Kensington Runestone: Real or fake? What do you think?

[raccoon]

The Kensington Runestone is a 200-pound slab of greywacke covered in runes on its face and side which, if genuine, would suggest that Scandinavian explorers reached the middle of North America in the 14th century. It was found in 1898 in the largely rural township of Solem, Douglas County, Minnesota, and named after the nearest settlement, Kensington.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kensington_Runestone

[deutsey]

1. LOL...I thought this was someone's name at first.

:silly:

[mediaman007]

2. Why here? Why now?

[raccoon]

3. I've been listening to some archaology lectures on DVD, put out by Modern Scholar.

In the lectures, they were talking about pre-Columbian visitors to North America from the Old World.

[mediaman007]

4. My vote is that the stone is real!

What kind of college kids would put a stone in a farmer's field hundreds of miles from a university (more than 100 years ago!).

[Jackpine Radical]

9. I think it's real.

For one thing, it used some Runic characters that weren't known (i.e. had been lost to scholars) at the time of its discovery. Also, some of the linguistic constructions were not in classic Old Norse and were therefore thought to have been faked by someone who used modern Swedish to cover for words he didn't know in ON. Later research has shown that the Kensington forms were a dialect variation that was in existence at the time of the date on the stone.

[eShirl]

5. probably fake

[Arkansas Granny]

6. There have been runestones found in Oklahoma, also. There has been some

discussion of their authenticity. You have to scroll down past the story about the Minnesota runestone, but there are Oklahoma stones listed.

http://www.sunnyway.com/runes/americanstones.html

[raccoon]

8. The Vikings would NEVER go to Oklahoma. NEVER.

Just kidding...thanks for the link. :hi:

[Vickers]

7. Rake. n/t

[Jackpine Radical]

10. Feel.

[Brickbat]

11. Fake, yet hugely awesome.

[KittyWampus]

12. It's real. Our ancestors were more mobile than we think. Researchers are so attached to accepted

history, it really is a shame. We desperately want to think we are the pinnacle of human culture in every way.

As an anthropologist, I have to say that any researcher or field worker who finds something that challenges the strict box that has become received wisdom faces a rough time.

[and-justice-for-all]

21. I agree.nt

[dawg]

13. probably a fake, but I *love* stuff like this

There is so much about our history that we don't know, and so much more that we think we know, but actually have all wrong. For instance, we now *know* that the Norse discovered America before Columbus. We've actually found the remains of one of their settlements.

Why the Hell do we still observe Columbus Day?

[DCKit]

14. Found in 1898 and nobody has yet attempted to build a religion around it?

Unbelievable.

[eShirl]

15. Close - it has an NFL team named because of it

"As you travel around this part of Minnesota, notice that many businesses use the Runestone or the vikings as an identifying symbol. You will begin to understand just how far-reaching this saga is. Indeed, the name for the National Football League's Minnesota Vikings is a direct outcome of the fame of the Kensington Runestone."

http://www.runestonemuseum.org/runestone.cfm

[old mark]

16. Oh...I thought it was the Packers....nt

[eShirl]

18. Wrong state....nt

[old mark]

17. Kind of think it is real - there were a lot of "absolute facts" we all learned in school

that have since been revealed as wrong, and I think various people traveled a lot further than we once thought.

I'd like to see someone translate that rock, and the one in Oklahoma, too...at least compare it to KNOWN examples.

mark

ADDED: Since reading the Wiki article, I am interested in this stone and I hope to find more information on it. I really don't see a purpose in some 19th century farmer going to the trouble of faking this, or having the knowledge to do it.

mark

[JohnnyBoots]

19. What is the Carbon date on it? nt

[DavidDvorkin]

20. I don't think that's applicable

The stone itself could be millions of years old, I assume.

[KittyWampus]

22. I would think the erosion would be hard to fake.

[DavidDvorkin]

23. Erosion of the lettering?

I wonder if that's been examined.

[Arugula Latte]

24. Oh, yah, them Vikings got around, dontcha know?

Uff da.