[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood

[Abramelin]

It's a bit much to reply to point for point in one post, and I know Cormac, Swede and others already did because I know you posted this list many times.

Anyway, I found something about that "Yoa event":

This gradual shift in the Sahara's overall climate contradicts a common theory that the region dried rapidly over a few hundred years, and provides clues about a potential re-greening triggered by global warming, Kröpelin says.

The data also confirms that a drop in rainfall was the major reason the area turned into a dusty badland. Based on the sediment samples, the researchers determined that Yoa's waters suddenly grew quite salty about 4,000 years ago. They speculate the salinity spiked because the streams that had previously drained salt out of the lake vanished as rainfall lessened. This abrupt event shows how a relatively small occurrencesuch as a slight slide in rainfallmay have a tremendous impact.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=from-bountiful-to-barren-sahara-desert

It pictures a bit different image then you suggested.

++++

EDIT:

I will try an analogy here:

Suppose you are on intravenous in some hospital because you were hit by a car or something.

But the nurse made a misstake and instead of a physiological salt solution to prevent you from drying out, she accidently put you on a solution containing substance X.

Substance X is not good for your body, but your body is able to fight it off to a certain treshold.

At the same time they also record the ECG.

Nothing will noticably happen for maybe a day, but then the treshold has been reached, your heart suddenly starts to fibrillate for a minute and finally it stops.

The event that your heart stops will be recorded as a short event, a sudden event.

But the process leading up to your heart failure took many hours and unnoticed.

.

Edited February 1, 2012 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

From the list you posted before (enter "Yoa" in the search tool to see where and when) only two locations are relevant to the OLB (I said this before, btw): Los Millares (Spain) and Delfzijl (Netherlands).

You posted about Delfzijl becuase of the sand deposits and peat layers that started forming around 2000 BC, but I said that according to the pdf you got it from, it was a gradual proces, and nothing to do with some tsunami.

The fires that destroyed Los Millares in Spain were most probably caused by fires during the many wars (archeological evidence of wars) around that time. Very soon after, however, people continued living there and soon a new culture was built up again.

And to get back to your Faroer/Friesland Island theory: if that really was Aldland, the homeland of the Finda, where are these volcanoes that destroyed it around 2200 BC?

[Abramelin]

From the OLB:

HOW THE BAD TIME CAME.

During the whole summer the sun had been hid behind the clouds, as if unwilling to look upon the earth. There was perpetual calm, and the damp mist hung like a wet sail over the houses and the marshes. The air was heavy and oppressive, and in mens hearts was neither joy nor cheerfulness. In the midst of this stillness the earth began to tremble as if she was dying. The mountains opened to vomit forth fire and flames. Some sank into the bosom of the earth, and in other places mountains rose out of the plain. Aldland, called by the seafaring people, Atland, disappeared, and the wild waves rose so high over hill and dale that everything was buried in the sea. Many people were swallowed up by the earth, and others who had escaped the fire perished in the water.

It was not only in Findas land that the earth vomited fire, but also in Twiskland (Germany). Whole forests were burned one after the other, and when the wind blew from that quarter our land was covered with ashes. Rivers changed their course, and at their mouths new islands were formed of sand and drift.

During three years this continued, but at length it ceased, and forests became visible. Many countries were submerged, and in other places land rose above the sea, and the wood was destroyed through the half of Twiskland (Germany). Troops of Findas people came and settled in the empty places. Our dispersed people were exterminated or made slaves. Then watchfulness was doubly impressed upon us, and time taught us that union is force.

=======

THIS IS INSCRIBED ON THE WARABURGT BY THE ALDEGAMUDE.

This is the history.

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 (Germany), 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 Findas 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.

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

The suggestion you get from this English translation is that the Magyar were from Finda's race, but not as wild as the rest of the Findas usually were. Later on in the text it is again suggested that they were from Finda's race.

These Magyar from Finda's race came from the EAST.

Also that Aldland was homeland of the Findas.

That in Aldland volcanoes erupted.

That Aldland submerged... disappeared.

If Friesland Island/Faroer or even the Rockall Plateau was Aldland, where is the geological evidence of its destruction in Ireland and Scotland?

They found evidence of a huge tsunami in Scotland and the Faroer (and other countries around the North Sea) of 6150 BC (Storegga Slide), but nothing of 2200 BC.

