[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood

[The Puzzler]

Hmm, I expected you would have jumped on the last sentence of my former post with another bucket full of information.

Anyway, these "Heinde Krekalanders", the Romans, were here in The Netherlands, around 2000 years ago, and stayed here for a couple of centuries.

They left lots of traces, like Roman reports, but also 'castelliae', and 'forae', and all that spaghetti.

Well, one of the most famous (and mysterious) Roman remnants is the "Britten Burg" near Katwijk.

Most sources will tell you that "Britten Burg" or Brittenburg is nothing but a Roman castaellium, fortress, whatever, on the west coast of The Netherlands, near Katwijk.

Some have said it had 2 defending walls, and so was nothing like any Roman fortress.

I don't know, I wasn't there.

OK, click the Wiki link, and read about it (it's a hoot, read about Calligula): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brittenburg

But then I found a site created by someone only interested in anything "Brittenburg"...

The Brittenburg or Huis te Britten is a Viking (Danish) castle, built in 810 in the mouth of the river Rhine by the Danish King Godfred (Gotrik). Similar castles have been built in the mouth of the River Maas at Witla (now sunken) and in the mouth of the river Schelde at Antwerp, which still exists, called Het Steen. The Danish castle probably has been built on the remnants of a Roman lighthouse (pharus), for which the lighthouse of Ostia (and the Pharos of Alexandria) modelled. The article in Dutch language describes the set of punishment measures against the conquered Frisian inhabitants, including a rather peculiar method of debt payment by throwing 'shilling' coins in a Viking shield, the obligation of building houses and churches with small doors to the North or East and the obligation of wearing wooden necklases. See Burcht van Gotrikhttp://www.brittenburg.net/index.php?page=Doc834

The next is in Dutch, but I will give something of a translation:

Hoewel de vuurtoren op de kust enorme afmetingen had - de oppervlakte van het gebouw was groter dan die van het Paleis op de Dam en de vuurtoren was met zijn 55-60 meter hoogte zeker ook hoger - het was maar een vuurtoren en misschien een vooruitgeschoven wachtpost om vriendelijke en vijandige schepen te signaleren. Burchten werden veroverd, verwoest, in brand gestoken bij wisseling van de macht of als strafmaatregel, maar vuurtorens werden gespaard, omdat ze ook voor de nieuwe machthebbers van belang waren. Toch hadden vuurtorens op zeeniveau het ook zwaar te verduren door hevige stormen en hoge zee, waardoor ze veel averij opliepen en soms zelfs instortten. Dat zal ook het lot van de Brittenburg (vuurtoren) geweest zijn, tot men na de verzanding van de riviermond besloot een kleinere vuurtoren met een zelfde reikwijdte op het duin te bouwen. Voor geschied- en kroniekschrijvers was het niet interessant om over een vuurtoren te schrijven. Die was er alleen voor om schippers bij te lichten om de riviermond te vinden, overdag te zien aan een ver dragende rookpluim, bij nacht en ontij aan het schijnsel van de vierboet

Transl:

It's mostly about a huge ligthhouse, 180 feet tall. The Roman one got destroyed by the sea, but later people built a new one, a smaller one.

http://www.brittenburg.net/index.php?page=Doc230

Now read this: (damn I will have to edit this again, I lost the link).

On the site I linked to someone tries his/her best to etymologically link Brittenburg to a "Friezenburg".

And s/he never even mentiones the OLB.

--

EDIT:

Found it:

Friezenburcht

Ten noorden van de (Oude) Rijn heeft zich een andere klankwijziging voorgedaan, namelijk de labiale *br > *fr en *d/t > *s. Dit heeft geleid tot *frd, *frs, hetgeen we terugvinden in Frisia, Frisones, Frisii, Fresia, Fresones, Friesland, Frislandt, enz. maar ook in *frt > *frd > *vrd Fridtenburg, Vredenburg (zowel een van de door Adrianus Pars vermelde namen voor de Brittenburg - zie hierboven - als voor de Utrechtse (Friese) wijk Vredenburg. Op etymologische gronden zouden we de Brittenburg dus ook kunnen aanduiden als Friezenburg, dat wil zeggen Burcht in het gebied van de Friezen.

