Hi-

Came across this today in the Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/0 … d%3D400393

Seems that the concept has some roots in Norse culture.

References to slaves in the afterlife appears in the writings of the Ibn Fadlan, an Arab emissary who spent time with the Vikings in an area called Rus in the 10th Century. But his description of slaves in the afterlife had to do with his travels through the Middle East on his way to Rus. This is clearly a much more direct application of the term to the Vikings.

Mike

Interesting Article. Thanks for sharing. Seems to be a fitting description to Zodiac’s way of thinking.

Hi-

When you combine this reference to the 1974 "sla" reference, it seems to whoever Z was, he was apparently heavily influenced not only by British culture but also by Norse culture. This also opens up discussion of "Odin’s cross" and the runes "laguz" and "ansuz," which appear to be present in the Zodiac literature. There is a seeming pattern to the Norse references that may go beyond "slaves in the afterlife" and "sla." Certainly, Norse culture can serve to link all of these seemingly random observations about the origin of these various elements in the case under a broader context-a Norse signal emanating from the apparent noise.

The interesting thing is that "Odin’s cross" represents the highest god in the Norse pantheon, a god who lacks feelings/empathy and who enjoys stirring up strife–a god therefore with which we could readily see Z associating himself. In fact, which other lesser Norse god would he choose, given his ego? And the two Norse runes in the return address of the Avery letter ("laguz and ansuz") suggest that if the letter got lost, it should be returned to someone who was a "wealthy individual with ties to water who loved to communicate," since "ansuz" is the rune of the god Odin, as well as the "Rune of Communication," while "Laguz" is the "Rune of Water" (an obscure water reference in the Zodiac case!), as well as the rune of the Norse god of wealth (Njord).

When you combine the meanings of the two Norse runes on the Avery letter, you may get a pretty good, concise description of who Z was and how he perceived himself. Hi-

When you combine this reference to the 1974 "sla" reference, it seems to whoever Z was, he was apparently heavily influenced not only by British culture but also by Norse culture. This also opens up discussion of "Odin’s cross" and the runes "laguz" and "ansuz," which appear to be present in the Zodiac literature. There is a seeming pattern to the Norse references that may go beyond "slaves in the afterlife" and "sla." Certainly, Norse culture can serve to link all of these seemingly random observations about the origin of these various elements in the case under a broader context-a Norse signal emanating from the apparent noise.

The interesting thing is that "Odin’s cross" represents the highest god in the Norse pantheon, a god who lacks feelings/empathy and who enjoys stirring up strife–a god therefore with which we could readily see Z associating himself. In fact, which other lesser Norse god would he choose, given his ego? And the two Norse runes in the return address of the Avery letter ("laguz and ansuz") suggest that if the letter got lost, it should be returned to someone who was a "wealthy individual with a big ego, ties to water, and who loved to communicate," since "ansuz" is the rune of the god Odin, as well as the "Rune of Communication," while "Laguz" is the "Rune of Water" (an obscure water reference in the Zodiac case!), as well as the rune of the Norse god of wealth (Njord).

When you combine the meanings of the two Norse runes on the Avery letter, you may get a pretty good, concise description of who Z was and how he perceived himself. Hi-

When you combine this reference to the 1974 "sla" reference, it seems to whoever Z was, he was apparently heavily influenced not only by British culture but also by Norse culture. This also opens up discussion of "Odin’s cross" and the runes "laguz" and "ansuz," which appear to be present in the Zodiac literature. There is a seeming pattern to the Norse references that may go beyond "slaves in the afterlife" and "sla." Certainly, Norse culture can serve to link all of these seemingly random observations about the origin of these various elements in the case under a broader context-a Norse signal emanating from the apparent noise.

