[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood

[The Puzzler]

kay is really hedging, fencing, kayaking usually consists of going one side to the other, around rocks, when you fence you evade the other person by hedging movements, this side, that side, this movement encloses you off from something attacking you at close range.

cay'ed or kade would be coasting because of the movement of the ship, hedging along the coastal land.

[The Puzzler]

OK got it - ditch is dik.

ka-dik

key-ditch.

dike

O.E. dic "trench, ditch; an earthwork with a trench; moat," from P.Gmc. *dik- (cf. O.N. diki "ditch, fishpond," O.Fris. dik "mound, dam," M.Du. dijc "mound, dam, pool," Du. dijk "dam," Ger. Deich "embankment"), from PIE base *dheigw- "to pierce, fasten" (cf. Skt. dehi- "wall," O.Pers. dida "wall, stronghold, fortress," Pers. diz)

the Kad in Kadik is not actually equal to kad, only the ka part - kad as coast imo has to be a past tense word.

They kay'ed past - they coasted past, they kade past.

kadik is enclosed pond/water/ditch/dam.

dÆk 43, afries., st. M. (a): nhd. Deich, Damm; ne. dike (N.); Vw.: s. in-*, sâth-, sê-,

-al-d-er-man-n, -a-th-th-a*, -et-t-ene, -fre-th-o, -râ-f, -riuch-t-ere*, -s-kâw-inge, -stathul;

Hw.: vgl. an. dÆki, ae. dÆc, as. *dÆk, ahd. tÆh*; Q.: B, F, W, R, E, S; E.: germ.

*dÆka-, *dÆkaz, st. M. (a), Deich, Teich; s. idg. *dhÐigÝ-, *dhæigÝ-, *dhÆgÝ-, V.,

stechen, stecken, festsetzen, Pokorny 243; W.: nfries. dijck, M., Deich, Damm; L.:

Hh 16a, Rh 686b

dÆk-a 4?, dÆtz-a, afries., sw. V. (1): nhd. graben, deichen, dämmen; ne. dig (V.),

dike (V.); Vw.: s. in-, mi-s-; Hw.: s. dÆtz-ia; vgl. ae. dÆca; Q.: W, R, E; E.: s. dÆk;

L.: Hh 16a, Rh 687a; R.: in dÆk-a, afries., sw. V. (1): nhd. eingraben; ne. dig (V.)

in; Q.: E; L.: Rh 849b

Edited November 21, 2011 by The Puzzler

[The Puzzler]

ka-dik should equal ga-dir and ga-diz and ca-diz.

Since diz is Persian dike, wall this word is the same.

Since g is just Semitic c/k that word is the same.

ka-diz should also mean gadir - so that would be ga/ka (enclosed quay) dir=diz/dike(wall)

Then gether or gather - from gader - where d is an early form of th.

enclosing a wall is bringing something together - whether it be elastic (garter) or a fence (garden) or earthworks/wall (kadik) - the process creates an enclosure.

gader as gather - would be found in the meaning of ga-dir - quay/enclosure - wall

The wijk in Katwijk would be different, no harbour -

wÆk 7, afries., st. F. (æ): nhd. Ort?, Dorf?, Immunitätsbezirk, Seitenkanal; ne.

place (N.)?, village?, area of immunity, side canal

[The Puzzler]

Source: Nile Flow Failure at the End of the Old Kingdom, Egypt:

Strontium Isotopic and Petrologic Evidence Geoarchaeology: An International Journal, Vol. 18, No. 3, 395402 (2003)

Jean-Daniel Stanley, Michael D. Krom, Robert A. Cliff, and Jamie C. Woodward

Geoarchaeology-Global Change Program, E-206 NMNH, Smithsonian

Institution, Washington, DC 20560

School of Earth Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom

School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom

and

Source: The use of AMS radiocarbon dating for Xia-Shang-Zhou chronology; Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 172 (2000) 724-731

Zhiyu Guo, Kexin Liu, Xiangyang Lu, Hongji Ma, Kun Li, Sixun Yuan, Xiaohong Wu

Institute of Heavy Ion Physics, Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China

Department of Archaeology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China

The drought in AE ending the Old Kingdom and the AMS results for the start of the Xia Dynasty, which Yu the Great was said to have begun, are known and NEITHER falls onto the date of 2193/2194 BC.

cormac

Historical records show that the Old Kingdom in Egypt continued successfully

until 2160 B.C. (4160 cal yr B.P.; Kitchen, 1991) when it quite suddenly collapsed into

anarchy (Bell, 1971). It has been suggested that this was due, in large part, to catastrophic

failure of the annual Nile flood for a period of 30 years.