http://www.brittenburg.net/index.php?page=Doc305&print=1

Translation:

At the north of the (old) Rhine a shift occured: the labial *br > *fr en *d/t > *s. This led to *frd, *frs, which we can find back in Frisia, Frisones, Frisii, Fresia, Fresones, Friesland, Frislandt, and so on, but also in *frt > *frd > *vrd Fridtenburg, Vredenburg (both a name mentioned by Adrianus Pars for Brittenburg - see above) - as for the Utrecht (Frisian) district called Vredenburg. On etymological grounds we could call Brittenburg "Friezenburg", which means "Burght in the land of the Frisians".

Seems quite desparate to me, but this person didn't even think of the OLB.

.

Can you give me a hint what you are talking about?...

[Abramelin]

Can you give me a hint what you are talking about?...

I am talking about the Brittenburg.

Someone - and clearly someone not familiar with the OLB - does his/her best to 'translate' the name into Friezenburg.

Now, if that was really it's true name (which I doubt, but who knows), then it must have been an important city for the Frisians, wouldn't you think so?

Near Katwijk? Kattik? Kadyk? Get it?

Or is it's true name maybe 'Frya's Burght'?

[crystal sage]

I may be guilty of mixng cultural connections unnecessarily but here is the culture I was hinking of but couldn't quite place. They are the Vinca culture and had their own script. Check it out to see if it compares in anyway with the symbols of the OLB.

http://www.omniglot.com/writing/vinca.htm

and here is another decent link

http://www.archaeomythology.org/events/events_romania_08.html

perhaps some more here.. maybe as the script evolved... ? Shades of the ancient Macedonean script ?

My link

and

[Abramelin]

perhaps some more here.. maybe as the script evolved... ? Shades of the ancient Macedonean script ?

My link

and

This is the Oera Linda script:

It's clearly derived from standard Latin script, the one we all use.

You don't have to go that far back into history for its roots...

[crystal sage]

Yo Alewyn, I'll be honest I have not bought your book yet and have found a lot of the research into OLB as undigestable. Not having a good background in germanic or frisian history I found it rather difficult.

However, I just found a really good site. It has a breakdown of the germanic tribes of the dark ages and this on the OLB.

There exists one very old Frisian manuscript named the Oera Linda book. It's forewords were written in AD 1256, although its main section was a diary kept about 2000 years, which was put together 560-558 BC. The authenticity of the Oera Linda Book has not been proved nor disproved. There is even evidence that most parts of the book are based on ancient events regarding the Lowlands of Europe.

Prove of this we can find in the writings and retellings of the writings of Homer, Strabo, Tachitus and even in Celts and German histories. Against the prevailing opinion of Historians, there are many reasons to believe that "The Oera Linda Book" is one of the most important books about European history from about 3000 BC to at least to about 500 BC. Although the last chapter - actually the first chapter - of it was written 1256 AD, it was composed to its preserved parts form 803 AD.

The most important part of it - "The Book of Adela's Followers" - was written from 560 BC to 558 BC, but was based on notes that had been kept at least 2000 years. When we compare the story in "The Oera Linda Book" with other stories which occurred in the same time (about 2,200 BC) in the Middle East (Egypt and Mesopotamia) we can't deny that the occurrences must be based on reality. From our point of view, the most important single event described in it was the destruction of Atland *, which happened 2194 BC.

* In my opinion is Atland not the same as Atlantis, believed by many historians, but the middle and south part of the present North Sea. There is evidence that Great Britain and Europe were once one continent in the past with a delta between present Belgian, Dutch and British coast. The river Rhine in the lowlands was at that time connected with the Themes river near London or possibly the Tyre river near New Castle in North-Humbria England.. In 2194 BC the swampy North-sea, with several islands, till that time an inner sea, became an open sea due to the breakthrough of the waters from the south (Atlantic ocean) of the present Strait of Dover between England and Northern France, during this inundation England was separated from the mainland of Europe and many islands, including Atland, were permanently inundated.