.

Edited February 1, 2012 by Abramelin

[Alewyn]

It pictures a bit different image then you suggested.

I am afraid it says exactly what I am saying. Now note my emphasis:

The data also confirms that a drop in rainfall was the major reason the area turned into a dusty badland. Based on the sediment samples, the researchers determined that Yoa's waters suddenly grew quite salty about 4,000 years ago. They speculate the salinity spiked because the streams that had previously drained salt out of the lake vanished as rainfall lessened. This abrupt event shows how a relatively small occurrence—such as a slight slide in rainfall—may have a tremendous impact.

Notice that the water suddenly became salty and they speculate about the cause of the spike in salinity. In other words, they have not been able to determine a cause for the increased salinity yet. If you now consider all the other things that happened at the same time, it must tell you something about a global event.

Don't you think it strange that the OLB's date of 2193 BC exactly coincides with all these other 2200 BC events from all over the globe? How can you possibly say that only the Spanish and Dutch events support the OLB. Surely your powers of deduction and logic are greater than that?

[Abramelin]

I am afraid it says exactly what I am saying. Now note my emphasis:

Notice that the water suddenly became salty and they speculate about the cause of the spike in salinity. In other words, they have not been able to determine a cause for the increased salinity yet. If you now consider all the other things that happened at the same time, it must tell you something about a global event.

Don't you think it strange that the OLB's date of 2193 BC exactly coincides with all these other 2200 BC events from all over the globe? How can you possibly say that only the Spanish and Dutch events support the OLB. Surely your powers of deduction and logic are greater than that?

I posted an analogy you obviously skipped.

But this is what I also posted:

This gradual shift in the Sahara's overall climate contradicts a common theory that the region dried rapidly over a few hundred years, and provides clues about a potential re-greening triggered by global warming, Kröpelin says.

The OLB story is about Fryan territory, or large part of Europe. So I expect they recorded mainly what happened in Europe, not what happened in China or America.

There is no evidence tsunamis hit the coasts of Europe around 2200 BC, no crumbling mountains in Europe, no fires burning for years in Europe, no volcanoes erupting in Europe (aside from very maybe an unimportant eruption in Italy), no rivers changing their course in Europe around 2200 BC, and so on.

Oh, and if we go nitpicking, lol, the Yoa event is said the have occurred 4000 BP. Could be 1800-1900 BC, right?

.

Edited February 1, 2012 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

Before everyone jumps on me again, I *do* know that at a later stage in the OLB narrative the name "Middel See" can only mean the Mediterranean.

======

It's interesting to note that the Frisian Middle Sea ("Middelzee") had an older name like Boorne, Bordine, Bordne,Bordena. It started as a river and developed into a tidel current and later on into an estuary.

On page 28 of the following book it is said that according to most writers the etymological meaning of the Bordine is "grensrivier" or "border river". And maybe something like "borderer" because of "Bordne", the 'one that borders'.

Op de grens van land en water: dynamiek van landschap en samenleving in ... by Daniël Augustinus Gerrets

http://books.google.nl/books?id=qr54JwrLi_sC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=Boorne,+Bordine+or+Bordena&source=bl&ots=7ojEfqdmFE&sig=LQfxfdOhhtb418wSypIi3q7fwTg&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=lo4pT9v4DIibOvjX-bYC&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Boorne%2C%20Bordine%20or%20Bordena&f=true

So we have a Frisian Middle Sea, it's original name means 'border' and it was an actual border as I have explained long ago (and as you can read again in the above link).

From the OLB:

By morne paldon wi ovir it uter ende thes aster-sê, by êvind an thene middelsê, alsa wi buta tha littiga wel twelif grâta swete rinstrama hêdon, vs thrvch Wr.alda jêven vmb vs lând elte to haldane aend vmb us wigandlik folk tha wêi to wisana nêi sina sê.

http://oeralinda.angelfire.com/

The word 'paldon' means something like 'being bordered by'. In Dutch there is the word 'afpalen', past tense, 'afgepaald'. It means exactly the same: bordered. "We defined our limits" >> "Wij paalden onze grens af"

"Elte" means 'healthy', and no modern equivalent in Dutch.

