Ancient and ArchaeologyΜύ permalink
Atlantis: Did it really exsist?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Μύ
Posted by hathor_101 (U2740307) on Sunday, 18th December 2005
I would just like to know peoples opinion on this, i myself remain undecided
-
Message 2
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Sunday, 18th December 2005
If you set the question like this, then without fear of being named as 'UFOlogist' or 'apocryptologist' or anything like that I would tell you that my personal opinion is that it most probably existed and I will explain you why below.
The question if Atlantis existed goes handin hand with the question whether there existed advanced civilisations in eras before the Soumerians, i.e. well before the 5000 B.C., and usually we concentrate on the 9.000 and before when the cataclysm has happened for Artorius I tell him that his is the official date for the sendiment that concists mainly of mud, thus a large deluge had happaned at that era). Then the second question is what do we mean by advanced airplanes and UFOs or just seafaring and stone building? Because if we go for the second I see no reason why civilisations would not have existed on a local scale (thus you need lack to find them) in the 20,000 - 10,000 period). Not to mention the later findings in northern India of a city that is dated around the 8,000 BC period, a city that was around 100,000 and more citizens thus implying they had, sanitation systems, road networks, commercial links with lands far away etc (basic things to reach that size!).
Do we have to believe this myth. Well it sets the island of Atlantis in the Atlantic ocean most explicitly since it mentions about the Herculeian columns (by that, Greeks were meanining nothing else apart from the Gibraltar), about Atlantis in the mid-way, about islands west of it (Carribean) and about another contintinent behind them (America). Cannot think of any other place after that description. Of course the Atlantic had no large island to the size of Libya (Africa or most probably north Africa) and Asia (perhaps Minor Asia) together but then who knows? Did we know till 2000 AD that actually indeed there was an island in the mouth of the Gibraltar some 7000-8000 years ago but then that was very small. Could it be the remains of a previous larger island? Well, practically it could be but that is up to geologists to say... Gibraltar is studied at least since the 1950s by international teams of geologists and it took them half a century to prove the previous existence of that island so nothing would surprise me.
Could it be that the Canarian islands are the remains of Atlantis mountains as the 3000 islands of the Aegean are the hills and mountains of a previously joined Greece+Minor Asia land (Black Sea had been for long a closed one like the Kaspian Sea)? Why not? Could also be those Guanches, the older habitants of the islands, the last remains of the Atlantean empire having went back to primitive state because of the total destruction? Why not,theoretically anything is possible.
The Athens-Atlantis is myth is compatible with so many other mythologies about gods and titans and giants fighting and so on, about formidable weapons and thunders and so many other flying objects and robots and so on... which are otherwise not easily explainable. It could also explain nicely why most ancient civilisations seemed to have certain knowledge seemingly advanced but then themselves being unable to explain from where they got it saying they got from the Gods.
Of course we are not supposed to start attributing everything that happened in later civilisations in the Atlantis myth, the pyramids and Zigkurats and Egyptians and Chinese and Indians and Sumerians etc. However, any self-respecting historian nowadays is at least vaguely aware that there must have existed progressed civilisations before 5000 BC and it is just us that do nto have enough details and proofs to form full theories and that is why we keep on the current viewing of history according to which kingdoms and states started vaguely around 5000 B.C.: No, kingdoms and states and democracies and oligarchies must have existed for much more than that. After who said that metal forming started in 6000 BC in the middle east? Cos the earliest specimen we found dates that time? Do we exlude finding specimens more old than that? Do not forget that this is difficult since metal was a precious thing and it was being used and reused (stones and marble has not such capabilities!) thus any finding would be due to accidental loss out in the wilderness... Lands like Egypt Greece or Mesopotamia were constantly habitated thus do not expect to find many proofs of metal forming. Then progressed civilisations could theoretically exist even without metal forming, i.e. using other materials such as wood, granite, obsidian etc.
Going to the myth itself says that Atlantians used gold, silver and zinc copper, i.e. softer metals, the ones that were supposedly used in the first wave of metal forming.
On the one hand we are supposed to believe that extremelky primitive tribes crossed the oceans some 40,000 years ago on boats, and then it is difficult for some to imagine that this mobility of that scale and for so long (some 20,000 - 30,000) would not have given birth to any civilisation at all. That is my main basis. I find it largely impossible that humans were all on the same levels of hunter-agriculturer-husbander till more or less 6,000 BC when all evidence (myths, matest findings) push dates far back. -
Message 3
Posted by Elistan (U1872011) on Monday, 19th December 2005
Nik,
What's wrong? that was a positively short answer for you. Are you okay? you're not ill or anything?
E -
Message 4
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Monday, 19th December 2005
Hi E and Ellistan,
Very funny Ellistan, made me smile this morning.
I think the date of 5000BC for the deluge holds water (no pun intended). A lot of people still deny any flood took place but there is much evidence for it.
They key to finding Atlantis lies in its teller, Solon/Plato. We all know that it's a tale made by Solon/Plato to make the Athenians behave a bit better and change their wicked ways by showing them the ideal society in his view.
9000 years we know is much too distant in the past for Atlantis or Athens to have existed. So this period must have been the moon years that Egytians went by. Some have suggested Season periods? Dividing 9000 then by 30 we get 300 years. Was the whole mention of the 9000 years a red herring thrown in by Solon/Plato?
When I was reading about Anatolia and Asia Minor I noticed that Phocea was mentioned. This has 2 harbours, just like Atlantis. Also Odyseus visited Phaecea on his travels and ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔr described it almost exactly as Solon/Pato did of Atlantis. Which is another piece of evidence that might link ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔr with Solon.
Also when reading about the Isands off the Ionan coats of Asia minor it was related that once some had been joined to the mainland but some dissapeard or land had been swallowed up in a flood causing land that was previously on mainland to become an Island and an Island to dissapear. I did't follow this up at the time.
In Solons time I wouldnt have thought that the pillars of Hercules would be in the Atlantic. Most Likley they were related to the clashing rocks of the Jason myth and so were located at one end of the waters seperating Thracia from Asia Minor. This is where it is known that that Herakleidae came from so would seem apt to be where the pillars were.
Is it any coincidence that the story of Atlantis and the Story of Troy are both couched by Solon/ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔr to hide the true identities of those involved.
