Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson - 31st Great Grandfather

Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson is Knut Gundersen's 30th great grandfather!

Ser ut for at vi er noen gener sammen. Men jeg lurer nå på når vi blir invitert til fest på slottet. Ha,ha...............

Først må vi vel finne ut av hvor slottet er ....... :-)

Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson is your 37th great grandfather.
You
→ Fernando Rojas Garmendia
your father → Esther Garmendia Anzola
his mother → Rita Anzola Yépez
her mother → Pompeyo Anzola Oropeza
her father → Wenceslaa Oropeza del Castillo
his mother → Maria Josefa Pérez del Castillo Mendoza
her mother → María Josefa de Mendoza González
her mother → Francisco Juan de Mendoza y Yépez
her father → Baltazar de Mendoza y Colmenares
his father → Juana de Colmenares y Bethéncourt
his mother → Juan de Colmenares y Bethéncourt
her father → Juana de Bethéncourt y Peraza
his mother → Pedro de Alarcón y Bethéncourt
her father → Argenta de Franchi y Bethencourt
his mother → Inés de Cardona
her mother → María de Franchi Luzardo
her mother → María de Cabrera Solier y Dumpiérrez
her mother → Alonso de Cabrera Solier, Conquistador
her father → Alonso de Cabrera
his father → Fernando Díaz de Cabrera, Sexto Señor de la Torre de Arias Cabrera
his father → Violante Enríquez de Castilla
his mother → Juan Enríquez, Alguacil Mayor
her father → Enrique Enríquez Pecha
his father → Enrique el Senador, infante de Castilla
his father → Beatriz de Suabia, reina consorte de Castilla y León
his mother → Philipp von Hohenstaufen, Herzog von Schwaben, Deutscher König
her father → Frederick I Barbarossa, Holy Roman Emperor
his father → Judith, Prinzessin von Bayern
his mother → Wulfhilda - Ulfhilda Billung, Prinzessin von Sachsen
her mother → Magnus Billung, Herzog von Sachsen
her father → Ulvhild (Wulfhild) av Norge Olavsdottir, Herzogin von Sachsen
his mother → Olav II «The Saint / Digre» Haraldsson, King of Norway
her father → Åsta (Astrid) Gudbrandsdotter
his mother → Ulfhild (Gunhild) Thorsdatter
her mother → Thora Audundsottir
her mother → Auðun skökull Bjarnarson, (Skogul)
her father → Bjørn Hunda-Steinarsson
his father → Ålov/Alof Ragnarsdottir
his mother → Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson
her father

Just question:

her father → Frederick I Barbarossa, Holy Roman Emperor
his father → Judith, Prinzessin von Bayern
his mother → Wulfhilda - Ulfhilda Billung, Prinzessin von Sachsen
her mother → Magnus Billung, Herzog von Sachsen
her father → Ulvhild (Wulfhild) av Norge Olavsdottir, Herzogin von Sachsen
his mother → Olav II «The Saint / Digre» Haraldsson, King of Norway

Is the link between Frederick Barbarossa and Olav Digre regarded as well documented?

Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdlssonis my - 31st Great Grandfather

Grethe Ekanger, your line back to Ragnar has some problems here: NN Eriksdatter Galle. The sources for this person isn't good enough to say that this person has existed. You can read about the doubt in her supposed husbands profile: Kjetil Hávardsson Galle

You should try to look for better sources and if it is impossible to find better sources, then the link between NN Eriksdatter Galle and her supposed parents should be severed and the names Eriksdatter Galle should be removed from this profile and written as a possibility in the About me section instead.

Merci beaucoup!

Bare hyggelig, Grethe Ekanger!

Remi,
you mean to tell me these curators made this stuff up
Go troll another site

Trolls, although a big part of Norwegian folklore, are impossible to track genealogically, therefore you (hopefully) won't see any trolls on Geni, Dennis. I'm staying here trying to sort the facts out, since I don't like genealogical trees full of fantasies, hearsay, fiction and disproved facts.

Dennis, Remi is right. The lines you find on Geni are only as good as the information entered by users, then corrected by other users. There hasn't been nearly enough time for all the questionable lines to be cleaned up. Remi is actually one of the curators working very hard to help users do the cleanup!

This is becoming interesting - some guy in Norway has the knowledge over hundreds of years of info's - and plays God on Geni... What a load of crap as the kids say.

Sorry - but I am not going to change my hundreds of years old pedigree for this crap you are trying to convince - whom I don't know that you have the right to play some supernatural genealogist Remi. Where is your proof.

And @Dennis maye - if you can trace your ancestry back to the middle ages - you can for sure believe it to be the truth - until proven otherwise by schience - not this Remi Tryggve Pedersen.

Anna darlin', that chip on your shoulder looks to be the size of a drakkar. Isn't it a bit heavy?

Legends have to start somewhere, but by the time the poets have been at work for a few hundred years, the actual person will be pretty hard to recognize under all their embroidery.

As for tracing one's ancestry back to the middle ages - well, yes and no. There are boatloads of bogus pedigrees out there, so you have to be very, very discriminating and try to verify with as many primary documents as you can find. Sometimes you find a lovely theory exploded by ugly facts - too bad, so sad, try again.

@Maven B. Helms
Fact one: The sons of Ragnar are "HISTORICAL"... which means they existed.

Fact two: They must have had a father - or are you insisting on that they just surfaced out of what???

Fact three: Since the sons of Ragnar Lodbrok existed - they must have had a father and a mother to conceive them - therefore - Ragnar existed - but the LEGENDS around him are disputable.

Fact three: As for tracing ancestry back to the middle ages - YES I CAN - why - because my ancestors kept their pedigree "up to date" - why? - Because the law's here in Iceland insisted on so. People had to know at least 8 generations of ancestors. Why did they have to do this - because the social security system that existed here.

Fact four: All the pedigree tables here in Iceland that trace our ancestry back to the middle ages have gone through thorough research of scholars and therefore are considered reliable. Further more - the DNA tests up til today are constantly establishing the connection with the manuscripts.

Is your background scholarly or do you have any experience in genealogy other than here on Geni?

Anna, I agree with you about Ragnar Lodbrok but Remi's point was something else. Coming down the line from Ragnar there is a problem with NN Eriksdatter Galle. If there is no good evidence for her then this is not a good line to Ragnar.

Remi and Maven are both skilled genealogists. I don't always agree with them, but I value their opinions.

What Justin said - one bad link can spoil a whole line. (Upstream of it may be OK, downstream of it may be OK, but the "link" itself doesn't really exist.)

Take Nicholas Wyatt, Gent. for instance - there's one clear and one doubtful line of descent FROM him, and a clear line of descent TO Rev. Haute Wyatt in the generation just before him.

BUT - there is absolutely zero evidence that he is any kind of son of Rev. Haute Wyatt. What there is, is an awful lot of wishful thinking and forced splicing.

This annoys me, because it spoils a lot of my personal genealogy. But the fact appears to be, Nicholas Wyatt (arrived Anne Arundel 1649) is "antecedents unknown", like way too many other early Anne Arundel colonists. (Personally I suspect he may belong to the Devonshire Wyatt family - relationship to the Haute Wyatt line unproven - that produced a Nicholas every other generation or so. But there's no hard evidence for that either.)

PS: Anna, if you "lose" that attitude, you'll find people much more helpful.

Maven, Anna is one of our Geni scholars. You two should stop arguing and get to know each other.

Private User in practice it's a matter of phrasing more than what I'd do on the tree, but....

The fact we have is that the stories of Ragnar Lodbrok and his sons exist.
The simplest (to my mind) theory to explain those stories is that Ragnar Lodbrok and his sons existed.

One possible explanation for some inconsistencies in the stories is that the storytellers were talking about multiple people (possibly all named Ragnar), and got them confused. This means some stories have errors.

I've found many sagas consistent for lots of people - but Laxdala Saga doesn't agree with Eyrbyggja saga and Landnamabok about the father of Ingjald the White (Ingjald "The White" Helgasson, Petty King Of Ireland) - so sometimes, we have to choose.

The call of the genealogist shouldn't be "I know the truth", it should be "Let's share sources".

@"Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson is my 31st. Great Grandfather in direct blood line too. Nice to meet too many cousins and relatives.

Best regards,

Sylvia

Private User

Fact one: Wrong! The sons of Ragnar are not historical, they belong to the sagaliterature which is not considered historical, that's why they are called sagas.

Fact two: Correct, they must have had a father, but the different sagas doesn't prove which of the possible men living at that time it was. Just stating that it was this conglomerate of a person called Ragnar Lodbrok, without any form of another proof.

Fact three (1): We are not sure of the existens these sons of Ragnar, are we? And they do not prove that Ragnar Lodbrok existed, since it is not proven that he (one or more persons by this name) have existed, the only thing we is, as yoy say, the sagas and legends, and they do not make any genealogical or historical proof of his existence.

Fact Three (2): For the Icelandic people it is possible for some of them to prove ancestry back to the middle ages (wich by the way ended around 1536). For the rest of Scandinavia it is almost impossible to prove anything back to the middle ages unless you are Lucky enough to get into the upper class during the 17th century, or atleast during the 16th century. If you haven't found nobility or priests before this time in Your ancestry, you can almost forget to get into the middle ages.

Fact four: You are probably correct about this, except finding a DNA that will prove anything back to Ragnar Lodbrok or his sons will be impossible.

When it comes to Ragnar Lodbrok it will all depend on what you believe in, since it is not possible to prove anything. You belive the sagas are true, and I believe they are good stories of several different persons that lived around that time, but the names and facts are part hearsay, part fiction, part remnants of stories told through the ages and part found in other written stories, all added together to tell the story of Ragnar. Good story, but without provable genealogies.

Remember, in genealogy, we need to prove the links between people, not just take somebodys unsourced story, or familytree, as the truth. If we are not able to prove the links to some degree, then our ancestry ends there, and we should not continue with maybes or wishful thinking, that belongs in our work in progress and not in our published trees.

Remi is spot on here. The drawback with Geni is that it does not separate between proven geanology and other. We should have statuses like "in progress", "disputed", "fictional" etc. so that we can really distinguish the true bloodlines from what clearly are insufficient proof.

We end up with silly discussions like this and the average Joe coming on here believing that he's linked to all kind of royals and characters. It ruins the map for those of us who are concerned about real proof in each link and not interested in this fantasy world.

It's all fun of course to see connections based on the saga's, but I miss the chance to distinguish fact from fiction. Maybe a solution could be to use moderators to control the main links and demand a certain approval level from a group of users based on their subscription and experience. I think Geni needs to do something to maintain credibility

One point that gets missed by people who are used to doing genealogy by civil registrations and legal records is that the sagas *are* the historical literature of the time. Yes, there is an element of historical romance in some of them but the serious histories intend to be truly histories.

I am not sure if the Sagas as Justin points out is pure fiction, yes the storrieteller have taken some liberties to tell a more interesting storrie to gloriefy the heroes of Sagas.

Ragnar who ever he was or how many persons he is or which Ragnar we have to choose, I am conviencened that the Viking Ragnar has been around and I also think he's sons and daughters mentioned has lived, the challenge as Remi says is to prove the existens of Ragnar and family and put them into the reight context, at the momment it is not possible and therefore the lineage back is for now fiction even though some of the Sagas suggest a bloodline it can't be provede as fact.

In Denmark we lost big part of our writen documents and thereby part of our history and family relations due to the big fire in copenhagen 1728.

The discussion here is clean and nice to follow, with good argument.

Kind regards
Per

@Remi Trygve Pedersen
Fact one: I only have to name one of Ragnars sons – Ivar “The Boneless” – king of Dublin to make my point and prove you incorrect.

Fact two: I for one – believe the sources I have and they are closer to the period this man lived – Adam of Bremen and Saxo Grammaticus along with the Icelandic sources are sufficient sources for me. But that doesn’t mean I believe anything said about Ragnar other than he existed.

Yes Remi – sources on the legends do not agree on “how events played”, but it's enough for me that the sources (one or more) agree on that there was a person and the story is about that person.

Fact three (1): Here is the difference between a scholar and a layman Remi. I hold the stories separate from the characters - and Remi – you seem to mix the legends and the persons together and therefore come to the conclusion that since the legends are disputable – the persons involved in them are fiction also…

But for me - one thing is for sure – there existed a man with the name Ragnar (or similar name) who had at least one son named Ivar “The Boneless” who was king of Dublin. Therefore I can't exclude other things that are said about this man such as his sons or his the women that are attached to his legend.

Fact Three (2): “For some Icelanders”??? Where on earth did you get this info? ALL natives of Iceland who trace their ancestry in Iceland before 1950 can trace their ancestry back to the middle ages and further back to the first settlers of Iceland and further back.

Remember Remi – the first Settlers of Iceland fled from the tyrannical times in Norway and that could be one of the reasons the pedigree’s of Icelanders are so traceable – We left Norway unwillingly and through our pedigree we have kept our connections with our home country…

As I said before – Also - the law’s and the social security system forced the natives to know their parent’s pedigree EIGHT GENERATIONS back and we were always writing down our knowledge – …. long before and after 1536. In fact we here in Iceland are considered one of the leading literary nations of the world of modern times.

Further more - if it hadn’t been for our literary background and culture here in Iceland – the Sagas of Scandinavia would probably not exist.

Fact four: Yes I am correct about the scientific research – and Remi – sorry to disappoint you – my views are that UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE - the sources are to remain unchanged as they are presented before 1950 – unless they have been scientifically proven wrong (Even serious Historians agree with me on this today).

And based on the progress, constant advances and new technologies in most science- and research fields, then someday it will be possible to find out whether genetic testing’s prove the theories on who is a descendant of who. I remind you that this work has already begun many years ago and the results are astonishing – and based on scientific FACTS, not personal “feelings” or the urge to manipulate acknowledged sources just because you or me don’t agree with them.

And yes Remi – one day it will be proven that the group of people around the world that share the same DNA that can be traced back to the man we call Ragnar “Lodbrok” today – just as easily as the DNA tests have proven through DNA tests that the alleged descendants of Rollo share the same DNA.

Remi – again you force beliefs on me that do not have – I have NEVER insisted that I believed the legends in "The Saga’s” – For me it is enough that different sources mention the persons involved - I have however always warned against to change recognized research sources without having any scientific evidence and justification for any changes.

Further more – I sincerely hope that Geni bases their genealogy on scientific research – not what "you or I" want to believe.

But in order to prove the information´s Geni has to base their work on – the sources here on Geni must be as they are generally accepted and presented in modern times in order for Geni to be able to prove or disprove whether they are correct or incorrect.

Remi – one queston to you – can you trace your ancestry back to the middle ages and the sources you are disputing?

There is a suggestion that Hardeknuth worm, was adopted by Guthrum/Gorm den gamle or Gorm den barnløse(Gorm the childless). The father of Hardeknut worm is belivede to be Sigurd Worm(Orm)-i øje(Sigurd Snake in eye).

This Gorm is also called Gorm the Old, but he was before Gorm the old of Jellinge, he was babtiseded in England and had the name Æthelsan when he made peace with king Alfred in 878.

It was not unusual that Kings adopted next of kind or sons of other kings.

Cahllenge: No source avaliable.

The problem of the sagas is not much different from having chronicles from different medieval monasteries. They will have been compiled from information we no longer have. They will be more reliable for recent events but less reliable the further back they go. (How much less is debatable, but we wouldn't trust them to tell us the date of Noah's Flood!) When we have more than one, we can use the points of agreement and disagreement to tell us a lot about their reliability.

There is not a historian living who would throw out either the sagas or chronicles as a source.

Anna wrote: "Further more – I sincerely hope that Geni bases their genealogy on scientific research – not what "you or I" want to believe."

Yes, I sincerely hope so to, and then most of the sagas are out the window because they are not scientific reasearch, so are most of the cronicles when it comes to the stories about events a long time before they were written.

I have 2 proved lines that goes before 1536.

1. The Schjelderup family in Norway, second Bishop to Bergen born approx. 1509 and the names of his parents from Schjelderup, Denmark. This line stops with them in the late 1400'

2. The noble Benkestok family proved by Professional historians and genealogists in Norway by using primary Sources in Diplomatarium Norwegicum back to the late 1200'.

3. A line back to a person named Peter Gudleikson, a Knight and later a Farmer owning much land who lived in the late 1200'. He is mentioned With familyconnections in several documents in Diplomatarium Norwegicum.

Those are the only lines I have into the middle ages, all proved by primary sources. No vikings here at all. And no connection back to any of the kings in the middle ages included the viking time.

That should ofcourse be "... 3 proved lines ..."