| Johan Käll |
|
Member Joined Mar 4 2009
Actions
General Info
Sweden, Handen
Site Memberships
|
Recent Activity
About Me
Hails From Östergötland ( Norrköping) and now lives in the Stockholm area.
An Archeologist and historian mainly concentrated on the 14:th century in Sweden. Post a CommentOops!The words you entered did not match the given text. Please try again. 8 Comments
anitayakis33u AT yahoo.com.sg
Hello, My name is Ms Anita. i will be very happy to know you and have you as a good friend, i will be waiting to hear from you and to tell you more about me and my picture, My private Email ( anitayakis33u@yahoo.com.sg ) your new friend, Ms Anita.
It is a historical fact that viknings was in Newfoundland, but it seems they did not have any longer lasting settlement.
And... there are cases that can be made about the stones authencity to. And i bet he will have those down to very convincing arguments Thats how it is in this game, there are no true answers, just theories that some belive, and some dont. I just happens to be in the camp that dont belive because i dont think the evinedce talking for the stone is that conclusive. As a closer id like to quote a runeexpert: "Of course it is a real runestone, no question about that, but when was it carved?" I have a runestone three mins from my dorr that was cut in 1920 oh, by the way, here is a link to where i have collected some 11-15:th century Midevail runes. http://albrechts.se/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=119
I really appreciate your input . I will approach it with more skeptism. His book had rather convinced me but then I am not a scientist --though I found the story completely interesting and his arguments very compelling. I shall have to save some of these questions you bring up for the meeting in May. He also has a new book coming out entitled "The Hooked X: Key to the Secret History of North America. " I believe he researched it in Sweden. Don't know more than that about it. TJK
---later addition to my answer belov---
I checked Scott Wolters report. He bases the dating on micacrystalls that he says can not be formed unless the stine has been burried for at least 100 years. Although, Dr.Paul Weibler, former professor of Geology at University of Minnesota argues that they acn form above ground in 100 years. Also he pointed out the fact that the first geologist (Winchell) that saw the stone, when it was first dicovered, said that " I't looks newly cut and the patina looks like someone tried to age it" I am one that puts a lot of stock in 'the first scholarwiev'. The one on the place sees the whole picture of the find. A find is never alone but interacts with its suroundings. It is also a sore fact, for some, that Scott Wolter was paid by the Runestone foundation (that runs the Runestone museum ) and they may be considered having an interest of getting 'possitive' results. Altough... this is a common problem. Someone always have to pay for studies, and often it they have some sort of agenda. Its very hard for archeologist to delived 'bad news' . This is a problem often discussed in sholary eviroments.
Oh... that minefield...
Im not sure i want to go into that particullar minefield... Well, I'll give you MY wiev of it. They actually transported the stone here one or two years back and the people at Historiska museét (who is in charge of all medeival and vikngage things) had a look at it, scanned the whole stone and made analysis of the cutmarks in the runes. I have no idea how a geologist could see how the stone was from 14:th cent. The stone in Sweden is older then that by large... but i guess he had his way. But id we look at it this way.. Why would someone bring a big slab of stone on a ahip that far? the ships where not very big and every space was needed. they could be almost certain that there would be stone when they got there.... Anyhow. BASED on the runes, the ones examing the stones over here thinks it is not a 14:th century stone. The runes are not the ones used during rhis time, they more resemble runes used in dalarna in 17-19 th Cent (yes.. they used runes for a long time there). Also the cutmarks in the runes looks like they have been made with a modern tool. So, that the vikings got to Vinland (as they called amerika) and battled skrälingar (indians) is not in question, although.. the Kensingstone stone is, among scholars, considered to be unlikely to be from the middleages. But... you never know.. thats just where they stand today, and i would say nothing is conclusive it MAY still be old. I have seen medieval things that looks modern.
Our speaker at the club meeting in May has written a book about the Kensington Rune Stone. I think you may know about it. It was for years thought to be a hoax in this country by people whose science in the area turned out to be very poor and the poor Swedish farmer who found it was disgraced in his time about 100 years ago. It is my understanding that people in Sweden were more open to it being an authentic artifact than people in this country. Then Scott Wolter (a geologist) and his partner researched it and sincerely believe it to be a relic of the 14th century from perhaps Göteborg. I wondered if you had any views on it.
sure, i call tell alot
just.. about what would you like to be told?
Reply
foreverswedish
09:03 AM on March 05, 2009
Welcome Svenska Vänner. This is fascinating can you tell us more. TJK
|
Oops!
Oops, you forgot something.