The Elder Futhark, or Pan-Germanic Futhark (also spelt Fuþark, , ), is the oldest form of the runic alphabets. It was a writing system used by Germanic peoples in the Migration Period. Inscriptions are found on artifacts including jewellery, amulets, plateware, tools, and weapons, as well as runestones, from the 2nd to the 8th centuries.
In Scandinavia, beginning in the late 8th century, the script was simplified to the Younger Futhark, while the Anglo-Saxons and Frisians instead extended it, giving rise to the Anglo-Saxon futhorc. Both the Anglo-Saxon futhorc and the Younger Futhark remained in use during the Early and the High Middle Ages respectively, but knowledge of how to read the Elder Futhark was forgotten until 1865, when it was deciphered by Norwegian scholar Sophus Bugge..
Description The Elder Futhark is named after the initial phoneme of the first six rune names: /f/, /u/, /ð/, /ɑ/, /r/, and /k/ corresponding with ᚠ, ᚢ, ᚦ, ᚨ, ᚱ, and ᚲ respectively. It has 24 runes, often arranged in three groups of eight runes; each group is in modern times called an ætt, Old Norse for 'lineage', the term used in Younger Futhark. It has been speculated to potentially stem from Elder Futhark and thought to mean 'group of eight'. Irish Ogham features a similar division system.
f u þ a r k g w h n i j ï p z s t b e m l ŋ d o
What the groups were originally called remains unknown. In the following table, each rune is given with its common transliteration and phoneme:
ætt 1 rune ᚠ ᚢ ᚦ ᚨ ᚱ ᚲ ᚷ ᚹ transliteration phoneme or ætt 2 rune ᚺ ᚾ ᛁ ᛃ ᛇ ᛈ ᛉ ᛊ transliteration or or phoneme or or ætt 3 rune ᛏ ᛒ ᛖ ᛗ ᛚ ᛜ ᛞ ᛟ transliteration phoneme
The earliest known sequential listing of the alphabet dates to 400 AD and is found on the Kylver Stone in Gotland, [ᚠ] and [ᚹ] only partially inscribed but widely authenticated:
[ᚠ] ᚢ ᚦ ᚨ ᚱ ᚲ ᚷ [ᚹ] ᚺ ᚾ ᛁ ᛃ ᛈ ᛇ ᛉ ᛊ ᛏ ᛒ ᛖ ᛗ ᛚ ᛜ ᛞ ᛟ [f] u þ a r k g [w] h n i j p ï z s t b e m l ŋ d o
Two instances of another early inscription were found on the two Vadstena and Mariedamm bracteates (6th century), showing the division in three ætts, with the positions of ï, p and o, d inverted compared to the Kylver stone: f u þ a r k g w; h n i j ï p z s; t b e m l ŋ o d The Grumpan bracteate presents a listing from 500 which is identical to the one found on the previous bracteates but incomplete: f u þ a r k g w ... h n i j ï p (z) ... t b e m l (ŋ) (o) d
Origins
Derivation from Italic alphabets
The Elder Futhark runes are commonly believed to originate in the Old Italic scripts: either a North Italic variant (Etruscan or Rhaetic alphabets), or the Latin alphabet itself. Derivation from the Greek alphabet via Gothic contact to Byzantine Greek culture was a popular theory in the 19th century, but has been ruled out since the dating of the Vimose inscriptions to the 2nd century (whereas the Goths were in contact with Greek culture only from the early 3rd century). Conversely, the Greek-derived 4th-century Gothic alphabet does have two letters that may have been derived from runes, 𐌾 (from Jer ᛃ j) and 𐌿 (from Uruz ᚢ u).
The main problem is that a derivation from the classical Latin alphabet as used in the 1st and 2nd centuries, while the most obvious possibility suggested by the historical, geographical and cultural context,Compare: is not as straightforward as could be expected, especially regarding letter shapes, and many scholars are not satisfied by it. Instead, it is observed that many runic letters suspiciously resemble letters with similar sound values from alphabets used in the Alpine region in the last centuries BC, alphabets which are all derived from the northern Etruscan alphabet; however, again, there is no derivation so straightforward as to convince most scholars.
