General Notes

King of Vestfold, King of Norway, had many wives and concubines, undertook conquest of Norway to win Gytha, and until successful refused for ten years to cut or comb hair (called Lufa, "the Slovenly"), became 1st King of all Norway abt. 883/890, cut hair after conquest (then called "Fairhair"), won Gytha, d. abt. 936.

MISC: Harald inherited three small domains from his father in eastern, central, and western Norway, and set out to conquer the rest of Norway. According to the medieval saga, he was motivated by the refusal of Gyda (another petty king's daughter) to marry him until he had conquered all of Norway. According to the story, King Harald declared that he would not cut or comb his hair until he had conquered all of Norway. When he finally had victory about ten years later, he then had his hair done and was called "Fairhair." The chieftains of western Norway were the hardest to defeat, but Harald attained his victory in the Battle of Hafrsfjord about 885. Harald was a strong ruler, and managed to unite Norway. At Harald's death, his sons divided Norway with the favorite son, Eric Bloodaxe, as the overking, but dissensions and wars disrupted the unity of the country.

Alternatively, there are references that spell his first name "Harold," and list his death date as being 933 or 945.

He succeeded to the throne of his father's kingdom as a child in 860.

Age at death: Over 72.

He was the first king of United Norway.

[Sharen Neal, MJR6387, worldconnect.rootsweb.com]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
following is from Randy Jones, World Connect db=randyj2222, rootsweb.com:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The history of Norway prior to the late tenth century is extremely obscure, and the lineage of Harald is uncertain prior to his father. The old poem Ynglingatal is quoted (incompletely, with some missing stanzas of unknown content) in Heimskringla (early thirteenth century), and appears to have been composed in the late ninth or early tenth century, although that is not certain. Even if we grant for the moment that Heimskringla quotes an accurate version of an early poem, we still have the fact that Ynglingatal only gives the names of the kings, and does not supply any of the genealogical relationships which appear in so many later sources. It is not until sources of the twelfth century that there is any clear indication that the king mentioned in each stanza was regarded as the son of the king mentioned in the previous stanza, and this could easily be a very late invention. That the kings listed in the last few stanzas existed may be regarded as likely, but they remain very shadowy figures whose exact historical and genealogical connections are nebulous. At various times in the past, attempts have been made to identify one or more of them with individuals known from contemporary historical sources, but there are no identifications of the kings in Ynglingatal with known historical figures which can be regarded as certain. -- Stewart Baldwin


The source for this is a fragment of Ynglingatal repeated in Snorri's Heimskringla. Snorri wrote his work about 400 years after the events it is describing. It tells of Olaf Tree-Cutter founding Norway, and passing it to his son Halfdan Whiteleg. Halfdan had sons Eystein and Gudrod. Eystein had a son Halfdan. He was followed by Gudrod, son of Halfdan, and he was father of Olaf, father of Ragnevald, for whom the original poem was composed. The classical reconstruction is that this is a straight shot (Olaf- Halfdan- Eystein- Halfdan- Gudrod- Olaf- Ragnevald). However, it has been suggested that Gudrod, son of Halfdan Whiteleg sticks out like a sore thumb. He neither succeeded, nor is there any reason for him being mentioned at all (no other "other sons" are mentioned). Maybe, the speculation runs, he is the Gudrod Halfdanson who later became king - that Halfdan Eysteinson was followed not by his son, but by his uncle. One could argue this in circles, but it doesn't matter.An analysis of the succession after Rognevald reveals a splice between two traditions. Halfdan the Black is made son of Gudrod born of a second marriage, and left an infant coheir with his "brother" Olaf. The location of his rule is nowhere near the location where his predicessors are said to have ruled, and later his son Harald is made to defeat all of the other kinglets of Norway, including kings of places that Halfdan was supposed to have ruled. Finally, what appears to be a near-contemporary poem celebrating Halfdan the Black seems not to know his father. To make a long story short (too late! you say), it looks like the new dynasty, descended from Halfdan the Black, were attached after the fact to the family celebrated in the Ynglingatal (who actually appear to have been enemies that they displaced). Nothing before Halfdan the Black can be trusted, and it is not clear that the lines back to Harald Fairhair should be trusted either. The whole "kidnappped as an infant and didn't come back until an adult at the head of a strong army" thing about Olaf Trygvison smells foul. St. Olaf owed his position to being Olaf I's right-hand man, while Harald Hardrade was his step-brother. I have my serious doubts about the Fairhair pedigrees attached to each of them. -- Todd Farmerie