Forum # 19 (jan. 12 - feb. 9, 2012)

Posted 12 January 2012 - 12:18 AM
For the record, an essential translating error by Ottema (1876), copied by Sandbach (1876) and Raubenheimer (2011).

Context:
The Denamarka were occupied by the Magí (1602 after Aldland had sank) and the Mother didn't want them back, because the people there would already have been bastardised and wasted.

OLB, original manuscript [page 079/ line 18]
THJU MODER NILDET NAVT WÉR.HA

Dutch: Ottema p.111
De Moeder wilde het niet weren

English: Sandbach p.111; Raubenheimer (2nd edition, 2011) p.369
The mother would not prevent it

Correct translation:
Dutch: De Moeder wilde het niet weer (=terug) hebben
English: The Mother didn't want to have it back

### Posted 12 January 2012 - 09:48 AM
Knul, on 12 January 2012 - 07:16 AM, said:
I think Dutch weer (again, back) = whither. So the sentence would read: thju moder nildet wither ha.On the other hand Dutch weren = wera. Are there other possibilities ? I think of the meaning [ge]weren = ergens mee instemmen, akkoord gaan, Eng. to agree, German gewaehren, billigen, eiverstanden sein.

WITHER and WÉR are both used in that meaning.
In other fragments WÉR also means again/back:

[067/22]
WILST WÉR FRY WÉSA ÀND VNDER MINA RÉD ÀND HODA LÉVA. TJÀN UT THEN. WÉPNE SKILUN THI WRDA. ÀND IK SKIL WÁKA O.ER THI.
Do you want to be free again... (etc.)

[153/09]
THÉRVMBE NIL HI NÉNE MODER WÉR HÁ
Therefore he doesn't want to have a mother back/again

WÉR is a multifunctional word as it can also mean:
- "was"; the past tense singular of "to be" (german: war)
- the root of "to defend" (dutch: weer)
- where (dutch: waar)
- true (dutch: waar)
- in expression INA WÉR; busy (dutch: in de weer)

From the context, it's clear that in the fragment I posted, it means back/again twice.

### Posted 13 January 2012 - 04:48 PM
Knul, on 12 January 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:
I was bothered about the dot in the word wêr.ha as it should indicate a single word or verb, because this dot does not indicate the end of a sentence.
The verb could be wêr.ha = waarhebben, Eng. acknowledge, accept, agree with.
Otharus did not comment on this.
The matter has been discussed before and then I accepted Otharus view, but now there is some doubt.
In the example 153/09 lacks the dot.

Dots are not always used consequently in the text, in fact, the spelling has much variety anyway.

In my opinion, the dot here can mean two things:
- the copyist wrote the words too closely together and decided to seperate them with a dot
- the combination was indeed used as a seperable verb (samengesteld werkwoord); weer-hebben = weer-krijgen = terug-krijgen (like weer-spreken, weg-lopen etc.)

Anyway, from the context, it's quite obvious (imo) that the sentence says that the Mother didn't want to have the Denmarks back.

### Posted 17 January 2012 - 09:05 AM
It is an interesting observation that "again" and "against" are related to "wér", "weer", "with", "wither", "wether", "weder, "wieder" etc., but in the four fragments I gave , "WÉR" means "back" or "again".

Here they are for the last time.

[067/22]
WILST WÉR FRY WÉSA ÀND VNDER MINA RÉD ÀND HODA LÉVA. TJÀN UT THEN. WÉPNE SKILUN THI WRDA. ÀND IK SKIL WÁKA O.ER THI.
Do you want to be free again... (etc.)

[079/18]
THJU MODER NILDET NAVT WÉR.HA
The Mother didn't want to have it back

[079/19]
IK SJA NÉN FRÉSE AN SINA WÉPNE MEN WEL VMBE THA SKÉNLANDER WÉR TO NIMMANDE THRVCH DAM HJA BASTERED ÀND VRDÉREN SIND
I see no fear in his weapons, but in taking the Skénlander back, because they are bastardised and wasted.

[153/09]
THÉRVMBE NIL HI NÉNE MODER WÉR HÁ
Therefore he doesn't want to have a mother back

### Posted 17 January 2012 - 10:44 AM
Alewyn, on 13 July 2010 - 01:54 PM, said:
In my book I also came to the conclusion that "Phrygia" was most likely a derivative of "Frya" but I did not know about the Bruges and this Egyptian king.

Otharus, on 18 December 2010 - 07:28 AM, said:
Earlier in the OLB/Tsunami thread, it was suggested that the PHRYGIANS may have been the FRYAS of the OLB.

In this context, it's noteworthy that Lucius Apuleius (Metamorphoses, ca. 180 AD) calls them "PRIMIGENII",
translated as "first-born of mankind" by E.J. Kenney (1998).

PRIMIGENII PHRYGES PESSINVNTIAM DEVM MATREM

The Phrygians, first-born of mankind, call me the Pessinuntian Mother of the gods

It is significant that the term "frieze" (in architecture/ art) - in Dutch: "fries" - is accepted to be derived from "opus phrygium" (Phrygian work).

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/frieze
frieze
Pronunciation: /friːz/
noun
a broad horizontal band of sculpted or painted decoration, especially on a wall near the ceiling:
the horsemen of the Parthenon frieze

figurative
the coastline is a frieze of cliffs
- a horizontal paper strip mounted on a wall to give an effect similar to that of a sculpted or painted frieze:
a wallpaper frieze with chickens on it
- Architecture the part of an entablature between the architrave and the cornice.

Origin:
mid 16th century: from French frise, from medieval Latin frisium, variant of frigium, from Latin Phrygium (opus) '(work) of Phrygia'

### Posted 17 January 2012 - 10:50 AM
Abramelin, on 17 January 2012 - 10:15 AM, said:
Now, with too late you mean too young to be used for the OLB because the OLB uses a 4000 years old language.

If OLB is what it says it is, it's a 13th century copy of a 9th century copy of older original(s).
The first version would have been compiled in the 6th century BC.
That is ca. 2600 BP.
It is possible that the language had not changed much between 4200 BP and 2600 BP (as the Fryans liked to believe), but we can only guess if that is true.

### Posted 17 January 2012 - 03:19 PM
The Puzzler, on 17 January 2012 - 01:46 PM, said:
vispa-: "all".[49] (as in Avestan). The component appears in such words as vispafryā (Med. fem.) "dear to all", vispatarva- (med.) "vanquishing all", vispavada- (med. -op.) "leader of all", etc.

Aha, so "fryā" meant "dear to ..." in that word. Interesting.

### Posted 18 January 2012 - 10:46 AM
Knul, on 17 January 2012 - 09:21 PM, said:
Jesterdêi wêron-er mong jo tham allet folk to hâpa hropa wilde vmb tha âstlike stâta wither to hjara plyga to tvangande.
The tekst reads: to hare wopa.
Hare should be hjara
I would translate: tot hun wapenen, te wapen

In the transliteration by Ottema that you quoted, WOPA indeed was changed into HROPA. Ottema must have assumed a copyist error.
He was wrong. Hettema's dictionary has:

Wopa, woapje, alarm roepen, geschreeuw maken, noodschreijen. W.130.
English: call/ cry alarm

It is not clear if the word before WOPA is spelled HÁPE or HÁRE, but it must be HÁPE as that word is more often used (also as HÁPA) in a similar context.

First, the fragment under discussion, with various translations, then other relevant fragments to compare.

[003/20]
JESTERDÉI WÉRON.ER MONG JO THAM ALLET FOLK TO HÁPE WOPA WILDE VMB THA ÁSTLIKA STÁTA WITHER TO HJARA PLYGA TO TVANGANDE.
Yesterday there were among you that wanted to 'call all people to heaps' (gather and prepare them for battle), to force the eastern states (back) to their (old) habits.

[Ottema p.8]
Gisteren waren er onder u, die al het volk te hoop roepen wilden om de oostelijke Staten weder tot hare plicht te dwingen.

[Jensma p.77]
Gisteren waren er onder u, die al het volk te hoop wilden roepen om de oostelijke staten weer tot hun gewoonten te dwingen.

[Sandbach p.8]
Yesterday there were among you those who would have called the whole people together, to compel the eastern states to return to their duty.

- - - - - -
Other fragments with the word HÁPA/ HÁPE in a similar context:

[037/26]
NV SKOLDE ÀJDER WÁNA THÀT HJA VRAL.ET FOLK TO HÁPE HWOPN* HÉDE VMBE VS ALGADUR TO.T.LAND UT TO DRIWANDE.
(* a letter, probably E is added between O and P, but should more likely have been placed between P and N)

[Ottema p.55 (Jensma has similar translation)]
Nu zoude ieder wanen dat zij overal het volk te hoop geroepen hadden, om ons allen te zamen het land uit te drijven.

[Sandbach p.55]
one would have thought that they would have called all the people together to drive us out of the land

[066/11]
THA STRÁMADA THÀT OR.A SKELDA FOLK TO HÁPA.
Then the 'Ora Skelda' (Over de Scheldt) people 'streamed to heaps' (prepared for battle).

[Ottema p.93]
Toen stroomde het andere Schelda volk te hoop.

[Jensma p.203]
Toen stroomde het Over de Schelde-volk te hoop.

[Sandbach p.93]
Then the other Schelda people poured out towards her.

[195/22]
MEN NW HLIP ALLET ÔRA FOLK TO HÁPE ÀND THA RIKA WÉRON BLÍDE THAT HJA HÉL HÚDIS FON THÉRE ACHT OF KÉMON.
but now all other people revolted and the rich were glad... (etc.)