As to Athens being the last bastion of defence agaist these marauding Atlanteans; the only time we definately know they did this was against the Persians. Could they also have done this against the Hitties perhaps or Phrygians,Scythians or Lydians ie by sending men to Troy? Is all this linked?
The mention of Herculean columns and other Greek type parts of Atlantis just goes to prove when it was set and most likely where. In the med somewhere.
Persuasive arguments have been made for a Northern Atlantis - "Atlantis Of The North" (Jurgen Spanuth)and although it makes good sense I cant help but feeling that Solon wouldn't have known enough about the north to have set it there. At Solons time the Greeks of Asia Minor were still the real power and so it's around this area we need to look. -
Message 5
Posted by Elistan (U1872011) on Monday, 19th December 2005
Artorious,
A clarification, if you please. Solon/Plato? Solon/ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔr? Solon/Soloman? Even you must find that a bit incongruous
Elistan -
Message 6
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Monday, 19th December 2005
Hi Ellistan,
I only meant Solon(original myth) Plato (later relater of myth). I still think there may be a link between ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔr/Solon/Solomon.
Plato it was who wrote about Atlantis. I presume he got the barebones of the myth from Solon's story then embellished it for his more modern audience. He wrote in the 440's so we should look at the tale of Atlantis from both Solons time and Plato's. If the time of Atlantis is 300 years before Plato then it falls to around 740s BC if 300 years from Solons time it falls in the 940's.
One thing I researched a bit earlier was trying to see if the whole thing was a reference to the Persian invasion or perhaps earlier invasion. The Persian for The God King is Atta Kian and the Dias bit may be a reference to Darius. So maybe it could have been the God King Darius Attakiandias. The problem is the Persian invasion was not much before when Plato wrote so why disguise it? It must relate to some earlier invasion or domination of people, possibly the Lydians under Gyges as the Greeks did manage to keep him at bay. The Lydians spoke a form of Hurrian so perhaps it was related in some way to this language. I havn't had time yet to research which Island or lands sank forming some of the Ionian Islands or when they sank but for it to be remembered it couldnt be too far distant past. -
Message 7
Posted by geniusbearhug (U2425598) on Monday, 19th December 2005
what is wrong with you people,atlantis is really called altapelico and it is in boliva,the nine cities have been found mostly underwater,the futher proof is that they are all the same lenghts apart as stated by plato,futher proof is the gold and copper found there,also the tobacco and the coco leaf that only grew in the region all reports of life in atlantis state this,they are still excavateing the sites whay dont you visit the website in boliva just type in altapelico aka atlantis.
-
Message 8
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Monday, 19th December 2005
lol Genius, that word must be the only one in the world that is NOT listed in Google!! I think the Australians will be claiming they are Atlantis next.
It is just a myth related by Solon/Plato to relate an ideal society. It has nothing to do with reality. The only reality in it may be places and myths that existed in Solon's time that he based his cities and ideas on to make it seem more real. The idea will be to find those cities. Phocea is one(Phacea)(Atlantia). Islands that sank around his era would be another. -
Message 9
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Monday, 19th December 2005
The story of Atlantis started with Plato. Everything else is just theory and extrapolation from his story which he claimed was handed down through his family from Solon, who got it from Egyptian priests. Despite Nikolaos's claims, the idea of advanced civilisations before 5,000 BC does not have a lot of support among historians. As recorded by Plato, the stated facts do not make sense. The rational explanation has to be that some of the stated facts are incorrect or have been misinterpreted. Misinterpretation is all the more plausible when you consider that Plato recorded a story relayed through several generations, from a translation from the Egyptian, of a story the Egyptians claimed related to Greece.
Although I am far from being an "Atlantis nut", I have read a few theories about it over the years, more because I am interested in the real stories underlying mythology than any search for a lost kingdom. Most theories are just plain daft. The best one, and one that no-one I know of has been able to come up with a definite rebuttal of, is Eberhard Zangger's theory that the story of Atlantis is, as has been mentioned in an earlier message, based on a description of Troy. I am not going to go into the whole theory or this message would be almost as long as Nikolaos's message, suffice to say that Zangger addresses every issue in the original text by Plato and provides an explanation for each. Most theories latch on to one aspect of the story and ignore those elements which do not support the theory. Zangger, to his credit, does not do this.
Incidentally, Zangger does not claim that Atlantis was Troy, he just claims that his theory says it could be, that it fits the stated story provided his explanations for certain aspects of the original story are accepted. It is certainly a more plausible theory than those linking Atlantis to Athens, the Canaries, Bermuda , South America, the South China sea or Thera.
Certainly, Zangger subscribes ot the lunar year calculation and the Dardanelles as the Pillars of Hercules, both of which make sense in the contect of the original story, but one of the strongest arguments, for me, is that Atlantis is alleged to have had two springs, one of cold water, the other of hot. The only other place recorded as having springs like this is Troy. -
Message 10
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Monday, 19th December 2005
Sorry I got Platos time of writing wrong. It was in the 390s or 80's. 300 years before this would have been the 680's 690'sBC. The exact same time as the Trojan war!
Tony G's message was very interesting. I will have to look up his reference. -
Message 11
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Monday, 19th December 2005
First confirmation of Tony's message is that Hot Springs abound in Antatolia, especially central and western parts. Found references to at least 36 springs.
-
Message 12
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Monday, 19th December 2005
Ehehe Elistan, I have again talked on the subject with extremely long messages and I tried to refrain from doing so this time!
TonyG I say again that an increasing number of historians believe in the existence of "progressed" civilisations before 5000 B.C. and there everday findings who agree with that (though researches have not concluded yet). In the scientific community those who claim the opposite are considered as simply old fashioned.
It is actually very suprising to hear so much sceptisism on that by people who come from an 'extra-fast' civilisation that sent a man on the moon in some 200 years of development while only 500 years before it did not even exist, and some 1500 years ago it was not much more advanced (steel knowledge by itslef is no excuse for civilisation) than a 4000 B.C. Sumerian civilisation.
Employing the theory of probabilities it is only natural to guess that if man as a Homo Sapiens existed from 100,000 B.C. and if around 35.000 B.C. he had reach Australia by boat jumping from island to island, survived the ice age, and jumped to America and blah blah... why then it is not possible to there existed a rather advanced civilisation between 20,000 B.C. - 10.000 B.C.
