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This topic has been archived.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

#3091    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:28 PM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 14 February 2011 - 06:51 AM, said:

Well, Otharus mentioned it some posts back so thought I'd add to it.

PS: and number 1 on your list of things WAS etymology.

Lol, and you even agreed me many pages ago that BUDA meant nothing but bag or sack.

Welcome back, btw.


#3092    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:31 PM

View PostOtharus, on 14 February 2011 - 08:50 AM, said:

Posted Image
source: http://www.brucop.co...lands/toponyms/

Edit:
We really have to forget about the Dutch borders and looks at things from a broader perspective.

The problem with your map is that it is based on the idea that the situation (transgression) lasted for centuries.

They now know it didn't, and that is one of the reasons they left the Dunkirk Transgression Theory.


#3093    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:36 PM

View PostOtharus, on 14 February 2011 - 07:24 AM, said:

To be precise: I presented my translation of a Delahaye quote taken from IJpelaan's website.

The part "The Zuiderzee of the Netherlands never had the name Almere" may be right (if the 966AD document, like many similar ones of that time, is a forgery, used to claim and trade rights to land), or it may be wrong (if the document is authentic and not a 'copy' of a later date; in this case there was more than one "Almere"). Either way, it's irrelevant. To avoid distraction, I would now leave out the references to Almere, so the introduction becomes this:

"The Flevum from the Roman period, (...) was a sea-bay between Calais, St.Omaars, Winoksbergen and further up north." [Delahaye, "De ware kijk op...", pt.1, p.87]

Heh, ok, so maybe the document was a forgery.

But why should they use the name Urk in combination with Almere if there was no Urk in Almere? Was there an island called Urk in the Belgium Almere/Flevum?

Btw, the Zuiderzee did have the name Almere, after it was called Flevum.


.

Edited by Abramelin, 14 February 2011 - 03:35 PM.


#3094    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:55 PM

View PostAlewyn, on 13 February 2011 - 08:22 PM, said:

Quote from Abramelin:
[My logic is this: there are indeed old Frisian legends about Friso and Alexander the Great, Friso's travels in India, and so on. But the OLB turned things around. The reason why I showed many pages before: to create an 'ancient' legend about the history of Friesland (or better, Frya's Land) and not as a Friesland settled by people from India, but an India (or that area) settled by people from Friesland (Frya's Land) so making the history of Friesland even older.

--

Conventional teaching, for many years now, has it that European languages were influenced from the Indian sub-continent; hence the term “Indo-European Languages” or “Proto Indo-European languages. I am not aware of anybody (at least from the West) who have ever seriously considered that just the opposite happened – in other words, that the Indian cultures (and languages) were actually influenced by migrants from Europe as the OLB claims.

You will recall that the OLB states that the Gertmanne fled from Athens to India in ca 1552 BC i.e. about 3500 years ago. Please also bear in mind the OLB’s claim that the Frisians of the time had iron weaponry.

Chapter 6 of my book gives arguably the most compelling vindication of the OLB. Herewith some extracts:

“On his website adaniels info site hosted by Tripod, Aharon Daniel published a dissertation entitled Aryans and Dravidians – a controversial issue. This concise account seems to capture the essence of the accepted theories regarding the Aryans.

