Dear colleagues! Ladies and gentlemen!

As the professional philologist I got used to treat the text as to space closed in itselfand not to be beyond the subjects designated in it, motives, images and ideas. In our studying of the myth about Atlantis we shouldn't be beyond that about it Plato wrote. Or we recognize Plato's correctness and we accept the myth about Atlantis literally as it is written down by it in all details and details, or all myth collapses and turns into fiction and a subject for speculation. For this reason I extremely am negative to any attempts to find Atlantis not in the Atlantic Ocean, and in any other places - in the Black Sea, in the Mediterranean Sea, in Africa, on the island of Crete, etc. It is necessary to tell: or we recognize that Atlantis was in the Atlantic Ocean and was lost in the 10th millennium BC, or it wasn't at all, or it was not Atlantis Plato. Any other places can be considered only as colonies of Atlantis and no more than that. In this regard I urge to pay attention on Gobekli-Tepe as to a possible colony of Atlantis, or the remains of that civilization with which Atlantis waged war. At last, I consider necessary again to consider a question of interaction of Atlantis and Hyperborea. I consider that Atlantis was only a secondary civilization in relation to Hyperborea, settling down in the Arctic. The Indian myth about Tripura which I studied earlier, says that there was two Tripura. One - very ancient, initial, settled down in the region where many months polar night reigned. It was lost because of a raising of global sea level and flooding of the shelf at the end of Ice Age. It I was Hyperborea. The second Tripura was created at "The western ocean" as attempt to restore the lost Tradition. It was lost as a result of world war between Asuras and gods. It is also Atlantis. It is necessary to look narrowly at this myth with all attention.

Sergey Teleguin (Moscow, Russia)

25.08.2015