van Friesland branches

Dorothy, I can see you're struggling with concepts of proof. Just 100 years ago most people still thought the story was more important than mere facts. Nowadays, most people think the facts are more important.

We often get new people on Geni who still have the old mindset. It takes some time to adjust but most of them do. You will too, but you'll need to learn how to recognize the quality of your sources and read carefully to see what each is saying.

Right now you are "spinning your wheels". You're making the same arguments over and over, without reading or understanding what has already been posted.

I will write a summary for you about what we know so far.

I am not Struggling at all Justin. I am trying to point out the STORY

People WILL re add what was originally added on Geni back in 2007.. It was not an issue all those years . It WAS just added once again in 2016... I merged those profile as the same person etc... NOW you want to change things with "proof" adding that they are fictitious isn't good enough?

READ

Of the first historically verifiable rulers of Frisia, whether they are called dukes or kings, the last royal dynasty below is established by the chronicles of Merovingian kings of the Franks, with whom they were contemporaries. In these contemporary chronicles, they were styled dux, a Latin term for leader which is the origin of the title duke and its cognates in other languages (duc, duce, doge, duque, etc.). They were independent until the death of Radbod at the earliest.

Finn, son of Folcwald, is a semi-legendary figure. He was killed by Hengest, who later migrated to Britain and founded the Kingdom of Kent. For rulers prior to Finn the later Frisians developed a rich store of legend and myth, and these too are listed here in chronological order.
After coming under Frankish rule, Frisia was governed by Frankish counts and by potestates elected by the Frisians.

List of rulers

Kings
Finn Folcwalding, legendary (400?)
Audulf, 600
Adgillus I (Aldegisel I), ?-680
Radbod I (Redbad I), 680-719
Poppo, 719-734

Counts and Margraves

In 775 the Franks under Charlemagne took control of what remained of Frisian territory and incorporated it into their kingdom. Counts appointed by the Frankish rulers were:
Godfrey, 810-839 (a Danish invader)
Rorik, 839-875 (cousin of Godfrey)
Gerulf I, 875-883
Gerulf II, 883-916 (Friesland incorporated into the County of Holland in 922)
Dirk I, 916-939
Dirk II, 939-988
Arnulf I, 988-993
Dirk III, 993-1039
Dirk IV, 1039-1049
Floris I, 1049-1061
Dirk V, 1061-1091
Floris II the Fat, 1091-1101, Frisia is formally incorporated in Holland, when the title "Count of Frisia west of the Vlie" was changed to "Count of Holland". Continues in Counts of Holland.
Liudolf, 1028-1038
Bruno, 1038-1057
Egbert I, 1057-1061
Egbert II, 1068-1089
To Utrecht: 1089-1099
Henry I the Fat, 1099-1101

Potestates
Most of the early potestaats are completely legendary.
Magnus Forteman, fl. 809 (first recipient of the Karelsprivilege)
Taco Ludigman, fl. c. 830 (Focko Ludigman) (protected the country against pirates)
Adelbrik Adelen, fl. c. 830 (won a victory over a Swedish duke at Kollum)
Hessel Hermana, 869-876 (a diligent warrior against the Vikings)
Igo Galema (Ygo Galema), 876-910
Gosse Ludigman, 986-1000
Saco Reinalda, 1150-1167 (many Frisians were recruited into the crusades to the Holy Land)
Sicko Sjaerdema, 1237-1260 (Count William II of Holland offered him regional rule of Friesland)
Reinier Camminga, 1300-1306 (killed in the fight against "Danes Noertmannen ende")
Hessel Martena, 1306-1313 (protected Friesland against the attacks of the counts of Holland)
Juw Juwinga (Jonghema Ju), 1396 (killed in the Battle of Schoterzijl against Albert I, Duke of Bavaria)
Sytse Dekama, 1397-?
Gale Hania
Odo Botnia, ?-1399
Sjoerd Wiarda, 1399-1410 (elected by the Schieringers for Oostergo)
Haring Haringsma (Haring Harinxma, or Haring Thoe Heeg), 1399-1404 (elected by the Schieringers for Westergo)
Juw Dekama, 1494-1498 (died 1523) (only governed Oostergo)
With the victory of the Schieringers against the Vetkopers, the office passed to the dukes of Saxony:
Albert, Duke of Saxony, 1498-1500 (appointed by Maximilian I, Holy Roman Emperor)
Henry IV, Duke of Saxony, 1500-1505 (died 1541)
George, Duke of Saxony, 1505-1515 (died 1539)

