Atlantis: And Other Lost Worlds

by Frank Joseph

Atlantis and Other Lost Worlds is the most up-to-date and comprehensive investigation of history's infamous sunken city. Nowhere else will you find a more dramatic and convincing presentation of the evidence for its archaeological reality. The book uncovers the scientific genius of the ancients and the spiritual power of their mysterious religion. They are revealed as the inventors of a crystal technology to surpass our own, and the master builders of pyramidal monuments around the world. The cultural heritage of Atlantis in the civilizations of pharaonic Egypt, Bronze Age Europe, Maya Mexico and Inca Peru is clearly described. The doomed capital comes alive in a vivid recreation of its heyday of cultural splendour and imperial might. Inside these pages you will find the answers to many intriguing questions, • What is the most likely location of Atlantis? • How and when was Atlantis destroyed? • Has Japan's leading geologist found the sunken 'citadel' of Lemuria? • Have Russian oceanographers found the ruins of Atlantis? • What are the disturbing parallels between Atlantis and our time? Featuring wonderful illustrations, Atlantis and Other Lost Worlds opens a new window on the ancient past, offering views of Atlantis and its kindred civilizations never seen before.

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Mythology, Science

295 pages, Kindle Edition

First published May 24, 2000

About the author

Frank Joseph is the pen name of Francis Joseph Collin, a former activist with the American Nazi Party/National Socialist White People's Party and the founder of the National Socialist Party of America. In 1979, Collin was convicted of child molestation and sentenced to seven years in prison, and he lost his position in the party.

Upon his release from prison, Collin reinvented himself under the pseudonym of Frank Joseph, a New Age writer and a pagan worshiper. In 1987, he had his first New Age book published, The Destruction of Atlantis: Compelling Evidence of the Sudden Fall of the Legendary Civilization.

He wrote articles for the magazine Fate, and between 1993 and 2007 he was also an editor of Ancient American. This magazine focuses on what it considers to be evidence of ancient, pre-Columbian transoceanic contact between the Old World and North America, with the implication that all complex aspects of North America's indigenous cultures must have originated on other continents.

Reviews

[Dan · Rating 2 out of 5]

Way back in the day, I was into all the fringe science stuff: UFOs, cryptids, ghosts, and lost civilizations like Atlantis. When you're young, the world is a magical place with plenty of room for relict populations of mammoths in Siberia, dinosaurs in Africa, and some kind of dimensional nexus in the Bermuda triangle. As you get older, it's hard to ignore the nagging voice in your head pointing out all the holes in the logic of such things.

With the passage of time, I've acquired a thick skin of cynicism beneath a carapace of skepticism. I was hoping this book would be a study of possible origins of the Atlantis story of Plato. It wasn't.

First off, for what it is, this is a good book. Frank Joseph is a good writer and is clearly passionate about the subject. I fact-checked a lot of the examples he cites and found them to be real places at the very least.

My problem was with the tone of the book. Atlantis is presented as an indisputable fact from the first few pages. I kept reading and kept debating on not continuing as the depths of crack-pottery deepened. Poseidon creating Atlantis? The Egyptians having a war with the Atlanteans in 1200 BC? The story of the creation from the Bible being a corruption of the original Atlantean creation story? It sure seemed like Frank Joseph was using Atlantis to tie together every creation myth, every great flood myth, and every unexplained ruin or structure in the world.

While I don't doubt the Atlantis story has some basis in fact, I have a hard time believing in a world empire that there's no trace off. Further more, I also have a hard time believing in an entire continent that sank beneath the waves. The thing about continents is that they're quite large. Plate tectonic theory doesn't allow for Atlantis, Mu, Lemuria, or any other legendary sunken land.

On a site note, I have to wonder if Plato's story of Atlantis had some influence on Michael Moorcock when he created the city of Melnibone on the island of Imryr in the Elric book. The sea maze and some aspects of the Melniboneans seemed lifted from Atlantis.

As a work of fiction, this book could have been great. Presented as fact, I find it kind of sad, though interesting and well-researched. Two out of five stars.

