Hoax-theory claims debunked

The Oera Linda Book has been discussed in a thread at unexplained-mysteries.com. From its start in June 2010 till now (March 7, 2016), there have been 18,609 posts. No definite proof for OLB being a19th century fabrication, or against its authenticity as a 13th century copy of older originals has been posted, so far.

Some of the most common arguments that have been given, will be summarised and refuted in this post:

1. A linguistic study would have proven OLB to be fake.
2. OLB would contain modern words and syntax.
3. The paper would have been made in the 19th century.
4. OLB would contain etymologies and historic claims that can't be true.
5. Over de Linden's account of how he had obtained the manuscript varied, indicating he lied.
6. The creators would have been convincingly unmasked in 2004.

VERITAS TEMPORIS FILIA (Truth is Daughter of Time)
betw. 1576-1628 by Jan Collaert (Antwerpen) after Jan v.d. Straet (Florence)

 1. A linguistic study would have proven OLB to be fake.

The main misunderstanding is, that language must have 'evolved' (or degenerated) in a linear or exponential way and that the oldest (accepted) sources are a reflection of spoken language. The development may in fact rather have been cyclic; After many wars, including the violent and destructive christianisation process, language might actually have regenerated, specially the written form. Words and expressions that may have been used in small circles only for a long while, may have become more common again later. Post-christianisation written language may in time have gradually become more a reflection of spoken language, rather than a Latin inspired attempt to reproduce (or manipulate) it.

Hoax theorists usually refer to "De onechtheid van het Oera Linda-Bôk, aangetoond uit de wartaal waarin het is geschreven" (The falseness of the Oera Linda Book, as proven by the the gibberish in which it was written) by J.B. Vinckers (1876, Netherlands).

First of all, it is suspect, that the alleged evidence was never translated (not even a summary) from Dutch, although there has always been some international interest. But this on itself does not yet prove that the evidence is worthless.

The author appealed to ridicule and emotional, strong language to make his points. His work did not lead to general consensus, but since the press took his side, opposing views were silenced and opponents intimidated. This also does not mean that he did not also bring forth any good arguments.

J.B. Vinckers

Exemplary quotes (translated):

"this monstrous absurdity" ~~~ "linguistic madness"  ~~~ "hundred times more scandalous [...] than essay in a foreign language by a student, who dares to step on the slippery ice of a final exam without any linguistic preparation." ~~~ "The language in which this product was written, is a most detestable mishmash, gibberish, made by someone not ignorant in other topics, but absolutely unaware of the primal grounds of the linguistics of related German languages in general, and of the Old Frisian language in particular; a gibberish, nothing better than Negro-English; a gibberish, that makes the OLB to a disgrace in the line of most weighty remains of the Old Frisian language." ~~~ "A miserable hodgepodge of old and young, such a misfit of babel, that on every page, no in every line of the 126 printed pages, reveils its fake birth to the eye of the specialist through indisputable proof."

"I was recently informed that the late Mr. De Haan Hettema also declared the language of the OLB to be Frisian, older than that of the Old Frisian laws!! It's almost incredible."

M. de Haan Hettema

That De Haan Hettema (1796-1873) was indeed a specialist of Old Frisian - much more so, in fact, than Vinckers (1821-1891) - is demonstrated by this selection of publications by him:

1830 The Emsiger (Old Frisian) Landlaws of the year 1312
1830 Short guide to Old Frisian
1832 Friesche Spraakleer (study of Frisian oral language), with R. Rask
1832 Frisian Dutch dictionary
1834 Jurisprudentia Frisica, or Frisian law studies. A manuscript from the 15th Century. Part 1
1834/35 Idem - Part 2
1835 Idem - Part 3
1841 The Fivelingoër and Oldampster Landlaws. An Old Frisian Manusctript from the 14th Century
1846 Old Frisian Laws - Part 1 (Hunsingoër regt. Rustringer regt. Broekmer regt. Emsiger regt; 1st and 2nd codex)
1847 Old Frisian Laws - Part 2-1 (Jus municipale Frisonum)
1851 Old Frisian Laws - Part 2-2 (Boetregisters. Geestelijke regten. Willekeuren. Lex Frisionum)

(Vinckers' main argument will be summarised and refuted here.)

A. Hübner (1885-1937)

(1934, Germany) A. Hübner "Hermann Wirth und die Ura-Linda-Chronik" (Hermann Wirth and the OLB)


[A part about Hübner will be added somewhere else.]

At least some 'critics' in National-Socialist Germany saw in the OLB "... a political danger, as it suggests that Slavics would have lived in current eastern Germany, before the Germanic peoples." (translated from "Buchfieber – Zur Geschichte des Buches im 3. Reich" by G. Simon e.a., p.21)

This alone would have been enough reason in 1934 to suppress public discussion about the OLB.


2. OLB would contain modern words and syntax.

Two examples of words that would be too modern for OLB to be authentic are BEDRUM (p.82/21; bedroom) and SKELTA BI THÉR NACHT or SKELTA.BI.NACHT (p.53/28 and p.66/2; Dutch 'schout-bij-nacht': rear-admiral).

The Online Etymology Dictionary states that the oldest records of 'bed-room' are from around 1600, but the words 'bed' and 'room' are both much older. Why would it be impossible or even improbable that the combination might have been used earlier?

The oldest known records of 'schout by nacht' are from around the same time, early 1600, but in these records the word is not explained. Therefore it will already have been known and nobody can know for how long.

Some words exist long in oral language, before they are written down. Also, our oldest written records are only a fraction of what once must have existed.

About syntax (2012 discussion see here);

Our oldest accepted sources in what is called Old Dutch, Old German etc. were written by monks who had learned to read and write in Latin. Their earliest attempts to write in one of the many spoken dialects will have been more clumsy, than the later ones. Not only will they gradually have become better at representing individual words, also the syntax will have moved from a Latin inspired word order (aimed primarily at transferring information) to a more natural reflection of spoken language.

The dialects, some of which still exist in more rural areas, may have changed much less than the standardised languages, since they were passed on from mother to children, rather than from schools as has only happened in the last few centuries.

Icelandic is a good example of a language that has hardly changed over the last 1000 years, since the Icelanders have consciously decided long ago that they wanted to preserve their language.

The syntax of Dutch and German are very similar. It is clear that they stem from the same ancestral language, which can easily be much more than 2000 years old. In studying the age of languages, it might be much better to examine dialects, rather than old written records.

So in the end, that words or syntax would be too modern, merely is an argument from incredulity, which is a fallacy (variant of argument from ignorance):

P is too incredible (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be true); therefore P must be false.

Let me add that the OLB also contains many words that are still not understood, while many have been clarified only recently, in the forum-discussion that I mentioned earlier. In some cases, the syntax is very different from that of modern Dutch or German.


3. The paper would have been made in the 19th century.

Paper and ink have never been properly investigated. In 1876 a book trader and a paper maker had a look at one page and decided, based on the pattern of waterlines, that the paper had to have been machine-made and thus from the 19th century, not considering the fact that 13th century Arab paper has exactly the same waterlines.

A more recent attempt to date the paper assumed beforehand, that it had to be from the 19th century, not even considering the possibility that it could be medieval after all. The results are vague and contradicting and a final report was never published. It is clear that they did not get the results they had hoped for.

The text of the OLB could be authentic, even if the paper is modern, since it could be a copy of an older original. Even hardcore hoax-theorists admit this. But if the paper turns out to be medieval after all, it can hardly be forgery. A serious, decisive investigation should be possible with modern techniques. That this was never done thus far by the archive that guards it, is suspect.

See my video about the paper age.

Neptune mosaic (3rd C.) in Tunesia

4. OLB would contain etymologies and historic claims that can not be true.

Examples of etymologies that often are considered too 'silly' for OLB to be authentic are NÉF.TÜNIS (kinsman Tunis) for Neptune and HIMMEL.LÀJA (lead to/ lie in the heavens) for Himalayas.

To some, such suggested etymologies make sense, but even if they were made up by an ancient author and far from the 'real' etymology, it would not make OLB fake.

There exist books from earlier centuries, containing etymologies that we would now laugh about, but that does not mean that these books must be recent fabrications. So-called 'folk etymology' may very well be a phenomenon of all times.