It collapsed into anarchy in 2160BC, ok, but it has been suggested that it was due, to Nile flood failure for 30 YEARS PRIOR.

That at least would take it back to 2190BC, when the Nile floods were failing.

The first Nile flood failure would probably have made a small impact but after 30 years of no real floods and crop failure, the anarchy sets in and that is really the end of the Old Kingdom, as you said around 2160BC.

As for Yu I have real answer for that one, all I know is that it's always been dated to around 2200BC, co-inciding with the changes in weather pattern at that time.

Edited November 21, 2011 by The Puzzler

[cormac mac airt]

Historical records show that the Old Kingdom in Egypt continued successfully

until 2160 B.C. (4160 cal yr B.P.; Kitchen, 1991) when it quite suddenly collapsed into

anarchy (Bell, 1971). It has been suggested that this was due, in large part, to catastrophic

failure of the annual Nile flood for a period of 30 years.

It collapsed into anarchy in 2160BC, ok, but it has been suggested that it was due, to Nile flood failure for 30 YEARS PRIOR.

That at least would take it back to 2190BC, when the Nile floods were failing.

The first Nile flood failure would probably have made a small impact but after 30 years of no real floods and crop failure, the anarchy sets in and that is really the end of the Old Kingdom, as you said around 2160BC.

As for Yu I have real answer for that one, all I know is that it's always been dated to around 2200BC, co-inciding with the changes in weather pattern at that time.

That's not what it's saying, as it says that Egypt continued successfully until 2160. If they'd experienced catastrophic droughts during the prior 30 years then they couldn't have continued successfully. Most would have been dead by that point. What this is then saying is that the catastrophic droughts started in 2160 BC and lasted till 2130 BC, followed by a second 10 year period of droughts from 2120 til 2110 BC.

cormac

Edited November 21, 2011 by cormac mac airt

[The Puzzler]

That's not what it's saying, as it says that Egypt continued successfully until 2160. If they'd experienced catastrophic droughts during the prior 30 years then they couldn't have continued successfully. Most would have been dead by that point. What this is then saying is that the catastrophic droughts started in 2160 BC and lasted till 2130 BC, followed by a second 10 year period of droughts from 2120 til 2110 BC.

cormac

No, I don't think it says that - I think it says it was a built up thing, until finally anarchy overtook after 30 odd years of severe drought.

It aligns with the fall of Akkad for same reasons, severe famine and drought and political confusion and chaos. As in Egypt, the actual end of Akkad is not until around 30 years after the initial famine and drought.

The final blow was a severe drought in the region that resulted in a drastic drop in precipitation between 2200 and 2150 BC, which in turn prevented the normal flooding of the Nile.[7] The result was the collapse of the Old Kingdom followed by decades of famine and strife. An important inscription on the tomb of Ankhtifi, a nomarch during the early First Intermediate Period, describes the pitiful state of the country when famine stalked the land.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Kingdom_of_Egypt

2181BC is the 7th Dynasty, it's not really part of the Old Kingdom anymore, it's the First Intermediate Period and in that time famine stalked the land (already). 2160BC is way too late for what you say.

It has recently been suggested that the regional decline at the end of the Akkadian period (and First Intermediary Period of the Ancient Egyptian Old Kingdom) was associated with rapidly increasing aridity, and failing rainfall in the region of the Ancient Near East, caused by a global centennial-scale drought.[21][22]

The Sumerian King List, describing the Akkadian Empire after the death of Shar-kali-shari, states:

"Who was king? Who was not king?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkad

By the end of the reign of Naram-Sin's son, Shar-kali-sharri (2217–2193 BC), the empire had weakened.

The weakness in Akkad came directly after Shar-kali-sharri whose reign ended 2193BC.

Again, after this date, anarchy starts to reign - who is the King?? Reasons given above - centennial-scale drought and failing rainfall.

[cormac mac airt]

No, I don't think it says that - I think it says it was a built up thing, until finally anarchy overtook after 30 odd years of severe drought.

