Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood [Part 2]

[Abramelin]

Yeah I see.

Aromatic herb?

OK, well I better go to bed and sleep on it. Goodnight.

Sleep well, and don't dream about all these blond haired Nordic sailors or the dark haired Phoenician ones, lol.

I'll try to find that French reference online.

I am already glad the Fryans didn't claim to have visited China..

[The Puzzler]

Is incense an aromatic herb?

The Phoenix made his next with incense twigs and myrrh is also mentioned.

I think Pliny mentioned a herb called herba phoenica

The Linear B meaning of this word could indicate that it means this - aromatic herb called herba phoenica

The question is, why is the herb called that in connection to Phoenicia

Something in the Linear B word must indicate the meaning of Phoenicia

Probably the palmtree - herb of palmland

The palm has to be the root for the word Phoenicia I reckon.

And also for Phoenix probably hence it's association with the palm tree. Fruit of the Date Palm

Phoenix dactylifera http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_tree

Reading that Wiki article gave me the impression that the tree represented life itself and was a big part of the religion in Phoenicia as well. It also represented the Sun in the form of the bird on top, palms only grew in hot areas. The Assyrian sacred tree concept reminds me again of the ritual going on in the Cretan picture.

In Judaism, the palm represents peace and plenty. The palm may also symbolize the Tree of Life in Kabbalah.

Prophet Muhammad is said to have built his home out of palm, and the palm represents rest and hospitality in many cultures of the Middle East.

Palm stems represented long life to the Ancient Egyptians, and the god Huh was often shown holding a palm stem in one or both hands.

The sacred tree of the Assyrians was a palm that represents the god Ishtar connecting heaven, the crown of the tree, and earth, the base of the trunk. The Mesopotamian goddess Inanna, who had a part in the sacred marriage ritual, was thought of as the one who made the dates abundant ^[17].

The palm tree was a sacred sign of Apollo in Ancient Greece because he had been born under one

The Fryans might be right, etymologically Palm Land and Phoenicia might be the same.

Anyway, back on track...

[Apol]

I have no idea. You might find something to follow up in both links.

With the deciphering of the Linear B script in the 20th century, however, the ancestor of Greek φοίνιξ was confirmed in Mycenaean Greek po-ni-ke, itself open to a variety of interpretations

http://en.wikipedia....enix_(mythology)

The word stems from Mycenaean po-ni-ki-jo, po-ni-ki, ultimately borrowed from Ancient Egyptian fnḥw (fenkhu)

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

1630BC is it, ok.

You convinced me that they are already there when she gets there, so yes.

Regarding Kälta - have you never wondered where Kälta's burgh KÄLTA.S BURCH - later renamed KÊREN.ÄK and KÊREN.HERNE was situated? The OLB says it was in BERCH.LAND, which most authors agree is in the area of Scotland, though still even Alewyn points to CARNAC in Brittany...

[The Puzzler]

Regarding Kälta - have you never wondered where Kälta's burgh KÄLTA.S BURCH - later renamed KÊREN.ÄK and KÊREN.HERNE was situated? The OLB says it was in BERCH.LAND, which most authors agree is in the area of Scotland, though still even Alewyn points to CARNAC in Brittany...

Yes, wonder alot about it.

Here is a post from the archived 1st Part of this thread, it shows a map with Caereni in the top Nth corner of Scotland, according to information Knul supplied here.

http://www.unexplain...=184645&st=6825

On todays maps I see the name Kearvaig in this area.

This is about brochs, a type of 'brough' - found in Northern Scotland.

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

This shows distribution of them...so there is one where Knul has Kerenac situated. Top nth west corner.

Edited January 23, 2013 by The Puzzler

[Abramelin]

Puzz, I think that what you are trying to do (finding the 'palm tree' in the name Phoenicia) is the same as trying to find either the gem or the colour in Turquoise.

Anyway, what tree is kind of really famous and strongly connected with Phoenicia? It's the cedar tree; just watch the Lebanese flag.

The Egyptians got their cedar trees from that area already in 3000 BCE, and the Phoenicians built their boats using this tree.

And according to the Etymology Online site:

Cedar oil was used by the Egyptians in embalming as a preservative against decay and the word for it was used figuratively for "immortality" by the Romans.

Or look here:

http://en.wikipedia....bolism_and_uses

The original name for the cedar was something close to "Arz":

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

According to the next the Greeks gave the Phoenicians their new name in the 9th century BCE:

Phoenicia (fĭnē'shə), ancient territory occupied by Phoenicians. The name Phoenicia also appears as Phenice and Phenicia. These people were Canaanites (see Canaan), and in the 9th cent. B.C. the Greeks gave the new appellation Phoenicians to those Canaanites who lived on the seacoast and traded with the Greeks.

http://www.answers.com/topic/phoenicia

,

Edited January 23, 2013 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

I have posted this before, but I'm not sure I posted it in this thread:

Who were the Phoenicians?

(...)

Thus having eliminated one possibility, it remains for us

to conclude that Herodotus most probably includes the Israelites under the

term "Phoenicians".