[Jillian · Rating 1 out of 5]

At first I found this book somewhat interesting. However, please research this author’s bio and decide if you can stomach his views and the crimes for which he’s been convicted. I am absolutely disgusted.

[Laura Baugh · Rating 3 out of 5]

The problem with Atlantis is, it attracts fringe theorists. There can be a perfectly good piece of evidence on the table, but what's going to come up in discussion is magical floating rocks, psychic powers, and ancient astronaut theory. Any archaeological facts most worthy of realistic discussion are lost in the chaos.

This book is a perfect example of what's interesting and what's wrong in Atlantology.

Frank Joseph presents a dazzling buffet of Atlantis and Mu information, and indeed there are a lot of compelling tidbits in here. (Categorically denying the probable existence of a historical location by that name is silly if indeed histories on three or four different continents reference seafarers from Atzlan, Patulan, Etelenty, etc.)

But Joseph commits the unforgivable sin of stating his deductions as conclusive fact right alongside archaeological evidence, with nary a transitional phrase to separate them. (An early affront: "The Etruscans were themselves nothing more than late Atlanteans who colonized western Italy, so their surviving material culture offers us a glimpse of Atlantis at its cultural height.") While some of these conclusions might well be worthy, it is unacceptable to state them without leading the reader through the process.

Even more irritating is the utter lack of citation. I expected a book alleging to be a serious treatise of Atlantis to be covered in footnotes, identifying where archaeological fact could be referenced, history confirmed, etc. But there are no footnotes, no citations, only two pages of bibliography without a way to select the desired source. The text is peppered with the infuriating use of, "clearly," "obviously," and worst, "self-evident." As a result, this book is utterly useless for citation itself.

Even without footnotes, my grasp of world history is better than the average American's, which is how I was able to nod approvingly and then protest vigorously as I read. Joseph makes convincing arguments for some of his theories, but others are obviously flawed when considered in the light of known history (he cites several Old Testament events as concurrent or even identical with Atlantean history, without taking into account the appropriate historical dates of those events).

But then, dates are a weak point throughout the text. Joseph presents a case that the early date Plato attributed to Atlantis' demise, a sticking point for many researchers, can be explained by Plato's quoting a history which used lunar years (Egypt's account of the disaster) in his society which used solar years (Greece). This is a wonderful start, but Joseph fails to then lead us through the math to arrive at his corrected date of 1198 BC for the literal fall of Atlantis. On some points he fixes precise dates; on others he is unclear or even contradicts himself.

BAD BITS

A typical leap of logic: Sodom and Gomorrah are situated, according to Biblical and classical sources, on the Plain of Jordan and were destroyed some time prior to 1500 BC. (Dates are very inexact.)

My info: The two Hebrew terms describing the Plain of Jordan are "kikkar" (round, usually for coin or bread loaf; circular district) and "kullahh mashgeh" (completely irrigated, well-watered). (http://www.abu.nb.ca/ecm/topics/arch5...)

Joseph: "... the original name of Sodom was Si-da-Mu, while Gomorrah -- I-ma-ar -- is based on the root 'gh m r', which means to 'be deep, or 'copious (water).' These indications suggest that the lost cities of Sodom and Gomorrah ... may be biblical allegories, respectively, for the vanished Pacific and Atlantic civilizations of Mu and Atlantis."

Joseph not only conveniently ignores the many classical sources that specifically locate the cities in question, but also that the "copious water" nomenclature might be attributed to the thorough irrigation mentioned in both the place names and the Biblical account -- the entire reason Lot chose to live there was its verdant plain!

(Whether "I-ma-ar" refers to Gomorrah or Emar is still debated. It's apparent that Joseph didn't look too far into the linguistic background of Sodom and Gomorrah, though, or he would have seized upon the "round" attribute to support his Atlantis theory, as he relates nearly every classical or neolithic circular monument to Atlantis' obsession with concentric rings.)

To be fair, this example is taken from a final chapter overviewing other "lost civilizations" and probably doesn't represent the best of Joseph's efforts, but it does illustrate the critical reading required here.