What do I mean by advanced? Anything that goes beyond the "pill of hunter-gatherer communities". They say cultivation started in Middle East (or wherever else, India or Egypt) around 12,000 B.C. Why? Cos they have found some evidence. Alright. That means that people cultivated around that area in that place. So what? What does that say to us other than the aforementioned? NOTHING! Does it excludes cultivation in 15,000 in the same place or in another one? Or the finding of a primitive culture dated around 20,000 B.C. does it excludes the finding of a more advanced one that lived nearby? And were do we find human remains? In caves. Right. In a well protected place. But then more advanced civilisations would not live in such places isn't it? And if they built anything say with softer stones do we expect to find something? I doubt. Especially if this place is now sunk. And why would it be sunk? Well, you do not expect the 'advanced civilisation' to be up in the high mountains are you? Most probably it would be in the coast in order to have access in the sea that is one of the basic requirements (not an absolute one though since for example Australian Aboriginals had the knowledge but largely lost it later) for the development of civilisations, more than rivers. Thus if we search in the modern landmass we are searching for needles lost in hay... If I am right and most proofs are beneath the sea floor then how on earth are we going to find them? Start digging the oceans? Ha! Who is going to play 1/1,000,000 and put his nice money on a research like that?
Thus I am not saying that "look guys! it is this and it is that!". All I am saying is that it is more possible that "advanced" civilisations existed before 5,000 BC and why not before 10,000 BC. All mythologies suggest so. All mythologies tell us about previous very old civilisations that were destroyed. Who are we to call them all these liars?
Artorius: if Odysseus was indeed a sailor being lost in the ... Aegean and the Mediterranean that would be not an issue for an epic but an issue of a comedy!!!!!! Myceneans and Minoans and Greeks and Phoenicians and others knew that sea by heart.
Then if the Pheacs (kingdom of King Alkinoos) were indeed in Corfu then interesting e? Corfu had machine-driven ships with automatic pilots e? And what palaces e? Interesting but we have not found such things. Of course we can always claim that ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔr had a lot of imagination perhaps too much for referrign to Hephestus having robots made of metal, rolling on wheels and having moving hands, not talking but being able to listen to orders and do the tasks. I rather liked also the automatic serving little round tables (rolling also on wheels) in Gods' feasts (ohhh Mr Ambassador that is a Ferrero Roche, you spoil us!). -
Message 13
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Monday, 19th December 2005
Of course with the above I am not suggesting anything at all. All I am saying is that these people only had a wide wide wide imagination that could go that far. What do you get out of that?
PS: A flying object would be ok to imagine but an automatic serving table? -
Message 14
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Monday, 19th December 2005
And if it was only the Greeks we could all say Obelix style 'ils sont fous les Grecques' (these Greeks are mad), perhaps too much narcotics but then it can't be that all the planet was on drugs at the same time and that all these writers were crazy. Perhaps there is another explanation. Forget about robotics and UFOs (while anything is possible, why not?), but why couldn't a more advanced civilisatin spring around 15,000 b.c. Why could not they navigate around the world, built cities here and there and avoid too much contact with the primitive tribes that continued to account for most of the global population (few of them might have made the crossing by passing some basic knowledge to the primitive ones who watched them as Gods: thus you had myths like the one of Prometheus etc.). Is that all irrational? I say no and with my view there are 1000s of other scientists around the world. Unfortunately we cannot avoid with us the hippy-happy UFOlogists but its ok no big deal.
-
Message 15
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Monday, 19th December 2005
Hi E_Nik
I always have an open mind about past civilisations perhaps having existed thousands of years ago beyond our current understandng. I have read of too many anomolies found to dismiss the possibilty. At the moment though we just dont have enough evidence beyond 6000BC for advanced civilisation. I think that if there were loads of very ancient cities out there we would have found at least one by now, after all, we can dig up Dinosaurs from Millions of years ago but cant find anything from 20,000??
One 'civilisation' that does seemed to have dissapeared from history though is that of the Megalith builders. This was obviously a widespread culture that existed in Northern Europe as much as 5000 years ago. Who were these people, what happened to them?
Concerning Oddyseus getting lost. This is not what I implied. He obviously knew where he wanted to get to, he just couldn't do so easily because of the prevailing conditions.
I still havn't reserached the lost Islands of Asia Minor yet but will try at some point. -
Message 16
Posted by mvarennes (U2373372) on Tuesday, 20th December 2005
"And if it was only the Greeks we could all say Obelix style 'ils sont fous les Grecques' (these Greeks are mad)"
Nikos,
As a matter of fact, the right spelling would be : "Ils sont fous les GRECS "...
Sorry for the interruption...Please carry on. -
Message 17
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Tuesday, 20th December 2005
Artorius: if Odysseus was indeed a sailor being lost in the ... Aegean and the Mediterranean that would be not an issue for an epic but an issue of a comedy!!!!!! Myceneans and Minoans and Greeks and Phoenicians and others knew that sea by heart.
Μύ
Nic,
I think sometimes you forget where you are writing from. In our age we can sail the Pacific, the Atlantic is just 9 hours of flight across. Distance, in order to mean something has to be in the hundreds of thousands rather than the thousands. Sometimes I think you forget just how big the Med is, and also just how big it is when you are in a boat that takes 30 people, has primitive rigging and sails, no rudder (or at least not as we would use it) and for most voyages the primary locomotion being the oars (powered by the crew). These people (Greeks, Phoenicians, Punicβs. Minoans etc) did indeed know their area of sea, but know the whole Med? No Nic, without charts it would be easy for someone in a small boat blown off course far beyond the Greek Sphere to be lost. As for the time taken, well as someone else has pointed out when they say year do they mean 365 Solar days? Using Artoriousβ reckoning the 17 years would be only what 1 year seven months? That is not an unbelievable time frame. Also the whole tale is also used to point out that those who go up against the Gods had better be prepared for the consequences, as Odysseus finds out. -
Message 18
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Tuesday, 20th December 2005
Tony G's message was very interesting. I will have to look up his reference.Μύ
"The Flood from Heaven" by Eberhard Zangger. -
Message 19
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Tuesday, 20th December 2005
I think that if there were loads of very ancient cities out there we would have found at least one by now, after all, we can dig up Dinosaurs from Millions of years ago but cant find anything from 20,000??