[Ottema p.235 (Jensma has similar translation)]
maar nu liep al het andere volk te hoop, en de rijken waren blijde dat zij heelhuids van de vergadering afkwamen.

[Sandbach p.235]
so all the people rose up, and the rich were glad to get out of the assembly with whole skins.

- - - - - -
The Dutch expression "te hoop lopen" means: "in opstand komen" (source: http://nl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nederlandstalige_gezegden ); to revolt.
(In the time of the VOC (Dutch United East India Company), the term "hooploper" was used for young sailor's assistants (lichtmatroos).)

Conclusion:
I don't agree that the word is HARE and should be HJARA. It is HÁPE.
WOPA is a known Oldfrisian word.

### Posted 18 January 2012 - 11:35 AM
Knul, on 17 January 2012 - 09:21 PM, said:
OLB words and expressions are simply pseudo Oldfrisian calques of modern mid-19th century Dutch words and expressions, occasionally modern English (like bedrum-bedroom) and modern Frisian (like tobek = terug)

It's not that obvious at all. We don't know how old those words are. BED (the root) and RUM are both known Oldfrisian words. We don't know if BEDRUM means the same as our bedroom. It can also mean praying- or offering-room (from: beden = bidden, bieden).

Quote
the word order in the OLB is completely the Dutch word order (e.g. nei min ynfalda myning - naar mijn eenvoudige mening).

Not only the Dutch word-order, but also the Frisian word-order. If word-order does not change much in a 1000 years, why would it have changed so much in 2000 years or more?

Quote
the juulscript transcription contains many errors (like svnvm instaed of svna, ending -on instead of -en)

We don't know if these are errors, but if they were, what would this prove?

### Posted 18 January 2012 - 11:41 AM
Knul, on 17 January 2012 - 09:21 PM, said:
modern Frisian (like tobek = terug)

TO and BEK are both known Oldfrisian words, that can easily have been used in this combination.
See Richthofen's dictionary.

### Posted 18 January 2012 - 12:51 PM
Abramelin, on 18 January 2012 - 12:32 PM, said:
In general it can be said that ‘Runic Frisian’ cannot be analysed very well with the help of existing grammars and descriptions of Old Frisian [...] since they merely describe ‘Manuscript Old Frisian’ of much later centuries..

By all means interesting, those runes and their language, but I think it is a mistake to call them 'runic Frisian', and to assume that this language would be the main ancestor of the Oldfrisian from the medieval sources.

The find of "makia" = sword is very interesting indeed.

### Posted 18 January 2012 - 01:37 PM
Abramelin, on 18 January 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:
Those runes are from around the period Liko & Hiddo wrote their texts in the OLB, so one should expect both languages would look very similar.

Why? You think all people who lived in that region spoke and wrote the same (and only one) language?

### Posted 19 January 2012 - 10:48 AM
"Het is alleszins de moeite waard van het OLB, als van een echte geschiedbron, kennis te nemen,
indien men zich voor de oude vaderlandse geschiedenis interesseert.

Het is bovendien de moeite waard, de methodes, waarmee het HS in de loop van ruim 100 jaar
werd verguisd en het publiek gedesinformeerd, aan een nader onderzoek te onderwerpen,
indien men zich voor zuivere denk-en discussiemethodes interesseert.

Tenslotte is het altijd de moeite waard, de reputatie van achtenswaardige lieden,
die ten onrechte voor falsificateur of mystificateur gehouden zijn, te repareren,
indien men de normen van het maatschappelijk verkeer wil hooghouden."

- - - - - -
(inprovised translation)

"It is by all means worth the effort,
to learn from the OLB, as if it were a real historical source,
if one is interested in old history.

Above that it is worth the effort,
to research the methods used in over a 100 years,
to revile the manuscript and disinform the public,
if one is interested in pure methods of thinking and discussing.

Ultimately it is always worth the effort,
to repair the reputation of respectable people,
that have been falsely accused of being forgers and lyars,
if one wants to uphold a society of high ethical values."

- - - - - -
's-Gravenhage, 5 September 1989.
Mr. N. Luitse
Conclusion of OLB-Lecture for a society in The Hague.

### Posted 19 January 2012 - 11:59 AM
Yesterday at Tresoar, the Frisian archive of treasures, I read some of the letters that Cornelis Over de Linden wrote to Jan Ottema.

It is clear to me that these gentlemen trusted and respected eachother.

If the manuscript was a forgery, and Over de Linden was one of the forgerers, he has not just lied to Ottema; he would have ruined Ottema's carreer and life in a most heartbreakingly evil way.

This is utterly unlikely. Cornelis Over de Linden was a good man.

I suspect him of one little lie only:
He had not received the manuscript from his aunt Aafje, but got or took it from her daughter, his cousin Cornelia Kofman-Reuvers.

### Posted 19 January 2012 - 02:58 PM
How sardonic is this?

Before he translated and published the OLB, Dr. J.G. Ottema was secretary of the Frisian Society for History, Archaeology and Linguistics (Friesch Genootschap van Geschied-, Oudheid- en Taalkunde).

As the editor of an 1852 publication from this society, 'Die Olde Freesche Cronike - Gesta Frisiorum - M. Alvini Tractatus', he stated that 'Gesta Fresonum' and 'Thet Freske Riim' had to be derived from 'Die olde Freesche Cronike' and 'Tractatus Alvini' respectively.

Furthermore, he suggested that both 'Gesta Fresonum' and 'Thet Freske Riim' were "nothing but linguistic exercises and own fabrication by Simon Abes Gabbema, that he had handed over to his friend [Franciscus] Junius, as if they were most important memorials of antiquity."

Original quote:
"... niet anders zijn, dan proeven van taalstudie en eigen fabrikaat van Simon Abes Gabbema, die hij zijnen vriend [Franciscus] Junius voor hoogst belangrijke gedenkstukken der oudheid in handen gestopt heeft."
Source (p.203)

### Posted 19 January 2012 - 03:25 PM
Abramelin, on 19 January 2012 - 03:13 PM, said:
Lol, so our mr. Halbertsma maybe really did have a reason to get 'even' with Ottema?

Both the Halbertsma and the Haverschmidt hoax-theory only work if one assumes that Cornelis Over de Linden was a most evil liar.

It is a mystery to me how Jensma, who has read COL's letters and diaries, could come to this inconceivable conclusion.

### Posted 19 January 2012 - 11:35 PM
Otharus, on 11 February 2011 - 04:00 PM, said:
"ALVINUS (Magister) was head of the Latin school in Sneek ca. 1400, and secretary of town respectively. [...]

Statement: Alvinus = Alcuinus

I suspect that the author of the original text that was the source for "Thet Freske Riim" and "Tractatus Alvini" was not Magister Alvinus who was rector of the Latin School in Sneek ca. 1400 (as Suffridus Petri believed), but Alcuin of York (Latin: Alcuinus) or Ealhwine (ca.735-804).

Latin poem by Alcuinus (with Dutch translation by Kees Smit)

CARTULA PERGE CITO PELAGI TRANS EQORA CORSU
Briefje, zet snel koers over de grote zee,
OSTIA PISCOSI FLARIS PETE FORTIA RHENI
Zeil voor de wind naar de monding van de visrijke Rijn,
INGREDIENS RAPIDIS PONTUM QUA VOLVITUR UNDIS
Vaar door de branding en de kolkende golven.
TUM TUA PRELONGO DUCATUR PRORA REMULCO
De voorsteven moet aan een lang touw meegesleept worden,
NE CITO RETRORSUM RAPIATUR FLUMINE PUPPIS
anders grijpt de tegenstroom de achtersteven.
SI MEUS ALBRICUS VENIENS OCCURAT IN AMNE
Als mijn vriend Alberik je tegemoet komt op de kade
VACCI POTENS PRAESUL PROPERANS TU DICITO SALVE
De bisschop van het weidegebied, zeg dan gauw 'Gegroet',
NAM TIBI HADDA PRIOR NOCTE NON AMPLIUS UNA
Want zijn prior Haddo zal jou niet meer dan één avond
IN TRAIECT MEL COMPULTIMQUE BUTURQUE MINISTRAT
in Trecht een bord pap voorzetten met honing en boter,
UT PUTE NON OLEUM NEC VINUM FRESIA FUNDIT
Tja, Friezenland produceert geen olijfolie of wijn.
HINC TUA VELA LEVA FUGIENS DORSTADA RELINQUE
Hijs nu het zeil en laat Dorestad links liggen.
NON TIBI FORTE NIGER HROTBERCT PARAT HOSPITA TECTA
Ik denk niet dat die norse Robrecht je onderdak verleent,
NON AMAT ECCE TUUM CARMEN MERCATOR AVARUS
Want weet je, die gierige koopman is niet op jouw lied gesteld.

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

### Posted 19 January 2012 - 11:52 PM
HIR BIJINT THAT FRYSKE RYM

IK SKOLDE SEGZA JEF IK KVDE
HO DI FRYDOM ÉROST BIGVDE

THA THJV WRALD ÉROST DEDE FORGAN
AND THJV OTHER DEDE INGAN

ALDVS BISKRIVET ALWYN
THI MASTER IN THA BOKA SYN

THA THI FLODE DEDE OPGAN
AND DEDET ALLE FORSLAN

THER THJV WRALD HEDE BIFAN
BÉDE WIF AND MAN

... andsofort

### Posted 20 January 2012 - 09:44 AM
I changed and finished Abe's English translation:

Little letter, set course to the wide ocean.

