Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood [Part 3]


Abramelin
 Share

Recommended Posts

This issue is that the Hebrews originate in the central mounts of Canaan, not Phoenicia. And Teunis arrived in what, 1700 BC? Hebrew religion- the Priests- would only come about as of 1200 BC. And since the Hebrews were Monotheistic/ Henotheistic, that would presumably be due to influence from the Fryas.

Also, what is Gola equivalent to?

Pardon my ignorance on this discussion because I've never been involved in it beyond questions pertaining to the ancient Near East. I know very little about the Oera Linda Book, but is it not primarily about the adventures of ancient Frisians? You use the term "Fryas." Is this not a derivation of the ancient Norse goddess, or is it in reference to something or someone else? Like I said, I don't understand much of this discussion and should probably stay clear, but certain events in this thread have caused me to become involved as a Moderator (but I like to post, too).

I'm confused because, despite the tales told in the OLB, the Frisians were and are a Germanic people. They did not exist in the Early Bronze Age (c. 2200 BCE), unless you all are referring to very ancient northern Europeans whose identity, language, and culture are largely lost to us now. But technically speaking, culturally and linguistically, the Frisians could not be the same people. Perhaps you can see my confusion, but for the sake of full disclosure, I should state honestly that I see the OLB as a hoax or a parody.

On matters of the ancient Near East I can be much more authoritative. The earliest we can trace the Hebrews with any certainty, for example, is (like you said) to around 1200 BCE—specially around 1208 BCE, when they are mentioned for the first time in history on the victory stela of Pharaoh Merneptah. But we can't say much about their culture at so early a date, other than that they were semi-nomadic and evidently already practiced a prohibition against pork. We really know nothing about the nature, cultic practices, and priesthood of Hebraic religion as it existed at the end of the thirteenth century BCE. Much about the early Hebrew people does not become understandable historically until, at the earliest, the tenth century BCE.

We know, for instance, that the earliest practices of the Hebrew religion show it to be most likely solidly henotheistic. In the early periods it seems certain that Yahweh even had a consort (see especially W. Dever's excellent book on this, from 2008), as did so many deities of ancient Near Eastern cultures. The Hebrews do not seem to have become really monotheistic until the post-exilic period, after Cyrus the Great had freed them from captivity in Babylon. But where exactly the Hebrews originally came from is still much in debate even among the most polished of biblical scholars and archaeologists. That they were Semtici and shared many of the same cultural traits as Canaanites is beyond question. But there are plausible theories that they came from the coastal Levant and other plausible theories placing their origin in Trans-Jordan; only at the end of the Bronze Age did they filter into the highlands of Judah.

I'll shut up now, with the hope that I didn't p*** anyone off. :innocent:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know very little about the Oera Linda Book, but is it not primarily about the adventures of ancient Frisians? [...] I'm confused because, despite the tales told in the OLB, the Frisians were and are a Germanic people. They did not exist in the Early Bronze Age (c. 2200 BCE), unless you all are referring to very ancient northern Europeans whose identity, language, and culture are largely lost to us now. But technically speaking, culturally and linguistically, the Frisians could not be the same people.

Better would be to use the term proto-Frisians, as they are suggested to have been a people from which the Frisians descend (and the Germans, the Dutch, etc. - NW-Europeans). Obviously, the NW-Europeans will not exclusively descend from these 'Fryas', as there have been other influences.

Although there are no (other) written sources for this, the ancestors of the NW-Europeans will have existed in the Early bronze age. Technically speaking (culturally and linguistically), the NW-Europeans could have descended from the people described in the OLB. There is nothing in the OLB (or anywhere else, as far as we have seen in this thread) that makes this hypothesis impossible.

You use the term "Fryas." Is this not a derivation of the ancient Norse goddess, or is it in reference to something or someone else?

This term is derived from the OLB itself. If it is authentic, it seems like the Nordic-Germanic traditions that have Freya as a goddess are of later date. OLB describes/ suggests several other cults that were started by priesthoods, based on deified mortals (a.o. Minerva, Wodin, Neptune, Vesta).

Frya would have been the last 'Folk mother' (sort of chosen queen) from before a deluge, but the 'records' about this are more of a mythological nature. OLB also has a creation myth in which "Frya" is one of three primal mothers of which the white race would have descended.