The interesting thing is that "Odin’s cross" represents the highest god in the Norse pantheon, a god who lacks feelings/empathy and who enjoys stirring up strife–a god therefore with which we could readily see Z associating himself. In fact, which other lesser Norse god would he choose, given his ego? And the two Norse runes in the return address of the Avery letter ("laguz and ansuz") suggest that if the letter got lost, it should be returned to someone who was a "wealthy individual with ties to water who loved to communicate," since "ansuz" is the rune of the god Odin, as well as the "Rune of Communication," while "Laguz" is the "Rune of Water" (an obscure water reference in the Zodiac case!), as well as the rune of the Norse god of wealth (Njord).

When you combine the meanings of the two Norse runes on the Avery letter, you may get a pretty good, concise description of who Z was and how he perceived himself. In fact, this may be Zodiac "telling us who he is" without being literally able to do so…

Mike

Hi-

When you combine this reference to the 1974 "sla" reference, it seems to whoever Z was, he was apparently heavily influenced not only by British culture but also by Norse culture.

Well. If you could confirm that the ’74 letter was genuine, that is, and was worth combining with.
And if you could confirm that he wasn’t, say, talking about one of the many other cultural references there are to "slaves in the afterlife", such as in Egyptian and Mesopotamian, then, yes.
How wonderful it is, that there are so many interpretations which can be placed on this stuff……

Hi Smithy-

I was not trying to imply that there was only one interpretation of all these things. I am just looking for a consistent pattern in them. And I know the 1974 letter may not be legit but nobody has ever conclusively told me that it is forgery. Lord knows, I’ve been trying for years to determine is Alan Keel was recalling things correctly when he said that one of the 1974 letters was a forgery that had DNA on it that matched the forged 1978 letter. The only 1974 letter that appears to have been tested for DNA is the Exorcist letter. So where does that leave us?

Are there any hieroglyphs in Z’s codes or other references to Egypt?

Mike

Miker!
Fair enough.
Re: "Are there any hieroglyphs in Z’s codes or other references to Egypt?"
Well no, not that I’ve noticed. But wait, there’s no Norse or Danish either. Or anything particularly British. Damnit.

IMO it is reference to the Egyptian belief of slaves in the afterlife, and the Egyptians used symbols, Hieroglyphics.
IMO the reason Z may have sent the SLA letter was because at the time a terrorist group called the SLA who kidnapped Patty Hearst
was getting all the press. Zodiac was partly motivated by the press coverage he would get. He was jealous when someone else awful
received press coverage. The SLA in fact out of the Bay Area was more powerful and terrorizing the Zodiac ever had the nerve to be.
I like Smithy because he always brings a different approach to Zodiac. We can’t stay in a rut and hope to solve these crimes.

Deciding to send the "sla" letter because the Symbionese Liberation Army was getting too much press is the easy part. But how did Z know what "sla" meant in Old Norse if he was an Egyptologist?

In 2004, Richard Walter of the Vidocq Society, who consults on a monthly basis with police departments form around the country on their most difficult cold cases, and who has solved or help solve more cases than all of us combined on this website, re-examined the profile of the Zodiac killer and said that he was a powerful, wealthy man with a big ego who had a need to write letters to boast about his murders.

If people imagine for just a second that the symbol on the Avery letter consists of the Norse runes Ansuz and Laguz, then their combined meanings (except for the reference to water in Laguz), essentially recreate Walter’s profile of Zodiac: a wealthy, egotistical man who needs to communicate about his crimes. And I might add that this individual would then have a knowledge of Norse runes, so he would seem to have ties to that culture.

And you dare to call this thinking in a rut? I call it explaining some of what we see in the observable Zodiac universe–slaves in the afterlife, the Avery symbol and Z’s crossed-circle symbol–with a theory that unifies all of those seemingly unrelated elements into some semblance of order.

Mike

It’s all interesting to consider, but if the SLA letter wasn’t from Zodiac, I’m not sure if I see any Norse connection.

One letter from ’74 was considered a fake later on. We’ve talked about them all. Even the Exorcist letter–the one believed to be most authentic.

Looks like they didn’t even bother to test the SLA letter so I have to wonder how seriously it was taken as a Zodiac communication. http://www.zodiackiller.com/SFPDDNA.html

I mean, if we are going to question the Exorcist and Citizen letters, how do we not question this SLA missive at a time when the SLA was communicating as well?

