The destruction of Atlantis as a global event
By Jennifer Coelho
Any account of Atlantis has focused on a single island state ravaged by
earthquakes and floods that consequently sank to the bottom of the ocean.
The Atlantian story is often compared to the explosive volcanic eruption
which destroyed the Minoan civilization on the Mediterranean island of
Thera. Atlantis’ fate, however, was very different from that of Thera in
that it was not a singular event. When Plato introduced Atlantis in Timaeus,
it was within the context of Atlantis’ relationship to the rest of the world
and its destruction as a consequence of a cataclysmic geological phenomenon
that was planetary in scope. Therefore, the story of Atlantis – the attempt
to identify the cause of its destruction and to pinpoint its remains - must
be told in terms of the larger story of a catastrophic event affecting every
civilization on the planet. Plato’s Timaeus is interpreted here as an
account of historic events in humanity’s ancient past and those events are
substantiated through plate tectonics, Charles Hapgood’s Earth Crustal
Displacement Theory, and mitochondrial DNA studies in the area of population
movement.
Plato undertakes the formidable task in the Timaeus of capturing the entire
human experience. He begins with the origins of humans and goes on to
recommend an ideal system of social organization that would enable humans to
live out their lives in relative happiness. He places the ideal state within
the context of the reality that governs human existence, namely, our
relationship with each other and with nature. Plato shows how a state
properly governed could preserve itself and be victorious in war. The ideal
state, however, is not immune from a catastrophic geological cycle that
strikes the planet from time to time affecting all of humanity. It is in
this context that Plato introduced Atlantis to the world in 360 BCE when he
published two dialogues, the Timaeus and the Critias. Atlantis was the
aggressive seat of an empire bent on extending its control over the states
bordering the Mediterranean Sea and those of Asia. Under the heroic
leadership of Greece, the ideal state, the Atlantian armies were soundly
defeated. No sooner was the victory achieved, however, than both Greece and
Atlantis were struck by earthquakes and floods. In “a day and night of
misfortune,” Atlantis “disappeared into the depths of the sea.” Over the
centuries, a fierce debate has raged over the veracity of Plato’s account.
Had he invented Atlantis to extol the virtues of the Greek race and to
illustrate his ideas on good government or was he relating ancient history?
The Atlantian Story
Plato ascribed the story to an unimpeachable source – Solon, a state
representative of high repute, whom he described as “the wisest of the seven
sages”. While on an official visit to the city of Sais on the Nile Delta,
Solon learnt of a great military victory secured by the Greeks over the
aggressive forces of a powerful state called Atlantis. Solon was puzzled
because the Greek people were unaware of this astounding military victory
achieved in their distant past. One of the priests, with whom Solon was in
conversation, explained that the Greeks knew of the victory over the
Atlantians as the story of Phaethon’s misadventure with the Sun’s horses
which resulted in the scorching of the earth. In the Greek myth, Phaethon is
granted his wish to drive the Sun’s horses and chariot for a day.
Tragically, Phaethon could not control the horses and relinquished the reins
so they run freely through the heavens. This myth is meant to illustrate
what Plato called “the declination of the bodies moving in the heavens
around the earth and a great conflagration of things upon the earth, which
recurs after long intervals.” Here Plato introduced the destructive cycle
that caused Atlantis’ demise and that was as important in Timeaus as his
discourse on good government.
Atlantis is described as a fabulous state, a “mighty power”, and the seat of
an empire consisting of several islands, northern Africa as far as Egypt,
and Europe as far as Tyrrhenia in Italy. History has shown that empires are
parasitic by nature. As the seat of an empire, Atlantis would have sucked
vast resources from its colonies, enabling it to prosper and to build its
mighty army. There came a time, however, when the Atlantians were no longer
satisfied with the territory they had conquered and sought to expand their
holdings by launching an unprovoked attack against Asia and the rest of
Europe. Humanity was distracted by war and blind to the geological changes
occurring on the planet until it was too late. Plato relates how the Greek
people, “in a body sank into the earth,” while Atlantis disappeared in a day
and night of earthquakes and floods. Any explanation of Atlantis’
destruction must take place in terms of the global geological changes Plato
described.
