DOCSLIB.ORG

Notes on the Runic Moments of Kent

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Notes on the Runic Moments of Kent Archaeologia Cantiana Vol. 8 1872 164 NOTES IN ILLUSTRATION OF THE RUNIC MONUMENTS OP KENT. BY THE EEV. DANIEL H. HAIGH. The Runic monuments of Kent are few; but their inscriptions or legends, short as these are, are sufficient to show that they are the work of different, though kindred, tribes or races. I shall notice them in the fol- lowing order:— 1. Two sceattas found in a grave at Sarre, and another at Birchington, the former in the possession of the Kent Archeeological Society, the latter (once Mr. Eolfe's) in the Mayer Museum, Liverpool. 2. A gravestone in the Dover Museum. 3. A gold triens, in the British Museum. 4. Two monumental stones, in the Canterbury Mu- seum. 5. A sword-hilt, from the cemetery at Gilton, now in the Mayer Museum. 6. A gold mancus, origin unknown, in the British Museum. 7. A sceatta found at Sibertswold, now in the posses- sion of the Kent Archseological Society. For the correct interpretation of their legends, a knowledge of the various systems of Eunic writing, which have been handed down to us in MSS. ranging from the eighth to the twelfth centuries, is necessary; and to show the grounds of my own, I propose to lay before my readers a digest of the information we possess I. IT. m. TV. v. ELL i x a & e ff 3. z a 6 y 2 3 if 6 '9 2 Z 3 /t Z 3 Oi FA t H R k X St J f * B n > M K h x W I I 4 vT B * h t * M M AT.* N * I * 5 K a M h !> X S KY t N i 1 * / Ft H f A > B R hXp i 1 f H t I 1 RH fr i Ml h f & K ft B. Mi 1 /X ^ a h b I I T ^M^^ E A R 1 f li LTRiZl 1 4 I-X Jf H* * ^AKItA^11!7 RUNIC MONUMENTS OF KENT. 165 on this subject. In so doing, I shall retrace much of the ground I traversed in the second chapter of my ' Conquest of Britain,' a chapter which I wrote with the object of maintaining, not only that our Angle, Saxon, and Jute forefathers possessed the art of writing when they came to this island in A.D. 428, and so might well have records of their own; but also that every branch of the great Teutonic stock possessed it in common with them, and that their peculiar system was a tradition from a period of very remote antiquity. Since then, a magnificent work on Runic monuments has appeared, the fruit of the indomitable perseverance of my good friend, Professor Stephens,1 a rich treasury of materials for the illustration of this subject, which, whilst they serve to correct some errors of detail into which I had fallen, (chiefly for lack of these very materials), abun- dantly confirm my views. No one will now tell us that the conquerors of Britain were an unlettered race, nor that their runes were derived from Greek*and Roman alphabets. We can trace their system of writing in full activity up to the fourth century of our era; and beyond that period how little do we know of the history of any Teutonic tribe! Yet, of that little, one indisputable fact is this, that they had letters three centuries earlier. I still hold firmly my opinion, that the art of writing, in that peculiar system which we call Runic, was a tradition, descending to historic times from that epoch of unknown anti- quity, when Goths, Franks, Saxons, Angles, Jutes, and the rest, were one nation, tribe, or family; and that each of these scions of that ancient race possessed and practised it, until, under the influence of Christian mis sionaries, they adopted in its stead the alphabet of Greece, or the abecedarium of Rome. In this I am 1 ' The Old Northern Uunic Monuments of Scandinavia and England,' by George Stephens, F.8.A. London and Copenhagen, 1866-7. 