Talk:Ivar the Boneless

message: Should inn beinlausi really be translated boneless?? The concept is shocking(ly funny)! Bein also refers to legs, which may be a more plausible reason for the adnomen. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 23:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The translation is widely used in modern texts. We would need reliable support for an alternative. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 22:41, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

text: In my source of the þáttur, the punctuation is different so the meaning is that he had no lust or love because of the way he was made. It also does not say that his lack of lust is the source of his nickname. So reading it as a sequel to Ragnars Saga Loðbrókar it seems more that it is referring back to a well known story that he was born with cartilage instead of bones. Óli Gneisti (talk) 16:10, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Boneless or legless??

message: Just going to change that quickly. The article says that he is a major character in the novel, although he is referred to frequently as a great warrior he only has a few spoken words and is irrelevant in total.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.121.102.141 (talk) 16:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ivar the Boneless a minor character in Cornwell's novel 

message: Let's just take a look at this (and I note there are no citations at all in the section - Saxo is referred to but where is this in Saxo?:
"However, in all other sources, yet all possibly later than Saxo's, the father of Sigurd Ring is given as Randver. But this is where their agreement ends and each give Randver a different ancestry, three in all. Perhaps the most plausible of these alternatives is that offered by the Hervarar saga, which gives his father as Valdar, an attractive answer in part because a certain Valdar, perhaps once identical, is named as an ancestor of the mighty Ivar Vidfamne who himself very well may contribute to the character and/or possibly be an ancestor of Ivar II Beinlaus. In any case theirs is a Danish or Scyldinglineage."
However, in all other sources - who says this?
yet all possibly later than Saxo's who says this?
the father of Sigurd Ring is given as Randver. But this is where their agreement ends and each give Randver a different ancestry, three in all. who says this?' 
Perhaps the most plausible of these alternatives who says it is the most plausible?
is that offered by the Hervarar saga, which gives his father as Valdar, an attractive answer in part who calls it an attractive answer?
because a certain Valdar, perhaps once identical,who says this?
is named as an ancestor of the mighty Ivar Vidfamne who himself very well may contribute to the character and/or possibly be an ancestor of Ivar II Beinlaus. who says this?
 In any case theirs is a Danish or Scylding lineage. presumably this is easily cited, but it would be nice to have a cite. Dougweller (talk) 21:17, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I confess to not having done the best with the ancestry section. The majority of it is innocently enough pieced together from this and that which I have come across, and uncharacteristically for me I do not cite any secondary sources. The sources I refer to are the primary ones themselves and the section I guess assumes too much familiarity. As far as Valdar being identical with Valdar, and thus making the Hervarar saga account more plausible, it is possible I have genuinely messed up and am guilty of a little synth or even OR there, and I say this because I can't remember my source, although it seems I have a memory of there once being one (who could just be me). I feel like I came across something or someone saying that but I'm not sure enough. It was all quite a while ago. OR of that type is not like me, but I have taken a course or two in Old Norse literature and could have played the academic here. DinDraithou (talk) 22:07, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is mainly about Ragnars (possible) ancestry, and as such if you/we/anyone manage to get this section into shape it really belongs in that article (too). High kings, Vikings and other kings may be of help, I'll send it to you Din (it's a good read, although poor Smyth really gets astrapping from O Corrain - almost a violoation of "no personal attacks" I'd say...) Finn Rindahl (talk) 11:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

text: I also sent you Marios Costambeys' ODNB biography on Ivar, although this doesn't discuss ancestry at all. Finn Rindahl (talk) 11:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Smyth is victimised by everyone. Seemingly the Cambridge ASNC cabal wanted to have him burned as a witch! ;) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 23:52, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research 

message: As long as this article focuses (mainly) on the son of Ragnar Lodbrok, Ivar the Boneless is probably the best name per Wikipedia standards. I'm more concerned that the lead of the article doesn't really define the different references to "Ivar" we seem to be mashing together here: Ivar of the Irish annals, the shadowy Ivar of the English sources and the son of the legendary Ragnar. I see this has been discussed on this page earlier (2008) - but either way, "Ivar Ragnarsson" isn't as far as I can tell a more historical accurate name than "Ivar the Boneless". 
I was about to add a cn for "Ivar [the Boneless] is widely believed to be identical with the founder of the Uí Ímair or House of Ivar", but on second thought it may be better to rewrite that part instead of digging up on of many (now rather outdated compared to recent scholarly debate) references for this - perhaps "traditionally believed" with addition of some qualification from Corrain, Downham or Etchingham? Finn Rindahl (talk) 18:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm all for that, but would also like to see a separate article for the historical figure. As far as the legendary character, I chose Ragnarsson just because "Boneless" is controversial and not well sourced. Actually a number of our articles here at Wikipedia on persons of Norse derivation active in Britain and Ireland have arbitrarily chosen names. Some scholars like to look smart by pedantically using their reconstructions of the Norse forms and this has inspired some interesting behavior here. I gave Ivar his patronymic, which is used in some scholarship and popular literature, if you try both "Ivar Ragnarsson" and "Ivarr Ragnarsson" at books.google.com  DinDraithou (talk) 19:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

