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

@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.

"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 ."

And that just proved my point. You are set in your ways and are not even willing to think that anyone except you have the correct view.

"Specially since Archeology has in so many cases established or provided proof of what is written in the old sources." Maybe you should read https://www.vfk.no/globalassets/vfk/dokumenter/kultur/kulturarv/lit... (you need to use Chrome to read it, and it is written in norwegian). The main point being that all of the mounds in Borre believed to belong to Ynglingesaga kings, more or less have been proven to belong to the wrong time (they are not from 800-900 but from 600-700) so almost all of them have been proven to not be what Snorre Sturlasson wrote in his saga about the Norwegian kings in that period.

Please, Anna Kristin, before you make any claim, please be up to date on the newest research before you say something. And, yes, I have no authority over you and what you believe, but at least I'm trying to keep my knowledge up to date on what the historians, archeologists and linguistics are saying about the timeperiod 800-1100 in Norway, while I feel that you are just set in your ways.

You can find most of the references in the article I linked to above. I have found them by using archives, library searches and google searches.

I know what these Professionals have written, since I have infact read what they wrote in each article or book. And you just think they wrote this to make a name for them selves. Shame on you for not being an openminded critic but just being set in presumptuous mind.

That you are not able to change your mind when new trustworthy information are being presented before it is proven by DNA testing is a major fault in your reasoning. Our job as genealogist are to prove connections beyond almost any doubt.with the trustworthy sources we have. In the last 30 years Snorre Sturlasson's writings about the Norwegian kings has been thought to be more fictional than facts in the parts from around year 1000-1015 and earlier. And that is something we should recognize. We need to adapt to new knowlegde and not be set in our stubborn ways

Our job in our genealogy is not to prove what is wrong, but to prove what is correct. The sagas in the period we are talking about is not being proved as correct according to the professionals of today. That is something we as a collaborative genealogical site need to acknowledge. We do not have the liberty to show what our personal feelings are, but we need to show what the common and up to date knowledge is saying.

There is a lot of BS in this discussion.
I see that there are some people that do not axept the old history and say that they can’t be proved.
Just a question, who are you to say that they can’t be proven, is it because you have the answers but noone else? If anyone of you who claims that all old the written documentation is wrong and that you know this, then you must be God.
I also see that the testing for fake medival and ancient line project refuses the official french royal genealogy. To say that: «you should not have any decendents to these people» on this site is just BS.
If curators relay on the DNA profile, you should know that the scientists tells that this do not prove anything else than the area they came from.
When it comes to Harald Fairhair there are more written about this than Snorre and to say that noone can prove any relationship back to Harald Fairhair must be a joke, right.
It seems like it is to easy for Geni to just cut lines on a rather bad judgment from some who claims they are right about the proof of the lines, I doubt that they know any more than the others who have an interest in this and make the research, who Geni takes credit for.
Yes there are fault in many lines at Geni and they should be corrected with documentation, not only as assertions.
I know for a fact that there are German families who have proof of their ancestry on the wall for 800 years. (in some of the castles), and this is identical with the old scripts from Germany.
Staverskov in Denmark was not axepted in DAA, because they claimed she was not of a noble family, she then made a cloth which shows her linage of 150 years and DAA had to axept it. This cloth is at Fredriksborg castle and is brought out every christmas at the order of the Queen.
I hoped that Genis curators would behave better in the future and not to be arrogant to members of Geni. You should instead help members and correct them with documentation instead of just claim another assertion without documents as you do most of the time.

Tor Bjarne, before you make more accusations, maybe you should read up on what the historians have written since 1990 and up till today. You can find a good summary in this article written by professor in archeology Bjørn Myhre. The article is called "Før Viken ble Norge" and it can be found attached as a document under the project https://www.geni.com/projects/Scandinavian-sagas/18 Just click on "Bilder og dokumenter" (in Norwegian) [Photos and Documents in English] and you can find the pdf file under documents. (Sorry, the document is written in Norwegian)

The whole document is interesting reading, but if you don't want to read 230 pages, please just read Chapter 13 and 14, which recapitulates the historians views over time and what they think at the moment about having Harald Haafagre as an ancestor.

The main point being noone can prove any relationship further back than St Olav's father Harald Grenske. The persons mentioned by Snorre and others before him, Gudrød Bjørnsson and even Bjørn Farmann is not possible to prove that they have existed. So, Tor Bjarne, it is no joke, it is not possible to prove any relationship further back than Harald Grenske. Noone is able to prove any relationship back to Harald Fairhair and that is a fact that almost every medeival and viking historian think at the moment. That is what the historians say and they are closest to having the answers, not me, not you. Non of us are any god, but the historians think that Snorre and his fellow sagawriters in the 12th and 13th Century are wrong about this. And that is what we need to show here on Geni.

Thanks for referencing Bjorn Myhre's article, Remi. Highly interesting.

Agreed Remi.

Just to add a little fuel to the fire - Remi many on geni do not the methods you use to cut relationships in this forum. I have asked repeatedly that you unlock some of the profiles that you have locked so other information can be added. You have refused to do this. This would show that you at least respect other opinions. A confident man is open to thoughts and opinions of others. When you lock profiles it demonstrates that you are not confident, have a closed mind and that only your opinion counts.

