"Michael Zalar" <m_zalar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a458909b.0404192307.187f9ef3@posting.google.com...
"David B." <davidb@tronospamchos.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<c614vu$lbb$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk>...
The date on Larsson's first paper is actually 1883! Also, he does not seem
himself to be claiming that the runes were in use as a form of secret
writing; I think that's just a misunderstanding in the recent discussions.
He does describe the last alphabet on his paper (not runic, but based on
squares and dots) as secret- lönstilen- but he presents the two runic
alphabets as historic developments; the first (22 symbols) a genuine
futhark, the second (27 symbols) developed to transliterate documents from
the standard alphabet. Likewise he describes the pentadic numbers simply as
"gamla siffror"- old numerals.

But either way, yes, the point is that (unless these documents themselves
are fakes), somebody showed young Larsson these slightly unusual runes,
and there were probably others around with similar knowledge- apparently
not gleaned from printed books. So the next task is to find the
home-community of every Swede who ended up living in Douglas County,
Minnesota, before 1898, and see if any came from the area where Larsson
learned his trade and his runes.

Easy-peasy

David B.

David,
I agree entirely with the first paragraph above, howevr the I have to
disagree in the main with the second part. There is no evidence
suggesting that Larsson was taught the runes by any other party.
Rather, at least to me the evidence suggest that the notes were copied
(hastily) from some other document or book.

I think that is probably right, it looks like notes copied from other notes or
a book, although it could have been a blackboard.

Whatever the case, he got them from somewhere - I'm sure he didn't make them
up himself.

The question is, why? What was an 18 year old artisan studying this 'subject'
and making notes about it for? This matter seems to have been overlooked in
all the excitement of seeing the runes.

It could have merely been idle curiousity, just a personal interest in
history, but I think it more likely he had some other purpose, perhaps to do
with his work. That could have been an interest in design and calligraphy, but
the inclusion of the rather dull looking 'secret' alphabet hints there is more
to it.

That specific group might have been descendents to Greenlanders and the Cree
Indians they had lived close by.

information to prove that it was the same group which died in smallpot in
mid 1800's.

Thus we have no genetic material for that group but we do have
from others.

Greenlandic ancestor who married an Indian female and moved to Norway. Some
of their descendents moved back to NA and can today be found close to
Quebec.

Information around this will be presented in a documentary which
been made the last years.

That part in the quote referred by Philip I can second as
well. But he or the person who put the quote together
forgot two major exports from Greenland: cheese(!) and
whiteheaded eagles.

However by 1200, climatic change allowed the arctic ice
pack to creep farther southward, making navigation in
Greenland waters increasingly hazardous -- even in
summer. Ships came now only sporadically, and some years
none called at all. In 1261, the Greenlanders felt
obliged to accept union with Norway and subjection to the
Norwegian crown, in return for which two ships would be
sent per year.

Not correct reason for the Greenlander's comming under
Norway.

The land had in the early days been owned by the
Papal church in areas where there were no settlement. It
was due to the fact that Greenland came under the Nidaros
See and a agreement between the Archbishop and the
Norwegian king which was the main reason together with the
fact that the Lawmans were to be sent out from the Gula
Thing.

This effectively shut
the Hansa markets off from Greenland trade, and sometimes
even the promised Norwegian vessels didn't make it
through the ice. The colonies' decline accelerated.

No it most certainly didn't decline.

The trade was heavy up to 1450's.

It's all in contemporary documents.

Not to be found on net and not edited in English works
however.

Incorrect [Ingrish corrected].

There were no free independent Greenlanders in
the Western Settlement after Bishop Erik left together with
several hundreds to move to Vinland. The farms were owned
by the Papal Church from that on and the farmers were
allowed to live there as long as they payed their tithes
earned from farming the land, trading hunting whales
included.

Incorrect [Ingrish corrected].
. Read Ivar Bardsson's own words either as it's
edited in the book were all copies are discussed and the
incorrect English translation which had been edited earlier
is discussed from the remaining copies. The most known one
is AM 777 a 4to.

They
cleared out for parts unknown, leaving their houses and
churches intact and their livestock to go wild. An
ancient account says:

Not the Eastern settlement - the Western one all noted in
Ivar Bardson's story.