GOOD BITS

There are some really thought-provoking pieces of archaeological information in the text. Without citations, however, I am reluctant to repeat them, and I haven't the time to independently look up each of them. The first unattributed fact I entered into Google -- the alleged 1960 discovery of hundreds of ancient elephant bones a few hundred kilometers off Portugal, right where Plato reported Atlantis and its elephantine fauna -- produced many other references to this discovery (some substituting mammoth or mastodon) but no original report.

This kind of scholarship isn't scholarship, and it just makes interested folk look bad. I blame not only Joseph but the whole online community. As a person who works in a relatively recent and constantly-updating scientific field, I say: C'mon, guys, show a little respect for your topic and your readers!

EDITING

I was still in the first chapter when I commented to my husband, "I wish this guy were a better writer." I referred primarily to the lack of citation and additionally to some basic editing errors.

Here's one of the worst offenders, from a chapter on Atlantean/Mu influence on South American culture:

"The capital, Chan-Chan, lies just north of Trujillo, and was founded, according to Chimu historians, by Taycana-mu. [skip one sentence:] Tayacana-mu founded the city of Chan-Chan. The so-called 'Palace of the Governor' at Chan-Chan -- the city founded by Tayacana-mu -- features a wall...." (p. 145)

Why, yes, we GET that Chan-Chan was founded by Tayacana-mu. Or Taycana-mu; the spelling variation above is original.

CONCLUSION

This is a great read for tantalizing views of Atlantis and Mu, and it's very titillating. It cannot be taken seriously until proper citations are added; I refuse to do the author's research for him.

[Dr.J.G. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Most of the book is a desperate effort by Donelly in his quest to establish Atlantis as the biblical origin of humanity, aided by and aiding the missionary efforts to convert India by lies.

It's not enough for Donelly to establish that Atlantis existed, indeed, or that it was exactly where Plato says it was.

He had to try to force it down the reader as not only the biblical origin of all but Africans, but also paint it more specifically as a globe- grilling empire.
................................................................................................


Author gives details of deluge legends from various tribes of natives North of Mexico. He not only keeps using pejorative words for them, but also calling them Indian, knowing fully well they had nothing to do with India, and thereby using a tacit subconscious European presumption that the word defining people of India, Indian, was to be used to describe any people European migrants thought little of, an extension of Macaulay policy, of deliberately using falsehood against India, and deliberately, calling everything good of India bad.
................................................................................................


" ... the civilization of Egypt at its first appearance was of a higher order than at any subsequent period of its history, thus testifying that it drew its greatness from a fountain higher than itself. It was in its early days that Egypt worshipped one only God; in the later ages this simple and sublime belief was buried under the corruptions of polytheism. ... "

There's the prejudice. Why "corruptions of polytheism"? Most horrors of genocide and massacres were committed by monotheistic when not by atheists, and between the two there's almost no difference - neither cares about perception of Reality, but each assumes authority to pronounce decisive judgement regarding matters that cannot be proved by logic.
................................................................................................


" ... We are told that Deva-Nahusha visited his colonies in Farther India. An empire which reached from the Andes to Hindostan, if not to China, must have been magnificent indeed. ... "

The mistake he makes is in appropriating Sanskrit, Aaryans and all glorious literature thereof, denying India. For that's where the lie is exposed. Every bit of it, as far as related to India.
................................................................................................


At the very outset, one wonders, as one reads the purpose of the book - as the first chapter is titled, if the author has evidence for any of it, or is it completely based on the theories and suppositions that were then prevalent in Europe, along with a few traditions Europe took for granted such as colonial expansion radiant outward from Europe.

One may suppose that there is merit in an investigation of a legend thought so much of by respected ones of Greece, and much has indeed come to light even during twentieth century from Schlieman's discovery of Troy and its gold, to truth of Indian legends of Himaalayan ranges rising out of the ocean.

But the author assumes Aryan invasion theory and that's proven fraudulent amply, moreover with the agenda behind the fraud exposed too, a colonial ruse to impose a belief on natives that they were just as much invaders as those known to be invaders during last millennium and half have been, and to impose guilt on innocent victims by propaganda of a fraudulent division of a nation, a land and a culture, for purposes set out explicitly by Macaulay - to break spirit of India so British can benefit by reducing India to slaves.

