New Book Claims Kensington Rune Stone Is Part of an Elaborate Freemason Numerological Code and Hoax10/24/2013 Paul G. Stewart has released a new book, the first in a series, in which he attempts to solve the mystery of the Kensington Rune Stone (KRS) by proposing that it and several other disputed artifacts, including the Bat Creek Stone, and even accepted artifacts like the Phaistos Disk, are all the work of a Freemason hoaxer he dubs “The Enigmatist.” Stewart claims that he was able to deduce the handiwork of this hoaxer through numerology, discovering a set of rules drawn from Masonic writings that unlock a hidden code across all of these artifacts. Stewart provided me with a copy of the complete multi-volume book in August, but I have waited to write about it until Stewart officially released the first volume this week. I feel bad about having to report that Stewart’s claims are based on poor scholarship and faulty logic since Stewart has clearly put a great deal of effort into pursuing a line of inquiry he believes in. That said, a few examples from the first chapters of volume one will suffice to demonstrate that the foundational premises for his claims are unsound and therefore the conclusions derived from them cannot be supported with this evidence.
I’m going to leave aside the pure numerology in which he adds up the number of letters and the “values” of the words in various parts of the KRS to derive magical numbers that correlate to world mythology. I don’t find numerology at all convincing since the “rules” for numerology are never consistent, but in theory if the stone were hoaxed by a numerologist this could conceivably be intentional—not because numerology is real but because the numerologist believes it to be so. But how can we determine intentionality? Stewart says that the clues are in the language used in the KRS. Stewart informs us that he is not a linguist, but that he was able to discover a secret code in the Kensington Rune Stone by consulting various online language resources. Stewart claims that despite having no training in linguistics, “in my humble opinion all the experts had gotten the translation” of the KRS wrong. The stone contains what most translators see as a prayer: “AVM : frälse : äf : illü,” or, “Ave Virgo Maria (Hail, Virgin Mary), save (us) from evil.” Stewart states that the final word, illü, does not “feel” Swedish to him and therefore may better be understood as Latin. (This, he says, is OK because the hoaxer would not be bound by linguistic laws.) From this, he presents several examples of what he says is the word illu in the Vulgate Bible, along with instances where it was used on a website about Latin. He therefore translates illu as a code for light, as in illumination, in the “masculine tense.” Therefore, after running each word of the prayer through online translation programs to find alternative meanings, he re-translates the entire phrase as “AUM, Nobility of the Illuminated,” as in the Illuminati. We’ll deal with “AUM” in a moment. While Stewart may not be a linguist, I speak Latin, and I’ve never heard of “illu.” It does not conform to standard Latin usage, and there is no “masculine tense.” Masculine and feminine are genders, and Latin has three genders, including neuter. Only verbs have tenses; nouns have cases. The Vulgate passage he cites as including “illu” (Luke 22:57) is misquoted. It is actually “at ille negavit eum dicens mulier non novi illum.” In this case, “illum” is the masculine singular accusative case of “ille”—that, which. Similarly, his second quotation (Exodus 12:47) is also misquoted. The Vulgate actually gives it this way: “omnis coetus filiorum Israhel faciet illud,” with “illud” being the neuter form of “ille.” The other quotations provided as ancillary proof in a footnote are also misquoted. Mark 1:43 has “illum” and Luke 23:21 “illum” again. While some medieval Latin manuscripts omit the final letter to save space, indicating it only with a small hook or dot on the preceding vowel, the source consulted, linked here, simply stops its excerpt with the last letter searched for and does not display the rest of the word. Try it yourself by typing in any partial Latin word. The next website he cites discusses vulgar Latin, not Classical Latin, and the example of “illu” on that website refers to an elided form of Latin where the terminal “s” had been dropped, en route to becoming Italian, Spanish, etc. There, “illu omine magnu” are not Classical words but a decayed form of “ille hominus magnus” in which some letters have dropped out and the vowels consequently shifted. In the other examples, the accusative neuter “illud” had its final “d” removed and serves as nominative and accusative. It is the rough equivalent of the relationship between Ebonics and English. Therefore, Stewart’s proposed “translation” of the KRS AVM phrase cannot hold. He next suggests that the Freemasons masterminded the American Revolution. An equal number of Masons were on the Loyalist side during the Revolution, and Masonic Lodges actually served as middle ground where the