Sail with the wind to the mouth of the fishrich Rhine.
Sail through the surf and the swirling waves.

The prow must be dragged along a long rope,
or else the counter current will get the stern.

When my friend Albrikus meets you on the quay,
The bisshop of the meadows, then quickly say "Bye!",
as his prior Haddo will not feed you more than one night
porridge with honey and butter in Traiect.

Alas, Fresia does not produce olive oil or whine.

Set sail and ignore Dorstada.
I don't think grim Rotbercht will invite you,
as, you see, that stingy merchant will not like your song.

What it proves is there was a route from:
Mouth of RHENI => FRESIA; TRAIECT (bishop Alberik, prior Haddo) => DORSTADA (merchant Robrecht)
... and that people ate porridge with honey and butter.

### Posted 21 January 2012 - 09:22 AM
To be read on the church of Wommels in Fryslân, next to the graveyard:

Hier is Geschiet een Rechtveerdich recht
die heer lecht hier al bij den Knecht hier
lecht den aermen al bij den Ricke den Leeleke
al bij den suiverlicke hier lecht den buer al bij den
Eedelman de Geleerde al bij die niet en kan hier
lecht de sot al bij den Wijse den longe al bij den olde
Grise Coempt hier wat Naeder bij en segget
mij wije Rick arm Schoen ofte Eedel sij hier
Leggen sij al bij elc ander den eene en is niet
Meer Geacht Als den Ander Anno 1591.

What happens here is righteous:
The lord lies next to the servant,
the poor with the rich,
the ugly with the purelike,
the neighbor with the nobleman,
the scholar with the nitwit.
Here the fool lies with the wise,
the long with the old grey.
Come closer and tell me;
Who is rich, poor, beautiful or noble?
Here they all lie together.
The one is not considered more as the other.
Year 1591.

### Posted 21 January 2012 - 09:45 AM
St. Catherine with the (broken) Wheel in the Bonifatius-church Leeuwarden:

### Posted 24 January 2012 - 10:10 AM
lilthor, on 24 January 2012 - 08:05 AM, said:
If they date to 800 CE, what was at those sites during the 3-4k years prior to that?
One could imagine they long held raised structures of some kind for observation and even escape from floods (for a few).

Very good question.
Although not much was found indeed, it is hard to imagine that this most strategic and fertile delta was NOT inhabited all those millennia.

My guess is that for ages there was plenty of excellent oakwood (perfect for ships, pole-houses, watch-towers etc., but very flammable in times of war), untill the area was almost completely deforested and the bog-soil (result of age-old forrests) shrinked to become lying below sealevel.

### Posted 24 January 2012 - 10:26 PM
For the dutch-language readers (sorry, no time to translate yet), here's a relevant chapter from:

Friesche Oudheden ~ Afbeeldingen van Merkwaardige Voorwerpen van Wetenschap en Kunst, gevonden in de Archieven, Kerken, Kasteelen, Terpen enz. van Friesland.
Published by the Friesch Genootschap (1875).
Page 48-50 ~ see here

### Posted 24 January 2012 - 10:29 PM
Van Gorp, do you know this book?

Belgisch Museum vd Nederduitse Tael- en Letterkunde en de Geschiedenis des Vaderlands (1837) by Willems
http://books.google....epage&q&f=false

It's on my to read-list it.

### Posted 30 January 2012 - 04:45 PM
By accident I ran into this documentary today, from Frisian television, about the OLB.
One of the final editors (eindredactie) was prof. dr. G.Th. Jensma.
In this doco his theory, that Haverschmidt wrote the OLB, is presented as fact.

When his thesis was presented and discussed some years ago, none of the speakers believed his conclusion and yet this is what the Frisian audience is being taught by the professor.

NOTE: the video is not subtitled in Dutch, so most Dutch won't understand it, and it has no tags or description, so searching online to find info about the OLB, no-one would find it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxZ7W7_I-Vo

### Posted 31 January 2012 - 03:28 PM
Another reason why it is most unlikely (I'd say impossible) that Joost Halbertsma (1789-1869) was involved in the supposed (by Knul and Abe) fabrication of the OLB.

In 1867 Cornelis Over de Linden started corresponding with dr. Eelco Verwijs from the Fries Genootschap about the manuscript, and in the same year Verwijs reported to the government.

If - as Knul claims - Over de Linden and Stadermann had created their forgery based on Halbertsma's work, there are two possibilities:

1. Halbertsma knew about the forgery and agreed.
2. They had used his text without his agreement.

If 1. is true, Halbertsma risked being accused of forgery. With his place in society it is unthinkable that he would risk this.
If 2. is true, Over de Linden risked that Halbertsma (still alive in 1867) would spoil the forgery.

### Posted 31 January 2012 - 04:08 PM
Abramelin, on 31 January 2012 - 03:31 PM, said:
-2- But the book was published after Halbertsma's death; he may not even have known someone had used/stolen his fable about ancient Frisian history, or that people were busy communicating (letters) about it.

He was an honorary member of the Genootschap and still alive in 1867, when it was first discussed there.
It is unthinkable that he has not heard about it.

### Posted 31 January 2012 - 05:40 PM
Abramelin, on 31 January 2012 - 04:15 PM, said:
Then it's even better: he heard about it and kept his mouth shut, just to see the story unfold.
I don't know what I would do if someone publishes one of my concoctions believing it to be a real authentic and ancient manuscript. Maybe I'd just sit back and have an eternal grin on my face, lol.

Nonsense.
If Halbertsma would have been involved and if he would have talked, Cornelis Over de Linden would have been accused of something very bad (remember that Verwijs already reported to the government about it).

And if he was involved but stayed silent, he would still have risked losing his own very good reputation, specially in the Friesch Genootschap (Frisian Society).

This was not about an innocent joke.

The point is, that Over de Linden would not have risked being betrayed by Halbertsma, and Halbertsma would not have gambled with his excellent reputation by being part of a forgery.

### Posted 01 February 2012 - 12:16 AM
Abramelin, on 31 January 2012 - 08:42 PM, said:
I didn't deny Joost was a member, just that his brother Eeltje didn't have a very high opinion of these guys.

I suspect that part of the Genootschap's hidden agenda was to stress the uniqueness of Friesland (the Dutch provence), the (modern) Frisians, their language and culture, as opposed to Holland and the Dutch of their time. (And maybe even prepare for separation, if they would ever get the chance.)

The OLB did exactly the opposite: describe a shared history, language and culture.
The OLB (if true) is from a shared past. Some words survived in Dutch mainly, others only in Frisian.

Most members of this Genootschap will not have seen any use in Dutch-Frisian shared past & language; it did not match their agenda.

I observe something interesting and at the same time totally logical about the new-Frisian (Ny-Frysk) language:

If they can choose between two words that have the same meaning and are both correct (synonyms), Frisians (who love the uniqueness of their language) will prefer to use the more 'un-Dutch', the more typically Frisian variety. This is how neighboring languages deviate: People want to have their own language, preferrably not understood by the 'enemy' (or simply neighbor). The Dutch language has many synonyms, some more like German, others more like English. If Dutch people dislike Germans, they will avoid using Germanisms, but rather prefer Anglicisms. Theoretically, after a long time of peace and friendship with our neighboring countries, our vocabulary would be much more extended, as we would be happy to also use their languages and vocabulary, and play with mixing them.

Just thinking out loud here.
I have always been more interested in how languages match, rather than differ.

If the OLB language would have been created by some mad genius, it would be the perfect reconstruction of a shared origin of Dutch, Frisian, English, German and 'Scandinavian' (to name just the few most obvious ones).

It beautifully reflects what these languages have in common.

If a group of nowaday specialists would be asked to create a book in a reconstructed language of a few hundred years BC, I don't believe they could ever come up with something half as good as the OLB language.

### Posted 02 February 2012 - 01:52 PM
Abramelin, on 02 February 2012 - 12:06 PM, said:
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)

### Posted 02 February 2012 - 03:48 PM
Ottema's darkest side

The letters between dr. Ottema and the Over de Lindens (first Cornelis and later his son Leendert Floris) show that there is one thing they kept disagreeing about and this may be a tiny but most important detail:

The translation and interpretation of the word "od" in the "forma skédnise" (creation myth).

Ottema insisted that it meant "hate" (from Latin), while Cornelis suggested it would have to do with fertility (from Saxon and old-Norse), which makes much more sense in the context anyway.

Ottema to L.F. Over de Linden (translated from letter in Dutch dated 26-1-1876):

"Od (anger, rage, hate, animosity) trad to-ra binna, means that hate entered the hearts of the three daughters of Irtha; this hate was obviously inherited by all of their descendants, and this is cause of the inborn, innate animosity specially in Finda's and Lyda's posterity against Frya's children. An animosity that will not end until the people of Finda and Lyda will be exterminated, and the people of Frya at the final victory will remain and inherit and posess the whole earth.
This animosity dominates all of history in the OLB and still goes on in our days. Frya's people pervade in all continents and establish European supremacy all over the earth. Everywhere the peoples of Finda and Lyda will have to submit or disappear."

If Ottema really believed that his very own family name was derived from a word that means "hate", it is no surprise that his life ended the way it did.

~ ~ ~
Later I will translate parts of a letter from Cornelis Over de Linden, that demonstrate a completely different (positive) attitude.

### Posted 02 February 2012 - 04:46 PM
Abramelin, on 02 February 2012 - 04:39 PM, said:
Maybe "OD" could simply mean "lust"?
Like in "They were filled with lust".
"Entered by lust" or "Lust found its way among them" would sound a bit crappy.

