Who's in the sarcophagi? Are those Swedish Kings?

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
638
Likes
896
#1
Today I was fortunate enough to run into a bizarre engraving dated mid-17th century. The image pertains to the same 17th century Sweden. While the location is definitely correct, I have a few doubts as to whether we had any swedes in Sweden prior to an unknown 16th-17th century date. I could be off on time by a century or two here, so it could be a bit earlier.

The below image (17th century book) depicts two sarcophagi with what I assume are two Kings of Sweden:
  • Rex Magnus Ladulåås - King Magnus III (Swedish: Magnus Birgersson/Magnus Ladulås; 1240 – 18 Dec 1290) was King of Sweden from 1275 until his death in 1290.
  • Rex Carolus Canuti - Charles VIII of Sweden (1408 Uppsala - 1470 Stockholm, in reality Charles II), Charles I of Norway, also Carl (Swedish: Karl Knutsson), was king of Sweden (1448–1457, 1464–1465 and from 1467 to his death in 1470) and king of Norway (1449–1450).
Note: Carolus Canuti - I am not 100% certain that he is Charles VIII. Google research suggested that it is him.

Basically we have two Kings:
  • Magnus III (1240 - 1290)
  • Charles VIII (1408 - 1470) - this one is somehow Charles II in reality. Go figure... I guess we have five - six made Kings of Sweden...
Anyways, below are the images. The description states that #1 and #2 are the above two kings. But if you look at the head of the sarcophagi, you can see two totally different names. They look like Jilius/Julius Eric Ixt/i and Res Qui er Hur. I can not really make out what it says.
  1. Assuming that those are names, what does this image has to do with the above named Swedish Kings?
  2. Does the size of the sarcophagi look weird to anyone?
  3. Were the inscriptions changed? Photos at the very bottom demonstrate somewhat different text lines.
  4. Latin was the language of choice I guess.

rex.png rex2.png
rex3.png
Both of these sarcophagi still exist. They are located at the Riddarholm Church in Sweden.

Rex_Sweden_6.jpg Rex_Sweden_1.jpg Rex_Sweden_2.jpg Rex_Sweden_3.jpg Rex_Sweden_4.jpg Rex_Sweden_5.jpg

* * *

Little bonus: 17th century Sweden L&G

Ancient_Sweden_1.png Ancient_Sweden_2.png Ancient_Sweden_3.png Ancient_Sweden_4.png
 

humanoidlord

Active member
Messages
331
Likes
157
#2
i can see their names in a inscription below the one you noticed, that size however is definitely anomalous though
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
638
Likes
896
#3
i can see their names in a inscription below the one you noticed, that size however is definitely anomalous though
I’m talking about the short side of the rectangle next to their heads. The drawing is missing words and appears to provide different names, may be.
 

CyborgNinja

Active member
Messages
80
Likes
168
#4
Does the size of the sarcophagi look weird to anyone?
Either the engraver messed up the scale, the sarcophagi have been replaced or those people in the engraving are tiny. Its interesting to note that some of the plaques are missing from the base of the sarcophagi and the inscriptions on the floor seen in the earlier image have been completely polished clean. Also Latin seems to have been the language of Tartaria. Greek, Hebrew, Roman latin and Cyrillic are basically all the same thing.
 

Onijunbei

New member
Messages
10
Likes
19
#6
Either the engraver messed up the scale, the sarcophagi have been replaced or those people in the engraving are tiny. Its interesting to note that some of the plaques are missing from the base of the sarcophagi and the inscriptions on the floor seen in the earlier image have been completely polished clean. Also Latin seems to have been the language of Tartaria. Greek, Hebrew, Roman latin and Cyrillic are basically all the same thing.
I'll throw you a curveball. Neo Latin is all Latin ever written. It is said to have been developed in the 3-4 hundreds A. D. (or if going off of fomenkos and Newearths research 1300-1400 A. D. because a Thousand years was just added to the time line). The purpose for creating the new language was so that people could be forced to write in it and give an excuse to translate most written works into the new language... Providing an opportunity to remove or rewrite entire words, lines, paragraphs, and pages. And then for some strange reason lots of fires occurred at lots of major libraries around the world conveniently destroying all the old texts...
 

Onijunbei

New member
Messages
10
Likes
19
#8
Well... Yes historical timelines are all messed up but the steam engine was invented (allegedly) in 1776. And with the advent of mail, newspapers, universities, printing presses... It wouldn't take very long to get to pneumatic principles of the late 1800s and the diesel engine, so on and so forth...remember that its the energy barrons that buried technology and suppressed new advancements...
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
638
Likes
896
#9
What's funny about the steam powered systems, their coefficient of efficiency somewhere around 55-65%, while the best of the internal combustion engines produce around 34%.

My question would be in reference to what fuel they used to power their steam engines in the 19th century. Somehow it does not look like coal, or firewood.

Steam_Tricycle_1888.jpg
 
Top