[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood

[Abramelin]

OK, so you think this might be a telling of a local story Abe and as it has been translated worldly place names have been thought of when it really is local place names, I hear ya, I'll be back.

Uhmm.. no, not exactly.

It's a story based on (local) Frisian topography, language and history, but a bit stretched... And yeah, they once had a larger land, and it ranged from the coast of Belgium up to Jutland in Denmark. They have a history as a people of at least 2800 years.

Krekaland, land of Creeks, not land of GREEKS. What do you think was to be found all over the Frisian territories? CREEKS, and also marshes, rivers, islands, and so on.

We here live in a delta. Can't help it, although we are always busy changing it, lol.

[Abramelin]

Tha Nyhellenia * tham fon hira Sjn nfime Min-erva hete,

god seten was S,nd tha Krekalander t hja to met even h§,rde

minade as vs Sjn folk, tha kemon ther svme forsta &nd

prestera vppe-ra burch knd frejon Min-erva hwer of hjra

erva lejon. Nyhellenia andere, mina erva dreg ik om

in mina bosm, hw&t ik urven h&v is Ijafde vr wisdom,

rjucht §,nd frydom, h&v ik tham vrleren, alsa ben ik

elik an tha minniste jvvar slavonena. Nw jev ik red vm

nawet, men than skold ik vrk4pja tham, Tha hera gvngon

wei, &,nd hripon al lakande, jvwer heroga thjanra, wisa Hel-

lenia.

We can clearly see the name Min-erva and down lower Hellenia, I really cannot find any of this sort of reference apart from being about Greek Athena.

I'm still not totally in agreeance with this being a local story, yet.

LOL, don't tell me about Nehalennia, I have written a lot about it in the Doggerland thread. Like I did about the Frisans, btw.

Nehallenia was a local seagoddess venerated by the people living in the south west of Holland, which was once part of Friesland. The first statues were found in the 17th century by Dutch fishermen, and near Domburg, in the Dutch province of Zeeland (and that's near Walcheren, or the Walhallagara of the OLB).

And what do we see on old charts of that part of Holland? CREEKS, lots of them.

And it's the Romans who equated that goddess with Minerva, a Latin god.

Verwijs, Haverschmidt, Ottema, and all those others must have known that: they taught Latin, they spoke Latin, and they all translated ancient Latin manuscripts as part of their job.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Abramelin

[Alewyn]

This would appear to be greatly in error (as to dating) as the following, unless otherwise specified, is in accordance with the Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree 2008:

Haplogroup C: 60,000 BP

Haplogroup N: 20,000 BP

Haplogroup I: 22,000 BP

Haplogroup R1b: Table 2; New binary polymorphisms reshape and increase resolution of the human Y chromosomal haplogroup tree

……………………………. < 18,500 (12,500 - 25,700) BP, which dates R1

Haplogroup E3b: Revised from 2008 as E1b1b, 22,400 BP

Haplogroup ExE3b: No longer used as a designation

Haplogroup A: 75,000 BP

Haplogroup J: 30,000 BP

Haplogroup L: 30,000 BP

Haplogroup D: 60,000 BP

Haplogroup R1a: see R1b, above; < 18,500 (12,500 - 25,700) BP, which dates R1

Haplogroup O: 30,000 BP

cormac

I have no doubt that you are correct in terms of your dates above which seem to refer to the times these groups came into being.

In the context of my dissertation: when I am talking about the "regions they originated from after 2193 BC" I actually mean the regions they "migrated from after 2193 BC". I can see that this can create confusion. Perhaps I should have worded it better but I do not see that we should be in disagreement on this specific point.

[The Puzzler]

I dunno, she still seems associated with everything it says in a Greek context, I suppose you have a word for Athenia as well.

When I came away from Athenia with my followers,

we arrived at an island named by my crew Kreta, because

of the cries that the inhabitants raised on our arrival.

Tha-k althus wei faren was mith mina Ijvd fon Athenia,

kSmoD wi to tha lesta an en eland thrvch min Ijvd Kr^ta

Nyhellenia still could be Athena.

