CRITIAS

SECTION 4

CRITIAS

1. Prologue

1. In Critias, Plato reveals the Continent of Atlantis, the Island of Atlantis and the Sacred Isle (Poseidonia). Intriguingly, through combined presentation of other ‘myths’ and historical reports, several other issues are revealed also. The myths which refer to the creation of Athens and the Greek race, ‘tie in’ perfectly with the information given by the Egyptian Priest. Dates thus far unknown are defined, such as, for example, the reigns of Kekrops and Erechtheas as well as the contest between Athena and Poseidon for the patronage of Athens. The origins of the Atlantian and Athenian tribes are traced through the cross referencing of information in regard to the identity of Erechtheas, an entity who was always integral to Athenian faith and to whom the Athenians had dedicated a temple on their Acropolis.

Once again, as in the case of the Island of Atlantis, it is liquefaction as a consequence of earthquakes and cataclysms which is shown to have been the cause for the reshaping of the olden Athenian topography. Moreover, it appears that two wars, within a thousand years of each other, took place between the Atlantians and the Greeks; the first ending with the defeat of the instigating Athenians whereas the second with that of the instigating Atlantians. It becomes clear that the goddess Athena assumed the benefaction of Athens at the start of the first war, during the reign of king Kekrops, while later, at the start of the second war, she assumed that of Egypt. This is how the city known as Kekropia come to be renamed Athens. In addition, strong evidence is derived which suggests that certain verses by Homer and the Orphic poets are in relation to Atlantis. It seems that all these ancient poets adopted a very olden chronicle and with poetic license adapted it to their literary work. In this way the poems and epics became not only educational but also the vehicle by which many important truths and a wealth of factual information and important details were to be preserved. Accordingly, one is led to a number of very intriguing conclusions which clarify any or fill in the gaps one may have after finishing the reading of The Odyssey or of The Iliad or of the Saga of the Argonauts. However, as has been pointed out, each reader will draw their own conclusions when all is said and done. Besides, this is one of Plato’s central appeals; the encouragement of logical thought to compel his reader to arrive at knowledge through the process of reasoning.

2. Following “Timaeus” oration, the following day’s conversation sees Critias expanding in detail on Atlantis. Interestingly, Plato from the outset and at length presents Critias in an ‘apologetic’ mode as he is about to elaborate on his philosophical point. Indeed, he hesitates even as he is about to start the narrative. To prepare his fellow conversationalists for what is to follow, he asks adamantly for their open-mindedness and is practically imploring for their leniency and tolerance on what he is about to convey to them.

The description of Atlantis is indeed intrinsically complex. To facilitate the reader to easier understanding, an effort has been made for the presentation to be as straightforwardly comprehensible as it can be. Plato, without the use of maps, diagrams or illustrations but with exceptional detail, portrays the Athens of that time and also of an earlier one; just as he does for Atlantis, albeit in somewhat ‘disguised’ form. Eventually and for the first time after a very long expectancy, there is resolution to the myth of Atlantis; 2.600 years after Solon first learned of its being and approximately 2.350 years after Plato made its story public knowledge. And more that this, for the first time, 11.550 years later, Atlantis is revealed as it is today.

3. Plato gives a deliberately difficult portrayal of Atlantis. He is not at all accommodating. He does not withhold information but he offers it little by little, dotted throughout his manuscripts. His descriptions are comprehensive but concealed. To facilitate understanding, Image 49 shows the final hypothetical depiction of the Continent, the Island and the central Sacred Isle in the centre of the concentric town plan of the metropolis of Atlantis. Also depicted are the relative seas. With the accurate translation of the ancient text in hand and its associated elucidations and after working out the geometric forms given by Plato, the shapes and designs were transferred to paper and lo, step by step, all were illustrated. Of course, Plato deliberately does not give the clues to the ‘map’ in regular progression. Therefore, once again to facilitate the reader’s comprehension, the present author presents certain items of information …in advance relative to their mention in the ancient text, so that they make better sense in relation to subsequent Information.

Once the ‘blueprint’ was drawn up, it was juxtaposed with the natural (or not) land formations identified in Africa. Also elucidated, is how Plato connects all this information to that in Timaeus. Therefore, to now proceed, the reader should free imagination, sharpen memory and heighten perception so as to enjoy a superlative Plato.

Image 49: The white border marks the hypothetical depiction of Atlantis after the LGM, as well as the various associated regions, Pelagos and/or Pontos seas and ocean. Even though the seas depicted appear impressively large, they are nevertheless based on historical reports. There were probably large or small lakes, wetlands, rivers or islands which constituted a whole. Understandably, these have not been delineated because of the inability to substantiate the actual dimensions that they may have had at the time predicted to have been the dawn of a bygone civilization (23-18.000 BP)

H: Pillars of Heracles / AP: Atlantic Pelagos / P1: Atlantic Pontos / C: Lake Chad-Euthymanean Pontos C: Continent of Atlantis / L: Libya / ET: Ethiopia / V1, 2: Volcanic Fields / I: Island of Atlantis which contains the metropolis and is contained by the Continent. The “there pelagos”, barely discernible at the Island (I) and linked via a “poros” (π) to the Atlantic Pontos (P1)

2. Guide to Reading the Translation of the Ancient Text.

1. Wherever the word ‘island’ appears in the translation of the ancient text, its definition will be given in parentheses so as to point out when Plato is referring to the continent and when to the island of Atlantis; because here in the book of Critias their definition is reversed in relation to Timaeus. In other words, these definitions are valid only in Critias because Plato no longer describes the Island and Sacred Isle (Poseidonia) from afar as when he was mentioning “there”; he is now ‘on location’. He is “there”.

Terms and concepts that differ and must be noted are:

a) The “island of Atlantis” is the continent.

b) The “island” is the island inhabited by the descendants of Poseidon and was in the interior and middle of the continent. It is technically considered as an island by dint of water encircling it in a huge moat (1.900 km long, as will be duly seen). This word is qualified as ‘inhabited island’

c) The center of the Atlantis “polis” is in the center of the wheel formation, the metropolis and realm of Atlas. In Plato’s time, a “polis” was the city-state, which was usually a fortified citadel (acropolis) with adjacent urban conglomeration and surrounding rural areas. This word is transliterated and used as is in the translation. There were another nine “polis” on the “island”. However, exceptionally, in two cases Plato uses the word “polis” in reference to the “island” (Notes &79 & &84 which will be duly elucidated).

c) The “sacred isle” (or Poseidonia, named thus by the present author in tribute to the founding entity Poseidon) is the comparatively tiny island, hub of the wheel formation. It contained the citadel and was the administrative, religious and cultural centre of Atlantis.

d) Some “wheels” of land, are islands encircled by “wheels” of water. Plato sometimes refers to them as “circles”.

2. There are two plains or flatlands. When Plato refers to the “plain”, it is in reference to a relatively small plain that was subsequently reshaped by Poseidon into the formation of concentric and alternating wheels of land and sea. It had a circular shape and a point on it was the “centre of all”, which is to say, that there was a place on it, which was in the middle of the length and breadth of both the Continent and the Island.

When the term “pan-plain” is used, it is in reference to a vast flatland that contains the Island as well as the “there-pelagos” which Plato now, in Critias, refers to as “pan-pelagos”. Most of this plain lay in the interior of the continent except for a coastal edge on the side of the Pontos! It is that same plain of the Continent of Atlantis, from whose earth was produced the clay that blocked the waterway (“poros”) between the Atlantic Pontos and the “there-pelagos” in Timaeus.

3. The “there-pelagos” referred to in TIMAEUS is the far away (there) sea that is completely (“pan-telos”) enclosed by the land of the Continent which is the vast “pan-plain”. This sea is renamed as the “pan-pelagos” in Critias. It is the same “pelagos” as the “there” or “that” or “thereat pelagos” referred to in Timaeus, when Plato was describing it from ‘afar’ (i.e. from Athens, where Critias and his fellow conversationalists were). It is the sea which is contiguous to the Island of Atlantis and the small plain that Poseidon had formed into the concentric wheels of land and sea. This “pelagos” was connected via a narrow waterway which exited at a place at the Atlantic Pontos (Timaeus), that was somewhat like a harbour and from where could be ‘seen’ the islands from which one could navigate outwards to the edge of the continent where was the region of Gadeiriki. After Gadeiriki and by navigating the Atlantic Pelagos, one would pass through the “mouth” at the Pillars of Heracles and beyond, outside in the Mediterranean Sea.

4. All the important words or terms that differ from most other translations will also be herein written in parentheses. Plato intentionally gives the information on Athens comprehensibly and straightforwardly whereas he does the exact opposite with the information relating to Atlantis. Of course, as mentioned elsewhere, he does not withhold any data, but to decipher his wording and extract the correct information, is a veritable challenge of perception and test of knowledge. Plato’s method of providing information may seem excessively complicated, to the point of bewilderment, but he had his reasons. In the end, the reader will, amongst other things, be impressed by the amount of detailed information that is imparted in a few lines of script.

5. The reader will come to recognize the various clever contrivances given at regular intervals by the ingenious Plato and will eventually be satisfied that there is nothing ambiguous in his writings. But Plato is not immediately forthcoming with resolution to issues that arise and left hanging in the course of the narrative as to whether they are in one or another way. He provides answers at predetermined points which are not easy to isolate. Plato does this intentionally, to test the awareness and perception of his reader. However, not wanting to exhaust his reader, he intersperses the intricate sections with some straightforward and easily understood accounts, much in the way of intermissions for ‘brain rest’! Also and most importantly, he provides confirmation to any reservations or uncertainties his reader may still have, by referring twice to the ambiguous issue, albeit in a different ways. Besides whichever convolutions in his telling, Plato also gives some descriptions …in reverse, beginning his recounts from the end to the beginning. At other times, he provides information patchily albeit fully. Such are the particularities and peculiarities of Plato.

6. Finally, as will be duly analyzed, in Critias, Plato is describing Atlantis as if he is on location, whereas in Timaeus he is writing about Atlantis from home base, presumably Athens. It is important for the reader to keep this in mind so as to makes sense of the spatial perspectives such as ‘here’ vs. ‘there’, ‘inside’ vs. ‘outside’, ‘from’ vs. ‘to’, etc.

3. CRITIAS – Translation of the Ancient Text from the Current Greek.

Translators note: At risk of being repetitive, the reader is once again reminded that the English translation which follows is of the author’s Current Greek translation of the Ancient Greek text. The translation from the Ancient to the Current Greek was accomplished by analyzing each key word in context, the grammar and the syntax, particularly of sections that are defining. Likewise, the English rendition follows the fundamental principle of an as faithful as possible translation of the Current Greek with few minor and necessary deviations in parts where the syntax would have become too difficult to follow or the prose vague and ‘wooden’. In general, the English text has not been ‘modified’ or ‘adjusted’ for readability or literary effect. This is especially true for the contentious sections and the ones with data. As a result, the rendition that follows makes for challenging, albeit rewarding, reading and therefore, inevitably once again, an increased level of concentration is required of the reader. Besides, it must be pointed out that through the centuries, translators with a less than perfect awareness of the ancient language or lacking the scientific knowledge by which to make sense of the ancient writings would touch them up for agreeable reading. These arbitrary interventions and modifications of what is, in any case, an intentionally bewildering text by Plato, led to the meaning being lost in translation. The English rendition that follows may not be ‘beautiful’ or flowing but it is undoubtedly faithful.

Translation

TIMAEUS: how pleased I am, o Socrates, as if I am rested after a long walk, thus now with satisfaction I am relieved from the presentation of speech. But now I pray to the god, whose existence has on the one hand indeed been verified by acts from the past, while on the other it has just at this moment been acknowledged in words, (I pray) to grant us wellbeing for whatever has been spoken of to have been said well, but also to punish us with the apt punishment, should we have we said something despite our will. Proper indeed punishment is to bring back to order him who erred; for us to therefore speak correctly in future in relevance to the birth of the gods, we wish that he grants us the most good and perfect of the remedies, knowledge, so having thus indeed invoked (the god), as we had agreed, we give the word to Critias.

CRITIAS: Timaeus, indeed I accept, whilst that which you too had asked for at the commencement of (your) speech, requesting pardon because you were about to speak on important issues, that same also do I now demand, and even more do I demand from you (all) to show greater leniency on what are about to be said in due course by me. I know of course that my request is rude and more uncivil than it should because I intend to demand, but I must say so. Because which logical (person) would attempt to say that possibly all that have been said by you are not correct? But I will try somehow to prove this, namely that these things which are to be said are in need of greater leniency, because they are more difficult (intricate).

Because, o Timaeus, when someone makes reference to something relevant to the Gods and addresses himself to humans, it is easier for one to seem as if speaking to us correctly rather than when (speaking) about mortals. The lack of experience certainly and the complete lack of knowledge of the listeners, as to whether things are so, would offer great leeway to him who is about to speak on these; indeed with regard to the Gods, we know how things are. And to further clarify this of which I say, pay me your attention at this point. It is required of course that what has been spoken of by all of us to be an imitation and facsimile of something; from the artists we see that as to the depiction of divine and human bodies it is done easily and difficultly (respectively), so that they who behold (their works) to be of the impression that they are of sufficient resemblance and we will notice that basically we are content, should someone succeed in portraying even a little the earth, the mountains and the rivers and the celestial dome and all which are located and rotate around it, so that they are in resemblance to each other, and besides these, because we know almost nothing with exactitude about them, we neither examine, nor check what have been scribed, but bring into play for them a vague and misleading sketch; whereas each time someone attempts to depict our own bodies, because we exactly comprehend that which is missing from us, for the reason that we are well familiar with it due to daily contact, we become stern critics of the one who did not render as he ought to all the likenesses.

The same thing therefore we must see happens also with discourses; that is to say that we are accommodating as to the celestial and the divine, even if what is being said little resembles reality, while the mortal and the human we examine at depth.

But because I am about to speak forthwith without suitable preparation, if I do not manage to portray things, correctly, you must excuse me. But you must bear in mind that to portray mortal (matters) in their actual dimension is not an easy, but a difficult matter. I have said all these, Socrates, so as to remind you (all) of them in request of your indulgence not a little but sufficiently on what I am about to say. So indeed if I look to you as if I am justifiably asking for this benefaction, then give it willingly ⁽¹⁾.

SOCRATES: why should we not give it to you Critias? And even unto him Hermocrates let us give it, the third one of us (due to speak). Of course it is obvious that a short while later, when he is required to speak, he will request exactly the same as you. So that he can therefore think of some other introduction and not be obliged to begin again in the same manner, let him speak in such a way as if he has from now our indulgence.

