Craig: Today I deciphered both KOLAWIL and SAKIMA.  For KOLAWIL I have found "K" "ULI" both of which can be found in Vol. 2 p. 64.  Both K and ULI need to be looked up separately, K can be found in Vol. 1 and ULI is part of WULIT in Vol. 6 p. 148.  The last part is WEL which is from Vol. 1 p. 231.  So it would be "K  ULI  WEL."  The Old Norse is "Ek  Frygdh  Vel" which could be read as " I magnificent fully", although there are others ways of translating this as well. Also I do have a couple of back up words for KOLAWIL, including KULOSKAP Vol. 2 p. 66, and KENOMP Vol. 6 p. 40.  As for SAKIMA I have found SAGKIMAN Vol. 1 p. 175 which means "he is a chief" or in its Old Norse counterpart SAGA MADR which means " Historian".  This first choice pops up throughout the Viking and the Redman multiple times and in most volumes and with similar Lenape and Old Norse definitions; so I believe this word or one of its counterparts would be the appropriate choice and it fits along with the recorded sounds translated from the Walum Olum and seems to match the pictograph.  But this seemed to easy so I located another word that could also fit, SE'KIMAO Vol. 1 p. 182.  This word means " he urges him" and the Old Norse SEGJA " to say; tell".  So until the Drottkvaett Score is done for this Stanza I will not be sure exactly which one will be the better choice.

 Also I will make the updates to the blog and how it is configured on Monday.  Also to Myron, have a Happy Birthday from the Kean Team.

Craig: For a better decipherment of stanza 4.4 see our June 19th post, it is in the comments.  Today I have started Stanza 4.5 and so far for the first word WMEILO  I have come up with WEMATO in Vol. 1 p. 233.     I have also found a back up for this word WEMI in Vol. 4 p. 156 but could not find the LO  part in the  Viking and the Redman.

Craig: Today I have e-mailed the Shawnee Appalachian Tribe and asked them to please watch the  film Viking Visitors to North America.  Although, I received an email shortly after saying one of my emails did not make it through, if someone could find out if it went through or forward the email to them I would be grateful.  Also today I have done my best to finish Stanza 4.4 but I feel something is missing and the Old Norse Drottkvaet score does not reach 80%... this Stanza is starting to become very frustrating, but maybe I have just messed up the Drottkvaett, if it can be double checked I would be grateful.  Also I decided to stay with MOSOGQUEHT but I have also found another word that might fit in Vol 4. p. 72 MANASHK.  On another note I have discovered another missing page from the Viking and the Redman.  It is Volume 5 p. 66, it is cut off in the picture.  But with out further a due here is the Drottkvaett and Old Norse/English paraphrase.

Key: Aliteration = ______

Rhyme = “”

Lenape Drottkvaett

S w S w S w

An go me ch at ei

“ow” ch ek “ee” “ei” “ow”

“mo” “so” gq ve ht mi

no “a” “la” tan

ALIT 5/8 RHM 4/8 = 9/8 =112.5%

Old Norse Drottkvaett

S w S w S w

O en ga mi kill ei

“ga” st “er” “kr” ei “ga”

no suu ga mi ldr hal

va th ann

ALIT 3/8 RHM 2/8 = 5/8 = 62.5%

Old Norse/English Paraphrase

A few hunters had adhered (together), that good half

Craig: Today we had an inciteful interview with Steve Hilgren and discussed about many topics mainly about Kensington Rune Stone, Ruseau Stone, and the Vikings.  Also I began to introduce the decipherment Rob as well.

MA 4.4

Craig: Today I began to introduce Mike to the decipherment process for the project and tomorrow I plan to do the same with Rob.  I also re-watched the the film Viking Visitors to North America, as the first time I watched this film I was operating the computer and projector for Myron's lecture in March and was not able to pay attention to the whole film.  Also the group has made an appointment for a phone interview tomorrow with a Kensington Runestone scholar.  As for my decipherment today I continued with the last part of MENALTING--which would be TING and was unsuccessful in finding a direct match but for MENALTING here is what I have found with help from Myron.  MINO (VOL. 4-81) ALA (VOL. 1-9) TAN (VOL. 1-195).  Although this stanza is not complete I feel I must go over some of the other decipherments for this Stanza, but here is a working Old Norse paraphrase : A Few Hunters Had Put Together A Meeting (this is one word I am worried about), That Good Half.
Until tomorrow
Craig