Wigandlik: wagen = is a Dutch verb meaning to dare, to risk. In crooked Dutch it would be 'wagendlijk', or someone who is 'wagend', 'risking'. In short: brave, an English word which that is always used in translating this sentence.

What I find troublesome is "rinstrama' or 'rin strama' as it is called a bit further on in the text. All I could think of was "rijnstromen" but that would be nonsense (in this context that is; there is something like Rijnstromen...). There is, however, another river called Rijn (Rhine) and it is in Friesland, and I vaguely remember another small river called Rijn elsewhere in the Netherlands (no, not THE Rhine). The only thing (using the Old Frisian Dictionary) that comes closest to the OLB text is 'running streams' (in Dutch, rennende stromen, lol)

"Littiga" is 'little' in English. Again no modern Dutch equivalent.

My version in Dutch:

Bij morgen paalden we over het uiter(ste) einde deze Aster Sea, bij avond aan den Middel Zee, alzo wij buiten de kleine wel twaalf grote zoete ren-stromen hadden, ons door Wralda (ge)geven om ons land gezond te houden en om ons dappere volk de weg te wijzen naa zijn zee.

My version in English:

By morning (sunrise/east) we bordered on the utter end of the East Sea (= Baltic), by evening (sunset/west) on the Middle Sea, so that besides the little streams we had twelve large sweet running streams, given to us by Wr.alda to keep our land healthy and to show our brave people the way to his sea.

This is Sandbach's version:

Eastward our boundary went to the extremity of the East Sea, and westward to the Mediterranean Sea; so that besides the small rivers we had twelve large rivers given us by Wr-alda to keep our land moist, and to show our seafaring men the way to his sea.

As you can see, Sandbach made at least 4 mistakes in his translation.

-1- the Med is not to the west of the Baltic;

-2- he leaves out 'sweet' for some reason;

-3- he translates 'elte' into 'moist' but it should 'be 'healthy';

-4- it's not 'seafaring men', it should be 'brave people'.

End of editing.

Edited February 1, 2012 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

Alewyn, you may think that my former post about a proper translation is 'bullscheise' because it just distracts people or something from the real 'important' things, but I do hope that you read it carefully anyway.

You have used Sandbach's translation for your book (or Tony Steel's; ok, but his' is based on Sandbach's too), but the third edition of your book should be based on a PROPER translation.

I know even Otharus agrees with me about Sandbach making many errors while translating. And yes, even a Jensma made errors.

And I do realize that what I just said may sound arrogant again (as a simple layman, right, but I am not stupid), but Jensma is NOT a linguist.

He is a historian.

.

Edited February 1, 2012 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

You should show up more frequently, Alewyn.

I will bet you will wait for couple of weeks to show up again (being busy, having a life and all those crap excuses), and then you will only respond to a post you have an answer to.

In case you forgot: this thread is about YOUR book.

You should be very glad that sometimes like 50 guests are reading this thread.

And it is not your posts that attract visitors to this thread.

It is the long winding discussion about your book that attracts visitors who google the title of your book or your name, a discussion continued by a handful of people, but not you.

A thread of 655 pages about your book. Tell me, what writer would be so lucky?

At least you could show some decency and show up more.

I have no decency left in my whole body as many here told me one way or the other, but I assume you have, or should have?

We are all interested in the OLB, and post about it.

You just sit back and watch the game roll on, and loving the attention your book gets by that, whether in a positive way or a negative way.

.

Edited February 1, 2012 by Abramelin

[Swede]

No. You did not miss anything. Apart from my interpretation, the OLB and the Book of Enoch, nobody else says that the change was sudden. I know it sounds arrogant, but I believe that they (scientists) have not yet made the connection.

Consider the evidence:

1. Numerous scientific research papers mentions tsunamis and floods in 2200 BC (Mesopotamia, Spain, Sri-Lanka, The Caribbean, Australia, China, etc.) What caused these tsunamis all around the globe and why all at the same time?

2. Archaeologists determined that many civilizations collapsed in 2200 BC (Egypt, Akkad, China, India, Palestine, etc.). Again, all at the same time.

3. The collapse of these ancient civilizations are ascribed to droughts, floods, earthquakes, etc. Why earthquakes if it was caused only by a gradual climate change?

4. North Africa suddenly started to turn into a desert at the same time and Africa's great lakes subsequently started disappearing.

