks in Sicily's Valley of the Temples.
New discovery in Valley of Temples
Traces of pre-Greek settlement found at UNESCO site (ANSA) - Agrigento, January 17 - Archaeologists working in Sicily's Valley of the Temples have found traces of a settlement thought to pre-date the famous Greek temples built there in around 600 BC .
The valley near Agrigento on Sicily's southern coast is one of Europe's most important archeological sites. It marks a sacred area built when Greeks landed there to start the civilisation of Magna Grecia in southern Italy .
The discovery of a structure possibly built before the Greeks arrived came during preparatory work ahead of a project to shore up the ground near the Temple of Hera. Archaeologists uncovered a mysterious walled structure on top of which ancient Greeks had apparently built a shrine and a burial ground .
Until now it has been thought that Agrigento was settled by the Greeks soon after they began starting colonies in much of the Mediterranean in the 7th century BC .
"It has not yet been possible to establish precisely when these remains date back to," cautioned Pietro Meli, head of the agency which administrates the Valley of the Temples archaeological park .
Meli said fixing a date would be possible if and when archaeologists found pieces of clay vessels or ceramics, which would provide clear evidence .
He noted that the settlement appeared to have been built along the line of the ancient road to Gela, a town about 70 km southeast of Agrigento .
Several finds dating back to ancient Greek and early Christian times were also made recently. Experts found what appeared to be a Christian burial ground and an earlier Greek temple, digging up small statues, incense holders and lanterns .
There are eight temples, most of them well-preserved, in the Valley of the Temples. In the 5th century BC, at the height of Agrigento's power and wealth, there are said to have been 21 temples there .
"I'm sure there's still a lot waiting to be discovered," Meli said .
I know that southern and even central Italy has Aegean influences since
"always". I commented on that in the topics on Etrsucan origins, who
possibly came from the Aegean area, at least their aristocracy, in
times when it wasn't totally under Greek control.
I ahve also read somewhere that Greeks had some colonies there in the
Mycenean period but I'm unsure about the details. That's why I painted
orange the areas of southern Italy.
Italian megalithism exists too, particularly in the South, but I'm
unsure if it is related to Atlantic or it is rather a local evolution
more in the line of Maltan megalithism. In brief: I am uncertain about
which role Southern Italy and Sicily played in this story.
One thing seems clear though: that before the Etruscans, Italy was
rather secondary and that Iberia was more "developed" and civilized
then. So their role would be always secondary in our Atlantean story.
Maju qoute-One thing seems clear though: that before the Etruscans, Italy was rather secondary and that Iberia was more "developed" and civilized then. So their role would be always secondary in our Atlantean story.
Timaeus
Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia.
So its important in the story, who the Etsucans really were that subjected the Tyrrhenia in 600bc. Some say they were greeks, some say they came from Iberia . Herodotus said they were Lydians ,some say they were already there. I tend to think they came from Iberia. Gerogous Diaz has a pretty good case for Iberia.
There are other very interesting topics on Etruscans (use the search
feature). Anyhow the earliest culture that can be reasonably attribted
to Etruscans is the Culture of Vilanova (do not mix with VNSP) that
starts c. 1300 BCE. Anyhow they didn't urbanize until later.
I think that the Etruscan elite came from the Aegean region, possibly
fleeing Greek expansion or maybe just in a "normal" colonial adventure.
But they didn't appear until the end of our story, playing only an
international role later on. It is speculated that one of the Sea
Peoples could have been Etruscans, who called themselves Rassena.
Etruscans weren't Lydians as such, because Lydians spoke Luwian
(Hittite) while Etruscans spoke a different languages. Yet they could
well be original for Asia Minor, as the only known non-Italian
Etruscan-speaking site is the island of Lemnos, in front of ancient
Troy.
I also realized that everyone who is in this thing of the search of
lost Atlantis either thinks it is somewhere under the ocean (any ocean)
or thinks it's something related with Crete and the Thera explossion.
Yet I have to see one that points in the line I do: it is before your
eyes, it is a known and long-lasting ancient civilization that fits
almost 100% with Platonic and related narrations but you aren't able to
see it. <shrug>
But guess that most prefer to keep the myth as such and never find the chimera of their dreams under the daylight.
Maju, I like your theory , however there are a lot of serious investigators without a PHD or titles behind their names.