According to Herodotus (Vii – 89) "These Phoenicians dwelt in old time,

as they say, by the Red Sea, Passing over from thence, they now inhabit

the sea coast of Syria."9 Which sea does Herodotus call the Red Sea? In his

writings we find that the river Euphrates flows from Armenia and empties

into the Red Sea,10 and that the Tigris also flows into the Red Sea.11 We are

led to assume that Herodotus' Red Sea is today's Persian Gulf, and there are

scholars who believe this to be so.12

(...)

We have already discussed in previous chapters the indubitable

conclusion, based on the el–Amarna tablets and the Bible, that the region

of Sidon, generally accepted as a "Phoenician" region, was conquered by the

tribe of Asher. It was shown that names such as Tyrian and Sidonian do not

specifically mean Canaanites. Any citizen of Tyre or Sidon was called Tyrian

or Sidonian, and these names cannot be equated with the term Canaanite, as

accepted today. We have now seen that if Herodotus tells us anything about

the Israelites it must be looked for under the term "Phoenicians". When

Diodorus gives a summary account of the Jewish origins, he describes them

as aliens in Egypt, of whom "the most outstanding and active among them"

are referred to as Phoenicians. We may therefore definitely conclude that the

term "Phoenicians" is the Greek name for the nation of Israel.

http://www.whowereth...)_p175-p180.pdf

Or this entry in my UM blog:

http://www.unexplain...showentry=26483

And then there was this Lebanese professor, Kamal Salibi, who wrote a book about the true country of Abraham, a 'new theory on the origin of the people of Israel'...

http://www.amazon.co...i/dp/0224028308

http://www.independe...st-2350184.html

In short: he places the whole (or much of) the history of Israel in Western Arabia, at the coast of the Red Sea (I have the Dutch edition).

It's a much disputed theory, but if we combine it with what the Israeli professor (Nissim Raphael Ganor) stated (the Phoenicians and Hebrews being one and the same people), things might become clear....

.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Abramelin

[The Puzzler]

I turned to a book I have Archaeology of the Biblical Lands by Magnus Magnuson. Interesting read.

I think that Phoencians were Canaanites and Hebrews are a group of Canaanites who broke away from this religion of Baal, El, Asherah etc.

El is God. Wralda is God.

But the worshipping going on in most of early pre-Israelite Canaan which included Phoenicia and Ugarit was not what the new Jewish religion saw as suitable, so outlawed it among themselves.

The priests of Sidon at given date in OLB would be Canaanite priests practicing a religion of the Canaanites, that is typically Phoenician. Jews and Hebrews installed their religion and the Tyrians and co. were laid to waste by God as their 'unholy' ways went down in history with temple prostitution, sacrifice and so forth to Baal.

They had pillars everywhere and the Jewish God outlawed them, They were typical of Phoenician structures, these pillars, often a TREE, were actually Asherah, the wife of El. No longer existant in Jewish, Catholic or Christian faith now. But God did have a wife, ask the Sami.

Canaanites were Phoenicians and Hebrews/Jews but the Hebrews are basically a religious offshoot, not an actual different people imo. El probably transferred into a new God, who was really what Wralda was, before becoming contaminated by the 'religious abominations' that abounded in Canaan.

I was kinda surprised to also see many upright standing stones in Canaan, you would think you were looking at a field in Europe but no, huge standing stones, which represented Gods. Now I wonder all those standiing stones in Europe represent...

Anyway, all very fascinating.

[Apol]

Regarding Kälta - have you never wondered where Kälta's burgh KÄLTA.S BURCH - later renamed KÊREN.ÄK and KÊREN.HERNE was situated? The OLB says it was in BERCH.LAND, which most authors agree is in the area of Scotland, though still even Alewyn points to CARNAC in Brittany...

Thank you - that's indeed an interesting observation. I have another theory, though. Here it is:

It is written: "...thousands of Gola have went to North Brittanja. A short time ago the uppermost of the Golum was established at the burgh which is called Kêrenäk – which means ‘corner’, from where he gave his commands to all the other Gola. All their gold was also brought together there. Kêrenherne, or Kêrenäk, is a stone burgh which before belonged to Kälta,"

When Âskar had overpowered the Phoenician priests, the Dênamarkers became green with envy, and they would cross the sea to catch him. This indicates that we should search for Kälta's former burgh on the east coast of Great Britain. There exists an age-old fortification on the hilltops of Eildon Hill near Melrose, just south of today's Scottish border. At these heights - alongside the River Tweed - the largest settlement of the Scottish Bronze Age is situated. Upon the more than 300 horizontal foundations that are cut into the hillside, between 3,000 and 6,000 people had their residences; and one knows that there was activity in the place as far back in time as around 1000 BC. The ramparts have been built and rebuilt in three stages - the last time by the Romans in the 1st century BC. The Romans named the hillfort Trimontium - from Eildon Hill's three mountain peaks.

