Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson - Ragnar Lodbrok Sigurdsson

Started by Gregg VanSolen Rasor on Monday, July 11, 2016
Problem with this page?


Profiles Mentioned:

Related Projects:

Showing 31-60 of 122 posts

Private User "About Ragnar, someone made a connection in some of my ancestors. I didn't. I do not even know if I'm really a descendant of Åløf, Björn and Sigurd! "

You only have to check and verify your own lines down from this man to you, Duke of Saxony Magnus Billung if your lines are correct, you have 2 verified and almost bulletproof as best as it can be anyway, to both Åløf, and Björn Ironside since Magnus Billung have them both.

You can open this, and then go down the line, verify each and one, check if the sources are reliably and credible, that's pretty much it!

Sandro Márcio de Aguiar Costa is Magnus Billung, Herzog von Sachsen's 25th great grandson!


I have done this my self and so far, I can't dismiss it.
Magnus Billung, Herzog von Sachsen is Ulf Ingvar Göte Martinsson's 27th great grandfather!

Sorry, I missed Sigurd, lets add him.

Magnus Billung, Herzog von Sachsen is Sigurd "Snake-in-the-eye" Ragnarsson's 8th great grandson!


I add the rest
Magnus Billung, Herzog von Sachsen is Åløf Ragnarsdóttir's 6th great grandson!

Magnus Billung, Herzog von Sachsen is Björn Järnsida Ragnarsson's 7th great grandson!

The fact that "someone" has added those paths, are because of that it follows the sources, it corresponds to what's known about them from chronicles and different saga's and you find it reproduced in both lexicons and Wikipedia and that's just as it should be.

Ulf, is Ålöf connected to me as well?

Per Anders Dencker is Åløf Ragnarsdóttir's 25th great nephew's wife's sister's husband's first cousin 7 times removed!


Mine too Vilhelm Jörginsson!

Thank you Ulf. From following these discussions, I now have picked up another of my ancestors - Magnus Billung is my 29th GGF. We are all indebted to folk like yourself who can lead and guide on our individual Geni Journeys.I also do what you recommend, check each individual entry. It helps also to get an understanding of where our forefathers were, what their responsibilities were with any title they held at that time. I have become more interested in geography and history than ever before.

Private User please stop with this nonsense. If you have any verifiable sources for all the links from Duke of Saxony Magnus Billung back to Ragnar or any of his supposed children, please come forward with them, if you do not have any verifiable sources for all of these links, please refrain from maiking people believe in them.

We are trying as hard as we can to get as accurate as possible a tree according to trustworthy sources, and you're not helping one bit. You should know where the sources goes from being trustworthy to becoming fairytales and untrustworthy sagas, and you should tell people where that line goes instead of leading them into fairytales.

Please be accountable and reliable in what you are saying, and not lead people astray.

Remi Trygve Pedersen I have read enough in various threads to know that you are a very skeptical person, so I do not take your advice to be good or even to be taken serious at all, but feel free to disprove it.

When it comes to prove something, we all have different levels for acceptance, some people, or nearly half of the worlds adult population believes in God, the other half either do not believe or believe in something else, the same goes for supernatural phenomenon, so I guess that the half of the humankind could accuse the other part for believing in nonsense to, and actually, I would have a higher understanding if your complaint was about such topics, but when it comes to actual people who might have been glorified and thus become legends, we should not act too rigid but instead be a little bit more open for the possibility that there actually is some kind of truth behind the tale.

Each one of them, Åløf, Björn and Sigurd are said to be the children of the legendary Ragnar, and if you personally do not believe that Ragnar, ever existed, that's totally up to you.

Remi and Ulf. Please, let's not digladiar us for so little!

Excuse me if I ventured in questions of faith, but I believe that it is important that people do not lose the enthusiasm in their searches. The fact that I believe Ragnar has stimulated me a lot in the search for new sources of data.

I don't have much opportunity to research by informations of European ancestry "in situ". I have only the power of the internet.

For me to get reliable data, I have many problems to find the old records in Brazil, coming from a time and place where the means to preserve them were scarce. Just to give you an idea, there is a project called "Lost Titles" to find most of the information obtained by a brazilian genealogist, who lost almost everything in the Great Earthquake of Lisbon of 1755!

