MoM 1




The ancient Greek philosophers were introduced to the world either through their surviving manuscripts, or copies translated into several languages over the last hundreds of years, or through references to them by other authors. The majority of translations succeed, for the most part, in rendering the writings of the ancient scholars, such as Plato, for example. However, it was noticed that there are differences in translation between the various renditions of his works which are more pronounced in those passages of the myth that contain descriptions. The reasons for this are:

1) The impracticability of devoting the required time to semantics needed to exhaust all the connotations and accurately interpret all of what Plato means. The grammar and syntax of Ancient Greek are well known and individual words are, in the main, accurately interpreted by many illustrious philologists, researchers and scholars, both Greek and non-Greek. However, many ancient words have alternative meanings with fine distinctions that require assessment in choosing the most appropriate. Such an enterprise is evidently laborious and time consuming and can never be remunerated sufficiently enough so as to make the realization of a definitive translated version economically worthwhile.

2) Interdisciplinary knowledge is necessary in order to comprehend the meanings expanded upon by Plato and to properly render his texts. Without doubt, there is a need for collaboration with experts in the fields of Philology, Linguistics, History, Mathematics, Physics, Astronomy, the Geo-sciences, etc. The lack of adequate spherical knowledge is one reason for the loss or misevaluation of the information that the Philosopher intended to pass on to whoever wanted to examine his account in full. When Plato dealt with mathematics, he usually did so in intricate linguistic form. When he engaged in literature, he developed it mathematically. Therefore, to discover and exhaust all aspects of Plato’s character and gain as much knowledge as possible from his texts, it is absolutely necessary to work with renditions of his writings that are precise in meaning. In other words, a connotatively accurate translation is a must. The logic pervading the ancient texts was examined through the rules of language and application of logic. The latter was considered fundamental to research and crucial in attempting to evaluate the reason why Plato, an archetypal rationalist, wrote about an incredible myth such as Atlantis seems to be.

3) On conclusion of this research, it was obvious that Plato followed a specific method when writing myths. Therefore, in order to decipher or else, demythologize myths, a Methodology of Mythology© has been developed which allows for the extraction and separation -sometimes easily while at other times less so- of truth and falsehood from the writings and in so doing, achieve disclosure of whatever information concealed or ‘camouflaged’ in the writings. At the same time, this method enables the amendment of whatever misleading information was transmitted by previous mistranslations.


1.1 The Myth of Atlantis is unfolded over these two books.

The myth of Atlantis was chosen for research because it’s the longest of the Platonic myths. It is also self-contained and the integrity of its writer beyond dispute, as is the excellence of the reproductions of his manuscripts down the ages. The presentation that follows is synoptic. The investigations (for the purposes of this site) were along two lines; Firstly, that of semantics, that is to say, analyses of words, turns of phrase and the writings in general so as to determine accurate connotations[i] and secondly, that of determining the underlying logic.

1.2 Semantics

The ancient words, phrases, sentences and paragraphs were scrutinised so as to determine their true connotation as accurately as possible. This was in collaboration with specialists from linguistic disciplines. The time given to retranslating a short section from Timaeus (234 lines) and all of Critias (582 lines) from scratch, exceeded 4.000 hours. The vocabulary, grammar and syntax were processed through referring to a number of authoritative dictionaries and lexicons. Meanings as used by Plato and by other ancient writers from the time of Homer were drawn upon. Many words that were considered as crucially defining were re-examined in context so as to conclusively arrive at their intended meaning.

1.3. Definition of words with alternative meanings.

1) Timaeus 24.e.5 Pelagos/ 25.a.2 Pontos. These two words, along with Thalassa and Okeanos, are Greek designations in reference to various types of sea.