5. Lake Yoa and other lakes in North Africa suddenly turned salty around the same time.

6. Now the OLB and Enoch are found to explain a sudden change. How could either of them have observed a change in earth's orientation if this occurred slowly over generations? We now know that the change did indeed happen but how could they have been able to observe and record it if it did not happen suddenly?

7. All these catastrophes happened at the same time – ca 2200 BC. Surely this was not part of a continuous drawn out process?

8. Paleo-climatologists admit that they are not certain whether the change in earth's axial tilt and orbit happened gradually over millennia or suddenly over a few centuries. I say it happened very fast over a period of 0 to 3 years. That is why we find evidence of massive tsunamis, floods, earthquakes, as well as the very sudden collapse of civilizations and cities. I believe some of these cities (or towns) that collapsed in 2200 BC shows signs of fire damage which archaeologists incorrectly stated was caused by war.

Don't you find it just a little bit strange that all this turmoil happened at exactly the same time, yet scientists still refer to the fairly obscure term "Bond Event"? What really cause all this?

I believe the OLB gives us the vital missing piece in the puzzle. Once scientists realize this, we shall see massive new discoveries and supporting evidence coming to the fore. New discoveries are not made by staying on the well trodden path, but by exploring the unexplored.

To start with two of your "interpretations":

Climate variability during the present interglacial,

the Holocene, has been rather smooth in comparison

with the last glacial. Nevertheless, there were some

rather abrupt climate changes. One of these changes, the

desertication of the Saharan and Arabian region some 4 -

6 thousand years ago, was presumably quite important for

human society. It could have been the stimulus leading to

the foundation of civilizations along the Nile, Euphrat and

Tigris rivers. Here we argue that Saharan and Arabian deserti

cation was triggered by subtle variations in the Earth's

orbit which were strongly amplified by atmosphere- vegetation

feedbacks in the subtropics. The timing of this transition,

however, was mainly governed by a global interplay

between atmosphere, ocean, sea ice, and vegetation (Emphasis added).

Around 9 ka, the tilt of the Earth's axis was

stronger than today and the time of perihelion was at the

end of July [berger, 1978]. This led to a stronger insolation

of the Northern Hemisphere during summer which amplied

the African and Indian summer monsoon. However, variations

in orbital parameters through the Holocene are rather

smooth, whereas changes in North African climate and vegetation

were comparatively abrupt [see, e.g., Petit-Maire and

Guo, 1996]. This suggests that there are feedbacks within

the climate system which amplify and modify external forcing

leading to marked climate variations (Emphasis added).

http://www.mpimet.mpg.de/fileadmin/staff/claussenmartin/publications/claussen_al_sahara_grl_99.pdf

The change from the mid-Holocene climate to that of today was initiated by changes in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of Earth's axis. Some 9,000 years ago, Earth's tilt was 24.14 degrees, as compared with the current 23.45 degrees, and perihelion, the point in the Earth's orbit that is closest to the Sun, occurred at the end of July, as compared with early January now. At that time, the Northern Hemisphere received more summer sunlight, which amplified the African and Indian summer monsoon (Emphasis added).

The changes in Earth's orbit occurred gradually, however, whereas the evolution of North Africa's climate and vegetation were abrupt (Emphasis added).

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/07/990712080500.htm

As has been previously presented, there would not appear to be any support for a major axial shift during the time period of your speculation.

.

[The Puzzler]

...than the endless bickering by non-professionals about the origin of words.

Well, sorry for trying. Since my last 2 posts before this one were about the origin of words I can only assume you mean this kind of thing.

To me, showing that the language of the OLB is what the book itself says it is, is very important and the more the language is looked at, the more we will understand about the people of Europe.

You base your whole book around an event that is not even mentioned in the OLB, a meteor impact, come up with your own theory and then pass it off as truth because your own mind has come to the conclusion that is what must have occurred to have the events described in the OLB.

At least what I'm looking into is actually part of what the OLB says it should be, once people realise the language is a base, even THE PIE language, then you might start to see the kind of recognition in Europe you are expecting.

[Abramelin]

Well, sorry for trying. Since my last 2 posts before this one were about the origin of words I can only assume you mean this kind of thing.

To me, showing that the language of the OLB is what the book itself says it is, is very important and the more the language is looked at, the more we will understand about the people of Europe.

