Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Bob Voyles

The Norse Code Stone

118 posts in this topic

I first discussed the subject of the proposed "Norse Code-stone" in this Unexplained-Mysteries forum back in April of this year.  Since then, I have re-visited the site and I made a video showing two different types of stoneholes at the same location.  Then, I gave a free presentation about the Code-stone lasting about an hour and a half at the Park Theater in Park Rapids, MN, on September 5, 2017 to an audience of nearly a hundred people.  I recently put the presentation into three parts, and I have just made the first two parts available to the general public.  Going to YouTube and putting "norse code-stone" into search will bring you my videos.  The first part is the recorded PowerPoint of me both showing and describing the Code-stone as well as showing constrasting stoneholes in rocks at the site--from two distinctly different eras, the late 1800s and "medieval times."  The second part of the presentation is the on-location video, where I explain and show the Code-stone and the proposed medieval Scandinavian encoding in more detail while exploring local waterways and giving a strong case for a medieval land-claim...hundreds of years before the time of Columbus and hundreds of years before the later French arrived.

What I discovered ties in nicely with the story of the Kensington Runestone and other local associated evidences, especially in regards to the dozens of mysterious medieval Scandinavian stoneholes in rocks to be found in this region...where waterway sources beginning at oceanic points (Hudson Bay and St. Lawrence Seaway) dwindle down and merge, creating--hooking together--a huge waterway circle.  My theory proposes that Norsemen discovered this merging spot and, as a result of appreciating it greatly, left many evidences behind suggesting a strong interest in acquiring and settling the land in this specific region.  Since other local evidences suggest a medieval Christian Catholic presence--such as the KRS and the nearby Sauk Lake Altar Rock, it may be that the Catholic Church was involved with the making of the Code-stone, too.  For now, my discoveries have been ignored by Minnesota authorities, since the official position is that no Europeans made it to far-inland Minnesota before the French.  In my opinion, this is an entrenched, hidebound point of view, and a direct affront to history-truth.  (By the way, I do not consider myself to be on the fringe...I think it is academia and the "history professionals" who are on the fringe when it comes to early Norse exploration in America.)  I welcome sincere input. - Bob

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy Bob

Did you post about this before here? Something about holes you found on public land and you were upset that they wouldn't let you or experts dig there?

Quote

since the official position is that no Europeans made it to far-inland Minnesota before the French.  In my opinion, this is an entrenched, hidebound point of view, and a direct affront to history-truth.

I think you mean 'consensus' of opinion. As far as know there is no 'official' in Minnesota making public statements on matters of archaeological.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang about, I thought the Kensington Runestone was like Piltdowm Man, a forgery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Hang about, I thought the Kensington Runestone was like Piltdowm Man, a forgery.

The majority view Kensington as a hoax, yes. But as with all such things, there is a minority that still wants it to be real. An extreme example is the folks who still believe the earth if flat.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Hang about, I thought the Kensington Runestone was like Piltdowm Man, a forgery.

Your understandings would be correct. While debated for decades, there is little to no conclusive evidence supporting the "authenticity" of the Kensington Runestone. As to some of the other mentioned "evidences", none of these have been shown to be of the age and cultural attribution that Bob rather boldly presents as factually authenticated. As to travel routes, Bob would appear to be unfamiliar with the actual travel conditions associated with the Hudson's Bay to Lake Winnipeg to the north central US, particularly as they would relate to Norse era craft. In addition, Bob does not appear to grasp the cultural complexities involved.

Lastly, his "frustration" with the professional community is not uncommon. On a rather regular basis (at least one or two times per year) our offices are contacted by such well meaning, though deluded, individuals. We attempt to gently inform and guide such individuals. In a number of cases such individuals are grateful and appreciative of the guidance and instruction. Then, there are the others...

.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Swede said:

Your understandings would be correct. While debated for decades, there is little to no conclusive evidence supporting the "authenticity" of the Kensington Runestone. As to some of the other mentioned "evidences", none of these have been shown to be of the age and cultural attribution that Bob rather boldly presents as factually authenticated. As to travel routes, Bob would appear to be unfamiliar with the actual travel conditions associated with the Hudson's Bay to Lake Winnipeg to the north central US, particularly as they would relate to Norse era craft. In addition, Bob does not appear to grasp the cultural complexities involved.

Lastly, his "frustration" with the professional community is not uncommon. On a rather regular basis (at least one or two times per year) our offices are contacted by such well meaning, though deluded, individuals. We attempt to gently inform and guide such individuals. In a number of cases such individuals are grateful and appreciative of the guidance and instruction. Then, there are the others...

.

The interest in the subject is of course understandable, but basing such a hypothesis on rock shapes and features is not sufficient. Much more conclusive would be the unearthing of identifiable Norse material culture in the area.

So, Swede, start digging!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

The interest in the subject is of course understandable, but basing such a hypothesis on rock shapes and features is not sufficient. Much more conclusive would be the unearthing of identifiable Norse material culture in the area.

So, Swede, start digging!

Chuckle! Your point is a quite valid one. After many, many decades of formal excavation conducted across the North American continent, by many qualified individuals, agencies, and institutions, there has been precisely zero credible evidence of Norse occupation beyond L'Anse aux Meadows and potentially a few other sites associated with the eastern North America seaboard. Such sites have, of course, been discussed on these pages a number of times.

The above aspects are ones that some do not prefer to take into account. Humans (and virtually every other genus/species) leave definable evidences of their existence and presence.

.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Swede said:

Chuckle! Your point is a quite valid one. After many, many decades of formal excavation conducted across the North American continent, by many qualified individuals, agencies, and institutions, there has been precisely zero credible evidence of Norse occupation beyond L'Anse aux Meadows and potentially a few other sites associated with the eastern North America seaboard. Such sites have, of course, been discussed on these pages a number of times.

The above aspects are ones that some do not prefer to take into account. Humans (and virtually every other genus/species) leave definable evidences of their existence and presence.

.

Apparently there would be intrest in the region so would there not have been presence there of Native American in the midievel years, at the spot where these stoneholes are? Also on the trip off the Norse folks towards that point encounterd native americans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Hanslune said:

a direct affront to history-truth.

I feel like, as an historian, I should know that term. But I don't, so I am clearly inept.

...or part of a vast, dark conspiracy.

One or the other. Probably.

--Jaylemurph

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TRUTHFUL EVIDENCE OF A NORWEGIAN STONE COD.......

2F9D603D-60EF-4405-9736-5B8CCF6B11C4.jpeg.c0bf6e8b19d6460f04b31c6fabf9d4ee.jpeg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Hanslune, for your sincere question about how Minnesota history is perceived by various persons here in Minnesota, amatuers to professionals.  I am not dealing with a consensus...you are correct.  I am dealing with entrenched hidebound-ness related to academic peer pressure.  For your benefit and further understanding of the actual situation, I offer you this direct quote from the Minnesota Office of the State Archaeologist, from the FAQ page:

 Minnesota Office of the State Archaeologist:  

·          Is the Kensington Runestone real?

"The runestone is a large rock with Scandinavian runic inscriptions supposedly found on a farm near Kensington in Douglas County in 1898. The runic date listed on the stone is 1362. The Runestone itself has been studied by many experts of various disciplines. Most professional runic scholars and professional historians here and abroad agree that the Runestone was probably not carved in 1362 and was most likely the product of late 19th century Scandinavian settlers in western Minnesota.

The Runestone discovery site (now a county park) and other purported Medieval Norse sites in Minnesota -- as well as artifacts from these sites -- have been the subject of multiple archaeological examinations, but there is no archaeological evidence for a Medieval Norse presence in Minnesota."

Most of the other comments here so far seem to have little worth, as though those responding have not read and do not grasp what I'm showing and describing.  Having said this, it is refreshing to have my IDEAS slammed instead of me, personally, which is one of the reasons I chose to offer my new YouTube videos here on this blog, over others.  I'm sure, eventually, that what I'm saying and showing here will be picked up and understood...but that will take a bit of effort on the readers' part.  There is nothing superficial about this subject I brought here, and everything is free.  I only wish for a few astute readers to catch on to what my ultimate goal is, and that is to show and describe what I found, with the best explanation I can come up with.

