1564109

[large-G675.FTW]

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