Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 5 votes

[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
11638 replies to this topic

#7651    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 17 November 2011 - 05:02 PM

View PostAlewyn, on 17 November 2011 - 04:28 PM, said:

This is exactly my point. The excavations that showed that Troy was not a myth, started after the discovery of the OLB.

Edit:

This is what Wikipedia has to say:

"Around 1870 it was generally agreed in Western Europe that the Trojan War never had happened and Troy never existed."

But the date of the Troyan War that you think was 'proof' of the OLB was already known/calculated by Eratosthenes, as I showed you in a former post.

And what's 'generally accepted'? Some would say it is 'generally accepted' that Atlantis was nothing but a myth. But then you should check some of the threads on this site...


#7652    Alewyn

Alewyn

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2010

Posted 17 November 2011 - 05:07 PM

View PostKnul, on 17 November 2011 - 04:54 PM, said:

It shows, that the time frame of the OLB complies with what was known in the mid 19th century like the geography (Iran) of the OLB complies with what was known in the mid 19th century like the theology and philosophy (Descartes) comply with the state of the art in mid 19th century, the archeology (pile dwellings) comply, knowledge about Oldfrisian texts published by the Frisian Society comply, abolition of slavery complies, and so on. As all this was not known in 1256 (Hidde) or 803 (Liko) it is reasonable to suppose, that the OLB was written in the mid 19th century.
You may have missed my edit above:

Around 1870 it was generally agreed in Western Europe that the Trojan War never had happened and Troy never existed.

So you see, Troy was not known, or regarded as historical fact in the 19th century.
This is just another one of many clues that the OLB could not have been written in the 19th century.

Secondly, the Oera Linda Book was not written in 1256 AD or 803 AD. The relevant part of the book was compiled in the 6th century BC from writings that could have dated as far back as 2194 BC.


#7653    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 17 November 2011 - 05:56 PM

View PostAlewyn, on 17 November 2011 - 05:07 PM, said:

You may have missed my edit above:

Around 1870 it was generally agreed in Western Europe that the Trojan War never had happened and Troy never existed.

So you see, Troy was not known, or regarded as historical fact in the 19th century.
This is just another one of many clues that the OLB could not have been written in the 19th century.

Secondly, the Oera Linda Book was not written in 1256 AD or 803 AD. The relevant part of the book was compiled in the 6th century BC from writings that could have dated as far back as 2194 BC.



However, before Schliemann, not many people even believed in a real Troy, and those who did were divided about where to look for it. Charles Maclaren had pointed to Hissarlik as the location of Troy as early as 1822, but many other locations had been suggested.

http://en.wikipedia....rich_Schliemann

Before Schliemann no one had a real clue where to look for Troy. It would have been something if the OLB had given us a location of Troy, but the creators very cleverly left out a location, and only tell us that Troy was a city taken by the Krekalanders (Greeks).


.

Edited by Abramelin, 17 November 2011 - 06:05 PM.


#7654    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 17 November 2011 - 06:44 PM

Thach hwat bÍrde, an  giptalanda thÍr wÍre en overprester, hel fon ‚gnum, kl‚r fon bryn aend licht fon g‚st, sin n‚m wÍre SÍkrops,(*) hy kÍm vmb rÍd to jÍvane.

Doch wat gebeurdť, een Egyptenaar die een overpriester was, helder van oogen, klaar van brein, en verlicht van geest, zijn naam was Cecrops, hij kwam om raad te geven.

Then what happened, an Egyptian high priest, bright of eye, clear of brain, and enlightened of mind, whose name was Cecrops, came to give them advice


"SÍkrops" is being translated as "Cecrops".

OK, from the description in the OLB and what can be found on about Cecrops, these two must be the same:

Cecrops (Greek: Κέκροψ, Kťkrops; gen.: Κέκροπος) was a mythical king of Athens who is said to have reigned for fifty-six years. The name is not of Greek origin according to Strabo,[1] or it might mean 'face with a tail': it is said that, born from the earth itself, he had his top half shaped like a man and the bottom half in serpent or fish-tail form. He was the founder and the first king of Athens itself, though preceded in the region by the earth-born king Actaeus of Attica. Cecrops was a culture hero, teaching the Athenians marriage, reading and writing, and ceremonial burial.