(... add something about alleged historic anachronisms or impossibilities)

Over de Linden

5. Over de Linden's account of how he had obtained the manuscript varied, indicating he lied.

There are several conflicting versions of the story describing how Cornelis Over de Linden had received the manuscript: in his correspondence with Verwijs and Ottema, his diary and witness accounts by Jacob Munnik and Hein Kofman. (Details see here: April 2011.)

My suggestion is that he tried to cover up something that was embarrassing to him: He may have tried to get it from his relatives and in the end took it by force or without their consent. This would explain all conflicting information. They are relatively small lies that in no way exclude the possibility that the manuscript is authentic.

I want to point out here that the Over de Linden family does not have to be descendant in a straight line from the Oera Linda's who compiled the manuscript many centuries earlier. It is possible that Cornelis' forefather chose this modern version of the family name, because he was the proud owner of the manuscript and able to read (parts of) it.


6. The creators would have been convincingly unmasked in 2004.

Jensma's main suspect, poet-parson
François HaverSchmidt (1835-1894)
ca. 1867

In 2004 Goffe Jensma was promoted to Doctor at the Theological Faculty Groningen with his study about the OLB and his dissertation was published as "De Gemaskerde God". Two years later his new Dutch translation of the OLB was published. His study is not about the question whether or not OLB is authentic, but, assuming that it is fake, he theorised who could have created it and why.

Three days after Jensma's promotion, a discussion was organised where other specialists were invited to speak:

- Dr Eric Cossee, professor of Dutch church history
- Dr Marita Mathijsen, professor of Dutch language and literature
- Dr Henk Meijering, emeritus professor Oldfrisian and Oldsaxon

The next day a report appeared in de leading Frisian newspaper*, which stated:

Although the speakers without exception praised Jensma's work, he had not been able to convince any of them of his truth that François Haverschmidt is the main author of the Oera Linda-book.

And:

Emeritus professor Frisian, Henk Meijering, teasingly labelled Jensma's thesis a <scientific novel through which he had acquired his doctorate>.

* Leeuwarder Courant, Dec. 10: "Van het Oera Linda-boek, de Friese kip en de zeespiegel"

Jensma

So Jenma's work did not convince other well-informed scholars.

For Jensma's theory to be right, many people must have lied: Over de Linden, Verwijs, HaverSchmidt and all the various witnesses who confirmed to have heard about the manuscript before it should have been fabricated. Such a conspiracy is in theory possible, but not likely.

Jensma later became professor Frisian language and culture at the University of Groningen, was involved in an educational television production that included one episode about the OLB, and was supervisor of the failing recent paper investigation. He has all the while been presenting his theory as if it were an accomplished fact, despite the initial scepticism of his colleagues.

By ridiculing in strong terms people who consider the possibility that OLB might be authentic, Jensma has created a difficult situation for himself, because his scorn will fall back on his head, when he turns out to have been wrong after all. It is only human, that he will use his academic power - as long as he has any - to keep up the myth that he has reinforced.

Allegory with Truth (waerheyt), Knowledge (kennisse), Hate (haet) and Fear (vreese)
betw. 1507-1553 Netherlands by Cornelis Anthonisz./ Jan Ewoutsz.

dialects and languages in maps

Left:
Language continuum: when two or more different languages or dialects merge into each other without a definable boundary.

Right:
Within the last 100 years, the increasing dominance of nation-states and their standard languages has been steadily eliminating the non-standard dialects of which these language continua were formed, making the boundaries ever more abrupt and well-defined.

1917

dialects in Frisian province of NL

Nethersaxon dialects

Flemmish

Friesland, Frisians and the Frisian language

Medieval Frisian treasure

Translated from "De NSB - Ontstaan en opkomst van de Nationaal-Socialistische Beweging, 1931-1935" (2009) by Te Slaa & Klijn (p.706):

Regional commissioner Van de Weide ascertained, that Frisian students were interested in the old-Germanic culture: "The Frisian core, which indeed promotes the ideas of Prof. Wirth is also very much pro-Hitler and pro-German; in general they are hostile towards the NSB*, because they see it as too specifically Dutch, too metropolitan and not folkish; they are thus more attracted to groups like Dinaso**."

* Dutch National-Socialist Movement
** Union of Diets (Flemmish-Dutch) National Solidarists

'Open' Friesland - state-funded genocide

Below a selection of earlier posts about Friesland, Frisians and the Frisian language, now and in history.

2015

Oct.15: Joachim Hoppers (1523-1576) was a Frisian lawyer and professor who worked for the Spanish king (Philip II). He appears to have written about Frisia's ancient history, but I have not found that text yet. According to the "Chronique", he wrote that the Frisians stem from the "High-Nordic peoples or Hyperboreans" and were the first to have received the secrets of writing.
(...)
When Friso died, he left his travelling journal, contracts, his covenant with various German cities,documents about the division of Friesland, among other things. When his son Adel succeeded him, he was said to have improved some of the written laws. Winsemius (1586-1644) adds a note saying that this is questionable, as Tacitus suggested that the Germanic tribes didn't read and write.

Oct. 4: transliteration of relevant parts "Chronique van Vrieslant" by Winsemius (1622)

Oct. 1: Genealogy of Frisian kings in "Staatkundige Historie" by van Mourik (1756)

March 12: from "The Edge of the World" by M. Pye (2014)


2014

Oct. 27: Two fragments from article about this book (Pye, see right above):

... those Vikings, the Frisians before them and the Hanseatic merchants after them invented for themselves the conditions for modernity: international trade, money, credit, mathematics, law, the stock exchange, pensions and much else.
Mr Pye asks his readers to imagine a time before fixed national borders, when identity was not so much a matter of race, but of "where you were and where you last came from". The sea was a thoroughfare, quicker than rutted roads. It made it easy for "Scandinavians to be in York, Frisians in Ipswich, Saxons in London".
...
A central theme of this book is the re-invention of money and its role in the development of abstract, scientific and, eventually, secular thought. As a sea-trading people, the Frisians needed portable cash, not the gold and treasure of chiefs and kings, often hoarded and inert. They began minting silver coins, as a currency, an exchange.

Value became an idea, detached from the intrinsic nature of a thing. It could be calculated for different categories of goods, and more than that, it could be written down, arithmetically juggled, turned into ratios and equations. A new way of thinking was born, transactional and everyday, and yet with momentous philosophical implications.

2013

Oct. 30: Dr. Ottema to L.F. Over de Linden, 19-05-1877:

Concerning the manuscript it is important, specially because Suffridus Petrus, de Scriptoribus Frisiae mentions in his introduction, that Friso left several writings, one of them a travel diary and biography; that he had written them in the Frisian language and with Greek characters, and that his successors wrote just like that, until the times that the Roman script became current in Germania.

He did not mention how or where he had learned about that (as was not his habit), but he can not have sucked that out of his thumb.

Something must have come to his knowledge of Frisian notes, from the times in which the Ovira Lindas wrote, and that travel diary (about the journey from India to Friesland) may be related to Ljudgert's diary.

Informations like this from Suffridus used to be considered as fabulations, but among those fabulations there may turn out to be more truth than was presumed. It is also acknowledged that Suffridus Petrus never lied, but that he would have copied from earlier sources.

March 21: Dorestad in the 9th century was the most strategic Frisian trading centre:

(...)
A modern reconstruction (2012); source: Friese Graafschappen tussen Zwin en Wezer ~ een overzicht van de grafelijkheid in middeleeuws Frisia (ca. 700-1200), by Dirk Jan Henstra:


March 20: more maps "Tussen Zwin en Wezer"

2012

Nov. 13: transliteration of parts of frisian Chronicle by Ocko Scarlensis

March 12: translated fragments from "Het Geheim van het Oera-Linda-Boek" (the secret of the OLB) by Murk de Jong (1927).

Page 34, a quote from F. Binkes in "De Vrije Fries" (the free Frisian) #1 (1839):

"There are two kinds of people, that are most harmful for the practice of history: those who believe everything and those who believe nothing. The first present us anything they find, without sifting, ripe and green, plausible and improbable; but the second reject anything that at their own first sight seems to have no historical certainty. They cut all this out with a so-called skeptical trimming knife, that is often very blunt, or used very awkwardly by them."

To this M. de Jong adds the following comment:

The author [Binkes] does not hesitate to declare, that the unbelievers have harmed old Frisian history infinitely more than the naive believers.

On the same page dr. de Jong gives a similar quote from J.H. Halbertsma in "De Vrije Fries" #11 (1868):

"Frisian history to her great misfortune has mostly fallen in the hands of ultras, who either rigorously rejected the old sagas as worthless fiction, or accepted them as historical truth".

Page 74:

The only megalithic tomb ['hunebed'] of Friesland, that - as a memory of the Stone Age - would be much older than Adela, on the Van Swinderen estate in Rijs (Gaasterland), was destroyed immediately after its discovery in 1849, even before the archaeologist Dr. Jansen had heard about it.

And (paraphrased):

Dr. J.H. Halbertsma explained the phenomenon, that in Friesland so little antiquities are found:
The glory-addiction, that results in erecting monuments for oneself and others, was unknown to the sober and solid nature of the Frisians, as they chose to BE great, rather than APPEAR great.

2011

Dec. 7: From "De Rand van het Rijk" by Lendering & Bosman (2010), p.109

Four tribes lived in the northern coastal area. The 'minor' Frisians lived west of the Flevo-lake in what is now North-Holland, and the 'major' Frisians lived in present Friesland. [...] More to the east, the Romans distinguished the minor and major Chauks: the first tribe lived in the provinces Groningen and Ostfriesland, the second between the mouths of Weser and Elbe. The names suggest at most a political division, as the four tribes shared the same economy, that was characterised by varied agriculture and trade on distant shores.

Many Latin texts show that the Romans had much difficulties navigating the North Sea.
The Frisians must have been excellent ship builders and navigators.

Nov. 23: Old-Frisian RHYMESAGA: transcribed, translated and published by Montanus Hettema (1832)

Nov. 21: Petrus Wierdsma (1729-1811), from unpublished notes, as quoted by Montanus Hettema in his experimental Frisian-Dutch dictionary of 1832.

Nowaday Farmers-Frisian, Old-Frisian and Anglo-Saxon are in my opinion the same language, the only difference being, some changes as caused by time, as is the destiny of all living languages.
If one would compare Old-Frisian to the current dialect of the Frisian farmers, one can clearly see the similarities. The nowaday dialect is specially supported by the work of Gijsbert Japiks, who on purpose, and to save the dialect, spelled according to it and not according to the old ways. One can read his own foreword about that.

some relevant fragments from G.Th.Jensma "De Gemaskerde God" (2004; p.40-42)

According to Hettema, Newfrisian as spoken by 19th century farmers, was virtually the same language as the Oldfrisian of the known medieval lawtexts. He even dared say that this Oldfrisian was actually a much more pure variety of Frisian, than the Newfrisian of his time, because the latter had been bastardised in time by strange (Hollandic) influences. The consequence of this remarkable view was, that he wanted written Newfrisian to be based on historical Oldfrisian grammar and spelling.
The idea that languages were once more pure and had worn out in time was common in the 19th century, although of older humanist origine. Hettema shared this idea with important Dutch and foreign linguists like Jacob Grimm, Matthijs de Vries, Joost Halbertsma and Eelco Verwijs, to name just a few. (This view was abandoned later under the influence of Darwinism and other ways of thinking about evolution.)
[...]
In that time (certainly until 1875) Frisian had no certain spelling. Every writer used his own. One of them was Sytstra, who said: "To spell Frisian in strange letters is a disgrace", and he introduced an Oldfrisian spelling, the so-called 'Iduna-spelling'. The Frisians had to learn to become themselves again: Oldfrisians. [...] The introduction of the Iduna-spelling led to a readability problem, because most Frisian writers until then were used to spell phonetically, in 'Hollandic' letters. This resulted in a huge gap between spelling and pronounciation, because the latter could no longer be the criterium for spelling. Although Sytstra's spelling met with fierce criticism here and there, it was very succesful until 1862, when he and his comrade Tiede Roels Dijkstra both died.
In my opinion, the OLB-language originated from this extreme, archaizing stand. The lords purists must have been pleased, as the OLB-language is exactly what they were striving for. It's probably not a coincidence that in 1871 Hettema immediately accepted the book. Shortly before publication of the OLB, he was shown photo's of a few pages. Based on the script, he concluded that it could not be a really old text. Otherwise, he could only conclude that the language was 'the' Frisian (of all times), because the only difference he saw between Old- and Newfrisian was the way of spelling. He considered the OLB-spelling to be beautiful, fantastic, even better: "... the spelling... is, in my eyes, much more conform the old and most regular, and much better and orderly, than of those, who nowadays write the language; one would wish, that this spelling were reintroduced.

Oct. 27: From "The Frisian Society as frontrunner in museological understanding - 19th Century initiatives to musealization of folks-culture in Friesland" by Ad de Jong (2002)

The braiding of the hair in Hindeloopen, according to J.H. Halbertsma a tradition that was already described by Roman writer Tacitus, and that is characteristic for the free Frisians.
[...]
In two rooms [of the Palace of Justice in Leeuwarden] the Antiquarian Cabinet of Friesland was situated... [...]
In there the traditional garments from Hindeloopen were kept, that honorary member dr. Joost Hiddes Halbertsma (1789-1869), the famous Frisian linguist and literary man, had collected and donated to the Cabinet. [...]
Collecting traditional garments was still an unknown phenomenon in the rest of the Netherlands.
Halbertsma was intrigued by the culture of Hindeloopen. [...] His first notes date from 1820. [...]
The casques from Hindeloopen [...] were so capacious, that long braids could be rolled and placed under them, so there was no need to cut the hair. Halbertsma explained: "Because of those long braids the Frisian women were not just the women of a free people, but of the most distinguished women of the Germanic races; this in contrast to the unfree, who were forced by the old Germans to wear their hair short." With this Halbertsma made a direct connection between the Frisian popular culture and the description of habits of the old Germans by Roman writers. [...]
The Frisian Cabinet received many objects from folks-culture as a gift from Halbertsma, like garments and household goods, mostly from Hindeloopen.

for longer fragment (Dutch), see Halbertsma & Hindeloopen

Sep. 5: Frisian Pleasure Garden (J. Starter, 1621); scans and poetry

July 17: The Puzzler, on 15 July 2011 - 12:10 AM, quoted and commented:

"... Their tentative existence in the 4th century is confirmed archaeologically by the discovery of a type of earthenware unique to 4th century Frisia, called terp Tritzum, showing that an unknown number of Frisii were resettled in Flanders and Kent...

The lands of the Frisii would be abandoned by c. 400 due to flooding caused by a marine transgression and laid empty for a century, when changing environmental conditions again made the region habitable. At that time settlers would repopulate the region and come to be known as 'Frisians'. Medieval and later accounts of 'Frisians' refer to these 'new Frisians' rather than to the ancient Frisii.
...
In the 3rd and 4th centuries the population of Frisia steadily decreased, and by the 5th century the population had dropped dramatically. The coastal lands would remain largely unpopulated for the next two centuries. When conditions improved Frisia would receive an influx of new settlers, mostly Saxons, and these would eventually be referred to as 'Frisians', though they were not necessarily descended from the ancient Frisii. It is these 'new Frisians' who are largely the ancestors of the medieval and modern Frisians." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisii

I think that's interesting - it's like the ancient FRISII disappeared from history and were replaced by another form of Frisian.

This is important indeed and it agrees with something discussed earlier; Albert Delahaye's theory that the western half of present 'the Netherlands' was mostly uninhabitable because of flooding between the Roman and the Frankish occupation. That is: in most of the first millennium AD.

Some toponyms of Westfriesland are strikingly similar to ones in Westflanders and Calais region (also think of Delahayes long list of "fries-" toponyms in that region). As Joël Vandemaele argued, some of what is described in the OLB (and its language) has more continuity in Westflanders (Belgium) than anywhere in the Netherlands (e.g. supposed Frya worship and the spelling of Frya itself ~ ~ ~ more research needed as Vandemaele did not provide sources for this).

Therefore, it's likely that the most significant e-migration from "ancient Frisii" (or Fryans) from what is now North-Holland, was directly southwards, while most of the re-migration in the late-first and early-second millennium also took place from here (Westflanders, NW-France).

Whether they re-migrated to Westfriesland/ North Holland because the land became more habitable again, or because they fled from the Christenings (and just reclaimed the land), I don't know. Probably it was a combination of this.

The 'Frisians' in what is now Friesland will be a more Danish/ German mix.

There is indeed quite a cultural difference between the Dutch province of Friesland (the nowaday 'real' Frisians), and the region Westfriesland in the province of North-Holland (*).