It aligns with the fall of Akkad for same reasons, severe famine and drought and political confusion and chaos. As in Egypt, the actual end of Akkad is not until around 30 years after the initial famine and drought.

The final blow was a severe drought in the region that resulted in a drastic drop in precipitation between 2200 and 2150 BC, which in turn prevented the normal flooding of the Nile.[7] The result was the collapse of the Old Kingdom followed by decades of famine and strife. An important inscription on the tomb of Ankhtifi, a nomarch during the early First Intermediate Period, describes the pitiful state of the country when famine stalked the land.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Kingdom_of_Egypt

2181BC is the 7th Dynasty, it's not really part of the Old Kingdom anymore, it's the First Intermediate Period and in that time famine stalked the land (already). 2160BC is way too late for what you say.

It has recently been suggested that the regional decline at the end of the Akkadian period (and First Intermediary Period of the Ancient Egyptian Old Kingdom) was associated with rapidly increasing aridity, and failing rainfall in the region of the Ancient Near East, caused by a global centennial-scale drought.[21][22]

The Sumerian King List, describing the Akkadian Empire after the death of Shar-kali-shari, states:

"Who was king? Who was not king?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkad

By the end of the reign of Naram-Sin's son, Shar-kali-sharri (2217–2193 BC), the empire had weakened.

The weakness in Akkad came directly after Shar-kali-sharri whose reign ended 2193BC.

Again, after this date, anarchy starts to reign - who is the King?? Reasons given above - centennial-scale drought and failing rainfall.

And again, no that's not what it's saying. A country, especially one as dependent on a river as Egypt, doesn't "suddenly" collapse after a 30 year drought. Also, the article I referenced goes on to show in a graph (figure 2), that the Strontium Isotope being referenced indicates specifically that the drought occured in 2160 BC. Actually showing "2160....Old Kingdom Drought".

As to Shar-Kali-Sharri:

According to the Sumerian king list, he was the son of Naram-sin and reigned for 25 (or 24) years - around 2100 BC.

Shar-Kali-Sharri

As to your Egyptian dynasty dates from Wiki, they're wrong. The Old Kingdom, of which many Egyptologists include the 7th and 8th Dynasties, ended in 2160 BC with Neferirkare II.

Here's an actual breakdown of that particular period in time:

OLD KINGOM 2663–2195 BCE

3rd Dynasty 2663–2597

Djoser (H. Netjerikhet) 2663–2643

Nebka (H. Sanakht) 2643-2633

Djoserti (H. Sekhemkhet) 2633–2626

Teti? (H. Khaba) 2626–2621

Huni (H. Qahedjet?) 2621–2597

4th Dynasty 2597-2471

Sneferu (H. Nebmaat) 2597–2547

Khufu (H. Medjedu) 2547-2524

Djedefre (H. Kheper) 2524-2516

Seth?ka 2516-2515

Khafre (H. Userib) 2515-2493

Menkaure (H. Kakhet) 2493-2475

Shepseskaf (H. Shepseskhet) 2475-2471

5th Dynasty 2471-2355

Userkaf (H. Irimaat) 2471-2464

Sahure (H. Nebkhau) 2464-2452

Neferirkare (Kakai) 2452-2442

Shepseskare (Isi) 2442-2435

Neferefre (H. Neferkhau) 2435-2432

Niuserre (Ini) 2432-2421

Menkauhor (Ikauhor) 2421-2413

Djedkare (Isesi) 2413-2385

Unis (H. Wadjtawy) 2385–2355

6th Dynasty 2355-2195

Teti (H. Seheteptawy) 2355-2343

Pepi I (Nefersahor/Meryre) 2343-2297

Merenre (Nemtyemsaf I) 2297-2290

Pepi II (Neferkare) 2290-2196

Merenre? (Nemtyemsaf II) 2196-2195

FIRST INTERMEDIATE 2195–2066 BCE

7th & 8th Dynasties 2195–2160

Netjerkare 2195-?

Menkare? (Nitokris)

Neferkare II

Neferkare III (Nebty)

Djedkare (Shemay)

Neferkare IV (Khendu)

Merenhor

Nikare

Neferkare V (Tereru)

Neferkahor

Neferkare VI (Pepysonbe)

Neferkamin (Anu)

Qakare (Ibi)

Wadjkare

Neferkauhor

Neferirkare II ?-2160

cormac

[Knul]

ka-dik should equal ga-dir and ga-diz and ca-diz.