text: Same problem with Erik Bloodaxe, but it's the WP:COMMONNAME. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:35, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, but at least the issue is addressed regarding Eric. It is of course not fair to compare these two articles, as Cavila has done a very decent job with Eric (and says he'll do more next year...) while none of us has really made the same kind of efforts with Ivar. Finn Rindahl (talk) 18:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, but at least the issue is addressed regarding Eric.  Not sure I understand ... how?Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I meant that in Eric's article both the epithet and the possibility that different Erics are combined in later writings is discussed properly. I was not referring to the article title - both Eric of Norway and Eric of Northumbria will be called "bloodaxe" forever - even if Downhams "axing" should gain more support :). Apologies for mixing title and content in my ramblings... Finn Rindahl (talk) 19:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

text: So, you mean that the current Ivar the Boneless article doesn't argue the case for different Ivars strongly enough? I think that that should be addressed in the article with reference to the title. Just like in the Erik article, having separate articles would itself be boundary WP:NPOV violation ... so we probably settle on having one article. if we do that, WP:COMMONNAME comes in. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:07, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think additional information regarding the "different Ivars" should be presented, adn if I ever have the time, sources and inclination present at the same time I may try to do that (chances are it will not happen though). I also think that a new discussion on a possible split should wait until relevant information is presented. One thing is "Ivar the Boneless" from the sagas versus the Imair/Inguar of the annals, a different thing is the identification between Inguar (brother of Halfdan) of the English sources vs Imair of the Irish sources. Corrain challenges this identification in "High kings, Vikings and other Kings", and a forthcoming paper by Etchingham (from Oslo 2005) also seem to assume they are different as well. But until such time that the article is expanded with these and other sources, the title should indeed be "Ivar the Boneless". Finn Rindahl (talk) 19:48, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds stupid, but whatever. I'm actually hoping the two are different. Imar's title is imperial and the Inguar of the English sources is not. Mary Valante argues Imar was like Olaf, Norwegian not Danish. If you ask me the Norwegians were in a better position than the Danes at the time to establish an imperium. Valante argues that the dynasty got going in a sort of Norwegian push-back, when the Danes tried to establish overlordship but found themselves overpowered. DinDraithou (talk) 20:14, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

text:  Cheers. Incidentally, I think it unlikely that they will be able to demonstrate different Ivars. If the English and Irish ones are the same, the Scandinavian saga guy will be this guy ... or at least, it could never be proven otherwise, as there's no way of proving any Scandinavian tradition independent of insular sources. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:58, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ivar who? 

message: I happened upon  in http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=AvXAAAAAIAAJ page 75.  which claims that the burial was somewhere near Wauldby ie In Yorkshire .. one near Braffords and Wauldby Wood which is probably that in which Ivar Beenlose ... etc
This seems so obviously wrong ie William the Conquerer in Yorkshire before the Battle of Hastings.. it makes me wonder why the claim was made..
Anyway - are there any more likely burial places that could be mentioned in the text?? Thanks. Mddkpp (talk) 16:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Most compelling evidence comes from the dig by Biddle and Biddle at the site of the Great Army's burial place at Repton. Wilfridselsey (talk) 12:37, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Location of the mound

message: Changed the Old Norse spelling of Ivar's name - it is no longer "Īvarr", rather, it is now "Ívarr"; this is to keep in line with Old Norse transcription tradition. 93.184.91.103 (talk) 18:48, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling Change

message: ::Thanks. You're new and there can be a big learning curve here. My point was that the source, the Annals, didn't discuss the main material in the text you added. You obviously have sources for that and should use them. Read WP:VERIFY, WP:RS and WP:NOR. And I haven't done much in this article, certainly I didn't write the bit you are discussing. Good luck. You might need help with citations. Dougweller (talk) 15:06, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs

message: These two pages might be better served merged or at least incorporate information across them Smasongarrison (talk) 07:16, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: A problem is that there is no consensus amongst historians that they are the same person, as you can see at Ímar#Origins. Ben MacDui 19:58, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ditto, no scholarly consensus that these are instances of the same person. Against a merge, but all for sharing scholarly information across articles, where sourced of course. 2600:1700:1111:5940:D9F6:63D1:857A:104 (talk) 23:46, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Ímar]] 

message: This one thing is wrong almost every bit. And even spelled wrong… 71.31.3.189 (talk) 13:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is ALL WRONG