In the OLB and in the so-called fantastic Frisian historiography, Westfriesland is much more important than in the 'official' history. Medemblik would even have been the capital of 'old-Frisia'.

There's been many ancient archaeological finds in North-Holland, dating back thousands of years, but there is indeed no continuity. Not much happened during the first millennium AD.

That's the problem, and probably the main cause of why OLB is misunderstood and not taken seriously by mainstream science in NL.

(*) I'll mention two significant differences:

1) While "Friesland" has a long tradition of (orthodox) Bible-worship, in Westfriesland the church was never very powerful and churches started closing already in the late sixties.

2) While "Friesland" always had a strong 'nobility-culture' (dutch: "adel"); inheritance of accumulating wealth and power, Westfriesland did not have this (in the last few hundred years).

While OLB at first sight might be Frisian nationalistic, it's almost the complete opposite as it will be an uncomfortable read for both Frisian Bible-worshippers and Frisian nobility.

Aug. 23: Abramelin, on 12 August 2011 - 10:45 PM, quoted and commented:

"The Firaesi (Latinization) or Phiraisoi (original Greek) are a people listed in Ptolemy’s Geography (2.10). ...
The Firaesi are not mentioned elsewhere in history"

Any kid with some knowledge of the Frisian history would see the obvious connection (Frisii = Firaesi / southern Sweden).

(added 2016 feb. 19:)

The Ancient Roman historian Claudius Ptolemy described, in his work Geographia, the island of Scandia. This island, located to the northeast of the Cimbrian penninsula (present day Denmark), is now known to be not an island at all, but rather the southern area of the Scandinavian peninsula: specifically, Sweden. The western area of Scandia was inhabited by the Chaedini; the eastern region by the Favonae and Firaesi; the northern region by the Finni; the south by the Gutae, and Dauciones; and the central area by the Levoni and Hill-Levoni. (source)

source

April 9: One of the most important reasons why OLB is rejected by most Dutch scholars seems to be that the language is relatively easy to understand.

Since the oldest known texts in Dutch, Frisian, Saxon etc. are more difficult to understand, people assume, that anything older should be even more difficult than, or more different from our 'modern' language.

What they don't realize is that while the written history (written language) had been thoroughly destroyed in a few hunderd years of cultural genocide, the spoken language may have stayed almost the same for people who did not migrate and mix too much.

In the late Middle Ages, the only people who could read and write, had learnt this in Latin (not counting the few exceptions like Liko and Hidde, who risked their lives writing in the old language).

At some point they tried to write down the commonly spoken language (that was much older than Latin), but they had no more examples, they had to construct or actually reconstruct the spelling.

So instead of the evolution of language being linear or exponential (from very primitive to very advanced), it was actually more cyclic; at some point very advanced, and then as a result of wars, migrations and mixing of cultures, it became confused and partly forgotten, while later, in times of relative peace, it was reconstructed again.

Because of the similarities in the North-European languages, we can conclude that they must have had the same (or at least a shared) origin, much older than any known written source.

Nowhere ever have I seen one convincing example of "modern Dutch" in OLB that would prove that it cannot be as old as it says it is.

March 20: translated from website by Dr.W.Bruijnesteijn van Coppenraet, with some notes by me between [...]:

According to the usual theory, Frisia in the time of the Roman occupation was roughly the present Netherlands north of the old Rhinestream (the limes). Climatologically it was a regression period and a huge sweet water lake, Flevo or Almere [in OLB: "Flymar"], was in the centre. After the Romans left (ca.250 AD), and without doubt related to the increasing transgression, that wasted much of their lands, the Frisians moved their territory more to the in-lands: southwards with Zeeland and the river area [and Flandres?], east to the Weser (East-Friesland) and later (8th century) even up to Sleeswijk. (...) Neighbours were south the Franks and east the Saxons. The Frisians also founded a colony in Brittania, Northumberland, from where in the 7th and 8th century missionaries came to their old lands [mostly to Flandres?]. The Franks always hated the Frisians. Already ca. 574 the Frankish king Chilperik I was praised for his terror against the Frisians:

You are the terror of the far Frisians and Suevans,
who are not only unprepared for war,
but even ask for your protection.
(...)

The assumption that Utrecht already existed in the period 600-640 and was temporary in Frankish hands is based on quicksand. In 697 Frisia started to finally really fall apart and Frisia citerior, the southern part up to the Rhine, was taken by the Frankish Pepin II. Ca. 719 his successor Karel Martel crossed the old limes en marched up to the Almere. In 736 the same Karel Martel attacked the Frisians in the back with a fleet and by winning the "Borne battle" he occupied the area up to the Eems river. The remaining eastern area, already disintegrated and taken over by the Saxons, finally was taken by the Franks, together with all of the Saxon lands, between 770 and 800 by Charles 'the great'. The terms Frisia and Frisii remained in use, but now as a Christian people, submitted under Frankish rule. After a period of invasions by the Normans [attempts to free the Frisians?], the whole area of the Frisians, from Walcheren to Eems, was part of the "Imperium Danicum", the empire of the Vikings, during the second half of the 9th century, but this was under supervision of the Frankish emperor.
(...)
The highly indoctrinating traditional science, that has evolved from the primitive historiography of the late Middle Ages, often gives an unsatisfying view on the geography of our lands in the first millennium. At the other side, the vision of Albert Delahaye, who radically moved the geography to North France, is also far from satisfying. A "semi-traditional" view, that accepts that Delahaye went too far with his revision of the historical geography, but that also accepts that the Nether-lands in that area was subject to heavy transgressions and therefore mostly flooded, at least climatologically not habitable, is presented in publications by Kreijns and Pirson, Van Veen and Bruijnesteijn v.C.

March 7: Translation of IJpelaan's Frisi, Normanni and Saxoni

Feb. 12: Translation of IJpelaan's Willibrord (7th and 8th century) and 12th century forgeries of documents to claim churches, relocating Willibrord to Holland

Jan. 2: from: "Warfare in Holland 1000-1375" (English summary) by Ronald de Graaf (2004, dutch title: “Oorlog om Holland 1000-1375“)

Holland, slowly awakening under the name of Western Frisia, grew in four centuries from a little countship in the delta of the great rivers, lying along the borders of the sea, into a considerable region. In the 11th century one could not see any difference between a count and other local rulers, and the territory of the count was not entirely cultivated. The location of Holland in the centre of communication lines, was strategically favourable with a view to its own commerce and the control of alien trade.
...
In the 11th century Utrecht was very powerful. Owing to the location of the city on the crossroads of the rivers the Vecht and the Old Rhine, trading relations with England, the Rhineland and the Baltic could be profitable. In politicis, the bishops could depend on the support given by the German King. When the little Westfrisian countship strived for independence - for instance by imposing an illegal toll on passing mercantile ships to and from Utrecht - it seemed only a matter of time before the elephant had crushed the gnat. But the attackers, together with episcopal allies from Münster and Luik, lost the battle at Vlaardingen in 1018 (because of waterbarriers and panic), and a succeeding campaign in 1046. When in 1049 and 1061 two Westfrisian counts died - the first was trapped in an ambush, and the second fell in action - the end of the countship was in sight. Joined by Flemmish forces, count Dirk V had to reconquer it entirely. But he was successful. In 1101, the name 'counts of Holland' was used for the first time. During the preceding years, the subregion 'Western Frisia' was disengaged from the other part of the county. It would take tremendous efforts to get it back.
...
From antiquity on, Holland and Western-Frisia had belonged to Frisia. At the end of the 11th century, both regions apparently had grown apart, probably because around 1064 the bishop of Utrecht had driven the counts off the theatres of war in Holland. In 1132-1133 the warlike count Dirk VI decided to solve in a military way the problem of avoiding the autonomy of Western-Frisia. This was the start of a long series of bloodshed and pillage, raids and expeditions. At least twenty of these clashes emerge from the sources. They contain several constant factors. The farmers in Western-Frisia adopted a military strategy: the kind of warfare we survey with the word 'guerrilla'. They had an extra reason for fighting, because fields and pastures were drowned by waterfloods between 11-13th centuries. The Southern Sea, which drove the Western Frisians away from the Eastern, came into being in this time.

