• General Notes

  [SUSANNA KEENE.FTW]
  
  he also reduced Seeland.
  Danish fleet of 350 ships lost.
  
  
  
  
  
  See Snorre's Saga and the Icelandic Landnamobok (Book of
  Settlment).
  "Greatest of all Vikings" (Makers of England, Arthur Bryant, p.
  95, Doubleday & Comp., 1962)
  "Royalty for Commoners", Roderick W. Stuart, 1992, 2nd edition.
  "Pedigrees of the County Families of Yorkshire", Foster, 1874,
  2 vols. vol1: West Riding, vol2: North and East Ridings
  "Ancestral roots of certain American colonists who came to
  America before 1700", Weis, 1992, seventh edition.
  
  Was RAGNAR LOTHBROK historical?
  
  One of the things that makes this a difficult question to
  discuss is
  that the question "Was Ragnar Lothbrok historical?"  is itself
  somewhat ambiguous.  Thus, before the question can be
  discussed, the
  question has to first be more clearly defined.  To mention two
  opposite extremes, a skeptic could ask whether or not
  everything which
  is said about the character of Ragnar Lothbrok is historically
  accurate, observe that the answer is certainly "no", and then
  claim
  victory.  At the other extreme, a proponent of a historical
  Ragnar
  Lothbrok could ask if a Viking by the name of Ragnar ever
  existed,
  point out that a Viking having the correct name ("Reginheri")
  appears
  in the Frankish annals, and  claim that Ragnar Lothbrok was
  therefore
  historical.  Neither of these two extremes is acceptable in a
  serious
  argument on the subject, so I will discuss the subject from the
  following middle ground.  The criteria which I will use are
  that in
  order for Ragnar Lothbrok to be considered as historical, there
  should
  be a historically documented person of that name who actually
  performed a significant number of the deeds attributed to the
  legendary Ragnar Lothbrok.  I think these are reasonable
  criteria, and
  the  remainder of this discussion is based on these principles.
  Now,
  to answer the question:  No, Ragnar Lothbrok does not appear to
  be a
  historical figure, based on the above criteria.  I will give
  some
  comments as to why I have this opinion, and then mention some
  reading
  material for those who want more.
  
  RAGNAR
  
  The contemporary historical records of the ninth century (when
  Ragnar
  Lothbrok supposedly lived) show only one Viking of the correct
  name, a
  Viking named "Reginheri" (a Latin form equivalent to the name
  Ragnar)
  in France WHO DIED IN THE YEAR 845, according to the
  contemporary
  Frankish annals.  The emphasized words in the previous sentence
  are
  often conveninetly overlooked by those who wish to use
  Reginheri as a
  historical prototype for Ragnar Lothbrok.  Since Reginheri died
  in
  France in the year  845, he cannot have participated in the
  later
  events which form the principal part of the legendary Ragnar
  Lothbrok's exploits.  In addition, there is no good evidence
  that
  Reginheri was the father of any of the individuals who later
  came to
  be regarded as sons of Ragnar Lothbrok.  Thus, Reginheri fails
  to
  satisfy the criterion mentioned above.  No other historical
  Norseman
  named Ragnar is known for the appropriate time period.
  
  LOTHBROK
  
  No contemporary record gives this name, and it is significant
  that
  when the name finally does make it appearance in the records
  200 years
  later, it stands alone.  (Ari, writing in the twelfth century,
  was the
  first known writer to make Ragnar and Lothbrok the same
  person.)  The
  name first appears (as "Lothbroc") in "Gesta Normannorum
  Ducum", by
  William of Jumieges, writing about 1070, in which Lothbroc is
  called
  he father of Bjorn Ironside.  (A Viking named Bjorn is verified
  by the
  contemporary chronicles, but without the nickname.)  Adam of
  Bremen,
  writing soon afterward, called Ivar the son of "Lodparchus".
  Besides
  the fact that this Lothbrok is not attested in any of the
  contemporary
  sources, there seems to be another problem, and that is that
  the name
  ("Lothbroka") appears to be a women's name.  See the article on
  Ragnars saga" by Rory McTurk in "Medieval Scandinavia:  an
  encyclopedia" (New York and London, 1993).  If this argument
  based on
  philology is correct, then this Lothbrok(a), if historical at
  all,
  would be a women, and clearly not identical with the legendary
  Ragnarr
  Lothbrok.  (I do not have the background in linguistics to
  comment
  further on this gender argument.)
  
  RAGNALL
  
  The "Fragmentary Annals of Ireland" (edited and translated by
  Joan N.
  Radner, Dublin, 1978, formerly called "Three Fragments") has an
  item
  of interest which has frequently been pointed out as possibly
  relating
  to the legend of Ragnar Lothbrok.  In it, a certain Ragnall
  (Rognvald)
  son of Alpdan (Halfdan), king of Norway, is mentioned, and his
  exploits prior to the fall of York to the Danes are given, in a
  context in which it is at least arguable that Ragnall and
  Ragnar
  Lothbrok were the same person.  There are two problem with this
  interpretation.  First, Ragnar and Ragnall are not the same
  name, even
  though they look similar.  Second, and more important, the
  Fragmentary
  Annals are themselves not a contemporary source, and there is
  good
  reason to be suspicious about them.  However, even if we were
  to allow
  that the events given there are historical (a concession which
  many
  historians would be unwilling to make), and then concede
  further that
  these events form the basis of the Ragnar legend, then we would
  still
  have that the person on whom the legend was based did not have
  the
  right name.
  
  Could RAGNALL and LOTHBROK have been the same person?
  
