Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 12
Riaan

[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood

11,638 posts in this topic

Right, I shoul be more specific. The OLB does not mention any activity of the Romans with regard to people living in the Gaulic and Germanic regions (inluding the Frisians and the occupation of Britannia). The only reference to the Romans are the Punic wars. In the OLB it all happened before the Romans passed the Alps, which Otharus seems not to understand. I just wonder, why the old Frisians did not claim the foundation of Rome as a Frisian city like they did with Athens.

But the OLB DOES mention exactly that:

From Sandbach's translation:

The Romans, moreover, live at enmity with the Phœnicians; and their priests, who wish to assume the sole government of the world, cannot bear the sight of the Gauls. First they took from the Phœnicians Marseilles—then all the countries lying to the south, the west, and the north, as well as the southern part of Britain—and they have always driven away the Phœnician priests, that is the Gauls, of whom thousands have sought refuge in North Britain.

http://oeralinda.angelfire.com/#ca

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple.

Because they didn't.

Also, why would they? Rome was built by troops (Far Krekalanders) who had returned from Troy - it was never Frisian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a simple line for those who still doubt, that the OLB has been written by J.H. Halbertsma, or even think that the OLB is authentic medieaval prose:

[MS 031] [p. 44-46]

01 LA AGON TO DVANDE VMBE FRЄÐO WILLA / 02 VSA HALF-BROÐAR NE MŮGON VS NIMMER / 03 MINACHTJA NACH WANA ÐAT WI ANGE SEND . / 04 IN MIN JŮGED HÆV IK WEL / 05 ENIS MORT - OVERA BÆNDA ÐЄRA ЄWA ÆFER* / 06 HÆV-IK FRYA OFTEN TANKED VR HJRA TEX ÆND / 07 VSA ЄÐLA VR ÐA ЄWA ÐЄR ÐЄRNЄI TAVLIKT / 08 SEND . WR-ALDA JEFÐA AL-FODER HEÐ / 09 MI FЄLO JЄREN JЄVEN - INVR FЄLO LANDA ÆND / 10 SЄA HÆV IK OMME-FAREN - ÆND NЄI AL HWA -K / 11 SJAN HÆ - BIN -IK VRTJUGAD ÐAT WI ALLЄNA [p. 46] / 12 ÐRVCH AL-FODER ŮTFORKЄREN SEND - ЄWA TO 13 HÆVANDE . LYDA-S FOLK NЄ MЄI NЄN ЄWA TO / 14 MAKJANDE NI TO HALDANDE - HJA SIND* TO / 15 DVM ÆND WILD ÐЄRTO . FЄLO SLACHTA FIN / 16 DA-S SEND SNOD ENOCH - MEN HJA SEND / 17 GYRICH HACH-FARANDE . FALSK . VNKUS ÆND / 18 MORT-SJOCHTICH . POGA BLESAÐ HJARA / 19 SELVA VPPA ÆND HJA NE MŮGAÐ NAWET ÐAN / 20 KRUPA . FORSKA HROPAÐ WÆRK - WÆRK - ÆND / 21 HJA NE DVAÐ NAWET AS HIPPA ÆND KLUCHT / 22 MAKJA . ÐA ROKA HROPAÐ SPAR - SPAR - MEN / 23 HJA STЄLON ÆND VRSLYNAÐ AL WAT VNDER / 24 HJARA SNAVELA KVMAÐ . LIK AL ÐAM IS ÐÆT / 25 FINDAS FOLK - HJA BOGAÐ IMMER OVIR / 26 GODA ЄWA - EK WIL SETMA MAKJA VMB / 27 - ET KWAD TO WЄRANE - MEN SELVA NIL / 28 NIMMAN ÐЄR AN BONDEN WЄSA . ÐЄRA ./ 29 HWAM-HIS GAST ÐÆT LESTIGOSTE SY - ÆND / 30 ÐЄRTRVCH STERIK ÐAM -HIS HʘNE KRЄJAÐ KЄNING *./ 31 ÆND ÐA ʘRA MOTON ALWENNA AN SIN WELD / 32 VNDERWURPEN WЄSA TIL EN ʘÐER KVMÐ ÐЄR -IM

