Page 1 of 2

a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 8:03 pm
by wayward
page one

During the ongoing research for my current book project, which concerns the events surrounding Rennes-Le-Chateau, France, since the published hoaxes of the Dossier Secrets, I've maintained an interest in the Kensington Runestone.
As most know the KRS is a 200 lb. flat stone allegedly discovered by Swedish immigrant farmer Olof Ohman, while clearing his land near Kensington, Minnesota in 1898.
Since first hearing its intriguing story one obvious question has continually plagued me.
Could the actual location or placement of the Runestone have any significance? On the stone, runic Scandinavian style inscriptions had been carved, generally translatted as follows:
"Eight Gotlanders and 22 Northmen on [this] acquisition journey from Vinland far to the west we had a camp by the two [shelters] one days journey north from the stone. We were fishing one day. After we came home [here], found 10 men red from blood and dead. Ave Maria save from evil."
and this on the side (edge of the stone)
"There are 10 men by the inland sea to look after our ships fourteen days journey from this peninsula [or island] year 1362."
With some of the proponents of the KRS story postulating a Knights Templar exploration to west of the Great Lakes in the year 1362, I had assumed that if authentic, it could fit in well with my own premises. These included a Knights Templar excursion in 1308 from Lock-Etive in Argyll, Scotland using Viking routes to the area of Mahone Bay, Nova Scotia, eventually some 15 miles north of the Bay's famed Oak Island, erecting a small fortress.
I also had known that many experts considered the KRS to have been a fake from very early on. To quote Viking Heritage Magazine (Gotland University 2004) "Every Scandinavian runologist and expert in Scandinavian historical linguistics has declared The Kensington stone a hoax". The motive for this hoax was said to have been an attempt to prove the stories from old Norse sagas. These stories told of Scandinavian explorers (Vikings) who had discovered North America well before Columbus. Of course helping to fuel the hoax theory was the fact that the discoverer of the stone was Scandinavian.
In 1893, during the Chicago Columbian Exposition, which itself was an event held to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the Columbus discovery of North America, a replica of a 10th century Viking longship was sailed from Norway to Chicago. The stated purpose purpose of this voyage was to prove the feasibility of these same Norse sagas.
Of course we now know that archaeologist Helge Ingstad, by carefully following the information contained in the sagas discovered a Norse settlement on the northern shore of Newfoundland Island in 1960. Calling the site "L' Anse aux Meadows", objects were uncovered so obviously and conspicuously of Norse orgin that they could not be disputed. Final proof of a Scandinavian presence in North America before Columbus came when these objects were radio carbon dated to nearly 1,000 years old, or about the year 900 AD.
The KRS itself though, if proven authentic would point to a much deeper exploration far into the interior of the continent in 1362 AD, and still 130 years earlier than Columbus,
Since the discovery of the L' Anse aux Meadows site some archaeologisis, linguistics, and runologists have reacted quite favorably toward the authenticity of the KRS. Certainly some of this response was due to the fact that such an expedition was now deemed possible.

page two tomorrow

Re: a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 8:38 pm
by n4n224ccw
The locals showed her the site (mounds) actually along with four other mound locations. She chose to randomly dig where she did because of easy access.

The KRS along with Yarmouth's Fletcher and Bay View stones are two curiosities, we can also add to the mix other supposed Viking objects found in the US north east.

Some of those items can be explained as the attempts of a few Swedish and Scandinavian (1660s to 1720s) folks wanting to force their King's hand at foreign policy by providing legitimate proof they held claim to lands in North America because their ancestors were their first.

There are a few articles available online which speaks to this.

Here is a link to the Fletcher Stone ... sequence=1

Additionally there are some who think Vikings landed on the shores of Prospect Bay, about 20km or so from Oak Island.

Popular current thought is not for an inland exploration from the Atlantic, but rather from Hudson's Bay southwards, sort of a two pronged exploration. Somewhere I saw a chart of all (supposed) Viking artifacts found in North Eastern North America. Void were any artifacts in the mid great lakes area which suggests they did not travel that area.

Re: a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 1:35 am
by wayward
n4n224ccw wrote:
Popular current thought is not for an inland exploration from the Atlantic, but rather from Hudson's Bay southwards, sort of a two pronged exploration. Somewhere I saw a chart of all (supposed) Viking artifacts found in North Eastern North America. Void were any artifacts in the mid great lakes area which suggests they did not travel that area.

Very interesting n4n224ccw, but certainly irrelevant, I will continue my report tomorrow.

Re: a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:12 am
by wayward
page two

John D. Bengtson, a historical and anthropological linguist, who specializes in the Scandinavian languages, argues that some of the alleged errors in the inscription which led scholars to claim the text to be a clumsy forgery have now been revealed to be similar to runic inscriptions from Europe of the 14th century. Bengtson also points to other linguistic and historical reasons which support the authenticity of the KRS inscriptions,
In 2000, geologist Scott Wolter performed scientific tests on the stone, proving the inscription dates from more than 200 years before the date of its alleged discovery by Olof Ohman. Although he could not prove a date of 1362, Wolter believes the stone to authentic. "The fact the linguistics, historic record and geologic details all line up", he says.
Attorney Thomas E Reiersgord provided a theory in 2001 that many have agreed with, including Wolter. Reiersgord claimed the explorers were not Vikings, but instead were Scandinavian Cistercian Monks from Gotland along with some Norwegian sailors.
It would seem to be important to my own premise to point out here that Knights Templar Order was indeed Cistercian and after the order was dissolved many simply stayed in the Cistercian Order.
My one burning question and the object of this article, is why would this group of explorers, take the time to carve the inscriptions on this stone and then plop it down in, what at the time must have seemed to be, the middle of nowhere?
With navigation having always been a hobby with me, and also playing a part in my ongoing book, I thought I might attempt to answer that question by researching the location of the KRS when discovered from that angle.
I knew that in the 14th century, with the use of the cross-staff and compass, latitude and direction could be determined quite accurately. During an experiment of my own with only a framing square and level I found I could determine latitude to well within a mile.
I also knew that longitude could not be fixed without an accurate timepiece which had not yet been invented.
With this understanding it was obvious that if there was any logic to the placement of the KRS it must have been latitude related.
So I first determined the coordinates of the KRS when it was discovered, which was at latitude 45-48-38 North and longitude 95-39-44 West. Then using the Google Earth feature on my computer, I entered these numbers, which took me to the discovery site approximately 2 miles northeast of Kensington, Minnesota. Using my cursor, I began to follow that same laitude toward the east.
Of course it was no surprise when I first entered Lake Michigan at near the location of present day Escanaba. But what did suprise me was when my cursor then passed through the exact center of the Straits of Mackinac.
Continuing east with the premise that I was now backtracking a water route, I followed it as such and stayed south of Manitoulin Island (the largest island in a freshwater lake in the world). From there, at the northern end of Lake Huron, I moved the cursor further east into Georgian Bay at which point I could move it north again (still staying with a water route)to my target latitude of 45-48-38 North.
At that point I noticed that I was near the mouth of the French River of Voyageur fame. The Voyageurs were French Canadian fur traders of the upper mid-west during the 18th century. They even became legendary heroes celebrated in folklore and music.
Notably, the Voyageurs followed long distance fur trade water routes that ships or large boats could not travel. With their large (up to 36ft) canoes they would ply the routes that had been known of and used for centuries by 1st Nations (Canada) and Native American ( US) Indians.
The most famous of these was from what is now Montreal to Grand Portage in what is now Minnesota. Along this particular route, the "French River" was a major link.
Traders traveling from the area of Montreal to the upper Great Lakes region would turn up the Ottawa River to the mouth of the Mattawa, then follow the Mattawa upstream to the seven mile portage into Lake Nipissing. From Lake Nipissing the French River would take them to Georgian Bay and Lake Huron.

page three tomorrow

Re: a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:12 pm
by wayward
page three

This route constantly crosses the latitude we have been following during its east- west meanderings and was far more popular than the other option of continuing up the St. Lawrence and through the lower Great Lakes, mostly because of the greater distance and the difficult portages of the Lacine Rapids near Montreal and the Niagara Escarpment.
At some point our explorers could have exchanged their big water vessels for something similar to the large canoes of the later Voyageurs. Perhaps even building them on-site with the help or direction of the local native populations.
Still backtracking a proposed water route and continueing east on the St. Lawrence River I began to run further north of my targeted latitude. But, my thinking was that, more than likely either our explorers or earlier relatives had been to the St. Lawerence, Ottawa Rivers junction and knew that it was very near the latitude they wanted to follow. Moving my cursor into the Gulf of St. Lawerence I could again move south to the exact latitude of 45-48-38 North at the very center of St. George's Bay, Nova Scotia and the eastern end of the Canso Strait.
The Canso Strait provides a direct water route form the eastern side of Nova Scotia and Mahone Bay (the location of my premised Templar fortress) to the west and the entrance to the St. Lawerence. And if correct the technical point of beginning for this particular voyage of discovery at St. George's Bay.
Does the voyage that I just described fit the text of the KRS? Remember the words as translated read: "from Vinland far to the west". Many accept Nova Scotia as the Vinland of the Viking Sagas (which would be passed on to anyone who used Viking information) and certainly Kensington, Minnesota is far to the west, as a matter of fact it is exactly west.
"10 men by the inland sea". This could very well reference Lake Michigan, often even referred to today as The Inland Sea.
"14 day journey to this peninsula". Depending on where the vessels were parked on Lake Michigan (I'm guessing very near the latitude of 45-48-38 North) the overall distance to the site of the stones discovery would have been about 400 miles. One thing that should be remembered is that even if it took several months to travel while fishing and exploring this distance, the author of the text is saying they could return in some 14 days. This is the same way Native Americans described a distance, how long it would take if traveling direct. Even at this would it be possible for men walking to travel 400 miles in 14 days, which amounts to about 28 miles per day? Thru hikers on the famed Appalachian Trail average about 16 miles per day while some very fit and disiplined hikers have averaged more than 30 miles per day. Myself and some friends have hiked 20 miles per day at times in the very difficult Wind River Mountains of Wyoming. And children walking alongside wagons on the old Oregon Trail were known to average more than 15 miles per day, So it would seem that men in very good physical condition could easily accomplish this.
The following excerpt from the"Wisconsin History Explorer" indicates the possibility of already established trails along this route."In May of 1829, the first Europeans traveled by land across the state of Wisconsin, from Green Bay to Prairie du Chien. Records of the trip reveal that much of the course followed established Indian Trails".
As far as I know there has not yet been a latitude connection discussed with reference to the Kensington Rune Stone. Certainly there is enough evidence of such a connection to rule out mere coincidence, as well as to bring up new questions.
If this alleged expedition was to be a voyage of discovery, generally following an established latitude is understandable. One very important part of early map making would be to continually know with some certainty where you are.
Was the KRS then placed where it was later discovered, on this exact latitude (relative to the period) for the purpose of marking the furthest western extent of this group of explorers? Or if continuing west with their explorations could it have been left to provide a reference for a return trip? From the information contained herein, it would certainly seem to point to one of these or some similar scenario.
Obviously, whoever left this stone, whether a Swedish immigrant farmer or Cistercian Monk/ Knights Templar, they knew something about latitude, and were indeed familiar with the North American fur trading routes. End! comments welcome

Re: a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:49 pm
by wayward
n4n224ccw wrote:The locals showed her the site (mounds) actually along with four other mound locations. She chose to randomly dig where she did because of easy access.

I assume you are referring to Helge (a man, or do you mean his wife, Anne who led the excavation team?), and that may be true, but he still knew the correct area and located a site that had long been searched for.

Re: a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:54 pm
by wayward
I should have mentioned in my "a new angle on the KRS" text that within the first sentence of the translated KRS text the words "acquistion journey" are also commonly translated as "journey of exploration".
Hmm, no comments on the text, interesting.

Re: a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 7:28 pm
by n4n224ccw
From the Edmonton Journal - Mar 30, 1931

Re: a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:28 am
by wayward
n4n224ccw wrote:From the Edmonton Journal - Mar 30, 1931

I'm not sure what your point is here, n4n. By using that article are you saying that the KRS was placed by early scandinavians?

Re: a new angle on the Kensington Runestone

PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 3:12 pm
by n4n224ccw
I added the article as a possible source of information for you to further explore.

I’m neutral on the KRS and enjoy reading the arguments offered by both sides, but I doubt the route you suggest for a whole host of reasons.

There is no evidence which suggests Vikings were friendly with the natives rather parts of the sagas clearly mentions conflict.

The route you suggest from the Atlantic would need native co-operation, primarily from the Algonquin but would have them travel through non-Algonquin territory.

Without native co-operation these Vikings would find it impossible to transit the major native waterways without being detected and surviving the journey.

George Flom already published an excellent article during 1910 which details the easy route from Husdon Bay to this area of Minnesota which was used by the HBC during the late 1600s and beyond.

I’ve always wondered why no Viking remains/items were ever discovered in the immediate vicinity to the KRS?

You might wish to read or to incorporate Cartier’s journals, for when he first met the natives near the vicinity of modern day Quebec City, he noted they were already familiar with Christian symbols. Perhaps the Viking monks were the teachers?

Donnacona also told Cartier the Kingdom of Saguenay and of white men who lived to the northwest and who only wore woolen garments, perhaps they were descendants of a long lost Viking colony?

Perhaps Indians came across the stone near a salt water coastal area and seeing the markings thought it to be magic then carried it away?

Regardless, the KRS is an interesting topic.

Fatal error: ./cache/ is NOT writable. in /home/oakislan/public_html/forum/includes/acm/acm_file.php on line 103