Well I agree that we can question all the 1974 letters, since one is SUPPOSEDLY a forgery. But the only one tested for DNA was the Exorcist letter. None of the others was, at least according to the chart that was put together in 2001, or so. (And Keel had left around that time, so he was not necessarily privy to any of the analyses SFPD did after he left.) So if ONE 1974 letter is a forgery based on DNA, which one seems to be the most likely candidate?

The only problem with that notion is the amount of emphasis SFPD has always placed on the palm prints. BUT, if Z left such prints on that letter, why not any of the others? Why did he take his gloves off for just one–and then apparently put them back on? Or was it just that there were not enough oils on his hand to leave a print on any other letter? There were many of them. Could it be that he just happened to have oils on his hand for just one? Seems unlikely to me, but who knows?

And IF SFPD knows that the Exorcist letter is a forgery, what game is it playing with the public by making such a big stink about palm prints? Might it be a hold back–only the real killer will know that he didn’t write that letter and that those are not his palm prints? Is it a dog and pony show by SFPD to put info out there that only the killer would know? Wish I knew!

And BTW, I am beginning to question, after over six years, that one of the letters is actually a forgery. Like the DMV letter MAY be, this one may also be a rumor. Maybe Alan Keel was confused or mistaken. I’ve never heard anyone else in officialdom talk about a forged 1974 letter. I’ve asked a lot of people to poke around and try to find out but…nothing so far. But who really knows? Heck, if I had done DNA testing on the letters and determined that one was a forgery, I’d sure as heck remember which one it was! He didn’t.

And also BTW, if those are not Norse runes on the Avery letter, then out of all the Norse runes that exist (three dozen or so) the two that "do not" apparently appear on that letter just happen to essentially spell out the profile of the Zodiac killer that was determined by one of the most highly consulted behavioral profilers in the country. Why do those two in particular just happen to "not appear" on that letter? Seems kind of strange…Ansuz–Communication and the god Odin (highest one in the pantheon, suggestive of a large ego). Zodiac also uses a symbol that looks like "Odin’s Cross" and likes to write boastful letters. Laguz- Norse god of WATER (Njord) (the importance of which has been debated in the Z case for years and which miraculously appears again here, although it is not part of Walter’s profile) and of wealth.

Mike

For those who are big on Nordic, please be advised that the EAR/ONS has Nordic DNA. I highly doubt the Zodiac was some old rich guy.

It appears to me that a Nordic hypothesis makes very good use of the information intrinsic to the (presumed) canonical letters: there is the SLA reference, there is the rune-like symbols on the Halloween Card, there is the reference to slaves in the afterlife and there is the Odin’s cross-like symbol that is the Zodiac’s signature. As Mike alludes, they are not conclusive, but together they form a cohesive and consistent constellation of references that suggest that Z took an interest in things Nordic.

While I certainly would not discard a theory that ties slaves in the afterlife to an Egyptian (or other) origin, in my opinion it would be incumbent on the person presenting such a theory to either show the intrinsic supporting information within the Z corpus, or to show a reasonable tie-in to some information outside the Z-corpus.

OWK: regarding your quote below:

For those who are big on Nordic, please be advised that the EAR/ONS has Nordic DNA. I highly doubt the Zodiac was some old rich guy.

When you say that you "highly doubt the Zodiac was some old rich guy", were you just advancing your feeling about things, or did you have some reasons to support the statement?

Regards,

G

Please read my post regarding the witness evidence in this case.
Virtually everyone puts him at 30 years or younger.
The writer of the letters doesn’t scream "rich guy" to me either.
Everything I write is in my opinion.

We the public do NOT know if EAR/ONS has Nordic DNA.

All we can say is that his DNA has one marker that occurs with somewhat higher frequency in Nordic and Slavic groups.

The one thing that screams out "rich guy" in the Z letters is the Monarch sized paper. In fact, in 1999 I got two letters from a rich guy and they were on this sized paper.

Mike