Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson - 31st Great Grandfather

Google is also better than Geni at covering minor variations of common names, such as Larsen <-> Larssen. I've used it often when I'm not sure of the spelling.

And it's faster than Geni's search function.

Sigurd Rise Haraldsson is my 27th great grand father apparently...so his extent is in North Dakota, Minnesota, and Chicago!! Still completing the date run but our lineage is through Sigurd Halvdansson and his daughter Ingrid...

He's in my ancestry too by marriage. My direct ancestor's daughter married Ragnar's grandson Gorm, the son of Sigurd. Add Virginia and Florida to your list.

He is my 32nd Great Grandfather. Hello my relatives!

My 31st Great Grandfather...with all those kids we have a large hall of Kinsfoll!

Ragnar 'Lodbrok' Sigurdsson King of Denmark and Norway

Jim Hartman, Philip Babin and Private I'm sorry to inform you, but at the moment all of ou are wrong and no matter what the lineage Geni tells you, there is no provable path back to Ragnar. The main problem being that the figure Ragnar is nor a real historical person, but comprised of several persons using similar names and living during a 100 years period.

When climing you are a descendant of Ragnar you are in fact claming you are a descendant of a fictional person.

I like my ancestry to be as correct as possible, and I presume you would like your ancestry to be correct to. Then you should'nt call Ragnar your ancestor, because you have no chance to prove that claim. And you would like your ancestry to be as correct as possible, wouldn't you?

Damn!!! There goes my plans to raid Green Bay and justify it on the basis of my right through a television program... Well back to reality....

Guess that means Valhalla is out too

Valhalla will always be there, but good luck finding a road map thats properly sourced.

The signs are there if you know how to look for them.

http://cloud.graphicleftovers.com/15342/99500/99500_125.jpg

There are even other signs in Norway: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rriSNjEVmFQ

Stephen Baldwin is for me a self proclaimed "God" in genealogy - the man who hasn't even read the ancient manuscripts at first hand .. and doesn't even answer inquiries from "real and genuine" genealogists when he is asked to justify his unsupported theories - and above all - inform about the sources he relies on and bases his "theories" on...

Perhaps you mean Stewart Baldwin. Except that he's very knowledgeable about this area, so perhaps not.

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/1996-12/...

I know this is probably a silly question but can someone save me the effort of having to research the answer myself please.

Is Ragnar usually considered part of the Yngling dynasty?

Alex - It depends on how you view it. If as some suggest, Ragnar is not a real person, but a conglomeration of myths/legends - the point is null and he's not part of any dynasty. If you take Ragnar to be an actual person then he fits in the Yngling side of things but he is of the house of Munso

His father...(if he is real) was Sigurd Hring and depending on which Saga you attend to, Hring's father was Randaver. So when you start getting back to that era, there is a lot of saga and legend telling you have to sort through to determine what might/may be true or not.

Thanks Jim.

I have been thinking about Ragnar's birth field which currently displays as "Unknown" (I have changed it from "Ukendt").

I suggest it be changed to:

"Scandinavia - Denmark, Sweden, Norway, literary creation? In any case Ragnar's origins are Scandinavian."

It sort of covers all bases without inventing anything and gives more detail than "unknown" implies.

I like the idea but maybe just "Scandinavia".

It's long been a "best practice" for medieval nobility to identify the country or region of origin rather than trying to guess at a specific place.

Agree with Justin - place fields are for places, explanations belong in the About Me. "Scandinavia" is more likely to be true than anything else.

I've just merged about 10 Ragnar profiles into a single tree and will be merging into the MP tree over the next few days creating data conflicts and cleaning up as i go.

Starting with Aslaug Sigurd(snake-eye)sdotter, close to 1000 profiles involved so may take a while and bound to make a mistake at some point :)

I nominate Alex for the Sisyphus award of the month!

Truly, Alex's perseverance and courage are awesome.

Also, I like the idea of having a Sisyphus award.

Well it's certainly preferable to the Syphilis award, but in all seriousness I believe that every small step gets us that tiny bit closer to our goal... whatever that is. Plus i think i have OCD

Well, count me amongst the disillusioned Geni users after reading Remi's March 13 comment. Although I recognize that the TV series had fictionalized much of Ragnar's life, I did not think that Geni dealt in assigning fictional characters to roles as actual ancestors. Does this mean then that Rollo as the progenitor of the Ducs of Normandy is also fictional? If Ragnar in the Geni ancestry scheme is ficitional, shouldn't that line be removed from Geni? Just saying . . . or asking? And, yes, I am a newbie to the whole Geni matching process.

Hi Chuck, don't be too sad. Rollo was really the founder of the Norman adventure (but no one really knows who he was, except that he certainly was not Ragnars brother!)

The show is great but it's just a show. Add to that the stories are all over a thousand years old and none of the contemporary written records are from particularly knowledgeable sources.

Read the ABout section (at the bottom of Ragnar's profile page) for a good overview, if i do say so myself. Second port of call read this article https://media.geni.com/p13/5a/df/7b/21/5344483b542dc249/ragnar_orig...

Or just keep reading through this thread, after 24 pages there wont be many topics regarding Ragnar that you wont be aware of.

I came across an interesting theory today that "Boneless" is a reference to a ghost, as in Ivar could attack without warning then disappear without trace, like a ghost! Nothing to do with being a cripple, one of several alternate theories that all make a lot more sense than a viking warrior with no legs.

OK, here is one from my "Too Hard" basket.

Hringer, King of Östergötland is a duplicate of Hringer, King of Östergötland but i do not want to merge as the main tree at this point disappears into heavenly beings while the duplicate has many ancestors.

"I came across an interesting theory today that "Boneless" is a reference to a ghost"

Actually, we still, some of us, use the phrase "boneless", meaning that someone are extremely agile, lithesome, often in some meta phrase with respect to "have no bones in the body". Another similar remain, are the word, "lealös", (cf. ben-lös), meaning; lithesome, flabby, limp, exact word for word, are "lax joints".

If someone derived boneless, into silent hunter, into ghost, it would actually make some sense, to be able to sneak up on someone without any sounds, just as this one were floating forward without legs, like a ghost, boneless.

There is also a theory that his nickname was bawdy, as Norse nicknames sometimes are. Perhaps from his failure to perform on some significant occasion. If so, the other stories are later attempts to rehabilitate his reputation.

When i read the "cripple" explanation there is only one image that springs to my mind: http://embedded.eecs.berkeley.edu/Alumni/mehrotra/images/vitalstati...

He needed better PR people!