Stadtholders
In 1515, George of Saxony sold Friesland to Charles of Habsburg, the future Emperor. The Habsburgs appointed the following governors:
Floris van Egmond, Count of Buren and Leerdam, 1515-1518
Wilhelm von Roggendorf, 1518-1521
Georg Schenck van Toutenburg, 1521-1540
Jancko Douwama, 1522
Maximiliaan van Egmond, Count of Buren, 1540-1548
Jean de Ligne, Count of Arenberg, 1549-1568 (in 1556 sovereignty of Friesland passed to Philip II of Spain, son of Charles V)
Karel van Brimeu, Count of Megen, 1568-1572
Gillis van Berlaymont, of Hierges, 1572-1574
Caspar de Robles, Master of Billy, 1574-1576 (or 1572-1576)
George van Lalaing, Count of Rennenberg, de Stadhouder-verrader, 1576-1581 (after 1580 in the service of Phillip II)
Francisco Verdugo, 1581-1594 (in the service of Phillip II)
Willem I van Oranje-Nassau, 1580-1584
In 1581, Friesland and six other provinces revolted and formed the Dutch Republic. The office of stadholder became hereditary in the House of Oranje:
Willem Lodewijk van Nassau, 1584-1620
Ernst Casimir, 1620-1632
Hendrik Casimir I, 1632-1640
Willem Frederik, 1640-1664
Hendrik Casimir II, 1664-1696
Johan Willem Friso of Orange, 1696-1711
William IV of Orange, 1711-1751 (the seven provincial stadtholders within the Dutch Republic merged in 1747)
William V of Orange, 1751-1795 (died 1806) (Stadtholder-General of the Dutch Republic until it was destroyed by Napoleon)

Fictional rulers
A description of a course at the University of Amsterdam states ""One of the characteristics of Frisian historiography and literature from the Middle-Ages up to the nineteenth and twentieth century is the existence of a comprehensive corpus of fantastic, apocryphal and mystified historic works, which deal with the origins and identity of the Frisians. Well known examples are medieval myths of origin like the Gesta Frisiorum or the Tractatus Alvini, sixteenth-century humanistic scholarly books by e.g. Suffridus Petrus, Ocko van Scarl en Martinus Hamconius and nineteenth-century forgeries like the Tescklaow and the infamous Oera Linda Book."
The 17th century chronicle Frisia seu de viris rebusque illustribus, by Martinus Hamconius, purported to list the ancient kings of Frisia, beginning with Friso who had allegedly migrated from India during the time of Alexander the Great. A 19th century work, the Oera Linda Book (authorship uncertain but considered to be a hoax), embellished these stories further by describing an ancient and glorious history for the Frisians extending back thousands of years, during which time they were supposedly ruled over by a line of matriarchs known as folk-mothers, founded by the eponymous goddess Frya, ancestress of the Frisians.

