Ancient cultural revolution.
In my point of departure is a refilled undisputed proven and critical posture of our current history is based on the view that the single most important event for humanity is not at all considered in historical description.In previous chapters have complained that historiography is a forum for very different and powerful interests with strong relations to the previous scheme. The order in which these interests have been successful political careers, and often both. It is therefore appropriate to apply these conclusions to some accepted historical truths, beginning in antiquity.
Interpretation of Plato's description of Atlantis must be objectively considered to appear politically constructed. Most widespread interpretation is that Plato tried to describe a form of ideal society. The interpretation is likely planted from ancient intellectual elite.Without political interest, it should be impossible to get to the distorted conclusion. The issue underlying that whatsoever devote attention to the story of Atlantis is to explain the origin of any barbarian states and Hellenic families come from. Plato describes the backfill to the Egyptians escaped by following the Nile. They could therefore relatively well. The Greeks dabbades of floods and earthquakes and got scared on the islands. They made it very difficult for many generations and their elimination of the land that gave the world the islands were flushed into the sea.Atlantis is described as it sank into the sea and the place where it was formed as run together because of all the mess.It should be noted that what I describe as ensure my description and not that specified in the translations. What Plato did not interpret why people assumed that it was mud. With backfill collected organic material in the channel from all seas west of Basiliea and form a slurry of liquid organic plant residues. The interpretation that this is dry is thus an incorrect interpretation on the basis that you do not understand what happened. However, the text is then lost.
After the description of Atlantis went under is the logical end of the story deliberately destroyed. Full description of the impact of these three communities are correctly assuming one refilling. Looking at the issue as yet only answer to the original question. Where are barbarians and Hellenes?The reason for the need of the story is very clear and is contemporary of great importance. Shortly after the recording of Plato's Atlantis, Alexander the Great conquered most of the then civilized world. Alexander the Great was taught by Aristotle in their common language, Attic. Plato's student Aristotle and intellectual successors were very racist attitude towards the barbarians, and he encouraged Alexander to attack the Persians. The Persians had always been in conflict with the Greeks. The barbarians and contemporary Greek nobility, Hellenes, would have the same origin was thus unthinkable to present in contemporary Greece. It is impossible to gain acceptance for such a description be understood with regard to how Herodotus was assessed by the ancient Greeks. Herodotus described, among other things, that the barbarians in Egypt had built a much better social system than non barbarians. He was the contemporary classified as barbarians friendly and disparage as liars. There have been charged to his work right into our time. Herodotus's reputation has been largely restored in our time, but it took almost 2500 years to repair the damage to ancient intellectual elite made him. He is regarded as the father of history and seemed barely a century before Plato. His motive for writing down the very first of mankind history books was because he wanted to present the fruits of their research to avoid the memory of the Hellenes and the barbarians' ancient deeds would be erased.
Both Plato as Herodotus assumes an affinity between Hellenes and barbarians. Common to both of them is that the end of their stories are gone. When Atlantis described disappears late in logical order should describe how the Atlantic were affected and how they survive. So was the case with the Greeks and Egyptians. The Atlantic are the answer to where the barbarian states and Hellenic families come are therefore indirectly answered. The politically uncomfortable but only logical result was thus the missing closure to the story of Atlantis. When the Athenians and other Hellenes military were threatened by barbarians, there were political motives for mudslinging and blackening of them. They did even more than happy and Aristotle expressed himself very condescending about barbarians. Herodotus described its part, the Persians as a highly civilized people. In some ways, even with the more distinguished manners than the Greeks themselves. That he, in his book devotes attention to the Persians is that they are considered to be of barbarian origin. Otherwise, they would not qualify in his motives for writing the book that describes helleners and barbarians common ancient deeds. When both Plato as Herodotus end is gone without having been completed to link the similar origins of creation stories, it is chance reasonableness consumed. As in Plato's case boils down to a single sentence more likely to provide the answer while the rest of his voluminous works have been reproduced as it is already there randomly unlikely. When Avensa Herodotes suffer the same fate in combination with the two stories given illogical statements as are