Μύ
Exactly. This is where all these theories fall down. The response is usally, "Just because we can't find it doesn't mean it's not there". Not terribly scientific. Granted, new scientific discoveries are often made, but until someone finds proper evidence of one of these advanced civilisations, I don't understand how anyone can assert their existence. -
Message 20
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Tuesday, 20th December 2005
Here is an interesting snippet that locates a sunken land in Lydia that was on a lake. The land of Tantalus:
Lydia was across the Agean Sea from Greece. A legendary king of Lydia was named Tantalis: his name sounds similar to Atlantis, and he shared many mythic attributes among Lydians that the god Atlas had among Greeks. Like Atlas, Tantalis was a leader of the Titans, the group of gods who were overthrown by Zeus. In Greek mythology, Zeus punished Atlas by banishing him to the west and made to hold up the sky. A similar fate was shared by Tantalis in myths of Anatolia (an old name for the region in Asia Minor that includes Turkey).
According to that myth, Tantalis ruled over a fabulously wealthy city he founded on Mt. Sipylus in Lydia. His city was shattered by earthquake and flood and was reputed to have sunk when he lost the favor of the Olympian gods.
During the 1990s ruins were found on the northern slope of Mt. Sipylus. The area had undergone several phases of change through the centuries. Among the ruins was a statue of the goddess Cybele that was dated around 1400 B.C.E., a time when the Hittite rule over the area was overthrown by locals affiliated with the Mycenae civilization of Greece. The area of Tantalis had been conquered, and perhaps razed. Or, it subsequently was buried during an earthquake, and eventually submerged by a lake. The area is in a major fault zone, and heavy earthquake damage to the cities of Lydia was documented in 17 C.E. Among the hardest hit of twelve ancient Lydian cities was Magnesia at Sipylus, in the region where Tantalis was located.
Lake Saloe in Turkey has long been identified with the lost city of Tantalis. The lake was pumped out in modern times to provide more land for farming. It is now a fertile plain with nearby rivers. An old caravan route was found, certainly not a remnant of a mighty empire, but the tantalizing prospect that Tantalis was Atlantis remains."
I am starting to research sunken lands around Asia Minor. Rhodes according to its myths was once sunken. Patmos also is related to have sunken then risen again. Looking for more and trying to find when these occurences may have been. -
Message 21
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Tuesday, 20th December 2005
Hi all
Looks like Peter James(of Centuries of Darkness fame) also makes the link with Tantalus in his own book.
-
Message 22
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Wednesday, 21st December 2005
Hi
In my view though the idea of an Island on a lake being the role model for Atlantis is not proven enough, even without reading the book. I still think there may have been another Island off the Anatolian coast that sank. -
Message 23
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Wednesday, 21st December 2005
Hi all
Looks like Peter James(of Centuries of Darkness fame) also makes the link with Tantalus in his own book.
Μύ
I'll have to look out for that. At least Peter James usually backs up his theories with some research and good arguments. I am still quite attracted to the the Troy theory, though. One of the big elements in Plato's original is the fact that the "Atlanteans" fought a major war against the Greeks and the Greeks won. -
Message 24
Posted by hathor_101 (U2740307) on Wednesday, 21st December 2005
the most possible location for atlantis (in my opinion) is somewhere with high seismic activity. such as the mediteranean or pacific rim. somewhere with the capability to sink an island, no matter how big
-
Message 25
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Wednesday, 21st December 2005
Hi Hathor
I agree. There is such a fault running right through Turkey, indeed right near Troy. It appears to run down the northeast coast of Asia minor all the way along. If we are to find a sunken island it must be somehwere towards the end of this fault which carries on into the sea. If there was an Island I would expect it to be somewhere towards the entrace to the bosphorus ie in the Marmara sea. This is a heavy earthquake region.
I have been trying to research the depth of the sea at the entrance to the Bosphoros and indeed it is quite shallow, only 50M in places.
Alternatively it may be further south towards the entrance to the Marmara sea from the Med. Not certain which one yet, but the entrance to Bosphorus is favourite. -
Message 26
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Wednesday, 21st December 2005
Hi all
It is more than likely that the Black Sea was ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔrs Atlantic Sea. In ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔrs time the origins of Atlas was in this region. Black Sea is a fairly modern name for it. In antiquity it was just called `the Sea'. Then later it became known as Pontos Euxeinos and derivations of this before finally becomming Black Sea in 13th C. -
Message 27
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Friday, 23rd December 2005
In my opinion Atlantis may exist, our planet is constantly changing, half of our modern day counrties will be sunk one day, due to global warming, could that not have happened then. Who can say that the sinking of Atlantis came suddenly, such as an earthquake, it could have slowly sank. But why has no-one found it? i know there is immense pressure under the sea, and some places can't be reached, but what if the Atlanteans built buildings to a size of the Egyptians Pyramid's and the Romans colleseum? Do they just disappear??? It could be argued however that the Titanic has been under water for around a hundred years, and has already started to decompose, so to what extent of damage would thousands of years do? But again, in the seas by Alexandria, granite statues of Ptolemies have been found, they have decomposed a little but not much!!!??? Does the Med sea have some difference to the Atlantic ocean?
xxx -
Message 28
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Saturday, 24th December 2005
Plato's account is a bit contradictory. He specifically states that Atlanris sank because of an earthquake, but he also states that the flood came down from heaven and inundated the Greek lands. There is, apparently, evidence for flooding in a lot of areas of Greece during the Bronze Age.
The Zangger theory I referred to earlier does raise the interesting hypothesis that "Atlantis" did not actually sink and that this is another misinterpretation. He claims that Troy dominated the Dardanelles and that ships trying to get to the Black Sea would have used Trojan pilots (perhaps been forced to use them or face being sunk by the Trojan navy?) to guide them through the fierce currents. Once Troy was destroyed - remember, there is evidence of earthquake destruction at Hisarlik / Troy and the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔric legend of the Trojan War agrees with the Atlantis legend that the Greeks fought against and defeated Atlantis - then ships find it difficult to sail beyond the Dardanelles because there were no Trojans to guide them. Plato's account says that the seas beyond where Atlantis was were unreachable.
