Get out the way Santorini, you've got some competition

Santorini, often claimed as the inspiration for Atlantis, but never fitting any of the facts, because it didn't sink, it was never at War with Athens and Plato would have just said Santorini.

Well there's a new contender, a heavily fortified city has been found called Lambayanna in Kiladha Bay and its believed to have submerged in an Earthquake. Its also about 50 miles from Athens, Atlantis' famed protagonist



www.history.com...

In 2014, archaeologists from the University of Geneva were conducting dive-training exercises off Lambayanna Beach in Greece’s Kiladha Bay when they spotted some intriguing pottery fragments submerged near the shore. When they looked closer, they spotted what appeared to be architectural elements, suggesting the presence of an entire settlement underwater. Now, after conducting a full investigation of the site over the past two months, the researchers have uncovered what appears to be a sprawling, heavily defended city dating as far back as 2500 B.C.

Of course, I don't believe in Atlantis, because most of the claims made in the story are historically impossible, but I'm wondering why the Atlantis lovers aren't saying anything about this especially if they go look, they'll find that Its a circle shape, containing three more circles
You can see the remains on Google earth here
37°24'17.68"N 23° 6'26.23"E

Or if you're too lazy to do that,


What I do believe, is that stories get exaggerated and exaggerated every time they are retold. This city dates from 2500 B.C.E, which is about 2000 years of Chinese whispers before Plato got a hold of it, even if he did

I'm still betting on the Azores. Massive shift in the Mid-Atlantic plate, possibly caused by a meteorite impact (plainly indicated by Plato). Any artifacts or structures buried deep under tons of sediments and ocean water, with almost no hope of finding them until we develop some insanely good satellite scanning technology.

a reply to: Marduk

Thanks fore posting the cool information

I am tracking with your last paragraph. There has to be a kernel of truth generating the rest.

a reply to: Marduk

Woah, that's quite exciting for a gullible Atlantis-believer like myself!

More surprisingly, the ruins contain at least three horseshoe-shaped foundations attached to the wall line, which are believed to be the remnants of massive defensive towers of a type unknown elsewhere in Greece.

But that's quite interesting, in all seriousness. Do you know offhand of another culture who built massive defensive towers? Phoenicians? Or were they light house builders? It's getting late, I can't remember.

What I do believe, is that stories get exaggerated and exaggerated every time they are retold. This city dates from 2500 B.C.E, which is about 2000 years of Chinese whispers before Plato got a hold of it, even if he did

2000 yrs of chinese whispers would make some sense of the fantastic stories of Atlantis, i would say. Very cool thread Marduk.

Its also right next to the original pillars or Hercules

Before the 6th Century BCE several mountains in the edges of mainland Greece were seen as pillars that supported the sky. Amongst others, the two southward pointing headlands on each side of the Gulf of Laconia were "pillars of Hercules".[4] Support for this Peloponnesian location for the pillars comes from Medinet Habu in Egypt, dating to 1,200 BCE, which describes the Sea Peoples invading from the islands of the north "from the pillars of heaven", by which the Egyptians meant the ends of the earth as they knew it

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: beansidhe

But that's quite interesting, in all seriousness. Do you know offhand of another culture who built massive defensive towers? Phoenicians? Or were they light house builders? It's getting late, I can't remember.

The Hittites built Horseshoe shaped defences and towers. They are believed to have got the idea from the Trojans,

originally posted by: ABNARTY
a reply to: Marduk

Thanks fore posting the cool information

I am tracking with your last paragraph. There has to be a kernel of truth generating the rest.

It might be true that myths contain kernels of some truth or historic event.

However, as there is no myth associated with Atlantis in any form, I'd say you're just kidding yourself.

Harte

Love new finds!

Found another link: www.speroforum.com...

3D View of the underwater site


Also love the solar ship they used as the expedition tender:
www.planetsolar.org... ner

OOps first double post.

what a fantastic find.

The edge of the Mediterranean hs swallowed a few cities. Wonder if there might be more?

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
what a fantastic find.

The edge of the Mediterranean hs swallowed a few cities. Wonder if there might be more?

There's quite a few mentioned here
www.visitgreece.gr...

the settlement known as Archampoli or Charchampoli, a name that is probably a corruption of the words Archaia Poli (meaning ancient city). Here you can clearly see sections of the submerged ancient settlement in the shallow waters from the cliffs next to the sea that will make your visit worthwhile. In Attica, explore Pountaleza in Lavrio which has been partly submerged, as has the Port of Avdira, in Thrace.

You can also discover many sunken cities in the Peloponnese, such as Salanti in Argolida and the settlement of Methoni. At Pavlopetri in Laconia, the town of Voies, mentioned by Pausanias in his book Lakonika

a reply to: Marduk

all the info i find on that site you quoted is in a language that i can't read. Do you have a rough age on it?

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Marduk

all the info i find on that site you quoted is in a language that i can't read. Do you have a rough age on it?

