Some thoughts (bear with me):
Fryan morals exclude operating on the basis of money (in all it’s forms). Because money is dept, whereby when using it you’re participating in slavery.
Before there was money there was no dept, there where obligations though (dept is an obligation specified by and in money).
When someone owed society something because of his behavior he was tattood according to the olb and had to reconcile with society trough labor.
Later in time a tattoo became a sign of being a slave / or being concurred.
The Athenians supposedly tattood an owl on those who they concurred (might the owl sitting on the head of Minerva has anything to do with that?).
I think it might be possible that books/stories such as the Oera Lindabook might be there to share the knowledge of how reality comes more or less cyclically into existence and trough what prosseses. One of them being the psychological and the behavior of humans and the proces from being free to being enslaved possebly in connection/relation with astrology.
The Bible might also be, kind of, such a book and so on.
In revelations there is a warning to the people having a stigma on their hand and forehead. Without these stigma they cannot buy or sell (it is the stima/merk of “the beast”). To me it seems to refer to those who enslave themselves and others trough te use of money.
Also I wonder if the word markt/market refers to the mark/merk (which refers to dept/money/slavery). Following this thought I wonder if there were markets before money and if so what would be their name and how the Freyas in that time might have exchanged their goods and services.
Fryan economics
Re: Fryan economics
I'm not sure if this is correct.
In the Burg Laws (ch. 3a, law 14) MÀRK.JELD is mentioned (Dutch: marktgeld, lit. 'market-money'):
currently translated as ''the share it earns from the market".THÀT DÉL THAT HJU FON THÀT MÀRK.JELD BÜRT
Also in the General Laws (ch. 3b, laws 8, 9, 10):
"The village may not take market charges (MÀRK.JELD) exceeding one-twelfth of the revenue"
"All the market receipts (MÀRK.JELD) must be annually divided into a hundred parts"
and:
"ten parts for the market itself"MÀRK.JELD. TJAN DÉLA
We had to rephrase somewhat. Perhaps we can make the translation more literal some day.
Could JELD have had another (older) meaning than 'money' (as in coins/symbolic credit)? (This is not a rethoric question.)
Note: there is also the verb JELDA. Dutch: 'gelden'.
Re: Fryan economics
Hi Jan,
Yes it’s very possible that jeld is not the same as money.
“Kaap and verkaap”, might also in origin have nothing to do with money.
It might even be that the word money at one time was meant to warn for the change in the process of economics when money as “we” now usually understand it came in to existence . Money comes from “monere” which means warning.
We nowadays are used to interpret all things economic in to things that have something to do with “money”, even in such an extant that we cannot see the underlying and real structure/proces. There certainly is reason to doubt the current prominent understanding and with other perspectives in that way things will be seen very differently.
(One meaning of the word “geld/gelt/jelt).
https://etymologiebank.nl/trefwoord/geld2
There is so much to say about this. I feel I’m shortcoming with this post because of the vastness of the topic and my English. I hope it is understandable enough and I hope we can have a dialogue about this here on the forum. In my perspective it has everything to do with “to be or not to be free”, which is the essence of the Freyas.
Thank you for your time and attention!
Yes it’s very possible that jeld is not the same as money.
“Kaap and verkaap”, might also in origin have nothing to do with money.
It might even be that the word money at one time was meant to warn for the change in the process of economics when money as “we” now usually understand it came in to existence . Money comes from “monere” which means warning.
We nowadays are used to interpret all things economic in to things that have something to do with “money”, even in such an extant that we cannot see the underlying and real structure/proces. There certainly is reason to doubt the current prominent understanding and with other perspectives in that way things will be seen very differently.
(One meaning of the word “geld/gelt/jelt).
https://etymologiebank.nl/trefwoord/geld2
There is so much to say about this. I feel I’m shortcoming with this post because of the vastness of the topic and my English. I hope it is understandable enough and I hope we can have a dialogue about this here on the forum. In my perspective it has everything to do with “to be or not to be free”, which is the essence of the Freyas.
Thank you for your time and attention!
Re: Fryan economics
The word free and friend (phri) are closely connected.
When people became slaves they were taken from their roots / their bond, from their natural connections family/ friends. They were not longer someones friend / beloved.
Being free was being a friend / was being loved (more or less), and vice versa. It was to care and to care for. This “caring”/“love”, is materialized in goods and services, this is; (natural) economics it simply is what all people naturally do, for example with their family and friends. When people wanted goods/services from people who stood further away then people might have exchanged their goods and services (while expecting more or less immediately something of the supposedly same value (notice that here also money has no part in it).
