The time that is indicated is the time of the Neolithic expansion from Syria/Anatolia, and would correlate with the earliest maritime expansion into Greece and the Mediteranean from that Eastern region, it is an interesting date but the facts presented regarding it are contrary to all archaelogical evidence for the period.
There's no evidence Plato had any interest in the constellation Hercules whatsoever, only the Pillars of Hercules, which are in no way correspondant to the constellation.
As there is no plausible explanation for the city and its environs being on Earth...at least after years of searching no indication of value to this effect has come to light, one looks in other directions. What I supply is another evaluation that fits his description contained within the Atlantis account.
There is a plausible explanation for his description of the city, it is allegorical and based upon his understanding of Universal harmonics.
What you supply is contrary to his cosmological worldview and his capabilities to project such considerations.
Regarding the astronomical abilities of the Greeks at that time I would imagine that they had a very good idea of what was what in the sky. They had access to Babylonian Tables and other material and were not dull themselves
The Babylonians developed a linear grid system across the horizons circa 2,000 Bc for roughly stating which area of the sky a Heavenly body might be seen in, they never had the capability to project constellations accurately onto hypothetical concentric circles projecting from Celestial North,
From where in the Atlantis account do you derive this information. Note once more I stated Atlantis account. In other writings yes this would almost certainly be applicable but that does not mean that it applies to the Atlantis tale. If I am correct then he was applying a description that was widely known but has since been forgotten. I describe this in Deluge and as I have repeatedly stated, the evidence for it builds up a bit at a time. Once more, if I am correct then the model you describe, that which does apply to other of Plato's writings, will not apply in this case
Timaeus is almost entirely concerned with the Heavenly sphere, the Geocentric noature of this, and how everything in nature follows the principles contained within it.
Now the motion of the outer circle he called the motion of the same, and the motion of the inner circle the motion of the other or diverse. The motion of the same he carried round by the side to the right, and the motion of the diverse diagonally to the left. And he gave dominion to the motion of the same and like, for that he left single and undivided; but the inner motion he divided in six places and made seven unequal circles having their intervals in ratios of two-and three, three of each, and bade the orbits proceed in a direction opposite to one another; and three [Sun, Mercury, Venus] he made to move with equal swiftness, and the remaining four [Moon, Saturn, Mars, Jupiter] to move with unequal swiftness to the three and to one another, but in due proportion.
and the heaven came into being at the same instant in order that, having been created together, if ever there was to be a dissolution of them, they might be dissolved together. It was framed after the pattern of the eternal nature, that it might resemble this as far as was possible; for the pattern exists from eternity, and the created heaven has been, and is, and will be, in all time. Such was the mind and thought of God in the creation of time. The sun and moon and five other stars, which are called the planets, were created by him in order to distinguish and preserve the numbers of time; and when he had made-their several bodies, he placed them in the orbits in which the circle of the other was revolving-in seven orbits seven stars. First, there was the moon in the orbit nearest the earth, and next the sun, in the second orbit above the earth; then came the morning star and the star sacred to Hermes, moving in orbits which have an equal swiftness with the sun, but in an opposite direction; and this is the reason why the sun and Hermes and Lucifer overtake and are overtaken by each other.
Now, when all the stars which were necessary to the creation of time had attained a motion suitable to them,-and had become living creatures having bodies fastened by vital chains, and learnt their appointed task, moving in the motion of the diverse, which is diagonal, and passes through and is governed by the motion of the same, they revolved, some in a larger and some in a lesser orbit-those which had the lesser orbit revolving faster
The only model that applies to Platos theory of concentric circles is thus the cosmos/solar system, this model being presented as the basis of all could hardly have a counterpart...
I do not understand your 'numerology of Massey'. While he is mentioned and cited a few times here is the only section that could feasibly be described as'numerology' I let others decide if that is the case or not..I argue that it is not and in any case this citation from Massey is merely showing his opinion and not ours...it was used as an exemplar.
It's a fine example of someone ignoring what Plato's interest was in sevenfold division and going off on one...
Hence, I challenge your challenges. You have taken things out of context and made positive statements without foundation. Yes some of what you state regarding Plato is correct, you are far from the only one who has studied his work and Greek history and mythology in general but I claim that as the location of Atlantis, which is well described but has not been found on Earth, requires a rethink... that is what I have done and this fits with my interpretation of the flood tale which itself fits with the Indian interpretation of these events which then further fits with descriptions in the Book of Revelation...I shan't continue as the evidence in the book Deluge
Given the absence of any actual city, and the probabiliity that the scenario is allegorical, the objective basis for the model utilised is fully provided and explained by Plato himself, it is the Universal Soul Cosmos/Solar system as he envisioned it...the Earth is actualy located at its very centre in theoretical terms...any suggested alternative must entirely ignore Timaeus as you did.
That is fine coming from one who in another set of postings lost his temper and ridiculed and insulted Dr Nicholas Kazanas who is director of the Omilos Meleton institute for cultural studies in Athens and is a leading Sanskritist and Indologist along with a few other similar highly respected academics who are first rate scholars. If you had any genuine constructive criticism against these people then fine even though your words were nothing short of insulting...Hindu fundamentalists? A descriptive term for historians attempting to understand India's history? What an extraordinary narrow minded view, even your Witzel with his outmoded and unsupportable Aryan Invasion ideas would likely not stoop that low.
You refer to here, [www.grahamhancock.com] it's nothing to do with losing temper or ridiculing, i merely seek out counter viewpoints to try and get all sides of the argument as a basis for constructive criticism.