Atlantis

[kavaris]

When was the last time yas did an Atlantis thread. I think it'd be an approp., time of this year to look at Atlantis, as i was thinkin bout how many ppl (just in general, by default) default to the America, Spanish, and Spain (Espanol or Castellano) And how that whole story would be awesomer if having explored and unvealed the missing piece that is the Atlantis story or what i say is just quite literally the Spanish coast, which is also just Native Europea. And, as Spain has these sorts've  maritime nooks you might call them~not to mention theres massive underwater megaliths below the sea right near the straits of Gibraltar (or rather, its in a place just on the far side... basically, exactly where Plato said it is...)

Several areas in Spain and France~in nd around, are like this... somehow its still not widely unknown?... no idea how...

That is to say, iuno why everyone thinks Plato said ("Miles, miles, miles into the Atlantic") But nevertheless, the "Americas" is itself an important aspect. Why is the Americas important? Because the story of how the native americas got there is important, and one such culture talks about "the wooden people" (God, being angry, smashed the wooden people into the ground~that is the American earth...) Im paraphrasing it greatly. The point is, that is your blood, yall Spanish ppl, that which yous have no idea about. thts not to invalidate the landmass explored back when there was a bridge up north to Asialand (Northern Amer. natives?) im jus saying, there was a such thing as "Native Atlanteans" in Spain, before we got up in there with our spears and arrows, and kicked out all the males, and reproduced w/ the women. Back during the harmonious hunter gatherer era, it was like "serene and joyful". So thats also the bloodline (maturnal side) of some existing ppls like Etruscans maybe, etc... (later becomes Spain/France~which becomes Spanish/Espanol).... The point being, yall Spanish/America ppl should be investigating Atlantis, or rather, the Jöurneyman (see

 

Edited Saturday at 02:16 PM by kavaris

[kavaris]

Id also like to present a map for how they got there, that is via these winds/Atlantic current that runs along the US East Coast and through the Bermuda Triangle region. Ships can be swept significantly off course by it, and thats how ppl end up in S. Amer sometimes. Does that slipstream change going back thousands and thousands of years back? I dont know but id think it wouldnt change THAT much, i mean, Earth is still Earth. Like its in the exact same configuration, give or take an island drowning or resurfacing via tectonic/volcanic~yadayada. The point is, its the same shit, nother day, but in history terms. And like, back when ppl were building small little rinky-dink boats to explore the Atlantic, they didnt know what they were doing. And if you are the first ppl to build ships, its like, HOW tf would you kno bout the gulf stream and sht like this, right?

So that is the dilemma i pose, that is, to explore Atlantis. Explore Atlantica America. Like actually explore it. Dont take my word for it🗺️Go see it for yourselves. Everything that we are depends on it, so.. no pressure or anything. Go sailing. See if its more likely that theyd end up in Mezo America, or S America, Or wherever. See whats up with them megaliths in Spain. Please. Somehow its still like, fake news since no one knows about it. Unfake the news for us via curiosity.

p.s. "Pre-Columbians" is a term they sometimes use, as thats a plausible idea i presented apparently (retrospectively, i dug around on it), which i thought was unknown, but its considered already by modern scholars. So okay, THAT part is considered, but the Atlantis part is still in the dark, even though it is just as~if not more important.

Edited Saturday at 02:34 PM by kavaris

[kavaris]

Btw, for those ppl that still think the richat structure has anything to do with what Plato said, realize this,

Not only did Plato and most Greeks know about where and what Africa was, Plato literally references it in the Atlantis text itself.

But before I explain what he says about it, know this: The Greeks didn't use the word "Africa" — that's a Latin/Roman term. The ancient Greek name for the landmass we now call Africa was Libya (Λιβύη / Libye), derived from a Berber root. It referred to the area of North Africa directly west of the Nile — encompassing what is now modern Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco. It was considered one of the three parts of the known world alongside Europe and Asia.

Herodotus uses "Libya" to indicate the African continent broadly, while the lighter-skinned North Africans were called "Líbues," and those south of Egypt were known as "Aethiopians"

And as i said, Africa (Libya) appears in Plato's Atlantis account. Plato describes Atlantis as a naval empire that had conquered most of Europe and Libya, before being defeated by Athens. More specifically, in Timaeus, it is said the Atlantean empire ruled "Libya up to the border with Egypt, and Europe up to Etruria". Translate the following:

Quote

τῆς δὲ νήσου ταύτης βασιλεῖς ἦρχον μὲν πολλῶν ἄλλων νήσων καὶ μερῶν τῆς ἠπείρου, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τῆς ἐντὸς τοῦ στόματος ἡμῶν Λιβύης μὲν μέχρι πρὸς Αἴγυπτον, Εὐρώπης δὲ μέχρι Τυρρηνίας.