The name means "Free one", so it could also be that the people who identified as being free, created this myth of their primal mother for themselves.

Edited by Jan Ott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... a creation myth in which "Frya" is one of three primal mothers of which the white race would have descended.

That sentence should read:

... one of three primal mothers, namely the one of which the white race would have descended

(English used to be my second language - my first being Dutch - but since I now live in Germany, it is becoming my third --- so please excuse me if my writing is sometimes unclear)

Edited by Jan Ott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and i think it refers to a people (in OLB people is Ljiuda) that were once slaves , but that have escaped , and won

their freedom , and Frisians is Fri - sian (either free - asians or free - sions ) so they were a people that in their history

were in captivity ,

like the jews in Egypt , in Babilon , in Sparta (he-lots , who were Messenians who would not fight , and were reduced to

slaves by the Spartans , M-Essenes ?) maybe a people who had been continually enslaved because of their beliefs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused because, despite the tales told in the OLB, the Frisians were and are a Germanic people. They did not exist in the Early Bronze Age (c. 2200 BCE), unless you all are referring to very ancient northern Europeans whose identity, language, and culture are largely lost to us now. But technically speaking, culturally and linguistically, the Frisians could not be the same people. Perhaps you can see my confusion, but for the sake of full disclosure, I should state honestly that I see the OLB as a hoax or a parody.

I think , although some of the others who have been participating in this thread may disagree ... that just because the OBL was found / ended up among the frisians , that we should not think that this means the Frisians have been in this part of the world since their beginning.

The OLB purports to be a copied out history of a people , who after the flood probably split into 3 separate matriarchal societies , the one whose book/history was found in Frisia tells of periods of their history where various sections of their Kin migrated to Greece (notably Athens and Iona ) to Krete , and to India (for approx 1200 years before some returned ) ..... so at different times , their history has travelled with them , and been added to , by different generations ,and in different parts of the world............... therefore the problem of Germanics not existing in the 2200BC era does not really become relevant .........

I'll shut up now, with the hope that I didn't p*** anyone off. :innocent:

definitely not , from my point of view new blood , new points of view , and new expertise on various points in history could probably be invaluable , however as you know this thread has as its 'raison d'etre' the OLB , and it would be so much easier for participants to remain on subject (although we find this difficult at times also ), if they had actually read the Oera Linda book ,either the original manuscript available from Jan Otts footnote to his posts , or from the Sandbach translation , available here :-

http://www.archive.o...ge/n12/mode/2up

But thank you for your interest , and for your expertise :yes:

Edited by Passing Time
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

just because the OBL was found / ended up among the frisians, that we should not think that this means the Frisians have been in this part of the world since their beginning.

Yet it is obvious that of all known languages, Old-Frisian is most closely related to the language in which the OLB was written.

Also, some of the themes in OLB overlap those of Frisian mythology/ historiography, like Friso and Asega Askar, and many geographical names are similar to those in modern Friesland.

Edited by Jan Ott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think , although some of the others who have been participating in this thread may disagree ... that just because the OBL was found / ended up among the frisians , that we should not think that this means the Frisians have been in this part of the world since their beginning.

The OLB purports to be a copied out history of a people , who after the flood probably split into 3 separate matriarchal societies , the one whose book/history was found in Frisia tells of periods of their history where various sections of their Kin migrated to Greece (notably Athens and Iona ) to Krete , and to India (for approx 1200 years before some returned ) ..... so at different times , their history has travelled with them , and been added to , by different generations ,and in different parts of the world............... therefore the problem of Germanics not existing in the 2200BC era does not really become relevant .........

definitely not , from my point of view new blood , new points of view , and new expertise on various points in history could probably be invaluable , however as you know this thread has as its 'raison d'etre' the OLB , and it would be so much easier for participants to remain on subject (although we find this difficult at times also ), if they had actually read the Oera Linda book ,either the original manuscript available from Jan Otts footnote to his posts , or from the Sandbach translation , available here :-

http://www.archive.o...ge/n12/mode/2up

But thank you for your interest , and for your expertise :yes:

That was the politest "get the F out of this thread" I've ever seen. Touche'! :tu:

Edited by SSilhouette
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kmt's contributions have been useful. The Fryan's Red Sea crossing remains the big unanswered question in the OLB for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, all, for your patience and explanations. Unless I feel I have something legitimate to offer to your discussion in its forays into the ancient Middle East, I am going to step back and allow you to dissect the OLB some more. I will, however, be checking in regularly for a while to make sure that certain disruptions do not occur again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Fryan's Red Sea crossing remains the big unanswered question in the OLB for me.

Did I miss something?

Sandbach intro p.VIII-XVI (as translated from Ottema 1872):

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.

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. It existed still in the time of Moses (Exodus xiv. 2), for he encamped at Pi-ha-chiroht, the "month of the strait." Moreover, Strabo mentions that Sesostris made an attempt to cut through the isthmus, but that he was not able to accomplish it. That in very remote times the sea really did flow through is proved by the result of the geological investigations on the isthmus made by the Suez Canal Commission, of which M. Renaud presented a report to the Academy of Sciences on the 19th June 1856. In that report, among other things, appears the following: "Une question fort controversée est celle de savoir, si à l’époque où les Hebreux fuyaient de l’Egypte sous la conduite de Moïse, les lacs amers faisaient encore partie de la mer rouge. Cette dernière hypothèse s’accorderait mieux que l’hypothèse contraire avec le texte des livres sacrés, mais alors il faudrait admettre que depuis l’époque de Moïse le seuil de Suez serait sorti des eaux."

With regard to this question, it is certainly of importance to fall in with an account in this Frisian manuscript, from which it seems that in the sixteenth century before Christ the connection between the Bitter Lakes and the Red Sea still existed, and that the strait was still navigable. The manuscript further states that soon after the passage of the Geertmen there was an earthquake; that the land rose so high that all the water ran out, and all the shallows and alluvial lands rose up like a wall. This must have happened after the time of Moses, so that at the date of the Exodus (1564 B.C.) the track between Suez and the Bitter Lakes was still navigable, but could be forded dry-foot at low water.

This point, then, is the commencement of the isthmus, after the forming of which, the northern inlet was certainly soon filled up as far as the Gulf of Pelusium.

The map by Louis Figuier, in the "Année scientifique et industrielle" (première année), Paris, Hachette, 1857, gives a distinct illustration of the formation of this land.

Another statement, which occurs only in Strabo, finds also here a confirmation. Strabo alone of all the Greek writers relates that Nearchus, after he had landed his troops in the Persian Gulf, at the mouth of the Pasitigris, sailed out of the Persian Gulf by Alexander's command, and steered round Arabia through the Arabian Gulf. As the account stands, it is not clear what Nearchus had to do there, and what the object of the farther voyage was. If, as Strabo seems to think, it was only for geographical discovery, he need not have taken the whole fleet.. One or two ships would have sufficed. We do not read that he returned. Where, then, did he remain with that fleet?

The answer to this question is to be found in the Frisian version of the story. Alexander had bought the ships on the Indus, or had had them built by the descendants of the Frisians who settled there—the Geertmen—and had taken into his service sailors from among them, and at the head of them was Friso. Alexander having accomplished his voyage and the transport of his troops, had no further use for the ships in the Persian Gulf, but wished to employ them in the Mediterranean. He had taken that idea into his head, and it must be carried into effect. He wished to do what no one had done before him. For this purpose Nearchus was to sail up the Red Sea, and on his arrival at Suez was to find 200 elephants, 1000 camels, workmen and materials, timber and ropes, &c., in order to haul the ships by land over the isthmus. This work was carried on and accomplished with so much zeal and energy that after three months’ labour the fleet was launched in the Mediterranean. That the fleet really

came to the Mediterranean appears in Plutarch's "Life of Alexander;" but he makes Nearchus bring the fleet round Africa, and sail through the Pillars of Hercules.

After the defeat at Actium, Cleopatra, in imitation of this example, tried to take her fleet over the isthmus in order to escape to India, but was prevented by the inhabitants of Arabia Petræa, who burnt her ships. (See Plutarch's "Life of Antony.") When Alexander shortly afterwards died, Friso remained in the service of Antigonus and Demetrius, until, having been grievously insulted by the latter, he resolved to seek out with his sailors their fatherland, Friesland. To India he could not, indeed, return.