According to general Indian legend, the Aryans arrived in north India somewhere from Iran and southern Russia at around 1500 BC. Before the Aryans, the Dravidian people resided in India. The Aryans disregarded the local cultures. They began conquering and taking control over regions in north India and at the same time pushed the local people southwards or towards the jungles and mountains in north India. According to this historical fact the general division of Indian society is made. North Indians are Aryans and south Indians are Dravidians. But this division isn’t proper because of many reasons.
Many Indians immigrated from one part of India to other parts of India and not all local people of north India were pushed southwards by the Aryans. Some stayed and served the Aryans and others moved to live in the forests and the jungles of north India. Before the arrival of the Aryans there were also other communities in India like Sino-Mongoloids and Austroloids. There were also other foreign immigrations and invaders who arrived in India, from time to time.
There are many that completely doubt that there was ever any Aryan invasion in India. This scepticism is based on the dating of the Aryan invasion of India and the fact that Hinduism and the caste system are believed to have been established as the result of the meetings between the intruding Aryans and original residents of India, the Dravidians.
The caste system is believed to have been established by the Aryans. The fair skinned Aryans who occupied parts of India established the caste system, which allowed only them to be the priests (Brahman), aristocracy (Kshatria) and the businessmen (Vaisia) of the society. Below them in hierarchy were the Sudras who consisted of two communities. One community was of the locals who were subdued by the Aryans and the other was the descendants of Aryans with locals. In Hindu religious stories there are many wars between the good Aryans and the dark skinned demons and devils. The different gods also have dark skinned slaves. There are stories of demon women trying to seduce good Aryan men in deceptive ways. There were also marriages between Aryan heroes and demon women. Many believe that these incidences really occurred in which, the gods and the positive heroes were people of Aryan origin. And the demons, the devils and the dark skinned slaves were in fact the original residence of India whom the Aryans coined as monsters, devil, demons and slaves. Normally the date given to Aryan invasion is around 1500 BC.
  

"Another web-page on the Aryans by Richard Hooker also gives a good description of our Gertmanne. In their defence we can only conclude that, once again, this is how outsiders described them. Perhaps they were not too fond of writing as Richard Hooker describes them, or perhaps their writings did not survive because, inter alia, it would have been written on paper and in a language foreign to later generations. Again, they left no paper trial, so let us look at some quotes from Hooker’s page:

• They were unquestionably a tough people, and they were fierce and war-like.
• Their culture was oriented around warfare, and they were very good at it. They were superior on horseback and rushed into battle in chariots.
• They maintained the Aryan tribal structure, with a raja (reeve?) ruling over the tribal group in tandem with a council.
• What did the Aryans do with their time? They seem to have had a well-developed musical culture, and song and dance dominated their society. They were not greatly invested in the visual arts, but their interest in lyric poetry was unmatched. They loved gambling. They did not, however, have much interest in writing even though they could have inherited a civilization and a writing system when they originally settled in India.
• When they arrived, the vast northern plains were almost certainly densely forested. Where now bare fields stretch to the horizon, when the Aryans arrived lush forests stretched to those very same horizons. Clearing the forests over the centuries was an epic project and one that is still preserved in Indian literature.
  

"Under The Writings of Konered in the Oera Linda Book we read:

21. On the west of the Pangab where we come from, and where I was born, the same fruits and crops grow as on the east side. Formerly there existed also the same crawling animals, but our forefathers burnt all the underwood, and so diligently hunted all the wild animals, that there are scarcely any left.  

Richard Hooker’s observation, They seem to have had a well-developed musical culture, and song and dance dominated their society, matches old king Alcinous’s description of the Phaeacians to Ulysses in 1188 BC when he said: We are extremely fond of good dinners, music, and dancing;

DNA Evidence

A report by Bijal P. Trivedi written in May 2001 entitled Genetic evidence suggests European migrants may have influenced the origins of India’s caste system, appear to provide the ultimate proof that the Gertmanne were the Aryans. The report is reproduced here verbatim:

A new study has revealed that Indians belonging to higher castes are genetically closer to Europeans than are individuals from lower castes, whose genetic profiles are closer to those of Asians.
The study compared genetic markers—located on the Y chromosome and the mitochondrial DNA—between 265 Indian men of various castes and 750 African, Asian, European and other Indian men. To broaden the study, 40 markers from chromosomes 1 to 22 were analyzed from more than 600 individuals from different castes and continents. The comparison of the markers among these groups confirmed that genetic similarities to Europeans increased as caste rank increased
The study, led by Michael Bamshad of the University of Utah, in Salt Lake City, and his colleagues, is reported to be the most comprehensive genetic analysis to date of the impact of European migrations on the structure and origin of the current Indian population. The article appears in the current issue of Genome Research
The caste system, defined in ancient Sanskrit texts, determines a person's rank in society: The Brahmin, who were traditionally priests and scholars, held the highest rank in Hindu society. Warriors and rulers made up the Kshatriya who were the next in line to the Brahmin. Merchants, traders, farmers, and artisans were the third caste called the Vysya. The Shudra were the fourth rank and consisted of laborers. Because of strict rules forbidding marriage between men and women of different castes, these four classes remained distinct for thousands of years.
Bamshad's team found that Y chromosomes from the Brahmin and Kshatriya closely resembled European Y chromosomes rather than Asian Y chromosomes. The Y chromosomes from the lower castes bore more similarities to the Asian Y chromosome. The mitochondrial DNA showed the same pattern.
The authors believe their results support the notion that Europeans who migrated into India between 3,000 and 8,000 years ago may have merged with or imposed their social structure on the indigenous northern Indians and placed themselves into the highest castes.
Analysis of the paternally transmitted Y chromosome among Indians in general indicated that the Y chromosome had a more European flavour. Maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA among Indians is more Asian than European. This suggests that the Europeans who entered India were predominantly male.
  

"The last word on the Aryans we shall give to Professor Norman Brown out of Pakistan and Western Asia:

The evidence of the Rig Veda shows that during the centuries when the Aryans were occupying the Punjab and composing the hymns of the Rig Veda, the north-west part of the subcontinent was culturally separate from the rest of India. The closest cultural relations of the Indo-Aryans at that period were with the Iranians, whose language and sacred texts are preserved in the various works known as the Avesta, in inscriptions in Old Persian, and in some other scattered documents. So great is the amount of material common to the Rig Veda Aryans and the Iranians that the books of the two peoples show common geographic names as well as deities and ideas.  

"Iron Working in India
An interesting paper by Rakesh Tewari, the director of U.P. State Archaeological Department in India, appears on the webpage of Archaeology Online on the internet. The paper is entitled The Origins of Iron-working in India.
"Tewari notes that the subject of ancient iron working in India and surrounds remains a much-debated research problem which is not unconnected with the equally debatable question of its association with the supposed arrival, in the second millennium BCE, of immigrants from the west, as often suggested on the basis of the Rigveda.

Since then there has been fresh evidence for even earlier iron-working in India. Technical studies on materials dated c. 1000 BCE at Komaranhalli (Karnataka) showed that the smiths of this site could deal with large artefacts, implying that they had already been experimenting for centuries (Agrawal et al. 1985: 228-29). Sahi (1979: 366) drew attention to the presence of iron in Chalcolithic deposits at Ahar, and suggested that ‘the date of the beginning of iron smelting in India may well be placed as early as the sixteenth century BCE’ and ‘by about the early decade of thirteenth century BCE iron smelting was definitely known in India on a bigger scale. On the basis of four radiocarbon measurements, ranging between 3790 + 110 BP and 3570 + 100 BP, available for the Megalithic period (without iron) Sharma (1992: 64, 67) has proposed a range of 1550-1300 BCE (uncalibrated) for the subsequent iron bearing period at Gufkral (Jammu & Kashmir).  

"Here again we find evidence in support of the Oera Linda chronicles. The appearance of iron-working in India at exactly the same time the Frisians arrived in the Punjab cannot be ignored."

The above are just extracts from my chapter 6. If anybody are interested, I will gladly post the whole chapter here.

And Abe, please, please, don't tell me all this info was available in the 19th century. You have my book so please read chapter 6 again and tell me where I have gone wrong (apart from possibly the Tocharians)


First something from the OLB (the Sacredtext site to avoid bull about copyright..):

"Friso did come from India, and with the fleet of Nearchus;

but he is not therefore an Indian. He is of Frisian origin, of Frya's people. He belongs, in fact, to a Frisian colony which after the death of Nijhellênia, fifteen and a half centuries before Christ, under the guidance of a priestess Geert, settled in the Panjab, and took the name of Geertmen."


http://www.sacred-te...l/olb/olb02.htm


=

Then something from the pdf you posted:


"The origins of iron-working in India:new evidence from the Central Ganga Plain and the Eastern Vindhyas
Rakesh Tewari*

(...)