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

Cecrops (KekrŰps). A hero of the Pelasgic race, said to have been the first king of Attica. He was married to Agraulos, daughter of Actaeus, by whom he had a son, Erysichthon, who succeeded him as king of Athens, and three daughters, Agraulos, Hersť, and Pandrosos. In his reign Poseidon and Athenť contended for the possession of Attica, but Cecrops decided in favor of the goddess. Cecrops is said to have founded Athens--the citadel of which was called Cecropia, after him--to have divided Attica into twelve communities, and to have introduced the first elements of civilized life. (See Athenae.) He instituted marriage, abolished bloody sacrifices, and taught his subjects how to worship the gods. The later Greek writers describe Cecrops as a native of SaÔs in Egypt, who led a colony of Egyptians into Attica, and thus introduced from Egypt the arts of civilized life; but this account is rejected by some of the ancients themselves, and by the ablest modern critics.

http://www.websters-...nitions/Cecrops

But now this...

Many people who never studied Greek will pronounce "Cecrops" like "Sekrops"... with an -s- , a common mistake.

There is - as far as I know - know no linguistical explanation for a shift from -s- to -k- or visa versa.

The only explanation is that the one writing the passages about "SÍkrops" made the same error as all those who never studied Greek would have made.


#7655    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 17 November 2011 - 06:56 PM

What was a "Minerva" doing in Walhallagara?

I'll tell you: it was based on an 18th century poem:

Het Germaanse deel van het pantheon werd aanvankelijk niet met behulp van christelijke speculaties in de eigen cultuur opgenomen (zoals Eelhart later deed), maar via de bekende klassiek-Romeinse clichťs. Een illustratie daarvan is een gedicht uit 1740 waarin het Walhalla en de Elyzeese velden in ťťn adem worden genoemd,

ĎBy de Walhalla, en het Elizeesche veld,
Is Neerlandsch Tempe met Minervaas bos gelegen
Een rust- en vreugdeplaats voor elken braaven held,
Die door zyn vlyt en deugd heeft waren lof verkregen:
Daar groend de schoonste beemd, bezaayd en overdekt
Met Palmboom, en Laurier, en Mirthen, en Olyven.í

In een noot werd op gezag van een Deense (in het Latijn geschreven) publicatie over Deense Ďoudhedení uitgelegd dat dit Walhalla met zijn mediterrane flora het rijk van Odin was, de Vorst der Schimmen


http://www.dbnl.org/...a01_01_0005.php

tempe: http://www.etymologi...refwoord/tempe1

As soon as I am in the mood I will translate it.

But it appears I have been put on ignore by those who think I post too 'difficult' posts, so I am not in a hurry.


#7656    Knul

Knul

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • Joined:08 May 2011

Posted 17 November 2011 - 06:57 PM

View PostAlewyn, on 17 November 2011 - 05:07 PM, said:

You may have missed my edit above:

Around 1870 it was generally agreed in Western Europe that the Trojan War never had happened and Troy never existed.

So you see, Troy was not known, or regarded as historical fact in the 19th century.
This is just another one of many clues that the OLB could not have been written in the 19th century.

Secondly, the Oera Linda Book was not written in 1256 AD or 803 AD. The relevant part of the book was compiled in the 6th century BC from writings that could have dated as far back as 2194 BC.

The Troyan war has been described by Homer. No one has ever doubted about the Trojan War. That's why one tried to locate Troy. Likewise no one ever doubted about Ithaca. That why one still tries to locate the island. By the way Oldfrisian did not yet exist in the 6th Century BC.

Edited by Knul, 17 November 2011 - 07:03 PM.


#7657    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:03 PM

For thos who wonder what inspired the creators of the OLB with their description of the disasters happening around 2200 BC, here a part of Willem van Haren's (18th century) poem about Friso:

View PostAbramelin, on 02 May 2011 - 10:10 AM, said:

I have been sweating for a while today to translate the part of the 1741 poem of Willem van Haren, the part about the flood. It's maybe not a perfect translation, but I think it will do.

Here it is (after every > follows the translation in English of the previous line in Dutch):



(...)
En, met Argentorix, de naauwe stromen door

> And, with Argentorix, through narrow currents

Die naar de koude zeen der woeste Skyten leiden,

> that lead to the cold sees of the feroceous Scyths

En van het Britsche Ryk het groote Europe scheiden.

> and separate the British Empire of great Europe

Hier leefde een oud gerugt, dat Vader Oceaan,

> (T)Here was an old rumpour, that Father ocean,

Vermoeid langs Thyle's kust ten Noorder Troon te gaan,

> tired of going along Thule's coast to the Northern Throne,

Om d'Yszeen aan het strand des Samojeeds te stieren,

> to steer icy sees to the coasts of the Samojeds,

Een zamenkomst beval der Westersche Rivieren.