While I think this is one of the weakest parts of Zangger's theory, you have to bear in mind that simply looking for a sunken island does not answer the problem. If you find an island you also have to find a civilisation that fought aganst the Greeks and lost, you have to find a large rectangular plain watered on both sides by rivers and canals (like Troy but most unlike Santorini, for example), you have to find a place that had a hot and cold spring (like Troy according to ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔr), and the civilisatoin hs to be a powerful one. Simply finding a sunken island is not enough. This is where most Atlantis theories fail. I have found a sunken island - it must be Atlantis. Never mind that it does not fit the rest of the legend.
You also need to bear in mind that, to the Egyptians, from whom the account originally comes, everywhere across the sea was "an island". To them, Greece was an island.
There is no dout that the time frame in the legend is wrong, but, as has been mentioned in an earlier post, 9,000 lunar years makes much more sense (and incidentally brings it into a possible time frame for the Trojan War) and the Pillars of Hercules are more likely to have meant the Dardanelles or the Bosporus. It has always struck me as strange that nobody seriously looks for the clashing rocks of the Jason legend, recognising this cannot be an acurate description, but accepts without question that the pillars of Hercules in the Atlantis legend must be the Strait of Gibraltar. -
Message 29
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Saturday, 24th December 2005
Hi all
I am reading Peter James' The Sunken Island now, got it from Amazon for Β£2.80!. He does mention Zangger alot in this book. It does make quite interesting reading but it has been fluffed out. The first half is all about the earlier theories of Atlantis, and their tellers. Lots of Plato and Pythagoras and of course Aristotle who sent the world into retrograde thinking. Peter even decided to abandon his own chronology and follow old chronology in this book, which is dissapointing as he could have found the key had he not done this as the clues are all there in this book. -
Message 30
Posted by desertfox (U2819982) on Saturday, 24th December 2005
No, No, No, Atlantis is part of what was the Minoan Empire, it was destroyed by a Volcano
-
Message 31
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Sunday, 25th December 2005
Can u prove that? Can anyone prove anything, especially when there is no actual evidence of Atlantis existing at all!!!!
-
Message 32
Posted by Elistan (U1872011) on Monday, 26th December 2005
Can u prove that? Can anyone prove anything, especially when there is no actual evidence of Atlantis existing at all!!!!Μύ
Can't remember the proof off hand, but my lecturer in Classics identified Atlantis with the explosion of Thera between 1600 and 1400BCE, which ended Minoan civilisation.
Also the dating of that explosion could have repurcussions for your proposed revised timeline, artorious.
Elistan -
Message 33
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Monday, 26th December 2005
Hi Elistan and others,
There is no proof that Thera related to Atlantis at all. That theory, as has been stated, is one from the past classists of another age. There is still debate in fact as to when Thera went up. I for one would place it around 1600/1500BC. Some want to place it much later.
I have just finished Peter James' book that tries to indicate that Solon based his tale on the sunken land of Tantalus. It is an unconvincing read, mainly because James abandons his own chronology and so misses all the clues that point to in what time it was really based and there is much too much conjecture based on myth. The clues are many in this book though and taken with another historical text from the time of ShalmanasserIII(858-824) could lead to pinning down the time of the Atlantis legend. No time to exand on this yet as I have to cook the boxing day dinner!! -
Message 34
Posted by Noggin the Nog (U195809) on Monday, 26th December 2005
Plato's tale of Atlantis was constructed for political and philosophical reasons (ie it's *not* history in the modern sense).
But Plato probably drew on the history and literature of his time, and my bet would be that one major strand was a memory of the Thera eruption (whenever that was). The description of an island surrounded by water, surrounded by another island, is a good match for our current understanding of the shape of Thera prior to its eruption.
Noggin -
Message 35
Posted by Eric_Brewster (U2829317) on Monday, 26th December 2005
Eric Brewster
Ufologist,Genealogist
Historian:
*Looks at some of the people posting and wonders why don't they believe that Atlantis did exist in the Mid-Atlantic Ocean where some ancient historians thought it did? "I have to believe that Atlantis did exist because I am of ancient celt origins; why you may ask? If you look at my name....the last name of course.......
......"Brewster". It has chanced much over 2000 years and I have spent 15 years of my life researching this name and know I am the last Druid Warrior King Advisor to the higher Irish and English Kings of old.
To prove my point, an recient sea exploration at the Mid-Atlantic Ocean has turned up some surprising results that, indeed Atlantis did have many things just as Fantasy Writer Stephen R. Lawhead had said. I believe that Atlantis existed for a period of some 5 Million years or so. It had an mountain called "Atlas" that was an volcanoe that was ticking to a destruction in about 363-364AD, there were 9 kings that had ruled Atlantis. The sea expedition that had sonar sounded the Mid-Atlantic Ridge had found the remains of human made walls that could not be explained, fortifications and extensive workings that appeared to be buildings around the mountain area that may have been the destroyed volcanoe of Atlas.
I feel that History TV: Battlefield Britain has not even attempted to show much about the ancient celts nor that there was an King Arthur.....his life etc. But they try to bring out the ridicules stories of an supposed "Boudica" and her battles. I am curious where Stephen R. Lawhead got his tales from? I already know, from monastary records that few historians nowdays really want to consider. They say that the Celts had an 10,000 years history in Briton before it became "Britain". Yet they (Battle Field Britain) steers away from telling the stories of King Arthur, I also think that the italian film producer that made that last film of "King Arthur" was too concerned with his own Roman History to really clue in on British and Celt, Irish and English Dark Age History.
There was an "Atlantian Migration" to Briton and places nearby it when the "isle of glass" slipped into the sea from the destruction Atlas that caused Atlantis to submerge. The daughter of King Avallach Of Sarrius, Atlantis; Princess Charis, set into motion the exodus of the Atlantians just as Stephen R. Lawhead had said. She and her peoples boarded ships and left Atlantis just as it was destroyed.....you see for many months prior there was the battles of 4 kings against the other 5 Atlantian Kings.
3 Atlantian Kings came to Briton to start life anew, Charis would marry a Briton English Celt bard and have his child, Merlin.
