Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson - 31st Great Grandfather

At least Kristine Torsteinsdotter had two articles in the NST (Norwegian genealogical journal) to point to. Although it would not be the first time a reference was given to something that did not say anything about the subject.... NST is still not open access.

Thats true, I will see if I can find these articles ;)
I also doubt that this Hallkjellsdatter was married to both Brynjulf, Leofwine and Jon. The last one is impossible chronologically.. She would have been born 1030 and Jon 1130.... But the first two need some closure..

Not even Mogens Bugge has mentioned her as wife of Brynjulf, and I have find little mentioning her at all...

The first 20 volumes of NST is possible to buy as CDs: http://www.genealogi.no/nst-cd I have these, but the last CD with number 18 (XVIII) is lost somewhere, so I have to order a new..

31st grandfather. Hello all relatives

Harald Tveit Alvestrand could you do a thorough cleanup of Ragnars links. You know this best and you also believe in it.

As far as I can see there are to many wives, with to many children, like the one Marjo is claiming to be a descendant of.

This area is in dire need of a cleanup so it can conform to what the sources say, and that is a job better suited for you than anyone. And if you don't mind, why don't you ask Susanna about taking over the curatorship of Ragnar, you are allready heavy involved in this, so I think that would be smart. There are so many that want to connect to Ragnar that we need someone with intimate knowledge of what the different sources say to separeate the wheat from the chaff.

Remi Trygve Pedersen I'll add that to my list of Geni tasks - right after writing up the summaries of the source-gathering discussion of Gorm den Gamle and Rollo / Ganger-Rolf (the discussions unearthed a *lot* of evidence, but if nobody does the collation, it will soon be forgotten again).

It requires some hours of solid work. There may be significant time passing before I get to it.

No problem, Harald :-)

Cous this happen?
→
Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson is Francisco Javier Rojas Aguayo's 29th great grandfather!

Private User do you believe your path to Friedrich I Barbarossa, Holy Roman Emperor ? Above that point it is mostly data from Snorre's sagas. (not sure what historians think of the link between Olav Digre and Frederick Barbarossa, though....)

Jag tror inte på nånting. Jag är enbart överraskad över hur detta kan koppla ihop data utan att ha en gedigen genetisk uppbyggnad. Jag tror och vet att de flesta erövrare i Sydamerika, där jag föddes, härstammar från europeiska broderskap och släkt. Och visst är jag släkt med ett antal sådana härifrån. Är du släkt med tysken?

Geni's just a collection of the records that people have entered. If you trust the records, you believe the results. If there are records you don't believe, you shouldn't trust the results that depend on them.
There's no mastermind entering "truth" here, there's just users entering what they think is correct.
Sources rule.

Om data som mattas in av folket -användare- är sant eller icke sant, det är det frågan. Om massornas drömmar om tillhörighet och identitet är just motivationen. Vart någonstans mötts sanning med dröm? Matrix gör sig själv, enbart av de som skapade affärsidén.

Dear Remi Trygve Pedersen, we have a safeguard on geni.com and this is the locked master profiles that have been verified. Clearly it is not possible to verify such historic figures from the Nordic sagas. The further we go back, those of us who understand historical figures know, the less likely the information will be reliable and factual. In many instances it cannot be verified. Those who know what they are doing here must treat it as such. The rest can be a game if that's what people want it to be. I'm far more concerned about inaccurate entries made for more rcent ancestors where their claims can be proven. As well as honest mistakes there is room here for patent dishonesty and it is up to the community to look out for it and address these issues as they come up. All that said, it is fun and I feel the master profiles provide a sound structure for the rest. I'm actually less concerned about incorrect entries than I am about the private profiles that proliferate amongst the profiles of my near ancestors. It is not possible to work with them. I can understand why the profiles of living people are private and even the next generation back. I wonder why those who must keep all their entries private are even here. They could have bought their own program and kept it all on their home computer.

Oh and, I have no doubt that both me and many here who come up as grand children of this character, have Viking descent. It gives us a real link to the character, whether mythical or not. For all human beings it's the story about where they come from that is important. For those with Viking descent the Nordic sagas are part of their story.

OR should I say, where their claims can be disproven, as with the discussion on John Rice of Dedham. The community keeps people honest, as with Remi's post. I had something similar to the John Rice issue recently where someone had attached their family to part of my tree that is descended from royalty, because I had a relative with the same christian name and surname as their ancestor. Fortunately I was able to prove to him that my relative of that name had died at a young age and left no children and he went away.

Could one way of making these things better be to add a feature to Geni that makes it possible to mark parent/child relationships as «speculation» or «disputed»?

As has been mentioned in this thread it is often practical to share ideas with other users, and such tags would make it easier to share thoughts with others, and keep track of your earlier research, without cluttering the tree. Perhaps a «refuted» tag could also help to clearly show that a connection has been proven false. Through the use of such tags it would also be possible to give a warning if you try to readd an old connection, and locate (search for) uncertain connections in order to work on proving or disproving them.

When people are searching for their relationship to celebrities, royalty or historical figures the connections with these tags could be disregarded, since they are clearly marked in a way the software can make use of, and the relationship would follow more sound paths - if they exist at all.

Øystein Sættem Middelthun the concept of "speculative" as a way to mark links has been discussed a number of times. So far, hasn't made it to the top of the list. (I'd prioritize support for documenting adoptive parents first, for instance.)

Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson is my 32nd great grandfather through a coincidental lineage.

Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson is my 28th great grandfather and you are my 21st cousin once removed.

Best regards,
Ellen Rygh

Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson is my 28th great grandfather and you John Patrick McCaffrey are my 21st cousin once removed.

Best regards,
Ellen Rygh

Private User du har fremdeles de samme problemene i slektstreet som jeg viste til her: http://www.geni.com/discussions/129645?msg=944342. Når du har fått sjekket opp og evt. rettet opp disse problemområdene, så kan du komme tilbake og sjekke linjen din tilbake til Ragnar, inntil du har gjort det, så er den neppe korrekt, og dermed er han neppe din 28. oldefar.

In English (short version): Ellen Rygh you still have the same problemareas as I showed earlier here: http://www.geni.com/discussions/129645?msg=944342 and until these areas are checked out for validity, you can not state that Ragnar (or anyone else in your familytree going through the same persons), are your ancestor.

My resolution to that, always, is that the person "shows as" my ancestor, bearing in mind the result is only as good as the information people have put on there. I like the sense of having a link back to the Nordic legends. Cheers, Jan

Private User you should never ever use "shows as" unless there are good sources to the information about you ancestor or any other family relationship. When there is a lack of good sources, you should question the relationship and try to find good sources about where the relationship is in doubt. Never ever trust what people have put on any online genealogical site without them mentioning where they have got their information.

If your line back to Nordic legends are just a pile of humbug with no foundation in any real genealogy, would you still like to have the sense of having a line back to Nordic legends?

Remember, in genealogy, if you state that you are related to someone, you need to prove it, and if you can't prove it, you are not related to that person.

always rely on historical archives!

tks

You can't always even rely on historical archives. You always have to test them.

Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson,: 34th great grandfather's wife's father.

I realize it can be hard to believe Snorre King Saga's. Some in this tread has worked hard to convince us that Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson is just a myth.
The same attitude was also present in regard to Homer Iliad. That was until one person saw it as his lifes task to prove that it was not a myth, but a historical fact, his nam was Heinrich Schliemann. He found Troy, proved that it was not a myth. In fact a historical fact. Achilles fought Hector. Troy was burned. But Troy was found, so was Helenas gold treasure.

So Back to Snorre and the other sagas. Are they are all myth?
I hope some like Heinrich Schliemann will come and start digg. I believe Ragnar Sigurdsson lived.

Kim, on the 25th of December m children find presents under a tree in our house, does this prove that Santa Claus is real? Finding Troy does not prove that the Illiad is a factual historical document.

Historians tell us that Santa Claus is based on Saint Nicolaus, does that mean Saint Nicolaus had flying reindeer? It is not that Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson did not exist the evidence is that the stories are a combination of several men, you could even think of it as the evidence suggests/proves that there were more than one Ragnar Lodbrok.

I've seen a lot of sound reasoned arguments in this and other discussions to demonstrate that the Ragnar Lodbrok of the saga is not a _single_ real person. I've not seen any evidence or logical argument from anyone to support the belief that the saga is correct.

The Myths surrounding Ragnar Lodbrok can be about more than one man and aren't even necessarily true or correct.

Just remember - there must have been someone who was the father of the brothers: Ivar the Boneless - Bjorn Ironside - Hvitserkr - Ragnvald and their half brothers Agnar and Eirik. - They where hardly begotten out of thin air .. we should be able to agree on that?

I think every one should be able to agree that all humans have a father, but that's probably the end of certainty.

Were they really all brothers? Did they all exist?

If Ragnar Lodbrok is indeed a composite character could not these six men being "brothers" also be a literary tool? I'm not suggesting this is a fact, simply asking a question.

There was also a brother called Sigurdur Orms-i auga. I somewhat agree with you (to complicated to go into here in the comments area). But as is stated in Wikipedia:
"...... Nonetheless, the core tradition of a Viking hero named Ragnar (or similar) who wreaked havoc in mid-ninth-century Europe and who fathered many famous sons is remarkably persistent, and some aspects of it are covered by relatively reliable sources, such as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. According to Davidson, writing in 1979, "certain scholars in recent years have come to accept at least part of Ragnar's story as based on historical fact".[2] Katherine Holman, on the other hand, concludes that "although his sons are historical figures, there is no evidence that Ragnar himself ever lived, and he seems to be an amalgam of several different historical figures and pure literary invention." ..... "

Since I descend from those men Ragnar and his sons - and since I understand my Heritage and how proud my ancestors were to be the descendants of these people.

Also I can’t dismiss the fact that they must have known who their ancestors where. We have to take into consideration that the Settlers here in Iceland kept their pedigree so well up to date because that was also “their way” to keep in touch with their roots or where they originated from.

This custom (or tradition/rite) is well known still today – people that move from their home country tend to bring with them into the new environment their own culture and knowledge from the cultural region that they originate from - also the Sagas and memories from the old country.

Also it was considered a serious crime in the medieval Times if someone lied about his or hers family roots (at least here in Iceland). In the Middle Ages here in Iceland, people had to know their ancestry no fewer than eight generations back and be able to prove it also.

You've probably already realized that I don’t want to challenge what the old sources say - but I would like to use the scientific method to prove that the descendants of these people are related – or not.