| Abstract: | Historiographically, the main tradition of interpreting the Old Germanic bracteates has been that developed by Karl Hauck in the late 1960s. Much contested by critics, Hauck's bracteate iconology has also influenced the way the runic legends that appear on the golden amulets are understood in much continental scholarship. This paper presents an alternative interpretation of such testimonies of early Nordic language based on a less‐ambitious approach to the decoration and associated epigraphy of the controversial migration‐period finds, grounding its analysis in a more explicitly theorized linguistic and semiotic hermeneutics. |
