36 C. Save and G. Stephens, 



Liljegren, who also used a copy by Celsius, has: 7 vari. riti stin 

 j)ino at Kiij)biuru bru|)iir sin ... — ... kiin« var miiJ)iR x Kupmuntar . 

 Kuj)muntr l)rukna|)i: 



All that we have from Säve's hand is the above loose pencil-sketch, 

 very rongh, made on the 13th of Sept. 1851. He then measured the 

 stone. It was about 7 feet high by about 3 feet 3 inches broad. 



All the old copies being so faulty, and Save not having left one 

 line of help, what are we to do? We may at all events remark that the 

 old transcribers quietly forged the UAR in KUl*A UAR MUt>I7f, because 

 it appeared necessary that the word must be UAR. Secondly, we may 

 as well try to read so much of the risting as is decently legible, about 

 one half of the whole. If the good men of old had only taken a coujjle 

 of paper casts of each stone (cost, some öres), we should now be able 

 to decipher most of the old blocks now partlj^ illegible or altogether lost. 

 People gave and give what they saw or see, often things extravagant 

 enough. Onli/ the cast can control the eye of the copyist. Where the 

 letters are so worn and weak that we can get no useful impression, then 

 and only then can the cast be dispenst with. 



We observe, then, that there are 2 marks for S, S and '. — Next, 

 in a long inscription we must have a nominative, a verb and an accusa- 

 tive. Here the accusative, STIN t>INO, is plain. The first word is there- 

 fore the nominative, and the verb must be between. But what was the 

 first word? I do not know. All the transcripts are confused. Is the mark 

 at the extreme left a begiiming-sign, a cross or something such, or is it 

 a rune? The next letters seem to be TRIUI, possibly a name compounded 

 with TRI (TRÂ). If not, adding the first mark, the name was perhaps 

 ATRIUI. — The next group must be the verb, perhaps originally RISI 

 (= RISTI) raised, or RITI, urote. — The AT KUÏ>BIURNA seems clear. 

 But, if so, KUtelURNA is an antique accusative. — Then BRUITRSII 

 or BURITRSH, but more probably BRURTR SIN, as in Liljegren. — 

 Some runes follow, of which I can make nothing. They would seem to 

 speak of KUl^BIURN as being something I MANAIM, apparently a place- 

 name. There was a MANSHEIMS-HERAD, and therefore a"^ I\IAN or 

 MANS HAIM, in Norway, and there may have been a MANHAIM else- 

 where. — The rest of the line seems to me ruined and meaningless. 



Now the line below. The UAR in Bautil is not on the stone. 

 Bautil has KUNI UAR MUl>IR, Bure KUNA UA MUI^IR, Save KUTI 

 UA MUÎ'IR. But no KUNI or KUNA or KUTI has been spoken of be- 

 fore, and there is no divisional mark between UA and M. It would seem. 