Since diz is Persian dike, wall this word is the same.

Since g is just Semitic c/k that word is the same.

ka-diz should also mean gadir - so that would be ga/ka (enclosed quay) dir=diz/dike(wall)

Then gether or gather - from gader - where d is an early form of th.

enclosing a wall is bringing something together - whether it be elastic (garter) or a fence (garden) or earthworks/wall (kadik) - the process creates an enclosure.

gader as gather - would be found in the meaning of ga-dir - quay/enclosure - wall

The wijk in Katwijk would be different, no harbour -

wÆk 7, afries., st. F. (æ): nhd. Ort?, Dorf?, Immunitätsbezirk, Seitenkanal; ne.

place (N.)?, village?, area of immunity, side canal

Wijk in Katwijk, Noordwijk, etc. is from Latin vicus.

[The Puzzler]

And again, no that's not what it's saying. A country, especially one as dependent on a river as Egypt, doesn't "suddenly" collapse after a 30 year drought. Also, the article I referenced goes on to show in a graph (figure 2), that the Strontium Isotope being referenced indicates specifically that the drought occured in 2160 BC. Actually showing "2160....Old Kingdom Drought".

As to Shar-Kali-Sharri:

Shar-Kali-Sharri

As to your Egyptian dynasty dates from Wiki, they're wrong. The Old Kingdom, of which many Egyptologists include the 7th and 8th Dynasties, ended in 2160 BC with Neferirkare II.

Here's an actual breakdown of that particular period in time:

OLD KINGOM 2663–2195 BCE

3rd Dynasty 2663–2597

Djoser (H. Netjerikhet) 2663–2643

Nebka (H. Sanakht) 2643-2633

Djoserti (H. Sekhemkhet) 2633–2626

Teti? (H. Khaba) 2626–2621

Huni (H. Qahedjet?) 2621–2597

4th Dynasty 2597-2471

Sneferu (H. Nebmaat) 2597–2547

Khufu (H. Medjedu) 2547-2524

Djedefre (H. Kheper) 2524-2516

Seth?ka 2516-2515

Khafre (H. Userib) 2515-2493

Menkaure (H. Kakhet) 2493-2475

Shepseskaf (H. Shepseskhet) 2475-2471

5th Dynasty 2471-2355

Userkaf (H. Irimaat) 2471-2464

Sahure (H. Nebkhau) 2464-2452

Neferirkare (Kakai) 2452-2442

Shepseskare (Isi) 2442-2435

Neferefre (H. Neferkhau) 2435-2432

Niuserre (Ini) 2432-2421

Menkauhor (Ikauhor) 2421-2413

Djedkare (Isesi) 2413-2385

Unis (H. Wadjtawy) 2385–2355

6th Dynasty 2355-2195

Teti (H. Seheteptawy) 2355-2343

Pepi I (Nefersahor/Meryre) 2343-2297

Merenre (Nemtyemsaf I) 2297-2290

Pepi II (Neferkare) 2290-2196

Merenre? (Nemtyemsaf II) 2196-2195

FIRST INTERMEDIATE 2195–2066 BCE

7th & 8th Dynasties 2195–2160

Netjerkare 2195-?

Menkare? (Nitokris)

Neferkare II

Neferkare III (Nebty)

Djedkare (Shemay)

Neferkare IV (Khendu)

Merenhor

Nikare

Neferkare V (Tereru)

Neferkahor

Neferkare VI (Pepysonbe)

Neferkamin (Anu)

Qakare (Ibi)

Wadjkare

Neferkauhor

Neferirkare II ?-2160

cormac

I doubt anyone knows the REAL dates, they change them more than they change their underwear.

I don't even consider it part of the OLB anyway and probably off topic because no mention is even made of Egypt being part of the cataclysmic changes. The Med. was affected but as for Egypt, it's not really even relevant to the OLB in that context.

The dates you gave fit better if anything. The Old Kingdom really only goes to the 6th Dynasty. Just as you gave: OLD KINGOM 2663–2195 BCE - FIRST INTERMEDIATE 2195–2066 BCE

7th & 8th Dynasties 2195–2160

As I gave quote in the First Intermediate Period there was already a famine ravaged country. But like I said, whatever went down in Egypt is of no real concern to me in this thread. Take it up with Alewyn if you want.