Hmmm, I have to sleep on it all, it's 2 am here

[The Puzzler]

This could even mean that the Magyar being the Magi, wandering gypsy, magical priests and witches, who practiced astrology and other things settled in Egypt and started the whole thing down there, crazy I know, but isn't Min the first known King? God?, maybe it is actually Min-erva the sea goddess, accompanying these Magi into Egypt (and Libya) by seafaring means, who becomes Athena, Neith. The priests like the Chaldean magi priests, in fact written by one writer how Belus sent some Egyptian priests into Chaldea. All very strange. Anyway, night all.

Edited July 12, 2010 by The Puzzler

[Alewyn]

Maybe holes can be poked in SOME of your evidence, but hopefully a lot of it will stand.

About the "flood" whereby the wife and son and papers were "saved". Could this have just been a severe storm where maybe their house or holdings were threatened with flooding water? It doesn't have to be a "recorded" flood of national proportions does it?

Thanks for your moral support. At the moment, however, I seem to be fairly isolated and outnumbered. I don't hear much "friendly fire". In the words of the Oera Linda Book: "There is a lot of snapping at my heels".

In terms of your second remark: I fully agree. I have a short section in my book about the more prominent floods around the Netherlands and all of them recorded the "thousands" that died. They had so many floods that the small ones would definitely not have made it into the national archives.

[cormac mac airt]

I actually mean the regions they "migrated from after 2193 BC".

Unless you can show evidence of specific sub-clades of the above mentioned haplogroups that "migrated from after 2193 BC" (as opposed to all of the above doing so) then it's meaningless, IMO. There is no evidence for the claim that all of the above mentioned (mostly) major haplogroups suddenly moved c.2193 BC, after having resided in their respective areas for anywhere from 12,500 years up to 75,000 years BP.

cormac

[The Puzzler]

I see now where it all came from, its the story of Achilles' people, Thetis and her realm, Poseidon, and Athena who moved into Greece and Troy and when the Mycenaeans came they took over and ended the lives of the Trojans, kin of the people of Apollo, the healer, another who is always seen as fair and enters Etruscan myth, all from the area of the German Bight. It's the Phaethon myth and the story of the changes in climate and kingship on Earth and the beginnings of knowledge and laws. It's the flood stories in Greece with no real flood and the confusing history of the Gods, the Celts, the Centaurs and the realm of the Greek myth, a time told by Homer, as best he could, using strands of stories long held by the bards of the Northern lands...

Are you all ready for my book?

Just jokin' Alewyn. I agree with the guy who said you have discovered Atlantis, Plato was a clever guy alright.

Ok, sorry people, but how do you expect me to sleep..?

[Alewyn]

Where does Prof Harvey Weiss actually mention the exact year 2193 BC? I'm quite aware of hisTell Leilan Project, I've even managed to get my hands on a few of his publications about it. He sets the time frame between 2200 CB and 1900 BC, I've never read him giving that specific year.

I found something but this is not quite the quote I had in mind:

New York Times

Collapse of Earliest Known Empire Is Linked to Long, Harsh Drought

By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD

Published: August 24, 1993

Professor Weiss:

“However, new research suggests complex internal problems and the beginning of a 300-year drought as the culprits. * 2217-2193: Reign of his son Shar-kali-sharri, followed by a period of anarchy”

[Alewyn]

Unless you can show evidence of specific sub-clades of the above mentioned haplogroups that "migrated from after 2193 BC" (as opposed to all of the above doing so) then it's meaningless, IMO. There is no evidence for the claim that all of the above mentioned (mostly) major haplogroups suddenly moved c.2193 BC, after having resided in their respective areas for anywhere from 12,500 years up to 75,000 years BP.

cormac

Patience, patience. I will get there.

[Leonardo]

You might wish to read my own answers here on this subject as I think I covered it all. A local flood in 2800BC in Sumeria does not equate to a world wide flood even though it might have then tagged onto a later flood event. Why is Noah so old? Because the original event (of Gilgamesh) was probably the 2800BC flood of Sumer that had been recorded by the Sumerians so Noah had to be born then, then around 2193BC if another bigger flood occurred that co-incided with a meteor impact it would surely be noted as a bigger flood closer in time to what they knew so let's stick the Biblical description of it into there. Then Noah can be still around at that time, makes him pretty old though, doesn't it. You can only put a 600 year old memory into a 600 year old man. It would make more sense for a newer culture to use the later catastrophe over a base of an early smaller flood in Sumer told in the Gilgamesh story.