Craig: Today I did further decipherment on the stanza 4.4, I had skipped over the Elmusichik for today just because Myron had sent an email showing the decipherment for Elmusichik and something seems a bit off and I just want to look into it more extensively.  Also, I had looked in the next Phrase Menalting and came up empty for the whole word in all eight volumes, but as I was going through the volumes I came across these words that might fit Menalting since it must now be broken down into syllables.  MINA Vol. 4 p 177, MINO Vol. 4 p. 81, MANA Vol 8. p. 49, MANU Vol 8 p. 49.  Also after looking further into the idea of using the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) for deciphering, I have come to the conclusion that with the resources possessed for this project it would not be a functional alternative to the current way of deciphering.

(Mike)

I found this video very interesting. It breaks down the writing on the Kensington Rune stone and shows the actual stone on camera.

Kensington Runestone


History Channel Documentary - Holy Grail in America
    

Many Kensington enthusiasts may not agree with this video, however it does give support that the Kensington Runestone is authentic. This is part 1 of a 9 part video.

History Channel Documentary - Holy Grail in America

Craig:  Today I continued my decipherment of Stanza 4.4 and found words for the recorded sound ELOWICHIK Vol. 4 p. 8-9 ALEM and Vol. 1 p. 3 ACHAK.  I started the decipherment for the next word of   ELMUSICHIK  but I did not find any matches going through all of the E selections in all 8 Volumes and I also started searching through the other vowels as well; mainly for a word to match ELM as breaking the word down into syllables seemed a better option, even though I did look for a word to match ELMUSICHIK as a whole.  On a side note, I will not be in tomorrow or Wednesday due to my Capstone paper is due for the Senior Seminar class on Thursday and I would like to perfect this paper to receive a good grade in the class.  I will make up the time missed.

Robert: Another piece of evidence, though not technically archaeological, that has been the subject of great debate in the 20th century is the Yale Vinland Map. This one also has a great many facts backed up by science pointing towards a hoax.  

The Yale Vinland Map

Yale announced its acquisition in 1965.

Claimed it to be a pre – Columbian map of the known world showing Viking adventures to North America.

3 renowned experts in medieval documents had assessed the map for Yale taking over 7 years to prepare their final work The Vinland Map and the Tartar Relation

This work argued that the Vinland Map was once bound with the Tartar Relation and the Speculum Historiale which are both authentic medieval texts; circa 1437 for use at a conference of the Roman Catholic Church.

However, Yale’s 3 scholars worked alone and did not consult outside experts.

As soon as the map was unveiled many questioned it authenticity.

Since then Yale has spearheaded intensive scientific study of the map which has put its authenticity in question.

Analyzing the Map

The Maps Caption

The caption on the map is probably the most discussed portion of the map and claims that the Viking adventurers reached American shores 100 years before Columbus. This claim is aligned with the history of the sagas.

The Latin text on the map notes that Leif Eriksson had a companion for the voyage by the name of Bjarni when he discovered Vinland, which is noted as running counter of the sagas by Norse scholar Kristen Seaver, and originated with a history of Greenland written in 1765.

Also, the Latin translation of Eriksson(“erissonius”) is pointed out as a red flag. A medieval scribe would like have used the separate word “filius” for “-sson.” The use of “-sonius” became common only after 1600.

Vinland

A large island with 2 deep bays.

To the right of the island a Latin label reads “Island of Vinland discovered by Bjarni and Leif in company.”

The Norse sagas tell of Vinland and its landscape but gives only a vague geographic description. The map is very detailed.

Also, it is puzzling why a medieval scribe would have singled out Vinland and not included the other areas noted in the sagas such as Helluland and Markland.

Greenland

The appearance of Greenland as an island troubled even the experts who helped “authenticate” the map for Yale in the 1960s.

Medieval Scandinavian accounts suggested that Greenland was not an island but the end of a peninsula stretching towards the artic north, as depicted in a map from 1427.

Arctic ice made sailing conditions along the northern coast impossible and the first circumnavigation of Greenland was completed around the turn of the 20^th century.