The Greeks, a seafaring people, ascribed terms to seas according to their differentiating characteristics (the above are terms still used, although the newer generations of Greeks no longer remember their connotation). English translations usually render these words generically as ‘sea’ (gr: thalassa) or sometimes as ‘open sea’ or even as ‘ocean’. This conceptual lumping together,results in misleading associations, since the above Greek terms explicitly refer to the unique characteristics of each sea. Even today, Greek maps and charts indicate the Mesogaeos Thalassa, Aegean Pelagos and Euxinos Pontos which in English are known as the Mediterranean, Aegean and Black Seas.

The word ‘ocean’ in particular, is a serious mistranslation given that Plato does not use the word ‘ocean’ (gr: okeanos) in neither Timaeus nor Critias! He was very well acquainted with what an ocean was. He had defined it in his earlier work of Phaedo and makes references to it in Cratylus and in Theaetetus. There is no room for misinterpretation; when Plato wrote ‘pelagos’ and ‘pontos’, he meant precisely those types of sea. He did not write ‘okeanos’ because he did not mean the ocean. Atlantic ocean is an ocean and Atlantic pelagos, is a pelagos!

2) Timaeus 25.a.1. Katantikri– downward facing /25.a.2. Peri – around /25.a.2. Stoma– mouth. The reinterpretation of these words as to their appropriate meaning, their re-evaluation within the ancient text and the subsequent reworking in context, clearly and for the first time defined the contour of the continent of Atlantis².

3) Timaeus 25.d.3-4. Dysa – Means either ‘sank’ or ‘inundated’. The former meaning is legitimate when there is a causative case and the latter when there is not. This word is usually interpreted as ‘sank’. But in context, its connotation is ‘inundated’. This alternative albeit unconventional meaning is valid because there is no causative case (Greek term: Poetic cause). Evidently, the latter meaning completely upsets the hitherto popular presumption that the Island (not the continent*) of Atlantis sank. What is referred to in the book of Critias, is a tiny island (Sacred Isle – hub of the concentric wheel system) which was flooded and remained covered in water, at least up to the time of Solon’s description of it.

*analysis of the ancient text shows that there are three (3) ‘islands’ of Atlantis. For the first time ever it has become clear that no continent sank -which is a geological impossibility, at least in the past 10.000 years-. The writings refer to a large island (300 km in length) which suffered some damage and to a much smaller one (less than a 1.000 metres across) which was inundated.

4) Timaeus. 25.d.4. Izomeni(settling as in sediment). Usually translated as ‘submerged’ or ‘immersed’, this word contributes to the misunderstanding caused by the misinterpretation of the previous word ‘dysa’. The correct connotative definition of ‘izomeni’ gives the sense of ‘settling’ as in the deposition of sediment (Sediment = Ίζημα = Izima). Analysis of the text shows that part of the land of the Island-Continent transformed into clay as a result of intense seismic activity and the presence of large volumes of water. Accordingly, this word is used to describe the geological phenomenon known as liquefaction. It gives explanation on how the clay that blocked the canal that also acted as an outlet for excess water was produced. This blockage caused water to accumulate and rise, to subsequently inundate another island ‘trapped’ behind the drainage canal.

5) Critias.115.e.6. Synetetrito – The correct translation, as near as can be rendered in English, is that of ‘water flowing between two diametrically opposite bays, whose edges so closely approach each other, as to almost interrupt the space between them’! (Anthimos Gazis Lexicon:1836). This first time ever definition, depicts an opening in a wheel of land that forms two bays across each other whose respective edges come so close as to almost touch, thereby forming two narrow straits through which the sea flows constricted from one wheel of water to another (see schematic representation in page “The Apocalypse* of a Myth, The System of Wheels, Image 8”.

These are but a few examples of mistranslated and therefore misinterpreted words that serve to misinform and mislead by conjuring up wrong imagery. Evidently, all hitherto translations on Atlantis and whatever hypotheses and theories based on them are rendered meaningless.

