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 11
Abramelin

Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood [Part 2]

6,100 posts in this topic

Here it is (assuming you mean the 6-spoked wheel, not the 6-spoked priest, lol):

http://www.unexplain...65#entry3752000

Gluesing_Huegelgrab_c.jpg

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may find this post interesting too:

Could the loss have been the result of an ordinary storm flood? This was not very likely. because in that case the survivors would probably have tried to salvage some of the valuable plates. However, so many plates lay so close to each other that we almost have to conclude that there were no survivors. The most likely - and very spectacular - explanation is that the copper mining stopped suddenly as a result of some catastrophic loss of a large part of the south of the Oberland. The catastrophe must have been caused by sudden movements of the salt and gypsum layers underneath Heligoland. This catastrophe must have led to a tsunami-like wave in the North Sea; many of its shores must have been damaged to a larger degree than any ordinary storm flood has ever done.

How old are the copper plates? In the 1970s researchers measured radioactivity from organic material on the plates and concluded that they had been made between about 1140 and 1340 AD. This was a surprising result, because contemporary chronicles neither mention copper mining on Heligoland nor a catastrophe resembling a tsunami. Later researchers made more accurate measurements of the radioactivity and so we know that the plates must have been made many centuries earlier, almost certainly before the people around the North Sea could write, which could explain the lack of written evidence of a tsunami. Of course, the origin of the copper plates is still mysterious and hopefully we wil find out more in the nearby future."

http://www.unexplain...2

Copperdisc.jpg

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was trying to find (for the Doggerland thread) some new results of the research done in Skara Brae (Orkneys), and particularly the submerged Neolithic structure divers have found nearby, a year or so ago.

But I found something that is more interesting for this thread instead....

The OLB says that 'before the bad time came' (in 2194 BCE) Britain was the penal colony of the Fryans. Would that include what's now the Orkneys??

We have discussed the script invented by the Fryans. according to the OLB. Well, what has actually been found from before 2194 BCE?

Skara Brae is a stone-built Neolithic settlement, located on the Bay of Skaill on the west coast of Mainland, the largest island in the Orkney archipelago of Scotland. It consists of eight clustered houses, and was occupied from roughly 3180 BCE–2500 BCE.

Skara_Brae_symbols1.jpg

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Skara_Brae

Stonehenge People: An Exploration of Life in Neolithic Britain 4700-2000 BC

Rodney Castleden

http://books.google....People.&f=false

And look at this page from the book:

SkaraBrae_protowriting_zpsa648c55e.jpg

If this is really a script, then it doesn't look much like the OLB script.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been quite some debate about the location to which the Ewa ad Amorem applies. Originally, Pertz (1835, cited by Gaupp, 1855) had the idea that it had been codified at Xanten. However, Gaupp (1855) disagreed: he suggested, the law came from Hamaland, the region of the Chamave tribe. In modern geographical terms this is the eastern part of the Dutch province of Gelderland (including the area around the river IJssel and the eastern part of De Betuwe). Therefore, he suggested the name Lex Francorum Chamavorum. This name has been adopted by many scholars.

Fruin (in a study from 1924, cited by Niermeyer, 1953 and Halbertsma, 2000) looked to the west of The Netherlands, to the present Alblasserwaard. The names Groot Ammers and Ammerstol would refer to the river Amor (or Ammor) that used to flow here. In that case, Amor-land would be a rather small territory.

In 1953, Niermeyer made a thorough analysis of all available date. In his opinion, Amor-land was the whole central Dutch river area: De Betuwe, Maas and Waal and, to the west, Teisterbant. Possibly, further north, the present province of Utrecht could also be considered part of the Amor-area.

This latter vision has not been challenged since, although Algra (2000, p. 92, without source) still mentions Hamaland. I assume, with Blok (1968) and Halbertsma (2000), that Niermeyer is nearest the truth, with the central Dutch river area. Luit van der Tuuk (2005 and pers. comm.) argues that Dorestad was at the border between Frisia and Amorland. This would imply that Amorland was south of the river Rhine and that it did not stretch into the present province of Utrecht, as suggested by Niermeyer.