Here is a link that has a succinct synopsis of the proposed Norse Code-stone, as well as several other articles I wrote, which will likely help those who are sincerely interested in this subject understand why this is a fantastic reality.  Self-blinders will get you nowhere.  Don't trust Wikipedia on the Kensington Runestone.  The fact of the matter is that both the Minnesota Historical Society and the Smithsonian initially believed the KRS to be genuine...until naysayers with improper linguistics analysis succeeded in causing harm to truth-in-history...which is existing in MN to this very day.  Overt skepticism is not helpful.  Thousands upon thousands of intelligent people believe the KRS is genuine.  We shouldn't go on being fooled by superficial doubters who have little understanding or knowledge on this subject of medieval Norse explorations into America.

http://www.norwegianamerican.com/?s=bob+voyles

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bob Voyles said:

Most of the other comments here so far seem to have little worth, as though those responding have not read and do not grasp what I'm showing and describing.

You left out the very real possibility that, having read your particular strain of "I, alone, have correctly interpreted history" schtick, we do grasp it, in its entirety, but don't feel it warrants further conversation. If you want anyone to take you seriously, you need to be aware that is at least a possible outcome to the scenario until you provide actual, convincing data.

--Jaylemurph

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bob Voyles said:

Thanks, Hanslune, for your sincere question about how Minnesota history is perceived by various persons here in Minnesota, amatuers to professionals.  I am not dealing with a consensus...you are correct.  I am dealing with entrenched hidebound-ness related to academic peer pressure.  For your benefit and further understanding of the actual situation, I offer you this direct quote from the Minnesota Office of the State Archaeologist, from the FAQ page:

 Minnesota Office of the State Archaeologist:  

·          Is the Kensington Runestone real?

"The runestone is a large rock with Scandinavian runic inscriptions supposedly found on a farm near Kensington in Douglas County in 1898. The runic date listed on the stone is 1362. The Runestone itself has been studied by many experts of various disciplines. Most professional runic scholars and professional historians here and abroad agree that the Runestone was probably not carved in 1362 and was most likely the product of late 19th century Scandinavian settlers in western Minnesota.

The Runestone discovery site (now a county park) and other purported Medieval Norse sites in Minnesota -- as well as artifacts from these sites -- have been the subject of multiple archaeological examinations, but there is no archaeological evidence for a Medieval Norse presence in Minnesota."

Most of the other comments here so far seem to have little worth, as though those responding have not read and do not grasp what I'm showing and describing.  Having said this, it is refreshing to have my IDEAS slammed instead of me, personally, which is one of the reasons I chose to offer my new YouTube videos here on this blog, over others.  I'm sure, eventually, that what I'm saying and showing here will be picked up and understood...but that will take a bit of effort on the readers' part.  There is nothing superficial about this subject I brought here, and everything is free.  I only wish for a few astute readers to catch on to what my ultimate goal is, and that is to show and describe what I found, with the best explanation I can come up with.

Here is a link that has a succinct synopsis of the proposed Norse Code-stone, as well as several other articles I wrote, which will likely help those who are sincerely interested in this subject understand why this is a fantastic reality.  Self-blinders will get you nowhere.  Don't trust Wikipedia on the Kensington Runestone.  The fact of the matter is that both the Minnesota Historical Society and the Smithsonian initially believed the KRS to be genuine...until naysayers with improper linguistics analysis succeeded in causing harm to truth-in-history...which is existing in MN to this very day.  Overt skepticism is not helpful.  Thousands upon thousands of intelligent people believe the KRS is genuine.  We shouldn't go on being fooled by superficial doubters who have little understanding or knowledge on this subject of medieval Norse explorations into America.

http://www.norwegianamerican.com/?s=bob+voyles

 

 

I dont get it why you claim people dont have read it or understand it and thus the reactions here are litle worth. I have seen the 2 video's on youtube and it made me wonder that if the Norse people came to Minnesota and left markings there wich I do not say is not true than would they not have met Native Americans on the way over there or at the locations where these stoneholes where found. In short would these norse not have met native Americans and if so there should be proof of that somehow somewhere. 

The stones are there and come from 2 different era's but are there any other indications or is there any other proof off them being there. I can not imagine to be honest the Norse came there and never had contact with the native inhabitants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had no shortage of people who understand and appreciate what I've carefully presented here.  I can't count on doubters and skeptics in any way, and there is no shortage of them.  However, some mysteries can be explained, even though this is a blog about unexplained mysteries.  Some people will care about what I'm saying, and others won't care.  Some will encourage me, others will seek to belittle my findings.  My intent is to cut through the skepticism and doubt inherent with posting information about the Code-stone I discovered...to possibly reach the right ears.  Maybe this is a long shot in seeking a professional dig, but I'm a hopeful sort of person.  Right now, history is being wrongfully portrayed in Minnesota.  Eventually, the real truth will be more widely known.  In the meantime, my wish for you is that you won't much longer be fooled and in the dark about Scandinavians reaching other places in North America and America besides Vinland. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bob Voyles said:

I have had no shortage of people who understand and appreciate what I've carefully presented here.  I can't count on doubters and skeptics in any way, and there is no shortage of them.  However, some mysteries can be explained, even though this is a blog about unexplained mysteries.  Some people will care about what I'm saying, and others won't care.  Some will encourage me, others will seek to belittle my findings.  My intent is to cut through the skepticism and doubt inherent with posting information about the Code-stone I discovered...to possibly reach the right ears.  Maybe this is a long shot in seeking a professional dig, but I'm a hopeful sort of person.  Right now, history is being wrongfully portrayed in Minnesota.  Eventually, the real truth will be more widely known.  In the meantime, my wish for you is that you won't much longer be fooled and in the dark about Scandinavians reaching other places in North America and America besides Vinland. 

There’s no shortage of people who believe the earth is flat either. Food for thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blaid Drwg

Yes, certainly Native Americans allowed Scandinavians to enter their territory...they had a mutual interest of future trading.  The KRS mentions ten men being massacured, likely by Native Americans.  This area was hotly contested by the Sioux and the Chippewa in the Fourteenth century.  Look up "Crow Creek" in SD's Fourteenth century to see what happened to the ten men.  The question is:  why were the men murdered?  Basically, they were too comfortable in hazardous conditions.  Making camp late and breaking camp early may have helped them.  Most of the time, Natives accompanied the Norsemen, I believe, but for some reason not in the case of the KRS sojourners, where half of the party of twenty were away fishing.  Thanks for the question about Norsemen being accompanied by Natives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Blaid Drwg said:

I dont get it why you claim people dont have read it or understand it.

The entire "I, and I alone, have correctly understood history" routine is only ever taken up by people who are more or less narcissistic. It's literally unthinkable for most of them that people should read their genius and not appreciate it. I'm not necessarily tarring the OP with that brush, but anyone not willing to listen to /any/ critical comments is far more interested in himself than the truth.

--Jaylemurph

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let’s assume that Norsemen did find their way into the heart of America (which has been used as the basis of a reasonably good Doctor Who story by the way)... okay.... now what? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

The entire "I, and I alone, have correctly understood history" routine is only ever taken up by people who are more or less narcissistic. It's literally unthinkable for most of them that people should read their genius and not appreciate it. I'm not necessarily tarring the OP with that brush, but anyone not willing to listen to /any/ critical comments is far more interested in himself than the truth.

--Jaylemurph

Well the OP and the later posts in this topic made me look to the KRS again and went on a search towards some sort of codex of the Runic that can help in its translations. I did this with the help off someone who actualy has knowledge off linguistics and found out there are 4 different Rune dialects on the KSR wich is strange since there is only spoken off 2 differrent types of Scandinaviëns. Being Scandinaviens of Sweden and Norway so in best case you might expect 2 different dialects. Also the AVM on the KSR is quite a mystery since there are different posibilities in its translation and therefore there are also different options to interpretate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jaylemurph, see now how you have subtly gone from tarnishing what I have shared here, to attempting to tarnish me.  This happens to me quite often, which is why I immediately notice it when it happens.  So now, you don't like my message, nor me either, apparently, as expressed by your various negative judgements of my character.  The next step is usually some form of name-calling.  Another thing you have done, quite subtly, above, is attempt to reduce what I'm sharing down to an "interpretation," of history when in fact we're also dealing with a physical discovery.  I discovered the Code-stone in April of 2015 after first finding the hoard of nearby stoneholes in 2013.

What you insinuate as narcissism is nothing more than a personal inquiry into what the 3-hole rock I found represents.  I am looking for the best explanation for what I found, and I believe I am rubbing elbows with the truth.  Personal intelligence doesn't have much to do with this.  I am simply more dogmatic than a lot of people and willing to go out into the field, and when I find something I thing is meaningful in some way, I usually try to find out more about it.  I love to study maps.  I basically enjoy what I'm doing in retirement.  I ask no money of anyone.

One of my problems is that much of what I've discovered is, yes, very esoteric in nature; but I am not claiming superior intelligence in my narrowed research.  I've sorted through a lot of data, as you might suspect, looking at the videos.  In fact, it is my own personal belief that this has occurred so that in the end God Almighty may receive glory--for revealing whatever is buried.  In the Lord's Prayer, we are told to ask not to be led into temptation.  I believe one can also ask God to lead one's steps away from temptation AND towards something important to Him...that being history truth.

jaylemurph, I am very willing to listen to any comments, but I prefer that they stay on target with what I'm espousing, rather than attempting to judge any particular character defects I might seem to be exhibiting.  I put myself out here in public because I wanted to share what I discovered, and because I'm interested to hear what others might have to say.  I chose this venue because I like the by-laws intended to keep things friendly.  

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KRS - while logically is has to be "fake/planted"... i've yet to see a good explanation to how it was created/crafted. Maybe it was genuine but brought to that location years/centuries later?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bavarian Raven said:

KRS - while logically is has to be "fake/planted"... i've yet to see a good explanation to how it was created/crafted. Maybe it was genuine but brought to that location years/centuries later?  

I do not believe it was moved to that location the writings on it speak of things that are in that erea and can be confirmed as being there. 

The only thing that actualy bothers me about it is the different dialects in it (4 at least) and its interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bob Voyles said:

jaylemurph, see now how you have subtly gone from tarnishing what I have shared here, to attempting to tarnish me.  This happens to me quite often, which is why I immediately notice it when it happens.  So now, you don't like my message, nor me either, apparently, as expressed by your various negative judgements of my character.  The next step is usually some form of name-calling.  Another thing you have done, quite subtly, above, is attempt to reduce what I'm sharing down to an "interpretation," of history when in fact we're also dealing with a physical discovery.  I discovered the Code-stone in April of 2015 after first finding the hoard of nearby stoneholes in 2013.

What you insinuate as narcissism is nothing more than a personal inquiry into what the 3-hole rock I found represents.  I am looking for the best explanation for what I found, and I believe I am rubbing elbows with the truth.  Personal intelligence doesn't have much to do with this.  I am simply more dogmatic than a lot of people and willing to go out into the field, and when I find something I thing is meaningful in some way, I usually try to find out more about it.  I love to study maps.  I basically enjoy what I'm doing in retirement.  I ask no money of anyone.

One of my problems is that much of what I've discovered is, yes, very esoteric in nature; but I am not claiming superior intelligence in my narrowed research.  I've sorted through a lot of data, as you might suspect, looking at the videos.  In fact, it is my own personal belief that this has occurred so that in the end God Almighty may receive glory--for revealing whatever is buried.  In the Lord's Prayer, we are told to ask not to be led into temptation.  I believe one can also ask God to lead one's steps away from temptation AND towards something important to Him...that being history truth.

jaylemurph, I am very willing to listen to any comments, but I prefer that they stay on target with what I'm espousing, rather than attempting to judge any particular character defects I might seem to be exhibiting.  I put myself out here in public because I wanted to share what I discovered, and because I'm interested to hear what others might have to say.  I chose this venue because I like the by-laws intended to keep things friendly.  

But you admit you've already decided to ignore anyone who doesn't use the phraseology you prefer or who doesn't already agree with you. That's not "listening to any comment." That's the opposite.

Seems like to me you ought to thank me for this extended opportunity to display your martyr complex, which is clearly equally off-topic.

Well, off-topic for everyone who is not you.

--Jaylemurph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jaylemurph, you are off topic, not me.  You're trying to switch the topic of the Code-stone to the topic of saying negative things about me...like a common troll.  Frankly, I didn't expect that here.  At least some come here with sincere comments or questions, some of which I'll address now.  I'll not answer any more of your comments about me since you are an obvious troublemaker.

Blaid Drwg, the inscription on the KRS has undergone several changes in its interpretation, from the beginning until about 2010, when it received a refreshing from Williams/Neilson.  The last interpretation changed the purpose of the journey from exploring to acquiring something.  I consider myself a message purist in that I take the message at face-value.  I believe the story told and there's a lot of information available to go along with the story.  Many of the evidences in this region are genuine, although some are not, too.  The many metal artifacts cannot be discarded offhandedly, nor can the associated petroglyphs and stoneholes.  There is actually an impressive amount of evidence that accompanies the KRS, though some of it is obscure.  I find no problems with believing that the inscription is authentic to the mid-Fourteenth century.  Earlier wrongful runic information has now been cleared up, which means that the Minnesota Historical Society and the Smithsonian should both give the KRS another look.  Right now there is a huge amount of bias to overcome for people to see the true story of the KRS.

Bavarian Raven, "KRS - while logically is has to be "fake/planted"... i've yet to see a good explanation to how it was created/crafted. Maybe it was genuine but brought to that location years/centuries later?

I disagree with you, Bavarian Raven, that logic says the KRS has to be fake.  I believe logic says the opposite...that the KRS must be authentic.  Its creation needs no extra-special explanation.  It is a typical memorial stone, telling a typical story about men dying in a faraway place...no different from those many runestones in Europe.  Runestone Hill is likely where the stone was carved, in my opinion; there is no evidence to suggest that it was brought to the Runestone Hill location at a later time.  However, there is geological evidence to support the idea that Runestone Hill used to be surrounded by considerably more water, before a slowly eroding ravine lowered the water level surrounding Runestone Hill.  I tend to believe that Runestone Hill was a peninsula-island-like defensive camping position a few miles away from the river highway (the Chippewa River), somewhat akin to a moat-like setting in Europe.  Important to this subject, Runestone Hill is surrounded by stoneholes similiar to those on the Code-stone.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Bob Voyles said:

jaylemurph, you are off topic, not me.  You're trying to switch the topic of the Code-stone to the topic of saying negative things about me...like a common troll.  Frankly, I didn't expect that here.  At least some come here with sincere comments or questions, some of which I'll address now.  I'll not answer any more of your comments about me since you are an obvious troublemaker.

Blaid Drwg, the inscription on the KRS has undergone several changes in its interpretation, from the beginning until about 2010, when it received a refreshing from Williams/Neilson.  The last interpretation changed the purpose of the journey from exploring to acquiring something.  I consider myself a message purist in that I take the message at face-value.  I believe the story told and there's a lot of information available to go along with the story.  Many of the evidences in this region are genuine, although some are not, too.  The many metal artifacts cannot be discarded offhandedly, nor can the associated petroglyphs and stoneholes.  There is actually an impressive amount of evidence that accompanies the KRS, though some of it is obscure.  I find no problems with believing that the inscription is authentic to the mid-Fourteenth century.  Earlier wrongful runic information has now been cleared up, which means that the Minnesota Historical Society and the Smithsonian should both give the KRS another look.  Right now there is a huge amount of bias to overcome for people to see the true story of the KRS.

There is idd to much bias arround the KRS but than again before it is looked at it again and again translated with the knowledge known at this time we cant realy make up a story round the KRS. Or they should start digging at the place where you found the stoneholes. It might be that there is something to find wich would elebarate on it. So far it is still a guess at best as to what happend. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.