The North Sea is at present day still a shallow sea (between 30 and 130 meters deep). In the Dutch territory of the North Sea there are still several Sandbanks (The Brown Ridge, The Netherlands), The Hinder Ridges (Belgium and France), The Doggers ridge (England, The Netherlands and Denmark) and others, on witch once trees grew, most of them were once inhabited too. In my opinion was Atland situated in the present North Sea and sunk in a period of global catastrophic events around 2,200 BC.

The whole Oera Linda Book you can read on my Ancient history website HERE.

Rulers of the Frisians, after the submersion of Altland, mentioned in the Oera Linda Book

2194 BC submersion of Altland. Frisian Folk Mothers : Frya 2194-2145 BC, the traditional founder of the Frisian Commonwealth, Fasta, Medea c. 2013 BC, Thiania, Hellenia, Minna 1631-1621 BC, Rosamond c. 1621 BC, Hellicht ?-590 BC, Frana 590-559 BC. After Frana, the authority of the folk mothers collapses.

A period of division follows, with no clear Frisian rulers apparent. Adela De facto ruler ?-306 BC, Gosa 306-270 BC, eventually ruled jointly with the first king of Frisia, Friso.

http://dordrechthistory.info/Holland/holland1.htm

It's funny because I remember you mentioning the date of 2,194bce and today I found reference to a impact at around that time. It was not from a credible source but their may be some truth to it. It is the site of lake Umal in Iraq. There is a link to it on the sumerian thread on the conspiracies board. Anyway the article claimed the crater had straight edges like it was a spaceship but that is irrelavnt. What is interesting is that it was claimed as a bolid meteor from the comet Enke. I figure that if this were true then there couldn have been other impacts at the same time. You may have covered it in your book but the site is well worth a read. Have a good one.

Just found a site with an detailed historical impact chart.. might prove interesting...

My link

this one My link stood out as a really interesting theory ..

Edited August 17, 2010 by crystal sage

[Abramelin]

Just found a site with an detailed historical impact chart.. might prove interesting...

My link

Maybe it's a good idea if you read this thread first before you're going to repeat what's already been posted.

POST 696

.

Edited August 17, 2010 by Abramelin

[SlimJim22]

Jim, you said:

"Prove of this we can find in the writings and retellings of the writings of Homer, Strabo, Tachitus and even in Celts and German histories."

That is not proof. The guys who wrote the OLB knew of all these ancient writers.

I said nothing except to quote from a site that looked to have a lot of other really good information. That was the opinion of the web author and not my own. Surely in the whole article there was something more to pick out.

[Abramelin]

I said nothing except to quote from a site that looked to have a lot of other really good information. That was the opinion of the web author and not my own. Surely in the whole article there was something more to pick out.

OK, it may not have been your own words, but when you quote something to prove a point, I assume you agreed with what you quote.

Anyway, whatever you can find from old Roman, Greek, Egyptian, and Indian sources was already known in the 19th century and earlier.

Many seem to think these guys in the 19th century were illiterate or something, you know, professors in ancient languages and culture, teachers in history and ancient languages on gymnasia and highschools. God, it was their work !! What we are able to Google up, they knew by heart, and in the original language.

.

Edited August 17, 2010 by Abramelin

[The Puzzler]

This is the Oera Linda script:

It's clearly derived from standard Latin script, the one we all use.

You don't have to go that far back into history for its roots...

Later, Christian priests and monks who spoke and read Latin in addition to their native Germanic varieties began writing the Germanic languages with slightly modified Latin letters.

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

Maybe the book was written in this fashion..

[The Puzzler]

Abe, this sounds like a word to do with Ganuenta to me...Genua - river mouth, as in Genoa, near Marseilles.

Back tomorrow.

[Abramelin]

Later, Christian priests and monks who spoke and read Latin in addition to their native Germanic varieties began writing the Germanic languages with slightly modified Latin letters.

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

Maybe the book was written in this fashion..

You seem to forget that the one writing "Okke, my son" was desparate to not let the manuscript fall into the hands of Christian monks...

The Christians were their enemies, they hated them.

And then, the writers of OLB give us an explanation how they invented their own script: it is based on the Jule wheel:

And then we have these OLB numerals:

. The reason that they are more commonly known as "Arabic numerals" in Europe and the Americas is that they were introduced to Europe in the tenth century from Arabs of North Africa

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

The 10th century, you get that?

