 Plato's Lost Island of Atlantis did exist. Where was it located? The first location that we're going to look at today is the Azores Plateau, along the mid-Atlantic ridge in the North Atlantic Ocean. This geographically makes the most sense according to Plato's description. In his book to Mayus, Plato writes that Atlantis was in the Atlantic Ocean, and opposite the strait, the Greeks called the Pillars of Heracles. The Pillars of Heracles refers to two pillars of rocks that flanked the Strait of Gibraltar, with the Rock of Gibraltar on the European side, and the exact pillar on the North African side still debated. A boat sailing from Greece or Egypt through the Mediterranean Sea and out into the Atlantic Ocean would see these pillars either side of the strait. Today there is islands in this location as part of the Azores Archipelago, an autonomous region of Portugal. From Plato's description, this location, this general location, makes the most sense geographically, and it is in fact the opinion of Randall Carlsson, a master builder and architectural designer that the Azores Plateau is the area most likely if Atlantis did exist as to its location. This view has been challenged by others, however. Jimmy Corsetti of the Bright Insight Channel argues that the Rashat structure in the Sahara Desert in Mauritania in Africa is the most likely location of where the lost city of Atlantis would be located if it did exist. The Rashat structure is no doubt a mind-blowing geological structure, and it looks literally like something straight out of Lord of the Rings, the Eye of Sauron as some people call it. I'll link to Jimmy's full video below, as it's an interesting video in general and he makes a lot of interesting points. The Rashat structure is an eroded geological dome, 40km in diameter, exposing sedimentary rock and layers which appear as concentric circles. One argument is that the geological structure known as the Rashat structure, a semi-obscure and somewhat mysterious structure itself, is obviously a series of concentric circles or concentric rings, and this is in line with Plato's description of Atlantis. He does note that Atlantis was a series or organised or structured in a way where there was a series of rings of concentric circles with a acropolis in the centre and a series of land and water rings around the outskirts of the Acropolis. Jimmy also notes the connections between Atlas, who was a Greek Titan and Greek mythology, and Mauritania in general, and how there are numerous references through the history of Mauritania of Atlas, including a mythical king or some say a mythical king, who was a king of Mauritania in the ancient world, sometime I think around the 6th century BC, who was called Atlas. There are other connections between North Africa and Atlas, including a mountain range in the north of Africa called the Atlas Mountains. Jimmy also noted that there are various old maps from Greek and Roman times. They describe Atlas or Atlantis in the general region of the Rashat structure, and this is interesting, although the origins and the exact credibility of these maps is a little debated to be honest. Although Jimmy makes many interesting points in his video and again I'll link it below if you would like to check it out, I do find it a bit of a stretch, the argument of the Rashat structure. Most of these maps that document Atlantis or Atlas, and describe them in the general region of the Rashat structure, are about 2000 years old, old Greek and Roman maps whose origins themselves are quite obscure, but even if the maps are accurate, the timelines don't really match at all. Plato gives quite an accurate timeline of when the island of Atlantis was meant to have vanished and been swallowed up by the sea. He places the date around 11,600 years ago, and these maps that were cited by Jimmy are only around 2000 years old. So why are the same people shown on the same map? If there's 9,000 years of distance, if we look at the timeline of the events, the people that vanished and were destroyed by the sea around 11,600 years ago, can't be the same people that are on old Greek and Roman maps of 2000 years ago. There's 9,000 years that separates these people in these events. Furthermore, although there may have been rivers that ran through the Sahara thousands of years ago, and the Sahara desert itself was at one time a kind of lush green environment, very different to today. It's hard to argue that the Rashat structure in Mauritania in Africa could ever have been considered in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean beyond the pillars of Heracles. And there is more issues with this argument. Plato clearly writes that the island of Atlantis was swallowed up by the sea and vanished. How then, 10,000 years later, or over 10,000 years later, could the circular structure of Atlantis still be carefully preserved all these years later? If Atlantis itself was destroyed in a violent event, where the sea swallowed up Atlantis and Atlantis itself vanished, it seems again a bit of a stretch and it doesn't really seem to make much sense to myself. Doggerland is another location where people potentially site as the location of the lost city of Atlantis. Again, this doesn't seem very accurate to myself. The only real thing that Doggerland has going for it in relation to the connections to Atlantis is it was a landmass that was swallowed up by the sea and that's really about it. In general, Doggerland is a fascinating story but essentially Doggerland is quite out the way. To say it's in the Atlantic Ocean again isn't really accurate, especially if we consider Plato's description of it being opposite the pillars of Heracles. It's hard to argue that Doggerland could ever have been considered opposite the pillars of Heracles. The timelines also don't really match. Doggerland was swallowed up by the sea around 6500 BC where as Atlantis as we've already described was swallowed up by the sea as described by Plato around 9600 BC. Again, there's a major distance in the timelines of around 3000 years. Again, after reviewing a lot of the evidence it seems the most likely location for the lost city of Atlantis, if it did exist and that is of course an if, is the Azores Plateau region. Obviously there's islands still today in that general region but the region itself matches many of the descriptions that Plato describes and geographically it makes the most sense. The Azores Plateau, a connection of three major tectonic plates, a triple junction is again potentially a likely location of an island being swallowed up by the sea. Given the fact it sits in an area where there's so much tectonic movement and volatile earth forces they could have potentially destroyed this island. Where do you think the lost island of Atlantis would have been located if it did exist? Please let me know in the comments below either of these three that we've reviewed or any other potential locations as there is tens if not hundreds of different locations that people cite as the location of the lost city of Atlantis. Please also let me know if you think Atlantis did exist as obviously that's the debate in and of itself. Thanks for watching and I'll speak to you next time. If you value this content and you would like to support my channel you can support it through patreon buymeacoffee.com and also donate through PayPal. There are various other ways to support this channel. Please subscribe and hit the bell, hit the like button, leave a comment and also share this channel with your friends and family. Thanks again for watching and I'll see you next time.