Magic runic inscriptions — a dossier on each inscription (Eggja, Kylver, Lindholm, Kragehul I, Björketorp and Stentoften)

Overview

A close reading of each of the five Early Runic inscriptions on five monuments that the literature counts as “magic.” This is an in-depth treatment of a topic from the runic magic overview (section 5).

Source level (important for honesty). The primary gathering is from Wikipedia (a navigational level) + a check of the signatures against Rundata (Scandinavian Runic-text Database), with a mention of Kiel RuneS / Runenprojekt as the place where the competing readings are collected. The inscription texts themselves are public-domain; the scholarly transliterations and translations are cited from secondary sources and flagged. For publication, check against: Krause & Jankuhn 1966 (Die Runeninschriften im älteren Futhark), MacLeod & Mees 2006 (Runic Amulets and Magic Objects), Grønvik, Antonsen, Düwel, Spurkland 2005.

Summary table (Rundata signatures —):

⚠️ A correction to the runic magic overview: it says that Kylver has “six Tiwaz runes in a row.” On a close reading of the inscription this appears to be inaccurate — there is NO separate line of t-runes on Kylver; the “Týr” is extracted from the twigs of the tree bind-rune at the end of the row (see below). The stack of t-runes (×3) is on Lindholm, not on Kylver.

The Eggja stone (N KJ101)

• historical-fact Found in 1917 during ploughing at the Eggja farm, the municipality of Sogndal, county of Vestland, Norway; now in the Bergen Museum. — Wikipedia.
• historical-fact Dated ~650–700 CE (the late Elder Futhark with features transitional to the Younger). — Wikipedia.
• historical-fact ~200 runes — “the longest known Elder Futhark inscription”; the text is in three panels, many spots are damaged and contested. — Wikipedia.
• What counts as “magic”: historical-fact the inscription is read as a funerary protective charm — a prohibition against disturbing the grave (including the motif of “not at the waning moon”), a kenning of a “corpse-sea” (presumably blood-ritual), the mention of a psychopomp god, and a warning against desecrators. — Wikipedia.
• The scholarly interpretations (they compete):
  • historical-fact Krause & Jankuhn (1966) — protective magic; they read, in particular: “It is not touched by the sun and the stone is not scored by an [iron] knife” (it must not be exposed in the sun, must not be cut with iron). — Wikipedia (the quote verbatim).
  • historical-fact Ottar Grønvik (1985) — an alternative: an account of a shipwreck, the intervention of a deity, and the deceased's passage into the other world through a fish-like creature. — Wikipedia.
• Dispute / uncertainty: [unverified] a generally accepted translation has been reached for only small parts of the partially preserved inscription; the Kiel Runenprojekt (Kieler Runenprojekt) records 8–10 different scholarly readings of individual fragments. — Wikipedia.
• Connection with the charm-words: [unverified] in the runic magic overview Eggja is listed among the carriers of alu; in the present reading alu on Eggja was not clearly confirmed.

The Kylver stone (G 88)

• historical-fact Found in 1903 during the excavation of a burial ground near the Kylver farm, the parish of Stånga, Gotland; the slab lay with its inscription facing into the grave (the text toward the deceased). Now in the Swedish History Museum (Statens historiska museum), Stockholm. — Wikipedia.

• historical-fact Dated ~400 CE. — Wikipedia.

• historical-fact It contains the oldest known complete row of the 24 Elder Futhark runes: [f]uþarkg[w] hnijïpzs tbeml ŋdo (with mirrored a, s, b and a reversed z). — Wikipedia.
• What counts as “magic”:
  • historical-fact A tree bind-rune at the end of the row: “six twigs to the left and eight to the right of a single stem”; interpreted as “six times ‘Týr’ and four times ‘áss’ in the sense ‘god’… which could have been a good protection taken into the grave.” — Wikipedia (verbatim).
  • historical-fact The word sueus (a palindrome) of unclear meaning, “it may be connected with magic.” — Wikipedia (verbatim).
• The scholarly interpretations (they compete): historical-fact (a) a use of the futhark to “pacify the dead”; (b) simply an exercise / training in carving the futhark. — Wikipedia.
• Dispute / uncertainty: [unverified] the etymology of sueus: the hypothesis “a magical writing of the word ‘horse’” is called “linguistically impossible” for that era; the alternative — a reference to the Suiones tribe (the Swedes). — Wikipedia. The sources the article cites: Spurkland 2005; Düwel & Heizmann 2006; Antonsen 1988; Elliott 1959; Enoksen 1998.