[i]Present article: 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.
[ii] Methodology in Mythology – Part Two – Plato’s Logic as Mythographer. New light is shed on Plato’s methodology in his mythological reports.
[iii] 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
Isychios – Kaktos Publications
Lexicon of ancient Greek Verbs -Patakis Publications – Steph. A. Patakis – Nik. E. Tzirakis
Dictionary of the ancient Greek language. – Dedemadi Publications – I. Stamatakos.
Dictionary of Ancient Greek – Makarios B. Pelekis – Savvalas Publications.
Dictionary of the Greek Language – Papyros Publications.
Lexicon of all verbs found in the Attican prose writings/writers – P. Diamantakos – I. Sideris Publications.
Great Greek dictionary– Babiniotis.
Great etymological Lexicon – Kaktos Publications.
Suda – Kaktos Publications.
Superlexicon of contemporary Greek language – Pagoulatos Bros. Publications Co.

[i] Sarantitis G.: Book. “The Apocalypse of a myth”. – Greek first Edition (2008) / ISBN: 978-960-030936-3. Greek National Library.

Chart 1. It was necessary to identify the reason why the rationalistPlato wrote the myth of Atlantis. An accurate explication would shed light on the mysteries of the mythological references. For that reason, it was necessary to ascertain the unique logic of the author’s thought process as well as the distinctiveness by which these works were written. In other words, by attempting to define the logic of the author, it was necessary to identify his rationale for writing Timaeus and Kritias. Any methodologies to this end had not to allow leeway for misconception or uncertainty. For this reason, the works underwent analysis via the application of methodologies trusted for their rationalistic approach.


Figure 1.New translations derive new Illustrations of the several Atlantean diagrams. Herewith is the actual diagram of the 5th wheel of land, as described by Plato. The correct meaning of the world “συνετέτρητο” gives the picture of the open wheel with two bays at the edges. This shape comes first time ever in light.


2.1. Certain turns of phrase are of key importance in both texts.

1. One characteristic example, amongst many, are the following phrases in Timaeus:

Timaeus 24.e.5: «τοἐκεῑ – πέλαγος» – ‘the there-pelagos’.

Timaeus 24.a.4: «ἐκεῑνο δε πέλαγος» – ‘indeed that pelagos’.

Timaeus 25.d.4: «τοὐκεῑ πέλαγος» – ‘that there pelagos’.

They all refer to the same pelagos (sea) which is found ‘there’. (Note: a ‘there’ presupposes a ‘here’, which, by syntax, is the area of the Pillars of Heracles and the beginning of the land of Atlantis island + continent). In Critias however, there is the term ‘pan pelagos’ which, through combinatorial logic and in relation to concepts given elsewhere in the texts, turns out to be another way of Plato referring to the ‘that there Pelagos’ in Timaeus. In other words, the ‘there-pelagos’ in Timaeus and the ‘pan-pelagos’ in Critias, are one and the same! Furthermore, in Critias, certain phrases are accompanied by the qualifiers ‘all’ or ‘whole’ or ‘entire’ instead of ‘there’, thus giving rise to new depictions derived from association to complementary concepts. These conclusions resulted mainly from the application of the rules of syntax and, of course, common sense. 2. Another characteristic example stemming from the application of the rules of syntax is the differentiation in meaning that shows that there are three (3) different islands of Atlantis defined in the texts, namely, the Island-Continent, the much smaller Island inside the Continent and the very small Sacred Isle inside the Island. In Timaeus, the word ‘continent’ gives the concept of ‘island-continent’ whereas the term ‘island of Atlantis’ is in reference to a small island contained by the continent. However, these concepts are reversed in Critias, where the qualifiers ‘all’ or ‘whole’ or ‘entire’ in reference to the word Atlantis, mean both the Continent and Island together. In order to rule out all possibility of misinterpretation, a painstakingly thorough analysis of the syntax was conducted. Also in Critias, there emerges the third island which Plato refers to as the ‘sacred isle’. This isle, hub of the homocentric wheel system of Atlas, remained covered by water at least until the time of Solon’s description of Atlantis; note, covered because it was inundated, not because it sank, the latter concept being a presupposition of a landmass physically shifting to a lower level. This impression of Atlantis ‘sinking’ is an age old mistaken notion that has never taken into account the possibility that it is not necessary for terrain to sink so as to be covered by water. It can be flooded by rising water.