You base your whole book around an event that is not even mentioned in the OLB, a meteor impact, come up with your own theory and then pass it off as truth because your own mind has come to the conclusion that is what must have occurred to have the events described in the OLB.

At least what I'm looking into is actually part of what the OLB says it should be, once people realise the language is a base, even THE PIE language, then you might start to see the kind of recognition in Europe you are expecting.

Alewyn based his book on an erroneous translation of the OLB. How professional is that?

[Abramelin]

Otharus,

Perhaps we have dealt with this before but I do not recall it. It would seem to me, nevertheless, that you enjoy this kind of thing:

What was the relationship between Ottema and Halbertsma?

Both were (apparently) highly respected academics of their time and I assume they must have known each other. For one thing, Ottema did not think that Halbertsma could have created the hoax, otherwise he would have said so.

In his Address to the Frisian Society for History and Culture in February 1871, Dr. Ottema had the following to say:

“They cannot be forgeries. In the first place, the copy of 1256 cannot be. Who could have at that time forged anything of that kind? Certainly no one. Still less any one at an earlier date. At a later date a forgery is equally impossible, for the simple reason that no one was acquainted with the language. Except Grimm, Richthofen and Hettema, no one can be named sufficiently versed in that branch of philology, or who had studied the language so as to be able to write in it.”

As you can see - no mention of Halbertsma. Yet, now we have them at the opposite ends of the debate: The one knew it was a hoax (Halbertsma who supposedly created the hoax), and the other was certain it was authentic (Ottema who translated it).

Your views?

At some point Ottema became the chief editor of the "Friesche Volksalmanak" and Halbertsma was one of the writers whose articles were published in that same almanac.

[Abramelin]

Yes, indeed: these guys from the 19th century were no fools.

What Alewyn "forgot" to mention is that we nowadays have access to many media.

Many ancient documents have been photo-copied and put online for all to read.

In the old days you had to travel to some faraway library, and you would only do that if you expected to find something there.

If Alewyn had lived in the 19th century, he would not have been able to write his book.

.

This is exactly my point. The information in the OLB covers Scandinavia, Northern and Western Europe, the Mediterranean, Egypt and North Africa, Greece, the Middle East and India.

Who in 19th century Netherlands could have had the opportunity, time and resources to gather and process all this information? It would have had to be a FULL TIME and LIFELONG occupation. There would not have been time left over for any other career.

As I have shown before, none of the historical facts in the OLB have been proven wrong since it appeared and, as Otharus have stated, none of the historical ideas that were proven wrong since the 19th century, appear in the OLB.

=

Agreed, and if the “hoaxers” lived in the 21st century, then only might they have been able to have created this “hoax”.

If you ever have the opportunity, then check that huge list of books Joost Halbertsma had collected throughout his life.

==

An example of 'historical facts' in the OLB that are quite false is those citadels no one has ever found one single brick or stone of, not anywhere in Europe, not anywhere else. They simply never existed.

You said that the ringwallburchts that I came up with is proof, but no: I said they date from around the time of the Viking invasions.

All those circle-like structures in the old center of several Dutch cities you mention in your book (the first edition) are not older than the early Middle Ages.

[The Puzzler]

Alewyn based his book on an erroneous translation of the OLB. How professional is that?

Yes, everyone is doing their best, not all of us think a meteor impact that is never mentioned is the be all and end all of the OLB.

[The Puzzler]

Before everyone jumps on me again, I *do* know that at a later stage in the OLB narrative the name "Middel See" can only mean the Mediterranean.

======

It's interesting to note that the Frisian Middle Sea ("Middelzee") had an older name like Boorne, Bordine, Bordne,Bordena. It started as a river and developed into a tidel current and later on into an estuary.

On page 28 of the following book it is said that according to most writers the etymological meaning of the Bordine is "grensrivier" or "border river". And maybe something like "borderer" because of "Bordne", the 'one that borders'.

Op de grens van land en water: dynamiek van landschap en samenleving in ... by Daniël Augustinus Gerrets

http://books.google.nl/books?id=qr54JwrLi_sC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=Boorne,+Bordine+or+Bordena&source=bl&ots=7ojEfqdmFE&sig=LQfxfdOhhtb418wSypIi3q7fwTg&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=lo4pT9v4DIibOvjX-bYC&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Boorne%2C%20Bordine%20or%20Bordena&f=true

So we have a Frisian Middle Sea, it's original name means 'border' and it was an actual border as I have explained long ago (and as you can read again in the above link).

From the OLB:

By morne paldon wi ovir it uter ende thes aster-sê, by êvind an thene middelsê, alsa wi buta tha littiga wel twelif grâta swete rinstrama hêdon, vs thrvch Wr.alda jêven vmb vs lând elte to haldane aend vmb us wigandlik folk tha wêi to wisana nêi sina sê.

http://oeralinda.angelfire.com/

The word 'paldon' means something like 'being bordered by'. In Dutch there is the word 'afpalen', past tense, 'afgepaald'. It means exactly the same: bordered. "We defined our limits" >> "Wij paalden onze grens af"

"Elte" means 'healthy', and no modern equivalent in Dutch.

Wigandlik: wagen = is a Dutch verb meaning to dare, to risk. In crooked Dutch it would be 'wagendlijk', or someone who is 'wagend', 'risking'. In short: brave, an English word which that is always used in translating this sentence.

What I find troublesome is "rinstrama' or 'rin strama' as it is called a bit further on in the text. All I could think of was "rijnstromen" but that would be nonsense (in this context that is; there is something like Rijnstromen...). There is, however, another river called Rijn (Rhine) and it is in Friesland, and I vaguely remember another small river called Rijn elsewhere in the Netherlands (no, not THE Rhine). The only thing (using the Old Frisian Dictionary) that comes closest to the OLB text is 'running streams' (in Dutch, rennende stromen, lol)

"Littiga" is 'little' in English. Again no modern Dutch equivalent.

My version in Dutch:

Bij morgen paalden we over het uiter(ste) einde deze Aster Sea, bij avond aan den Middel Zee, alzo wij buiten de kleine wel twaalf grote zoete ren-stromen hadden, ons door Wralda (ge)geven om ons land gezond te houden en om ons dappere volk de weg te wijzen naa zijn zee.

My version in English:

By morning (sunrise/east) we bordered on the utter end of the East Sea (= Baltic), by evening (sunset/west) on the Middle Sea, so that besides the little streams we had twelve large sweet running streams, given to us by Wr.alda to keep our land healthy and to show our brave people the way to his sea.

This is Sandbach's version:

Eastward our boundary went to the extremity of the East Sea, and westward to the Mediterranean Sea; so that besides the small rivers we had twelve large rivers given us by Wr-alda to keep our land moist, and to show our seafaring men the way to his sea.

As you can see, Sandbach made at least 4 mistakes in his translation.

-1- the Med is not to the west of the Baltic;

-2- he leaves out 'sweet' for some reason;

-3- he translates 'elte' into 'moist' but it should 'be 'healthy';

-4- it's not 'seafaring men', it should be 'brave people'.

End of editing.

Nice translating. Maybe there was 2 Middle Sea's...? They called their own one middelse and the other one middelse as well. Like a generic term for any sea in the middle of somewhere.

[Abramelin]

Nice translating. Maybe there was 2 Middle Sea's...? They called their own one middelse and the other one middelse as well. Like a generic term for any sea in the middle of somewhere.

Well, could be of course. Something like York/New York or earlier Amsterdam/New Amsterdam?

My main purpose was to show how many adaptions Sandbach made with or without the help of Ottema.

My version in English:

By morning we bordered on the utter end of the East Sea, by evening on the Middle Sea, so that besides the little streams we had twelve large sweet running streams, given to us by Wr.alda to keep our land healthy and to show our brave people the way to his sea.

Sandbach's version:

Eastward our boundary went to the extremity of the East Sea, and westward to the Mediterranean Sea; so that besides the small rivers we had twelve large rivers given us by Wr-alda to keep our land moist, and to show our seafaring men the way to his sea.

Maybe my translation into English does look a bit crappy, but it is as close as you can get to the original text in 'Fryan'.

And it has consequences for the extent of Frya's empire.

.

Edited February 2, 2012 by Abramelin

[Otharus]

My main purpose was to show how many adaptions Sandbach made with or without the help of Ottema.

Sandbach's wife was Dutch. She helped him.

