Talk:Fairhair dynasty

Untitled

This article was frankly very poor - no reliable or verifiable sources at all, and a seemingly over-literal use of Norwegian names. I've stripped it down to the basics and added a king-list taken from List of Norwegian monarchs. If people want to expand the article, feel free, but please make sure that you cite your sources and don't add your own original research. -- ChrisO 21:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Genelogy

Most medieval genealogies of noblemen and royals were actually all made up centuries later to gain political power by claiming noble birth. To point out that they contain false links is like criticizing a crime novel for just being fiction. Of course its made up!.. If people of the 12th century actually believed that i.e. Sverre was the son of King Sigurn Munn, it had political consequences, regardless the fact that it was a forgery. Perceived (and sometimes false) genealogies may be equally as historically important as true genealogies.

"But its more likely that only three generations of rulers in lineage of Harald Fairhair himself are known, and all the rest afterwards just used the prestige and name of the country's first unifier." Sounds plausible, but that is not the point the medievalist are making. It was (probably) in the 12th century that it was politically advantageous to claim inheritance as far back as AD 890, instead of e.g. Saint Olav (died 1030). "The rest" didn't claim being members of a Fairhair dynasty, it was instead claimed later that they had been members of the Fairhair dynasty by their postdecessors. (Same logic as it was in 1648, that 1618 became the start of the 30 years war) --H@r@ld 05:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

A Norwegian nationalist/ traditionalist view to Fairhair dynasty

On 1 May 2007 an anonymous Norwegian contributor edited this article in a way that the non-traditionalist viewpoint was erased away. Editors may want to dissect that one's claims and comment upon such. The outcome on 1 May was: Suedois 15:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

"Dynasty itself: traditional view vs artificial construct

The Fairhair dynasty is the first royal dynasty of the united Kingdom of Norway. It was founded by King Haraldr hinn hárfagri, known as Harald Fairhair or Finehair, around 870. Its last ruler was king Olav IV who died in 1387.

The descent starting from Harald Hardrule (872-930) down to Magnus IV of Norway is undisputed. Sverre Sigurdsson's claim to be the son of Sigurd Munn is however disputed, which could make Inge Bårdsson the last king of a dynasty.

The concept of a "Fairhair dynasty" is probably an invention from the later mediaeval period, when rivalry between throne pretenders, and desire to enforce the legitimacy of the whole dynasty compared with its early rivals, made it appropriate to trace royal lineages back to the 9th century in order to gain legitimacy for their rule.

A few of the Norwegian earls in the early 11th century were in fact tribute-paying petty rulers subjugate to Denmark, or outright Danish vice-kings, however, Denmark were also under Norwegian control for a brief period later in the same century. Many contemporary historians conceals however that for a period of 20 years the earl of Hladir was in fact the sole and undisputed ruler of Norway, while he has by many been described as just a petty king under Danish control.

The Kingdom of Norway as a unified realm was initiated by King Harald Fairhair in 9th century. His efforts in unifying the petty kingdoms of Norway, resulted in the first known Norwegian central government. The country however fragmented soon, and was collected into one entity again several times during the 10th century, it was finally stabilized by Magnus I and later Harald III when they did not only secure Norway as an independent kingdom, but also subdued Denmark for a period. This marked the coming period (1035-1130) as the time when Norway was the most powerfull kingdom of Scandinavia. Norway has been a monarchy since then, passing through several eras.

Thus was born the medieval kingdom of Norway, the realm of the Fairhair dynasty.

Norway was the hereditary kingdom of this dynasty, i.e agnatic descendants of the first unifier-king. The throne was inherited by all of Harald's male descendants. In the 13th century, the kingdom was officially declared hereditary by law. Contrary to other Scandinavian monarchies (which were elective kingdoms in the Middle Ages) Norway has always been a hereditary kingdom.

Harald Fairhair was the first king of Norway, as opposed to "in Norway". The date of the first formation of a unified Norwegian kingdom was 872 when he defeated the last petty kings who resisted him at the Battle of Hafrsfjord, however the consolidation of his power took many years. The boundaries of Fairhair's kingdom were not identical to those of present day Norway all the way north, and upon his death the kingship was shared among his sons for a short period. Harald was however the first king to have control over the entire country, and therefore the true unifier of Norway. Olav II is generally held to be the driving force behind Norway's final conversion to Christianity, though it was started by Olav I. He was later also revered as Rex Perpetuum Norvegiæ (Latin: the eternal king of Norway).[1]

The Fairhair dynasty, is not, an artificial construct. The genealogical lines between Harald Fairhair and the generation of Olav the Saint and Harald Hardraade is real, however Danish historians have tried to proove it otherwise.

From our sources, it seems reasonable to assume that Olav II and Harald III were half-brothers, from the same mother. Their line back to Harald I comes through their fathers however, both descended from the great unifier of Norway.

Harald III's father were a descendent, in unbroken male line, from a younger (son of Harald Fairhair. The same goes regarding Olav II's line...."

Seperation

The different branches of the so-call Fairhair dynasty should be seperated to their own articles, maybe stubs. There is already a House of Hardrada article (which still needs to be broken down into Hardrada and Gille branch), and I created House of Sverre. Can someone else create the other branches?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 18:05, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree, because there is this big scholarly issue of whether the Fairhair dynasty is real, which is best discussed here. I'd rather see some of the repetition removed. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:14, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

The Hammer Collective : Soviets Of Jutland

It is natural for most to accept all that is Non-Roman to be German, including the Bretons, this, is unfounded.

The classification of all tribes living beyond the Roman districts describes them to be as variant that the word Saxon assumes slang connotations.

It is true that a collective may have been formed during war or any other duress, but it is not proper to study them as a whole. This pan-germanic idea has grown in the recent past into a perceived fundamental ethnic order forged by military and economic alliance. There are instances in England of men claiming a thread that does not fit many needles.

A break down serves well.

Amanbir Singh Grewal

RV

117.237.43.140 (talk) 19:53, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

The Trojan Grail : Europe's Quest For Glory

The Trojan Wars are used by certain Europeans to claim tracts in the regions of Lower Egypt and Mesopotamia.

What began as trade might have led to the Greek colonisation of the Nile Delta and its surroundings with the establishment of a European Seat across the seas. This short lived domain was repulsed by the Ethiopians under Memnon.

The Chaldeans of Irak claim to be related to these European rex.

The Trojan Wars, an ordinary conflict, formed the subject matter for the Greek Epics and is also used by certain Europeans today to pursue a dominant position in the Middle East. Rumors are it is coming under severe attacks from the periphery by what is commonly known as the holy warriors - The Finishians.

Amanbir Singh Grewal.

Carthage.

117.237.67.236 (talk) 20:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)