> ordered a meeting of the western Rivers.

Den Betis, die den Wal van Hispalis besproeid,

> The Guadalquivir, who sprays the Wall of Seville,

En door een vrugtbaar Land en vette Weiden vloeid;

> and flows through a fertile land and rich pastures;

De zil'vre Gadiane, op Zwanendons gedragen;

> The silver Guadiana, carried on Swans's down;

Den ryken Taag, gevoerd op eenen gouden wagen,

> The rich Tagus, carried on a golden wagon,

Met Vorstelyk gebaar, en Koninklyken zwier;

> with a regal gesture, and royal panache;

Den Durias, gekroond met Roos en Violier,

> The  Douro, crowned with Rose and Stock Gillyflower,

En houdende eenen krans van Bloemen in zyn handen;

> and keeping a garland of flowers in his hands;

De snoevende Garonne in 't midden harer banden;

> The boasting Garonne in the middle of her bonds;

De Loire, die, hoewel groot van gestaltenis,

> The Loire, which, though tall of stature,

Der gunsten van de Faam het minst deelagtig is;

> shares fame the least;

De Sein, die, door zich zelv' met Lauweren te cieren,

> The Seine, which, by adorning itself with laurels

De Heerschappy begeerd van alle de Rivieren;

> covets the dominion of all Rivers;

En een oneindig tal van mindre Watergoôn;

> And an endless number of lesser watergods;

Riep Triton's schelle hoorn voor Amfitrites Troon.

> Called on Triton's horn in front of Amfrites' throne.

Daar op deed de Oceaan hen alle in orde scharen,

> There the Ocean made them line up in order,

En, duizend voeten hoog verheffende zyn baren,

> And, raising his waves a 1000 feet high,

Viel op de Landstreek aan, die 't Albionsche strand

> attacked on the land that attached the Albion beach

Aan 't ryke Europe hegtte; en, duwend met zyn hand,

> to wealthy Europe; and, pushing with his hand,

De Bergen van hun' grond, de Rotsen van haar vesten,

> The Mountains from their bases, the Rocks from their footings,

Gaf hy 't verwonnen Land aan 't gramme Volk ten besten.

> He gave the captured (?) lands to the angry mob [= the rivers]

Elk nam, op dezen last, een Rots of heuvel meê,

> Each took from this burden a rock or a hill along,

En maalde die tot gruis, en spreide ze in de Zee.

> And grinded it to gravel, and spread them to the Sea.

De Koning Oceaan reed fluks langs effen zanden,

> King Ocean travelled swiftly along smooth sands,

Van 't bruisschend nat gevolgd, naar de Aloceesche stranden:

> From the fizzing waters to the Alocean beaches:

En van dien tyd af aan wierd Albion een Ryk

> And from that time Albion became an Empire

Voor buitenlandsche magt, onoverwinnelyk.

> Invincible for foreign powers.


http://www.dbnl.org/...04geva01_01.pdf

(According to the poem, Argentorix is the son of Coïlus, King of the Brittons. He met Friso on the Isle of Wight, and begged him for help. He shows Friso the way to the Land of the Alans = Frisia. I still have no idea where to locate those "Alocean beaches".)

What I found strange is, that only Spanish, Portugese and French rivers are mentioned, and not rivers in Northern Europe (like the Thames, Rhine, and so on).

Location of Thule/Thyle (for this poem that is):

Thule (pronounced /ˈθuːliː/ or ˈθjuːli;[1][2][3] from Greek Θούλη, Thoulē), also spelled Thula, Thila, or Thyïlea, is, in classical European literature and maps, a region in the far north. Though often considered to be an island in antiquity, modern interpretations of what was meant by Thule often identify it as Norway.[2][4] Other interpretations include the Orkney Islands, Shetland Islands, and Scandinavia. In the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance, Thule was often identified as Iceland or Greenland.

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

Btw, 2 days after this post I found out about those "Alocean beaches": they are the "Alociae islands":

Above the Cimbrian peninsula there are three other islands which are called the Alociae islands

http://penelope.uchi.../2/10/text.html

And those "Alociae" beaches sound quite close to "Elysium" fields/ "Elizeesche velden".

++++++

Did anyone count the number of rivers?

Just add the Rhine, Schelt, Thames, Elbe, and you have the number of rivers mentioned in the OLB, the number of rivers that flowed through Fryan land.

.
.

Edited by Abramelin, 17 November 2011 - 07:26 PM.


#7658    Knul

Knul

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • Joined:08 May 2011

Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:12 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 17 November 2011 - 06:44 PM, said:

Thach hwat bÍrde, an  giptalanda thÍr wÍre en overprester, hel fon ‚gnum, kl‚r fon bryn aend licht fon g‚st, sin n‚m wÍre SÍkrops,(*) hy kÍm vmb rÍd to jÍvane.

Doch wat gebeurdť, een Egyptenaar die een overpriester was, helder van oogen, klaar van brein, en verlicht van geest, zijn naam was Cecrops, hij kwam om raad te geven.

Then what happened, an Egyptian high priest, bright of eye, clear of brain, and enlightened of mind, whose name was Cecrops, came to give them advice


"SÍkrops" is being translated as "Cecrops".

OK, from the description in the OLB and what can be found on about Cecrops, these two must be the same:

Cecrops (Greek: Κέκροψ, Kťkrops; gen.: Κέκροπος) was a mythical king of Athens who is said to have reigned for fifty-six years. The name is not of Greek origin according to Strabo,[1] or it might mean 'face with a tail': it is said that, born from the earth itself, he had his top half shaped like a man and the bottom half in serpent or fish-tail form. He was the founder and the first king of Athens itself, though preceded in the region by the earth-born king Actaeus of Attica. Cecrops was a culture hero, teaching the Athenians marriage, reading and writing, and ceremonial burial.

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

Cecrops (KekrŰps). A hero of the Pelasgic race, said to have been the first king of Attica. He was married to Agraulos, daughter of Actaeus, by whom he had a son, Erysichthon, who succeeded him as king of Athens, and three daughters, Agraulos, Hersť, and Pandrosos. In his reign Poseidon and Athenť contended for the possession of Attica, but Cecrops decided in favor of the goddess. Cecrops is said to have founded Athens--the citadel of which was called Cecropia, after him--to have divided Attica into twelve communities, and to have introduced the first elements of civilized life. (See Athenae.) He instituted marriage, abolished bloody sacrifices, and taught his subjects how to worship the gods. The later Greek writers describe Cecrops as a native of SaÔs in Egypt, who led a colony of Egyptians into Attica, and thus introduced from Egypt the arts of civilized life; but this account is rejected by some of the ancients themselves, and by the ablest modern critics.

http://www.websters-...nitions/Cecrops

But now this...

Many people who never studied Greek will pronounce "Cecrops" like "Sekrops"... with an -s- , a common mistake.

There is - as far as I know - know no linguistical explanation for a shift from -s- to -k- or visa versa.

The only explanation is that the one writing the passages about "SÍkrops" made the same error as all those who never studied Greek would have made.

Formerly Latin ce- has been pronounced as se-. Most people speak about caesar (sezar) instead of Kaisar.


#7659    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:23 PM

View PostKnul, on 17 November 2011 - 07:12 PM, said:

Formerly Latin ce- has been pronounced as se-. Most people speak about caesar (sezar) instead of Kaisar.

But it was originally a Greek name, with a -K-.

"Most people".... I told you, "most people" are those of us who never studied Greek or Latin.

And no one can tell me how to change a -K- into an -S- or visa versa.

It proves the one creating the name of "Sêkrops" also didn't know.

He made the same mistake as all the rest of us - who never studied Greek or Latin - would make.

.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 17 November 2011 - 07:32 PM.


#7660    Alewyn

Alewyn

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2010

Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:49 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 16 November 2011 - 01:02 PM, said:

Have a guess: where did the word "Aryan" come from? The word was known in the 19th century and most probably it did not come falling from the skies.

You really think no one in the Netherlands ever read about the history of Persia or the Sassanid Empire?

If I wanted to write an 'ancient' manuscript I would use the names the natives in the lands I describe used for themselves.
I have to come back to this discussion.

In post 7575 I said the following:

Quote

So you see, before 1935, Iran (“the land of the Ira”) was known throughout the Western world as “Persia”. Yet, the OLB does not talk about the Persians, but rather about the Ira; the only West European source which called them by their ancient name. This also tells us that the name Ira or Iran goes back to before 300 BC and most likely to before 1500 BC when the Gertmanne arrived in the Punjab. This is much further back than the Sassanid Empire and even before the Greeks’ “Persia”.

You then went on to explain that the names "Aryan" and "Arian" was known in the 19th century, which is quite correct.
My point, however, was that the name "IRA" is unique to the OLB. If the OLB is a 19th century hoax, why did they not use the term "Arya" instead of "Ira"?

(The Frisian copy at Tresoar uses "Ira" whilst the Gutenburg copy says "Yra". The pronunctiation would, nevertheless, be the same.)

I have also shown before that the OLB's "earth mother", Frya, appears in a few places in the Avesta (the old Persian "Bible") which is further proof that the OLB's account of the Gertmanne in India and Persia is based on facts.

It is really a long stretch of the imagination to say that these two points were dreamed up by somebody in the Netherlands in the 19th century.

Edited by Alewyn, 17 November 2011 - 07:50 PM.


#7661    Alewyn

Alewyn

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2010

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:06 PM

View PostKnul, on 17 November 2011 - 06:57 PM, said:

The Troyan war has been described by Homer. No one has ever doubted about the Trojan War. That's why one tried to locate Troy. Likewise no one ever doubted about Ithaca. That why one still tries to locate the island. By the way Oldfrisian did not yet exist in the 6th Century BC.

Please make up your mind. Earlier today you said (post 7643):

Quote

The Trojan War has been dated as soon as the text of Homer became known, even in Roman times. In the 16th and 17th century it was thought, that the Trojan War happened in the 12th century BC. In the 19th century ca. 1180 BC was generally accepted. Dating was based on literary evidence, not on archeology. The first indications, that Troje could be found at Hissarlik date back to 1822, fifty years before Schliemann started his excavations. Excavations showed, that the myth of the Trojan War might have an historical basis.

Face up to it: In the 19th century Troy AND the Trojan War were regarded as myths.


#7662    Alewyn

Alewyn

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2010

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:14 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 17 November 2011 - 05:02 PM, said:

But the date of the Troyan War that you think was 'proof' of the OLB was already known/calculated by Eratosthenes, as I showed you in a former post.

In that case, why did the OLB not use Eratosthenes' date of 1184 BC. Why did they "invent" the date of 1188 BC which is today regarded as the more accurate date?
You must hand it to those guys who "dreamed" up the OLB: they really knew their history.


#7663    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:17 PM

View PostAlewyn, on 17 November 2011 - 07:49 PM, said:

I have to come back to this discussion.

In post 7575 I said the following:



You then went on to explain that the names "Aryan" and "Arian" was known in the 19th century, which is quite correct.
My point, however, was that the name "IRA" is unique to the OLB. If the OLB is a 19th century hoax, why did they not use the term "Arya" instead of "Ira"?

(The Frisian copy at Tresoar uses "Ira" whilst the Gutenburg copy says "Yra". The pronunctiation would, nevertheless, be the same.)

I have also shown before that the OLB's "earth mother", Frya, appears in a few places in the Avesta (the old Persian "Bible") which is further proof that the OLB's account of the Gertmanne in India and Persia is based on facts.

It is really a long stretch of the imagination to say that these two points were dreamed up by somebody in the Netherlands in the 19th century.

I also showed you a link to a 19th century book about the "Iren".

I also showed you their native name was known for like 1800 years (Sasanid empire); anyone interested in ancient Persian history could have read the name "Ira" in some book.

And what you showed about Frya in the Avesta was always in a combination.

And I will bet you can find a "Frya" or something similar sounding on a Samoan island.

And nothing what you showed me was unknown in the 19th century.


#7664    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:22 PM

View PostAlewyn, on 17 November 2011 - 08:14 PM, said:

In that case, why did the OLB not use Eratosthenes' date of 1184 BC. Why did they "invent" the date of 1188 BC which is today regarded as the more accurate date?
You must hand it to those guys who "dreamed" up the OLB: they really knew their history.

I also told you why: the Troyan war took 10 years (1194-1184 / Eratosthenes); 1189 (and NOT 1188, which is based on the erroneous OLB date of 2193 BC; it should be 2194 BC) was smack in the middle of those 10 years.

I also showed you that some scientists - based on their knowledge of ancient eclipses - come to a date of 1178 BC.


#7665    Alewyn

Alewyn

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2010

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:27 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 17 November 2011 - 07:03 PM, said:

For thos who wonder what inspired the creators of the OLB with their description of the disasters happening around 2200 BC, here a part of Willem van Haren's (18th century) poem about Friso:

I think you have your facts mixed up.
Nowhere did I see the date of 2193 BC or even 2200 BC. You are really stretching the facts here to say that this inspired the OLB to write about the 2200 BC event.

The Oera Linda Book does describe a flood in Friso's time - in 305 BC which, I would like to suggest, was the Cimbrian Flood.