But back to the story, Critias says the priest stated the atlantains king names were recorded before theirs kings( theseus, cecrops erechteus, erichtronius,erysichthron ) however the names given were not the real names. Which makes me believe that they were dynasties, such as Aganthonios king of Tartesso name was more of a title ( many kings)? Is there any thing in the VNSP culture that gave any names or list of kings?
Now different gods had their allotments in different places which they set in order. Hephaestus and Athene, who were brother and sister, and sprang from the same father, having a common nature, and being united also in the love of philosophy and art, both obtained as their common portion this land, which was naturally adapted for wisdom and virtue; and there they implanted brave children of the soil, and put into their minds the order of government; their names are preserved, but their actions have disappeared by reason of the destruction of those who received the tradition, and the lapse of ages. For when there were any survivors, as I have already said, they were men who dwelt in the mountains; and they were ignorant of the art of writing, and had heard only the names of the chiefs of the land, but very little about their actions. The names they were willing enough to give to their children; but the virtues and the laws of their predecessors, they knew only by obscure traditions; and as they themselves and their children lacked for many generations the necessaries of life, they directed their attention to the supply of their wants, and of them they conversed, to the neglect of events that had happened in times long past; for mythology and the enquiry into antiquity are first introduced into cities when they begin to have leisure, and when they see that the necessaries of life have already been provided, but not before. And this is reason why the names of the ancients have been preserved to us and not their actions. This I infer because Solon said that the priests in their narrative of that war mentioned most of the names which are recorded prior to the time of Theseus, such as Cecrops, and Erechtheus, and Erichthonius, and Erysichthon, and the names of the women in like manner.
Within the academic sphere, Atlantis is just a construction of Platos
mind. By constructing a political fable about a brilliant civilisation,
but too much confident of itself, he pretended to caricature
Athens. He was alerting Athens citizens that such overconfidence
would only lead to decline. That is why he incorporated an old (and
better) Athens in its story, which confronts and defeats Atlantis. In
other words, a more virtuous Athens was better than an overconfident
one. He almost certainly mixed some folkloric elements to its story to
give it more colour, such as the Sea Peoples invasions or Teras
eruption. But these and other elements had no historical connection
among themselves. Platos main concern was not historical but
political, so he mixed the elements as he saw adequate in order to pass
a political message.
However, on the popular sphere, Atlantis is just another version of the
myth of the lost paradise. In all human societies life is considered a
hell, which makes persons lounge for a mythical time when everything
was perfect. This idea led humans to search for such paradise in
different ways. Some follow religion, believing that they will find it
after death. Others are more sceptical and prefer to use science to
create a paradise on Earth. And others believe that such paradise is
still on Earth, albeit hidden, and try to find it either through
archaeology or geographical exploration.
Well Voyager, I went over and over that in my mind many times ,however Solon said the story was true. Solon was a lawmaker and I don`t think he would have given false statements. Unless Critias made it all up and would`nt that be given false testimony.
I believe the story was true based on a few facts and its those few facts that I think most are looking for.Like I said ,I think it was based on Herodotus`s Tartesso,and the Etrusan,Greek war.
Maju, I like your theory , however there are
a lot of serious investigators without a PHD or titles behind
their names.
Sure. I didn't say "qualified", just "serious".
But back to the story, Critias says the priest stated
the atlantains king names were recorded before theirs kings(
theseus, cecrops erechteus, erichtronius,erysichthron ) however the
names given were not the real names. Which makes me believe that they
were dynasties, such as Aganthonios king of Tartesso name was more
of a title ( many kings)? Is there any thing in the VNSP
culture that gave any names or list of kings?
No. We have nothing written by Western cultures before Etruscan and
Iberians/Tartessians started to write under Greek and Phoenician
influence respectively, already in the 1st milennium. The very
adscription of the tombs to royal dysnasties is just speculative: they
are outstanding in every sense in their context, so they must be
"royal" or at least "principesque".
The only thing that Western cultures of the 2nd and 3rd milennium left
engraved that can be understood are "calendars" or "astronomical
predictors". It is quite clear now that they were able to predict all
lunar ecclipses, even those that they weren't able to see from their
region. This actually is not surprising, knowing the astronomical
capabilities of Stonehenge and Avebury, for instance. Though there are
not such impressive structures in Iberia, they left mnemonic predictors
in different manners, particularly the so-called "plate-idols", which
seem to be the wall-calendars of the wisemen time, and that have only
recently been interpreted (numbers 19 and 4 are key ones, though larger
figures and more coomplex predictors also exist).