Ottema was happy with his layout and copied it for the 2nd Dutch edition, but he was a bit dissapointed about the inaccuracy of the English translation.

(Source: letters Ottema to L.F. Over de Linden)

[Otharus]

Otharus, I must say that I enjoyed all your recent posts tremendously. You have given me even more confidence that you and I are not the only ones who believe in the authenticity of the OLB, and that we are, in fact, in very good company.

Thank you, Alewyn, your feedback is stimulating. There's more to come.

As for the "suppresion" of the OLB, please read again my posts in early December which totally support your view:

My post 8256 dated 3 December 2011 (translation of an article on the Oera Linda Book on the Dutch website Semafoor.net of the academic study group, SEM.)

My post 8294 dated 5 December 2011 (Albert Delahaye censored by Dutch academics i.e. he was not allowed to quote the OLB)

My post 8295 dated 5 December 2011 (Prof. Jensma’s theory and Tresoar)

“Jensma alleges the following (P.188): “Neither Molenaar nor Vleer dared, and it typified the Netherland situation, declare the book outright authentic”.

Yes, those were good posts, I copied them onto my blog.

The following quotes are reveiling too:

Two more fragments to illustrate how 'believers' were not only ridiculed (1972), but even discredited (2004).

S.J. van der Molen (1972)

"From time to time, the ever unknown author of this manuscript succeeds in troubling minds and making victims. The youngest victim (apparently not in years: the man already published in 1940) is dr. phil. Frans J. Los, who recently published: The Ura Linda Manuscripts as Source of History"

Original text, taken from "Doctor schiet Ura Linda-'bok'", published 11-11-1972 in Leeuwarder Courant

"Van tijd tot tijd slaagt de nog steeds onbekend gebleven maker van dit geschrift er in geesten te verwarren en slachtoffers te maken. Het jongste slachtoffer (kennelijk niet in jaren: de man publiceerde al in 1940) is dr. phil. Frans J. Los, die ... zojuist liet verschijnen: Die Ura Linda Handschriften als Geschichtsquelle"

Jensma (2004; page 17)

"This Ottema was followed by a long row of believers of suspicious character. Of them SS-Führer Heinrich Himmler is most notorious, but he was certainly not the only one. Theosophists, nazi's, New Agers and right extremists of various sorts explained and still explain this OLB as an authentic and important source for our knowledge of western civilisation."

Original text:

"Deze Ottema kreeg een lange stoet van gelovigen van bedenkelijk allooi achter zich aan. De SS-Führer Heinrich Himmler is van hen de beruchtste, maar hij was zeker niet de enige. Theosofen, nazi's, New Agers en Nieuwe Rechtsen van allerlei pluimage verklaarden en verklaren dit Oera Linda-boek nog steeds voor een authentieke en belangrijke bron voor onze kennis van de westerse beschaving."

There are and have been 'suspicious' OLB believers, but certainly not all 'believers' were like that, as Jensma suggests.

The lawyer N. Luitse was very serious and intelligent, he did a lot of research and some of his work is used by Jensma, but not discussed. Mr. Luitse would not fit in Jensma's long row of believers of suspicious character.

The suggestion that a book is loved mostly by neo-nazi's and other extremists is an effective way to make it taboo to speak openly about it (in other words suppress it).

I must say that it is quite frustrating to realise that we could have been so much further down the line in reconstructing Europe's pre-history here, than the endless bickering by non-professionals about the origin of words.

That we are non-professionals should not matter too much, as long as we use our common sense.

There's enough professionals that produce nonsense.

Since the language of the OLB seems to be the main argument of the skeptics, discussion about it is relevant.

All of their arguments so far have been systematically refuted.

They cannot imagine that certain words and expressions are that old, they expect something else.

That does not mean the OLB cannot be real, but rather that our ideas and expectations about language-history may be wrong.

Edited February 2, 2012 by Otharus

[Abramelin]

Sandbach's wife was Dutch. She helped him.

Ottema was happy with his layout and copied it for the 2nd Dutch edition, but he was a bit dissapointed about the inaccuracy of the English translation.

(Source: letters Ottema to L.F. Over de Linden)

OK, I didn't know about his Dutch wife.

Btw, you will remember 'Tony" (Tony Steele) who posted here long ago.