two sides would break from fighting to enjoy meals. So, unless the conspiracy stage-managed the whole thing, this is also unlikely to be a tenable claim. I admit to having trouble following Stewart’s discussion of Charles T. McClenachan, a nineteenth century Freemason whose work Stewart uses to tie AVM to AUM (a Freemason symbol brought in from early scholarship on Sanskrit, the presumed oldest world language, as a name for God) and thus to numerological totals showing up on the KRS. Stewart knows McClenachan’s Book of Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite Freemasonry (1868) only from an edited online version, which has led him terribly astray. In the online source, Stewart felt that he saw the Tetragrammaton and three lines of Hebrew presented as keys to a puzzle, with special instructions for decoding Hebrew into a numerological language exclusively for Freemasons. He also thought he saw equivalencies made between the Hebrew names of God and English words. Unfortunately, I have reviewed McClenachan’s original text as published in 1868, 1884, 1899, and 1914, and he does not provide, as Stewart claims, “English-based” Hebrew equivalents, nor are the three lines of Hebrew presented as a puzzle. Instead they are pasted in (in Hebrew) without comment above a piece of sheet music (1884 ed., 1914 ed.). What Stewart call “instructions” are actually the recent online poster’s interpolation into the text to indicate that he or she has replaced the original Hebrew lines with a transliteration not found in the original in typing up (and condensing) the book for the web. Therefore, Stewart’s “instructions” are wrong, and his analysis is predicated on a false claim. The “equivalencies” are not to be read as equations for a code but rather as some of the 72 names of God. Stewart missed quite a bit of context by not reviewing the original work. He next applies his new understanding to the Ten Commandments, but in using numerology on them fails to note that they are numbered differently by Jews, Catholics, and Protestants (the text of the Bible does not number them). This would affect his analysis depending on whose Commandments he is totaling in numerological value. Similarly, the number of the Beast is given differently in various manuscripts, as either 666 or 616, with the oldest papyrus fragments giving 616, so therefore any numerology based on that has to deal with the discrepancy. Overall, I failed to understand why Stewart’s rules for working with KRS numbers change for his convenience. Sometimes the numbers are read as whole numbers and sometimes as numerological digits. When you can change the rules at will, it’s no wonder you can make all sorts of “meaningful” numbers, and then imagine a designer behind every coincidence. I didn’t really read much farther in the book. Most of the sources are from web pages, popular magazines, and above all nineteenth century books. There is no engagement with modern scholarship, no research into recent work except for Scott Wolter’s. As much as I’d love to say Stewart proved a widespread hoaxing effort, the failures of the book’s scholarship prevent me from endorsing his conclusions.
81 Comments
Cathleen Anderson
10/24/2013 07:55:16 am
Anytime someone refers to a masonic conspiracy, I have to laugh. As you pointed out in the above posting, there were quite a few masons on the loyalist side during that particular revolution. If there is a conspiracy, it would have to be among a really small number of people, because most masons wouldn't agree to it.
Reply
Cathleen Anderson
10/24/2013 07:57:45 am
In paragraph 5, 3rd sentence, there is a typo , the word to should be no.
Reply
10/24/2013 09:55:34 am
The Swedish word "illa" means "bad". One minute on the net would suffice to verify that. Mr Stewart is, indeed, no linguist.
Reply
charlie
10/24/2013 10:39:07 am
While web is extremely convenient, there is NO substitute for original source material. Oh Jason, I have long ago lost count of how often you have stated this truth here on your site/blog. If only these writers had done so............ Yeah, if only. If only the AAT's could actually read the ancient texts in the original languages, e.g., Sumerian, Greek, Hebrew, etc. If only.
Reply
Gunn
10/24/2013 10:39:44 am
Wow, these weird books just keep coming!
Reply
Gunn
10/24/2013 10:47:57 am
By the way, Hennepin gives a firsthand account of some of his travels into the MN area, in French, and it has been translated into English. Great original source material, though the wording and language is quite bizarre, his descriptions of Native Americans, etc.
Reply
Gunn
10/24/2013 01:17:05 pm
Actually, Hennepin may have been on the lookout for something like what Verendrye found a half-century later. Who knows, maybe Hennepin knew about the KRS and other oddities, such as the land-marking-up stonehole rocks. This makes me wonder a bit if Hennepin wasn't perhaps trying to influence land claims.
Reply
10/24/2013 11:06:09 am
The good news: he says a lot of fake stuff is fake. The bad news: he has an explanation even crazier than Vikings etc.
