WarriorsPosted by Kim Pierri Fri, April 21, 2017 10:21:19
are sharing the following Meme at the moment
thing that’s true in that meme are that it is mind blown.
come from a modern game named Skyrim and was invented to make some guards have a
conversation. For more information see this link
TechnologyPosted by Kim Pierri Thu, February 02, 2017 08:40:45
debate in the Facebook group “Norse Rune Writing/Translating” I became aware,
that some people seems to think that the runes was invented in the Bronze Age. Then
asked for sources guy who proposed the very early date could just say “i cant remember which old dusty book i found it in ...i
dont have to show you the road though. you need to do more research .”.
So I decided to do a bit of research.
What do the
Lisbeth M. Imer,
Runologist at The National Museum of Denmark say in her book: Danmarks Runesten
- En fortælling” 2016 says that the runes was properly created in the
environment of the nobility in the second or third century CE (p. 30).
Jensen, archeologist at The national Musem of Denmark wrote in his work:
“Danmarls Oldtid -Ældre Jernalder“ 2003 write that the oldest inscriptions we
know, are from the late second century, but that runes may be a bit elder,
because Tacitus in about 100 CE that the Germanic people use marks cut in twigs
to take omens from. (The original text can also be seen here: http://denstoredanske.dk/Danmarks_Oldtid/%c3%86ldre_Jernalder/Et_nyt_aristokrati_200-400_e.Kr/Den_f%c3%b8rste_skrift )
Lotte Hedager from Oslo University wrote in Politikens Danmarkshistorie,
bind 2 Danernes land (1988) that the runes must have been invented
around the time of Christ, but that the first inscriptions are from the first
century and that the use of runes became more common around year 200. (p 310)
(The original text can also be seen here: http://denstoredanske.dk/Danmarkshistorien/Danernes_land/%C3%86ldre_germansk_jernalder-Folkevandringstiden/Gyldne_tider/Futharken_-_det_%C3%A6ldste_runealfabet )
quite clear that the runes was created in the start of the Common Era sometime
between year 1 and 200. Why would someone then think that the runes went back
to the Bronze Age (1700-500 BC), which are 500 years before the earliest date
of the runes?
I tried to
google “Bronze Age Runes” and found a couple of pages.
one I found was Oswald The Runemakers page (http://www.runemaker.com/history.shtml ). He says: “Rune-like symbols
appear as cave markings as early as the late Bronze Age (circa 1300 BC), and
they are mentioned in the Bible, but their use in ritual and as an Oracle for
consultation must certainly pre-date their use as a system of writing.”. The
page seem to be a shop, where “Oswald” are seeling runeset for divination.
I found was History of The Runes from a Wicca group http://www.wolfmoongrove.com/Rune%20Info%20Pages/rune_history.htm
wrote: “Before the Germanic peoples of ancient Western Europe possessed a true
alphabet, they used pictorial symbols to carve into stones their ideas and
thoughts. Pre-runic symbols, or hällristningar, have been found in various
Bronze Age rock carvings, primarily in Sweden. Some of these symbols are
readily identifiable in the later alphabets, while others represent ideas and
concepts that were incorporated into the names of the runes (sun, horse, etc.)
The earliest known examples of these pictorial writings date from about 1300
BCE and may have been linked to Sun and Fertility cults … These
pictoglyphs later evolved into the more abstract glyphs composed of lines
resembling no particular objects. That
there was great power endowed to those who were adept at the use of these
glyphs is indicated by the name given to the glyphs themselves. These glyphs were called Runes, from the
Gothic Runa, meaning “a secret thing, a mystery.” “
article has references, but they are to two articles from 1898 and 1928. As you
have seen in the references, I have made to moderns scholars, not what scholars
are from people using runes for magic/divination and not as part of a
historical research. When you read the homepages it also become clear that it’s
not the rune-letters they are referring to. They interpret the figures on the
Bronze Age carvings as having the same symbolic meaning as they think the runic
letters have. This symbolic meaning are interpreted from the medieval rune
poems written down very late (about 1500 years after the end of the Bronze
It is fine in
you religious practices to use pictures from Bronze Age Rock Carvings to
represent the symbols you get from the Rune Poems, but there are no evidence
for runes being from the Bronze Age.
MiscellaneousPosted by Kim Pierri Tue, December 06, 2016 10:12:58
I have many times seen this manipolated picture on Facebook:
followed by this text:
The myths are an storehouse of infinite knowledge. They speak of the
Midgard Serpent lying at the bottom of the see. He encircles the globe and when
he moved great earth trembles cause terrible convulsions. Most believe this is
just a tale, but the ancient knew of his existence at the bottom of the oceans.
Now, with modern technology, we can see for ourselves that the Myths were
true--he does exist. But how did primitive Norsemen know of this
great belt of fissions at the bottom of the oceans? Perhaps they were not
primitive as most people think they were? Did they have knowledge passed down
to them from thousands of years earlier, in a time when their ancestors had
built an advance civilization, more advance than ours' today? But when it
collapsed, their knowledge were encoded in Myths passed down from generation to
generation? Take a look at the maps once more and think about it. - unknown
It is funny
and might be an interpretation of the myth into modern cosmology we can use
today, but the thing about “advance civilization,
more advance than ours' today” are at best silly and a little insulting to our
ancestors, who did amazing things with the technology available to them. Notice
that the map is manipulated. The lines they have highlighted are boundaries
between tectonic plates, but they have just selected those that fit with what
they want you to see. Humans are experts to notice patterns and if you condition
people to see a pattern they will do so.
Most of the boundaries they have chosen are the
mid-ocean ridge, but not all. The ridges at the west coast of Greenland are
very small and not active anymore and in the pacific there are only ridges in
short areas along the Californian coast and none along the Aleutian Islands. On
the map above the mid-ocean ridge are colored red. I have modified the original map to show this. Notice how the serpent has disappeared.
have chosen to include the destructive line along the Californian coast and the
destructive boundary along The Aleutian Islands. If they decided to include
island arcs and destructive plate boundaries, then there are plenty of more
places that need to be included in the picture. They are included as lines with
lumps on in the picture. If you include all of them, then there are no serpent either. Se the map below.
MigrationPosted by Kim Pierri Sun, November 13, 2016 09:51:28
I've seen this meme on a Asatru Facebookpage. I have looked at the relevant sagas:
In the Saga
of the Greenlanders, the people of Karlsefni have dealing with the Native Americans.
It says that they don’t understand each other, but nothing about the languages
sounding like anything they know. P. 341
In the Saga
of Erik the Red Karlsefni can negotiate prices with the natives, but it doesn’t
say anything about the language they talk. P. 366
capture some boys and teach then Norse (which might indicate that the
negotiating earlier was done without understanding each other’s language). They
say that there is a country nearby where people wear white clothes and that the
country are called whitemansland, which clearly refer to the white clothes. P.
clear that there’s no reference to the language of the natives and that there is
no reference to them meeting people with white skin before (actually there’s no
reference to someone described as having white skin at all)
I have used the new danish translation of the sagas and the pages in this article refer to that translation:
Islændingesagaerne samtlige sagaer og niogfyrre totter. Book one.
Saga Forlag, Reykjavik Iceland, 2014
WarriorsPosted by Kim Pierri Thu, September 22, 2016 09:28:42
In a debate
about berserkers, someone mentioned that berserker graves had been found and
googling I found two articles who both are talking about a grave found I Hårup
in Jutland Denmark:
one I read doesn’t really tell us much about why they think that man in the
grave was a berserker. http://www.newhistorian.com/grave-axe-wielding-viking-berserker-found-denmark/6983/
His only reference
are an article on News Corp Australia. I also found that article: Viking burial
site in Denmark contained a warrior — and his enormous axe
The first I
looked at said: “IT seems there’s some truth in the myths after all.
Archaeologists in Denmark have found the burial site of a Viking ‘berserker’
warrior — complete with an oversized battle axe”
reference archeologist Kirsten Nelleman Nielsen (who they clearly think are a
man) and say that the find are reported in “Dead and buried in the Viking Age”
from Saxo Institute at The University of Copenhagen. They don’t know it, but it’s
a compendium of articles from a Symposium at the institute from 2016 (I went
there myself and listened to the presentations). The journalist doesn’t seem to
have read the article in the book, because he wrote: “His findings, Dead and
buried in the Viking Age, have been published by the Saxo Institute at the
University of Copenhangen” [SIC!]
When I read
through the article, none of its contents appear to be talking about
berserkers. It only talks about the grave and say that an enormous axe was
found in the grave.
in News Corp Australia also says: “It [the axe] was the sole possession found among
the bones of a particularly strong man”. That is also an invention of the
journalist, because the article in “Dead and buried in the Viking Age” says
that there was very little human remains found and that they determined the sex
of the buried peoples by the grave goods. That also follow, that they couldn’t determinate
the size or musculature of the buried man. I would surmise that the journalist thought,
that a man buried with such a large axe, must have been big and muscular.
journalist also reference two articles more:
those articles mentions a berserker.
like the part of it being a berserkergrave are an invention of the journalist
at Australian News Corp and that others have referenced him on other pages.
None of them read the original article. The journalist at “The new historian”
even uses material not found in the Australian News Corp, but in the 2 articleslinked
from there, but not noticing, that those articles doesn’t talk about
can read from the original article in “Dead and buried in the Viking Age” are
that this grave original was with two wooden build rooms, the female had a lot
of high status grave goods in her grave and in the male grave, there was only found
a very large axe. Later another graveroom was added to the grave with a male also
containing an axe. The article also says that axes are the weapon mostly found
in norse graves from the Viking Age.
The 2 articles
that claims that the buried man was a berserker also base their interpretation on
that his only gravegoods was the large axe. The problem with that
interpretation are that in the burialground no organics material have been preserved.
Segments of Wood, fur or cloths are only preserved when it was in contact with
metal objects. So there could have been more in his grave, that hasn’t survived
to this day.
archeologist estimates that the reason the man has a large axe in his grave are
to mark his status as a warrior and a chieftain, but not a word of berserkers.
I have read
the Danish version of the book from the Saxo Instirute (the English version are
a translation of that book):
Død og begravet – I vikingetiden, ed. Jens Ulriksen and
TechnologyPosted by Kim Pierri Wed, September 21, 2016 09:32:48
I have read
this article: Cannabis found in Viking grave
are about the Oseberg boat Grave in Tørnsberg, Norway. The article seems to be
quite accurate, except for the wording. It is true that Cannabis was found in a
leather purse found with the elder lady (the word sack seems to imply something
larger). What the article doesn’t tell are that the cannabis are in the form of
seeds and that seem to be forgotten in the article.
to be no doubt that cannabis was farmed in Norway during the Vikinge Age. Beside
the purse with the seeds found in The Oseberg Mound and other places, we also
have found hemp pollen in a bog in Vest-Agder in Norway. Hemp pollen doesn’t move
very long, but a bog would be a bad place to grow hemp. This seem to indicate that
the hemp was placed there to loosen the fibers so that it would be possible to
make rope or clothes from the fibers. (From Norwegian Vikings grew hemp)
aware of which kind of hemp was found in Viking-age Norway, not all strains
have high percentage of THC which gives it the psychoactive effects and as said
its likely that the hemp pollen found in Vest-Agder was grown to make fibers,
but that doesn’t mean, that they didn’t also use hemp for its psychoactive
effects. We just don’t know.
MigrationPosted by Kim Pierri Tue, September 13, 2016 15:05:52
on the article found here: http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/usa-viking-ship-discovered-near-mississipi-river/
was published by World News Daily Report, which are a homepage with intentional
fake news. They write in their disclaimer: “WNDR assumes however all
responsibility for the satirical nature of its articles and for the fictional
nature of their content. All characters appearing in the articles in this
website – even those based on real people –
are entirely fictional and any resemblance between them and any persons,
living, dead, or undead is purely a miracle.”.
it’s clearly fictitious, I once in a while run into the article posted by
people that believe it’s true, so I will look into the article.
start with a picture of what are supposed to be the Mississippi Viking ship. It
is not, it’s a picture of the longest Viking long ship ever found “The Roskilde
6 ship”. You can see the same picture in this article from a Danish newspaper. http://jyllands-posten.dk/kultur/historie/article5650467.ece
intro the WNDR claim that it’s a Knarr type vikingship, which also would be
likely to find in the Americas. Knarrs are the big burly trading ships. Unfortunately
the ship on the picture are clearly a long ship, and not a Knarr. Long ships
are long sleek ships, made for speed and transporting a lot of warriors.
for the fictitious ship are also reliable for a Knarr-type ship and are very
close to those of the Skuldelev 1 Knarr found in Roskilde Fiord. (source http://www.vikingeskibsmuseet.dk/no_cache/besoeg/udstillinger/de-fem-vikingeskibe/skuldelev-1-havskibet/)
also a picture of a Viking sword in the article, but that was not found in Mississippi,
bur in Scotland in 2011. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-15366336
professor mentioned in the article are also not a real person and the picture
are of an Italian professor from Trinity College in Dublin. http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/meeting-held-for-ancient-city-of-karkamis.aspx?pageID=449&nID=67144&NewsCatID=375
if you read an article that falls out of what normally assumed in archeology,
then it’s important to look at it critically and check the information in it.
Kim Pierri, Denmark