3.1 Structure of texts.

Repeatedly, in both books, long sections of ‘straightforward’ writing are interrupted with text of high complexity. This observable fact is too systematic and too intense to be considered coincidental. Focusing on these passages has, for the first time, yielded new information and developed entirely new ‘images’.


Chart 2 up. The sentences (horizontal axis) containing important information are definitely always of greater complexity, as evidenced by how long it took to process them in working hours (vertical axis). These taxing passages crop up suddenly between stretches of relatively easy reading. The complex sections materialize abruptly in the regular text, giving rise to a ‘torrent of thought’. The most significant of all aspects in the complex texts, is the correlation of concepts. Comparatively, the connotatively challenging words are the easiest part of the complex text. Chart 3 bottom. The first column contains numbered sentences as per Chart 2 and also as per their position in the ancient text. W: Total number of words in the sentence 1: Number of challenging words researched as to their meaning. 2: Number of challenging phrases researched as to their meaning 3: Number of challenging concepts examined in relation to other sections of text in order to be accurately interpreted.

3.2. Example of a passage with no less than 6 independent sentences or clauses (either main or subordinate and punctuated distinctly between full stops).

The following passage (115.d.3-8), as well as another similar, is the most syntactically ‘bizarre’ that Plato has written in Critias. Inserted in parentheses, are words implied by syntax and/or elucidations. In this passage, consequent to the new translatory approach of absolute exact definition, there appear two (2) dioryches or canals of equal dimensions but of different properties, instead of the single canal as has been generally accepted from the outset to the present day by students of Atlantis. Also, in all three ‘peculiar’ passages, whether in normal or reverse reading of the clause or independent sentence, an unambiguous, even if complex, description of two separate subjects is given, alternating each in explanation of the other (i.e. role reversal occurs between the main and subordinate clause)!

1) Such as a diorycha (waterway) commencing from the sea with a width of three plethra (100m),

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

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

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

5) and accomplished the re-navigation (return journey) from the sea towards that {diorycha} (and then) towards that {outermost wheel} which was akin to a harbour,

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

Above, translated text, Timaeus (115.d.3-8). Usually, when rendering this sentence, well known translations describe one canal. The breakdown of this passage reveals two, each with different properties (hollowed out inland waterway vs. pierced mouth) and for different purposes (re-navigation vs. navigation inwards). The word ‘sea’ (note: thalassa in the ancient text, not okeanos) appears twice and is in reference to two separate bodies of water. Plato is pithy, not making redundant use of words and concepts. The expressions ‘re-navigation’ (5th line) and ‘navigate inwards’ (6th line) and the dissimilarities of the two canals (hollow inland waterway vs. pierced mouth) disclose the two different canals. This observation is verified as being correct from the analysis of a passage further on in the text that is conceptually associated to this one (117.d.8 & e.1-3). Also, with a reverse reading of sentences, the reader understands better the description of the second canal, while with the forward reading understands better the first one! It’s an incredible -Plato’s- spiritual game!


4.1. Noticeable characteristics of both books:

1) The writings start off straightforwardly with easily comprehensible expressions and concepts which abruptly become highly complex and idiosyncratic in structure. Τhere follows a ‘respite’ with uncomplicated text again, until the next composite section.

2) In the complex sections and often at a short distance from each other, there are words almost alike in spelling and ‘sound’. The reader can easily be misled into understanding them as more or less the same in meaning, but they are not.

3) A ‘difficult’ word often helps to clarify the connotation of a previous one in the same sentence or passage.

4) A particular sentence may lack determinants or is inconclusive. Resolution is definitely given elsewhere in the text, in a sentence which needs to be located by following the rules of syntax.

5) There are paragraphs whose meaning is vague but which are clarified by the content of other paragraphs. Gaps in meaning in Timaeus are filled in with meaning from Critias and vice versa. Thus, the two books are complementary and must be read in correlation. Nothing is left hanging or open-ended. On all ambiguous issues, Plato provides verification elsewhere in the text as to whether a derived conclusion is correct or not. He is convoluted but complete.