The names of the kings that you list are strangely Hellenic: they are
all mythical Kings of Athens: Cecrops is the mythological first king of
Athens, Theseus was another mythical king of Athens (who defeated the
Minotaur), Erechteus and Erichtonios are also semi-mythical Kings of
Athens. I haven't found anything about Erysichthron, though the name
does make think of of Erythia, the "Atlantis" of the Heraklean labors.
Arganthonios is thought to be a generic name meaning King of Silver or something like that.
Within the academic sphere, Atlantis is just a construction of Platos
mind. By constructing a political fable about a brilliant civilisation,
but too much confident of itself, he pretended to caricature
Athens. He was alerting Athens citizens that such overconfidence
would only lead to decline. That is why he incorporated an old (and
better) Athens in its story, which confronts and defeats Atlantis. In
other words, a more virtuous Athens was better than an overconfident
one. He almost certainly mixed some folkloric elements to its story to
give it more colour, such as the Sea Peoples invasions or Teras
eruption. But these and other elements had no historical connection
among themselves. Platos main concern was not historical but
political, so he mixed the elements as he saw adequate in order to pass
a political message.
That's an iterpretation, which may be justifed, as Critias was a
political figure in real life, much in the line of Platonic
aristocratic ideology. Anyhow, how would you explain the coincidence
between the Platonic narration and the labors of Herakles, in which the
Greek hero goes to the Hesperides (the far West, presumably Iberia) to
fight for something in two narrations (that I think are parallel
versions of the same story)?
However, on the popular sphere, Atlantis is just another version of the
myth of the lost paradise. In all human societies life is considered a
hell, which makes persons lounge for a mythical time when everything
was perfect. This idea led humans to search for such paradise in
different ways. Some follow religion, believing that they will find it
after death. Others are more sceptical and prefer to use science to
create a paradise on Earth. And others believe that such paradise is
still on Earth, albeit hidden, and try to find it either through
archaeology or geographical exploration.
This has much to do with modern esotherics, specially Blavatsky, who
also seem to have some ideal of promoting the superiority of Atlantic
cultures and promoting Eurocentric racism. In Blavatski's racist
thought, Atlanteans were the supreme race, followed by "Aryans"
(meaning in her thought Nordics).
Well Voyager, I went over and over that in my mind many times
,however Solon said the story was true. Solon was a lawmaker and I
don`t think he would have given false statements. Unless Critias made
it all up and would`nt that be given false testimony.
I believe the story was true based on a few facts and its those
few facts that I think most are looking for.Like I said ,I think it
was based on Herodotus`s Tartesso,and the Etrusan,Greek war.
If you prefer to believe in that...
Maju
That's an iterpretation, which may be justifed, as Critias was a
political figure in real life, much in the line of Platonic
aristocratic ideology. Anyhow, how would you explain the coincidence
between the Platonic narration and the labors of Herakles, in which the
Greek hero goes to the Hesperides (the far West, presumably Iberia) to
fight for something in two narrations (that I think are parallel
versions of the same story)?
Nice effort of imagination that you had regarding the location of
Atlantis. The problem is that Plato mentioned that Atlantis sunk. You
cant believe in parts of the legend (that is, Atlantis existed), while
conveniently putting aside the other elements that dont fit within
your scheme.
This has much to do with modern
esotherics, specially Blavatsky, who also seem to have some ideal of
promoting the superiority of Atlantic cultures and promoting
Eurocentric racism. In Blavatski's racist thought, Atlanteans were the
supreme race, followed by "Aryans" (meaning in her thought Nordics).
You are using a Straw Man argument: a weak or otherwise flawed version
of an opponent's argument that is easily defeated. And a very miserable
one, I must say. The myth of the Lost Paradise and your reference to
Blavatsky are worlds apart. Your Atlantis theory clearly fits within
the popular view of the subject and you're not happy with that.
That's an iterpretation, which may be justifed, as Critias was a
political figure in real life, much in the line of Platonic
aristocratic ideology. Anyhow, how would you explain the coincidence
between the Platonic narration and the labors of Herakles, in which the
Greek hero goes to the Hesperides (the far West, presumably Iberia) to
fight for something in two narrations (that I think are parallel
versions of the same story)?
Nice effort of imagination that you had regarding the location of
Atlantis. The problem is that Plato mentioned that Atlantis sunk. You
cant believe in parts of the legend (that is, Atlantis existed), while
conveniently putting aside the other elements that dont fit within
your scheme.
Yes, I can. That's my prerogative as sovereing mind. Nobody achieved
much just following others' ideas to the letter, the ones who achieved
things have always been critical and creative.
I have not the faintest idea, based only on Plato, wether what he said
was all true, a pure fantasy, a mixture of both things or even a more
complex admixture of several stories fused in one.
As I've said several times I don't base my reconstruction exclussively
in Plato's Atlantis but also in the Heraklean legends and, particularly
in archaeological facts.
Still, too many of the elements of the Platonic story are present in VNSP.
Plato never travelled himself to the Hesperides, nor did Critias, nor
did Solon. They all relied in other sources, the Egyptians, who
themselves had not been there at all and relied largely in other
unknown sources, most likely Cretan and Mycenean Greek ones. In the
process of transmission (of almost 1,000 years) much may have been lost
and/or modified and I can't say without other evidence which part is
true, which fals and which just an approximation to the real facts.
In any case, I said before and I repeat that I suspect that an
earthquake and tsunami of at least the dimensions of the Great Lisbon
Earthquake of the 18th century, which conmotioned Europe, may well have
happened, causing the effective destruction of that civilization;
though we will have to wait till the archaeological and possible
archaeo-geological data arises in the current and/or future excavation
campaigns.
This has much to do with modern
esotherics, specially Blavatsky, who also seem to have some ideal of
promoting the superiority of Atlantic cultures and promoting
Eurocentric racism. In Blavatski's racist thought, Atlanteans were the
supreme race, followed by "Aryans" (meaning in her thought Nordics).
You are using a Straw Man argument: a weak or otherwise flawed version
of an opponent's argument that is easily defeated. And a very miserable
one, I must say. The myth of the Lost Paradise and your reference to
Blavatsky are worlds apart. Your Atlantis theory clearly fits within
the popular view of the subject and you're not happy with that.
I wonder where you learnt to behave. You are, I must say, a quite rude and inconsiderate person.
Anyhow, if my theory fits with the "popular view", I really don't care.
I think it is original and solid enough to be considered a view on its
own right. I don't pretend to idealize or denigrate Atlanteans but just
to suggest that they existed that they were a real people of flesh an
bone and that their actual reality is not as brilliant as the legend
but specially the "popular version" attributes to them, though they had
some knowledge and inventive of their own. They were just a Chalcolitic
civilization in the far end of the known world but that happened to
control some very rich resources and therefore they were attcked in a
colonialist manner.
Also I don't think, like the "popular version" sustains that Atlantis truly sunk and it is now under water.
The only thing that truly could fit in the "popular version" but rather
is more simmilar to Blavatsky's approach (tough without the racist and
esotheric pretenses), is that VNSP-Atlanteans belonged to the genetic
and cultural substrate of Western Europe and that they may well be
looked upon as some of our more outstanding ancestors in a wide sense,
along earlier with Magdalenian cave artists and the contemporary
builders of British and Britton megaliths, to which they are related.
In a sense, it may be said that since the fall of VNSP-Atlantis until the Modern Age, Western Europe was sunk in a colonial and barbarian Dark Age that lasted 2,800 years - nothing less.
Whats puzzling in the story Critias describes the anicent city of Athens to be very simple temples ( there was no adorning of them with gold and silver, for they made no use of these for any purpose) however as to the temple of Atlantis was described as adorned with sliver, gold and ivory and orichalcum, with a staute of Poseiden that reach to the roof.
In what era of history would you have place this temple?
Critias
Here was Poseidon's own temple which was a stadium in length, and half a stadium in width, and of a proportionate height, having a strange barbaric appearance. All the outside of the temple, with the exception of the pinnacles, they covered with silver, and the pinnacles with gold. In the interior of the temple the roof was of ivory, curiously wrought everywhere with gold and silver and orichalcum; and all the other parts, the walls and pillars and floor, they coated with orichalcum. In the temple they placed statues of gold: there was the god himself standing in a chariot-the charioteer of six winged horses-and of such a size that he touched the roof of the building with his head; around him there were a hundred Nereids riding on dolphins, for such was thought to be the number of them by the men of those days. There were also in the interior of the temple other images which had been dedicated by private persons. And around the temple on the outside were placed statues of gold of all the descendants of the ten kings and of their wives, and there were many other great offerings of kings and of private persons, coming both from the city itself and from the foreign cities over which they held sway. There was an altar too, which in size and workmanship corresponded to this magnificence, and the palaces, in like manner, answered to the greatness of the kingdom and the glory of the temple.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum