Earth's Ancient History

A Website dedicated to Ancient Times

This website is completely renovated to the newest PHP protocol

This old HTML website will still stay online for a few months but will not be updated

If you like to go to the new PHP website click HERE

 


Bible search Bible Generations Links Mailinglist New additions Public domain Sitemap

Main Index My Manuscript, Preface Ancient America Ancient Arabia Ancient Atlantis Ancient Babylonia Ancient Egypt Ancient Europe Ancient Greece Ancient India Ancient Persia Ancient Rome Ancient Sumer King James Bible Apocrypha Books Pseudepigrapha Books Islam Judaism Various publications

Appendices


The Oera Linda Book

Written in 1256 AD, from a diary
which was put together 560-558 BC.

from the Original Frisian text

verified by Dr. Ottema

by :

William R. Sandbach

Londen, Trubner & Co, 1876


Appendices

APPENDIX A-1: THE GEOLOGICAL AGES

Age

From

To

Aquarius

23,820 BC

21,660 BC

Capricorn

21,660 BC

19,500 BC

Sagittarius

19,500 BC

17,340 BC

Scorpio

17,340 BC

15,180 BC

Libra

15,180 BC

13,020 BC

Virgo

13,020 BC

10,860 BC

Leo

10,860 BC

8,700 BC

Cancer

8,700 BC

6,540 BC

Gemini

6,540 BC

4,380 BC

Taurus

4,380 BC

2,220 BC

Aries

2,220 BC

60 BC

Pisces

60 BC

2,100 AD

Aquarius

2,100 AD

4,260 AD

One "Age" = 2160 solar years

One "Earth Year" = 12 "Ages" = 25,920 solar years


APPENDIX A-2: CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS

DATE

EVENT

REF

ca 9600 BC

Sinking of Atlantis per Plato's Timaeus and Critias

Plato

ca 9500 BC

End of Younger Dryas

web

ca 3300 BC

Start of the Pre-Minoan period

Encarta

ca 3000 BC

Earliest indications of settlement at Troy #1 (aka Ilios, now Hissarlik, Turkey)

Grolier

ca 2700 BC

Gilgamesh travels north to 'Netherworld' at mouth of 5 rivers seeking immortality

web

ca 2500 BC

End of Troy #1 by fire, (stone foundations, clay brick walls, bone and stone tools)

Grolier

ca 2200 BC

End of Troy #2 by fire (gold and silver ornaments, copper tools, potters wheels)

Grolier

ca 2200 BC

Current version of Stonehenge

web

ca 2200 BC

Start of First Intermediate Period of Egypt, dark ages lasted ca 200 years

web

ca 2200 BC

Start of the Early-Minoan period

Encarta

2193 BC

The sinking of Aldland/Atland (3449 ASA = 1256 AD)

01-I-4

2193 BC

Frya provides the Tex, Fasta appointed first folk-mother (see also 02-II-41,43)

02-III-12

2163 BC

Alternative calculation for the sinking of Aldland (Kalta 563 ASA = 1600 BC)

only in FGK

ca 2150 BC

End of the Early Minoan period, Start of the Middle-Minoan period

Encarta

2144 BC

Fasta opens a citadel at Medeasblik, inscribes the creation myth (49 ASA)

02-II-1

2092 BC

Magyarar and Finnar settle east (back) of Skenland (101 ASA)

02-XXIII-5

2012 BC

Magyarar and Finnar overrun Skenland, Minna is folk-mother (80 +101 ASA)

02-XXIII-10

ca 2011 BC

Wodin leads campaign to free Skenland (possibly the same year)

approx

ca 2004 BC

Wodin disappears after reigning 7 years, Tunis and Inka depart Skenland

02-XXIII-23

ca 2001 BC

Inka departs from Kadik with a crew of Frisians, Finnar and Magyarar

approx

2000 BC

Teunis founds Thyrhisburch, south of Sydon (193 ASA)

02-XXIV-6

ca 1800 BC

End of Troy #5, start of #6 (the era of Troy #3 through #5 was undistinguished)

Grolier

ca 1750 BC

End of the Middle Minoan period, start of the Late-Minoan period

Encarta

ca 1650 BC

Eruption of Mt. Thera, end of Late Minoan-A

FGK

ca 1645 BC

Eruption of Santorini on Island of Crete

web

1630 BC

War of Kalta and Minerva, Jon and Minerva go to the Mediterranean (563 ASA)

02-XXVI-4

1629 BC

Kalta founds the Kaltanar, builds a citadel at Kaltasburch (within 1 year)