  We have already seen that the only historically attested Ragnar
  (Reginheri) cannot reasonably be regarded as a historical
  prototype
  for Ragnar Lothbrok.  Thus, it appears that the best attempt to
  argue
  for a historical Ragnar Lothbrok is to propose (as has been
  done on
  numerous occasions) that Ragnall and Lothbrok were both the
  same
  person, and then assume that the similar (but different) names
  Ragnall
  and Ragnar were accidently confused.  Thus, let us see what
  assumptions are needed in order to assume that Ragnall and
  Lothbrok
  were the same person, assuming that they existed at all.  In
  order for
  this to be the case, we must make the following assumptions:
  
  (1)  We must assume that Adam of Bremen (late eleventh century)
  was
  correct in giving "Lodparchus" (i.e., Lothbrok) as the name of
  the
  father of Ivar (late ninth century).
  
  (2)  We must assume that the "Coghad Gaedhel re Gallaibh" ("The
  War of
  the Gaedhil with the Gaill", ed. by Todd, London, 1867), a
  twelfth
  century Irish source, is correct in stating that Halfdan of
  Dublin
  (killed in Ireland in 877, according to the Annals of Ulster)
  was the
  son of a certain Ragnall, and that this Ragnall was the same as
  the
  Ragnall who appears in the Fragmentary Annals of Ireland.
  
  (3)  We must assume that the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is correct
  in
  stating that a brother (unnamed, but called Ubbe in later
  sources) of
  Halfdan and Ivar was killed in England in 878, despite the
  contradictory testimony of Aethelweard which gives a very
  different
  reading for the same event (see 4).
  
  (4)  We must assume that the chronicle of Aethelweard is wrong
  in
  stating that Halfdan brother of Ivar was killed in England in
  878, for
  otherwise that would prove that Halfdan of Dublin (d. 877 in
  Ireland)
  was a different person from Halfdan brother of Ivar.
  
  (5)  In addition to assuming that Halfdan of Dublin was the
  same
  person as Halfdan brother of Ivar, we must also assume that
  this Ivar
  was the same person as Adam of Bremen's Ivar, keeping in mind
  that
  Aethelweard's chronicle, if correct, would imply the existence
  of two
  Ivars in the British isles at this time.
  
  (6)  We must assume that the philological argument making
  Lothbrok(a)
  a feminine name is incorrect.
  
  (7)  If Ari, the earliest author to mention Ragnar Lothbrok, is
  to be
  considered a reliable source on this matter, then we must also
  assume
  that Halfdan of Dublin was the same person as the Halfdan
  brother of
  Sigifrid who appears in the Annals of Fulda for the year 873,
  despite
  the severe chronological problems which that would cause with
  Ari's
  genealogies.
  
  Of the above assumptions, numbers (1) through (6) are crucial
  if one
  wishes to argue that Ragnall and Lothbrok were the same, and
  (7) is
  needed also if it is to be assumed that the information given
  by Ari
  is accurate.  Given the noncontemporary nature of the first two
  items,
  along with the contradictions present some of the others, there
  is a
  very small chance that all six of the crucial assumptions are
  correct.
  However, if any one of the first six items is false, then the
  case for
  Ragnall being the same as Lothbrok collapses, and we must
  conclude
  that the "Ragnall Lothbrok" attempt for a historical Ragnar
  Lothbrok
  is unsatisfactory.  [Note:  See R. W. McTurk's article "Ragnarr
  Lothbrok in the Irish Annals?" (Proceedings of the Seventh
  Viking
  Congress, 1976, pp. 93-123), where a different, but much more
  rigid,
  list of the same type is given.]
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  
  Since all of the above attempts to find a historical Ragnar
  Lothbrok
  fail to satisfy the mentioned criteria, Lothbrok and Ragnall
  come from
  noncontemporary sources which are themselves open to suspicion,
  and
  the historical records show nobody else (as far as I know) who
  could
  be plausibly identified with Ragnar Lothbrok, it must be
  concluded
  that Ragnar Lothbrok is not historical according to the terms
  described above.  In fact, if there is any historical basis to
  Ragnar
  Lothbrok legend, it is quite likely that Ragnar Lothbrok is the
  result
  of combining two or more distinct individuals into a single
  character
  having the attributes of both, in much the same way as Ragnar
  Lothbrok's legendary "father" Sigurd Ring is in fact a
  composite of
  two different men who fought against each other for the Danish
  throne
  in the year 814, Sigifridus ("Sigurd") and Anulo (of which
  "Ring" is a
  translation of Latin "Annulus").  However, such composite
  characters
  cannot be considered as historical, and there is no evidence
  which
  comes close to being contemporary which shows that either
  Lothbrok or
  Ragnall existed.
  
  FURTHER READING
  
  The most ambitious attempt to portray Ragnar Lothbrok as a
  historical
  figure is "Scandinavian Kings in the British Isles 850-880" by
  Alfred
  P. Smyth (Oxford University Press, 1977).  For a very critical
  examination of Smyth's views, see "High-kings, Vikings and
  other
  kings", by Donnchadh O' Corrain, in Irish Historical Review,
  vol 21
  (1979), pp. 283-323 (very highly recommended).  Both of these
  sources
  cite numerous other relevant  sources for those who are
  interested in
  further details.
  
  [Note:  The usual apologies if my transliterations from the Old
  Norse
  alphabet into the alphabet available to me is a bit sloppy.]
  
  Stewart Baldwin

Details of Ragnar Sigurdsson "Lodbrok"'s family with Aslaug Sigurdsdottir