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

Except that evidence suggests that N1c1 expanded into Europe c.6200 BC, 4000 years before anything remotely relevant to the OLB.

Source: Y-chromosome haplogroup N dispersals from south Siberia to Europe

cormac

N3a2 the younger subcluster, not N3a1

Miroslava Derenko and her colleagues noted that there are two subclusters within this haplogroup, both present in Siberia and Northern Europe, with different histories. The one that they labelled N3a1 first expanded in south Siberia (approximately 10,000 years ago on their calculated by the Zhivotovsky method) and spread into Northern Europe where its age they calculated as around 8,000 years ago. Meanwhile, the younger subcluster, which they labelled N3a2, originated in south Siberia (probably in the Baikal region) approximately 4,000 years ago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The amazing Lake Baikal, a Garden of Eden if ever there was one...

Lake Baikal (Russian: о́зеро Байка́л, tr. Ozero Baykal; IPA: [ˈozʲɪrə bɐjˈkal]; Buryat: Байгал нуур, Mongolian: Байгал нуур, Baygal nuur, meaning "nature lake"[3]; Kyrgyz: Байкол, meaning "rich lake") is the world's oldest lake,[4] at 25 million years (possibly older),[citation needed] and deepest, averaging 744.4 m (2,442 ft).

Located in the south of the Russian region of Siberia, between Irkutsk Oblast to the northwest and the Buryat Republic to the southeast, it is the most voluminous freshwater lake in the world, containing roughly 20% of the world's unfrozen surface fresh water.[5][6]

At 1,642 m (5,387 ft),[1] Lake Baikal is the deepest[7] and among the clearest[8] of all lakes in the world. Similar to Lake Tanganyika, Lake Baikal was formed as an ancient rift valley, having the typical long crescent shape with a surface area of 31,722 km2 (12,248 sq mi), less than that of Lake Superior or Lake Victoria. Baikal is home to more than 1,700 species of plants and animals, two thirds of which can be found nowhere else in the world[9] and was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1996

Christ himself visited Lake Baikal.

According to 19th century traveler T. W. Atkinson, locals in the Lake Baikal Region had the tradition that Christ visited the area:

The people have a tradition in connection with this region which they implicitly believe. They say "that Christ visited this part of Asia and ascended this summit, whence he looked down on all the region around. After blessing the country to the northward, he turned towards the south, and looking across the Baikal, he waved his hand, exclaiming 'Beyond this there is nothing.'" Thus they account for the sterility of
, where it is said "no corn will grow."

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

Mountains on the banks of Baikal, good for floodwaters to build up against...

220px--26_swiatoinos.JPG.JPG

A shamans rock...

240px-Olchon1.jpg

Lake Baikal is in a rift valley, created by the Baikal Rift Zone, where the Earth's crust pulls apart.[6] At 636 km (395 mi) long and 79 km (49 mi) wide, Lake Baikal has the largest surface area of any freshwater lake in Asia, at 31,722 km2 (12,248 sq mi), and is the deepest lake in the world at 1,642 m (5,387 ft). The bottom of the lake is 1,186.5 m (3,893 ft) below sea level, but below this lies some 7 km (4.3 mi) of sediment, placing the rift floor some 8–11 km (5.0–6.8 mi) below the surface: the deepest continental rift on Earth.[6] In geological terms, the rift is young and active—it widens about two cm per year. The fault zone is also seismically active; there are hot springs in the area and notable earthquakes every few years. The lake is divided into three basins: North, Central, and South, with depths of about 900 m (3,000 ft), 1,600 m (5,200 ft), and 1,400 m (4,600 ft), respectively. Fault-controlled accommodation zones rising to depths of about 300 m (980 ft) separate the basins. The North and Central basins are separated by Academician Ridge while the area around the Selenga Delta and the Buguldeika Saddle separates the Central and South basins. The lake drains into the Angara tributary of the Yenisei.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was known and theorized in the 19th century and earlier:

In 1671, Swedish scholar Georg Stiernhielm commented on the similarities of Lapp, Estonian and Finnish, and also on a few similar words between Finnish and Hungarian, while the German scholar Martin Vogel tried to establish a relationship between Finnish, Lapp and Hungarian. These two authors were thus the first to outline what was to become the classification of the Finno-Ugric (and later Uralic) family. This proposal received some of its initial impetus from the fact that these languages, unlike most of the other languages spoken in Europe, are not part of the Indo-European family.

In 1717, Swedish professor Olof Rudbeck ( !!! ) proposed about 100 etymologies connecting Finnish and Hungarian, of which about 40 are still considered valid (Collinder, 1965). In the same year, the German scholar Johann Georg von Eckhart, in an essay published in Leibniz's Collectanea Etymologica, proposed for the first time a relation to the Samoyedic languages.

By 1770, all the languages belonging to the Finno-Ugric languages had been identified, almost 20 years before the traditional starting-point of Indo-European studies. Nonetheless, these relationships were not widely accepted. Hungarian intellectuals especially were not interested in the theory and preferred to assume connections with Turkic tribes, an attitude characterized by Ruhlen (1987) as due to "the wild unfettered Romanticism of the epoch". Still, in spite of this hostile climate, the Hungarian Jesuit János Sajnovics suggested a relationship between Hungarian and Lapp (Sami) in 1770, and in 1799, the Hungarian Sámuel Gyarmathi published the most complete work on Finno-Ugric to that date.

At the beginning of the 19th century, research on Uralic was thus more advanced than Indo-European research. But the rise of Indo-European comparative linguistics absorbed so much attention and enthusiasm that Uralic linguistics was all but eclipsed in Europe.

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

From your link:

Scholars of Far Eastern history believe that the Magyars were also exposed to the Sumerian culture in the Turanian Plain. Linguists of the 19th century, including Henry C. Rawlinson, Jules Oppert, Eduard Sayous and Francois Lenormant found that knowledge of the Ural-Altaic languages such as Magyar, helps to decipher Sumerian writings. Cunei form writing was found to be used by the Magyars long before they entered the Carpathian Basin. The similarity of the two languages has led orientalists to form a Sumerian-Hungarian connection. The orientalists speculate that a reverse of the Finno-Ugrian theory may be possible. The theory holds that if the proto-Magyars were neighbors of the proto-Sumerians in the Turanian Plain, then the evolution of the Hungarian language must have been a result of Sumerian rather than Finno-Ugrian influences. The theory in turn holds that rather than being the recipients of a Finno-Ugrian language, it was the Magyars who imparted their language to the Finns and Estonians without being ethnically related to them. What scholars site for added evidence for this theory is the fact that the Magyars have always been numerically stronger than their Finno-Ugrian neighbors combined. The theory believes that the Finns and Ugors received linguistic strains from a Magyar branch who had broken away from the main body on the Turanian Plan, and migrated to West Siberia.

http://hungarianhistory.freeservers.com/magyars.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

What was known and theorized in the 19th century and earlier:

In 1671, Swedish scholar Georg Stiernhielm commented on the similarities of Lapp, Estonian and Finnish, and also on a few similar words between Finnish and Hungarian, while the German scholar Martin Vogel tried to establish a relationship between Finnish, Lapp and Hungarian. These two authors were thus the first to outline what was to become the classification of the Finno-Ugric (and later Uralic) family. This proposal received some of its initial impetus from the fact that these languages, unlike most of the other languages spoken in Europe, are not part of the Indo-European family.

In 1717, Swedish professor Olof Rudbeck ( !!! ) proposed about 100 etymologies connecting Finnish and Hungarian, of which about 40 are still considered valid (Collinder, 1965). In the same year, the German scholar Johann Georg von Eckhart, in an essay published in Leibniz's Collectanea Etymologica, proposed for the first time a relation to the Samoyedic languages.

By 1770, all the languages belonging to the Finno-Ugric languages had been identified, almost 20 years before the traditional starting-point of Indo-European studies. Nonetheless, these relationships were not widely accepted. Hungarian intellectuals especially were not interested in the theory and preferred to assume connections with Turkic tribes, an attitude characterized by Ruhlen (1987) as due to "the wild unfettered Romanticism of the epoch". Still, in spite of this hostile climate, the Hungarian Jesuit János Sajnovics suggested a relationship between Hungarian and Lapp (Sami) in 1770, and in 1799, the Hungarian Sámuel Gyarmathi published the most complete work on Finno-Ugric to that date.

At the beginning of the 19th century, research on Uralic was thus more advanced than Indo-European research. But the rise of Indo-European comparative linguistics absorbed so much attention and enthusiasm that Uralic linguistics was all but eclipsed in Europe.

Yes, I still don't think that means much, if this was a forgery, the common knowledge that Finns and Hungarians/Magyar were possible relations through language - is only justified more by the OLB's telling of the complex relationship between the 2 people and how they arrived where they did and who they were, which genetics is showing - the OLB tells us they are different people, which genetics shows, but possibly travelled together for up to 100 years before arriving in Fryan territory, so language may have developed in the Uralic area easily enough, where genes didn't flow so quickly.

From your link:

Scholars of Far Eastern history believe that the Magyars were also exposed to the Sumerian culture in the Turanian Plain. Linguists of the 19th century, including Henry C. Rawlinson, Jules Oppert, Eduard Sayous and Francois Lenormant found that knowledge of the Ural-Altaic languages such as Magyar, helps to decipher Sumerian writings. Cunei form writing was found to be used by the Magyars long before they entered the Carpathian Basin. The similarity of the two languages has led orientalists to form a Sumerian-Hungarian connection. The orientalists speculate that a reverse of the Finno-Ugrian theory may be possible. The theory holds that if the proto-Magyars were neighbors of the proto-Sumerians in the Turanian Plain, then the evolution of the Hungarian language must have been a result of Sumerian rather than Finno-Ugrian influences. The theory in turn holds that rather than being the recipients of a Finno-Ugrian language, it was the Magyars who imparted their language to the Finns and Estonians without being ethnically related to them. What scholars site for added evidence for this theory is the fact that the Magyars have always been numerically stronger than their Finno-Ugrian neighbors combined. The theory believes that the Finns and Ugors received linguistic strains from a Magyar branch who had broken away from the main body on the Turanian Plan, and migrated to West Siberia.

http://hungarianhist...om/magyars.html

That the Magyar described in the OLB were Sumerians would not surprise me at all - the city of 1000 Gods, who else was creating Gods but the Magyar?

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that these relationships were already known in the 19th century.

The whole thing with the OLB is this: it is suggested that much of what we know now was not known when the OLB was published (or before)

I remember Alewyn once said that the date for the fall of Troy was not known. But it was known, and the date in the OLB (counted backwards from the arrival of Ulysses in Fryas land) is the same date as calculated by Erathostenes.

It is said the pile dwellings near/in Switzerland were not known when the OLB was published, but they were already known almost 2 decades before the OLB was published.

Same thing with the lung disease of cattle (already in the 18th century).

Everytime you can read that so and so was not known and thus the OLB cannot be a forgery, only to discover later that it was known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does a people share a language but not genetics?

They were not originally the same people but grouped together in an area and both took on the language of the native people. (In the Uralic area) - Also like Greeks did.

This merged group that entered Fryan land repeated this - they took on and learnt the Fryan language (to insidiously infiltrate them).

Hungary and Uralic language areas were probably populated by a people who were not as dominant as the Fryans, Slavic people seem to be mentioned as being slaves to the priests so the Magyar language, learnt in the Urals was kept in Hungary, it was kept in Finland and areas where the Sami retreated to, where Fryans were not so dominant either, it was lost as these people blended into the Swedish, Danish and Frisian areas though.

That, to me, would be a logical answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that these relationships were already known in the 19th century.

The whole thing with the OLB is this: it is suggested that much of what we know now was not known when the OLB was published (or before)

I remember Alewyn once said that the date for the fall of Troy was not known. But it was known, and the date in the OLB (counted backwards from the arrival of Ulysses in Fryas land) is the same date as calculated by Erathostenes.

It is said the pile dwellings near/in Switzerland were not known when the OLB was published, but they were already known almost 2 decades before the OLB was published.

Same thing with the lung disease of cattle (already in the 18th century).

Everytime you can read that so and so was not known and thus the OLB cannot be a forgery, only to discover later that it was known.

None of that bothers me, I've never really been into the idea of backing up the OLB in this way.

I understand your point but don't think it really justifies it being a forgery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of that bothers me, I've never really been into the idea of backing up the OLB in this way.

I understand your point but don't think it really justifies it being a forgery.

It doesn't 'justify' it being a forgery, it also doesn't prove the OLB not to be a forgery.

The whole point for years has been: if we discover something that was not known in the 19th century when the OLB was published, something that the OLB describes, then that is proof of it being a true account of ancient European history (and beyond), and thus not a forgery.

Just another thing for the record: Alewyn said that the Minoan Civilization was not known when the OLB was published, and that the OLB describes this Minoan Civlization, and voila: proof.

No, the OLB does NOT decsribe the Minoan Civilization, it describes the acts of king Minos, acts we can all read about in Homer and/or Herodotus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Trojan War may have occurred when Erathostenes said.

Cattle disease was a real threat, don't you think cattle had it before the 18th century or something?

Pile dwellings were all over Fryan lands I can imagine, so they found some in Switzerland where Fryans said they were, it is possible the information was included once known, but it's also possible the discovery justified the OLB even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't 'justify' it being a forgery, it also doesn't prove the OLB not to be a forgery.

The whole point for years has been: if we discover something that was not known in the 19th century when the OLB was published, something that the OLB describes, then that is proof of it being a true account of ancient European history (and beyond), and thus not a forgery.

Just another thing for the record: Alewyn said that the Minoan Civilization was not known when the OLB was published, and that the OLB describes this Minoan Civlization, and voila: proof.

No, the OLB does NOT decsribe the Minoan Civilization, it describes the acts of king Minos, acts we can all read about in Homer and/or Herodotus.

OK, I'll check it out some more and see what I might notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

N3a2 the younger subcluster, not N3a1.

So which subgroup would you suggest it is currently, as earlier than around 2007 N3a2 wasn't an officially recognized designation for the most part and since then there have been three subgroups added to the tree. N1c1b and N1c1c, which date to c.1300 BP (700 AD) and N1c1d which hasn't been given a date AFAIK.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So which subgroup would you suggest it is currently, as earlier than around 2007 N3a2 wasn't an officially recognized designation for the most part and since then there have been three subgroups added to the tree. N1c1b and N1c1c, which date to c.1300 BP (700 AD) and N1c1d which hasn't been given a date AFAIK.

cormac

I'll ask Miroslava Derenko...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The Trojan War may have occurred when Erathostenes said.

Cattle disease was a real threat, don't you think cattle had it before the 18th century or something?

Pile dwellings were all over Fryan lands I can imagine, so they found some in Switzerland where Fryans said they were, it is possible the information was included once known, but it's also possible the discovery justified the OLB even more.

Depends on how you look at it.

Pile dwellings were discovered in 1854, How does that justify the OLB?

Lung disease of cattle was known in the 18th century (even a Frisian vicar/amateur scientist had published about his vaccinations). How does that justify the OLB?

Erathostenes calculated the date for the end of the Trojan War, the same date as is used in the OLB. How does that justify the OLB?

You know what would justify the OLB? Like I have said a zillion times: another example of the OLB script but of many centuries old (on stone, or parchment or paper). Proof of forest fires all over Germany that whiped out the once thick forests, and then preferrably dated at around 2200 BC, remants of those circular citadels (including a central hexagonal tower with longhouses oriented around it so that the complete structure looks like a Yule wheel) which must have been built all over Europe, thick layers of animal and human bones and debri, dated at around 2200 BC, layers that created new islands, volcanic eruptions of 2200 BC, massive earthquakes of around 2200 BC, and so on, and so on.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't prove anything but it's interesting that a Minoan type Labrys was found in Switzerland so early... - the early Cortaillod Culture is 4300-3900BC.

In Minoan Crete, the double axe (labrys) had a special significance, used by women priests in religious ceremonies. In 1998 a labrys, complete with an elaborately embellished haft, was found at Cham-Eslen, Canton of Zug, Switzerland. The haft was 120 cm long and wrapped in ornamented birch-bark. The axe blade is 17.4 cm long and made of antigorite, mined in the Gotthard-area. The haft goes through a biconical drilled hole and is fastened by wedges of antler and by birch-tar. It belongs to the early Cortaillod culture.

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

You know what would justify the OLB? Like I have said a zillion times: another example of the OLB script but of many centuries old (on stone, or parchment or paper). Proof of forest fires all over Germany that whiped out the once thick forests, and then preferrably dated at around 2200 BC, remants of those circular citadels (including a central hexagonal tower with longhouses oriented around it so that the complete structure looks like a Yule wheel) which must have been built all over Europe, thick layers of animal and human bones and debri, dated at around 2200 BC, layers that created new islands, volcanic eruptions of 2200 BC, massive earthquakes of around 2200 BC, and so on, and so on.

It's not that people don't find anything:

Is this prehistoric building older than Egypt's Pyramids?

By Graham Henry, WalesOnlineJun 13 2012

Archaeologists may have stumbled across the remnants of a massive prehistoric building on the edge of a long-lost lake – which could be older than the Pyramids.

The significant find at the site in Monmouth has baffled historians and archaeologists, who believe it could be a structure entirely unique to Britain, which dates back to at least the Bronze Age.

But experts have suggested that the structure’s size and the fact it was made from entire trees mean it could be a “long house” – raising the possibility it could date as far back as the New Stone Age (the Neolithic Age) and could pre-date the Pyramids from 3,000-2,000BC.

http://www.walesonli...91466-31174869/

http://www.bbc.co.uk...-wales-18423528

http://www.dailymail...aeologists.html

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I know many will have seen it already, but here's Overwijn's drawing of a citadel, the largest one located in OLB Texland, and viewed from above:

The 'spokes' are the longhouses (with a rounded roof)

OVERWIJN3.jpg

If anyone thinks s/he needs a translation of the accompanying text, please ask.

I am still waiting for the moment they will find the remnants of only one of these structures, these citadels that were built all over the Fryan empire.

My city lies near the north end of the Liudgaarde. The tower has six sides, and is ninety feet high, fiat-roofed, with a small house upon it out of which they look at the stars. On either side of the tower is a house three hundred feet long, and twenty-one feet broad, and twenty-one feet high, besides the roof, which is round. All this is built of hard-baked bricks, and outside there is nothing else. The citadel is surrounded by a dyke, with a moat thirty-six feet broad and twenty-one feet deep. If one looks down from the tower, he sees the form of the Juul. In the ground among the houses on the south side all kinds of native and foreign herbs grow, of which the maidens must study the qualities. Among the houses on the north side there are only fields. The three houses on the north are full of corn and other necessaries; the two houses on the south are for the maidens to live in and keep school. The most southern house is the dwelling of the Burgtmaagd. In the tower hangs the lamp. The walls of the tower are decorated with precious stones. On the south wall the Tex is inscribed. On the right side of this are the formulae, and on the other side the laws; the other things are found upon the three other sides. Against the dyke, near the house of the Burgtmaagd, stand the oven and the mill, worked by four oxen. Outside the citadel wall is the place where the Burgtheeren and the soldiers live. The fortification outside is an hour long—not a seaman’s hour, but an hour of the sun, of which twenty-four go to a day. Inside it is a plain five feet below the top. On it are three hundred crossbows covered with wood and leather.

Besides the houses of the inhabitants, there are along the inside of the dyke thirty-six refuge-houses for the people who live in the neighbourhood. The field serves for a camp and for a meadow. On the south side of the outer fortification is the Liudgaarde, enclosed by the great wood of lime-trees. Its shape is three-cornered, with the widest part outside, so that the sun may shine in it, for there are a great number of foreign trees and flowers brought by the seafarers. All the other citadels are the same shape as ours, only not so large; but the largest of all is that of Texland. The tower of the Fryaburgt is so high that it rends the sky, and all the rest is in proportion to the tower.

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

Ireland's Stonehenge, a 4,500-year-old structure at the Hill of Tara in Co Meath, has been re-created by archaeologists and computer-graphics experts. They have built a representation of a huge, wooden monument that appears to have been used for inauguration ceremonies and pagan burials of Ireland’s high kings.

Underground remains of the structure were discovered by soil x-rays of the hill, which has been at the centre of an international dispute because of its proximity to the new M3 motorway. The model, to be shown on an RTE television documentary this week, was created using information gathered from studying a ditch, six metres wide and three deep, cut into the bedrock of the hill and enclosing the Mound of Hostages, an ancient passage tomb.

Study of the remains of tree trunks have prompted scientists to conclude the hill was once surrounded by a “wooden version of Stonehenge” that would have been 250 metres in diameter, a “massive scale” similar in size to Croke Park.

Archaeologists believe elaborately decorated timber posts and crossbars rose out of the ditch and surrounded the tomb, which is believed to be Tara’s oldest monument. It is estimated the mound was raised in about 3,000BC, making it a contemporary of Stonehenge, the ancient monument in the English county of Wiltshire, and the pyramids of Egypt.

Tara was the coronation place of the country’s pre- Christian kings. A pillar stone, the Lia Fail, originally stood at the northern end of the Mound of Hostages and legend had it that when the true king of Ireland stood on this phallic symbol, it would roar.

http://www.knowth.com/woodhenge.htm

woodhenge.jpg

250 meters in diameter.... the largest OLB citadel - made of bricks - would have been almost double that size.

And the argument against not finding any remnants of such a citadel is that its construction material must have been re-used.

But what they forget is that when a stone building disappears for whatever reason, you can still see its outlines because of a different growth pattern of grass, and sometimes it becomes visible with ground penetrating radar.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still waiting for the moment they will find the remnants of only one of these structures, these citadels that were built all over the Fryan empire.

The diameter of the burgwal at the center Den Burg is 600 feet...same as Overwijn's drawing. Could remnants be found at a place like that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The diameter of the burgwal at the center Den Burg is 600 feet...same as Overwijn's drawing. Could remnants be found at a place like that?

What they found at the center of Den Burg is from much later time, the Viking period. And they have done archeological research in Den Burg but found no traces of such a citadel. However, they did find some of the oldest traces of.habitation in the Netherlands in the area (= Texel/Westfriesland).

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What they found at the center of Den Burg is from much later time, the Viking period. And they have done archeological research in Den Burg but found no traces of such a citadel. However, they did find some of the oldest traces of.habitation in the Netherlands in the area (= Texel/Westfriesland).

.

And what is the etymological origin of the name "Texel/Texland"? I can't find much but it seems quite ancient and predates the introduction of the sheep industry.

Does it mean "Place of Texts"? As in Frya's Tex?

Seems like Texel would have been not only an outpost of the mainland, but also a jumping off point to Doggerland. Like 5,000 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Do you know what Texel actually means? ZUIDLAND = South Land:

Dutch:

Texla was in de vroege middeleeuwen een gouw in Frisia ten westen van het Vlie. Het wordt al in de achtste eeuw genoemd als pagus Tyesle, Thesla (Zuidland). Waarschijnlijk werd het begrensd door het Vlie in het oosten en het Marsdiep in het zuidwesten.

English:

Texla was in the early Middle Ages a shire in Frisia, west of the Vlie. It has already been named as Pagus Tyesle in the eight century, Thesla (Southland). It was probably limited by the Vlie in the east and by the Marsdiep in the southwest.

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

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

It appears it's original name was written and pronounced with -s- instead of -x- , and that's how the people on Texel still pronounce it.

Just the other day I found this:

Het eiland Texel (Westfries: Tessel) is het grootste van de Nederlandse waddeneilanden. De naam wordt uitgesproken als tessel; de bewoners heten Tesselaars. De reden hiervoor is dat historisch gezien een karakter dat sterk op de x leek als een ligatuur voor ss werd gebruikt in het Hollands.

The island of Texel (Westfrisian: Tessel) is the largest of the Dutch Wadden islands. The name is pronounced as tessel; the inhabitants are called Tesselaars. The reason for this is that historically, a character strongly resembling an -x- was used as a ligature for -ss- in Dutch.

http://www.woestehoevetexel.nl/

http://en.wikipedia....raphic_ligature

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9F

And 5000 years ago Doggerland/Dogger Island was long gone: Doggerland disappeared around 6150 BC, its remnant, Dogger Island finally submerged around 5000 BC. So there was nothing to jump off to around 5000 years ago.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This from an old post of mine:

Taxila (Urdu: ٹیکسلا) is a Tehsil in the Rawalpindi District of Punjab province of Pakistan. It is an important archaeological site. Taxila is situated about 32 km (20 mi) northwest of Islamabad Capital Territory and Rawalpindi in Panjab; just off the Grand Trunk Road. Taxila lies 549 metres (1,801 ft) above sea level.

The city dates back to the Gandhara period and contains the ruins of the Gandhāran city of Takṣaśilā which was an important Hindu and Buddhist centre, and is still considered a place of religious and historical sanctity in those traditions

-

Scattered references in later works indicate that Takshashila may have dated back to at least the 5th century BCE.

-

Taxila is called Taxiala in Ptolemy’s Geography.

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

Tehsil:

Generally, a tehsil consists of a city or town that serves as its headquarters, possibly additional towns, and a number of villages. As an entity of local government, it exercises certain fiscal and administrative power over the villages and municipalities within its jurisdiction. It is the ultimate executive agency for land records and related administrative matters.

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

A few quotes from the OLB:

At last they landed at the Punjab, called in our language the Five Rivers, because five rivers flow together to the sea. Here they settled, and called it Geertmania.

-

After we had been settled 12 times 100 and twice 12 years in the Five Waters (Punjab), whilst our naval warriors were navigating all the seas they could find, came Alexander the King, with a powerful army descending the river towards our villages.

-

Punjab, that is five rivers, and by which we travel, is a river of extraordinary beauty, and is called Five Rivers, because four other streams flow into the sea by its mouth. Far away to the eastward is another large river, the Holy or Sacred Ganges. Between these two rivers is the land of the Hindoos. Both rivers run from the high mountains to the plains. The mountains in which their sources lie are so high that they reach the heavens (laia), and therefore these mountains are called Himmellaia.

-

On their arrival our forefathers likewise established themselves to the east of the Punjab, but on account of the priests they likewise went to the west. In that way we learned to know the Yren and other people.

-

On the west of the Punjab where we come from, and where I was born, the same fruits and crops grow as on the east side. Formerly there existed also the same crawling animals, but our forefathers burnt all the underwood, and so diligently hunted all the wild animals, that there are scarcely any left. To the extreme west of the Punjab there is found rich clay land as well as barren heaths, which seem endless, occasionally varied lovely spots on which the eye rests enchanted.

http://oeralinda.angelfire.com/

TAXILA.jpg

http://www.imninalu....IndusValley.htm

More about Taxila here: http://www.livius.or...xila/taxila.htm

From the last link:

Taxila was the capital of a kingdom that was called Hinduš (or Indus-country) and consisted of the western half of the Punjab. It was added to the Achaemenid empire under king Darius I the Great, but the Persian occupation did not last long. There are no archaeological traces of the presence of western armies in the Punjab, although in 2002, archaeologists have claimed to have found a Persian building.

When the Macedonian conqueror Alexander the Great occupied Gandara and the Punjab in 326, the Indian kingdoms had already regained their independence. King Ambhi of Taxila, who is called Taxiles ("the man from Taxila") and Omphis in the Greek sources, had invited Alexander in 329, because he needed support against king Porus (Indian: Puru) of Pauravas, a state that was situated in the eastern Punjab. Alexander did what he had been asked to do: he defeated Porus on the banks of the river Hydaspes (modern Jhelum). However, he unexpectedly allied himself to Porus, and forced Ambhi and Porus to reconcile themselves. Leaving the region, he left behind an occupation force of Macedonian and Greek veterans under a satrap named Philip. When this man was murdered in 325, Alexander sent a Thracian Eudamus to share the reign with Ambhi.

From the OLB:

After we had been settled 12 times 100 and twice 12 years in the Five Waters (Punjab), whilst our naval warriors were navigating all the seas they could find, came Alexander the King, with a powerful army descending the river towards our villages.

http://oeralinda.angelfire.com/

http://www.unexplain...184645&st=10920

And I remember Otharus once came up with Thessaloniki.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

As you can see, the Punjabian "Taxila" much better fits the description of the OLB "Texland" then the island of Texel itself.

Taxila was the center of admistrative, fiscal and jurisdictional power, and it's name is derived (?) from "Tehsil" with the same meaning.

Texel means nothing but "South Land".

I remember another old post but can't find it right now, but it's about a Germanic word "tesha" or "tusha" or something meaning "to the right". In old times the east was the main direction, the direction things were oriented according to, like we now have the north on maps. So 'to the right' would mean the south. Hence, South Land.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Knul once posted a map by Ptolemy, and his post was about the true location of the OLB Kerenek. He situated it in the north(-west) of Scotland.

But when I looked at that map, I found something else that was interesting:

Scotland-ancient.jpg

And I will try to find what I posted about these Taexali on the south-east coast of Scotland; I remember they were not Pictish or Celtic, but a Germanic tribe, at least according to one source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found it:

These Taexali lived on the east/south-east coast of Scotland.

ON THE EARLY FRISIAN SETTLEMENTS IN SCOTLAND,

BY W. F. SKENE, ESQ., F.S.A. SCOT

If in these traditions of the Fomhoraigh there is preserved some recollections

of these forerunners of the Saxons and Angles, those Frisians

who under the generic name of Saxons first invested our coasts and made

settlements on our shores, it is probable that we must attribute to them

many of those stupendous hill forts which are to be found within no

great distance from the eastern shore, and especially those which crown

the summits of the hills termed "Laws," and probably many of the sepulchral

remains; while it is not impossible that the Cat Stane, with its inscription

of "In hoc turpulo jacet Vettafilius Victi," may commemorate

by a Eoman hand the tomb of their first leader Vitta, son of Vecta, the

traditionary grandfather of Hengist and Horsa.

http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/arch-352-1/dissemination/pdf/vol_004/4_169_181.pdf

According to the contemporary historian Ammianus Marcellinus who says that the Saxons invaded the roman province of Britain as early as AD 360 but not how soon after they invaded Scotland. But the presence of Frisians in Dumfriesshire possibly before AD 400. The leaders of the Frisians, Octa and Ebissa could have been established in Lothian AD 500; and at any rate, Angles and Frisians i.e. men from the swamps and plains around the Weser, Rhine and Scheldt rivers had spread from the river Tees to the shores of East Lothian by AD 547. Ida, ‘the Flame bearer’ set up the kingdom of Northumbria soon after.

The Forth Estuary used to be called the Frith of Forth and the name Frith itself was written on old maps as mare Freisicum or Frisian Sea and a district on the south side of the Forth which could have been on the East Lothian shore was known long as the ‘Frisian Shore’. Frisians were of course the Dutch or low Germans of Holland and and Hanover in modern terms of course.

http://www.haddingtoncc.org.uk/firstmill.htm

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=184645&st=6300

=============

Knul then asked me what the connection between these Taexali and the OLB could be...

This was my answer:

-1- Ptolemy's "Geography" was most probably one of the sources of the OLB;

-2- Frisians have been in contact with the Scots for many ages, and even settled there;

-3- Even earlier Frisians may indeed have come from 'Texla' (one of the ancient names of the isle of Texel/Tessel. Texel and other parts of the Netherlands got catastrophically flooded around 350 or 360 BC, according to an old Frisian source I have talked about a long time ago) and settled in the area on Ptolemy's map that was inhabited by the 'Taexali';

Intermezzo (from an old post of mine):

The 17th century Frisian historian Chr. Schotanus wrote this about the Cymbrian Flood:

About the year 360 or 350 before the birth of Jesus Christ a terrible flood, caused by violent storms, hit all the sea coasts of Germany, a flood that destroyed many cattle and people. This first and oldest flood which can be remembered, could also have ripped all the islands on the Frisian coast from the mainland, and have created many inlets and lakes because formerly the mouths of the rivers ended up in them through narrow entrances.

-4- I will bet a dime that those/the one who created the OLB knew that (some of) these Scottish hillforts (in the area where the Taexali lived) were called "Laws".

I have not yet found the word 'tex' as meaning 'law' in Old Frisian (it should be something like 'rjucht' in real Old Frisian), but combining the 4 points I mentioned, I think I know how the creators of the OLB made it up.

+++++++++++++++++++++++

It's very hard to find anything in that archived first part of this thread because the search tool doesn't function for archived threads, but this is the way how I google and able to find most:

"XXXX" "oera linda" "unexplained mysteries" "archived"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

From my former post:

"it is not impossible that the Cat Stane, with its inscription

of "In hoc turpulo jacet Vettafilius Victi," may commemorate

by a Eoman hand the tomb of their first leader Vitta, son of Vecta, the

traditionary grandfather of Hengist and Horsa."

I once showed an old Dutch source that said that an old name for the Danes/Jutes was "Vith".

And that their king could probably have been called "Vith Kening" or "Vitking", or king of the Jutes.

(Post 11482 in the archived thread:

"Vitho, according to some also called Jutho, a son of Friso, would have travelled to the north to become the forfather of the Viths or Jutes"

http://www.unexplain...184645&st=11475 )

You know, the OLB "Godfreyath the Witkening"?

According to another old Frisian source I once posted, Hengist and Horsa were Frisians.

.

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.