But I tell you beforehand, friend Critias, the thoughts of your listeners, because he who spoke before you succeeded in doing so to a satisfactory degree, so you will need extra indulgence from us, if you are to consummate these satisfactorily.

HERMOKRATES: the same exactly, o Socrates, you urge upon me, exactly as unto him here. Of course, o Critias, men without daring have never set up a trophy to victory yet. You must therefore proceed boldly with your speech, and by citing Peon and the Muses to proclaim and extol the olden fellow citizens who had been superb.

CRITIAS: O friend Hermokrates, because you have been set to speak tomorrow and because there precedes somebody else before you, that is why you still have courage. But what exactly this (courage) is, perhaps you will come to feel; so we must therefore comply with you who consoles us and gives us courage and furthermore we must ask the Gods to draw near to us, they whom you mentioned and all the rest and above all Mnemosyne (Memory); because the greater part of our discourse depends on this goddess. Because, if I recall enough so as to speak on those (matters) which were once spoken of by the priests and were brought here by Solon, I am certain, that we will appear to this here audience that of what we had to (speak of) we have analyzed them adequately well. Now, therefore, right away this is what we have to do and we must delay no more.

To start off let us remember that in total nine thousand years have elapsed ⁽²⁾, from the time when in actual fact was declared war unto those who live outside the Pillars of Heracles, and unto all of those who were within ^{(3) (4)}; of this (war) therefore I must narrate. And of them whom this here polis (city-state) did lead and the entire war continued and concluded, as well as of them (who were led) by the kings of the island of Atlantis (Island) ⁽⁵⁾ which was once as we have said an island (Continent), larger than Libya and Asia together ^(6), but now after earthquakes ⁽⁷⁾, having been covered (the Island) lacks a poros (narrow navigable waterway joining two seas) because of clay ⁽⁸⁾ for those (on this side) who want to navigate outwards towards the pan-pelagos (the “there-pelagos” in Timaeus) ⁽⁹⁾, forming an obstruction so that they cannot (navigate outwards) ⁽¹⁰⁾. Indeed many of their nations that were barbaric and whichever were races of the Hellenes (Greeks) of that time ⁽¹¹⁾, of each individually will be made known from the narration I have undertaken; both of the Athenians of that time and their adversaries, whom they battled to the end it is requisite for me to narrate of first, namely of the strength of the army and of their polity. Of these I would prefer to begin with the following.

The gods did at sometime divide all the earth of that time by sortition (drawing or casting of lots) – without contention; for it would not be proper for gods not to know of what is analogous to each one, nor again, while knowing that something belongs more to others to attempt by contention to obtain it ⁽¹²⁾ – fairly done by therefore by the lot which befell unto them they populated the lands and having established inhabitants, as

shepherds with their flocks, they nourished us as if we were their possessions and property but without them exercising physical violence on the bodies, as do the shepherds who drive their animals to graze by beating them, indeed to the contrary because it (humankind) is an intelligent animal, just as we govern a ship by the rudder from the stern, similarly by way of persuasion influencing on the psyche in accordance with their disposition, they governed the whole genus of mortal humans.

Indeed the other of the gods ⁽¹³⁾, to whom were allotted other places did administer them well, while to Hephaestos and Athena who were of the same descent, since they were indeed siblings by the same father, and who at the same time engaged themselves with the same, namely with philosophy and the fine arts, befell by sortition to both of them this here land which is by nature dear and appropriate to their virtue and prudence, thus having formed the indigenous men goodly, they inspired in them the way in which their polity would be in order; as for the names of them they have been saved, whereas their works by the degeneration of their descendents and because of the passing of the years did vanish.

Because the generation that survived every time, as was previously mentioned, remained forsaken on the mountains and illiterate, having heard only the names of the leaders of the land and little of their deeds.

So it was these names that they would usually give to their descendants because they cherished them, while the virtues and the laws of the olden people (ancestors) because they were ignorant of them (would not make use of), apart from some faint hearsay as to each one; and in deprivation of the essentials both they and their children had for many generations their attention turned as to their needs, and preoccupied with these, would neglect all that had gone before of the bygone and olden events. Because the meticulous search of the mythology and the past reemerged in the cities, after the people had ensured the necessities of life, and not before.

So it is in this way therefore that have been saved the names of the olden ones without their deeds. Indeed I say these things by drawing a conclusion since Kekrops and Erechtheus and Erichthonius and Erysichthon and most of the others whoever are older than Theseus ⁽¹⁴⁾ are recalled by each single name by the higher priests who recounted of that war, as was said by Solon, and as for the names of women the same applies as before.

In fact both the form and the statue of the goddess (Athena) demonstrate that common were the pursuits of women and men as regards to war, so in accordance with that law the armed goddess was dedicated to them of those times, and proof of this is that all the female animals and the males of the same species, are by nature (designed) for each genus (species) of animal to exercise in common all the ability together with the appropriate asset ⁽¹⁵⁾.

In this land therefore lived all the other nations of citizens, who occupied themselves with the arts and the victuals from the earth, whereas the combatant force of divine men from the very beginning, having been set apart, both of food and edification had the essentials, without any one of them having anything in their possession, but considering everything as common to them all and without having the claim to take more food than the other citizens and having the benefit of all the good things we referred to yesterday, namely with whatever was said that the guards occupied themselves with.

And furthermore the following very probable and true was said about our country, firstly that its borders at that time were delineated by the Isthmus (of Corinth) and on the other side of the mainland up to the limits of Cithaeron and Parnis (known mountains around Attica, province of Athens) while the boundaries came down having Oropos (river) to the right whereas the boundaries to the left towards the sea were delimited by Asopos (river); and this here land surpassed in fertility every other of the ones here, and that is why it was able at that time to provision many armies of the land that came from the neighboring areas. Indeed the greatest evidence of this fertility is that today’s remaining relic of this land is as equally fertile both as to the abundance of fruits as well as to the many good pastures for every type of animal. At that time indeed besides its beauty it also had an abundance of such animals.

So in what way will this be confirmed, and why rightly could it be said to be a remnant of that age? All (our land) protrudes far from the rest of the continent into the pelagos (sea) so as to form a promontory; while the sea that has the shape of an urn happens to be of great depth.

Consequently because of many occurrences and great cataclysms over the course of nine thousand years, for that is how many years have passed from today to those years ⁽¹⁶⁾, the (soil) of the land during these years, also due to the deposition because of the runoff from the high places no soil was left as in other places as completing its cycle disappears by flowing into the deep; it has remained, therefore, exactly as on the small islands, in comparison to that time, like bones of the skeleton of an ailing body, since the covering earth which was thick and soft departed, while indeed there remained only a thin layer of earth.

So because it (our land) was intact and its mountains and the surrounding high hills and the plains which today we call fellees (stony place) were full of fertile soil at that time, and on the mountains there were many forests, of which even now there is evidence; because the mountains that exist today have food only for bees, whereas not much time has gone by when of these trees were used as roofs in large buildings like those which crumbled into ruin, and which still exist.

There were indeed many other tall fruit trees that posed difficulties in the grazing lands for the flocks.

Even the water from Zeus (rain) that fell upon it they would exploit, not like now where it is lost flowing from the bare earth and ends up in the sea, to the contrary as it had much soil and would absorb it as it fell on it, like the earth that is roofed by ceramic tiles, it would store it, while the water that fell from on high and was absorbed in hollow places flowed to all places and supplied plenty of spring water and drinking fountains and rivers, as even now in the olden springs that used to be, there are vestiges of sacred signs, (showing) that they are true these things which are now been said concerning this (land) ⁽¹⁷⁾.

These therefore as to the rest of the land were thus as to their nature, and as was natural it was tended by true farmers who did exactly that, who were indeed discerning and ingenious, while having indeed the best land and utmost abundance of water and very good climate with the hours of the earth properly allocated ⁽¹⁸⁾; as for the city it had been inhabited at that time as follows.

Firstly the area of the Acropolis was not then as it is now. Because an extreme nightly rain dissolved its soil and washing it away laid it bare even until today, with simultaneous earthquakes and before the catastrophe of Deucalion for the third time there fell an excess of water ⁽¹⁹⁾; while earlier in other periods, its (the Acropolis’) size was from the Iridanos and Ilisos (rivers) coming down as far and including the Pnyx and the hill of Lycabettus which it had opposite to the Pnyx, while it (the Acropolis) was entirely of soil and apart from a few places it was level on top.

And its exterior parts, that is to say under its sides, were inhabited, by the artisans and the farmers who cultivated the nearby areas; whereas the top part (was inhabited) solely by the genus of warriors, around the temple of Athena and Hephaestus, encircled by a wall such as the wall that surrounds the garden of a house.

Indeed to the north of it (the Acropolis) they resided in communal dwellings and partook in winter messes, and had built all that are necessary for the communal living of the warriors and the priests without owning gold and silver -because of these nothing would they ever use, while pursuing the moderate level of pride and independence they would build fine houses, in which they and their descendents lived until deep old age and they would hand them over always on to others of their ilk – whereas to the south they had gardens and gymnasiums and eating areas which they would abandon in summer.

Indeed there used to be a drinking fountain there where the Acropolis is now, which having diminished because of the earthquakes ⁽²⁰⁾, there remain the present perimetrical small brooks, while at that time it supplied to everyone a plentiful amount of water of even temperature both in summer and in winter.

Thus in this arrangement did reside the guardians of the citizens and leaders of the other Hellenes who sought after them (for protection), while they would maintain for there to be as much as possible always a regular number of men and women, and be fit for combat, approximately twenty thousand (strong), also then as now.

These therefore were they and in this manner they would always govern judiciously both their land and Hellas, (even as) in all of Europe and Asia as to the beauty of the physique and all the virtues of the soul they were admired and more renowned above all others of that time; what was therefore the circumstance of their enemies and how it came about in the beginning, if we are not deprived the memory of what we heard, when we were still children, now in the middle of our age I will make them known also unto you my friends.

But I must briefly explain to you, before I tell the story, so you do not wonder when you hear Hellenic names for barbarian peoples; the reason for these you will be informed of now. Specifically Solon, because he thought of using this story in his poetry on asking to be informed of the meanings of the names, found that the Egyptians of that time who were the first to write this narrative, had translated them into their own language, subsequently he in turn, after learning the meaning of each name would translate it and write it in our language; and even these now which were written for my grandfather (by the great grandfather) and which I possess have been studied by me in depth from when I was a child, so if you hear names the same as the ones here let it not seem remarkable to you , for you now know the reason for them ⁽²¹⁾.

At that time the beginning of this long story was somewhat like this.

As was also said previously with regard to the sortition of the gods, namely that they shared out the whole earth, where there were elsewhere indeed bigger (lots) whereas elsewhere also smaller ⁽²²⁾, building temples for sacrifices there, so too did the Island of Atlantis (continent) ⁽²³⁾ bechance unto Poseidon and he populated it with his descendants, who were born of mortal woman at some place on the island (Island) ⁽²⁴⁾ as follows. Indeed neighboring the sea ⁽²⁵⁾ and in the direction of the centre of all (Island & Continent) ⁽²⁶⁾ there was an level plain, which is said to have been the best of all in capability and fertility ⁽²⁷⁾, whereas besides the rest (neighboring the sea) on the plain once again, at the middle ⁽²⁸⁾ at a distance of approximately fifty stadiums (9,5 km from the centre of all), there was a small mountain afar from everywhere (equidistant) ⁽²⁹⁾. Indeed thereon resided one of the first men born on earth ⁽³⁰⁾, named Euvinor, who cohabited with a woman named Leukippi; where they gave birth to an only daughter Kleito ⁽³¹⁾.

So when the daughter had reached man time (time to be married) her mother and father die, whereas because Poseidon desired to come and eventually couple with her, the small hill, where she dwelled, so as to fortify it well he enclosed it within a circle, by constructing wheels of sea and land alternately smaller (of sea) and larger (of land) perimetrically between them, of which two of earth, whereas three of sea, so that starting in rotation from the centre of the island ⁽³²⁾, from everywhere for it to be of same distance (concentric) ⁽³³⁾, so as to be inaccessible to humans; because ships and sea voyages were not yet made at that time ⁽³⁴⁾. Indeed he as a god that he was richly provisioned the centre of the (sacred) island, since he brought from under the earth two kinds of water gushing onto the surface, whereby the one hot, whereas the other cold flowing from a fountain ⁽³⁵⁾ and providing the capability to be produced from the earth every variety and sufficiency of food. So after birthing male children by five twin births, he raised them, and the island (inhabited island) (and) Atlantis all (Island & Continent) ⁽³⁶⁾, having divided it up into ten parts he offered it, of the eldest (twins) to the first who was born and also the maternal residence did he bequeath up to the end of the circle where was the most and premium land ⁽³⁷⁾ and appointed him indeed the king of the others, while to the other archons, to each one independently he gave power over many people and much land.

Indeed he gave names to all, while to the eldest and king he gave the one after whom also Atlantis the entire island (Continent & Island) ⁽³⁸⁾ as well as the pelagos (sea) ⁽³⁹⁾ was named being called Atlantic, because Atlas was the name of the foremost sovereign. (Poseidon) to the twin who was born after him (Atlas), and unto who (second twin) had bechanced the end of the island in the direction of the Pillars of Heracles ⁽⁴⁰⁾ toward (the end) that is to say of the present land of Gadeiriki which was named the same as that place (of the Island), whereas in Greek (would name) Eumilos⁽⁴¹⁾ , while in accordance with the prevalent practice (would name) Gadeiros, which would precisely in this way give a name as an eponym (to that place of the Island) ⁽⁴²⁾. While of those ones second born the one Amphiris, the other Euaimon did he name ⁽⁴³⁾; while the third Mnyseas the first born, whereas the one after him, Autochthon; as to the fourth Elassipos the first, whereas Mistor the next; as to the fifth, while to the first he designated the name Azaes, whereas to the next Diaprepes. All they therefore both them and their descendents dwelled there for many generations as kings indeed over many others and also of the islands which were in the direction of the pelagos, while even, as was also previously said, up to Egypt and Tyrrhenia (lands) inside our parts did they dominate ⁽⁴⁴⁾.

From Atlas is born indeed a most grand and just genus (lineage), while king became always the eldest, who in turn bestowed authority to the eldest of his descendents and in this way they would perpetuate the monarchy over many generations, while having amassed wealth, which multiplied so much, as had never before ever to any other king of the dynasties, nor ever in the future was it easy to come about, while it was by them that all were built, whatever in the polis (city-state) and whatever in whichever other land had ever been constructed.