18 Halbertsma: ,,Jonge,'' aldus Eölus zelf, 'ik kom fierder as dou en dyn gelikens. Dou bliuwste op dyn pôle sitten en dêr mienste as in frosk, dy him fen greatskens opbliest, de wisheid yn pacht to habben. Ik kom, ik waai oeral, mar ljeafst yn Ingelan. It A-bie fen de constitutie, dat ik dy hjir opsei, hab ik dêr leard. In turfdrager tinkt dêr klearder oer sokke dingen as dou, en dou hjitste den noch ek preker ?' (227) ' Uitvoerig legt Eölus uit, hoe verderfelijk de Jacobijnen werken en groote moeite doet hij om het nut van een goede oppositie aan te toonen. (225 vlgg.) Mogen de Friezen nu maar luisteren, eer het te laat is. De underfining jowt hjar lexoms rju let, en den noch mei triennen'; aldus Halbertsma, 'my tinkt, it is al. Bron: P.A. Jongsma, Denkbeelden (diss) 1933. s. http://rodinbook.nl/olbjongsma.html p. 103.

post-115881-0-58226700-1332563567_thumb.

Edited by Knul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the OLB DOES mention exactly that:

From Sandbach's translation:

The Romans, moreover, live at enmity with the Phœnicians; and their priests, who wish to assume the sole government of the world, cannot bear the sight of the Gauls. First they took from the Phœnicians Marseilles—then all the countries lying to the south, the west, and the north, as well as the southern part of Britain—and they have always driven away the Phœnician priests, that is the Gauls, of whom thousands have sought refuge in North Britain.

http://oeralinda.angelfire.com/#ca

You convinced me, but it happened long before Hannibal surpassed the Alps and Caesar tried to conquer the Germani, Batavii and Frisii, beyond the present scope of the OLB.

Edited by Knul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, i'll try my best. Maybe in relation with the text below from OLB: Gosa's Advice

Unless we attach again the guts to the words, meaning not talking about Liberty as Liber-ties (something where -tig books are being written) but the rebeluous spirit to break free from bondage (we have accomplished on material level, now on spiritual -> by means of the common 'sense', wat zin heeft het, the is-sens, dat maakt sense).

I prefer senseo !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a simple line for those who still doubt, that the OLB has been written by J.H. Halbertsma, or even think that the OLB is authentic medieaval prose:

[MS 031] [p. 44-46]

POGA BLESAÐ HJARA SELVA VPPA

...

FORSKA HROPAÐ WÆRK - WÆRK

Halbertsma: as in frosk, dy him fen greatskens opbliest

OLB: Toads (POGA) blow up themselves, frogs (FORSKA) say "work, work".

Halbertsma (when did he write that?): a frog (FROSK) that blows up himself

How is this 'proof' that Halbertsma made the OLB?

I've seen better 'proof' against Haverschmidt and Verwijs... but not good enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, i'll try my best. Maybe in relation with the text below from OLB: Gosa's Advice

...

Lat-in as the opposite twisted letters of Ni-tal, which means a 'new language' in Dietsch (ny tael). But so far was clear i think :-)

For me the true meaning behind this view is that the Latin/Greek/All other Babylonian languages are indeed new languages, and intentionaly brought to live to bring people in chaos by means of disrupting the words in use from their original meaning leaving a language with meaningless words and thus meaningless talks in the truth sense about the history of mankind.

Mostly done in late middleages by unpious Monks paid by the wicked rulers of the people (even now, even now people just believe what they are being told or what is written down by authority)

...

The same as we are talking french when children are not considered to follow our conversation, the inventors of Latin knew more about it's deceitfull compositions than their fellowman.

And said f.e. to the people that Aristoteles was an ancient sage from Greece. While in fact it was a contemporary and pedantic entity to give ancient background for a new and twisted worldvision. Many people have a clue about the impossible 'intellectual' but materialistic inspired truths coming from 'it', few have a clue that the name is pronounced as 'Erwisthetalles' (beter) and that this really makes sense as it says 'He knew it all, better than the rest' -> so better live according our sage's views and all that follows :-)

...

Unless we attach again the guts to the words, meaning not talking about Liberty as Liber-ties (something where -tig books are being written) but the rebeluous spirit to break free from bondage (we have accomplished on material level, now on spiritual -> by means of the common 'sense', wat zin heeft het, the is-sens, dat maakt sense).

Very interesting!

This material is hard to explain, but I think I see what you mean and I basically agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OLB: Toads (POGA) blow up themselves, frogs (FORSKA) say "work, work".

Halbertsma (when did he write that?): a frog (FROSK) that blows up himself

How is this 'proof' that Halbertsma made the OLB?

I've seen better 'proof' against Haverschmidt and Verwijs... but not good enough.

in: Oan Eölus oer it Needwaer fen de 29ste Novimber, 1837 en Eölus syn Antwird, mei oar Grjimmank (1837).

There is no better proof than 1:1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no better proof than 1:1.

So what is your proof?

Jean de La Fontaine (1621 - 1695) wrote a fable about a frog, that wanted to be as big as an ox, and blew up himself.

With your logic, I just 'proved' that La Fontaine wrote the OLB.

You just demonstrated wonderfully how desperately weak the hoax-theory 'proof' actually is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You convinced me, but it happened long before Hannibal surpassed the Alps and Caesar tried to conquer the Germani, Batavii and Frisii, beyond the present scope of the OLB.

I already said things don't add up: the time line is wrong. What the OLB says about the Romans is anachronistic.

+++

EDIT:

The only additions to the OLB family chronicle after 558 BC (Book of Adela's followers) BC are the letters from Hidde (1256 AD) and from Liko (803 AD) at the start of the OLB as we know it.

If we asssume nothing has been added after 558 BC to the narrative itself, we have a problem.

If we assume members of the OLB family did add to the chronicle/narrative itself but without mentioning they did (anonymous) it could explain some things, like certain events and the insertion of modern-looking words or even the use of the more modern Old Frisian language as we know it from around the 13th century AD.

And the last case, however, would tell us that the OLB wasn't just copied over and over again, but rewritten (with additions) in a more modern language everytime it was copied.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OLB: Toads (POGA) blow up themselves, frogs (FORSKA) say "work, work".

In fact, the fragment is interesting, because it points to the solution of a mystery that 'official' etymology never explained:

The etymology of "pochen" (dutch for 'to bluff'), the origin of the word 'poker'.

[031/18]

POGA BLÉSATH HJARA SELVA VPPA.

ÀND HJA NE MÜGATH NAWET THÀN KRUPA.

FORSKA HROPATH WÀRK - WÀRK.

ÀND HJA NE DVATH NAWET AS HIPPA ÀND KLUCHT MÁKJA.

Oldfrisian dictionary Wiarda (1786):

Pogge - Frosch (frog)

(no frosk or forsk)

Oldfrisian dictionary Hettema (1832):

Pogge - kikvorsch (frog)

(no frosk or forsk)

Oldfrisian dictionary Richthofen (1840):

(no frosk, forsk or pogge)

Newfrisian dictionary (1896):

Froask, frosk - frog

Pod, podde - padde (toad)

Pogge, pôge - as podde, west-Dutch for frog

Westfrisian dictionary (1984):

Pog - 1) bladder or bag that precedes the birth of a calf. Compare 'voetpog' en 'waterpog'. 2) bag under the eyes; "wat kroigt ze toch lilleke pogge onder d'r ouge".

Voetpog - membrane filled with liquid and slime that brakes after the 'waterpog' at the birth of a calf.

