This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Runes article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Template:Vital article Ancient Germanic studies: Runes B‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Germanic studies articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Germanic studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Germanic studiesTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Germanic studiesAncient Germanic studies articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Runes work group. Norse history and culture B‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the North Germanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Writing systems B‑class Mid‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Sweden B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Runes is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 26, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

This page is not a forum for general discussion about uncited theories on the runic alphabet. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about uncited theories on the runic alphabet at the Reference desk.

Runes and Nazism have any relationship? I think I saw this in a doc ... This here: goo.gl/MKo4ec Did Hitler want to take ownership of the ancient power of the runes? Can anyone help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodrigoablima (talk • contribs) 01:18, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are both German....119.92.93.84 (talk) 13:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The runes are not just German. But the Nazis tried to take advantage of popular cultural revivals like Wagner's Odinistic operas and runic symbolism — the same way American politicians have long tried to take advantage of cowboy symbolism — e.g. the SS used double-Sig runes as their logo on lapels etc... the rune-name "Sig" is as given in Guido von List's Armanen runes, the version popular in Nazi occultism. The Nazi version of the swastika itself (right-facing and diagonal rather than square) makes it a bind rune of Sig which is a pun for Sieg (victory); as Hitler himself said of his design for his Party's flag, "the swastika (represents) the mission of the struggle for the victory of the Aryan man...." Swastika#Use in Nazism – _•Raven  ^.talk 04:19, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A stupid suggestion. If so, then also Latin letters would be Nazism. Hitler, Goebbels and Göring etc all read and wrote Latin letters. After the Black Death, the last usage of runes vanished. Boeing720 (talk) 20:25, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They sure look like runes, and they are described in literature as 'runiform'. So they should be included in the article in some way. Y-barton (talk) 21:10, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds very likely. Runes was used in central Europe too, but was replaced with latin letters earlier than was the case in Scandinavia. Boeing720 (talk) 20:22, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes the letters of angular scripts are called runes because they look like runes, but in a narrow, scholarly sense they're not runes. Hurlebatte (talk) 18:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article claims ᛝ shows up in elder futhark. Can someone point to an artefact where this is true? I've seen speculation that ᛝ shows up on one of the Weser Bones, but it's not conclusive. Hurlebatte (talk) 18:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't point to any sources either. The topic was raised over at Elder Futhark too. I just made a note about it over at Template:Elder Futhark, which would be the proper place to deal with it. --CoreGoon (talk) 09:46, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some additions were recently added to the see also section that I reverted per WP:BRD. The IP's response to that was vague so I wanted to start a discussion about this. MOS:SEEALSO says Links in this section should be relevant and limited to a reasonable number. The first two links, Old Turkic script and Old Hungarian script make sense given that they are currently not incorporated in a better place. The rest of the links, however, are not relevant enough to warrant inclusion in a limited and reasonable list of relevant articles. What does Hunnic Empire (which redirects to Huns) have to do with Germanic runes? Very little. I don't think these additional links are warranted. - Aoidh (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. By the time the Huns invaded in 375, Scandies had been using runes for over 200 years. Martin Rundkvist (talk) 20:43, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CNN reports that runes dating back to about year 0 have been found. It's not a scholarly source so, so I'm not adding it. But assuming it's true, we should put the earliest runes further back. Herostratus (talk) 09:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The new Norwegian find is from the period AD 150-250. It does not push the starting date of the runes themselves back. But it may be the oldest inscription on a stone known to date. Note that it is not a runestone in the sense of a standing above-ground memorial. It is a slab used to line the inside of a cremation grave pit. Martin Rundkvist (talk) 08:46, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has been proposed in this section that Runes be renamed and moved to Rune. A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use ((subst:requested move)). Do not use ((requested move/dated)) directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

Runes → Rune – Does not meet either of the two requirements of WP:PLURAL. Treetoes023 (talk) 16:56, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. This is the same case as Arabic numeral: one is far more likely to find reference to runes than to “rune”.—Ermenrich (talk) 17:44, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Per WP:NATURALNESS, like Chinese characters. Rreagan007 (talk) 17:49, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Pretty sure this qualifies as an article on groups or classes of specific things as the runes are collectively treated together here. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 05:44, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, even per common sense. Drmies (talk) 17:21, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Meets the first exception of WP:PLURAL. The subject is not about a rune, it is about the grouping called runes. - Aoidh (talk) 17:48, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]