Reply
Shane Sullivan
10/24/2013 12:47:23 pm
Perhaps he's part of a secret plot to discredit the KRS hoax theory by making it sound crazy.
Reply
Lynn Brant
10/24/2013 02:15:03 pm
Paul may truly believe this theory, but I am not convinced of that. The day the book emerged on Amazon, it was only with prodding that he changed the About the Author section to read that it was his first book. It originally read that it was his first novel. A Freudian slip, perhaps?
Reply
clay
10/24/2013 03:32:27 pm
I heard you live in your Mom's basement? Is that why you know it all? I guess you have all the time in the world to be a critic, right?. I probably would too if I didn't have to spend all my time working to earn my own keep. Do you know anything about that? Ever read that in a book?
Reply
BuzzOff
10/24/2013 05:45:49 pm
Wow, aren't YOU an offensive little troll. I guess you'd know all about living in basements. Not so much about reading, CLEARLY.
Reply
Paul Cargile
10/25/2013 02:26:36 am
I should hoax a stone and put some half-assed old language on it. Put a secret code on it that says "You've been had." It can't be too hard.
Reply
The Other J.
10/25/2013 10:54:38 am
Do it in Quenya, using the Cirth rune script. That way when people find it, they'll think Tolkien was in on the conspiracy.
Reply
William Smith
10/25/2013 09:12:29 am
I feel Jason did a good job in pointing out some potential areas of concern in the first part of the book, however for a first publication by someone trying to provide a new connection to the author and the numbering code on the KRS, I give him an A. Just because I disagree with many of Paul's statements does not make me an expert in saying he is wrong.
Reply
Gunn
10/25/2013 12:16:23 pm
I can't help noticing that there are two groups of authors who write about the KRS: Those who believe in it and those who don't. Then there are two types of writings, fiction and nonfiction.
Reply
I truly believe that my short story on the KRS, which I label fiction, is a far more plausible and likely depiction of the origin of the KRS, than this book in question. In fact, I think, except for dimensions and weight, everything written on the KRS is fiction. It's all just scenarios offered up to explain the few facts we have. The so-called non-fiction is full of fabrication. Take the sacred story of the "discovery." All we have are the accounts of the two adults present, Ohman and his oldest son. It was dug up by accident? It was tangled in tree roots? We don't know that's true. It is literally just a story, no better than mine. And nothing that has happened since then has done a damn thing to illuminate it further
William Smith
10/26/2013 01:41:07 am
As I have stated in the past. I am not an author and have no story to defend about the KRS. I am however a retired engineer and have the skills to read information on the KRS with proper tools and hands on research in the surrounding area. If Paul can show positive proof of the Masons carving the KRS for a hoax then I support him. I have read his work and told him where he is short of facts. I feel he has the research ability to defend these identified concerns. He admits he is weak in some areas, however he also invites all to challenge his findings. It is better to listen to the message than to shoot him. The paper I posted in Migration and Diffusion gives 10 reasons why the KRS is real and supports what it states. If you feel Jason is the expert in translating the Bible word for word then so be it, however I am not aware of any two people on earth that agree with it completely. Have you or Jason been to the KRS hill or surrounding area? Have you studied the stone and the area? Can you explain the mechanical wear line? Can you connect the stone holes to the KRS and its location on the earth as related to 1362? Have you read the Native American history of the area? Can you explain the Blue eyed blond hair Mandan's that were in the area? Can you explain why pneumonia was first introduced in R.I. and Minn. in the 1400,s? Can you explain what King Magnus meant when he told Pal Knutson to go to the North pole in 1362? Can you explain what the King of Portugal and Denmark told Josh Cort-real to claim all land as far as the eye can see? If all of these can be called a hoax I will support Paul's work. Their is a fool born every day and two to take him. William, Indeed I cannot explain things that aren't there and things that didn't happen. Speaking of which, why don't you explain to these folks how the "weathering ground line" became the "mechanical wear line?" Neither exist, of course. By the way, are you still a "Township Certified Archeologist?"
Gunn
10/26/2013 03:47:59 am
Obviously, I support William in this debate, because he believes the KRS is genuine, and apparently, LynnBrant is a bit more than skeptical. Some of us write books to influence the notion the KRS is a fake, a hoax, and some of us write books to influence the notion that the KRS is absolutely genuine. So then, William is on the right track, LynnBrant is on the wrong path. Simple.
Reply
William Smith
10/26/2013 05:09:50 am
Thanks Dunn - Their are many that want the truth and then others that are professional self appointed experts. I have heard the critics before and even attempted to show facts that are accepted by the academics. I try not to get personal when I share my findings because it leads to nowhere. Yes Lynn I am still a certified arc by the township and continue the donation of one week of my time in training the local people the importance of proper archaeology. I have also received certification from The Boy Scouts of America to teach young children this technology. We had 15 scouts earn their merit badge this past year at the annual township dig at an old ice house facility that was built in 1830. I know Scott Wolter does not want their to be a mechanical wear line on the KRS because it does not fit his theory that the stone was buried and to be located by triangle lines from stone holes.
Reply
Those who can see things that aren't there are impossible to reason with. That's how the priesthood came to be, I suppose.
Reply
william smith
10/26/2013 07:36:50 am
Thanks Gunn - I am glad we are the only ones reading this post in that when Mr. Brant leaves without addressing his facts on the KRS. I guess we are 100% in agreement the KRS is authentic.
Reply
Paul Stewart
10/26/2013 08:03:38 am
Thank you (I think) Jason for your torching of my book. To be fair to Jason, I asked him to apply said blowtorch because I greatly respect its temperature- and he didn’t disappoint. He didn’t earn my nick name “Two-Guns Colavito” for being timid. To be additionally fair to Jason and as he correctly points out I also provided him with a “beast version” of the book- one so large that in fact it was ridiculous. Due to peer pressure and logic I have since broken it into three smaller volumes.
Reply
Paul Stewart
10/26/2013 08:07:42 am
Not sure if all of my post...in fact posted? It was far longer than what is being displayed....If not I will have to add it per sections I guess...but later as I have to get some things accomplished.
Reply
Paul, all banter aside, I don't understand how one can write a book, and be unclear in his own mind whether it is non-fiction or a novel. Lots of novels are written in a way that emulates non-fiction. But I think the novelist knows what he is doing.
Reply
Paul
10/26/2013 10:44:51 am
Ha! I love it! Actually...I like the term "Designasaur"- as what I went to school for doesn't exist much anymore. In an ideal world I would call what I've written a non-fiction novel...
Reply
Paul Stewart
10/26/2013 10:42:39 am
It seems, due to length that I'll need to post in parts- So, this constitutes "Part 2":
Reply
Paul Stewart
10/26/2013 10:46:51 am
"Part 3"
Reply
Paul Stewart
10/26/2013 10:51:51 am
In 1877, Cryptics would finally respond at their national convention held in Buffalo, New York, with Drummond coming prepared- suggesting committees be assigned to research and answer four critical questions with the results to be presented at the next Convention in 1880. If these questions could all be answered concretely it could potentially constitute the beginnings of a formalized Cryptic governmental structure;
Reply
10/26/2013 10:56:34 am
I am not questioning the existence of Kaballah and its various mystical analogues. What makes you wrong is the fact that you found "instructions" for applying an alleged code in a recent editor's online interpolation into a 19th century text that says no such thing.
Reply
Paul Stewart
10/26/2013 11:01:28 am
Part 4 I guess....
Reply
Paul Stewart
10/26/2013 11:07:48 am
Knowing 33 has this deep connection....isn’t it odd that when the numbers on the front of the KRS are added together (8 + 22 + 2 + 10 = 42) and the side (10 + 14 + 1362 = 1386), and the two are divided by each other; 1386/42, that the answer is 33? No?
Reply
RLewis
10/27/2013 03:57:43 am
Yes, it's simple coincidence. What you seemingly fail to grasp is that you are cherry-picking from literally millions (probably billions) of sources throughout all time. It would be much weirder and significant if you could not find ANY 33s in that entire data set.
Reply
Paul Stewart
10/26/2013 11:09:07 am
Yikes...lots 'o typos on that last one...someone is tired...
Reply
Only Me
10/26/2013 12:57:38 pm
No offense, Paul, but "The Enigmatist" would not be for this reader for a few reasons. I'll address two.
Reply
william smith
10/27/2013 02:09:05 am
I agree with you 100%. Take the KRS for what it is and make your own choice on the strength of the evidence and credibility of the messenger. Ever who carved it understood where they were on the earth.( Far west of Vinland) and they understood their mission (Claim land). I once witnesses a meteorite fall to earth. It was recovered about two miles from my house. Out of the billions of meteorites out there, and the millions that fall to earth without disintegrating, THIS particular meteorite fell in THAT square foot of the earth's 4.5 quadrillion square foot surface. What are the odds of that? Can that be chalked up to coincidence?
Reply
Gunn
10/28/2013 09:23:47 am
Yes, unless you're someone special. And what message did you get out of the meteorite falling so close to your home--that you're lucky it didn't hit you?
Reply
Tom Rent
10/26/2013 11:55:13 am
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this discovery by Stewart. It seems very plausible if you step back and look at it with an open mind.
Reply
Gunn
10/26/2013 01:59:25 pm
Paul, I really hate to bring this up, but if Cistercians or a similar group were partly responsible for carving the KRS in 1362, as some believe, couldn't you be confusing some of their sacred geometry numbers with something else? In other words, maybe there are some mysterious connections between the KRS and special numbers, but originating from a source other than what you imagine...a much earlier source, for instance.
Reply
LynnBrant
10/26/2013 03:01:43 pm
"much as our government knew 911 was going to occur and didn't stop it, and have now covered it up."
Reply
Only Me
10/26/2013 07:02:33 pm
Really, Lynn. It's been a long time since you last participated here, and already you're getting personal. Didn't the fact you faced such behavior back in March, when you commented on Jason's review of the America Unearthed episode "America's Oldest Secret", leave an impression? I suggest you follow John J. McKay's advice to the posters that attacked YOU.
LynnBrant
10/27/2013 12:50:23 am
No. It's not a cheap shot to call crazy talk crazy. The government knew about 911 and didn't stop it? I would be embarrassed to have anyone on my side of any debate say such a thing. I would also be embarrassed not to have the balls to use my real name. Just sayin'
Gunn
10/27/2013 04:12:04 am
A "Truther?" Well, if that's someone looking for the truth, then I guess I'm a Truther.
Only Me
10/27/2013 05:49:22 am
You missed the point, Lynn. Like I said, argue with Gunn based on his ideas, don't summarily dismiss him with feeble name-calling, like "truther".
LynnBrant
10/27/2013 06:03:42 am
1. The present culture defines truther as one who believes in a 9/11 conspiracy. It's not name-calling to refer to one who espouses such theories as a truther, anymore than to refer to one who advocates liberal causes as a liberal. As for his "ideas" - that's precisely what I was speaking to. Crazy truther ideas.
Only Me
10/27/2013 06:19:54 am
Alright, I'll accede your first point. However, you've shown you can make one without being snarky. Respectful expression of a differing opinion is preferred.
william smith
10/26/2013 03:38:46 pm
Gunn - I agree with you and feel the KRS is older than the late 1800,s, however the tree roots could be more supportive to Paul's theory than to the aging theory. A close observation of the suggested tree roots indicate they exist only on the back and right side. This brings up the question as to why no root stains on the left side? One answer may be the left side was carved after the stone was removed from the ground which may imply their was no tree. The following link will allow you to see for yourself (http://www.photospherix.com/examples/239.aspx)
Reply
Gunn
10/27/2013 04:35:25 am
I don't know, William, maybe there was another rock or rocks next to the runestone that prevented or restricted the root from "acting normally."
Reply
william smith
10/27/2013 06:15:38 am
Gunn - I will attempt to answer your question as to my opinion on the stone holes. I spent one week in the fields of Minn.. and N.D. with Steve Hilgren and a film crew doing work as it relates to the KRS. I also give credit to Judi Rudibush (sp) for being a detail researcher of the holes. First - You must include all the stone holes and not just the one at Duluth and the group in N.D. and the group at KRS hill. You must classify the holes as a triangle hole rather than a round. You must include the same type found in the New England states as well as the one in Ohio near the finding site of the Ohio rock. About 50 miles north of KRS hill is additional holes and more toward the red river as well as other areas Steve and Judi have identified. I am sure their are over 100 identified that fit the triangle style. Their are no two that are alike other than triangle in shape and likely made with a flat chisel. Some of the variances are depth (1/2 in. to 10 in.), some stones have as many as 3 holes at different locations on the same stone, some stones with holes have little iron magnetite where others have a high degree (measured with a compass deflection when held next to the stone and in some cases the color of the iron oxide in the stone), Their is no consistency in the size of the stones (some are as small as a basketball and some are as large as a car), Their is no consistency in elevation above old lake levels or sea level. Their is no consistency between game trails or timber areas.
Reply
Mike M.
10/27/2013 01:04:40 pm
I think the stone holes are common because settlers used field stone in construction of fences and house basements, and because it was necessary to get larger rocks out of their fields for more efficient plowing. There is plenty of documented evidence that this is true. In fact, Olof Ohman's son even stated (in a newspaper interview) that he and his brothers drilled the holes in rocks on runestone hill. He said that he wasn't very good with the chisel and ended up drilling triangular holes, even though he tried to make them round. And by the way, during archaeological survey in western Minnesota it is not uncommon, when an old settler house foundation is discovered, to see remnants of drilled holes in some of the foundation stones. Sometimes stone was also broken up and taken to local "granite works" where it was sold for a little profit.
Reply
william smith
10/27/2013 01:51:20 pm
Mike - That is a good function the holes could have had. It seems to me in my visit to the fields and surrounding area of KRS hill that their are plenty of stones laying around to make a basement wall without changing the size by drilling holes in them. I also think plenty of buildings would show evidence of this practice. I have heard they even made lift aids for stones and I have seen many railroad bridge stones with holes for lifting them in place. These were normally from a quarry where larger stones were cut to size. A few other uses could be holding nets to catch birds in july when they are molting and can not fly or holding fish nets or traps in a river, or securing bear traps or beaver or holding marker flags or blasting powder or using the stone as an anchor point for pulling logs, wagons from one point to another. They used them in Canada to lock a log in the water in order to guide the floating logs to the mill. they used them as mooring stones also. prospectors used them to study the minerals in the rock. however in most of the holes drilled for these functions were round and at least 8 in. deep. If they were for clearing a field for plowing or making a fence then the rock piles in the area will be full of them or at least half a hole. A suggestion to prove your point would be to inspect the stones in a pile down the hill from the KRS. When clearing fields in Indiana with my grandfather we would load them on a wood drag and pull the drag with a team of horses to a low ground cut at the edge of a field and place them at that location to decrease erosion of the field. Your suggestion is a good one that should be shared and studied. Thanks for sharing.
For a good study of stoneholes showing the difference between round, modern stoneholes and aged, triangulated ones, look at the page on my website showing the rock I recently found outside a MN museum, touting it as a Viking or Indian rock. I put up photos of the area it was found, showing round, not triangulated stoneholes.
william smith
10/27/2013 03:13:15 pm
Gunn - You must back up what you say about the ancient triangle stone holes are left by early explorers to carve up the land. What tool did they use to locate the positions of the holes. I think we agree on age of the stones, however the only potential land mark claim I am aware of is the KRS. Keep in mind these people understood where they were (far west of Vinland, one day south of main camp, 14 days from the inland sea).
Gunn
10/28/2013 10:15:00 am
William, I'll admit that most of my reasoning for thinking the stoneholes were for carving up land is because of the general pattern of stoneholes found just across the MN border, in SD, along the Whetstone River. The pattern suggests carving up land, especially if one considers that Scandinavian images are also carved in conjunction with these stonehole rocks. To me that further suggests the "branding" of land, such as cattle used to be branded years ago. Here's how it would work: the land prospector, using stonehole rocks, sets up boundaries, such as was actually, historically, done in Iceland. Swedes knew what stoneholes were for, besides mooring ships. But who owns the stoneholes in a certain stretch of land? Ownership would be determined by whoever was able to claim the particular image carved in association with the stoneholes in that area. I think there were certain rules that applied, such as perhaps two or three stoneholes grouped close together meant something in particular...I don't know what. I'm just speculating about why I think most of the stoneholes were used in association with claiming land, and not for another main purpose.
We agree about a lot, William, except about the stoneholes. I don't think they were used for the purpose you indicated, especially because there are other oddities about these hole to consider. For example, the so-called Viking Altar Rock near Sauk Lake has 4 stoneholes in it, two carved vertically and two horizontally. Who can guess what the actual purpose of the stoneholes here was? It looks to me like it could have been used as a shelter against the prevailing NW wind, rather than an altar. Or, maybe it was part of a land claim.
Reply
william smith
10/27/2013 02:30:06 pm
Gunn - I also feel we agree on a lot of items, just as I agree with Paul and Mike on a lot of items. If Paul finds out Holland and Cooley were fraternity brothers we all may eat crow. That's ok with me because at least we may find the truth. Their will still be those that ignore supporting facts or hard evidence. The best book in the world (The Bible) has and is challenged daily for its content.
Reply
william smith
10/28/2013 01:29:37 pm
Gunn - A few points I would like to make, however do not think my logic is any better than yours.
