| 1. |
- Axelsdóttir, Katrín
(author)
-
All the King’s Runes
- 2020
-
In: Futhark. - : Uppsala University. - 1892-0950 .- 2003-296X. ; 9-10, s. 231-260
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The so-called Third Grammatical Treatise by the Icelandic poet and scholar Óláfr Þórðarson hvítaskáld (c. 1210–59) contains a section in which runes are compared to letters of other alphabets. Óláfr quotes a runic sentence that he attributes to King Valdemar II of Denmark, at whose court Óláfr stayed in the winter of 1240–41. The meaning of this sentence, which is said to contain all the runes of the futhark, has been considered obscure by many scholars. However, some attempts towards its elucidation have been made. It has for example been proposed that the sentence alludes to a hawk (perhaps referring to falconry) since one of the words might correspond to Old Icelandic haukr, Old Danish høk. Here, a different interpretation is proposed, according to which the sentence is a reference to King Valdemar and Óláfr’s special interest, the runes, more specifically the b-rune, and its derivate, a variant of the p-rune, i.e. ᛕ.
|
|
| 2. |
- Barnes, Michael P.
(author)
-
Corpus Editions of Scandinavian Runic Inscriptions in Britain and Ireland
- 2022
-
In: Futhark. - : Uppsala University. - 1892-0950 .- 2003-296X. ; 12, s. 99-110
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This article begins with brief mention of two significant early attempts at editing Scandinavian runic inscriptions from the British Isles. It goes on to explain how the modern scholarly corpus editions of these inscriptions came about. It describes the genesis and content of the four works that together present and elucidate the total corpus: The Runic Inscriptions of Maeshowe, Orkney (1994), The Runic Inscriptions of Viking Age Dublin (1997), The Scandinavian Runic Inscriptions of Britain (2006) and The Runic Inscriptions of the Isle of Man (2019). The circumstances in which each of these editions was conceived and brought to fruition are discussed, and the way they are structured and set out is examined in some detail. The advantages and drawbacks of different ways of presenting the runic material are considered, though no overall conclusions on these questions are offered.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Carlquist, Jonas
(author)
-
Runskrift på fibulor: Ett tidigt germanskt skriftbruk
- 2024
-
In: Futhark. - Oslo och Uppsala : University of Oslo, Uppsala University. - 1892-0950 .- 2003-296X. ; 13, s. 5-54
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This article discusses the use of runic inscriptions on fibulas from the period 0–700, exploring how they enhance the jewellery, investigating them as sources of information on Germanic literacy and viewing them from a social semiotic per spective. First the inscriptions which contain a verb are dis cussed and then those lack ing a verb are fitted into the same patterns. For this Martin H. Graf’s concept of Kleinst schriftlichkeit ‘minimal literacy’ is em ployed whereby isolated words, such as names, can imply more complex mes sages. The article discusses sixty-four runic fibulas from Germanic regions and identifies three different uses: (1) reveal ing the name of the maker of the fibula or the inscription (usually a man, the donor?), (2) invoking prosperity (usually a woman wishing happiness or love for a man), and (3) indicating the owner (always a female name and no verb). Chronological differences are evident. The oldest ones usually contain a male name (maker or donor). Owner in scrip tions and prosperity inscriptions are found, in addition to maker inscrip tions, on fibulas from the period after the year 500 and from this point, female participants become more prominent. The earliest inscriptions are mostly from Scandinavia while those from the southern area become more numerous from the 500s. In the southern area, there are many non-lexical inscrip tions, whereas those from the northern area are more linguistically advanced. The significance of a fibula bearing a runic inscription, whether legible or not, was probably greater than that of a non-runic one.
|
|
| 6. |
- Cucina, Carla
(author)
-
A Runic Calendar in the Vatican Library
- 2020
-
In: Futhark. - : Uppsala University. - 1892-0950 .- 2003-296X. ; 9-10, s. 261-274
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In 2014, the present author came across a runic calendar — that is a perpetual calendar in which golden numbers and Sunday letters are represented by runes – stored in the repository of the Vatican Latin Collection as item no. 14613. It was known previously to scholars only through a set of photographic reproductions dating back to the mid-1800s now in the Royal Library in Stockholm. This paper is a short and corrected summary of the author’s detailed account of the Vatican runic item, which was published in the Miscellanea Bibliothecae Vaticanae 22 (2016). This well-preserved artifact, dated 1684 and belonging to the Swedish “rune-book” type, consists of eight small wooden boards carved on both sides, bound together by a cord passing through two holes near one end. Both the contents of the calendar and its structure and overall style allow an identification of its origin as belonging to the post-medieval Swedish production in the Baltic area, more specifically in the Swedish settlements in present-day Estonia. Interesting analytic cues derive from the first account of the calendar as being stored in Bibliotheca Barberina in Rome, while a comparative investigation of the few rune-book calendars from Estonia that we know of shows that the Vatican item is original in some formal aspects and very attentive in responding to calendar issues and Swedish models. The feasts recorded with symbols in the calendar conform to the Åbo diocese; the holiday marks agree with the Swedish popular tradition, but are occasionally re-interpreted; various onomastic initials, owner’s or identification marks (bomärke) and the so-called Saint Peter’s game are cut on the cover pages of the rune-book.
|
|
| 7. |
- Findell, Martin
(author)
-
Corpus Editions of English and Frisian Runic Inscriptions
- 2022
-
In: Futhark. - : Uppsala University. - 1892-0950 .- 2003-296X. ; 12, s. 81-98
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The inscriptions of England and Frisia attest to the expansion of the older rune-row, chiefly with a set of additional vowel runes. Further developments in England from the later 600s suggest a systematic reform of the writing system. The extant corpus of English epigraphical inscriptions contains over 100 objects, although the large number of coins with runic legends raises problems for any attempt to collate all the material. While a number of handlists or catalogues have been produced over the years, there has been no fully detailed corpus edition until the forthcoming volumes produced by Gaby Waxenberger. The corpus of inscriptions associated with Frisia or (Pre-)Old Frisian language is much smaller, comprising up to twenty-four objects. The status of this material as a distinctly “Frisian” corpus in contrast to the English one has been challenged. Like the English inscriptions, the Frisian ones have been described and studied as a group in many publications, but a dedicated corpus edition has only recently been published by Livia Kaiser. The present article includes a historical overview of the published work on these corpora leading up to the recent corpus editions, and discusses some of the methodological difficulties in defining the corpus. It concludes with a summary of the arguments for studying them as a single corpus defined at least in part by innovations in writing practice around the North Sea.
|
|
| 8. |
- Freund, Andrea, et al.
(author)
-
Modern Rune Carving in Northern Scotland
- 2019
-
In: Futhark. - : Uppsala University. - 1892-0950 .- 2003-296X. ; 8, s. 127-150
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This article discusses modern runic inscriptions from Orkney and Caithness. It presents various examples, some of which were previously considered “genuine”, and reveals that OR 13 Skara Brae is of modern provenance. Other examples from the region can be found both on boulders or in bedrock and in particular on ancient monuments ranging in date from the Neolithic to the Iron Age. The terminology applied to modern rune carving, in particular the term “forgery”, is examined, and the phenomenon is considered in relation to the Kensington runestone. Comparisons with modern rune carving in Sweden are made and suggestions are presented as to why there is such an abundance of recently carved inscriptions in Northern Scotland.
|
|
| 9. |
- Fridell, Staffan, 1952-, et al.
(author)
-
De äldre runorna på Rökstenen
- 2021
-
In: Futhark. - : Uppsala University. - 1892-0950 .- 2003-296X. ; 11, s. 167-171
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- A short section of the runic inscription on the Rök stone (Ög 136) is written mainly in runes from the older, 24-type futhark. This use has for a long time been considered a form of cryptography, one of several in the inscription. The older runes are used to represent their corresponding runes from the younger, 16-type futhark, but in a reversed, “mirrored” manner; for example, whereas the younger futhark’s t rune is used for [t] and [d], the ᴅ rune has that same function in this part of the Rök inscription. There are in addition two unique runes in the section, corresponding to a and i respectively, which are probably variants of the old jāra- and ihwaʀ-runes, both of which adhere to the acrophonic principle of orthography.
|
|
| 10. |
- Fridell, Staffan, 1952-, et al.
(author)
-
Om Kensingtonrunornas ursprung
- 2021
-
In: Futhark. - : Uppsala University. - 1892-0950 .- 2003-296X. ; 11, s. 155-165
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Runes of the same type as those on the Kensington stone are now known from five other source groups in Sweden, from the provinces of Dalarna, Hälsingland and Medelpad, and with datings from 1870 to 1911. The relative uniformity of the runes in the different sources and the fact that there are no known inscriptions before 1870 indicates that the Kensington runes were created not long before, probably around the middle of the 1800s. The Kensington runes can be divided into three categories: (1) long-branch runes of a Viking Age type, which probably are derived from popular literature on runes in the 1800s — most likely from the widespread book Den kunskapsrike skolmästaren by Carl Rosander, first published in 1857; (2) runes modelled after Dalecarlian runes; and (3) newly created runes. Those who designed the Kensington rune row must have had knowledge of Dalecarlian runes, which indicates a probable provenance in the parish of Älvdalen in Dalarna.
|
|
