IB Extended Essay: Please comment if you find anything that should be fixed or changed please.
Note: any book names which are not italicized are italicized in the actual paper, it didn't transfer the same way (too lazy to go through and change them all)
“The story of Atlantis has long fascinated oceanographers, historians, archaeologists, geographers, explorers, psychics – anyone with a taste for the more intriguing mysteries of human history.” (Ellis 4) Ever since Plato described the lost continent in his dialogues Timaeus and Critias, people have searched for something that fits his description. As we search, we find Atlantis could have been any of several ancient cities, places, or civilizations. None of these theories has ever been proven, but many have been supported. It is up to each one of us to decide for ourselves what Atlantis actually was, or whether it even existed.
For many, the story of Atlantis is nothing more than a myth. Perhaps the most accepted theory of Atlantis is that it never existed. However, it is much easier to prove something did exist than to prove it did not. Evidence can prove existence, but what can prove nonexistence? Can lack of evidence? No, as lack of evidence proves nothing. One must use caution in using lack of proof as a reason to claim something does not exist.
Another idea to consider is that before Plato wrote Timaeus and Critias, he described an ideal state in his dialogue The Republic. Some believe Plato invented Atlantis as an adversary to this perfect state. In considering this we must remember that Plato was no writer of fiction. It is unlikely he would have given up philosophy to write fiction, something he had done on no previous occasion. “‘It would be like saying that Einstein’s theory of relativity was not a work of mathematics at all, but a novel written for entertainment.’” (Wyckoff 63) We should realize Plato did indeed use the story of Atlantis to illustrate his ideas regarding the ideal state, but that does not mean he wrote it as fiction. (Spence 48)
One last reason for the general belief that Atlantis was merely a myth is its popularity as a theory. It is such an accepted and unchallenged belief, most people accept it without first examining it. If we do examine it, then we realize it is very likely that most myths have their origins in fact. Consider Troy, for example. For hundreds of years, it was accepted that Troy was nothing but a myth. Yet Heinrich Schliemann, through studying Homer’s Iliad, found Troy under an occupational mound near Hissarlik and proved Homer’s writings regarding Troy were indeed based in fact. (Collins 62)
We must also consider the test of recurrence. This means if a single story is repeated in several cultures across the world, it is likely the story is in some way based in fact. If we look for the story of Atlantis, we find it in countless places. We find it in the Babylonian legend of Gilgamesh. We find it in the Old English Beowulf. (Wyckoff 16) We find it in Genesis in the Bible and in the Koran. We find priests in Egypt told it. We find it in ancient Chaldaea. We find it among peoples of India and China. (Wyckoff 69) We find it in Aztec culture as the legend of Aztlan. (Collins 220) We find it among North American Indians as the story of Coxcox. (Wyckoff 71) We find it in tradition among the Iroquois. We find it as a story of the Chickasaws and the Sioux. (Wyckoff 72) Indeed, the story of Atlantis is told in many forms across the world. But where did they all come from? Could they all have actually come from some central civilization, which we now call Atlantis?
Thus we have two reasons that do not prove Atlantis existed, but most certainly strengthen such a proposition. We know that in most cases myths are based in some fact, which may have been exaggerated but is nonetheless true. We also know that the test of recurrence supports the central themes of the story of Atlantis. If we then assume Atlantis may have existed in some form, then we must find what form. We come to a central question, one that has been discussed for hundreds of years. What could Atlantis have been?
Of course, the simplest answer would be that Atlantis was in the Atlantic, right outside the “pillars of Heracles,” as directly described by Plato. These “pillars” are now known as the straits of Gibraltar, which puts Atlantis in an area around the Azores and the Canaries, islands of that area. This is the most literal translation of Plato’s writings. In 1882, Ignatius J. Donnelly supported the theory that Atlantis was an enormous Atlantic landmass around the Azores and Canaries in his book Atlantis: The Antediluvian World. (Collins 48)
Donnelly believed Plato’s description of Atlantis was true history, unexaggerated and unbiased. It has been observed that some birds still migrate to that area, looking for a place to land. These birds could still have the memory of Atlantis, passed on through instinctual habits. (Wyckoff 15) The area would also be close to Greece, with whom Plato described the Atlanteans to be at war. However, there is little proof that Atlantis was in the area of the Azores and Canaries. More recent discoveries have shown that the Azores and Canaries were more likely created by volcanic rock than a sunken continent. (Ellis 62)
Donnelly’s theory created a renewed interest in Atlantis in the world; the topic of Atlantis was little discussed in the hundreds of years between Plato’s first dialogues in Timaeus and Critias and Donnelly’s Atlantis. (Collins 48) As interest grew, information regarding Atlantis grew, and theories were created and evolved to fit the most current information.
“One of the more unusual solutions to the problem of Atlantis was proposed in 1979 by [a] German, a clergyman named Jürgen Spanuth.” Spanuth proposed that Atlantis was in the North Sea, near Heligoland. He believed Plato’s dating of Atlantis was a mistranslation, and claimed the 9000 years described by Plato was meant as months, rather than years. If we place the time period as 9000 months, Heligoland may fit Plato’s description. (Ellis 60)
Spanuth believed Atlantis was the island of Basilea, and the impenetrable mud described by Plato was created by sandbanks left behind when Basilea sank. Spanuth identifies the “orichalcum” described in Plato’s dialogues as amber, claiming this is another “mistranslation.” As for the destruction of Atlantis, any of several natural catastrophes, including volcanic eruptions or earthquakes, could have destroyed the island of Basilea. (Ellis 61)
However, little trust should be placed in the theory that Atlantis was Basilea. It is unlikely that a philosopher such as Plato could have mixed up months and years, especially when we notice that he emphasized the time period of 9000 years several times in Timaeus and Critias. The force fitting of Plato’s time period is typical of less reliable Atlantis theories. Most Atlantologists put aside Spanuth’s theory as incorrect and look to other theories.
More recently, a theory put forth by Professor Arysio Nunes dos Santos places Atlantis in the area of India and Indonesia. If Atlantis existed during the ice age, then at the time Indonesia could very well have been one large landmass. To excuse Atlantis’s obvious non-Atlantic location, Santos states that when Plato referred to the Atlantic, he was referring to the sea that surrounds all the continents. Thus, the Indian Ocean is still fair ground. Santos claims that when the ice age ended and the sea rose again, Atlantis was covered by water and what remains is now known as Indonesia. (Nunes dos Santos)
Santos also puts forth many odd ideas, such as the theory that the original homeland of the Jews was in Indonesia, and Primordial Egypt was not where the country so named now lies. He also supports the theory that Atlantis was inhabited by an Aryan race, an idea created in Germany during Hitler’s Third Reich. It has been made abundantly clear that the Aryan theory was created for the sole purpose of supporting Hitler’s reign. Furthermore, he claims the Indonesian Atlantis was destroyed by the ending of the ice age, that is, by the gradual melting of glaciers. (Nunes dos Santos) Yet we find in most Atlantis stories, most notably Plato’s, that Atlantis was destroyed suddenly. (Collins 258) These ideas seem quite absurd, and the idea of tall white blondes having a homeland in Indonesia makes little sense.
Santos also brings up more evidence, but in most of his writings, seems to prefer to criticize other theories rather than support his own. He adds to his theory the idea that Atlantis will resurface in some way at the beginning of the second millennium, an idea with no support whatsoever. (Nunes dos Santos) The measure of time that brings us to two millennia is in no way related to Atlantis’s timeline. Also, Indonesia during the ice age was not an island as Plato described Atlantis, but a connector between Asia and Australia. (Nunes dos Santos)
As spectacular as the idea of Atlantis in Indonesia may be, the idea is based more in new ideas than old assumptions. It seems Santos is more interested in bringing a new idea to the field than an accurate one. The idea that Atlantis may have been somewhere other than the Atlantic Ocean is an idea that should be considered, but perhaps Santos’s theory should not be regarded as the most reliable of these.
Many Atlantologists have supported the idea that Atlantis was Carthaginian. If we examine a statement of Plato in Critias, we find where this idea originates. Plato writes “’…the extremity of the island off the pillars of Heracles, fronting the region now known as Gadira.’ His name in Greek is Eumelus, ‘but in the language of his own country [it is] Gadirus, and no doubt his name was the origin of that of the district.’” (Collins 56) If we examine this statement, we find Gadira was an ancient Phoenician city-port located in Spain, controlled by Carthaginians in Plato’s time. This statement led to the theory that Gadira, known in later Roman times as Gades, “or more precisely the neighbouring city-port if Tartessos” was Atlantis itself. (Collins 56)
In support of the Tartessos Atlantis theory, Tartessos occupied Spanish coastline, so it may have been seen as an island. It was also rich in mineral deposits, just as Plato described Atlantis to have many mineral resources. The city organization of Tartessos fits Plato’s writings as well, and a sun temple was discovered below Seville that could have been Atlantis’s central temple. (Collins 350) Yet, if we look back to Plato’s Critias, we recall Atlantis was described as being outside of the pillars of Heracles. This makes Spain a less likely candidate for the location of Atlantis.
However, Tartessos is often described not as Atlantis, but as one of its colonies. This theory was first put forth by Elena M, Whishaw. “Whishaw, in her book Atlantis in Andalucia, describes the discovery of a complex of Neolithic ‘galleried dolmens… temples, fortresses, hydraulic systems and harbour works’ at Niebla, near the site of ancient Tartessos.” (Collins 350) She proposes Tartessos may have been a trading colony of Atlantis, which may have even made long-distance Atlantic journeys to the Americas. (Collins 350)
If we look at the earlier quoted passage once again, then another idea should be mentioned. Looking at the root of Gadira, we find it is Punic, or Carthaginian. We may then assume, since Plato claimed Gadirus was an Atlantean name, the language of the Atlantean tradition was Carthaginian. We may also then assume since those who told the Atlantis legend to Plato used Gadira as a reference point, it is very likely they were Phoenician or Carthaginian, since they would have been most likely to cite the city-port. (Collins 163)
Carthage itself has also been compared with Plato’s description of the Atlantean city. (Collins 163) Indeed, “the plan of Ancient Carthage is almost identical to that of Atlantis.” (Wyckoff 28) The city is composed of three rings of alternating land and water, just as Plato described Atlantis. (Wyckoff 28) It is also situated on a low fortified hill, just as Plato described Atlantis. (Collins 163) However, the fact should be considered that Ancient Carthage was not in fact outside the pillars of Heracles, but in Spain. Also, in ancient times we observe a tendency in city plans; they are often copied from other famous cities of the time. It is possible that Ancient Carthage is not Atlantis itself, but a copy. Carthage could even have been a colony of Atlantis. (Wyckoff 28)
One of the most widely accepted theories of Atlantis is that of the Minoan Empire on Thera or Crete. The Minoan Empire brutally oppressed the Greek mainland in its time. This memory may have been translated into the idea of war between Atlantis and Athens. Also, Thera was destroyed by an enormous volcanic explosion that completely obliterated the island and the Minoan Empire along with it. The memory of such an event would most definitely still be present in Plato’s time, so it is possible Plato’s Atlantis had origins in stories of the Minoan Empire. (Collins 39)
However, we must once again resort to the idea that the time frame of Atlantis was false. This time, we must assume Solon, from whom Plato was said to have heard the story of Atlantis, mixed up the Egyptian hieroglyphs for 1000 and 100. The two hieroglyphs are very different and would be nearly impossible to confuse, especially by someone with such stature as Solon. (Collins 39) We must also consider that the Minoan Empire was most definitely inside the pillars of Heracles. Plato made it abundantly clear Atlantis was outside of the pillars of Heracles, and Plato would most definitely not have made such an obvious mistake. (Collins 40)
Yet, in 1992 Eberhard Zangger found a solution to the problem of the pillars of Heracles. Zangger writes in his book The Flood From Heaven that there were two sites of the pillars of Heracles, one which we now call the straits of Gibraltar, and another at the opening to the Black Sea. He bases this idea on a statement of Servius, which reads “’Columnas Herculis legimus et in Ponto et in Hispania.’ (We pass through the pillars of Heracles in the Black Sea as well as Spain)” (Zangger 109) He goes on to say that if Plato was referring to the pillars of Heracles at the Black Sea, then they do indeed open up into the Mediterranean and Crete. One reason for this belief might be that most of Plato’s descriptions of the Atlantic Ocean fit the Black Sea more easily. However, Zangger still places Atlantis in the Mediterranean, rather than the Black Sea, which he claims to be the location of Atlantis. (Zangger 109) Even if Plato was referring to the Black Sea when he spoke of the Atlantic, Atlantis still could not have been in the Mediterranean.
Perhaps the most believable and most credible theory of Atlantis is that it was located in the Antilles, around Cuba. (Collins 106) The idea is very old, and has been supported for hundreds of years by various Atlantologists. Such a location may seem odd, but it fits Plato’s description more easily than most other theories. If we look at key hints to Atlantis’s location as placed by Plato, then we realize the Antilles are indeed outside the pillars of Heracles, and the time period of around 9000 years might actually work. The idea that Atlantis could be far from the pillars of Heracles had simply been little considered by many Atlantologists.
Interestingly enough, the flood story of the Caribs around the Antilles is slightly different from most others. Rather than the waters subsiding and the peoples landing and resettling, the floodwaters stayed high. If this is so, then the Antilles may have once been the great continent of Atlantis, and what the floodwaters left above water are now no more than islands. (Collins 107) There are seven main islands of the Antilles, the three largest of which are Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Hispaniola, which includes the Dominican Republic and Haiti. The other four were most likely the Isles of Prosperine, the principal members of the Lesser Antilles. (Collins 111)
When Plato described Atlantis in Timaeus, he mentioned “stepping stones,” to the “opposite continent,” which could easily be interpreted as the islands in the Antilles, which lead to the Americas. Assuming ancient voyagers may have discovered the Americas before Plato, it is possible stories of such islands could have reached Europe or Africa in pre-Columbian times. (Collins 108) The writings of Psuedo-Aristotle and Diodorus Siculus tell of Carthaginians who settled Atlantic islands with mild climates and navigable rivers. Could these islands have not been Cuba or Hispaniola? Himilco, a Phoenician explorer, even goes as far as to describe the Sargasso Sea; if he had gotten that far, is it so hard to believe he could have reached the Antilles? It is likely if the Carthaginians or Phoenicians knew of Atlantis trade routes or of islands across the Atlantic, they would have kept the information to themselves, explaining the lack of knowledge of such islands after the time of the Carthaginians and Phoenicians. (Collins 141)
Maps such as the Venetian chart of 1424 and the Piri Reis map of 1513 even include an island that closely resembles Cuba, especially its arrangement of bays. Of course, the Piri Reis map was created after 1492, so Columbus had already discovered the West Indies. Yet, the map only shows half of Cuba, which shows the mapmaker was not informed of the most recent discoveries, as if he had, the entire island would have been plotted. We may therefore assume his sources were pre-Columbian, which goes to show Cuba was indeed known before Columbus’s journeys across the Atlantic. (Collins 179)
The Aztec god Quetzcoatl adds to the case that the West Indies may have been found in pre-Columbian times. When Cortés arrived in Tenochtitlan after many battles had been fought, Montezuma greeted him and even gave him a place to stay. Cortés told Montezuma of the church of Rome and tried to convince him to convert to Christianity. He had seen pagan shrines and on many occasions destroyed them, and it amazed the Aztecs that the god of the Spaniards had protected them from their gods. Montezuma’s reply was to say that when Quetzcoatl left, he told them he would return and take control of the Aztecs through conquest. He suggested the Spaniards must have been descendants of Quetzcoatl fulfilling this prophecy. (Collins 208) Interestingly enough, Quetzcoatl is often associated with the cross, an obviously Christian symbol. Some say Quetzcoatl was a Christian knight named Henry Sinclair, who is believed to have reached the Americas and may have landed in the Yucatan. There are even carvings in the unfinished Rosslyn Chapel which support this theory. (Collins 210) However, it should be considered that Spanish historians might have altered their writings on Montezuma’s speech to help justify their conquest of the Aztecs. (Collins 212)
