HPB of course does have some very definite statements on Atlantis. I will be getting to those. In my opinion, though, there is much material that should be covered to do HPB the justice she deserves on this subject. I would like her to receive that justice. So as part of working up to her view, I will be first answering your questions as you framed them.
You asked about the Carribean as a site for Atlantis.
Background: Fidel Castro was attempting to raise funds by looking for shipwrecks with treasure aboard that are within his territorial waters. He hired the high tech company of Advanced Digital Communications (ADC). Paulina Zelitsky is associated with that company.
On May 14, 2001 Reuters reported about her companies discovery off Cuba:
"Most intriguingly, researchers using sonar equipment have discovered, at a depth of about 2,200 feet, a huge land plateau with clear images of what appears to be urban development partly covered by sand. From above, the shapes resemble pyramids, roads and buildings."
This of course is exciting sounding material. I was looking forward to a significant find. Even though HPB (Blavatsky) asserts Atlantis was in the mid Atlantic - it could still have outposts at Cuba.
The Reuters release further said:
''It is stunning. What we see in our high-resolution sonar images are limitless, rolling, white sand plains and, in the middle of this beautiful white sand, there are clear manmade large-size architectural designs. It looks like when you fly over an urban development in a plane and you see highways, tunnels and buildings,'' Zelitsky said.
''We don't know what it is and we don't have the videotaped evidence of this yet, but we do not believe that nature is capable of producing planned symmetrical architecture, unless it is a miracle,'' she added in an interview at her office at Tarara, along the coast east of Havana.
This became extra interesting because Andrew Collins had recently written an excellent book that deeply researched old documents to find traces of knowledge of the western hemisphere in the old world. This led him to be the first to predict Cuba as the location of Atlantis. So the Cuba find of Zelitsky directed the spotlight of attention to his book "Gateway to Atlantis"
It has been more than three years now and I have not heard any further positive result. Maybe others have. But there is a negative result. There is another book "The A.R.E.'s Search for Atlantis" by Gregory and Lora Little. It is an excellent book and I expect to say more about it later. In that book are two quotes: "Sonar images can be very misleading, and wrecks and debris can be mistaken for structures." (p 60). Zelitsky had been using Sonar. And "In other cases, the sonar picture is far more geometrical than the anomalies appear to a diver." (p62)
What we discover is that Zelitsky subsequently took video of the site to supplement her sonar data. She then showed that video to Collins. Now if that Little book is read it becomes clear that it properly reflects the views of Collins. Collins wrote the introduction for it. That book also says "Initially, ADC utilized side-scanning sonar to discover the "ruins," but later they sent a small remote camera into the fast-moving, murky water. After viewing the video footage ADC sent him, Collins was unconvinced that the stone features discovered by ADC were actual ruins. To this writing, [book published in 2003] no new information has been released by ADC, and the world awaits the eventual outcome."
So here is the rub. Collins has much to gain if the Cuba site is verified. However when shown the video he was "unconvinced". So now more than 3 years later I am skeptical of the bold original claims.
There are also some theoretical problems with the Cuban theory. Cuba is not under the sea. Part of the alledged plain described by Plato in the dialogues as pointed to by Collins is indeed underwater. But other parts of alledged Posoidonis are above water. That is not so suitable for an island that Plato says sank "in a day and a night".
Here is a key passage from Plato:
"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."
A shocking note here is Plato's reference to "a boundless continent". There is wide agreement that the reference is to the Western Hemisphere. But isn't that startling that Plato should know about that? (It would not be shocking according to some of HPB's statements.)
Also note that Plato is quite aware here of the distinction between the Atlantic and the Mediterranean. That decreases the viability of the arguments of Galanopoulos.
And finally this passage reflects negatively on the arguments of Collins. He makes much in his book of the greater and lesser Antilles. But in his case of Cuba those islands lead TO his proposed Atlantis and not FROM it as Plato mentions.