The text says that Âskar took two islands as shelter for his ships. There exist very few islands on the east coast of Great Britain, but just 25 kms south of where River Tweed empties into the North Sea, we have the Farne Islands - which certainly also must have been the only ilands that suited for Âskar's purpose. The sea kings wanted small islands just outside the coast as safe harbours for their ships - especially islands with deep bays, but also two islands situated beside each other, between which the fleet could lay sheltered from wind and waves. This was the reason why Âskar chose two islands. If the Farne Islands was the place, I would believe that he occupied the innermost of the island groups, as it looks like they must have been the most suitable. He may have sailed his fleet into the creek formed by the Inner Farne and West Wideopen with Knoxes Reef. The sandbanks between these islands must have been suitable for landing.

'Farne' is usually explained as being a gaelic-scotch name derived from ærn ('house') or fearn ('distant'). Yet, there lies also a Farne island separated alongside the coast, a little farther northwest. This tidal island, which at ebb-tide is linked to land, is called Lindisfarne or Lindesfarne. It is famous for its monastery, and from the fact that the Vikings attacked it in AD 793 and thus initiated the Viking Age. This would have been a natural site for the first stopping of intruders to Eildon Hill, as well as for the defence of the coastline.

The burgh was not formed like a ringwallburgh - according to the Frisian tradition of how a burgh should look like. That was not in Kälta's interest - to her the protection of her territory was the essential, which she could do in the same way as the Gola.

One do not know the background of the name Lindisfarne; though Anthony D. Mills has forwarded a theory that it should mean 'the island of the travellers from Lindsey'.

I think the background of the name has a slightly different history. Kälta's burgh was called Kêren.äk – in Frisian they called it Kêren.herne. When Âskar conquered the burgh he renamed it Linda.s.herne in memory of Adela Oera Linda. After the Magy was killed, several sites were named from her - first and foremost Lindas.nose and Lindas.burch. Âskar's renaming of Kêren.herne was one of his several attempts to cotton up to the Adelings.

[The Puzzler]

Only Tyrians should be the true incomers of the story about arriving from the Red Sea, not the whole of Canaan. People from Sidon were there very early and do not have to be the Phoenicians who arrived from the Red Sea.

The OLB touches on this - they arrive at Tyre, settle there - giving Tyrians only a Frisian heritage.

Even though the Tyrians might really be from the Red Sea, the OLB has included the foundation of Tyre as an event by them.

When Tyre, Sidon and the coastal area was established as traders I'd say it then became known as Phoenicia and all these coastal people were now Phoenicians.

[Apol]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LindisfarneCastleHolyIsland.jpg Edited January 23, 2013 by Apol

[Apol]

Regarding Kälta - have you never wondered where Kälta's burgh KÄLTA.S BURCH - later renamed KÊREN.ÄK and KÊREN.HERNE was situated? The OLB says it was in BERCH.LAND, which most authors agree is in the area of Scotland, though still even Alewyn points to CARNAC in Brittany...

Thank you - that's indeed an interesting observation. I have another theory, though. Here it is:

It is written: "...thousands of Gola have went to North Brittanja. A short time ago the uppermost of the Golum was established at the burgh which is called Kêrenäk – which means ‘corner’, from where he gave his commands to all the other Gola. All their gold was also brought together there. Kêrenherne, or Kêrenäk, is a stone burgh which before belonged to Kälta,"

When Âskar had overpowered the Phoenician priests, the Dênamarkers became green with envy, and they would cross the sea to catch him. This indicates that we should search for Kälta's former burgh on the east coast of Great Britain. There exists an age-old fortification on the hilltops of Eildon Hill near Melrose, just south of today's Scottish border. At these heights - alongside the River Tweed - the largest settlement of the Scottish Bronze Age is situated. Upon the more than 300 horizontal foundations that are cut into the hillside, between 3,000 and 6,000 people had their residences; and one knows that there was activity in the place as far back in time as around 1000 BC. The ramparts have been built and rebuilt in three stages - the last time by the Romans in the 1st century BC. The Romans named the hillfort Trimontium - from Eildon Hill's three mountain peaks.

The text says that Âskar took two islands as shelter for his ships. There exist very few islands on the east coast of Great Britain, but just 25 kms south of where River Tweed empties into the North Sea, we have the Farne Islands - which certainly also must have been the only ilands that suited for Âskar's purpose. The sea kings wanted small islands just outside the coast as safe harbours for their ships - especially islands with deep bays, but also two islands situated beside each other, between which the fleet could lay sheltered from wind and waves. This was the reason why Âskar chose two islands. If the Farne Islands was the place, I would believe that he occupied the innermost of the island groups, as it looks like they must have been the most suitable. He may have sailed his fleet into the creek formed by the Inner Farne and West Wideopen with Knoxes Reef. The sandbanks between these islands must have been suitable for landing.

'Farne' is usually explained as being a gaelic-scotch name derived from ærn ('house') or fearn ('distant'). Yet, there lies also a Farne island separated alongside the coast, a little farther northwest. This tidal island, which at ebb-tide is linked to land, is called Lindisfarne or Lindesfarne. It is famous for its monastery, and from the fact that the Vikings attacked it in AD 793 and thus initiated the Viking Age. This would have been a natural site for the first stopping of intruders to Eildon Hill, as well as for the defence of the coastline.