Believe me Leo, I have spent much time pondering this stuff.

The Old Kingdom and the Kindom of Akkad both fell c. 2193BC both affected by the 4.2 kiloyear event and the possible impact of the meteor imo.

There is no reason to assume the separate flood myths relate to separate flood events. As the culture in the region evolved, so the mythology had to be adapted to the new mythos - Enki had to be replaced with Ea, etc. It is eminently possible, if not probable, a single, archaic, flood event was simply retold and possibly reconfigured to suit the religio-political requirements of the day.

I did not assume the 2800BCE event (if it occurred) was a 'local flood', but accepted it could have been a catastrophic regional event, affecting not only Mesopotamia, but the Indian subcontinent as well (this might tie in with similar, and similarly dated, flood mythology in that area.)

Gilgamesh's Flood was the 2000BCE retelling of the earlier myth. All we know (that I know of) of the 2800BCE myth are the fragments that describe Ziusudra and the building of his 'ark'. In light of this, to presume that myth included a Gilgamesh figure is pure guesswork and should not be used as part-basis for supporting a hypothesis.

Thanks for your moral support. At the moment, however, I seem to be fairly isolated and outnumbered. I don't hear much "friendly fire". In the words of the Oera Linda Book: "There is a lot of snapping at my heels".

In terms of your second remark: I fully agree. I have a short section in my book about the more prominent floods around the Netherlands and all of them recorded the "thousands" that died. They had so many floods that the small ones would definitely not have made it into the national archives.

With respect, Alewyn, the criticism on this site is nothing compared to the examination your hypothesis would receive in academic circles. It is unreasonable to suppose people will simply accept your hypothesis as stated, especially given that those people may have specific knowledge of their own that your studies, perhaps, have not unearthed.

While it might seem disheartening to be in receipt of such criticism, the opportunity is there to refine and adapt your hypothesis to new information and this can only be a positive thing.

[cormac mac airt]

Patience, patience. I will get there.

Considering that you've made claims, specifically, about several of the major haplogroups I'd have expected you to already be there.

It should be interesting to see how your claims mesh with what is currently known about either Y Chromosomal or even mitochondrial (mt)DNA Haplogroups and their respective sub-clades.

Edit to add: The Y Chromosome Haplogroup Tree, Version: 5.18, Dated 2 July 2010 shows no dating for any of the haplogroups, nor sub-clades, that would be relevant to any discussion of a timeframe of circa 2193BC. I'm interested to find out how this is wrong.

Y-DNA Haplogroup Tree 2010

cormac

Edited July 12, 2010 by cormac mac airt

[The Puzzler]

I found something but this is not quite the quote I had in mind:

New York Times

Collapse of Earliest Known Empire Is Linked to Long, Harsh Drought

By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD

Published: August 24, 1993

Professor Weiss:

However, new research suggests complex internal problems and the beginning of a 300-year drought as the culprits. * 2217-2193: Reign of his son Shar-kali-sharri, followed by a period of anarchy

I agree Alewyn, I saw this issue and imo it can be reconciled to exactly around or on 2193BC.

I had said: Here's another thing, how correct is the Sumerian King List with their reigns of 1300 years and so forth.

Let's look who was King in 2193BC.

Man-ishtishu "the older brother of Rimush, the son of Sargon" 15 years ca. 22052191

http://en.wikipedia....erian_King_List

Manishtushu was a king of the Akkadian Empire from 2276 to 2261 BCE.

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Man-ishtishu

Check the King List yourself, if we come down 2 from Manishtushi (if his reign was the older 2276-2261 and the space of 2 Kings was 34 years each av.) we would actually be near to 2193BC and so at that time we would have this:

Shar-Kali-Sharri (Akk. = "King of all Kings") was a king of the Akkadian Empire. He was the son of Naram-sin and reigned for 25 years, around ca. 2100 BC. After his reign, there seems to have been a short period of chaos: The list of kings states:

Then who was king? Who was the king? Igigi, Imi, Nanum, Ilulu: four of them ruled for only 3 years

After this, king Dudu ascended, who reigned for 21 years.