So, Brian, grand conclusion: Likely nothing Atlantean has been found in Cuba. I'll keep an open mind though. And the details of Collins' argument, while very well done, don't satisfy all the requirements.
The case for Atlantis at the island of Santorini (anciently Thera) in the Aegean Sea is instructive.
You see, traditional science has two very major objections to the idea of Atlantis in the Atlantic. The first objection is the date that Plato assigns to it of 9,000 years prior to Solon - which I will approximate at 9,600 BC. Archaeology has very carefully catalogued, analyzed and interpreted its finds. It says mankind went through stages called paleolithic (old stone), mesolithic (middle stone), neolithic (new stone), bronze age, iron age and onward. A reading of Plato's Atlantis with this understanding of science in mind most definitely places Atlantis in the bronze age - and perhaps advanced in some ways beyond that. However the bronze age was approximately 2,100 to 1,200 BC. This is completely at odds with the carefully constructed chronology of science.
Some details are revealing. In Plato's Atlantis the inhabitants do metallurgy. But metallurgy is from about 3,000 BC. Plato's describing Atlantis with metallurgy is therefore said to be "wildly anachronistic".
The laws of Atlantis are inscribed on pillars. Note inscribed. Writing is thought to have been invented by the Sumerians somewhere between 2,700 to 2,300 BC. Even if we think "inscribed" should include heiroglyphs that still only takes it back a couple more millennia according to traditional science. Again "wildly anachronistic".
In the dialogues it says Atlantis was a maritime threat to Greece and to Egypt. However, scholars say Greece culture came after 2,000 BC and Egyptian after 5,000 BC. Therefore there were neither Greeks nor Egyptians yet born for the Atlanteans to fight. Again "wildly anachronistic".
Similarly the architecture of Atlantis was certainly not before the bronze age. The social organization and maritime skills of Atlantis as described are also clearly bronze age.
A few decades ago, Galanoupolos, a Greek seismologist, pushed the idea of Santorini in the Aegean as having been the origin for the Plato's myth of Atlantis. Here are some quotes from his book "Atlantis":
"Indeeed there is nothing in the essence of Plato's Atlantis that cannot be matched in the known remains of the high Bronze Age; ; and it is impossible to read his account without being sure that what is being described is indeed a Bronze Age civilization - perhaps one that we know not of, possibly one that we know under another name."
"This ... is what Plato has said about Atlantis. Is it credible? Obviously not. Can its discrepancies be reconciled? We believe they can."
And finally in summation Galanopoulos states:
"There are other anachronisms which it would be wearisome to pursue since the case is already so strong. One wild anomaly could perhaps have been allowed, but for Atlantis to have everything - architecture, metallurgy, writing, agriculture and unborn opponents - between 3,000 and 7,000 years before their time is manifestly absurd. The date of 9600 BC for Atlantis is both incredible andimpossible, in detail and in general alike."
Galanopoulos found a "solution". He said he could "fix" Plato. He noted that the island of Thera very violently exploded around 1,500 BC. No-one disputes this explosion. It exploded some 900 (not 9000) years before Plato. He noted that tsunami was from Thera would have destroyed the civilation on the nearby Crete (which was destroyed near then). Also he noted that the bull and Poseidonis feature importantly on Crete as they did on Plato's Atlantis. And also Crete was extending maritime threats to both Athens and Egypt.
So Galanopoulos assumed that Plato, who after all was a philosopher and not a historian, had somehow taken bits of information about this destruction at Thera and used it for the basis of his dialogues - whether knowing or not knowing of the changes he was inserting.
It is key to Galanopoulos' final solution that his island of choice was too small by a factor of 10 to be the island Plato described. He turned this to his advantage as he saw it. Somehow Plato had gotten a mistranslation of the Egyptian hierglyphic symbol for "100" and it had been read as "1,000". This explains why both the size of the island and the years ago of the island were both off by a factor of 10. Why that even helped his solution.
