Re: The Alans

In soc.history.medieval ATT?LA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Soren Larsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...

>> The Kylver Stone simply lists the futhark

> what are written on this stone?  will u give information on about it? 

>> The Möjbro stone:
>> 
>> A: frawaradaR
>> B: anahahaislagina
>> 
>> A: 'Frawarath '
>> B: possibly 'slain on horse'

> This is far away from a certain statement ..It is only related to the
> possibility ...

There are two inscriptions on the Kylver stone. One is, as said, simply
the futhark. The other is the word sueus.

Opinions about the Möjbro stone differ widely. Some say it is a student
joke from the 17:th century, but the official view is that it is genuine.

The theory about it being false says that the as function as interpunctions
and that the other runes are initials for some of the forgers.

Like this:

fr.w.r.d.R.n.ha ha islaginaR

according to that theory "ha islagina" means have made it. The last R
they say is golden no. for the year of the forgery. (they hit upon this
because that rune stands alone above the rest of the text.)

The stone was found close to a parish where the infamous Nils Rabenius
had worked. The other initials are supposedly those of his friends.

The person coming up with this theory also checked for printings of
copper plates of this stone and found that someone had taken a printing
from about 1680 and put it in a catalogue from the 1620s.

A very nice theory, because we know that Rabenius forged himself into
the nobility. Other factors also seem to be right. But I checked the
golden no. for the year 1676 (when it was supposedly made) and the sign
isn't right. An error that casts doubts over the other assertions.

Looking at the stone, you do get a feeling that something is fishy. How come
that the carver manages to make a very vivid picture of a horseman and his
dogs, but is unable to fit the carving into neat lines? That single R spoils
the harmony of the stone.

People in defence of the stone has said that the old futhark was unknown
in the 1680s, mind you in the same breath they pointed out that there were
copper plate printings of it possibly dating from the 20s. :-)

We really don't know whether it is a forgery or if it is genuine. There
are perhaps 70 North Germanic inscriptions in Sweden. The amount of extant
text is simply too small for us to give clear cut answers.
 
What is very clear is that we don't need a connection with some Turkish
script. At least those people have to come up with something better than
trying to make a sentence out of the futhark. They also have to explain
why we find most of the early rune texts in central Germany and
not somewhere off to the east.


-- 
Dake-san: - You sure are confident to say you  | Professor:
don't need a handicap. How strong are you kid? | what's another word for
Hikaru: - How strong - hm - about as strong as | "indolent gamer"?
Honinbo Shusaku, probably.                     | Well, I think it's Mof.