02-XXVII-11

ca 1628 BC

Jon founds Jonhis/Rawer Elanda, Minerva founds Athenia

approx

ca 1628 BC

Minno provides laws to the Kretar

approx

1620 BC

Travellers return with the story of Jon and Minerva (10 years after Jon left)

02-XXVIII-1

ca 1590 BC

Death of Minerva (assumes she was 25 in 1630 and lived to age 65)

approx

ca 1585 BC

Gert elected burgh-femme of Athenia (assumes 5 years disputing the priests)

approx

ca 1571 BC

Estimated birth of Moses - open to debate - said to have lived to 120 years old

web

ca 1567 BC

Expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt

web

ca 1565 BC

Athenians/Thyriar leave via Rade Sea (assumes 20 years of estrangement)

approx

ca 1564 BC

Date of Israelite Exodus per Ottema in the Address

Appendix B

ca 1550 BC

Gertmannar found Gertmannia in the Pangab (requires 5 years of travel)

approx

(these assumptions put the arrival of the Gertmannar close to the Aryan invasion

and this date reconciles with their meeting with Alexandre 1224 years later)

ca 1555 BC

Destruction of Knossos, end of Minoan civilization

FGK

ca 1550 BC

Start of the Mycenaean period, (the Greeks conquered the Minoans)

Encarta

ca 1500 BC

Date of the Indian Vedas, which tell of the invasion of white-skinned Aryans

Encarta

ca 1450 BC

Estimated date of Israelite Exodus

web

ca 1300 BC

Destruction of Troy #6 by earthquake

Grolier

ca 1250 BC

Another estimate date of Israelite Exodus

Grolier

ca 1200 BC

End of Troy #7A ,archaeological evidence supports the siege theory

Grolier

ca 1190 BC

End of the Trojan War after 10 year siege

FGK

1188 BC

Story of Ulysus inscribed on the walls of Fryasburch (1005 ASA)

02-XXX-title

1184 BC

Fall of Troy according to Homer's Iliad

Grolier

ca 1100 BC

End of Troy #7B - start of ca 400 year abandonment, 'dark age' for Troy

Grolier

1000 BC

End of the Mycenaean period due to civil war - Dark Age ca 1000 BC to 750 BC

Encarta

ca 900 BC

Etruscans (Tyrrhenoi) arrive in north-eastern Italy (gender equality/seafarers)

Encarta

753 BC

Village of Latin renamed City of Rome - start of Roman monarchy

Encarta

750 BC

Start of the Archaic period, (Dorian, Ionian, Aeolian)

Encarta

ca 700 BC

Resettlement of Troy - Start of Troy #8 through #11 (died out 4th century AD)

Grolier

593 BC

Birth of Jesus in Kasamyr (1600 ASA)

04-V-5

591 BC

Loss of Denamark to the Magyarar, Frana is folk-mother (1602 ASA)

02-XXXI-01

589 BC

Invasion of Texland by the Magy and murder of Frana (2 years later)

02-XXXI-15

559 BC

Adela nominates Tuntia as folk-mother, advises writing the Book (30 years later)

02-I-Title

558 BC

The Book of Adela's Followers is written (passes to Apollonia the next year)

approx

557 BC

Further invasions and murder of Adela, Adelbrost and Apol (15 months later)

03-II-1

ca 550 BC

Etruscan Kings take over the monarchy of Rome

Encarta

ca 509 BC

Etruscan Kings expelled - start of Roman Republic

Encarta

480 BC

End of the Archaic period, Start of the Classical Athenian period

Encarta

447 BC

Construction of the modern Parthenon begins

Encarta

432 BC

Construction of the modern Parthenon is completed

Encarta

387 BC

Rome invaded by Celts/Gauls over the Alps - they looted and went home

Encarta

359 BC

Start of the Classical Macedonian period, (Phillip II, father of Alexander)

Encarta

336 BC

End of reign of Philip of Macedonia, Start of reign of Alexander the Great

Encarta

326 BC

Gertmannar encounter Alexandre in the Pangab (1224 years after settling)

04-II-11

325 BC

Gertmannar leave the Pangab with Nearchus/Alexandre

approx

323 BC

Gertmannar return to the Middel Sea overland at Suez, death of Alexandre

approx

323 BC

Death of Alexander the Great, End of Classical period, Start of Hellenistic period

Encarta

305 BC

Demetrius sieges Rhodes, (Demetrius was defeated)

FGK

305 BC

Frethorik writes about the second geological disaster (1888 ASA)

04-I-17

305 BC

Gosa Makonta elected folk-mother (immediately after the second disaster)

04-I-18

(possible inconsistency: 589 BC - 282 years with no folk-mother = 307 BC)

303 BC

Return of the Gertmannar, Fere Krekalandar and Joniar (2 years later)