That one is from a 1640's not from now lost origins when
one of the Icelandic Annals were copied up to the year it
was written. Not the same as it actually were.

One major fault in it. Nicholas of Lynn was to young to
travel in 1350's. He did however participate on a ship in
King Hakon's warfleet later on.

Surviving members of the Knutson expedition returned to
England and Norway in 1363 or 1364 with Ivar Bardson, a
priest from Greenland. Nicholas of Lynn presented himself
to the kings of England and Norway with a written account
of the voyage entitled Investo Fortunato, which
regrettably has been lost.

We do have much better documentation for the voyage and for
the returning people. Paul Knutsson included. His
descendants came to name two male by his name up to 1850.

As for Ivar Bardson he is noted to have been in Norway
Spring 1364 and delivered the tithes from all Greenland
See's dioceses, Vinland included in the Papal documents
delivered to the Papal church.

That specific group might have been descendents to
Greenlanders and the Cree Indians they had lived close by.

We simply don't know and it's way to loose information to
prove that it was the same group which died in smallpot in
mid 1800's.

Thus we have no genetic material for that group
but we do have from others.

Including now living Indians
who knows the name of their Greenlandic ancestor who
married an Indian female and moved to Norway.

Some of their
descendents moved back to NA and can today be found close
to Quebec.

Information around this will be presented in a
documentary which been made the last years.
The interesting thing is that the named Greenlander-Norse
is the only person who can be found in contemporary sources
to have sold his farm in Greenland....

smallpot?

"t(nospam)kavanagh" <"tkavanag"@(nospam)indiana.edu> says in
news:c63lea$5mh$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu:

smallpot?

Ingrish for smallpox

Now I would be willing to be you know exactly how many Mandam
survived and what there numbers currently are in the 3 tribes.

"Michael Zalar" <m_zalar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
There is no evidence
suggesting that Larsson was taught the runes by any other party.
Rather, at least to me the evidence suggest that the notes were copied
(hastily) from some other document or book.

I think that is probably right, it looks like notes copied from other
notes or
a book, although it could have been a blackboard.

Whatever the case, he got them from somewhere - I'm sure he didn't make
them
up himself.

The question is, why? What was an 18 year old artisan studying this
'subject'
and making notes about it for? This matter seems to have been overlooked
in
all the excitement of seeing the runes.

It could have merely been idle curiousity, just a personal interest in
history, but I think it more likely he had some other purpose, perhaps to
do
with his work. That could have been an interest in design and calligraphy,
but
the inclusion of the rather dull looking 'secret' alphabet hints there is
more
to it.

I'd like to know more about Larssen - was he a Freemason for instance? I
don't
know very much about Scandinavian lodges, but in most countries a lot of
'local history' is encompassed (whoops!) into the Craft. This could be
part of
his training to becoming an apprentice Mason. Secrecy is an important part
of
the tradition of the Brotherhood, and in those days was far more carefully
preserved than it is today. Just a thought... (oh boy, will Yuri love
this!)

Doug,
I wasn't the one who found that one. Only the first to tell you others that
it's worse following Verendrye's voyage by reading it in origin and in works
from before 1800 AD. Which obviously Philip found someone who had done as
well.

Back to basic. I am not doing your homework. If you don't go looking in old
documents and works you can't expect other to tell you about it.

Failing that, the reverse seems indicated; The tailors shorthand was a
relic of a previous tradition of writing runes that, being isolated
from mainstream literary innovation, maintained a higher degree of
literary conservatism.

Uno Hu

I don't expect you to do my homework, but when you make
announcements like this I do expect you to offer some proof
or something concrete. Well, expect isn't the correct word
-- I would expect a scholar to do that, I expect you *not*
to offer any proof or anything concrete, and you haven't
disappointed me.

Uno Hu wrote...

...

Failing that, the reverse seems indicated; The tailors shorthand was a
relic of a previous tradition of writing runes that, being isolated
from mainstream literary innovation, maintained a higher degree of
literary conservatism.

Uno Hu

Thank you for your reply, Uno.

Here are some well-known facts about the Kensington Rune Stone. None
of them are changed in any way by Larsson's futharks.

1. At the time KRS was discovered in Minnesota, it was dismissed as a
crude forgery. The establishment scholars said that the runes were
invented by a forger, because no such runes existed in real life.

2. A few years later, after Hjalmar Holand rescued KRS from the
rubbish heap, some independent researchers started to say that some of
these unusual runes were actually real, and are attested in historical
sources.

3. Finally, more recently, mainly because of Nielsen's painstaking
research, virtually all of KRS runes have now been attested in
historical sources.

Based on these three facts, it is now impossible to dismiss KRS as a
"crude forgery". If it was a forgery, it was certainly not "crude".

Assuming that KRS is a forgery, the mysterious (and still
unidentified) author of this inscription seems to have known more
about runology than even the best Scandinavian scholars of ca. 1900.

Of course, it seems rather unlikely that some poor and uneducated
Minnesota farmer could have known more about runology than the best
scholars of the time. Thus, the unlikelihood of KRS being a forgery.

Now, in what way would the newly discovered Larsson's futharks change
any of the reasoning above? IMHO not at all.

The fact is that, from the very beginning, the establishment scholars
were wrong about the KRS inscription. They demonstrated their
incompetence.

Now, if we assume that Larsson's futharks were copied from some old
source or sources, what this will prove is that... the establishment
scholars were in fact _even more_ incompetent that previously thought!
They knew less about runes than some Swedish tailor...

So, in the final analysis, the only thing that the newly discovered
Larsson's futharks can prove with any certainty is that...

(and) the
establishment scholars were even more incompetent that previously
thought. But their total incompetence certainly cannot be used as a
valid argument to show that KRS is a forgery.

It is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than
to put out on the troubled seas of thought -=O=- John K. Galbraith

In sci.archaeology Martin Reboul <martin@spamfukreboul1471.freeserve.co.uk
wrote:

: Yuri "Konspirisy" Kuchinsky wrote...

It's true that from time to time I enjoy making fun of the conspiracy
buffs in these ngs.

For those logically-impaired, opposing conspiracies isn't the same as
embracing them... But I'm afraid this distinction is entirely lost on Mr.
Reboul. Alas!

It seems like Mr. Reboul is only interested in making false accusations
here. He's made the same accusation many times already...

Plonk!

Inger E Johansson wrote:

That specific group might have been descendents to Greenlanders and the
Cree
Indians they had lived close by.

What complete and utter BS.
The Cree speak an Algonquian language, the Mandan speak a Siouan
language. The Cree got nowhere near the Middle Missouri where the Mandan
still live.

In article <a458909b.0404192307.187f9ef3@posting.google.com>,
m_zalar@hotmail.com (Michael Zalar) wrote:

SNIP

David,
I agree entirely with the first paragraph above, howevr the I have to
disagree in the main with the second part. There is no evidence
suggesting that Larsson was taught the runes by any other party.
Rather, at least to me the evidence suggest that the notes were copied
(hastily) from some other document or book.
There is evidently an error, as I mentioned in a post solely in
sci.archaeology, as the secret alphabet is referred to in terms that
suggest the Hebrew alphabet - and there is some similarity as both use
symbols which are fundementally right angles, some with dots.

SNIP

Michael Zalar


You are joking about Hebrew, I hope. The cipher that Larsson shows is a
variant of one that is commonly called the Masonic, Tic Tac Toe, or
Pigpen cipher. It is the simplest form of substitution cipher, and has
been used for centuries. I learned it as a child.


http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/jan2000/olson.htm#masonic%20cipher


His inclusion of it shows clearly that he was taught it by somebody else.

HWL

On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:31:20 GMT, Inger E Johansson wrote:

Doug,
I wasn't the one who found that one. Only the first to tell you others
that
it's worse following Verendrye's voyage by reading it in origin and in
works
from before 1800 AD. Which obviously Philip found someone who had done
as
well.

Back to basic. I am not doing your homework. If you don't go looking in
old
documents and works you can't expect other to tell you about it.

I was asking about this alleged copy of the stone. Your reply (which
isn't
in British or American English) is as usual cryptic. I know a number of
people who spend their whole life looking for proof of 'Diffusionism'.
They
don't know about this either.

I don't expect you to do my homework, but when you make announcements like
this I do expect you to offer some proof or something concrete. Well,
expect isn't the correct word -- I would expect a scholar to do that, I
expect you *not* to offer any proof or anything concrete, and you haven't
disappointed me.

Doug