The burgh was not formed like a ringwallburgh - according to the Frisian tradition of how a burgh should look like. That was not in Kälta's interest - to her the protection of her territory was the essential, which she could do in the same way as the Gola.

One do not know the background of the name Lindisfarne; though Anthony D. Mills has forwarded a theory that it should mean 'the island of the travellers from Lindsey'.

I think the background of the name has a slightly different history. Kälta's burgh was called Kêren.äk – in Frisian they called it Kêren.herne. When Âskar conquered the burgh he renamed it Linda.s.herne in memory of Adela Oera Linda. After the Magy was killed, several sites were named from her - first and foremost Lindas.nose and Lindas.burch.Âskar's renaming of Kêren.herne was one of his several attempts to cotton up to the Adelings.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Apol

[Abramelin]

Only Tyrians should be the true incomers of the story about arriving from the Red Sea, not the whole of Canaan. People from Sidon were there very early and do not have to be the Phoenicians who arrived from the Red Sea.

The OLB touches on this - they arrive at Tyre, settle there - giving Tyrians only a Frisian heritage.

Even though the Tyrians might really be from the Red Sea, the OLB has included the foundation of Tyre as an event by them.

When Tyre, Sidon and the coastal area was established as traders I'd say it then became known as Phoenicia and all these coastal people were now Phoenicians.

I quoted Herodotus in my former post (the Israeli professor), and here's another quote:

The Greek researcher Herodotus of Halicarnassus visited Tyre in the mid-fifth century BCE. In Histories 2.44, he offers a description of the sanctuary of Melqart, whom he calls Heracles, because the Greeks believed these two deities were identical.

Herodotus on the Temple of Melqart

Because I wanted to know more about it, I made a voyage to Tyre in Phoenicia, because I had been told that in that place there was a holy temple of Heracles. The sanctuary was richly furnished, there were many votive offerings, and I noticed two pillars: one of pure gold and one of an emerald stone of such size as to shine by night.

I interviewed the priests of the god, and asked them how long ago their temple had been built, and I discovered that they were at variance with the Greeks, because they said that the temple had been built when Tyre had been founded, and that this happened 2,300 years ago.

http://www.livius.or...e/tyre_t01.html

That would mean that Tyre was founded 450+2300 = 2750 BCE.

At last they arrived at the Phœnician coast, 193 years after Atland was submerged. Near the coast they found an island with two deep bays, so that there appeared to be three islands. In the middle one they established themselves, and afterwards built a city wall round the place. Then they wanted to give it a name, but disagreed about it. Some wanted to call it Fryasburgt, others Neeftunia; but the Magyars and Finns begged that it might be called Thyrhisburgt.

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

So according to the OLB this happened in 2194-193 = 2001 BCE.

Preserving Lebanon’s coastal archaeology: Beirut, Sidon and Tyre

Nick Marriner, Christophe Morhange

(..)

The areas surrounding the present seaports are rich in buried archaeological monuments and relics, bearing witness to a complex history of human occupation spanning some 5000 years. Using a multi-disciplinary geoarchaeological approach,recent study has enhanced understanding of the development of dock and harbour installations. We have identified a number of important waterfront areas (Figs. 1 -3), significant in comprehending the evolution of maritime infrstructure and thexpansion of shipping activities along the Levantine seaboarfrom the Bronze Age onwards[52 - 56,58]. The heart of Beirut, Sidon and Tyre’s main anchorage havens today lie land-locked in the city centres, buried beneath the tracts of coastal sediment.

http://www.academia.edu/697386/Preserving_Lebanons_coastal_archaeology_Beirut_Sidon_and_Tyre

You all may chose between the OLB on the one hand, and archeology and Herodotus on the other hand.

I know which one I'd pick, lol.

.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Abramelin

[NO-ID-EA]

I quoted Herodotus in my former post (the Israeli professor), and here's another quote:

The Greek researcher Herodotus of Halicarnassus visited Tyre in the mid-fifth century BCE. In Histories 2.44, he offers a description of the sanctuary of Melqart, whom he calls Heracles, because the Greeks believed these two deities were identical.

Herodotus on the Temple of Melqart

Because I wanted to know more about it, I made a voyage to Tyre in Phoenicia, because I had been told that in that place there was a holy temple of Heracles. The sanctuary was richly furnished, there were many votive offerings, and I noticed two pillars: one of pure gold and one of an emerald stone of such size as to shine by night.

I interviewed the priests of the god, and asked them how long ago their temple had been built, and I discovered that they were at variance with the Greeks, because they said that the temple had been built when Tyre had been founded, and that this happened 2,300 years ago.

http://www.livius.or...e/tyre_t01.html

That would mean that Tyre was founded 450+2300 = 2750 BCE.

At last they arrived at the Phœnician coast, 193 years after Atland was submerged. Near the coast they found an island with two deep bays, so that there appeared to be three islands. In the middle one they established themselves, and afterwards built a city wall round the place. Then they wanted to give it a name, but disagreed about it. Some wanted to call it Fryasburgt, others Neeftunia; but the Magyars and Finns begged that it might be called Thyrhisburgt.