[Abramelin]

I don't even have to try.

quay

1690s, variant of M.E. key "wharf" (c.1400; mid-13c. in place names), from O.N.Fr. cai (O.Fr. chai) "sand bank," from Gaulish caium (5c.), from O.Celt. *kagio- "to encompass, enclose" (cf. Welsh cae "fence, hedge," Cornish ke "hedge"), cognate with O.E. haga "hedge" (see hedge). Spelling altered by influence of Fr. quai, from the same Celtic source.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=quay

Yeah, it is possibly originally a Celtic word.

That is: non-Frisian.

http://www.etymologiebank.nl/trefwoord/kade1

[Abramelin]

ka-dik should equal ga-dir and ga-diz and ca-diz.

Since diz is Persian dike, wall this word is the same.

Since g is just Semitic c/k that word is the same.

ka-diz should also mean gadir - so that would be ga/ka (enclosed quay) dir=diz/dike(wall)

Then gether or gather - from gader - where d is an early form of th.

enclosing a wall is bringing something together - whether it be elastic (garter) or a fence (garden) or earthworks/wall (kadik) - the process creates an enclosure.

gader as gather - would be found in the meaning of ga-dir - quay/enclosure - wall

The wijk in Katwijk would be different, no harbour -

wÆk 7, afries., st. F. (æ): nhd. Ort?, Dorf?, Immunitätsbezirk, Seitenkanal; ne.

place (N.)?, village?, area of immunity, side canal

Great.

So it's maybe of Celtic origin, or maybe Persian or Semitic.

There you go.

[The Puzzler]

Wijk in Katwijk, Noordwijk, etc. is from Latin vicus.

Oh right, yeah, sure it is.

[Abramelin]

Oh right, yeah, sure it is.

It's very possible:

The name "Katwijk" probably has its origins in the name of a Germanic tribe called the Chatten (Chatti). The Dutch word "wijk" means "area", so the name probably meant something like "the Chatti area".

In Romans times, Katwijk was a place of strategic importance. It was located at the Roman Empire's northern border, at the mouth of the Rhine river, which in Roman times was larger in this area than it is today. There was a good deal of traffic along the Rhine. Katwijk was also a jumping-off point for the voyage to Britain.

Built during the reign of Emperor Claudius (41-54), the town's name was Lugdunum Batavorum. The town's name was later associated with the name of the city of Leiden, but this is now thought to be incorrect.

In 1231, the first reference to Catwijck appeared in records.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katwijk

[The Puzzler]

Yeah, it is possibly originally a Celtic word.

That is: non-Frisian.

http://www.etymologiebank.nl/trefwoord/kade1

Why would it be non Frisian?

I again am being hardline on this.

If we go with the OLB the Celts/Kelts are nothing more than the ones who chose to follow Kalta, why would they speak a different language? They were originally Fryans.

kei is the original form, all that proto stuff is guesswork. kei-ge - these all all syllable words, some are shortened, like barn, is barley house - it's really bé-arn - barn is in the OLB, as I said before I believe I see a Celtic language substrate in it - like Celtic words have come out of it as well - and according to the OLB this is exactly how it should be, because the Celts are no others than Fryans who turned.

cei-ge/je - both ga and je are in the Frisian dictionary, everything is syllables, I'm good at Charades.

cei + ge or ga

gâ (1) 29, afries., st. M. (a): nhd. Gau, Land, Gegend, Ort, Dorf, Kirchspiel; ne.

district (N.), region, village;

quay region - that is, enclosed region = cage

---------------

Edit: Here's ge instead of ga

ge-, afries., Präf.: Vw.: s. jegÐ,

afries., Adv.: Vw.: s. jÐ (1)

see je which is yes.

quay - yes

Maybe but I'd be inclined to go ga.

Edited November 21, 2011 by The Puzzler

[The Puzzler]

It's very possible:

The name "Katwijk" probably has its origins in the name of a Germanic tribe called the Chatten (Chatti). The Dutch word "wijk" means "area", so the name probably meant something like "the Chatti area".