04-II-1

(so, the events described in the Middel Sea transpired over the course of 20 years)

ca 280 BC

Approx time of Wiljo (wife of Frethorik and contributor to the Book)

approx

(The writings of Frethorik and Wiliow cannot be precisely dated)

(The writings of Konered cannot be precisely dated)

(The writings of Beden, and possibly his son cannot be precisely dated)

133 BC

Roman civil wars begin in reign of Gracchi

Encarta

50 BC

Caesar annexes Gaul to Rome

FGK

44 BC

Roman civil wars end with assassination of Gaius Julius Caesar

Encarta

31 BC

End of the Hellenistic period of Greece, Start of the Roman period

Encarta

27 BC

Roman Empire begins with reign of Gaius Octavius

Encarta

23 BC

Title "Augustus" conferred on Octavius

Encarta

ca 4 BC

Alleged birth of Jesus of Nazareth (corrected for "Octavius" vs "Augustus")

Bible

14 AD

End of reign of Augustus

Encarta

98 AD

Tacitus writes Germania

Grolier

803 AD

Liko Oera Linda writes to his Beloved Successors

01-II-5

1255 AD

Hidde Oera Linda saves the Book from a flood, copies it onto foreign paper

01-I-2,4

1256 AD

Hiddo Oera Linda writes to his son Okke

01-I-4

1820 AD

Death of grandfather Andreas Over de Linden, 15th April, age 61, (Cornelius age 10)

Ottema

1848 AD

Aunt Aafje Meylhoff passes the book to Cornelius (age 38) in August

Ottema

1858 AD

Ferdinand Marie de Lesseps incorporates the Suez Canal Company

Grolier

1867 AD

Dr. Eelco Verwijs (Leeuwarden Prov. Library) translates the Book into modern Frisian

Ottema

1869 AD

Suez canal opens

Grolier

1870 AD

Heinrich Schliemann starts excavating Troy

Grolier

1871 AD

Dr. J. G. Ottema translates the Book into Dutch and Addresses the Frisian Society

Ottema

1875 AD

Heinrich Schliemann publishes Troy and Its Remains

Grolier

1876 AD

W. R. Sandbach translates the Book into English

FGK

1890 AD

Death of Heinrich Schliemann

Grolier

(ASA = After Submergence of Aldland/Atland, FGK = From Goddess to King)


APPENDIX B - ADDRESS TO THE FRIESLAND SOCIETY, 1871

The preface of Dr. Ottema’s original modern publication of the Oera Linda Book that was read at a meeting of the Friesland Society, February, 1871.

Over de Linden, Chief Superintendent of the Royal Dockyard at the Helder, possesses a very ancient manuscript which has been inherited and preserved in his family from time immemorial, without anyone knowing whence it came or what it contained, owing to both the language and the writing being unknown.

All that was known was that a tradition contained in it had from generation to generation been recommended to careful preservation. It appeared that the tradition rests upon the contents of two letters, with which the manuscript begins, from Hiddo Oera Linda, anno 1256, and from Liko Oera Linda, anno 803. It came to C. over de Linden by the directions of his grandfather, Den Heer Andries over de Linden, who lived at Enkhuizen, and died there on the 15th of April 1820, aged sixty-one. As the grandson was at that time barely ten years old, the manuscript was taken care of for him by his aunt, Aafjie Meylhoff, born over de Linden, living at Enkhuizen, who in August 1848 delivered it to the present possessor.

Dr. E. Verwijs having heard of this, requested permission to examine the manuscript, and immediately recognized it as very ancient Fries. He obtained at the same time permission to make a copy of it for the benefit of the Friesland Society, and was of the opinion that it might be of great importance, provided it was not suppositious, and invented for some deceptive object, which he feared. The manuscript being placed in my hands, I also felt very doubtful, though I could not understand what object any one could have in inventing a false composition only to keep it a secret. This doubt remained until I had examined carefully executed facsimiles of two fragments, and afterwards of the whole manuscript - the first sight of which convinced me of the great age of the document.

Immediately occurred to me Caesar’s remark upon the writings of the Gauls and the Helvetians in his `Bello Gallico’ (i. 29, and vi. 14), `Graecis utuntur literis’, though it appears in v. 48 that they were not entirely Greek letters. Caesar thus points out not only a resemblance - and a very true one - as the writing, which does not altogether correspond with any known form of letters, resembles the most, on a cursory view, the Greek writing, such as is found on monuments and the oldest lapidary. Besides, I formed the opinion afterwards that the writer of the latter part of the book had been a contemporary of Caesar.