After a time, some 200 yrs, after Uther and Aurelius, the changing times of Briton and Ireland then came Duke Arthur, King Arthur then Emperor Of The West Pendragon Arthur, whose kingdom of about an 25 yrs span reshaped the world as it had never been, the Kingdom Of Summer was not "Camelot" but a specific place called "Caer Lial". Or in other times that was named the "City Of Legions". I know the maps in Stephen R. Lawhead's 4 books were very specific in the history he had found.
So why is it so hard to believe in Atlantis and the Celt-Atlantian multiculturialism of Briton from the beginnings of 364 AD to 566AD at the fall of Emperor Arthur's Summer Kingdom? -
Message 36
Posted by Eric_Brewster (U2829317) on Monday, 26th December 2005
Eric Brewster:
Topic: "Atlantis We Need Proof!"......good Golly Miss Molly, are you britishers daft? I live in Nova Scotia, Canada, a place called New Minas in Kings County, NS.
The Dark Age History that was forged out of an real King Arthur set the stage for further events of the Medieval Age England! How could they not; how could they not set into motion the events that would later create the British Royal Family?
Does any of you know what the word "Brehon" means, I indeed know what it means....how should I not? However I will never be getting spots on "Battle Field Britain" nor History TV because even your brits scholars do not believe the history that helped create what we know now that has become the "British Royal Family".
Does the term "Brehon Laws" mean anything really to you now days? It should, it is very very old, more importantly my family came from Ireland to Britain in an very remote past, my ancestors came to Plymouth Colony after being ousted from England first about 1030 AD then having to settle in France for a time, then with the later Normans comming to England and conqueroring it, the later Norman-Sacsen wars, Robin Hood Era etc.....then the disasterious Elizabethian Era that drove my ancestors to the New World.......hummmm so tell me what is in our last names? I lay claim to my rich history as the last Brewster Heir. -
Message 37
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Monday, 26th December 2005
Hi Brewster,
There is one major problem in placing Atlantis in the Atlantic ocean. It wasnt named such at the time of Solon. It did'nt get that name until about the 7thCBC when the Greeks named it such, beliveing this was where Atlas had fled to. As the myths of Atlas have him being banished to the west. What commentators have not understood here, is that the myth came from Anatolia, and being banished to the far west, just meant Greece mainland!!! To the ancient Greeks and Anatolians, the far edges of the world were just the territories of each others lands. Just think Alexander to understand how far they concieved the edge of the world to be. Even in his time the world wasn't seen as much bigger than the Archaic period. It was only his wars which opened up new frontiers and then his mens fears - that they were at the edge of the world - stopped him going further.
Atlantis is placed in the Atlantic _SEA_ not ocean. This means it refered to either the Black Sea, Sea of Marmara or Med. -
Message 38
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Monday, 26th December 2005
Oh dear lord
Eric
Stephen Lawhead wrote a book, a very good book buyt a book.
I happen to have bought all four books of the series and I enjoyed them immensly, but to say that these characters are real, well, I wish I was eating whatever Amsterdam special you have imported.
"If you look at my name....the last name of course.......
......"Brewster". It has chanced much over 2000 years and I have spent 15 years of my life researching this name and know I am the last Druid Warrior King Advisor to the higher Irish and English Kings of old.""
Yes your surname has indeed changed. Not a trace of Brythonic or Goeidic in it. A Druid advisor to pagan Anglo-Saxons??? My, what a claim. If you had left it to just the Irish I would have just giggled, but the Sais as well, mmm, yes yes, oh course and I have it on good authority that I am descended from Brutus direct.
Now I don't wish to appear rude or anything, but this has been a long day spent drinking far too much single malt for me to ignore your special brand of lunacy.
Atlantis, if it was ever EVER a real place, was Med in origin. It is one of perhaps three locations for which people can put forward some sort of logical argument. Troy, Thera or possibly the Black Sea (If the Black Sea then it is more a cultural memory than anything remembered in details but that is another thread)
So Please, If you have any proof other than the writings of a fantasy novel (no matter how good the book is) please show it, otherwise this all seems like the ravings of someone who has eaten far too much cheese before bed time -
Message 39
Posted by aarionrhod (U2719853) on Monday, 26th December 2005
I have spent 15 years of my life researching this name and know I am the last Druid Warrior King Advisor to the higher Irish and English Kings of old.
Μύ
Now I don't wish to appear rude or anything, but this has been a long day spent drinking far too much single malt for me to ignore your special brand of lunacy.
So Please, If you have any proof other than the writings of a fantasy novel (no matter how good the book is) please show it, otherwise this all seems like the ravings of someone who has eaten far too much cheese before bed time
Μύ
Hi everyone, I am a first time poster on this board. I've only been a reader of threads up until now, but I just couldn't resist sharing a laugh. Sorry, Eric.
-
Message 40
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Tuesday, 27th December 2005
Thera has a lot of support, but principally because it literally vanished beneath the waves. However, it does not resemble Plato's account in any other way except that it was an island. Volcanic erupton is not mentioned by Plato. Where is the large rectangular plain? Volcanos are not renowned for being large, rectangular and flat.
This theory is one of the main examples of looking simply for somewhere that sank and claiming it must have started the Atlantis legend solely because of that. -
Message 41
Posted by Elistan (U1872011) on Tuesday, 27th December 2005
Tony,
Point taken. As I said, I was just repeating the official line fed to us in college, though if I remember right it was heavily qualified. I don't think any perspective descriptive elements of Plato's tale should be taken to literally. As is the general problem with oral traditions that are later written down, one cannot tell when certain details have been embellished or altered to match the audience's expectations. The centrality of a concept of a previous culture more developed than the current one (whenever one is speaking) seems to be the common thread here. If we take the myth as coming out of the Greek dark ages (quiet for a minute artorious) then we can begin to think of its relationship to culture at that time. If this is an oral tradition passed down through the hard times following a natural disaster into the redevelopment of civilisation the relavant levels of technology and power taken on a different shading.
Atlantis, for the myth to be effective, has to have reach the current level of development and then some. That touch extra is the hubris which tips the gods against it, it is a warning from history against excessive modernity. Thus the myth must grow and develop with the society within which it is told. Atlanteans will always be that bit better, that bit more advanced, that bit closer to godhead.