This assumption by the author, of a theory thst never had any truth in it at any level, makes one alert about the rest of his thesis, and question how much of his theory holds any truth at all, beyond the incontrovertible facts - yes, there us an astounding similarity between cultures, architecture et al, on two shores of southern Atlantic. Since there have been discoveries of other sites, for example one at Goebekliteppe, in a region in present day Turkey, once part of Greece.

Atlantis might have been fact, but was it an island? There have been satellite sightings of a city in Sahara that is now thought as the site of Atlantis.

On the other hand, why conclude that it was a single source? It is perfectly possible there was more than one.

Aryan civilisation and culture of India, by any name, and certainly knowledge possessed by India, predates India merging with Asia. There is evidence that Pacific islands had migrations and trade across the Pacific, and India has records of architect named Maya invited to create the palace at Indraprastha, which invoked deadly envy in others.

So there might have been more than one advanced civilisation, with relationship of trade rather than colonisation.
................................................................................................


Then there are theories such as one proposed by Graham Hancock in his amazing Fingerprints of Gods.

And finally, there's India, reality being India has knowledge of having seen an ocean vanish, oceans churn and Himaalayan ranges rising out of the ocean; the river Sindhu, called Indus by Europe, and one that outsiders from Persia to Europe named the land after, is literally named "ocean" in India, as "Sindhu", in Sanskrit and in every Indian language, translates to ocean; no other river, not even the mighty Gangaa or far wider Brahmaputra, are ever referred to or thought of as anything but rivers. Goddesses, yes, but not ocean.

There's no denying the linguistic part of the bond, as said by Max Müller - "the Hindoos, the Persians, the Celts, Germans, Romans, Greeks, and Slavs" sharing a root language.

But there's also no denying that Hindus retain not a shred of memory of any other home or a journey to India, while Aarya literature in Sanskrit not only goes far back, it goes farther back than before the vanishing of an ocean between India and Asia, and seeing Himaalayan ranges rising out of the ocean.

A culture that retains memories reaching farther back than that would not likely forget an Atlantis that vanished only twenty thousand years ago, or a journey filled with travails from an idyllic homeland, finally reaching India, crossing Sindhu, if indeed the journey were after Sindhu river came to be in place of the ocean - Sindhu in Sanskrit - that had vanished as they watched.

It's either that Aarya were always in India and saw the cataclysmic churning of the oceans, vanishing of an ocean North of Vindhya and rising of Himaalayan ranges out of the ocean, or they came from elsewhere.

Truth must be ascribed to a memory retained so long and so firmly, about India and Himaalayan ranges, than the theory made up by Europe to explain the commonality of cultural heritage of "the Hindoos, the Persians, the Celts, Germans, Romans, Greeks, and Slavs". The latter is explained just as well by asking, did some Aryans migrate from India? Likely, that's the clue.
................................................................................................


Early on begins a series of extremely racist comments, as author refers to India, by various persons he quotes, apart from himself.

"India affords us art account of the Deluge which, by its poverty, strikingly contrasts with that of the Bible and the Chaldeans. Its most simple and ancient form is found in the Çatapatha Brâhmana of the Rig-Veda. It has been translated for the first time by Max Müller."

Here author gives a familiar version involving Manu, his name misspelled half the time as Mann, and then mentions another variation involving Satyavrata talked to Hythe ultimate Divine, God Vishnu himself, instead of the first Avataara of Vishnu, Matsyaavataara, referred by ignorant and uncomprehending guys here as Fish-God, before the next stupid and racist comment comes.

" ... Nor is the Puranic version of the Legend of the Deluge to be despised, though it be of recent date, and full of fantastic and often puerile details. In certain aspects it is less Aryanized than that of Brâhmana or than the Mahâbhârata; and, above all, it gives some circumstances omitted in these earlier versions, which must yet have belonged to the original foundation, since they appear in the Babylonian legend; a circumstance preserved, no doubt, by the oral tradition--popular, and not Brahmanic--with which the Purânas are so deeply imbued. ... "

His ignorance of India, and a lack of understanding of much more is on exhibition when he says "oral tradition--popular, and not Brahmanic".

