On Runes

This will be an article containing some rune information, images, and a piece written by a friend who taught me a few things over the years. His writing is pulled from a Facebook group we are both in.

So you want to learn about runes? What are they? A language, magic, both? Hopefully the information provided here can help you further understand, and at the least set you on the right direction to further learn yourself. Always cross reference things and do your own research. Humans can make mistakes. Image of the set have been added to this article to show them, as well as image reference.

Insert from Ronald (With added images to give you an idea)

"Let's take a little time to evaluate the runes and some of the linguistics of the runes and the different fuþarks in a non divination setting. Many people are new to the culture and don’t t quite understand.

First I will start with the different Germanic and Scandinavian runes.

There are essentially 3 groups of "real runes", that is, runes which were used by the pre-Christian Germanic people for writing/magic/etc (150-1100 CE). The Elder Fuþark, the Scandinavian Futhark, and the Anglo-Saxon Futþorc. As well as 2 post Christian futharks.

The Elder Fuþark:

The oldest of the three groups. It was used by the continental and Scandinavian Germanics (150-700CE) mostly to write Proto-Germanic languages, but also for Frankish, Saxon, proto-Norse and other south Germanic languages(2).

It was mostly replaced in Scandinavia by the Younger Fuþark during the 8th century(3).

We have no surviving Rune poem of it (assuming we don't consider the Abecedarium Nordmannicum poem as one), and therefore its Rune "meaning" are mostly educated guesswork.

** Added image of the Elder Futhark not in original article**

The Scandinavian Fuþark:

The runes of the Norseman, usually called "Younger Fuþark", but it's actually a grouping of 3 different writings(4). I will not go into details about each of them, so I'll refer to them as "Scandinavian runes". These runes were commonly used from about 700-1200CE, slowly dropping out of use until they ceased being understood by their own writers(5) in the 15th century. Those are the runes used to write old Norse.

While their shapes could vary widely, they can roughly be divided into the following groups: long twig runes, short twig runes, and Norwegian-Swedish runes(6).

We have two surviving Rune poems for this group.

** Younger Futhark image not in original article, image source from wikipedia for an idea on what the Younger Futhark look like**

The Anglo-Saxon Fuþarc:

These runes were developed out of the Elder Fuþark, and were commonly used from 5-8th century CE (although they were probably still in common usage far later, until the runes were declared illegal by king Knut in the 10th century). Those are the runes which were used to write Old-English and Frisian.

**Image added to show Anglo Saxon Runes, not in original article, image sourced from Wikipedia**

We have two copies of the same rune poem for these runes(7).

The Dalecarlian fuþark:

The Dalecarlian runes, or dalrunes, was a late version of the runic script that was in use in the Swedish province of Dalarna until the 20th century.

The Dalecarlian futhark was used between the 16th-20th century and for northern germanic languages such as the Älvdalian language, a separate dialect of Swedish. Dalecarlian runes were derived from the medieval runes, but the runic letters were combined with Latin ones, and Latin letters would progressively replace the runes.

The Icelandic Fuþark:

Icelandic Runic was created by Alexander R. as an adaptation of the runic script for Icelandic. He created it while researching if it was possible to write any modern language in runes. He thought that most languages cannot be written in runes, until he realized that Icelandic and medieval runes have a lot of similar letters.

The script is based on medieval runes, although vowels from Elder Fuþark were added to be used for the letters á, é, í, ó, ú and ý in order to give a unique look to as many letters as possible. The Elder Fuþark rune for J was also added since the medieval runes had no rune for J.

Despite their differences, all of the rune sets were used for magic, writing, and as a status symbol (8).

A criticism often heard is that one set or another does not fit to write modern English. In most cases, each rune set fits only for its respective languages (due to sound changes which accrued during the last millennia, for example Old English written "ge" is spoken as "ye")so if you want to write in Norse runes, it would be more accurate if you'll translate your word/sentence into Old Norse and then write it with Scandinavian Runes, or translate your word/sentence into Old Saxon and then write it with the Elder Fuþark. I'll explain a little more.

In order to use the Elder Fuþark correctly you would have to translate English to old Norse then to proto-germanic languages then to Elder Fuþark as well as you don't use double runes back to back in most cases. The Elder fuþark is Germanic and from the 2-8th century, of course there was a transitional period from Proto-Germanic to old Norse. Is it historically inaccurate yes, can you still do old Norse in Elder fuþark yes, but it would be off a little. The evolution of the language and linguistics prevents some of these sounds to form right. The Elder fuþark was made for proto-Germanic a cruder language than old Norse per say. In parts of Scandinavian the Elder fuþark was used, but again it was a transitional period as the language evolved so did the runes and an unknown rune master developed the Younger Futhark. A defining feature of Proto-Germanic is the completion of Grimm's law, a set of sound changes that occurred between its status as a dialect of Proto-Indo-European and its gradual divergence into a separate language. As it is probable that the development of this sound shift spanned a considerable time several centuries, Proto-Germanic cannot adequately be reconstructed as a simple node in a tree model but rather represents a phase of development that may span close to a thousand years. The end of the Common Germanic period is reached with the beginning of the Migration Period in the fourth century. The same rules apply for the second great sound shift from proto-Germanic languages to the Old Norse family languages, Vernon's law and the Younger futhark. Then the Icelandic language and the Icelandic futhark.

About writing double letters using runes: while there are historical examples to it being done (9), it was not very common, but there are many documented runestone inscriptions with double runes back to back.

We actually have a lot of runic inscriptions that have double runes, but most of them are medieval inscriptions where I guess the use of Latin letters and the way they were used influenced the runes also. You have the First Grammatical Treatise. It is a linguistic work dealing with Old Norse, in the tradition of Latin and Greek grammatical treatises, generally dated to the mid-12th century. Hreinn Benediktsson was not able to narrow the time of writing more precisely than to 1125–1175. The runes were also in use at that time. There is also such work as the Codex Wormanius.

If you look at Elder fuþark inscriptions you also have double runes. Here are a few runestones that use the elder fuþark for a writing system that use double runes And this is just 2 of them found in Sweden. There are many more.

Runestone (N KJ 74):

ᛁᚢᚦᛁᚾᚷᚫᛘ ᛖᚲ ᚹᚫᚲᚱᚫᛘ ᛬ ᚢᚾᚾᚫᛗ ᚹᚱᚫᛁᛏᚫ

iuþingaz (e)k wakraz : unnam wraita

Iuþingaz. Ek Wakraz un-nam wraita.

Iuþingaz. Ek Wakraz un-nam wraita.

Iuþingaz (rests here). I, Wakraz, understand how to write.

Runestone (N KJ 75):

ᚺᚫᛞᚢᛚᚫᛁᚲᚫᛘ ᛖᚲ ᚺᚫᚷᚢᛊᛏᚫᛞᚫᛘ ᚺ͡ᛚᚫᚫᛁᚹᛁᛞᛟ ᛗᚫᚷᚢ ᛗᛁᚾᛁᚾᛟ

hadu(l)aikaz ek hagustadaz h^(l)aaiwido magu minino

Hadulaikaz.

(Runic inscriptions that we dont understand tends do be given some magical purpouse)

You also have double runes in "Viking age" inscriptions. Here you can find them in words. Some makes sense and others not.

One that makes sense is N 68 Dynnasteinen:

× kunuur × kirþi × bru × þririks tutir × iftir osriþi × tutur × sina × su uas mar hanarst × o haþalanti

Gunnvôr gerði brú, Þrýðríks dóttir, eptir Ástríði, dóttur sína. Sú var mær hônnurst á Haðalandi.

Here the Name Gunnvôr is done ᚴᚢᚾᚢᚢᚱ. In this case you have two sounds that follows each other that is covered by the same rune. First u is v. This sound is always ᚢ in the beginning of a syllable. The name is Gunn vór, if it was only Gunnv then the v would be ᚠ. ó is also the ᚢ rune, but another sound. Later on this sound would be the ᚮ rune. In this inscription you actually have this rune in Ástríði ( osriþi) but it is a nasal a.

You also find this double rune in Vg 62:

utlaki : risþi : stin : þn- iftiR : uuit : harþa : kuþon : þikn :

Utlagi ræisti stæin þenn[a] æftiR Øyvind, harða goðan þegn.

Here it is in the name Øyvind. What is interesting here is that the three first letters is all the ᚢ rune. Øy is a diphtong that is done ᛆᚢ (au) so it could be ᛆᚢᚢᛁᛏ. So the first rune is either ø or y and the next is then a v.

You also have inscriptions where I think they have done a mistake, but they just keep them because it is not possible to do over,

Sö 360 : þurstin : reisti : stin : þisi :iffir: bruuR : sin þurbn ·: sun : ru-ts : farit : uas i : far-nki :

The word æftir is done iffir. Should the second f actually have been a t, but the carver forgot him self

Here is a list of Royal Codex Numbers to other such runestones with the use of double runes back to back:

DR 148,DR 35,DR EM85;534A,DR NOR1999;21,DR IK300,DR IK241,2,N 102,N 350,N 357,N 216,N 615,N B462,N A39,SÖ 41,SÖ 173,SÖ 17,SÖ 335 ,SÖ 360,VG 2,VG 62,VG 2,SM 49,SM 93,G 100,NIæR 32,N 53

About spaces between words:

spaces are a relatively "new" invention for the runic writing, only appearing a few centuries after people started using and writing in runes (10). Spaces were marked either by a ":", by a "+", or by a "·".

Hope this helps some of the new comers to better explain the use of linguistic runes.

(1) You're double checking me, I like you already!

(2) Martin, Kontinentalgermanische Runeninschriften, 2004.

(3) Barnes, The transitional inscriptions, 1998

(4) enacademic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/7470999

(5) R.I.Page, the Manx rune-stones, 1983

(6) Answers to the Ròk, Futhark journal, 2015

(7) Codex Vindobonesis 795 and Cotton Otho B.x.165

(8) Bernard Mees, Runic amulets and magic objects, 2006

(9) R.I.Page, the use of double runes in Old English inscriptions, 1962

(10) Martin, Kontinentalgermanische Runeninschriften, 2004."