Hallstein Torleivsson - The connection between the deposed king of Isle of Man and the noble Skanke family i Norway, Sweden and Denmark

Harald et al,

Which would be the best kit to buy to trace back to the Skanke claimants. Both lines, maternal and paternal (Y). I understand there are firms that will run both but I would like to know which one is the gold standard. We trace back to Jens Karlsson, brother of Orjan, but I would stop at the mad priest, for now.

Andrew, how do you trace back to Jens Karlsson, only paternal, only maternal, or a mix? If only paternal then Y, if only maternal then MT, if a mix you need an autosomal test.

To me it seems like Andrew has a mixed line: https://www.geni.com/path/David-Widerberg-Howden+is+related+to+Andr...

So if this is correct then Familyfinder (autosomal) is the way to go!
But theres no guarantee that you have inherited DNA from Your Skanke ancestors,
as you dont inherit DNA from all ancestors, and the further you go back in time
the amount DNA inherited are smaller. (6-7 generations are usually the limit for when Familyfinder relations are at a confident Level).

His paternal lineage is after what I can see Norwegian, so I would very much like to invite Andrew to join the Norwayproject and test his Y-DNA. You find reduced Project prices here: https://www.familytreedna.com/group-join.aspx?Group=Norway (By ordering here you get both Project price and joins Our Project).

The DNA research is fascinating. My Skanke connection is through Elizabeth Jensdatter Skanke, the daughter of Jens Pederson Skanke. She married into the Herdal family. Her descendants came to the Trondheim area where my grandfather and grandmother's families are from. I've done autosomal DNA through ancestry.com, but that is just scratching the surface. I would certainly by interested in following up with the Norway research group. Thanks for the information.

Thank you David, I would be very much interested in that project. There are other lines as well that I am tracing as the trail for my maternal grandfathers line stops in Sor Aurdal, but most lines point to Norway (at least I think they do). I will order up the test and since I am chasing another line I will augment with mtSeq as well.

Thank you again.

Hi David.

What about a MT full sequence from my grandmother, 12 generations to Olav Nilsson Skancke.

But she has like 5 different paths to Olav. (which could be measured as the equvalence to only a few generations between as it is stronger?)

And as many paths to Erik Sämundsson Skanke..

MT full sequence is only going to test the mother's mother's mother's mother path, of course. Autosomal will be useful for verifying the first 5-6 steps of each path (if you can find suitable relatives to test with).

If your grandmothers back to Olav was only through women then you could test mtDNA, but I dont think that is much point if you want to find DNA related to Skanke, as it is only Y-DNA that really matters for finding paternal lineages. But Familyfinder could possible give indication of common ancestry with other Skanke-descendants. Its always the best to test the oldest generations as they carry With them much more autosomal-DNA from the generations before, remember you always inherit 50% of Your autosomal DNA from each parents, so theoretically you will only have match With 25% of the matches that Your grandmother. Welcome to the Project Andrew, as admin I noticed Your order earlier today :)

I was just thinking that there were a chance to get specific markers.. to be able through this and other tests pin point skanke markers.. through the excluding method..

So, markers doesnt come with full sequence test (which we had), it comes best with autosomal test? ..

Oh okey. Family finder. Maybe one can upgrade the already existing test to a family finder, without taking new samples?

You can Upgrade Your already existing kit, without taking a New sample. Just click Upgrade in the profile. Y-DNA is only testing the Y-chromosome which you only inherit directly from Your father, the mt-DNA is only testing the mitochondrial DNA, which you only inherit from Your mother. While the Familyfinder is only testing the Autosomal-DNA, which is a mixture of autosomal DNA from both father and mother, With this test you can identify specific segments by triangulate several who matches the same, but its no guarantee that its possible and the more distant, the harder and more unpredictable it gets.. Are you member of the Sweden Project on Familytreedna?

Right, thanks. And the info goes to others who also are listening/reading this.. (One always learn something.)

No not in the Swedish but the Norweigan, as they are from Bohuslän.. I can add the Swedish too. (Hjördis Olsson)

I can upgrade to Familyfinder if this can help a search for Skanke dna.