Check the King List on Wiki Leo, it says they found LOCAL flooding at 2800BC.

PS: Gilgamesh if he was real is dated 2600BC, so he is already 200 years after this local flood in reality. Tell me how he survived a 2800 BC flood? Place a known person in an older event, seems to be the whole gist of everything...

Now I'm really off to bed.

Edited July 12, 2010 by The Puzzler

[Abramelin]

Alewyn: "There is a lot of snapping at my heels".

Oh really, is that why you ignore what I write?

I should gobble it all up then, right?

Hell no.

But don't worry about me anymore, I feel like someone calling in a desert. You just ignore what I found out.

Let me know if you get any respons from Jensma, ok?

Somehow I have the feeling you will have to wait a very long time for a thorough answer, aside from maybe a 'Thank you, you will hear from me soon".

Edited July 12, 2010 by Abramelin

[Leonardo]

Check the King List on Wiki Leo, it says they found LOCAL flooding at 2800BC.

PS: Gilgamesh if he was real is dated 2600BC, so he is already 200 years after this local flood in reality. Tell me how he survived a 2800 BC flood? Place a known person in an older event, seems to be the whole gist of everything...

Now I'm really off to bed.

Puz, if the archaeology in a specific area bore evidence of flooding, then that could imply a local flood, specific to that area, or a regional flood over a wider area - the signs of regional flooding in any specific locality of a region would be identical to the signs of local flooding of that locality. I hope that makes sense.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Leonardo

[Abramelin]

OK Puzz, I will talk with you here because what I am finding out appears a bit too disturbuing for Alewyn (="honorable friend" in Old Frisian, nothing with athen/athenia, btw..) to respond.

This is what I posted earlier, concerning a centuries old Frisian tradition of cooking up fabulations about the ancient history of Friesland:

Friso is a legendary king of the Frisians who is said to have ruled around 300 BC. According to Martinus Hamconius in his 17th century chronicle Frisia seu de viris rebusque illustribus, and also the 19th century Oera Linda Book, Friso was a leader of a group of Frisian colonists who had been settled in the Punjab for well over a millennium when they were discovered by Alexander the Great. Taking service with Alexander, Friso and the colonists eventually found their way back to their ancestral homeland of Frisia, where Friso founded a dynasty of kings.

Again I say, these guys were no d...heads, they spoke several ancient/classical languages, like Latin, Greek and what have we.

Then it's a short step to thinking about a couple of these Frisian historians mixing what they knew about real ancient Frisian history with what they read in ancient Latin and Greek texts, then add a bit of conveniently distorted local place names and family names, and then cook up a socalled ancient manuscript.

Oh, and invent a real ancient script... of which even a blind person can see that someone must have asked his smart 10 years old kid to invent it and get a nice new bike (it's The Netherlands, right, therefor a bike).

All we need now is someone who is able to read Latin, and then ask him or her to tell us what this Martinus Hamconius wrote about "Friso in the Punjab" in his 17th century chronicle "Frisia seu de viris rebusque illustribus".

----

I posted earlier:

Recap:

>Middel.se was a branch of the North Sea that split the territory of the Frisians into half; (it's not the Nediterranean, it's 'Middel Sea" in ancient Friesland;

>Egypte was a district of Ooststellingwerf, and was on the eastern border of that Middel.se. ;

> Over De Linden was a family named after a small river, De Linde, it's source in Ooststellingwerf; Over De Linden means "on the other side of De Linde" {Ooststellingwerf lies on the eatsern border of what once was the Frisian Middle Sea)

>"Egypte" was probably named after the gypsies who settled there (several areas in The Netherlands were called Egypt or something with Egypt because of the gypsies)

>That 'King of Egypt' was most probably no one else but a rich Gypsy king;

>Many gypsies in The Netherlands came from Hungary (Magyarorsag, land of the Magyar, your 'Magi').

