Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood [Part 2]

[Otharus]

Well, read Beowulf or any other old English text of around the 8th century (or before) and you will see what I mean: you will recognize many Old Germanic words, but the syntax is very different.

Do you think people on Texel will have spoken that language in the the 8th century?

I don't.

The only real wars in North-Holland in the last 2000 years were the counts of 'Holland' trying to subdue Westfriesland, in which they only succeeded in the late 13th century.

Those counts from Holland will have been from Merovingean royal descent, judging by the name Theuderic (Diederik, Dirk) most of them had. Just like Friso did 1000 years earlier to get more influence, they will have married Frisian women (also because they were most beautiful and wise ofcourse), and after a few generations they could have themselves be called 'comes Frisia', but that didn't mean the Frisians were willing to pay taxes. Hence the wars. In 1297 the whole male population was murdered, but the women remained and they will have taught their children the old language, although some terms may have become taboo, like after every war.

There may also have been a few Danish invasions around the time of Christenings, but then again, it was men coming, not changing much of the 'mother-tongue'.

There is no reason to believe that language in North-Holland changed much between the time of the Romans (who stayed below Rhine anyway) and the arrival of the Franks/ Merovingeans.

[Otharus]

This was not a book with mere formulas or incantations or codes, although I should add that it is suggested that Wulfila tried to stay as close as possible to the Latin and/or Greek versions of the Bible he must have used.

That's the whole point. All of the oldest sources were written by Latin schooled monks.

Nothing (other than OLB) is saved from Westfrisian spoken language.

[Abramelin]

That's the whole point. All of the oldest sources were written by Latin schooled monks.

Nothing (other than OLB) is saved from Westfrisian spoken language.

Heh, you take the one example from my former post that was written by a Latin/Greek schooled monk who wrote a copy of the Bible in his native language.

But being a monk in those days was nothing more than having a chance to study.

However, that doesn't necessarily mean that as soon as they wrote in their native language about ancient legends that they used a syntax somewhat similar to the Latin or Greek syntax. But yes, I can imagine they did use such a syntax when they wrote a copy of the Bible in their native language.

[Abramelin]

Do you think people on Texel will have spoken that language in the the 8th century?

I don't.

The only real wars in North-Holland in the last 2000 years were the counts of 'Holland' trying to subdue Westfriesland, in which they only succeeded in the late 13th century.

Those counts from Holland will have been from Merovingean royal descent, judging by the name Theuderic (Diederik, Dirk) most of them had. Just like Friso did 1000 years earlier to get more influence, they will have married Frisian women (also because they were most beautiful and wise ofcourse), and after a few generations they could have themselves be called 'comes Frisia', but that didn't mean the Frisians were willing to pay taxes. Hence the wars. In 1297 the whole male population was murdered, but the women remained and they will have taught their children the old language, although some terms may have become taboo, like after every war.

There may also have been a few Danish invasions around the time of Christenings, but then again, it was men coming, not changing much of the 'mother-tongue'.

There is no reason to believe that language in North-Holland changed much between the time of the Romans (who stayed below Rhine anyway) and the arrival of the Franks/ Merovingeans.

The language used (idiom and grammar) in the OLB is very similar to what we read in those 13th century Frisian Law Texts.

Which in it's turn is quite similar to other Germanic texts of the same age.

Then we go back centuries in time, and the language changes.

Did the Frisians speak a similar language as Old English (Beowulf style or older)? Quite probably for it is known that when Willibrord tried to convert them to Christianity he didn't need an interpretor/translator.

.

Edited June 9, 2012 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

Heh, at least we know where Alewyn (the writer of the book with the title "The Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood" and one of the main participants in part -1- of this thread), is hanging out these days:

http://www.historum....nda-book-3.html

At appears to me he (= "Transvaler") simply started all over as though 'nothing happened''.

.

Edited June 9, 2012 by Abramelin

[Otharus]

Then we go back centuries in time, and the language changes.

Why?

Did the Frisians speak a similar language as Old English (Beowulf style or older)?

Quite probably for it is known that when Willibrord tried to convert them to Christianity he didn't need an interpretor/translator.

Why do you think Willibrord spoke Beowulf style Old-English?

If the Westfrisians would have spoken that Beowulf style language, why and how would it have changed in only a few hundred years into Frisian/ Dutch?