Anyway, the name Lex Francorum Chamavorum is dubious. Therefore, I have used the name Ewa ad Amorem throughout this article.

http://www.keesn.nl/...m/en1_intro.htm

Here again you see, that the non existing Dorestad is used to divide Frisia from Amorland. However, Central Frisia consisted of Westergo, Oostergo and Bornego. In that area the Lex Frisicum was applied. In the Niedersachsen area (Overijssel, Hamalant) the Ewa ad Amorem was apllied. The river Amer is regarded as the Eem river.

Edited by Knul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here again you see, that the non existing Dorestad is used to divide Frisia from Amorland. However, Central Frisia consisted of Westergo, Oostergo and Bornego. In that area the Lex Frisicum was applied. In the Niedersachsen area (Overijssel, Hamalant) the Ewa ad Amorem was apllied. The river Amer is regarded as the Eem river.

As you can read in my quote, it's only Luit van der Tuuk who uses Dorestad as an argument for his location of the border between Amorland and Frisia.

Did you read all of the site, btw?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The river Amer is regarded as the Eem river.

Ammers, Ammer of Amer betekende vroeger: waterloop.

Ammers Ammer or Amer used to mean: watercourse.

http://nl.wikipedia....ki/Groot-Ammers

So Amer doesn't necessarily have to point at the Eem river in Utrecht. It could just as well be an area with many 'watercourses', like the area of Waal, Rhine and Maas, or the area you see in that yellow map I posted (horizontal ellipse).

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you can read in my quote, it's only Luit van der Tuuk who uses Dorestad as an argument for his location of the border between Amorland and Frisia.

Did you read all of the site, btw?

Yes I did. Apparently you did not read my website on Dorestad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I did. Apparently you did not read my website on Dorestad.

I did, but not all, I admit. I have to scroll from left to right for a mile to read it.

And did you read this? It's from the site you are registered on:

http://www.semafoor....oorDORESTAD.pdf

,

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here it is (assuming you mean the 6-spoked wheel, not the 6-spoked priest, lol):

http://www.unexplain...65#entry3752000

Gluesing_Huegelgrab_c.jpg

Thank you, 'Abramelin'. It is an interesting find. It is surely related to other sun disks found - like the one from Moordorf in Germany and the harnessed one from Trundholm in Denmark - though they don't display any six-spoked wheels.

Edited by Apol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because more than half of this thread (including part -1- ) is about language, linguistics and etymology , plus the suggestion that the OLB Fryan language may have stood at the base of many diverse languages, I think the next is rather appropriate for this thread:

the Skeptic

Vol 20, No 2

ISSN 0726-9897

http://www.skeptics....ptic/2000/2.pdf

From chapter

42 - Linguistic reconstruction and revisionist accounts of Ancient History - Mark Newbrook

6) Hallet on pygmies

One of the theories of Hallet, the maverick Belgian explorer

of Africa, was that the Ituri pygmies of the Congo

region, notably the speakers of Efe, represent the original

human population. This is reflected in their lore,

which includes all the basic motifs of myth and religion,

and in the Efe language, from which large

elements of Egyptian, Hebrew and many

Indo-European languages can be derived. The methodology

is again the same: comparison of isolated forms

which are superficially similar. (Others, such as King,

have made other wild claims about the pygmies.)

7) Reinterpretations of the Bible

Like Salibi, Wilkens etc more recently, Daunt, writing

in the 1920s, claimed that the scene of key events in

ancient history (in this case the central narratives

of the Old Testament) was not in fact the

obvious location as normally interpreted (in

this case Palestine) but some other quite distant

location. Daunt placed the Biblical events

further east, especially in India, equating Biblical

characters with figures from the history

and myth of that region. He supported these

claims with linguistic equations of the usual

kind, involving superficial similarities between

isolated words. Another non-standard

approach to Biblical languages is that of the

British Israelites, who implausibly proclaim

linguistic connections between Hebrew, on the

one hand, and both English and Welsh, on the

other.

8) Basque and Etruscan

Alonso and others have claimed that the contemporary

isolated language Basque is related to an ancient, poorly

understood isolated language, Etruscan. This is in no

way impossible, but the evidence offered here is at the

usual inadequate level. (Compare earlier C20 attempts

to relate Basque to the Cretan Linear scripts; see my

paper on the Phaistos Disk for details.) Associated with

these ideas are attempts by Khvevelidze and others to

link Basque with Caucasian, a language group which

shares some general typological features with Basque

but is not otherwise similar to it.

