Harald I "Fairhair", king of Norway - Why does my tree break when it comes to Harald's daughter Ingebjørg?

And I accept the ancient writings and saga by & about Erik "Bloodaxe" Haraldsson until some other ancient text can contradict them legitimately, so that checks out. ;)

Not necessary for a curator to use words like "shit". That is quite tasteless behavior, there must be decent words to use, no reason to unbehave, nor act rude to anybody.

I think that was the poor Curator's exact point about the tasteless use of the word to attack him. We're not punching bags.

Michael Walsh you can make your own tree, and/or
contact the person that put up the information

I do have my own offline tree. It's a bit of extra labor I could do without, but worth it. And it keeps everything safe should Geni ever cease to exist.

I have a tree too, on Family search that I can refer to and it really helps, cause they already had it, I just followed it to the Royal Tree. So just getting the right lineages going now. It is great.

I maintain my own tree on Ancestry.com. For every connection I find here on Geni I do a screen shot and save it to my computer. This comes in handy when you know you're related to someone on a specific lineage but when you go back to see it again it changes to a completely different lineage because the system found an alternate path to them and you cant toggle back to the previous one. It's really frustrating when you know you're some king's great grandchild and then when you try to show it to someone it suddenly says you're merely the cousin of the brother of the aunt of the king's wife's 3rd ex-husband.

So how many of you have found a direct descendancy from Harald the Fairhair?
He's my 34th Great Grandpappy.

Unless i have Proof, e.g paper work, documentation, i believe nothing, and i am sceptical

shouldnt that be a priority,rather than just blind belief? and in the end, whilst genealogy is very interesting , and learning about history is amasingly fullfilling, unless i have Proof of a line, it means nothing at all.(i am not being cynical) just realistic.

James David Cunningham, I have found my ancestors to King David of Israel, I am with you. We need to start our own ground of finders are unique and we found our lineages so we need to stick together and build our monarchy. We will form our own country away from the government rules and make our own for we have our own countries rules as a moor in this land I am sovereign.

Angelina, I had the Kings of Mercia in my back ground with Edger son of Harold was King of Scotland. King of Goths, so my kings...and I have all the bloodlines crossing in my Grandparents. I am the crossing of all the northern bloodlines of the Icelantic people. Home of the Asgaards. Well I found this link to The royal and this seams to link right into David, want to prove it on Geni cause they are more strict on facts. So I have made it to 1400 with the Hoyt Dynasty, going into Frowick and up to Wentworth and Frowick to Stourtion 800 years to 1066 King Harold of England

My lineage goes to King David and it also has the Figg, Frey and Frig as the children of Odin. Why would anyone put that in if not known, knowledge is fact. I researched everything and those people are people but they did great thing and people made them out to be gods...not a myth

James David Cunningham, Also found my Lineage to Jesus Christ, I copy screen dump to a file and sent it to my e mail...Have run into the same issues bud. Covered my butt like you did bro

Okay Lord Bruce Ross Myers

then you Must Have one of the only 10 people Registered in Scotland born in 1555,in your lineage

- Dicksone Nicoll 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland Duncane Agnis 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland . Duncane Peter 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland . Hay Elisabeth 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland . Hay Peter 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland . Jacksone Edmond 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland . Jacksone John 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland . Monorgone Gilbert 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland . Ramsay Johne 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland . Symsone Margarit 1555 — 1555 Scotland Births & Baptisms 1564-1950 Perthshire, Scotland.

Have you seen this very informative video? If not, I sincerely recommend it!
It may be a tiny bit off topic but I think it relates to quite a few posts in this discussion.

"Are All Europeans Descendants of Charlemagne?"
https://youtu.be/15Uce4fG4R0

https://archive.org/stream/completepeerage01cokagoog#page/n56/mode/...

Hope you can find this fact, on the history of everything we are doing, will help to contribute to the Tree.

1555 year of 10 people is so hard to believe that it sounds like faults in there. Have not personally found that date in my history.

Need more facts to base your info on, sounds and looks like Mickey Mouse, stuff

Here some more info on Perthshire.

https://www.scotsgenealogy.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=0VMqrGuqz-... do you have this info

https://archive.org/stream/completepeerage01cokagoog#page/n56/mode/...

Hope you can find this fact, on the history of everything we are doing, will help to contribute to the Tree.

1555 year of 10 people is so hard to believe that it sounds like faults in there. Have not personally found that date in my history.

Need more facts to base your info on, sounds and looks like Mickey Mouse, stuff

https://www.geni.com/path/Lord-Bruce-Myers+is+related+to+Harald-I-F...