Atlantis’ original location
Plato placed the island state in the Atlantic Ocean in front of the Pillars
of Heracles, the narrow passage between the European and African continents
which today is called the Straits of Gibraltar. Atlantis was said to be “as
large as Libya and Asia put together”. “Libya”, in Plato’s day, described
the area of North Africa to the borders of Egypt. What is meant by “Asia” is
unclear. However, if an island the size of North Africa was placed in the
Atlantic outside the Pillars of Heracles, it would be impossible to
accommodate other information provided by Plato. For instance, it was
possible to circumnavigate Atlantis, which “…was the way to other islands,
and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which
surrounded the true ocean…” If Atlantis were placed in today’s North
Atlantic only a narrow strait would remain between Atlantis and the North
American continent - hardly a body of water large enough to qualify as the
“true ocean” or to contain the “other islands” Plato described.
If, however, Atlantis was positioned where North America now lies, between
latitudes 30 degrees north and 50 degrees north, and the North American
continent were located closer to the North Pole, one could travel between
Atlantis and the South American continent and enter the Pacific, a more
worthy candidate of the title “true ocean”. Ahead would lie the Pacific
islands and the opposite end of the Eurasian continent. Hence, when Plato
placed Atlantis in front of the Pillars of Heracles, the island was
positioned in the location currently occupied by the North American
continent.
The Location of Atlantis’ Remains
According to Plato, in a day and night of earthquakes and floods, Atlantis
was relocated to a place where ”…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.” Today, a “shoal of mud” lies
between the North and South American continents and effectively blocks
passage between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. This “shoal of mud” is the
Isthmus of Panama, or Middle America, the neck of land that joins the two
continents. The remains of Atlantis were seamlessly attached to two
continents having traveled approximately 30 degrees of latitude from its
original position in the North Atlantic in front of the Pillars of Heracles.
What is left of Atlantis can be found in the area that makes up Middle
America, the north western shoulder of the South American continent and the
Caribbean islands.
Hapgood’s Crustal Displacement Theory
The difficulty of the Atlantis argument is that it must be made in terms of
the global earth change Plato described. Currently, there is no accepted
scientific explanation for a geological upheaval that could shift a
continent approximately 30 degrees of latitude, causing a large part of it
to disappear in the process. A theory does exist, however, that might
partially explain this major geological upheaval. In two seminal works,
Earth’s Shifting Crust (1958) and Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings (1966), the
late geologist, Charles Hapgood, outlined the Earth Crustal Displacement
theory that might partially explain Atlantis’ fate. Hapgood, in his search
for an explanation of how ice ages come to an end and how the earth’s
geographic poles are able to shift, theorized that these events come about
because the lithosphere, the outer shell of the planet, is able to shift in
its entirety around the core of the planet, “much as the skin of an orange,
if it were loose, might shift over the inner part of the orange, all in one
piece.” He proposed that the lithosphere is able to shift because it rests
on a bed of liquid material. During an ice age, when there is a buildup of
massive ice caps at the poles, the centrifugal effect of the earth’s
rotation acting on the ice caps set the lithosphere in motion over the
liquid material beneath it. When this happens, the entire lithosphere moves
as one unit and continues to move until the ice cap encounters warmer
temperatures, gradually dissolves, and runs out of momentum bringing the
crustal displacement to a halt. According to Hapgood, during the last
displacement, the earth’s crust shifted 2,000 miles southward along the 90th
meridian of West Longitude. Hapgood allowed that the lithosphere would move
at varying degrees of speed – the closer the point of reference was located
to the 90th meridian of West Longitude the more rapid the speed of motion.