Discussion
These results indicate that iron using and iron working was prevalent in the Central Ganga
Plain and the Eastern Vindhyas from the early second millennium BC. The dates obtained
so far group into three: three dates between c. 1200-900 cal BC, three between c. 1400-1200
cal BC, and five between c. 1800-1500 cal BC. The types and shapes of the associated pottery
are comparable to those to be generally considered as the characteristics of the Chalcolithic
Period and placed in early to late second millennium BC. Taking all this evidence together it
may be concluded that knowledge of iron smelting and manufacturing of iron artefacts was
well known in the Eastern Vindhyas and iron had been in use in the Central Ganga Plain, at
least from the early second millennium BC
. The quantity and types of iron artefacts, and the
level of technical advancement indicate that the introduction of iron working took place
even earlier.
The beginning of the use of iron has been traditionally associated with the
eastward migration of the later Vedic people, who are also considered as an agency which
revolutionised material culture particularly in eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar (Sharma 1983:
117-131). The new finds and their dates suggest that a fresh review is needed. Further, the
evidence corroborates the early use of iron in other areas of the country, and attests that India
was indeed an independent centre for the development of the working of iron.
"


http://antiquity.ac....wari/tewari.pdf


What I want to show is that apparently iron was being used before the supposed arrival of Friso.



================

Alewyn, I also want to show you what was actually known and assumed about Aryans in the 19th century:


This claim became increasingly important during the 19th century. In the mid-19th century, it was commonly believed that the Aryans originated in the southwestern steppes of present-day Russia. However, by the late 19th century the steppe theory of Aryan origins was challenged by the view that the Aryans originated in ancient Germany or Scandinavia, or at least that in those countries the original Aryan ethnicity had been preserved. The German origin of the Aryans was especially promoted by the archaeologist Gustaf Kossinna, who claimed that the Proto-Indo-European peoples were identical to the Corded Ware culture of Neolithic Germany. This idea was widely circulated in both intellectual and popular culture by the early twentieth century,[16] and is reflected in the concept of "Corded-Nordics" in Carleton S. Coon's 1939 The Races of Europe.

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Aryan_race



In 19th century Indo-European studies, the language of the Rigveda was the most archaic Indo-European language known to scholars, indeed the only records of Indo-European that could reasonably claim to date to the Bronze Age. This "primacy" of Sanskrit inspired some scholars, such as Friedrich Schlegel (10 March 1772 – 12 January 1829), to assume that the locus of the Proto-Indo-European Urheimat had been in India, with the other dialects spread to the west by historical migration. This was however never a mainstream position even in the 19th century. Most scholars assumed a homeland either in Europe or in Western Asia, and Sanskrit must in this case have reached India by a language transfer from west to east, in a movement described in terms of invasion by 19th century scholars such as Max Müller. With the 20th century discovery of Bronze-Age attestations of Indo-European (Anatolian, Mycenaean Greek), Vedic Sanskrit lost its special status as the most archaic Indo-European language known.

http://en.wikipedia....Aryan_migration


In the 19th century the Corded Ware culture was favoured by some authors as the Urheimat (original homeland) of the speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language, a theory that has been discarded by modern science in favor of the Kurgan hypothesis or the Renfrew NDT. Still it is generally held that:[8]

"...Celtic, Germanic, Baltic and Slavic may possibly be traced back to the Corded Ware horizon of north, central and eastern Europe."

However this is not to suppose that all of these proto-languages actually arose during the period of the Corded Ware horizon, across its whole territory, or exclusively within its confines. The Proto-Germanic language for example is deduced have developed in Scandinavia towards the end of the Nordic Bronze Age. See also Proto-Balto-Slavic language and Proto-Celtic language.

http://en.wikipedia....ed_Ware_culture


The Nordic Bronze Age (also Northern Bronze Age) is the name given by Oscar Montelius to a period and a Bronze Age culture in Scandinavian pre-history, c. 1700-500 BC, with sites that reached as far east as Estonia.[1] Succeeding the Late Neolithic culture, its ethnic and linguistic affinities are unknown in the absence of written sources. It is followed by the Pre-Roman Iron Age.

http://en.wikipedia....rdic_Bronze_Age


Oscar Montelius (9 September 1843–4 November 1921) was a Swedish archaeologist who refined the concept of seriation, a relative chronological dating method. Seriation is the procedure of working out a chronology by arranging material remains of a cultural tradition in the order that produces the most consistent patterning of their cultural traits.

http://en.wikipedia....Oscar_Montelius


Iron working was introduced to Europe in the late 11th century BC,[12] probably from the Caucasus and slowly spread northwards and westwards over the succeeding 500 years.

The Iron Age in the Ancient Near East is believed to have begun with the discovery of iron smelting and smithing techniques in Anatolia or the Caucasus and Balkans in the late 2nd millennium BC (c. 1300 BC).[13] However, this theory has been challenged by the emergence of those placing the transition in price and availability issues rather than the development of technology on its own.

The development of iron smelting was once attributed to the Hittites of Anatolia during the Late Bronze Age. It was believed that they maintained a monopoly on ironworking, and that their empire had been based on that advantage. This theory is no longer held in the mainstream of scholarship, since there is no archaeological evidence of the alleged Hittite monopoly. While there are some iron objects from Bronze Age Anatolia, the number is comparable to iron objects found in Egypt and other places of the same time period; and only a small number of these objects are weapons.[14]

The use of iron weapons instead of bronze weapons spread rapidly throughout the Near East or southwest Asia by the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. The technology expanded into both Asia and Europe simultaneously.[15]

http://en.wikipedia....Northern_Europe


--

From the first Wiki-quotes you might get the idea that these ideas were around only after the OLB was published. But you will understand these ideas were around even before the books containing them were finally published, and no doubt popular during the time the OLB was being written.


.

Edited by Abramelin, 14 February 2011 - 03:24 PM.


#3095    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 03:33 PM

Well, religion has been mentioned in respect to the OLB a couple of times, and by accident I found something interesting... hmmm... let's say it's funny.

Did you all know that the first Dutch converts of the Latter Day Saints ("Book of Mormon") lived in Friesland?? That happened in 1861, in the town of "Broek onder Akkerwoude", south of Dokkum.

I just thought that 'some Frisian' may have gotten his inspiration to write an 'ancient manuscript' from these people of the Book of Mormon...


#3096    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 03:39 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 February 2011 - 02:36 PM, said:

Heh, ok, so maybe the document was a forgery.

But why should they use the name Urk in combination with Almere if there was no Urk in Almere? Was there an island called Urk in the Belgium Almere/Flevum?

Btw, the Zuiderzee did have the name Almere, after it was called Flevum.


.

In de Middeleeuwen werd Flevo Lacus Almaere genoemd. Dat betekent ‘groot meer'http://www.nieuwland...rzee-1100-1450-

English: During the Middle Ages Flevo Lacus was called 'Almaere'. That means 'big lake'

.

Edited by Abramelin, 14 February 2011 - 04:02 PM.


#3097    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 04:19 PM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 14 February 2011 - 07:02 AM, said:

Just to clarify, the word WAGRUM was what I was investigating and found that it could be relative (my posts at the time has links etc) to WAG being a form of wicker-work wall in German and again, rum being space, to which I translated WAGRUM to wicker-work (wall) space. That was the word used in the OLB to describe the walls they wrote on. wagrvm actually.

But yes, I do believe that it does talk about bricks as well.


You may want to read this post of mine: post 2975 om page 199

(for some reason the post-link doesn't work...)

.

Edited by Abramelin, 14 February 2011 - 04:23 PM.


#3098    Alewyn

Alewyn

    Remote Viewer

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

Posted 14 February 2011 - 04:44 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 February 2011 - 02:55 PM, said:

First something from the OLB (the Sacredtext site to avoid bull about copyright..):

"Friso did come from India, and with the fleet of Nearchus;

but he is not therefore an Indian. He is of Frisian origin, of Frya's people. He belongs, in fact, to a Frisian colony which after the death of Nijhellênia, fifteen and a half centuries before Christ, under the guidance of a priestess Geert, settled in the Panjab, and took the name of Geertmen."


http://www.sacred-te...l/olb/olb02.htm


=


What I want to show is that apparently iron was being used before the supposed arrival of Friso.



I will start by addressing only two aspects from your very lengthy ( and interesting) post:
1. The OLB does not say anywhere that Friso came from India. In fact, if you carefully study the OLB, it is very clear that the Gertmanne from India met Friso for the first time in Athens. He was an admiral (or Sea King) in the Greek navy and the Gertmanne fought under his command at the Battle of Salamis. He spoke the language of the Greeks and the Gauls; he fought many sea battles and was well acquinted with the Grecian methods of warefare,and his wife and children stayed in Athens. After his two children committed suicide, he decided to lead the Gertmanne back to Friesland because he had been there before. He then forced the rest of the Frisian-Athenians to accompany him and the Gertmanne.
I would suggest that the legends became distorted because Friso arrived back in Friesland together with the Gertmanne from India. People then just assumed that he also came from India.

Edit: I would like to emphasize that anybody who says that the Friso came from India according to the OLB, IS WRONG.

2. The Gertmanne originally went to India in ca 1550 BC, which corresponds with the introduction of iron working in India. Friso lived ca 350 BC to 280 BC - about 1200 years after the original Gertmanne and the introduction of iron-working in India.
Friso, therefore, had no connection with the dawn of the iron age in India. I do not understand why you mention this.

Edited by Alewyn, 14 February 2011 - 04:57 PM.


#3099    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 04:46 PM

View PostOtharus, on 14 February 2011 - 07:42 AM, said:

Yes I like that image, thanks!
Please note the "Veenmoerassen" (bog-marshes).

That first image (with 'groot-Friesland' is proven wrong by what is presented on IJpelaan's website. I will translate more of that soon.


That's why they lived on 'terps', artificial dwelling hills  (other names: wierden, woerden, vliedbergen).
Terp means "village" in Old Frisian and is cognate with English thorp, Danish torp, German Dorf and Dutch dorp

In the north of The Netherlands there were several thousands of these therps, and in Zeeland many hundreds.


And from the (Dutch) Wiki page about the Duinkerken Transgressies you should get the fact there were problems with the radiocarbon dating, and what first appeared to be the situation all over the western and northern part of The Netherlands - at the same time, and for centuries - is now thought to have happened in different time periods. That is why they said on that Wiki page that many paleogeographical maps should be corrected; so it was not all bog marches or sea at the same time (differences of centuries).


#3100    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 04:57 PM

View PostAlewyn, on 14 February 2011 - 04:44 PM, said:

I will start by addressing only two aspects from your very lengthy ( and interesting) post:
1. The OLB does not say anywhere that Friso came from India. In fact, if you carefully study the OLB, it is very clear that the Gertmanne from India met Friso for the first time in Athens. He was an admiral (or Sea King) in the Greek navy and the Gertmanne fought under his command at the Battle of Salamis. He spoke the language of the Greeks and the Gauls; he fought many sea battles and was well acquinted with the Grecian methods of warefare,and his wife and children stayed in Athens. After his two children committed suicide, he decided to lead the Gertmanne back to Friesland because he had been there before. He then forced the rest of the Frisian-Athenians to accompany him and the Gertmanne.
I would suggest that the legends became distorted because Friso arrived back in Friesland together with the Gertmanne from India. People then just assumed that he also came from India.

2. The Gertmanne originally went to India in ca 1550 BC, which corresponds with the introduction of iron working in India. Friso lived ca 350 BC to 280 BC - about 1200 years after the original Gertmanne and the introduction of iron-working in India.
Friso, therefore, had no connection with the dawn of the iron age in India. I do not understand why you mentioned this.


#1- No, the OLB does indeed not say Friso came from India, only that he had lived there. It's indeed the other Frisian legends that say that Friso came from India.

But overall the OLB has many similarities with those other legends.


#2 OK, that was an error. But even then the timing is off: the Geertmannen went to India in 1550 BC, iron working was in India centuries before that.

You say ca 1550 BC. I have to look that one up in the OLB: I assumed the OLB said it was exactly 1550 BC.


#3101    Flashbangwollap

Flashbangwollap

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 957 posts
  • Joined:13 Nov 2010

Posted 14 February 2011 - 05:00 PM

[Conventional teaching, for many years now, has it that European  languages were influenced from the Indian sub-continent; hence the term  "Indo-European Languages" or "Proto Indo-European languages. I am not  aware of anybody (at least from the West) who have ever seriously  considered that just the opposite happened – in other words, that the  Indian cultures (and languages) were actually influenced by migrants  from Europe as the OLB claims./]

This question and others associated with tool and weapon development cross my mind on a daily basis. For instance we know that Britain produced Bronze weapons from the abundant finds in Britain. People don't find it remarkable that a huge number of Bronze age finds have been found throughout Europe pointing to an advanced culture.

Even worse that this culture arrived so say around 500BC. Ha! Who's kidding who. The same thing has to be said of the iron age and merely because of the lack of finds in this instance ignoring the fact that iron rust badly in a European climate and that Most of Europe has been tilled and plowed for centuries particularly around the city areas of today.

Add into this frustration the Druids which it would appear is the reason behind not keeping written documentation and you end up with a real conundrum.

But as you say due to our methods of teaching these points are passed over by almost all academia. Indeed if it wasn't for the odd maverick like Wilkens or Spanuth we would all be munching grass in a field full of BS which I believe is modern and quite ancient history of Europe spoon fed to us today.

However since nothing is proven unless it is written then what chance of changing anything?

Sorry Abe if you feel this is off topic but I feel it reflects on much of history today.

Edited by Flashbangwollap, 14 February 2011 - 05:04 PM.


#3102    Otharus

Otharus

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 2,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Sep 2010

Posted 14 February 2011 - 05:24 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 February 2011 - 02:31 PM, said:

The problem with your map is that it is based on the idea that the situation (transgression) lasted for centuries.

They now know it didn't, and that is one of the reasons they left the Dunkirk Transgression Theory.
"Het oorspronkelijke model van de Duinkerkse transgressies wordt inderdaad door steeds meer geologen verlaten. Voor de conclusies over de bewoonbaarheid maakt dat geen verschil; de onbewoonbaarheid krijgt alleen een betere en nauwkeuriger verklaring."

source: http://www.ijpelaan....ansgressie.html

Translated:
"The initial model of the Dunkirk transgressions is indeed abandoned by ever more geologists. For the conclusions concerning the habitability this does not make a difference; the inhabitability only gets a better, more accurate explanation."

What about those "recent archeological discoveries" proving Delahaye wrong, that you were talking about? They should be all over the internet.


#3103    Alewyn

Alewyn

    Remote Viewer

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

Posted 14 February 2011 - 05:25 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 February 2011 - 04:57 PM, said:

#1- No, the OLB does indeed not say Friso came from India, only that he had lived there. It's indeed the other Frisian legends that say that Friso came from India.

#2 OK, that was an error. But even then the timing is off: the Geertmannen went to India in 1550 BC, iron working was in India centuries before that.

I have to disagree with you again. The OLB does not say or even hint at Friso ever having stayed in India. When Friso arrived back in Friesland, he uttered these words:

"We come from the Fere Krekaland to preserve our customs. Now we wish you to be kind enough to give us as much land as will enable us to live."

He himself said that he came from Greece (according to the OLB)

As for the iron-working in India: My sources all say this started ca 1500 BC


#3104    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 February 2011 - 05:29 PM

View PostFlashbangwollap, on 14 February 2011 - 05:00 PM, said:

[Conventional teaching, for many years now, has it that European  languages were influenced from the Indian sub-continent; hence the term  "Indo-European Languages" or "Proto Indo-European languages. I am not  aware of anybody (at least from the West) who have ever seriously  considered that just the opposite happened in other words, that the  Indian cultures (and languages) were actually influenced by migrants  from Europe as the OLB claims./]

This question and others associated with tool and weapon development cross my mind on a daily basis. For instance we know that Britain produced Bronze weapons from the abundant finds in Britain. People don't find it remarkable that a huge number of Bronze age finds have been found throughout Europe pointing to an advanced culture.

Even worse that this culture arrived so say around 500BC. Ha! Who's kidding who. The same thing has to be said of the iron age and merely because of the lack of finds in this instance ignoring the fact that iron rust badly in a European climate and that Most of Europe has been tilled and plowed for centuries particularly around the city areas of today.

Add into this frustration the Druids which it would appear is the reason behind not keeping written documentation and you end up with a real conundrum.

But as you say due to our methods of teaching these points are passed over by almost all academia. Indeed if it wasn't for the odd maverick like Wilkens or Spanuth we would all be munching grass in a field full of BS which I believe is modern and quite ancient history of Europe spoon fed to us today.

However since nothing is proven unless it is written then what chance of changing anything?

Sorry Abe if you feel this is off topic but I feel it reflects on much of history today.


No Flash, it's perfectly on topic.


But you say:
"I am not  aware of anybody (at least from the West) who have ever seriously  considered that just the opposite happened in other words, that the  Indian cultures (and languages) were actually influenced by migrants  from Europe as the OLB claims"

If you read my large post to Alewyn, then you will see that many in the 19th century were convinced that that was exactly what had happened.


"Even worse that this culture arrived so say around 500BC."

No, even the OLB (the Geertmannen) says they arrived in the Punjab around 1550 BC.


#3105    Otharus

Otharus

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 2,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Sep 2010

Posted 14 February 2011 - 05:30 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 February 2011 - 02:36 PM, said:

Was there an island called Urk in the Belgium Almere/Flevum?

Btw, the Zuiderzee did have the name Almere, after it was called Flevum.
Urk is of zero-point-zero relevance here.

The Zuiderzee was indeed called Flevum/ Almere,
just like Nijmegen was called Noviomagum,
and Utrecht => Trajectum,
and Dokkum => Dockynchirica,
and Wijk bij Duurstede => Dorestadum
and Holland, Utrecht, Friesland => Frisia
...
AFTER the history of the first millennium was imported to our provinces in the beginning of the second millenium (as I have extensively explained before).

Another interesting quote from:
KRITIEK der FRIESCHE GESCHIEDSCHRIJVING (Review of Frisian Historiography)
by Dr. J. BOLHUIS VAN ZEEBURGH (1873) Page 68 (about Gesta Fresonum):

Dutch:
"Van den tijd waar de heiligenlevens en de verhalen van Karel den groote onzen kroniekschrijver begeven (d. i. van ongeveer 900 tot 1200) tot aan de kruistochten wordt niets verhaald, eene gaping, die ook in andere Friesche kronieken bestaat."

English:
"From the time of the hagiographies and the tales of Charlemagne till the crusades (that is from ca. 900 till 1200), our chronicler has no reports, a gaping hole, that also exists in other Frisian chronicles."

I know it must be hard, having to unlearn things you liked so much at primary school.
The older you are, the more it hurts (for a little while).

Edited by Otharus, 14 February 2011 - 05:33 PM.