9) Hungarian as the ancestor language

Simon, a Hungarian author, argues for a wide-reaching

version of the Atlantis story (see 5) above) incorporating

Noah’s Ark and tracing as much as possible back to

a Hungarian-using civilisation in the remote past which

was linked culturally and linguistically with Sumer and

other civilisations in both the Old World and the New.

The linguistics does not loom so large here, but where

it does appear it is on much the same level as that of

Temple, although Simon also works on his own computerised

lexically-based dialect atlas of Hungary and

does seem to know something of the more traditional

branches of the subject. Simon’s work also links in with

that of the American epigraphists; along with some

other Hungarian enthusiasts, he accepts a Hungarian

version of the Norse ‘Vinland Map’. Most scholars consider

that the Hungarian map is probably a recently

forged special version (of a map which itself may very

well be a forgery).

10) Hungarian as close to the ancestor language

Vomos-Toth, a second Hungarian writer, has developed

a rival view of Hungarian as close to the ultimate ancestor

language. Drawing off Lahovary and others, as

well as his own investigations, he believes that Hungarian

retains many features of a language called

Tamana used universally before a catastrophe several

thousand years ago (compare 3), 5) above); cognates

also appear in Dravidian, Sumerian and African languages.

The methodology for reconstruction is again

on the same level.

11) Latvian as the ancestor language

Kaulins, a Latvian author, has been claiming since 1977

that Latvian is the oldest known language

(and has therefore been remarkably static over

a long period). He supports his claims with

analyses of cultural manifestations and of

blood-group distribution (there is actually a

serious tradition of work in this latter area,

which has produced some very

thought-provoking results). However,

Kaulins’ main evidence is, naturally, linguistic.

Unlike most writers discussed here, he

knows enough linguistics to recognise his situation

with respect to the mainstream, and he

thus explicitly rejects rather than ignores contemporary

ideas on the adequacy of evidence

(compare Ruhlen). On this basis, Kaulins

identifies many words in Ancient Egyptian, Greek,

Sumerian etc as corruptions or (later) cognates of

Latvian words. Naturally, he also rejects the mainstream

view that Latvian has a mixed structure because of influential

contact with Finno-Ugric and is the least

conservative of Baltic languages.

12) Turkish as the ancestor language

In the 1920s, the new republican regime in Turkey tried

to persuade Turks that their language was the ancestor

of all human languages. This was partly a political

move, made with a view to persuading conservative

Turks to accept borrowed words for innovations (if all

words were originally Turkish, it was surely legitimate

for Turkish to ‘reclaim’ them); but nationalistic ideas

were again a factor here. The linguistic evidence is of

the same kind.

13) Nicolas Marr

Marr was a Soviet-era linguist whose Marxist-based

ideas about language change became more and more

‘fringe’ in nature but were endorsed by Stalin, which

protected him from criticism (a linguistic Lysenko).

Eventually he came to hold (on less than persuasive

grounds of the usual kind) that all words in all languages

derived ultimately from the four syllables sal,

ber, yon and rosh in combination. After his death his

ideas continued in favour in the USSR for 16 years until

Stalin himself finally pointed out some unrelated

inconsistencies in his theories.

14) Ior Bock, ‘onomatology’, etc

A more down-to-earth version of Marr is Ior Bock the

Finnish sperm-drinker, who manages the

‘Lemminkainen Temple’ near Helsinki and claims that

his family possesses a tradition of ‘the oldest language

in the world’, known as Rot (pronounced like English

root); this unwritten and allegedly unwritable language

(naturally spoken in Finland!) is based on a ‘ring’ of 23

‘sounds’ (mainly syllables), each with a specific meaning,

which combined in many different ways in the

remote past to form all human languages. The resemblances

are often very approximate indeed, and the

derivations are typically far-fetched and naturally in

conflict with those generally accepted.