The Ulf tips were welcome, since I could find other branches I could not even imagine, coming to Björn by other trunk (different from Billung Magnus, Herzog von Sachsen) starting from my great-grandfather Adauto: https://www.geni.com/path/Adauto-de-Salles-Soares+is+related+to+Bj%...

Thank you Ulf, for the tip!

Thanks Remi, to open our eyes.

Private User I found them both
Maria Walesca de Aguiar Costa is Ulf Ingvar Göte Martinsson's 22nd cousin thrice removed!

Adauto de Salles Soares is Ulf Ingvar Göte Martinsson's 23rd cousin thrice removed!

They in turn both share this common ggg+f, maybe some more?
Sancho I, o Povoador, rei de Portugal

Yup. I have found others. But this is very tiring !!! The Geni search engine could be better! Could have a kind of filter Not "name", to prevent it passes through a node simply because it is the shortest route.
You and I have portuguese ancestry! ;-)

seems so!
Maria Walesca de Aguiar Costa is Sancho I the Populator, King of Portugal's 21st great granddaughter.
Adauto de Salles Soares is Sancho I the Populator, King of Portugal's 22nd great grandson.

Sandro Márcio de Aguiar Costa is Sancho I the Populator, King of Portugal's 22nd great grandson.

Sancho I the Populator, King of Portugal is my 24th great grandfather.

Father of Sancho 1 the Populator, King of Portugal, is my 26th great grandfather - namely Alfonso 1 "the Conqueror" Henriques, King of Portugal.

I am now trying to research more of this interesting Portuguese lineage.

Ora pois! Todos nós somos portugueses também!
Well of course! All of us are Portuguese too! :-)

Ulf, once a person asked me: "Why is everyone is descended from noble and is not from thieves?". I replied that the number of ascending branches is absurdly huge (even if repeating). The documents that come to us are from nobles who had way to generate them and preserve them. The documents of our humbler ancestors may not have been able to be made:

And the Vikings populated Europe, generating descendants in several countries:

Coralie, you'll like this: Portuguese Discovered Australia and New Zealand, https://youtu.be/TuSRW9B0fOs

And I like so much of this: https://youtu.be/_y-l9C7vzbk

The Brazilian accent not sizzles so much with "ssss" (Except Cariocas of Rio) :-p

But the focus here is Ragnar. It is better not turn away from him.

Sandro, we all have a lot of different characters in our family tree, thieves, murderers, rapist, slaves, rich folks and poor, purely statistically we would encounter them all if we just handle enough data and gets a good bit down our family historical road. I have stumbled upon forefathers that have killed, and forefathers that have been murdered, but no matter if they were farmers, fishermen, preachers or burghers, simple men or of nobility, they've all contributed with something and you can't take anyone of them away without the boring 100% fact, that you wouldn't have existed at all.

Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson is my 35th Great Grandfather, from my mother's side (Norwegian and Swedish). Clicking through the links to other Viking and Nordic ancestors is fascinating and amazing. I have direct lineage to the many of the characters in the Saga's.

Ulf, do you remember that I put on discussion topic about Ragnar?


It was on February 3, 2015:

Recently I found a very good text, which expresses exactly all the feeling that I have in genealogy (I'm sorry the translation!...):

"Today, certainly, I know more than I knew. I know that for more ignorant you are about your past, all people have millions of ancestors. I know however simple it seems their origin, all the families come from millenary lineages. And if something today sets me apart from other people, is not the number of ancestors or the centuries of family history, but the fact that I can now say I know something about them. I am not now no more or less important than I ever was; I'm also no more or less important than any other - I am perhaps just better informed.

And against of the old question, "Which family you belong," I understand today that this is a matter devoid of any sense. I belong to all families. And I know that all belong to my family. Therefore in this long search, I found hundreds of names, overlapping and confusing in dozens of generations, forming an endless network of interwoven family trees, whose mesh reveals an indisputable way that at the end, all are relatives of all.