The idiots are unable to see that, this is beginning of Dashaavataara, whereby evolution is portrayed as a series of Divine Descents (Avataara) or Manifestations, from Matsya (Fish), which here grows from tiny to humongous size, enough to guide and anchor a ship, to the ultimate Divine Avataara Krishna, and then final Avataara, yet to arrive.

But they proceed instead to make more asinine comments.

"The references to "the three worlds" and the "fish-god" in these legends point to Atlantis. The "three worlds" probably refers to the great empire of Atlantis, described by Plato, to wit, the western continent, America, the eastern continent, Europe and Africa, considered as one, and the island of Atlantis. ... "

No, the three worlds - the translation here of "Loka" as world is very inadequate, to say the least: former refers more to planes of existence, ours being the mortal and other two being one above, occupied by Gods, and a Nether.

" ... As we have seen, Poseidon, the founder of the civilization of Atlantis, is identical with Neptune, who is always represented riding a dolphin, bearing a trident, or three-pronged symbol, in his hand, emblematical probably of the triple kingdom. He is thus a sea-god, or fish-god, and he comes to save the representative of his country."

India is definitely NOT referring, to a god of either ocean or of Nether world, when speaking of Matsyaavataara (which is Vishnu appearing in the first form manifested on earth); even though Vishnu is portrayed as one resting on - not in - ocean, he's holding up the universe, he's holding up existence itself, and of course, earth; it's an ultimate form of Divine, supreme God, not a literal physical object, or something Europe can fit into a racist denigration comfortably. The first Avataara described here isn't as small as a dolphin, either, when grown to its full form.
................................................................................................

Author gives details of deluge legends from various tribes of natives North of Mexico. He not only keeps using pejorative words for them, but also calling them Indian, knowing fully well they had nothing to do with India, and thereby using a tacit subconscious European presumption that the word defining people of India, Indian, was to be used to describe any people European migrants thought little of, an extension of Macaulay policy, of deliberately using falsehood against India, and deliberately, calling everything good of India bad.

When the author says Indian, he's referring to natives of continent across Atlantic; people of India he visually refers to as "Hindoo", or, at least equally often, as Aryan. Which is more correct than he realised.
................................................................................................

Now, however, he gets completely muddled, chiefly due to racism equating India, Hindus and Aarya with caste system, and misconstruing very words from Sanskrit, which is entirely common in West.

"In the same way we find that the ancient Aryan writings divided mankind into four races--the white, red, yellow, and black: the four castes of India were founded upon these distinctions in color; in fact, the word for color in Sanscrit (varna) means caste. The red men, according to the Mahâbhârata, were the Kshatriyas--the warrior caste-who were afterward engaged in a fierce contest with the whites--the Brahmans--and were nearly exterminated, although some of them survived, and from their stock Buddha was born. So that not only the Mohammedan and Christian but the Buddhistic religion seem to be derived from branches of the Hamitic or red stock. The great Manu was also of the red race."

This is so silly it's enough to make one speechless, giving up the hope that anyone thus determined to retain prejudice couldn't possibly be made to hear what are plain facts. For what it's worth, here they are.

First, castes in India were not separate races, never were, and still aren't. Marriages are usually arranged within caste because a daughter has grown up adjusted to a certain profession, vocation, especially that of males of the family, and would find it easier to adjust immediately and take charge when appropriate, if her new home and family aren't drastically different.

When European royals married other royals, or were considered not royal otherwise, that was caste system of not only inheritance but marriage as well, for those born of morganatic marriages were treated badly by others.

Hence Mountbatten partitioning India and leaving in a hurry, so he could make up for the humiliations of his father, in Germany by cousin Willie and later in England due to being German.