Goddess and Folk-mothers
According to the Oera Linda Book.
Frya, ?-2194 BC (eponymous ancestress of the Frisians, who supposedly inhabited all of Northern and Western Europe)
Fasta, 2194-after 2145 BC (appointed by Frya when the latter ascended to the stars during a terrible flood)
Medea
Thiania
Hellenia
(unknown)
Minna, fl. 2013 BC (faced an invasion of Finns from the east, who settled in the Frisian lands in Scandinavia)
(unknown)
Rosamond, 1631-? BC (the Frisians in Western Europe revolted and became the Celts)
Hellicht, fl. 1621 BC
(unknown)
Frana, ?-590 BC (murdered by the Finns during an invasion)
Adela (de facto), 590-559 BC (supposedly ordered the compilation of what became the Oera Linda Book)
(vacant)
Gosa, 306-before 264 BC (elected after a long vacancy, Frisian rule confined to approximately the modern Netherlands)
(vacant)
Prontlik, fl. c. 60 BC (puppet folk-mother appointed by King Asinga Ascon)

Kings
According to the Frisia seu de viris rebusque illustribus (and the Oera Linda Book).
Friso, 313-245 BC (Adel I Friso (de facto), 304-264 BC) (established a militaristic hereditary monarchy)
Adel, 245-151 BC (Adel II Atharik, 264-? BC)
Ubbo, 151-71 BC (Adel III Ubbo)
Asinga Ascon, 71 BC-AD 11 (Adel IV Asega Askar, or Black Adel) (reviled for employing foreign troops and bringing plague)
Diocarus Segon, 11-46
Dibbaldus Segon, 46-85 (? Verritus) (forced to accept Roman protection, and may have visited Rome in person)
Tabbo, 85-130 (? Malorix)

Dukes
According to the Frisia seu de viris rebusque illustribus.
Asconius, 130-173 (title downgraded to duke as a Roman client)
Adelboldus, 173-187
Titus Boiocalus, 187-240
Ubbo, 240-299
Haron Ubbo, 299-335
Odilbaldus, 335-360
Udolphus Haron, 360-392

Kings
According to the Frisia seu de viris rebusque illustribus (and Merovingian chronicles).
Richardus, Uffo, 392-435 (? Finn Folcwalding)
Odilbaldus, 435-470 (? Sibbelt)
Richoldus, 470-533 (? Ritzard)
Beroaldus, 533-590 (? Audulf)
Adgillus I, 590-672 (Aldegisel, ?-680)
Radbodus I, 672-723 (Radbod I, 680-719)
(Poppo, 719-734) (not listed in the rebusque)
Adgillus II, 723-737 (Aldegisel II)
Gondobaldus, 737-749 (Gundebold, or Aldegisel III)
Radbodus II, 749-775 (Radbod II)

Notes

References
Ancient Holland: The History of the Lowlands
Petz, G.H. (ed). MGH Scriptures. (Hanover, 1892).

Wyrd Designs – King Radbod and the Importance of the Ancestors

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/pantheon/2011/08/wyrd-designs-king-rad...

Members want to see the connections Justin be it with fictional characters or real.

We read all about them all over the internet. I think it should be added, it does paint a picture explaining the folktales of the Friesians.

Yes make Radbod I "the Last pagan King" that can proven. But add all the others too as his ancestors the same ones he asked Wolfram the Christian missionary about.

Is that so wrong ? Many others over the internet and here on Geni over the years seen it my way too. That why they added the Fictitious profiles.

1. Beroaldus and all his ancestors are mythical. There is no documentary evidence they were real people. They come from the great period of genealogical invention in the 16th, 17th centuries. This line is already connected to Finn Folcwalding, although we probably need more work on the details.

2. Aldgils is the first historically attested king. His father is unknown. His children are unknown. He might have been a father of Radbod but there is no evidence, so he's not going to get connected unless someone discovers a source the experts don't know about.

3. Radbod is the next historically attested king. His father is unknown. Same rules apply. He's not going to get connected to Aldgils on the basis of a myth. Radbod's story is very well known. He preferred to be with his ancestors in Hell than with strangers in Heaven. Nice story, but it doesn't tell us who his ancestors were.

3. Radbod's only proven child is a daughter who married a son of Pepin. He is said to have had a son who died in childhood. We're not going to add more children based on stories that first appear hundreds of years later. We need to have primary sources.

4. Poppo was Radbod's (eventual) successor. He might have been Radbod's son, but there is no proof. Same rules apply here.