LOL, yes, I'd prefer that to "hate".
Actually, I am sure that the whole reception history of the OLB would have been completely different.
Cornelis Over de Linden tried to warn Ottema, but the latter was too stubborn, or maybe he had a dark hidden agenda...

### Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:14 PM
Otharus, on 21 December 2011 - 11:28 AM, said:
L.F. Over de Linden ("Beweerd maar niet bewezen", 1877) also refers to this:
"The most important peculiarity, concerning the origin of our numbers - called 'Arabic', but never used by the Arabs - the peculiarity that these numbers, in the 'Yul' as in the manuscript, appear as ornamentfigures in the decorations of the Alhambra, the greatest memorial of Morish architecture in Spain...

I found them:

Source:
The Arabian antiquities of Spain, by James Cavanah Murphy, London 1813

Comment from dr. Ottema in a letter to L.F. Over de Linden, dated 4-3-1875 (translation):
"For our ciphars we are not indebted to the Arabs, for the simple reason, that they never used such figures as ciphars, and we therefore could not have gotten ours from them."

### Posted 03 February 2012 - 02:02 PM
Abramelin, on 03 February 2012 - 12:53 PM, said:
Yeah, I get it now, Ottema's 'dark side'... he's a first class racist.

The Nazi's wanted to exterminate 'only' the Jews, but Ottema's ideal was that all yellow and black people would 'disappear'...

Interestingly, in the OLB a completely different final victory is idealised.

From HEL.LÉNJA.S SKRIFTA:
[OLB p.140/18 with translation Sandbach, and some corrections by me]

MEN AS THA PRESTERA SKILUN WÁNA THÀT HJA ALLET LJUCHT FON FRYA ÀND FON JES.US LÉRE UTDÁVATH HÀVA.
But when the priests fancy that they have entirely extinguished the light of Frya and Jessos [Jes-us],

SÁ SKILUN THÉR IN ALLE VVRDA MÀNNISKA VPSTONDA THAM WÉRHÉD IN STILNISE AMONG EKKORUM WARATH ÀND TO FÁRA THA PRESTERA FORBORGEN HÀVE.
then shall all classes of men [in all places] rise up who have quietly preserved the truth among themselves [eachother], and have hidden it from the priests.

THISSA SKILUN WÉSA UT FORSTA BLOD. FON PRESTERUM BLOD FON SLÁVONUM BLOD ÀND FON FRYA.S BLOD.
They shall be of princely blood, of priests, Slavonic [slaves], and Frya's blood.

THAM SKILUM HJARA FODDIKUM ÀND THÀT LJUCHT BUTA BRINGA SÁ THAT ALLERA MÀNNALIK WÉRHÉD MÉI SJAN.
They will make their light visible [bring out their 'foddiks' and the light], so that all men shall see the truth;

HJA SKILUN WÉ HROPA OVERA DÉDA THÉRA PRESTERA ÀND FORSTA.
they shall cry woe to the acts of the princes and the priests.

THA FORSTA THÉR WÉRHÉD MINNA ÀND RJUCHT THAM SKILUN FON THA PRESTERA WIKA.
The princes who love the truth and justice shall separate themselves from the priests;

BLOD SKIL STRÁMA.
blood shall flow,

MEN THÉRUT SKILET FOLK NYE KRÀFTA GÁRA.
but from it the people will gather new strength.

FINDA.S FOLK SKIL SINA FINDINGRIKHÉD TO MÉMA NITHA WENDA.
Finda's folk shall contribute their industry [inventiveness] to the common good,

THÀT LYDA.S FOLK SINA KRÀFTA ÀND WI VSA WISDOM.
Linda's [Lyda's] folk their strength, and we our wisdom.

THA SKILUN THA FALXA PRESTERA WÉI FÁGATH WERTHA FON JRTHA.
Then the false priests shall be swept away from the earth.

### Posted 03 February 2012 - 02:18 PM
Dr. Ottema in a letter to L.F. Over de Linden, dated 13-6-1876 (translated from Dutch):

"On a memorial stone of Domburg Neef Teunis is standing next to Nehalennia.
You can also see him on the tower of Zierikzee, where he has the job of weather vane,
and all his life was known to the people of Zierikzee as nothing other than Neef Teunis."

Image of the weather vane in Zierikzee, known to the 19th century inhabitants as "Neef Teunis" (old-Dutch name for Neptune?).

### Posted 03 February 2012 - 03:00 PM
Otharus, on 02 February 2012 - 02:25 PM, said:
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).

More about the taboo on taking the OLB seriously:

Dr. Ottema in a letter to L.F. Over de Linden, dated 24-6-1876 (translated from Dutch):
"I wish someone would act who is courageous enough to defend the OLB in public, without fear for the systematic intimidation.
Because all the howling is intimidation, started by Spectator magazine and systematically sustained.
There are enough proponents, but they dare not speak, out of fear of being declared fool or villain."

### Posted 03 February 2012 - 03:17 PM
One of the probable reasons why it was made a taboo to take the OLB seriously.

Cornelis Over de Linden in a letter to Dr. Ottema, dated 16-11-1871 (translated from Dutch):
"I don't have the slightest doubts that one day the truth will come float to the surface, but now that I have studied your translation, I figure that the laws described in it are very radical, and that when the theology it teaches would become that of the people again, all sorts of clergymen would have to find a new job. That is why I think they will oppose it as much as is in their power."

### Posted 03 February 2012 - 03:58 PM
Otharus, on 14 July 2011 - 10:25 AM, said:
In the most scientific publication about the paper-age study, "The Oera Linda Boek - A literary forgery and its paper", by A. Kardinaal, E. v.d. Grijn, H. Porck; published in: IPH Congress Book 16 (2006), p. 177-185; discussed here, it is merely suggested that the paper is from the 19th century, but not clearly stated.

The following quote from dr. Ottema (translated from letter to L.F. Over de Linden, dated june or july 1876) about the OLB paper is interesting, but was not mentioned by Jensma nor in the report of the recent paper study:

"Concerning the waterlines, the making of paper on wire frames was invented by the Goths in Spain between the years 1035 when Toledo was conquered, and 1238 when Valencia was conquered. They already used watermills and stamping techniques to process cotton tatters. See: Meyers Conversations Lexicon; art. Paper.
[...] Remember this: no chlorine and no amylose, therefore no machine-made paper. I would be surprised if the ink is anything else than pure lamp-soot, that remains black and does not corrode the paper."

### Posted 03 February 2012 - 04:46 PM
Abramelin, on 03 February 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:
I find this quote highly suspicious. It's almost like CodL gives us the true reason why he created or took part in the fabrication of the OLB.


Here's another fragment.
Cornelis Over de Linden in a letter to Dr. Ottema, dated 26-10-1873 (translated from Dutch):

"I gave a copy of The Oera Linda Bok [Ottema's translation] to a cousin of mine who works in the town hall of Enkhuizen. He borrowed it to the gentlemen of the town hall. One of those gentlemen made the remark, that the ALDEGAMUEDE must be the 'Oudergouw' near Enkhuizen, NOT 'Ouddorp' near Alkmaar. This 'Oudergouw' is a brook right behind the city that is being dried these days. It is three poles, that is half a tide or three hours from Medeasblik."

OLB page/line
050/19: ALDE-GÁ-MVDE
053/15: ALDER-GÁ-MVDE
065/22: ALDER-GÁ
085/22: ALDERGA
110/17+23: ALDERGA
116/31: ALDERGÁ
118/26: ALDERGA
120/04: ALDERGA
148/15: ALDER-GÁ
157/22: ALDER-GÁ

Ottema didn't change Ouddorp into Oudergouw in his second edition (1876) as suggested by Cornelis.

This is about Enkhuizen, where Cornelis had his roots and from where he got the manuscript.

Why, if he was involved in its creation, would he have waited till after the first edition, with pointing out to Ottema that Alderga should be Oudergouw (near Enkhuizen) and not Ouddorp (near Alkmaar)?

For me this is another indication that Cornelis was innocent and honest, but for Jensma it will be more proof of his slyness.

### Posted 03 February 2012 - 09:40 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia
Paranoia (adjective: paranoid) is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself. Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia.

Jensma's Haverschmidt theory

Somewhere around 1860, François Haverschmidt (1835-1894) wrote the OLB in Dutch, Eelco Verwijs (1830-1880) translated it into a reconstruction of Oldfrisian, and Cornelis Over de Linden (1811-1874) wrote it in the specially designed Jol-script.
- Haverschmidt would have lied in publications and personally to Ottema, who had been his teacher and whom Haverschmidt respected. As Jensma put it, "he broke reputations, in the first place that of poor Ottema, whose old days he poisoned and whose remembrance he stultified."
- Verwijs would have lied in publications, to his fellow members of the Fries Genootschap and to Government officials. In Jensma's words, he would have "deceived his superiors and abused his professional authority". All letters between Verwijs and Over de Linden would have been part of the hoax.
- Cornelis Over de Linden would have lied in all his letters to Ottema and to his very own family, even in his testament. He would have replaced a real old family-document (that according to several witnesses must have existed) by a fake manuscript. Jensma describes Cornelis as a "brutal liar".
- Anyone defending one of the three 'convicts', or confirming Over de Linden's story, must be a liar too, and part of the conspiracy.

