METHODOLOGY OF MYTHOLOGY (MoM) -Part Two. Plato’s logic as mythographer. Light is shed on Plato’s methodology in his mythological reports.

Γιώργος Σαραντίτης

Thera 2011

It is generally accepted that in order to correctly identify and convey the Logic of writings, it is necessary to make a connotatively accurate rendition of the words, sentences, passages, units, in short, of the literary output as a whole. So too with Plato’s two books, Timaeus and Critias. The initial challenge of defining the true meanings had already been met and overcome via an exhaustive enquiry as to what Plato indeed wished to convey through these two books of his. So there remained to conduct an in-depth and in breadth analysis by applying the MoM to the texts so as to locate the Logic articulated therein and by this means identify, to the extent possible, what the structure, function, audience etc. of a myth might be.

To this end, a methodology was developed which was a combination of the methodologies of Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon and, by extension, of Platonic Rationalism. If the myth of Ατλαντίδα was found to bear up to this ‘truth test’, then the Myth or section(s) of it, would undoubtedly come under the category of True Word. If not, it would be False Word, in which case, the individual aspects of Atlantis carry on being the subject of multifarious analysis and speculation, in the way they have been through the centuries.

Πράγματι, μετά τον προσδιορισμό δύο σημαντικών αξιωμάτων και την εφαρμογή της Άλγεβρας του Boole, επιβεβαιώθηκε ότι ολόκληρη η λογική εξέλιξη, η ανάλυση και πολλά από τα συμπεράσματα στα οποία κατέληξε, ήταν πράγματι καλά μελετημένα.

Following the interdisciplinary and connotatively accurate translations of Plato’s writings, attention was focused onto his distinctive form of literary expression as a mythographer; which was the main reason for examining his texts of Timaeus and Critias in the first place. The question was not so much to find out why Plato, this giant of rationalism or, in other terms, an arch exponent of the True Word, should choose to fabricate a false myth such as Atlantis appears to be on the surface, but to find out the Logic by which this mythological work was created. Plato wrote on other myths as well, but the myth of Atlantis was chosen for analysis because it is not exhaustively long like Homer’s The Odyssey, for example, while it is self-contained as a narrative and with a great deal of detailed information. These attributes were regarded as useful in facilitating further research into Plato’s Logic.

1. Sequence of research.

Turns of phrase or forms of expression inside the myth were categorized as being:

1. 1. True, i.e., containing a truth that is easily discernable through the application of logic or common sense.

   2. False, i.e., containing an untruth which is also easily discernable as per the above reasoning.

   3. True ή Ψευδές i.e., containing an either/or situation which can be identified through the application of logic.

True AND False. Again, through the application of logic, a statement may be characterised as a ‘fusion’. Such are the rhetorical devices of hyperbole, metaphor or allegory, where, despite evident falsehood, seeing as the recount of events is not what can normally be considered as probable and rational, there is truth, nonetheless. The reader cannot readily distinguish the whole truth from the falsehood.

Apart from the application of logic, current scientific knowledge of whatever discipline or area of expertise that the text is dealing with can also be called upon. In truth, the rational aspects of a myth have enduring value.

The above mentioned four categorizations by which to define the contents of a myth as either true or false, was the most valuable guide to further study. Subsequently, ‘signals’ within the myth had to somehow be identified that would provide for said categorization of each point -possibly by some special method devised by Plato himself-. This was required so as to rule out the possibility of anything other than True or False.

Thus, the analysis hereby synoptically presented takes account of the following:

• A connotatively accurate translation. This had already been made [i].

• The Identification of a myth. The Contents of a myth. The category of Topics.

• To who is a Myth directed. Categorization of the Audience, Classification.

• Enquiry into givens that validate, confirm or clarify the previous assessments.

• Enquiry into givens that lend themselves to syllogism and evaluation.

• The function or purpose of the myth.

Also, by applying the Methodology of Mythology, six additional elements were found:

1. 1. 1. Laws and Axioms of genuine Myths.
      2. Their application in Timaeus and Critias.
      3. Their Application in the Iliad.
      4. Their Application in the Odyssey.
      5. The Apocalypse*of the Myth of Ατλαντίδα [ii].
      6. The Apocalypse*² of the Myth of ER.

Επιπλέον, ένας σχετικά μικρός αριθμός εφαρμογών έχει γίνει μέχρι σήμερα στα ορφικά ποιήματα και στα έργα του Ησιόδου.