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

So according to the OLB this happened in 2194-193 = 2001 BCE.

Preserving Lebanon’s coastal archaeology: Beirut, Sidon and Tyre

Nick Marriner, Christophe Morhange

(..)

The areas surrounding the present seaports are rich in buried archaeological monuments and relics, bearing witness to a complex history of human occupation spanning some 5000 years. Using a multi-disciplinary geoarchaeological approach,recent study has enhanced understanding of the development of dock and harbour installations. We have identified a number of important waterfront areas (Figs. 1 -3), significant in comprehending the evolution of maritime infrstructure and thexpansion of shipping activities along the Levantine seaboarfrom the Bronze Age onwards[52 - 56,58]. The heart of Beirut, Sidon and Tyre’s main anchorage havens today lie land-locked in the city centres, buried beneath the tracts of coastal sediment.

http://www.academia...._Sidon_and_Tyre

You all may chose between the OLB on the one hand, and archeology and Herodotus on the other hand.

I know which one I'd pick, lol.

.

Weird how these things seem to keep coming around in circles......................Tyre..non aspirated TYR .......TROY.. non aspirated TRY

could Herodotus have got it wrong and he was told 2,300 years AM , what difference would that make ?

Also funnily enough after Apols post not long ago.........before King Oswald..(Wr-Alda ?) asked St Aiden to move from Iona and found the Monastery at Lindisfarne , which they named themselves.. it was actually called the island of Medcaut ... (is that fairly close to Melqart.. just a coincidence i suppose)

Also what Apol was saying about two islands.......although Bamborough is now part of the mainland , it itself was an island before the 11th Century, and only silted up after this

No chance i suppose that when nef-teunis said he went to phoenicia to found Tyre , he could have meant Britain because it was conquered by the phoenicians by then ?? ......perhaps the Magi wanted to call part of it Thyrhisburght after their homelands ??.

Could that then bring us back to "was Tyr/Try (Troy)in Britain " which i remember came up on this board a while ago....??

Also Oswalds father was Aethelfrith , whos father i think was King Ida of Berenice , same name as the mount Ida where a lot the Greek Gods are supposed to have come from, .i think Ida had 12 sons . Theodoric and Hussa were a couple... need to check

Edited January 23, 2013 by NO-ID-EA

[The Puzzler]

I quoted Herodotus in my former post (the Israeli professor), and here's another quote:

The Greek researcher Herodotus of Halicarnassus visited Tyre in the mid-fifth century BCE. In Histories 2.44, he offers a description of the sanctuary of Melqart, whom he calls Heracles, because the Greeks believed these two deities were identical.

Herodotus on the Temple of Melqart

Because I wanted to know more about it, I made a voyage to Tyre in Phoenicia, because I had been told that in that place there was a holy temple of Heracles. The sanctuary was richly furnished, there were many votive offerings, and I noticed two pillars: one of pure gold and one of an emerald stone of such size as to shine by night.

I interviewed the priests of the god, and asked them how long ago their temple had been built, and I discovered that they were at variance with the Greeks, because they said that the temple had been built when Tyre had been founded, and that this happened 2,300 years ago.

http://www.livius.or...e/tyre_t01.html

That would mean that Tyre was founded 450+2300 = 2750 BCE.

At last they arrived at the Phœnician coast, 193 years after Atland was submerged. Near the coast they found an island with two deep bays, so that there appeared to be three islands. In the middle one they established themselves, and afterwards built a city wall round the place. Then they wanted to give it a name, but disagreed about it. Some wanted to call it Fryasburgt, others Neeftunia; but the Magyars and Finns begged that it might be called Thyrhisburgt.

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

So according to the OLB this happened in 2194-193 = 2001 BCE.

Preserving Lebanon’s coastal archaeology: Beirut, Sidon and Tyre

Nick Marriner, Christophe Morhange

(..)

The areas surrounding the present seaports are rich in buried archaeological monuments and relics, bearing witness to a complex history of human occupation spanning some 5000 years. Using a multi-disciplinary geoarchaeological approach,recent study has enhanced understanding of the development of dock and harbour installations. We have identified a number of important waterfront areas (Figs. 1 -3), significant in comprehending the evolution of maritime infrstructure and thexpansion of shipping activities along the Levantine seaboarfrom the Bronze Age onwards[52 - 56,58]. The heart of Beirut, Sidon and Tyre’s main anchorage havens today lie land-locked in the city centres, buried beneath the tracts of coastal sediment.

http://www.academia...._Sidon_and_Tyre

You all may chose between the OLB on the one hand, and archeology and Herodotus on the other hand.

I know which one I'd pick, lol.

.

I have no problem with Tyre being settled when Herodotus said it was.

One of my older topics: http://www.unexplain...c

The Puzzler on Oct 19 2008, 07:22 AM, said:

What did you think of my evidence showing that Tyre could have been settled back when Herodotus said it was?