It were the Arabs who introduced the numerals into Europe in the 10th century. Before that it was "one, two three four, many" or we Europeans used the Roman numerals, I, II, III IV, V, VI, VII, VIII,IX,X....L.. C..D..M.

Just think: if these Frya people knew about the numerals we now know to be Arabic numerals as long ago as 2200 BC, we would have landed on the moon in prehistoric times.

.

Edited August 17, 2010 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

I find many things when searching the web for info on the OLB.

I also search ancient maps of The Netherlands.

Well, even though I am a skeptic, I won't hesitate to post this (and I think it will make some believers in the OLB very happy):

Look at this map by Ortelius:

And now read the commentary (I give a translation after that):

Opmerkingen van een kaart-deskundige van Cartographica Neerlandica:

"Het plaatje ... is een deel van Ortelius' Frisia Occidentalis en pretendeert een beeld te geven van Friesland in de tijd van keizer Augustus, maar is in feite een redelijk beeld van Friesland zo'n 2000 jaar B.C., dus 4000 jaar geleden.

Meer over West Friesland en dit nevenkaartje op mijn website."

Reactie van Rik hierop:

"4000 Jaar terug lijkt mij wel heel erg ver. Mijn argumentatie voor de

echtheid van deze kaart ontleen ik aan het feit dat er hoge bomen op

staan afgebeeld in het gebied dat nu IJsselmeer heet en onder Texel. Dat

lijkt onvoorstelbaar en laat Ortelius ook niet terugkomen in zijn eigen,

latere kaarten, maar lijkt toch te kloppen." .... "wat gebeurt er als je 40 meter

hoge eiken gaat kappen en tot boten verwerkt? Daar verliest de moerassige

bodem waarop deze bomen stonden zijn houvast en wordt 'ie door de zee

weggespoeld. Zo is het IJsselmeer ontstaan en door de veranderende zeestroming zijn de Waddeneilanden van ligging verplaatst. (t.o.v. de getoonde kaart, H)

Translation:

"The image.... is part of Ortelius' Frisia Occidentalis and pretends to give an image of Friesland during the time of emperor Augustus, but is in fact a reasonably well depiction of Friesland from around 2000 BC, that's 4000 years ago.

More about West Friesland and this map on my own website. "

Respons by Rik:

" 4000 years seems a bit far back to my taste. My arguments for the validity of this map I deduce from the fact that the map shows tall trees in the area that's now called the IJsselmeer, and below Texel. This seems just unbelievable, and Ortelius doesn't show them again on his own later maps, but they appear to be right after all. "... "wat happens when you cut down 40 meters high oaks and make boats of them? Then the swampy soil on which these trees stood will loose its grip and will be flushed away by the sea. That's how the IJsselmeer came into existence, and by changing sea currents the Wadden Islands changed location. (opposite the map shown, H.)

http://home.zonnet.nl/postbus/frisia.html

=====

EDIT:

What I get from the commentary is that the map above is not The Netherlands around 2000 BC, but only Friesland, around 2000 BC....hmmm.

http://www.orteliusmaps.com/book/ort81.html

Edited August 17, 2010 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

There are still many who think that the OLB talks about Atlantis, or in OLB lingo, "Atland" or "Aldland".

I have proven that the OLB Aldland was located east, in Asia, and not in the Atlantic.

This is what most people think was the "Aldland" (Old Land) of the OLB:

(Click the thumbnails)

Dogger Island:

Or Doggerland, at an earlier time than Dogger Island:

Alas, these areas submerged long before 2193 BC.

.

Edited August 17, 2010 by Abramelin

[SlimJim22]

OK, it may not have been your own words, but when you quote something to prove a point, I assume you agreed with what you quote.

Anyway, whatever you can find from old Roman, Greek, Egyptian, and Indian sources was already known in the 19th century and earlier.

Many seem to think these guys in the 19th century were illiterate or something, you know, professors in ancient languages and culture, teachers in history and ancient languages on gymnasia and highschools. God, it was their work !! What we are able to Google up, they knew by heart, and in the original language.

.