Κατά την εξέταση της λογικής όλων των μυθολογικών αναφορών, έγινε προσπάθεια να τηρηθούν οι ακόλουθες βασικές αρχές και διαδικασίες που αποτελούν συνδυασμό των μεθοδολογιών του Ρενέ Ντεκάρτ και του Φράνσις Μπέικον. Συγκεκριμένα:

1. Nothing obvious is necessarily true.
2. The breakdown of a subject into its smallest constituent parts.
3. Subsequent to orderly analysis, to recompose the original whole. Comprehensive enumerations and re-evaluations so as to rule –έξω- the possibility of oversight.
4. Επιπλέον, η Logic υπόκειται στο:
   1. Method of agreement.
   2. Method of difference.
   3. Method of concomitant variation.

Με άλλα λόγια, εφαρμόστηκαν οι ακόλουθες μέθοδοι: Μέθοδος της συμμόρφωσης - Μέθοδος της ασυμφωνίας και Μέθοδος της συνεπαγόμενης ασυμφωνίας.

The result of analysis was laws and axioms which were found to govern the structure of each Platonic myth. The above approach was applied to the Homeric texts in similar fashion. Those texts also demonstrated the same laws but contained more axioms.

Apart from the findings thus far, several new chapters of research have been opened in application to other writers and writings. The developments on this issue will be revelatory, since the genuine myths and the mythographers who wrote them, can be easily identified from the pseudo myths and tall stories and the fabulists who wrote them. Thus, will be shown which writers occupied themselves with this special form of literary expression when philosophizing and each one’s purpose will be divulged, while pointing out any interrelationships.

Another significant issue concerns the development of the reasoning process and philosophy of the ancient Greeks. It is evident that this intricate, while at the same time easily comprehensible and functional form of Literature that is associated with a mathematical way of thought, did not simply just evolve. It requires time and tuition for such a method to be developed and refined. Preliminary research conducted into the reasoning and logic of the Orphic poems initially, afterwards of the Iliad and the Odyssey and followed by a similar analysis of Hesiod before culminating with Plato, shows clearly the progression of mythography, while at the same time it revealed hitherto unknown aspects of the culture of those times. There is no doubt that there is scope for further research and even more findings.

1. 1. 1. Sarantitis G. – Methodology in Mythology. Part one. New connotatively accurate translations of Plato’s books Timaeus and Critias reveal another dimension in Plato’s way of thinking.
      2. The Greek derived word ‘apocalypse’ is relevantly used in its original definitions of ‘uncovering’, ‘disclosure’, ‘exposure’ or ‘revelation’.

Figure 1. In the above diagram of logic development [i], fundamental to analysis is the examination of the language used in order to precisely render the concepts so as to accurately arrive at the meanings the author wished to express. Subsequently, the correct definitions of meaning can be safely followed by an examination in breadth and width so as to then analyze all the aspects and implications of these meanings.

2. The identity of a myth.

Πριν ξεκινήσουμε την εξέταση της δομής του μύθου, πρέπει να οριστεί η έννοια της λέξης "μύθος". Αν κάποιος ανατρέξει σε ένα λεξικό για τον ορισμό, θα "χαθεί" σε μια σειρά από συχνά αντιφατικές ερμηνείες. Ο Πλάτων όμως, μέσα σε λίγες γραμμές στον Τίμαιο, ορίζει τι είναι ο μύθος. Το κάνει όμως με τον δικό του χαρακτηριστικό τρόπο, καλώντας τον αναγνώστη να χρησιμοποιήσει την επαγωγική λογική για να βρει τον ορισμό του μέσα από την ανάλυση των νοημάτων που περιέχονται στα κείμενα. Όπως πάντα, ο Πλάτων προωθεί την εκπαίδευση του ακροατηρίου του θέτοντας συνεχώς προκλήσεις λογικής. Εικόνα 2.

[i] Table from Panteion University – Social Sciences – Notes and references from : S. I. Seferiades / G. Sartori / Papanoutsos E.P. / Hospers, J. / Salmon, W. C.

