After the Kensington Rune Stone was first discovered, the language on the stone was thought to be an odd mixture of Old Swedish, Norwegian, and English. Indeed the greatest argument against the stone has always been that some of the linguistic and runelogical aspects of the stone were not in keeping with what has been known of 14th century Swedish. As our knowledge of the linguistics of the era have grown over the past century, so have many of the arguments against the stone shrunk. Experts such as S.N.Hagen, Thalbitzer, and Hall have over the years increased our knowledge of the linguistics of the period through their examinations of the Runestone.
In 1987/8, Dr. Richard Nielsen made the most thourough modern examination of the stone, and his articles were printed over several volumes of the Epigraphical Society Occasional Papers. Based on these studies, the linguistics of the stone seem to become a proof of its authenticity, rather than a liability. It is from these articles I have introduced the evidence below.