Reply
Kelly Broyles
10/29/2013 05:00:11 am
I have read over the comments concerning the book by Paul Stewart on his theory regarding the Kensington Runestone in Minnesota. I also had the opportunity to look at his book on the matter. It strikes me that there are two prevailing opinions in the analysis of this Minnesota artifact. First, the runestone says what it says and that is an obvious fact and most observers acknowledge that fact. However, the flip side of the coin is the conspiracy/secret code folks like Stewart who feel that swarms of Freemasons, Knights Templar, Kabbalah devotees, or others were marching around the countryside leaving secrets for other members of their fraternal organizations. The author of the Da Vinci Code, Mr. Brown must revel in the mischief that he unleashed on the rest of us.
Reply
william smith
10/29/2013 05:14:41 am
Gunn - The Viking Alter rock is 36 miles east of KRS hill. It has 4 triangle holes that vary in location and depth in the so called stones making up the alter. I feel the stones are just a convenient location and position to drill and gather magnetite. The 36 miles would represent 1/2 degree on the compass used during this time and would show confirmation that the KRS was located close to the zero magnetic declination of the time. Has anyone taken a reading to see if the alter stone contains iron magnetite?
Reply
Gunn
10/29/2013 02:21:45 pm
William, I figure differently on what "one day travel" meant. Although I agree with you about the open sea, the travel these men were embarked on was accomplished, I believe, by river, down and over west from near Duluth, MN. In essence, I think the message was referring to how far the men were camped, north, in terms of how far they could travel up the relatively small Chippewa River, upstream, in one day. I see no reason to think they applied some other method to describe their travel, other than by accurate terms for the circumstances. Why would they describe land navigation the same way as the sea?
Reply
William smith
10/29/2013 10:59:26 pm
It is always good to have different views on what took place over 500 years ago. My views are from years of research on the subject and the best fit picture that took place at the time. My vision may be off, however I can change direction when I am shown supporting facts. From this I will say why I feel 500 years ago the distance on land was the same at sea as well as some other questions I would ask for explanation. For example: Paul will never convince me the KRS is a fake unless he can prove how the mechanical wear line was put on the stone.
William smith
10/29/2013 10:59:34 pm
It is always good to have different views on what took place over 500 years ago. My views are from years of research on the subject and the best fit picture that took place at the time. My vision may be off, however I can change direction when I am shown supporting facts. From this I will say why I feel 500 years ago the distance on land was the same at sea as well as some other questions I would ask for explanation. For example: Paul will never convince me the KRS is a fake unless he can prove how the mechanical wear line was put on the stone.
William smith
10/29/2013 10:59:42 pm
It is always good to have different views on what took place over 500 years ago. My views are from years of research on the subject and the best fit picture that took place at the time. My vision may be off, however I can change direction when I am shown supporting facts. From this I will say why I feel 500 years ago the distance on land was the same at sea as well as some other questions I would ask for explanation. For example: Paul will never convince me the KRS is a fake unless he can prove how the mechanical wear line was put on the stone.
Gunn
10/30/2013 03:47:35 am
Part of the reason I think the party came by way of Lake Superior is because of the ship carving (on my website) at Copper Harbor, MI, which is an exact depiction of a medieval Norse vessel. I have wondered about getting the ship into Lake Superior, and there would be a few ways to do it. It could have been a disassemble-able sailing ship, so that the parts could be portaged where necessary. I hope I'm not going too far on this one, but there's also the possibility of using Shetland Ponies or other animals for most of the muscle-work.
Reply
william smith
10/30/2013 07:33:02 am
Your theory is well worth investigation. The stone boat carving you are talking about looks more like it was carved by a native American rather than a person with skills to carve runes. Keep in mind that a local native legend indicated the chief (peacemaker) rowed a stone boat across Lake Ontario from west to east in order to explain to the 5 tribes in the east the new laws of the land. I feel a small number of the crew (one or two small boats) with the aid of the native Americans rowed and sailed a small fishing boat from KRS hill to Duluth and via the great lakes to the east coast on their return trip. In addition to the small boat carving you are talking about is a map carved in stone of the lake rout in NY. One key factor is the KRS states 14 days north to the inland sea. We could debate this until the cows come home, however we need to stay on the original topic rather than distract from Paul's theory. I like your theory for the most part and do not want to steer you from it.
