Attila the Hun, "Scourge of God", King of the Huns - Attila the Hun is born where?

Pannonia, Roman Empire (now Transdanubia, Hungary), Hungary- that's what I'm finding out as well.

All previous connection is cut away, no one living today is no longer his decendant, so why the interest, it's just to forget one of the most likely progenitor of all living europeans today and just let him rest as our curators already have done...

Ulf I'm tri-racial and have Hungarian roots in part. I'm challenging Somerled's viking roots. He may be more exotic than meets the eye !

I get what Private User is saying, but I think it is part of the evolving process of gaining information or maybe evaluating information. That is ongoing and should be.

Once I had a direct line to Attila. Might come around again, who knows? I have to sort of hope that one day DNA will tell all that I, Private User, and Dr. Wilton McDonald II - Attorney & Barrister are seeking.

That all said, we can't just throw out "illegitimate lines" of historic nature (or in our own family history) if someone decided another bed was warmer, safer, or worse if it was by force as was the case in many instances. There are many out there who just "did the right thing" and accepted that a child might be of another to gain an heir or have a child or protect someone. Sometimes it was even worth it in the long haul. Happy Thanksgiving!

Susan never claimed a blood connection here- just an in-law

Yeah, mine is in-law too, now. But like Ulf, once I had a direct connection. I think it is just a process.

If he Attila had countless of wifes, then he must have had countless of children, 3 sons Ellac, Dengizich and Ernak are mentioned among others, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernak Ernak was set up in the Nominalia of the Bulgarian khans, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalia_of_the_Bulgarian_khans
The main problem seems to be validation of the genealogical lines between them and later lines into other rulers.

The former connection, was likely this profile, in legend he was son of Ed, son of Csaba, son of Attila the Hun. Ügyek

Cut and locked initially by some lost old wannabe and notorius hostile curator to all legends, oral myths and sagas in world history, self-appointed know it all judge autocrat who decides what lines to be allowed and displayed in the common world tree.

There was no discussion about the "why" behind his cut at all, as usual.

All of european descent are descedants of Attila. Not once or twice, but several times. Pure mathematics. (But what comes to Somerled dr Will, his DNA IS R1, so your blood line is cut somewhere, hundreds of his direct male descendants has taken the DNA test, it is actually one of the most researched :) I did not know that before. They are not just putting their DNA to Geni )

Saga I can be related to Somerled but perhaps not in terms of Big Y- father/ son. My official DNA is now dated to Scotland around 1000 to 1200 AD . This is the official official report and I'm matched to Oakley and Logan families all EM2 class . There are more I'm sure and my geneticist Terry is very good. I'm happy - my closest match James Macdonald b 1788 is also EM2 . I am pretty sure I'm related to Somerled. Perhaps one of his daughters got knocked up by a dashing handsome Moor and the child was adopted as Somerled's own/ grand son??? Will know more after next month when more Big Ys come in from my line . Looking good right now and if I'm not related to Somerled then the Clan Bible written 200 years is wrong . I'm happy with DNA results so far all EM2 class and backs up my family tree / claims

As for the birth place of Attila, it should be altered to Hungaria, not that that land existed then, just as less as Romania did, but geographically and with use of modern name of the correct land, it was said that Atilla's homeland was what is now known as Hungaria, thus he should have been born there in that territory.

Ok thanks Ulf and have a great weekend

Private User if it is important enough we can ask a Curator to create a place that is historical correct existed at the moment Attila was born. I will make the changes.

No, we just should use modern days nomenclature in the fields, but in the about me, we can write what it was called at that time, or what country state or whatever it was under just as we do with everything else where states have vanished or got up into other or new states.

"No, we just should use modern days nomenclature in the fields"

I could be wrong, but on Geni we try to work based on facts and not hear say.
In the past google maps was used. See https://help.geni.com/hc/en-us/articles/229706107-How-are-location-... but Google maps can only handle modern days nomenclature. What I did was entered first the modern place and then I did correct it manually. Now the birth place is linked to a real place closely to where he was born and the name of the place is also correct.

Do what you do, the connections to the profile and the 520 that followed it, is anyway destroyed, ruined.

This is a found from Sweden 300c, http://mis.historiska.se/mis/sok/fid.asp?fid=109203 it's a king in Ranarike who depicted himself as a Roman emperor on a coin, larger picture, http://catview.historiska.se/catview/media/highres/14710 . 100 years later the Huns came to northen Europe, all along the northen roman empier frontier, they made deals with the goths, the danes and the swedes, and many other tribes that they encountered, so that they had allies when they attacked the roman empire.

Some of these deals was based on friendly marriages between the western ruler families and the rulers of the huns, this is a known concepts to avoid feuds and wars, nevertheless, many had to pay tribute along the borders, especially on the roman side.