In Hapgood’s scenario, North America, which was located at the North Pole,
was pushed southward towards the equator. As a result, the Hudson Bay, which
was once positioned at the centre of the ice cap at the North Pole was moved
to its current latitude. Since the whole crust moves as one unit, as North
America shifted south, South America would also have been carried southward
with the rest of the western hemisphere. The eastern hemisphere would have
experienced a northward adjustment with Siberia being pushed north into the
freezing Arctic. Hapgood supported his argument with data drawn from the
analysis of portolan charts of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance and the
examination of sedimentary core samples taken from the Ross Sea in
Antarctica by the Byrd Expedition. Hapgood concluded that the maps showed
Antarctica with an icefree coastline. The maps and the results of the Ross
Sea data suggested that prior to 6,000 years ago Antarctica may have been
located in more temperate latitudes. Its presence, now at the South Pole was
likely due to an Earth Crustal Displacement which shifted it 2,000 miles
south to its current location beneath an icecap two miles deep in some
places.
Hapgood’s Theory versus Plato’s Account
Hapgood’s theory predicts the movement of continents that must have occurred
to shift Atlantis 30 degrees of latitude and attach it to two continents.
If, however, one is to remain true to Plato’s account in Timeaus, then
Hapgood’s theory provides only part of the answer. The two differ on several
aspects, one of which is the cause of the global earth change. Hapgood
theorized that the ice build-up at the poles during an Ice Age would cause
the earth’s lithosphere to slip, while Plato attributed the cause to a
“declination of the bodies moving in the heavens around the earth”. In
addition, in the myth of Phaethon and the Sun’s horses and chariot, the
earth shrinks away from the sun. In other words, it shifted to an orbital
path farther away from the sun, precipitating the geological upheaval Plato
described.
Also, Hapgood does not account for Atlantis but positions South America in
more northerly latitudes. A more realistic scenario, is that the South
American continent was located more or less where it is today and Atlantis
was positioned above it opposite the Pillars of Heracles. As the North
American continent moved out of the Arctic, Atlantis should have shifted
over with the rest of the western hemisphere. Instead, the South American
continent moved very little to accommodate an advancing Atlantis. Hence
Atlantis was sandwiched between the North and South American continents.
Hapgood also predicted more northerly latitudes for Antarctica. He
positioned Antarctica 2,000 miles north of the Antarctic Circle. However,
there was insufficient room to accommodate Antarctica in the Atlantic
because of the presence of Atlantis. In order to accommodate Antarctica
2,000 miles north of the Antarctic, it must have been located in the Pacific
and not beneath the South American continent in the Atlantic.
The Theory of Plate Tectonics
Instead of an Earth Crustal Displacement as proposed by Hapgood, perhaps the
science of plate tectonics can more closely predict the tremendous movement
in the earth’s crust that caused Atlantis’ destruction. So instead of the
entire lithosphere moving as one unit as a result of the weight of icecaps,
perhaps a change in the earth’s orbital path may have set the planet’s
tectonic plates in motion. In plate tectonics, the earth’s outer shell, the
lithosphere, is broken into sections or plates that fit together like a
jigsaw puzzle. Two plates meet along a plate boundary and there are three
recognized types of plate boundaries - divergent, convergent and transform,
each of which moves in a different manner.
Where plates meet at divergent boundaries, the plates move away from each
other and new land is pushed up to fill the gap as in the process of
seafloor spreading. Such is the manner in which the Mid-Atlantic Ridge was
formed, a huge mountain range on the ocean floor stretching 47,000 miles
from Iceland to Antarctica with peaks ranging from 6,000 to 10,000 feet. At
convergent boundaries the plates come together and one of the plates is
subducted or dives beneath the bordering plate. Convergent boundaries are
called “destructive boundaries” because the subductive plate eventually
disappears. As a consequence of subduction activity, two continents that
were once separate can be joined together to form one continuous continent.
The third type of plate is characterized by a transform boundary, where the
plates slide past each other.