166 NOTES IN ILLUSTRATION OF THE sorry to say that I have not the advantage of my friend's support. He limits the use of runes to Scan- dinavia and England. Every rune-bearing relic, which the diggings of the last half-century in the cemeteries of France and Germany have revealed, is set down in his grand work as a "wanderer" from a Scandinavian home; and for every MS. authority for the existence of runes in Germany a,n English origin is claimed. It is not my purpose to enter into controversy with him; his " mo- numentum sere perennius" is before the world, and every one who feels an interest in the subject can read and judge for himself. In the interests of what I con- ceive to be the truth, I will endeavour in the following pages to set forth the grounds of my own conviction, that every Teutonic people had their own system' of writing, which, on account of its peculiar order, we call the Futhorc;1 that these futhorcs differed, (as did the dialects of the language they were employed to express), in the forms as well as the values of some of their runes, yet were so nearly alike as to indicate a common origin, however remote, just as the. JEolo-Dorian, Corinthian, Argive, Athenian, Ionian, and Insular alphabets differ from, and resemble, one another; that it is as incorrect to apply systematically the sounds of the runes of the English futhorc to the monuments of other kindred races, and as impossible to read the inscriptions on those monuments by the aid of the English futhorc alone, as it would be to apply the sounds of the Attic alphabet to an old Corinthian monument, or to read a Corinthian inscription with no alphabet but the Attic for a key. I commence, as in my former essay, with that futhorc which is best known, arid of which the monuments are of the greatest importance, and most certain interpretation; and so proceed to those which 1 Its first characters being F, U, TH, 0, R, C. " BUNIC MONUMENTS OF KENT. 167 are least known, and of which we have the fewest monuments. In the accompanying table (PI. 1) I give the old English futhorc from the following MSS.:— a. MS. at Vienna, Salisb. 140. From the orthography of the names of the runes I have inferred in my essay that this MS. is of Northumbrian origin and of the eighth century. I have since learned that W. Grimm regarded it as a transcript from one brought to Germany, in the latter part of that century, by the Northumbrian Arno, (brother of Alcwine), Bishop of Salzburg. This MS. gives twenty-eight characters, but differs from every other authority in the relative position of yr and ear. Fech Ur Thorn Os Eeeda Gen Geofu Uyn Haegil Naed Is Gaer Ih Peord lies Sigil Ti Berc Eh Mon Lagu Ing Daeg Oedil Ac Aes Eor Yr I. MS. at St. Gallen, No. 878, of the ninth century. It is called " Anguliscum," to distinguish it from an alphabet which precedes it, (and which I shall notice in the sequel), and from the Scandinavian futhorc, which is there called "Abecedarium Nord." It gives twenty-nine characters, in what I regard as the correct order; but the 15th, as here represented, is indistin- guishable from the 29th. Neither the names nor the powers of the runes are given. c. MS. Cotton., Otho B. 10. In this the names and powers of the runes are supplied, but a later hand has inserted correc- tions, and those incorrectly. Thus, the 20th is m<m} and every authority (except the following) places man here; the corrector has written deg, and d over the true value, TO. The 24th, (in every other the 23rd), is dceg, as it should be; the corrector has written mann, and m over d. The scribe has given to ior the 28th place instead of the 29th, and to ear the 29th instead of the 28th; and the corrector has inserted tir as the name of the latter. Important variants of the 9th and 13th runes are added, derived from other futhorcs. 168 NOTES IN ILLUSTRATION OF THE Feoh "Or Thorn Os Bad Gen G-yfu Wen Hsegl Nyd Is Ger Boh Peorfch Bollix Sigel Tir Beorc Eh Man. Lagu Ing Ethel Deeg Ac u33sc Tr lar Bar Cweorth Stan Gar d. MS. Cotton., Domitian A. 9. In this futhorc there are several ei'rors, imputable to the writer of the names of the runes. The llth is iac instead of is; the 13th sigel instead of eoh; neither 15th nor 16th named; the 19th is ethel instead of eh; the 20th deg instead of mem; the 23rd manis instead of deg; and the 28th tir as well as ear; as if the scribe of this manuscript were the corrector of the last. Tolx, the name which is omitted over the 15th, is inserted over the 31st, which is really cale; and a rune resembling iolx, but with calc written over it, follows gwr, and a variant of the 24th is added above the line. These are borrowed from another futhorc, to be noticed in the sequel. Over ior is written orent, and over queorth, cii/r. Feoh Ur Thorn Os Bad Gen Gifu Wen Hegel Nead lac Geor Sigel Peord Tir Berc Ethel Deg Lagir Ing Manis Ac JEw Yr Ear lor Cwaaorth lolx Stan Gar Gale e.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Rise and Fall of Anglo-Saxon Runic Stone Monuments Runic Inscriptions and the Development of Sculpture in Early Medieval England