Waterpog - membrane filled with water that precedes the 'voetpog' at the birth of a calf.

It seems as if the word "pog" is no longer used in the modern NW-European languages (maybe still in some dialects):

frog - english

kikker, kikvors - dutch

frosch - german

frosk - norwegian, icelandic

Frøer - danish

groda - swedish

froask, kikkert - newfrisian

toad - english

kröte - german

kört - icelandic

pad - dutch

padde - danish, norwegian

padda - swedish

podde - newfrisian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, the fragment is interesting, because it points to the solution of a mystery that 'official' etymology never explained:

The etymology of "pochen" (dutch for 'to bluff'), the origin of the word 'poker'.

[031/18]

POGA BLÉSATH HJARA SELVA VPPA.

ÀND HJA NE MÜGATH NAWET THÀN KRUPA.

FORSKA HROPATH WÀRK - WÀRK.

ÀND HJA NE DVATH NAWET AS HIPPA ÀND KLUCHT MÁKJA.

Oldfrisian dictionary Wiarda (1786):

Pogge - Frosch (frog)

(no frosk or forsk)

Oldfrisian dictionary Hettema (1832):

Pogge - kikvorsch (frog)

(no frosk or forsk)

Oldfrisian dictionary Richthofen (1840):

(no frosk, forsk or pogge)

Newfrisian dictionary (1896):

Froask, frosk - frog

Pod, podde - padde (toad)

Pogge, pôge - as podde, west-Dutch for frog

Westfrisian dictionary (1984):

Pog - 1) bladder or bag that precedes the birth of a calf. Compare 'voetpog' en 'waterpog'. 2) bag under the eyes; "wat kroigt ze toch lilleke pogge onder d'r ouge".

Voetpog - membrane filled with liquid and slime that brakes after the 'waterpog' at the birth of a calf.

Waterpog - membrane filled with water that precedes the 'voetpog' at the birth of a calf.

It seems as if the word "pog" is no longer used in the modern NW-European languages (maybe still in some dialects):

frog - english

kikker, kikvors - dutch

frosch - german

frosk - norwegian, icelandic

Frøer - danish

groda - swedish

froask, kikkert - newfrisian

toad - english

kröte - german

kört - icelandic

pad - dutch

padde - danish, norwegian

padda - swedish

podde - newfrisian

Over de uitspraak van het Landfriesch,

door

Dr. J.H. HALBERTSMA.

Aan Dr. L.A. te Winkel.

Nl. vorsch, oud Eng. frosk, heden verbasterd in frog, Sf. frósk, Lf. froásk;

bron: L.A. te Winkel en J.A. van Dijk(red.), De Taalgids, Tijdschrift tot uitbreiding van de kennis derNederlandsche taal, Negende jaargang. pag. 23. C. van der Post Jr., Utrecht 1867.

So Halbertsma knew the word from Stadfries (Sf) and Landfries (Lf).

Edited by Knul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over de uitspraak van het Landfriesch,

door

Dr. J.H. HALBERTSMA.

Aan Dr. L.A. te Winkel.

Nl. vorsch, oud Eng. frosk, heden verbasterd in frog, Sf. frósk, Lf. froásk;

bron: L.A. te Winkel en J.A. van Dijk(red.), De Taalgids, Tijdschrift tot uitbreiding van de kennis derNederlandsche taal, Negende jaargang. pag. 23. C. van der Post Jr., Utrecht 1867.

So Halbertsma knew the word from Stadfries (Sf) and Landfries (Lf).

Did Halbertsma also mention "POGA" or a word similar to that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, why would they? Rome was built by troops (Far Krekalanders) who had returned from Troy - it was never Frisian.