But even in ancient legends and epics of India we find people routinely marrying drastically across castes, even more, and not only their children not suffering, but no questions raised about their marriages by anyone. There are at least half a dozen such examples that come readily to mind, from Shantanu to Bheems, from parents of Raavana to parents of Bharata who the country is named Bhaarata after, from Raama and Sita (she was found by a king when he went to till a field as per ritual, and brought up by him as his own daughter), to Krishna and his second wife Satyabhama, daughter of Jaambuwanta who's usually in resemblance close to a bear, and was with Raama in the war against Raavana.

What's more, the caste changed if the work did, so Vaalmieki from being a born fisherman became a wayside looted and killer, but met a holy man and changed, so much so he became a revered holy man, a sage who eventually not only gave refuge to Sita and her sons, bringing them up, but wrote the earliest Raamaayana that survived, teaching the sons about their father.

At the other end of the spectrum, Raavana the son of a Brahmin became a king in his own right, while his mother was a Raakshasie, and he had characteristics inherited from both parents. Why his lower nature dominated is told in an interesting detail, but didn't affect his prospects until he abducted wife of another man - his own chief wife certainly was a princess from a kingdom in Rajasthan, and Jodhpur still has a garden bearing their names.

As for Bharata, or sons of Shantanu by the fisherman's daughter he married, they were kings, inheriting without any question the kingdoms of their respective fathers.

And the explanation Donelly gives about the word "Varna" meaning caste, is again complete nonsense. The word literally means colour, but isn't about skin colour, it's about mind, heart, spirit, ones whole inner being as transformed by one's work.

Brahmins are described as white because that's colour assigned to a life devoted to intellectual work, whereby one isn't allowed to charge for services rendered but must accept whatever is offered, whether one chose to become a Brahmin or was born thus to a family. One is also not allowed to lapse in for example rules regarding hygiene, beginning with freshly bathe every morning and freshly washed, not previously worn and unwashed, clothes worn, before beginning of day or partaking of any food. Its a whole lifestyle apart from learning the various things.

Brahmins aren't white race any more than any other Aryans, were mostly always poor or very poor, and can still be seen to be of a continuum of variety of skin hues, just as any other Indians are, of whatever caste.

Kshatriya are visualised as red, not because it was a skin colour, but because red is the colour that'd come to mind when one thinks of someone brought up bear arms to fight to protect weak, and carry out other prescribed duties of a warrior.

Raama, Krishna, and their clans were quintessential Aarya and Kshatriya, but both Raama and Krishna are described as "shadowed", not quite black but dark blue of a cloud, or shade of a tree amidst brilliant sunlight, darker than medium. Not red.

As for the war Donelly describes, there wasn't one, not between castes. One single Brahmin who's held as sixth Avataara of God Vishnu, Parashuraama, alone went to war, for personal reasons and his terrible wrath. But he was pacified down from his anger when he met Raama after, ironically, Raama had broken the bow Parashuraama had obtained from God Shiva, and given to Sita because she played with it as a child. Pacified after, not because - reason for pacification was rather a recognition of a higher manifestation of God in Raama.

Again, this is something West is unable, due to unwillingness, to see. Caste system has Brahmins do intellectual work, but spiritual life is open to everyone who hasn't bound oneself to another in responsibility; caste is no matter if one lives in renunciation of the world. Moreover, then one's only work is achieving union with Divine, and when so achieved - or whatever stage of achievement arrived at - people do recognise it, but not because there's any imposition thereof by any institution.

Brahmins have rights to priesthood, but becoming God is open to everyone to achieve, and when someone is in fact achieved, he's worshipped as God or whatever level he or she are at, regardless of which caste they began in.

Yellow obviously for traders because it's colour of gold, but the fourth colour isn't black, it's blue, for workers.

And given a free choice along with an understanding of the requirements and duties, one can't imagine anyone choosing not wealth, which is most with the third caste, trade. But not everyone would choose trade if otherwise inclined. An Alexander must choose being Kshatriya (although it's unclear if he did follow all duties of one, but then he wasn't properly taught so), an Einstein a Brahmin and a Raphael an artist. It's not hard to imagine someone loving weaving, if one sees the beauty and variety of fabrics of India. And so on.
................................................................................................


"How comes it that all the civilizations of the Old World radiate from the shores of the Mediterranean? The Mediterranean is a cul ....

