Well, the origin of runes is a river topic. We have a Greco-Latin version, a North Etruscan version, an Asian version, and even a mythological version headed by Odin. I personally lean towards the North Etruscan version, but I admit that each of these theories has something intriguing in it.

I personally lean towards the North Etruscan version. There are many indications that runes They are derived from a combination of the North Etruscan and Ogami alphabets. Of course, the Greek-Latin version also has its arguments, especially when it comes to the shape of the runes. Well, and let's not forget the mythological version with Odin! I wonder what others think?

The origin of the runes is a mystery shrouded in many mysteries. I also favor the North Etruscan version, although mythology adds an unusual dimension to the runes. Imagine Odin hanging on to Yggdrasil to learn the mystery of the runes.

Well, mythology with mythology, but it should be remembered that futhark is the only runic script accepted by science. All these "angel runes" and other modern inventions are a different tale altogether.

And what do you think about the modern use of runes? Do you rely on ancient texts, or do you use newer interpretations?

I try to combine tradition with modernity. Runes are the basis, but one should not forget that each of us has his own intuition and experience. It is important to approach runes with respect and an open mind.

@Bylica trafiła w sedno! Runy to żywy system, który ewoluuje wraz z nami. Nie bójmy się eksperymentować i odkrywać nowych znaczeń, ale zawsze pamiętajmy o korzeniach.