The World's Unsolved Historical Mysteries

[The Wrath]

I figured we could use a thread to discuss issues on which history has yet to draw a conclusion. The two that most interest me are the lost city of Atlantis and the Ark of the Covenant. Does anyone know anything about either of these?

I know very little about either. I know that Atlantis was supposedly buried some 9,000 years before Plato, and that he was the first person to write about it. I know that it supposedly existed in the area that is, today, the Straights of Gibraltar. Is there any truly credible historical evidence to suggest that it might have existed?

As far as the Ark goes...I know it's a religious artifact, but I find it very possible that it existed in real life. The Bible does, after all, describe many events which are known to have actually occurred. There have been a lot of claims over the years by people who claim to have found it. Probably the most famous is that church in Ethiopia that claims to be in possession of it. Naturally, only the high priest is allowed to view it...sounds suspicious enough to completely disregard that claim. I think that the most likely fate of the Ark, if it did actually exist, is that it was melted down by the Babylonians.

I realize that any information on either of these subjects, or any others that are broached in this thread, are likely to be largely a mix of fact and myth, but it has always been intersting to me to hear people try to decipher parts of history that are not yet fully understood.

[GarinStone]

Atlantis was either a myth or a small unimportant island. Its actually believed to only have been breifly before Platos time.

The ark is a ridiculous concept. Of all the crazy hair brained things in the bible it stands out to me as the most blatently contradictory and impossible.

Many reasons:

1. The animals would have eaten eachother

2. We're still discovering new species that could have never survived in the climate of the middle east. Where did these come from?

3. The building of an ark capable of withstanding such a storm requires modern technology - and even that is a stretch if this really was the all powerful wrath of god.

4. Why were sea creatures saved? Surely if bunny rabbits were hopelessly sinful then great whites weren't great people.

Thats just the beginning of the list. These are really not too unsolved.

[The Wrath]

Uh...read my post again. I was referring to the Ark of the Covenant. You know, the thing that Indiana Jones rescues from the Nazis.

[softwareNerd]

Would "God" qualify as another of histories unsolved mysteries...as in... the phenomenon is mentioned in numerous forms, in numerous texts, and many people can relate anecdotal evidence of His presence in their lives.

If the Ark and Atlantis are in a different category, what makes them so?

[The Wrath]

I don't know that it does. That's why I'm asking if anyone knows anything about either.

Unless Plato was intentionally writing a myth, it seems reasonable to assume that it was at least based in fact.

As far as the Ark, I don't really know. I just think it possibly be plausible, because the Bible does describe certain events which are known to have happened.

[LaVache]

I don't think there is any reason to assume that the ark of the covenant didn't exist. It's just an intricate gold box. Considering the wandering ways of the Israelites I don't think that it's out of the question that they had at least one expensive symbol of their religion to carry around with them.

I'm sure that the whole touching it equals holy smiting is a myth, but the fact that the priesthood attributed mystical properties to a mundane object doesn't mean the object itself is a myth. There are plenty of religous artifacts, idols and the like, that no doubt had interesting mythos surrounding them.

As for the Babylonians melting it down, I highly doubt it. Having a unique religious artifact from a people you have conquered seems like a more exciting trophy than a blob of molten gold. Unless they had some reason to spite the Jews that I am unaware of, I don't see why the Babylonians wouldn't keep it intact.

As for it's ultimate fate, I have heard that it still resides in a locked room in Jerusalem. I know of no compelling evidence to back up that claim, but I've heard it a few times and thought I'd toss it out there.

-softwareNerd-

The fact that God myths have popped up worldwide and throughout history is no coincidence. The only mystery involved would be psychological or literary, though.

[DavidOdden]

I figured we could use a thread to discuss issues on which history has yet to draw a conclusion. The two that most interest me are the lost city of Atlantis and the Ark of the Covenant. Does anyone know anything about either of these?

