Plato's Myth of Atlantis


As Aristotle remarked " "Plato alone made Atlantis emerge from the waves, and then he submerged it again." Here then, we examine the truth of the Atlantis Myth.

Numerous attempts have been made to rationalise Plato's myth and find a kernal of historical truth in it.Noble attempts to find this reality have been made by amongst others, J.V.Luce (1969) and Peter James (1996).All have failed. Proponents have to alter major parts of Plato's tale, such as location, dates and it's very nature in order to find that match.Also, more than enough groundless speculation has, and continues to be written about Atlantis, all of it based on pure conjecture.None of this need be considered anything other than what it is, speculation without regard to understanding Plato and Athens.

The originator of all lost civilisations is the Greek philosopher Plato, born in 427 BC three years after the outbreak of the Peloponnesian war and about a year after the death of Pericles.

A member of an established Athenian family with political connections he was, through his stepfather, related to Pericles.As a young man Plato would have witnessed the downfall of Athens in 404 BC in the Peloponnesian war against the landlocked state of Sparta. Following Sparta's victory, Athens was plunged into chaos and tyranny. After eight months of enduring the tyrants, democracy was restored and the thirty oligarchs were either killed or driven out. Notable amongst the tyrants is Critias. This is surely theCritias of the synonymous dialogue in which Atlantis is introduced. Thesame Critias who knew Socrates.

The democracy, in settling old scores, had Socrates put to death on trumped up charges of corrupting the young, something that Plato never forgot or forgave.To Plato, Socrates' death meant a final disillusionment with contemporary politics.In the ten years following Socrates' execution Plato drifted away from politics towards philosophy.

Plato's seminal work, "The Republic" outlines the ideology of Plato's perfect state, one in which the rulers are philosophers. "The Republic" was written down in the early years of the Academy which Plato had founded in 386 BC. This institution was his answer to his disgust with contemporary politics and was, in essence, to train the philosopher-rulers of a future Athenian state. Plato died in 347 BC.

In considering the "Timaeus and the Critias", which includes the story of Atlantis, it has to be read against the background of "The Republic".The Critias dialogue is in direct response to Socrates demand to know how his ideal state will conduct itself in action.What Socrates means by this ideal state is of course Plato's Republic.In essence, this story is to be an illustration of how the ideal state conducts itself in warfare against it's neighbours.Three real states are bound up in this struggle; pre-Salamis Athens (the noble model), post-Salamis Athens and Persia (the Atlantean models).

The noble ancient Athens can be seen as the Athens which stood alone against Persia (Atlantean model). Atlantis in the tale is both Xerxes' Persia and Periclean Athens (Atlantean model), both maritime powers full of hubris, deceit and vanity.

Therefore the themes are the destruction of Atlantis by noble ancient Athens, in this have the defeat of Persia by Athens standing on her own and the defeat of Periclean Athens (Atlantis) by Sparta (the noble state). The moral lesson being that evil will not and cannot stand against determination, courage and integrity.Both Persia and Periclean Athens had large fleets, something very much in common with Atlantis. Both were expansionist, intent on empire and crushed whoever stood in their path.

Plato has placed many clues in the "Timaeus and Critias" which tell us that this is not literal history but a political and moral tale - a parable. Look at what happens to the hubristic aggressors; Persia, Athens and others. Follow the dictates laid down in the Republic or suffer the fate of Atlantis!

Atlantis is a paradeigma, a model, not a reality.

Now to the story of Atlantis itself, the story concerns the greatest and noblest action of Ancient Athens, the defeat of aggressive Atlantis.The story relates that this happened far back in history, so far indeed that the Greeks cannot recollect it.The story states that both Egypt and Athens were founded by the same goddess, namely Athena, patron goddess of Athens.It was said that Athena founded Athens in 9000 BC and Egypt in 8000 BC. At this point in the story, anyone who thinks that this is a factual account, is simply being naive.

There was no city of Athens in existence in 9,000 BC. There may have been a small Neolithic settlement but nothing else, no acropolis, no temples etc. As this was the stone age, the fine city of Socrates simply did not exist. This account also has nothing to do with the archaeological evidence regarding Egypt in the pre-Dynastic period. The Egyptians have their own creation myths and they have absolutely nothing to do with Athena.