The Lindholm amulet (DR 261)

• historical-fact A bone plate (“amulet”), found in 1840 during peat cutting in Skåne; now in the Lund University Historical Museum. — Wikipedia. ⚠️ A divergence over the dating: Wikipedia gives 375–570 CE (the late Roman Iron Age); the “Erilaz” article — 2nd–4th c. Record it as a range.
• historical-fact Transliteration (Elder Futhark), two lines: line 1 — ek erilaz sa wilagaz hateka (variants: wilaz); line 2 — aaaaaaaazzznn[n]?bmuttt : alu :. — Wikipedia.
• Translation of line 1: historical-fact “I am (an) erilaz, I am called the wily” — or a name with the meaning “the one who is from the Sun.” — Wikipedia (verbatim).
• What counts as “magic”:
  • historical-fact line 2 — a “magic” chain: eight Ansuz (interpreted as an invocation of eight gods) + three t-runes (M&M: these are t-runes, NOT Tiwaz — part of an encoded tumbnaz, p.72/92) + the closing formula alu (the well-known charm-word). — Wikipedia.
  • historical-fact per Spurkland (2005) the repeats = “a repetition of calling on a deity eight times as one would do in a magical ritual.” — Wikipedia (verbatim).
• Dispute / uncertainty: [unverified] the function (a warrior's protection or well-being magic) and the exact meaning of erilaz remain contested (see the “erilaz” block below). — Wikipedia. ⚠️ In the runic magic overview “stacked Tyr bi-runes and a repeated Ansuz” are mentioned — this is about Lindholm.

Kragehul I (DR 196)

• historical-fact A spear/javelin shaft (lance shaft), Rundata DR 196 U; found in 1877 in the sacrificial bog Kragehul, the island of Funen, Denmark; now in the National Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen. The bog contained five deposits of military equipment (200–475 CE); the shaft is probably from the late ones. — Wikipedia.
• historical-fact Transliteration (Elder Futhark, with lacunae): ek erilaz asugisalas muha haite gagaga ginu gahe … lija … hagala wiju big-. — Wikipedia.
• historical-fact The normalized opening: “I, the erilaz of Āsugīsalaz, am called Muha, ga-ga-ga!”; Āsugīsalaz = ansu- (“god”) + gīsalaz (“hostage”). — Wikipedia (verbatim).
• What counts as “magic”: historical-fact the triple repeat gagaga — probably a ritual formula / a “battle cry” / an incantation in a Germanic combat context; a “helmet-destroying hail” is mentioned as a magical image. — Wikipedia.
• The scholarly interpretations (they compete):
  • historical-fact Schneider (1969) — a bull sacrifice; the repeat = “gift, god!”
  • historical-fact Düwel (1983) — “I give good fortune”; “helmet-destroying hail.”
  • historical-fact Pieper (1999) — “gift to the god [Odin]” + “hell-hail.”
  • historical-fact MacLeod & Mees (2006) — the repeat as onomatopoeia, the whole expression a “metrical charm.” — Wikipedia (all four verbatim).
• Dispute / uncertainty: [unverified] a direct alu on Kragehul I was not confirmed in the present reading — the brief stated “possibly alu”; so far it has not been found, so hold it as unconfirmed. The meaning of gagaga is also contested (a gift to the god? a cry? onomatopoeia?).