A nice extra: did you know where these gypsies, these "Egyptians" originally came from? THE PUNJAB !!!

Hahaha, oh god, they must have thought, "Let's shake hands with our ancestors, and travel half the world to meet them again".

Roma (Gypsies) originated in the Punjab region of northern India as a nomadic people and entered Europe between the eighth and tenth centuries C.E. They were called "Gypsies" because Europeans mistakenly believed they came from Egypt. This minority is made up of distinct groups called "tribes" or "nations."

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005395

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

We now know that the gypsies originated in the Punjab in northwestern India, fleeing from the region during the clashes between invading Arab and Mongolian warriors, a thousand years ago. On their long odyssey, they travelled through, and settled in, the countries of the Middle East, including Persia and Egypt. Indeed, they became so closely associated with Egypt that they eventually came to believe that they were descendants of the Pharaohs, a legend to which many of their songs still refer - as a result of which they were called Egyptians, or "Gypcians" in English; while, in old Spanish, gitano was simply a way of saying "Egyptian". In fact, having no written history, they had forgotten where they really came from.

http://www.xmission.com/~dderhak/monte/gypsies.htm

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

Looking at the words within the Romani language it is viable to say that they have their origin from Prakrit that is unique to the Punjabi region of Northwest India and Northern Pakistan.

The quickest way to confirm that Romanis is from Punjabi regional Prakrit is to compare it to modern Punjabi, which has also derived from the same Prakrit. There are certain words within Punjabi that are of Sanskrit origin but have changes unique only to Punjabi. Examples of these words are Phrah meaning ‘brother’, Phehn meaning ‘sister’, Khar meaning ‘house’, Kura meaning ‘horse’ and Oteh meaning ‘over there’. [‘Ph’ is pronounced as ‘p’ with a slight ‘h’ after it and not as the English ‘ph’ that has a similar sound as ‘f’]

The equivalent words in Hindi and most other Indo Aryan languages are Bhai, Bahin, Ghar, Gura and Udahr.

Now if we look at the same words in Romanis they are Phrahl, Phehn, Kher, Kuro (meaning ‘Colt’) and lastly Oteh.

From this we can observe that the Romani words are the same as the words that are unique to Punjabi and therefore must have come via Prakrit of the region in which Punjabi developed.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:BDSa1kh4fBEJ:www.indiabook.com/bbs/showthread.php%3Ft%3D3248+gypsies+punjab&cd=7&hl=nl&ct=clnk&gl=nl

=====

The Roma are descendants of the ancient warrior classes of Northern India, particularly the Punjab, and they are identifiable by their language, religion, and customs, which can be directly linked to those of the Punjabi in northern India.

http://www.romani.org/

.

Alewyn's main problem is: he didn't check his sources.

The souces are: the OLB manuscript itself, and.. the ones who published it.

No, he just got his hands on an english translation of a Dutch translation and interpretation of the OLB and got on with it. Oh yeah, he said he had been skeptical, but then started reading this english version and got convinced it was a true account of an unknown ancient history.

To me it's like someone building a skyscraper. Everything looks ok, the construction is in full progress, it all looks great and fabulous. Then a couple of geologists come along, and tell the architect, "Say, did you know you are building on thick layers of ancient clay and quicksand??". And then the architect answers, "No no no, a government official told me it's all ok, no problem".

.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Abramelin

[Swede]

Alewyn - This is the sort of sweeping hyperbole that will subject your position to intense scrutiny;

"Today, at the end of the first decade of the 21st century, it is a well-researched, documented fact that a cataclysmic event happened in the Near, Middle, and Far East some 4200 years ago is and accepted fact , in ca 2200 BC. From the Aegean and Anatolia to Egypt and across Mesopotamia to the Indus and the Far East archaeologists found traces of the sudden collapse of whole cities and civilizations. These findings are supported by ice core analyses from Antarctica, Greenland, Mount Kilimanjaro and the Himalayas. Deep-sea core drilling in the North Atlantic and tree rings in North America all point to a sudden climate change in the latter half of the Holocene. It is also remarkable that all these very ancient civilizations older than say, 4500 years, were remote from any oceans or seas. There appear to have been relatively little coastal development at the time or, alternatively, very little remained thereof.