Reply
Gunn
10/31/2013 03:15:35 pm
William, sorry to say, but I don't think a small fishing boat rowed and sailed from Runestone Hill. Small river craft don't use sails, no more than birth-bark canoes used sails. There is no place to embark on a river journey from Runestone Hill, other than the Chippewa River, nearby. I've gone onsite several times to study this area, and the river area leading about a day's travel upstream, north. This is a small river, barely navigational in places. Yet explorers have always enjoyed finding river sources.
Reply
william smith
11/1/2013 02:35:11 am
Gunn - I do not agree with most authors who have published work on the KRS, however in all cases pro and con I find value in their theory. I like you, challenge their theory if I have strong evidence to the contrary. You must treat each authors work as if you were a first reader of the KRS. I think Paul did a very good job explaining a motive and potential connection between the Masons and the KRS. Do I believe his story? No because I have been to the KRS and studied wear lines and other items that do not fit the theory. I also do not believe Scott Wolter's work for the same reason.
Reply
Only Me
11/1/2013 07:21:27 am
While I agree with Gunn that this discussion of the KRS here has gone on long enough, I would add just one thought to the carvings he's found.
Reply
Copper would have to be alloyed with something else (tin) for it to be useful in carving stoneholes out of rocks. Copper is quite soft. An iron chisel would be in order. What is the purpose for these stoneholes I just found? I can think of a reason that has to do with staking a claim to land by medieval persons, but I can't think of a reason for Native Americans to have carved the holes. It makes sense and fits the pattern I've seen for carving up land. They obviously weren't for use in blasting. They were made by hand, taking considerable effort and time.
william smith
11/1/2013 05:04:25 am
Gunn - Paul has made a better case on the KRS than others even though I believe it is authentic, which is contrary to his theory. The two items that add the most strength to the authenticity of the KRS are the mechanical wear line and the small holes in the KRS.
Reply
William, I went to the Runestone Museum yesterday and took a lot of new photos of the runestone; the bottom line is that the date shows very clearly 1362, with no indication of any other way to interpret it. Also, to my eye and camera, there is no perceptible wear line. However, there is a clearly distinguishable line made by the engraver, a chipping away, that more or less indicates to which point the stone would be buried a third of the way deep, upright. I've taken a lot of photos of this, too, and I'll plan on putting up another page on my website to show these two issues. I'm doing this to help you, not to promote an argument (or course).
Reply
11/1/2013 11:27:23 pm
Is there any chance I could convince those still interested in this discussion to take it to my discussion forums in the Forum section?
Reply
11/3/2013 03:27:55 am
I doubt it. It's nice that you set it up, but I see it as a sort of pigeon-holing...and I have nothing against pigeons! This thread had already run its course and I am prepared to wait patiently for you to bring up the KRS again, here. I'm confident it'll pop up again before long. A noose around your neck as heavy as the KRS (202 lbs.) is noticeable, and can't be ignored long. And the stoneholes keep coming back full circle; they resist straight-lines to forums, too. The KRS, and stoneholes, prefer to be noticed, if only occasionally at the good host's choosing.
Gunn
11/3/2013 04:09:30 am
I was just thinking, maybe the large stoneholes were used for construction, like to place vertical posts with carved circular "nubs" into the holes. The posts could then rest on rock, which wouldn't decay the posts, or settle. Many of these stonehole rocks were carved in rocks level with the ground, and the spacing suggests this possibility of construction of a building Much of the ground top soil and moss has cloaked the spot over. Hundreds of years ago, the spot probably showed the rocks better, in pattern formation. Right now it's difficult to ascertain a pattern, probably because even more stoneholes are covered over with time. Perhaps the spot can be professionally looked at to see if a building may have once stood there...on stonehole rocks. (Recall that the so-called Viking Altar Rock was probably used for construction--though perhaps not for an altar, but as a shelter.)
william smith
11/2/2013 03:28:15 am
Jason - Are you saying Paul,s Book or the KRS? I like your site and your work. It makes it hard to share factual data without the ability to post photos.
Reply
11/2/2013 04:05:51 am
The KRS in general. I have a forum in the Forums section for discussing the KRS. You can post photos there provided you have them hosted on a picture site like Post Image, etc.
Reply
David White
3/22/2019 04:38:45 am
JOIN THE ILLUMINATI BROTHERHOOD TODAY AND LIVE A GOOD LIFE.
Reply
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorI am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab. Newsletters
Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.
Categories
All
Terms & ConditionsPlease read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.
Archives
February 2025
|