As to its reality, the myth is most probably structured around a real event, a diminishment in cultural development due to a natural disaster. This is, I think, a reason why many point to Thera, not so much that Atlantis was that island, but that eruption wiped-out a clearly advanced civilisation, the minoan, leaving traces of its happenings. The tale of Plato is didactic, reliant on a fore-knowledge of the myth within his audience, but much as the foundation myths of poets such as Lucretius have relationship with generally accepted mythologies, they are also adapted to the author's ends. The structure within which Plato introduces his Atlantis, a debate about the ideal society, and the fate that he has befall them, is a lesson/warning against striving for perfection. Considering the indecision of Plato in the Republic as to the ideal society this is hardly surprising.
Linking his morality lesson to a memory of a collapsed civilisation, known to his audience, he anchors his tale in 'truth not fiction', as he has critias tell socrates.
As to the self-professed ufologist Eric's wild Celto-centric hypothesis it holds as much water as his claim to being the last tribal high chieftain of the blue daubed ones west of the nile. But good for laugh, eh? Why is it that everyone wants to link this particular tale to their own pet theory of early civilisation?
Elistan. -
Message 42
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Wednesday, 28th December 2005
Hi Elistan,
I agree that we cant take the story of Atlantis too literaly, hence why we try to find the places, events or myths behind the description.
Concerning the size of the _Islands_ of Atlantis, stated to be larger than Asia and Libya to the borders of Egypt. This doesnt mean that one Island was larger than Libya/Asia, just the sum of the Islands and its mainland. To me the Libya described here is not North west Africa. My view is that the Egyptians and archaic Greeks considered Libya to be the Lebanon region. It has just been mistranslated as Libya. The Egyptians had a different name for the Western real Libyans. Asia to the Greeks was the Anatolian region. So this is not that huge region as always considered in the past by later Greeks. -
Message 43
Posted by Eric_Brewster (U2829317) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
Eric Brewster:
Artorious and others; if we do not take the myth Atlantis seriously, we are closing off our minds to the possibablities that there actually was one, are we not? I wonder why that every country of the world today has an ancient memory of Atlantis?
My case in point, in the middle of the Mid-Atlantic ocean, over the last 7 million years "Atlantis" sub sided some 7-10 times or more. The Mid-Atlantic ridge shows this out when ships do echo-sounding here. Look at an water depth map in any map atlas and you will see.
There were others places in the pacific etc where this happened. -
Message 44
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Friday, 30th December 2005
Elistan,
Always a pleasure to read your posts. I think we are agreed that there is probably something behind the legend, the hig question, of course, being what was the real event. Clearly there are elements of the description which are inaccurate, and htis is what helps keep th estory alive, because we can all put our own interpretatons on it.
Plato claimed that the story came from Egypt and was related to his ancestor Solon as a history as seen by the Egyptians. Of course, this claim may be untrue, but the text does suddenly break off when he starts describing the council of the gods. With ancient texts, of course, it could simply be that the rets of it did not survive, but it is also possible that he suddenly stopped writing because he had just realised the similarity between what he was writing and the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔric tale of Troy. This again is Zangger's theory, and it does have a flaw in that, if this is indeed what happened, why did Plato leave what he had written so far for others to read? -
Message 45
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Friday, 30th December 2005
Eric Brewster:
Artorious and others; if we do not take the myth Atlantis seriously, we are closing off our minds to the possibablities that there actually was one, are we not? I wonder why that every country of the world today has an ancient memory of Atlantis?
My case in point, in the middle of the Mid-Atlantic ocean, over the last 7 million years "Atlantis" sub sided some 7-10 times or more. The Mid-Atlantic ridge shows this out when ships do echo-sounding here. Look at an water depth map in any map atlas and you will see.
There were others places in the pacific etc where this happened.Μύ
Eric,
If you read our posts you will realise that most of us accept that there might be some truth to the myth of a land lost to some natural disaster. Afterall, you only have to think of Pompeii for that. The more wild claims of Atlantis though will always be put under immense scrutiny as they quite often make claims that are too imposible.
Have you ever stopped to wonder why "every country of the world today has an ancient memory of Atlantis?"
Look at where the most fertile land is, the land easiest to build on and quite often you will find that they are coastal flood plain areas. These areas are susceptible to natural disasters. Here in Wales we have the submerged land of Terweryn (sp) off the Llyn Peninsula and in Cornwall there is the legend of Lyonesse, of which the Scily Isles are the last remnant.
In India there is also the submerged city that was unearthed by the Tsunami. They cannot all be 'Atlantis'
One more point and on this I am open to vigourous correction if there are any geologists in here. The Mid Atlantic Ridge is a spreading ridge. Europe/Africa are moving away from the America's, so surely any movement of land sitting over this ridge would spread with it.
For this I point you to Iceland. It is sat ontop of the ridge and has been growing for centuries. Why then would Atlantis sink?? -
Message 46
Posted by Eric_Brewster (U2829317) on Friday, 30th December 2005
Eric Brewster:
Good Richie, I was hoping someone would point out what I was saying. The most recient echo sounding expedition turned out unnatural constructions around the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, but in England, Ireland, Iceland, Greenland and off of our North American contienent there are enormous landsubsidings that cannot be explained by an mere over burden of Silt build up by rivers and streams.
They happened in the recent prehistory but Scholars want to claim that these events are so relatively recient that cannot have been felt at all.....therefore cannot have had an impact on shaping our contienents. I point out contienental drift is a series of things, when you consider that the iceages that we have been having has each time raised the water levels each time about 500ft, that is alot. Yes Richie there was an Llyonesse; there was an "Glass Isle" too. Look Richie, I have a neo-druid books from Douglass Monroe........he describes what past druids done and what he had done as an neo-druid.
These 2 books are called, "The 21 Lessions Of Merlin" and "The Lost Books Of Merlin"; in them are just about all the things that the ancient druids did and some neo-druids are now doing.....
......Douglass Monroe believes he is an "reincarnated druid", he even believes strongly that he got into contact with the "Spirit Of Merlin".
