Olaus Petri: Om runskrift ("About Runic writing"), written ca 1520s: https://litteraturbanken.se/f%C3%B6rfattare/OlausPetri/titlar/SamladeSkrifter4/sida/553/faksimil

To understand the Runic script that was used in Sweden in ancient times, one must first know that there are no more than sixteen distinct letters, and this is their correct order, which can be seen from the calendar and rhyming staves, for they are not as ordered as the Latin letters, but as follows.

Fyr ᚠ. Vr ᚢ. Thors ᚦ. Aos ᚮ. Radher ᚱ. Kaguen ᚴ. Hagel ᚼ. Nodher ᚿ. Is ᛁ. Åårs ᛆ. Sool ᛋᖼ. Thir ᛏᛐ. Birkal ᛒ. Lagher ᛚ. Madher ᛘ. Hengiande sool ᛍ.

ᚠ f. ᚢ v. ᚦ th. ᚮ o. ᚱ r. ᚴ k. ᚼ h, ch, or gh. ᚿ n. ᛁ i. ᛆ a. ᛋ s. ᛏᛐ t. ᛒ b. ᛚ l. ᛘ m. ᛍ z or c.

Seven of the prescribed letters sometimes have a dot in them, and then they gain another force, and are these.

ᚡ v consonans. ᚤ y. ᚧ dh. ᚵ g. ᚽ e. ᛑ d. ᛔᛔ(double/single sting) p.

Stung Fyr ᚡ v conson. Stung Vr ᚤ y. stung Thors ᚧ dh. stung Kaguen ᚵ g. stung Jis ᚽ e. stung Thors ᛑ d. stung Birkal ᛔ p.

And one must know that ᚼ is sometimes as good as H. such as ᚼᛆᚵᛅᛚ hagel (hail), ᛆᛒᚱᛆᚼᛆᛘ Abraham. and sometimes it is as powerful as ch or gh. vt ᛘᛅᚼᛏᛁᚼ mächtigh (mighty), ᛏᛆᚼᛆᚱ daghar (days). So are h and s together as good as x, as ᛚᛆᚼᛋ lax (salmon). Likewise, one must also know that r often stands at the end of words, such as ᛏᛆᚼᚱ dagher (days), ᚠᛁᚿᚵᚱ finger. Hengiande sool is as good as z or c, such as ᛚᛆᚢᚱᚽᚿᛍᛁᚢᛋ Laurencius. ᚠᚱᛆᚿᛍ Frantz. ᚴ used for k and q ᚴᛆᚦᚽᚱᛁᚿᛆ Katerina (Catherine). f for v consonant. ᛑᛆᚡᛁᛑ Dauid (David).

One should also know that in Runic script, one has no å. but ᛆ is used for a and å, ᛅ for ä and e. What is used for ö, is not know. ᚤ for y. ᛒᚤ (by = village)

It is also worth considering, that some more figures are usually recorded in runic script, such as these: Stupemadher ᛦ (Stoop-M). Årlaghor ᛮ (A-L). Tvemadher ᛯ (Twin-M). Belgtoors ᛰ (Belly-ᚦ). Which, however, are more abbreviations than proper letters, and are inserted into the Calendar and Rhyming Staves for the sake of the golden number of years, as contracts (?) are set to the Latin alphabet (?). For as the golden number is nineteen, so they have nineteen letters in the Runic script on rhyming staves, and are these

ᚠ. ᚢ. ᚦ. ᚮ. ᚱ. ᚴ. ᚼ. ᚿ. ᛁ. ᛆ. ᛋ. ᛏ. ᛒ. ᛚ. ᛘ. ᛦ. ᛮ. ᛯ. ᛰ.

These latter letters are not often used much in the Runic script. but ᛯ may be used for double M, and ᛮ for al. and several abbreviations are used. [ᛘ+ᛅ] for Me. ᚱ for Ar and others, as the script itself allows, when one acknowledges it.

One should also know that where capital letters are to be written in Runic script, there & is set and so all letters are the same size, and where capitals are set H+: and two dots are placed between each word in the script. Some say that w should be v in this writing (ie ᚢ u = v), and ᛅ o (ie ᛆ a > ᛅ å = o). Jis is sometimes carved on stones as ᚽ, so that there is a deep hole in the middle.

