486 research outputs found
Corpus Editions of Scandinavian Runic Inscriptions in Britain and Ireland
No full textThis 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. https://doi.org/10.33063/diva-491880</p
Runic and Skaldic Evidence of Palatal r in West Norse
No full textRunic evidence shows that the phonemes r and palatal ʀ merged at an early date in West Norse. I argue here that skaldic poetry also comprises valid evidence of this merger and that there is no reason to believe that r and ʀ should have rhymed until the two phonemes had actually coalesced. All the poets of the Viking Age whose verse consists of at least eighty rhymed lines show examples of rhyme between r and ʀ, except Bragi Boddason, whose poetry, traditionally dated to the 800s, is the most archaic to be preserved. There are, on the other hand, five examples of r and ʀ rhyming with each other in the poem Haustlǫng by Þjóðólfr ór Hvini, traditionally dated to c. 900. These admittedly sparse data would date the merger of r and ʀ to the late 800s. This is essentially the same dating shown by the runic evidence, which is also quite meagre. The linking of runic and skaldic chronology can be shown to strengthen both.https://doi.org/10.33063/diva-401047</p
Corpus Editions of Swedish Runic Inscriptions
No full textThe idea of recording all the runic inscriptions of Sweden dates back to the early 1600s when Johannes Bureus laid the foundations for Swedish runic research. Only two older works can lay claim to the title of corpus editions: these include the collection of woodcut prints depicting more than eleven hundred Swedish rune-stones published in 1750 and known as Bautil, and Johan Gustaf Liljegren’s Run-urkunder of 1833 which transliterates all the runic inscriptions known at that time. In the early 1880s, the National Antiquarian Hans Hildebrand laid plans for what would become the collected series Sveriges runinskrifter and in 1900 the first fascicle on the runic inscriptions of Öland was published. The immense contributions made from the late 1920s onwards, primarily by Elias Wessén, Sven B. F. Jansson and Elisabeth Svärdström, have ensured that most of the Swedish provinces have today been covered, although a few provinces, mostly in Norrland, are still lacking and many of the earliest volumes require supplementation and revision predominantly because of new finds. The volumes in the series normally comprise two parts consisting of text and plates. Each inscription that belongs to the genuine runic tradition is given its own number and the inscriptions are usually ordered according to geographical principles within each province. https://doi.org/10.33063/diva-491876</p
Corpus Editions of Runic Inscriptions from Eastern Europe and the Byzantine Empire
No full textThe runic inscriptions from Eastern Europe lack a dedicated corpus edition, but here the best attempts to describe these inscriptions are discussed. Unfortunately, the main work in this field, Elena A. Mel′nikova’s Skandinavskie runičeskie nadpisi (‘Scandinavian runic inscriptions’), lacks a clear method for distinguishing between runic, rune-like and non-runic inscriptions. For this reason, many of its inscriptions should be treated with great caution and some are here deemed not to be runic.https://doi.org/10.33063/diva-491881</p
Corpus Editions of Runic Inscriptions in Supranational Databases
No full textWhile there are a number of scholarly databases which contain information about runic inscriptions, none of them can be considered to represent a corpus edition in the true sense of the word. Such databases are, however, important sources of a limited amount of core information concerning the corpus or corpora they include, and as a rule they build on and at times even supplement or correct information in the printed corpus editions. There exist three scholarly, supranational databases important to runology and publicly available at the present time. These are: (a) the Scandinavian Runic Text Database (Samnordisk runtextdatabas), (b) the Kiel Runendatei (database of the Kiel Rune Project), and (c) the RuneS database (of the research project Runic Writing in the Germanic Languages). The origin, development and future prospects of each are reviewed here, along with their strengths and advantages as well as their weaknesses and limitations.https://doi.org/10.33063/diva-491882</p
Two Recent Runic Finds from Orkney
No full textThis article provides accounts of OR 22 Quoys and OR 23 Naversdale, two runic inscriptions recently found in Orkney. There is discussion of the find circumstances, followed by a description of the object bearing the runes (the former a folded lead plaque, the latter an irregular stone fragment), a transrunification, transliteration, and commentary on the reading. Thereafter comes an interpretation of the text. In the case of OR 23 this is straightforward enough since the text consists of a sequence from the Pater Noster, the first instance of a Latin-language runic inscription from Orkney. OR 22 provides more of a challenge, and various suggestions are offered
Roman and Runic in the Anglo-Saxon Inscriptions at Monte Sant’Angelo : A Sociolinguistic Approach
No full textThis paper addresses the Anglo-Saxon personal name inscriptions at Monte Sant’Angelo in Southern Italy from a sociolinguistic angle. The main interest lies in the mix between Roman and runic writing and its interpretation in the light of individual literacy and the cultural context of medieval pilgrimage. Four from a total of five inscriptions were written in runes; two of these show significant influence from Anglo-Saxon scribal practices and Roman epigraphic writing. The fifth Anglo-Saxon name is written entirely in Roman letters. Drawing on theoretical approaches from modern sociolinguistic studies of multilingualism in writing, this study suggests that the use of mixed Roman-runic practices reflects the biscriptal background of the respective carvers and was applied in situ to individualize the inscriptions. However, not all the inscriptions show such a mix; hence either skill or personal preference varied among the pilgrims. The practice of mixing evident in the runic inscriptions does not fully correspond to previously described features of multilingual and multiscriptal writing, which is why a new term, “heterographia”, has been coined in this study to include mixing not only in a language and a writing system, but also on a graphetic and orthographic level. Finally, the use of runes or Roman script for one’s personal name is interpreted as an expression of social identity dependent on the person’s social embedding.https://doi.org/10.33063/diva-402192</p
A Runic Calendar in the Vatican Library
No full textIn 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.https://doi.org/10.33063/diva-401070</p
The Metrical Characteristics of Maeshowe Runic Inscription No. 20
No full textMaeshowe runic inscription no. 20 in Barnes’s edition (1994) is one of the most discussed among the runic inscriptions which were carved into the walls of the prehistoric cairn by Norsemen around the middle of the twelfth century. The inscription states that it was carved by the man who was most skilled in runes west of the ocean with the axe of Gaukr Trandilssonr (known from Njáls saga and Landnámabók). Various opinions have been aired with regard to the metrical character of the inscription. Whereas Olsen (1903, 18–21) considered it to be poetic, Finnur Jónsson (1904–05, 33) firmly rejected this notion. In this paper a thorough investigation of the metrical character of Maeshowe no. 20 is carried out, starting from the premise that a runic inscription can only be declared metrical if it shows both rhythm and alliteration. This leads to a refinement of the principles for evaluating the metricality of any given inscription
Runic Spindle Whorl Recently Found in Orkney
No full textThis article gives an account of a rune-inscribed bone spindle whorl which was found by a member of the public in Orkney in January 2017. The inscription will presumably be designated as OR 24. The circumstances of the find are briefly discussed and the artefact described and depicted. Thereafter follows a transliteration and commentary on the reading and an interpretation of the text, which seems to be a futhark inscription with some notable oddities. Along with the spindle whorl bearing OR 24, the finder also handed in a quartzite pebble from the same site, which is decorated with a painted rune-like mark. The article discusses whether the painted mark is intended as a rune, and whether the artefact is Norse at all. The conclusion is that the mark is most probably not intended to be runic and that the artefact is likely to be Pictish rather than Norse.https://doi.org/10.33063/diva-401055</p
- …