Because due to their power, many (goods) indeed came from abroad, while most were provided by that island (Island) ⁽⁴⁵⁾ for the buildings which were required in life, indeed first it would give birth to whatever can be extracted from the mines as solids and whatever can be made by smelting ⁽⁴⁶⁾, as well as of the one now known of only in name -for at that time there was much more of the sort of earth from which orichalcum was mined at many parts of the island (Island) ⁽⁴⁷⁾ which with the exception of gold was the most precious for them of that time- and timber as much as they needed for the manufactures of the artisans, all did it supply abundantly, moreover it nourished several tame (domesticated) and wild animals. While in addition there were a large number of elephants there (at the island) ⁽⁴⁸⁾; for there was food there for other animals also, whichever (live) in marshes, in lakes and in rivers, as well as for whichever in the mountains and for whichever graze in the plains, for all of these there was provided aplenty, even for that animal which is by nature the largest and the biggest eater ⁽⁴⁹⁾. Aside from these it produced and supported an abundance of aromatics (flowers & herbs), whatever thing the earth produces now, root vegetables or greens or timber or essences either of flowers or fruits; moreover even the tame (cultivated) fruit which is dry, which we use as food, as well as whatever we use instead of wheat -indeed we call all these varieties legumes ⁽⁵⁰⁾– as well as from the fruit off trees, from which come beverages ⁽⁵¹⁾, also foods and fats and those things that are prized for the delight of children, the fruit that has a hard shell like oak (walnut), moreover whatever we offer after the meal to patients for their digestion and they take them gladly, all these good and marvelous and in infinite quantities did it avail of, that then sacred isle (Poseidonia) ⁽⁵²⁾, that was once under the sun ⁽⁵³⁾.

All these therefore acquiring from their land, they constructed their temples and the royal buildings, and the harbours and the ports and all the rest of the land they provisioned in the following way.

Τhe wheels of sea, which were around the ancient metropolis (Poseidonia), firstly they bridged by constructing a road outwards and towards the palaces ⁽⁵⁴⁾. While the palaces they built promptly from the start at that place which was the first residence of the god and their ancestors (the ten kings) who succeeding one another, adorning the already adorned would surpass the splendour of his predecessor, until they completed them to an amazing degree for one to observe as to their size and beauty. Namely a diorycha (canal) from the sea commencing ⁽⁵⁵⁾ with a width of three plethra (100m), and with a depth of a hundred feet (33m), while with a length of fifty stadiums (9.5 km), on the outermost wheel they did open with a concave shape ⁽⁵⁶⁾, and accomplished the re-navigation (return journey) from the sea towards that (diorycha) ⁽⁵⁷⁾ towards that (wheel) which was akin to a harbour ⁽⁵⁸⁾, and after having pierced a mouth so that they could navigate inwards with the largest of the ships ⁽⁵⁹⁾. And furthermore, as regards the wheels of land, which separated those of sea, they cross sectioned them and formed bridges so as to allow the transit of a trireme between them and covered them on top, so as to be possible to be navigated under; because the lips (rims) of the wheels were of sufficient height protruding from the sea ⁽⁶⁰⁾. It was that indeed the maximal of the wheels, at which the sea synetetrito (flowed constricted through a narrow opening between two diametrically opposed and closely facing each other bays), of three stadiums in width (570 m) ⁽⁶¹⁾, while the next earthen (wheel) equally as wide as that one ⁽⁶²⁾; while of those ones second ⁽⁶³⁾ indeed that wet one (seaward facing) was two stadiums (380 m) wide, whereas the other dry one (landward facing) was equal again to the previous wet one ⁽⁶⁴⁾, while that (wheel) which surrounded that particular island in the centre (Poseidonia), (was) one stadium wide (190 m) ⁽⁶⁵⁾, indeed that island, on which were the palaces, had a diameter of five stadiums (950 m). While that (island) they surrounded circularly with stone walls the thickness of one plethro (33 m) as well as the wheels and the bridge, which was on both the one and the other side (of the wheels), and constructed towers and gates on the bridges over the passages of the sea at each point; as for the stone they cut it perimetrically from the island which was in the centre, as well as from the wheels of land externally (from the edges) and internally (inland), indeed of the white, of the black, of the truly crimson (respectively from the sacred isle of Poseidonia, the exterior and the interior parts of the wheels of land), cutting and simultaneously constructing double ship sheds concave internally, covered by the same stone (the white ⁽⁶⁶⁾. And of the buildings some were plain, whereas others, by mixing a variety of stones for the sake of youthfulness, outwardly demonstrating their innate hedonism (belief that whatever pleasurable is good); and the wall of the outermost wheel they covered over its entire surface with copper, using that in place of colour, while the internal (wall) they poured in tin, whereas the one around that acropolis in orichalcum, which sparkled like fire ⁽⁶⁷⁾.

The palaces inside the acropolis had been built as follows; in the centre was a temple sacred to Kleito and Poseidon, forbidden to enter, surrounded by a golden wall, that was where for the first time they came together erotically and gave birth to the genus of the ten kings; and where also each year from all of the ten lots they would come to that place to make offerings to each of them to whom were dedicated their temples. Indeed to Poseidon himself there was a temple the length of one stadium (190 m), while the width was three plethra (~100m), while the height was such that, when one looks at it to appear symmetrical, while it had something barbaric about it ⁽⁶⁸⁾. Indeed everything on the exterior of the temple they covered in silver, except for the cornerstones which they covered in gold; while in the interior of the temple one could see the roof as comprised of ivory and all decorated with gold and orichalcum, while all the other walls and columns and floor they covered in orichalcum. Indeed golden statues they erected, of the god on a chariot as the charioteer steering the six horses ⁽⁶⁹⁾ and because of its size to touch the top of the roof, one hundred Nereids (water nymphs) on dolphins in a circle -because that was how many they of that time believed them to be- indeed many other statues there were from oblations made by private citizens.

While perimetrically outside the temple there had been erected golden icons of all the women (wives) to wit of them, whoever had become kings (descended) from the ten and many other large offerings made both by kings and by civilians of the polis (city-state) itself as well as from outsiders as many as there were.

There was also an altar in analogy to the size and style of this construction, and correspondingly the royal palaces were analogous to the degree of the power in accordance with to the appropriateness relevant to sacred events. Whereas at its fountains, of cold and hot spring water, of which there were many, and which had aplenty (of water), pleasurable as to the use of each one, and exceptional by nature as to its amazing qualities ⁽⁷⁰⁾ and after they had constructed buildings and planted trees that require irrigation, they built reservoirs and these in the countryside for this purpose (of watering), of which the winter ones with hot baths were roofed, while separate being the royal ones, whereas separate the public ones, while yet others for the women and others for the horses and for the other yoke animals (beasts of burden), decorating each one of these accordingly.

While the excess (cold water) they would direct to the grove of Poseidon, which had trees of every variety and exceptional beauty and tallness owing to the fertile earth, whereas the other (hot water) they drained by means of drainpipes, to the outer circles (wheels) to the bridges ⁽⁷¹⁾.

Indeed there were many temples and of many gods at that place, there were handmade (ornamental) gardens and gymnasiums, of which those for the men, while those for the horses separately on each one of the islands which were formed by the wheels, while besides the others at the centre of the largest of the islands (wheels) ⁽⁷²⁾ it had a separate hippodrome (horse racetrack) on it, with a width of one stadium (190m), while as to the length the whole circle was intended for the competition of horses ⁽⁷³⁾ .

Indeed perimetrically around this (hippodrome) on the one and on the other sides there were houses for the numerous attendants; to the most trustworthy had been ordered the guarding of the smallest wheel and in front of the acropolis, even as to those who were exceptional as to their dependability had been given houses inside the acropolis, around the palaces.

While the shipyards were packed with triremes and equipment such as befit triremes, everything positioned well. Thus indeed in this way had been built what concerned the residence of the kings; as one would traverse the external three harbours ⁽⁷⁴⁾, starting from the sea came a perimeter wall, which was of the maximal wheel and (maximal) harbour (and) at a distance from everywhere of fifty stadiums (9 ½ km) ⁽⁷⁵⁾ and being open ⁽⁷⁶⁾ at the same position (as the opening) as towards the mouth of the diorycha (canal) ⁽⁷⁷⁾, with direction towards the sea ⁽⁷⁸⁾.

While all of this was cohabited by many and dense habitations, while the return route and the maximal port were full of ships and merchants who would came from everywhere, and where because of the crowd there was produced much shouting and noise and there was created hubbub during the course of the day and the night.

So indeed all that have to do with the city (urban area) and about its ancient buildings almost as then told of (by grandfather Critias) I have now quoted from memory; as for the rest of the land as to how was its nature and the various species which constituted it, I must attempt to recall. Firstly therefore it was indeed said that all the place was very precipitous and abrupt from the sea, while the pan-plain around the polis (inhabited island) did enclose it ⁽⁷⁹⁾, while that (pan-plain) was enclosed within a circle by mountains that reached as far as the sea, (whereas) it was flat and even, while elongated was it all, whereas both the two (non-elongated sides were) three thousand stadiums (570 km), while at the middle (of the elongated side along the entire expanse from top to bottom) from (the side adjacent to) the sea, (the pan-plain was) more than two thousand stadiums (380 km). While this place of the entire island was turned due south, leeward of the arctic bears (winds blowing from 0˚ north). As for the mountains around this (place), there was the great fame that as to the plethora and size and beauty they were superior to all the present ones ⁽⁸¹⁾, and they contained many and wealthy neighboring towns, and rivers and lakes and meadows for pasture, for fodder that was able to nourish all both the tame (domesticated) and the wild (animals), while having timber in great quantity and diversity for all constructions and for each one individually aplenty. That therefore was the nature of the plain and many kings and for long periods of time had made the most of it. Indeed it was a tetragon from the beginning generally rectangular and elongated ⁽⁸²⁾, while wherever something was spare, they would direct it in a straight line to a moat which they would dig perimetrically in a circle (around the pan-plain); while the depth and width and length of this (moat) as was told is unbelievable, that it is handmade work, which when compared to all the others is so enormous, but it must be told that which we did hear; thus indeed the depth had been excavated to one plethro (33 m), while in width everywhere it was one stadium (190 m), while the entire (moat), which had been excavated perimetrically around the plain, happened to have a length of ten thousand stadiums (1.900 km) ⁽⁸³⁾. While the rivers that flowed down from the mountains it (the moat) did receive and in this manner encircling the plain, reaching from the one and the other side to the polis (inhabited island) ⁽⁸⁴⁾, would release them ⁽⁸⁵⁾, so that they would flow out to the sea ⁽⁸⁶⁾. While on this (plain), there were (excavated) dioryches (canals) in straight lines of at least 100 feet (33m) wide, intersecting vertically as to the direction of the plain and again did reach the moat towards the sea, while each (diorycha) was at a distance of 100 stadiums (19 km) from the other; by means of this (moat) they would bring down logging from the mountains to the city (urban area) and the other goods would arrive downwards on ships ⁽⁸⁷⁾, while the crossing from the dioryches towards the others (was made) by intersecting those diagonally and in the direction of the polis (inhabited island). From this land they would reap crops two times a year, whereby in the winter by utilizing waters from Zeus (rain), while in summer by what was offered by the earth, that is to say the spring waters which would come up, via the diorychae (pl: diorycha = canals) ⁽⁸⁸⁾. For the numerous useful (able bodied) men for war (who lived) in the plain he (Poseidon) had arranged to provide a lot to each male leader, of which the size of each lot was one hundred stadiums (19 km), while all together there were sixty thousand lots ⁽⁸⁹⁾; while the number of people from the mountains and the rest of the land, it was said to be innumerable, thus all these lots had been apportioned unto the leaders (of the inhabitants) of those areas and towns. So the leader who had been appointed as to warfare (as the chief commander in the event of war), was required to provide by random selection, one sixth of the soldiers for each chariot of countless chariots, while two horses plus riders, and in addition a chariot of two horses without the double seat, a soldier for landing carrying a small shield and the passenger (charioteer) who held the reins of both horses, even as two hoplites and two archers and for each (hoplite and archer) two slingers (and) lapidators lightly armed and spearmen three unto each (hoplite and archer). While four seamen as crew for each of one thousand two hundred vessels ⁽⁹⁰⁾. That is how was arranged the military organization of the royal polis (city-state), whereas of the other nine (royal city-states), in another, about which I could speak at length.

The ranks and honorific distinctions had from the outset been determined in the following manner. Each one individually of the ten kings ruled over the men in his land and of his polis and lay down most of the laws, punishing and putting to death whomever he wished; the exercise of power however and the relationships between them were in keeping with the edicts of Poseidon, as the law stipulated unto them and the letters (of the law) were engraved by the first (kings) on an orichalcum stele, which was inside the temple of Poseidon in the centre of the island ⁽⁹¹⁾, so they (the kings) would assemble every five or six years alternately, since they honored equally both the odd and the even numbers ⁽⁹²⁾, convening and deciding on matters of common interest and would examine if someone had violated some law and would judge him.

While when they were about to sit in judgment, they would first take vows of loyalty between them as follows. After letting bulls free inside the temple of Poseidon, left on their own being ten, after praying to the god to decide on the sacred slaughter which would be agreeable to him, would pursue them without irons, but with sticks and nooses, while whichever of the bulls they captured, after leading him to the stele, would slaughter him, there where the letters were engraved at its top; while on the stele, near to the laws, there was an oath with terrible curses unto them who would not comply (with the laws).

So after they had made the sacrifice in accordance with the laws and had sanctified all the parts of the bull, they would pour and mix wine with blood in a krater each in turn ⁽⁹³⁾, while the rest (body parts) they would throw into the fire, and clean off the stele; while after that by drawing off (the mixture) with golden vials from the krater they would perform libations by pouring into the fire and would take an oath that they will dispense justice according to the laws on the stele, and that they will apply punishment, if someone had previously violated any (law) and furthermore they would take (an oath) that they will not violate any written law volitionally nor would they override nor would they conform to the archon (king of the Atlas lineage) except if he governed in accordance with the laws of the father (Poseidon).

These pledges, each of them having made, both for himself and on behalf of his genus, having drunk and offered the vial (jug) to the temple of the god, and after making arrangements as to the dinner and all the necessities, as soon as night fell and the fire around the slaughter began to go out, all wearing the most beautiful cyan uniform, sitting on the floor by the warmth of the slaughters and the libations, throughout the night and after extinguishing every flame that burned around the temple of the god, both judged and were judged, if one of them had accused another of having made some violation; and after adjudicating the issued verdict , at day break, they would write it on a golden tablet, and offer it to the god along with their uniforms as testimony.