    Runrön Runologiska bidrag utgivna av Institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet 24 Kopár, Lilla, 2021: The Rise and Fall of Anglo-Saxon Runic Stone Monu- ments. Runic Inscriptions and the Development of Sculpture in Early Medi- eval England. In: Reading Runes. Proceedings of the Eighth International Sym posium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions, Nyköping, Sweden, 2–6 September 2014. Ed. by MacLeod, Mindy, Marco Bianchi and Henrik Williams. Uppsala. (Run rön 24.) Pp. 143–156. DOI: 10.33063/diva-438873 © 2021 Lilla Kopár (CC BY) LILLA KOPÁR The Rise and Fall of Anglo-Saxon Runic Stone Monuments Runic Inscriptions and the Development of Sculpture in Early Medieval England Abstract The Old English runic corpus contains at least thirty-seven inscriptions carved in stone, which are concentrated geographically in the north of England and dated mainly from the seventh to the ninth centuries. The quality and content of the inscriptions vary from simple names (or frag- ments thereof) to poetic vernacular memorial formulae. Nearly all of the inscriptions appear on monumental sculpture in an ecclesiastical context and are considered to have served commemor- ative purposes. Rune-inscribed stones show great variety in terms of monument type, from name-stones, cross-shafts and slabs to elaborate monumental crosses that served different func- tions and audiences. Their inscriptions have often been analyzed by runologists and epigraphers from a linguistic or epigraphic point of view, but the relationship of these inscribed monuments to other sculptured stones has received less attention in runological circles. Thus the present article explores the place and development of rune-inscribed monuments in the context of sculp- tural production in pre-Conquest England, and identifies periods of innovation and change in the creation and function of runic monuments.
    [Show full text]
  • Myths of the Rune Stone: Viking Martyrs and the Birthplace of America
    book review Myths of the Rune Stone: Viking Martyrs For example, Krueger’s and the Birthplace of America take on the local and reli- David M. Krueger gious dimensions of the (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2015, 214 p., stone’s history is original. Paper, $24.95.) He excellently explores how the stone became a near- Many places claim to be the birthplace of America, but few sacred artifact even outside have been as contested as the one near Kensington, Minnesota. the Scandinavian American The source of this claim, a stone slab unearthed in 1898, is the ethnic community. Krueger subject of David Krueger’s Myths of the Rune Stone. This first shows how in the 1920s the comprehensive book about the popular meaning of the Kens- stone— by way of a failed ington Rune Stone is a welcome contribution to the study of its plan for a massive 200- foot historiography and to the impact of local culture on an Ameri- monument— became a can origin myth. tool of small- town booster- Since its discovery by a Swedish- born farmer, the Kensing- ism. In 1928, the stone was ton Rune Stone’s claim that Norsemen were present in what purchased by a group of is now Minnesota in the year 1362 has been a topic of heated Alexandria businessmen controversy. Although scholars of Scandinavian languages and and put on display in a downtown bank. To the Alexandria runology (the study of runic inscriptions) have long agreed community, the stone was a source of prestige and a strategy about its nineteenth- century origin, the stone has continued to to promote tourism.
    [Show full text]
  • Anglo-Saxon Runes
    Runes Each rune can mean something in divination (fortune telling) but they also act as a phonetic alphabet. This means that they can sound out words. When writing your name or whatever in runes, don’t pay attention to the letters we use, but rather the sounds we use to make up the words. Then finds the runes with the closest sounds and put them together. Anglo- Swedo- Roman Germanic Danish Saxon Norwegian A ansuz ac ar or god oak-tree (?) AE aesch ash-tree A/O or B berkanan bercon or birch-twig (?) C cen torch D dagaz day E ehwaz horse EA ear earth, grave(?) F fehu feoh fe fe money, cattle, money, money, money, wealth property property property gyfu / G gebo geofu gift gift (?) G gar spear H hagalaz hail hagol (?) I isa is iss ice ice ice Ï The sound of this character was something ihwaz / close to, but not exactly eihwaz like I or IE. yew-tree J jera year, fruitful part of the year K kenaz calc torch, flame (?) (?) K name unknown L laguz / laukaz water / fertility M mannaz man N naudiz need, necessity, nou (?) extremity ing NG ingwaz the god the god "Ing" "Ing" O othala- hereditary land, oethil possession OE P perth-(?) peorth meaning unclear (?) R raidho reth (?) riding, carriage S sowilo sun or sol (?) or sun tiwaz / teiwaz T the god Tiw (whose name survives in Tyr "Tuesday") TH thurisaz thorn thurs giant, monster (?) thorn giant, monster U uruz ur wild ox (?) wild ox W wunjo joy X Y yr bow (?) Z agiz(?) meaning unclear Now write your name: _________________________________________________________________ Rune table borrowed from: www.cratchit.org/dleigh/alpha/runes/runes.htm .
    [Show full text]
  • Runestone Images and Visual Communication
    RUNESTONE IMAGES AND VISUAL COMMUNICATION IN VIKING AGE SCANDINAVIA MARJOLEIN STERN, MA Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy JULY 2013 Abstract The aim of this thesis is the visual analysis of the corpus of Viking Age Scandinavian memorial stones that are decorated with figural images. The thesis presents an overview of the different kinds of images and their interpretations. The analysis of the visual relationships between the images, ornamentation, crosses, and runic inscriptions identifies some tendencies in the visual hierarchy between these different design elements. The contents of the inscriptions on runestones with images are also analysed in relation to the type of image and compared to runestone inscriptions in general. The main outcome of this analysis is that there is a correlation between the occurrence of optional elements in the inscription and figural images in the decoration, but that only rarely is a particular type of image connected to specific inscription elements. In this thesis the carved memorial stones are considered as multimodal media in a communicative context. As such, visual communication theories and parallels in commemoration practices (especially burial customs and commemorative praise poetry) are employed in the second part of the thesis to reconstruct the cognitive and social contexts of the images on the monuments and how they create and display identities in the Viking Age visual communication. Acknowledgements Many people have supported and inspired me throughout my PhD. I am very grateful to my supervisors Judith Jesch and Christina Lee, who have been incredibly generous with their time, advice, and bananas.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rök Runestone and the End of the World. Futhark 9–10
    The Rök Runestone and the End of the World Per Holmberg (University of Gothenburg), Bo Gräslund (Uppsala University), Olof Sundqvist (Stockholm University), and Henrik Williams (Uppsala University) Abstract The Rök runestone from central middle Sweden, dated to around 800 CE, is famous, among other things, for a supposed reference to the emperor Theodo­ ric the Great. This study proposes instead that the inscription deals with an anxiety triggered by a son’s death and the fear of a new climate crisis similar to the catastrophic one after 536 CE. Combining perspectives and findings from semiotics, philology, archaeology, and history of religion, the study presents a completely new interpretation which follows a unified theme, showing how the monument can be understood in the socio­cultural and religious context of early Viking Age Scandinavia. The inscription consists, according to the pro­ posed interpretation, of nine enigmatic questions. Five of the questions con­ cern the sun, and four of them, it is argued, ask about issues related to the god Odin. A central finding is that there are relevant parallels to the inscription in early Scandinavian poetry, especially in the Eddic poem Vafþrúðnismál. Keywords: Rök, runestones, Viking Age, riddles, Eddic poetry, skaldic poetry, climate crisis he Rök runestone (Ög 136) is the most famous runic monument of Tthe Viking Age. It was erected c. 800 CE in a prosperous agricultural district in today’s central middle Sweden by Varinn as a memorial to his son Vāmōðʀ. Except for one damaged line, its more than 700 runes and other characters are still clearly legible, and cover all five visible sides of a five­ton granite slab, over two and a half meters high above the ground.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading Runes in Late Medieval Manuscripts
    Runrön Runologiska bidrag utgivna av Institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet 24 Beck, Wolfgang, 2021: Reading Runes in Late Medieval Manuscripts. In: Read ing Runes. Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions, Nyköping, Sweden, 2–6 September 2014. Ed. by MacLeod, Mindy, Marco Bianchi and Henrik Williams. Uppsala. (Run rön 24.) Pp. 225–232. DOI: 10.33063/diva-438880 © 2021 Wolfgang Beck (CC BY) WOLFGANG BECK Reading Runes in Late Medieval Manuscripts Abstract Whilst the runica manuscripta of English tradition, the Scandinavian rune poems, and the occasional use of runes as writers’ signatures and in the Old High German glosses have been comparatively well-researched, this does not apply to the same extent to the use of runes in late medieval (German) manuscripts. Runes and runic alphabets are found far less frequently in these, for example in the foreign alphabets in the Voyages by Sir John Mandeville or in a manuscript with medical remedies and an invocation of the devil; finally also in a magical treatise relating to the hermetic tradition. However, the use of runes in late medieval manuscripts cannot properly be explained by the functions usually attributed to the runica manuscripta. On the understanding that discussion of runica manuscripta is not just a runic problem in the narrow sense, but can also contribute to an understanding of medieval culture, the specific implications of the use and pragmatics of the late medieval runica manuscripta will be explored. The func- tion of runes in late medieval manuscripts should be determined at the same time with reference to secret written forms, readability and illegibility.
    [Show full text]
  • ᛶ 16F1 ᛷ 16F2 ᛸ 16F3 ᛱ 16F4 ᛲ 16F5 ᛁ 16C1 ᛳ 16F6 ᛴ 16F7 ᛵ
    ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2 N4013R L2/11-096R 2011-05-10 Universal Multiple-Octet Coded Character Set International Organization for Standardization Organisation Internationale de Normalisation Международная организация по стандартизации Doc Type: Working Group Document Title: Proposal to encode additional Runic characters in the UCS Source: Michael Everson and Andrew West Status: Individual Contribution Action: For consideration by JTC1/SC2/WG2 and UTC Date: 2011-05-10 0. Introduction. A number of Runic characters should be encoded to fill gaps in the UCS. Three of them are found in the writings of J. R. R. Tolkien, and five of them are found on the Anglo-Saxon Franks Casket. If this proposal is accepted, the following characters will be added to the standard (since the Franks Casket characters replace original inherited runes, those are given on the right for comparison): ᛶ 16F1 RUNIC LETTER K ᛷ 16F2 RUNIC LETTER SH ᛸ 16F3 RUNIC LETTER OO ᛱ 16F4 RUNIC LETTER FRANKS CASKET OS ᚩ 16A9 RUNIC LETTER OS O ᛲ 16F5 RUNIC LETTER FRANKS CASKET IS ᛁ 16C1 RUNIC LETTER ISAZ IS ISS I ᛳ 16F6 RUNIC LETTER FRANKS CASKET EH ᛖ 16D6 RUNIC LETTER EHWAZ EH E ᛴ 16F7 RUNIC LETTER FRANKS CASKET AC ᚪ 16AA RUNIC LETTER AC A ᛵ 16F8 RUNIC LETTER FRANKS CASKET AESC ᚫ 16AB RUNIC LETTER AESC 1. Tolkienian extensions. Although for The Lord of the Rings J. R. R. Tolkien devised and employed two writing systems, the featural Tengwar script and the runiform Cirth script, in The Hobbit and some of his other writings he made use of Old English runes.
    [Show full text]
  • Anglo Saxon Runes
    Anglo Saxon Runes LO: I can recognise Anglo- Saxon runes. Anglo Saxon Runes Success Criteria: I can recognise historians used these runes to find out what happened during Anglo-Saxon times. I can successfully interpret Anglo-Saxon runes. Anglo Saxon Runes Runes were letters used by the Saxons to write short messages of ownership, like “This belongs to Offa”. When the Anglo-Saxons became Christians, they began to use the Roman alphabet for writing (as we still do today). Before that time, they wrote in runes like these: How many letters do you think there are? There are 33 letters in the Runic Alphabet. Is that more or less than the Roman one that we use? We have 26 letters in our Roman alphabet. The Anglo Saxon alphabet takes it’s name from the first 6 letters. ‘Futhork’. F U TH O R K Feo Ur Thorn Os Rad Ken Here are the remainder. G W H N I J IE P X S T B E M L NG Beroc Eoh Mann Lagu Ing OE D A AE Y IO Otael Daeg Ac Asec Yr Ior And finally….. EA QU C ST G Ear Cweorp Calk Stan Gar You can see that some of the runes are quite like our capital letters. Some are easier to guess if you turn them upside down. Some are not what you would think! The word RUNE means secret or mystery. Runes were used in religious ceremonies. They were a charm or a spell as well as a way of writing messages. The Anglo Saxons believed that if you used the runes in the right order they had magical powers.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonhuman Voices in Anglo-​Saxon Literature and Material Culture
    i NONHUMAN VOICES IN ANGLO- SAXON LITERATURE AND MATERIAL CULTURE ii Series editors: Anke Bernau and David Matthews Series founded by: J. J. Anderson and Gail Ashton Advisory board: Ruth Evans, Nicola McDonald, Andrew James Johnston, Sarah Salih, Larry Scanlon and Stephanie Trigg The Manchester Medieval Literature and Culture series publishes new research, informed by current critical methodologies, on the literary cultures of medieval Britain (including Anglo- Norman, Anglo- Latin and Celtic writings), including post- medieval engagements with and representations of the Middle Ages (medievalism). ‘Literature’ is viewed in a broad and inclusive sense, embracing imaginative, historical, political, scientific, dramatic and religious writings. The series offers monographs and essay collections, as well as editions and translations of texts. Titles Available in the Series The Parlement of Foulys (by Geoffrey Chaucer) D. S. Brewer (ed.) Language and imagination in the Gawain- poems J. J. Anderson Water and fire:The myth of the Flood in Anglo- Saxon England Daniel Anlezark Greenery: Ecocritical readings of late medieval English literature Gillian Rudd Sanctity and pornography in medieval culture:On the verge Bill Burgwinkle and Cary Howie In strange countries: Middle English literature and its afterlife: Essays in Memory of J. J. Anderson David Matthews (ed.) A knight’s legacy: Mandeville and Mandevillian lore in early modern England Ladan Niayesh (ed.) Rethinking the South English legendaries Heather Blurton and Jocelyn Wogan- Browne (eds)
    [Show full text]
  • Rune Poem' in the Encyclopedia of British Medieval Literature Author(S) Birkett, Thomas Editor(S) Echard, Siân Rouse, Robert
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Cork Open Research Archive Title 'Rune Poem' in The Encyclopedia of British Medieval Literature Author(s) Birkett, Thomas Editor(s) Echard, Siân Rouse, Robert Publication date 2017-08 Original citation Birkett, T. (2017) 'Rune Poem', in Echard, S. and Rouse, R. (eds.) The Encyclopedia of British Medieval Literature, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. isbn: 978-1-118-39698-8 Type of publication Book chapter Link to publisher's http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/book/10.1002/9781118396957 version Access to the full text of the published version may require a subscription. Rights © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2017 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Item downloaded http://hdl.handle.net/10468/5089 from Downloaded on 2018-08-23T18:56:08Z Rune Poem poet deviates from the typical order of the futhorc in several places, including placing TOM BIRKETT the rune ear (“earth” or “grave”) at the end University College Cork, Ireland of the sequence, seemingly to conclude the poem on a meditative note. Whilst it has been A rune poem is a verse exposition of the com- suggested that the rune poem tradition as a monnamesgiventotheindividualcharacters whole developed “as an elementary guide to of the runic alphabet, and examples of vary- the futhorc,presumablydesignedtohelpthe ing complexity survive from Anglo-Saxon memory” (Page 1999, 63), in the case of the England, thirteenth-century Norway, and late Old English poem the individual stanzas are medieval Iceland. far too developed to serve a purely mnemonic The original tenth-century witness to the function (Shippey 1976).
    [Show full text]
  • Runic and Latin Written Culture: Co-Existence and Interaction of Two Script Cultures in the Norwegian Middle Ages
    Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen Deutsches Seminar Abteilung für Skandinavistik Magisterarbeit Runic and Latin Written Culture: Co-Existence and Interaction of Two Script Cultures in the Norwegian Middle Ages Eingereicht von Stephanie Elisabeth Baur zur Erlangung des Grades Magistra Artium im Fachbereich Nordische Philologie Eingereicht am: 14. Juni 2011 1. Gutachterin: Prof. Dr. Stefanie Gropper 2. Gutachterin: Prof. Dr. Antje Wischmann TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 CHANGING PERSPECTIVES IN RUNOLOGICAL RESEARCH: A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW 6 2.1 Prelude: Medieval Theoretical Treatments of Runes 7 2.2 Early Modern Runological Research 8 2.3 The 19th Century: The Beginnings of Modern Runology 10 2.4 Runological Research in the 20th Century 13 2.5 Paradigmatic Change: From Magic Script to Functional Writing System 14 3 METHOD AND CLASSIFICATION 18 3.1 Some Preliminary Remarks on Runology and Method 18 3.2 Basic Methodological Procedures 19 3.3 Principles for Transliteration 21 3.4 Identification of Runic Inscriptions: The Corpus Editions 24 3.5 Latin Runic Inscriptions 27 3.6 Definition of Terms 28 3.7 The Two-Script Culture of the Norwegian Middle Ages: 30 Establishing the Cultural Background 8 4 TWO SCRIPT SYSTEMS IN CONTACT: LEVELS OF IMPACT 38 4.1 Script System: Changes in the Fuþark 39 4.1.1 Preliminaries: The Concept behind the Viking Age Runes 40 4.1.2 Expansion of the Fuþark: Strategies and Motivation 43 4.1.3 Preliminary Conclusion 55 4.2 Writing Conventions: Consequences for Runic Orthography and Punctuation 57 4.2.1 Preliminaries:
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin of Runes and Old English Runic Inscriptions
    The Origin of Runes and Old English Runic Inscriptions Park, Young-Bae Kookmin University, Korea Outline I. Introduction: the origin of runic writing. three main theories II. The Common Germanic Fuþark III. Runic writing in England IV. A Case of Runic Inscriptions: the Ruthwell Cross I. Introduction The word ‘rune’ suggests not merely a form of writing, the angular characters of the old Germanic script long since discarded, but a whole world of mystery and magic: strange symbols scratched into ancient tools and weapon not lying idle in some museum show-case; names of warriors, secret spells, even snatches of songs, appearing on objects as diverse as minute silver coins and towering stone crosses, scattered in the unlikeliest places from Yugoslavia to Orkney, from Greenland to Greece. The word itself means ‘mystery’ and ‘secret’ in early English and its related languages. When Bishop Wulfila translated the Bible into fourth-century Gothic, he rendered St Mark’s ‘the mystery of the kingdom of God’(iv. 11) as ‘rū na þiudangardjōs guþs’. When the chieftains and wise counsellors of Anglo-Saxon England gathered in conclave, men called their secret deliberations ‘runes’, as does the poet of the Old English Wanderer in a line weighty with wisdom and secrecy: Swa cwæðsnottor on mode, gesæt him sundor æt rune. (Thus spoke the wise man in his heart as he sat apart in secret musing.) Proceedings of the SCRIPTA 2008, Seoul, Oct. 8~12, 2008 In Beowulf, the Danish nobleman Æschere is described as the king’s runwita, probably as distinguished a title as our privy councillor.
    [Show full text]