The point of view of the present study presupposes that OE runes—in their genesis a product of pagan Germanic times, replete with established phonetic and lexical levels of meaning—ought to be considered from the further perspective of their literal configuration as found in MSS, as well as in artifacts. Specifically, like the common cross-marks or other notae often found in medieval MSS, runes also may function as visual pointers to significant passages in a poetical text, most evident, for example, in the Cynewulfian signatures. Further, individual \"cruciform\" runes, viewed graphically in relation to their literary context, may serve either to reinforce existing interpretations or to point old views in new directions. That is, the form of a rune, especially a \"cruciform\" rune, may serve to give special symbolic force to the passage or poem which contains it, and runes may also serve to evoke generally the ethos of an older, heroic age. In hypothesizing the cruciform potential of certain OE runes in particular contexts, then, it is not to be inferred that the traditional lexical and/or phonetic functions of the runes are to be dismissed, but rather that these common functions are only part of the symbolic dimensions of the runic ideographs.
","abstract_html":"<p>The point of view of the present study presupposes that OE runes—in their genesis a product of pagan Germanic times, replete with established phonetic and lexical levels of meaning—ought to be considered from the further perspective of their literal configuration as found in MSS, as well as in artifacts. Specifically, like the common cross-marks or other notae often found in medieval MSS, runes also may function as visual pointers to significant passages in a poetical text, most evident, for example, in the Cynewulfian signatures. Further, individual "cruciform" runes, viewed graphically in relation to their literary context, may serve either to reinforce existing interpretations or to point old views in new directions. That is, the form of a rune, especially a "cruciform" rune, may serve to give special symbolic force to the passage or poem which contains it, and runes may also serve to evoke generally the ethos of an older, heroic age. In hypothesizing the cruciform potential of certain OE runes in particular contexts, then, it is not to be inferred that the traditional lexical and/or phonetic functions of the runes are to be dismissed, but rather that these common functions are only part of the symbolic dimensions of the runic ideographs.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Meling, Kjell"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"English, General Literature, and Rhetoric","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Bernard F. Huppé","Mario A. Di Cesare","Frederick Jones"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1972,"date_issued":"1972-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"1972-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:10:16Z","subjects":["Runes","Criticism and interpretation","Crosses","Manuscripts","English (Old)"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://orb.binghamton.edu/dissertation_and_theses/180","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Bernard F. Huppé","Mario A. Di Cesare","Frederick Jones"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Meling, Kjell"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["English, General Literature, and Rhetoric"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Runes","Criticism and interpretation","Crosses","Manuscripts","English (Old)"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://orb.binghamton.edu/dissertation_and_theses/180"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The point of view of the present study presupposes that OE runes—in their genesis a product of pagan Germanic times, replete with established phonetic and lexical levels of meaning—ought to be considered from the further perspective of their literal configuration as found in MSS, as well as in artifacts. Specifically, like the common cross-marks or other notae often found in medieval MSS, runes also may function as visual pointers to significant passages in a poetical text, most evident, for example, in the Cynewulfian signatures. Further, individual \"cruciform\" runes, viewed graphically in relation to their literary context, may serve either to reinforce existing interpretations or to point old views in new directions. That is, the form of a rune, especially a \"cruciform\" rune, may serve to give special symbolic force to the passage or poem which contains it, and runes may also serve to evoke generally the ethos of an older, heroic age. In hypothesizing the cruciform potential of certain OE runes in particular contexts, then, it is not to be inferred that the traditional lexical and/or phonetic functions of the runes are to be dismissed, but rather that these common functions are only part of the symbolic dimensions of the runic ideographs.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Cruciform runes in the manuscripts of some Old English poems"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Bernard F. Huppé","Mario A. Di Cesare","Frederick Jones"],"dc:creator":["Meling, Kjell"],"dc:description.abstract":["The point of view of the present study presupposes that OE runes—in their genesis a product of pagan Germanic times, replete with established phonetic and lexical levels of meaning—ought to be considered from the further perspective of their literal configuration as found in MSS, as well as in artifacts. Specifically, like the common cross-marks or other notae often found in medieval MSS, runes also may function as visual pointers to significant passages in a poetical text, most evident, for example, in the Cynewulfian signatures. Further, individual \"cruciform\" runes, viewed graphically in relation to their literary context, may serve either to reinforce existing interpretations or to point old views in new directions. That is, the form of a rune, especially a \"cruciform\" rune, may serve to give special symbolic force to the passage or poem which contains it, and runes may also serve to evoke generally the ethos of an older, heroic age. In hypothesizing the cruciform potential of certain OE runes in particular contexts, then, it is not to be inferred that the traditional lexical and/or phonetic functions of the runes are to be dismissed, but rather that these common functions are only part of the symbolic dimensions of the runic ideographs.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://orb.binghamton.edu/dissertation_and_theses/180"],"dc:subject":["Runes","Criticism and interpretation","Crosses","Manuscripts","English (Old)"],"dc:title":["Cruciform runes in the manuscripts of some Old English poems"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["English, General Literature, and Rhetoric"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:10:16Z"}