A roughly similar claim, promoted by Alferink, involves

new etymologies for modern words such as

Australia, which are held to be constructed out of basic,

allegedly ancient syllables or other short sequences;

these have somehow retained fixed meanings (obscure

to modern scholars and the general public) over long

periods. Yet another, somewhat ludicrous proposal is

that of Hietbrink, who believes that many words and

phrases in a variety of languages are corruptions of expressions

in (Modern) Dutch! Shaver’s ‘Mantong’,

published by Palmer in Amazing Stories as part of the

1940s ‘dero’ cycle, was again rather similar, although

here the original language, like that of Ior Bock, was

mysterious.

The advocates of such ideas often use the term onomatology

to refer to their methods and results. I recently

saw a large display in a central Melbourne street, attacking

Freemasonry and featuring some very

far-fetched ‘onomastic’ equations of

haphazardly-selected parts of names etc with other very

loosely similar words, to suit the promoter’s case.

A slightly (but only slightly!) more sophisticated

version of this kind of idea was developed by Cohane

in his 1969 book The Key. This work focuses on Ireland

and Gaelic, and also involves a great deal of very loose

philology of the more usual type as discussed in earlier

sections of this paper. (There has in fact been a string

of works promoting Ireland as a major unrecognised

centre of early civilisation or even as the remains of

Atlantis.)

15) Mayan, Greek and Aramaic

A 1993 article in the creationist journal Creation Ex Nihilo

exemplifies the real ‘lunatic fringe’ in the area

represented by 13) and 14). Taking as its source Ripley’s

Believe It Or Not (!), it rehearses the claim that the Greek

alphabet, as normally recited, is really a poem in Mayan! ***

In charity, I will not comment on such a claim. Of course,

Le Plongeon claimed a century ago that Jesus spoke

Mayan on his cross, not Aramaic, and Mayan and the

Maya are still very popular among fringe thinkers.

16) Another case in Australia

An intriguing Victorian case not yet available in print

or on-line (mainly focused on links between the ‘Celts’

and Egypt and on alleged early visits to Australia; see

again Richardson) involves the owner of the

Bowerbird’s Nest Museum outside Heywood near Portland,

a most unusual institution which Skeptics visiting

the area should tour.

It will be seen from the above that the general nature

of the main problem with the linguistic aspects of

these theories/claims is very much the same. The authors,

relying largely on ‘common sense’ examination

of superficial similarities and knowing little or nothing

of historical linguistics itself, are ‘stuck’ in C18; they

are not even failing to re-invent the ‘wheel’ of careful

comparative reconstruction, because they have not seen

that this ‘wheel’ is necessary, and because the ‘easy’

method of relying on superficial similarities can readily

be applied in such a way as to ‘support’ their

nationalistic ideas or their revisionist histories. Being

isolated, private workers or small groups of the

like-minded, each with a conviction that they alone are

right, they do not talk to each other, and so they do not

observe that the same unreliable methods ‘work’ more

or less equally well for all of their mutually contradictory

claims. One can persuade oneself, using such

methods, that any two languages are related; linguists

faced with such ideas have occasionally done just this

(eg, for Mayan and English), as a tour-de-force. Even

when linguists do make a supportive contribution, they

are mainly those who are themselves on the ‘fringe’ of

academic scholarship; if they were not, they would

scarcely be involved in such ideas.

References

Here follow some key references which are (fairly) readily

available, ie recent books (in English) rather than

papers in fringe or scholarly journals. The works listed

are of a fringe nature except where marked

(skeptical) or [C] (controversial work by mainstream

or near-mainstream linguists or other scholars). The

views of some other recent authors (eg, Talbott and the

other Saturnists with their journal Aeon, Vomos-Toth,

Kaulins, etc) are available mainly on web-sites; a

web-search will locate them.

* Bekerie, Ayele Ethiopic: An African Writing System 1997 RSP

* Bernal, Martin Black Athena 1987, 1991 (2 vols) Rutgers University

Press

* Bomhard, Allan R. & Kerns, John C. The Nostratic Macrofamily: A Study

In Distant Linguistic Relationship 1994 Mouton de Gruyter [C]

* Cohane, John P. The Key 1969 Turnstone

* Daniel, Glyn Writing For Antiquity 1992 (sections on Glozel)

* Fell, Barry America BC 1976 Times

* Flem-Ath, Rand & Flem-Ath, Rose When The Sky Fell: In Search Of

Atlantis 1995 Orion

* Gimbutas, Marija The Language Of The Goddess 1991 Harper

* Goodison, Lucy & Morris, Christine eds. Ancient Goddesses 1998 British

Museum Press (criticism of Gimbutas)

* Gordon, Cyrus Before Columbus: Links Between The Old World And

Ancient America 1971 Crown

* Hallet, Jean-Pierre Pygmy Kitabu 1973 Souvenir Press

* Lefkowitz, Mary & Maclean Rogers, Guy eds. Black Athena Revisited

1996 University of North Carolina Press

* McGlone, William R., Leonard, Phillip M., Guthrie, James L., Gillespie,

Rollin W. & Whittall, James P., Jr. Ancient American Inscriptions: Plow

Marks Or History 1993 Early Sites Research Society (accepts some

non-standard claims but quite scholarly)

* Muck, Otto The Secret Of Atlantis 1978 Collins (example of a fringe

book on Atlantis with linguistic material)

* Rohl, David Legend: The Genesis Of Civilisation 1999 Arrow

* Ruhlen, Merritt The Origin Of Language 1994 John Wiley [C]

* Ryan, William & Pittman, Walter Noah’s Flood 1998 Simon & Schuster

[C]

* Scrutton, Robert The Other Atlantis 1977 Neville Spearman (Oera

Linda Book)

* Simon, Zoltan Atlantis: The Seven Seals 1984 Robinson Expeditions

* Sitchin, Zecharia The Twelfth Planet 1976 Avon

* Smithana, Don America: Land Of The Rising Sun 1990 Anasazi

* Sutcliffe, Ray ed. Chronicle 1978 BBC (section on Glozel)

* Swadesh, Maurice The Origin And Diversification Of Languages 1971

Aldine [C]

* Temple, Robert The Sirius Mystery 1999 (2nd ed.) Arrow

* Van Sertima, Ivan They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence In

Early America 1976 Random House

* Williams, Stephen Fantastic Archaeology: The Wild Side Of North American

Prehistory 1990 University of Pennsylvania Press

* Yaguello, Marina Lunatic Lovers Of Language 1991 Athlone (translation)

(section on Marr)

(*** In fact that was claimed by James Chiuchward)

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did, but not all, I admit. I have to scroll from left to right for a mile to read it.

And did you read this? It's from the site you are registered on:

http://www.semafoor....oorDORESTAD.pdf

,

You can read this text on my website as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And did you read this?

It ends with:

"Kortom: Dorestad-Wijk bij Duurstede is een zwakke hypothese maar alles bijeengenomen sterker dan de alternatieven."

=> "Summary: <<Dorestad = Wijk bij Duurstede>> is a weak hypothesis, but alltogether stronger than any alternative."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It ends with:

"Kortom: Dorestad-Wijk bij Duurstede is een zwakke hypothese maar alles bijeengenomen sterker dan de alternatieven."

=> "Summary: <<Dorestad = Wijk bij Duurstede>> is a weak hypothesis, but alltogether stronger than any alternative."

Exactly.

And the funny thing is that I was convinced I had quoted that same line, and when I read your post I thought, "Hey, that is what I said in an earlier post", but I didn't. I had only saved that line plus link in a Notepad (Kladblok) file.

But the important thing is that of all possibilities Wijk bij Duurstede is better than the alternatives.

Even Knul has that line copied:

http://www.rodinbook.nl/indexdorestad.html

Question: how is Dorestad - whether it existed or not - important for the understanding of the OLB?

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But as the word order in the OLB is exactly the same as in modern and 19th century Dutch, fâra is nothing else but (EN) 'fare' (like in farewell = fare well, in Dutch 'vaarwel', or something like 'have a safe journey').

+++

EDIT:

bi-for-a* (1) 13?, bi-for-e* (1), bi-for-i* (1), bi-for* (1), afries., Präp.: nhd. vor,

für; ne. before (Präp.); Vw.: s. -wor-d-a; Hw.: vgl. ae. beforan (1), as. biforan, ahd.

bifora;

http://www.koeblerge...ch/afries-B.pdf

far-a (1) 80 und häufiger?, afries., st. V. (6): nhd. fahren, ziehen, gehen, reisen,

verfahren (V.), angreifen, überziehen; ne. go (V.), travel (V.), attack (V.);

http://www.koeblerge...ch/afries-F.pdf

.

