|
|
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 22:47:11 GMT, Tomi <inv@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>news:mmhnf1d4hd0a7f8igri56o6jmkq58m7hpl@xxxxxxx:
>
>> If, as has been suggested by
>> Scott Wolter, the KRS was intended to mark out a land claim it may be
>> that it was always intended to create markers in stone and they
>> brought along tools for the purpose.
>
>Then he must have examples of that kind of behavior in the 14th century.
>>>
>>>Everything is possible but certain things just are less likely than
>>>others.
>>>
>>>Here' a competing scenario: Somebody with connections to Minnesota gets
>>>his hands on a Medieval document, perhaps it reads exactly as the text
>>>on the stone. This person has strong nationalistic, anti-Swedish
>>>sentiments, or perhaps he just wants to make money. Maybe both. He
>>>contacts Ohman who then "finds" the stone carved for the purpose.
>>
>> You have to overcome obstacle of the apparent two hundred years or
>> more of weathering on the stone if you are to support this theory.
>
>Every stone that has been exposed to the elements shows signs of it. But you
>must mean that those places where the chisels were used show signs of
>weathering. If so, then it is likely that the inscriptions are genuinly old.
>
>Then again, the solution can't be that simple. If it was, we would not be
>discussing it here.
>
|
|