I agree entirely. The 19th century was the high point of romnaticism and that included reading of latin and greek texts. It was virtually a prerequisite for academics to have a good background in the classics so knowledge of those things is evidence of nothing ancient. I was just searching, which I don't usually on OLB as it fires my brain, thought that was a decent site so posted 'their' opening of the article on OLB. I have no point to put across personally though I like to drop in sometimes and see how it is progressing.

I'll be honest i love the ancient maps but have no feeling on them being accurate or not. What is more intriguing is your comments about arabic coming into Europe in the 10th century. That is during the time of the Moors right? Well what is the connection to OLB script? Sorry I am feeling rather slow so can you clarify. Does it suggest common origins of arabs and frya pre 2,200bce or is it more vidence of a hoax or what?

[Abramelin]

This is the Oera Linda script:

It's clearly derived from standard Latin script, the one we all use.

You don't have to go that far back into history for its roots...

I do hope you all see the yellow color of this page of te OLB.

They discovered it had this color my soaking it in tea.....

Het papier waarop geschreven is, dateert overduidelijk van na 1850. De bruine kleur kwam tot stand door het papier in de thee te hangen.

Translation:

The paper it's written on is over clearly from after 1850. The brown color is caused by hanging the paper into tea.

http://members.multimania.nl/vvhdenhelder/newpage1.html

http://coffeetea.about.com/cs/crafthowtos/ht/ht_agepaper.htm

http://brewsnnews.blogs.com/brews_n_news/2005/12/ageing_paper_wi.html

http://www.lifespy.com/2007/how-to-age-paper/

http://www.instructables.com/id/Age-paper-using-tea/

http://www.yourbos.com/2009_05_01_archive.html

http://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/olb/img/olb048.jpg

[Abramelin]

I do hope you all see the yellow color of this page of te OLB.

They discovered it had this color my soaking it in tea.....

Het papier waarop geschreven is, dateert overduidelijk van na 1850. De bruine kleur kwam tot stand door het papier in de thee te hangen.

Translation:

The paper it's written on is over clearly from after 1850. The brown color is caused by hanging the paper into tea.

http://members.multimania.nl/vvhdenhelder/newpage1.html

http://coffeetea.about.com/cs/crafthowtos/ht/ht_agepaper.htm

http://brewsnnews.blogs.com/brews_n_news/2005/12/ageing_paper_wi.html

http://www.lifespy.com/2007/how-to-age-paper/

http://www.instructables.com/id/Age-paper-using-tea/

http://www.yourbos.com/2009_05_01_archive.html

http://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/olb/img/olb048.jpg

Now one of you must tell me why this socalled ancient manuscript was colored by soaking it into tea.

[cormac mac airt]

Now one of you must tell me why this socalled ancient manuscript was colored by soaking it into tea.

The obvious reason would be to make it appear older, lend it an air of credibility not otherwise evidenced.

cormac

[The Puzzler]

Now one of you must tell me why this socalled ancient manuscript was colored by soaking it into tea.

Firstly, can you provide me with proper test results for that opinion..?

Does the paper contain tea residue?

[The Puzzler]

Translators Preface:

"The manufacture of paper from cotton must have been in use among the Chinese from very remote times, and must have become known to the Arabs by the conquest of Samarcand about the year 704. In Damascus this manufacture was an important branch of industry, for which reason it was called Charta Damascena. By the Arabians this art was brought to the Greeks. It is asserted that Greek manuscripts of the tenth century written upon cotton paper exist, and that in the thirteenth century it was much more used than parchment. To distinguish it from Egyptian paper it was called Charta bombicina, gossypina, cuttunea, xylina. A distinction from linen paper was not yet necessary. In the manufacture of the cotton paper raw cotton was originally used. We first find paper from rags mentioned by Petrus Clusiacensis (1122-50).

"The Spaniards and the Italians learned the manufacture of this paper from the Arabians. The most celebrated factories were at Jativa, Valencia, Toledo, besides Fabriano in the March of Ancona." *

In Germany the use of this material did not become very extended, whether it came from Italy or Spain. Therefore the further this preparation spread from the East and the adjoining countries, the more necessity there was that linen should take the place of cotton. A document of Kaufbeuren on linen paper of the year 1318 is of very doubtful genuineness. Bodman considers the oldest pure

p. viii

linen paper to be of the year 1324, but up to 1350 much mixed paper was used. All carefully-written manuscripts of great antiquity show by the regularity of their lines that they must have been ruled, even though no traces of the ruled lines can be distinguished. To make the lines they used a thin piece of lead, a ruler, and a pair of compasses to mark the distances.

In old writings the ink is very black or brown; but while there has been more writing since the thirteenth century, the colour of the ink is often grey or yellowish, and sometimes quite pale, showing that it contains iron. All this affords convincing proof that the manuscript before us belongs to the middle of the thirteenth century, written with clear black letters between fine lines carefully traced with lead. The colour of the ink shows decidedly that it does not contain iron. By these evidences the date given, 1256, is satisfactorily proved, and it is impossible to assign any later date. Therefore all suspicion of modern deception vanishes.

The language is very old Fries, still older and purer than the Fries Rjuchtboek or old Fries laws, differing from that both in form and spelling, so that it appears to be an entirely distinct dialect, and shows that the locality of the language must have been (as it was spoken) between the Vlie and the Scheldt.

The style is extremely simple, concise, and unembarrassed, resembling that of ordinary conversation, and free in the choice of the words. The spelling is also simple and easy, so that the reading of it does not involve the least difficulty, and yet with all its regularity, so unrestricted, that each of the separate writers who have worked at the book has his own peculiarities, arising from the changes in pronunciation in a long course of years, which naturally must have happened, as the last part of the work is written five centuries after the first.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/olb/olb02.htm

[The Puzzler]

You keep going on Abe about how everything in it was already known, well, Ottema begs to differ...

The whole contents of the book are in all respects new. That is to say, there is nothing in it that we were acquainted with before. What we here read of Friso, Adel, and Askar differs entirely from what is related by our own chroniclers, or rather presents it in quite another light. For instance, they all relate that Friso came from India, and that thus the Frisians were of Indian descent; and yet they add that Friso was a German, and belonged to a Persian race which Herodotus called Germans (Γερμάνιοι). According to the statement in this book, Friso did come from India, and with the fleet of Nearchus;

p. xiii

but he is not therefore an Indian. He is of Frisian origin, of Frya's people. He belongs, in fact, to a Frisian colony which after the death of Nijhellênia, fifteen and a half centuries before Christ, under the guidance of a priestess Geert, settled in the Panjab, and took the name of Geertmen. The Geertmen were known by only one of the Greek writers, Strabo, who mentions them as Γερμᾶνες, differing totally and entirely from the Βραχμᾶνες in manners, language, and religion.

The historians of Alexander's expeditions do not speak of Frisians or Geertmen, though they mention Indoscythians, thereby describing a people who live in India, bat whose origin is in the distant, unknown North.

In the accounts of Liudgert no names are given of planes where the Frieslanders lived in India. We only know that they first established themselves to the east of the Punjab, and afterwards moved to the west of those rivers. It is mentioned, moreover, as a striking fact, that in the summer the sun at midday was straight above their heads. They therefore lived within the tropics. We find in Ptolemy (see the map of Kiepert), exactly 24° N. on the west side of the Indus, the name Minnagara; and about six degrees east of that, in 22° N., another Minnagara. This name is pure Fries, the same as Walhallagara, Folsgara, and comes from Minna, the name of an Eeremoeder, in whose time the voyages of Teunis and his nephew Inca took place.

The coincidence is too remarkable to be accidental, and not to prove that Minnagara was the headquarters of the Frisian colony. The establishment of the colonists in the Punjab in 1551 before Christ, and their journey thither, we find fully described in Adela's book; and with the mention of one most remarkable circumstance, namely, that the Frisian mariners sailed through the strait which in those times still ran into the Red Sea.

p. xiv

In Strabo, book i. pages 38 and 50, it appears that Eratosthenes was acquainted with the existence of the strait, of which the later geographers make no mention.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/olb/olb02.htm

[The Puzzler]

It appears to me with several readings over of the book that they are actually in Jutland and Denmark at first and it might be this area that was affected. Extending down to the Scheldt and moving down their more over time.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

On one side we were bounded by Wr-aldas Sea, on which no one but us might or could sail; on the other side we were hedged in by the broad Twiskland (Tusschenland, Duitschland), through which the Finda people dared not come on account of the thick forests and the wild beasts.

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

The banks of these rivers were at one time entirely inhabited by our people, as well as the banks of the Rhine from one end to the other. Opposite Denmark and Jutland we had colonies and a Burgtmaagd. Thence we obtained copper and iron, as well as tar and pitch, and some other necessaries. Opposite to us we had Britain, formerly Westland, with her tin mines.

Britain was the land of the exiles, who with the help of their Burgtmaagd had gone away to save their lives; but in order that they might not come back they were tattooed with a B on the forehead, the banished with a red dye, the other criminals with blue. Moreover, our sailors and merchants had many factories among the distant Krekalanders and in Lydia. In Lydia (Lybia) the people are black. As our country was so great and extensive, we had many different names. Those who were settled to the east of Denmark were called Jutten, because often they did nothing else than look for amber (jutten) on the shore. Those who lived in the islands were called Letten, because they lived an isolated life. All those who lived between Denmark and the Sandval, now the Scheldt, were called Stuurlieden (pilots), Zeekampers (naval men), and Angelaren (fishermen). The Angelaren were men who fished in the sea, and were so named because they used lines and hooks instead of nets. From there to the nearest part of Krekaland the inhabitants were called Kadhemers, because they never went to sea but remained ashore.

Those who were settled in the higher marches bounded by Twisklanden (Germany) were called Saxmannen, because they were always armed against the wild beasts and the savage Britons. Besides these we had the names Landzaten (natives of the land), Marzaten (natives of the fens), and Woud or Hout zaten (natives of the woods).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Settled to the EAST of Denmark = at the Vistula and Baltic shoreline of Poland = Jutten

Saxmannen - right where Old Saxons were in West Germany

All who lived BETWEEN DENMARK AND THE SANDVAL (SHELDT), that is the Stuurlieden, Zeekampers and Angelaren.

Now to me this area is actually FRIESLAND.

Denmark and Jutland is Jylland, that is Jule Land, land of the Jule.

See, what I notice with Dutch people in particular is they rename areas old names, in Australia we have Arnhem Land as one example but many many more in Western Australia where the Dutch landed and in Tasmania, which was van Diemens Land for a long time....

In New York, what was it, New Amsterdam for a long time, Flushing, Haarlem etc.

It would not surprise me if areas of Friesland were named in this way, such as Zealand Zeeland. Then we have New Zealand...

Edited August 18, 2010 by The Puzzler

[The Puzzler]

This is how I would place them:

Wr-alda's Sea = Skagerrak and part of the North Sea in the North / Twiskland = Germany / East Sea = Baltic Sea shore to the Vistula / Mediterranean Sea (middel.se) = North Sea near England (in between - in the MIDDLE of the continent and England)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Schoonland might not be Sweden. Schooners are ships invented by the Dutch c. 17th century, so to me Schoonland means an area where they sailed large sailing ships, the whole area could be Schoonland not just Sweden or todays Scandinavia.

Did you know here in Australia we call a beer a schooner?

Edited August 18, 2010 by The Puzzler

[Oniomancer]

You keep going on Abe about how everything in it was already known, well, Ottema begs to differ...

Puz, Like Abe and I said before, they're all ex post facto observations. Every piece of alleged "new" data in the OLB you just cited is being claimed as authentic because it meshes with classical sources, sources that were already known to classicists for hundreds of years. The amazing "coincidence" then becomes less amazing if one half of the equation is relatively common knowledge to any would-be hoaxer. This is like a copycat killer reading about a murder in a newspaper and tailoring his MO accordingly, which is why investigators often withhold details on such cases. (this incidentally can be applied to "waves" of various paranormal experiences. The first report sets the pattern.)

The only way the match up would be really significant is if you were to find a previously unknown corroborating ancient source whose discovery unquestionably post-dated the discovery of the OLB.

[The Puzzler]

Abe you said

I have proven that the OLB Aldland was located east, in Asia, and not in the Atlantic.

What does this mean? You are saying that Aldland was in Asia?

