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

something to do with Torment and suffering would be an appropriate name to give to people that had just escaped slavery , Myconos ....Greek Island (Myk pho(e)netically..... Meek )....The Myc (meek ) shall inherit the world......those chosen by God (the Myc (meek) ones) Mycenai..??

What's the chances Phoenetic (Phonetic )writing came from Phoenicians (Assyrians ) ?? write what you hear Phoneticaly, rather than draw a symbolic picture ? ........could that be how phoenicians got their name ??

Good one, ID

Again found 'Muiken', now in meaning of proces of riping fruit (softening)

http://www.dbnl.org/tekst/_taa008194601_01/_taa008194601_01_0051.php

Een diphthongeringsuitzondering.

Er bestaat in het Nederlands een woordstam *muik die ‘zacht, murw’ betekent, en voorkomt als bijv. nw. muik in de betekenis: zacht of murw van vruchten, in het werkwoord muiken dat betekent: rijp broeien van vruchten, zowel transitief als intransitief, en in het zelfstandig nw. muik dat zowel de ‘muikplaats’ als de hoeveelheid te ‘muiken’ vruchten aanduidt

Google translate:

There is a word in Dutch strain * Muik that "soft, mellow" means, and as such comes with nw. Muik in meaning: soft or mellow fruit, muiken the verb that means forcing of ripe fruit, both transitive and intransitive, and in self-nw. Muik that both the 'muikplaats "as the amount of' muiken" fruits indicates.

Meek = Muik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are a sad mf

Yeah, but not as sad as some guy - not saying who, but it's not me - who posts under the name "H.Himmler" on a white supremacist site (Stormfront).

+++

EDIT:

Your signature says, "Saved from the flood".

I'd like to ask you: "What flood?"

A week ago I bought J.Buisman's "Duizend jaar weer, wind en water in de Lage Landen", part 1 for a small price.

No floods reported for the years 1254 and 1255. You can check the book for yourself; it's available in most Dutch libraries.

http://www.duizendjaarweer.nl/

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Buisman

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, but not as sad as some guy ... who posts under the name "H.Himmler" on a white supremacist site ...

I´m sure that superficial people will immediately agree with you.

The name used was HLH, being the initials of the founder of Ahnenerbe (foundation for research of ancient cultural heritage) and head of the intelligence agancy that did secret investigations about the OLB until ca. 1943. What you think to know about him is mostly post-war propaganda, that true skeptics would not simply take for granted. That forum provided relative freedom of speech, specially about a certain group of religious supremacists (who believe they are the chosen ones and act accordingly).

*I* am the one [...] not you, not anyone.

Yes, you are uniquely wonderful.

"What flood?"

The archetypal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but not as sad as some guy - not saying who, but it's not me - who posts under the name "H.Himmler" on a white supremacist site (Stormfront).

+++

EDIT:

Your signature says, "Saved from the flood".

I'd like to ask you: "What flood?"

A week ago I bought J.Buisman's "Duizend jaar weer, wind en water in de Lage Landen", part 1 for a small price.

No floods reported for the years 1254 and 1255. You can check the book for yourself; it's available in most Dutch libraries.

http://www.duizendjaarweer.nl/

http://nl.wikipedia....iki/Jan_Buisman

.

Can't find a flood yet but here's something interesting that happened in 1256...

He was the son of Count William II (1227–1256), who was elected King of the Romans of the Holy Roman Empire in 1248, and was slain in 1256 by Frisians when Floris was just two years old.

In 1282 he again attacked the troublesome Frisians in the north, defeating them at the battle of Vronen, and succeeded in retrieving the body of his father. After a campaign in 1287–1288 he finally defeated the Frisians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floris_V,_Count_of_Holland

Here's an interesting chronology link on Holland, very detailed, thought I'd share. http://web.raex.com/~obsidian/Holland.html

The Frisians would have known that by killing Willem/William they would receive a backlash and this event could have spelled the end of the old way - hence the urgency at 1256 to keep the manuscript contents alive.

You must preserve these books with body and soul. They contain the history of all our people, as well as of our forefathers.

--------that is, according to the Christian reckoning, the year 1256.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cant disagree with any of that last post Puzz :tu:

Edited by NO-ID-EA
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No floods happened in Friesland or the northern part of the Netherlands in general in 1255, nor in 1254.

=

And to Otharus/Gestur:

The OLB wasn't saved from the 'mythical' (or Biblical) flood, it was saved from a flood that took place in 1255 CE (or 1254, if "Apol" was right).

You should read that book written by Buisman.

===========

From the OLB:

OKKE MY SON—

You must preserve these books with body and soul. They contain the history of all our people, as well as of our forefathers. Last year I saved them in the flood, as well as you and your mother; but they got wet, and therefore began to perish. In order not to lose them, I copied them on foreign paper.

In case you inherit them, you must copy them likewise, and your children must do so too, so that they may never be lost.

Written at Liuwert, in the three thousand four hundred and forty-ninth year after Atland was submerged—that is, according to the Christian reckoning, the year 1256.

Hiddo, surnamed Over de Linda.—Watch.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No floods happened in Friesland or the northern part of the Netherlands in general in 1255, nor in 1254.

You don´t know. Smaller floods may not have been recorded.

The OLB wasn't saved from the 'mythical' (or Biblical) flood, it was saved from a flood that took place in 1255 CE (or 1254, if "Apol" was right).

The title of my blog and videos does not have to refer to the flood from which the OLB was saved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To check with you all, if this makes sense ...

Following quotes, from the chapter 23 'THIS IS INSCRIBED ON THE WARABURGT BY THE ALDEGAMUDE.':

"One hundred and one years after the submersion of Aldland a people came out of the East. That people was driven by another. Behind us, in Twiskland, they fell into disputes, divided into two parties, and each went its own way. Of the one no account has come to us, but the other came in the back of our Schoonland, which was thinly inhabited, particularly the upper part. Therefore they were able to take possession of it without contest, and as they did no other harm, we would not make war about it. Now that we have learned to know them, we will describe their customs, and after that how matters went between us. They were not wild people, like most of Finda’s race; but, like the Egyptians, they have priests and also statues in their churches. The priests are the only rulers; they call themselves Magyars, and their headman Magy. He is high priest and king in one. The rest of the people are of no account, and in subjection to them. This people have not even a name; but we call them Finns, because although all the festivals are melancholy and bloody, they are so formal that we are inferior to them in that respect. But still they are not to be envied, because they are slaves to their priests, and still more to their creeds. They believe that evil spirits abound everywhere, and enter into men and beasts, but of Wr-alda’s spirit they know nothing. They have weapons of stone, the Magyars of copper. The Magyars affirm that they can exorcise and recall the evil spirits, and this frightens the people, so that you never see a cheerful face.

"The wind was fair, so they arrived immediately in Schoonland. When the northern brothers met together, Wodin divided his powerful army into three bodies. Frya was their war-cry, and they drove back the Finns and Magyars like children. When the Magy heard how his forces had been utterly defeated, he sent messengers with truncheon and crown, who said to Wodin: O almighty king we are guilty, but all that we have done was done from necessity. You think that we attacked your brothers out of illwill, but we were driven out by our enemies, who are still at our heels. We have often asked your Burgtmaagd for help, but she took no notice of us. The Magy says that if we kill half our numbers in fighting with each other, then the wild shepherds will come and kill all the rest. The Magy possesses great riches, but he has seen that Frya is much more powerful than all our spirits together. He will lay down his head in her lap. You are the most warlike king on the earth, and your people are of iron. Become our king, and we will all be your slaves. What glory it would be for you if you could drive back the savages! Our trumpets would resound with your praises, and the fame of your deeds would precede you everywhere. Wodin was strong, fierce, and warlike, but he was not clear-sighted, therefore he was taken in their toils, and crowned by the Magy."

Could this be the account of the 13th Century Mongol invasion in Europe, recounted in a Western European part not trodded yet by the invasion?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe

Being the Slavonic people (slaves of their ruler-priests and creeds), pushed by the invading Mongols/Tartars (wild shepperds) to the west and north to settle at last in a tiny populated part in scandinavia (Finns -> slavonic). Magyars (Magiërs), being the ones performing (black) magic, could then be interpreted as the priests holding the people in their grip with superstitious belief that many westerners still find in more eastern belief systems.

If so, the year of Altland sinking can be placed (I know contrary to what the text says in the beginning) in 12th century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... or history repeated itself, as it often does, being rather cyclic than linear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... or history repeated itself, as it often does, being rather cyclic than linear.

I see ...

A bit like the tearing down of the World Trade Center (as symbol of worldwide mercantilism emperial strive to play god over the people) as part of a cyclic event in tearing down any symbol of emperialism of any kind (Babylon as another emperial strive in an earlier time, maybe the emperial strive by means of words/history recounting/arguing -> the downfall of the worldwide republic of letters, they babbel but don't understand each other). In that sense the tearing down of symbols can be used to try to be part or enact a prophesy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small possible discovery to announce :-)

Not stating things has to be interpreted this way, but still remarkable imo.

I was busy checking Fomenko and possible some real base in his assertions.

Not full proof but by going along a bit, just see what happens and linking it with OLB.

You know what happenend? When going along with OLB and seeing the tale of the Magiars as Slavonic people chased by Mongols (common history belief approx 1250 CE), by OLB stated to be approx. 100 years after Atland sunken, I came at approx 1150 for Atland sunken.

Not in line so far, but when Fomenko states following

“By the end of the first half of the XIV century the restoration of the Empire commences under the rule of Ivan Danilovich Kalita = Caliph = Khalif. The Russian cavalry = 'Mongolian' hordes invade Europe, Africa and India, fig.22 in a wide reaching offensive. The 'Mongol' = great invasion begins.

Let's derive from both his mindset mixed with possible interpretation of OLB narration equating the same Mongolian invasion that Atland is sunken approximately around 1250 (1350-100).

Now this coincides with the first date mentionned in OLB. So is it possible that the time given in OLB when Hidde dates the letter as

Skrêven to Ljuwert. Nêi âtland svnken is thaet thria thû sond fjvwer hvndred aend njugon aend fjvwertigoste jêr, thaet is nei kersten rêknong that tvelfhvndred sex aend fiftigoste jêr.

Could mean: Written at Ljuwert, after Atland is sunken, the year 3449, that is according to Christian reckoning the year 1256.

So the letter might not be written 3449 years after Atland is sunken (actually Atland was then sunken in the year 3449), but written just right after it was sunken, in the year 1256 according to Christian reckoning.

By this the part “ut-er flod hred” can be explained by the fact the book was saved from THE flood of Atland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another similarity: the use of iron weapons: Fomenko (Russian viewpoint) states it as follows

In the XIII-XIV cc. in Russia for that time unprecedented PRODUCTION OF IRON AND IRON WEAPONRY was up and running.

Iron ore can also be found in the South, not exclusively in Central Russia. However smelting of iron requires a lot of fuel. In those times only firewood and charcoal were used for fuel. Black coal and oil (petroleum) were yet to be discovered. That is why Central Russia had an important advantage over the South. There were forests and consequently firewood and charcoal in greater quantity than in the Mediterranean. Let alone that exactly at that time in Russia the TOTAL BURNING OUT OF FORESTS was taking place, please see above. This as a matter of fact was providing an unlimited amount of charcoal, which most likely, allowed Russia-Horde to quickly take the lead in the field of iron smelting and the manufacture of the iron weapons. The Russian czars-khans were able to equip the Horde with iron weapons, which in the Mediterranean were quite expensive and unaffordable to many.

This also gave a huge advantage to the Russian Horde over its enemies.

OLB also mentions the Three-Ages in a rather compressed way or turning point (Slavonic people: stone weapons, Magiars: Bronze, Fryans: Iron).

Good question could be: the heating for iron weapons, how was then done by the Fryans.

So to summarize possible view: in times of 'Mongolian/Slavonic/Magyar' infusion into Europe the use of Iron weapons was an advantage both contested/claimed to use by the Russians/Mongols (East) and the Fryans (West). With the dispersed slaves in the middle not using iron weapons, Magyars envied the iron weaponry.

Edited by Van Gorp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he end of the first half of the XIV century the restoration of the Empire commences under the rule of Ivan Danilovich Kalita = Caliph = Khalif. The Russian cavalry = 'Mongolian' hordes invade Europe, Africa and India, fig.22 in a wide reaching offensive. The 'Mongol' = great invasion begins.

this coincides with the first date mentionned in OLB. So is it possible that the time given in OLB when Hidde dates the letter as

Skrêven to Ljuwert. Nêi âtland svnken is thaet thria thû sond fjvwer hvndred aend njugon aend fjvwertigoste jêr, thaet is nei kersten rêknong that tvelfhvndred sex aend fiftigoste jêr.

Could mean: Written at Ljuwert, after Atland is sunken, the year 3449, that is according to Christian reckoning the year 1256.

So the letter might not be written 3449 years after Atland is sunken (actually Atland was then sunken in the year 3449), but written just right after it was sunken, in the year 1256 according to Christian reckoning.

By this the part “ut-er flod hred” can be explained by the fact the book was saved from THE flood of Atland.

Nice VG............Ivan Danilovich Kalita ......Kalta ? only got to drop one vowel, and he was Khalif......Ka-lip.....i mentioned before the name could be khaliph , being as f and p are interchangeable , Chronicles of Eri reckons hordes , or hosts of people , or armies were called a see (as in the Pope's holy see ) can be see , sea, sie all the same phonetically ,

.....he reckons the biblical flood was the 1st big war , the Assyrians under Nimrod , forming a horde (sie) which invaded Sumer (Mesop ), .....and the flood of Deucalion being the scythian flood of the Og-eig-eis (note last part sie , or horde backwards ,( ie in semitic writing)......Og-eig-eis being Gyges...............maybe OLB is not talking about a flood of water , but a loss of land , buildings destroyed by a mongol flood.

Edited by NO-ID-EA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice VG............Ivan Danilovich Kalita ......Kalta ? only got to drop one vowel, and he was Khalif......Ka-lip.....i mentioned before the name could be khaliph , being as f and p are interchangeable , Chronicles of Eri reckons hordes , or hosts of people , or armies were called a see (as in the Pope's holy see ) can be see , sea, sie all the same phonetically ,

.....he reckons the biblical flood was the 1st big war , the Assyrians under Nimrod , forming a horde (sie) which invaded Sumer (Mesop ), .....and the flood of Deucalion being the scythian flood of the Og-eig-eis (note last part sie , or horde backwards ,( ie in semitic writing)......Og-eig-eis being Gyges...............maybe OLB is not talking about a flood of water , but a loss of land , buildings destroyed by a mongol flood.

Hordes: a sea of people that is hurting ('horten', to shake, to shock) ... Can make sense idd ID.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we are talking about the Hordes, the Mongols, the Treiteraars (Tarters) ...

Could it be also the Scythians is just another 'general' name for nomadic shepperd people that used the bow and were all versed in war.

Both Scythians and Mongols were told to strike a large area, both shepperds, both fluent with the bow.

Fomenko must be right, it is not he who mixed things up. Historians not able to interprete the different names used to describe a same thing by a slightly different angle

:-)

Edited by Van Gorp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we are talking about the Hordes, the Mongols, the Treiteraars (Tarters) ...