Martin

Martin, rather than personal attacks present your arguments in public discussions started from the relevant profile and tagging associated profiles to increase visibility for other users.

General complaints and whinging just sound petulant and in my experience Remi is always willing to explain his actions with supporting evidence whenever a specific query is raised. With far more patience and restraint than I could muster if it were me.

While locking Data and also Relationships between profiles is very common practice for Curators, fully locking a profile or locking of About sections is quite rare. Without specific examples...

It boils down to the question: Is Geni a World Tree based on opinions or facts.

We are all entitled to our opinions, as Martin mentions above. But do we want to build a Tree based on (all the diverse) opinions that people have? Or do we want to have a Tree based as much as possible on facts? Facts here meaning what the primary sources tell us; then added professional genealogists' and historical research; and supplemented by DNA if possible.

Personally I want the Tree to be based on facts, and hence it will not be possible to accommodate everybody's opinions.

Jørn Middelborg Yes facts only facts and nothing but facts.

So say we all.

My compliant is not about the facts. It is the method being used to determine what the acceptable evidence is that I have concerns about. As curators many of you are basing your "facts" on your personal interruption of the evidence that you are personally choosing to use while rebuffing any debate about your facts and choosing to ignore some of the old sagas as mentioned by others in this discussion. This is not the way to get at the real truth.

Case in point is Eyvind Ranesson Sodheim and his possible son Rane Eyvindsson. When curators lock the profile so no other information can be added you are not helping to create a world tree where if additional facts are found, those facts can be easily added. If new information can only be added when a curator approves them and makes a personal judgement on the merits of the information through his own person view something is very wrong This is NOT the way to have input that could be important to the overall profile. I am not the only one complaining and sometimes my frustration has shown. It's extremely important to be seen to be fair and some of your curators have lost their perspective. I am not deputing any of Remi's facts, just the dictatorial methods he is using to lock profiles in order to control the agenda. That is not fair and that method is not getting any respect from me and obviously from many others. Remi you need to unlock the controls and allow contributes that could be a benefit to Geni as a whole.

Martin Nordstrom

Tor, I'm with you 100%. It's a bit like the micro minority of no faith hijacking and controlling scientific data and dictating their view as "fact" to people of faith who constitute *96% of the planet's population while crushing any other view. When people of such a way of thinking are put in power, who are given the controls to out-shout and silence the majority by deleting what they deem to be "unapproved" history, or deleting opposing voices (posts), or revoking their membership, you have a total info totallitarian dictatorship akin to Orwell's 1984. This is Smithsonian-style history-controlled story telling, which all private "little guy" history museums are constantly up against. Not all curators here are dictators, there are some which realize that they are not God, but there are others who think this site is their private kingdom and that their private interpretation of data is the ONLY VALID interpretation. Those are the curators that should be removed. I tip my hat to the curators who work hard each day to be fair and honest and who justly compromise instead of putting an iron boot to the throats of the rest of us. *[ref. Carl Sagan].

Yes indeed, Martin.

@Martin Emanuel and @James David Cunningham, D.D. - I totally agree with you. And I simply do not understand the ethics in allowing the "Know it all and manipulative" curators to manipulate old sources and data that await scientific research, data that needs to be listed and connected to the sources that await to be researched as science and scientific research methods develops.

Little comment about familysearch, it is very untrustworthy these days, because anybody can really mess with the information, there are no curatoring. There are hundreds of copies of same profile and the profiles are made in the first place to do "babtisms for dead" for mormon/LDS faith and they need new material all the time for their templework. Just saying. Lots and lots of mistakes found all the time sadly. And lots of mrs N. There were no mrs someones wife before 1800's. :)

Harald I "Fairhair", king of Norway is now my 29th great grandfather.
He was my 30th Great Grandfather?
Not trusting the "world tree."

I have the feeling that people sometimes do not understand the notion that: The quality of the output depends on the quality of the input.

Going back to the time of Harald, about 1,100 years ago the sources we have are very limited, and the reliability and quality is rather poor. Therefore, it is quite impossible to produce realistic and quality output data based on these sources. There will be great uncertainties.

You can't stop the knowledge that has been followed for centuries, truth is where it lies and belief is what we have, so go with the facts on the knowledge for knowledge is true. Also you can't go wrong with a tomb of kings and don't destroy history, cause they want it to be forgotten.

Jørn Middelborg the problem with uncertainties is that they can often lead to blank spaces or disconnects in the tree.

We can't prove X is the son of Y so we will not show that on Geni, but 90% of people think X is the son of Y so when they do not find this connection on Geni they complain that Geni is wrong or a conspiracy. Or they "fix it" for us.

Genealogy (especially this far back) is not black and white it is grey and red and gold, and blue.

Alex Moses - sure I will accept around 90-99 % certainty in many cases :) Especially if several sources point in one direction.

Yes that would be nice, but 90% of people may believe a "fact" because one unreliable source recorded it and no other source contradicts it.

