Re: Kensington runestone in the Scandinavian press

On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 23:50:04 GMT,
nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>Apparently on date Thu, 9 Jun 2005 23:43:55 +0200, "Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxxxx>
>said:
>
>>nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> Eric Stevens said:
>>>> "Alaca" wrote:
>>
>>>>> clears Ohman and that's all.
>>>>> Forget the tree and the rootmarks.
>>>>> They are a complete waste of time.
>>>> Clearing Ohman is important as for nearly a century opponents of the
>>>> authenticity of the KRS have been arguing that Ohman forged it. Now
>>> It doesn't clear Ohman, as we haven't established that the stone was
>>> actually found under a particular tree which made marks which I'll
>>> assume are there at all, etc, etc. I've no reason to think he was or
>>> wasn't the forger, if it was forgery, as it is pathetically easy to
>>
>>I am prepared to accept the relation between the
>>simultaneously appearance of the distorted roots and
>>the stone. The consequence is that the age of the
>>tree clears Ohman.
>
>Well I don't see it is certain, but I don't see it is ruled out either. And I
>can see how Ohman could extract the stone and tree with compatible marks and
>then carve the runes on it. Operative word "could".

But then, how does he leave the inscription with a respectable layer
of weathering?
>
>>BTW, Do you know David B's "The Third Way"?
>>http://homepages.tesco.net/~trochos/
>
>A perfectly reasonable tale that may have plenty of truth in it. Speculation
>obviously.
>
>I've not got a different tale to promote.
>
>The point about not knowing when the Norse were in NA and possibly the forger
>giving a later than actual date, is interesting. As is the other suggestion in
>another thread that a 1662 date fits quite well with a Swede / Dutch "prior
>claim" dispute.
>
>There are lots and lots of plausible explanations.
>
>




Eric Stevens

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Killing myth - Ohman - part 1
    ... >>> Ohman as a stone mason man forward. ... >>> Ohman, signed statement in Landesverk) ... >there were 4 large roots projecting from the tree. ... >not fall over on its own or be tip the root ball because of an axe. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Kensington runestone in the Scandinavian press
    ... >>> likely age for the KRS tree, based on ring counts from other ... >>> certificates of Olof Ohman and of his son Edward, ... The annual rings ... >>entangle the stone. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Kensington runestone in the Scandinavian press
    ... >>> The favourite forger in the minds of most people was Olaf ... IMHO the issue of authenticity remains up in ... >> Just look at the controversy that has swirled around Ohman ... Who thinks Ohman carved the stone? ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Kensington runestone in the Scandinavian press
    ... >>> authenticity of the KRS have been arguing that Ohman forged it. ... as we haven't established that the stone was ... >tree clears Ohman. ... The point about not knowing when the Norse were in NA and possibly the forger ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Spirit Pond, Maine
    ... > with a peer reviewed source that claimed the stone wasn't 14th ... Also realize that I have stated, frequently, that peer review is not a ... on a large number of peer reviewed sources. ... that Ohman was a stonemason. ...
    (sci.archaeology)