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

What for block printing , pre-Guttenburg.........Is it not more likely they are parts damaged beyond reading ?.......Surely we have to surmise that although he says he saved it in the flood that some damage was caused ,he could not have saved it undamaged from the flood , otherwise why did he need to copy it at all

Is there a difference though in being faithful to the meaning , but using updated words with the same meaning , ......and just as double U = W ....could we presume M = double n ?.........That double U being W , is why you might recall i thought the W was the U with the line in the middle of it shown in the full stand and run script .

Edited by NO-ID-EA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good observation, No !

Damn, now I am seriously thinking of visiting an optician.

Those wiggly lines are (according to Knul) some sort of notification for a printer: leave this blanc.

They show up everywhere in the MS.

+++

EDIT:

Knul, I think you should edit this too:

30 HJU -TRAGD HELP TO LЄ [p. 134] NANDE ÆND WR

31 - ALDA SKIL JO KREFTA JЄVA - ÐЄR HIPÐ

32 HJU NЄI T KRYL-WOD - GRIPT ELSNE TRЄJON

Like NO-ID-EA said, it should be TRЄON.

Page 96 of the MS (scroll down to bottom of the page) :

http://images.tresoa...php?p=98&pm=212

.

Thanks. I changed it to: ÐЄR HIPÐ HJU NЄI T KRYLWOD GRIPÐ ELSNE [ELZEN] TRЄON [TAKKEN].

I followed Ottema: Thêr hipth hja nêi t Krylwod , gript elsne trêjon ,

Edited by Knul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note also on page 96 of Tresor the word is written treon , and not trejon .( last word on page )

Are the wiggly lines in some parts of page 96 , and in other places ,supposed to indicate that the original document was damaged , and he could not read it to copy it ??

if so which one was damaged the one saved from the flood presumably ,but could it have been the copy was damaged later ??

Thanks, I changed it. I followed Ottema: Thêr hipth hja nêi t Krylwod , gript elsne trêjon , Besides Ottema did not notice the alliteration between hipth and gripth. She did not run to the Krylwod, but jumped (in Dutch: hopte). This gives an idea of the literary quality of the OLB, almost poetry.

In the preceding lines HWERFON HJRA TOGHATERA MEN .. MEN is a mistake, should be MAR (Dutch maar, slechts). MEN means but (Dutch: maar), but that is a conjunction. Again Ottema did not notice, else he would have improved the text. For me it shows, that the original text was written in Dutch. By the way at the end of the MS the conjunction MEN (but, maar) is replaced by MAR. I don't want to make the case more complicated than it is, but the OLB word MAR shows also up as (ANY) MORE (Dutch: meer). What do you think of that ?

Edited by Knul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MS 096:

16 MEN AL WЄRE HJU LEDLIK ÐACH SKOLDE

17 HJU VS DJŮRA WЄSA -

18 [bLANCO REGEL]

19 JEF HJU WYGANDLIK SY -

It looks like the 'translator' could not read the line and left it open. There is no grammatical connection between line 17 and 19. Line 19 should be preceded by a text, which leads to the subjunctive SY. In fact I cannot find any reason to insert a white line.

Edited by Knul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, it might have been branches she fetched, and threw into a heap, so that the children could walk on them.

Right. She was in a hurry to rescue the kids. So she had no time to grasp a whole tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What for block printing , pre-Guttenburg.........Is it not more likely they are parts damaged beyond reading ?.......Surely we have to surmise that although he says he saved it in the flood that some damage was caused ,he could not have saved it undamaged from the flood , otherwise why did he need to copy it at all

Is there a difference though in being faithful to the meaning , but using updated words with the same meaning , ......and just as double U = W ....could we presume M = double n ?.........That double U being W , is why you might recall i thought the W was the U with the line in the middle of it shown in the full stand and run script .

He had to copy, because the paper was deterioriating and the ink was vanishing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about copies....

I always said it is strange that only one copy of the OLB survived.