5. Radbod's son who supposedly converted to Christianity was St. Fris. I wouldn't object if someone added him, but we should be aware his legend is very late and probably not reliable.

>> Members want to see the connections Justin be it with fictional characters or real.

No, I think you're wrong there. The majority of users want reliable, fact-based information. Curators, me included, get quite a bit of "hate mail" about mythical lines. It makes Geni look bad to include information that cannot be proven.

The story is certainly important. That's why we write the story in the About Me for the profiles, and that's why we include links in the About Me to mythical connections.

BTW, the Merovingian chronicles also have problems. Many of the surviving chronicles show a political agenda. They contradict each other. They inflate the connections. When they can be checked against contemporary records, they are often wrong or impossible.

Writing on their Profiles at the top stating they are mythical/ fictitious is also proof that we realize that they are just story's.

I can add all the information in their profiles, I've added enough "proof" via links in the discussions that they are in fact .

As for your comment "The majority of users want reliable, fact-based information" There are hundreds of profiles with NOTHING written in the ABOUT area within their profiles. So I don't agree with you. Maybe in the" high profiles" SUCH AS CHARELS MARTEL there is written proof but many children attached to them there's nothing GOING DOWN THE TREE. Thousands of profiles on Geni have no proof.

People just add what they find on stupid trees adding profiles that shouldn't even be on the tree. My point.... van Friesland, I where is his proof? could he be perhaps https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=... ? Only we can guess.

son of Radbod I according to Gemi... ... van Friesland

his sister Thiadsvind didn't have anything in her profile showing proof till I put it there the other day.

Attached to her as her son ... NOTHING is written as proof.... do I need to go on ?

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theudesinda

LOL. Dorothy, I don't think you know how funny that is.

There are two BIG reasons most of the profiles don't have documentation yet.

1. Most users don't work in the medieval area of the tree because they know they don't have the skill it takes. (Quite a few write long, private messages complaining about the problems and demanding immediate action.)

2. The users who can do and who really do work in the medieval area have to spend most of their time cleaning up messes left by people who don't know what they're doing. (Lots of time gets wasted trying to convince reckless users not to add duplicates and not to connect fantasy lines.)

Still laughing. You might want to back off a bit on the hostility. Speaking as someone who used to spend 8-12 hours a day, often longer, cleaning up medieval messes I can assure you I would much rather have been building and documenting.

On the "van Friesland" son of Radbod, Geni came up with a technical error when I tried to merge the profile with Poppo. I decided to leave him as the unknown son who died in childhood, and come back later to edit the details when Geni would let me.

"hostility"? Just asking who is ... van Friesland

where is the proof?

Dorothy, we discussed that a few days ago. Please read back through the thread.

Ethelhard von der Sachsen married to Heila von Friesland
Ethelhardus von der Sachsen

Ethelhard von der Sachsen profile added March 9, 2009
his wife Heila von Friesland profile added May 25, 2013

Who is "Ethelhard von der Sachsen" ?

his father ...Theoderich, King of the Saxons Theoderich, chief of the Saxons

"Proof" in the ABOUT area http://worldconnect.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&am......

Now that's funny and that profile was made MP status based on another tree site... that's far from a reliable source NO?

Theoderich von Asseburg added May 23, 2007 Curated by:Sharon Doubell

you said "Speaking as someone who used to spend 8-12 hours a day, often longer, cleaning up medieval messes "

My point being , just how hard did you clean? I cant find real proof on their profiles.

Dorothy, after you made so many unfounded accusations like this about another curator, then asked me privately to help you, I said I would. Sadly, this discussion seems to be taking the same path. Now, I need to make the same decision she did. Time for you to find someone else.

You're right this discussion is over.. I am sick or Sharon always telling me to "start a new discussion" I've already started this one regarding the van Friesland branches .. I will not be starting anymore when its all regarding the same family.

AND I will be re connecting what I added and many others have added over the years starting in 2007. if you have a problem with that, feel free to report me to the owners.