He also published his transliteration and/or translation on the internet. He said that Frisian friends had helped him with the translation, and I told him that because of several errors in his translation I wasn't very impressed with that help.

You happen to know a link to his translation? I use the Angelfire site with Sandbach's translation for years now, but I know I sometimes also used his. It was on a site called "Bulfinch", but I am not sure.

[Otharus]

And then there is your idea Friesland Island (or the Faroer) might have been Aldland.

That this was the "Aldland" mentioned in the OLB is not likely, but the idea that it was once much bigger and known as "Frisland" is quite reasonable and worth taking very seriously.

[Abramelin]

We have discussed the OLB "Nyhellenia" (aka "Min-erva") or "Nehalennia" of the Dutch votive altars many times in this thread and also in the Doggerland thread.

One of the many explanations of that name (I think it may have been by Theo Vennemann) is that the name had a Phoenician part in it, "nahal".

But by accident I found something interesting related to the way the OLB explains that name.

The next one is the explanation of "nahal" as a Semitic (and thus also Phoenician) word:

The English name Nile (Latin: Nīlos; Greek: Νεῖλος) is thought to be ultimately derived from the Semitic Nahal meaning "river" from which the Hebrew nachal (Hebrew: נחל‎) is derived.

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

That makes sense because the Nehallennia statues/votive altars were found near Domburg and at Colijnsplaat on the shore of the Oosterschelde in the Dutch province of Zeeland.

But now this:

Nehal is a very popular Egyptian,Turkish , Middle eastern and Indian name .It is particularly common in western Indian state of Gujarat. This name is common for both male and female. It has variety of meanings in different languages, suach as rainy, handsome, loving, spring,or beautiful.Nehal also means love.

Nehal is also a popular Persian and Middle Eastern name which metaphorically refers to the personal attributes of beauty and youth and which, in its literal form, means "little tree". In Arabic, Nehal is a collective word. It relates to water from springs, essentially meaning 'source of life'. As a name, it symbolizes the fact or the will to drink from the source of knowledge. Therefore the meaning of "Nehal" is "eager to get knowledge". It is a female name & also a male name.Usually female name. In Egypt, Nehal is one of the most common new female names. Nehal is also a last name in north India. This caste belongs to the jatt-sikh group in north India(punjab). Nehal is the sub caste of the toor caste in the sikh group of the north India and belongs to the rajpoots.

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

From the OLB:

563 jêr nêi âldland svnken is, sat hir en wise burch fâm, Min-erva was hira nôma. Thrvch tha stjurar Nyhellênja tonômath. This tonôma was god kêren, hwand tha rêd thêr hju lênade, was ny aend hel bvppa alle ôtherum.

My translation:

563 jaar na Aldland gezonken is, zat hier een wijze burchtfemme, Min-erva was haar naam. Door de stuurlui Nyhellenia toe(ge)naamd. Deze toenaam was goed gekozen, want de raad die ze verleende, was nieuw en helder boven alle andere.

Sandbach's translation:

Five hundred and sixty-three years after the submersion of Atland a wise town priestess presided here, whose name was Min-erva—called by the sailors Nyhellenia. This name was well chosen, for her counsels were new and clear above all others.

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

++++

EDIT:

Several etymologies for "Nehallenia" : http://everything.explained.at/Nehalennia/

.

Edited February 2, 2012 by Abramelin

[Otharus]

Btw, you will remember "Tony" (Tony Steele) who posted here long ago.

You happen to know a link to his translation?

I would not use anything from him.

[Otharus]

How do you explain the underwater topography and contours that fit the old Zeno map? Statistically the number of similarities are impossible to be a coincidence. Some of the contours are virtually identical to the old map. [...] Have you ever considered the enormity of the discovery if I am proven correct (which I sincerely believe I am)?

I agree and am convinced that some day underwater research will prove you right.

[Otharus]

I believe the OLB gives us the vital missing piece in the puzzle. Once scientists realize this, we shall see massive new discoveries and supporting evidence coming to the fore. New discoveries are not made by staying on the well trodden path, but by exploring the unexplored.

Exactly!

[Otharus]

And to get back to your Faroer/Friesland Island theory: if that really was Aldland, the homeland of the Finda, where are these volcanoes that destroyed it around 2200 BC?

No, Faroer/Frisland will obviously not have been the Finda homeland.