80 years after Atillas death a large volcano eruption occured somewhere in Siberia, creating a 3 years long winter, 6 years later a second eruption of a volcano in the Indian Ocean created a 10 years winter that killed half of the mankind on earth, mostly by starvation.

This is a very dark age in the midst of the 550, and a lot of real history turned into myths, mostly surving orally, among them the stories about this catastrophe, later named Fimbulwinter, known today just as a myth, but it nevertheless happened according to modern archeolgical findings and study of sediments. When we know, do we changes the imprint that it's all just was a myth, or do we name it as a fact?

The main reason for telling this, is that ofcourse, there will be gaps in the lines from Atilla down to us, easy to spot when the persons had to either have lived for 100-150 years, or in fact, contain some missing profiles inbetween. It could have been replaced by N.N. profiles, or being displayed regarless of the lacks of reals dates.

But this chosen solution to just cut the connections, is the easy way out, but it's also at the same time just a falsification of history.

Dr Will Jr - there are many ways of being "related to" somebody. There's direct father-to-son descent, which is what can be detected by Y-DNA (in all variants). There is direct mother-to-daughter descent, for which mtDNA is the tool of choice (but getting a good paper trail is extremely difficult). There is mixed descent (father to daughter to grandson to great-granddaughter, and zillions of other variations), which can *sometimes* be detected by autosomal DNA if it isn't too many generations ago (the current limit is about five to seven, so you're not going to find Somerled that way). And there's all the collateral, in-law, step and foster possibilities, for which a sound paper trail is a must.

As far as Somerled goes, we're pretty sure who his sons were, but not so sure about daughters (or for that matter sisters).

Ulf: The bottom line on Geni is, "if you can't prove it, you can't claim it". You know this. You've been told so often enough. You just don't want to accept it.

Disconnecting unproven ancestors is not any more "falsifying history" than connecting to unproven ancestors.

https://guides.lib.uw.edu/research/ancient/primary

https://eudocs.lib.byu.edu/index.php/History_of_Prehistoric_and_Anc...

https://libguides.uah.edu/c.php?g=263642&p=1759769

https://libguides.uah.edu/c.php?g=263642&p=1759769#s-lg-box-537...

https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/attila1.asp

Maven- my geneticist Dr. Fowler is helping me to sort out my down lines

Dr Will Jr - Okay. Please keep us posted on any major developments.

Maven. If we have had an oral tradition, that first was recorded in print on a book several hundreds years after, it doesn't make it false.
Easy example.
If we have a saga of 10 kings in a row, all fathers and sons, it's considered by most academic, historians etc. today as just legend, myth. But if we do find that number 1, 3, 7 and 10, in that row of kings actually have existed, doesn't it tell us that in fact, all of them MUST have existed, why be right on just these and wrong about the others?

Logic tells us that the probability in this case is very high that the oral tradition about them all actually was right and therefore it does not need to be contemporary,
(the moment when they wrote it down, contra when it happened, when it comes to such accounts). Yes, I fought for this and by time, must people will probably be more aware of it and maybe, accept it despite lack of some coexisting other sources regarding some of the kings mentioned.

There's a well-known process by which a list of kings gets turned into a pedigree, simply by assuming that each king was the son of the last.

But those people lived by the sword and died by the sword. They were top dog, for a while, but it was only a matter of time before they were bested by a younger man. Occasionally they were killed by their own sons, but more often by somebody else.

Yes will keep everyone updated. My main tree is on My Heritage. Geni is a back up tree for me

Feel free to discuss what you want, but I started this discussion with a simple question where was Attila born and I got that answer. So I will leave this discussion.

Brian Johnson name one actual king that by the sword took his rule as a king, being a peasant or nobody to begin with, please, no names from any movie. If it true what you claim, then you might want to add a link to him here on geni.

Ulf Martinsson

Maximinus Thrax, Roman Emperor

IIvailo Ugain, of Bulgaria

Zhu Yuanzhang 朱元璋, Emperor Taizu of Ming

Basil I, Byzantine Emperor

Anne Brannen Not one pesant, only generals, commanders etc, Basil you can forget, it's not sure that he was a son of a pesant, more likely a son of a landowner, it's a subject of debate, more than likely, he has never used a plough or sowed land. It's possible (according to some historians true) that Basil's parents were captured by the king of the Onogundur Huns, Krum, (who might have been a decendant of Attila), and if so, why would Krum capture simple pesants?

The fault with historians, is the lack of a good trustworthy context, in this case, they capture people with power, ordinary people they use them as they are by letting them continue their simple work. From pesant to emporer sounds good, it sells, from enslaved landowners, to free man and emporer doesn't.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basil_I#From_peasant_to_emperor in here, you can read and be sure, that nothing about him or his origin is sure.

About Zhu Yuanzhang 朱元璋, Emperor Taizu of Ming, does not reflect the traditions in Europa, where every king (including Basil I) have claimed to be decendant of another king, or at least been adopted by one.