In the ancient world, there was little distinction between the concepts of fiction and non-fiction with regard to story-telling, given that they viewed their own existence as part of a larger (what we might call fantasy) narrative about the universe itself. For them, a story was fiction (not true to life) if it taught lessons and ideas that were not true. A story was non-fiction (true to life) if it taught lessons and ideas that were true. So a simple story like &quot;a citizen robbed a merchant and was rewarded by the town for his good deed&quot; may or may not be factual (by our standards), but to them would be a fiction. On the other hand, the story of Icarus would be regarded as non-fiction, not because it actually happened in the sense that we understand historical events, but because it taught a moral truth. Whatever did or did not happen in the mundane world of day-to-day life wasn&#x27;t as important as the lens through which that world was interpreted.<p>With that in mind, they would not have placed a high priority on clearly stating what was totally real and what was totally unreal. Atlantis could have been a real city in accordance with the theory described by OP, but Plato might have adopted that truth for the purpose of crafting a political allegory that would be, in his eyes, even MORE true than some mundane fact like &quot;Atlantis actually exists.&quot; So don&#x27;t be too quick to dismiss it as false just because Plato meant it as a political allegory. The ancient Greeks didn&#x27;t care as much about the distinctions we cling to in the modern world.