The Oera Linda Forum

Interesting little discussion on the Wiki-Talk-page about the ‘discoverer’ of ancient (?) manuscripts, Poggio Bracciolini from Florence (1380-1459).

For those who understand German I recommend the half-hour video “Die Ära Poggio”.

In defence of the revised chronology, in regards to Bible work the theory explains very well:

• explain why OT beginning and NT ending are written to mirror each other

• explain why the Biblical genealogy year lengths are modelled on medieval European dynasties.

It does not explain that well:

• why there are Buddhist materials (e.g. Ashoka's missionaries or Bock saga Jesus)

• why the author used a non-Berossussian version of Sumerian King List (SKL)

• why the author used in addition knowledge of Frá Fornjóti and Bock saga (i.e. was Bock saga Jesus).

The Egyptians used hieroglyphs along the European scripts (Greek, Roman era Latin). What about Sumerian clay tablet texts? To my eyes Sumerian clay tablets and European scripts are distant to each other in regards to manner of information storage. As per the standard chronology, no medieval scribe had access to Sumerian texts as such (as they were beneath sand still in the 1800s and 1900s).

The revisionism researchers focus on Greco-Roman-Biblical material, but pay less attention to similarities to other traditions. What does that mean for the non-Levantine sources - OLB, Buddhist materials and likes of Frá Fornjóti written down by Christian era Icelandic scribes? As per most revisionist accounts, the Greco-Roman-Biblical culture is timewise and geographically the stretch of the faked material.

Nordic wrote: ↑05 Mar 2025, 12:27 revised chronology, in regards to Bible work ... does not explain that well why there are Buddhist materials

Why, if the Bible was concocted in the Renaissance, would it be hard to explain Buddhist ideas having been used as inspiration?

Possible reasons for existence of Buddhism in the Bible text and Christianity include:

• generic influence i.e. OLB Buddhism, Ashoka's missionaries and Hellenistic cultural exchange (Alexander the Great)

• the primary Bible author was well indoctrinated in Buddhism i.e. Bock saga Jesus who had lived in Tibet and India

• there is a positive attempt at a new religion, with Buddhist texts as the secret source material ie. secret Buddhist influencers (yet to be identified).

• there is a nefarious forgery of a new religion, with Buddhist texts as the secret source material ie. very late pagan Romans, Roman Catholics and Byzantines (latter historically also called 'Romans').

OLB suggests the first or the last, Bock saga implicitly the second and late Danish researcher Christian Lindtner the first or the third. As there is a whole literature sub-genre of Roman emperors and their later Roman Catholic followers (chronology revision) faking history, the fourth option matches well with those claims.

One story of Buddha was known as a saint story in the 1000s Europe onwards. The northern God of Job 37 links to Mahagovinda Sutta included in an early Buddhist collections. The Romans had an ideological culture of conquering the north, the project eventually finished under the Roman Catholic and Byzantine Orthodox banners (more here on that). If one assumes that the Greco-Roman-Christian authors did not know well, or that much care for, the background holy polar land mythos, it all forms a semi-coherent narrative. This is suggested also by the fact that the Greco-Roman mappers did not understand that they already knew the Asian polar land stories of Uttarakuru ie. Ódainsakr (as misplaced "Ottorokorai" and "Attacori") as the polar Hyperborean stories.* This agrees with the idea of Bible to have had whole lot of authors and thus to contain several "layers":

• the Sumerian-(Norse-)Egyptian-Levantine-Hindu-Greek-Buddhist layer

• whoever knew to substitute correctly Reu 'Ra' for original Enmerkar (Kári) and correctly syllable-reversed original Melemkic back to Lémek/Lamech 'Lemminkäinen'

• the Roman layers (emphasis on saint Peter, makig NT compatible with emperors' rule)

• the medieval layers (as suggested by Fomenko).

If we however assume it all was written by single author or a joint group of authors in the renaissance era, it would make little sense to find such a variety of sources, occasionally contradictory in use (third and fourth reason in list above). In that scenario the only reason to include it all would have been to produce a wall of text as a synthetic book, with little care if they made coherent whole or not. Hence I find it less believable that the Bible was wholly written in the renaissance era.**

* As opposed to German Hyperborean tales (Dominitian's war agaisnt Chatti) and Frisian Hyperborean tales on Ulysus and his children (here).