### Posted 04 February 2012 - 10:41 AM
OLB-related books in Frisian public libraries (Tresoar not included)
Leeuwarden
- Jensma: Gemaskerde God (2004)
- Jensma: Oera Linda-boek (2006)
Sneek
- Jensma: Gemaskerde God (2004)
- Jensma: Oera Linda-boek (2006)
Dokkum
- Jensma: Gemaskerde God (2004)
Heerenveen
- Jensma: Gemaskerde God (2004)

### Posted 04 February 2012 - 11:49 AM
Abramelin, on 04 February 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:
Well, you must live in fairy land if you really think the OLB is being suppressed.

I think we are talking about something different.
I guess you mean suppressed by the government or something, like political suppression.
I will try to explein better what I mean:

Before I found this forum, I have tried a few times to make the Dutch Wiki-page about the OLB a bit more neutral. It had been set up by a Jensma adept and he would not allow a single change. There other views than that of Jensma and his followers were suppressed in that sense.

Jensma in his book suggests that 'followers' of Ottema are idiots, nazis and other 'suspicious' people.
How encouraging is that?

When I started asking difficult questions to the research group that is investigating the OLB-paper (lead by guess who, Jensma), they answered that they would not give any further information.

In the beginning of this thread you claimed that no-one in the Netherlands or Friesland believed in OLB's authenticity and you suggested that it's so selfevident that it's fake that to believe it one has to be very stupid. I think you also suggested once that it's only neonazis who like it.

What about the fact that in Ottema's obituary from the Fries Genootschap, his lifework the OLB is not even mentioned? Appearantly it was a painful, embassaring subject.

I have heard about people losing their mind, studying the OLB.
To have one's belief system challenged can be a very scary thing.
People tend to suppress difficult or painful thoughts and memories.
They do this to themselves and others, no government needed.

### Posted 04 February 2012 - 02:09 PM
Abramelin, on 04 February 2012 - 12:21 PM, said:
About Ottema's obituary: could it not have been his work on the OLB was left out on request of his family to 'protect his reputation' which had suffered quite a lot because it?

Whether it was Ottema's relatives or the Fries Genootschap, the fact that OLB was his lifework, that he was 'Mister OLB', that he had become internationally known for it etc., was left out of his obituary from 1879.

Four years earlier (1875), another publication from the Genootschap was still very positive about the OLB and Ottema's work on it.

Something happened between 1875 and 1879, and I know exactly what: Beckering Vinkers aggressive pseudo-scientific publication (1876), which "aimed at ridiculing the OLB" as he admitted. After this no-one dared to speak positively about it. The effect of this publication was suppression of the OLB. The subject had become taboo.

### Posted 04 February 2012 - 04:54 PM
Abramelin, on 04 February 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:
And yes, most Dutch think it is ridiculous there are people who believe in it, but that's about it.

Most Dutch have never even heard of it and most of the few who have, hardly know anything more than what they know from hearsay.

But yes, many of those few will talk like you at the beginning of this thread, that no sane person would believe it and that it would be a self-evident hoax.

My point is: it's not that obvious and it would deserve a serious unbiassed multidisciplinary investigation.

### Posted 04 February 2012 - 05:26 PM
I think the high relevance of my post about Ottema was missed.

Otharus, on 02 February 2012 - 03:48 PM, said:
Ottema's darkest side
[...]
Ottema to L.F. Over de Linden (translated from letter in Dutch dated 26-1-1876):

"[...] An animosity that will not end until the people of Finda and Lyda will be exterminated, and the people of Frya at the final victory will remain and inherit and posess the whole earth.
This animosity dominates all of history in the OLB and still goes on in our days. Frya's people pervade in all continents and establish European supremacy all over the earth. Everywhere the peoples of Finda and Lyda will have to submit or disappear."
[...]

If he wrote things like this to Over de Linden he may have talked like this too, in meetings of the Genootschap, informally, or who knows where and when.

It may have been a good thing to shut him up.

If only he would have listened to Cornelis and chosen a better translation of that little odd word in the creation myth...

### Posted 04 February 2012 - 05:54 PM
Otharus, on 03 February 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

Which version looks more original?
If you'd ask me, I'd say that it looks like the Alhambra artist had once seen the Jol-numbers, but didn't exactly remember and tried to reconstruct from his memory.
The OLB-version makes more sense to me.

### Posted 04 February 2012 - 06:29 PM
Because Abe has challenged me several times to post something in favor of the hoax-theories, I will for once descend to that level.

Why François Haverschmidt might have written the OLB.

Under the pseudonym "Piet Paaltjens", he wrote this poem ca. 1850:

Aan Rika

Slechts éénmaal heb ik u gezien. Gij waart
Gezeten in een sneltrein, die den trein,
Waar ik mee reed, passeerde in volle vaart.
De kennismaking kon niet korter zijn.
En toch, zij duurde lang genoeg, om mij
Het eindloos levenspad met fletsen lach
Te doen vervolgen. Ach! geen enkel blij
Glimlachje liet ik meer, sinds ik u zag.
Waarom ook hebt gij van dat blonde haar,
Daar de engelen aan te kennen zijn? En dan,
Waarom blauwe ogen, wonderdiep en klaar?
Gij wist toch, dat ik daar niet tegen kan?
En waarom mij dan zo voorbijgesneld,
En niet als de weerlicht 't rijtuig opgerukt,
En om mijn hals uw armen vastgekneld,
En op mijn mond uw lippen vastgedrukt?
Gij vreesdet mooglijk voor een spoorwegramp?
Maar, Rika, wat kon zaalger voor mij zijn,
Dan, onder hels geratel en gestamp,
Met u verplet te worden door één trein?

[OLB 189/02] use of the name Rika
BRÉF FON RIKA THJU ALD.FÁM. VPSÉID TO STÁVEREN BY.T JOL.FÉRSTE.

[OLB 009/18] blue eyes
FRYA WAS WIT LIK SNÉI BY.T MÔRNE.RÁD ÀND THAT BLÁW HJRAR ÔGNUM. WN.ET JETA THÉRE RÉINBÔGE OF.

[OLB 009/22] this must be about (light-) blond hair
LIK STRÉLON THÉRE MIDDÉI SVNNE BLIKADON HJRA HÉRON THÉR SA FIN WÉRON AS RACH.

If I think it's a strong argument? No.

### Posted 04 February 2012 - 10:18 PM
Let's brainstorm about these Alhambra decorations.

To me the Alhambra numbers look like they have been made by someone who tried to make sense out the the idea that the numbers were based on a circle with spokes, but he couldn't really figure it out.

It's not likely that the OLB version is based on the Alhambra ones, and yet they seem to be somehow related.

It makes more sense that the Alhambra ones were vaguely based on a more original version where they were indeed fitted into a 6-spoked wheel.

### Posted 04 February 2012 - 11:27 PM
Abramelin, on 04 February 2012 - 10:37 PM, said:
To me the Alhambra numbers look like someone from Arabic descent went to India and wanted to create his own version, using (semi-)circles.
The result looks the same, the basis is different.
And we have Arab manuscripts far older than the OLB (= 19th century).

Why Arabic?
Arabic numbers look different.

### Posted 05 February 2012 - 01:24 PM
About 'suppression' of the OLB.

If I would have children, I would not want their minds to be poisoned with lies and nonsense.
So if I would believe that the OLB was fake, I would not want a schoolteacher to teach my kids that it is true.
It would needlessly confuse them.
I would want him to shut up and leave.
So I perfectly understand why and respect that OLB-'advocates' have been suppressed.
. . . . . .
But now it's time to evaluate whether the arguments used to reject it were strong and sincere.
Jensma wrote that he did not include a list of personal and geographic names, because that would only encourage reading it as if it were true.
What was he affraid of?
That some readers might start believing in its authenticity?
Did he realise that his (hoax) arguments were not strong enough?

### Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:24 AM
In his 2006 book, Jensma suggests on pages 143 and 195 (OLB pages 36 and 62) that the makers of the OLB have created the etymology for Nehalennia = NY.HEL.LÉNJA = bringer of new light.

I have found an older source where this etymology is suggested:
"Schatkamer der Nederlandsse Oudheden" (1711) by Ludolf Smids

### Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:20 PM
Anyway, we have established, that the etymology Nehalennia => NY-HEL => new light is not a 19th century invention, as Jensma thought, but older than 1711.

### Posted 06 February 2012 - 04:38 PM
Alewyn, on 06 February 2012 - 03:24 PM, said:
To my mind, therefore, I find Ottema and Sandbach’s translation of the word “odd” to “hatred” or “hate” (“haat” in Afrikaans) to be correct and not the sexual connotation you put to it.

Thank you for your answer, Alewyn.

The word is OD, not ODD, and my interpretation is not necessarily "sexual".

I have argued that the translation into "hatred" is based on Latin, while the word has a very different meaning in Old-Saxon (ancestral inheritance, luck, etc.) and Old-Norse (spirit, life-force).

Now guess what languages are more related to Old-Frisian? Not Latin!

That Ottema insisted in this mistranslation is even more shocking, because Over de Linden (and later his son) pointed out the better translations to him.

OdL also warned Ottema that if you tell your children stories about hate, they will more probably start fighting, while if you tell them about love, they will grow up more lovingly. I will copy and translate that letter when I visit the archives next time.

Also look at the context: something enters the three women, and AFTER THAT they give birth to 12 sons and 12 daughters.

There has to be something seriously wrong with you, if you believe that "hate" can make a woman pregnant (or that the old Frisians educated their children that way).

Quote
Having said all this, I did not loose any sleep over it as the creation myth is obviously not factual.

A creation myth defines how people think about the origin of life.

In Ottema's mind, the translation of OD into "hate", resulted in fantasies about white supremacy and the extermination of all coloured peoples.