For geophysical reasons most battles were fought in the surroundings of Alkmaar. For almost 150 years Holland played into the hands of their enemies, by only attacking them when the cattle were in stables, the harvests cropped and the granary full. The knights did not dare to invade Western-Frisia, because their horses were hindered by the many ditches, brooks, lakes and wet soil. On account of these environmental factors, the Dutch were trapped in many a Westfrisian ambush.

It was not until 1282 that Floris V defeated the Westfrisians, by means of a fourfold military-strategical concept. He had castles built along the border and then launched a surprise attack over the Southern Sea. His offensive started while the cattle were in the pastures and the crops in the fields, so that most of the Frisians were needed in their farms. After winning the battle he consolidated his victory by building compulsionary castles, according to a containment plan that was developed with geometrical precision. Finally he helped his enemies in their struggle against the sea, by means of well constructed and maintained dikes as in Utrecht and Brabant. He let them have as many of their ancient rights and customs as possible.
...
The count of Holland received an official confirmation of his rights on (Eastern-) Frisia in 1165. Owing to the energetic support of both the countal and episcopal claims, Barbarossa saw no alternative and devided the region by a Salomon’s judgement. This condominium worked, as it seems, rather well between 1165-1197 and 1204-1212. Market- and tollrights and the endowment of goods and appointments were equally divided. By frana and asega the bishop exercised his power; the count worked by way of a zendgraaf, vice-comes or sherrif. Much less than in Holland and rather less than in Sealand, the local nobility in Frisia, the so-called hoofdelingen, became feudalized.

Nonetheless, they were willing to submit themselves to certain Dutch claims. Ever since the reign of Floris V, Utrecht no longer demanded its old rights persistently. In the year 1233 the Frisians in Franeker lifted the count on a shield on condition that the local nobility would not lose their allodia or receive their fiefs from him. Although they acknowledged the Dutch sherrifs, they demanded that the office be held only by people born in Frisia. The background of these conditions was their fear of being oppressed by Holland, as clearly happened - in their opinion - in Western Frisia, when Floris V erected compulsionary castles.

Jan. 30: Chronyk van Friesland (1742) transliteration of parts

2010

Oct. 16: from "The Oera-Linda-Book in Germany and here" by Dr. M. de Jong (1939):

When we don't limit our view to the controversies that kept us busy here in Holland, we must admit, that the OLB begot a significance because of the war in Germany, that no one ever could have dreamt of. In the spiritual revolution, that occurred there in the last decennia and is still unfolding, it played an important role. The OLB has been the highlight of passionate discussions about national-socialist principles and philosophy. A model for living and history, women’s place in society, democracy and authority, pacifism, the Slavic East front, racial theory and the Nordic race, even the Jewish question, were discussed. It’s a remarkable fact, that the OLB seems to appeal to profound feelings, that the German people have developped in their fight against alien influences and in favour of their own Germanic culture. Science had already succesfully resisted against the Christian-Latin historiographic image of old-Germanic civilisation’s inferiority and of the blessings brought to the supposed barbarians by the Romans and the Roman Catholic church. The aureole of great-christener Charles “the Great” faded away. People hoped to find traces of their own old civilisation, their own spiritual heritage, even an original Nordic monotheism.

This now, many believed to find, in the footsteps of Herman Wirth, together with lots of other ancestrial heritage, in the OLB, specifically in the so-called Wralda-mysticism.

Herman Wirth, 1935

(Fragment:)
Een paar Friese studenten, die na Wirth's rede op het Friesche Studentencongres hun academiesteden hebben verlaten en naar Duitsland zijn getrokken, waar zij thans behooren tot de assistenten van den Duitschen prof, hebben het kamp te Bakkeveen propagandistisch voorbereid en tot tal van Friezen uit de Friesche beweging een brief gericht, die aldus aanvangt: "Friesland, het oeroude Germaansche land, dat zijn geschiedenis verliest tot in de grijze oudheid, tot in de tijden, van welke men meende, dat er geen geschreven woord was overgebleven, ligt als een onbekend gebied voor de tegenwoordige wetenschap. Deze wetenschap, die alle kontakt met het volk en het volksleven verloren heeft, heeft tot voor kort niet beseft, wat het heeft over het hoofd gezien, en erger nog wat door haar onkunde en achteloosheid is verloren gegaan. Gelukkig echter dat er menschen zijn opgestaan, die beseft hebben wat er gebeurde, die getracht hebben te redden, wat er te redden viel en dit nog doen. De groote figuur in deze, haar zetel in Duitschland vindende beweging, is professor dr. Herman Wirth, die door zijn onderzoek van de oeroude symbolische voorstellingen der Germanen baanbrekend werk verrichte. Prof. Wirth, die zich met den grooten symbolenschat van het Friesche land heeft beziggehouden, sprak j.l. Kerstmis op het Friesch Studentencongres te Leeuwarden. Door den korten tijd, die toen beschikbaar was, was het niet mogelijk dieper op de onderzoekingen in te gaan. Om hiervoor de mogelijkheid te scheppen, hebben eenige belangstellenden het initiatief genomen tot het organiseren van een kamp te Bakkeveen. Dietschers en Friezen, neemt allen deel aan dit kamp, daar het hier gaat om het cultuurgoed van onze voorvaderen!"

If you are interested...

... in pre-Christian Europe, and you understand that official contemporary history is dictated by the victors of the latest wars, the Oera Linda Book will be a treat.

Burning of Arian books at Nicaea (fragment ca. 825 CE)

The medieval Christian establishment is responsible for our oldest accepted sources by preserving or copying them. They were also known for destroying anything that they considered to be heretical. Even in our times, some opinions, beliefs, memories and facts are not tolerated. In Germany for example, historians and scientists (as well as their defending lawyers) have been jailed for questioning the establishment's version of what happened in the labour camps of the Third Reich. Their books have been burnt and banned.

Thanks to the internet and as long as it is relatively accessible, ever more people are educating themselves and coming to their own conclusions. What we have learnt at school, from documentaries or even from specialised mainstream literature often turns out to have an other possible perspective, that sometimes makes more sense. This "aha!"-experience is addictive. The more pieces of the puzzle fall into their right position, the more a real picture becomes clear, resulting in a more healthy world view, identity and belief system.

It is easy to imagine that the oldest texts that we have are only a fraction of what once existed. For not only have books and manuscripts been destroyed on purpose or by accident, much will have simply fallen apart, used to make fire, or be hiding in private or secret collections. When information is hidden to the common public, it is called "occult". When an occult source suddenly shows up in the public domain, it will be a threat to the cultural elite, so they will try to hide it again.

In the case of the Oera Linda Book, they were too late, since it was translated, published and widely discussed before they knew it. So what else could be done than have it ridiculed and intimidate scholars who dared to be interested in it? This happened in the 1870s in the Netherlands and was repeated in Germany in the 1930s, when it was once more declared fake and publication about the topic became forbidden. But Heinrich Himmler did take it seriously and had the OLB secretly investigated between 1936 and 1942.

After the war, in Germany the OLB was nicknamed "Himmler's Bible", which further discouraged academics to publicly doubt the dominating forgery doctrine. The most recent scholarly works were published in 2004 and 2006, a dissertation and new translation, that do not question or consider authenticity, but merely confirm the hoax theory, suggesting a religiously motivated conspiracy of vicar-poet Haverschmidt, linguist Verwijs and Over de Linden, who had owned the manuscript. My video demonstrates the weak spots in the official story.

This weblog contains language studies, forum discussions, translations, links and thought experiments. My current main priority is to make a new English translation that will be published together with a new transliteration and a facsimile of the manuscript. This way it will be easier than ever before to compare the translation with the original text and script. An index of names and key words will be added, as well as summaries, time lines and more. With this I hope to inspire other researchers, for the Oera Linda Book is way too great for the few of us alone.

Wirth's Heilbrenger ~ Telegraaf 14-05-1933

Plain text below. This is important material. I will translate parts of it into English. See also (German Wiki): Deutsche Glaubensbewegung.
See also: kranten (newspaper articles) 1933-1934

Contemporary primordial religion for the Aryans

[...] In Germany, a daily increasing movement of people can be observed, that turns away from Christianity and wants to return to the original Germanic and Aryan gods. This movement had been moderate, since many felt uncomfortable worshiping Wodan again. But now, Wirth has come with his "Hailbringer" and it is under this banner, that the anti-Christian Germans can somewhat decently unite if they want.
    The matter has become highly relevant, since the organisation of "German Christians" has emerged, its main aims still hardly being known. As far as this new initiative persues reformation of the Protestant church after National Socialist principles, it is of some interest. But it becomes sensational, when it aims at "purging" Christianity of all Semitic smut, for example by abolition of the Old Testament. [...]

Prof. Wirth's Heilbrenger

Actuele oer-religie voor de Ariërs.

Poolgebied als bakermat van het edele Noordsche ras beschouwd.

Strijd tegen Christendom?

(van onzen correspondent).

Berlijn, 8 Mei. - Onze landgenoot professor Herman Wirth heeft op een daartoe buitengemeen geschikt oogenblik in Berlijn 'n tentoonstelling geopend, welke hij aan den "Heilbrenger" heeft gewijd. Om deze tentoonstelling te begrijpen dient men eerst te weten, dat er sedert de laatste jaren in de Duitsche wetenschappelijke wereld erg fel gezocht wordt naar den oorsprong der dingen en met name naar dien van het Arisch ras (wanneer we het zoo ten minste in de taal van den dag mogen noemen) en deszelfs eigenaardigheden. Twee of drie geleerden hebben zich op dit gebied zeer verdienstelijk gemaakt, maar toen is ineens professor Wirth met zijn nieuwe wetenschap, de paleo-opigrafiek voor den dag gekomen en daarmede is het geheele voorhistorische onderzoek in nieuwe banen geleid. Altijd, wel te verstaan, volgens de discipelen van gezegden Wirth.
    Wirth is ertoe overgegaan een vergelijkende studie van de oudste schriftteekens, krabbels, enz. van het menschelijke geslacht te maken en daarbij is hij tot verbluffende resultaten gekomen. Deze worden nog gesteund door zijn onderzoekingen op het gebied van kalenders, van megalithen, enz. door philologische, biologische, ethnografische vergelijkingen, door studies van archeologie, van klimaatwijzigingen, van oude dialecten, enz., en dit geheel is nu samengevat en overzichtelijk ten toon gesteld in zijn "Heilbrenger" in de Potsdammerstrasse te Berlijn.
    Het is ondoenlijk de sensationeele vondsten van onzen landgenoot in een krantenartikel samen te persen en we moeten het uiteraard aan anderen overlaten, naar eventueele "missing links" in zijn stelsel te zoeken. Voorop zij echter gesteld, dat zijn tentoonstelling in Berlijn zeer au sérieux genomen en bewonderd wordt, ook door menschen, die met de eindresultaten van Wirth's onderzoekingen in geenen deele kunnen meegaan. Zijn collectie zit puik in elkaar en legt getuigenis af van veel diepe en waardevolle studies.
    Volgens Wirth heeft de bakermat van het edele Noordsche ras en van alle werkelijke cultuur in het hoogste Noorden gelegen. Immers alleen in de tegenwoordige arctische gebieden speelt de zon in het dagelijkse leven der menschen een zóó groote rol, dat zij het alleen met haar hulp tot iets konden brengen. In den langen donkeren nacht bijvoorbeeld, gromden onze voorouders maar zoo'n beetje o- en oe-geluiden uit. Maar wanneer zij, tegen het voorjaar, door de eerste zonnestralen beschenen werden, raakten zij daarover dermate in hun schik, dat zij tot vroolijk e-, i- en u-klanken overgingen. Aldus ontstond de taal, welke, zooals nu wel voor iedereen duidelijk zal zijn, alléén in het hoogste Noorden en uit de zon geboren kon worden.
    Veel interessanter is nog het ontstaan van de schriftteekens. Al wat daarover tot dusver gepubliceerd werd, is volgens Wirth bare nonsens. Het waren de lieden aan de Noordpool die met stokjes of steenen den loop der zon vastlegden. Deze houdt zich daarginds, bij haar wandelingen door het heelal, precies aan de vier windstreken. De menschen aan de Noordpool verbonden de vier punten, Zuid, Noord, West en Oost, met elkaar en aldus ontstond het rechtarmige kruis, het eerste schriftteeken, dat echter later volgens Wirth door Joden en Romeinen totaal verbasterd tot het symbool van de Christelijke verbastering der oer-religie zou worden. Later ontstond in Zuidelijker gewesten uit de verbinding van Noord-oost met Zuid-west en Noord-west met Zuid-oost het maalteeken, dat 25.000 jaar noodig had om tot onze letter x op te bloeien.
    Op den duur vond het Noordsche ras het runenschrift uit en het is door het plegen van een schandalig plagiaat, dat de Egyptenaren, de Babyloniërs, enz. hieruit hun hiëroglyphen afleidden en niet omgekeerd, zooals tot nu wel eens verteld werd. Past men de grafologie op dit runenschrift toe, dan blijkt zeer duidelijk, dat de vroegere bewoners van Groenland, Spitsbergen en het verdronken land van Thule, koud en tegelijk hartstochtelijk, vroolijk, materialitisch, natuurlijk en ook nog filosofisch waren.

Het ontstaan der menschheid.

Over het ontstaan der menschheid heeft Wirth zijn eigen theorie. De elite, het Noordsche ras, zag het levenslicht in het uiterste Noorden, dat toen nog goed bewoonbaar was, de negers in het Zuiden en de gele Mongolen een beetje overal en tusschen de anderen in. Maar op een zeker moment brak de ijstijd in de Pool-wereld aan en verdreef de kinderen van het Noordsche ras van hun haardsteden. Dat hinderde echter niet erg. Want het waren goede schippers, die kinderen van het edel-ras, en zoo roeiden zij langs Afrika, de Middellandsche Zee binnen en de Amerikaansche kusten langs, overal hun hooge cultuur, hun schriftteekens enz. verbreidend.
    En nu moet tusschen twee haakjes erkend worden, dat Wirth een overweldigende massa materiaal bij elkaar gezocht heeft om de oorsprongs-eenheid van alle cultuur uit allerlei kleinigheden, welk wij thans achteloos voorbij gaan, te bewijzen. Het stadswapen van Ootmarsum wordt hierbij met evenveel aplomb aangehaald als de oudste Eskimo-dialecten, de gewoonten van Texas-Indianen, de kappen van Friesche boerinnen, de bruidsstoel in een Brunswijksch huishouden, of de rotsteekeningen, door Frobenius en anderen in Afrikaansche grotten ontdekt. Wanneer men met prof. Wirth door zijn tentoonstelling wandelt, laat hij zulk een bandjir van inderdaad zeer opvallende bijzonderheden op U neer, dat men zich gelukkig acht maar een leek op het gebied van Indiaansche dialecten te zijn en tegelijkertijd de vak-geleerden beklaagt, wier taak het zal zijn den ganschen arbeid van Wirth onder de loupe te nemen en uit elkaar te rafelen.
    Op den tocht naar het Zuiden splitste het Arctische oer-ras zich in twee groepen. De eene, de z.g. Zuid-Atlantische, maakte de enorme reizen, bovengenoemd, bezocht o.a. ook het Tweestroomenland, en legde daar den grondslag voor de beschaving, zooals wij die thans kennen. Het waren de Amorieten, die het godsbegrip aan hen ontleenden, dat later door de Joden overgenomen en in den Jahweh-dienst vastgelegd werd. Een andere groep, de Noord-Atlantische, liep op de Doggersbank vast, die toen overigens nog bewoonbare wereld was. Hier ontwikkelde het zich tot een volk, dat door de Ieren "Tuatha de Danann" genoemd werd, uit welk woord het woord "Duitsch" weer opbloeide. Hier, op de Doggersbank, ontstonden de Ariërs, die, minder zeewaardig dan de Zuid-Atlantische groep, zich er toe bepaalden noordelijk Europa voetje voor voetje op de minderwaardige rassen te veroveren, maar die op den duur toch ook Indië binnendrongen om met de zwarte en bruine broeders aldaar een onteerende bloedmenging aan te gaan.
    Wat nu de religie van deze Poolmenschen betreft, deze was, altijd volgens Wirth, zuiver geestelijk en had b.v. met afgodendienst niets te doen. De zon speelde een groote rol in hun leven, en de dageraad, die na een langen nacht aanbrak, was een soort verlossing. Hieruit zou dan door allerlei verbastering het christelijk mysterie der verlossing zijn ontstaan. De Wodandienst was ook een afwijking en wel een, die zijn ontstaan aan Finsche invloeden tijdens de verovering van Noord-Europa te danken had. De goddelijkheid, welke Wirth daar in de Poolgebieden ontdekt meent te hebben, en die volgens hem de vader van alle eerediensten, religies, enz. is, wordt door hem de "Heilbrenger" genoemd, en zooals wij in den aanvang al zeiden, deze is op het oogenblik aan de orde van den dag.

Stroomingen in Duitschland.

Voorop zij gesteld, dat de tentoonstelling van Wirth de bijzondere protectie van de Pruisische machthebbers geniet en dat een benoeming van Wirth tot professor aan de universiteit van Berlijn in geenen deele uitgesloten is. Maar de hoofdzaak, waarop het aankomt, is deze. Er is in Duitschland een met den dag sterkere strooming waar te nemen van lieden, die zich van het Christendom afwenden en naar de oorspronkelijke Germaansche en Arische goden terug willen. De strooming werd tot nu toe geremd, doordat het toch wel wat al te raar leek Wodan weer te gaan aanbidden. Maar nu is Wirth met zijn "Heilbrenger" gekomen en het is onder de vanen van dezen Heilbrenger, dat de anti-Christelijke Duitschers zich desgewenscht en met eenig goed fatsoen kunnen scharen.
    De kwestie heeft een dubbele actualiteit gekregen door de organisatie der "Duitse Christenen", van wier diepste wenschen nog te weinig bekend is. Voor zover deze nieuwe richting naar een reorganisatie der Evangelische kerk, volgens nationaal-socialistische snit, streeft, is zij maar betrekkelijk interessant. Maar ze wordt sensationeel, wanneer zij het Christendom van alle Semitische smetten wil "zuiveren", b.v. door afschaffing van het Oude Testament. Van dat punt af kan men alle schakeeringen van nieuwsoortigheid bij haar aantreffen. De vraag b.v. of de kerstening van de Germanen indertijd een weldaad of een ramp geweest is, vormt in tal van milieux, van de universiteiten af tot heelemaal beneden toe, een onderwerp van vurig debat. Velen zijn al zoo ver gekomen, dat zij Bonifacius als den aartsvijand van het Germanendom beschouwen, die in zijn noodlottigen invloed nog slechts door Karel den Grooten geëvenaard wordt.
    Het is deze strooming, welke Wirth door de schepping van een nieuw monotheïsme in de hand werkt. En alhoewel het niet bij voorbaat valt aan te nemen, dat een aanzienlijk aantal Duitschers Christus voor den "Heilbrenger" zullen verruilen, toch is deze strooming een karakteristiek verschijnsel van den tijd, dien wij beleven, terwijl er anderezijds ook rekening mee gehouden moet worden vanwege de tot botsingen voerende agressiviteit tegen het Christendom, waarmee zij geladen is.
    (Nadruk verboden).

~ ~ ~

NB from German website:

Wirth referierte auf  beiden "Nordischen Things" und eröffnete beim "Ersten Nordischen Thing" seine "Erste urreligionsgeschichtliche Ausstellung DER HEILSBRINGER". 1935 durfte Hermann Wirth neben Heinrich Himmler Mitbegründer der "Forschungsgemeinschaft Deutsches Ahnenerbe" der SS werden. Diese Organisation sollte den Nationalsozialisten  helfen, mithilfe von archäolgischen, anthropologischen und geschichtlichen Forschungen die Überlegenheit der nordischen Rasse zu belegen.

"Echt of Onecht?" 1934 by prof. dr. J. van Dam

Dutch newspaper article (Telegraaf) of 23 January 1934.
For plain text, see below. Also a short article of 6 May 1934 below.

Telegraaf 23 januari 1934 (avond editie)

Is het Oera Linda Bok echt of onecht?

Prof. H. Wirth op het oorlogspad.

door Prof. dr. J. van Dam (Hoogleraar te Amsterdam).

Een Duitsche bewerking die niets positiefs bewijst, doch den twijfel versterkt.

Een geniaal vervalser.

Het befaamde Oera Linda Bok, dat al zoo vaak de pennen in beweging heeft gebracht, is opnieuw op verrassende wijze in het middelpunt van de wetenschappelijke en pseudo-wetenschappelijke belangstelling geplaatst.

    De voorgeschiedenis is vrij algemeen bekend. In 1872 publiceerde dr. J.G. Ottema uit het bezit van Cornelis over de Linden uit Den Helder een geschrift, dat een soort familiekroniek zou zijn en een overoude overlevering van Frieschen oorsprong zou bevatten. De inhoud was verrassend, vooral wegens de oudheid van het meegedeelde, maar niet geheel onverdacht: de taal, z.g. Oudfriesch, was op zijn minst sterk verbasterd. Het waren voornamelijk twee vragen, die de filologen verder bezighielden: Is het echt? - dan openden zich ongekende perspectieven op de voorgeschiedenis der Germanen -, of: is het onecht? - wie is dan de, men mag wel zeggen geniale grappenmaker, die de wetenschap van zijn tijd en later zoo in het ootje durfde en kon nemen?
    Welnu, de eerste vraag werd en wordt ook nu nog algemeen met neen beantwoord: het werk is een vervalsing, en het belangwekkende uitzicht op de Germaansche oudheid wordt weer in nevelen gehuld. De vraag, wie dan wel de maker van dit meesterwerk van travestie en parodie geweest is, wordt vrij algemeen in den geest van dr. M. de Jong beantwoord, die in zijn uitvoerig werk: Het geheim van het Oera-Linda-boek (Bolsward 1927), Dr. Eelco Verwijs, een voortreffelijk kenner der middeleeuwsche letterkunde en bovendien op dat gebied als parodist bekend, als zoodanig aanwees.
    Toch zijn nog lang niet alle moeilijkheden opgelost, en prof. Brugmans wijst er in zijn "Nieuws over het Oera Linda Bok" (mededeelingen der Kon. Akademie van Wetenschappen Deel 66 Nr. 5, 1928) uitdrukkelijk op, dat het strikte bewijs nooit is geleverd. Zoo blijft b.v. als groote moeilijkheid over, dat Verwijs en Over de Linden elkaar pas laat, in 1867 hebben leeren kennen, toen de geschiedenis van het handschrift al aan de orde was gesteld. Voor een nieuw onderzoek van de kwestie was er dus ook na het boek van dr. De Jong nog aanleiding.

Herman Wirth.

Dit nu is op zeer verrassende wijze gekomen van de hand van onzen ex-landgenoot, prof. Herman Wirth, die al sinds jaren ons land ook geestelijk heeft verloochend en in Marburg als "Privatgelehrter" naast de officieele wetenschap de praehistorie op eigenaardige, maar niet weinig succesvolle wijze beoefent.
    Hij biedt nu aan het Duitsche volk dit oudste document van Germaansch geestesleven in vertaling aan, blij, het aan de voorstanders der vervalschingstheorie te hebben ontrukt en in de stellige verwachting, dat dit volk er veel tot eigen stichting en inzicht uit zal leeren.

Men moet over dit feit niet al te gering denken. Wirth is een figuur van groote beteekenis in Duitschland. Hij hoort tot die halfwetenschappelijke menschen, bij wie het critisch inzicht is geatrofieerd naast, misschien wel ten gevolge van het woekeren  der fantasie, en die de gave bezitten, eigen inzichten voor te dragen op een wijze, die vooral den leek fascineert en diens nog weinig ontwikkelden twijfel en critiek het zwijgen oplegt. Hij is een goed kenner en een al te gemakkelijk interpreet der Europeesche voorgeschiedenis en hij ziet dingen, samenhangen, uitingen van geestelijk leven, die er geweest kunnen zijn, maar wier bestaan hij niet kan bewijzen. het zou hier te ver voeren, uiteen te zetten, uit welke wortelen zijn aanhang in Duitschland is ontstaan. Ik duid slechts aan, dat zich in de wetenschap al sinds tientallen van jaren het inzicht heeft baangebroken, dat de cultuur onzer Germaansche voorouders in vergelijking met de klassieke, schromelijk is miskend en dat er dientengevolge alle aanleiding bestaat, haar waarden in het licht te stellen. Dat dat inzicht nu ook tot het publiek doordringt, is begrijpelijk en wordt bevorderd door de ideologische verheerlijking der Germanen, wier bijzondere eigenschappen door velen in de tegenwoordige Duitschers teruggevonden worden, die als afstammelingen van het z.g. noordsche ras geroepen zijn, den Germaanschen aard, zoo waardevol voor de wereld, in stand te houden.

In dit verband nu speelt Wirth een zoo groote rol, dat de officieele wetenschap er een beetje mee verlegen is en niet weet, of zij zijn theorieen beter negeeren of weerleggen moet.
    Is het dan inderdaad op lichtvaardige gronden, dat de Nederlandsche wetenschap het Oera Linda Bok als een vervalsching beschouwt? En welke motieven leiden Wirth er toe, de echtheid opnieuw te verdedigen?

De Bewijsvoering.

Wirth accepteert, na nieuw deskundig onderzoek, het feit, dat het papier van het handschrift van het Oera Linda Bok in de 19de eeuw is gemaakt. Maar dit kan natuurlijk best een afschrift of omwerking van een ouder geschrift zijn, zoodat dit feit op zichzelf niets zegt tegen Wirth's veronderstelling, dat er in den bestaanden tekst bronnen verwerkt zijn, die zoo oud en geloofwaardig zijn, dat alle critiek de vertelde feiten niet kan omverwerpen. Uit de jaren 1848 tot 50 en 1854 citeert hij getuigenissen, die moeten bewijzen, dat het handschrift toen al in het bezit van Over de Linden was. Staan er nu dingen in, die een vervalscher, zelfs een man van wetenschappelijke kennis als Verwijs, laat staan een eenvoudig man als Cornelis niet uit de vakliteratuur kon weten, dan is het bewijs voor de echtheid geleverd.
    Zulke dingen nu zoekt Wirth bijeen en hij vindt nog al wat van zulk materiaal. Zoo werden de in de kroniek vermelde paalwoningen pas in 1853 in Zwitserland ontdekt. De oorspronkelijke tekst zou dan ettelijke malen overgeschreven en het meest ingrijpend door een humanist van de 17de eeuw gewijzigd zijn. Aan hem schrijft Wirth ook het foutieve Oudfriesch en de talrijke, nu humoristisch aandoende geleerde naamverklaringen toe.
    Daartegenover moet ik er op wijzen, dat er in deze redeneering foutenbronnen schuilen, waarmee Wirth geen rekening heeft gehouden. Wat de getuigenissen over het vroege bestaan van het handschrift betreft, is het toch niet uitgesloten, dat sommigen zich na vele jaren te goeder trouw hebben vergist, of dat anderen - Wirth, die zijn landgenooten lang niet malsch critiseert, zal hen voldoende kennen, om dat mogelijk te vinden - aan de grap meededen.
    Dat geldt b.v. stellig voor Verwijs, van hem is bovendien ook niets bekend van een op eerewoord gegeven verklaring. Verder is het toch niet uitgesloten, dat een zoo geniaal man als de vervalscher moet zijn geweest, uit zijn wetenschappelijke intuitie dingen heeft verzonnen, die later gebleken zijn, waarheid te zijn. Waarom zou een vindingrijk schrijver b.v. niet op de gedachte kunnen komen, dat ook de huizen onzer voorvaderen al op palen waren gebouwd? En ten slotte, is alles, wat Wirth aan echte gegevens heeft verzameld, inderdaad ook bestand tegen de objectieve critiek van germanisten en praehistorici van professie?

Hier is nu juist het punt, waarop de typisch onexacte geest van Wirth den critischen lezer teleurstelt. Met een methode, die merkwaardig genoeg juist vaak op het gebied der praehistorie door dilettanten wordt toegepast, verbindt hij een reeks dingen en verschijnselen met elkaar, die oogenschijnlijk telkens wat met elkaar te maken hebben, maar waarvan het verband als reeks hoogst twijfelachtig is.

In het wetenschappelijk aanhangsel van zijn uitgaaf geeft hij een ongeloofelijke massa stof uit alle periodes der voorgeschiedenis, die buitengewoon verwarrend is en steeds weer van het te bewijzen doel afleidt. De manier, waarop hij van een god Krodo via de zwaan als levenbrengend dier (later verdrongen door den ooievaar) bij de Lohengrinsage belandt, is daarvoor karakteristiek. Bovendien sluit hij telkens aan bij zijn eigen theorieen omtrent den Westerschen oorsprong der menschelijke cultuur, zijn oplossing van het Atlantisprobleem enz., die, hoe belangwekkend ook, uiterst aanvechtbaar zijn. Hij neemt b.v. aan, dat het getuigenis van het Oera Linda Bok, dat de Friezen omstreeks 2000 v. Chr. een reis naar de Middellandsche Zee hebben ondernomen, echt is, omdat het zijn eigen veronderstelling omtrent de Noordelijke herkomst der Filistijnen eenigszins bevestigt. Maar als de geleerde schrijver der kroniek dit nu eens uit zijn duim heeft gezogen en Wirth zelf zich heeft vergist? Wat dan? Toch trekken sommige punten zonder twijfel de aandacht, zoo, waar het Oera Linda Bok de godin Nehalennia noemt, wier vereering uit Walcheren bekend is, of waar de uitvoerige beschrijving van een aan eeredienst gewijden toren door Wirth niet zonder speurzin met andere torens en torenmotieven in verband wordt gebracht.

Nov. 1941: tentoonstelling Het wetenschappelijke Duitse boek.
Links: Prof.dr. Jan Van Dam

Niets bewezen.

Wirth heeft in zijn uitgave, naar het mij voorkomt, niets positief bewezen. Daarvoor is zijn materiaal te groot, zijn methode te zwak, zijn geest te weinig zakelijk. Maar bestaande twijfelingen heeft hij zeker versterkt, en het zal de plicht zijn van de echte wetenschap, deze in half profetischen toon geschreven uiteenzettingen te controleeren.

een nieuw bronnenonderzoek van het Oera Linda Bok is daarom hoogst gewenst, vooral in het belang van de wetenschap der Germaansche praehistorie. Iedere twijgel omtrent echtheid of onechtheid behoort te verdwijnen. Er is dus inderdaad weer nieuws over het Oera Linda Bok en nieuw werk aan den winkel!
    Wirth zal in zijn vroeger vaderland wel geen ander oordeel hebben verwacht. Het past immers precies in het beeld, dat hij zich van ons heeft gevormd. Het ontbreekt ons geheel en al aan stambesef, zegt hij nadrukkelijk, en zonder dat schijnt de wetenschap der germanistiek voor hem onmogelijk te zijn. Zij wordt naar zijn opvatting minstens evenzeer door de intuitie als door de critiek der feiten gevoed. Dat een klein beetje stambesef ons geen kwaad zou doen, wil ik gaarne toegeven, maar het tweede inzicht kan ik onmogelijk onderschrijven. Over deze dingen beslisse de wetenschap zonder voor- of tegeningenomenheid!
    (Nadruk verboden).

Some personal notes

(This post is not finished yet.)

Looking back, I see how my attraction to hidden history started, when, as a teenager, I got into tracing my Westfrisian family roots and collecting old pictures. The thrill of discovery, the "aha!"-experience, learning things about my older ancestors, that could have been passed on through the generations and thus, helped me understand myself and my direct family.

Most striking is it, to learn how oral tradition does not always match up with recorded information. Even families have their versions of censorship and propaganda, often about little details, but sometimes concerning something more significant. It may have been silenced or changed on purpose, or subconsciously. The mind plays tricks on us and this can be helpful. Some things are better forgotten or made nicer, so we can move on.

But when a lie or suppressed rage keeps causing trouble, like a deep stuck splinter, it is better to face it and deal with it after all. What may have been a near fatal trauma several generations back, can now be something that we would frown about. But as long as it is not known and understood, it can keep nagging, cause nightmares, lead to distractive habits, or worse.

This principle is not only applicable to the individual and its family, but also to a whole tribe, a folk, a nation.

~

For a few years, I had been interested in Nordic mythology, when in 2005 I first heard about the Oera Linda-book (OLB). Someone had written a dissertation about it, having something to do with the Frisians and their supposed primordial mother Frya.

I bought "De Gemaskerde God" (the masked god) by Goffe Jensma, but when I read the summary, suggesting this OLB to be a 19th century joke, I put it on the shelf, where it would remain untouched for another four years. I wanted to read this OLB myself first anyway, before reading someone's opinion about it.

The subject had lost my attention, until in 2009 in a small bookshop in Amsterdam, I found Sura de Heer's translation that included the original text in a specially designed font.

(to be continued)