There were many other specific laws as to the office of each of the kings, of which the most important, that they would never declare war among themselves and they would all help among themselves, if one of them by some means attempted to dethrone the royal genus (lineage) of any polis (city-state), while deciding in common, exactly as had their ancestors, as to the correct options as regards war, and on other matters, conceding the leadership to the lineage of Atlas. While furthermore the king did not have the right to put to death any of the relatives, if this did not seem right to more than half of the ten kings ⁽⁹⁴⁾.

But this so great and of such manner of power that there was then at those areas the god after amassing it did lead it against these lands, under the following, as the narration says, alleged reason.

For indeed many generations, as long as there was still the influence of the god upon them, they were obedient to the laws and honored their divine kinship; because their thoughts were pure and they had accomplished gracious acts and were gentle and with prudence on every occasion and in their interrelationships, and thus contemning everything, except for virtue, they would regard things of the present as inconsequential and with great ease considered as burdensome the amount of gold and remaining possessions, but neither did they err intoxicated by indulgence thereby losing self-restraint on account of wealth, to the contrary composedly, they saw plainly that these too all increase thanks to the common amity with virtue, whereas these same possessions are destroyed due to the constant pursuance and overvaluation of them, while that (value) too is lost together with them. Due to this way of thinking therefore, and the divine nature that lingered (in them), everything of theirs developed, all that we referred to previously. But when the divine element was eradicated because it mixed a great deal and many times with the mortal and the human element prevailed, they subsequently began to offend (behave with impropriety), because they were unable to bear the weight of their belongings, and to him who had the ability to judge, they seemed disgraceful, because they had lost the very best of their most precious assets, but they who were incapable of discerning the true and felicitous life, appeared as if eminently blessed, even though they had been consumed literally by greed for inequity and power. Therefore Zeus the god of gods, who reigns in accordance with the laws, because he can discern such things, on realizing that the chosen race was behaving despicably, wishing to punish them so as to become judicious, after coming to their senses, called to council all the gods in their most honorable abode, which is in the centre of the whole cosmos and who observes and considers all things, whichever have taken place, and on having assembled them, said… ⁽⁹⁵⁾

… in continuation and ending, there follows an addendum by the present author which demonstrates that Plato did in fact conclude Critias and moreover, did so flawlessly.

This ancient excerpt is not placed here arbitrarily by the author. Justification for it follows in the analysis of para.96.

Thus, at the start of Homer’s The Odyssey, Zeus speaks to the assembled gods and says…

“O alas, how mortals put the blame on the gods. They declare that from us stem their misfortunes, while it is often they themselves who with their bad deeds fall into grief beyond the written…” ⁽⁹⁶⁾

4. Analyses of the Translation.

Translators Preamble: All the reference books that the author has used in support of his theories are listed in the Greek version of this book, which also contains the ancient text. Self evidently, it is ineffectual to attempt to reproduce here, in the English version, the grammatical, syntactical and contextual studies conducted on the ancient text. Even so, it is necessary to justify the commentaries that follow so as to put to rest any misgivings as to arbitrariness. Thus, wherever feasible, analyses which can be explained relevantly in English have been presented in maximum scope and detail. Fortunately, the instances which do not lend themselves to such analysis are few.

No discount is made as to the number of notes to be analyzed (a total of 96 in both the Greek and this, the English language version). It goes without saying, seeing it’s been said elsewhere, the process of translation was meticulous, comprehensive, cross referenced, cross checked and collaborative. As also previously stated, the rendition into English follows a principle of faithfulness without lapsing into incomprehensibleness. To this end and to avoid tiring the English reader with extensive transliterations from Greek, only a few but essential key words have been retained from the ancient Greek.

In view of the above, the author as well as the translator, wish to reassure the reader, once again, that the notes which now follow in explication with the accompanying remarks, interpretations and conclusions, are well founded, having been researched according to scientific methodology and by the test of proof or proven by testing, each according to case.

Notes

1. After his talk in Timaeus, Critias expands on his description of Atlantis in Critias. The two narrations are interconnected and the reader can move uninterruptedly between the two as if they are one continuous narrative. Critias ‘apologizes’ in advance about the paradoxical nature of the subject he is about to present and starts off with a long introduction on how humans perceive the artistic portrayal of gods and mortals in his attempts to prepare his audience about the description he is about to make as to the divine and extant. Clearly, it shows his anxiety at the prospect of being faced with the incredulity of his listeners and for this reason, he forewarns them of the complexity and singularness of the topic on which he is about to speak.

2. In Timaeus, Critias began his description of Atlantis as from 8.000 years before his time whereas in Critias the time perspective changes. He carries on with his description from further in the past, 9.000 years before his time or 1.000 years earlier than from in Timaeus. This gives rise to the deduction of a war that preceded that at the time of the catastrophe, around 9.600 BC. The reader is reminded that in Timaeus it was reported that a great war took place between Athens and Atlantis in 8.600 BC which ended with the destruction of all in 8.585 BC.

3. Plato states that war “in actual fact” began in 9.600 BC. Therefore, this war took place before the one in Timaeus. It therefore signifies that not one but two wars took place, within 1.000 years of each other. The deities Athena and Hephaestos took charge of the Athenians at the start of the first war, to nurture and advance their civilization. At the outbreak of the second war in 8.600 BC, they also took charge of Egypt. This is derived from the words of the Egyptian priest, who stated that the goddess Athena went to Egypt 1.000 years after Athens and that his people learned and began to keep written records 8.000 years before he spoke with Solon. As will be shown, Poseidon had undertaken to develop Atlantis much, much earlier. As for who instigated the first war, Plato, in purposely intricate syntactical manner, that is analyzed in the Greek version of this book, clarifies that it was started by those who were outside the Pillars of Heracles in relation to the Atlantians, that is, by the peoples of the Mediterranean and specifically by the Athenians and their allies. As for the second war, he states plainly that it was started by the Atlantians.

4. It is important to note that before the first war, the forces of the Atlantians and the Athenians were each on their respective side of the Pillars of Heracles. Thus, the Atlantians were ‘inside’ whereas the Athenians, ‘outside’. Therefore, if the Atlantians were in Tyrrhenia at the start of the second war in 8.600 BC, then clearly they must have been victorious in the first war! In which case, this proves the assertion of having been two wars and also explains how the Atlantians came to be in Tyrrhenia and as far as the border of Egypt.

5. The term “island of Atlantis” is one of the many demonstrations of Plato’s reverse thinking. In Timaeus, wherever he writes the word “island” on its own, it is in reference to the Continent and wherever ‘island of Atlantis’, he means the Island of the 10 city-states , in other words, the inhabited island. In Critias, he reverses it in that where he writes “island of Atlantis” he refers to the Continent and where “island” on its own, it is in reference to the Island. This occurs several times in the text. Furthermore, the analysis of the syntax of the next sentence confirms that the Continent too, is considered to be an island.

6. As per above; in Critias, when Plato writes “island of Atlantis” he means the Continent. This reversal of meaning will be seen again further on. Thus, it is once more confirmed that there is an island that is also a continent.

7. It is unequivocally stated that earthquakes were the main cause due which an island was covered (which island, will be clarified in due course) and a “poros” (narrow navigable waterway) was blocked. It is the same “poros” referred to in Timaeus, where Plato stated that the “poros” which led to the “there-pelagos” was blocked by a small quantity of clay. In other words, Plato indirectly indicates that it is the same “poros” in both cases. This is a key item of information because it associates the sea termed “there-pelagos” in Timaeus with the “pan-pelagos” in Critias (&9). There is no mention made of a volcanic eruption or some other disruptive natural occurrence. Of course, it is not impossible that the earthquakes were triggered by an especially violent volcanic eruption at some faraway place but there is no reference to sounds of explosions or observations of volcanic clouds or unusual precipitation. Therefore it is taken as given that an extremely violent earthquake with a series of powerful aftershocks over the course of 24 hours occurred. There followed the catastrophic events of liquefaction and of the flood because of the blockage of the drainage system, as Plato explains in Timaeus and makes clear in Critias.

8. a) It is evident from the text that because of the continual shaking, clay was produced which blocked the “poros” (narrow waterway). In which case, the most plausible of all hypotheses is that of widespread liquefaction and/or a colossal land or mudslide, which impacted on both land and sea.

b) With regard to the word “poros”, the same interpretation is given here as in Timaeus. The word “aporon” with the negative prefix “a-” before the noun, defines it as an ‘ex-poros’ or ‘non-poros’ or as an absent “poros”. It is the same navigable waterway referred to in Timaeus (&10). Not a breach or other type of waterway. Plato here points out that the “poros” became a ‘non-poros’ because of the clay that was produced (he gives the chronological sequence of events) after the island was covered by sea and essentially at the moment when the Continent (the land of the Continent) was settling, as is reported in Timaeus. Thus is confirmed that the sea referred to as the “there-pelagos” in Timaeus, ceased to be linked to the sea referred to as the “there-pontos”. Furthermore, it is obvious that the “aporon” waterway that was blocked in Timaeus is the same blocked “aporon” waterway in Critias and this, because Plato uses the same characteristic word in both his books. Also important is that in both cases, it is clay that is reported as being the cause of the blockage. What is more, in Timaeus, by writing “aporos” (i.e. unnavigable waterway) Plato has already established that it is the same “narrow navigable entrance” mentioned later in the same book. Thus, the waterway characterized as “aporos” in Timaeus is identified as being the same “aporon” waterway in Critias as well as with the “narrow navigable entrance” mentioned in Timaeus. Thus, confirmation that the waterways mentioned are actually the same single waterway is that it was clay which blocked it, in so doing rendering it nonexistent as a waterway and thereby unnavigable.

9. a) In other translations, the term “pan-pelagos” is usually rendered as ‘entire sea’ or ‘sea’ or with words to that effect. It is interesting and defining to understand why Plato refers to this sea as the “pan-pelagos”. Once again, the philosopher displays a remarkable contrivance of logic in words. In Timaeus, he reports that the Atlantian military force would set off from the “there-pelagos” which was before a narrow navigable waterway which was shown to be a “poros” which subsequently became “aporos”. Now, in Critias, he reports that the “pan-pelagos” is no longer accessible (he describes the route in the opposite direction than when in Timaeus) because it is “aporon” i.e. this sea lacks a navigable waterway via which to get to it. He thereby indicates and confirms that the “there-pelagos” is the same as the “pan-pelagos” by dint of the fact that they had the same “poros” which became “aporos” or a ‘non-poros’! Consequently by deduction, the waterway, which ceased to be, connected two different seas, namely, the “there-pontos” and the “there-pelagos”. This will be reaffirmed further on. Thus is reached the very useful and significant conclusion that the “there-pelagos” in Timaeus which became “aporos”, is the same as the “pan-pelagos” in Critias which was “aporon”. To make it more understandable, in plain English, the inland sea in Timaeus whose exit to the outer sea was blocked by clay and was therefore landlocked, is that same inland sea in Critias which had been closed off and was no longer accessible by boat from the outer sea.

b) When Plato describes the continent in Timaeus, he does so from afar, from the Pillars of Heracles at least. Consequently, he refers to the sea there as the “there-pelagos” because it is at a distance from where he is. In Critias however, Plato is now ‘there’ and so his description of Atlantis takes place from ‘there’. Consequently, his spatial perspective changes and he employs a different term by which to define this sea: the prefix “pan-”.

10. Here it is again apparent that the “pan-pelagos” used to be behind the blocked “poros” because they who were ‘on this side’ (as translates the relevant word in the ancient Greek text and which indicates the side on which there are Athens, the Pillars of Heracles, the Atlantic Pelagos and Pontos, or in a direction from ‘here’ to ‘there’) could not navigate outwards from ‘here’ to the “pan-pelagos” which was ‘there’. In other words, it was not possible to navigate from the outside places and the Pontos sea which, as analyzed in Timaeus, were all before the “poros” and so, by this route, go to the “pan-pelagos”. Thus is derived a most important conclusion (by combining information found in both Timaeus and Critias), that the sea route to Atlantis was:

Pillars of Heracles → Gadeiriki → other islands in the “there-pontos” → a place somewhat like a harbour in the middle of the Pontos → through a narrow entrance and a “poros” (which had not yet become “aporos” and enabled “those on this side” to go to the ‘there’ side) → the “there-pelagos” or “pan-pelagos” sea → Island of Atlantis → Kingdom of Atlas and the wheel arrangement.

Further on in the text, there is additional substantiation that the sea via which the wheel system would be reached, was the “pan-pelagos” since they would go through a “diorycha” (i.e. the opening to a narrow waterway) which was a pierced mouth and in this way arrive to the interior of the Island of Atlantis where the wheel arrangement was. Thus are confirmed the positions of the Pontos, the “poros” and of the “there-pelagos” or “pan-pelagos”. In due course it will be shown that a “pan-plain” encompassed the both the Island of Atlantis and the “pan-pelagos”.

11. Plato defines that the Atlantians were comprised of many nations while the Greeks of diverse races. In order to dispel any doubt as to the analyses of the previous sentences, by the syntactically examining the meaning of the previous sentence (which refers to the immediately previous paragraph), it is clear that the first “navigate outwards” refers to the “nations that were barbaric” of the Atlantians whereas the second (which is not written but is clearly inferred by the syntax), relates to the Greeks who would want to “navigate outwards” to there!

12. At this point, Plato makes an interesting comment that has never received due attention. He states that “The gods did at sometime divide all the earth of that time by sortition (drawing or casting of lots) – without contention;” This took place during a time when humankind was completely undeveloped. However, in Timaeus he states that in 9.600 BC, the deities Athena and Hephaestus drew the lots by which they obtained Greece and Egypt, while Athens is not referred to as being undeveloped at the time under the leadership of Kekrops. Also, in relation to the draw, it is interesting to observe that “…it would not be proper for gods not to know of what is analogous to each one, nor again, while knowing that something belongs more to others to attempt by contention to obtain it …” This signifies that there were already some gods who had shares to which others were laying claim. This becomes clearer in Critias where it is stated that at the time when Poseidon united with Kleito, whose father was one of the first humans of that land (i.e. the continent), ships did not exist. However, the first war which, as has been shown, broke out in 9.600 BC, presupposes the existence of sea going vessels. As a result, it is proven that Poseidon had preceded and obtained his share before Athena took over in Athens. At that time (9.600 BC) the Athenians were not in communion, so to speak, with the gods, whereas the Atlantians had Poseidon as their guardian. In which case, the draw that is mentioned here is some sort of follow-up lottery or competition in order to settle who was in charge over what lands. The implication is that Athena and Hephaestus, who were ‘younger’ than the known gods, took part in a subsequent draw or competition by which they claimed and took possession of their domains, namely, of Athens (and the Greece of that time, as per the description) and of Egypt! Thus it is relatively safe to assume that the draw, this second time around, was the competition between Athena and Poseidon for the patronage of Athens.