Plato’s TIMAEUS 26.e.3-27.α.1. (Socrates speaking after Critias’

reference to the ancient – in relation to them – Athenians)

Kaiì ti¿n’ aÃn, wÕ Kriti¿a, ma=llon a)ntiì tou/tou (λόγον) metala/-
boimen, oÁj tv= te parou/sv th=j qeou= qusi¿# dia\ th\n oi¹keio/tht’
aÄn pre/poi ma/lista, to/ te mh\ plasqe/nta mu=qon a)ll’ a)lhqino\n
lo/gon eiånai πάμμεγά που. πῶς γὰρ καὶ πόθεν ἄλλους 

ἀνευρήσομεν ἀφέμενοι τούτων; οὐκ ἔστιν, ἀλλ. ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ

χρὴ λέγειν μὲν ὑμᾶς, ἐμὲ δὲ ἀντὶ τῶν χθὲς λόγων νῦν

ἡσυχίαν ἄγοντα ἀντακούειν.

And with which other (spoken words-speech) instead of this one would we exchange it for, o Critias, so as for it to be more fitting to the present sacrifice to the Goddess, and especially at the moment when it is not a fabricated myth but true word because where, how and wherefrom are we to find others, if we abandon these? It is impossible, therefore you must in good begin to speak, while I will now quietly be listening to you, in reciprocation of mine (spoken words-speech) yesterday.

Dictionary Papyros – Myth:

Fake History, Fantastical account. Mythic Tradition of Gods and Heroes. Allegorical narrative for ethical instruction or conclusion.

Of a dramatic, epical, anecdotal storyline. Proverb. Recount, story, historic narrative. Logos, maxim. Rumor, popularization, hearsay. Channel of communication, etc….

A Myth might be

Not Fabricated or True Word

or

Fabricated or Untrue Word

Logos – Spoken Word

might be

or Fabricated Myth

or non-Fabricated Word

or True Word

or Untrue Word

 However: Myth = Word

 therefore, a myth can be either of spoken or written word and contains truths and/or untruths.

Picture of a Myth

WHAT A MYTH IS.

Professor S. Papamarinopoulos– University of Patras– The form of the Myth.

True Word or

Non-fabricated Myth

Untrue Word

or

Fabricated Myth

Figure 2. What a Myth is [i]. The zone of the truth in the myth shrouded in falsehood (outer zone) which gives the overall impression of fabricated fiction. Through analysis of the above connotatively correct rendition of an extract from Timaeus, a precise definition is derived as to what a myth truly is. Thus, a myth can be written or spoken word and as such, may contain truths and falsehoods.

3. Analysis of true and false. Categorization of the contents of a myth.

Οι βασικές κατηγορίες της αλήθειας ή του ψεύδους μπορούν να διαχωριστούν με την εφαρμογή της κοινής λογικής. Στη συνέχεια, με ορθολογική αξιολόγηση, προκύπτει το σχήμα 3:

1. The first outer zone represents those sections of the text that are immediately recognizable and easily distinguishable as belonging to the category False. For example, gods or demigods or supernatural beings and suchlike untruths that cannot bear up to logical evaluation.

2. The core (centered zone) represents the readily recognizable αλήθειες and meanings that rational thinking cannot disallow, such as concepts of good vs. evil, descriptions of people, buildings, cities and territories for which there exist historical cross-reference or archaeological evidence that supports their veracity.

Figure 3. By applying Common Sense / Rational Evaluation, four (4) categories are derived. The narrative or the myth. Atlantis was analyzed as to the individual meanings it contains with the aim of separating truth from falsehood (or, in Plato’s words, the true word from the false myth) as well as other meanings imparted by this narrative. The category of False (outer Zone) envelops the Myth whose core (centered) contains Truth. Also, of great importance, however, are the two distinct situations between the absolute definitions of True or False, which are the transitional zones categorized as TRUE ΚΑΙ FALSE and TRUE ή FALSE.

1. The category of TRUE ΚΑΙ FALSE. Such ‘fusions’ of truth and falsehood are hyperboles, metaphors and allegories. Such are the dialogues of the gods, for example. They contain logically sound concepts, but these conversations never actually took place nor was there someone present to record and pass them down. This is a simple example. There are many statements, comparable in essence but considerably more involved in what they report, that merit analysis in defining them as to what are True and what are False. A very high man as a Cyclope, is a statement and meaning containing hyperbole due to the unknown height of a Cyclope but indeed someone wants to describe a very tall man.

2. The category of TRUE ή FALSE of questionable truth or the category of concepts that may be either. For example, is the story of Atlantis a true story or is it a figment of the imagination?

[i] S. Papamarinopoulos. (2007). University of Patras. EMAEM. (Diagram). The nature of the Myth.