Could it be also the Scythians is just another 'general' name for nomadic shepperd people that used the bow and were all versed in war.

Both Scythians and Mongols were told to strike a large area, both shepperds, both fluent with the bow.

Fomenko must be right, it is not he who mixed things up. Historians not able to interprete the different names used to describe a same thing by just synoniems

:-)

I know you are into it at the moment VG , but i just can't believe Fomenko's dating myself i am afraid , but aside from that there is a lot of good history in his books,and a lot of good source notes.

Back to Chronicles of Eri again , and dont forget i am using one book accused of being a forgery to back up another accused of being a forgery , so not on very stable ground here .

but the word nomads according to o'connor came from the Noe-maid-eis (nomads), or as we call him Noah , OK so Noahs flood (sie = sea/flood eis=host or horde ) was Nimrods Horde/ army from Assyria , that invaded Mesopotamia , the people there were Scythians, lots got killed , lots got enslaved , and lots fled he says first to Ardmenia (Armenia )later to greece, pelloponese.

re the mongols and the Rus or Russians the gist of it seems to be ,at first the mongols were nomadic shepherds , they did not believe anyone should own the land,and did not want anyone building towns , or villages on it ,and possibly staking a claim to their traditional cyclic grazing rights....... ( herd is probably a version of horde ) every now and again they burst out of their nomadic lands , and destroyed any towns and villages they came across ,restoring the land to pasture , pillaging as they went , then they went home to continue their nomadic lifestyle , but the Rus were helping them , the difference being when the mongols went back home , the Rus stepped into the lands that the mongols devastated , and made them their own.

do i remember a bit in OLB , where they say that their task is to take over the lands and re-populate them where war has made them barren.....sure i remember reading that bit somewhere in OLB. ???

Edited by NO-ID-EA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there actually people in this thread claiming Oera Linda Book is not a forgery? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there actually people in this thread claiming Oera Linda Book is not a forgery? :blink:

For someone who debates on the side of Atlantis with an open mind, I find that kind of an odd post.

Yes, a few of us here investigate the possibility that the Oera Linda Book is an authentic manuscript.

Edited by The Puzzler
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are there actually people in this thread claiming Oera Linda Book is not a forgery?

On your website you wrote (last january 26):

... the Oera Linda Book. Anyone trying to defend this sort of stuff lacks intellectual honesty.

What makes you say this?

How would you defend your conclusion that it must be a forgery?

Edited by gestur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For someone who debates on the side of Atlantis with an open mind, I find that kind of an odd post.

Yes, a few of us here investigate the possibility that the Oera Linda Book is an authentic manuscript.

What makes you say this?

How would you defend your conclusion that it must be a forgery?

Oera Linda Book has no academic credibility. Can you find a peer-reviewed work or scholarly source defending it? Otherwise you would need to explain why no historian takes it serious. The obvious answer why Oera Linda is a forgery is because this is what the historical method (i.e. source criticism) shows it to be.

It was not even written to be taken serious.

Edited by OliverDSmith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why are there no historians that take Oera Linda as a non-forgery? You're only left with crazy conspiracy theories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See how gestur has to invoke those conspiracy theories...

first scholar who studied the manuscript and confirmed its authenticity (1867) - later he withdrew this conclusion, probably to save his career

So the only 19th century philologist who studied the manuscript came to the conclusion it was a forgery... only to "save his career"? :sleepy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This upstart, who got his bachelor of arts last year, boasts on his website about his almost encyclopedic knowledge of classical literature:

My knowledge of classical literature is almost encyclopedic, but I am far less knowledgeable on other topics.

... but admits to be far less knowledgeable on other topics.

I'd advise him to be more modest on topics about which he doesn't have a clue.

Edited by gestur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This upstart, who got his bachelor of arts last year, boasts on his website about his almost encyclopedic knowledge of classical literature:

... but admits to be far less knowledgeable on other topics.

I'd advise him to be more modest on topics about which he doesn't have a clue.

:-)

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.