Also, the phrase “the then known earth” implies that it was recognized that there were massive geological occurrences which had transformed the face of the earth and will transform it again in the future such as, for example, the rise and fall in sea levels.

13. This analogy of humans being guided by persuasion with a boat being steered from the stern is also found in the Orphic poems: Hymn to Law.

“For only this (the law) controls the rudder of animals (sentient beings), because it has upright maxims, is resolute, ogygian, wise, cohabiting soundly with the just, but begets grave detriment unto the unjust.”

Note: the term ‘Ogygian law’ should be kept in mind.

14. Kekropas or Cecrops, according to Greek mythology was a well disposed daemon, half man, half serpent. He was the first ruler of olden Athens, when it was known as Kekropia. Certainly, the known mythology is not revealing enough so as to identify the time of his reign. Plato provides this information for the first time, via Solon and the reports of the Egyptian priest, to have been 11.550 BP or 9.600 BC. Cecrops’ wife was Aglaurus and Erysichthon was his son. According to folklore, in view of an impending war with the Karres and Boeotians, he founded a dodeca-polis (twelve-in-one city state) in Attica (the province of Athens). He organized the first population census, lay down legislation, established monogamy and burial of the dead and taught the first alphabet. It was during his reign when the competition between Athena and Poseidon for the patronage of the city to be duly called Athens, took place.

The much later Athenians honoured Kekropas at the Erechtheum of the Acropolis and his grave was at its northwestern edge. This part was connected to the Caryatids via a small stoa which in the official inscriptions of 409 BC is named Prostasis (Pre-station) or Unto Kekropas (in dedication to Kekropas). This space was identified by Wilhelm Doerpfeld (Barmen 1853 – Lefkas 1940), from the inscription on a large 4.6 m long stone tablet found at the northwestern internal room of the Erechtheum.

As for Erechtheas, he was the next king of the Athenians succeeding Kekropas (who, according to Isocrates, was childless). He was the son of Hephaestus and Gaia. He was claimed to be the founder of the Eleusinian mysteries, the Pan Athenian celebrations and the inventor of the four-horse drawn chariot. However, according to other traditions, these institutions were established by Erichthonius who is considered to have been the father of Erechtheas. Erechtheas and his family lineage were annihilated by the enraged Poseidon (!) because of the killing of Eumolpus, king of the defeated Eleusinians, by Erechtheas. In his memory was erected the previously mentioned Erechtheum at the Acropolis (Encyclopedias Domi and Helios).

In short, Plato informs that the story of Kekrops is much older than it is thus far believed to have been. Even today, these names are chronologically placed by certain researchers at various dates ranging from 3.000 to 1.600 BC.

Zeus was the first of the gods who together with his siblings, Poseidon and Pluto, emerged victorious from the Titanomachy. Therefore, Poseidon had the patronage of the Atlantians and perhaps also of the Greeks, long before the goddess Athena arrived on the scene. In which case and in view of the above, Athena seems to have laid her claim somewhat belatedly.

The sortition referred to here, indicates that the war of 9.600 BC was led by Kekropas and possibly also by his son Erysichthon. Athena had not participated in the first lottery. Subsequently, at the outbreak of the first war, Athena took over the benefaction of Athens. Then, 1.000 years later, the second and last war took place. Erechtheas and those after him, possibly including at least one synonymous descendent named Kekropas, were the new kings of Athens. In 9.600 BC, the name of the city was changed to Athens.

There is the well known myth that recounts how Athena, after prevailing over Poseidon in a contest judged by the Athenian citizens, undertook the patronage of Athens. So as to appease the loser, the Athenians constructed the famous temple of Poseidon at Cape Sounion, on the southernmost tip of the province of Attica, now mostly in ruins but with part of it still standing. The west pediment of the Parthenon (as much as survived the wrath of the early Christian years, the vandalism of the Venetians under Francesco Morosini and the desecrating fervor of the Scot, Lord Elgin) portrays in exquisite sculpture the famed duel of the deities. However, here in Plato’s narrative, the prehistoric mythology carried over from Egypt, attributes the patronage of Athens to the luck of the draw. Amongst other things, even though Plato is clear as to the jurisdiction of Athena over her prize, he also states that Hephaestus and Gaia gave of their sperm; namely, their offspring Erechtheas. Indeed, this is also corroborated by mythology, in that Erechtheas was the divine sperm that was passed on to the inhabitants of Athens. As from that time, Kekropia was renamed Athens

Finally, one is unavoidably led to thinking of a further association. Throughout Greek mythology, the goddess Athena is in constant competition with her uncle Poseidon; and twice against the Atlantians (in both wars) as well as in the Odyssey!

15. a) Even today, Greeks will customarily name their children after their grandparents although in recent decades there has been a noticeable shift away from this tradition in preference of ancient Greek names thereby replacing many of the Christian ones that had been established over the previous centuries.

b) Athena is invariably portrayed in military attire and chronologically this is related to the occupations of women at a time when there was an established equality between the sexes in times of war.

16. This information is particularly interesting for two reasons. Firstly, Plato gives the approximate date of certain significant geomorphologic occurrences in the Attica basin. Secondly, should these be verified, they will substantiate what was analyzed in Timaeus as to the exact calculations of the dates of that period of time and this, because these natural transformations could not have taken place 2-3.000 years ago! Regrettably, this information has been ignored.

Therefore, the year in which there was much erosion by water, is given to be 11.600 BP or 9.600 BC. What is more, further on in the text (&19), there is commentary on the time prior to this date. In addition, Plato gives a description of an earthquake (he refers to “occurrences” here, which he qualifies in &19) and a cataclysm that changed the Athenian topography and which are reminiscent of the catastrophic natural phenomena that befell Atlantis, namely, liquefaction (of the soft ground, as is mentioned elsewhere) as well as a deluge and an earthquake. This report alone, once it is cross-referenced with geological research that may find evidence to prove that these natural events did in fact occur, will confirm the dates given by Solon with regard to this natural event and also the information supplied by the Egyptian priest. Furthermore, should the latter’s information be substantiated, it will confirm that in that far distant past (long before 11.600 BP), there may well have been civilizations of note in Athens and Egypt as well and with the two cultures intercommunicating. Otherwise, how else would the Egyptian priest have come to know of all this information? He must have drawn it from somewhere.

To date, from existing paleogeographical evidence as to when these particular environmental changes took place, the following important information has been derived.

According to a study by D. Papanikolaou, E. & K. Bassi, Ch. Kranis and G. Danamas (2004), during the Later Miocene epoch (10-6 million years ago), there was a range of hills in the central part of what is now the basin in which is Athens. Today, besides the Acropolis of course, three hills remain (Lycabetus, Philoppapou, Turkovounia). The sea in those times, reached as far as the hill of Philopappou, which is very close to that of the Acropolis, and may perhaps have been a promontory. The topographical picture was about the same during the Early Pliocene Epoch (4-2 million years ago). The sea still reached as far as the present day central Athenian suburb of Agios Dimitrios. It was only during the Middle Pliocene Epoch (800.000- 500.000 years ago) that this barrier of the central range of hills had ceased to exist and the topography of the Attica basin looked very much like it does today. Whereas during the Later Pleistocene, that is just before the present Holocene epoch, when the level of the sea was lower by 120 m (see SECTION 3), the present day islands of Aegina and Salamina were one lamdmass (Mariolakos and Theocharis 2001) and the hills in the Attica basin had their present day form. The start of the Holocene epoch has been scientifically determined to have been before 11.430 years ± 130 years! Plato reports that this is the time (11.600 BP) at which the terrain had taken the shape familiar to Solon and himself and which was as it is today. With modern scientific methods, it is chronologically ascertained that it was perhaps some millenniums before 11.600 BP! It is apparent that the two reports, the modern scientific and the historical, draw a close parallel. It would be indeed very interesting to determine exactly when these hills took their present form. It may lead to decisive historical confirmation that in the Attica basin existed civilized societies from 23-25.000 BP! In any case, Plato is already justified, as he gives a particular millennium albeit without the chronological precision allowed by today’s capabilities for research.

17. Plato makes an informative description of waterworks that were designed to select and store rainwater for later use. The runoff from higher ground was gathered in hollow places. This seems a much more effective alternative to today’s practice of positioning logs as barriers to stop or divert torrents in forests ravaged by fire. As described, the water gathers in water basins and its rush and volume is reduced while at the same time allowing the earth time to absorb it. In this way, aquifers are maintained and replenished. An added benefit is that the spores of the burnt trees, by not being washed away, not only remain on site but also in pits ready for immediate and natural reproduction; thus, not even manual planting is required. Forestry managers everywhere, heed the ancient ways…

18. Once again reference is made to the correct division of the hours (Section 3 – S. Chasapis – Report on 11.835 BC or 13.789 BP) This notable remark reflects back to what was described in Timaeus and demonstrates that the ancients were fully cognizant at which periods of time and at which geographical coordinates, the hours between day and night, in the course of a year, were in correct proportion.

19. a) The dissolution of the ground at Athens had preceded the growth of civilization in Kekropia and also occurred before the catastrophe of Atlantis. These natural events in Attica had the same cause and effect as those which befell the Atlantians, namely liquefaction and landslip. It is reported that excessive volumes of water in combination with earthquakes resulted in continual wastage.

b) The Greeks have still today preserved the legend of three great floods; those of Ogyges, Dardanus and Deucalion. Plato here reports a third cataclysm in Attica, which was so far unknown, making that of Deucalion, fourth.

20. There is a well on the Acropolis, now dry, from which were retrieved shards of pottery from a much older era than that classically recognized as there having been advanced civilizations established on mainland Greece (12^th cent. BC). This well is not the same as the one referred to by Plato, because he adds that where it used to be, the Acropolis was subsequently built and thus, only “remained the present perimetric small brooks”. This report by Plato and/or the Egyptian priest, confirms that there was a well prior to the one known to have been from the pre-classical era. According to the description, it is probably below the temple of the Parthenon which was built many millennia later.

21. a) Shortly before, Plato writes that Solon had intended to incorporate this story of Atlantis in his poetry. Deliberately, he again alerts his reader that this story was almost recorded to be passed down in yet another poem because, as will be shown in due course, it had already partly been done by the Orphic poets and also by Homer in his epics. But one needs to know these latter mentioned writings in depth so as to be able to recognize the references. As one progresses in the of reading Critias and in correlation with all that has been referred to previously, there should be no doubt in anybody’s mind that those great poets had incorporated in their recounts certain specific regions of Atlantis and an ‘unknown’ until now, topography of Africa.

b) It is stated that Critias (i.e. Plato) had the story he is recounting also in writing from his great-grandfather. Therefore it is safe to assume that Plato had actually studied these manuscripts and had not just memorized the narrative of Critias so as to subsequently write in such a circumlocutory manner. It must here be reminded that in SECTION 1 of this book which deals with Timaeus, reference is made to Plato and Eudoxus having visited Sais in Egypt and staying there for thirteen years. As to why Plato states that Critias despite having the story in writing nevertheless recounts it off by heart, this will be analyzed in due course.

c) The ‘translation’ of foreign names into Greek, has preserved the particularities characterizing many peoples and places of olden times. This is but one reason why even today, care should be taken when translating all names and designations. In cases where hydronyms and toponyms cannot be rendered in another language in a way such as will maintain their historically distinguishing characteristics, they should be transliterated and spelled in a way that is as faithful as possible to the original. One of many examples to be avoided is that of Gadeiriki, which in some other recent reports is written as Gades or Gadez or Gadirus. Such renaming, which was done either by mistake or deliberately for political and/or economic expediencies, would subsequently often become generally accepted and thus recognized, would be propagated through the years. This has given rise to confusion because scholars in recent centuries, by applying onomastics when conducting research, were misled, since they based their studies on erroneous renditions or interpretations of the original names.

22. So in this way Poseidon obtained a sizeable portion of the world, which was the Continent of Atlantis, while Athena and Hephaestus received smaller ones. There is no mention of the other gods, who obviously must have had their own lots elsewhere.

23. Here is seen how the schematic logic followed in Timaeus, is reversed in Critias and remains so. Accordingly, wherever Plato writes “island” he means the Island of Atlantis and wherever “island of Atlantis” he means the Continent of Atlantis i.e. the opposite meaning as in Timaeus. The reason being that, in Critias, Plato is no longer ‘getting’ to the continent (as in Timaeus) but has ‘arrived’ at the island and is therefore ‘on site’ and unfolding the story from that geographical perspective; hence the reversal of definition.

24. The original rulers were all born on the Island of Atlantis, not somewhere else on the Continent. This item of information is relevant, as will become apparent further on.

25. The centre of the Continent, the Island and the wheel system to which Plato refers to immediately afterwards, were not far from the sea. This is an important condition that must be met and which will also be duly shown to be relevant.

26. a) Plato makes reference to a location that is “the centre of all” meaning the centre of both the Continent and the Island. It is as to this place that he gives the geographical bearing of the places mentioned in his previous phrase which are both the Continent and the Island. It is an illustrative sentence which qualifies the previous one and confirms that which was opined in Timaeus. Namely, that when the word “all”, or its synonyms in whichever grammar case, is used in qualification of the term “island of Atlantis”, it is meant to signify both the Island and the Continent! Thus, as has been established, “all” is a key word. Plato uses it three more times (in different grammar cases) in relation to the Continent or the Island of Atlantis. Of course, Plato uses this word elsewhere, but when he associates it to the Island or the Continent, he means them as per the above analysis.

b) The characteristic phrase translated here as “…in the direction of the centre…” is used three times (in similar wording). It is also of major defining importance because depending on its combination with the words it accompanies its meaning changes. This change of meaning oftentimes happens with many ancient Greek words which must be considered within the context of the text.

In ancient Greek, the above phrase usually indicates the direction towards a location which is in the centre or the in the proximity of the centre, whereas the phrase “…in the middle…” usually means exactly that. In the writings of other olden writers it may have a different connotation but in his use of the specific expression, Plato is reminiscent of Herodotus. (The relevant Greek grammar rules, analyses and correlations are in the Greek version of this book).

To summarize, there is a place on the Island which is in the proximity of the centre of the Continent and the fertile plain of the Island and which is at the same time central as to the length and breadth of the Continent and the Island!

This is an incredibly precise geographical condition which must be met and in fact exists! To be seen in due course.

27. Plato refers to a small fertile plain where Poseidon ‘constructed’ the famed concentric wheel system of Atlantis and in the centre of which, as he clarifies in due course, was a small mountain or hill that was later transformed into the Sacred Isle (Poseidonia), hub of the wheels.