But according to the OLB several copies were made of the "Book of Adela's followers' , mid 6th century BCE:

Thit send tha nêilêtne skrifta Brunnos, ther skrywer wêsen is to thisre burch. After that tha Adela follistar ella hêde lêta overskryva elk in sin rik, hwat wryt was in vppa wâgarum thêra burgum, bisloton hja en Moder to kjasane.

These are the writings left by Brunno, who was the writer of this burgt. After the followers of Adela had made copies, each in his state/realm, of what was inscribed upon the walls of the burgt, they resolved to choose a mother.

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

Does "sin" or "his" point to the grevetmen and the areas and cities that were under their command, like we have discussed before? In that case we know where to 'find' these copies.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the word "tohnekka":

Hwat hja forth dêdon, hja buwgdon to fâra Adela aend keston thju slyp hyrar tohnekka.

Upon that they bowed themselves before Adela, and kissed the hem of her garment.

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

Thêre burchfams lov.

THE ELEGY OF THE BURGTMAAGD

Hira hemeth is linnen, hira tohnekka wol, thaet hjv selva spon aend wêvade.[OLB]

Haar hemd is linnen, haar tunica wol, dat zij zelve spon en weefde.[Dutch]

Her shirt/skirt is of linnen, her tunic (?) is of wool, that she herself spun and wove.[English/me]

Her garments of linen and wool she spun and wove herself.[sandbach]

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

P.A.F. van Veen en N. van der Sijs (1997), Van Dale Etymologisch woordenboek

tunica [membraan, gewaad] {1624 in de betekenis ‘membraan’; de betekenis ‘gewaad’ 1734} < latijn tunica [wollen onderkleed], evenals grieks chitōn (ionisch kithōn) uit het semitisch, vgl. aramees kittūnā [linnen], hebreeuws kuttōneth [hemdachtige lijfrok] → chiton, tourniquet.

tunica [membrane, robe] {1624 in the meaning 'membrane'; meaning 'robe' 1734} < Latin tunica [woolen garment], as well as Greek chiton (ionic kithōn) from Semitic, cf Aramaic kittūnā [linen], Hebrew kuttōneth [shirt-like tunic] → chiton, tourniquet.

http://www.etymologi...refwoord/tunica

Ontleening van lat. tunica.

4. Dameskleedingstuk dat de(n) eronder gedragen rok of japon gedeeltelijk vrijlaat. Gebezigd m. betr. t. zekere vrouwendracht in het verleden.

Borrowing from Latin tunica.

4. Ladies garment that leaves the skirt or dress underneath partially free. Used in relation to a particular women's wear in the past.

http://gtb.inl.nl/iW...=WNT&id=M071235

tunic (n.)

c.1600, from Middle French tunique, from Latin tunica (cf. Spanish tunica, Italian tonica, Old English tunece, Old High German tunihha), probably from a Semitic source (cf. Hebrew kuttoneth "coat," Aramaic kittuna).

http://www.etymonlin...searchmode=none

(Up to now I haven't found anything in an Old Frisian dictionary)

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

W:

In other Germanic languages, including German, its name is similar or identical to that of English V.[4] In many languages, its name literally means "double v": Spanish doble ve (though it can be spelled uve doble),[5][note 1] French double vé, Icelandic tvöfalt vaff, Czech dvojité vé, Finnish kaksois-vee, etc.

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

Literally double V - so a W written as VV would not be that odd. That it's in Finnish is especially interesting.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about copies....

I always said it is strange that only one copy of the OLB survived.

But according to the OLB several copies were made of the "Book of Adela's followers' , mid 6th century BCE:

Thit send tha nêilêtne skrifta Brunnos, ther skrywer wêsen is to thisre burch. After that tha Adela follistar ella hêde lêta overskryva elk in sin rik, hwat wryt was in vppa wâgarum thêra burgum, bisloton hja en Moder to kjasane.

These are the writings left by Brunno, who was the writer of this burgt. After the followers of Adela had made copies, each in his state/realm, of what was inscribed upon the walls of the burgt, they resolved to choose a mother.

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

Does "sin" or "his" point to the grevetmen and the areas and cities that were under their command, like we have discussed before? In that case we know where to 'find' these copies.

.

Yes, I think that's right. But the copies might not be there for many reasons. Taken by family members or lost to every other thing the original Frisians finally succumbed to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tohnekka - funny name - sounds like toe to neck - like bathers had to be once, neck to toe and everbodys clothing was - from your neck to your toe.

In the Frisian dictionary, maybe it's cover: thekkene - hem of her garment/hem of her covering.

thek-k-en-e

, tek-k-en-e, afries., F.: nhd. Decke; ne. cover (N.); Q.: W, S; E.: s.

thek-k-a; W.: s. nfries. teck; W.: s. saterl. tace, tac; L.: Hh 110a, Hh 176, Rh 1068a

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tohnekka - funny name - sounds like toe to neck - like bathers had to be once, neck to toe and everbodys clothing was - from your neck to your toe.

In the Frisian dictionary, maybe it's cover: thekkene - hem of her garment/hem of her covering.

thek-k-en-e

, tek-k-en-e, afries., F.: nhd. Decke; ne. cover (N.); Q.: W, S; E.: s.

thek-k-a; W.: s. nfries. teck; W.: s. saterl. tace, tac; L.: Hh 110a, Hh 176, Rh 1068a

Thek-k-en-e seems to be a logical choice, but then we have to change -N- for -K- .

But both the 'tohnekka' and the 'tunica' were made of wool, so I don't think people would have bathed wearing these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I think that's right. But the copies might not be there for many reasons. Taken by family members or lost to every other thing the original Frisians finally succumbed to.

So every other forgot to make copies but only Cornelis Over de Linden's direct ancestors did ?

From the paragraph I posted I get the idea that it may not have been uncommon to make copies, so if it is all true, then there should be at least another surviving copy, somewhere.

Don't forget, this happened around mid 6th century BCE, so long before the Christian era there may have been many copies.

Or did the need to make copies only arise because of those Christians, but maybe all other Fryans started too late?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

W:

In other Germanic languages, including German, its name is similar or identical to that of English V.[4] In many languages, its name literally means "double v": Spanish doble ve (though it can be spelled uve doble),[5][note 1] French double vé, Icelandic tvöfalt vaff, Czech dvojité vé, Finnish kaksois-vee, etc.

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

Literally double V - so a W written as VV would not be that odd. That it's in Finnish is especially interesting.

In the OLB a W is what it says it is - a double V. You can see it in for instance Hidde Oera Linda's letter, where the same word is written with two V's and one W respectively:

I have vvrskrêven them on foreign paper. If you inherit them, you must also wrskríva them – likewise your children, so that they never become lost.

You see it all the time: Vvl, Wl (vile), Vvnnen, Wnnen (won), Vvr, Wr (over), Vvrda, Wrda (places) - and Vvral, Wral (over all, everywhere)

Edited by Apol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So every other forgot to make copies but only Cornelis Over de Linden's direct ancestors did ?

From the paragraph I posted I get the idea that it may not have been uncommon to make copies, so if it is all true, then there should be at least another surviving copy, somewhere.

Don't forget, this happened around mid 6th century BCE, so long before the Christian era there may have been many copies.

Or did the need to make copies only arise because of those Christians, but maybe all other Fryans started too late?

I'd ask - how many bothered to make copies of a long, unusual, hard to understand, inappropriate and dangerous to have, manuscript that could jeopardize their lives?

Or who had the inclination or yearning to keep it intact as the Oera Linda family had?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd ask - how many bothered to make copies of a long, unusual, hard to understand, inappropriate and dangerous to have, manuscript that could jeopardize their lives?

Or who had the inclination or yearning to keep it intact as the Oera Linda family had?

I was talking 6th century BCE. They understood the language.

So they had at least some 6-800 years to make copies if they had wanted to - or even longer in some parts of Europe, because Christianity had not arrived yet.

And why would only the Westfrisians have that yearning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the OLB a W is what it says it is - a double V. You can see it in for instance Hidde Oera Linda's letter, where the same word is written with two V's and one W respectively:

I have vvrskrêven them on foreign paper. If you inherit them, you must also wrskríva them – likewise your children, so that they never become lost.

You see it all the time: Vvl, Wl (vile), Vvnnen, Wnnen (won), Vvr, Wr (over), Vvrda, Wrda (places) - and Vvral, Wral (over all, everywhere)

Yes I agree now, I had not noticed the other portions of the original manuscript until seeing the post here today. Rather interesting really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was talking 6th century BCE. They understood the language.

So they had at least some 6-800 years to make copies if they had wanted to - or even longer in some parts of Europe, because Christianity had not arrived yet.

And why would only the Westfrisians have that yearning?

Well, I tell you, I don't think I would have bothered at the time. Also it appears it's only the Oera Linda family who have added to this particular manuscript - you think all families did that too?

There could have been 5 originals, maybe copied by 3-5 people who were in the appropriate circumstances to copy it, not flooded out or had no home or left the country or been over taken by Magy....

Then of them, maybe got copied another few times, not added to and lost or what-not, unknown to us, known about and burned through fear of even having it, many reasons to get rid of it even.

Just cause it says to do it (copy it) who actually does what they are told? Just saying, half of them might not have even copied it once. Depends on the person and their personality and their interest in it etc.

The Oera Lindas kept theirs in tact, finding it important and relevant to them.

IMO the odds just aren't there of being lots of copies around.

Edited by The Puzzler
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I agree now, I had not noticed the other portions of the original manuscript until seeing the post here today. Rather interesting really.

Alternately using W and VV is a sign people were no yet used to using only the W. That was the situation around 1600 CE:

The shift from the ligature 'vv' to the distinct letter 'w' is thus gradual, and is only apparent in abecedaria, explicit listings of all individual letters. It was probably considered a separate letter by the 14th century in both Middle English and Middle German orthography, although it remained an outsider not really considered part of the Latin alphabet proper, as expressed by Valentin Ickelsamer in the 16th century, who complained that

"Poor w is so infamous and unknown that many barely know either its name or its shape, not those who aspire to being Latinists, as they have no need of it, nor do the Germans, not even the schoolmasters, know what to do with it or how to call it; some call it we, [... others] call it uu, [...] the Swabians call it auwawau."

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thek-k-en-e seems to be a logical choice, but then we have to change -N- for -K- .

But both the 'tohnekka' and the 'tunica' were made of wool, so I don't think people would have bathed wearing these things.

I don't think they bathes in them, just comparing the name, a garment that may have been from toe to neck - like a long dress or covering, which I'd be pretty sure she'd be wearing and I'm familiar with little short tunics but in the instance I think the word might not be tunic at all - but covering.

The letter change is somewhat hard yes, for now, but the meaning and similarity as you agree does seem logical, so I'll check it more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I tell you, I don't think I would have bothered at the time. Also it appears it's only the Oera Linda family who have added to this particular manuscript - you think all families did that too?

There could have been 5 originals, maybe copied by 3-5 people who were in the appropriate circumstances to copy it, not flooded out or had no home or left the country or been over taken by Magy....

Then of them, maybe got copied another few times, not added to and lost or what-not, unknown to us, known about and burned through fear of even having it, many reasons to get rid of it even.

Just cause it says to do it (copy it) who actually does what they are told? Just saying, half of them might not have even copied it once. Depends on the person and their personality and their interest in it etc.

The Oera Lindas kept theirs in tact, finding it important and relevant to them.

IMO the odds just aren't there of being lots of copies around.

The Frisians were the ones who resisted conversion to Christianity the longest of all European tribes, as far as I know, so more than just the Frisians in Leeuwarden (or Enkhuizen) may have felt the need to preserve their book of their history and laws.

Same thing may have happened during the time the Magi took over, and they must have known of the book.

And there where not only Over de Lindens in Leeuwarden and Enkhuizen, but elsewhere too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So every other forgot to make copies but only Cornelis Over de Linden's direct ancestors did ?

From the paragraph I posted I get the idea that it may not have been uncommon to make copies, so if it is all true, then there should be at least another surviving copy, somewhere.