Here lies the major difference in the minds of Ottema and Over de Linden.

### Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:19 PM
Alewyn, on 06 February 2012 - 08:48 PM, said:
I don't think that the OdLs was qualified to advise Ottema on the translation.
Ottema was, after all, highly regarded as a linguist.

OdL was self-educated and knew several OLB words that were still known in North-Holland, but not in Friesland. Ottema gratefully accepted several suggestions from OdL.

### Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:26 PM
Alewyn, on 06 February 2012 - 08:48 PM, said:
Let us look at the sentence again:
“Od trad to-ra binna”

Have a GOOD look at the original.

The sentence is: "WR.ALDA.S OD TRÀD TO RA BINNA"

If "od" meant "hate", it would say: "wralda's hate".
"God's hate"?!
I hope you will finally see that it really does not make sense.

######

Posted 07 February 2012 - 11:34 AM
Alewyn, on 07 February 2012 - 10:34 AM, said:
Just have another look at the full text:
Frisian transcription on “Project Gutenberg”: ...

This transcription is the one by Ottema, which is not without mistakes. He had to make it in a hurry. I only work with the original and have discovered many transcription errors, that sometimes lead to translation errors. This is one of them.

Here is, once more, the fragment in the original manuscript:

Quote
As you can see, from all of the above, none of these translations say “Wralda’s od”.

That is because they are based on Ottema's erroneous transliteration.

Quote
You will also notice that Wralda breathed his spirit upon Frya only

No, that's your erroneous translation (based on a misinterpretation by Sandbach); HJA KÉMON and HJAM are plural.

[006/26]
THÁ HJA BLÁT KÉMON SPISDE WR.ALDA HJAM MITH SINA ÁDAMA.
Ottema (1876):
Toen deze te voorschijn kwamen, spijsde Wralda haar met zijnen adem
Sandbach (1876):
When the last came into existence, Wr-alda breathed his spirit upon her
Jensma (2006):
Toen zij bloot kwamen, spijsde Wralda hen met zijn adem

Quote
The word “trad” is closer to “tread” than to “enter”.

Yes, so something "tread" into them.
I didn't know that was proper English.

Why could this not be something positive like "spirit", "life-force" (from Old-Norse), or something based on the Old-Saxon "od", which seems to have meant "luck", or "ancestral inheritance". Both the Old-Norse and the Old-Saxon versions have nothing to do with "hate", that's only in Latin.

Quote
In the original manuscript there does not appear to be a full stop after “Wralda’s”, in which case your interpretation could be right.

Indeed, my interpretations are based on the original manuscript only.

Quote
The previous sentence, however, would then end with “visions”. This does not make sense. Whose visions?

No, it ends with "DRÁMA", which means "dreams".
They got "FRÜCHDA ÀND NOCHTA ANDA DRÁMA" = they got "fruits and nuts" (methaphor) or "joy and pleasure" (Dutch: vreugde en genot/ geneugten) "in the/ their dreams".

Compare:
[202/32]
NÉI THONGAR WÉRON FRIA.S SJVGUN WÁK.FÁMKES HJA ANDA DRÁME FORESKINNEN. SJVGUN NACHTA ÀFTER EKKÔRUM.
Ottema:
Na dien donder waren Fryas zeven waakmaagden haar in den droom verschenen, zeven nachten achtereen
Sandbach:
After the thunder Frya's seven watch-maidens appeared to her in a dream seven nights in succession.

### Posted 07 February 2012 - 12:33 PM
Alewyn, on 07 February 2012 - 10:34 AM, said:
Nowhere else in the book are they as explicit as you suggest in this part.
This was a history book which, no doubt, was intended to be read and taught to children as well.

Have a good look at the following fragment, and note that both Ottema and Sandbach self-censored, as I will prove:

[082/19]
HWIL THAT ALREK DROK TO KÀMPANE WÉRE
WAS THÉR EN WLA FIN TO THÉRE FLÉTE JEFTHA BEDRUM FON THÉRE MODER INLET.
ÁND WILDE HJA NÉDGJA.
THA THJU MODER WÉRDIM OF THAT ER BEKWÁRD TOJÉNST THA WÁCH STRUMPELDE.
THÁ.R WITHER VPA BÉN WÉRE STEKER SIN SWÉRD TO IR BUK IN. SEGZANDE.
NILST MIN KUL NAVT SÁ SKILST MIN SWÉRD HA.

Ottema (1876):
Terwijl iedereen druk aan het vechten was,
was er een leelijke Fin in de (fleete) of het slaapvertrek van de Moeder binnen geslopen,
en wilde haar geweld aandoen.
De Moeder weerde hem af, dat hij ruggelings tegen de wand tuimelde.
Toen hij weder op de been was, stak hij haar zijn zwaard in de buik, zeggende:
wilt gij mijne roede niet, zoo zult gij mijn zwaard hebben.

Sandbach (1876):
While the fight was going on,
a rascally Finn stole into the chamber of the mother,
and would have done her violence.
She resisted him, and threw him down against the wall.
When he got up, be ran his sword through her:
If you will not have me, you shall have my sword.

Jensma (2006):
Terwijl een ieder druk aan het vechten was,
was er een vuile Fín in de 'fleete' of slaapkamer van de Moeder geslopen
en wilde haar verkrachten.
Maar de Moeder weerde 'm af zodat-ie achteruit tegen de wand strompelde.
Toen-ie weer op de been was, stak-ie zijn zwaard in haar buik, zeggende:
"Wil je mijn kul niet, dan zul je mijn zwaard hebben."

Raubenheimer (2011, p.371):
While everybody was fiercely fighting,
a vile Finn slipped into the bedroom of the mother
and wanted to violate her.
She fought him off so that he fell backwards against the wall.
When he got up, he ran his sword through her abdomen saying:
"If you will not have me, you shall have my sword".

Old-Frisian dictionary (1832) Hettema about NEDGA:

NÉDGJA = NEDGA = to rape (Dutch: verkrachten)

Frisian dictionary (1896) Dijkstra & Buitenrust Hettema about KUL:

KUL = penis

### Posted 07 February 2012 - 12:42 PM
Alewyn, on 07 February 2012 - 10:34 AM, said:
Sometimes one has to take a holistic view of the book to try to determine the correct meaning such as in this case. [...]
I find it unlikely that they would have described the penetration of these earth mothers’ bodies as you claim. [...]
I find it even more unbelievable that the old Fryans would have ascribed a carnal act to their most revered Creator.

If you want to understand the "old Fryans" from the OLB, I would advise to take a more holistic view of Frisian cultural history, like I try to do.

One of the things you will learn, is that their language was far more rich in words and expressions that refer to sexuality, than modern Dutch, English and German together.

That subject, BTW, was one of Joost Halbertsma's passions.

Here's a fragment to illustrate from:
J.H. Halbertsma als lexicograaf. Studies over het Lexicon Frisicum (1872),
by Anne Dykstra, for the Fryske Akademy - Afūk, Ljouwert 2011.

(From chapter 5 - Sexual language and the Lexicon Frisicum)

### Posted 07 February 2012 - 02:13 PM
Alewyn, on 07 February 2012 - 01:43 PM, said:
You have convinced me. Your interpretation is correct. (It sometimes just take a bit longer)

Thank you, no worries. I'm also learning to explain things better.

### Posted 07 February 2012 - 10:38 PM
Here's all fragments with WRALDAS, WRALDA.S or WR.ALDA.S; Wralda-his.
(I have not checked all transliterations this time.)

As you can see there are only four examples were WRALDAS is placed AFTER the word that it belongs to, as it more usually (21 times, "WRALDAS OD" not included) is placed before the word, just like in modern English, Dutch and Frysk.

Also note that in none of the four examples an underscore is used between the word and WRALDAS.

Normal use: WRALDAS before the word; 21 times
THJUS ÁGATH WRALDA.S GÁST
THESSA NIGUNG HÀVATH WI TRVCH WR.ALDA.S GÁST
ÉWA IS ÁK THET ÔRA SINNA.BYLD FON WR.ALDA.S GÁST
NÉI THA SIN THÉR WR.ALDA.S GÁST
FON WR.ALDA.S GÁST NÉTON HJA NAWET
THAT NIMMAN GOD JEFTA FVLKVMA WÉSA NE KVNDE THÀN WR.ALDA.S. GÁST
THET HJARA GÁST THET BESTE DÉL IS FON WR.ALDA.S GÁST
WÉRE HJARA GÁST WR.ALDA.S GÁST SÁ SKOLDE WR.ALDA ÉL DVM WÉSA
WY FRYA.S BERN SEND FORSKINSLA THRVCH WR.ALDA.S LÉVA
VMBE SÉJEN TO WINNANDE FON WR.ALDA.S.GÁST
BÉVADE JRTHA LÎK WR.ALDAS SÉ
WR.ALDAS GÁST MÉI MÀN ALLÉNA KNIBUWGJANDE TÁNK TOWÍA
THÀT IS WRALDAS GÁST
THRVCH WR.ALDAS SÉ BISLOTEN
THAT.I FRYA ÀND WR.ALDAS GÁST MIS.KÀNA ÀND SPOTA THVRADE
THÀT AIDER SKEPSLE EN DÉL IS FON WR.ALDAS VNENDLIK WÉSA
THRVCH UT WR.ALDAS LÉVA
EN DÉL FON WRALDAS VNENDELIK WÉSA
THINGA THAM THRVCH WR.ALDAS LÉVA FORSKINA
VSA GÁST NIS NAVT WR.ALDAS GÁST
AK LIKTET NÉI WR.ALDA.S HÉI
- - - - - -
Variety: WRALDAS after the word; 4 times
AN THA NÔME WRALDAS
IK BEN THET BESTE DÉL WR.ALDAS
HROP THÀN THI GÁST WR.ALDAS AN
THÀT IS THÀT FORMA SINNE BILD WR.ALDA.S

### Posted 07 February 2012 - 10:44 PM
The 3 mothers started having 'fruits' and 'nuts' in their dreams (not Wralda's), before they became pregnant.
Don't fruits and nuts have everything to do with fertility and procreation?
Aboriginals would perfectly understand this concept, wouldn't they, Puzzler?
A seed dreams of becoming a plant or tree, etc.
Reality follows after dreamtime.
Good dreams lead to good deeds.