The angular shapes of the runes, presumably an adaptation to the incision in wood or metal, are not a Germanic innovation, but a property that is shared with other early alphabets, including the Old Italic ones (compare, for example, the Duenos inscription). The 4th century BC Negau helmet B inscription features a Germanic name, Harigastiz, in a North Etruscan alphabet, and may be a testimony of the earliest contact of Germanic speakers with alphabetic writing. Similarly, the Meldorf inscription of 50 AD may qualify as "proto-runic" use of the Latin alphabet by Germanic speakers. The Rhaetic "alphabet of Bolzano" in particular seems to fit the letter shapes well.. The spearhead of Kovel, dated to 200 AD, sometimes advanced as evidence of a peculiar Gothic variant of the runic alphabet, bears an inscription tilarids that may in fact be in an Old Italic rather than a runic alphabet, running right to left with a T and a D closer to the Latin or Etruscan than to the Bolzano or runic alphabets. Perhaps an "eclectic" approach can yield the best results for the explanation of the origin of the runes: most shapes of the letters can be accounted for when deriving them from several distinct North Italic writing systems: The p rune has a parallel in the Camunic alphabet, while it has been argued that d derives from the shape of the letter san (= ś) in Lepontic, where it seems to represent the sound /d/.
The g, a, f, i, t, m and l runes show no variation, and are generally accepted as identical to the Old Italic or Latin letters X, A, F, I, T, M and L, respectively. There is also wide agreement that the u, r, k, h, s, b and o runes respectively correspond directly to V, R, C, H, S, B and O.
The remaining ten runes of uncertain derivation may either be original innovations, or adaptions of otherwise unneeded Latin letters of the classical Latin alphabet (1st century, ignoring marginalized K). There are conflicting scholarly opinions regarding them:
ᛖ may be from E. ᚾ may be from Raetic N. ᚦ may be from Latin D or from Raetic Θ. ᚹ may be from Q, from Latin P, or from Raetic W. ᛇ may be from Latin Z, from Latin Y, or from Raetic E. ᛉ may be from Raetic Z, from Latin Y, or from Etruscan 𐌙. ᛜ may be from Latin Q. ᛃ may be from Latin G. ᛈ may be from Raetic P or may be an original Germanic innovation. ᛞ may be from Raetic D, from Lepontic san (ś), or may be an original Germanic innovation.
Of the 24 runes in the classical futhark row attested from 400 (on the Kylver stone), ï, p and ŋ are unattested in the earliest inscriptions of c. 175 to 400, while e in this early period mostly takes a Π-shape, its M-shape () gaining prevalence only from the 5th century. Similarly, the s rune may have either three () or four () strokes (and more rarely five or more), and only from the 5th century does the variant with three strokes become prevalent.
The "mature" runes of the 6th to 8th centuries tend to have only three directions of strokes, the vertical and two diagonal directions. Early inscriptions also show horizontal strokes: these appear in the case of e (mentioned above), but also in t, l, ŋ and h.
Date and purpose of invention The general agreement dates the creation of the first runic alphabet to roughly the 1st century. Early estimates include the 1st century, and late estimates push the date into the 2nd century. The question is one of estimating the "findless" period separating the script's creation from the Vimose finds of c. 160. If either ï or z indeed derive from Latin Y or respectively Z, as suggested by Odenstedt, the first century BC is ruled out, because these letters were only introduced into the Latin alphabet during the reign of Augustus.
Other scholars are content to assume a findless period of a few decades, pushing the date into the early 2nd century. Pedersen (and with him Odenstedt) suggests a period of development of about a century to account for their assumed derivation of the shapes of þ ᚦ and j ᛃ from Latin D and G.