While archaeological evidence points to widespread famine and a resultant mass migration after ca 2200 BC, climate change and the much-hypothesized resultant drought alone cannot explain the almost instantaneous collapse of these ancient societies. The onset of a drought-induced famine would have been somewhat slower."

To patently state the above will simply not stand up to analysis.

As an example, you site North American studies and interpret these as a "sudden climatic change". In actuality this time frame would be best associated with the latter Altithermal (Hypsithermal), which was not, in human terms, particularly sudden. Nor does it coincide with a specific date. Nor did it affect all regions of the continent in the same manner at the same time. Did this climatic change have a cultural impact? Yes. Did it result in widespread famine? Apparently not, as we see a return to the general climatic conditions that we experience today. A "reprieve" from the warmer and more arid conditions of the Altithermal and a return to a more temperate climate. This climatic change is associated with (over time) increased population growth and cultural sophistication.

In regards to the more specific Eurasian factors, your position on coastal development may be one that you would wish to reconsider.

Given your statement regarding the inland nature of the "affected" cultures and their geographical relationship to the Burckle crater, one must question the proposed relationship.

My apologies for not having the time to evaluate the succeeding elements, and my compliments for having the fortitude to present your position. I must note, however, a tendency to selectively associate certain mythologies with apparently supportive archaeological/geologic/genetic evidence. There is a term for this approach.

.

[The Puzzler]

Puz, if the archaeology in a specific area bore evidence of flooding, then that could imply a local flood, specific to that area, or a regional flood over a wider area - the signs of regional flooding in any specific locality of a region would be identical to the signs of local flooding of that locality. I hope that makes sense.

Mate, I'm not 10. We all know now that Woolley didn't find the Flood!! They evidence is too small an area to be the real worldwide flood even though the ark thing is part of it...supposedly in the Gilgamesh story, or is it?

Excavations in Iraq have revealed evidence of localized flooding at Shuruppak (modern Tell Fara, Iraq) and various other Sumerian cities. A layer of riverine sediments, radiocarbon dated to ca. 2900 BCE, interrupts the continuity of settlement, extending as far north as the city of Kish. Polychrome pottery from the Jemdet Nasr period (3000-2900 BCE) was discovered immediately below the Shuruppak flood stratum.

This one in 2800-2900BC only went as far as Kish and was localised in Sumer. This would not account for any flooding in India or the North Sea.

Again you can tell me how a person who is dated 2600BC Gilgamesh ends up in a flood story from 2900-2800BC?

The earliest listed ruler whose historicity has been archaeologically verified is En-me-barage-si of Kish, ca. 2600 BC. Reference to this individual in the Epic of Gilgamesh has led to speculation that Gilgamesh himself may be historical.

Here is the thing, I don't doubt that a local flooding occurred in 2900-2800BC in the area of Sumer, then 200 years later Gilgamesh comes along, is King, gets a good name, oh he must have saved us in that flood, they start writing a story another 600 years later in 2000BC and put the famous Gilgamesh of their history into a story that tells of when he saved everyone from the terrible flood...which flood? The one of 2800BC when he wasn't around?

Or a more recent one that may have had worldy effects and more devastating results, such as one in 2193BC?

See, I have really twisted my brain on this Leo and the Bible doesn't add up, the flood doesn't add up, the old ages of Biblical characters, the timeframe they fit into etc and the only way it can work is to have layered things on top of each other. I believe this is why the Biblical characters are so old too. They have been placed into an event that has happened before they were around so they have to make them really old.

You could work Noah like Gilgamesh too. Ask yourself why is Gilgamesh, a supposed real person from 2600BC in a story that contains a flood from 2900-2800BC?

[The Puzzler]

The flood in the Epic of Gilamesh imo can only be a more recent flood, it could be down to 2000BC and this would fit perfectly with recollections of a 200 year old epic flood. (2193BC)

Put a really famous guy in it who already had a legendary status who lived 600 years ago and away you go.

Confuse everyone with the timeframe by them thinking it must be a 2800-2900BC flood and you are on ya way...