In studying the OLB and Oldfrisian, I have learned that English is much more a bastardised language than Frisian and Dutch. F and D are more pure and 'in between' English, German and the Scandinavian languages. So it would only make sense if they are closer to the original 'Germanic'. I don't know much about English/ Brittish history, but it looks like there have been more wars and mixing of cultures and languages. Considering that even today Great Brittain knows several very different dialects, the 'Beowulf-style language' will not be the only Old-English that there must have been.

[Otharus]

At appears to me he (= "Transvaler") simply started all over as though 'nothing happened''.

Thanks for that link.

I wonder what you mean with "as though nothing happened".

It was a great plesasure to read his posts there.

Enough nonsense has been written by others over the years about the OLB.

His reasoning is clear and the facts relevant.

OLB will be accepted as authentic.

I do not have the slightest doubt about that.

It is only a matter of time.

Edited June 9, 2012 by Otharus

[Otharus]

The language used (idiom and grammar) in the OLB is very similar to what we read in those 13th century Frisian Law Texts.

We must be aware, that the OLB language (as we know it) may not be what it was when it was first compiled in the 6th C. BC.

Copyists tend to make the text they copy more understandable.

There may have been many copyists other than Liko and Hidde, all may have changed bits.

The last copy (1256 BC) may represent what was understandable in that time.

Personally I don't think that language would have had to change so much within a strong culture, where people tended to chose to marry only people of there own culture.

But this is just to remind ourselves that - when OLB is authentic - it still is a 13th century copy, so we are not sure if it perfectly reflects the language of the original version.

[Van Gorp]

Thanks for that link.

I wonder what you mean with "as though nothing happened".

It was a great plesasure to read his posts there.

Enough nonsense has been written by others over the years about the OLB.

His reasoning is clear and the facts relevant.

OLB will be accepted as authentic.

I do not have the slightest doubt about that.

It is only a matter of time.

Yes, thnx for the news Sherlock Abe.

I must say I really enjoyed reading his posts.

"The stong will continue" says Damian.

[Abramelin]

Thanks for that link.

I wonder what you mean with "as though nothing happened".

It was a great plesasure to read his posts there.

Enough nonsense has been written by others over the years about the OLB.

His reasoning is clear and the facts relevant.

OLB will be accepted as authentic.

I do not have the slightest doubt about that.

It is only a matter of time.

"As though nothing happened"....

I mean, read that thread on that site. It is as though he completely forgot what others here have posted concerning his theories.

[Abramelin]

Yes, thnx for the news Sherlock Abe.

I must say I really enjoyed reading his posts.

"The stong will continue" says Damian.

I never even remotely suggested his posts weren't interesting.

And I wasn't even looking for him, I found it by accident when I Googled "Oera Linda" and "linguistics". I already knew of the site, but not much if any new info showed up concerning the OLB.

Well, at least his presence in that thread overthere will make people dig a bit deeper.

[Abramelin]

Although Proto-Germanic is a reconstructed language, does any of you not think that this reconstructed language should be very close to the language used in the OLB?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic_grammar

[Van Gorp]

I never even remotely suggested his posts weren't interesting.

And I wasn't even looking for him, I found it by accident when I Googled "Oera Linda" and "linguistics". I already knew of the site, but not much if any new info showed up concerning the OLB.

Well, at least his presence in that thread overthere will make people dig a bit deeper.

True, just wanted to thank because i probably wouldn't have come there in the near future without your post.

Interesting also about that proto-german, for me it 'sounds' all familiar (meaning looks like phonetic dialect).

Maybe we all talked the same language in different dialects :-)

[Otharus]

It is as though he completely forgot what others here have posted concerning his theories.

I would have ignored that too if I were him.

He holds better cards in his hand.

[Big Bad Voodoo]

The L, maybe you better read that link in my signature, heh. It will take you only a month or so to wade through it...

776 pages. Can you give sum of it. Perhaps?

[Van Gorp]

I saw our friend Alewyn is referring to Homer’s description of the Ulyssee voyage in connection with OLB referrings on Greeck connection (and even ancient relations of the writers and language).

For sure he’s not in need for etymologic ‘speculation’, but I can amuse myself in the meantime with the obvious :-)

Maybe allready stated here somewhere but a small summary which just catches the ear …

Scytisch tongue, OLB-style:

• Ulyssee coming from Hel-ische (see also how in Hel-As they use the same, Declination of Greeck water via the Hel-As-Pont, because the pont is a bond)
  
• Going to the Ulysian fields: Hellische Kampen, Hellisch meant as Hellend but also as in Heilig (meaning of Hel as an awfull place is twisted over time, in connection with under-ground), Hol-Land-> Holy-land
  
• Passing the Sickel (Sicilia)
  
• Passing the gates (Gat-Us), going out the mediterrenean see
  
• Forming Ulysse-baan en cours de route, op z’n pad
  
  • Ulysse-baan
    
  • Ulissipad, Ulissipo
    
  • uLisbane
    
  • Lissabon
    

  [*]Around the estuarium you see the same namegivings

  • Ulyssinghe, Vlissinghen
    
  • Ulyssewegen (Lissewege: curious in connection Ulysse-baan! Ulysse-pad)
    
  • Ulysseghem, Vlissegem
    
  • …
    

Assebroek is also a nice one, same with Helle-Voet-Sluis, too many to mention in relation with Helisch/Helas/Ulysse/Vlies.

[Abramelin]

I would have ignored that too if I were him.

He holds better cards in his hand.

I meant the posts by Swede and others about geology, Cormac's posts about genetics, and posts about archeology.

Posts that were critical concerning the theories in his book.

If you now say you would have ignored those posts too, then what are we doing here?

He could also have said that several online translations were in error, and he now knows they are.

776 pages. Can you give sum of it. Perhaps?

You're kidding, right?

[Abramelin]

If you look on page 5 of that thread on that other site, this is what Alewyn ("Transvaler") says:

"The discovery of facts that were not known at the time of the OLB’s first appearance in 1867 and which subsequently proved the old manuscript to be correct"

I will bet he will come up with his "Minoan Civilization" again which the OLB doesn't mention at all; it mentions what was already known about king Minos.

Some cow disease is mentioned in the OLB? We have shown that was known decades before the OLB was published.

Pile dwellings? Known too, and proven to be known long before the OLB was published.

Just a couple of examples. But those sources are in Dutch and most non-Dutch will happily ignore those sources unless some people like us are willing to post a translation.

And quoting from Latin and Greek classics as proof of the OLB won't help as these books were known and read in the 19th century.

[Abramelin]

The first part of this thread...

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=184645&st=11625

... became archived on May 17 of this year because the thread was huge and causing slow loading time for many people here.

As is known, one can search for some word or name in a specific thread by using the search tool, top-right of the screen ('this topic', the magnifying glass). But that is no longer possible with an archived thread, and I complained to Saru about it (see "Forum Updates", at the top of the index page), but he is not able to change that. Meaning: a LOT of info is available in that thread, but very hard to retrace again.

Of course you can retrace the info, but you will have to use Google to do it and it will take ages for someone who doesn't know of that thread to find this info.

So if Alewyn decided to simply ignore the info posted here by many, info/scientific facts that shot several of his theories to pieces, then he won't have to worry it will be easily found again by others.

Just think about Alewyn's claims that science has corroborated the OLB 2194BC scenario (the disasters described in the OLB, 'when the bad time came'). I think a Cormac, a Swede, and others including myself have posted a lot that pulled the rug from under his feet.

Now I could register at that site, and tell them what I know about all this critical info, but I am not on some personal 'man hunt', lol.

[Abramelin]

This post is about Tex, Ewa, and Riucht.

9. Far thissa thjanesta skilun hja lêra Fryas tex aend tha êwa

9. For this service they must study Frya’s Tex and the laws

That is nêi Frya-his tex aend-et skolde vnrjucht wêsa to vnthandana that.

This is Frya’s Tex, and it would be unjust to act contrary to it.

In min jüged haev ik wel ênis mort overa baenda thêra êwa, aefter haev ik Frya often tanked vr hjra tex, aend vsa êthla vr tha êwa thêr thêrnêi tavlikt send.

In my youth I often grumbled at the strictness of the laws, but afterwards I learned to thank Frya for her Tex and our forefathers/nobility for the laws which they established upon it.

==

2. Nên aefta Fryas skil ovira misslêga sinra nêste malja nach kalta. Is hwa misdêdoch far-im selva, tha navt frêselik far en ôra, sâ mêi hi him selva riuchta.

2. No true Frisian shall speak ill of the faults of his neighbours. If any man injures himself, but does no harm to others, he must be his own judge;

Fasta sêide.

Alle thinga, thêr maen anfangja wil, hoka thaet-aet môga wêsa, vppa tha dêi, thêr wy Frya heldgad haewa, tham skilun êvg falykant utkvma: nêidam tid nw biwysd heth thaet hju riucht hêde, sâ is thaet en êwa wrdon, thaet maen svnder nêd aend tvang a Frya hjra dêi nawet owers ni dva ne mêi, tha blyda fêrsta fyrja.

FASTA SAID—

Anything that any man commences, whatever it may be, on the day appointed for Frya’s worship shall eternally fail, for time has proved that she was right; and it is become a law that no man shall, except from absolute necessity, keep that day otherwise than as a joyful feast.

The Old Frisian word for 'right' in 'to be right' or in 'to be in one's right' or in 'rightful' is "riucht'. "Riucht" became the later Dutch "recht" and also has to do with 'to be right' and so on.

In the old Frisian Law texts it is also used for "law" or "judge" (and again, the same as in old and modern Dutch).

http://www.etymologiebank.nl/trefwoord/recht2

Another Old Frisian word for law is "ewa" meaning law, and again that's the same in Old Dutch and Old Saxon:

http://www.etymologiebank.nl/trefwoord/eeuwig

"Riucht" is used only a couple of times in the OLB, but "ewa" shows up more times.

But what is this "tex" that appears in the OLB?

I haven't found anything in Old Frisian (or other Old Germanic languages):

http://www.koeblergerhard.de/germanistischewoerterbuecher/altfriesischeswoerterbuch/ne-afries.pdf

http://www.koeblergerhard.de/germanistischewoerterbuecher/altfriesischeswoerterbuch/afries-T.pdf

The only thing that comes close is the English word "text" or the Dutch word "tekst", but both are derived from "texere/textus":

text (n.)

late 14c., "wording of anything written," from O.Fr. texte, O.N.Fr. tixte (12c.), from M.L. textus "the Scriptures, text, treatise," in L.L. "written account, content, characters used in a document," from L. textus "style or texture of a work," lit. "thing woven," from pp. stem of texere "to weave," from PIE root *tek- "make" .

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=text&allowed_in_frame=0

"Wording of anything written".... but from the context of the OLB it appears to be more than just something written, it would be the Dutch "voorschrift" or the English "prescript" or "regulation" or "instruction".

So is this OLB "tex" a borrowing (and shortening) from Old (North) Frankish texte/tixte or Latin textus? I didn't find any original (= not derived from Latin) Old Germanic equivalent, contrary to the words "ewa" and "riucht" for which I did find Germanic equivalents.

[Abramelin]

OK, enough of mere words...

This is what Alewyn/Transvaler wrote today:

"The fact that the Ira (or Iranians) were driven out from the East of the Punjab to the West by the Shamanists from Mongolia after the 4.2 ka BP Event, leaves the suspicion that they may have been the original inhabitants of the Harrapan Urban Civilization in India that was apparently destroyed in 2200 BC. The implication of this scenario is that the Harrapan Civilization was not totally wiped out by the 4.2 ka BP Event. Instead, the survivors of the natural disaster were finally driven out by refugees from Mongolia."

http://www.historum....nda-book-5.html

And this is what someone sent me today:

Climate change contributed to demise of ancient Indus civilisation

Using archaeological data and geoscience technology, a team of scientists has shown that a major, gradual decline in monsoon rains led to the collapse of the ancient Harappan culture, which relied on river floods to sustain its system of agriculture.

Once extending more than 1 million square kilometres across the plains of the Indus River from the Arabian Sea to the Himalayas and the Ganges - over what is now Pakistan, northwest India and eastern Afghanistan - the Indus civilisation was the largest but least known of the first great urban cultures that also included Egypt and Mesopotamia. Now mostly arid desolation, over 4,000 years ago the area supported a sophisticated urban culture with various trade routes and maritime connections with Mesopotamia, standards for building construction and sanitation systems, the arts, and a writing system that still eludes epigraphers.

Between 2003 and 2008 the team developed and analysed digital landform maps of the Indus Valley area, then probed the ground to determine origins and ages of sediments, eventually developing a 10,000-year chronology of landscape change.

"We reconstructed the dynamic landscape of the plain where the Indus civilisation developed 5200 years ago, built its cities, and slowly disintegrated between 3900 and 3000 years ago," said geologist Liviu Giosan of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), and lead author of the report.

