the date of any one event. Nor could the inscriptions, adds he, afford greater assistance to that historian; they contain very few matters of importance, they are for the most part eaten away with time, and are very difficult to understand[1]. With regard to the Icelandic chronicles, Torfæus thinks that they might have been of great use to Saxo, had he often consulted them; but this, notwithstanding his assertions, does not sufficiently appear, since they rarely agree with his relations. Finally, the recitals of archbishop Absalon are doubtless of great weight for the times near to those, in which that learned prelate lived; but we do not see from whence he could have drawn any information of what passed a long time before him. Upon the whole, therefore, Torfæus concludes, with
- ↑ Wormius had read almost all those which are found in Denmark and Norway, as Verelius had also done the greatest part of those which subsisted, in his time, in Sweden. Both of them agree, that they scarce throw any light upon ancient history. To be convinced of this, one need only to examine the copies and explanations they have given of them. See “Olai Wormii Monumenta Runica.” Lib. iv. and "Olai Verelii Runagraphia Scandica antiqua,” &c. ——— Since Verelius’s work, there hath been published a compleat collection of all the inscriptions found in Sweden, by John Goransson; at Stockholm. 1750. Folio.