Maybe you can convince the rest of the crew here including Leonardo who answered my question, cause they sure didn't buy my reasoning or archaeological evidence I provided.

I also know the OLB date is later than when Herodotus said though. I hate that OLB timeline.

Edited January 23, 2013 by The Puzzler

[The Puzzler]

Thank you - that's indeed an interesting observation. I have another theory, though. Here it is:

It is written: "...thousands of Gola have went to North Brittanja. A short time ago the uppermost of the Golum was established at the burgh which is called Kêrenäk – which means ‘corner’, from where he gave his commands to all the other Gola. All their gold was also brought together there. Kêrenherne, or Kêrenäk, is a stone burgh which before belonged to Kälta,"

When Âskar had overpowered the Phoenician priests, the Dênamarkers became green with envy, and they would cross the sea to catch him. This indicates that we should search for Kälta's former burgh on the east coast of Great Britain. There exists an age-old fortification on the hilltops of Eildon Hill near Melrose, just south of today's Scottish border. At these heights - alongside the River Tweed - the largest settlement of the Scottish Bronze Age is situated. Upon the more than 300 horizontal foundations that are cut into the hillside, between 3,000 and 6,000 people had their residences; and one knows that there was activity in the place as far back in time as around 1000 BC. The ramparts have been built and rebuilt in three stages - the last time by the Romans in the 1st century BC. The Romans named the hillfort Trimontium - from Eildon Hill's three mountain peaks.

The text says that Âskar took two islands as shelter for his ships. There exist very few islands on the east coast of Great Britain, but just 25 kms south of where River Tweed empties into the North Sea, we have the Farne Islands - which certainly also must have been the only ilands that suited for Âskar's purpose. The sea kings wanted small islands just outside the coast as safe harbours for their ships - especially islands with deep bays, but also two islands situated beside each other, between which the fleet could lay sheltered from wind and waves. This was the reason why Âskar chose two islands. If the Farne Islands was the place, I would believe that he occupied the innermost of the island groups, as it looks like they must have been the most suitable. He may have sailed his fleet into the creek formed by the Inner Farne and West Wideopen with Knoxes Reef. The sandbanks between these islands must have been suitable for landing.

'Farne' is usually explained as being a gaelic-scotch name derived from ærn ('house') or fearn ('distant'). Yet, there lies also a Farne island separated alongside the coast, a little farther northwest. This tidal island, which at ebb-tide is linked to land, is called Lindisfarne or Lindesfarne. It is famous for its monastery, and from the fact that the Vikings attacked it in AD 793 and thus initiated the Viking Age. This would have been a natural site for the first stopping of intruders to Eildon Hill, as well as for the defence of the coastline.

The burgh was not formed like a ringwallburgh - according to the Frisian tradition of how a burgh should look like. That was not in Kälta's interest - to her the protection of her territory was the essential, which she could do in the same way as the Gola.

One do not know the background of the name Lindisfarne; though Anthony D. Mills has forwarded a theory that it should mean 'the island of the travellers from Lindsey'.

I think the background of the name has a slightly different history. Kälta's burgh was called Kêren.äk – in Frisian they called it Kêren.herne. When Âskar conquered the burgh he renamed it Linda.s.herne in memory of Adela Oera Linda. After the Magy was killed, several sites were named from her - first and foremost Lindas.nose and Lindas.burch.Âskar's renaming of Kêren.herne was one of his several attempts to cotton up to the Adelings.

Interesting idea Apol.

Seems the Lindisfaras were an Anglian tribe.

Place-name evidence indicates that the Anglian settlement known as Lindisfaras spread from the Humber coast.

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

The Lindisfaras (or Lindesfaras) (Old English Lindisfaran) were an Anglian tribe who, in the 6th century, established the kingdom of Lindsey between the valleys of the rivers Humber and Witham, in the north of what is now Lincolnshire

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

[Abramelin]

I have no problem with Tyre being settled when Herodotus said it was.

One of my older topics: http://www.unexplain...c

Maybe you can convince the rest of the crew here including Leonardo who answered my question, cause they sure didn't buy my reasoning or archaeological evidence I provided.

I also know the OLB date is later than when Herodotus said though. I hate that OLB timeline.

Well, what can I say: I showed you there is archeological proof Tyre was founded 5000 years ago.

Herodotus is always considered to be a guy fabricating history, but many of his so called fabrications have been proven to be true after all.

I have always been skeptical about Herodotus and his writings (because I was told he was a fantast), but he has been proven right, many times.

And yes, he has been proven wrong often too.

But that does not make him a liar.

He may have just written down what people told him, and his only fault is that he believed what he was told.

.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

Apol,

You say there are not many islands at the east coast of England, but there was a large and important one (and not an island anymore now) :

http://en.wikipedia..../Isle_of_Thanet

Edited January 23, 2013 by Abramelin

[cormac mac airt]

Weird how these things seem to keep coming around in circles......................Tyre..non aspirated TYR .......TROY.. non aspirated TRY

could Herodotus have got it wrong and he was told 2,300 years AM , what difference would that make ?