4.2. Intricate Contrivances of Logic.

1. Plato’s contrivances of logic pose a serious mental challenge. He employs all the fundamentals of Logic as established in modern thinking, unfolding in breadth and in depth, with argumentation, criticism and syllogism.

2. A very important element in Critias is the elucidation of where the Pillars of Heracles were. By applying logic and syntax to combine syntactically complex paragraphs and correlate the defining words and phrases therein, Plato gives the Pillars as sited in Africa (both of them) with Libya and Egypt to the east. He also establishes Atlantis as being ‘behind’ the Pillars past the ‘outer sea’ and ‘behind’ and to the west of Libya[i].

3. In Timaeus, Plato provides geographical directions and delineates the Continent of Atlantis. In Critias, he presents new schemata of the wheels concentric to the hub of the Sacred Isle of Atlantis[ii]. All known so far diagrams have been changed.

4. In Timaeus, he describes a war that is the second of two wars. Reference to the first war is made in Critias, that is, the second of his books dealing with Atlantis. Also disclosed, are two different locations named Gadeiriki (Instead of one known so far).

5. In Timaeus, Plato describes the surroundings of Athens and the origins and development of its inhabitants while in Critias he deals with things Atlantian.

6. Certain proceedings in these two books refer the reader to Homer’s Odyssey while others, to Herodotus. These too are distinct signs that Plato expects his reader to be well-read and have perception.


5.1 In order to draw near to Plato’s ‘method’ when writing, it was necessary to examine the rationale of the two works by analysing the myth as to its individual elements.

Many reviewers, both olden and recent, have remarked on the ending of Critias which seems to be unended because Zeus does not make the statement he was about to. In this respect too, new information emerged after careful analysis of the texts of Timaeus and Critias. It is evident that Plato has concluded the book of Critias. The narrative of Atlantis lacks nothing, save what Zeus was about to say. Deliberately, Plato requires his reader to apply logic to round off the concept, the paragraph, the book and the story.

Specifically: In Critias, Plato analyzes the apposite system of laws that governed Atlantis, as he has already previously done with regard to Greece in Timaeus. He goes on to explain that this system was not adequate enough to last, no matter how ideal it seemed. As many good and righteous laws as there were, at the end, for some reason, the Atlantians reverted to primitive ways, in pursuit of power and inequity. Even so, there were those who in prudent evaluation found these doings unacceptable while others considered such deeds to be admirable and reasonable. In justification for the moral and ethical decline, Plato states that responsibility lay with the divine element that existed but subsequently waned in humans. In other words, the Divine in mortals was the reason people prospered, but in the course of time, it diminished to the point where humans reverted to being base in thought and actions. Even so, he elsewhere explains that the Atlantians’ greatest asset was their virtue, so blame for the decadence should not be put on the gradual loss of the divine element but on the gradual loss of human virtue. On the one hand, there was the faith of those who could not see clearly and lay responsibility for the evils that befell them on the Gods while, on the other hand, there was the faith of those who could perceive and distinguish and who thought poorly of the others. It was logical for Zeus to comment on human wrong doings which put them on the road to destruction. Consequently, it is reasonable to anticipate that he would remark on the wretched behaviour of people that leads them to commit ‘hubris’. Indeed, the offense of hubris -with its repercussions and inevitable punishment- is referred 26 times throughout the Odyssey and 4 times throughout the Iliad. Thus, there is a strong suspicion that Plato is once again [iii] guiding his reader’s thoughts to the Odyssey.

