Comments
|
Page 3 of 3 pages < 1 2 3 |
Kenneth Mackay
in hobart
|
Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 | 05:37 AM
I don't really care if the stone is a hoax but I would like to track down a book that I read in 1967 (fiction) that was based on the Kensington stone. I can't remember the title or the author. I thought I had found it when I found reference to a book called Immortal Rock the saga of the Kensington Stone by Laura Goodman Salverson. However this is not the book, it is too adult and the story is different to what I remember. Does anyone know of any fiction books based on the Kensingtom stone |
Mark Johnson
|
Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 | 06:58 AM
Hi
History tells us that Futhark Runic was last used in the 17th Century by a Swedish Admiral to convey his battle plans because even by then it was so little known he could use it as a secret code.
If you read my report you will be able to read and write Futhark Runic as well as he and his officers did. Something that has not been done since then, over four hundred years ago.
The inscription on the Kensington Runestone is in a ship |
oyun oyna
in Maegan in Tampa, FL - USA Member
|
Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 | 03:31 PM
You're forgetting about L'Anse-aux-Meadows, where the Vikings settled 500 years before Columbus even thought of getting to N.America. That places them already in North America. Since they don't know what happened to the Vikings there, could it be possible that that was the jumping off point for them to go other places? |
Annoymous
|
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 | 02:11 PM
See "American Heritage" April 1959 Volume 10 Issue 3 for Erik Wahlgren article "The Case of the Kennsington Rune stone"; also follow up article [http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1977/5/1977_5_110.shtml American Heritage Postscripts AUgust 1977]  |
Andrew
in Bellingham, WA
|
Posted: Thu Apr 15, 2010 | 12:12 AM
However, you cannot deny the geological data. It has been successfully proven that the runes are older than 200 years. The erosion of micas has also shown that the stone was in fact under a tree for a few decades. It would be a nice trick if Ohman could carve the stone a few hundred years before he was born while it was under a tree. |
Steinar Skailand
in Europe (Norway)
|
Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 | 10:28 AM
Se "Top Ten Viking Hoaxes".
4 significant American engraved stones
are delt with. Waki, waki "4000 years are much better than (2010-1362=648)". |
E
|
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2010 | 04:16 AM
Hello,
I have come across this purely by mistake but I am fascinated by the assumptions made here. First allow me to apologize for any misspelling, English is not my first language. Secondly my history is thus I am an assistant professor at University in Iceland my primary study is Norse culture. I have attended research projects, Archeological digs in Gotland, Fresia, Sweden, Iceland, Faeroe Islands, Norway, Russia and Nova Scotia in the past 25 years. My view point is completely academic..
I would like to address the assumption that the Kensington stone is True or Fraud. The answer is very simple, we in the academic word are not certain. There are many who discount it while others accept it with out question. Neither of these parties are being very scientific. One of the major problems with the Runes used on the stone is that with our current knowledge the runes come from several different eras. Some of the runes were not used after the viking age, (8th - 11th centuries), other runes were still in use in certain areas until the 17th century. This may strike some as odd but in Iceland and the Faeroe Islands runic was used along with Latin alphabet until the mid 18th century when it was outlawed for having heathen ties.
In Iceland we do not doubt that our Norse ancestors made it to America, we readily agree upon this since it is stated in our sagas more than once. Also there are stories from the 14th and 15th centuries of Icelanders fleeing debts and going to find Vinland. Several of them eventually came back to Iceland to free themselves of the debts and told tales of Wild men in Vinland. One of our most famous stories is of an individual whose party made friends with a groups of Skr |
Tracy
in USA
|
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 | 11:04 AM
I find the KRS to be interesting. Is it a fake or is it real, I don't know and I'm not sure that anyone can realistically or scientifically say one way or the other. The geological evidence first provided in 1910 and confirmed in the 2000s about the weathering of the rock and the lines of the runes states that the inscription is older than what Olof could have generated. The linguistic evidence for a fraud provided in the early 1900s through Molte in the 1950s has taken serious credibility shots with the recent discoveries of runes in existence in the 1300s that are contained on the KRS by Richard Nielsen. My thought is that anyone who says that the KRS is absolutely real or absolutely fake is not being scientific in their methods. True science requires an open mind and an ability to admit if you are wrong not just agree to disagree. I would find it very interesting to see more research on the KRS in conjuntion with the Heavener, Poteau, Shawnee and other rune stones found in the US and incorporate the triangular mooring holes. |
|
Page 3 of 3 pages < 1 2 3 |
In order to post comments you have to register as a member of the site. We were forced to restrict commenting because spammers were flooding the comment form with spam and crashing the server.
|
Note: This thread is located in the Old Forum of the Museum of Hoaxes.
|
