> "Viking" is a term that should not be used in this context. By the 14th
> century they, the Baltic and North-sea pirates, had been gone for several
> centuries. Also their boats had been mostly replaced by more developed,
> German-type ships. These larger ships could not have managed the up-river
> trip, including several rapids and and three different rivers, from Hudson
> Bay to Minnesota. So , I suppose, we have to assume that the Kensington
> fellows used an older-type boat. But even then, getting the boat from
> Hudson Bay to Minnesota would have been a remarkable achievement.
> Incubation period of bubonic plague is 2 to 10 days. If that was what
> killed the men, they would have had to sail all the way from Europe to
> Minnesota in ten days. This makes the achievement even more remarkable.
> If it was the Indians who killed the men, then the surviving group was on
> the run, trying to hide from the Indians. In that case it would not have
> been a clever move to start hitting a stone with a metal object. It would
> not have served any purpose and it would have made a loud sound.
> And anyway, why did a group of apparently desparate men trying to survive
> in wilderness carry stone-working tools along? Anybody who's done any
> trekking knows that you don't want to carry any extra weight on you. Even
> more peculiar it all becomes taking into account that the tradition of
> carving runestone had gone out of fashion for about 300 years earlier.
> It all seems so unlikely. Perhaps the stone is genuinely old, but
> originally found somewhere else. My guess is that it's a forgery, though.
> That would fit the romantic and nationalistic atmosphere of the late 19th
So the story in favour of the Kensington Runestone requires
more elaboration. Let me try. The 40 brave men who plan
a royal expedition to the far west study all available old
reports, learn about runes, and luckily find a shipward
where ships are still being built in the way of the Vikings.
They need such a ship for exploring inland rivers and lakes.
Well, they go on their journey, reach the Hudson Bay, follow
the Nelson River, overcome rapids and falls by dragging their
vessel over land in the way of the ancient Greeks, reach
Lake Winnipeg, and moor their ship on the southern shore,
where they build camp A. 10 men remain in camp A, guarding
the ship. 30 men march southward. After fourteen days they
arrive some twenty kilometers north of Kensington Minnesota.
Here they build camp B. 10 men remain in camp B. 20 men
march southward for another day, looking out for a river
or a lake where they might fish. On the evening they build
camp C in the area of Kensington. On the next morning,
out of whatever reason, they return to camp B - where they
find the 10 men they left behind "red with blood and dead,"
apparently killed by Indians (the bubonic plague is ruled
out by your information that the incubation time is only
two to ten days). Shocked and frightened, they flee to camp
C, where they feel secure enough to commemorate the sad fate
of their comrades on a greywacke slab - in runes, which are
more easily carved than Roman letters and numerals. Hereupon
they resolve to return to camp A and the ship on the southern
shore of Lake Winnipeg, a journey of fifteen days northward.
If the believers in the Kensington Runestone wish to compete
with my story of a forgery - told a couple of years ago in
the thread "Enough Inger Bashing," and again in a previous
message here in this thread - they should improve on the above
outline of a story based on the runic inscription as translated
by Nielsen. Herewith I return the challenge posed by Inger.
The owing party are the KRS pushers. They can't blame us
"naysayers" for their lack of a plausible story.
Regards Franz Gnaedinger www.seshat.ch