Rome was built by the Etruscans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


  1. Did Halbertsma also mention "POGA" or a word similar to that?
    The word might be related to boha (=Dutch poeha - pochen, snoeven, druk- of dikdoenerij). OLB Page 239: Nu zal men zien, waarop al dat boha uitgeloopen is. - Hjud skil maen sjan hwêr vppa al thaet bâ hêi ûthlâpen is.
    Een niet meer bekend woord in het Oera Linda Boek is boha (= boeha, meer bekend als poeha - drukdoenerij, drukte om niets, ophef, enz.) in de zin: Nu zal men zien, waarop al dat boha uitgeloopen is. Het woord wordt niet door J.G. Ottema vertaald of uitgelegd. Het komt voor in het verouderde spreekwoord 'Het is beter, eens een groot boha te maken, dan alle dagen met gevouwen handen te liggen' (ca. 1860). Het woord boha brengt ons in elk geval bij Joost Halbertsma. Op 10 juli 1822 schreef hij in Vaderlandsche Letteroefeningen: 'Het Vriesche geyen stemt in klank en beteekenis overeen met het IJslandsche gèyen, blaffen, uitlagchen, bespotten; en, wat hier alles afdoet, de Zuidhoekers gebruiken het in die beteekenis: te Warns althans zegt men nog, wat he'st' ien gegey! 'wat hebt gij een gepoch, gesnork of gelach! wat maakt gij daar een boha over!' Joost Halbertsma zal wel niet de enige zijn geweest, die het woord boha gebruikte, maar diens relatie met de volkstaal in het Oera Linda Boek valt wel zeker te leggen.
    poeha
    ` poe - ha , poe` ha de -woord (mannelijk) & het -woord ophef, drukte
    Gevonden op http://www.woorden.org/woord/poeha
  2. poeha
    bombarie, drukte, ophef
    Gevonden op http://www.woorden-boek.nl/woord/poeha
  3. poeha
    1) Ambras 2) Bluf 3) Bombari 4) Bombarie 5) Dikdoenerij 6) Drukte 7) Drukte om niets 8) Grootspraak 9) Koele drukte 10) Koude drukte 11) Leven 12) Omhaal 13) Omslag 14) Onnodige drukte 15) Ophef ...
    Gevonden op http://www.mijnwoordenboek.nl/puzzelwoordenboek/po

Edited by Knul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nl. vorsch, old Eng. frosk, currently bastardised in frog, Sf. frósk, Lf. froásk

...

So Halbertsma knew the word from Stadfries (Sf) and Landfries (Lf).

AHA! Now you're contradicting yourself.

You have stated before that Halbertsma loved old-English and he obviously loved Frisian.

He did not think much of Dutch (Hollandic or Netherlandic).

In your quote, Halbertsma mentions varieties in language for "frog":

Old-english: frosk, bastardised into frog

City-Frisian: frósk

Land-Frisian: froásk

(not mentioned; German: frosch)

Dutch: vorsch

Note that (19th century) Dutch ('Netherlandic') is the only variety where R is placed after O!

Also note that the Oldfrisian dictionaries from 1786, 1832 and 1840 did not include "frosk" or "forsk".

Now look at the spelling in OLB: "FORSKA".

This spelling suggests that the Dutch spelling is more authentic than Old-english, German and (both city- and land-) Frisian.

This (using Knul's own 'logic') is proof against Halbertsma's supposed involvement in the supposed creation of the OLB.

Edited by Otharus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The word might be related to boha

Could be, but the OLB spelling "BÁHÉI" does not suggest this.

POG = bag, bladder

POGA, POGGA = blow up, bluff (dutch: pochen), exaggerate

POHA, BOHA = exaggeration

Most probably related too: "pokken" (pox).

Edited by Otharus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be, but it the OLB spelling "BÁHÉI" does not suggest this.

POG = bag, bladder

POGA, POGGA = blow up, bluff (dutch: pochen), exaggerate

POHA, BOHA = exaggeration

Most probably related too: "pokken" (pox).

pock

O.E. pocc "pustule," from P.Gmc. *puh(h)- "to swell up, blow up" (cf. Du. pok, Low Ger. poche), from PIE root *bhu- "to swell, to blow."