The invention of the script has been ascribed to a single person or a group of people who had come into contact with Roman culture, maybe as mercenaries in the Roman army, or as merchants. The script was clearly designed for epigraphic purposes, but opinions differ in stressing either magical, practical or simply playful (graffiti) aspects. concludes that in its earliest stage, the runic script was an "artificial, playful, not really needed imitation of the Roman script", much like the Germanic bracteates were directly influenced by Roman currency, a view that is accepted by in the light of the very primitive nature of the earliest (2nd to 4th century) inscription corpus.
Rune names Each rune most probably had a name, chosen to represent the sound of the rune itself according to the principle of acrophony.
The Old English names of all 24 runes of the Elder Futhark, along with five names of runes unique to the Anglo-Saxon runes, are preserved in the Old English rune poem, compiled in the 7th century. These names are in good agreement with medieval Scandinavian records of the names of the 16 Younger Futhark runes, and to some extent also with those of the letters of the Gothic alphabet (recorded by Alcuin in the 9th century). Therefore, it is assumed that the names go back to the Elder Futhark period, at least to the 5th century. There is no positive evidence that the full row of 24 runes had been completed before the end of the 4th century, but it is likely that at least some runes had their name before that time.
This concerns primarily the runes used magically, especially the Teiwaz and Ansuz runes, which are taken to symbolize or invoke deities in sequences such as that on the Lindholm amulet (3rd or 4th century).
Reconstructed names in Common Germanic can easily be given for most runes. Exceptions are the þ rune (which is given different names in Anglo-Saxon, Gothic and Scandinavian traditions) and the z rune (whose original name is unknown, and preserved only in corrupted form from Old English tradition). The 24 Elder Futhark runes are:
Each rune derived its sound from the first phoneme of the rune's respective name, with the exception of Ingwaz and Algiz: the Proto-Germanic z sound of the Algiz rune never occurred in a word-initial position. The phoneme acquired an r-like quality in Proto-Norse, usually transliterated with ʀ, and finally merged with r in Icelandic, rendering the rune superfluous as a letter. Similarly, the ng-sound of the Ingwaz rune does not occur word-initially. The names come from the vocabulary of daily life and mythology, some trivial, some beneficent and some inauspicious: Mythology: Tiwaz, Thurisaz, Ingwaz, God, Man, Sun. Nature and environment: Sun, day, year, hail, ice, lake, water, birch, yew, pear, elk, aurochs. Daily life and human condition: Man, need/constraint, wealth/cattle, horse, estate/inheritance, slag/protection from evil, ride/journey, year/harvest, gift, joy, need, ulcer/illness.
IPA vowels and consonants
The following charts show the probable sound values of each rune based upon Proto-Germanic phonology.
ConsonantsLabialDentalAlveolarPalatalVelarNasalᛗ /m/ᚾ /n/ᛜ /ŋ/Plosiveᛈ /p/, ᛒ /b/ᛏ /t/, ᛞ /d/ᚲ /k/, ᚷ /g/Fricativeᚠ /ɸ/, ᛒ /β/ᚦ /θ/, ᛞ /ð/ᛊ ᛋ /s/, ᛉ /z/ᚺ ᚻ /x/, ᚷ /ɣ/Approximantᛚ /l/ᛃ /j/ᚹ /w/Trillᚱ /r/
VowelsFrontBackCloseᛁ /i/ᚢ /u/Close Midᛖ /e/ᛟ /o/Openᚨ /ɑ/
ᛇ has been excluded from the table because what its sound might have been is highly disputed. It may have been a diphthong, or it may have been a monophthong falling somewhere within the range of [ɪ] to [æ]. The only certain fact is that it represented a front vowel.
Inscription corpus
Old Futhark inscriptions were found on artifacts scattered between the Carpathians and Lappland, with the highest concentration in Denmark. They are usually short inscriptions on jewelry (bracteates, fibulae, belt buckles), utensils (combs, spinning whorls) or weapons (lance tips, seaxes) and were mostly found in graves or bogs.
Scandinavian inscriptions