We are asked to believe that the Atlantis myth reached Athens through the medium of Solon, who lived between circa 630 BC and 558 BC. Solon was a famous 6th century lawmaker and one of the seven sages. He was considered to be the founder of Athenian democracy and, in Plato's time, was thought of as a glorious icon of a better time. Who better to give the story authority and, as he is long dead, he can hardly refute the words Plato places into his mouth.

According to the story Solon learns of Atlantis during a visit to Egypt. Both Herodotus (1.29-30) and Aristotle (Ath.Pol 11.1) place Solon's visit to Egypt after his Athenian legislation. There is a discrepancy here as, according to Plato, Critias said that Solon had intended to use the tale as poetry but was prevented from doing so because of the state he is said to have found Athens in on his return. Solon had to abandon his poetic aspirations in order to take up law making and return order to the city. If both Herodotus and Aristotle are correct, and they were much closer in time to these events, then the inference is that Plato didn't fully check his facts when writing this part of the story.

Plato also uses the Egyptians, who were thought by the Greeks to be the wisest of peoples of great antiquity and the keepers of secret knowledge. In using both Solon and the Egyptians, Plato gives his tale two elements that can lend it both a ring of truth and authority.

We can state with the utmost confidence that no such story exists in the Egyptian record either at Sais or elsewhere.

According to the Egyptian priests who supposedly related the tale to Solon, the Greeks forgot their own history, forgot the noblest race of men who ever lived, who happened to be Athenians and Solon's ancestors ! Is this likely? No credence can be given to having the Egyptians know more of Athenian history than the Athenians, here Plato ignores plausibility for credulity.

In the connection then between theassociation of Athens, Egypt and Solon, Plato has Critias engage in atypical fourth century practice of tapping into an historical source forpolitical validation, and in this case the source is pseudo-history.

Within the "Timaeus and Critias", Plato has used the two interlocutors as role models for Athens and Atlantis. Timaeus represents the noble state, Athens, and Critias the hubristic state, Atlantis. An important clue as to the fictionality of the Atlantis story is the occasion on which Critias relates he heard the tale from Solon, the feast of the Apatouria. This feast was associated with deception and deceit and its traditional origin was a celebrated Athenian victory won by the deceitful abuse of an agreement. This is Platonic irony at work, a tale of noble Athens related on an occasion of deceit. Plato wants those with the eyes to see it, that Critias is both a liar and a deceiver.In response to Socrates, Critias says: we will transfer your city from myth to fact; we will assume that your city is ancient Athens; in all ways they will correspond and so we will not be out of tune in saying that your citizens are those very Athenians of long ago.Critias further embellishes this metamorphosis at 27a-b.

Plato uses the character of Critias to illustrate the tragedy of Athens. Just as Critias admired Solon's fame he also failed to perceive the moral of his story so, on the Panathenaea, the Athenians celebrated the glorious deeds of their forefathers in defeating the Persians but failed to perceive or heed the moral of that defeat.

In identifying Atlantis with both Persia and Periclean Athens we can realise that Atlantis did not exist as a real state but is, in fact, based in part on two expansionist maritime powers who came to grief in conflict with smaller, more noble, states.

The story is one that describes the moral and theological aspects of the two great wars in Greek history; the conflict with Persia and the Peloponnesian war. It could also encompass many other wars. It reflects Plato's ideas in as much as it reveals a paradigmatic and universal truth.

Pericles deserves some of the honour of making one of the surest identifications of Atlantis, as it was he who told his fellow citizens to think of their city as an 'impregnable island' (Warman Welliver, “Character, Plot and Thought in Plato's Timaeus-Critias? Leiden 1977).The Athenians made little attempt to disguise their ideology: they spoke of themselves as "ruling over subjects", not "leading allies".Elsewhere Pericles and Cleon flatly state "we are ruling like a tyrant over cities which do not like it".

We can summarise the "Timaeaus and Critias" as a parable of good (ancient Athens) triumphing over evil (Atlantis). However, a good or an ideal state such as that described in the Republic is impossible due to the unpredictability of human nature and the world as outlined in the Timaeus sosmographic dialogue. Thus we don't have a broken narrative ending the Critias as its ending is in its' beginning (Timaeus 25 b-d).

We must recognise that Atlantis is a speculative exercise in political rhetoric albeit philosophically based.

NB: The Greek word pseudos and its corresponding verb means not only fiction, stories and tales but also lies, fraud and deceit. This ambiguity must be remembered.





Discuss This Article: The Message Board










To the Message Board