Maybe you are right in this - you know the Dutch language much better than me,

I don't know. It's just that it fits exactly to Norwegian also, and that the other problem would have been solved by it.

Is the English:

the sailors then went on sailing to Denmark

an exact translation of the Dutch:

de sturers gingen dan naa de Denemarken varen ?

...or is

the sailors then went sailing to Denmark

a better translation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you are right in this - you know the Dutch language much better than me,

I don't know. It's just that it fits exactly to Norwegian also, and that the other problem would have been solved by it.

Is the English:

the sailors then went on sailing to Denmark

an exact translation of the Dutch:

de sturers gingen dan naa de Denemarken varen ?

...or is

the sailors then went sailing to Denmark

a better translation?

A literal translation would be:

"The steersmen went on sailing to the Denmarks". But you will agree with me that is a crappy translation, but it IS a literal translation.

"Went on" means that they continued doing something. In this case: sailing.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Question: how is Dorestad - whether it existed or not - important for the understanding of the OLB?

It aint.

But that Knul said it never existed lowers his general credibility (imo).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A literal translation would be:

"The steersmen went on sailing to the Denmarks". But you will agree with me that is a crappy translation, but it IS a literal translation.

"Went on" means that they continued doing something. In this case: sailing.

.

So, gingen varen means went on sailing.

Now I found this in Gerhard Köbler's Old Frisian dictionary:

Far-a (3), afries., Adv., Präp.: Vw.: s. for-a.

For-a 35, for (2), for-e, for-i, far-a (3), afries., Adv., Präp.: nhd. vorn, zuvor, vorher, früher, vor, für; ne. in front, before, for; ÜG.: lat. ante…

I think it's this word we are looking for, and have to use in this case.

Edited by Apol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It aint.

But that Knul said it never existed lowers his general credibility (imo).

Hmmm.... do you know of Delahaye's theories?

The Nifterlake site Knul registered on is all about Delahaye.

One of Delahaye's claims is that much of the Netherlands didn't even exist between 200 and 1000 CE, based on the now discarded theory of the Dunkirk Transgressions.

According to Delahaye half of the Netherlands was flooded, uninhabitable.

But it has no relevance to the OLB. The OLB narrative is about a period long before 200 CE.

That is, of course, if you believe the OLB narrative to be a true account of the history of ancient Europe...

I don't.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, gingen varen means went on sailing.

Yes, they continued doing what they were doing, and that was sailing.

I wished Jaylemurph showed up in this thread. He is our resident linguist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
do you know of Delahaye's theories?

I remember that he was discussed here, but forgot the details.

Delahaye may have thought Dorestad was somewhere else, but I don't believe he would claim that it never existed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember that he was discussed here, but forgot the details.

Delahaye may have thought Dorestad was somewhere else, but I don't believe he would claim that it never existed.

No, he claimed it was located in Belgium.

But his etymology..... well, I don't agree with it.

Here is a Dutch Wiki page about him (and I hope you can read Dutch) :

http://nl.wikipedia....Albert_Delahaye

But like I told Otharus. long ago, he was someone to be reckoned with, He was no idiot.

.

Edited by Abramelin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Possible meaning of the words Nocta and Fructa from the OLB..........From a latin and old Irish versions of Genesis , in the Labor Gabala Erenn .

Latin...2:- Cui respondit mulier de (fruicta) lignonum , quae sunt in Paradiso vescemur, 3:- de ( fructo) vero ligni quod est in medio paradisi prae cepit nobis deus.

Old Irish...10:-ro frecair imorro adhamh ro raidh ad choaladhus do ghuth a bPairrthais , romghabh eaglaor bham (nocht ), ro foilgios me . 11:-ro raidhdia, cia ro inndios dhuit do bheith (nocht) acht me feinin ro chathis forad in chrainn, do ro tairmioscious iomut ?