The form and the origin of the writing is so minutely and fully described in the first part of the book, as it could not be in any other language. It is very complete, and consists of thirty-four letters, among which are three separate forms of a and u, and two of e, i, y, and o, besides four pairs of double constants - ng, th, ks, and gs. The ng, which as a nasal sound has no particular mark in any western language, is an indivisible conjunction; the th is soft, as in English, and is sometimes replaced by d; the gs is seldom met with - I believe only in the word segse, to say, in modern Fries sidse, pronounced sisze.

The paper, of large quarto size, is made of cotton, not very thick, without watermark or maker’s mark, made upon a frame or wire-web, with not very broad perpendicular lines.

An introductory letter gives the year 1256 as that in which this manuscript was written by Hiddo Oera Linda on foreign paper. Consequently it must have come from Spain, where Arabs brought into the market paper manufactured from cotton.

On this subject, W. Wattenbach writes in his `Das Schriftwesen im Mittelalter’ (Leipzig, 1871), s. 93:

`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 Samarkand 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 necessary. In the manufacture of 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 the necessity there was that linen should take the place of cotton. A document of Kaubeuren on linen paper of the year 1318 is of very doubtful genuineness. Bodman considers the oldest pure 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 color of the ink is often gray 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 color 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 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.

As a specimen of antiquity in language and writing, I believe I may venture to say that this book is unique of its kind.

The writing suggests an observation, which may be of great importance.

The Greeks know and acknowledge that their writing was not their own invention. They attribute the introduction of it to Kadmus, a Phoenician. The names of their oldest letters, from Alpha to Tau, agree so exactly with the names of the letters in the Hebrew alphabet, with which the Phoenician will have been nearly connected, that we cannot doubt that the Hebrew was the origin of the Phoenician. But the form of their letters differs so entirely from that of the Phoenician and Hebrew writing, that in that particular no connection can be thought of between them. Whence, then, have the Greeks derived the form of their letters?

From `thet bok thêra Adela folstar’ (`The Book of Adela’s Followers’) we learn that in the time when Kadmus is said to have lived, about sixteen centuries before Christ, a brisk trade existed between the Frisians and the Phoenicians, whom they named Kadhemer, or dwellers on the coast.

The name Kadmus comes too near the word Kadhemer for us not to believe that Kadmus simple meant a Phoenician.

Further on we learn that about the same time a priestess of the castle in the island of Walcheren, Min-erva, also called Nyhellenia, had settled in Attica at the head of a Frisian colony, and had founded a castle at Athens. Also, from the accounts written on the walls of Waraburgt, that the Finns likewise had a writing of their own - a very troublesome and difficult one to read - and that, therefore, the Tyrians and the Greeks had learned the writing of Frya. By this representation the whole thing explains itself, and it becomes clear whence comes the exterior resemblance between the Greek and the old Fries writing, which Caesar also remarked among the Gauls; as likewise in what manner the Greeks acquired and retained the names of the Finn and the forms of the Fries writing.

Equally remarkable are the forms of their figures. We usually call our figures Arabian, although they have not the least resemblance to those used by the Arabs. The Arabians did not bring their ciphers from the East, because the Semitic nations used the whole alphabet in writing numbers. The manner of expressing all numbers by ten signs the Arabs learned in the West, though the form was in some measure corresponding with their writing, and was written from left to right, after the Western fashion. Our ciphers seem here to have sprung from the Fries ciphers (siffar), which form had the same origin as the handwriting and is derived from the lines of the Juul.

The book as it lies before us consists of two parts, differing widely from each other, and of dates very far apart. The writer of the first part calls herself Adela, wife of Apol, chief man of the Linda country. This is continued by her son Adelbrost, and her daughter Apollonia. The first book, running from page 1 to 88, is written by Adela. The following part, from 88 to 94, is begun by Adelbrost and continued by Apollonia. The second book, running from page 94 to 114, is written by Apollonia. Much later, perhaps two hundred and fifty years, a third book is written, from page 114 to 134, by Frethorik; then follows from page 134 to 143, written by his widow, Wiljo; after that from page 144 to 169, by their son, Konered; and then from page 169 to 192 by their grandson, Beeden (a doubtful assumption). Pages 193 and 194, with which the last part must have begun, are wanting, therefore the writer is unknown. He must have been a son of Beeden.

On page 134, Wiljo makes mention of another writing of Adela. These she names `thet bok thêra sanga (theta boek)’ thêra tellinga’, and `thet Hellênia bok’; and afterwards `tha skrifta fon Adela jeftha Hellênia’.