I would like to recommend the work of David Greaber. I recently discovered it and he has managed to put all if it together in his books: “dept the first 5000 years”, and “the dawn of everything”. I was aware of some of the information written therein, and I find the dept of it and the completeness in context written by him absolutely astonishing! And it helps me understanding all of it, such as the Olb even
better.
When people became slaves they were taken from their roots / their bond, from their natural connections family/ friends. They were not longer someones friend / beloved.
Being free was being a friend / was being loved (more or less), and vice versa. It was to care and to care for. This “caring”/“love”, is materialized in goods and services, this is; (natural) economics it simply is what all people naturally do, for example with their family and friends. When people wanted goods/services from people who stood further away then people might have exchanged their goods and services (while expecting more or less immediately something of the supposedly same value (notice that here also money has no part in it).
I would like to recommend the work of David Greaber. I recently discovered it and he has managed to put all if it together in his books: “dept the first 5000 years”, and “the dawn of everything”. I was aware of some of the information written therein, and I find the dept of it and the completeness in context written by him absolutely astonishing! And it helps me understanding all of it, such as the Olb even
better.Re: Fryan economics
This is an interesting topic indeed. Below I will add some fragments that are relevant.
I published an unfinished word study earlier: wiki.oeralinda.org/view/JELD
Note the part "of special interest, because unclear", which is why I did the word study.
FRÉJA is 'to ask' (Dutch/German: vragen/fragen) and FRÁN is 'pious' or 'sacred' (Dutch/German cognates: vroom/fromm).
FRÉTHO: peace (Dutch/German: vrede/Frieden), FRÉSE: fear (Dutch/German dialect: vrees/freise)
Some relevant fragments:
Minno's Writings, 4c. Useful Precedents
Ch. 9b: ... and set there the red rooster in revenge [TO WITTERJELD].
Ch. 10b: NÉIDAM RIKDOM BY THÀT VRBRÛDE ÀND VRBASTERDE SLACHT FÉR BOPPA DÜGED ÀND ÉRE JELDE.
Because wealth was much more important than virtue and honor to this spoiled and corrupted brood
More literally: Because wealth ('richdom'), to this spoiled and corrupted brood, 'yielded far above' virtue and honor
A highly relevant chapter is 16c. Friso: Praise and Suspicion, involving what could be called bribery.
I published an unfinished word study earlier: wiki.oeralinda.org/view/JELD
Note the part "of special interest, because unclear", which is why I did the word study.
Also, just to add, the words are FRY and FRJUND (most common spelling) in OL.
FRÉJA is 'to ask' (Dutch/German: vragen/fragen) and FRÁN is 'pious' or 'sacred' (Dutch/German cognates: vroom/fromm).
FRÉTHO: peace (Dutch/German: vrede/Frieden), FRÉSE: fear (Dutch/German dialect: vrees/freise)
Some relevant fragments:
Minno's Writings, 4c. Useful Precedents
and 4g. CreteIf our neighbors have a piece of land or water that appears to be useful for us, it is fitting for us to ask them to sell it.
Ch. 8d: In return [TO WITHER.JELD], they would recognize Tunis as their eternal king.But when they saw that we did not plan to wage war, they calmed down, so that I could eventually trade a boat with iron goods for a harbor and a piece of land.
Ch. 9b: ... and set there the red rooster in revenge [TO WITTERJELD].
Ch. 10b: NÉIDAM RIKDOM BY THÀT VRBRÛDE ÀND VRBASTERDE SLACHT FÉR BOPPA DÜGED ÀND ÉRE JELDE.
Because wealth was much more important than virtue and honor to this spoiled and corrupted brood
More literally: Because wealth ('richdom'), to this spoiled and corrupted brood, 'yielded far above' virtue and honor
A highly relevant chapter is 16c. Friso: Praise and Suspicion, involving what could be called bribery.
Re: Fryan economics
The Roman author Tacitus, writing on the relations of Romans and the Germany area folks during the first century, notes the following tidbits:
Based on the comparison to the Rígsþula Danes and Bock family saga Finns and other Nordics (Russians, Swedes...) the Germania ones seem to be both oddly free-wheeling in their sociatal openess, as in status rank not solely derived from birth lineage but instead able to be decided upon by the chieftain, and also oddly puritanistic or monogamous husband-wife types (Christians-before-Christianity or Muslims-before-Islam) at base levels when compared to later Vikings, Swedes, Finns, Russians etc. In comparison to OL Frisians they seem also less cultured as in relating to staying at certain locales and having written traditions, but are seemingly more agrarian and warlike.