You gotta understand how many years in the past we are talking about, not to mention, how "Atlantis" was mentioned once again, after Plato, and w/ the same idea, as "Libya v. Atlantis/Spain", as its a conflict that goes back (and has lasted) for thousands and thousands and thousands of years.

Plato described Atlantis as being larger than "Libya and Asia combined" (though i doubt he went around it w/ a ruler and measured it all, so dont be taking this too literally) located beyond the Pillars of Heracles (the Strait of Gibraltar). So Libya/Africa wasn't some vague unknown — Plato used it casually as a geographic benchmark so his audience would recognize just what he was saying.

Plato wouldve said "Atlantis is in Libya", if that is what he meant. Plato wouldve said (Oceanus far & wide, sits some distant land, Atlantis).

The Atlantic beyond Gibraltar was called "Oceanus". So if Plato was going to say ANYTHING about Amer. (as some also speculate about America being Atlantis), then he is going to say "Oceanus, far & wide...", or using the words Plato was likely to have said, and yous can read his stuff, as he is quite specific about what everything is, and he makes no mention of Libya = Atlantis, or Oceanus = Atlantis/Atlantic...

Let me be even more specific.  The Greek word Plato uses is πρό (pro) or the phrase πρὸ τοῦ στόματος — which literally means "before the mouth of" (the mouth being the strait). And "before" in Greek spatial language is ambiguous in the same way it is in English:

It can mean in front of — i.e. on the near side, before you even pass through

It can mean beyond — i.e. out past it, in the open Atlantic

So depending on how you translate that prepositional phrase, Atlantis could be:  "Beyond the Pillars" which is the traditional reading. This is how most people picture it, and frankly, it gets them way off course looking in the Atlantic (see where i said, they had a word specifically for that)

Interpretation 2 — "Before/In Front of the Pillars"

Atlantis is in the Mediterranean itself, or right at the mouth of the strait. This has led some researchers to propose locations like western Mediterranean, or the shallow Spartel Bank just outside Gibraltar; or a third option being near the coast of southern Spain or Morocco.

The Spartel Bank is a submerged shallow bank in the Atlantic, sitting just outside the Strait of Gibraltar, off the northwest tip of Morocco.

What Plato does mention is Gades, which is the ancient Phoenician/Greek name for modern Cadiz in southern Spain, right on the Atlantic coast just north of the strait. He references it as a geographic marker near Atlantis territory. What more could ppl want. What more could be said, its layed out very plainly, vwery straightforward and direct.

And apparently, Plato is wrong (or according to many, many people, Plato is making things up) except, no one has even taken him on his actual word(s). How can anyone say Plato is wrong without validating whether or not the most obvious solution is wrong first. Like, surely that should be step one. Plato has never been wrong, and if anything, we are still trying to figure out just how accurate his writings are; We are starting from the perspective that "people are wrong" too premature. We should assume, especially in the case of Plato, that he was right, and that everyone is just getting the wrong info about what he said, as that is most definitely the case.

p.s. And imagine, we are still thinking Plato was "making things up" to this day (by a large majority, mind you). How can we even begin looking at OTHER figures/or characters in Myth, or other Greek texts, et caetera, if we cant even get the facts straightened out w/ Plato, who is like the bedrock.

*p.s.s. i have this crazy long thing that i wrote on Plato & Mythology ~which I have actually posted here before (the less-long vers.), to get everyone familiar and started in that direction, however its since grew gianormously~And considering how long this one was, i thought i should just wait awhile until the dust has settled and i can start to sortve introduce these writings in a more compact, and controlled/meaningful way.

Edited Sunday at 09:04 AM by kavaris

[kavaris]

The Republic is another one that ppl get mixed up w/  Timaeus And Critias  and it is like ppl want to make The Republic the index/legend to interpreting Plato's dialogues. And yes, it would be a good idea for ppl to read The Republic too, just to see how many elements are shoved into Plato's other dialogues, but dont then get them tangled together. Lol, they are already unnecessarily tangled together for no reason.

Let me phrase it like this:  Is there even one single pers., who we know, who has a reasonable following who is saying "Plato's Atlantis is in Spain"

If that is the case, if no one out there wants to try to follow step 1, then why does everyone worship Plato (hence Platonism, et caetera)? Surely someone who is revered and made into their own icon shouldnt be so venerated. Like, wouldnt the situation be flipped? That is, where we all decide that we dislike Plato for being wrong about everything? Do yous see what i mean? Like, this is a rhetorical ques., but do people celebrate Plato for fibbing and handing out fake facts to ppl? Or do they just like him for like, a single passage? What im tryina say is, the current stigma around Plato is like its own sea of confusion, its own non-sensical Atlantica

Edited Sunday at 10:35 AM by kavaris