To fix a date we must start from the year 1256 of our era, when Hiddo oera Linda made a copy, in which he says that it was 3449 years after Atland was sunk. This disappearance of the old land (aldland, atland) was known by the Greeks, for Plato mentions in his `Timaeus’, 24, the disappearance of Atlantis, the position of which was only known as somewhere far beyond the Pillars of Hercules. From this writing it appears that the land stretching far out to the west of Jutland, of which Helgoland and the islands of North Friesland are the last barren remnants. This event, which occasioned a great dispersion of the Frisian race, became the commencement of a chronological reckoning corresponding with 2193 before Christ, and is known by geologists as the Cimbrian flood.

On page 80 begins an account in the year 1602 after the disappearance of Atland, and thus in the year 591 before Christ; and on page 82 is the account of the murder of Frana, `Eeremoeder’, of Texland, two years later - that is, in 589. When, therefore, Adela commences her writing with her own coming forward in an assembly of the people thirty years after the murder of the Eeremoeder, that must have been the year 559 before Christ. In the part written by her daughter Apollonia, we find that fifteen months after the assembly Adela was killed by the Finns in an attack by surprise of Texland. This must accordingly have happened 557 years before Christ. Hence it follows that the first book, written by Adela, was of the year 558 before Christ. The second book, by Apollonia, we may assign to the year 530 before Christ. The later part contains the history of the known kings of Friesland, Friso, Adel (Ubbo), and Asega Askar, called Black Adel. Of the third king, Ubbo, nothing is said, or rather that part is lost, as the pages 169 to 188 are missing. Frethorik, the first writer, who appears now, was a contemporary of the occurrences, which he relates, namely, the arrival of Friso. He was a friend of Liudgert den Geertman, who, as rear admiral of the fleet of Wichhirte, the Sea King, had come with Friso in the year 303 before Christ, 1,890 years after the disappearance of Atland. He has borrowed most of his information from the logbook of Liudgert.

The last writer gives himself out most clearly as a contemporary of Black Adel or Askar, about the middle of his reign, which Furmerius states to have been from 70 before Christ to 11 after the Birth of Christ, the same period as Julius Caesar and Augustus. He therefore wrote in the middle of the last century before Christ, and knew of the conquest of Gaul by the Romans. It is thus evident that there elapsed fully two centuries between the two parts of the work.

Of the Gauls we read on page 84 that they were called the `Missionaries of Sidon’. And on page 124 `that the Gauls are Druids’. The Gauls, then, were Druids and the name Galli, used for the whole nation, was really only the name of an order of priesthood brought from the East, just as among the Romans the Galli were priests of Cybele.

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. Accordingly to the statement in this book, Friso did come from India and with the fleet of Nearchus; but he is not therefore Indian. He is of Frisian origin, of Frya’s people. He belongs, in fact to a Frisian colony, which after the death of Nyhellenia, fifteen and a half centuries before Christ, under the guidance of a priestess Geert, settled in the Punjab, and took the name of Geertmen. The Geertmen were known by only one of the Greek writers, Strabo, who mentions them as being entirely different from Phoenicians (slightly edited) in manners, language and religion.

The historians of Alexander’s expeditions do not speak of Frisians or Geertmen, though they mention Indo-scythians, thereby describing a people who lived in India, but whose origin is in the distant, unknown North.

In the accounts of Liudgert no names are given of places 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 summer the sun at midday was straight above their heads. They therefore lived within the tropics. We find in Ptolemy, 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, Foolsgara, 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 Adel’s book; and with the mention of one most remarkable circumstance, namely, that the Frisian mariners sailed through the strait in whose 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 Piha-chiroht, `the mouth 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 did flow through is proved by the result of the geological investigations on the isthmus made by the Suez Canal Commission, of which Mr. 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 merrouge. Cette dernière hypothèses’ accorderait mieux qu l’hypothèse contraire avec le texte des livres sacres, 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 BC) the track between Suez and 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 that occurs only in Strabo, finds also here a conformation. 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 further 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 the fleet?

The answer to this question is to found in the Frisian version of the story. Alexander had bought the ships on the Indus, or had had them built by descendants of the Frisians who had 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, 1,000 camels, workmen and materials, timber and ropes, in order to haul the ships by hand over the isthmus. This work was carried on and accomplished with so much zeal and energy that after three months’ labor 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 Petraea, 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.

Since the last twenty years attention has been directed to the remains of the dwellings on piles, first observed in the Swiss lakes, and afterwards in other parts of Europe. (See Dr. E. Rückert, Die Pfahlbauten; Wurzburg, 1869. Dr. T. C. Winkler, in the Volksalmanak, t.N.v.A.1867). When they were found, endeavors were made to discover, by the existing fragments of arms, tools and household articles, by whom and when these dwelling had been inhabited. There are no accounts of them in historical writers, beyond what Herodotus writes in book v. chapter 16, of the Paeonen. The only trace that has been found in one of the panels of Trajan’s Pillar, in which the destruction of a pile village in Dacia is represented.