And the last detail Plato had said the location of Atlantis was "before the pillars of Hercules". This is the Straits of Gilbraltar by all other accounts. Galanopoulos rather stretched a little and proposed the straits referred to the entrance to a nearby small harbor.
So was the solution of Galanopoulos reasonable? Was it helpful? It is ONLY major solution I know that is acceptable to standard science. Now you see why.
If a proposal comes forth that uses the wrong side of the Straits of Gilbraltar, of a vastly differing size, of a vastly differing time, even with some similarities - is that the Atlantis used by Plato in his dialogues or is it just another incident in history?
On the face of it, what would a reasonable person think?
|Much has been written on Atlantis. Since the time of Plato, humanity has pondered upon, and written on this mysterious island. Could it have been really real? Is there any evidence to its having been a substantial civilization as Plato and other ancient writers claim? Through the last two centuries and into this one, much archeological searching for Atlantis has revealed findings that do indeed substantiate the claims of Plato. There really was a highly developed civilization prior to what is termed "written history".|
BlavatskyNet introduces the Atlantis Series. We begin the series with emails and newletters - written from 2002 to 2004 by Reed Carson - to members of BlavatskyNet. In these writings a lot of information then available throughout the "non-establishment" scientific community was highlighted and discussed. He compared what was being re-discovered to what was already known by Theosophists. The resultant conclusion the readers drew was that H. P. Blavatsky did indeed know what she was talking about. HPB had much to say about Atlantis, and much, if not all of it was not accepted by the "Scientific Establishment" of her day, however, that did not bother her, nor did it keep her from sharing the hidden knowledg that she had been taught.
The Atlantis Series touches on her writings, primarily taken from her two major books, Isis Unveiled and The Secret Doctrine. We also look to her copious articles for comments on Atlantis and compare all to what "Science" has found in the ensuing centuries. Slowly the hidden knowledge of what happened at the beginning of our Humanity's sojourn on this planet is being accepted, studied and enlarged upon by an emerging cadre of scientists no longer afraid to voice, and print their findings.
Welcome to the quest.
Many modern archeologists will not accept that Plato knew what he was talking about. In fact, many ancient writings and commentaries of events in pre known history (meaning their story) is discounted or thrown out wholesale by our "serious" archeologists of today. Why? Because it does not fit their tidy chronology or better known as their mythology. The argument for Atlantis being in the Mediterranean runs counter to what Plato describes, a continent that began beyond the pillars of Hercules -meaning in the Atlantic Ocean. The Atlantic Ocean, could it be thus named because Atlantis was in the middle of it. Reed Carson's insights into how mainstream science distorts history to suit its belief system is interesting reading.
|Atlantis in Cuba and or in Bimini. Although artifacts near these islands were found in separate occasions by separate discoveres, both these islands were claimed to be Atlantis. However, this is not so, and the supporting research, which Reed Carson highlights should help those interested in this fascinating portion of history to understand the underlying problems associated with claiming the Carribbean islands Atlantis.|
|When discussing Atlantis, the "geological Problem" tends to arise. Since, mainstream Science will not recognize the ancient written accounts of this civilization as being true, the location of this "fantasy" island is anyone's guess. But, is it really a guess, or is Science just ignoring the obvious truth - that Atlantis sunk into the Atlantic Ocean, plain and simple.|
|In this email Reed Carson discusses the various dates for the sinking of Atlantis, which occurred in the Pleistocene and the supporting geological evidence indicating a major catastrophe. We have recently witnessed the rising and sinking of islands in the Pacific Ocean correlated to volcanic action. Contrary to traditional geology, land does indeed rise and sink.|
|For the past 147 years or so, we have been taught a fundamentally erroneous theory called "Gradualism" which attempted to explain how we got here in geological terms. The theory was enthusiastically accepted by Science because it sort of discribed how "erratics" (large boulders) got to where they are now, in the middle of nowhere without having to make reference to any ancient texts that described a certain event (Atlantis?). Reed Carson lays out the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, evidence that was overlooked because it brings into question the underlying thesis of Gradualism. What happened about 10,000 years ago and to Atlantis can be summed up in one word -Catastrophy, and a new theory is emerging "Catastrophism."|
|We are all familiar with the picture on the front cover of the Time Magazine back in 1960's depicting the norther half of the world covered by an enourmous sheet of ice. But, did the ice age really happen as main streem media protrayed. In this email Reed Carson outlines the scientific necessities requiring such an ice sheet, and the science doesn't hold up to the theory.|
|Geological discoveries in Siberia and Northern Climes have consistently pointed to sudden unexplained (at least for main stream Science) freezing. Not ordinary cold, but instantaenous freezing in which frozen mammoths are found to still contain in their mouths buttercups. And we are talking about millions of animals found in Siberia and Alaska, all frozen in a matter of miutes, so that their stomach contents remain undigested. This suddenness of events corroborates the story of Plato that Atlantis fell in a night and a day.|
|When we look at the sudden freezing of animals and plants that occurred in the Northern Hemisphere in Siberia to Alaska region, we need to look at a shift of axis for the mechanism of such rapid cooling. And the geological evidence indeed points to such an event. In fact, recently geologists upon examining rock stress lines hint to about 4 such events in our past. The most recent, about 10,000 years ago.|
|Some readers on the BN talk list asked whether Atlantis sunk from a direct meteor or comet impact. Many psychics have taken up this "comet hit Atlantis" story and have erroneously seen the past (actually their perception of the past. The Akashic field holds truth and falsehood within it environs.) Reed Carson here explains the geological evidence of multiple impacts by meteors and comets affecting life on earth.|
|In the comments and emails above, Reed Carson dealt with various aspects of the destruction of Atlantis from a scientific viewpoint. Looking at the reasons for discounting the various hypothesis that have been brought forward by others. In this email he points to the culprit, the reason for the sinking of Atlantis. And the scientific data is overwhelming when one looks at the material already discovered and discussed in the emails above. Unfortunately, much of today's science is tied to special interest groups that promote dogma and not facts. However, in time the ancient history that is outlined by the Secret Doctrine will be studied and accepted. And now we come to the heart of the matter, Theosophy knows when this event occurred, it has the exact year, for it was witnessed and set down.|
|Phaeton and Atlantis. Phaeton, the Greek mythological culprit that nearly destroyed the earth due to his inability to control the firery steeds of his father's (Helios) chariot. Was there more to this myth than main stream science is willing to admit to?|
|Reed Carson wrote back in 1996 this extensive article on the then geological findings of Atlantis. In "Atlantis Found" he gives Theosophical background, that has since HPB published "Isis Unveiled," spurred the search for this prehistory advanced civilization.|
|Wrong Turn of Science, in this article, Reed Carson reviews the uniformitarian philosophy in geology that is proving to be in much error as to the real events that occurred back in 10,000 B.C.|
|In Evidence Of Atlantis - Reed Carson introduces findings from "Ocean Seamounts" (from Unknown Earth: A Handbook of Geological Enigmas by William R. Corliss.) - proofs of Atlantis in Atlantic|
|As we pursue the growing evidence that Atlantis is not a mere myth or theory but an actual fact of history, we present two more articles written by Reed Carson that outlined the growing scientific evidence that Atlantis was indeed real, populated by real people and that some of us are the inheritors.|
|Plato- Original Source of Atlantis legend|
|Flood myths - a site with 96 pages of flood myths around the world. The stories below are flood stories from the world's folklore. The stories included here if (1) they are stories; (2) they are folklore, not historical accounts or fiction by a known author; and (3) they involve a flood. In most borderline cases, the story is included anyway. For example, one story (Hopi) tells of a flood which was avoided and never occurred.|