28. a) Plato here means that the plain was “…in the direction of the centre of all…” of the Continent and the Island. Furthermore, at its own centre and in the direction of the sea -at a distance of 9.5 km away from “…the centre of all…”- a landmark which, as will be reported further, was a small mountain or hill (Image 50). The grammatical and syntactical analyses of the ancient text by which the conclusion that follows is drawn, is exhaustively presented in the Greek version of this book. Accordingly, the conclusion is that the small mountain or hill was nearer the sea by 9, 45 km from the centre of all. Put in another way, that initial point on the plain that is “…the centre of all…” is in the opposite direction of that point which is “at the middle…” of the plain and is also in the opposite direction from the sea. Therefore, there is the point that is in the centre of all and yet another point which is the hill in the middle of the plain which is in the middle of the Island and they are all in a line towards the sea. This means that the middle of the plain is between the centre of all (the length and breadth of the Island and Continent) and the sea.

b) The phrase translated as “… besides the rest on the plain once again…” has been rendered by following the grammatical analysis of the ancient text and interpreted according to accredited dictionaries. Thus is concluded that what Plato means, is that apart from being the centre of all, there is ‘something more’ there. He duly states that there is a hill in the centre and further on will emerge to what else he is implying here. All the above will become evident in due course.

29. Plato states that in the middle of the plain there is a hill “… afar from everywhere…” This means that it was equidistant from everywhere which indicates that it was in the centre of a circle. A similar contrivance was seen in Timaeus when he describes the harbour-like place which could be seen from everywhere, which is Plato’s way of showing that the harbour was at a ‘central’ point on the Continent. Consequently, if the equidistant from everywhere point (in this case, the hill) is a central point and in the middle of the plain, it follows that the plain is round (Plato confirms this further on) and its centre is this small mountain or hill. Its diameter is at least 9, 45 + 9, 45 km because it is not yet given exactly how far he sea is and, as will be shown in due course, there was an intervening “…perimetric wall…”. This element will be given much further on in the text (Image 54).

It is highly improbable, nay, impossible, for the above mentioned geographical conditions that Plato describes to have a coincidental counterpart in reality. And yet, as will be shown in due course, these conditions do in fact exist at Richat and what is more, correspond with remarkable precision as to their depiction and given dimensions.

30. As “…earth…” Plato means the Continent of Atlantis. This has been analyzed in the section on Timaeus. Thus, Euvinor was of the first inhabitants of the Continent of Atlantis, not of the planet Earth.

50

Στάδια

Point B

Small visible Hill, from the center of the island, and from the sea and from everywhere around. Center of the plain.

“Afar from everywhere”.

SEA

Fertile plain, in the middle of the Island.

Point A.

Center of the Island and of the Continent. (At their width and Length)

Point C.

Joined point of sea and the plain.

Center of the fertile plain

Image 50: Illustration of the small fertile plain. Point A has been determined by Plato as the “centre of all” which is of both the Continent and the Island of Atlantis. In other words, he specifies it as the central point as to the length and breadth of the Continent and the Island

Point B is the “small mountain afar from everywhere” by 9, 45 km. Because he states that this small mountain was in the middle of the plain, the depiction is of a circular plain with a small mountain at its centre

Furthermore, because by correlation he reports that the plain is “in the direction of” the sea, it follows that the sea is diametrically opposite to “the centre of all”. Besides, taken from a geometrical perspective, the centre of everything could not be between the centre of the plain and the sea. This will be reconfirmed further on when all the given dimensions are given, because “the centre of all” could not be very near the sea which borders the one side of the Island and much further away from the opposite -to it- side of the Island

Another geometrically derived conclusion is that the “small mountain” which is in the centre of the plain is also in the centre as to the length or breadth of the Island and Continent. As will be proven later, when all the relevant information and dimensions are eventually made available, that this hill is indeed in the centre as to the length of both the Continent and the Island

31. Plato does not go into a detailed analysis of the names of the ten twins. Most of the names are probably symbolic and not actual. However, it is interesting at this point to note an extract from The Odyssey. Plato here offers his reader a ‘break’ from concentration before carrying on with multifarious and complex presentations (if the meaning of the names had been elaborated on, it would not have been a ‘break’. This will become apparent in &43). In any case, this is the first indication by Plato that he has included fictional elements in this account.

The following extract is from The Odyssey by Homer.

“At first the shaker of the earth Poseidon, sired Nausithous with Periboea, best of womankind, the only daughter of Euremedon, who reigned in the past over the proud Gigantes (Giants). But this king destroyed his irreverent people and he too was destroyed; with her did Poseidon mate, and she gave birth to an only son, Nausithous the magnanimous, who reigned over the Phaeacians. And Nausithous gave birth to Rixinoras and Alkinoous”

Remarks: Plato was well versed in The Odyssey which, besides being a useful source of language, amongst other things, was also a good vehicle by which to carry information on mythology to future generations. Plato would frequently ‘borrow’ words and meanings from the Homeric epics. Thus, with an elementary comparison, certain conclusions can be derived.

a) In Critias, Poseidon mated with Kleito, whereas with Periboea in The Odyssey. The names (in Greek) are comparable. Accordingly, possible interpretations are:

• Kleito: from ‘clitoris’, at the anterior part of the vulva

Periboea: Compound word meaning ‘the area of pubic hair surrounding the genitals’

• Euremedon (The Odyssey – Father of Periboea): he who dominates or leads.

Euvinor (Critias – Father of Kleito): he who is paramount or excels. May also mean: he who arms men’, fine horse or fine man – Homer (Liddell & Scott)

• Leukippe: White horse.

b) Poseidon fathers ten twin sons in Critias, whereas two sons in The Odyssey

c) Euremedon, the father of Periboea, was lost following the loss of his people (The Odyssey), whereas Euvinor, the father of Kleito, had no people because he was of the first humans to inhabit that land (from him descended the Atlantians – Critias).

d) Gigantes (Giants) in The Odyssey whereas Atlantians in Critias.

e) Alkinoous became king of the Phaeacians and departing from his land, Hyperia, during the rule of his brother Rixinoras and dreading the Cyclopes, he went to Scheria (Phaeacia – the island today known as Kerkira or Corfu).

Thus, faint parallelisms with themes from The Odyssey can already be observed.

32. a) In the beginning and before the intervention of his descendants, the wheel system created by Poseidon consisted of three wheels of sea and two of land, homocentric to the hill mentioned. The smallest wheel i.e. the first from the central hill was of sea (Image 51). Even so, it will emerge that there used to be three wheels of sea and three (!) wheels of land and this without Plato being refuted. It will also be shown that Poseidonia (the small hill) was originally a little larger because, some time later, Poseidon’s heirs fashioned another wheel of sea which formed another small and narrow wheel of land perimetrically around Poseidonia. Further on, Plato gives the dimensions as they were reshaped under the sovereignty of Poseidon’s descendants (Image 52 & 54). As will be shown, they made several ‘conversions’.

b) Plato makes reference to the creation three wheels of sea and two of land without mentioning a third wheel of land (!) which logically should have existed but is not mentioned here. There is good reason for this. He previously reports that the flat fertile plain had a radius of 9.45 km. Therefore, there is a plain, in the middle of which there is a hill. If three concentric trenches are excavated around the hill so as to form three wheels of sea and/or two of land, then once the third trench fills with sea, another wheel of land is formed; but on one condition, namely, that at the exterior side of the third wheel of land, either the land lies at a lower elevation or there is non fertile flatlands or there are rivers or wetlands or sea; in other words, a defining differentiation in land features. Information as to exactly what this defining feature was, will be presented in due course but as a brief mention, it was a plain (obviously at a lower elevation), in effect a basin, which filled with sea. The possibility of there being marine waters after the second wheel of land is excluded because Plato stipulates that the size of the plain was equal to the distance where there was a wheel of land. This will be further analyzed in due course. So, with three wheels of sea, three wheels of land are formed but no effort was exerted for the third wheel of land or, put in another way, it was not made by design. This is one of the reasons why Plato states that Poseidon created three wheels of sea and two of land; because the third wheel of land (Image 52, Z) transpired automatically, naturally.

Therefore, the calculations due to follow also take into account the third wheel of land, which came about naturally and was not purposely created. What’s more, this wheel was surrounded by the plain and since Plato states that the last wheel of earth is at a distance of 9. 5 km from the hill, just as “the centre of all” (which was on this plain) too is 9, 5 km away from the hill, then, logically, there is a point on that wheel that must be “the centre of all”!

c) The wheels radiating from the centre of Poseidonia are reported as equidistant from each other. Given that the circular plain on which the wheels were formed has a radius of 9. 5 km (Image 51), the following calculations result:

1) The third wheel (the largest, which for sake of differentiation will henceforth be referred to as the Maximal) is at a radius of 50 Stadiums (9.45 km) from the hill.

2) The second wheel has a radius of 50 ÷ 3 x 2 = 33.33 stadiums (6.33 km).

3) The first wheel has a radius of 50 ÷ 3 x 1 = 16.66 stadiums (3,165 km).

Later in the course of time, the heirs made changes to the perimeter of the hill and to the two original wheels of land had been formed by Poseidon (Images 51, 52).

33. As is his wont, Plato provides second clarification to ‘unclear’ pictures. He reconfirms that the small mountain or hill, is the middle of the plain because he declares it as being equidistant from everywhere.

34. It is worthy of question to which period of time Plato is referring to, when he states that ships did not yet exist; because at the times of Poseidon’s successors and before the war of 9.600 BC, he reports that there were Triremes even before that first war.

35. Even if the wheel system is not a manmade construction but a natural landform, it is in fact possible for it to have had both hot and cold running waters. It must here be noted that according to the descriptions, the entire Island of Atlantis had an active geological and geothermal past. As a result, it is not unlikely for there to have been a widespread dispersal of thermal springs. This signifies that the subsoil of the area in question should contain traces of sulfur or other volcanically derived materials. As for the cold water, this is easily understandable as having preexisted since the whole wheel system ‘revolved’ around freshwater. Plato states this indirectly but certainly further on, when he describes a vast plain. Thus, here is an added condition that must be met (except for the springs, of course, which are no more due to the lack of water sources).

But here too (as mentioned in &31) there is a notable parallel with The Odyssey.

The Odyssey – Description of the palace of Alkinoous.

a) The palace shone like the Sun and the Moon

b) Walls of copper on each side of a road with a geison (cornice) of azure steel.

c) Silver jambs on a copper doorsill and silver lintels.

d) Gold and silver hounds (watchdogs) on each side and golden statues of children on pedestals with torches so as to shine in the night.

e) There were fifty slave women in the palace

f) Outside in the courtyard there was a big square garden, each side was one gye long and with a stone wall on all sides (a gye was in rough measurement of the size of a field. It was as much earth as a farmer could plow in a day).

g) Everywhere there was a variety of trees and vineyards.

h) There were two water faucets, one used to water the garden and the other with potable water.

Critias

a) Around the citadel (acropolis of Poseidonia) was a wall dressed in copper which sparkled like fire.

b) The external wall was covered in copper over its entire perimeter while the inside wall in tin (which looks like silver).

c) The inside of the temple was covered in silver whereas the cornerstones with gold

d) “Indeed golden statues they erected”. Surrounding the temple there were golden icons of the women and of them who were kings.

e) There were a hundred Nereids on dolphins in a circle.

f) In the centre was the temple of Kleito and Poseidon, encircled by a golden high wall.

g) There were trees planted that required irrigation.

h) There were hot and cold water fountains, for the baths and for consumption respectively.

Α

F

C

16,6

16,6

Β

16,6

D

E

2^ος

1^ος

3^ος

Image 51: Construction of wheels first by Poseidon. Poseidon had construct the 1^st and 2^nd “wheels of land “ by creating 3 “Sea Wheels”. The 3^rd wheel of land was the result of the 3^rd sea wheel creation.

Point B is the small mountain which was transformed into the small sacred isle herein named Poseidonia.

Point A = “the centre of all” (as to the length and breadth of both the Continent and the Island) which is located diametrically opposite to the sea.

Point B = the centre of a small fertile plain where was the small mountain which was subsequently transformed. It is referred to as the “sacred isle” by Plato and named Poseidonia by the present author

AB = BE= 50 Stadiums = 9, 45 km

BC = CD = DE = 50 ÷ 3 (Stadiums) = 16.66 Stadiums = 3, 16 km

The distance EF to a “perimeter wall” is given further on in the text and is 9, 45 km. The distance to the sea has not yet been given. However, to be announced in due course, there is a “diorycha” (canal) with a “mouth” that is 9, 45 km from Point F

D

F

E

3^rd → 5^th

Α

Β

C

C

2^nd → 4^th

1^st → 3^rd

1^st → 2^nd

1^st

1^st wheel of sea

2^nd wheel of sea

3^rd wheel of sea

N

Image 52: The system of wheels as modified by the descendants of Poseidon

Poseidon’s original wheels as transformed by his descendants:

1^st → 2^nd and 3^rd then the 2^nd → 4^th and 3^rd → 5^th

(Image 51) → (Present Image)

According to Plato, Poseidon ‘constructed’ three (3) concentric trenches of sea and two wheels of land, beginning with a moat around the small mountain at the centre B.

BC = CD = DE = EF = 16.66 Stadiums (3, 16 km) F = Perimetric Wall

1. The 1^st wheel of land of the descendants was not one of Poseidon’s original ones. It was formed by his descendants who excavated a moat around the perimeter of Poseidonia (B, Sacred Isle in the centre)

2. The 1^st wheel of land of Poseidon was converted by his descendants into the 2^nd and 3^rd (twin wheels) by excavating a moat in the centre along the length of its circumference.

3. The 2^nd wheel of Poseidon obtained a semi-elliptical canal, 9, 45 km long

4. The 3^rd wheel existed but is not mentioned by Plato since it was not ‘constructed’ by Poseidon. It came about consequentially when the 3^rd wheel of sea was excavated. What is more, it is not a complete wheel. As will be shown in due course, there was a gap in it, with two bays facing each other across the opening

In due course will be given the orientation of all and whichever dimensions still missing.

36. As already noted, the phrase “the island Atlantis all” is in reference to both the Continent and the Island. Poseidon divided them into 10 equal shares and distributed them to his 10 twin sons. In other words, each offspring received an area on the Island as well as an area on the Continent. This will be confirmed further on in the text.