Most importantly as I have been saying, I also have 2 very important maps from Collin's Publishers.......I have made note that my last name has changed over the 2000 years but some of you made fun of that. How did our names change should be the questions that you should be asking. One map is the Irish Family Names Map and the other is Clans Of Scotland map.....they are made from real Dark Age and Midieval Age maps and scrolls on Family Names that have been recorded for well over the past 2000 years. Things that were in monastries in both Ireland, England, Normandy, Norway etc. I said I have been researching for the past 15yrs and the name changes have given many hints on who royality were in Ireland and England. For example, Mac Fergussons's and MacGillicuddys's; do you think that these names are actually seperate last names?
They are not, at about 400AD to 500AD there was an actual Irish Clan King by the name of King Fergus MacGillicuddy. Over time the two names merged and also broke up into their basic components. Thus becomming their basic sept clans, it was the same for the "Brehons" and "Brehenys's". These names still actually exist, in Ireland of today there is a place called Fergus Carrack, a town also called Fergus in Ireland near Belfast. Why is the memory of these places not based on real people?
Now abit of an brainteaser for you Richie, these names are all sept clan names and I give all the readers here the districts in Ireland that these names can be found......if names meant nothing then these names should not have been recorded; should they?
Brewsters, O'Beddans, Brusters, Brehons, Brehens, Brehans, Brehanns, Brehans, O'Brehenns, M(ac,Mc)Breheny, Mc Brennans. Irish Districts: Silgo, Roscommons, Gallway, Kerry, Tippary, Kilkenny, Wexford, Offaly, Clare.
Of course Richie, but long ago there were alot of islands and land bridges before the iceages swamped all the oceans, thus we have the cases of land submergence, look at Bermuda and the Bahamas? You can see that there are undersea walls and some sort of buildings there. Of the coast of India, even off Easter Island etc.....all around the world near almost every coastline you can think of........but you peope only seem to consider the Greko-Roman areas as possible Atlantises. What about South and Central America.....the same, lots of submergances etc. Stephen R. Lawhead did alot of research in Genealogy and in the archieves in England before he wrote his books. He was not an fantasy writer in the way we understand it.
Richie, there was an Bishop in the Dark Ages called St. Gildas The Wise.......he wrote upon the destruction of the petty kings of England and their abuses shortly after the "Summer Kingdom" of King Arthur fell. This St. Gildas helped found an monastry or several of them that preserved information that would have been lost had not he wrote about it. He also claimed to be an adept of Merlin Embries. So there is not much Myth today to say an High King Of West Rome, Arthur Pendragon did not live. -
Message 47
Posted by Eric_Brewster (U2829317) on Friday, 30th December 2005
Eric Brewster:
TonyG, oddly enough there is something in "The Dead Sea Scrolls" about an council of "The Gods"; possibably all the gods gathered together to help create man, but some ArchAngels broke faith with the council and we have the Enoch stories formed.
What happened was an "Satan", whatever you call him; stole the spark or fires of Life from "God", Zeus.....etc, had friends of his mate with mortal women and create superbabies. So the legends say that there were 20 leaders of the "Fallen, Chosen, Great Ones" etc. Then there were atleast 200 of their followers after that.
They taught primative man and woman all they needed to know of how to start societies that we value today. Enoch was taken by "God" to the Archangels and he was taught for about a period of 300 years then returned to Earth to bring the Fallen Archangels to justice.
Strangely enough, in many different religious sects there are very similiar stories of many "Enochs" that are taken by "God" and taken to their "High Friends Of God" whom bring the "Dark Ones" to justice. -
Message 48
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Friday, 30th December 2005
No god or gods created directly man. Evolution did so. We come from within the families of hominoids. Gods mentioned in ancient mythologies could be nothing more than humans with more knowledge.
-
Message 49
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Friday, 30th December 2005
Hi all
What of the possibility that the Gades of Solon\Plato is in fact another place, not the one in Spain.
Are there any other possibilities for places or rivers named Cades in ancient times on the Anatolian region? There is a place further north up the region towards Mysia and Troy. The river Hermus is now called Gediz for reasons I havent discovered yet. Perhaps it was assigned the name Hermus to fit in with the plain of Troy as the other rivers have, and its original name was indeed Gediz... easily becomming Gades in Greek..
Plato writes: [Atlas's] twin brother...obtained as his lot the extremity of the island towards the Pillars of Heracles, as far as the country which is still called the region of Gades [Hades, Gates]... in the language of the country which is named after him, Gadeirus.
So if this is the correct reading then it could mean the northern part of the Anatolian region and northern Isalnds up to the pillars of Hercules(Bosphorus). Which would include the Troad, Mysia and possibly Lydia.
Gadeirus could of course be the Akkiyu mentioned by the Hittites as being from the western Anatolian region and Islands, leading to the name Achaeans of the Greeks. The leader of the Akkiya was well respected by the Hittites and considered an equal in power. -
Message 50
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Friday, 30th December 2005
Hi Eric,
As I said I am no geologist, so I am afraid my arguments with the MAR and the various mysteries as to areas that may have sunk rather than spread are at the mercies of others more qualified than myself in that area.
One thing I am curious about is this though. How can anyone claim to have indepth knowledge about a non literate society such as the Druids? Now I do not mean that they were ignorant of reading and writing, far from it. It is just that the Druidic religion was an oral tradition. What we know of them comes from the more than slightly hostile viewpoint of the Romans. So anyone claiming to be a βNeo-Druidβ describing the 21 lessons of Merlin (almost certainly a hybrid character not a single man) and his lost books (when Druids didnβt commit to writing their faith and ideas) I tend to become rather a sceptic as to their motivation, and as for the βcontactβ well, lets say that while I have a persuadable viewpoint I am firmly in the sceptic camp
With regards to your surname. People travel. People who now regard one place as an βancestralβ homeland is nothing of the sort. Irish and Scotish surnames are flexible names. All βMacβ refers to is βson ofβ, so without actual strong proofβs there is no way one could say with any finality that one MacFergusson is related to another MacFergusson.
As I pointed out in my response to your surname post, I freely admit that surnames are a memory of places and that place names themselves can be memories of the founder or a group of peoples living there. Rome was named after its mythological founder Romulus and Carmarthen is named in memory of a βMerlinβ who once lived in the area during the Roman era.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Μύto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ iD
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ links
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.