If it is relevant to trace certain dna that they had.

as you say "With this test you can identify specific segments by triangulate several who matches the same, but its no guarantee that its possible and the more distant, the harder and more unpredictable it gets"

Obviously a haplogroup, and in combination with other dna - like markers (what are they, these different numbers?) one could get a possibility to distinguish different I1-haplogroups for example.. or even break the Skanke dna down to specific sequenses of markers!? - and if someone has them, there is a higher probability that there is an ancestry..

Brainstorming ..

Haplogroups can only be identified With mtDNA and Y-DNA tests, these have no limit for how far back they can go but both are only on the direct paternal and maternal lines. Familyfinder on the other is a very good tool to confirm relatives within 6 generations (nothing to do With haplogroups or Y-DNA/mtDNA), before that it is used for indicating relations and by triangulating a lot of known descendants of one man, that all matches each other on the same segment, you can indeed identify that segment. But that has to do With chromosome-segments and not SNP and STR-markers as you will get with a Y-DNA test. Yes I would recommend you to upgrade to a Familyfinder-test. Besides that as admin I can see that you probably belong to subgroup I1-L22, maby P109, so you should join the P109-project as well.

Thanks! :)

Justin said :

"Munch based his idea that the Skanke family was descended from the kings of Man only on their coat of arms. Stein Aage has said this clearly several times. It was considered to be good evidence in the 1800s. Now it's not.

This whole debate comes down to that one point. The standards for using and interpreting sources have changed in this past 150 years. It's as simple as that."

I have never reduced Munch to a negliant scientist. It is Remi Trygve Pedersen that has done so, and you curators keep on copying him. Munch has written the comments to the chronicle of the Isle of Man in addition to the Norwegian regests.

Even though his work was done in the ninteenth century he is the foremost expert on any medieval connections between the Isle of Man and Norway.

I totally agree with Ulf, if curators could moderate themselves to leave the connections on Geni like all the other unsourced connections that still exists there, this debate could have been done in a friendly manner. Adding "disputed" or "need more sources" would do the job, wouldnt it ?

I am sorry to say that I must withhold my complaints against Remi Trygve Pedersen to the Geni-team.

Well, I'm sorry to because my previous comment didn't fell out in good ground, "endless tirades", yes, two times = endless, and, "making a fool of myself leading other people to mistrust everything I do or say", hopefully, people aren't that stupid that they confounds my contribution in genealogy with my opinion about some curator, but I'm not sure, you might have right here, if I do not agree with you, people will disbelieve me, that's what you Remi says out in plain subtext.

But actually, what I'm saying is that if a curator are strongly biased against profiles that lived before the preservation of church records, then he or she might not be so suitable to act as a manager or curator for such concerning profiles, that's pretty much all and if that makes other people reject everything I say or do, so be it.

> Even though his work was done in the ninteenth century he is the foremost expert on any medieval connections between the Isle of Man and Norway.

You continue to confuse the man and the method. Academic research does not work the way you think it does. Isaac Newton was one of the foremost experts in his field. His work has been modified by people who worked later. Albert Einstein was one of the foremost experts in his field. His work superseded much of what Isaac Newton said but his work has also been modified by people who worked later.

Academic efforts evolve. Standards and frameworks change. That's as true of history as any other field. If Munch were truly still the foremost expert, it would be only because no one ever did anything else in the same area.

> if a curator are strongly biased against profiles that lived before the preservation of church records, then he or she might not be so suitable to act as a manager or curator for such concerning profiles

If a curator were biased in the face of contrary evidence, then yes. But there is no contrary evidence here, just opinion and over-confidence in the face of an idea that is 150 years old.

The modern standard of evidence is being applied fairly and consistently. It's not a grand conspiracy.

As i know it when it comes to theory of science. There is no such thing as conspiracy, or rather the expression conspiracy in science circumstanses. Everything is research and investigation, or not. ?

The lack of imperia or data is rather the question.

Therefore, as we dont have all the data. We have to lay a pussle. Some pieces are not yet possible to see. But they might be, later. Regardless from what angle you observe. You will in the end see the same kind of thing, phenomenon.

So, perhaps we should not try to fight each other which slice of the cake is the most truthfull. (theory)

It is a full spectrum pussle that is being layed. No slice is more worth than any other. It is the whole that matters. Constructively build, together.

Just a reminder that is.