[The Puzzler]

Puz, Like Abe and I said before, they're all ex post facto observations. Every piece of alleged "new" data in the OLB you just cited is being claimed as authentic because it meshes with classical sources, sources that were already known to classicists for hundreds of years. The amazing "coincidence" then becomes less amazing if one half of the equation is relatively common knowledge to any would-be hoaxer. This is like a copycat killer reading about a murder in a newspaper and tailoring his MO accordingly, which is why investigators often withhold details on such cases. (this incidentally can be applied to "waves" of various paranormal experiences. The first report sets the pattern.)

The only way the match up would be really significant is if you were to find a previously unknown corroborating ancient source whose discovery unquestionably post-dated the discovery of the OLB.

No, I don't think it has to be like that. What if this is the correct story and Homer etc are the copycats.

Let's say for instance a people of the North settled in Greece (far Krekaland) for examples sakes with their associated symbolism...before Homer wrote.'

Then Homer writes the stories that tell of these people and another/others settling in Greece in mythic telling.

Which in fact, I really cant find anything too mythical in the whole book.

Alewyn said to me the Phocaeans were not the Phaeaceans but I beg to differ. I probably should have addressed this post to him but never mind...

IMO Phaeaceans is the name of them prior to them entering Greek culture as the Phocaeans, settling in Ionia, Asia Minor c. 800BC from Phocis in Western Greece.

Phocis actually sounds much like Folks to me, Folk Mother people. The first Greek sailors who settled very early in Lydia and had contact with other sailors in the Western mediterranean. They settled Marseilles and reached Tartessos, where the King had an Etruscan name, which could translate to silver, that word then moves through to Greece - treasury/Aga - Agamemnon - treasurer Treasury at Mycenae.

I say Schylla was Malta, because of the nymphs, Melita, Melite, all meaning honey (melita) and dark (melanin), on the island of Phocaeans. These would be Libyans. In saying that I am not adverse to placing it as a Maltan outpost in Tartessos either but Malta seems a better position. The furthest East these people knew when Odysseus landed was Euboea.

Stesichorus identifies Lamia as the mother of Scylla, by Phorcys.[12] This may be a conflation of Lamia with the sea goddess Ceto, traditionally Phorcys's wife and mother of Scylla. Further passing references to Lamia were made by Strabo (i.II.8) and Aristotle (Ethics vii.5

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamia_(mythology)

In ancient Greek mythology, Lamia (Greek: Λάμια) was a beautiful queen of Libya who became a child-eating daemon.

According to Diodorus Siculus, Lamia was born the beautiful daughter of King Belus of Egypt, making her the granddaughter of Poseidon and Lybie.[7] Upon her father's death she became queen of one of his territories, Libya.[8] However, while visiting Delphi, Pausanias remarks that Lamia was the daughter of Poseidon. He also states that Lamia and Zeus were the parents of Herophile, a noted sibyl.

The Delphian Sybil - NOT the Oracle, was through Lamia.

The Sybil was an educator about Gods and nature, not an oracle. Pythagoras himself learnt much of his education from the Delphic Sybil.

So, for reasons I can trace through I say the Phaeaceans are the Phocaeans and it them who bought Athena into Athens. I also say they had contact with Troy who bought in silver from Tartessos and that Troy was built by them too. (Apollo and Poseidon)

Malta was settled by Corinthians first out of the Greeks (and they lived there with Phoenicians), not Athenians, like everything, the Athenians really did zippo from Athens itself, the Corinthians had boats, that is where the story of Jason is set too, Corinth. Phocis is right near the Corinthian Isthmus.

The word Phaeaceans (Homer) means gray, or then it says dark skinned, Athena has GREY eyes. Athena is on this island of Schylla with Homer and can change into a little girl and all sorts of things, arrives on clouds, just like Nephele, the cloud nymphe, mother of Helle and Phrixos.

Palm Land is in the Siwa Oasis in Libya, where Ammon is worshipped, who came in as Zeus. At Dodona, Epirus. Where Achilles was worshipped the most.

The Phaeaceans imo are the people who became the Phocaeans, Corinthian sailors of Western Greece who had sailed the western Mediterranean looking for Golden Fleeces that eventually as time went on moved into Asia Minor and became some of the earliest Athenians. Therans then colonised Libya first at Cyrene, again not Athenians.