Doubly important, therefore, is it to learn from the writing of Apollonia that she, as `Burgtmaagd’ (chief of the virgins), about 540 years before Christ, made a journey up the Rhine to Switzerland, and there became acquainted with the Lake Dwellers (marsaten). She describes their dwellings built upon piles - the people themselves - their manners and customs. She relates that they lived by fishing and hunting, and that they prepared the skins of animals with the bark of the birch-tree in order to sell the furs to the Rhine boatmen, who brought them into commerce. This account of the pile dwellings of the Swiss lakes can only have been written in the time when these dwellings still existed and were still lived in. In the second part of the writing, Konered Oera Linda relates that Adel, the son of Friso, (approximately 250 years before Christ), visited the pile dwellings in Switzerland with his wife Ifkja.

Later than this account there is no mention by any writer whatever of the pile dwellings, and the subject has remained for twenty centuries utterly unknown until 1853, when an extraordinary low state of the water led to the discovery of these dwellings. Therefore no one could have invented this account in the intervening period. Although a great portion of the first part of the work - the book of Adela - belongs to the mythological period before the Trojan war, there is a striking difference between it and the Greek myths. The Myths have no dates, much less any chronology, nor any internal coherence of successive events. The untrammeled fancy develops itself in every poem separately and independently. The mythological stories contradict each other on every point. `Les Mythes ne se tiennent pas’, is the only key to the Greek Mythology.

Here, on the contrary, we meet with a regular succession of dates starting from a fixed period - the destruction of Atland, 2193 before Christ. The accounts are natural and simple, often naive, never contradict each other, and are always consistent with each other in time and place. As, for instance, the arrival and sojourn of Ulysses with the Burgtmaagd Kalip at Walhallagara (Walcheren), which is the most mythical portion of all, is here said to be 1,005 years after the disappearance of Atland, which coincides with 1188 years before Christ, and thus agrees very nearly with the time at which the Greeks say the Trojan war took place. The story of Ulysses was not brought here for the first time by the Romans. Tacitus found it already in Lower Germany (see `Germania’, chap. 3), and says that at Asciburgium there was an altar on which the names of Ulysses and his father Laëtes were inscribed.

Another remarkable difference consists in this, that the Myths knew no origin, do not name either writers or relaters of their stories, and therefore never can bring forward any authority. Whereas in Adela’s book, for every statement is given a notice where it was found or whence it was taken. For instance, `This comes from Minno’s writings - this is written on the walls of Waraburgt - this in the town of Frya - this at Stavia - this at Walhallagara’.

There is also this further. Laws, regular legislative enactments, such as are found in great numbers in Adela’s book, are utterly unknown in Mythology, and indeed are irreconcilable with its existence. Even when the Myth attributes to Minos the introduction of lawgiving in Crete, it does not give the least account of what the legislation consisted. Also among the Gods of Mythology there existed no system of laws. The only law was unchangeable Destiny and the will of the supreme Zeus.

With regard to Mythology, this writing, which bears no mythical character, is not less remarkable than with regard to history. Notwithstanding the frequent and various relations with Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, we do not find any traces of acquaintance with the Northern or Scandinavian Mythology. Only Wodin appears in the person of Wodan, a chief of the Frisians, who became the son-in-law of one Magy, King of the Finns, and after his death was deified.

The Frisian religion is extremely simple and pure Monotheism. Wr-Alda or Wr-Alda’s spirit is the only eternal, unchangeable, perfect and almighty being. Wr-Alda created everything. Out of him proceeds everything - first the beginning, then time, and afterwards Irtha, the Earth. Irtha bore three daughters - Lyda, Finda and Frya - the mothers of the three distinct races, black, yellow and white - Africa, Asia and Europe. As such, Frya is the mother of Frya’s people, the Frieslanders. She is the representative of Wr-Alda, and is reverenced accordingly. Frya has established her `Tex’, the first law, and has established the religion of the eternal light. The worship consists of the maintenance of a perpetually burning lamp, foddik, by priestesses, virgins. At the head of the virgins in every town was a Burgtmaagd, and the chief of the Burgtmaagden was the Eeremoeder of the Fryasburgt of Texland. The Eeremoeder governs the whole country. The kings can do nothing, nor can anything happen without her advice and approval. The first Eeremoeder was appointed by Frya herself, and was called Fasta. In fact, we find her the prototype of the Roman Vestal Virgins.

We are reminded here of Velleda (Welda) and `Aurinia in Tacitus (`Germania’, 8.Hist., iv. 61, 65; v. 22,24. `Annals’ i. 54), and of Gauna, the successor of Velleda, in Dio Cassius (Fragments, 49). Tacitus speaks of the town of Velleda as `edita turris’, page 146. It was the town of Mannagarda forda (Munster).