[Zoe Lambi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Took me 4 months to read. Not enough pics and kinda presented it all as truth

[Melisende · Rating 1 out of 5]

Reviewing my notes from when I read this, and one word stands out .... rubbishy.

References to Greek and Egyptian mythology; stories of lost worlds; crystal skulls; meso-america; Homer; Plato; Atlantis; the Land of Mu.

Read it at your peril - and only if this sort of thing takes your fancy. Obviously I read it - I do like a good lost civilisation story - emphasis on the good. This is something I would pick up at a train station or airport for a quick, "I have time to kill", read.

[Patricia Moore · Rating 2 out of 5]

I’m very interested in the subject and maybe it’s just me or maybe not a good time to read this book. I chose this author and book because it was recommended by a mutual friend. I tried to like it and finish. Sorry. It was like a textbook and not one I was in the mood to study.

[Angello Adrien · Rating 5 out of 5]

it was very informative.

[Deborah A. Morrison · Rating 4 out of 5]

Frank Joseph brings a most contemporary and thorough investigation about Altantis. In this book you will find many answers to your questions about Atlantis.

[Terry · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very interesting on some of the latest research into Atlantis, Lemuria, and other 'lost' lands. Traces the history from Plato to the current (and with references to times long before Plato) and makes a fairly convincing case for the existence of a lost civilization(s) which impacted many areas of the world including North and South America, Egypt, Japan and Pacific Islands, Africa, and other areas.

Also draws parallels to today and speculates on if we may be headed down the same path of destruction.

[Dan Zarfati · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well, this book has an interesting view on the origin of the Atlantis myth and tries to make it believable or probable. Well, some of his propositions are plain wrong but not all of them. The biggest problem of this book is the lack of references, and that is a bit strange because the author has dedicated many years to studying the subject. The book starts with positions similar to Charles Berlitz's views but then adds some new information. The book is interesting but I would expect more from it.

[Debbie Mcclelland · Rating 3 out of 5]

It could have happened that way.

Many interesting ideas that make you think, but without verification,this is only conjecture. The only references given are by authors who also are vague. The mysteries are true, and interesting, but sometimes the author goes of the deep up trying to explain them.

[Rich Elvers · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was painful and hard enough to read without finding out the author is a convicted child molesting avowed Nazi. Into the trash it went as a definite DNF.

The author writes as if the existence of Atlantis is undisputed fact.
It’s all crockpot theories from a Nazi.

[Megan Greenaway · Rating 4 out of 5]

Atlantis

Found this highly interesting, makes me want to read more about the lost cities and classical history. Would read again.

[Steve Lee · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not quite what I was expecting, but an interesting read nevertheless.

[Matthew Jeffrey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty standard stuff, but well presented. a good coffee table book for anyone interested.

[Lori L (She Treads Softly) · Rating 3 out of 5]

Atlantis: And Other Lost Worlds by Frank Joseph is a recommended for those interested in speculation about Atlantis and Lemuria (Mu).

After researching and writing a paper about Atlantis many years ago, the sunken city has always fascinated me. Joseph gathers evidence that he claims support the conclusion that Atlantis really existed, where it most likely was located, along with information about their religious beliefs, as well as other thoughts. He does the same for the lost civilization of Lemuria, also known as Mu. This is a book which is clearly for those who already have an interest in the topic.

Obviously, many books about Atlantis are going to have a lot of speculation rather than hard facts, which makes them entertaining, but not necessarily a scholarly work that will be taken seriously by experts. Joseph manages to present a plethora of conjecture along with some discoveries and facts that could be interpreted to potentially be Atlantis - and Lemuria. The most important thing to note is that there are no footnotes or chapter notes, so the reader has no other point of reference to refer to. There are archeological discoveries discussed, but no extensive research into them. There is only a limited bibliography.

I also wanted more pictures. There are some pictures, but certainly not enough to prove and document many things described. It also stretches my credulity when Edgar Cayce is a major source of evidence. Read it for fun if you are interested in the topic, but don't expect a serious scholarly work with well documented information.

Disclosure: My advanced reading copy was courtesy of the publisher for review purposes.