all the randomness completely exhausted. Geographically Herodotus placed in Halikarnossos, now Bodrum in southeastern Turkey. Plato was in Athens and the solution to his problem described came from Egypt. This means that in the Eastern Mediterranean was a widespread perception of helleners and barbarians common origin. This suspicion coincides naturally with ljushylltheten the appearance similarity. While there was a smear of the military threatening barbarians there were parallel descriptions of their and helleners common origin.A truth that was not desirable and contemporary vision probably well represented by the then leader and racist scientist Aristotle.The ancient Greeks, mainly Thukydites, believed that all history should be given the present and simply describe what they were able to directly inform themselves about and preferably from opposite sides. Herodotus, who lived at the beginning of Greek antiquity, around 450 f.kr related human progress contrast to the historical origin. He wanted to write down their knowledge of that history was being forgotten. Before the art of writing was established storytelling is the only forum that brought the story forward. Since he was first to write down the story so there for Herodotes no written sources. To record history was thus listening to people who bore the oral tradition. Thukydites lived about 400 f.kr through his historical approach drew practically a historical starting line when he rejected any historical definition oral tradition.By definition thus became immediately even Herodotus works useless knowledge.Rejecting all these stories and those of Herodotes recorded was thus a contemporary cultural revolution.To this zeitgeist rid of troublesome and undesirable history apparently then be a minor problem. With the same unwanted theme, it is too absurd to be random events. Their end was both politically uncomfortable and destroyed to eliminate the unwanted Hellenes common origin with the barbarians. Herodotus and Plato lived in our contemporary assessment in an era with an outstanding and unique intellectual development. In contrast, they considered that they preceded by people and civilizations with a higher level than they themselves lived.
The effect of the Cultural Revolution has been that of the ancient Greeks desirable. They are acclaimed as those who strongly pushed forward the development and knowledge even though it was old skills that were already scattered in other civilizations. Above all, the fire of the library in Alexandria, but also the destruction of indigenous knowledge, the killing of religious leaders and the disparagement of any other culture and knowledge that are not developed by us westerners themselves have historically entrenched this apparent Greek greatness. The ancient Greek greatness lies in the written down and managed to preserve knowledge that probably would otherwise come to nothing. It is nedtecknarna with credit for development but it's compilation based on many predecessors thoughts, ideas and knowledge.
Our Western history is therefore based on the Greek antiquity active destruction of inconvenient history and the rejection of any other story than the writing itself.With the writing seems their knowledge progress huge but it was recorded and preservation of this knowledge was ancient great achievement. They managed to write down our time and preserve knowledge that was already known for thousands of years. Although these skills already existed elsewhere in the world, Alexander the Great conquered the same time a large part of the area where much of the Atlantean heritage there. He is given the honor and described as a great disseminator of Hellenic knowledge and culture with the shutter all the way to China and other distant places. Not that it is very unlikely, but fits well in our Western history description. A more reasonable view is that Alexander the Great conquests in many leading social strata was welcome and that their common cultural heritage with his conquest got a boost. The military successes are therefore likely strongly linked to the conquest of these circles was welcome. With Herodotes descriptions of the Hellenes and the Persians common background knowledge and culture are already in place and bloom with conquest. Alexander the Great has become the solution to an otherwise unexplained dissemination of culture whose influence is therefore magnified a thousandfold.
One then seemingly inconsequential history corrections Plato and Herodotes writings have hidden humanity's most significant event. Going forward, it came to cost 100's of millions of lives in the religious, cultural and racial conflicts whose real origins and causes it removed. Although a common historical background is not a guarantee for peaceful solutions to the common story probably made it much more complicated to conduct clean eradication project of what is historically regarded as other ethnic groups.
Published on www.resmalet.se
[It is written in Swedish and will not be good translated but hopefully understandable.
I will write after Christmas too You and tell You about my very hard conflict with the Swedish authorities about my Atlantis theory.
Have a very nice christmas from a region with 4 dm snow, white frost on the trees, shining stars and moon, nothern light. All very nice looking.
Have a nice Christmas and a happy new year, Greetings Carl Festin, Sweden, Ostersund.]
Here is the Google Translate version of resmalet.se: