It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


1362-The Kensington Runestone

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:03 AM
On November 8th 1898, Olof Ohman found The Kensington Runestone in the roots of a tree on his property in Kensington, Minnesota. For years now, the stone has been thought of as a hoax. However, geologist, author and researcher Scott Wolter, says this is not the case. He says that the mineral biotite has been long gone from the Runestone, and uses 200 year old tombstones in that area for comparison. Wolter came to the conclusion that the Runestone is hundreds of years older then originally thought. It had also been noted that some of the Runes on the stone were a hoax, but Wolters' research found that some of the Runes were not known in 1898 and were just recently found in 1935 on the island of Gotland, off the Swedish coast.

I believe that there is a good possibility that they were here before in not saying that they were here before the Native Americans.Here is also a youtube link thats pretty interesting

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:23 AM
Thank you for bringing this topic up.
I have never heard of this Runestone and will be looking into it more.

So thanks again.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:31 AM
Thank you Mono Chrome Wrayth i find this whole field very interesting.Just wish that one day ill be able to go see some of these amazing finds with my own eyes

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:41 AM
This is interesting.

Is it really that far out of an Idea to think that other people have sailed the world and came to what we call America, before Columbus? I know that is what we are all taught, but it almost seems like if an artifact that pre-dates Columbus and not native American in origin, is automatically written off as fake.

Now I'm not claiming to be an expert on ancient history, but what I stated could be considered true?

What is even more interesting about this is that it was found in the root of a tree.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:50 AM
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife

I have to agree with you...its funny how Columbus is jammed down are throats as fact and main streem scholars wont budge from the idea that know one else could have possibly have come to the Americas before him.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:55 AM
I thought it was a generally accepted fact that the scandanavians were here before the other Europeans?

This is still neat, but I didn't think this was still a point which needed proving...

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 01:07 AM
reply to post by Mr Headshot

Well if it was generally known that the Scandanavians were here before Columbus then they should'nt teach it in schools and celebrate it as a holiday.I think alot of people really dont know this.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 01:24 AM
reply to post by jammer2012

Agreed. It's been a while since I have been in grade school, but they always taught us that Columbus discovered America, but I don't think much has changed since then.

Must be an American thing.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 01:52 AM
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife

Same here its been years but i was taught the same thing...and they still teach this today and i know this because i have a 11 year old son.Its one of many inaccuracies still being taught to are children.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 02:01 AM
reply to post by jammer2012

I am assuming u guys are from the states. Because up here in Canada they teach in school that Columbus claimed the states while the Norseman discovered North America.

I also remember my teacher saying that there is a possibility that the Chinese may have discovered the West coast before even the Vikings. That was 20 years ago too that I was told of this.

I just found this link so I haven't read ALL of it yet.

edited for clarity

[edit on 10-8-2009 by MonoChromeWrayth]

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 02:12 AM
reply to post by MonoChromeWrayth

Just goes to show you what a wonderful thing the American Public School System is.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 02:18 AM
reply to post by jammer2012

I don't see why anyone would doubt it being authentic, isn't it common knowledge that some of the earliest documented visitors to the western continents were the vikings? They didn't stay here permenently which is why they don't get full credit for discovering the place but they were here hundreds of years before amerigo/columbus. I think the vikings are a very interesting people, the icelandic language is supposedly the most pure viking language alive today.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 02:29 AM
reply to post by Razimus

This thread was initially meant to discuss The Kensington Stone, but in doing so, we have strayed off topic slightly. My point is that The Kensington Stone has been thought to be a hoax for years, but more recent evidence points to the fact that The Kensington Rune Stone is not a hoax. And it may even have connections to the Knights Templar, or some other order.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 03:19 AM
Good find. I'm wondering though, has it been translated yet ?

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 04:51 AM
sweet,l we discussed this subject in this thread

one of the things i realized, is tha the the runes on the kensington runestone were rejected as being real. because the runes didnt match any gramatical pattern for the area, except until they discovered the runes used in cemetary in gothland And the runestone specificaily states that the party in question was made up of norwegians and goth landers.
and the runestone in question geochemicaly dates to that era, and they use runes used no where else in the world.
As far as im concerned the norse made it well into north america. but due to the nature of thier explorations they were doomed to failure.
The amazing number of runestones that have beeen found in NA is almost hard to believe.
Take the various runestones into question and the weapons and sheilds found that date to the same period, and its pretty hard to deny it

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 05:02 AM
Very nice. This is good timing considering that the Vinland map was recently verified as genuine. Is there more big ones like these two waiting to be verified?

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 05:55 AM
Like Punkin says, there's no doubt whatsoever that Columbus wasn't the first European to get there. The difference between Columbus and the Norsemen (AFAIK), is the Norse didn't look around and shout, "Mine!" One of my favorite examples of human ego and futility is Captain Cook. He and his men 'discovered' Australia and rowed ashore. He stood on the beach of one of the largest land masses on Earth...stuck a flag in...and said, "Mine!"

OT, there's some persuasive evidence that Norsemen made sporadic forays across to Newfoundland from Greenland. Several sagas describe expeditions across to N America with details about livestock and crews. For one reason or another, they weren't welcomed by the locals and were unable to successfully colonize. The best evidence is an 11th century settlement discovered at L' Anse aux Meadows...

Map of the site.

Recreation of a log and sod dwelling

Remains of a smithy where tools and other items could be repaired or constructed.

I've been reading about the Kensington Runestone for what seems like years. For all the evidence that it's genuine...there are valid doubts. From my perspective, if it's genuine it won't alter my view of history in the slightest. US academics are debating the authenticity of a stone claimed to show earlier populations than Columbus...yet, L'Anse aux the Meadows does brisk trade over the border. It's a bit like Cook and Australia...little bit silly in scheme of things

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 06:25 AM
reply to post by fapython

I did a quick google and found the following, quite interesting now that I`ve come to think of it...

The Kensington Rune Stone was discovered three miles northeast of Kensington, Douglas County, Minnesota in the fall of 1898. The Runestone remains a controversy to this day. The controversy centers on the interpretation of the inscription. Translated it reads:

(We are) 8 Goths and 22 Norwegians on (an) exploration-journey from Vinland over the West. We had camp by 2 skerries, one days-journey north from this stone. We were (out) and fished one day. After we come home (we) found 10 (of our) men red with blood and dead. AV(e) M(aria) Save us from evil. (We) have 10 of our party by the sea to look after our ship(s?) 14 days-journey from this island. Year 1362.

Proponents of the Kensington Rune Stone see it as an artifact of great historical significance, as it alleges Norse visits to America before a century before the arrival of Columbus. The voyage would also have been 238 years after the last recorded Vinland voyage. Opponents hold equally strong opinions. They argue it is absurd that 30 Vikings could in 1362, in fourteen days, penetrate from Vinland on the Atlantic coast as far west as Douglas County, Minnesota. They also contend that the inscription itself is much younger than the dates of the inscription. The Kensington Rune Stone is on permanent display at the Runestone Museum in Alexandria, Minnesota.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 01:40 PM
reply to post by Kandinsky

I agree with you, there is no doubt that Norsemen had settelments in Newfoundland and Greenland.So why is it so hard to belive that the Kensington Runestone is the real deal? There is good evidence to support that the stone is real, and I feel that it has been put aside for too long. It is intersting to me that if something does not fit within the guidelines that our scholars have set, it is automatically a hoax. As for me, I look at history with an open mind, there is alot of hard research and study that goes into it,but proof is proof and our scholars need to realize that

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 01:54 PM
because people dont want to admit that what they were taught in schools was waste of years of their life and precious youth. we get false knowlidge and junk trivia shoved up our head to become mindless wage slaves.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in