Runes represent an early Germanic writing system that was used before the adoption of the Latin alphabet, and was prevalent across Scandinavia and other parts of Northern Europe until the end of the Viking Age. However, while the Vikings used a runic alphabet called younger futhark, earlier examples that predate the emergence of this warrior culture are typically written in older futhark.

In use until around 700 CE, older futhark is something of an enigma, with researchers still unsure exactly where, when, and how the writing system first emerged. Prior to this latest discovery, the oldest known examples were found on a bone comb and an iron knife in Denmark, both of which were dated to the mid-second century CE.

“The development of runic writing (the early Germanic alphabetic script) and the practice of inscribing runes on stone are difficult to trace, particularly as rune-stone inscriptions are rarely found in original and/or datable contexts,” write the authors of a new study. While investigating the archaeological site of Svingerud in Hole, Norway, however, the researchers stumbled upon something that may help to fill in some of the gaps.

Runes and other unidentifiable inscriptions were found on pieces of sandstone in multiple graves at the ancient burial ground. After assembling these fragments, the study authors noticed that several of them fitted together like a jigsaw puzzle, indicating that they were all part of one original slab of stone that was split up and distributed across numerous graves.

Dating the cremated human remains and charcoal in these burials revealed that they belonged to individuals who died during the Roman Iron Age. “The dating frame is relatively wide, but still makes the Hole fragments the earliest known archaeologically dated rune-stone,” write the researchers.

Analyzing the markings on the ancient stone, the authors explain that “some are identifiable as runes; others can be ornamental or imitate and stylise script.” The various fragments feature an array of recognizable and ambiguous markings that may have been made by different people at different times.

One possibility is therefore that the stone was originally used to commemorate a single burial, before later being broken apart so that it could be incorporated into a greater number of separate graves. However, the researchers say that while the stone is clearly associated with burials, it is ultimately “unknown how and why its fragmentation occurred, and when and why the inscriptions were created.”

Commenting on this intriguing find in a statement via email, study author Dr Kristel Zilmer said that “rune-stones likely had both ceremonial and practical intentions.”

“The grave field and the original raised stone suggest a commemorative and dedicatory intent, while subsequent use in a separate burial illuminates later pragmatic and symbolic expressions,” she added.

While the researchers are currently unable to provide firm answers to any of the questions regarding why the stone was broken up or what purpose it was intended to serve, their attempts at deciphering the inscriptions have raised some surprising possibilities. For instance, a series of runes on one of the pieces mentions “idiberug”, which may be the name of a woman.

The same passage also appears to reference the act of rune-carving, and could therefore indicate that the runes were produced by this female scribe. If confirmed, this would represent the earliest known example of runes being inscribed by a woman, though the study authors point out that these conclusions “remain hypothetical at this point.”

“Idiberug may refer to the deceased, the benefactor or someone/something else,” they say.

The study is published in the journal Antiquity.