[Kailash 108]

You guys can find out about DWARKA an ancient city of the North West Coast of India recently discovered..... this magical city was swallowed by the sea.... could of been the same time as the great flood. The flood happened when Krishna passed it was his Kingdom and his city. This city can be anywhere from 5000 to 10,000 year old Metropolis. Pretty amazing. Here is a video below Really cool check it out.

Edited July 13, 2010 by Kailash 108

[Qoais]

A few years ago, I came across this artist's rendering of the lost city of Dwarka.

[The Puzzler]

This is probably all true, see, what Abe said, it is a local telling of events.

It's not a hoax, it doesn't have to be.

What appears to have happened is as people have read it over time and it has been passed on, it tells us this same story was written by others too, has been read by others, just like me and others, and have put it into a worldly scenario as the laws migrated with small lots of the people, the Anglo-Saxons of the North.

Maybe areas have actually been named in relation to the retellings of this put into myth such as Aegyptus as we know that country as Egypt, is Egypt actually named that because the Greek writers of myth thought that the reference meant this country because the context of what he read made it seem that way, even if it wasn't named, if you sailed through the straits and a rich King was there you could think it was Egypt and Libya is very mixed with Egypt early on, Neith herself seems to have been in Libya first. I'm confusing myself but think I can nut it out as being like that.

It seems the OLB is a copied version of myths but in fact, I actually think the myths are copies of the information in this book and everyone who read it put it in the Mediterranean.

Lets say Homer read it and he decided it meant they went through the straits and he knew the Middle Sea as being the Mediterranean, what would happen if he rewrote the stories? They would end up being placed in the Mediterranean, not only that but as the people migrated out and around and took the following of Freya it would have taken hold as well, particularly her laws and if the people of the Urnfield culture, of Celtic ancestry, moved down into Greece as the people I believe are the line of Achilles and Thetis, the same laws in the OLB would actually be in Greece.

The impact of Norse culture should not be overlooked in the naming of our days, Woden's Day, Thor's Day, Freya's Day. I believe that this book is a story of people in the area of Helgoland, who as the area was affected by climatic changes from the 4.2 kiloyear event and a seperate impact meteor event impacted the people of the East, grew into a monster as it was read and translated.

Many people see the story of Troy in the Baltic, we know Mycenaeans traded with them for amber (Phaethon story connection). There is no reason to think the OLB story was bought back and then once into Greece, Freya's laws were established in an Athena form there. Homer then constructs the Greek myths using the information that he has mistakenly placed into the area of Greece and Troy and Crete because he sees Athena etc there, thinks Egype is Egypt etc until a story has been overlaid into the Mediterranean instead of the Middle Sea in Holland.

I'm not sure about the Indian part but because we do have Dionysus in similar travels and the IE language is in India as well as Celtic styed Tarim Mummies I don't think we can discount a connection really as odd as it seems. Alexander did have men bring boats through the Suez Canal area too.

I actually feel a huge wave of relief over me because I think it answers the whole thing, including the sinking of Atlantis. See, the mention of Cadiz really intrigues me, if Min-erva did make it to Libya, which is not really out of the ball park, from Western Europe and she is Min, Egyptian religion would be built on the laws of Freya, Athena and the Magi, which they seem to be.

Plato would be describing a story that he had read or been told about too, Chinese Whispers is very amusing but very confusing...

Lost in translation might be a good phrase to describe it all.

Edited July 13, 2010 by The Puzzler

[Kailash 108]

A few years ago, I came across this artist's rendering of the lost city of Dwarka.

Lost City Dwarka was recently of the North West Coast of India Dated at 10,000 year old Metropolis. Legend Has it When Krishna passed and into the heavens, the ocean swallowed alot of the coast line around the world. Here is a top knotch series of Documentaries of the lost city Dwarka.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2gQu3rWwxY

Edited July 13, 2010 by Kailash 108

[Leonardo]

Mate, I'm not 10. We all know now that Woolley didn't find the Flood!! They evidence is too small an area to be the real worldwide flood even though the ark thing is part of it...supposedly in the Gilgamesh story, or is it?