In Romans times, Katwijk was a place of strategic importance. It was located at the Roman Empire's northern border, at the mouth of the Rhine river, which in Roman times was larger in this area than it is today. There was a good deal of traffic along the Rhine. Katwijk was also a jumping-off point for the voyage to Britain.

Built during the reign of Emperor Claudius (41-54), the town's name was Lugdunum Batavorum. The town's name was later associated with the name of the city of Leiden, but this is now thought to be incorrect.

In 1231, the first reference to Catwijck appeared in records.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katwijk

I'll admit I'm not Dutch and don't know your language, wijk - area can only be the same as the vik they say viking might come from, which is really creek, river area dwellers, - so vik and wijk have it's meaning in people living on the creek, river, canals - wik/wijk was side canal in Frisian and I think it's really the same word.

Point being, it's not the same word as Kadik.

[Abramelin]

I'll admit I'm not Dutch and don't know your language, wijk - area can only be the same as the vik they say viking might come from, which is really creek, river area dwellers, - so vik and wijk have it's meaning in people living on the creek, river, canals - wik/wijk was side canal in Frisian and I think it's really the same word.

Point being, it's not the same word as Kadik.

I only said it's possible because it was once an important harbour for the Romans. But sure, "wijk" could be of Nordic origin. You'll remember: Vikings.

And no, the etymology of Katwijk has nothing to do with Kadik, apart from it being pronounced almost exactly the same in local dialect (Kaddik/Kattik).

It's what the creators of the OLB tried to fabricate out of it, using the similarity between this Kaddik and Kadix (as Cadiz was known in France and the Netherlands).

[The Puzzler]

Great.

So it's maybe of Celtic origin, or maybe Persian or Semitic.

There you go.

What are you on about?

Kadik is Fryan and Frisian and Gader is Frisian. If the Phoenicians named it Gadir and it really equates to gader, as I showed it can, it's therefore possible the Phoenicians were speaking a form of Fryan language, as the OLB says they did. It would have been changed somewhat obviously mixing with others there.

The Thyriers.

That language comes in as Gadir, which really equates to an original IE meaning, not Semitic, which is possibly Fryan as well, like how I explained the word 'matsal' and Gadir will mean just what it meant when it was taken out by Neef Teunis and co. ka-dik. If it's already named, it means they didn't even name it, but just took on the name in their own language (a form of Fryan with Semitic sounds eg: g instead of c) which again is the same word as Kadik - Gadir.

[The Puzzler]

I only said it's possible because it was once an important harbour for the Romans. But sure, "wijk" could be of Nordic origin. You'll remember: Vikings.

And no, the etymology of Katwijk has nothing to do with Kadik, apart from it being pronounced almost exactly the same in local dialect (Kaddik/Kattik).

It's what the creators of the OLB tried to fabricate out of it, using the similarity between this Kaddik and Kadix (as Cadiz was known in France and the Netherlands).

Oh Ok, well I'm not quite getting your 'conspiracy angle' that's all. You think this Katwijk is where Kadik is really situated in your local version of the OLB?

Edited November 21, 2011 by The Puzzler

[Abramelin]

Oh Ok, well I'm not quite getting your 'conspiracy angle' that's all. You think this Katwijk is where Kadik is really situated in your local version of the OLB?

"Conspiracy angle"??

But yes, that's what I think the OLB Kadik was really located, although they wanted the readers to believe it was Cadiz.

And was Katwijk a Roman harbour?

Well, they are now digging to find out:

Katwijk mogelijk Romeinse havenplaats ("Katwijk possible Roman port")

http://www.archeologieonline.nl/nieuws/katwijk-mogelijk-romeinse-havenplaats

http://www.vandaag.nl/katwijk/nieuws/article12235103.ece/Zoeken-naar-Romeinse-havenplaats

http://www.leidschdagblad.nl/nieuws/regionaal/leidenenregio/article12235103.ece/Zoeken-naar-Romeinse-havenplaats

+++++++

EDIT:

What I personally love is that this Katwijk/Kadik is located in the area of the ancient Cananefates. You love to scrabble, so I'd say: leave out the -f- in Cananefates, and you get Cananeates, heh, the Canaanites.

Cadiz was once a Phoenician city. Phoenicians were Canaanites.