Neither existed in their full-blown mythical form with all the properties attributed to them. There probably was some kind of ornate box used by the Jews in their religion, and there certainly was a highly advanced (Minoan) civilization living on the volcanic island of Thira, which blew up and mostly disappeared beneath the Aegean. Since Plato was telling a story about a story about a story, and I don't think anyone seriously believes that the place was actually called "Atlantis", I would say that the story of Atlantis does inaccurately describe an actual event. There needs to be some kind of independent corroborating evidence, such as Egyptian records, to come to a firm conclusion about the relationship between the myth and the historical event.

There's no serious question that The Temple existed, and it seems highly unlikely that there wasn't any such box in it. The argument that the Babylonians didn't take it is that they documented a lot of what they took and they did not document taking that object. It may have been snuck out earlier, and it might even be in Ethiopia. It could even be in the Temple Mount, and once that land is taken oven by secular authorities and auctioned off to the highest bidder, there is a chance somebody could dig it up and find the thing. But not in my lifetime.

[The Wrath]

Neither existed in their full-blown mythical form with all the properties attributed to them. There probably was some kind of ornate box used by the Jews in their religion, and there certainly was a highly advanced (Minoan) civilization living on the volcanic island of Thira, which blew up and mostly disappeared beneath the Aegean. Since Plato was telling a story about a story about a story, and I don't think anyone seriously believes that the place was actually called "Atlantis", I would say that the story of Atlantis does inaccurately describe an actual event. There needs to be some kind of independent corroborating evidence, such as Egyptian records, to come to a firm conclusion about the relationship between the myth and the historical event.

There's no serious question that The Temple existed, and it seems highly unlikely that there wasn't any such box in it. The argument that the Babylonians didn't take it is that they documented a lot of what they took and they did not document taking that object. It may have been snuck out earlier, and it might even be in Ethiopia. It could even be in the Temple Mount, and once that land is taken oven by secular authorities and auctioned off to the highest bidder, there is a chance somebody could dig it up and find the thing. But not in my lifetime.

I don't imagine many people think that such things existed in the "full-blown mythical form," but so much of what we know of ancient history is mingled with myth that we don't really don't have much else to go on besides myth and speculation.

There was a thread posted on here sometime over the summer that had a link to a story that Atlantis had supposedly been found, although the city thought to be Atlantis was destroyed about 100 years after Plato, so that doesn't make sense.

That's an interesting theory about the ark. I think that if it is ever found, it would easily be one of the greatest archaeological artifacts ever recovered. If for no other reason, just because such a dense shroud of mystery and cultural significance has been associated with it for centuries.

Okay, here's another one: King Arthur. The explanation that seems most likely to me is that he was originally a Nordic god who, over the centuries, was gradually un-deified until he was just an exceptional man.

[RPalmer7]

Atlantis was either a myth or a small unimportant island. Its actually believed to only have been breifly before Platos time.

The ark is a ridiculous concept. Of all the crazy hair brained things in the bible it stands out to me as the most blatently contradictory and impossible.

Many reasons:

1. The animals would have eaten eachother

2. We're still discovering new species that could have never survived in the climate of the middle east. Where did these come from?

3. The building of an ark capable of withstanding such a storm requires modern technology - and even that is a stretch if this really was the all powerful wrath of god.

4. Why were sea creatures saved? Surely if bunny rabbits were hopelessly sinful then great whites weren't great people.

Thats just the beginning of the list. These are really not too unsolved.

I am not mad at you Garin...you are not properly schooled in the Bible thats why. First things first the ark was real ok and nothing else.

1. The animals if you studied the story of Noah and the ark, you would realize that God was judging the earth and was in total control of those he wanted to save and there is nothing on this earth that can override his precepts.

2. Right! we're still discovering new species. So, let me ask you about the Pitbull (the mix bred dog from the German and Bulldog)...was it around when the ark floated? No! Point taken. The point is God wanted Noah to take some animals with him so the animals can replenish the earth and i believe a representative of every living animal at that time went in and if that was not the case God would have to create a new set of animals. The discussion can go on and on about God could have made new people and all that ...NO! God had already his plans for this earth and man was not one of the planners.