4. Can truth or falsehood be gradated?

4.1 Steps of True in a Myth.

A meaning that is examined as to its truthfulness must be either True or False. It is in fact so when one has concluded as to whether something is true or false. However in the course of searching for the truth –just as in the course of an ordinary conversation or simple narration- the receiver of the commentary may question a point on which he or she is unconvinced as to the credibility of the person making the statement. Thus, one can be undecided “equally” as to whether a piece of information is true or false. This is a 50-50 situation (figure 4). Thus, there is here a case where one needs a strong piece of evidence to be convinced of the truthfulness of what was conveyed. In other cases, the reader/listener requires a single simple confirmation as to the truth of the statement. This is characterised as a 75% True situation. This means that an opposite situation exists of course, where a small confirmation suffices to verify the untruth. This is characterised as a 25% or ¼ True situation (figure 5).

Figure 4 (upper). Sometimes given, is information (or meaning) which is equally disputable as to whether it is True or False. This is characterised as a 50% case of True (or False, but most correct is ‘True”). (½ true or ½ false).

Figure 5 (Bottom). Sometimes, there is given information (or meaning), the truth of which is not perceivable, and confirmation is required by the discerning reader to accept it as such. Because the item of information is closer to being factual, this situation is regarded as 75% True or, in other words, ¾ Truth (probably true or ¼ false).

4.2 Platonic Vs Homeric Steps of True.

Undoubtedly, by following the same logical sequence, infinite transitions can be found from truth to falsehood and vice versa. However, what was identified in Plato’s Atlantis myth was that wherever Plato considers it necessary to confirm the truth of some statement or concept to his reader, he does so be repeating it once; but only once. Thus, after a report in Timaeus or Critias that is open to incredulity or skepticism (common logic of the mature reader’s opinion) he provides a single conceptual repetition on this point elsewhere in the text so that the reader is assured that the information is true. Plato, in these two works, employs this device as in figure 6. Thus, the initial hard to believe statement is graded as being 50% true . When Plato, restates it somehow once again, he establishes it as being 100% true. That means the reader has only one (1) time statement of a dispute meaning and only (1) time to confirm the first statement.

Figure 6. If the reader of a myth is uncertain whether a word-phrase-concept is True or False, then:

1. It can be verified through identifying repetitions. Plato confirms a statement as being true by making one (1) other statement that is related in meaning. Homer on the other hand, confirms the truth by repeating the entire phrase. Thus, while both writers use repetition to confirm the truth, Plato repeats the concept while Homer repeats mainly the writing (and the concept).

2. The meanings in a myth are governed by a principle of credibility. This means that the author is taken to be stating truth. However, if by the end of the narrative no reiteration of that ‘probably seriously dubious’ statement has been made in any way, whether by meaning or by directly repeating the words, that statement is established to be false. As in point 1 above, each statement which the author wishes to validate as Not False, is reiterated elsewhere in the text.

In general, repetition is used to convince an audience that what is conveyed is true. In today’s world, advertising uses the instrument of constant repetition to influence the psychology of the consumer who becomes convinced that the publicized product has the stated qualities and buys it. In exactly this way with many repetitions, the advertisement companies or mass media act to pass off either advertisements as true statements or dictatorial leaderships as democratic. The same applies in the day-to-day communication between people where oftentimes, in wanting to convince the other party, one will emphatically say “I repeat… that’s the way things are. Trust me (or believe me!)”. This method of making repetitions so as to provide verification, is observable also in Homer’s writings but with certain important differences.

1. Homer’s output is often subject to more gradations, with the number of reiterations depending on the degree of skepticism, whereas Plato seems to make exception to his “once only “rule of a single repetition as confirmation of the truth is when he repeats several times in the book of Timaeus that the story of Atlantis is true. And yet, there is no exception to this rule of ‘Initial Statement + One Repetition = True Statement’ because what Plato has ingeniously done, is to apply the rule by having each one of the conversationalists in his books accept the story of Atlantis as being true and by saying so twice! For example, Socrates acknowledges in advance that the story Critias is about to narrate must be true, evidently because he considers Critias a credible co-conversationalist. Socrates’ validation of the truthfulness of the story of Atlantis comes immediately after Critias ends his narration, when he unhesitatingly accepts the story as true (21a.5 / 26.a.6-7). Hence the Initial Statement + One Repetition = True Statement. Similarly, Plato applies his rule by means of the ‘voice’ of Critias (20d.8 / 21.a.7-8) and he is doing the same with the other persons present in their discussion. It is palpably evident that Plato wishes to verify to his reader that the story of Atlantis in Timaeus, despite its sounding unbelievable, is in fact true; at least for the most part and definitely in essence. Thus, by having each individual conversationalist saying it twice, Plato makes several verifications of the truth without deviating from his rule for backing up what is True in his narrative.