[Tony Calder · Rating 1 out of 5]

I started this book a long time ago - nearly 3 years I think - But put it down since it was irritating me so much.

This book focuses primarily on Atlantis, but also gives a reasonable amount of space to Lemuria. What it is missing, however, is credible evidence. Lots of speculation, and lots of "interesting" interpretations of existing facts.

Was there an island in the mid-Atlantic that was destroyed by a volcanic eruption or asteroid impact? And did that island have a civilisation comparable to contemporaneous civilisations? Probably yes to both. There have certainly been enough animal bones discovered to indicate there were islands which have now been submerged. But whatever Atlantean civilisation there may have been, there is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that it was highly advanced and had some form of crystal-based psychic technology - both of which are central tenets of this book's claims.

And the author's claims about Mu (or Lemuria) are even more fanciful -he claims they had a civilisation 40,000 years ago,and that it was far more advanced than the Stone Age level that humanity had achieved at that time.

There are a lot of photos in the book, and many of them are underwater shots meant to prove his claims - but most of them are either reproduced badly, or were quite blurry when taken, so very little detail is visible.

[Elisa · Rating 4 out of 5]

I received a free copy from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review. Thank you, Arcturus Digital!
This is a very interesting look into Atlantis, Lemuria and other mysterious extinct civilizations that may have existed. Or not. In the words of Agent Mulder: I want to believe. Frank Joseph clearly does, and he makes a strong case for it. It's so unlikely that civilizations so far away in space have so many things in common that there must be a common ancestor. Still, I've read many books debunking the myth, and the author uses some of the theories skeptics scoff at (mainly, that the math doesn’t make sense, explained away by a translation error - which does seem too convenient). If you're looking for someone to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Atlantis and Lemuria were real, you may need to wait until somebody finds them at the bottom of the ocean. If you want interesting stories and anecdotes, this is the book for you. I wish there were more pictures (there is a special illustrated edition, but this one didn't have as many as I would have liked), but the material is well researched and explained so that it's easy to understand. Skeptics and believers alike will enjoy this read.

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well, I read this book in 2009 and much has changed in the world of Atlantean research since then, but I'll repost my original review from the Library Thing site:

"Some convincing theories about the lost civilisation fatally weekened by the equal credence given to 'channeled' information from psychics and mediums.

The circumstantial evidence soon mounts up and I was left with the impression that Atlantis could well have existed - though whether this was down to the author's argument or the sledghammer repetition of ideas and concepts I don't know.

The cover is terrible, resembling a children's book. But having said all that, I enjoyed reading it and would certainly recommend it to those with an interest in the topic."

That's what I wrote back in 2009. Subsequently, most Atlantean theorists (the non-crazy kind, that is) agree that Atlantis was a myth spun around the volcanic destruction of the island of Thera, now Santorini. Despite this, the book is still an intriguing insight into the world of nutty psychics and the pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo that have tarnished the legend.

[Andy N · Rating 4 out of 5]

This review was originally posted on NetGalley:

I always had an interested for lost civilisations, unexplained events in history. I really enjoying going through the extinct civilisations, the facts, the theories. I really liked the back-research that I found here. Frank Joseph did a great work on the research of the details, theories and places, presenting it in a writing style that motivated me to read more. I usually grow bored when I read theoretical books, but this one is like an adventure that took me on a travel. Everything is very well explained and easy to understand.

It also easy to notice one of the main ingredients that clues this book together: passion. Joseph is clearly passionate about history and mythology, and for me the book overflows with it.

I really enjoyed it!

[Stacy Robinson · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this book, not knowing what to expect. I had learned about Atlantis in school but I was pleasantly surprised to learn about the lives and customs of the people that lived during the time. The author also tells of certain other civilizations to tell the reader about. I remember learning about the Incas so I could remember that part. Good book if you are a history buff.

[Dave · Rating 2 out of 5]

A bit disappointing, too much mumbo jumbo for me, whilst the might have been earlier civilisations, I don't think they went in for this weird religious practice's.

[Madi Schoenecker · Rating 1 out of 5]

DNF