Plate Tectonics - An Alternative To Earth Crustal Displacement
Atlantis’ destruction and relocation southward 30 degrees of latitude could
have been caused by drastic movement in the earth’s tectonic plates with
each plate moving according to its own nature. Hence divergent plates would
have moved away from each other and transform plates would have slid past
each other carrying along their landmasses and oceans. In the case of plates
with convergent boundaries, as one plate dove beneath the other, the
landmass it carried would have been subducted into the planet. The greatest
degree of destruction would have occurred where landmasses straddled several
plates. For instance, several plates come together in the area where
Atlantis’ remains are to be found. These are the North American Plate, the
Caribbean Plate, the Nazca Plate and the South American Plate. An island the
size of Atlantis “as large as Libya and Asia combined” would have straddled
all of these plates some of which have transform boundaries and others
convergent boundaries. When the plates began to move, the transform
boundaries would have slid past each other dragging Atlantis southward,
while at convergent boundaries, one plate would have dipped beneath the
other, sucking Atlantis down into the planet. The Caribbean Plate, for
instance, which may have been located in the middle of the former Atlantis,
shares convergent boundaries with neighbouring plates. Devastating
earthquakes are known to occur along convergent boundaries. In Atlantis’
case, because it overlay several plates with convergent boundaries, large
sections of the island would have disappeared into the planet. This explains
why there is no submerged Atlantis to be found on the ocean floor. The
sections of Atlantis which were not grafted onto the North and South
American continents were absorbed by the planet.
The Major Earth Change as a Global Phenomenon
The magnitude of the force required to destroy Atlantis would have
reverberated across the planet causing destruction and loss of life on an
unimaginable scale. Entire populations would have been displaced, especially
in areas such as Siberia, Antarctica and Atlantis, creating the need to
relocate survivors to more stable areas. One such area would have been the
South American continent which did not shift its position and therefore did
not experience the same degree of upheaval as other parts of the world and
would have provided a safe haven for survivors. In addition, the North
American continent, newly released from the Arctic, would have served as
another resettlement area. If events transpired in this manner, the genetic
make-up of the native populations of North, Central and South America should
reflect a population mix of the people who inhabited the South American
continent prior to the major earth change and the survivor of Siberia,
Antarctica and Atlantis.
Genetic Studies and the Origins of Native Americans
In the early 1990s, scientists turned to the field of genetics to establish
where native American populations originated and the timeframe in which they
entered the Americas. The studies utilized both Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)
inherited from the female lineage and Y-chromosome DNA inherited from the
male lineage. Mitochondrial DNA studies were especially useful in the
Americas because changes to mtDNA tend to accumulate sequentially along the
molecules that identify a particular lineage, making it possible to
determine if and when populations diverged. The studies were therefore able
to predict approximately when particular groups entered the Americas and
their place of origin.
Mitochondrial DNA is categorized into haplogroups based on their
characteristics. Ninety-seven percent of Native Americans fall into four
major haplogroups – A, B, C, D and each of these groups can be traced to
southern Siberia and central Asia. However, while there is a wide
distribution of haplogroups C and D throughout Siberia, haplogroup A occurs
at very low frequencies except among the Chukchi of the Chokota peninsula
when it soars to 68%, making this population group the closest match to
Native Americans as carriers of all four haplogroups. Also, unlike
haplogroups A, C, and D, haplogroup B has been found at extremely low
frequencies throughout Siberia. This calls into question whether Siberia was
the source of the haplogroup B found in the Americas.
The Pacific area is a more likely source of the American haplogroup B - this
particular lineage is highly concentrated in the Pacific. Haplogroup B would
have been carried to the Americas by survivors from Antarctica as that
island shifted from its Pacific location to the freezing South Pole. The
argument for a Polynesian migration to the Americas is reinforced by genetic
studies showing that native Siberians lack a particular mutation that
appeared in the Americas 6,000 to 10,000 years ago. Further studies traced
the mutation to aboriginal populations in Southeast Asia and the islands of
Melanesia and Polynesia, suggesting that about 6,000 to 10,000 years ago, a
migration occurred from the Pacific to the Americas. If the migration had
originated in Siberia, the Siberians should have experienced a similar
mutation. The timeline of 6,000 to 10,000 years established by the genetic
mutation with a Pacific origin, substantiates Hapgood’s argument that prior
to 6,000 years ago, Antarctica was not located at the south pole but in much
more temperate climes.