** I cannot however argue against Fomenko's charts, so I think they were edited at some point in those times; the ruler lenghts in corresponding texts of Sumerian King List and OT Genesis differ, so either there was a broken link in text transmission or the dates are based on some altogether different source (for example invented).

If our conventional historical timelines were essentially fabricated with long stretches tacked on, it would certainly explain elegantly a lot of chronological problems in the historical record. I think I will reexamine a lot of my research assumptions in light of that new context.

ott wrote: ↑01 Mar 2025, 08:36I have suspected for some time that the passages below refer to the so-called Viking Age (c. 800-1050 CE), which I now believe coincides with our so-called Roman period: the time when Papal/Venetian (OL: late-Phoenician?) influence became a greater threat in northern Europe.

Even though I don't have time now to delve into this in depth myself, I highly recommend the work of Phoenician Hunter. This work bridges the gap between OL and the more well-known post-Renaissance world order.

Oera Linda describes the gradual power-grab by the Tyrians/ Phoenicians/ Gola — the latter are defined as ‘missionary priests of Sidon’ and were also called ‘druids’.

These seem to have been the arch enemies of the Fryas, although initially introduced by them into overseas trade.

Most relevant chapters and (some) fragments:

Part I — Book of the Adela-Followers

H) Yule and Script: Tyrians are listed as descendants of Finda (‘yellow’ root race), together with Finns and Greeks. These three peoples would have derived their scripts from the Fryas, ever more changing them in order to keep their writings illegible for the unversed.

K3b) Tunis and the Tyrians: Tunis and his crew arrive at the Phoenician coast (eastern-Mediterranean) and build Tyr’s Burg (Tyre). Trade route is opened (import: ships, iron weapons, amber; export: wine, honey, leather products among which horse gear), limited to seven ships per year.

K3c) The Idolatrous Gola: Marseille becomes Tyrian and becomes the gate through which France is colonized by ‘Gola’: Sidon’s missionary priests, later known as druids. Their merchants trade fancy copper weapons and jewelry for Fryas iron weapons and animal hides. Gradual invasion of southern lands and Britannia through moral corruption and abduction of young women and children.

L1a) The War of Kelta and Minerva: Kelta allies with the Gola, rules through fear and by sorcery; loss of southern lands and Britannia.

L1b) Jon’s Fleet: Export goods (127 ships): amber, tin, copper, iron, cloth, linen, felt, hides/furs, ‘writing felt’.

L1c) Kelta and the Gola: Kelta’s rule (from burg Kearenek) is gradually taken over by the Gola, her followers become slaves.

L2a) Minerva and Jon Resettle: A conflict between Tyrians and Jon (Ionians) is initiated. Settlement at Athens and Ionian (pirates) Islands.

L2b) The Geartmen Move to Panj-ab: Tyrians attack Athens, fleet (84 ships) leaves and moves to Punjab, later joined by 30 ships from Tyre. Tyranian king tries to stop them, but is hindered by earthquake at Red Sea strait.

Part II — Added by Oera Lindas

P) Intrigues and Division: The Gola have taken control of the lands south of the Scheldt.

R3) Ode to Adela: Anecdote of Phoenician sailors trying to abuse Frya children and being humbled.

“Once, three Phoenician sailors were about and sought to harass [some of our children].”

S3a) Alexander the King: Constant friction between the Ionians and the Phoenicians in Alexanders fleet. Alexander wanted to be more powerful than Tyrian kings had ever been. Fryas refuse to resettle on Phoenician coast.

“This expedition failed as a result of the constant quarreling between the Ionians and the Phoenicians, which undermined Nearchus’ authority. ... Nearchus now wanted us to settle on the Phoenician coast, but none of us wanted that.”

S3c) Friso takes command: Phoenician crew of Demetrius’ battle fleet attacks Friso’s fleet.

“[The] Phoenicians started shooting, but Friso did not answer until the first arrow landed six fathoms from his ship.”

U2b) Danish Alliance: Sea wars continue between Fryas and Phoenicians/ Gallo-Kelts (and early version of ‘viking’ raids?)

“The Sealand navigators ... who had a strong antipathy to the Gola, later went pirating Phoenician ships. ... various precious goods that they had stolen from Keltic lands and Phoenician ships.”

U2d) Rise of the Dad’s Sons: Friso knew language and tricks of the Gola.

U3b) Purity of Language: Keltic language influenced by Gola (Sidon-priests).

Za) War Games: Threat of Gola crossing southern borders and invading Fryasland.

Zb) Streams of Blood: Gola rule much of Britannia where blood is mixed. Mediterranean south-coast mostly Phoenician who are of mixed blood: conflict with Romans (Punic wars?). Romans took Massilia and southern lands from Phoenicians, who moved to North-Britannia. Kearenek taken from Gola. Plundering of Phoenician ships and cities continues.

“The Phoenicians are a debased folk; a mix of Frya’s blood and Finda’s blood, and of Lyda’s blood. ... This Phoenician folk and the Romans fight constantly for rule over the Middle Sea, and they live in enmity with one another. ... Everywhere, they expelled the Phoenician priests, known as the Gola.”
“[He] later went out to plunder all the Phoenician ships and cities he could reach.”

Zc) Reintia’s Dream: Plan to expel Gola from southern lands.

Ze) How Punishment Came: Anecdote of Phoenician goods being plundered, among which purple cloth.

Zf) Askar’s Failure: Attempt to reconquer southern lands from the Gola fails.

Anyone who understands German and is interested in the revision of our (pre-Renaissance) chronology should read this thread in our Deutschsprachiges Forum: Geschichtskritische und katastrophistische Studien — ViaVeto

Hi Jan,

Could you try and explain in a video or something, why chronology is so important? Isn't it more important that first people believe in the basic values of OL. Than afterwards comb through the jungle of chronology and history, to find the precise correct story. It seems like an unwinneable uphill battle, to start with the chronology, as that is something most people aren't willing to question. Especially in Friesland, the culture and new values introduced to us, are easily questioned. But doubting history itself seems so far-fetched, to most.

Please tell me there are better sources than via-veto or fermenko. I do respect professor Gunnar Heinsohn. We need better prove...

Agree tstrooper. I am not at all invested in the timeline. Mainly because its dizzying and inconsequential for what I get out of it. For someone who likes that puzzle go for it, it's to much of a pain to me.
'Wouldn't Magi love all these dead ends for sceptic minds to go on', is what I'm thinking often. new age, flat earth and tartaria, 'established'or 'unconventional' esoterics,filosophy and science rabbitholes are moreoften exactly that; mindtraps,spam,slop.With sometimes just a rim of Minervas dress to give it gravitas.
But like said I have no strong position, I don't even see how much OL would depend or be proven by what timeline. Because there are so many datapoints that can shift either way.
Religiously, it doesn't need allignment with historian's truth by virtue of it's transcendant quality. It's truth in more important spheres. Frisian folklore has this quality constantly which evokes the same wholesomeness. for me folklore is not just wholesome. Like St Nickolas; it is culture with unfathamable deepness -on par with Abrahamics- in it's simple and seemingly ahistorical outwardness, with no need to excuse itself. Accepting that we don't know everything from the start and in the end is a wisdom in itself. The lie of St Nickolas has this same ascendance. Imagine being brought up with OL and in school represented with it's denial. Having it's truth would stay in your heart were it belongs,preparing for the true struggles in life.
I have a lot of storybooks because of this wholesome magic.
My heuristics are probably interested to answer different questions then a historian or even a political endeavour.
Just to find the most interesting thing to put to art, or understand the world from within all the narratives and beliefs. They are in a way more important than facts.
So to believe OL is not only a challenge, scepsis toward other narrative but an affirmation of an allegiance the core of which is obviosly true and alligned with my purpose and humanity to me.
So, in a way a sort of inversion of it's main manifestation is actually the main rethorical objection held against it, which is a denial of an ideal, next to a culture having a story that predates 'the birth of culture' in Mesopotamia.
I think at least anybody can see that the bible has its purpose even for its ahistorical or even morally questionable motifs, and OLM has enough historical grounds to be just as valid as a peoples narrative, and moral inspiration.

tstrooper wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025, 09:45 It seems like an unwinneable uphill battle

Kraftr wrote: ↑25 Dec 2025, 14:27 For someone who likes that puzzle go for it, it's to much of a pain to me.

Waar jelui om vraagt is een slap aftreksel van waarheid.
Ik begrijp dat wel, na jarenlang te hebben geworsteld met vragen die nog bij je zullen opkomen.