Thus these accounts chime in with and clear up each other, and in that way afford a mutual confirmation of the events.

Such simple narratives and surprising results led me to conclude that we had to do here with more than mere Saga and Legends.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was the politest "get the F out of this thread" I've ever seen. Touche'! :tu:

No it wasn't, it was a very genuine response.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, all, for your patience and explanations. Unless I feel I have something legitimate to offer to your discussion in its forays into the ancient Middle East, I am going to step back and allow you to dissect the OLB some more. I will, however, be checking in regularly for a while to make sure that certain disruptions do not occur again.

No no kmt, that was just SSilhouettes opinion, the rest of us love having your attendance here, in fact, it's a very interesting topic. That you say you think it's a fake but in the same breath admit to knowing sweet f all about it is what I hear a lot, you should educate yourself kmt, PT made it easy...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You say their was no Germanic language no Frisians, proto-Frisians, you are very wrong kmt. People were existing in the early Bronze Age in Northern Europe, they may be lost to us now in some forms, which makes the validity of the OLB even truer, it IS lost to us! I don't use exclamation marks much, I'm a stoic kinda gal but it needed to be used then. Check it out, who was there, no-one you got to be kidding, people were in the area of which later (in recorded time) became Saxons, Frisians, and yes, Romans decimated along with ecology the Frisian lands and most original Fryan people, you can Google this info, its no secret, Frisians of old ceased to exist by around 300AD.

More to the point, tell me then, who the Latin people were, who was Minerva exactly, who were half these people who became deified Gods by duh, priests, who wanted to run the whole show...?

Who was trading with Phoenicians and Mycenaeans in the Bronze Age amber road..?

We really know zippo. You termed people to early Bronze Age cultures "unknown", well quite possibly they are, now.

There is nothing in the narratives of this book inconsistent with probability, however they may vary from some of our preconceived ideas.;

This is what the OLB does, it asks you questions, it asks you who you are, it asks you to ask yourself exactly what it is you believe...

It awakens your senses, if you love history, as the translator said himself:

The reader may perhaps be inclined to laugh at these statements, and apply to me the words that I myself have lately used, fantastic and improbable. Indeed at first I could not believe my own eyes, and yet after further consideration I arrived at the discovery of extraordinary conformities which render the case much less improbable than the birth of Min-erva from the head of Jupiter by a blow from the axe of Hephaestus, for instance.

http://www.sacred-te...l/olb/olb01.htm + the introduction, a must read.

Edited by The Puzzler
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Jan Otts last post he meant to type that " Pi - ha - chiroht " means "mouth of the strait ....... i would still love "the mouth of the Pasitigris" to be "the mouth of the pass(age) to Greece "

why were the bitter lakes so named........possibly because they were salt lakes from the sea connection.

So both Sesostris and one of the Necho's (both abandoned opening a passage )

Friso decided to seek out the Fatherland , as he could not go back to India ..........( we know India cannot therefore be their original land )..........why did Friso call it a Fatherland , as one having roots in a Matriarchal society .you would think he might call it a motherland ?....although they have been in India 1200 Years , if as we think they were based around Minnagara , Barygaza , (The market , Caravan Serai ) Vindhya Mtns , would they not also have been sailing back and forth with trading goods. ie..... the seacampers.......and still in touch with Frisia on a regular basis.

Edited by Passing Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Jan Otts last post he meant to type that " Pi - ha - chiroht " ...

I didn't.

It was Sandbach translating Ottema.

why did Friso call it a Fatherland

He didn't.

That word is nowhere used in the original text, nor in the translations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did I miss something?

Sandbach intro p.VIII-XVI (as translated from Ottema 1872):

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.