In the country of the Marsians he speaks of the temple Tanfane (Tanfanc), so called from the sign of the Juul.

The last of these towns was Fastaburgt in Ameland, temple Fost, destroyed, according to Occa Scarlensis, in 806.

If we find among the Frisians a belief in a Godhead and ideas of religion entirely different from the Mythology of other nations, we are the more surprised to find in some points the closest connections with the Greek and Roman Mythology, and even of the origins of the two deities of the highest rank, Min-erva and Neptune. Min-erva (Athene) was originally a Burgtmaagd, priestess of Frya, at the town of Walhallagara, Middelburg, or Domburg, in Walcheren. And this Min-erva is at the same time the mysterious enigmatical goddess of whose worship scarcely any traces beyond the votive stones of Domburg, in Walcheren, Nyhellenia, of whom no mythology knows anything more than the name, which etymology has used for all sorts of fantastical derivations.

The other, Neptune, called by the Etrurians Nethunus, the God of the Mediterranean Sea, appears here to have been, when living, a Friesland Viking, or Sea King, whose home was Alderga (Ouddorp, not far from Alkmaar). His name was Teunis, or Cousin Teunis, who had chosen the Mediterranean as the destination of his expeditions, and must have been deified by the Tyrians at the time when the Phoenician navigators began to extend their voyages so remarkably, sailing to Friesland in order to obtain British tin, northern iron, and amber from the Baltic, about 2,000 years before Christ.

Besides these two we meet with a third mythological person - Minos, the lawgiver of Crete, who likewise appears to have been a Friesland Sea King, Minno, born at Lindaoord, between Wieringen and Kreyl, who imparted to the Cretans an `Asegaboek’. He is that Minos who, with his brother Rhadamanthus and Aeacus, presided as judges over the fates of the ghosts in Hades, and must not be confounded with the late Minos, the contemporary of Aegeus and Theseus, who appears in the Athenian Fables.

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

In the Greek Mythology all the gods and goddesses have a youthful period. Pallas alone has no youth. She is no otherwise than adult. Min-erva appears in Attica as high priestess from a foreign country, a country unknown to the Greeks. Pallas is a virgin goddess, Min-erva is a Burgtmaagd. The fair, blue-eyed Pallas, differing thus in type from the rest of the gods and goddesses, evidently belonged to Frya’s people. The character for wisdom and emblematical attributes, especially the owl, are the same for both. Pallas gives to the new town her own name, Athenai, which has no meaning in Greek. Min-erva gives to the town built by her the name Athene, which has an important meaning in Fries, namely that they came there as friends - `Athen’.

Min-erva came to Athens about 1600 years before Christ, the period at which the Grecian Mythology was beginning to be formed. Min-erva landed with the fleet of Jon at the head of a colony in Attica. In later times we find her on the Roman votive stones in Walcheren, under the name of Nyhellenia, worshipped as a goddess of navigation; and Pallas is worshipped by the Athenians as the protecting goddess of shipbuilding and navigation.

Time is the carrier who must eternally turn the `Jol’ (wheel) and carry the sun along his course through the firmament from winter to winter, thus forming the year, every turn of the wheel being a day. In winter the `Jolfeest’ is celebrated on Fry’s day. Then cakes are baked in the form of the sun’s wheel, because with the Jol Frya formed the letters when she wrote her `Tex’. The Jolfeest is therefore also in honor of Frya as inventor of writing.

Just as this Jolfeest has been changed by Christianity into Christmas throughout Denmark and Germany, and into St. Nicholas Day in Holland; so, certainly, our St. Nicholas’ dolls - the lover and his sweetheart - are a memorial of Frya, and the St. Nicholas letters a memorial of Frya’s invention of letters formed from the wheel.

I cannot analyze the whole contents of this writing, and must content myself with the remarks that I have made. They will give an idea of the richness and importance of the contents. If some of it is fabulous, it must have an interest for us, since so little of the traditions of our forefathers remains to us.

An internal evidence of the antiquity of these writings may be found in the fact that the name Batavians had not yet been used. The inhabitants of the whole country as far as the Scheldt are Frya’s people - Frieslanders. The Batavians are not a separate people. The name Batavi is of Roman origin. The Romans gave it to the inhabitants of the banks of the Waal, which river bears the name Patabus in the `Tabula Pentingeriana’. The name Batavi does not appear earlier than Tacitus and Pliny, and is interpolated in Caesar’s `Bello Gallico’, iv. 10. (See my treatise on the course of the rivers through the countries of the Frisians and Batavians, p. 49, in `DeVrije Fries’. 4th vol. 1st part, 1845).