---

"(...) In it a scene is sketched about Cornelis Over de Linden who finished some pieces of the text during daytime, and who during the evening, together with two learned doctors, re-read the writing and then, as recalled by Cornelis' grandson, the three men roared with laughter: "They'll never believe it '. "

.

Edited November 21, 2011 by Abramelin

[The Puzzler]

According to the OLB the Fryans were at least to the far reaches of the Baltic, down in Italy and Greece, before as well as after the 'Atland disaster' for want of a better description.

So, even prior to the disruption in the Med. at this time, which is mentioned, Fryans were in both Krekalands. This is when the language would have been taken in. This could be prior to 2200BC even. That would be in the areas into Italy, even down to Latium and present day Genoa and Marseilles, where sailing Ligurains inhabited all the way inland as well. There are Fryans imo, also called early Celts, they are part of a European people who had made it down to the reaches of the Northern Mediterranean. Thrace is the intermediate area, where men described as having auburn, red or yellow hair lived. Ancestors of Achilles and Alexander the Great, Macedonians and other Northern Greek states and even into Romania and upwards.

It's not that hard to imagine imo. So then this protoIE language they are looking for is found right in the OLB, and can be found in the Frisian dictionary.

When Phaethon hit, or Kaali, the people from East Finland moved out and took that event with them as well. They are also Celts imo and from all evidences I have given earlier, Saaremaa is even postulated to be the island that Irtha's ritual took place. The Celts of the West knew the myth of Phaethon best. Amber came down into Italy and even into Egypt c. 1200BC. This stone was sacred and would have driven trade to it's maximum between the 2 areas. "Their inquiries were incessant about it".

Many lines came in imo. The factories the Fryans had in both Krekalands, being part of Latium and Genoa, the Gutians into Mesopotamia after Kaali, also same going south into Northern Austria and Germany, eventually blending in to become part of the new Celts, again, just a newer layer of same European Fryans.

The arrival of Minno, the arrival of Jon and Minerva, the arrival of Nef Teunis and Magyars - all different arrivals into Southern Europe from Northern Europe, bringing their assorted versions of Fryan language with them.

[The Puzzler]

"Conspiracy angle"??

But yes, that's what I think the OLB Kadik was really located, although they wanted the readers to believe it was Cadiz.

And was Katwijk a Roman harbour?

Well, they are now digging to find out:

Katwijk mogelijk Romeinse havenplaats ("Katwijk possible Roman port")

http://www.archeologieonline.nl/nieuws/katwijk-mogelijk-romeinse-havenplaats

http://www.vandaag.nl/katwijk/nieuws/article12235103.ece/Zoeken-naar-Romeinse-havenplaats

http://www.leidschdagblad.nl/nieuws/regionaal/leidenenregio/article12235103.ece/Zoeken-naar-Romeinse-havenplaats

+++++++

EDIT:

What I personally love is that this Katwijk/Kadik is located in the area of the ancient Cananefates. You love to scrabble, so I'd say: leave out the -f- in Cananefates, and you get Cananeates, heh, the Canaanites.

Cadiz was once a Phoenician city. Phoenicians were Canaanites.

---

"(...) In it a scene is sketched about Cornelis Over de Linden who finished some pieces of the text during daytime, and who during the evening, together with two learned doctors, re-read the writing and then, as recalled by Cornelis' grandson, the three men roared with laughter: "They'll never believe it '. "

.

OK, I'll keep that in mind.

--------------

Conspiracy angle - you know, your view of the OLB as a conspiracy by others.

Edited November 21, 2011 by The Puzzler

[Otharus]

Petrus Wierdsma (1729-1811), from unpublished notes, as quoted by Montanus Hettema in his experimental Frisian-Dutch dictionary of 1832.

My improvised translation:

"Nowaday Farmers-Frisian, Old-Frisian and Anglo-Saxon are in my opinion the same language, the only difference being, some changes as caused by time, as is the destiny of all living languages.

If one would compare Old-Frisian to the current dialect of the Frisian farmers, one can clearly see the similarities. The nowaday dialect is specially supported by the work of Gijsbert Japiks, who on purpose, and to save the dialect, spelled according to it and not according to the old ways. One can read his own foreword about that."

Original text:

"'T koomt mij voor dat 't heeden daagsche Boersch-Vries, het Oud-Vriesch en 't Angel-Saxisch, eenen dezelfde taal is, en dat 't onderscheid alleen moet worden gezogt, in de veranderingen daar aan door verloop van tijden te beurt gevallen, gelijk 't lot is van genoegzaam alle leevendige Taalen.

Indien men aan 't Oud-Vriesch de heedendaagsche dialect van de Vriesche Boeren weet te geven, wort men de overeenkomst tusschen beide alzeer duidelijk gewaar. Tot de heedendaagsche Dialect helpt ongemeen 't werk van GIJSB. JAPIKS die opzettelijk, en om de Dialect te bewaaren, de spelding daar na en niet na de spelling wijze der ouden geschikt heeft. Men zie daarover zijne eijge voorrede."

Edited November 21, 2011 by Otharus

[Otharus]

Improvised translation of some relevant fragments from G.Th.Jensma "De Gemaskerde God" (2004; p.40-42)

According to Hettema, Newfrisian as spoken by 19th century farmers, was virtually the same language as the Oldfrisian of the known medieval lawtexts. He even dared say that this Oldfrisian was actually a much more pure variety of Frisian, than the Newfrisian of his time, because the latter had been bastardised in time by strange (Hollandic) influences. The consequence of this remarkable view was, that he wanted written Newfrisian to be based on historical Oldfrisian grammar and spelling.

The idea that languages were once more pure and had worn out in time was common in the 19th century, although of older humanist origine. Hettema shared this idea with important Dutch and foreign linguists like Jacob Grimm, Matthijs de Vries, Joost Halbertsma and Eelco Verwijs, to name just a few. (This view was abandoned later under the influence of Darwinism and other ways of thinking about evolution.)

[...]

In that time (certainly until 1875) Frisian had no certain spelling. Every writer used his own. One of them was Sytstra, who said: "To spell Frisian in strange letters is a disgrace", and he introduced an Oldfrisian spelling, the so-called 'Iduna-spelling'. The Frisians had to learn to become themselves again: Oldfrisians. [...] The introduction of the Iduna-spelling led to a readability problem, because most Frisian writers until then were used to spell phonetically, in 'Hollandic' letters. This resulted in a huge gap between spelling and pronounciation, because the latter could no longer be the criterium for spelling. Although Sytstra's spelling met with fierce criticism here and there, it was very succesful until 1862, when he and his comrade Tiede Roels Dijkstra both died.

In my opinion, the OLB-language originated from this extreme, archaizing stand. The lords purists must have been pleased, as the OLB-language is exactly what they were striving for. It's probably not a coincidence that in 1871 Hettema immediately accepted the book. Shortly before publication of the OLB, he was shown photo's of a few pages. Based on the script, he concluded that it could not be a really old text. Otherwise, he could only conclude that the language was 'the' Frisian (of all times), because the only difference he saw between Old- and Newfrisian was the way of spelling. He considered the OLB-spelling to be beautiful, fantastic, even better: "... the spelling... is, in my eyes, much more conform the old and most regular, and much better and orderly, than of those, who nowadays write the language; one would wish, that this spelling were reintroduced."

[The Puzzler]

I thought Gijsbert Japiks might have had the potential to write it, but I'm not really sure about any of that really.

Twiskland does not have to mean Germany in particular.

a-twi-s-k 6, a-twi-s-k-a*, afries., Adv.: nhd. dazwischen; ne. between (Adv.); Q.: S,

W, H; E.: s. a-, twi-s-k; L.: Hh 117a, Rh 615a

a-twi-s-k-a*, afries., Adv.: Vw.: s. a-twi-s-k

Back tomorrow for me.

[Abramelin]

I thought Gijsbert Japiks might have had the potential to write it, but I'm not really sure about any of that really.

Twiskland does not have to mean Germany in particular.

a-twi-s-k 6, a-twi-s-k-a*, afries., Adv.: nhd. dazwischen; ne. between (Adv.); Q.: S,

W, H; E.: s. a-, twi-s-k; L.: Hh 117a, Rh 615a

a-twi-s-k-a*, afries., Adv.: Vw.: s. a-twi-s-k

Back tomorrow for me.

Well, we found out 500 pages ago that Twisk means In Between, lol.

And that "Tuisco" was the main/supreme god of the Germanic tribes according to Tacitus.

And... that it was In Between Fryas teritory and the Magyar/Finda.

.

Edited November 21, 2011 by Abramelin