3. The ark itself was built by Noah yes but who maintained...now thats the question. The power of God is far beyond the imagination of the greatest mind ever to walk this earth and cannot be limited to a thought. If you have read the story you would realized that when those who were to be saved got into the ark God himself sealed...its a mystery and science cannot solve it...its that simple!

4. Now Garin and why was SEA creatures saved again? One more thing in the next destruction of this earth which is impending and unavoidable the entire earth will be destroyed except those who follow his words.

[Adrian Hester]

Okay, here's another one: King Arthur. The explanation that seems most likely to me is that he was originally a Nordic god who, over the centuries, was gradually un-deified until he was just an exceptional man.

Legends of Arthur started among the Welsh; he was a war leader who defeated the Saxons. (Britain was Roman province until the withdrawal of Roman armies in 410. For a generation or so after that it was governed by a Celto-Roman elite. Around 452 Saxons were enlisted as mercenaries, and over the next couple of centuries they and other Germanic peoples, the Angles and Jutes, settled throughout much of modern-day England.) There are a number of distinct legends wrapped around Arthur, but if you look at the earliest ones, he seems to have been a leader who fought successfully against the Saxon invaders; later the stories of earlier Roman and Celtic figures were associated with him. It was only after 1066 that Arthur was made into a figure for all the British (Geoffrey of Monmouth, for example, who was more a novelist than a chronicler).

[DavidOdden]

Okay, here's another one: King Arthur. The explanation that seems most likely to me is that he was originally a Nordic god who, over the centuries, was gradually un-deified until he was just an exceptional man.

I think he was probably a Celtic king of some kind. Nordic influence wasn't until after the 8th c. What I've read suggests that Arthur is more about the Celt v. Saxon conflict. I don't know of anything in Arthur's character that points to Nordic deity. Eye patch & ravens?

[ed: I see Adrian is here making the point... I oughta learn to check for new posts that crop up after I start replying]

Edited November 23, 2005 by DavidOdden

[softwareNerd]

... you would realize that God was judging the earth and was in total control of those he wanted to save and there is nothing on this earth that can override his precepts. <similar bizzarre assertions clipped>.

Funny how this omniscient and omnipotent God has to jump through such hoops to get things done. Reminds me of the movies where the bad guy doesn't shoot the good guy, but instead ties him to a railroad track or puts him into a cage with a swarn of killer bees, of some such. Entertaining yarn! It is scary to think that there are those who take this seriously and that these people live among us, rather than in some undiscovered jungle!

[JMeganSnow]

I have also read a theory that Atlantis was supposed to have been America, and that the sinking was an allegory for the loss of ability to travel there. I believe this theory came about because Plato placed Atlantis beyond the Straights of Gibraltar. Of course, Hades was supposed to be out there somewhere as well, and supposedly you could sail to it.

Maybe that's Iceland or something

[DavidOdden]

I have also read a theory that Atlantis was supposed to have been America,

Which would explain Part 3, Chapter 1 of Atlas Shrugged.

[Free Capitalist]

As for King Arthur, I think that the evidence that links him with the Roman general in Britain is really fascinating. The movie King Arthur is based on this theory. There are records left that there was a Roman centurion who, after the Romans withdrew from Great Britain, remained there and that he led the Celts to successfully fight against the Saxons. And we know his name -- Arturius.

Edited November 24, 2005 by Free Capitalist

[diverbetty]

Hello - this is my first ever post. I registered on this forum just so I could reply to this thread, if anyone is still interested in it.

History Channel's recent "Exodus Decoded" claims that for the first time, we actually know what the Ark of the Covenant looked like. Sure enough, 2 winged birds (okay, cherubs by far stretch of the imagination) sit atop a large box or chest. This image is extracted from a golden image on a plaque, or pin, of objects inside the Temple of Jerusalem. This golden image is among many gold artifacts attributed to the people who the Bible refer to as the goldsmiths who designed the Ark. Does anyone know anything more about this? I am an amateur historian, just getting into the subject. I defer to anyone who cares to respond. Thanks.

Edited September 10, 2006 by diverbetty