Two main islands that could have been the central island of Atlantis are Cuba and Hispaniola, previously described as the Dominican Republic and Haiti. They both are supported by amazing evidence. As for Hispaniola, there are six main pieces of evidence that show its relation to Atlantis. For one, the coasts of Atlantis as described by Plato were very precipitous, a trait which is in accordance with the coasts of Hispaniola. Second of all, Plato wrote of a great rectangular plain upon which the city of Atlantis was built. There is a near rectangular-shaped plain in the southeastern corner of Hispaniola, which could have been Atlantis’s plain. Thirdly, there is a region of Hispaniola known as the Plaine de Cul-des-Sac, which could have been the site of the Atlantean city itself. (Collins 244) The fourth point for Hispaniola is its size. The plain on Plato’s Atlantis is described in Critias to have been around 600 by 400 kilometers, which is close to Hispaniola’s size of 650 by 300 kilometers. The fifth reason is the Taino name of Hispaniola, which is Quisqueya, the ‘mother of lands.’ This may have suggested Hispaniola was the mythical homeland of the Caribbean peoples. Finally, the Greater Antilles could have been the other islands making up the Atlantean empire. (Collins 245)
However, before we accept Hispaniola was Plato’s Atlantis, several counterpoints should be considered. The points in favor of Cuba are just as strong, if not stronger. First of all, Cuba fits Plato’s description of the Atlantean plain much more easily than Hispaniola. If we examine Critias, we find for Atlantis’s waterways to be present, its southern shoreline, where the waterway began, must have been around 15 meters above sea level. Hispaniola’s southern shore does not fit such a description. “Cuba, on the other hand, is much better suited to Plato’s description of the island’s fertile plain as outlined in the Critias.” (Collins 246) Both islands are ‘precipitous’ as Plato described Atlantis, except for Cuba’s southwestern shore, where Atlantis’s waterway would have begun and mountains could not have been present. Also, Atlantis’s plain was known for its fertility, a trait exhibited not by Hispaniola but Cuba. (Collins 246) Further evidence for the Cuba Atlantis site includes its obvious tactical naval position, its extensive navigable rivers, and its mountainous nature. (Collins 246) Indeed, Cuba could have been a base for ships that would have easily reached any part of the North American or Central American shore on the Gulf of Mexico.
As for the Taino name for Hispaniola, which, as previously mentioned, means ‘mother of lands,’ the Taino did not arrive on Hispaniola until AD 250. The name they gave it most likely refers not to Atlantis, but the fact Hispaniola was the first major island reached after leaving Venezuela. (Collins 247)
One interesting feature of Cuba is its Punta de Este ‘Seven Caves’ complex. In many of the cultures around the Caribbean, the creation myth involves the emergence of humans from caves, often a complex of seven caves. Inside the Punta de Este complex, there are ancient petroglyphs on several of the cave walls, some of which resemble rain falling on water. Others seem to signify an arrow hitting a target, or comets and serpent-like figures. Many of the petroglyphs seem to have a celestial nature as well. (Collins 276) In some other Cuban caves we find drawings which include bulls, a noted feature of Atlantis in Plato’s dialogues. (Collins 250)
As for the destruction of Atlantis, an interesting theory came forth shortly after World War II, contributed by Otto Muck. Muck, when exploring hydrographic charts of the ocean floor, noticed two large, elliptical holes orientated northwest to southeast located north off Puerto Rico. Marine geologists would have supposed them to be enormous sinkholes, but Muck believed they were left by the impact of a gigantic celestial body. He believed their northwest orientation suggested their trajectory when the two largest fragments of the object when they struck the ocean. However, such an assumption obviously could not be made without the discovery of further craters left by smaller fragments of the object. (Collins 275) Such a discovery was made soon after, in the area around the Carolinas. Aerial surveyors noticed a series of small, elliptical depressions scattered across the Carolinas, most of them orientated northwest just as the two larger craters in the Atlantic. Some of these craters were overlapping one another, suggesting they were created in quick succession. (Collins 276)
Could these scars have been created by meteorites? Frank A. Melton and William Schriever were the first to suggest the idea and wrote of it in the Journal of Geology under the title ‘The Carolina Bays – Are They Meteorite Scars?’ They suggested a swarm of objects may have approached from the northwest and struck the area around the Carolinas “between ’50,000 to a million years ago.’” (Collins 276) However, their opinion lost much interest when no meteoric fragments were found in connection with the bays, and much of the other evidence usually found at an impact site was not found. (Collins 281)