Don't forget, this happened around mid 6th century BCE, so long before the Christian era there may have been many copies.

Or did the need to make copies only arise because of those Christians, but maybe all other Fryans started too late?

According to the book it was seemingly made one copy only. You can read it from what Apollânja and Wiljo write.

The Oera Linda's were in a leading position, and it was also Adela's idea to do the transcriptions.

That particular family probably felt a special responsibility for taking care of their people's history.

Moreover, they hadn't any copy machines in those days - it was quite a work to make transcriptions, and how and where should they do it? And the scribes had certainly enough to do, and people in general had enough to think about - they didn't think of things so remote from their daily lives as to see to it that their history became preserved.

And Adela's family took care of the recording, so why should they then worry about it?

Another thing: If there existed several copies, the individual families keeping them wouldn't be so concerned about them not getting lost.

It would also have been dangerous to be in the possession of a manuscript like that in those times.

And the writings would have to be copied over and over again as time went on.

I think we should be happy that a history like that has survived at all.

Edited by Apol
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What for block printing , pre-Guttenburg.........Is it not more likely they are parts damaged beyond reading ?.......Surely we have to surmise that although he says he saved it in the flood that some damage was caused ,he could not have saved it undamaged from the flood , otherwise why did he need to copy it at all

Is there a difference though in being faithful to the meaning , but using updated words with the same meaning , ......and just as double U = W ....could we presume M = double n ?.........That double U being W , is why you might recall i thought the W was the U with the line in the middle of it shown in the full stand and run script .

See bolded text: no, I don't think so.

Here is part of the original letter sheet:

(click to enlarge)

post-18246-0-59818300-1364555114_thumb.j

And every people from around the Med and the Middle East had a separate letter for -N- and -M- for thousands of years already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the book it was seemingly made one copy only. You can read it from what Apollânja and Wiljo write.

The Oera Linda's were in a leading position, and it was also Adela's idea to do the transcriptions.

That particular family probably felt a special responsibility for taking care of their people's history.

Moreover, they hadn't any copy machines in those days - it was quite a work to make transcriptions, and how and where should they do it? And the scribes had certainly enough to do, and people in general had enough to think about - they didn't think of things so remote from their daily lives as to see to it that their history became preserved.

And Adela's family took care of the recording, so why should they then worry about it?

Another thing: If there existed several copies, the individual families keeping them wouldn't be so concerned about them not getting lost.

It would also have been dangerous to be in the possession of a manuscript like that in those times.

And the manuscript would have to be copied over and over again as time went on.

I think we should be happy that a manuscript like that has survived at all.

They may have not been interested in their own history that much, but they sure must have felt the need to copy all those laws and regulations?

So someone living in a burgt like Münster, Buda, Kattenburch and so on would at least copy those laws and regulations, and others after him or her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alternately using W and VV is a sign people were no yet used to using only the W. That was the situation around 1600 CE:

The shift from the ligature 'vv' to the distinct letter 'w' is thus gradual, and is only apparent in abecedaria, explicit listings of all individual letters. It was probably considered a separate letter by the 14th century in both Middle English and Middle German orthography, although it remained an outsider not really considered part of the Latin alphabet proper, as expressed by Valentin Ickelsamer in the 16th century, who complained that

"Poor w is so infamous and unknown that many barely know either its name or its shape, not those who aspire to being Latinists, as they have no need of it, nor do the Germans, not even the schoolmasters, know what to do with it or how to call it; some call it we, [... others] call it uu, [...] the Swabians call it auwawau."

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

Interesting too.

So, is W a separate letter? Maybe not. Maybe it's just showing the double ligature version of it's use, VV as what appears as W in the letter list - which might not actually be a W - as well as regular V as V. The same letter no-id-ea mentioned. The W that is on the manuscript pages could be from sheer laziness to lift your ink pen, unneeding to dip again. Being a lazyish person, I'd do that, not take my pen off while joining 2 V's. It's just a running writing/cursive step without being officially cursive.

Edited by The Puzzler

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.