[←72 ]
Magnus Hammarström, “Om runskriftens härkomst,” in Studier i nordisk filologi, 1929, pp. 1–67.
[←73 ]
Helmut Arntz, Handbuch der Runenkunde, Max Niemeyer, Halle/Saale 1935 (2nd ed. 1944). It should be noted that at the time the publication faced some backlash in official circles. See the violent critique of Edmund Weber, “Ein Handbuch der Runenkunde,” in Germanien, September 1937, pp. 257–260. Helmut Arntz was also virulently criticized by the prehistorian Hans Reinerth. On the “Germanic people of the Alps” see Hans Schmeja, Der Mythos von den Alpengermanen, Gerold, Wien 1968; Klaus Düwel, “Alpengermanen,” in Heinrich Beck et al. (Hg.), Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, vol. 1, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 1973, pp. 190–191.
[←74 ]
Franz Altheim and Elisabeth Trautmann, Vom Ursprung der Runen, Deutsches Ahnenerbe, Frankfurt/M. 1939.
[←75 ]
Otto Haas, “Die Herkunft der Runenschrift,” in Lingua Posaniensis, 1955, pp. 41–58; “Die Herkunft der Runenschrift,” in Orbis, 1965, pp. 216–236.
[←76 ]
Ralph W. V. Elliott, Runes. An Introduction [1959], Manchester University Press, Manchester 1971, p. 6.
[←77 ]
Introduction à la runologie, op. cit., pp. 47 and 49.
[←78 ]
Thomas L. Markey, “Studies in Runic Origins,” in American Journal of Germanic Linguistic and Literatures, 1998, pp. 153–200, and 1999, pp. 131–203.
[←79 ]
Bernard Mees, “The North Etruscan Thesis of the Origin of the Runes,” in Arkiv för nordisk filologi, 2000, pp. 33–82.
[←80 ]
Helmut Rix, “Thesen zum Ursprung der Runenschrift,” in Luciana Aigner-Foresti (ed.), Etrusker nördlich von Etrurien. Etruskische Präsenz in Norditalien und nördlich der Alpen sowie ihre Einflüsse auf die einheimischen Kulturen. Akten des Symposions von Wien-Neuwaldegg, 2.–5. Oktober 1989, Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien 1992, pp. 411–441.
[←81 ]
Vittore Pisani, “Italische Alphabete und germanische Runen,” in Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung, 1966, pp. 199–211; Aldo Luigi Prosdocimi, “L’origine delle rune come trasmissione di alphabeti,” in Studi linguistici e filologici per Carlo Alberto Mastrelli, Pisa 1985, pp. 387–399; “Sulla formazione dell’alfabeto runico. Promessa di novità documentali forse decisive,” in Archivio per Alto Adige, 2003–2004, pp. 427–440.
[←82 ]
Runes. An Introduction, op. cit., p. 11.
[←83 ]
Alain Marez, Anthologie runique, Belles Lettres, Paris 2007, pp. 27–28.
[←84 ]
Les runes, op. cit., p. 43.
[←85 ]
Runes and Germanic Linguistics, op. cit., p. 96.
[←86 ]
Introduction à la runologie, op. cit., p. 69.
[←87 ]
Runes and Germanic Linguistics, op. cit. p. 111.
[←88 ]
See Elmer H. Antonsen, “Die ältesten Runeninschriften in heutiger Sicht,” in Heinrich Beck (ed.), Germanenprobleme in heutiger Sicht, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 1986, pp. 321–343 (ici p. 338).
[←89 ]
Richard L. Morris, Runic and Mediterranean Epigraphy, Odense University Press, Odense 1988, p. 2. See also the author’s theory, Umbilicus runicus. Runic and Mediterranean Epigraphy, University of Illinois, Urbana 1983.
[←90 ]
Ibid., pp. 157–158.
[←91 ]
Elmer H. Antonsen, “Zum Ursprung und Alter der germanischen Fuþarks,” in Kurt R. Jankowsky and Ernst Dick (ed.), Festschrift für Karl Schneider, John Benjamins, Amsterdam 1982, pp. 3–15. By the same author: “The Graphemic System and the Germanic Fuþark,” in Herbert Penzl, Irmengard Rauch and Gerald F. Carr (ed.), Linguistic Method. Essays in Honor of Herbert Penzl, Mouton, The Hague 1978, pp. 287–297; “On the Notion of ‘Archaicizing’ Inscriptions,” in John Weinstock (ed.), The Nordic Languages and Modern Linguistics, University of Texas, Austin 1978, pp. 282–288; “The Oldest Runic Inscriptions in the Light of New Finds and Interpretations,” in Runor och runinskrifter. Föredrag vid Riksantikvarieämbetets och Vitterhetsakademiens symposium 8–11 september 1985, Alkqvist & Wiksell International, Stockholm 1987, pp. 17–28; “On Runological and Linguistic Evidence for Dating Runic Inscriptions,” art. cit. Antonsen’s theories were criticized by Lena Pederson and Klaus Düwel, but Michael P. Barnes thinks those critics were “too hasty” (“What Is Runology, and Where Does It Stand Today?,” in Futhark. International Journal of Runic Studies, 4, 2013, p. 24).
[←92 ]
Enver A. Makaev, The Language of the Oldest Runic Inscriptions. A Linguistic and Historical-Philological Analysis, Kungl. Vitterhets historie och antikvitets akademien, Stockholm 1996.
[←93 ]
“Die ältesten Runeninschriften in heutiger Sicht,” art. cit.; Runes and Germanic Linguistics, op. cit., pp. 3–13 and 93–117. See also A Concise Grammar of the Older Runic Inscriptions, Max Niemeyer, Tübingen 1975, in which the author offers etymologies that are sometimes noticeaby different from those put forth by Hans Krahe or Wolfgang Krause (Die Sprache der urnordischen Runeninschriften, Carl Winter, Heidelberg 1971).
[←94 ]
Hans Frede Nielsen, The Early Runic Language of Scandinavia. Studies in Germanic Dialect Geography, Carl Winter, Heidelberg 2000, p. 381. From the same author, see also “The Linguistic Status of the Early Runic Inscriptions of Scandinavia,” in Klaus Düwel (Hg.), Runeninschriften als Quellen interdisziplinäre Forschung, op. cit., pp. 539–555; “The Early Runic Inscriptions and Germanic Historical Linguistics,” in Marie Stoklund, Michael Lerche Nielsen, Bente Holmberg and Gillian Fellows-Jensen (ed.), Runes and their Secrets, op. cit.; “The Grouping of the Germanic Languages and the Dialectal Provenance of the Oldest Runic Inscriptions of Scandinavia (AD 160–500),” in Oliver Grimm and Alexandra Pesch (Hg.), Archäologie und Runen. Fallstudien zu Inschriften im älteren Futhark, Wachholtz-Murmann, KielHamburg 2015, pp. 45–58. Frede Nielsen explains that “the idiom of the oldest runic inscriptions in Scandinavia is the most archaic one out of all of the confirmed Germanic languages.” For a more general discussion, see Alfred Bammesberger and Gaby Waxenberger (Hg.), Das “Fuþark” und seine einzelsprachlichen Weiterentwicklungen. Akten der Tagung in Eichstätt vom 20.–24. Juli 2003, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 2006.
[←95 ]
Runes and Germanic Linguistics, op. cit., p. 116.
[←96 ]
“Periculum runicum,” art. cit.
[←97 ]
Isaac Taylor, Greeks and Goths. A Study on the Runes, Macmillan, London 1879.
[←98 ]
George Hempl, “The Origin of the Runes,” in Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 1899, pp. 370–374; “The Runes and the Germanic Shift,” in Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 1902, pp. 70–75. Theo Vennemann recently tried to explain some runes like p (p), 4 (ï), e (e) or o (o), as a result of a borrowing from a Punic or Neo-punic alphabet from the 3rd or 2nd century BC, notably because the first letter of the Carthaginian alphabet is a f, like in the Fuþark. That theory, which is historiographically interesting, is nevertheless obviously problematic when it comes to its chronology (and how the alphabet spread). See Theo Vennemann, “Germanische Runen und phönizisches Alphabet,” in Sprachwissenschaft, 2006, pp. 367–429; “Vowels in Punic and in Runic,” in Sprachwissenschaft, 2013, pp. 265–280; “The Origin of the p Rune,” ibid., pp. 281–286.
[←99 ]
Klaus Düwel, Morris’s recension in Germania, 1991, pp. 230–234.
[←100 ]
As Lucien Musset wrote, “If Denmark had directly imitated a Mediterranean writing in the 1st or 2nd century AD, there would have been no reason to address any other source beside Latin writing (or maybe a Greek writing)” (Introduction à la runologie, op. cit., p. 33).
[←101 ]
Let us mention just for the anecdote the theory that runic writing’s origin
was partially Nabataean, which was put forth by John Troeng (“A Semitic Origin of Some Runes. An Influential Foreign Presence in Denmark c. AD 200,” in Fornvännen, 2003, pp. 289–305), and let’s not forget Örjan Svensonn’s theory, which asserts that the runes were derived from the Aramaic language and that they are a “coded” writing emanating from one of the ancient “lost tribes” of Israel (De blekingska runornas hemligheter, the author, Karlskrona 2001)!
[←102 ]
While referring to Erik Moltke’s work, Lucien Musset writes that “it is quite likely that Denmark was one of the first centres of Old Fuþark, if not the first one” (Introduction à la runologie, op. cit., p. 31). See also Michael P. Barnes, Runes. A Handbook, Boydell Press, Woodbridge 2012, p. 9.
[←103 ]
Wolfgang Krause underlines that “the absence of ancient runic writing inscriptions in the southern Germanic area should not be attributed to the fact that wood is a material that perishes fast. This is not an admissible argument. Indeed, we know of a whole lot of runic inscriptions inscribed in wood from the North” (Les runes, op. cit., p. 53).
[←104 ]
Introduction à la runologie, op. cit., p. 39.
[←105 ]
The Greeks from the west part of the Mediterranean Sea were already in contact with Scandinavia around 300 BC. We also know that the amber found in Mycenaean tombs had Danish origins. On the ancient “amber routes,” see J. M. de Navarro, “Prehistoric Routes between Northern Europe and Italy Defined by the Amber Trade,” in The Geographical Journal, December 1925, pp. 481–507; Arnold S. Spekke, Ancient Amber Routes and the Discovery of the Eastern Baltic, M. Goppers, Stockholm 1957; Patty C. Rice, Amber. The Golden Gem of the Ages, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York 1980; Gisela Graichen and Alexander Hesse (ed.), Die Bernsteinstraße. Verborgene Handelswege zwischen Ostsee und Nil, Rowohlt, Reinbek bei Hamburg 2012.
[←106 ]
Introduction à la runologie, op. cit., p. 48.
[←107 ]
Lucien Musset, ibid., p. 42. From that viewpoint, one can only reject Henrik Williams’ opinion, according to whom “only the form determines the origin of the runes’ forms” (“The Origin of the Runes,” art. cit., p. 214).
[←108 ]
David N. Parsons, Recasting the Runes. The Reform of the Anglo-Saxon”Fuþorc,” Institutionen för nordiska språk, Uppsala universitet, Uppsala 1999, p. 15.
[←109 ]
Runic and Mediterranean Epigraphy, op. cit., p. 1.
[←110 ]
Runes and Germanic Linguistics, op. cit., p. 93.
[←111 ]
“Origine et développement de l’écriture runique,” art. cit., p. 16.
[←112 ]
Introduction à la runologie, op. cit., p. 90.
[←113 ]
Les runes, op. cit., p. 52 (see figure above).
[←114 ]
Anthologie runique, op. cit., p. 33.
[←115 ]
Ibid., p. 24.
[←116 ]
One must note that Terje Spurkland is the author of a controversial theory according to which the total number of signs in a row of runes should have originally been eight. See Terje Spurkland, Norwegian Runes and Runic Inscriptions, op. cit., p. 80.
[←117 ]
Karl Schneider, Die germanischen Runennamen. Versuch einer Gesamtdeutung, Anton Hain, Meisenheim am Glan 1956. See also Wolfgang Krause, “Untersuchungen zu den Runennamen I,” in Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-Historische Klasse, 1946–1947, pp. 60–63; “Untersuchungen zu den Runennamen II,” ibid., 1948, pp. 93–108; Robert Nedoma, “Runennamen,” in Heinrich Beck, Dieter Geuenich and Heiko Steuer (ed.), Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, vol. 25, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 2003, pp. 556–560.
[←118 ]
Erik Brate, “Runradens ordningsfjöljd,” in Arkiv for nordisk filologi, 1920, pp. 193–207.
[←119 ]
Elmar Seebold, “Was haben die Germanen mit den Runen gemacht? Und wieviel haben sie davon von ihren antiken Vorbilden gelernt?,” in Bela Brogyani and Thomas Krömmelbein (ed.), Germanic Dialects. Linguistic and Philologic Investigations, Benjamins, Amsterdam 1986, pp. 525–583.
[←120 ]
Wolfgang Jungandreas, “Die Namen der Runen. Fuþark und Kosmologie,” in Onoma, 1974, pp. 365–390. For a critique of that viewpoint, see Edgar C. Polomé, “The Names of the Runes,” art. cit.
[←121 ]
Sigurd Agrell, Runornas talmystik och dess antika förebild, Lund 1927; Zur Frage nach dem Ursprung der Runennamen, Lund 1928; Die spätantike Alphabetmystik und die Runenreihe, Lund 1931–32; “Die Herkunft der Runenschrift,” in Kunglinga humanistika vetenskapssamfundet i Lund, 1937–1938, pp. 65–117.
[←122 ]
See in particular Franz Rolf Schröder, Altgermanische Kulturprobleme, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 1929.
[←123 ]
Heinz Klingenberg, Runenschrift — Schriftdenken — Runeninschriften, Carl Winter, Heidelberg 1973.
[←124 ]
Murray K. Dahm, “Roman Frontier Signalling and the Order of the ‘Fuþark’,” in The Journal of Indo-European Studies, spring-summer 2011, pp. 1–12.
[←125 ]
See also Sigmund Feist, “Die religionsgeschichtliche Bedeutung der ältesten Runeninschriften,” in Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 1922, pp. 602–611.
[←126 ]
See Wolfgang Krause, Runeninschriften im älteren Fuþark, Max Niemeyer, Halle/Saale 1937, p. 4. See also Was man in Runen ritzte, Max Niemeyer, Halle/Saale 1935; “Die Runen als Begriffszeichen,” in Kurt Helmut Schlottig (ed.), Beiträge zur Runenkunde und nordischen Sprachwissenschaft. Gustav Neckel zu seinem 60. Geburtstag dargebracht, Otto Harrassowitz, Leipzig 1938, pp. 35–53 (picked up in Wolfgang Krause, Schriften zur Runologie und Sprachwissenschaft, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 2014, pp. 150–165).
[←127 ]
Les runes, op. cit., p. 50.
[←128 ]
See Klaus Düwel, “Begriffsrunen,” in Heinrich Beck, Herbert Jankuhn et al. (ed.), Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, vol. 2, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 1974, pp. 150–153.
[←129 ]
Introduction à la runologie, op. cit., p. 41.
[←130 ]
Ibid., p. 88.
[←131 ]
See Louritz Baltzer, Hällristningar från Bohuslän — Glyphes des rochers du Bohuslän (Suède), Handelstidnings Aktiebolag, Göteborg 1881–1908; Hällristningar och hällmålningar i Sverige, Forums Bokförlag, Stockholm 1989.
[←132 ]
Vom Ursprung der Runen, op. cit., p. 49.
[←133 ]
The engravings of the Val Camonica were mostly studied by Emmanuel Anati, according to whom “rupestrian art is writing before writing” (“L’art rupestre est écriture avant l’écriture”), and the engravings of the Vallée des merveilles by Henry de Lumley. See Henry de Lumley, “Les gravures rupestres de l’âge du bronze de la Vallée des merveilles, Mont Bego, Alpes-Maritimes,” in L’Anthropologie, 1984, 4, pp. 613–647; Daniel Riba, Les gravures rupestres du Val Camonica, France-Empire, Paris 1984. Emilia Masson also offered a deciphering.
[←134 ]
See Nicole Torchet, Patrick Ferryn and Jacques Gossart, L’affaire de Glozel. Histoire d’une controverse archéologique, Copernic, Paris 1978; Alice Gérard, Glozel. Les os de la discorde, Temps présent, Paris 2013.
[←135 ]
See Hans Jensen, Die Schrift in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart, Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, Berlin 1969; Maxime Gorce, Les pré-écritures et l’évolution des civilisations (18 000 à 8000 avant J.–C.), Klincksieck, Paris 1974; Károly Földes-Papp, Von Felsbild zum Alphabet. Die Geschichte der Schrift von ihren früheste Vorstufen bis zur modernen lateinischen Schreibschrift, Gondrom, Bayreuth 1975; Marthe Chollot-Varagnac, “Les origines du graphisme symbolique,” Essai d’analyse des écritures en préhistoire, Fondation Singer-Polignac, Paris 1980; André Cherpillod, “L
’écriture en Europe à l’époque préhistorique,” in Nouvelle Ecole, 50, 1998, pp. 93–111; Alain Nicolas and Jean Combier, Une écriture préhistorique? Le dossier archéologique de Moras-en-Valloire, La Mirandole, Pont-Saint-Esprit 2009.
[←136 ]
See Shan M. M. Winn, Pre-Writing in Southeastern Europe. The Sign system of the Vinca Culture, ca. 4000 BC, Western Publ., Calgary 1981; Emilia Masson, “L’écriture” dans les civilisations danubiennes néolithiques,” in Kadmos, 1984, pp. 89–123; Richard Rudgley, Lost Civilizations of the Stone Age, Century, London 1998 (Chapter 4: “The Signs of Old Europe: Writing or Pre-Writing?,” pp. 58–85); Michaël Guichard, “Les avant-courriers de l’écriture dans la vallée du Danube,” in Anne-Marie Christin (ed.), Histoire de l’écriture, op. cit., pp. 25–27. Harald Haamann (“Writing from Old Europe to Ancient Crete — A Case of Cultural Continuity,” in The Journal of IndoEuropean Studies, Autumn-Winter 1989, pp. 251–275) links the writings of “Old Europe” with the linear writing of the Aegean, like the Cypro-Minoan Linear.
Runes and the Origins of Writing Page 14