### Posted 08 February 2012 - 10:08 AM
Abramelin, on 07 February 2012 - 11:22 PM, said:
Heh, did you even READ my translation?
I created my own.
I didn't use anyone else's.
Well, check what I made of it and you will realize you will find it nowhere else.
Look, Otharus, somehow you appear to be pissed off by my translation for god knows what reason.

No, I just don't think it's any good.
I'm a bit pissed off yes, because I have put a lot of effort in showing that Ottema clearly made an error transliterating (with big consequences), and you just ignored it.
And then you're too proud to admit your mistake, resulting in a lot of timewasting.
If you put the point correctly, you can still translate with "Wralda's humunculus" or whatever you like.
I don't know what was meant with OD. It may have been ambiguous.
I just argued we can better look at the OldNorse and Oldsaxon meanings rather than Latin.

### Posted 08 February 2012 - 10:09 AM
Abramelin, on 07 February 2012 - 11:28 PM, said:
"Ring as hja rip wêron krêjon hja früchda aend nochta anda drâma Wr.aldas"

How could the girls know Wralda's dreams or visions?

### Posted 09 February 2012 - 10:27 AM
Letter from Cornelis Over de Linden to Dr. Ottema, dated 8-11-1871 (translated).

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Den Helder, 8 November 1871

Dear and erudite sir,

I am pleased that we have come to an agreement.

When nothing is in the way, one can think more clearly. Therefore I will once more point at my earlier comments.

You would prefer to translate 'poppenkoningen' into 'papenkings' ['paap' is an invection for catholics]. Here in Westfriesland strangers are called 'pop', terms like 'poppe-horses' and '-pigs' are known too.

Thus you would not risk a mistake if you would use 'strange kings' for 'poppa koningen'. You say: "In Apolonnia's book, the 'Formleer' is the purest representation of Godness, that most agrees with the Christian view. More sublime than Jehova from the old Testament, who goes for a walk in the garden of Eden in the morning, to have a chat with Adam.

If you want to prevent that many people will put the book aside, prejudiced at first sight, you should - according to my modest mind - avoid things that can upset people. One catches more flies with syrup than with vinegar.

[...]

When children need to swallow a bitter medicine, to free them of worms that hinder their growth, we don't say: "swallow this, stupid, because it's for your own good"; but we comfort them with sweet words and candy.

That's how scholars who want to elevate the people should act, rather than inveigh them with terms like grey, donkeys, etc.

You want to replace the word 'od' with 'animosity'. On page 128 I find FIAND for enemy. I would rather see you use 'fertilising force' - or a more appropriate term. The word animosity will cause animosity. [Ottema would later change 'animosity' in 'hatred'.] When one speaks to youths about love, they will fall in love. But when one speaks to them of war, they will seperate in groups and play soldier, to the great pleasure of despotism.

[...]

Having nothing else bothering me, I great you friendly, and am respectfully at your service,

C. Over de Linden.


### Posted 09 February 2012 - 05:07 PM
Abramelin, on 09 February 2012 - 11:55 AM, said:
Otharus, why do you think CodL would try to correct Ottema on the latter translating the word OD into 'animosity'?

Because 'animosity' in that fragment does not make sense.

Quote
I mean to say: CodL resepcted Ottema and his erudition. He could instead have asked something like, "Are you sure OD means 'animosity'?

COdL respected Ottema, but didn't think the erudite doctor was omniscient.
Ottema had had a better education and social status than OdL, but he was less intelligent.

Quote
The sentence you translated almost makes it look like CodL knew better then Ottema.

In this case, he did indeed.
He had put a big effort in educating himself.

Quote
And "fertilizing force" is not just another, nicer, more positive, or better sounding expression for the word "animosity", it means something totally different.

Yes, Cornelis was not prejudiced by the Latin meaning.
He may have read or heard about the Saxon or Nordic meaning, or just used his common sense.

Quote
Based on what I think - that CodL was one of the co-creators of the OLB - I'd say that CodL was the one who entered that word, OD, into the OLB using what he had read, and was now amazed an erudite person like Ottema translated it into 'animosity'. Like in "Hey, that was not what I meant!"

In that case he would also have mentioned the misplacing of the point between WRALDAS and OD.

He could not imagine that his ancestors would tell their children that life had originated out of animosity or hatred, which is a sick idea anyway.

He simply had an obvious interest in having the manuscripty of his ancestors translated as good as possible.

Your ideas about COdL are based on your ignorance about him. You should read his letters and diaries if you are serious about your theory.

Friesche Oudheden

A relevant chapter from:

Friesche Oudheden ~ Afbeeldingen van Merkwaardige Voorwerpen van Wetenschap en Kunst, gevonden in de Archieven, Kerken, Kasteelen, Terpen enz. van Friesland. (Frisian Antiquities ~ Depictions of remarkable objects of science and art, found in the archives, churches, castles, terps etc. of Friesland)
Published by the Friesch Genootschap (1875).
Page 48-50

http://images.tresoar.nl/wumkes/pdf/Friesche_Oudheden.pdf

TRANSLATION SEE BELOW

The OERA LINDA Manuscript [added July 3, 2021: new translation here]

The Over de Linden family in Den Helder is in possession of an old manuscript, of which script, language and content were unknown to its members. However, it had been passed on from generation to generation, with the advice to preserve it with care, as a family-treasure. They guessed it was written in Old-Frisian and suspected it would contain information about ancient ancestors.

When Dr. Eelco Verwijs, archivist-librarian of Friesland, heard about this, he informed the Dutch government, that commissioned him to examine it. On December 17, 1867, he reported his first conclusions and that the owner had given him permission to copy and translate the manuscript. [...]

Thanks to the persevering zeal and care of Dr. Jan Ottema, the content was understood and translated. In detail he reported the results of his accurate examination in a meeting of the Frisian Society on 10 February 1871. This report was printed and distributed, and lead to a great common interest in this curious piece.

In his opinion, the doubts that had risen about the authenticity of the manuscript had no grounds. He saw it as a most important source of old-Frisian history, with completely new information. His conclusion: "We can assume that this manuscript, of which the oldest part was composed ca. 600 BC, contains the oldest product (besides Homer and Hesiod) of European literature. It describes an ancient culture, thus far unknown, with a development, civilization, industry, navigation, trade, literature and sublime religious values. In our imagination, our history did not reach beyond the arrival of Friso (ca. 300 BC), the supposed Frisian founding father. Here however we discover a history beyond 2000 BC, older than that of Greece and as old as that of Israel."

The manuscript is a copy from 1256, made by Hidde Oera Linda. In all debates about its authenticity and value, it was impossible to have a solid judgement, until it was published in 1872. [...]

Publication lead to heavy debates about authenticity of the manuscript. Dr. Ottema published an explanation in 1873, titled 'Historical Notes and Clarifications to the Oera Linda book', and defended it a year later in 'The Royal Academy and the Oera Linda book'. Dr. A.T. Reitsma from Groningen studied it and presented the result of his critical research in three meetings of the Frisian Society. He concluded that the manuscript is probably real, and of high historic value. In the last meeting the skeptics also gave their opinion. The manuscript itself was also displayed at that occasion, so anyone could judge if it could be a 13th century copy.

The most detailed research report so far was published in 1874, titled 'In response to the Oera Linda Book'. It is obvious that the author [prof. A.J. Vitringa] is very erudite and unprejudiced. His answer to the thought that the book would be a forgery, made after 1853, when the stilt-houses in lake Zürich were discoverd, is: "Who would be the forgerer? Not just anyone would be capable of such a thing. For that an accurate knowledge is needed of the oldest Frisian language, of which a very limited vocabulary from only a few sources is available. Besides, one should have known how that language would have changed through the ages. The fact is, there is a clear difference between the language of the oldest and the youngest texts of the manuscript. The forgerer would have needed a rare historic and geographic knowledge. Years of study would have been an inexorable condition and writing the odd letterscript would have been a tough job. What would all that effort have been good for? Honour? ... Forgerers have a good reason to keep their name a secret. - Money? ... Beforehand it was hardly expectable that any profit could be made with publication. - The pleasure of fooling some scholars? ... Would an utterly erudite and talented man, as the maker must have been, offer so much time and effort for such questionable delight? All that is inconceivable."

"What we have here is an odd dilemma: Either we are being fooled by a fabrication, made by a highly devoted, mad genius, or much of our ancient history will be seen from a different viewpoint, which will make a revolution in that field inevitable."

"You might think it was made by a bored friar? This cannot be the case either. The OLB describes ethics and a concept of God, that are unsurpassably true and pure, anti-monkish and anti-theologic. Someone who was raised under the influence of Katholic or even Protestant dogma's, could impossibly have expressed these true liberal and totally unbenefited feelings."