While the Amerind speaking Paleo-Indians of North, Central and South America
carry all four haplogroups, a characteristic in the Americas is for
haplogroups to cluster geographically, suggesting that these groups entered
the Americas as distinct population groups and the areas in which the groups
cluster represent their point of entry into the Americas. For instance,
haplogroup B is found in highest concentration among the Quechua people of
the Andes Region on the South American Pacific coast, making this area the
point of entry for survivors fleeing Antarctica.
Haplogroup A is dominant among the Na-Dene of the Pacific Northwest and the
Navajo and Apache of the Pacific Southwest. A North American Pacific coast
concentration of mtDNA haplogroup A identifies the point of entry for
survivors crossing over from Siberia. The Na-Dene, Navajo and Apache are
considered to be newcomers to the Americas, a belief substantiated by mtDNA
studies which suggest that a wave of migrants entered the Americas from
Siberia between 6,000 to 10,000 years ago. These migrants would account for
the survivors fleeing Siberia at the time of the global Earth Change.
In addition to the new arrivals in the Americas between 6,000 and 10,000
years ago, there is a very ancient genetic lineage that falls in the time
frame of 20,000 to 30,000 YBP (years before the present) that would
represent the resident South American population prior to the Earth Change.
As one heads south on the South American continent, the dominance of mtDNA
haplogroup D increases. The concentration of a particular haplogroup in the
south, in this case haplogroup D, in addition to the identification of an
ancient lineage, suggests the presence in ancient times of a homogeneous
group on the South American continent. The predominantly haplogroup D
population from the south would account for the South American population
prior to the global Earth Change.
The Atlantian Genetic Marker
If the Siberians and Antarcticans willingly sought refuge in the Americas,
the Atlantians were relocated by the force of nature. The Siberians and
Antarticans are represented by the four major haplogroups A, B, C and D. In
addition to these four groups, scientists have identified a fifth genetic
group, haplogroup X, in about 3% of Native Americans with the highest
frequency of occurrence among northern populations such as the Ojibwa.
Haplogroup X qualifies as the Atlantian marker. Although it is found in only
a very small percentage of Native Americans, it is an ancient, founding
lineage in the Americas, falling into the timeframe 12,000 to 36,000 YBP.
In addition to North America, haplogroup X has also been identified in
Altaian populations from southern Siberia, and in some European and
middle-eastern populations. The X mtDNA identified in Native Americans,
however, has several control region mutations that differ from the European
version indicating that Europe was not the source of the X mtDNA found in
the Americas.
If haplogroup X is the Atlantian marker, then one would expect it to be
dominant in the area identified as the remains of Atlantis – Middle America
and the Andean region on the South American continent. However, this is not
the case. Haplogroup X does not occur in a high enough frequency in Middle
America or the Andes to be identifiable. The most plausible explanation for
its absence is that most of the Atlantian survivors eventually abandoned
this part of the world. The few that chose to remain relocated to the North
American continent, hence their genetic material can be found among the
Ojibwa of the north.
The occurrence of Haplogroup X in Altaian, European and Middle Eastern
populations can be attributed to Atlantis’ role as the seat of an empire.
Atlantian military, technical and administrative personnel would have been
present in these areas to conduct the affairs of empire. In addition, when
the disaster struck, Atlantis had just emerged from a war of aggression
against the nations within the Pillars of Heracles and would not have been
able to repatriate all of its troops. Consequently, the Atlantian military
would have been stranded in this part of the world, providing another
explanation for the presence of X mtDNA in Europe and the Middle East.
The Change to our Measurement of Time
According to Plato, Atlantis’ destruction was due to a devastating cyclical
event brought about by a change to the earth’s orbital path and he
implicated the sun as the cause of the change. Any change to the earth’s
orbit would directly impact our measurement of time since that measurement
is based on the number of revolutions the earth makes around the sun. The
universal law of gravitation, which describes the relationship among the
planets in the solar system, stipulates that the speed of a planet, its mass
and its orbital radius are related. The gravitational force between a planet
and the sun will decrease the farther away the planet is from the sun, and
correspondingly, so will the planet’s velocity along its orbital path around
the sun. Humanity’s measurement of time is based on the 365.2423 days it
takes the earth to complete a single orbit around the sun. If the earth were
once located closer to the sun, it would have taken a shorter period of time
to complete an orbit than the current 365.2423 days.
Did humanity change its measurement of time at any point in the distant
past? There are indications such a change occurred when one examines the
timekeeping system of the two high cultures of Middle America – the Aztecs
and the Maya. These two cultures used a calendar system that is similar and
consists of a religious and secular calendar. Both had a sacred 260-day
calendar and a 365-day secular calendar. The Mayan called the 260-day
calendar the tzolkin, and the 365-day calendar the haab. The haab and
tzolkin were synchronized into a 52-year calendar or Calendar Round.
Although the 260-day tzolkin was eventually adapted to track religious
rituals and festivals, its original purpose might have been quite different.
The tzolkin may have been the calendar in use when the earth orbited closer
to the sun on a shorter orbital path. When the earth shifted to an orbital
path farther from the sun, instead of 260 days, it now took 365.2423 days to
complete an orbit. By synchronizing the two calendars into a 52-year system
the survivors of the major earth change were able to adjust to a very
different world utilizing the new 365.2423 rate and still were able to keep
an account of significant events with the 260 day system from the past.
The synchronization of the earth’s two calendars, past and present, into a
52-year cycle also made it possible to track the destructive cycle Plato
described. If the cycle is expected to cause the “declination of the bodies
moving in the heavens around the earth,” impacting all the planets in the
solar system, then linking the earth’s time system to one that is external
to our solar system would help humanity to track the duration of the cycle.
The 52-year cycle coincides with the orbit of Sirius A, the brightest star
in the Northern Hemisphere. Sirius A and its companion star, Sirius B,
orbit each other over a 50-year cycle. The annual heliacal rising of Sirius
is 365.25 days, almost the same as our solar year. Sirius, with a 50-year
cycle would come closest to providing a means of tracking time that was
external to our solar system. Hence in the calendars maintained by the
Native Americans three tracking systems were synchronized - the past, the
current and a system external to the solar system.
The Atlantian Age
In 360 BCE, when sailors feared losing sight of land, Plato described a
people capable of traveling from the Mediterranean, across the Atlantic and
into the Pacific. Plato described a worldwide civilization, with global
reach, that moved easily from one end of the planet to the next. Atlantis
was the most powerful state of the Age, a predator that launched a worldwide
war of aggression to extend its influence. The war had just ended when the
planet was struck by a tremendous geological upheaval. Entire continents
were relocated several degrees of latitude. A geological upheaval of such
magnitude must have resulted in the tremendous loss of life and extreme
climate change. Only a technologically advanced people could have survived
such an upheaval. The presence of intelligent life on earth today is a
testament to their ability to survive. In that case, how advanced were the
people of the Atlantian Age?
Plato explained that the phenomenon occurs “just when you and other nations
are beginning to be provided with letters and the other requisites of
civilized life, after the usual interval, the stream from heaven, like a
pestilence, comes pouring down, and leaves only those of you who are
destitute of letters and education; and so you have to begin all over again
like children, and know nothing of what happened in ancient times”. Our Age
certainly has been “provided with letters and the other requisites of
civilized life.” Tremendous advances have been made in the arts, science and
technology. We have invented aircraft that soar above the earth and
submarines that travel beneath the water. But beyond these achievements we
are capable of launching satellites into orbit around the planet to provide
communication and monitor planetary weather. An even greater accomplishment
is the space station currently under construction. If we have achieved so
much and yet have not come face to face with this devastating phenomenon,
how advanced were the people of the Atlantian Age when they were forced to
contend with what Plato has described as an inevitability? One can conclude
that they were at the very least as advanced as we are today. Yet all they
had created was erased without a trace and humanity began “all over again
like children”.
Page updated Jan. 6, 2006
