Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Gothic Runes

Expand Messages
  • llama_nom
    I have to concur with Francisc. Only a handful of Gothic inscriptions survive: while there may be some quirky forms, for example the box-shaped D-rune on the
    Message 1 of 7 , May 31, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I have to concur with Francisc. Only a handful of Gothic
      inscriptions survive: while there may be some quirky forms, for
      example the box-shaped D-rune on the Kovel spearhead, nevertheless
      Gothic runes are essentially the Eldar Futhark, and don't really
      differ from the standard runerow any more than other individial
      early inscriptions do from each other. The "Gothic Runes" at this
      Omniglot page

      http://www.omniglot.com/writing/runic.htm

      contain doubtful forms that I don't recognise from any of the
      inscriptions. You are right to be suspicious. The terms you
      mention "Fraujo's ahtu" etc. are not recorded in any ancient
      historical source relating to the Goths, nor does the form *ahtu
      work as a cognate of Old Icelandic 'ætt'. They're presumably a
      modern invention. On the Omniglot page about the Gothic alphabet,
      <e> and <o> only stand for long sounds; *aihvus should read *aihvs
      or *aihws--depending which spelling convention you adopt; and the
      Lord's prayer is slightly garbled by internet-transmission... But
      still, hats off to Omniglot for bringing together all these amazing
      writing systems. Have you seen this one:
      http://www.omniglot.com/writing/nushu.htm ? Anyway, here is a
      useful table comparing several futharks and lists of rune-names.

      http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/germ/runennam.htm

      The column on the far right lists the names of the Gothic letters
      recorded in a 10th(?) century manuscript. These are the source for
      the reconstructed names at the Omniglot page. They were apparently
      written according to Old High German spelling conventions, so the
      <z> should probably be sounded [s]. Quite a lot do match the
      corresponding names in English and Norse tradition, as you can see,
      though some have been changed, e.g. thyth (='þiuþ'(?) "blessing").
      Curious that the Gothic differs here, and with 'chozma', at a point
      where English and Norse differ from each other. You may have heard
      the hypothesis that OE 'þorn' replaced the demonic (Norse) 'þurs'
      for euphemistic reasons. It has been questioned whether these are
      in fact Gothic (RI Page, An Introduction to English Runes), but I
      can't see what else they can be. It's easy to match some to the
      Biblical Gothic equivalent, but others like AZA have inspired
      various guesses.

      Here are photographs of three Gothic runic inscriptions:

      http://www.gotica.de/

      The runes on the top spearhead (Dahmsdorf) are not very clear in
      this picture, but read RANJA, which has been interpreted as a name
      (for the spear) *Rannja "the one who puts to flight". The next
      reads right-to-left TILARIDS, a name (of the owner?, maker?, the
      spear?), perhaps "Good/appropriate Councel"--but some interpret TILA-
      according to its modern German cognate Ziel "goal, target", and
      RIDS as "rider", and the whole as "target-pursuer", "attacker". The
      final picture here is probably the most famous Gothic inscription of
      all, the golden neck-ring from Pietrioassa, Romania--GUTANI ? WI
      HAILAG--interpreted: Gutane ? weih hailag "the Goths' ?, sacred
      [and] holy." The single uncertain rune is thought to be a concept
      rune, representing its own name, but was damaged when looters sawed
      it in half. The grammar requires a neuter noun in the singlar.
      Often taken to be O = 'oþal' "inheritance".

      These and others are discussed in an online book "Runes around the
      North Sea and on the Continent AD 150-700; texts & contexts", by
      Jantina Helena Looijenga. She interprets the damaged Pietrioassa
      rune as 'jer' "year" (i.e. [good] harvest, a fruitful year). See
      especially Chapter 5 for early south-east European inscriptions,
      including the Letcani spindlewhorl also pictured in Peter
      Heather's "The Goths". This is another Romanian find, and most
      likely Gothic too.

      http://www.ub.rug.nl/eldoc/dis/arts/j.h.looijenga/

      Chapter 7, no. 11 is the Charnay brooch (fibula) inscription,
      thought to be Burgundian--an East Germanic language similar to
      Gothic. Along with the Kylver runes mentioned by Tore, this is one
      of the earliest (near) complete futharks.

      Some pictures (early inscriptions from southern and eastern Europe:
      Charnay, Kowel, Pietroassa, Breza, Bezenye--the others here are
      later, from Viking times). Looijenga has suggested Lombardic
      authorship in the case of the Breza futhark.

      http://www.arild-hauge.com/europe-rune.htm

      A discussion of many early inscriptions including some mentioned
      above:

      http://www.nordic-life.org/nmh/runic.htm

      A German database of inscriptions in the Eldar Futhark, including
      those attributed to the Goths.

      http://www.runenprojekt.uni-kiel.de/

      Hope there's something of interest in that lot.

      Llama Nom
    • rhoomegaphi
      Thanks. Those are good sources. Personally I like the querky forms of the Jer, Quairthra, Pairthra, Ezec, and Sauil. That s my two cents worth. Thanks. ...
      Message 2 of 7 , Jun 10, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks. Those are good sources.

        Personally I like the querky forms of the Jer, Quairthra, Pairthra,
        Ezec, and Sauil. That's my two cents worth.

        Thanks.

        --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell@o...> wrote:
        >
        > I have to concur with Francisc. Only a handful of Gothic
        > inscriptions survive: while there may be some quirky forms, for
        > example the box-shaped D-rune on the Kovel spearhead, nevertheless
        > Gothic runes are essentially the Eldar Futhark, and don't really
        > differ from the standard runerow any more than other individial
        > early inscriptions do from each other. The "Gothic Runes" at this
        > Omniglot page
        >
        > http://www.omniglot.com/writing/runic.htm
        >
        > contain doubtful forms that I don't recognise from any of the
        > inscriptions. You are right to be suspicious. The terms you
        > mention "Fraujo's ahtu" etc. are not recorded in any ancient
        > historical source relating to the Goths, nor does the form *ahtu
        > work as a cognate of Old Icelandic 'ætt'. They're presumably a
        > modern invention. On the Omniglot page about the Gothic alphabet,
        > <e> and <o> only stand for long sounds; *aihvus should read *aihvs
        > or *aihws--depending which spelling convention you adopt; and the
        > Lord's prayer is slightly garbled by internet-transmission... But
        > still, hats off to Omniglot for bringing together all these amazing
        > writing systems. Have you seen this one:
        > http://www.omniglot.com/writing/nushu.htm ? Anyway, here is a
        > useful table comparing several futharks and lists of rune-names.
        >
        > http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/germ/runennam.htm
        >
        > The column on the far right lists the names of the Gothic letters
        > recorded in a 10th(?) century manuscript. These are the source for
        > the reconstructed names at the Omniglot page. They were apparently
        > written according to Old High German spelling conventions, so the
        > <z> should probably be sounded [s]. Quite a lot do match the
        > corresponding names in English and Norse tradition, as you can see,
        > though some have been changed, e.g. thyth (='þiuþ'(?) "blessing").
        > Curious that the Gothic differs here, and with 'chozma', at a point
        > where English and Norse differ from each other. You may have heard
        > the hypothesis that OE 'þorn' replaced the demonic (Norse) 'þurs'
        > for euphemistic reasons. It has been questioned whether these are
        > in fact Gothic (RI Page, An Introduction to English Runes), but I
        > can't see what else they can be. It's easy to match some to the
        > Biblical Gothic equivalent, but others like AZA have inspired
        > various guesses.
        >
        > Here are photographs of three Gothic runic inscriptions:
        >
        > http://www.gotica.de/
        >
        > The runes on the top spearhead (Dahmsdorf) are not very clear in
        > this picture, but read RANJA, which has been interpreted as a name
        > (for the spear) *Rannja "the one who puts to flight". The next
        > reads right-to-left TILARIDS, a name (of the owner?, maker?, the
        > spear?), perhaps "Good/appropriate Councel"--but some interpret
        TILA-
        > according to its modern German cognate Ziel "goal, target", and
        > RIDS as "rider", and the whole as "target-pursuer", "attacker".
        The
        > final picture here is probably the most famous Gothic inscription
        of
        > all, the golden neck-ring from Pietrioassa, Romania--GUTANI ? WI
        > HAILAG--interpreted: Gutane ? weih hailag "the Goths' ?, sacred
        > [and] holy." The single uncertain rune is thought to be a concept
        > rune, representing its own name, but was damaged when looters sawed
        > it in half. The grammar requires a neuter noun in the singlar.
        > Often taken to be O = 'oþal' "inheritance".
        >
        > These and others are discussed in an online book "Runes around the
        > North Sea and on the Continent AD 150-700; texts & contexts", by
        > Jantina Helena Looijenga. She interprets the damaged Pietrioassa
        > rune as 'jer' "year" (i.e. [good] harvest, a fruitful year). See
        > especially Chapter 5 for early south-east European inscriptions,
        > including the Letcani spindlewhorl also pictured in Peter
        > Heather's "The Goths". This is another Romanian find, and most
        > likely Gothic too.
        >
        > http://www.ub.rug.nl/eldoc/dis/arts/j.h.looijenga/
        >
        > Chapter 7, no. 11 is the Charnay brooch (fibula) inscription,
        > thought to be Burgundian--an East Germanic language similar to
        > Gothic. Along with the Kylver runes mentioned by Tore, this is one
        > of the earliest (near) complete futharks.
        >
        > Some pictures (early inscriptions from southern and eastern Europe:
        > Charnay, Kowel, Pietroassa, Breza, Bezenye--the others here are
        > later, from Viking times). Looijenga has suggested Lombardic
        > authorship in the case of the Breza futhark.
        >
        > http://www.arild-hauge.com/europe-rune.htm
        >
        > A discussion of many early inscriptions including some mentioned
        > above:
        >
        > http://www.nordic-life.org/nmh/runic.htm
        >
        > A German database of inscriptions in the Eldar Futhark, including
        > those attributed to the Goths.
        >
        > http://www.runenprojekt.uni-kiel.de/
        >
        > Hope there's something of interest in that lot.
        >
        > Llama Nom
      • klikabcd
        ... of ... if ... Gothic ... those ... that ... at
        Message 3 of 7 , Jun 27, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "rhoomegaphi" <rhoomegaphi@y...>
          wrote:
          > Hi I haven't found a discussion here yet about the Gothic variety
          of
          > Runes. Is there an inscription somewhere that we could see how the
          > Goths wrote?
          >
          > I have found at www.omniglot.com something interesting about Gothic
          > Runes. Fraujo's Ahtu is the same as Freyja's Aett, and so is Teiws'
          > Ahtu to Tyr's Aett. Hagls' Ahtu however varies. Btw, I don't know
          if
          > it's accurate or correct to apply the same information to the
          Gothic
          > Runes as the Vikings did when we refer to each eight as an aett.
          >
          > I don't know if it is right or not to think that the Gothic Runes
          > have the same meanings or not. At www.omniglot.com, the Gothic
          > Alphabet is also posted. If one could find out the meanings of
          those
          > names, which most are similar, then we could learn the meanings of
          > those runes.
          >
          > I really like the way that the Gothic runes are different from the
          > Elder Futhark in some of their designs. I have done searches on the
          > Gothic Runes, but I keep getting the same erroneous information
          that
          > the Gothic Futhark is the same as the Elder Futhark, but with one
          > extra rune. This doesn't seem true according to the list of runes
          at
          > www.omniglot.com . I think I will e-mail both sources and ask for
          > references.
          >
          > But if anyone can contribute to this discussion, please do.
          >
          > Thanks.
        • ertydfh110
          Hello, While reading all the forum I´ve found this thread. I found it interesting because I´ve just post a thread about some slate stones found in Spain
          Message 4 of 7 , Oct 9, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello,

            While reading all the forum I´ve found this thread. I found it interesting because I´ve just post a thread about some slate stones found in Spain which are supposed to contain numbers (at least that is what the spanish academics thought at the moment they studied it).

            Looking at:
            http://www.omniglot.com/writing/runic.htm

            I can see that there are similarities with some of the numers/letters? found in this visigothic slate stone:
            http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/696/visigothicwhiteboard.jpg/

            I have no idea of gothic, but is there a possibility that this visigothic stone contained runes?.

            I have personally taken the picture and in the museum where I took the photo told me that there are literally hundreds (probably more than 1.000) in boxes that are not shown to public.

            Regards.
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.