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=pocks&searchmode=none

The OLB "POGA" is a frog. I had to think of the Latin "bucca" or the Spanish "boca" meaning 'mouth'. A wide mouth (think about this: "to have a big mouth" or to bluff) is one of the typical characteristics of a frog (and of a toad).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OLB "POGA" is a frog.

So what would be the difference between POGA (in other fragment spelled as POGGA) and FORSKA?

IMO it makes more sense that POGA means toads (padden) here.

Edited by Otharus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what would be the difference between POGA (in other fragment spelled as POGGA) and a FORSKA?

Sandbach used "toad", not "frog" for his translation of POGA.

Poga blêsath hjara selva vppa, aend hja ne mügath nawet than krupa.

The toad blows himself out, but he can only crawl.

And that is actually toad behaviour: a frog will jump off when threatened, a toad will inflate itself because it can't jump like a frog and is quite slow.

So POGA = toad, FORSKA = frog ('Du: 'vors').

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have stated before that Halbertsma loved old-English and he obviously loved Frisian.

He did not think much of Dutch (Hollandic or Netherlandic).

...

Now look at the spelling in OLB: "FORSKA".

This spelling suggests that the Dutch spelling is more authentic than Old-english, German and (both city- and land-) Frisian.

This (using Knul's own 'logic') is proof against Halbertsma's supposed involvement in the supposed creation of the OLB.

No! Don't tell, Knul, let us guess...

Over de Linden and Stadermann will have changed FROSKA into FORSKA?

:w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rome was built by the Etruscans.

Well I mean in the OLB. Why confuse things more than they are already? It says that a troop of Far Krekalanders from Troy came and nestled in and built Rome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I mean in the OLB. Why confuse things more than they are already? It says that a troop of Far Krekalanders from Troy came and nestled in and built Rome.

Herodotus already said the Etruscans came from Lydia:

lydia.gif

And genetics has finally proven him right:

Origins of the Etruscans: Was Herodotus right?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/health/03iht-snetrus.1.5127788.html

The enigma of Italy's ancient Etruscans is finally unravelled

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/18/italy.johnhooper

Discussion here:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/education/125186-dna-reveals-origins-of-ancient-etruscans.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AHA! Now you're contradicting yourself.

You have stated before that Halbertsma loved old-English and he obviously loved Frisian.

He did not think much of Dutch (Hollandic or Netherlandic).

In your quote, Halbertsma mentions varieties in language for "frog":

Old-english: frosk, bastardised into frog

City-Frisian: frósk

Land-Frisian: froásk

(not mentioned; German: frosch)

Dutch: vorsch

Note that (19th century) Dutch ('Netherlandic') is the only variety where R is placed after O!

Also note that the Oldfrisian dictionaries from 1786, 1832 and 1840 did not include "frosk" or "forsk".

Now look at the spelling in OLB: "FORSKA".

This spelling suggests that the Dutch spelling is more authentic than Old-english, German and (both city- and land-) Frisian.

This (using Knul's own 'logic') is proof against Halbertsma's supposed involvement in the supposed creation of the OLB.

I told you before that Halbertsma wrote the OLB in DUTCH and then tranlated it into Oldfrisian using both Dutch and Frisian words and expresions. No contradiction at all. By the way pod, podde, pogge and poge are modern Frisian words for Dutch pad..That the Dutch spelling would be more authentic is purely nonsens. Did you ever hear about the liquidae l and r ?

Edited by Knul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halbertsma wrote the OLB in DUTCH and then tranlated it into Oldfrisian using both Dutch and Frisian words and expresions.

Following your train of thoughts, I imagine Halbertsma translating his Dutch version into (a reconstruction of) Oldfrisian.

You have argued before that he was a Frisian nationalist who loved Old-english.

Now why would he spell FORSK (like Dutch 'vorsch') and not FROSK, as in Frisian and Old-english?

There are many more examples in the OLB where words are more similar to Dutch, when an obvious Frisian version was also available. Within your 'theory', this does not make sense at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 12

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.