At first, the declining monsoon rains actually played a role in the rise of the Harappan civilisation. Adds Giosan: "As monsoon drying subdued devastating floods, the land nearby the rivers - still fed with water and rich silt - was just right for agriculture. This lasted for almost 2,000 years." By about 3900 years ago the river system had dried to the point where the Harappans were compelled to move and disperse eastward toward the Ganges basin, where the monsoon rains were still plentiful and more reliable.

Dorian Fuller, an archaeologist with the University College London and co-author of the report, explains: "cities collapsed, but smaller agricultural communities were sustainable and flourished. Many of the urban arts - such as writing - faded away, but agriculture continued and actually diversified."

The researchers also believe they have discovered the mythical river Sarasvati, portrayed in ancient Sanskrit scriptures as "surpassing in majesty and might all other waters", and long considered lost. They have evidence that the current Ghaggar-Hakra river was the ancient Sarasvati, based on sedimentary, topographical, and archaeological data of settlement near the river during the Harappan era. Their findings suggest the ancient river was fed by perennial monsoons - not Himalayan glaciers, as was previously supposed - and that the increasingly arid climate reduced it to the short seasonal flows of today.

Edited from Popular Archaeology (28 May 2012)

http://www.stonepage...news/index.html

Or... the Harappan Civilization wasn't destroyed in 2200 BC (think OLB, 2194 BC in case you missed the connection) like Alewyn said.

In reality it didn't happen suddenly and whatever happened, it started centuries after 2200 BC.

.

Edited June 10, 2012 by Abramelin

[Otharus]

I meant the posts by Swede and others about geology, Cormac's posts about genetics, and posts about archeology.

Posts that were critical concerning the theories in his book.

Those critical posts were not strong enough to make me doubt that his main conclusion is right.

For me, even without Alewyn's evidence, it is evident that OLB must be authentic, because it is just way too complex for human minds to fabricate something like that out of nothing, specially in the 18th century.

If it were a 19th century hoax, it would fit more in the belief system of that time. Things in it that by then were considered totally outrageous, by now actually seem to be possible.

If it were fake, that should become more evident through the years, not less, which is the case.

And like I said before: why does that paper-study have to take more than five years?

Still no clear results.

If the paper would be from a 19th century factory, that can be established within one week.

Edit: one thing I think he should have mentioned is, that the flood year was also known in 19th (18th?) century Frisian almanaks.

Edited June 11, 2012 by Otharus

[Otharus]

The only thing that comes close is the English word "text" or the Dutch word "tekst", but both are derived from "texere/textus":

"Wording of anything written".... but from the context of the OLB it appears to be more than just something written, it would be the Dutch "voorschrift" or the English "prescript" or "regulation" or "instruction".

... or testament?

[Abramelin]

Those critical posts were not strong enough to make me doubt that his main conclusion is right.

For me, even without Alewyn's evidence, it is evident that OLB must be authentic, because it is just way too complex for human minds to fabricate something like that out of nothing, specially in the 18th century.

If it were a 19th century hoax, it would fit more in the belief system of that time. Things in it that by then were considered totally outrageous, by now actually seem to be possible.

If it were fake, that should become more evident through the years, not less, which is the case.

And like I said before: why does that paper-study have to take more than five years?

Still no clear results.

If the paper would be from a 19th century factory, that can be established within one week.

Edit: one thing I think he should have mentioned is, that the flood year was also known in 19th (18th?) century Frisian almanaks.

You should not forget that this thread is originally about Alewyn's book, which, in turn, is based on the OLB. Even if the OLB proves to be a real ancient history of Europe, then we can still discuss the claims he makes in his book.

[Abramelin]

... or testament?

According to this etymology site, 'testament' is derived from the Latin 'testari '(to be witess to) and 'testis' (witness).

testament

late 13c., "last will disposing of property," from L. testamentum "a will, publication of a will," from testari "make a will, be witness to," from testis "witness," from PIE *tris- "three," on the notion of "third person, disinterested witness." Use in reference to the two divisions of the Bible (c.1300) is from L.L. vetus testamentum and novum testamentum, loan-translations of Gk. palaia diatheke and kaine diatheke. L.L. testamentum in this case was a mistranslation of Gk. diatheke, which meant both "covenant, dispensation" and "will, testament," and was used in the former sense in the account of the Last Supper (see testimony) but subsequently was interpreted as Christ's "last will."

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