I can see the will from you all to build this however, but who will hypothetically build the pussle while you are arguing? :)

Just saying...

Evidence is not an opinion. But often it is resulting in that because lack of context.

This is why interdisiplinary science is a must. Perhaps even more and other social sciences than stein age is promoting.

Which one of you for example still believes in the formal investigation of 9/11?

That, is a conspiracy if any.

Right?

Maybe we can go back to using contemporary sources for documentation ;)

In one format or another, most of us English-speakers are probably already using Goss's translation of Munch's edition of the Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, printed by The Manx Society in 1874.

http://www.isle-of-man.com/manxnotebook/manxsoc/msvol22/index.htm#c...

This edition includes a translation of a pedigree chart prepared by Munch. There is no indication there of the Skanke claim.

http://www.isle-of-man.com/manxnotebook/manxsoc/msvol22/adx_d55.htm

In the entry for 1249 the Chronicle says "Harold, the son of Godred Don, usurping the name and dignity of king in Man, drove out nearly all the chiefs of Harold, Olave's son, and in their stead made the fugitives who had joined him chiefs and nobles."

In 1250 the Chronicle says "Harold son of Godred Don was summoned, amid went to time Court of the Lord King of Norway; for the king was displeased with his having usurped a kingdom to which he had no title, and intended not to allow his return to the Sodor Islands." (Then describes Manx resistance to having "John son of Dugald" as king because they wanted Magnus son of Olave.)

Skipping forward, in 1252 Magnus son of Olave returns to Man and is hailed as king. In 1254 the Norwegian king Haco appoints Magus as king. In 1263 the Norwegian king dies. In 1265 Magnus dies. In 1266 the "kingdom of Man and the Isles" was transferred to the king of Scotland. In 1275 the Scottish fleet was defeated by the Manx.

http://www.isle-of-man.com/manxnotebook/manxsoc/msvol22/p101.htm

That's it. No mention of the Skanke family and their supposed connection to the Manx kings.

Instead, Note 53 to the edition (probably by Goss but perhaps by Munch) says:

"According to the Chronicle of Lanercost the expedition here mentioned was caused by a new rebellion of the Manxmen, who had taken Godred, the son of Magnus, for their king. We give the entry at length, as a supplement to our Chronicle Hoc anno (1275) septima die mensis Octobris, applicuit navigium regis Scotiae in party de Reynaldsway. Statim dominus Johannes de Vesci 1 et optimates regis cam exercitibus suis in insuicem Sti Michaeiis ascendebant, Mannensibus paratis ad proelium, cum Godredo filio Magni, quem paullo ante regem constituerant sibi. .Magnates vero et capitanei regis Scotiae legationem pacis ad Godredum et populum Manniae transmiserunt, pcecem dei et regis Scotiae eidem afferentes, si a stultissima praesumtione sua desisterent, et se vitro regi et optimatibus suis dederent. Godredo autem et perversis quibusdcem consiliceriis suis legcetioni pacis non consentientibus, sequenti die ante solis ortum, cam adhuc tenebrae esset super terram, et corda stultorum hominum obtenebrata essent, conflictus factus est, et miseri Mannenses terga vertentes miserabiliter corruerunt.2 If Godred, as it would seem, was among the slain, the male line of the Godredian dynasty expired in his person. The female line seems to have survived for one generation more, for in the year 1293 one Affreca, related to the last king, Magnus, and pretending to be his legal heir, claimed the Isle of Man, as we learn from a letter issued June 15, 1293, by King Edward I. to John Baliol, then King of Scotland, citing him as a vassal of the English crown, to appear before his court, and receive judgment in the same case.3 It must be added that the Island had been lately made over by Edward to King John (see letter dated January 5, 1293, Rymer, Faed. i. 9. p. 785), the inhabitants having three years before (Rymer, 1. c. p. 740) of their own free will put themselves under the protection of King Edward.4 This Affreca was no doubt a grand-daughter of her namesake, the daughter of King Godred, mentioned heretofore (p. 80, ad. ann. 1204) on her marriage with John de Courcy, and named after his grandmother, as she again, in her turn, was named after her grandmother, Aifreca of Galloway, King Olaf’s Queen (vide p. 60, ad ann. 1102). What was the issue of the lawsuit we do not know; nor do we think it necessary to dwell on the entries in our Chronicle for the years 1313 and 1316, as being sufficiently explicit to want any explanation.5"

The Latin here is translated in Footnote 2: [Upon the 7th of October (1275), the fleet of the King of Scotland put into the port of Ronaldsway. John de Vesci and the king’s nobles immediately landed their forces on the island of St. Michael, the people of Alan being prepared for the encounter, along with Godred, the son of Magnus, whom they had made their king but a short time previously. The chiefs and officers of the King of Scotland, however, sent an embassy of peace to Godred and the people of Man, offering to them the peace of God and of the King of Scotland, on condition of their laying aside their absurd presumption, and of giving themselves up to the king and his nobles. As Godred, however, and some of his perverse counsellors did not agree to the terms of the embassy, on the following day, before sunrise, whilst darkness still covered the earth, and thee hearts of foolish men were darkened, an engagement took place, and the unfortunate people of Man running away, fell miserably.]

http://www.isle-of-man.com/manxnotebook/manxsoc/msvol22/note_53.htm

These pieces bear repeating --

In the genealogy prepared by Munch for this family there is no indication (in the English edition) that Harald Godred's son had any children or siblings from whom the Skanke family might be descended.

In the footnote to the English edition, the editor (whether Munch or Goss) says explicitly that Godred Magnus' son was probably killed in the 1275 rebellion and was probably the last of the male line -- leaving it open for Affreca to claim the island in 1293.

> That, is a conspiracy if any.

LOL. I'm not much for believing in conspiracy theories but no one ever went bankrupt by betting there is more information somewhere, no matter what subject is under discussion.

Just out of names, if I would laid this puzzle, Johan Lindqvist I would have had Torlack married to the daughter of Olav, in her first and only marriages, she would have been the sister of Harald who drowned, they in turn would have a son named Torleiv, this family would be the one who fled to Norway, earliest in 1249 and latest 1280, Torleiv in turn would I set up as the father to all profiles in this family named Torleivssen, then it would at least fit better pure chronological.

Torlack born before 1237, Torleiv born after ca. 1250 and Hallstein ca. 1280 and his son Nils Hallsteinsson ca 1300.

I also think that it is plausible that some of them did reuse their fathers seal, which have led to later confusions regarding Torlack and Torleiv being the same or different person instead of just father and son, but yes, hypothetically, they could also have just belonged to the same family either as brothers or near cousins, but due to their descendants use of the same and similar coat of arms it's more likelier that they were father and son, I think my line above are plausible but it doesn't cover who's the father to Torlack was.

Ulf, regarding the puzzle :

I doubt that Hallstein is born later than appr 1270-1272, as he is appointed judge by the king latest 1302 and probably educated at a university or at a renowned clerical school.

Yes, he could have been born as early as you wrote, 1270-1272, I used the born latest in this "puzzle", and remember, this is how I would have laid it out, mostly based on the small amount of information given, regarding the plausible son of Torlack with Olofsdotter, her father died 1237 if I remember it right, she could latest have been born 1238, which in that case makes her a possible mother earliest 1255, so if Torleiv was born THAT late, he could even then be a father to the son Hallstein in 1272, it still works. ; )

:)

I invited Michael Häggmark of the Skankeföreningen Sverige/Sweden to read this discussion. He said he will take it step by step. Hehe.

If these two profiles could be DNA verified as having a likely common father, then it would strenghten my puzzle.
Hallstein Torleivsson
Sæmund Torleivsson Torleivsson

Private User unfortunately the "show living descendants who might be tested for Y-DNA matches" for these profiles peters out after 10 generations, so it returns nothing.

HistoryLink's Y-descendant chart (you can get it at https://historylinktools.herokuapp.com/graph?profile=profile-g60000...) shows Sæmund's male line terminating after 4 generations.

So it seems that the first order of business to get that lineage is to find some male-line descendants of Sæmund.

(Hallstein's descendant graph, at https://historylinktools.herokuapp.com/graph?profile=profile-g60000..., is a lot more promising. The graph shows something like 60 males alive in the 1800s who claim descent from him; it's likely that some of them have living descendants. Some may even be among the gene-testers mentioned up-thread.)

But without male-line descendants from Sæmund, this is the sound of one hand clapping.