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. It existed still in the time of Moses (Exodus xiv. 2), for he encamped at Pi-ha-chiroht, the "month of the strait." Moreover, Strabo mentions that Sesostris made an attempt to cut through the isthmus, but that he was not able to accomplish it. That in very remote times the sea really did flow through is proved by the result of the geological investigations on the isthmus made by the Suez Canal Commission, of which M. Renaud presented a report to the Academy of Sciences on the 19th June 1856. In that report, among other things, appears the following: "Une question fort controversée est celle de savoir, si à l’époque où les Hebreux fuyaient de l’Egypte sous la conduite de Moïse, les lacs amers faisaient encore partie de la mer rouge. Cette dernière hypothèse s’accorderait mieux que l’hypothèse contraire avec le texte des livres sacrés, mais alors il faudrait admettre que depuis l’époque de Moïse le seuil de Suez serait sorti des eaux."

With regard to this question, it is certainly of importance to fall in with an account in this Frisian manuscript, from which it seems that in the sixteenth century before Christ the connection between the Bitter Lakes and the Red Sea still existed, and that the strait was still navigable. The manuscript further states that soon after the passage of the Geertmen there was an earthquake; that the land rose so high that all the water ran out, and all the shallows and alluvial lands rose up like a wall. This must have happened after the time of Moses, so that at the date of the Exodus (1564 B.C.) the track between Suez and the Bitter Lakes was still navigable, but could be forded dry-foot at low water.

This point, then, is the commencement of the isthmus, after the forming of which, the northern inlet was certainly soon filled up as far as the Gulf of Pelusium.

The map by Louis Figuier, in the "Année scientifique et industrielle" (première année), Paris, Hachette, 1857, gives a distinct illustration of the formation of this land.

Another statement, which occurs only in Strabo, finds also here a confirmation. Strabo alone of all the Greek writers relates that Nearchus, after he had landed his troops in the Persian Gulf, at the mouth of the Pasitigris, sailed out of the Persian Gulf by Alexander's command, and steered round Arabia through the Arabian Gulf. As the account stands, it is not clear what Nearchus had to do there, and what the object of the farther voyage was. If, as Strabo seems to think, it was only for geographical discovery, he need not have taken the whole fleet.. One or two ships would have sufficed. We do not read that he returned. Where, then, did he remain with that fleet?

The answer to this question is to be found in the Frisian version of the story. Alexander had bought the ships on the Indus, or had had them built by the descendants of the Frisians who settled there—the Geertmen—and had taken into his service sailors from among them, and at the head of them was Friso. Alexander having accomplished his voyage and the transport of his troops, had no further use for the ships in the Persian Gulf, but wished to employ them in the Mediterranean. He had taken that idea into his head, and it must be carried into effect. He wished to do what no one had done before him. For this purpose Nearchus was to sail up the Red Sea, and on his arrival at Suez was to find 200 elephants, 1000 camels, workmen and materials, timber and ropes, &c., in order to haul the ships by land over the isthmus. This work was carried on and accomplished with so much zeal and energy that after three months’ labour the fleet was launched in the Mediterranean. That the fleet really

came to the Mediterranean appears in Plutarch's "Life of Alexander;" but he makes Nearchus bring the fleet round Africa, and sail through the Pillars of Hercules.

After the defeat at Actium, Cleopatra, in imitation of this example, tried to take her fleet over the isthmus in order to escape to India, but was prevented by the inhabitants of Arabia Petræa, who burnt her ships. (See Plutarch's "Life of Antony.") When Alexander shortly afterwards died, Friso remained in the service of Antigonus and Demetrius, until, having been grievously insulted by the latter, he resolved to seek out with his sailors their fatherland, Friesland. To India he could not, indeed, return.

Thus these accounts chime in with and clear up each other, and in that way afford a mutual confirmation of the events.

Such simple narratives and surprising results led me to conclude that we had to do here with more than mere Saga and Legends.

please see your post as above highlighted words ? month and fatherland.......LOL

Edited by Passing Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

please see your post as above highlighted words ? month and fatherland.......LOL

Im sure Jan can answer but it actually says "month of the strait" in the text if you copied pasted it so literally Jan didn't make an error in his typing.