If someone to want to know about my origin, that blood runs in my veins, who is my family, this is the answer:

Are Brazilians and foreigners, Tupis and tapuias, Portuguese and islets, Spanish, Italian and French, German and Hungarian, Dutch and Belgians, English and Irish, Finns, Norwegians and Swedes, Turks and Arabs, Greeks and Armenians, Europeans, Americans, Asians and Africans, Catholics and Protestants, Jews and Muslims, atheists and pagans, priests and lay people, pilgrims and missionaries converted and excommunicated, saints and prophets, teachers and illiterate, doctors and engineers, judges and lawyers, mechanics and repairers, artisans and merchants, farmers and farmers, slaves and landlords, nobles and commoners, kings and emperors, shipwrecked and convicts, murderers and murdered, military and warriors, alferes, sergeants, lieutenants and captains, majors and colonels, chiefs and deputies, governors and authorities, rebels and fugitives, explorers and sailors, pioneers and pioneers, founders of cities, the backcountry explorers, Indians hunters and whale fishermen, children born at sea, elders who died in the jungle, abducted princesses and barons kidnappers, heirs and bastards, rich and poor, Bragança and Maria da Silva, illustrious names and unknown distinguished, historical characters and mere anonymous, thousands and thousands of somebodies, and millions and millions of nobodies ..."

Aksel Sandemose
His son: Sandro Márcio de Aguiar Costa is Espen Sandemose's 23rd cousin! https://www.geni.com/path/Espen-Sandemose+is+related+to+Sandro-de-A...

Aksel-Sandemose wrote in his book "A refugee crosses his tracks" (1933) about the misery of a man in a small town, in this book he formulated ten new commandments that he thought were traits of characters of Scandinavia, those traits were called the law of Jante, that in turn corresponds to Tall poppy syndrome that exist in some english speaking countries around the world, anyway it goes as follows;

The law of Jante
* You shall not think you are something.
* Do not think you're as good as we are.
* Do not think that you are wiser than we are.
* You should not fool yourself into thinking you're better than us.
* You should not think that you know more than we do.
* Do not think that you are better than we are.
* Do not think that you are good at anything.
* You shall not laugh at us.
* You should not think that anyone cares about you.
* Do not think that you can teach us anything.

The sad thing is that many people actually are dominated by this, willingly or by some kind of indoctrination and this in turn affects there ability to make good judgement because they will never accept that someone knows more or are better than themselves in any area, unfortunately this also makes them naturally biased against everything that point in a direction of someone great, like a legend, like Ragnar, a HERO, because this stands against everything they appreciate and live by, and they will stop at nothing to prove you wrong, or anyone that tells them different.

We do indeed have a lot of difficulties even to set up famous people, actors, sculptors, painters, inventors, etc, and most likely because of this trait, this unwillingness are most obvious unfortunately when it comes to Scandinavian projects, they are indeed very few, they have very few profiles, and they are often very bad built and followed up, thje lack of profiles that could have been a part in this existing or none existing projects are huge.

The reason that I enlighten you in this subject are because of the fact that you most likely already have, or will have, encounter strong opposition from people who deny these generations up to profiles like them in the Saga of Ragnar Lothbrok and other equivalent to him from our cultural heritage, BUT, the truth is also, that IF he had been an Englishman, most of the Jante laws followers wouldn't have cared to even protest. ; )

Wow! This is quite different from our Latin world! And now it makes perfect sense to me! Now I can better understand the behavior of some people! Thank you!

Yes indeed it make sense Sandro, unfortunately, and here I will present a line that will never be made on Geni, just because of a multiple reasons mostly based on that Jante Law, the following kings line.

Sigurd "Snake-in-the-eye" Ragnarsson most likely had a son named Svein Sigurdsson, Svein in his turn had a son named Knut I (Hardeknut), he was adopted by Gorm the old in England, also known as Guthrum II, who had no own biological children.

Here Knut are presented as a son of Svein N.N. Knut Sweynson
This one, is also the same profile, Knut Sweynson but presented as a son directly to a father named Sigurd, thus his patronymic name are wrong, and the reason for doing this errors in both profiles is simple because of their? need to make it chronologically impossible to make him a grandson to Sigurd snake in the eye, with the result that his named father Sigurd are someone else unknown Sigurd...

The fact that Knut named one of his famous son Gorm, are here not even considered to have any kind of connections with other "Gorm's" who lived before, Gorm "den Gamle", dansk konge have a very deliberately shortened line of forefathers, just as he came out of the blue and are a result of his own success!