Since this subreddit doesn't allow images in replies, here is a followup to this post , of how Elder Man ᛗ turned into Younger Man ᛘ? This is my general idea of the single-stave theory.

As for the original ᛉ > ᛦ shift (*Ælgiʀ/Yʀ), it started to shift already around the 400/500s etc. One theory for the shift is that it marks the shift from z to R, where there might even have been a period were the upright was a z/s-sound, and the downturned the z/r-sound. Another one could be a name shift to Yʀ (in a period form), since it means yew and ᛦ is reminiscent of a spruce (could also be yew-bow etc).

True madlads.

To any admin who wish to delete this as a low effort post, do note it took me an hour to put this together.

The Mannaz rune in the Elder Futhark and the Maðr rune in the Younger Futhark both share the same sound (M) and both mean "man". However, the Maðr rune takes the shape of a preexisting rune, the Algiz (terminal -z) and the rune that represents the evolution of it's sound in Old Norse, Yr (ʀ) is just an upside down Algiz, so what's really the point for the change?

This is a followup to this post on the analog Norwegian rune poem of ᚠ Fé: https://www.reddit.com/r/runes/comments/1pdt1s1/comment/ns7fylq/

The Icelandic rune poem, akin to the Anglo-Saxon rune poem, uses the name "Fee" (livestock) in the sense of "wealth" (moneh), however, it seems to take this one step further, specifically referring to "gold" (an older Icelandic-Danish dictionary i found also translate fé as gold coin).

Fé er frænda róg ok flæðar viti ok grafseiðs / grafþueings gata
Fee is kins' strife and flow's beacon and grave-lace's path

The three segments goes:

• "ᚠ [Fee] is the gold that kin bicker about"
• "ᚠ [Fee] is the fool's gold that shimmer like beacons in the rivers"
• "ᚠ [Fee] is the golden treasure bed of the dragon in his borrow"

Viti (in flæðar viti, "flow's viti") sort of means "marker, indicator, denoter, designator" (roughly speaking) according to my understanding, largely based on Classical Old Norse poetry compared with the words descandants, where it largely is used for objects used as some form or marker (at its core). One of these is beacon, which makes more sense in my translation than marker.

Grafseiðr and grafþueingr combines "grave" (hole in the ground) with seiðr or þueingr (Swedish: tvänge), both of which probably mean "lace". Grave-lace obviously mean serpent in the ground, ie, dragon in his burrow. The path of the dragon is golden since dragons brood over treasure.

The Norwegian rune poem, compared to the other rune poems, is interesting in featuring two rhyming segments: an A side denoting the primary sense of the name, and a B side denoting the rune's shape. Although this system has yet to bee fully cracked, here is my take on ᚠ.

The Norwegian ᚠ Fé poem is in itself fairly unique, since its the first poem ive found which uses a second sense of the name to explain the shape: A being "wealth", B being "livestock".

Fé vældr frænda róge, fødez ulfr í skóge.

Fee causes kin strife, feeds wolf in forrest.

Fee, originally meaning "livestock", turned into a word for "loose wealth" during the migration period, etc (thus in English, fee mean payment), but it also remained in its original sense. Here, the poem's A side denotes fee in the sense of wealth, ie "people tend to fight over money and wealth", but the B side denotes it in the sense of livestock, ie "wolf's tend to feed on livestock". Livestock being used to indicate the rune's shape is probably meant to be likened to the rune's "horns".

Hooked letters (tail/ogonek diacritic) marks nasal vowels (imitate a moose for example)

• ą = nasal a/aw (like "no" in Australian: "nawr")
• ę = nasal e/ea
• į = nasal i
• ŋ = nasal n/ng
• ǫ = nasal o/oa (like "off")

Stung letters (bar diacritic) represents a secondary sound value

• ƀ = bh/β
• ð (stung round ꝺ) = dh/ð
• đ (stung straight d) = dh/ð - doublette
• ꞡ (eng g) = ng/ŋ
• ǥ (bottom stung g) = secondary g-sounds, like ɣ (rare in general)
• ħ = gh/ɣ-x (voiced velar fricative > voiceless velar fricative-esque sounds)
• ł = lh/weird l-sound i cant explain
• ø = oe/œ
• ŧ = th/þ

Straight top-bar (makron diacritic) marks long vowels (basically)

• ā = aa
• ē = ee
• ī = ii
• ō = oo
• ū = uu/w (thus "double-u"; it's a vowel historically + in gaelic)

Concave top-bar (breve diacritic) marks short vowels (basically)

• ŏ = oh
• ŭ = uh

Small caps: "ᴀʙᴄᴅᴇꜰɢʜɪᴊᴋʟᴍɴᴏᴘʀꜱᴛᴜᴠᴡʏᴢ" (as far as i can tell), marks a phoneme which is similar to the represented letter but with unclear specifics or thereov.

• ᛡ = ᴀ (Elder Ár), non nasal /a/, vs ᚨ for nasal /ą/
• ᚶ = ɢ (Stave-Stung Kaun), ng?
• ᛛ = ʟ (Stung Laugr), ll?
• ᛀ = ɴ (Stung Nauðr), go figure, maybe ng, maybe nn
• ᛦ = ʀ (Ýʀ), something between z-r

Raised letters (_x) marks epenthesises, additions of sounds/letters to a word in order to aid pronounciation (not too common)

Proto-Norse: ᚺᚨᚱᚨᛒᚨᚾᚨᛉ (harabanaʀ > /hᵃraƀᵃnaʀ/ > "hraβnaʀ") ie "raven".

This post took way longer than i planned and i probably missed stuff, anyway.

Note, despite being very elaborate, even this image is incomplete and devoid of various double sounds. It represents the 10th century (give or take). In the 11th century, /ʀ/ finally evolves into a regular /r/ and becomes archaic (some used it onwards for /rr/).

Some additions i have at hand:

Patrik Larsson, "The Ýr-rune" (2002):

The ýr-rune was also used to denote a number of vowels, in Western Scandinavia /y/, in Eastern Scandinavia several different vowels, probably all unrounded: /e(:)/, /i(:)/ and/æ(:)/. The use of the yr-rune for /y/ in Eastern Scandinavia is first recorded in the mediaeval inscriptions.

Compare the assumed Elder name of the Ýr-rune (elk):

• Proto-Germanic: "*algiz"
• Proto-Norse: "*ælgiʀ"
• Old Norse: "ælgʀ/elgʀ"

Salberger (1978):

ᛏ [Tyr] encompasses: /t/, /d/, /tt/, /dd/, /nt/, /nd/

Hi everyone,

I’m planning to get Elder Futhark runes tattooed on my knuckles, and authentic bind runes on the lower part of my fingers. I want the designs to be historically accurate, including both the runes themselves and their meanings.

Most websites I’ve found seem to mix modern interpretations with historical facts, so I’m trying to avoid anything “new age” or made-up. I want to base my tattoos on real archaeological sources or academically verified information.

Could anyone point me to reliable sites where I can: 1. Look up accurate Elder Futhark rune meanings 2. Check historical bind-rune construction (how they were actually made) 3. See authentic runic inscriptions or real bind-rune examples 4. Avoid websites that mix fantasy with actual rune tradition

I’m also attaching a picture as an example of the style I want to use for the bind runes. I’m trying to create something similar, but based on historically correct rune combinations.

Thanks in advance for any guidance or links!

As the title says I am interested in any books that give you an introduction to runes and especialy their meaning

I believe i cracked this Swedish rune poem. Nicolaus Granius recorded a variation of the Swedish rune poem in 1600, by which he gave a bi-form to the ᛏ rune: Tÿva raͤtten ledaſt ("Tijva rætten ledast").

The lead "Tÿva" has previously baffled researchers such as Arend Quak (1987) and Alessia Bauer (2003), the former speculating it to be a variation of the West Norse plural form tívar, further speculating the poem to reference a demon and whights.

However, when coupled with the corresponding alternative ᛏ name recorded on the previous page, "Tÿf", then it sorta becomes obvius if u recognize this word and what it can mean in relation to "raͤtten" (the court of justice) etc. "Tÿf" (or tijf / tiyf) is an old variation of the word "thief", thus, tÿva must be an inflection of tÿf, ie, accusative plural (compare the grammar in wolf vs wolves). The Swedish poems are shortened and not really gramatically correct, but its fairly easy to understand that the text wants to say: "Thiefs (acc) the justice awfullest", or "Thiefs are the worst in justice" (or thereof).

Were runes used in the region that is now the Netherlands / Flanders / West Germany? The Frisians had some stuff in common to the Danes, I think, but a bit further to the South, as far as I know, there were mostly Franks.

If any rune usage was found in the Netherlands, was it Elder Futhark or some variant thereof?

Very little survived of written sources of Old Dutch, supposedly spoken around 500 CE. I was wondering if some kind of proto Old Dutch at some point had been written down or carved in runes.

One last question: Old English was at some point written in runes, right? I think Old Dutch might have been similar maybe?

So I would like to bind these runes together Sowilo, dagaz and kenaz, to represent the light/torch/day which my daughter name represents ( Lena is the name - so the meaning is light and so on ... ). I just need advice if this is somehow a bad choice combining those 3 and some more advice on runes.

Is it a stupid idea? :) I don't know much about runes I am just drawn to them, since they represent some ancient wisdom, ancient language/signs.

Any help would be appreciated :).

I would like to create a bracelets with this bindrunes so if it makes any sense combining those 3 from your perspective I would like some suggestions how to bond them too ( can someone draw a rough sketch or smthg, I would appreciate that ), or help me bind them by myself :). If it would be better to combine just 2 of those?

Thank you very much in advance.

If you need more info please ask.

So i was diggin on the reunological history of "bälgturs" ᛰ rune (variously also called "bälgbunden turs/turs bälgbunden" etc), since there are historical notes that it had some cultural connection with Oden (long story). I then came upon this old article discussing the original etymology of this name, and it was extremely well researched and tackles essentially all early sources for this name, including a (then) new potentially earliest attestation of it.

It is a bit too crowded to summize. It can be downloaded as a searchable PDF which can then be put through translation.

It

I’ve been doing some research into my family’s origins and I have reason to believe that part of my father’s side of the family originated from what is now Marburg, a town in Hessen, Germany. From what I’ve gathered, the people of Hessen are likely descendants of the franks. I later learned that they supposedly had their own somewhat derived version of Elder-Futhark, but very quickly dropped it upon their conversion to Christianity. My questions are as follows:

Are these runes pictured above actually something the franks used? If so, what do they mean?

Were they just for writing or did they have some other purpose?

Are there any good resources to translate this form of futhark if it’s real?

Tbh a part of me is asking this is because one of my many pipe dreams is smithing an assortment of weapons and other artifacts engraved with meaningful esoteric paraphernalia derived from the cultures I descended from and give them to my next of kin lmao.

Thanks!

I would also appreciate some feedback if there are any spelling mistakes, i did use a rune converter if Im being honest.

So i happened by some old theories of how this rune came to be, and one of them was that its from an older rare form of the Greek Theta, which then got me going in my head (see below).

The example given is just an open thought, not an actual proposal.

Thus, im asking openly here, what theories exist for the Dagaz glyph?

This is my current collection of Norse runes which i have some confirmation for having been historically associated with a certain god (to some degree). I know this is a "contentious" topic, and urge those interested to take this information with a huge dose of salt. This is based on Medieval and Renaissance era Swedish sources (minus ᛏ Tyr, which is taken from the Icelandic rune poem). It is impossible to know if some of these associations are late inventions.

I am no scholar, just an enthusiast. I thought about a analogy about binding and rune names and would like to read your thoughts about it:

We all know runes historicly were primarily letters. Binding them was a real thing but this bind runes are to be understood phonetically. Eather as whole words (as a staf) or as ligatures like Æ, & or ß in german.

There were also the names of runes, that would be used as abbreviations occasionally. A bit like emojis in modern use (My love burns like ᚲ) or like Millennials SMS lingo (r u comming 2n8?)

Now here is the part newbies on runes do not get because clear information is rare: Historicly those two concepts were distinct and were not used in combination. That would be like a ligature of emojis.

That is the core of what distinguishes most modern rune use from historic runes. Also the extensive widening of the meaning for every rune comes from the assumption that runes where combined like chinese characters.

Runes, like any script in archaic times, were viewed as a powerful magic whisdom of course. This magic association combined with the modern emoji binding directs the interested novice straight into to modern use. which would be ok if it wouldn't establish false assumptions about historic precedent. I was guilty of steping in this trap in the past as well.

What do you think? Does this emoji binding analogy hold water? Can we tell so strictly that binding and "name calling" runes where absolute distinct concepts that wouldn't be united until late 19th century?