Don't you just hate it when that happens.
Posted on 09/23/2005 7:25:11 PM PDT by solitas
8 göter ok 22 norrmen paa opthagelse farth fro winlanth of west Wi hathe läger weth 2 skylar en thags norder fro theno sten wi war ok fiske en thag äptir wi kom hem fan X man rothe af bloth og ded AVM frälse af illum.
har X mans we hawet at se äptir wore skip 14 thag rise from theno odh Ar wars Herra 1362.
Translation:
8 Geats (South Swedes) and 22 Norwegians on acquisition venture from Vinland far to the west We had traps by 2 shelters one day's travel to the north from this stone We were fishing one day. After we came home found 10 men red with blood and dead AVM (Ave Maria) Deliver from evils!
I have 10 men at the inland sea/lake to look after our ship 14 days travel from this wealth/property Year of our Lord 1362
Don't you just hate it when that happens.
"Vell by yumpin' yiminy, dat looks like ol' Sven Larsen's laundry list."
Why doesn't this article mention the "transcriptions" of the kensington stone that were later produced by Olof Ohman while promoting the kensington stone? It turns out, the runes on these supposed copies do not match the runes on the stone exactly, or each other exactly. When examined together, they were clearly not copied from the stone, but were rough drafts done before the carving.
Also, the sentence structure and grammar of the stone has little in common with old norsk, but resembles modern english quite well. Every expert on old norse languages that has look at the stone has declared it a hoax.
It amazes me how every few years or so, someone drags up the kensington hoax again. We know the scandinavians were in North America centuries before Columbus. There is actual proven physical evidence of their presence in eastern Canada. Yet for some reason, certain people with scandinavian ancestors don't think that's good enough but insist on some mythical scandinavian empire in North America and repeatedly put forth the kensington hoax as proof.
No doubt, when we finally get to mars, the same people will find a runestone there too.
Any guesses as to what it says?
Garrison Keillor is a dufus & the Mighty Thor lies at the bottom of Lake Wobegone?
I couldn't care - on the face of it: it sounds interesting.
"Where's the honey-meade?" I think is what it says. And 'What the heck are we doing in Minnie-sota?"
lingonberries, lingonberries,
lefse' lefse
We're Minnesota boys ya sure ya betch ya!
So, what about the runestones of Eastern Oklahoma? Any connection?
Maybe se should let the NCAA settle this. We can't offend Vikings now, can we?
Here's a North American Runes site, mentions the Oklahoma runestones.
and a pic of Olaf Ohman.
Big Ole, the local tourist draw or used to be went to the NY World's Fair, has been fired bombed, shot with arrows and guns, dressed up as Santa Claus many a time, somebody tied a set of big balloons and a large salami on his hips one time too was the best prank I saw pulled off.
There were also deathbed confessions by relations of the perpetrators.
The best summation of this hoax is contained in the book, Ancient Mysteries. Highly recommended to one and all for a very informed look at historical curiosities and mysteries, including this one.
This guy is way off...It was found in June...Everybody knows school kids get out in June...Or maybe it was the spring break...That'd be March, or April, wouldn't it???
Yet every few years it gets dug up again and some new scholar claims to have new evidence "proving" its authenticity. They always focus on some single aspect of the stone that could theoretically be interpreted in the correct light after a few beers as having been centuries old instead of just a few decades. At the same time, they also quietly ignore all the other problems with the stone that prove it's a hoax.
Real historians and archaeologists don't even bother debunking these new claims because there really is no point. The stone is a hoax, but facts simply don't matter to the true believers.
I've never been able to figure out why, with all the real evidence of vikings in North America, some people still feel a need to cling desperately to obvious fakeries like the kensington stone. It probably has something to do with the local kensington tourism board.
As an aside, has anyone else noticed how every time a hoax like this is "discovered", whether it's the kensington stone or piltdown man or whatever, it's always done by a man? Any men out there want to explain that to me?
Interesting point you raise on the men being the exclusive discoverers (and presumbably perpetrators) of the hoaxes.
One possible exception would be the Cottingley fairy photographs. The photographic hoax was confected by young females. They became famous when Arthur Conan Doyle became aware of them, but he didn't discover them. Though Doyle was credulous, he was not a part of the original hoax.
Along with Celts, Phoenicians, Egyptians, Jews, Chinese...in various other parts of the US.
You can thank me, a Minnesota native, for this information at your convenience.
Very cool!
I have always loved this story.
We agree that the KRS must either be a hoax or not a hoax. If is a hoax, then the details will show it. The same thing is true if genuine.
The text is similar to English construction, I will grant you. The word "ded" (dead) is English. One possible explanation is that it is a fake and carver had English as a first language with some knowledge of Runes, perhaps a school boy. Or was he a part of the expedition in 1362? Further, what sort of "proof" is to be inferred from the "transcriptions". I wonder what medieval monks did with all their imperfect copies. My guess is that they kept the boys warm on chilly nights. If we found some, would we infer they were trying to "fake" the Bible?
However, even before we weigh this against all the Rune figures being used in 1362, as well as every word, which modern scholars did not know in 1898, we must weigh it against the physical evidence, which cannot lie.
If you say it's a hoax, then you must explain the Mica weathering. Scott Wolter told me that Gaywacke has four different types of Mica embedded in it. He drilled cores
into the bottom of the stone to remove unweathered material for comparison. He separated out the type that weathers fastest. Then he compared it against samples from the undressed surface, the dressed surface and from the bottom of the carved Rune grooves. The results: The undressed portions were much more weathered than the dressed; The dressed surfaces were weathered the same as the carvings; It would have taken at least 200 years for that weathering to happen.
Now you might say that Scott Wolter is mistaken or dishonest, but he is an expert who set out to prove the Stone was a fake, and wound up becoming a believer in its authenticity. He removed enough material from the bottom of the Stone so that others in the future can repeat his experiments or test the slower weathering Micas. You can call him if you like. He will be happy to talk to you. My judgement is that he is an honest, competent man.
If you judge it a hoax, you must present a theory of how it could be a hoax, with the above facts a part of the explanation. Otherwise you must change your opinion, as I have.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.