Excavations in Iraq have revealed evidence of localized flooding at Shuruppak (modern Tell Fara, Iraq) and various other Sumerian cities. A layer of riverine sediments, radiocarbon dated to ca. 2900 BCE, interrupts the continuity of settlement, extending as far north as the city of Kish. Polychrome pottery from the Jemdet Nasr period (3000-2900 BCE) was discovered immediately below the Shuruppak flood stratum.

This one in 2800-2900BC only went as far as Kish and was localised in Sumer. This would not account for any flooding in India or the North Sea.

Again you can tell me how a person who is dated 2600BC Gilgamesh ends up in a flood story from 2900-2800BC?

I never said Gilgamesh is in the Flood myth from 2800BCE - in fact, I said he isn't known to be.

The earliest listed ruler whose historicity has been archaeologically verified is En-me-barage-si of Kish, ca. 2600 BC. Reference to this individual in the Epic of Gilgamesh has led to speculation that Gilgamesh himself may be historical.

Here is the thing, I don't doubt that a local flooding occurred in 2900-2800BC in the area of Sumer, then 200 years later Gilgamesh comes along, is King, gets a good name, oh he must have saved us in that flood, they start writing a story another 600 years later in 2000BC and put the famous Gilgamesh of their history into a story that tells of when he saved everyone from the terrible flood...which flood? The one of 2800BC when he wasn't around?

Or a more recent one that may have had worldy effects and more devastating results, such as one in 2193BC?

See, I have really twisted my brain on this Leo and the Bible doesn't add up, the flood doesn't add up, the old ages of Biblical characters, the timeframe they fit into etc and the only way it can work is to have layered things on top of each other. I believe this is why the Biblical characters are so old too. They have been placed into an event that has happened before they were around so they have to make them really old.

You could work Noah like Gilgamesh too. Ask yourself why is Gilgamesh, a supposed real person from 2600BC in a story that contains a flood from 2900-2800BC?

Noah is not comparable to Gilgamesh at all, but comparable to either Ziusudra (from the 2800BCE myth), or Utnapishtum (from the 2100BCE myth).

Now, I am not saying the evidence for flooding in Mesopotamia is evidence for a global flood. I have, in fact, explicitly said it is not. I have said the timing of this flood mythology does roughly correlate to similar flood stories from Southern India.

Again, this does not mean I am speaking of a global flood, but perhaps a regional flood, caused by a catastrophic event (such as an impact).

Please, leave the Gilgamesh references out of this, because they have no relevance that I can see and are only confusing the discussion. I only mentioned the Epic because it was (indirectly?) used by Alewyn as part evidence for a 2200BCE flood, but it actually refers to a much earlier flood event (around 2800BCE, perhaps a bit earlier).

In Mesopotamian mythology, there was only one Flood, and it was first spoken of in the Eridu Genesis (circa 2800BCE).

[The Puzzler]

Please, leave the Gilgamesh references out of this, because they have no relevance that I can see and are only confusing the discussion. I only mentioned the Epic because it was (indirectly?) used by Alewyn as part evidence for a 2200BCE flood, but it actually refers to a much earlier flood event (around 2800BCE, perhaps a bit earlier).

I want to elorate because to me this is important since we are discussing Alewyns interpretation so that is the parts I am debating.

OK, I said Gilgamesh wasn't around if he was a real person c. 2800BC or 2900BC according to the alluvial river deposits up to Kish in Sumeria.

You say the story of Gilgamesh refers to a prior flood, most likely the one in the King List dated to 2800BC, the one that has the archaeologcal proof I spoke of just then.

But how can it be if Gilgamesh wasn't around when this 2800-2900BC flood occurred?

I know I sound repetitive but get your head around it - If the story was not written until 2000BC that is the Epic of Gilgamesh, and Gilgamesh was around 2600BC wouldn't it make more sense to have the flood that occurred at 2200BC (2193BC) as the flood story with an old, that is 600 year old man in it?

ie: the story of Noah or Gilgamesh in the ark.

The Epic is evidence for a later flood as Alewyn says because Gilgamesh couldn't have been in a flood that occurred in 2800-2900BC which the alluvial deposits are showing if nothing else.