37. Poseidon bestowed the entire small plain with the wheel system he created to Atlas and apportioned the island into ten equal parts. Therefore, the island of Atlantis should have a total surface area ten times that of the entire wheel system which was conferred to Atlas. There is still one more outstanding detail; the distance from the 3^rd wheel to the sea. Plato has not yet reported on what there is between the wheel system and the sea while he makes the open ended remark “…besides the rest …” (&28b) All these factors should be kept in mind for future reference.

38. Just as in &36, with the phrase that translates as “also Atlantis the entire island”, Plato denotes both the Island and the Continent. Thus did the Continent and the Island both come to be named Atlantis. In the ancient text, the wording of the phrase is somewhat emphatic, one could even say uncharacteristically redundant. The only logical explanation is that Plato is referring to both the Continent and the Island. In which case, Plato confirms anew that with the qualification “entire”, he means both the Continent and the Island of Atlantis.

39. Plato verifies that the hydronym of this sea (that has been shown to be neither the “pan-” nor the “there-pelagos” and which is after the “mouth” of the Pillars of Heracles), was derived after Poseidon’s first born, Atlas. This sea is the Atlantic Pelagos, as was analyzed in the beginning.

40. At this point in the ancient Greek text, the phrase under analyses is of amazing composition and complexity, as is another similar that is to be examined in due course. Amongst other things, it ‘hides’ within it two regions named Gadeiriki; not one as has until now been accepted by all! (As mentioned in the Translators Preamble at the start of these analyses, it is ineffectual to attempt to convey in English the analysis of the grammar and syntax of the Ancient Greek text. Nevertheless, in way of explanation, an attempt will be made).

This phrase has been usually rendered as ‘at the Pillars of Heracles’ but Plato is here specifying that the orientation of the end of the Island is “… in the direction of the Pillars of Heracles”. He describes the axis of the Island being in alignment with the end of the Continent and the Pillars beyond. In other words, in the direction of where it has already been determined that the Pillars were located and is therefore in absolute accord with this location. This has also been pointed out by the researcher, U. Hoffman (2005 – Atlantis: Searching for the Lost Land – International Conference at Milos Island – Was Atlantis a Bronze Age Metropolis in North Africa?).

This means that somehow, the end of the Island (and it is apparent that this applies equally to the Continent) must in some way be ‘pointing’ towards the Pillars and also towards the end of the Continent. Accordingly, the most likely shape of the Island, ‘in line’ with this description, is elongated, with one end pointing towards the Pillars; these are difficult but defining conditions which need to be met.

In the following notes (& 41 & 42), it will be shown that the same bearing applies also to the Continent, because the corresponding tips of both the Island and the Continent were given the name Gadeiriki (Image 53)! Thus, there are two distinct locations named Gadeiriki in the ancient text which have never before been defined through a detailed grammatical and syntactical analysis; never before until now, that is. To be elaborated on in & 42.

41. Previously, Plato described Gadeiriki as “the end of the island” and identifies the location as “that place”. This is the Gadeiriki of the Island of Atlantis. The other location, which he terms “the present land” (i.e. as it was known during Solon’s time and at the time of Plato’s narration), was that region at the end of the Continent which had always been known as Gadeiriki in antiquity. This is the Gadeiriki of the Continent of Atlantis. Plato signifies that the Island and the Continent both form some sort of tip or corner, at least at their end which ‘points’ or ‘looks’ towards the Pillars of Heracles. The next logical conclusion is that the Island is not, for example, circular. Accordingly, “the end”, also qualified as “that place”, will become one of the geometrical reference points in delineation of the contour of the Island.

Significantly, Plato’s translated words, “… unto who had bechanced the end of the island in the direction of the Pillars of Heracles…” are immediately suggestive that the other end of the island faces away from the Pillars, in a different and most probably, the opposite direction. If this was otherwise, Plato would have simply written ‘on whom had bechanced the tip of the island’ or ‘the region of Gadeiriki’ or ‘the promontory’ or described the place in words to that effect which would have definitely been more specific in identifying the location. In addition, the reference as to the great length of the Continent makes it evident that it is less wide. Therefore, one can logically conclude that both the Atlantis’s (i.e. the Island and the Continent), have a somehow elongated shape. Indeed, the shape of the Continent has been shown to curve like the arc of a circle (Timaeus – reminder, like a C as in Curved Continent). Whichever dimensions remain outstanding, Plato will provide progressively, little by little, as the story unfolds.

These geographical conditions are unlikely to be met but they need to be met. Indeed, the axis of the plateau (i.e. the Island) on which lies the Richat Structure (i.e. the concentric wheel system), bears towards the Pillars of Heracles at Gabes with a possible small deviation of just 9^o (Image 53)! Thus, a fortiori, one edge of the Continent is towards the Pillars of Heracles.

42. a) Plato reports that “that place” would take the name Gadeiriki after the second twin whose name was Gadeiros. According to the text, as analysed in the previous note, “that place” is the tip of the Island whereas “the present land” is the tip of the Continent, aligned and pointing towards the Pillars of Heracles. Plato explains that the tip of the Continent derived its name by association from the corresponding tip of the Island.

The ancient compound word in the ancient text that is herein transliterated as “epichorion” (epi + chorion = as to + place) and translated as “prevalent practice”, can mean – Anthimos Gazis: ‘everything that is’, ‘born of a space’, Aristotle. Liddell & Scott – ‘customary habit’, Thucydides 6.7 – ‘convention of a place’, Plato Laws 730A΄– “ Herodotus 1,78,181: ‘people of the place’.

Atlantis Continent Opposite and Across (its beginning) and Curved around the Pontos.

“Mediterranean Sea”

“Gadeiriki”

“Gadeiriki”

Image 53: Shown are the two Gadeiriki, one at the end of the Island and one at the end of the Continent. Also, their bearing in alignment towards the Pillars of Heracles which are located in the new position as has been explained and determined in this book.

There is an actual divergence of about 9^o in relation to the proposed position of the Pillars of Heracles. Without considering this divergence significant, the reader should keep it in mind for later.

b) Analysis of the entire sentence 114.b.1-6 (from &40): it is comprised of five clauses punctuated by commas. To facilitate reading, inserted are the ‘missing’ meanings (or words) that are inferred by syntax and grammar. As has already been shown, the word “island” is in reference to the Island and not the Continent whereas “…the present land of Gadeiriki…” is the northern end of the Continent that was known as the region of Gadeiriki to the Greeks scholars of the pre-classical and classical ages. This was specified in Timaeus where it was shown that once past the Pillars of Heracles and after crossing the Atlantic Pelagos (sea), a seafarer would come upon the Continent of Atlantis. Furthermore, Plato makes reference to a harbour that is in the middle of the Continent and also that the rest of the Continent was ‘downward’ i.e. southward.

In the analysis of the sentence that follows, because the English rendition is an as faithful translation of the Current from the Ancient Greek, it may be somewhat difficult to grasp, so an extra effort in comprehension is required. As mentioned previously, in parentheses are added those words which are actually in the original text, albeit elsewhere, and which have been inserted by the present author to supplement the intentionally incomplete meanings so as to aid in understanding them. For instance, although Poseidon is mentioned by name, four sentences prior to this one under examination, it is clear that it is he who is taking action.

1. (Poseidon) to the twin who was born after him (Atlas),

2. and unto who (second twin) had bechanced the end of the island in the direction of the Pillars of Heracles ⁽⁴⁰⁾ in the direction of (the end) that is of the present land of Gadeiriki which was named the same as that place (of the Island),

3. while in Greek (would give a name) Eumilos⁽⁴¹⁾,

4. whereas in accordance with the prevalent practice (would give a name) Gadeiros,

5. which would precisely in this way give a name as an eponym (to that place of the Island) ⁽⁴²⁾.

Meanings extracted from this sentence: The name of the second twin, Gadeiros, or Eumilos in Greek, was bestowed to those extremities of the Island and the Continent which were aligned with each other and faced in the direction of the Pillars of Heracles (Image 53). If one finds it difficult to follow the overall development of Plato’s logic, it may facilitate comprehension to read the clauses… in reverse, starting from the last one and so on, back to the first. One will be amazed to observe that with the combination of normal and reverse reading, all meanings are clarified (it is clearly obvious in Greek). Each part comprised of a set of clauses, whether read normally (1^st and 5^th) or in reverse (5^th to 1^st) becomes the main subject or is the explication to the other set of clauses. Indeed, clause 2 contains both locations. The same literary contrivance will be repeated shortly in practically the same fashion, again with a ‘two-in-one’ sentence (i.e. containing two meanings), made up of six clauses (&59).

43. Plato employs the phrase “…of those ones second…” twice in Critias,114.b.6. It is a key phrase which he uses once at this point and once more further on in reference to the second set of wheels, much as to ‘sound an alarm’ for his reader. This phrase is in reference to the second-born twins, Amphiris and Euaimon. In the name Amphiris, the prefix ‘amphi-’ suggests dual possibilities. The name implies that ‘it has two parts’ (Anthimos Gazis) or ‘can be rowed from both sides or has two rudders’ (Liddell & Scott). Euaimon (Eu-hemo) translates as ‘good or wholesome blood’ and indicates a rich red colour. These interpretations will in due course assist in providing additional conclusions.

44. After recounting of the ten sons and their descendants, Plato continuous in the next sentences to inform that Poseidon’s offspring (the 10 sons) ruled over many people and many islands in the direction of the Pelagos sea, while their descendants did so as far as (but not including) Egypt and up to (and including) Tyrrhenia. He thus provides additional support to the initial justified hypothesis that these lands were during later times conquered by the descendants of the …descendants of Poseidon.

45. Once again, the reference is to the Island of Atlantis, not the Continent.

46. Indicative of the volcanic activity on the Island, is that there must have been lava flows which brought various metals in liquid form to the surface. There were also a number of mines. Even now, one would expect to find traces of such activity in the area of the Island. This is a condition which must be met.

47. Once again, reference is to the Island of Atlantis and not the Continent. With regard to the metal described as ‘orichalcum’ that was mined on the Island and about which much has at various times been conjectured, with finality let it hereby be clarified. It is a compound word comprised of the word ‘ori’ (mountains, pl.) and ‘chalkos’ (copper). Thus, this metal is interpreted as ‘copper of the mountains’ and historically, was known only to the ancient Greeks.

Orichalcum may have been a natural form of copper that contained other metallic constituents and being found in its natural state in mountains, came to be called thus. The base element is copper but according to the mixture of zinc or tin or even iron, alloys such as brass or bronze are derived with varying colour and differing properties. In Greece, from antiquity to today, distinction is made between copper and ‘Orichalcum’ (‘chalkos’ and ‘orichalkos’ respectively in modern Greek), the latter in recent years coming to be known as ‘brountzos’ (i.e. bronze’- word of Italian origin). Indeed, there are many types of alloys with properties for particular usages and applications. The present author happens to have first hand knowledge of this process because, as a child in his father’s machine-shop. In those days the word ‘orichalkos’ was used more often than ‘bronze’ when referring to premixed copper based alloys. The varieties of ‘orichalkos’ would be described according to their properties as ‘red orichalkos’, ‘phosphorous orichalkos’ etc. When in pure form, copper was simply called ‘chalkos’.

48. The existence of elephants is characteristic. Consequently, Atlantis cannot be associated with America because until today, the only known elephantine species are only the African and the Indian. However, there is an objection of secondary importance as to Atlantis having a close association with Africa. It is raised by J. M. Allen who has opined that Atlantis may have been in the Americas. He refers to a species of pachyderm which differed little in appearance from today’s elephants; the mastodon. These mammals became extinct following the great climatic changes that took place about 10.000 years ago at the end of the Pleistocene epoch. More recent fossils have been found, especially in North America. At any rate, the existence of elephants is not conclusive evidence as to where Atlantis is. Much and decisive evidence has been herein submitted in proof that the Continent of Atlantis was part of present day Africa, not least being the proximity to Greece, Egypt, Tyrrhenia, Libya and of course, Herodotus’ reference to Atlantians in Africa. Besides, as has been explained in the prologue, the present translation revises everything.

49. Plato emphatically confirms the rich natural environment of the island. It was even able to sustain elephants.

50. The same that we call legumes today: lentils, chickpeas etc.

51. Trees from whose fruit can be produced beverages are representative of a temperate climate. Thus, one can in retrospect determine at which time there was a temperate zone in the region of the Island of Atlantis. This condition, along with those previously mentioned, is not met today because of the fundamental change in the climate since then.

52. The “sacred isle” is neither the Continent nor the Island of Atlantis. It is the small mountain or hill in the middle of the plain; that same circular fertile plain worked on by Poseidon who transformed it into an island and on which were also the temples of the gods. It is for this reason that Plato defines it as the “sacred isle” and which has, with good cause, been named Poseidonia by the present author, so as to enable the reader to distinguish it from the plethora of other islands. After all, it was Poseidon who created it.

53. Indeed, this Sacred Isle of Poseidonia is no longer under the sun (at the time in which the narrative unfolds but also at the time of Solon). It is covered by sea. Therefore, Plato hereby conclusively clarifies that the island that was covered for millennia by water, was not the entire Island of Atlantis but just the small mountain or hill in the middle of the fertile valley; namely, Poseidonia. The other island, that is to say, the Island of Atlantis containing Poseidonia, was devastated when it was ‘covered’ temporarily by the waters of a tsunami (Timaeus). In other words, it was not continuously under water. It will be shown further on, that it was only Poseidonia that remained flooded, because of its ‘drainage’ system becoming blocked. Thus it remained covered by water for thousands of years and at least up to 610 BC when Solon first learned of this story. Furthermore, because Poseidonia was a small mountain protruding in the hub of the wheels, the implication is that they were probably covered as well. In time, due to the steady rise in temperatures in that region and the overall change in climatic conditions, the waters receded to reveal today’s dramatic scene of the hill and wheels surrounded by desert.

54. From this point onwards, it would be help if all the paragraphs which follow are read in both normal and reverse order (as in Timaeus) so as to better understand them. Be that as it may, the analysis of the narrative will continue along on the same lines, as it has been thus far.