Secondly Friso didn't call it fatherland, it's only referred to as such in that text, not the OLB itself so there's no need to wonder why Friso called it as such.

~~~

This part is really interesting:

That in very remote times the sea really did flow through is proved by the result of the geological investigations on the isthmus made by the Suez Canal Commission, of which M. Renaud presented a report to the Academy of Sciences on the 19th June 1856. In that report, among other things, appears the following: "Une question fort controversée est celle de savoir, si à l’époque où les Hebreux fuyaient de l’Egypte sous la conduite de Moïse, les lacs amers faisaient encore partie de la mer rouge. Cette dernière hypothèse s’accorderait mieux que l’hypothèse contraire avec le texte des livres sacrés, mais alors il faudrait admettre que depuis l’époque de Moïse le seuil de Suez serait sorti des eaux."

With regard to this question, it is certainly of importance to fall in with an account in this Frisian manuscript, from which it seems that in the sixteenth century before Christ the connection between the Bitter Lakes and the Red Sea still existed, and that the strait was still navigable. The manuscript further states that soon after the passage of the Geertmen there was an earthquake; that the land rose so high that all the water ran out, and all the shallows and alluvial lands rose up like a wall. This must have happened after the time of Moses, so that at the date of the Exodus (1564 B.C.) the track between Suez and the Bitter Lakes was still navigable, but could be forded dry-foot at low water.

This point, then, is the commencement of the isthmus,

after the forming of which, the northern inlet was certainly soon filled up as far as the Gulf of Pelusium.

The map by Louis Figuier, in the "Année scientifique et industrielle" (première année), Paris, Hachette, 1857, gives a distinct illustration of the formation of this land.

Can anyone translate the French or find the map mentioned online?

The land rose high, it didn't nec. dry up but the land rose up making it impassable. The earthquake may have been related to Theras instability at the time.

Pelusium lay between the seaboard and the marshes of the Delta, about two and a half miles from the sea. The port was choked by sand as early as the first century BC, and the coastline has now advanced far beyond its ancient limits, so that the city, even in the third century AD, was at least four miles from the Mediterranean

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelusium

Heres a pdf file:

http://www.academia....est_Sinai_Egypt

Earthquakes generated along the Pelusium Line may have produced sediment load structures in the channel courseof the study area. If the structures were produced by ground shaking, it is only pos-sible to date the earthquake to some time between deposition of the sand and aban-donment of the paleochannel (since about 3200 B.P. to about 1000 B.P.).

As the Pelusiac branch advanced, the paleolagoon south of the PelusiumLine was filled with delta plain sediments and transformed into a swamp contigu-ous with the Plain of Tineh. Nile flow, reduced to modern levels (pre-Aswan Dam)by 1000 years B.P. (Krom et al., 2002; Stanley et al., 2003), may have contributedto the abandonment of the Pelusiac branch. A similar pattern of fluvial depositionand abandonment during the same time period was documented in paleochannelsof the Nile Valley in northern Sudan, Northern Dongola Reach (Woodward, Macklin,& Welsby, 2001). In addition, el-Gamili and Shaaban (1988) proposed that west-ward tilting of the delta region during the late Holocene may have promoted thedegeneration and silting up of eastern Nile delta branches. Local seismic activityis indicated by sediment load structures in the paleochannel sediment.

The Pelusium Line is the linear surface expression of a buried fault (transcon-tinental mega-shear) that apparently controlled the location of the Mediterraneancoastline for several millennia after stabilization of sea level about 5000 years B.P.Kurkar dune ridges are evident along the ancient Mediterranean coast (correspon-ding to the Pelusium Line) in the study area, as well as a semi-enclosed lagoon of about 7 km diameter. Mud deposits seen as dark ground on CORONA photographsrepresent marsh and estuarine environments surrounding the lagoon and landwardof the coastal dune ridge. A paleochannel course with sediments representing estu-arine and fluvial conditions linked the lagoon and the ancient, inland Ballah Lake or may have been related to the distributary system of the Pelusiac Nile branch.Development of the Pelusiac branch and the establishment of fluvial and wetland envi-ronments along the northwest Sinai coast during the second millennium B.C. coin-cides with increased Nile system flow during a long, wet period in North Africa. After 3000 years B.P. the Pelusiac branch advanced seaward beyond the PelusiumLine, creating the delta Plain of Tineh. At this time the lagoon south the Pelusium Line

was filled with fine-grained sediment and converted into a delta plain marsh thatexists today as a sabkha. A photo-lineament previously interpreted as an ancientcanal (Eastern Frontier Canal) is evident south of the sabkha/paleolagoon.

Edited by The Puzzler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

please see your post as above highlighted words ? month and fatherland.......LOL

"Month" is a text-recognising error which should be "mouth".

Like Puzzler said, fatherland is a word Ottema used in his introduction (which Sandbach translated).

It wasn't used in any translation of the OLB.

Edited by Jan Ott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough .......thanks for info ......was not trying to catch you out JO , was just trying to correct what i thought was a typo in 1st instance .......and asking a question in the 2nd inst.......my regards .

Edited by Passing Time
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The above pdf file is not exactly saying an ancient canal went through from the Med. to the Red Sea but it proposes that channels were going through the area connected by lagoons, combined with other information, such as the fault line that runs through, it seems likely to be where an earthquake would raise up the two sides of a channel.

See the second photo, it says 'ancient canal trace', which may have been a possible route through the paleolagoon that was there to the Ballah Lakes

http://www.academia....ation_to_Demise

4-820d71ff03.jpg

Strike-slip motion, with some vertical displacement, along the tec-tonic structure has served as a significant control of geo-graphical sectors on this lower delta plain, including thoseselected for human occupation in the region. As indicatedear-lier, an older (pre-1000 BC) channel of the Pelusiac Nile andsettlements near it were located just south of the fault trace(Figures 4 and 9B;

It was not until after thebeginning of the first millennium BC that a subaerially ex-posed delta plain formed north of the Pelusiac Line; this sur-face was then traversed by a younger channel of the Pelusiacbranch that had shifted northward and flowed to where Pe-lusium’s ruins lie today. The city could only have been con-structed at this location following an important structuralevent leading to margin uplift, northwarddisplacementoftheshoreline, and subaerial exposure of the former submergedmarine platform.

Edited by The Puzzler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Jan Otts last post he meant to type that " Pi - ha - chiroht " means "mouth of the strait ....... i would still love "the mouth of the Pasitigris" to be "the mouth of the pass(age) to Greece "

why were the bitter lakes so named........possibly because they were salt lakes from the sea connection.

So both Sesostris and one of the Necho's (both abandoned opening a passage )

Friso decided to seek out the Fatherland , as he could not go back to India ..........( we know India cannot therefore be their original land )..........why did Friso call it a Fatherland , as one having roots in a Matriarchal society .you would think he might call it a motherland ?....although they have been in India 1200 Years , if as we think they were based around Minnagara , Barygaza , (The market , Caravan Serai ) Vindhya Mtns , would they not also have been sailing back and forth with trading goods. ie..... the seacampers.......and still in touch with Frisia on a regular basis.

Well if the area was heavily inundated from a massive flood that ripped through the Sahara and spilled over into the eastern Sahara & ME, then surely the Red Sea could've been flooded just enough too to make it open between the Mediterranean and the Indian ocean? For a time, until it either dried up or an earthquake happened or both.

Apparently there were lagoons all over the place back when the floodwaters still sat around stagnant after that big original event...probably around that time of the Black Sea flooding at circa 6,000 BC. The gradual drying of the Sahara probably took about 5,000 years according to accounts of various regions and their accessibility by boats. Sailing around the southern tip of Libya...when was that again Puzzler?

Edited by SSilhouette
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply because it is so beautiful, and in the collection of the Westfrisian Archive (Hoorn), where I spent too many hours of my adolescence: Map of the world (1657) by Frederik de Wit.

Wereldkaart-Frederik-de-Wit.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if the area was heavily inundated from a massive flood that ripped through the Sahara and spilled over into the eastern Sahara & ME, then surely the Red Sea could've been flooded just enough too to make it open between the Mediterranean and the Indian ocean? For a time, until it either dried up or an earthquake happened or both.

Apparently there were lagoons all over the place back when the floodwaters still sat around stagnant after that big original event...probably around that time of the Black Sea flooding at circa 6,000 BC. The gradual drying of the Sahara probably took about 5,000 years according to accounts of various regions and their accessibility by boats. Sailing around the southern tip of Libya...when was that again Puzzler?

Around 500BC by Hanno the Phoenician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.