Plato guides the reader to append the remaining text, not once but twice, as is his wont albeit not simply. To begin with, in the ancient text of Timaeus, the text in reference to Atlantis occupies a total of 35 lines while the rest of Timaeus is given (8) to philosophical debate and analyses. In Critias, the theme logic is ‘reversed’, as happens typically between the two books. Therein, most of the text is given to a detailed description of Atlantis and just 32 lines devoted to philosophy and instruction. Thus, there are three lines ‘outstanding’ needed to ‘balance out’ the different in content texts of the two manuscripts. Therefore, Zeus’ speech would need to be brief. Should the reader consider that Plato the Rationalist would not arbitrarily leave his thoughts unended and in so considering finds that this numerical imbalance in the writings is good reason to go in search of three missing lines, then, on condition that the reader has become aware of references suggestive of the Odyssey and given that after 32 lines Critias ends ‘inconclusively’, to simply go to verse 32, rhapsody A’, at the start of the Odyssey and ‘borrow’ from there the three or more missing lines! The unfinished meaning is immaculately complemented and neatly concluded. The ending of Critias is the beginning of the Odyssey (ingenious, double reverse logic). This is another, the ultimate perhaps, ‘message’ Plato gives as to the relationship between his Atlantis and Homer’s Odyssey. Thus:

Plato’s – CRITIAS: 121.b.7. (The unfinished text …Zeus about to speak for the first time in the presence of all the gods…)

‘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, (hubristically) 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 observes and considers all things, whichever have taken place, and after having assembled them, said…’

The ending of Critias continues as the start of the Odyssey ….

Homer’s – ODYSSEY: 1.32-34. (Zeus speaks for the first time in the presence of all the gods…)

‘O alas, the manner in which the mortals put the blame on the gods. For they claim that from us do derive their misfortunes˙ yet often they themselves with their wicked deeds (hubristically behaviour) fall into grief beyond what can be written…’


It was reasonably expected that the new connotatively accurate translations would yield new information and provide elucidation and correction to previous ones. What was unexpected and a complete surprise, was the number and extent of the redefinitions, perhaps the foremost being, to the chagrin of Atlantologists everywhere, that Plato reports three (3) Atlantis’ (Island-Continent, Island, Sacred Isle) and that, most importantly, none of these sank. The continent of Atlantis was shaped as a semi-circle (semi-oval actualy) and the island of Atlantis – contained by the Continent – had the shape of a rhombus with ratio 4/1 length to width. The Sacred Island – contained by the Island – was located at the centre of a wheels’ system. Also, there were two (2) places named Gadeiriki, two (2) canals, not one, with matching dimensions etc. But what is probably the most significant finding of all, is the identification of the hitherto unidentified methodology employed by Plato when writing his myths. This was observed when analysing the rendition of Atlantis in which the misinterpretations from previous mistranslations had been rectified. The end result was the derivation of a Methodology of Mythology ©, a new and innovative applicancy by which a wealth of new information can be extracted from myths and faulty evaluations can be reappraised and righted. 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. The information they reveal is of serious consequence to the ongoing study of the ancient world.

End of Part one.

[i] 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.
[ii] Sarantitis G. (2008). The True Dimensions and Shape of Libya, Asia and Atlantis. Proceedings of the International Symposium “Atlantis: Searching for a Lost Land”, Editor Stavros P. Papamarinopoulos, Publisher Heliotopos.
7. G. Sarantitis (2010) OCPC- Methodology in Mythology – Part one.
8. Might have 36 lines in some text copies, for example, Book- J. Burnet: Platonis opera vol.4. Oxford – Clarendon Press. Repr.1902, or 37 lines because of a single word overflowing onto the 37th line. For example Book- Platonis, Timaeus et Kritias – Lipsiae B. G. Teubneri 1891
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.
Translation (Greek-English) and proof reading: Nick Kaloudis.
Copy editing and additional proof reading: Deborah M. Cotterell.
Corrections – support – supervision of all translations from Ancient to Current Greek.
Professor Eva Dakia –Philologist of Athens University.
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.
Timaeus/ Critias – Kaktos Publications.
Timaeus/ Critias – Papyros Publications.
G. Sarantitis (2011) – For publication – The Apocalypse of a Myth (English edition). G. Sarantitis