Plato writes that they bridged the wheels of sea around the metropolis (metro = mother + polis = city). This is literally the ‘mother city’ where Poseidon’s descendants were born. Therefore, he is referring unmistakably to the Sacred Isle of Poseidonia. However, he does not report bridges having been built over all the wheels of sea. So, to which wheels is he referring? Without doubt, he means the wheels that are nearest to the Sacred Isle. Originally, from the time of Poseidon, Poseidonia was encircled by a wheel of sea followed by the first wheel of land. Thus, this wheel of sea separated Poseidonia from the first wheel of land which, as reported, was at a distance of 16.66 Stadiums (3.166 km). However, this geomorphic state of affairs was not left as was by Poseidon’s descendants. Plato in due course reports that by digging a wheel of sea inside the perimeter of Poseidonia, they formed a smaller wheel of sea, akin to a moat. Subsequently, they divided the first wheel of land created by Poseidon into two. They spanned (somehow) the newly formed wheel of land by constructing bridges from it inwards to the Sacred Isle, as well as from it outwards to Poseidon’s original 1st wheel, which, let it be noted, Plato refers to in the plural later on at 116.e.8, calling it “seconds’ instead of “second”. Evidently, it is not a single wheel. This must be kept in mind because it will soon be shown that the Poseidon’s original 1^st wheel of land was converted into two but the same first wheel became second after the modification from Poseidon’s descendants. This is why Plato refers to them in the plural, so as to once again pre-alert his reader. Furthermore, as reported, all the wheels are at a short distance from the central isle. This indicates that they had already created the first (new) wheel of sea and land close around Poseidonia and then proceeded to excavate a moat of sea on Poseidon’s original 1^st wheel of land, thereby dividing it into two distinct wheels of land. In other words, the descendants formed the 2^nd and 3^rd wheels of land out of Poseidon’s 1^st (Images 51 & 52). Thus, this set of two wheels of land is the ‘twins’ wheel, as was mentioned previously. This will be analyzed in greater detail in due course.

55. When Plato refers to the descendants excavating a “diorycha”, he does not mean a waterway which can be mistakenly understood as a canal cutting through an isthmus, or over a narrow belt of land with sea on each side. Further on in the text, it is made manifest that the nature of a waterway termed as “diorycha””, depends on the accompanying verb defining its design. Thus, in this case, the “diorycha” is a canal which “…they did open with a concave shape…,” whereas in the other case, the canal was formed by them having “… pierced a mouth…” This will be elaborated on in notes &56, 57, 58 & 59 (Image 54).

The word “diorycha” (‘ch’ pronounced as the h in ‘hat’) is the archaic version of the Current Greek word transliterated as ‘diorygha” which means ‘canal’ (the ‘gh’ sound or letter ‘Γ – gamma’ has no equivalent in English. It is a soft guttural sound of which the closest sounding would be the ‘y’ in ‘yes’ or ‘yellow’…albeit not that soft). At any rate, as per Herodotus and others (in the Greek version of this book), it means an artificial (man-made) waterway. Herein, the word “diorycha” is usually replaced by the word ‘canal’ and sometimes, ‘waterway’.

56. a) In the phrase translated as “… on the outermost wheel they did open with a concave shape …”, the outermost wheel of land is Poseidon’s 2^nd or the subsequent 4^th of his descendants. (For way of differentiation, it will at times be referred to as the Outermost Wheel). On the surface of this wheel was hollowed out a 9.5 km long trough-like waterway. There is only one way in which such a long canal can be excavated on a wheel of land 540 m wide and that is, elliptically, between the inner and outer circumferences of the wheel! It probably does not need to be said but nevertheless it will be stated, that there has never, until now, been such a correlation of information with regard to this particular waterway.

Thus, the excavation of this canal on the Outermost (4^th) Wheel was begun from its outer edge, namely, from the side of the sea. The rationale as to the qualification “concave shape”, is that it probably indicates that this “diorycha” would contain water deep enough to be navigable but not always, probably depending on the season. (U-shaped) This is a reasonable assumption to make, because Plato would have otherwise defined this waterway, in a different way, more specific and unqualified, if he had meant to describe a permanent waterway that contained water deep enough so as to be always navigable; in the same way as he has been systematically specific throughout his writings so far and continues to be so.

b) The word “on” is in translation of the ancient word “epi” which has several meanings (as it also has when used as a prefix in English). According to the grammatical analysis of the ancient text, of which more in the Greek version of this book, “epi” in this case means ‘on top of’ or ‘on site’ or simply, as translated, “on”.

57. This sentence specifies that the “diorycha” with the “concave shape” enabled vessels to execute what is translated as “…re-navigation…” In other words, ships could, via this waterway that was hollowed out on the Outermost Wheel of land, navigate from its inner circumference to its outer edge and out to the open sea and return in the same way. The translation of the single ancient Greek word which has been concisely translated as above, can also be rendered as ‘the reverse navigation’ or even more broadly, as ‘the return journey from the sea by the same route as when setting off’.

58. At this point of the text is the culmination of what was previously stated; namely, that the return journey from the sea back to the Outermost Wheel is via that same “diorycha” which is a hollowed out waterway on its surface. However, because Plato also wants to stipulate the place of destination one arrives at after navigating the “diorycha”, he reports that on returning, one comes to a place that is somewhat like a harbour. In other words, to one who navigates the waterway and exits into the wheel of water that is on the inner side of the Outermost Wheel, that entire place will appear as if a harbour. This observation is useful when analyzing notes 74 & 75 because there, reference is made to a perimeter wall which is equidistant from the larger harbour and the 5^th wheel of land. Therefore, the place “which was akin to a harbour” , is the entire inner side of the Outermost Wheel and which, in addition, is equidistant from the perimeter wall.

59. Here, reference is made to another “diorycha” which, however, has different characteristics and purpose. Plato writes that they had “…pierced a mouth…” which enabled the largest ships to navigate inwards. This indicates that the Atlantians had cut through to make an opening in ‘something’… It will duly be shown that this ‘something’ is the perimeter wall previously mentioned. Furthermore, this waterway was shaped like a mouth, that is to say, with an opening that was wider externally i.e. on the side of the sea and narrower internally, towards the hub of the wheel system. Plato additionally states that this was done “… so that they could navigate inwards with the largest of the ships…” He does not use the word “largest” incidentally; there is reason for his using the superlative. He indicates that in the past, only the smaller (of the largest) ships could navigate inwards, probably through another smaller opening or this one which was initially narrower. Thus, after making the mouth-like aperture, the largest of all ships also had access. Further on it will become clear that before the time of the descendants, the excess waters that were produced inside the wheel system must simply have flowed out from a breach in the perimeter wall and to the sea (which suggests that originally, the perimeter wall was a ridge that naturally encircled the wheel system). Therefore, the largest of the ships could not pass from the sea to the wheel system. Furthermore, earlier in his narrative, Critias informs his audience that at the time when Poseidon created the island and the wheels of sea and land, there was no communication with the sea because ships did not exist (&34). This comment signifies that Poseidon and his ‘works’, were at a much earlier period of time. There follows the analysis of the whole sentence, which analysis could be conducted without it being necessary to reread the sentence per se. However, it is exceedingly interesting to isolate it because this sentence, like the one in &40, is the quintessence of the syntactical ‘tests of awareness’ that Plato sets and at the same time shows how the readers can be aided in identifying its correct structure.

This sentence, similarly to the one analyzed in &40, is the most syntactically ‘bizarre’ in Critias. There is one more sentence, further on in the text, which associates with the one here in referring to a perimeter wall, but which is somewhat ‘easier’.

Inserted in parentheses are the words which are implied and certain elucidations. The clauses are punctuated by commas as per the ancient text. Thus:

1. Namely a diorycha (canal) from the sea commencing ⁽⁵⁵⁾ with a width of three plethra (100m),

2. and with a depth of a hundred feet (33 m),

3. while with a length of fifty stadiums (9.5 km),

4. on the outermost wheel they did open with a concave shape (hollowed out inland waterway),

5. and accomplished the re-navigation (return journey) from the sea towards that* (diorycha-canal) (a) towards that* (Outermost Wheel) which was akin to a harbour ,

6. and after having pierced a mouth so that they could navigate inwards with the largest of the ships.

Elucidations:

1. The 4^th clause defines the excavation of a waterway on the Outermost wheel via which ships could navigate in and out so as to go to place like a harbour.

2. The 6^th clause describes the Atlantians “having pierced” what in due course will be shown to be an opening in a perimeter wall. In addition, it is stated that by thus “having pierced a mouth”, a waterway was formed for the largest of vessels to be able to navigate inwards, to where the wheel system was.

3. The ancient words translated in English as “re-navigation” (5^th clause) and “navigate inwards” are different navigational state of affairs. The former refers to the return journey from the open sea to the Outermost wheel (5^th clause) whereas the latter, to the entry from the sea via an opening (“mouth” – 6^th clause) made by “having pierced” a perimeter wall; which in fact wall this is, will be shown in due course.

* Translator’s note: as already mentioned, unlike English where nouns are of neutral gender only, in Greek they can be neutral, female or male. The same applies to pronouns. Thus, in the 5^th clause, the first pronoun ‘that’ is of female gender whereas the second is male. Accordingly, because “diorycha” is female and ‘wheel’ is male, by gender correlation, it can be understood that the first pronoun ‘that’ refers to the “diorycha” whereas the second, to the Outermost Wheel.

At first, the present author considered that Plato with this sentence was referring only to a “diorycha” that was excavated on the Outermost Wheel. This, because the ancient Greek verb “synetrisan” herein translated as “pierced”, is itself an intellectual ‘trap’ which is set by Plato who further on in the text employs an almost identical verb (“synetetrito”) so as to confuse the reader into understanding them as both having the same meaning. Thus, the present author did not expect Plato to have set a second ‘trap’. In effect, Plato has ingeniously ‘concealed’ that there are two waterways mentioned in this sentence. Firstly, the 9, 45 km long “diorycha” hollowed out on the Outermost Wheel of land and then, another “diorycha” with exactly the same dimensions but defined by a different verb and excavated for a different purpose. This latter “diorycha” or canal, is the “mouth” that was formed by the Atlantians “having pierced” the perimeter wall. Clearly, each waterway had different characteristics and functions. The one excavated on the Outermost Wheel allowed “re-navigation” for ships to return to where they started from, namely, to the inner rim of the Outermost Wheel where it was like a harbour. The other waterway, constructed by “having pierced” an opening that resembled a “mouth”, enabled ships to “navigate inwards”, from the sea to the Outermost wheel of the system. This indicates that at first, the wheels of sea were not initially connected to the outer sea i.e. the “pan-pelagos”. It will duly be shown that the barrier was a perimeter wall (a natural land barrier) which enclosed the wheel system. Both of the “diorychae” (pl. of diorycha?) lead from the sea to the inner rim of the Outermost Wheel which appears to have been formed into a huge harbour.

Plato links these two meanings by manipulating the syntax in a masterly fashion. When reading the sentence under consideration carefully from the beginning, the first four clauses separated by commas, illustrate the main theme. In other words, the main topic is the excavation of a concave canal on the Outermost Wheel of land. The next clauses show the end result, which is, access from the outer sea inwards to the wheel system via the “mouth” that was “pierced” for that purpose. If however, the clauses are read in reverse order, the last two clauses become the theme, namely, the opening of a sea passage to enable communication from the outer sea to the wheel system, while the rest of the clauses show the end result i.e. access to the harbour-like inner rim of the Outermost Wheel of land. It is a remarkable manipulation of the language by Plato that demands comprehension by his reader and which, of course, cannot be done full justice as to its ingenuity when translating into English. Even more remarkable is the fact that Plato has ‘camouflaged’ yet another message and meaning in another peripheral sentence which he has intentionally situated quite further on in the text and which sentence and meaning will be analyzed in due course.

Α

Β

Γ

17,5

17,5

Δ

N

Center of All.

C

Center of all wheels.

The Canal of the 4^ου for “going out”.

Concave ditch on surface.

Length: 9,5 Km.

The Canal for “going in”.

Pierced Mouth.

Length 9,5 Km.

Perimeter wall

Image 54: The “diorychae”:

The red line traces the route from the hub to the sea (from Poseidonia to the “there/pan-pelagos”) as described in the ancient text. Plato draws attention to the communication between the 4^th (Outermost) wheel of land and the sea, in order to point out the direct access from one waterway to the other. This means that the exit of the “diorycha” on the 4^th wheel should be in the direction of the sea and which sea is beyond the “diorycha” that was made by “having pierced a mouth” in the perimeter wall. This will be shown again in due course, as it will also be shown that the perimeter wall was in fact a natural landform of the Island, a ridge that acted as barrier. The Island communicated with a sea which will prove to be the “pan-pelagos” or the “there-pelagos”, because in Timaeus it is referred to as the place from where the fighting force of the Atlantians set out on expedition. Furthermore, it is reported that there was sea adjacent to the wheel system of the Island. Finally, it will be geometrically proven that the hollowed-out “diorycha” that was excavated on the 4^th wheel, ran along ¼ of its circumference and its inner opening faced towards the temple of Poseidon from a westerly direction. In other words, the temple faced eastward. Indeed, this entire design illustration is derived after processing all the known parameters in correlation with those to be duly made known and which give the orientation of the entire system as well as showing that the entrance to it from the sea was from the south. All the above elements and other, even more improbable to meet conditions and specifications, are exactly so at Guelb Et Richat!

The hollowed out waterway on the Outermost Wheel was excavated (as can be physically seen on site) at almost the level of the system’s high altitude (This will be shown to have been approximately 420-425m above the current level of the terrain, taking into account the soil and sand deposition of millennia). Otherwise, there would have been the danger of the inside of the wheel system flooding in the case of a sudden and unexpected rise in water level or alternatively, if the spring waters gushing forth on Poseidonia in the centre of the system could not drain away. This means that the edge or edges of this wheel must be of a height such as to protect the entire inside system from flooding. Accordingly, the bed of the “diorycha” must be no lower than the lowest requisite water level of Poseidon’s central isle.

In addition, the “mouth” that joins the wheel system with the outer sea, which will be shown to be the “there-pelagos” in Timaeus and the “pan-pelagos” in Critias, must have had the same dimensions as the waterway on the Outermost Wheel. The previously mentioned ‘magical’ use of syntax, will reoccur a little further on in an associated sentence, where Plato repeats corresponding turns of expression in regard to the same objects.

As mentioned already, the present author had not at first perceived that there was a second “diorycha” which was a “mouth”, assuming it to be the same canal as the one on the 4^th (Outermost) wheel. However, there were anomalies in the translation and certain irreconcilable issues had arisen. The text was reexamined under closer scrutiny because at the end, after all the descriptions were given, still missing was the length of the waterway between the wheel system and the sea. It was also missing in the calculations for the dimensions of the Island. Actually, because of this missing dimension which had not been ‘revealed’, there was a 25% deviation as to both the length and breadth of the Island in relation to the measurements taken by Google Earth after the identification of Atlantis. Following the ‘discovery’ in the text of the length of the second waterway, which is on the side of the Island, by then adding it to the overall breadth of the Island, to be duly calculated, it was defined with a 5% deviation as to the breadth and about 1-5% as to the length and this, without the present author’s measurements via Earth Google being precise, obviously, because one can’t clearly define the coastline of that time because the sea no longer exists.