And yet this scholar concluded: "Although nothing excludes authenticity, and we discovered nothing that convinces of a forgery, still there is something suspicious about the parts that deal with Greek-Roman antiquity. We have no doubts about the honesty and frankness of the gentlemen Over de Linden and dr. Ottema. We are convinced that, if it would be a forgery, they have not participated in making it. We have doubts, but they are not strong enough to make us definitely reject the OLB."

We can anyway call this book remarkable. Some see the OLB as an idolization of the Frisian past. The book will remain subject of meticulous research, as long as it is hard to determine what part of old history is myth, saga, or embellished tradition. Yet anyone who has read the book will have to admit, that parts of the content are valuable. Therefore we fully agree with the following statement of the scholar from Deventer: "Although I have fallen in love with the book, I confidently look forward to the results of a scientific examination. Because, even if it would be convincingly refuted on historic grounds, it would still keep its great ethical value as an allegory, as fiction."

############

Het OERA LINDA Handschrift

Familie Over de Linden in Den Helder heeft een oud handschrift, waarvan schrift, taal en inhoud onbekend zijn. Het was overgeleverd van geslacht tot geslacht met de aanbeveling het zorgvuldig te bewaren, als een familie-erfstuk. De eigenaar vermoede dat het in Oud-Fries was geschreven en informatie over verre voorouders zou bevatten.

Toen Doctor Eelco Verwijs, archivaris-bibliothecaris van Fryslân, hiervan hoorde, lichtte hij de overheid in. Hij kreeg opdracht het te onderzoeken. Op 17 december 1867 gaf hij een verslag van zijn eerste conclusies. De eigenaar heeft hem toestemming gegeven het handschrift te transcriberen en vertalen.

Het was te danken aan de volhardende bezieling en zorg van Doctor Jan Ottema, dat de inhoud begrepen en vertaald werd. Hij deed uitvoerig verslag van zijn nauwkeurig onderzoek in een vergadering van het Fries Genootschap op 10 februari 1871. Dit verslag werd gedrukt en verspreid, en leidde tot een grote belangstelling voor dit merkwaardige stuk.

Volgens hem was de intussen gerezen twijfel aan de echtheid van het handschrift ongegrond. Hij zag het als een uiterst belangrijke bron voor oud-Friese geschiedenis, met geheel nieuwe informatie. Zijn conclusie: "We mogen aannemen dat dit geschrift, waarvan het eerste deel rond 600 BC is opgesteld, het oudste produkt (op Homerus en Hesiodus na) van Europese literatuur bevat. Het beschrijft een tot nu toe onbekende, eeuwenoude cultuur, met een ontwikkeling, beschaving, industrie, scheepvaart, handel, letterkunde en zuivere religieuze waarden. In onze voorstelling ging onze geschiedenis niet verder terug, dan tot de komst van Friso (rond 300 BC), de vermeende Friese stamvader. Hier ontdekken we echter een geschiedenis tot voorbij 2000 BC, ouder dan die van Griekenland en even oud als die van Israel."

Het manuscript is een kopie uit 1256, gemaakt door Hidde Oera Linda. Bij alle meningsverschillen over de echtheid en waarde ervan, was het onmogelijk daarover een goed oordeel te vellen, totdat het gepubliceerd werd in 1872. [...]

Publicatie leidde tot hevige discussies over de echtheid van het manuscript. Dr. Ottema gaf in 1873 een toelichting in 'Geschiedkundige Aantekeningen en Ophelderingen bij thet Oera Linda bok', en verdedigde het een jaar later in 'De Koninklijke Akademie en het Oera Linda boek'. Dr. A.T. Reitsma te Groningen bestudeerde het en presenteerde het resultaat van zijn kritische onderzoek in drie vergaderingen van het Fries Genootschap. Hij concludeerde dat het manuscript waarschijnlijk echt is, en van hoge historische waarde. In de laatste vergadering gaven ook de skeptici hun visie. Toen werd ook het handschrift zelf vertoond, zodat men zelf kon beoordelen of het een 13e eeuwse kopie kon zijn.

Het meest uitvoerige onderzoeksverslag tot nu toe werd in 1874 gepubliceerd onder de titel 'Naar aanleiding van het Oera Linda Bok'. De schrijver (prof. A.J. Vitringa) is duidelijk zeer geleerd en onpartijdig. De gedachte dat het boek een vervalsing zou zijn, gepleegd na 1853, toen de paalwoningen in het meer van Zürich werden ontdekt, beantwoordt hij met: "Wie zou de vervalser zijn? Niet de eerste de beste was tot zoiets in staat. Daarvoor zou noodzakelijk zijn een nauwkeurige kennis van de oudste Friese taal, waarvan een zeer beperkte woordenschat uit slechts enkele bronnen bestaat. Bovendien zou men moeten weten hoe die taal in de loop der tijd is veranderd. Er is namelijk een duidelijk verschil tussen het taalgebruik in de oudste en de jongste teksten van het handschrift. De vervalser zou een zeldzame historische en geografische kennis moeten hebben gehad. Jarenlange studie zou een onverbiddelijke voorwaarde zijn geweest en het schrijven van het vreemde letterschrift een zure arbeid. En waarvoor zou hij dat alles hebben gedaan? Eer? ... Vervalsers hebben een goede reden om hun naam geheim te houden. - Geld? ... Het was vooraf nauwelijks te verwachten dat publicatie enige winst zou opleveren. - Het genoegen om geleerden in de maling te nemen? ... Zou een door en door geleerd en talentvol man, zoals de maker moest zijn, zo'n offer van tijd en moeite over hebben voor zulk bedenkelijk genot? Dat alles is onvoorstelbaar."

"We staan hier dus voor een zonderling dilemma: Òf we laten ons beet nemen door een met grote toewijding tot stand gebracht maaksel van een geniale gek, òf een groot deel van de oude geschiedenis komt in een geheel ander licht te staan, waardoor een revolutie op dat gebied onvermijdelijk is."

"U denkt misschien nog aan geknutsel van een verveelde kloosterbroeder? Ook dit is uitgesloten. In het OLB komen een godsbegrip en ethiek voor, die onovertroffen waar en zuiver, anti-monniks en anti-theologisch zijn. Iemand die is opgevoed onder invloed van Katholieke of zelfs Protestante dogma's, heeft deze echt vrijzinnige en totaal onbevoordeelde gevoelens onmogelijk kunnen uiten."

En toch besloot deze geleerde met: "Hoewel niets echtheid uitsluit, en we niets hebben ontdekt dat van vervalsing overtuigt, toch is er iets dat onze argwaan wekt in de delen die te maken hebben met de Grieks-Romeinse oudheid." We hebben geen enkele twijfel aan de eerlijkheid en openhartigheid van de heren Over de Linden en dr. Ottema. We zij er stellig van overtuigd dat, indien er sprake zou zijn van een vervalsing, zij daar niet aan hebben meegewerkt. We hebben twijfels, maar deze zijn niet sterk genoeg om daarom het OLB definitief te verwerpen."

Het gaat in ieder geval om een merkwaardig boek. Sommigen zien in het OLB een verheerlijking van het Friese verleden. Het boek zal nauwkeurig onderzocht blijven worden, zolang het moeilijk is, om in oude volksgeschiedenis te bepalen wat mythe, sage of versierde overlevering is. Toch zal iedereen die het boek gelezen heeft moeten toegeven, dat delen van de inhoud waardevol zijn. We zijn het dan ook helemaal eens met het volgende oordeel van de Deventer geleerde: "Hoewel ik van het boek ben gaan houden, zie ik de resultaten van een wetenschappellijk onderzoek met vertrouwen tegemoet. Want, zelfs als het op historische gronden overtuigend zou worden weerlegd, dan toch zal het boek als allegorie, als fictie een hoge ethische waarde blijven behouden."

Jan Ottema and the Friesch Genootschap

Translation:

Fifty-first report of the proceedings of the
Frisian Society of History, Archaeology and Linguistics in Leeuwarden,
over the year 1878-1879, given in the meeting of 18 September 1879.

[...]

C. Executive committee

In the general meeting of 12 September 1878, mr. W. Eekhoff's resignation as treasurer was accepted. He was replaced by mr. J.G. van Blom, while both periodically resigning board members dr. J.G. Ottema and mr. F.J.J. van Eijsinga were re-elected in their function.

Unfortunately, mr. Ottema could not hold this renewed position for long. Since 1832 he had been member of the Society, member of the board since 1843, initially as secretary, later since 1858 as general member. He died last March 19. The long-lasting membership offered him many opportunities to be useful to the Society and mr. Ottema did not fail to do so. He always was and remained a very diligent member of the board, who was hardly ever absent at the weekly meetings, while not only the various issues of "the free Frisian" but also separate publications of the Society (especially the 5 books 'Chonyken van Worp Tyaerda van Rinsumageest') are incontestable witnesses of his high efficacy. May his memory stimulate us to continue the path chosen by him.

He will have to be replaced in this meeting.

Source: http://images.tresoar.nl/wumkes/periodieken/vfg/vfg_1878-79_51.pdf

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

From December 1870 till his death, that is more than 8 years, dr. Ottema has spent researching, translating, publishing and defending the OLB.

To him the book was sacred.

While the 1875 publication 'Friesche Oudheden' from the Frisian Society, was still very positive about the OLB (see translation in 11 parts that I posted in the last few days), it is emphatically not even mentioned in Ottema's obituary, only four years later.

Note that the full name of the Society is: Frisian Society of History, Archaeology and Linguistics.

By leaving the OLB out of his obituary, they not only proved their disrespect to Ottema who had been a member for 47 years, but to history in general.