Also, the outline of Greenland on the map is curiously similar to modern map depictions of Greenland.

Handwriting

The Yale scholars in the 1960s that declared the maps authenticity claimed it was in the same handwriting as the tomes they were bound to. But others do not agree.

The Keeper of Manuscripts at the British Museum was shown the map in 1957 and rejected it in part because he thought the handwriting had a 19^th century look.

Several paleographers(experts in ancient writing) including the woman who catalogued the map and the other two texts for Yale in the 1980s point to differences in the handwriting of the map and its supposed companions.

Kristen Seaver noted similarities including a horizontally looped “d”  and a wavering tendency in both the maps writing and the hand of Father Josef Fischer(1858 – 1944) a Jesuit expert on medieval geography whom she considers to be the maps true author.

Atomic – Era Substance

Before the map could be dated a carbon – based coating either on the maps surface or embedded in its fabric had to be cleaned off.

The nature of the coating is unknown but clearly contains carbon dating to the mid – 20^th century.

It seems to have been deliberately applied to the parchment around the time of its surfacing in the 1950s.

This may have been just an attempt to conserve an authentic medieval map or it could be a sign of forgery.

If the forger used a 15^th century parchment then they would have scrubbed it clean of markings and prepared a smooth surface on which to draw, perhaps with this substance.

Yellow Brown Lines

In the 1970s, researchers at Walter McCrone and Associates, a firm specializing in chemical analysis, examined ultramicroscopic samples from yellowish lines found on the maps surface.

They identified crystals of the mineral anatase, specifically a form that was only manufactured around 1920.

In the 1980s physicist Thomas Cahill of the University of California  challenged the McCrone findings suggesting that the McCrone team mistakenly sampled paint that had fallen onto the inked lines of the map from a modern ceiling.

More recently, work using Raman probe spectroscopy has corroborated the McCrone discovery of the suspicious mineral crystals.

Off-Register Lines

The lines on the map appear yellow and worn and have flakes of black pigment on top.

This could be because the map was drawn with a single application of black ink, most of which flaked off leaving behind the stain of a binding agent.

It could also be a forger attempting to mimic the effect of aging.

Smithsonian scientist Kenneth Towe believes that this effect, specifically on the west coast of Great Britain on the map, points to evidence of the yellow – brown line drawn separately.

Those at the University of California, Davis who defend the maps authenticity counter that this is the only place on the map where the lines don’t match up and that it could be the mark of a medieval scribe retracing a sketchy line with fresh ink.

Even some skeptics of the map reject the idea of a “double – inking.”

Scandinavia

It seems odd that a map providing such intricate detail of Viking exploration depicts the Viking homeland so inaccurately.

The map depicts Norway as an immense peninsula stretching over the Baltic Sea and wrongly locates Sweden south of the Baltic.

Defenders of the map never claimed that the maps author was Scandinavian, but it has been suggested that the medieval scribe used Scandinavian and Venetian maps as references.

Page Fold

Whoever drew this map did everything they could to avoid drawing on the fold.

Geographic names are written on either side of the fold rather than crossing it, the Adriatic Sea is widened so that Greece and Italy lie to the sides of the fold and some European rivers appear re-routed as if to avoid it.

Knowing that the map would be folded, did a medieval scribe avoid marking this area? Or is this evidence that a modern map was drawn on old, used parchment long after the fold was made and the crease developed?

Black Ink

The black ink used on this map was different in composition then medieval black ink and even the black ink used to write the two tomes witch which this map is claimed to have been bound.

Iron-gall ink, such as was used in the medieval period, appear dark under UV light but this ink appears to glow.

The pigment is proven by Raman probe Spectroscopy to be carbon – based and unlike iron – based inks historians expect to see on medieval documents and maps.

Wormhole

Rare book collector Laurence Witten, who bought the map from an Italian dealer in 1957 was thrilled to find holes that lined up with holes in the front pages of the Speculum Historiale. A hole in the later pages of the Speculum, had a match in the front pages of the Tartar Relation. This evidence linked the map with the two documents.

The nine holes in the map do not appear to have been made by a drill and some go directly through lines of ink.

But skeptics point out that they are more near the center then the edges where a worm is more likely to have eaten.

River Tatartata

This name, like many geographic labels on the map, appears to have been copied from the first few pages of the Tartar Relation.

On the first page of this text two words, “tatar” and “tata” are next to one another and the punctuation that is supposed to separate them is missing.

The Vinland Map author may have mistook the two separate words as one and joined them together on the map.

Parchment Date

The parchment the map is drawn on is animal hide. Animal hide can be carbon dated.

Universtiy of Arizona researchers dated a sliver of parchment with no ink to within 11 years of 1434 in the time frame noted by the map’s defenders.

The test only proved that the parchment is medieval and not the ink.

A forger would have used old parchment to give the air of authenticity.

They may have even used parchment from the Speculum Historiale itself, which appears to have a section missing.

Robert: Here is some information L'anse aux Meadows, the most definitive evidence(the only evidence not shrouded in hoax theories and debate) of a Viking landing and settlement in North America.

Brief History

Over the years many different peoples inhabited the L'Anse aux Meadows site and many researchers have contributed to our understanding of this important archaeological site. The following is a brief historical summary of this site.

ca. 6000 B.P.

Native peoples began using this location.

ca. 1000 A.D.

Norse Settlement

1500 to late 1800's

Area is visited by French migratory fishermen and possibly Basque whalers.

ca. 1835

The present day community of L'Anse aux Meadows is founded by William Decker.

1914

W.A. Munn of Newfoundland hypothesizes that the Norse landed at L'Anse aux Meadows.

1960

Helge Ingstad visits L'Anse aux Meadows and is shown some overgrown ridges by George Decker, a local resident.

1961-68

Excavations led by Anne Stine Ingstad

1973-76

Further excavations undertaken by Parks Canada

1977

Site is designated a National Historic Site.

September 8, 1978

Site is recognized as one of the world's major archaeological properties and is designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

1984

New Visitor Centre opens.

August 2, 1991

" Vinland Revisited - One Thousand years of Discovery, " L'Anse aux Meadows is visited by the Gaia, a replica viking ship on a voyage from Norway to Washington D.C.

Discovery of the Site and Initial Excavations(1960 – 1968)

Helge Ingstad, Norwegian explorer and writer came upon the site while searching for Norse landing places along the coast from New England northward.

While in L’anse aux Meadows a resident by the name of George Decker led Helge to  a group of overgrown bumps and ridges that could have been building remains.

This led to the unearthing of a small colony Ingstad proved to be a Viking colony.

For the next years Helge and his wife Anne led an international team of archaeologists from Norway, Sweden, Iceland and U.S. to excavate the site.

8 Norse buildings were uncovered dated around the 11^th century.

Walls and roofs of sod laid over a supporting frame of wood; typical Viking architecture of the same kind used in Greenland and Iceland just before and after the year 1000 A.D.

Artifacts were also unearthed consistent with the Viking theory(i.e. a bronze ring – headed pin 

 Vikings used to fasten their cloaks, a stone oil lamp, a small spindle whorl once used as the flywheel of a handheld spindle, a fragment of a bone needle believed to have been used for knitting and a small decorated brass fragment that had once been gilded). These are all things that had been consistently found at the Viking settlements of Greenland and Iceland.

These finds concluded that the entire colony did not consist of only men, but of women as well.

The most important finds at this site that unanimously confirmed the site to be Norse were the slag produced from smelting and working with iron and a large number of boat nails, or rivets.

Excavations by Parks Canada(1973 – 1976)

http://www.pc.gc.ca/~/media/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/parkmap.ashx (Map of L’anse aux Meadows from Parks Canada website. Referenced throughout.)

Parks Canada excavated new sites around the Viking colony.

Of the new areas excavated was a peat bog below the Norse building terrace which held three separate layers with a total of 2000 pieces of worked wood. One of these layers was from the Norse occupation and was mostly debris from smoothing and trimming logs and planks with metal tools(relating to the sagas account of timber preparation for Greenland).

There was also broken and discarded objects among which laid what was probably a floorboard from a small Norse boat.

The Norse site included 3 compounds each with a dwelling and a workshop.

The major purpose of these buildings was to serve as winter living quarters for the whole group but each complex housed specialized craftsmen.

The smiths most likely lived in the complex closest to the brook in houses A, B and C(Parks Canada map). They roasted bog iron ore in building B and used one room of house A for smithing.

Figure H shows a forge on the opposite side of the brook where iron was smelted.

The D and E(which is a typo on the map as a second "F") building complex was probably home to carpenters as the wood debris was found in the bog just below it.

The specialized activity in the F and G was ship repair. The excavators found many rivets that had been deliberately cut and removed from boats to be replaced with new ones, presumably forged in house A.

After this dig the site was buried in white sand in order to preserve it.

Is L’anse aux Meadows Vinland?

Vinland was first recorded by Adam of Bremen, a geographer and historian, in his book Descriptio insularum Aquilonis of approximately 1075.

To write it he visited King Svend Estridson who had knowledge of the northern lands.

It was King Estridson that told Adam that Vinland was named so because of the wild grapes that grew there.

Some historians explain this away by saying it was a marketing attempt to get more people to settle there, much like Erik the Red’s naming of Greenland.

This leads certain historians to believe that Vinland is further south than Newfoundland, on which 

L’anse aux Meadows resides.

Based on the most recent analyses of the sagas and archaeological and palaeoecological evidence L’anse aux Meadows is believed to be a place where ships could be hauled ashore and tended to so that they would be safe for the long voyage home.

The site itself was a base and a winter camp for people exploring regions further from Greenland.

Some of the voyages must have taken them as far south as the St. Lawrence River and New Brunswick.

This is known because butternuts were found amongst Norse objects but have never grown in Newfoundland. 

Today their northern limit is in northeastern New Brunswick.

New Brunswick is also the northern limit on wild grapes. The Vikings may have found the wild grapes on one of their excursions and named the place in which they found them Vinland.

Although L’anse aux Meadows is not Vinland – Vinland was a country not a place – the site would have marked the entrance to Vinland, which probably extended to the St. Lawrence River and New Brunswick.

L’anse aux Meadows played a vital role for those groups of people far from home that wanted to explore even further.

Although most members of the group were free to travel as far south as they liked enough people stayed at L’anse aux Meadows to collect food and fuel and support the explorers and themselves during the winter.

Not having to return to Greenland for supplies they could devote more time to exploration and accumulating valuable goods for resale in Greenland.

As winter approach everyone probably returned to L’anse aux Meadows to celebrate Christmas and tell stories of their adventures.

It is not known for how many years this persisted but the remains suggest that it could not have been for too long.

It was more practical to go to Europe as it was just as close as L’anse aux Meadows and had more to offer. Vinland was forgotten and along with the the small outpost of L’anse aux Meadows.

Robert: Hey guys. I know I have been a little distant in communications but I have been doing quite a bit of research on the archaeological evidence of the Norse in North America. In studying the Kensington Runestone I have only found material that negates its authenticity. It has been a subject of controversy for over a century now and it all started with a man named Olof Ohman. Ohman was a Swedish immigrant and a farmer in Minnesota and, in 1898, he claimed to have found the runestone entangled in tree roots while clearing a field on his farm . There are a few translations of the inscriptions on the stone but the most common one is:
                                      
                            "8 Swedes and 22 Norwegians on exploration journey from Vinland westward. We had camp by 2 rocky islets one days journey north from this stone. We were out and fished one day. After we came home found 10 men red with blood and dead. A VM save from evil. Have 10 men by the sea to look after our ships 14 days' journey from this island. Year 1362." 

    The first scholar to investigate the stone was a man by the name of O.J. Breda. He believed the stone to be a hoax. He brought the stone to the University of Minnesota to Professor George R. Carume. Upon further investigation by Carume, he also believed it to be a hoax. Breda and Carume noted incorrect runes and words from the wrong era as proof of their hypothesis. After word of this the Kensington locals began looking for more Viking relics but found nothing. The stone was returned to Ohman.
     
     In 1907 a social historian named Hjalmar R. Holand became neighbors with Ohman and noticed that the locals were more interested in discussing the runestone rather then the trials of settler's life. So Holand began his investigation. By 1908 he published his first article on the stone and since has been one of the only proponents of its authenticity. 


    In 1908 the Minnesota Historical Society set up a committee to study the stone. On April 21, 1910 the committee agreed that the stone was authentic but needed to be analyzed by a specialist. They consulted professor Gisle Bothne, who was successor to Breda.
    
   Bothne believed the stone to be a fake and so invited John A. Holvik, who also believed it was a fake, onto the committee. And so beginning a rivalry between Holand and Holvik that will last the rest of their lives.

   After a while, Holand attempted to sell the stone for $5,000 to the Historical Society but was denied. He then tried to get money to transport the stone to Europe for further study, but the society would not fund this. So, in 1911 he paid out of pocket to take the stone to runologists in Europe. Every runologist he visited dismissed the runes as forgeries. Holland only noted this trip in one obscure article and otherwise tried to omit it for all his other works. He still would not believe that the stone was a fake and he criticized the runologists for not believing.

    Meanwhile, the Minnesota Historical Society published their final report on the subject of the runestone in 1915 declaring the inscription as fraud. However, the committee that the Historical Society formed to study the stone contradicts this conclusion. The Committees final statement of their report reads, "after carefully considering all the opposing arguments, the Museum Committee of this Society and Mr. Holand, owner of the stone believe its inscription is a true historical record.” For the next 20 years all is quiet on the subject.

    In 1932 Holand published a small book called The Kensington Stone. According to author Stephen Williams who commented on this work in his book Fantastic Archaeology published in 1991, the book is said to have been "filled with imagination, pride and a little research but no objectivity."The public was swayed by the book at this time especially since there was no one voicing opposition.

In 1948 a letter surfaced from J.P. Hedberg of Kensington to Swan J. Turnblad, editor of the Minneapolis Newspaper. The letter was dated January 1st, 1899 and asks for help with the translation of the runes. However, the written inscription had many problems that did not appear of the stone. This suggests that the letter was a first draft rather then a copy of the stone. The letter sparked an investigation of Ohman's past and many thought he created the stone himself. Ohman enjoyed reading, especially books about his homeland of Sweden and its history. Ohman had a friend by the name of Sven Fogelblad, who was educated and well read on scholarly works. Together they had more then enough information to create the runestones.
    
    In 1968 Theodore Blegen found the missing field notebook of the geologist of the Historical Society Committee with the initial observations of the roots from which the stone had been removed. The notebook provided evidence for the recent placement of the stone and, as a whole, was detrimental to the Vikings in Minnesota theory.

    An interesting theory surfaced thanks to Dr. Ole D. Landsverk, professor of Physics and Math and Alf Monge, who both believe that the rune inscriptions are authentic cryptograms.

    As of the 1990s there has been no further evidence of Vikings in Minnesota. However, discrepancies in the Ohman/Holand story have surfaced. The date of finding the stone is questionable, the Aspen root's dimensions(4” or 10” in diameter making the root either 10 – 30 years old or 70 years old – if the tree was 10 – 30 years old the stone could have been deliberately placed under the roots), if the inscriptions were done before or after the stone was removed from the soil(the original geologist noted the chisel marks were fresh and unweathered). Currently the “H” put on the rock by Holand and the rune chisel marks have the same amount of patina, which indicates they are equally weathered and therefor carved at the same time(though there was a claim that the runes had merely been chiseled again so after discovery to make it easier to read) and some of the words used are similar to colloquial Scandinavian( a combination of Norwegian and Swedish used in the northern Plains in the mid 1800s). Also the story on the stone relates directly to a massacre in the mid 1800s of ten Scandinavians at Norway Lake, MN which occurred while the rest of townspeople were at Church and it also relates to the amount of time taken to tow a reconstructed Viking ship from Yonkers, NY to Chicago(14 days) for a celebration in 1893.

     In a video produced by the BBC, this story ended with deathbed confessions of the Frank Walter Cran, the son of one of Ohman’s friends and of Ohman’s son, Edward. They said that Ohman and his friends had created the stone “to fool the educated ones” (Williams 1991:206). The credibility of these confessions is questionable but does provide Hollywood conclusion to the question of whether or not Vikings were in Minnesota.

  

    Sorry for the length of this post but this is all the information I have collected about the Kensington Runestone thus far. I am still searching for an objective paper on the subject as well as one written from the perspective of a modern proponent of its authenticity. 

-Robert Muller