Yourself and Sharon just did what you wanted to do behind my back regardless of my objections and concerns. And DO NOT give me your excuse about "MOST GENI MEMBERS WANT PROOF" here on Geni. ... If they wanted it, they should of added it when they made the profiles in the first.... It's YOU that wants it. This site is so messed up it's not even funny.

Dorothy, if you re-connect disconnected branches in defiance of the evidence in this discussion that would be vandalism. Any curator can suspend your account. Proceed at your own risk.

I can partly agree Dorothy Jane, a lots of persons just adds a name to their created profiles, nothing more, it doesn't matter if those profiles are their direct parents, they are happy with just a name, nothing more. I see it all the time all around Geni, it makes me wonder if they are serious or not?

Some people are also in the continues work of deleting good information added by others, one of them told me once when I asked why; If you want information, look it up yourself.

Then we have some odd curators locking profiles that looks like a dyslectic child have done all the text in it making it looks like an unreliable shitty work. What I want and hopefully many others, is the name first, correct spelled with known variants after that, the partner/s name/s, and the known children/s in that order displayed in the ABOUT ME, secondly, notable events like known for, achievements etc. put in a short biography, especially regarding notably figures, and lastly all the sources either in short statements and or with links if available.

Unfortunately, we see all variants but that in many profiles, a confused jumble of often irrelevant things that makes we wonder again about the intellectual level of the ones creating it, accepting it, and without slightest hesitation also locks the profiles, maybe even proud of their achievement, and yes, some of them have indeed also often ruined a complete corrected presentable profile with their own debris.

Ulf, you're an "old hand" at this but Dorothy is relatively new. It's a mystery why some people come to a site like Geni then demand to change its culture to be something else.

If Dorothy stays she will need time to adjust. Right now she is making many rash assumptions.

For example, you can see above she thinks the only reason for an MP is that the information has been verified. If the information is wrong she blames the curator. She does not yet understand the sheer volume of work required to keep the core part of the tree from being destroyed by well-intentioned users. And, she doesn't yet accept the core principle that information should be fact-checked.

You are absolutely right about the messes you see. I wish we had more good people doing cleanup. I often see an About Me that would only take 30 minutes or so to clean up but I have to make a personal choice how to use my time. If I have only 2 or 3 hours, it usually seems better if I do work that will provide more benefit to the overall tree. Then, I have to hope that someone else will clean up the About Me. I imagine you are the same.

According to the Frisia seu de viris rebusque illustribus (and Merovingian chronicles) and this site Https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rulers_of_Frisia#Fictional_rulers

the years of their reign as Kings

Richardus, Uffo, 392-435 (? Finn Folcwalding)

Odilbaldus, 435-470 (? Sibbelt)

Richoldus, 470-533 (? Ritzard)

Beroaldus, 533-590 (? Audulf) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>aka Ygo I Galama
http://www.liquisearch.com/igo_galema/biography

Audulf-600
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audulf
https://translate.google.ca/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=https:/...

Adgillus I, 590-672 (Aldegisel, ?-680) >>>>> disconnected from the tree branch as Radbod I son
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldgisl

Radbodus I, 672-723 (Radbod I, 680-719) >>>>> still on Geni as a real living King but with no Ancestors
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redbad,_King_of_the_Frisians

(Poppo, 719-734) >>>>>> Not connected to Radbod I as his son
https://translate.google.ca/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=https:/...

Adgillus II, 723-737 (Aldegisel II >>>>>>>now disconnected as Radbod I son
https://translate.google.ca/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=https:/...
and
https://translate.google.ca/translate?
hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://www.encyclo.nl/begrip/Adgillus%2520II&prev=search
other sites says ....Adgillus II was Radbout successor in 710, was a fierce opponent of Christianity. At the instigation of Charles Martel Willibrord went against him. The sacred groves were destroyed and Adgillus had to submit. After his death, he was succeeded by his son Gondebald.

