392 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1953 



we find that both its vertical stems are overworked, whereas the cross 

 stroke is intact ; and this cross stroke shows incipient weathering. 



As will be known, the inscription on the Kensington stone, trans- 

 lated into modern English, reads : 



Front : 



Line 1 8 Goths and 22 Norwegians on 



2 ? exploration- journey from 



3 Vinland across West. We 



4 had camp by 2 skerries one 



5 day's journey north from this stone. 



6 We were and fished one day. After 



7 we came home found 10 men red 



8 with blood and dead. A V M 



9 save from evil. 

 Edge: 



Line 1 Have 10 men by the sea to look 



2 after our ships 14 days' journey 



3 from this island. Year 1362. 



For the transliteration and transcription of this text see figure 9. 



This then is an account, without mentioning names, of an expedition 

 of 30 men who, away in the wilderness, far from their ships at the sea 

 coast, have suffered a bloody attack. Ten of the thirty were killed 

 (scalped ?) , while the others were out fishing. They send a prayer to 

 the Virgin Mary (A V M is deciphered as Ave Virgo Maria), and in 

 conclusion the runes say that 10 men are by the sea keeping guard on 

 the expedition ships. Moreover, that this happened in 1362. 



The authenticity of this inscription has many assailants and perhaps 

 still more defenders. There is no denying that the great majority of 

 philologically erudite scholars are on the side of the aggressors. It 

 must be understood that this is a specimen of linguistic text of which 

 the genuineness or falsity can only be decided — if it can be decided at 

 all— by people familiar with the Nordic language of the fourteenth 

 century. 



Before the philologists have their say, I shall briefly present and 

 jomment upon certain archeological considerations. They may be 

 8ummarized into four points. 



1. On the f/nding of the stone. — It is stated that the stone was un- 

 earthed by the farmer Olof Ohman while working to remove a tree 

 stump. The stone was lying among the roots of the tree and they had 

 grown at an angle to the shape of the stone ; this can be explained only 

 by assuming that the stone was already there when the tree above it 

 was young and that in order to get down deeper the roots must have 

 encompassed the stone and following its outline. Estimating the age of 



