title: The Scandinavian dotted runes
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Schulte, Michael
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2020-01-15T07:31:25Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2020-01-15T07:31:25Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2019-09
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Schulte M. The Scandinavian dotted runes. Scandinavian Philology, 2019, vol. 17, issue 2, pp. 264–283.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu21.2019.205
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/16907
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: The present piece deals with the early history of the Scandinavian dotted runes.
  The medieval rune-row or fuþork was an extension of the younger 16-symbol fuþark
  that gradually emerged at the end of the Viking Age. The whole inventory of dotted
  runes was largely complete in the early 13th century. The focus rests on the Scandinavian
  runic inscriptions from the late Viking Age and the early Middle Ages, viz. the
  period prior to AD 1200. Of particular interest are the earliest possible examples of
  dotted runes from Denmark and Norway, and the particular dotted runes that were
  in use. Not only are the Danish and Norwegian coins included in this discussion, the
  paper also reassesses the famous Oddernes stone and its possible reference to Saint
  Olaf in the younger Oddernes inscription (N 210), which places it rather safely in the
  second quarter of the 11th century. The paper highlights aspects of absolute and relative
  chronology, in particular the fact that the earliest examples of Scandinavian dotted
  runes are possibly as early as AD 970/980. Also, the fact that dotted runes — in
  contradistinction to the older and younger fuþark — never constituted a normative
  and complete system of runic writing is duly stressed. In this context, the author also
  warns against overstraining the evidence of dotted versus undotted runes for dating
  medieval runic inscriptions since the danger of circular reasoning looms large. This is
  a preliminary study to reassess the possible origin of dotted runes and the technique
  of diacritic dotting in the British Isles.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Scandinavian Philology;Volume 17; Issue 2
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Dotted runes
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Old Danish
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Old Swedish
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Old Norwegian
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Viking Age
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: runestones
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: younger runic inscriptions
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: runic epigraphy
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: younger fuþąrk
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: medieval fuþork
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Roman alphabet
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: runic coins
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: renovatio moneta
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: The Scandinavian dotted runes
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 264-283.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/16907/1/264-283.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 1,32 MB