2. This ‘tool’ of repetitions cannot be used for any meaning either in Plato’s myths or Homeric myths, where the common logic can be applied, and the reader can judge by himself what is true and what is a lie. i.e. The present of Zeus is obviously a lie as nobody was present at his narration and of course, Zeus did not exist. But the meanings of Zeus’ speech, can be true and useful for the reader.

3. In Homeric myths, in a few cases, certain special repetitions play another role, such as for example, to ‘signal’ his reader that there is a concealed issue at that point that requires analysis to discover what it is. In other words, there is a true somewhere there.

4. Homer makes use of elements from everyday social reality, elements which Plato avoids because he has rejected them as non-rational or existed. For example, repetition of prophesies, premonitions, decrees by oracles and discrimination against women credibility, are commonplace in Homeric descriptions but not in the Platonic.

5. The writer, whether he is Plato or Homer, requires from his reader to consider his initial statement as being true. If there is no repetition of the information carried in that statement, the reader can use common sense and find out if this statement belongs to the category of meanings demanding confirmation of true or not or they are easily recognized as false. In other words there is a ¨Principle of Credibility¨ that governs the function of myth. Indeed, this is no different to what sensible parents instruct their children, namely, that they should consider their fellow humans as trustworthy unless proven otherwise in the future.

To whom is a myth directed – audience.

Simply put, one could say that a myth is a story for everyone. But is this really so? To begin with, Plato’s myths do not have the same audience as those of Homer. As in any narrative, each intellectual age group retains from a myth that which is most relevant to it. Alternatively, each characteristic element of a myth presents more or less interest to different -intellectual- age groups. Thus, in attempting a general separation of the reading public on the lines of intellectual maturity, receptiveness or perception to be (or not be) able to identify, distinguish and reason out the subject matter as per the categories previously analyzed, four distinct categories of audience are derived (figure 6). It must be noted however, that Plato’s myths, because of the nature of his reports, lack appeal for children and adolescents. Plato directs himself to an educated and intellectually adequate audience. This is not the case with the Homeric epics where long sections can be easily appreciated by young readers (or listeners –either under the category ‘children’ or under the category ‘adolescents’ or maybe ‘dubious matures’). But both types of myth contain sections that address the 3^rd category of ‘matures’ and the 4^th category of audience which is that of the ‘hyper-mature’ intellectuals or wise literati or ‘initiates’.

Interestingly, a similar research conducted on the Homeric epics, yielded findings which are herein included to demonstrate the similarities and dissimilarities in the myths written by two individuals very unlike in temperament and idiosyncrasy who lived and worked in very different times; namely, Plato and Homer.

Figure 7. Ο μύθος απευθύνεται σε:

‘Children’: As a pleasant story, imprinted on their memory by exaggerated and fantastical anecdotes, by music and poetry, offering easily comprehensible teachings (i.e., Good vs. Evil) (figure 7. 1st level)

‘Adolescents’: Provides knowledge. Presents subjects such as for controversy and discernment of True from False, Religion, Contemplation, Substantiation, Emotion, and Tuition (figure 7. 2nd level)

‘Adults’: Provides knowledge of a higher level. Considerations of values and honor. Precepts for maturity. Principles. Deliberations of logic, intellect (figure 7. 3rd level)

‘Initiates’: The whole truth. Hitherto unknown or hidden knowledge. Provides in convoluted fashion, information which is strange or obscure. It stimulates investigation, reconciliation and offers substantiation (figure 7. Core – 4th level)

5. Plan of a myth

It has already become apparent from the preceding rundown that a structured plan exists to achieve specific objectives and there is method by which the mythographer imparts these to his audience. Figure 8 shows the entire plan of action underlying Homer’s writings. As for Plato, who never employs obvious poetic or lyrical aspects in his writings, aspects which in their musicality or when accompanied my musical instruments facilitate the memorization of the contents and the retention of the correct spelling, the other difference with respect to Homer, is that his ‘audience’ does not include the categories of ¨children¨ and ¨adolescents¨ while maintaining the categories ‘themes’ and ‘stimuli’. As regards Homer’s poetry, the rules of the dactylic hexameter that employs long and short syllables are known. These rules were easily recognized through its constant repetitions over 27.802 lines of the Odyssey and Iliad. It is now apparent that apart from the musicality and rhythm that allows orchestration with a variety of musical adaptations, it is probably a ‘security lock’ of the Greek language in order for its spelling not to be lost in the course of the centuries, as it happened in the past when a few Homeric researchers have correct a quite number of distorted lines of the ancient text.