Also funnily enough after Apols post not long ago.........before King Oswald..(Wr-Alda ?) asked St Aiden to move from Iona and found the Monastery at Lindisfarne , which they named themselves.. it was actually called the island of Medcaut ... (is that fairly close to Melqart.. just a coincidence i suppose)

Also what Apol was saying about two islands.......although Bamborough is now part of the mainland , it itself was an island before the 11th Century, and only silted up after this

No chance i suppose that when nef-teunis said he went to phoenicia to found Tyre , he could have meant Britain because it was conquered by the phoenicians by then ?? ......perhaps the Magi wanted to call part of it Thyrhisburght after their homelands ??.

Could that then bring us back to "was Tyr/Try (Troy)in Britain " which i remember came up on this board a while ago....??

Also Oswalds father was Aethelfrith , whos father i think was King Ida of Berenice , same name as the mount Ida where a lot the Greek Gods are supposed to have come from, .i think Ida had 12 sons . Theodoric and Hussa were a couple... need to check

Almost. Oswalds lineage (ascending) is: Oswald > Aethelfrith > Aethelric > Ida of Bernicia

Ida's sons are listed as:

Adda

Belric

Theoderic

Aethelric

Theodhere

Osmer

Bearnoch

Ocga

Ealric

Ecca

Oswald

Sogor

Sogethere

cormac

Edited January 23, 2013 by cormac mac airt

[The Puzzler]

Well, what can I say: I showed you there is archeological proof Tyre was founded 5000 years ago.

Herodotus is always considered to be a guy fabricating history, but many of his so called fabrications have been proven to be true after all.

I have always been skeptical about Herodotus and his writings (because I was told he was a fantast), but he has been proven right, many times.

And yes, he has been proven wrong often too.

But that does not make him a liar.

He may have just written down what people told him, and his only fault is that he believed what he was told.

.

I totally agree. I understand when he wrote he was getting 2nd hand news, he makes very little assunptions himself (one is about the Nile), he was not lying, maybe those who were telling him things didn't really know, now they wanna shoot the messenger, but I love it when the information he gave is shown to be right.

The OLB has this time put this event later than what might be the true time frame, makes a change from being put earlier anyway....

I'll put on my thinking cap.

See, this is what is really weird, had this been a hoax, and the writers would have surely known Herodotus works - why put events totally out of known chronology if they wanted to be believed...?

[The Puzzler]

There is some other info concerning when the Phoenicians/Tyrians arrived, in Herodotus. It would have to be a time when Assyria was around.

According to the Persians best informed in history, the Phoenicians began to quarrel. This people, who had formerly dwelt on the shores of the Erythraean Sea, having migrated to the Mediterranean and settled in the parts which they now inhabit, began at once, they say, to adventure on long voyages, freighting their vessels with the wares of Egypt and Assyria. They landed at many places on the coast, and among the rest at Argos, which was then preeminent above all the states included now under the common name of Hellas.

http://classics.mit.edu/Herodotus/history.1.i.html

23rd-22nd century BC is the earliest one could really have the Assyrians imo.

Late 25th century would be the absolute earliest if you stretched it to before Sargon.

But then you'd have to have evidence they freighted their wares to Argos and made long voyages in that timeframe.

Edited January 24, 2013 by The Puzzler

[The Puzzler]

It's possible the priests were wrong and gave a longer date they were established than they really were.

Tyre might have been inhabited but not by the Tyrians Herodotus talks about, who more likely imo, arrived during this timeframe:

(I have the same issue with Athens when i discuss Atlantis, its been inhabited since 7th millenium, but by Athenians?)

From the mid 14th century BC through to the 11th century BC, much of Canaan (particularly the north, central and eastern regions of Syria and the north western Mediterranean coastal regions) fell to the Middle Assyrian Empire, and both Egyptian and Hittite influence waned as a result. Powerful Assyrian kings forced tribute on Caananite states and cities from north, east and central Syria as far as the Mediterranean.^[26] Arik-den-ili (c. 1307-1296 BC), consolidated Assyrian power in the Levant, he defeated and conquered Semitic tribes of the so-called Ahlamu group.

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

This is when Assyrians ruled Canaan.

Now later than the OLB timeframe but not as early as 2750BC per the Tyrian priests Herodotus spoke to or the first inhabitation of Tyre.

[Abramelin]

It's possible the priests were wrong and gave a longer date they were established than they really were.

Tyre might have been inhabited but not by the Tyrians Herodotus talks about, who more likely imo, arrived during this timeframe:

(I have the same issue with Athens when i discuss Atlantis, its been inhabited since 7th millenium, but by Athenians?)

From the mid 14th century BC through to the 11th century BC, much of Canaan (particularly the north, central and eastern regions of Syria and the north western Mediterranean coastal regions) fell to the Middle Assyrian Empire, and both Egyptian and Hittite influence waned as a result. Powerful Assyrian kings forced tribute on Caananite states and cities from north, east and central Syria as far as the Mediterranean.^[26] Arik-den-ili (c. 1307-1296 BC), consolidated Assyrian power in the Levant, he defeated and conquered Semitic tribes of the so-called Ahlamu group.

