Runisch lguskaþi mit Personen- statt Bildbezug

Abstract The interpretation of lguskaþi as ‘Hirschschädigung’, i.e. a kind of comment on the sketch of a large dog or wolf attacking a stag, is improbable for several reasons. More probable is the interpretation as the name of a person, whether the maker of the footstool or its owner. The emendation of lgu- to lagu- is better than to * algi- ‘elk’, which involves a postulated change of * -i- > -u- . The second element -skaþi does not have to go back to an s- stem: a genuine i -stem and a nomen agentis are both possible. Then the meaning would be ‘sea-warrior’, not an inappropiate name for a man living along the coast and buried in a dugout. Another possibility would be a fourth mistake by the carver, omitting a final -n : with this we would arrive at a dative -in as in Old High German of the attested n -stem meaning ‘destroyer’. The second part of this name would then correspond Old English sæ-scaþa , translating ‘piraticus’.