Some runic stones. 43- 



These staves I now divide and interpret as follows: 

 1. UKSA, ac. s. m. An Ox, one Ox. 



TUIS-KILAN (= TUIS-GILLAN), ac. s. m. TWICE-GILD, full-grown 

 and strong, worth 2 common beasts. Thus I here follow Brocman, Lilje- 

 gren, Rydquist and Bugge, and banish our friend the god TU (TY, TYR), 

 who appeared here in my first version. Cannot help it. Peace be 

 with him! 



AUK, EKE, and. 



AURA, ac. pi. m. ORES, ounces of silver. 



TUO, ac. pi. ni. 7' 117). I again must object to Bugge's fancy of 

 transliterating the plain rune for by % (which he makes to be a kind 

 of nasal A). The rune for A nnist be given by A, the stave for by 

 0, however we may theorize (often, as here, unfoundedly) as to the 

 pronunciation of this or any other letter in certain eases. All who like 

 may accept Bugge's theories. I and most others decidedly reject them. 

 But he has quite simply no right to bolster them up altering the runic 

 values of any letter. 



STAFA, inf. {One shall) STAVE, fix as icith a stroke of the Judge's 

 staff, decree, levy as a mulct, demand as a fine. I take STAFA here to be 

 the usual N. I. verb so frequently emploj'ed for — to ordain,, fix, de- 

 termine, sentence to any fine or punishment even death itself. As Bugge 

 truly says, this is perhaps the hardest word in the whole risting. Î now 

 divide STAFAT as STAFA^AT. Bugge thinks this is inadmissible, as, 

 in the next place where it occurs, there are 3 points between the F and 

 the, following A. But there are hundreds of examples on our runic pieces 

 of much greater freedoms than this, so necessary was it to spare space 

 or hard cutting-labor or both. And, when the rune-stamper came to the 

 other place 



ATASTAF : AITKALT 



how was he to proceed? If he had written 



ATASTAFA : UKALT 

 it would have been much harsher and more unintelligible. Including the 

 twice-taken but once cut L in TUISKILAN, there are 8 letters thus 

 twice redd in the usual runic way on this roundel. The whole sentence 

 is undoubtedly in the accusative, and I take STAFA to be the govern- 

 ing verb (with the indefinite man must or one shall understood as the 

 nominative, a construction so very common in oiu- old tungs). Bugge 

 divides STAF AT FURSTA, and takes STAF to be a hitherto unknown 

 word meaniag a fast (fast as a staff) sum or norm or fine or mulct. STAF, 

 with him, is therefore a second accusative, in apposition with UKSA — 