Gondobaldus, 737-749 (Gundebold, or Aldegisel III) >> was a potestaat
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=...

Radbodus II, 749-775 (Radbod II>>>>>>>>>> (not proven) was the father of Princes daugther of Radboud II wife of Gale Galama but it could be that Igo Gales Galama
Birth 780 • Staveren, Nijefurd, Zuidwest-Friesland

Death 0896 • Staveren, Nijefurd, Zuidwest-Friesland
was Radbod II son. Not proven but a posiblity

https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=...

Is that enough Proof?

I have been a member since 2008 far from relatively new Justin

I could have merged my Radboud I profile with the one MP profile by Sharon 2 years ago. I seen the mess connected to it too. I made my own Profile of Radboud I and added his ancestors be it fictitious or real it told the story. I wanted nothing to do with the other Radbod I profile. Besides it had Finn Folcwalding as his father now removed just the other day by Sharon.

Dorothy, we've said it several times now. Your are finding proofs of historicity (or not). It is not proof of relationship. Notice that these names are coming to you through the Fictional Rulers section of a Wikipedia article called Rulers of Frisia.

"Frisia seu de viris rebusque illustribus" is a book published in 1609. This is the prime period for genealogical myth making. It is not a reliable source for people who lived 1000 years earlier.
https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_WXAR0B45EdkC

You are still relatively new. No matter how long you've been on Geni you haven't done enough yet to understand some of the most basic principles.

""You are still relatively new. No matter how long you've been on Geni you haven't done enough yet to understand some of the most basic principles. """ In your eyes only Justin .

You should take a look at my other tree on Ancestry. There I have added as much information I can find in thousands of profiles, mostly from all the Wikipedia sites and from sites like weiwaswei for birth and deaths and if I am luck marriages and even pleases the families lived etc.. further down the tree. My tree is the forest version ( same as Geni is) At present I am at Charles Martel's ancestors. I have 32563 profiles on that tree with no doubles either. I've added many of aunts and uncles family trees too plus many members I've met here on geni andhave added their family trees that do ALL connect by marriages to my family tree . I've even help them find ancestors they can add and build their tree on Geni. So stop insulting me and do not assume I don't know how to build a family tree.

You yourself said it was ok to add fictitious profiles, that's all I am trying to do now.

There are at least one hundred members that have merged their own profiles with the profiles in question. All thinking the same way I am. Build the story of the Friesian history and folktales

I am still according to Geni related to these profiles in Question https://www.geni.com/path/Dorothy+is+related+to+Beroaldus-King-of-F...

All I want to do is connect the Galama and van Friesland families like hundreds of sites have already done for many years. Only on Geni is it not showing that way because you want proof.

Can't you just in this case let it go and add to the profiles that say " probably or possibly father of" Radbod I or son of him and re connect the ones that have been now disconnected? Let me finish what many others have started on Geni since 2007? It wasn't an issue till the other day. In all that time members have seen themselves as a descendant of these fictitious profiles so why stop now?

Let me rephrase my last statement

Let me complete the Galama and van Friesland connections to all the other branches that are already fictitious profiles that are NOT in question. That way what's written in the profiles will make sense and the story will come full circle.

Aldgisl

within this profile Justin you wrote
"In legend, he was son of Beroald.

http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsEurope/FranceHolland.htm this is a much better reference to use by far. "

So why is it good for him and not all the other profiles in question. That IS the story I want to complete.

BTW the van Holland branches have been compromise too on Geni by a curator that clearly doesn't know the history of that family ... it's all wrong and messed up the tree and ruined it for everyone that is biologically connected to them too.

Dirk I, graaf van Kinhem

Dirk van Holland, graaf in Friesland there is NOW no known father because a curator doesn't know what they're doing. I 'm not blaming George J. Homs I know him on a personal note.
Dirk I van Holland is part of the story too. I know for a fact that Dirk I's descendants were all there before. Where did they all go?
This isn't even funny , it's sad. You know the history better than most do Justin. Can you please help me fix this mess up too?