Alex - sure. We are on the same page.

With respect to some of the conversations in this discussion, I believe that curators need to actually read the "terms of use" posted by Geni at the link below. Please note VI "Proprietary Rights in Content." Another interesting line is in VII "Geni does not endorse and has no control over the Content. Content is not necessarily reviewed by Geni prior to posting and does not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of Geni. Geni makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the Content or to the accuracy and reliability of the Content or any material or information that you transmit to other Members."

I especially like item X "Copyright Policy. You may not post, modify, distribute, or reproduce in any way any copyrighted material, trademarks, or other proprietary information belonging to others without obtaining the prior written consent of the owner of such proprietary rights. It is the policy of Geni to terminate Membership privileges of any Member who repeatedly infringes the copyright rights of others upon receipt of prompt notification to Geni by the copyright owner or the copyright owner's legal agent."

As curators who are in the habit of locking profiles and thereby blocking impossible information, I believe it is very clear you are violating the Terms of Use and should unlock those profiles.

In XIII - Part of the terms of use says this website is intended a private family network.

These are the FACTS and reality of what Geni is intended to be - as curators, if you disagree I say maybe you should look elsewhere to control the agenda.

https://www.geni.com/company/terms_of_use

Martin Nordstrom

Martin Emanuel Please post what is correct about Harald, since you claim to know this.

We are all looking forward to your sources!

Knowledge is true, Knowledge is fact, but if they teach us about all this Babble than it is not true but falsehood that they have been teaching us all these years. Why would WIKIpedia would post thing that are false and misleading. It is the people that are destroying history, so we will not claim our past, as in WWll was a big downer burning all the books of history, very disturbing about sad. Only the real book like Charles Dickens and William Shakespeare tells the real story about life in books is where you can get alot of real life experiences. Been gathering lots of history books to see the merit in all this, for I am the solution to the future as well as the past. As my family of Freemason's did, they keep a great lineage on record I heard, hhhmmm. That would be my link to my past everyone has there own special link to the past.

Remi, I think Martin made it clear, according to Geni Policy which you are obliged to obey, that you are not entitled to dictatorially control content. The data that is historically attainable about Harald is what should be used until and unless other HISTORICAL PROOF TO THE CONTRARY (not modern opinion about the past) comes to light. Curators are here to curate; if a curator refuses to accept ancient recorded history due to some personal opinion or bias against it, they have no authority (based on Geni Policy that We the paying members agreed to by contract) to dictate to the rest of us that we have to believe the same way. Put the data in the profiles and allow us, the paying members, to make our own historical or theological opinion on it. If an historic person was elevated in ancient times to that of deity, their claimed deitiship dos not discount their existence AS A PERSON, and a curator has no right to eliminate them from the heritage of the human race. I do not believe in THE GOD Odin, but there is more than enough historical data to demonstrate that the deity Odin is in fact based on a real flesh and blood human and therefore MUST be included on the Geni world tree UNDISCONNECTED from the human lineage attributed to him by ancient writers. If there are conflicts in the data, make note of it. If its too complicated, let someone else do it. If you refuse, then resign as curator. But none of us are here to take dictation. The data must be provided in an UNBIASED way, whether from an historic religious tome such as the Bible or an ancient Epic - it doesn't matter - a curator's lack of faith or belief shouldn't be made everyone else's problem.

Dr. James David Cunningham
The excerpts Martin's quotes from the T&Cs regard Proprietary Rights in Content and Copyright Policy it is not clear why he thinks these are relevant to this discussion, your own post is interesting but not in my opinion supported at all by the T&C excerpts that Martin posted.

Your request seems to be that Curators stop curating the tree, this would call into question why Curators exist on Geni. Why have Geni created this concept and supported it for nearly 10 years if we are not fulfilling the role that they intended?

As for Odin, which Odin is it that you wish to be connected as your ancestor? "...there is more than enough historical data to demonstrate that the deity Odin is in fact based on a real flesh and blood human..." Can you share even one example? Even just a link? I have spent an enormous amount of time curating the profiles around Odin, {Norse God} and it is my "fault" (with the blessings of other curators) that he is not connected in any way to the human tree.

I agree, I cant see how that part of the copyright policy is relevant... The Geni policy does say that it is not theyr responsibility if members post wrong info, but that doesnt mean that they have no right to curate the errors. The curators job is to curate the historical profiles that we all share a connection to and also the quality of the tree. What you post on Geni is not your property it is part of a World Tree and belongs to everyone. That means that we must have curators to make sure that what the tree contains actually has some minimum level of quality. If not we would still have fictional characters like Santas wife connected to St. Nicholas and other characters we know that are modern constructions. I might not always agree with all the cuts, but it serves none to have fictional characters or lineages that we have no sources for in the tree (leave that to your own private tree on MH or PC)..

HELLO JAMES DAVID CUNNINGHAM!!! It's me again. Boy, is this kinda like the Charlemagne discussion episode..... I hope that I don't have to show more dna matches again...

https://www.geni.com/path/Diana+is+related+to+Harald-I-Fairhair-kin...