This is my link or one of my lineages to Fairhair, GOT IT PEOPLE, sweet

Found my link to the Royal Tree, Right on

Bruce, Angelina it's not saying there were only 10 people living in Perthshire in 1555 she is informing you that there are only surviving records for 10v of the people who lived in Perthshire in 1555.
If you accept her statement then the logical extension is that if you claimed lineage goes thru a Perthshire family but does not include one of those 10 people then it is unsubstantiated.
I am not saying she is correct but your repeated use of the Mickey Mouse phrase suggests that you are failing to grasp her point. No one in their right mind thinks there were only 10 people living in Perthshire 460 years ago

Thank you, just alot of repeats there, thanks for explaining

Life's too short to be skeptical. What good is skepticism on your Deathbed. You can show me a million documents that say that George Washington was President of the United States, but unless I can see him in the white house with my own two eyes all that paperwork is not proof, anybody could have made that up. So that's why I say throw skepticism out the window and just use some basic sense.

Hey, thanks to everyone who shared their relations to Harald.

Anywho, I just found the weirdest thing. I just discovered my spouse is my 18th cousin one-time removed! How Wild is that. Anybody else related to their spouse?

Doubt I'm related in any way to my spouse, she being a second-generation American of Norwegian descent and me being a naturalized American/Englishman of Irish descent. But those crazy Vikings did get everywhere, so you never know. The one thing I can say, after now seeing some of the ways her modern and more recent past cousins are related to her, is that I think there is a better than normal chance your partner/spouse is a distant cousin if you're both of Norwegian descent.

Yes cousins, lol

Generally i find that any Geni user from the USA with a European ancestry is a 24th cousin of mine, or closer, so you would be a distant cousin of your wife all that may be lacking is the connections on Geni.
The longest connection i have seen on Geni was to a user who is ethnically Chinese, he was something like my 118th cousin.
The basic premise of Geni is that we are all connected and the challenge is proving the path, if you think you are not distantly related to your wife that implies you do not understand/accept the founding principle of this website.

The connection through Harald Grenske, his saga figured father Gudrød Bjørnson, and further on Bjørn Farmand to Harald Haarfagre will soon be cut because there are no trustworthy sources, accordind to Nordic Viking historians, and all of you need to know that Snorre Sturlasson is not trustworthy in this part of his story.

I'm not going to explain this further in this tread, but those of you disputing this need to read what the Nordic Viking historians have written about this the last 30 years. And if you're still disputing this, after getting up to date, please make your argument public here with what part of the sources you don't agree with, and we will take it from there.

Please, what you're personal feelings are, is of no consequence, only what the trustworthy sources say, is important.

What ever.

James David Cunningham, as per Geni: Harald I "Fairhair", is my 33rd great grandfather.

Also, I keep my Main Genealogical Tree & info offline: mostly on Reunion...JIC even Ancestry 'disappears.' Lord knows, mistakes are copied & propagated everywhere. I use Ancestry, MyHeritage, Geni, Geneanet, FTDNA, and all the others as References.

@Remi Trygve Pedersen Since when have "The Nordic Viking historians" you are constantly referring to done DNA-tests on the persons in the SAGAS? And when referring to "NO-NAMES" is not credible ..... and as you say usually so unprofessionally - "I'm not going to explain this further..." ...

I really think you ought to respect that many of us here who use Geni are keen on retaining the connections that are revealed in old pedigrees and old sources so maybe in the future can be CONFIRMED by GENETICS sometime in the future if those old sources are correct or not. Modern Historians have nothing to do with what goes on here on Geni as you so constantly claim... specially those who have NO-NAMES.

Quoting you again... "I'm not going to explain this further..."

Anna Kristin, please read what the historians say. You can start with your countryman Ólafía Einarsdóttir. Then read what these persons have written: Claus Krag, O. G. Moseng, G. Sigurdsson, Tormod Titlestad, Inger Ekrem, L. B. Mortensen, Johan Schreiner, Joan Turville-Petre, Bjarne Fidjestøl, H. Magerøy, S. Lindqvist, Svante Norr, Peter Sawyer, Egon Wamers, K. von See, Knut Helle, A. Opedal and a dusin more.

And your way of thinking is in fact opposite of how genealogists thinks. We do not make a link between two persons unless there are credible sources saying the link is true. We do not make links between two persons just because there are a theory stating it is a possibility.

I really think you need to understand that Geni is a genealogical site and then respect the genealogical way of when there should be links between two persons. And if you can't respect that, then maybe Geni isn't the right place for you, and you could for instance use MyHeritage (or some other platform online or offline where you can have your unproven trees with complete control yourself), and then we can add these theoretical links when or if they get confirmed by genetics, not before.

Ofcource modern historians have alot to do with what goes on here on Geni, same as modern genealogists do. Both are researching for new information so our family history can get more correct. And instead of calling them NO-NAMES, maybe you should try to read some of what they have researched instead of just discredit them as nonsense. You have shown that you don't care about new research plenty of times and only want to believe what suits the way you want your familytree to be, please don't force your fantasy trees on the rest of us that mostly wants to have our trees as correct as possible according to trustworthy sources. And what sources are trustworthy or not you can find out by reading what these professionals have written. Then maybe you to can get a trustworthy tree to show your family.

@Remi Trygve Pedersen - You should name the sources where the Historians accuse or claim the old Sagas to be false - sources that are hundreds of years before those people where even born.

You can all swirl around names and and try to build some credibility on a list of names of academics and scholars - but will you will never be credible if you do not refer to the sources that these names claim the people in the Sagas and old sources to be false. If you don't don’t refer to the articles or books you insist that the scholars and academics on your list claim that everything is a lie that is written in old data or sources, then you are simply lying up on these people you are quoting.

By the way Ólafía Einarsdóttir she studied also archaeology and anthropology as an extra subject with emphasis on Nordic culture. She studied archeology because she found History far too limited in knowledge regarding the Middle Ages and criticized that everything by Historians had to be bound by dates and demands on that everything should be signed and printed for.

History was simply not enough for her or a reliable science for her – certainly not credible – and by far too limited research method. And further more – Besides her PHD in Chronology, her specialty was the women in the Sagas, their rights and status as she pointed out for example that women in Iceland enjoyed more rights and respect than in most other places at the end of the Icelandic Commonwealth (up till the year 1262). And guess what – she based her work on Islendingabok and the Sagas. So how on earth are you going to argue your statement that Ólafía Einarsdóttir has argued that the Book of Settlers in Iceland and the Sagas are all based on a lie and all the persons mentioned in those sources are "Fictional"?

By the way! I'm going to take the liberty to quote Ólafia where she writes about historians and their work: "...The troubles of historians who often need to work with timelines that are not in use, timelines that are different from us today, and that is not this is not adequately explained by the profession (Historians).

So Remi - as written here above - where on earth did you read that Ólafia Einarsdóttir states that the old sources from Middle Ages and the Sagas, sources she based her lifelong studies on, are based on lies? Please give me the name of the article or the book she makes this statement.

Regarding Joan Elizabeth Turville-Petre she was a noted academic at Oxford University, England, in the field of Anglo-Saxon, Icelandic and Scandinavian language studies. And since I have read her article on Icelandic genealogy: "….. The genealogist and history: Ari to Snorri" Saga-Book of the Viking Society for Northern Research 20 (1978–81) 7–23 ( http://www.vsnrweb-publications.org.uk/Saga-Book%20XX.pdf )” – I would really appreciate if you could point out to me where she states that Scandinavian genealogy is based on a lie or point out to me the source you claim to have read her statements.

The other names you so patronizingly mention in your "list" mean absolutely nothing to me because you don't reveal the sources you base your claims on. I think I even wrote to this person, Claus Krag, and asked him to explain your claims that he insisted that the story of Kong Sverre was based on a lie and Kong Sverre wasn't the son of Sigurd Mund. This source of yours hasn't written back to me - and why on earth could that be?

And Remi - just to be in the clear - since you have absolutely no authority over us here on Geni - and clearly no academical background - I sincerely advise you to do some effort in respecting the views and work of other members here on Geni. And historians do not contribute with any credibility on Medieval genealogy and therefore are not credible or trustworthy sources as you claim. After having read the work of many modern historians on Medieval Ages - I have come to the conclusion that most of them are are trying to make a name for them selves . Specially since Archeology has in so many cases established or provided proof of what is written in the old sources.

And there you have my reason for joining Geni. I base my knowledge on what is written in the old sources until proven otherwise through DNA-TESTING or other scientific methods that I am confident that will be developed further in the future - My view is that the old pedigrees are to be connected as they are written until proven otherwise through scientific methods - not by your historians. And how on earth are you going to prove that the connections are wrong if no one knows of how they are in the old sources because you and your followers have disconnected them all? And once again Remi - historians are not scientists, they are scholars and therefore aren't compatible to what the purpose of Geni is.