Björketorp and Stentoften (the Blekinge group of curses, DR 360 / DR 357)

Two 7th-c. stones from Blekinge (Sweden) with a parallel curse formula; they belong to a local tradition together with the Istaby and Gummarp stones (by their shared clan names). The writing is transitional between the Elder and the Younger Futhark. — Wikipedia.

Björketorp (DR 360):

• historical-fact Blekinge, Sweden; height 4.2 m (one of the tallest runestones); without personal names. — Wikipedia.
• historical-fact Transliteration/translation (Proto-Norse, two sides): side A — “Haidz runo runu, falh'k hedra ginnarunaz. Argiu hermalausz, … weladauþe, saz þat brytz” ≈ “I, master of the runes(?) conceal here runes of power. Incessantly (plagued by) maleficence, (doomed to) insidious death (is) he who breaks this (monument)”; side B — “Uþarba spa” = “I prophesy destruction.” — Wikipedia (verbatim).
• historical-fact A runic peculiarity: “the a rune has the same form as the h rune of the Younger Futhark.” — Wikipedia (verbatim).

Stentoften (DR 357):

• historical-fact Found in 1823 (by Dean O. Hammer), Stentoften, Blekinge; it lay face down, surrounded by five stones (a geometric figure). Dated ~500–700, more often the 7th c. — Wikipedia.
• historical-fact It contains a gift of “harvest”: “niuhaborumz niuhagestumz hAþuwolAfz gAf j” (the j rune as an ideogram for jēra “harvest/year”) and “niu habrumz, niu hangistumz” = “nine bucks, nine stallions” (interpreted as a description of a sacrifice for the harvest — a fertility ritual). — Wikipedia (verbatim).
• historical-fact It ends with a curse, parallel to Björketorp's: “Hermalausaz argiu, Weladauþs, sa þat briutiþ” — punishment/death to him who destroys the stone. — Wikipedia (verbatim).

What counts as “magic” (both): historical-fact a curse formula against a destroyer/desecrator of the monument + “ginnarunaz / runes of power.” On Stentoften a fertility gift-sacrifice is added. — Wikipedia.

Dispute / uncertainty:

• [unverified] The purpose of Björketorp is disputed: a gravestone / a cenotaph / a sanctuary to Odin / a fertility monument / a boundary marker. — Wikipedia.
• historical-fact Björketorp and Stentoften share a common formula but were probably “not carved by the same person.” — Wikipedia (verbatim).
• [unverified] The names Haþuwulfz / Hariwulfz (“battle-wolf,” “warrior-wolf”) are lycophoric; a hypothesis of a link to ritual wolf symbolism and the initiation of young warriors. — Wikipedia.

A cross-cutting theme: erilaz (Lindholm + Kragehul)

• historical-fact erilaz (Proto-Norse, ek erilaz “I, the erilaz”) occurs on a number of Migration-era inscriptions: Lindholm, Kragehul I, Järsberg, the bracteates (Eskatorp-F, Väsby-F), Bratsberg, By, Veblungsnes, Rosseland, Etelhem and others. — Wikipedia (Erilaz).
• The main dispute: [unverified] does erilaz denote a “magico-religious specialist / rune-master” (the traditional interpretation) or is it a military/social title (“earl” / “a warrior of noble status”)? Mees argues that the word is an ablaut variant of “earl” (a title, not a “magician”); modern scholarship leans toward the second. — MacLeod & Mees 2006 (p.73 n.3, 78, 90) take “earl” throughout; the source of the argument: Mees, NOWELE 42 (2003), 41–68.
• ⇒ A direct consequence for the boundary: a “rune-master as magician” is not reliably read from the word erilaz itself; this matters against the esoteric reconstruction of an “ancient class of runic magicians.”

Links

• the runic magic overview — the overview note; this file is its in-depth reading (the TODO of section 5).
• The charm-word alu: confirmed for Lindholm AND Eggja (M&M p.218); on Kragehul — on the knife aau=alu (p.84), on the spear not.
• The erilaz theme links Lindholm and Kragehul I and runs into the dispute “magician vs. title.”