Figure 8. Structure of a myth such as is the Odyssey. The three “flags” marked with asterisk (*), do not apply to Plato’s writings because he addresses himself exclusively to the last two categories of objectives and does not contain poetry in its structure.

6. Analyses of the tactic to decode the truth in a myth.

In order to examine a myth, as depicted in figure 3 (also on the left in figure 9), so as to identify as many falsehoods as possible and to define and categorise dubious truths as True or False, one must proceed according to the layout in the diagram of figure 9.

7. Algebraic expression of truth and false.

The main challenge in rationally analysing myths is the simultaneous existence of true and false reports and the difficulty in identifying and separating them. In order to depict these two situations, there needed to be found appropriate symbols and relationships. Επειδή of their simple duality, a binary mathematical format would suffice to describe and express the logic of certain phrases or sentences. The result would be an algebraic expression whereby ‘Truth’ corresponds to 1 (one) and ‘False’ to 0 (zero).

Figure 9. To analyse a myth (as analysed and is on the left in this figure) so as to perhaps result as on the right, where whichever Falsehoods have been identified or minimised, one must proceed as per the above procedure and go in search of repetitions that the author provides as confirmation of the truthfulness of the initial statement. Accordingly, the truth will emerge while half-truth and false will be suppressed. Repetitions of Words or Phrases or Meanings: Clarifications = Confirmations = Re-confirmations = Evaluation. Plato confirms a 50% statement as True and makes it 100% true by a single repetition of similar meaning. Homer makes graded (50%, 75% etc) confirmations by corresponding number of repetitions of identical phrases. Plato usually repeats meanings as long as Homer mainly repeats phrases. This is another similarity of Plato’s philosophy with the Homeric one, and of course Plato is not hiding this detail but provokes the reader to understand it.

An algebra that perfectly suits the subject matter, criteria and the applied methodology, is Boole’s algebra with the use of Truth Tables and Logic Gates. (fig. 10).

This algebra cannot be applied to any text, narrative or poem that does not follow the ingenuous and systematic method of structuring a myth. The Homeric epics especially, in the way in which they are structured, lend themselves to ‘automatic’ -to some extent- analyses of the main truths through a simple computer program since it usually contains the same words and phrases by which to express a meaning. These words can easily be traced by a simple software program. But this method confirms just a part of the meanings.

Seeking for the truth of a Myth and Boole’s Algebra of Logic.

Figure 10. The cases of ‘Truth AND False’ and ‘Truth OR False’ can be processed via the Logic Gates AND, and OR of Computers and via the associated Truth Tables that accompany them. The OR gate will be applied to the basic question of whether something is true OR false. Besides, this is the first question asked when examining a meaning dubious in veracity. The AND gate will be applied to each confirmation of truth. At gate AND for example, both inputs must have 1 i.e., True. Any other input combination will result as False.

8. Function of myth.

Undoubtedly, the main objective of a myth is to instruct and inform. This is manifestly obvious because even if persons in mature groups are not in a position to evaluate the educational content directed to them by the author, they are nevertheless still able to discern that there is intention there for the less mature. Plato’s Myths not only impart philosophical, ethical and sociological teachings but also lessons on history, geography, complex rules of verbal and written communication and even information not for the general public. The Homeric myths, in addition to the above, also instruct on musicality and on elementary and complex grammar, etymology, rules of syntax of any level of difficulty, etc. In other words, to declare that the function of myth is didactic is to mean it in the broadest possible sense. Accordingly, it also acts as a vehicle for the reliable transfer of things unknown or not to be made public, by reason of the author considering the information as inappropriate for disclosure at that time and thus best recorded as esoteric or hidden.