The last line is usually taken to mean that the usage of money coins came about with the Romans, with the endless Germanic golden bracteates seen as some other type of usage purpose. One would assume that any older era OL Frisians and Finns hanging around in the Mediterranean regions next to Italy, Greece, Macedonia and Phoenicia would get to hear of the likes of Croesus' golden coinage.The man who is found guilty has to pay a fine of so many horses or cattle, part of which goes to the king or the state, part to the victim of the wrongful act or to his relatives. [...] They are always making demands on the generosity of their chief, asking for a coveted war-horse or a spear stained with the blood of a defeated enemy. Their meals, for which plentiful if homely fare is provided, count in lieu of pay. [...] It is a national custom for gifts of cattle or agricultural produce to be made to the chiefs, individual citizens making voluntary contributions for this purpose. These are accepted as tokens of honour, but serve also to supply their wants. They take particular pleasure in gifts received from neighbouring states, such as are sent not only by individuals but by communities as well - choice horses, splendid arms, metal discs, and collars. And we have now taught them to accept presents of money also. (source)
Based on the comparison to the Rígsþula Danes and Bock family saga Finns and other Nordics (Russians, Swedes...) the Germania ones seem to be both oddly free-wheeling in their sociatal openess, as in status rank not solely derived from birth lineage but instead able to be decided upon by the chieftain, and also oddly puritanistic or monogamous husband-wife types (Christians-before-Christianity or Muslims-before-Islam) at base levels when compared to later Vikings, Swedes, Finns, Russians etc. In comparison to OL Frisians they seem also less cultured as in relating to staying at certain locales and having written traditions, but are seemingly more agrarian and warlike.
Re: Fryan economics
Thank you!
Indeed giftgiving seemed to have played a crucial part in early human economics. When people where rooted (friends/free) people’s needs seem to have been provided by giftgiving. It seemed to have been based on a collective certainty that ones needs would be fulfilled. In that way a gift brought the expectation that one would eventually receive what's necessary. Sometimes or maybe even often this kind of relationship was practiced between different folk.
It seems to be the case that the barter myth indeed is a myth.
People might only have started bartering because they where used to money when there became a shortage of coins.
Money seems to have been the product of the state / ruling class/ slavery.
The thing we’ve all learned, that the double coincidence of wants resulted in the use of money (and differentiation in work and labour), is quite possibly utterly untrue.
Indeed people had for a very long time moneyless economics and were “educated” in the use of money (just as Tacitus writes).
It’s also affirming the payment of obligations due to harmfull behavior to others, the payment without money and indeed cattle seemed to have played a great role. The word capital even has etymological ties to chattel. As does the word geld/gelt/jelt (this means not producing/infertile).
It even might be that the use of money itself is usery. For usery we use the word woeker, but woeker is referring to the natural process of increasement by means of fertility.
Nowadays and for a very long time, we do not make the difference between usery (to use/gebruiken) and woeker (increasement/aanwas), but there sure is!
Usery seems to be the unnatural increasement by usage of people. This might also apply to bartering when someone does this for profit.
The following is also me trying to put my thoughts into words:
Money is a concept of an “I owe you” with the expectation of reconciliation trough the usage of (usery) somebody’s labour (one’s combined, time/attention/energy). On the basis of the believe of the exact measurement of the unmeasurable, namely worth.
Indeed giftgiving seemed to have played a crucial part in early human economics. When people where rooted (friends/free) people’s needs seem to have been provided by giftgiving. It seemed to have been based on a collective certainty that ones needs would be fulfilled. In that way a gift brought the expectation that one would eventually receive what's necessary. Sometimes or maybe even often this kind of relationship was practiced between different folk.
It seems to be the case that the barter myth indeed is a myth.
People might only have started bartering because they where used to money when there became a shortage of coins.
Money seems to have been the product of the state / ruling class/ slavery.
The thing we’ve all learned, that the double coincidence of wants resulted in the use of money (and differentiation in work and labour), is quite possibly utterly untrue.
Indeed people had for a very long time moneyless economics and were “educated” in the use of money (just as Tacitus writes).
It’s also affirming the payment of obligations due to harmfull behavior to others, the payment without money and indeed cattle seemed to have played a great role. The word capital even has etymological ties to chattel. As does the word geld/gelt/jelt (this means not producing/infertile).
It even might be that the use of money itself is usery. For usery we use the word woeker, but woeker is referring to the natural process of increasement by means of fertility.
Nowadays and for a very long time, we do not make the difference between usery (to use/gebruiken) and woeker (increasement/aanwas), but there sure is!
Usery seems to be the unnatural increasement by usage of people. This might also apply to bartering when someone does this for profit.
The following is also me trying to put my thoughts into words:
Money is a concept of an “I owe you” with the expectation of reconciliation trough the usage of (usery) somebody’s labour (one’s combined, time/attention/energy). On the basis of the believe of the exact measurement of the unmeasurable, namely worth.