English:- Howbeit Adam answered and said, i heard thy voice in Paradise , and fear laid hold of me , for i was naked , and hid me .11:- and God said " who told you you were naked, other than myself ? has though eaten of the tree which i forbade thee ?

could they both mean naked one in latin (friucta ) and the other in old Irish (Nocht) ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Possible meaning of the words Nocta and Fructa from the OLB..........From a latin and old Irish versions of Genesis , in the Labor Gabala Erenn .

Latin...2:- Cui respondit mulier de (fruicta) lignonum , quae sunt in Paradiso vescemur, 3:- de ( fructo) vero ligni quod est in medio paradisi prae cepit nobis deus.

Old Irish...10:-ro frecair imorro adhamh ro raidh ad choaladhus do ghuth a bPairrthais , romghabh eaglaor bham (nocht ), ro foilgios me . 11:-ro raidhdia, cia ro inndios dhuit do bheith (nocht) acht me feinin ro chathis forad in chrainn, do ro tairmioscious iomut ?

English:- Howbeit Adam answered and said, i heard thy voice in Paradise , and fear laid hold of me , for i was naked , and hid me .11:- and God said " who told you you were naked, other than myself ? has though eaten of the tree which i forbade thee ?

could they both mean naked one in latin (friucta ) and the other in old Irish (Nocht) ???

The OLB word for "naked" is....."nâked".

Êr thêre aerge tid kêm was vs lând thaet skênnéste in wr.alda. Svnne rês hager aend thêr was sjelden frost. Anda bâma aend trêjon waxton frügda ând nochta,

Before the bad time came our country was the most beautiful in the world. The sun rose higher, and there was seldom frost. On the trees and shrubs (?) grew fruits and nuts (Dutch: vruchten en noten)

But the two words are also used in a metaphorical sense in the OLB, and then they mean "vreugde en ge-neugten" or "joy and pleasures".

+++

EDIT:

Personally I think that those "nochta" growing on trees and shrubs should be "nota". No old Germanic word has a -CH- or - K- in it. Only in Latin we have "nux".

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OLB word for "naked" is....."nâked".

Êr thêre aerge tid kêm was vs lând thaet skênnéste in wr.alda. Svnne rês hager aend thêr was sjelden frost. Anda bâma aend trêjon waxton frügda ând nochta,

Before the bad time came our country was the most beautiful in the world. The sun rose higher, and there was seldom frost. On the trees and shrubs (?) grew fruits and nuts (Dutch: vruchten en noten)

But the two words are also used in a metaphorical sense in the OLB, and then they mean "vreugde en ge-neugten" or "joy and pleasures".

+++

EDIT:

Personally I think that those "nochta" growing on trees and shrubs should be "nota". No old Germanic word has a -CH- or - K- in it. Only in Latin we have "nux".

.

I'm consistently translating früchda änd nochta into 'pleasures and delights' - though I'm aware of its double meaning - 'fruits and nuts'.

I can't see any relation to the the biblical Genesis. What I see, though, is a parallel to the biblical expression 'milk and honey'.

Edited by Apol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm consistently translating früchda änd nochta into 'pleasures and delights' - though I'm aware of its double meaning - 'fruits and nuts'.

I can't see any relation to the the biblical Genesis. What I see, though, is a parallel to the biblical expression 'milk and honey'.

I remembered that Knul once said that "vruchten en genoegens" ("fruits and delights") is a Biblical expression

http://www.unexplain...35#entry4197419

++

EDIT:

Well, it's not in the Bible itself (I think), but it appears to be a Dutch explanation of an episode in the Bible.

From the pdf Knul linked to:

3e. Met het verlies van dit leven werd Adam gedreigd

ingeval van ongehoorzaamheid, als het grootste verlies en

de vreeselijkste ellende die hem ooit overkomen kon. Adam

verloor vele dingen, namelijk het geheele beeld Gods, vereeniging

met God, gerechtigheid, vrede, troost, het paradijs

en al de vruchten en genoegens van hetzelve.

English:

3rd. With the loss of this life Adam was threatened in

case of disobedience, as the greatest loss and

the most terrible misery that could ever happen to him. Adam

lost many things, namely the whole image of God, union

with God, righteousness, peace, comfort, paradise

and the same with all the fruits and delights..

.

Edited by Abramelin

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 11

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.