The fact that his father Knut was a son of Svein, who was a son of Sigurd who was a son of Ragnar Lothbrok will never be presented, neither the strong indication that the Danish king Gorm mothers name was Asfrid Odinkarsdotter, will we see here, despite that Gorm actually named one son Odinkar... who in turn had a brother named Toke who also named one of his son Odinkar: Odinkar "den store" Tokesen, Biskop

Let us instead be ignorant and just pretend that this lines above have no connection at all, just as I mentioned.

Gorm the Old, was he old at all?

No, he was most likely born around 917, mentioned for the first time 936 as a king, making him ca. 19 years old at that time, and he died 958 0r 959. So why the nickname "the old"? He was apparently never called that when he lived, and if he died at an age of max 42, how could it become that we today refer him as "the old" Gorm today?

The answer lies in historical revisionism, the very need to address the first acknowledged Danish king as old and why not, wise, the second underlying reason to cut of any forefathers are to simple make him danish born with two unknown most likely 100% danish parents, thus kill two birds with one stone in creating and defending a genuine Danish national icon, but best would certainly have also been, if he had died without any known heirs...

Sorry for the mix up between the two kings with the same name.

Guthrum I (Aethelstan, Gorm the old) 8??-890 "He dies in 890, but before that he adopted Harde-Knud, the same Knut Sveindsson (den Hårde) who later becomes father to Gorm."


Guthrum II was, according to some reconstructions, a King of East Anglia in the early tenth century. He should not be confused with the earlier and better-known Guthrum, who fought against Alfred the Great.


Ulf, you'll never find that line on Geni and for good reason -- it's speculation. It isn't supported by the sources.

I was reading a book last night that made an interesting point. Historians (and good genealogists) are minimalists at heart. They assume stories are just myth unless there are sources to support them.

I liked that. I often say the same thing a different way. Once you abandon the sources you can make up any story you want.

When I first came to Geni I was very tolerant of these speculations. I particularly liked the ones that come from scholars working in the field. I thought to myself that everyone knows it's a guess, maybe even a wild guess, so it doesn't hurt anything and it's very entertaining.

Now I'm changing my mind. It turned out that everyone doesn't know it's a guess. Some people take the guesses seriously, and they are generally also people who don't realize that for every fantastic theory that just has to be true there are dozen other theories that are just as likely.

There's nothing wrong with you or anyone else becoming a hell fire and brimstone evangelist for your pet theories, but I'm very glad we're not going to enshrine them as fact on Geni.

I understand and accept your personal view Justin, but my "pet theory" are not just mine, others who are digging like true detectives comes up with the same result, pointing in one direction, just like my presented theory.

If we accepted circumstantial evidence, we would have this line presented already and perhaps with a footnote in this middle connected profiles between Sigurd and Gorm the old telling us that this relations are plausible but partly lacks solid evidence.

Instead of this, we have a hard locked down profile of a danish king who have seemingly popped up from nowhere, controlled by a danish curator who claims to represents the Danish researcher elite as well as defending Danish interests. The whole idea of a common world tree crashes into small pieces when subgroups defending their national interests are allowed to control how profiles are to be presented and where the crossbar should be laid, this is nothing else than a continuing part of nationalistic history revisionism.

I tell you why, Knut was adopted by an English king, Knut (Canute) in his turn was most likely born in an area that today is in Sweden, just as probably his father. This three probabilities combined are enough to rock the concept of a full blooded danish king, only his mother would have been born in Denmark. Yes, it's that simple, and that's the main reason as I see it to turn down rune stones as evidence also.

Ulf, what on Earth are you using to generate those assumptions from?

King in 936, born in 917 - from which tower of supposition did you jump to that conclusion?

"Nationalistic history revisionism" - what a great phrase for saying "you're wrong and I'm right, and that's the end of that, I don't have to present evidence, my word is enough!"

No, circumstantial evidence is not enough.


If you believe the profile is locked down for political reasons, then you need to come up with sources that show a majority of experts disagree. It's as simple as that.

You have it backwards, I think. The whole idea of a common tree does not crash when a relationship is doubted. Instead, the whole idea of a common tree crashes when anyone can make up anything and expect everyone else to accept it.

Anyone can create a plausible scenario, if they don't bother with sources. What's harder is to take a pet theory that next step and show that the people who do this for a living are pretty much all convinced by the evidence.

For something like this, I would expect to see citations to prominent scholars in Denmark, the other Scandinavian countries, France of course, almost certainly Germany, and probably also Britain and the US.

Showing 31-60 of 122 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion