Atlantis the Lost Continent Finally Found

by Arysio Santos

  The names differed, but the place they referred to was invariably one and the same: Paradise destroyed and turned into Hell or Hades, the gloomy Land of the Dead. In other words, this formerly paradisial land was no other than Atlantis-Eden itself.

  Even the contribution of authors later than Plato – for instance, Diodorus Siculus and Pliny – is most valuable. These authors invariably based themselves on far older sources, now lost. These sources were usually repeated verbatim, as was the custom in those days.

  Allegories, disguises and metaphors could well be the creation of the poet. But the facts themselves could not be tampered with, as these were rooted in tradition and in religion.

  Pausanias, Pliny, Avienus and several other later Classical authors also disclose very precious information on the Atlanteans, as we shall be arguing in more detail next.

  These authors often identify the Atlanteans with the White Ethiopians and the Libyans or Phoenicians, accordingly placing Atlantis either in North Africa (Morocco, Libya, Carthage, etc.) or in its dual, the Ethiopia on the opposite bank of the World-Encircling Ocean, its other moiety.

  For instance, Pliny (H. N. 2:92; 6:36) specifically places the Pillars of Hercules (Columnae ) along with Mt. Atlas at the exit of the Red Sea leading into the Indian Ocean. Pliny is very probably identifying these Pillars of Hercules with the two peaks at the banks of the narrow Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, which was in fact often closed up by extremely perilous coral reefs that there abound. ↑152

  Pliny’s allusion to an eastern Atlantis is somewhat garbled, as is invariably the case with this tabooed subject. So, he could even be referring to Taprobane itself, if by “Red Sea” he meant the whole Erythrean (or Indian) Ocean and by “Ethiopian Ocean” he really meant the Pacific Ocean. No matter what, the authorities that Pliny used here are visibly independent of Plato’s.

  Pliny also refers that Kerne (or Cerne) is placed “opposite” Ethiopia (contra sinum persicum cerne nominatur insula adversa aethiopiae) and “opposite” Mt. Atlas, in Mauritania. Now, the words he uses (contra; adversus) also express the idea of “antipodal”. This type of double entendre was standard in antiquity when speaking of Atlantis’ location, as we will be arguing below. ↑153

  Kerne is apparently the same as Kerkenes, the capital of Atlantis according to Diodorus Siculus. Moreover, the double entendres such as the ones Pliny uses here – meaning either “facing, next to” or, conversely, “opposite, antipodal” – are apparently tied up with the antipodal location of Atlantis on the other side of the Ocean.

  The very fact that Pliny’s text is so obscure and so ambiguous proves the fact that the great naturalist, like so many other ancient authorities, was reluctant to divulge the well-kept secrets having to do with Atlantis’ true location beyond the Ocean, at earth’s antipodes.

  Properly interpreted, some of these authors even specifically place this paradisial (or infernal) land in Taprobane (Indonesia), just where we have located Atlantis. Their information is often seemingly incongruous and chaotic. But their data are all convergent, and only start to make sense when properly culled and carefully collated one with the other, as an ensemble.

  Rather than sheer myth, the places and personages just named are often no more than mere codenames and metaphors for Atlantis itself. Like its several other names, Atlantis is the appellative given the sunken continent by both Plato and Diodorus, among others.

  But this onomastic term is also used by several other authors, Avienus, Proclus, Herodotus and Pliny included. However, we must always keep in mind that the subject matter of Atlantis’ historical reality was the core of the secret of the ancient Mysteries.

  Hence, it could not be openly divulged to the profanes except under a veil of impenetrable mythical or religious allegories and other similar disguises such as the ones we are presently discussing.

  For example, Homer spoke of Phaeacia (or Scheria) as some sort of ghostly Atlantis turned into the terrifying Land of the Dead due to a punishment sent by Poseidon. Hesiod spoke of Tartarus as a semi-mythical place beneath the earth or located at its far fringes, beyond the Ocean and inaccessible to humans and loathed even by the gods themselves.

  Diodorus, the erudite Sicilian Greek – given the cognomen Siculus (“Sicilian”) for that reason – wrote several important passages on Atlantis, in his Bibliotheca Historica. Although his book dates from the middle of the first century BC, and is hence somewhat later than Plato’s, his sources – now lost – are obviously much older than that, and are visibly different from the ones followed by Plato.

  Once properly interpreted, Diodorus’ information is congruent with the one provided by the supreme philosopher. This coincidence proves that at least some ancient historians believed that the story of Atlantis was based on historical fact and treated it as such.

  Diodorus is one of the most important authors on Atlantis, being second only to Plato himself. Moreover, as a skilled, careful historian, the Sicilian author actually wrote on Atlantis in factual historical terms, very much as did Plato himself.

  However, despite the importance of the information that Siculus provides, his treatise is seldom if ever mentioned by Atlantologists in general, who apparently ignore his invaluable contribution to the enigma of Atlantis.

  It is for this reason that we now comment on Diodorus’ remarkable work on the Lost Continent in some detail. To start with, Diodorus places Atlantis on the far side of the Outer Ocean, “at the outermost bounds (or fringes) of the earth”. And these “outermost bounds of the earth” are clearly the East Indies according to ancient Greek and Egyptian sources, among others.

  For example, Homer speaks of the Far Eastern Ethiopia as the dual and counterpart of the other one, placed in Libya (North Africa). This Western Ethiopia was so named because it too was inhabited by the White Ethiopians who invaded this region of the world in the dawn of time.

  And it may well be that Plato actually had that invasion in mind, rather than the far later one of the Sea Peoples when he wrote on the Atlantean invasion of the Mediterranean region in his dialogues.

  Actually, it was this assertion of Diodorus that made me look for the Lost Continent in its correct location, beyond the Ocean. And it was there, in Taprobane, the “Land of Gold”, that I eventually found the now sunken remains of Atlantis, exactly as described by Plato: continental size, far eastern location, tropical climate during the Ice Age, vast forests, priceless mineral resources, etc..

  In no way may the text of Diodorus Siculus be interpreted as meaning that Atlantis was located near the Euro-African coasts of the Atlantic Ocean. This is where most experts currently believe it was located by Plato. But this is at best a gross one-sided misinterpretation of the philosopher’s text.

  The Far Eastern location of Atlantis is specifically stated by Diodorus. This antipodal placement may also be true of Plato, whose text on this issue is ambiguous and very obscure at best. And it is certainly affirmed by Pindar, who places the Pillars of Hercules at the “ultimate fringes of the earth” (eschata).

  The word pro used by Plato in his Greek original may mean both “opposite; in front of; facing; next to” as well as “antipodal; located on the opposite side of the ocean”. Such is also the case with the Latin words adversus and contra used by Pliny, as we just saw above.

  We will see next that many other Classical writers used similar ambiguous expressions, given the fact that they were forbidden by oath to divulge the true whereabouts of the formerly paradisial location turned into the gloomy Land of the Dead feared by all.

  Though up to now invariably interpreted in the first sense, a careful collation with Diodorus and other authorities shows that, beyond reasonable doubt, it is the second sense that really applies to Atlantis. Besides, since there is no great island – sunken or other – right in front of Gibraltar, Plato would at best be misleading if he really meant the first of the two senses of the word pro.

  It is also clear from both his text and the unique features of Atlantis that P
lato really meant the distant location, rather than the near one. For instance, in one passage of his dialogues, Plato specifically affirms that the Atlanteans actually came “from a distant point in the Atlantic Ocean”.

  Now, this can only mean the farther bank of the ocean, as we just demonstrated. Why would Plato use the idea of “distant” if he really meant nearby Gibraltar? And why would he say the Atlantic Ocean if the Atlanteans in fact came from the European coast itself, as most researchers currently believe?

  Again, why would the philosopher say that the Atlantic Ocean was murky and “innavigable” in the region of Gibraltar when even the school children of his day knew that the Phoenicians and other peoples regularly sailed this region of Europe both inside and outside the pillars?

  While this affirmation is obviously wrong of Gibraltar, it is quite true of Sunda Strait and the region of Indonesia. There the land had in fact sunk away in a great cataclysm, just as affirmed by Plato and others, Diodorus and Pliny included.

  And this volcanic cataclysm left behind mud shoals and sandbars formed by the deposited tephra, as well as the terrible darkness which is consistently mentioned in the ancient sources and which was obviously caused by the dust and smoke suspended in the atmosphere by the giant eruption.

  Likewise, in his remarkable text on Atlantis, Diodorus Siculus specifically adds something to the effect that: “The Atlanteans, dwelling as they do in the regions on the fringe of the ocean, inhabit a very fertile territory.” By “fringe” Diodorus, like Pindar and other ancients, generally meant the far end, the other bank of the Ocean, at the ends (or “fringes” or “wings”) of the world.

  “Fringe” (eschaton, epeira) is a technical term whose meaning must be carefully considered if we really strive to understand what the ancients actually meant by it. As is clear, the meaning of such geographical expressions changes a lot in the course of time due to the linguistic affectations such as metaphor, allegory, irony, metonymy, synecdoche, paradox, hyperbole, and so on.

  Curiously enough, Isaiah explicitly affirms that the Jews (Israelites) came from “the ends of the earth” and, more exactly, from the “islands in the east”. This is tantamount to saying that the Jews were among the Ethiopians who came in from the Far Orient; from the islands of Indonesia, crossing to the West either via the Ocean or, far more likely, along the Silk Road, via the Far East.

  Isaiah even refers to these Israelites as “the righteous men from the East”, probably a way of saying that they were the same as the Pious Ethiopians of Homer, Herodotus and Pliny. 17

  Such is perhaps the real reason why Dawn is invariably portrayed as winged, for instance, in the remarkable portrait of Dawn holding up the dead body of her son Memnon linked to here. We will return to this subject further below, when we discuss the real identity of the Eastern Ethiopia ruled by Dawn (Eos) and Memnon. ↑154

  A close study of the remarkable passage of Isaiah just linked will no doubt reveal that it in fact refers to the destruction of Far Eastern Atlantis by the vajra, that is, by the supervolcanism of the Krakatoa.

  The Atlantean Origin of Agriculture

  Curiously enough, Diodorus also enigmatically affirms that: “Corn (wheat and/or barley) is unknown to its inhabitants [the Atlanteans].” This piece of information, though strange, is extremely interesting. The Atlanteans are held to have been the inventors of agriculture, which most experts think started in the Near East with cereals such as wheat and barley, etc..

  But when we look deeper into the matter the real reason readily becomes apparent. It is now known for certain that the first cereal ever to be cultivated was rice. As recently discovered, rice agriculture started in the Far East (China and the East Indies) over 15,000 years ago and more.

  Besides, rice was reaped from the wild there as early as 25,000 years ago, as some recent archaeological finds of great importance have also demonstrated.

  These dates were obtained by the Chinese and other scholars from actual grains of cultivated rice found in a sacrificial cache, in a well-known archaeological site. So, these results are direct, and cannot be validly questioned by anyone sufficiently knowledgeable in the matter.

  Moreover, these rice grains were themselves radiocarbon dated not by the Chinese alone, but also by reputed Western laboratories, which are quite well-known and universally accredited, and are hence beyond any suspicion whatsoever.

  So, like it or not, we must all learn to live with the reality that agriculture originated not in the Near East, as most experts think, but in the Far East, where this practice is attested far earlier in time.

  This remarkable archaeological find also precludes locations such as Europe and the Levant, where wheat and barley are of course the staple crops, as is well-known. In these western regions, rice agriculture was unknown down to relatively late times, when it was later introduced from the east.

  We have already quoted, in previous chapters of the present book, a text by the traveler Marco Polo affirming, with a great deal of wonder, that the people from East Asia ignored wheat agriculture, cultivating rice instead. And the reason for that is easy to realize.

  Rice is typically a tropical produce. This fact further confirms the tropicality of Atlantis, just as unequivocally affirmed by both Plato and Diodorus. Moreover, the very word “rice” ultimately derives from the Dravida (ariči), a fact that again attests the Indian origin of the world’s most important cereal. Even the name of “cereals” derives from an early form of this Dravidian base (*sariči).

  Why would the plant have an Indian name if it actually came from somewhere else? This Dravidian name is also the source of words such as the Latin oryza, the Greek oruza, the Italian riso, the French riz, the Portuguese arroz, the English rice, the Arabic uruzz, etc..

  Hence, even though the Atlanteans apparently did not have wheat, as Diodorus asserts, they abounded in rice and other tropical crops, exactly as so forcefully affirmed by Plato. And since this useful plant’s name is Indian (Dravidian), it is virtually certain not only that the plant itself but also its culture are ultimately Indian in origin.

  Plato even mentions – by means of a detailed description, since these fruits were unknown in his time, and consequently had no Greek name – what several experts recognized to be coconuts and bananas. The fruit “having a hard rind, affording a drink and meat and ointment” is obviously the coconut, as no other known fruit does so.

  And “the fruit which spoils easily and makes a very pleasant dessert” is quite clearly the banana. If these fruits were known in ancient Greece, they would necessarily have a Greek name, even if imported. And Plato would obviously have used their names instead of these clumsy descriptions.

  This reality is also fast becoming apparent to most researchers, now that we have so unequivocally demonstrated the Far Eastern origin of agriculture, perhaps within Atlantis itself. Despite their archaic date, we believe, the Chinese samples just mentioned – and so the Korean, the Vietnamese and the Indian ones – are certainly not the earliest ones to be had.

  These sites are, it seems, mere secondary gene-centers which imported rice agriculture, probably along with some others such as bananas, coconuts and pineapples, etc. from its source. The development proper occurred far earlier than that, very probably within Atlantis itself.

  From Atlantis the seminal invention passed to the other “gene-centers” where the technique was adopted and adapted to the local conditions, perhaps via crossbreeding with local wild species, a common agricultural technique of a highly advanced character akin to Genetic Engineering.

  It seems that it was only when they later moved to the temperate regions of the world that the survivors of the Atlantean cataclysm were forced to give up rice agriculture – by far more productive than wheat or barley – in favor of these less desirable local substitutes such as barley, oat, wheat, etc..

  It is not impossible that the survivors of the Atlantean cataclysm had to develop these local cultures afresh, starting essentially from scratch. But th
ey of course already had the seminal idea itself. The odds against an independent reinvention of agriculture are exceedingly small, and can be ignored for all purposes, as we have formally demonstrated with rigorous mathematical arguments.

  However, if we accept the hypothesis of diffusion, the above mathematical objections are automatically eliminated and everything starts to make sense. Moreover, this apparent reinvention of agriculture probably happened in several different places in the world: China, Southeast Asia, the three Americas, the Near East, Europe, India and so forth.

  It was this local redevelopment that created the illusion of an “independent invention” in the so-called “gene-centers”. Their existence was long ago postulated by N. I. Vavilov and most other specialists who later adopted his ideas. These, though outdated, still survive essentially unchanged down to this day, at least in academic institutions and in the standard textbooks on the subject.

  The Sanskrit name of rice is java (or yava), which exactly coincides with the one of the island of Java (in Indonesia). This name again corresponds to the designative of the white races in this sacred tongue of India: Yavanas. It is also from this name that the one of the Greeks or Ionians, as well as that of Javan, the son of Japheth, are derived.

  This ethnonym is spelled as IaFones (with the fau, F) in Homer, a form that leaves no room for doubting a common origination in India. This fact proves beyond reasonable doubt the Far Eastern origin of the Greeks or Yavanas.

  Curiously enough, in Greek traditions, the Titan Atlas is made the son of Iapetos, along with other Titans such as Prometheus, Epimetheus and Hesperus. Iapetos was considered by the Greeks to be their ultimate ancestor, via Prometheus and Deucalion, their Flood hero and the son of the Titan Prometheus himself. 18

  In the Bible (Gen. 10:2; Jer. 66:19; Eze. 27:13) Javan and his brethren inhabit the “isles of the gentiles”. These mysterious islands seem to be precisely those of Paradise itself, Java included, which we have now identified with Atlantis. The Egyptians, and several other ancients too, often referred to these islands, which they often place in the Eastern Ocean, and reached via the pristine Suez Strait.