Its in English
www.visitgreece.gr...

a reply to: Marduk

LOL, i read that link. All the others on a search from the US on Google are in something else.

The link you provided didn't mention the age of "ancient city", and i was interested in background info. It does mention 4th century AD as the "oldest submerged city in the world" at another location. Although I am certain India has them beat.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Marduk

LOL, i read that link. All the others on a search from the US on Google are in something else.

The link you provided didn't mention the age of "ancient city", and i was interested in background info. It does mention 4th century AD as the "oldest submerged city in the world" at another location. Although I am certain India has them beat.

They're probably in Greek
try google.co.uk

The sunken city of Dwarka (India) is 3700 years old
The sunken city in the OP is 4500 years old
The sunken city of Pavlopetri (Greece) is 5000 years old

a reply to: Marduk
Thanks for your OP and info, I wil add my views to the theory. As of for now we only seem to be able to come up with theories, but that is a start. Also in platos reference to what he was told in the Egypt of his day, it was said or implied that there were a vast quantity of men. That being the case, I would say the place you have located would not hold that many men. None the less it doesnt mean that it might not have formed part of a network of simililar sites. Take the romans, for example, in Spain (Iberia) they have a network of sites that they ruled over for some time. It is clear they were there, just for how long they ruled is not so clear. Did they rule every square yard? I doubt it. What I am trying to imply is that the sea people or perhaps the Atlanteans worked in a similar way, until one day the sea just swept them all away. In Spain, if you travel her, you will see the original people had a fondness towards living on hill and mountain tops. The main reason is well known, fear of the sea. The down side is traveling from one area to another is a big effort.

What is so amazing about Plato's account anyway?

Unless I missed something else.. can someone inform me?

There is nothing mythological about his account (I posted 2 translations below).

He basically mentions a land that is supposedly huge - "larger than Libya and Asia together", at a "distant point in the Atlantic ocean".. with a great king.

Well from where they are, the only land masses in the Atlantic Ocean that large are the Americas and Greenland.


Plato's Account in Timaeus and Critias:

"For it is related in our records how once upon a time your State stayed the course of a mighty host, which, starting from a distant point in the Atlantic ocean, was insolently advancing to attack the whole of Europe, and Asia to boot. For the ocean there was at that time navigable; for in front of the mouth which you Greeks call, as you say, 'the pillars of Heracles,' there lay an island which was larger than Libya and Asia together; and it was possible for the travelers of that time to cross from it to the other islands, and from the islands to the whole of the continent over against them which encompasses that veritable ocean. For all that we have here, lying within the mouth of which we speak, is evidently a haven having a narrow entrance; but that yonder is a real ocean, and the land surrounding it may most rightly be called, in the fullest and truest sense, a continent. Now in this island of Atlantis there existed a confederation of kings, of great and marvelous power, which held sway over all the island, and over many other islands also and parts of the continent."
- en.wikipedia.org...


Another translation..

Many great and wonderful deeds are recorded of your state in our histories. But one of them exceeds all the rest in greatness and valour. For these histories tell of a mighty power which unprovoked made an expedition against the whole of Europe and Asia, and to which your city put an end. This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent. Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia. This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she defeated and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjugated, and generously liberated all the rest of us who dwell within the pillars. But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea. For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was caused by the subsidence of the island.

a reply to: nOraKat

What is so amazing about Plato's account anyway?

The point is not that it is amazing in content but rather that we have some kind of content from way back in time, in writting. It gives us many clues as to the possible existence of Atlantis or how life was back in the day. That is a blessing like any other book that passes through time that gifts us with something we may or may not of realized.

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Marduk

LOL, i read that link. All the others on a search from the US on Google are in something else.

The link you provided didn't mention the age of "ancient city", and i was interested in background info. It does mention 4th century AD as the "oldest submerged city in the world" at another location. Although I am certain India has them beat.

They're probably in Greek
try google.co.uk

The sunken city of Dwarka (India) is 3700 years old
The sunken city in the OP is 4500 years old
The sunken city of Pavlopetri (Greece) is 5000 years old

The age of a sunken city doesn't correlate to the date it sank.

My info is that Dwarka sank during the Medeival Period.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Marduk

LOL, i read that link. All the others on a search from the US on Google are in something else.

The link you provided didn't mention the age of "ancient city", and i was interested in background info. It does mention 4th century AD as the "oldest submerged city in the world" at another location. Although I am certain India has them beat.

They're probably in Greek
try google.co.uk

The sunken city of Dwarka (India) is 3700 years old
The sunken city in the OP is 4500 years old
The sunken city of Pavlopetri (Greece) is 5000 years old

The age of a sunken city doesn't correlate to the date it sank.

My info is that Dwarka sank during the Medeival Period.

Harte

I agree, but I was answering a specific question

The link you provided didn't mention the age of "ancient city",