I will conclude with one more remark regarding the language. Those who have been able to take only a superficial view of the manuscripts have been struck by the polish of the language, and its conformity with the present Friesland language and Dutch. In this they seem to find grounds for doubting the antiquity of the manuscript.

But, I ask, is, then, the language of Homer much less polished than that of Plato or Demosthenes? And does not the greatest portion of Homer’s vocabulary exist in the Greek of our day?

It is true that language alters with time, and is continually subject to slight variations, owing to which language is found to be different at different epochs. This change in the language in this manuscript accordingly gives ground for important observations to philologists. It is not only that of the eight writers who have successively worked at the book, each is recognizable by slight peculiarities in style, language and spelling; but more particularly between the two parts of the book, between which an interval of more than two centuries occurs, a striking difference of the language is visible, which shows what a slowly progressive regulation it has undergone in that period of time.

As a result of these considerations, I arrive at the conclusion that I cannot find any reason to doubt the authenticity of these writings. They cannot be forgeries. In the first place, the copy of 1256 cannot be. Who could have at that time forged anything of that kind? Certainly no one. Still less any one at an earlier date. At a later date a forgery is equally impossible, for the simple reason that no one was acquainted with the language. Except Grimm, Richthofen and Hettema, no one can be named sufficiently versed in that branch of philology, or who had studied the language so as to be able to write in it. And if one could have done so, there would have been no more extensive vocabulary at his service than that which the East Friesian laws afford. Therefore, in the centuries lately elapsed, the preparation of this writing was impossible. Whoever doubts this let him begin by showing where, when, by whom, and with what object such a forgery could be committed, and let him show in modern times the fellow of this paper, this writing, and this language.

Moreover, that the manuscript of 1256 is not original, but is a copy, is proved by the numerous faults in the writing, as well as by some explanations of words which already in the time of the copyist had become obsolete and little known, as, for instance, in pages 82 (114), `to thera flete jefta bedrum’; page 151 (204), `bargum jefta tonnum fon tha besta bjar’.

A still stronger proof is that between pages 157 and 158 one or more pages are missing, which cannot have been lost out of the manuscript because the pages 157 and 158 are on the front and the back of the same leaf.

Page 157 finishes thus: `Three months afterwards Adel sent messengers to all the friends that he had gained, and requested them to send him intelligent people in the month of May’. When we turn over the leaf, the other side begins, `his wife, he said, who had been Maid of Texland, had got a copy of it’.

There is no connection between these two. There is wanting, at least, the arrival of the invited, and an account of what passed at their meeting. It is clear, therefore, that the copyist must have turned over two pages of the original instead of one.

There certainly existed then an earlier manuscript, and that was doubtless written by Liko Oera Linda in the year 803.

We may thus accept that we possess in this manuscript, of which the first part was composed in the sixth century before our era, the oldest production, after Homer and Hesiod, of European literature. And here we find in our fatherland a very ancient people in possession of development, civilization, industry, commerce, literature, and pure elevated ideas of religion, whose existence we had never conjectured. Hitherto we have believed that the historical records of our people reach no farther back than the arrival of Friso the presumptive founder of the Frisians, whereas here we become aware that these records mount up to more than 2,000 years before Christ, surpassing the antiquity of Hellas and equaling that of Israel.


This appendix was taken from the Introduction to the Oera Linda Book by W. R. Sandbach, published in London by Trubner & Co., in 1876.

It is an English translation of Dr. J. G. Ottema’s Dutch translation of the original Frisian text, published in Friesland, in 1872 under the title Thet Oera Linda Bok.

The London edition contains the Frisian text on the left and English on the right and was verified by Dr. Ottema.


Join my mailing list Mailing list Earth-history, or (and) sign my Guestbook

Main Index Bible search Bible Generations Links Mailinglist New additions Public domain Sitemap

Main Index

Intro Plates and Maps 1 Okke, my son 2 Adela's followers 3 Writings of Adelbrost 4 Writings of Frethorik 5 Writings of Konered 6 Writings of Beden Appendices Extracts Glossary


Please report broken links to the Webmaster.

Last modified: 2011-10-06

This is copyrighted information presented under the Fair Use Doctrine of the United States Copyright Act (section 107 of title 17) which states: 'the fair use of a copyrighted work...for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.' In practice the courts have decided that anything which does not financially harm the copyright holder is fair use

This is a Non-Profit Web page, © 1998-2011 L.C.Geerts The Netherlands all rights reserved.

It is strictly forbidden to publish or copy anything of my book without permission of the author, permission is granted for the recourses, for personal use only.