However, the same was true when an aerial blast occurred in Tunguska in 1927. It baffled scientists, as no evidence of meteorites was found at the impact site, but the entire area was covered in small depressions. When one scientific team looked around the impact site, they found tiny spheroids mixed in soil samples taken from the epicenter. These spheroids were determined to have come from a comet! Therefore, the Tunguska event must have been caused by the aerial explosion of such a comet. (Collins 282)
We may then look back at the Carolina bays, and consider the idea that a comet of a large size could have come too close to earth more than 50,000 years ago. If so, it could have come toward Asia at a low angle, and then, pulled in by earth’s gravitational pull, come closer to earth’s surface as it reached North America. Its core would have fragmented into countless pieces that subsequently detonated in the air, creating shock waves that would produce the series of some 500,000 bays now observed in the southeast of the United States. Two larger remnants of the comet could have crashed into the Atlantic Ocean, leaving the two depressions now observed. This would explain the bays, their elliptical and seemingly arranged nature, their pronounced rims at their southeastern edges, and perhaps even the destruction of Atlantis! (Collins 283)
Indeed, if such an explosion occurred, the result would have been catastrophic. It most definitely would have wiped out the Caribbean, where Atlantis may have been destroyed as described by Plato. However, Muck does not place Atlantis in the Antilles, but around the Azores as Donnelly did. He remains convinced the comet would have split the Atlantic Ridge, completely obliterating Atlantis, leaving only a few islands behind, the rest sinking into the cracks and hollows below. (Collins 288) This is indeed a possible theory, but nonetheless an unlikely one. “There is no convincing evidence to suppose that an Atlantean landmass ever existed on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge…” (Collins 289). There is so little evidence, Muck had to go as far as to theorize Atlantis was destroyed so completely that it left absolutely no trace in order to create a credible theory. (Collins 289)
Had Atlantis been in the Antilles, it is easy to believe it would have been destroyed by such a catastrophe. Such an impact could have even caused the end of the ice age, as glaciers would have been destroyed as well. (Collins 290) If this is so, Atlantis sunk after it was hit by a tidal wave, and its people were littered across the world, still with a memory of their home, of Atlantis. Over thousands of years this memory was tainted, and changed slightly for the cultures of each continent. Yet, as previously proven, we can still find the story in some form in many cultures across the world.
Atlantis is out there. In some form or another, it existed, be it only in cultures of countless peoples, or be it somewhere on this earth. As it stands, we have only discovered Atlantis as a myth, as a tale. Theories have been made, ideas created, but not one proven. Yet we still seek what we feel must be there. Remnants of Atlantis remain in our culture, even if tainted ways. Disney’s “Atlantis: The Lost Empire” is still remembered by many children of this generation. “Stargate: Atlantis,” a series created by Sci-Fi, tells of another Atlantis fantasy, if indeed one placed in Antarctica. Countless other movies, stories, and books have been created and continue to be created on this mysterious topic. Some of these stories are so incredible they lead us to believe Atlantis could be nothing more than a myth. But is it? The name Atlantis still rings a tone in our hearts which leaves us seeking. This is our origin; this is from whence we came. We are all searching for it inside of us, for the birthplace of man. Is it nothing but a fantasy, or is it truly our history?
Works Cited
Collins, Andrew. Gateway to Atlantis. New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., 2000
Ellis, Richard. Imagining Atlantis. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1998.
Nunes dos Santos, Professor Arysio. “Atlantis Checklist.” 1997. Atlantis: The Lost
Continent Finally Found. March 3, 2005.
Spence, Lewis. The History of Atlantis. New York: Bell Publishing Company, 1968.
Wyckoff, James. The Lost Continent of Atlantis. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1968.
Zangger, Eberhard. The Flood From Heaven. New York: William Morrow and Company,
Inc., 1992.
<- Normal Cherry Coke