9. Other mythographers or writers who exist in the Platonic myths.

9.1 Meanings from Homer into Platonic myths.

Even though evidence was given in Part One of the Methodology in Mythology that Plato ‘links’ the myths of Atlantis and the Odyssey, there follows another example in strong indication of this relationship. It is evident that Plato has adapted Homer’s instructive tactics to his own idiosyncrasy. Even so, he leaves perceptible traces of logic that cannot but make his reader aware of his references, since, in his writings of Timaeus and Critias, he gives noticeable indications in conceptions that are directly comparable to themes in the Odyssey but also to the Orphic poems, because even with these, there are distinct conceptual cross-referrals. The figure 13 (11.1) displays an example of reference in recognisable relation to the Odyssey.

Figure 13. It is manifest that Plato ‘directs’ systematically his reader to Homer’s Odyssey. Poseidon united with Klaeto in Critias and with Perivoea in the Odyssey. Both female names are characteristic of the female physique. Also, the fathers of these women had very similar circumstances and finally, Atlas and Nausithous were the first Kings of their respective people. It is obvious that Plato ‘relates’ the myth of Atlantis to that of the Odyssey and not only once as in the present case. Plato systematically ‘signals’ his reader to be alerted, instigating him to find out why.

9. 2. Meanings from Orphics into Platonic myths.

Plato ‘guides’ his readers logic also to the Orphic poems. Clearly, a reason is to indicate the relationship of the logic in the myth of Atlantis not only with the Odyssey but also with the Orphic poems. One example is given below:

1. Orphic: (64.8-13) Hymn to the Law.

αυτός γάρ µουνος ζώιων οȉακα κρατύνει γνώµαις όρθοτάταισι συνών, αδιάστροφος αίεί, ….. Μετάφραση: Επειδή only this (the law) commands the rudder of living things, because it has plainspoken opinions, is resolute…

2. Critias 109.C.3-5: ..εκ πρύµνης απευθύνοντες, οiον οίακι πειθοĩ ψυχής εφαπτόµενοι κατά τήν αύτων διάνοιαν, οűτως άγοντες τò θνητòν πãν εκυβέρνων.

Translation:…as we govern a ship by the rudder from the stern, thus similarly by persuasion influencing the soul according to their disposition, they governed over all the race of mortals.

9. 2. Meanings from Herodotus into Platonic Myths.

The most indicative example of Plato referring to Herodotus is in the description of the length of Atlantis, which Plato gives as being longer than that of Asia and Europe combined. Herodotus, who came slightly before and was, for a while, contemporary to Plato, does not equate it like that but instead writes that that Europe is as long as Libya and Asia together. Seeing that with great accuracy Herodotus gives the east and west boundaries of Europe as being 4.300 km of each other, plain inductive reasoning leads to the conclusion that Atlantis is longer.

• Timaeus 25.e.6 – 7 … η δε νήσος άµα Λιβύης ήν και Ασίας µείζων,

Translation:

…Whereas the island was of together larger than Libya and Asia.

Length of the Island / Continent of Atlantis > Length of Libya + Length of Asia=1.600 + 2.700 = 4.300 Km

• Herodotus 4.36, 37, 39, 40, 42.

4. 42 “…Europe is equal in length with Libya and Asia together…”.

Reports in several references that the: Length of Europe = Length of Libya + Length of Asia = 1.600 + 2.700 = 4.300 χλμ. [iii]

After making sense of the Logic in the myth of Ατλαντίδα and having extracted all the geometric shapes therein, the length of the arc of the semi-circle Island / Continent of Atlantis, was found to be 5.400 km.

10. Conclusion

The Methodology in Mythology derived from investigating the logic underpinning the writing of myths was demonstrated to be an ideal way of analysing myths, whether written by Plato or Homer. Myths which do not obey governing laws and their axioms or generally lack a definable structure in their writing or Logic, are proven to be fairytales or fantastical falsehoods or para-myths/fairytales that lack deeper instructional value or data ingeniously concealed to be imparted to the well versed, such as is found in the Platonic and Homeric myths, and which are thereby characterized as being True (truthful) myths. A true myth means that has the type of construction as per Plato or Homer (at least) although not all meanings contained in it, are not true.

Research has made steps. The present synoptic introduction presented in two parts, can rightly be regarded as the very beginning. Much new information has resulted while a number of questions raised by many researchers and scholars, past and present, on previously irreconcilable issues in Plato’s or Homer’s reports, have been answered while brand new issues and queries have been raised. One amongst many important outcomes is the ease by which from the small but significant distinctions of the axioms in the various writings, from the most ancient to Plato, the evolution of the Methodology of Mythology can be traced while at the same time providing insight as to the identity of the writers.

