It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
When I began my own research the prevailing understanding was that Aristotle had rejected the story of Atlantis as an invention. Franke’s study has turned this idea completely on its head, clearly demonstrating that there is implicit evidence that Aristotle was “rather inclined towards the existence of Atlantis”. However, he goes further and forensically demolishes the idea that the two passages in Strabo’s Geographica (2.3.6.& 13.1.36) were quotations from Aristotle and even if they had been, they were references to Homer not Plato.
However, the Naval Station, still now so called, is so near the present Ilium that one might reasonably wonder at the witlessness of the Greeks and the faint-heartedness of the Trojans; witlessness, if the Greeks kept the Naval Station unwalled for so long a time, when they were near to the city and to so great a multitude, both that in the city and that of the allies; for Homer says that the wall had only recently been built (or else it was not built at all, but fabricated and then abolished by the poet, as Aristotle says); and faint-heartedness, if the Trojans, when the wall was built, could besiege it and break into the Naval Station itself and attack the ships, yet did not have the courage to march up and besiege the station when it was still unwalled and only a slight distance away; for it is near Sigeium, and the Scamander empties near it, at a distance of only twenty stadia from Ilium. But if one shall say that the Harbour of Achaeans, as it is now called, is the Naval Station, he will be speaking of a place that is still closer, only about twelve stadia from the city, even if one includes the plain by the sea, because the whole of this plain is a deposit of the rivers — I mean the plain by the sea in front of the city; so that, if the distance between the sea and the city is now twelve stadia, it must have been no more than half as great at that time. Further, the feigned story told by Odysseus to Eumaeus clearly indicates that the distance from the Naval Station to the city is great, for after saying, "as when we led our ambush beneath the walls of Troy," he adds a little below, "for we went very far from the ships." And spies are sent forth to find whether the Trojans will stay by the ships "far away," far separated from their own walls, "or will withdraw again to the city." And Polydamas says, "on both sides, friends, bethink ye well, for I, on my own part, bid you now to go to the city; afar from the walls are we." Demetrius cites also Hestiaea of Alexandreia as a witness, a woman who wrote a work on Homer's Iliad and inquired whether the war took place round the present Ilium and the Trojan Plain, which latter the poet places between the city and the sea; for, she said, the plain now to be seen in front of the present Ilium is a later deposit of the rivers.
Originally posted by Byrd
There's nothing new here except a bad interpretation.
...... ..... ..... So no, he never says Atlantis is real.
And this is the problem about people using "a sentence here, a sentence there" as evidence.
You have to read the WHOLE chapter.
Originally posted by JayinAR
Even if Aristotle DID think Atlantis was a real place, this isn't 'news'. Aristotle was still thousands of years removed from the events. Its an argument from authority to link the two together as evidence Atlantis was real.
And I say that as someone very open to the possibility of Atlantis.
Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by cicerone
You must be joking, right?
You want a literal interpretation of Plato in regards to Atlantis being a real place, but not the timeframe he gives for its existence?
So basically you get to pick and choose what you want to believe and anything ELSE is pseudo science?
Haha
Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by cicerone
You must be joking, right?
You want a literal interpretation of Plato in regards to Atlantis being a real place, but not the timeframe he gives for its existence?
So basically you get to pick and choose what you want to believe and anything ELSE is pseudo science?
Haha
Originally posted by punkinworks10
Atlantis was a real place, in a metaphoric way, it was the minoans and the city was akrotiri on thera, which in fact did sink under the waves.
The minoans empire was the largest of its time, stretching from anatolia all the way to iberia and the Atlantic north african coast.
After the theran eruptions devastated minoan shipping, the flow of tin stopped and the early bronze age civilization of the med collapsed. Without contact from the eastern med the western colonies collapsed as well. The med went into a " dark age " for several centuries and the minoans became the stuff of Egyptian legends that remembered their former trade partners.
When the mycenean Greeks got to thera just 50 years after the eruption they had no idea people were there before them.
Originally posted by cicerone
The point is: That Plato really had information of an ancient civilization was *not* denied by Aristotle, as many scholars tried to tell us, and so the Thera hypothesis, too, gains more credibility.
Originally posted by Harte
Care to list the other things " 'not' denied by Aristotle?"
For example, Aristotle did "not" deny the existence of the boogyman. Hence, the boogyman must be a real thing?
(Outside the pillars of Heracles the sea is shallow owing to the mud, but calm, for it lies in a hollow.)
Originally posted by cicerone
Originally posted by Byrd
There's nothing new here except a bad interpretation.
...... ..... ..... So no, he never says Atlantis is real.
And this is the problem about people using "a sentence here, a sentence there" as evidence.
You have to read the WHOLE chapter.
Unfortunately, you confuse a lot of things, what about YOU reading "the whole chapter"?!
It is *not* Aristotle quoting Posidonius, it is the other way round: Posidonius quotes Aristotle, and then, Posidonius is quoted by Strabo. O my god, you confuse the most simple things! Strabo quoting Posidonius clearly says, it is "better" to put the matter in that way ... (meant is: Atlantis as a reality).
Originally posted by cicerone
Originally posted by Harte
Care to list the other things " 'not' denied by Aristotle?"
For example, Aristotle did "not" deny the existence of the boogyman. Hence, the boogyman must be a real thing?
Quite right, but since academia again and again claimed that he denied it, it is news.
Furthermore, after the removal of this mistake, the old view on Aristotle's opinion comes back:
That his and his followers' work shows clear indication and evidence that Aristotle was rather inclined to accept the reality of Atlantis. After approx. 100 years of error it is time to regain proper views.
Originally posted by cicerone
And what Atlantipedia.ie also pointed out: It is heavily interesting to see how the mistake crept into science, and which scientists silently disagreed but did not speak out clearly.
Originally posted by Harte
It would be more correct to say "...crept into the study of classical literature..." since this has absolutely nothing to do with science.
Originally posted by cicerone
Originally posted by Harte
There are mainstream scientists chasing Atlantis right now. Wasting their time and money, IMO.
Oh really? I don't think so. Who is it?
The purpose of these conferences is to gather specialists of all the different disciplines involved in highlighting the scientific aspects of this greatly interesting subject, provide a greater understanding of key issues on the Atlantis Hypothesis and in the same time offer networking opportunities at an international level.
Atlantis’ locations in Europe, Africa, Aegean Sea and the Americas
Chair persons: Yannis Makris, Ioanna Papoulia and Stavros P. Papamarinopoulos
10.00-10.25 Was Atlantis located in the straits of Gibraltar? The Spartel Bank hypothesis: in situ-investigations and chronological contradictions
Mark Andre Gutscher, C.N.R.S, France
10.25-10.50 Atlantis in Puerto de Santa Maria/Cadiz/Spain
Juergen Karl Hepke, Independent Researcher, Germany
Originally posted by cicerone
Before the mistake concerning Strabo 2.3.6 crept into science, academia clearly saw Aristotle in favour of Atlantis because of several reasons.
Perhaps even more important is Franke’s revelation of how the prevailing attitude regarding Aristotle’s opinion of the Atlantis story arose. He has carried out extensive research that brought him back to 1587 when a commentary on Strabo by Isaac Casaubon was published, which in turn was badly misinterpreted in 1816 by Jean Baptiste Joseph Delambre who attributed a critical comment by Aristotle regarding Homer’s Achaean wall in the Illiad to be instead a reference to Plato’s Atlantis. This had far-reaching consequences as Delambre’s book was probably more generally available than Casaubon’s, resulting in Delambre’s error being widely disseminated and so in time his misinterpretation gained sufficient critical mass to become ‘received wisdom