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

This is when Assyrians ruled Canaan.

Now later than the OLB timeframe but not as early as 2750BC per the Tyrian priests Herodotus spoke to or the first inhabitation of Tyre.

The important point is that Tyre was inhabited for 5000 years. By whom doesn't matter that much.

Why not?

Because the OLB never says Tyre was already inhabited when Nef Teunis' men settled there.

And you can expect some 'opposition' when you invade an already inhabited island the size of Tyre.

[Abramelin]

<snip>

No chance i suppose that when nef-teunis said he went to phoenicia to found Tyre , he could have meant Britain because it was conquered by the phoenicians by then ?? ......perhaps the Magi wanted to call part of it Thyrhisburght after their homelands ??.

Could that then bring us back to "was Tyr/Try (Troy)in Britain " which i remember came up on this board a while ago....??

<snip>

Nef Teunis entered the "MIddle Sea" and then his men settled Tyre.

If that 'Middle Sea' was not the Mediterranean, what was it? The North Sea?

[Abramelin]

I totally agree. I understand when he wrote he was getting 2nd hand news, he makes very little assunptions himself (one is about the Nile), he was not lying, maybe those who were telling him things didn't really know, now they wanna shoot the messenger, but I love it when the information he gave is shown to be right.

The OLB has this time put this event later than what might be the true time frame, makes a change from being put earlier anyway....

I'll put on my thinking cap.

See, this is what is really weird, had this been a hoax, and the writers would have surely known Herodotus works - why put events totally out of known chronology if they wanted to be believed...?

To make a fake ancient manuscript look authentic, you don't simply copy and paste from known sources. You must introduce a new twist on accepted history.

The ones or the one who wrote the OLB can not be blamed for a having a lack of creativity.

[Knul]

Thank you - that's indeed an interesting observation. I have another theory, though. Here it is:

It is written: "...thousands of Gola have went to North Brittanja. A short time ago the uppermost of the Golum was established at the burgh which is called Kêrenäk – which means ‘corner’, from where he gave his commands to all the other Gola. All their gold was also brought together there. Kêrenherne, or Kêrenäk, is a stone burgh which before belonged to Kälta,"

When Âskar had overpowered the Phoenician priests, the Dênamarkers became green with envy, and they would cross the sea to catch him. This indicates that we should search for Kälta's former burgh on the east coast of Great Britain. There exists an age-old fortification on the hilltops of Eildon Hill near Melrose, just south of today's Scottish border. At these heights - alongside the River Tweed - the largest settlement of the Scottish Bronze Age is situated. Upon the more than 300 horizontal foundations that are cut into the hillside, between 3,000 and 6,000 people had their residences; and one knows that there was activity in the place as far back in time as around 1000 BC. The ramparts have been built and rebuilt in three stages - the last time by the Romans in the 1st century BC. The Romans named the hillfort Trimontium - from Eildon Hill's three mountain peaks.

The text says that Âskar took two islands as shelter for his ships. There exist very few islands on the east coast of Great Britain, but just 25 kms south of where River Tweed empties into the North Sea, we have the Farne Islands - which certainly also must have been the only ilands that suited for Âskar's purpose. The sea kings wanted small islands just outside the coast as safe harbours for their ships - especially islands with deep bays, but also two islands situated beside each other, between which the fleet could lay sheltered from wind and waves. This was the reason why Âskar chose two islands. If the Farne Islands was the place, I would believe that he occupied the innermost of the island groups, as it looks like they must have been the most suitable. He may have sailed his fleet into the creek formed by the Inner Farne and West Wideopen with Knoxes Reef. The sandbanks between these islands must have been suitable for landing.

'Farne' is usually explained as being a gaelic-scotch name derived from ærn ('house') or fearn ('distant'). Yet, there lies also a Farne island separated alongside the coast, a little farther northwest. This tidal island, which at ebb-tide is linked to land, is called Lindisfarne or Lindesfarne. It is famous for its monastery, and from the fact that the Vikings attacked it in AD 793 and thus initiated the Viking Age. This would have been a natural site for the first stopping of intruders to Eildon Hill, as well as for the defence of the coastline.

The burgh was not formed like a ringwallburgh - according to the Frisian tradition of how a burgh should look like. That was not in Kälta's interest - to her the protection of her territory was the essential, which she could do in the same way as the Gola.

One do not know the background of the name Lindisfarne; though Anthony D. Mills has forwarded a theory that it should mean 'the island of the travellers from Lindsey'.

I think the background of the name has a slightly different history. Kälta's burgh was called Kêren.äk – in Frisian they called it Kêren.herne. When Âskar conquered the burgh he renamed it Linda.s.herne in memory of Adela Oera Linda. After the Magy was killed, several sites were named from her - first and foremost Lindas.nose and Lindas.burch.Âskar's renaming of Kêren.herne was one of his several attempts to cotton up to the Adelings.

Kerenak can be found in the area of the Cornavii and Caereni on the northern coast of Scotland. Even the two islands, where Askar hided his ships are shown.