Another interesting characteristic of true myths is that through hyperbole or metaphor or allegory or even simple straightforward text, there is sometimes revealed a hitherto completely unknown hidden anecdote or item of information for which there is no manifestly obvious word or phrase in the text to betray its presence, while this information is usually of great political, societal or strategic import. For example, the location and characteristics of unexplored regions are revealed as are certain geological or other natural phenomena that are explained away as the actions of gods.

Another short example is that inside one Homeric myth, the first written in history accurate Calendar was hidden but discovered.

The end result was the derivation of a Methodology of Mythology ©, a new and innovative applicancy by which a wealth of new information is extracted from myths and faulty evaluations can be reappraised and righted. With 12 laws and 12 axioms discovered inside the Platonic myth and 12 laws and 17 axioms, so far, in Homeric myths, it further proves that there was indeed a method in mythography that followed highly intricate but completely systematic orthological structuring at least from Homeric times. All these issues and many more, too many to be included herein, are new.

[iii] The length of Libya and Asia was another work which has be done especially for this purpose. It should be exam the references from Herodotus for that era and calculate the exact length of all territories. The confirmation of the length of Asia, Libya and Europe was of fundamental importance. It’s an additional prove that the west edge of Libya was reaching up to the Golf of Gabes, and not at the Atlantic Ocean.

References

– Sarantitis G. (2008) – Book – The Apocalypse of a Myth. (Greek Edition). ISBN: 978-960- 030936-3.

– Sarantitis G. (2008). The True Dimensions and Shape of Libya, Asia and Atlantis. Proceedings of the International Symposium “Atlantis: Athens, Searching for a Lost Land”, Editor Stavros P. Papamarinopoulos, Publisher Heliotopos.

– Sarantitis G. (2008). The True Position of the Pillars of Heracles. Proceedings of the

International Symposium “Atlantis: Searching for a Lost Land”, Editor Stavros P.

Papamarinopoulos, Publisher Heliotopos.

Ancient Texts – Codices.

• Platonis, Timaeus et Critias – Lipsiae B.G. Teubneri 1891 with reference to: Parisius Greacus 1807. Parisius Greacus 1812. Vindobonensis 21-54-55.

• TLG. Reference by: J. Burnet, Platonis opera, vol. 4. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902 (repr. 1968): St III.17a-92c.

Translations

• Corrections – support – supervision of all translations of the author from Ancient to Current Greek. Professor Eva Dakia –Philologist.

English Translations for comparative measure.

• Plato. Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 9 translated by W.R.M. Lamb. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1925.

• Τίμαιος/Κριτίας - Εκδόσεις Κάκτος.

• Timaeus/ Critias – Papyros Publications.

Dictionaries used.

• Henry G. Liddell & Robert Scott – Mega Dictionary on the Greek Language – Editor I Sideris – Translation Ch.P. Moschos

• Anthimos Gazes 1839 – Dictionary of the Greek Language-Publications “Kypeiros”, published by Konstantinos Garpola son of Olympius.

• Basic dictionary of ancient Greek–G. Markantonatos – Th. Moschopoulos -E. Chorafas.

• Etymological lexicon of ancient Greek-J.B. Hofmann -Translation A.D Papanikolaou.

• Lexicon of ancient Greek Verbs -Patakis Publications – Steph. A. Patakis – Nik. E. Tzirakis

• Λεξικό της αρχαίας ελληνικής γλώσσας. - Εκδόσεις Δεδεμάδη - Ι. Σταματάκος.

• Dictionary of Ancient Greek – Makarios B. Pelekis – Savvalas Publications.

• Λεξικό της Ελληνικής Γλώσσας - Εκδόσεις Πάπυρος.

• Great Greek dictionary– Babiniotis. Great etymological Lexicon – Kaktos Publications.

• Ισύχιος - Εκδόσεις Κάκτος

• Lexicon of all verbs found in the Attican prose writings/writers – P. Diamantakos – I. Sideris.

• Suda - Εκδόσεις Κάκτος.

• Superlexicon of contemporary Greek language – Pagoulatos Bros. Publications Co.

George Sarantitis (2008)

Ηλεκτρονικός μηχανικός

Researcher of Philology and History

EMAEM – Society for the Study of the Ancient Greek Mythology