What's with the family trees that go through the Vikings and then to biblical people?

Question

Such as this one: http://juch.org/gedpages/fam/fam15118.htm

If you follow it far enough back it will lead you all the way to Methuselah, Abraham, Rebecca, Adam, and Eve.

So how do you know when the factual family tree ends and the mythical people start?

Answer 1

are you saying that the vikings were preceded by jews?

Answer 2

I ran across one of the originals of this that was kept by a heraldic society in the UK. IT WAS A JOKE! But I have seen this repeated many times since in submitted genealogies.

What they did, really just for fun, was to use "historical assumptions" to trace Romans, Europeans back to Troy. There is archeological evidence (documents, physical ruins, etc) that allowed historians to recreate Trojan (and Carthage) leadership chains - though like any ancient history it is also full of assumptions and changes all the time as more information is discovered or existing information is studied more closely.

Then there is loose evidence that those who settled Troy and neighboring areas came from Sinai and that area, and even have some folklore documents that identify the theoretical first immigrants. Thus that let them get back to Sinai. Then using the selective biblical genealogies (they had to be selective because different biblical genealogies contradict themselves), they worked their way back to Adam and Eve. It was fun. But if you look at the original work, it is clearly described as just that - FUN.

Besides the historical assumptions (and there were many), the biggest leap they made was genealogical relationship of leaders. For example, they know XXX was preceeded as Trojan leader by YYY thus they make XXX YYY's son, just by default - no proof whatsoever. Similarly YYY was preceeded by ZZZ so YYY was ZZZ's son. Etc. Etc. Etc.

This is just bogus as the original clearly pointed out. This is one of the problems with using submitted genealogical records. The original was as they said, just for fun and of no historical validity whatsoever. However, someone saw it, added it to their genealogy (without the disclaimers) and published it - which someone else saw and copied and published - which someone else say -etc.

So now there are probably 200 or more out there that have this "lineage" back to Adam and Eve. And all are just as bogus as the original, but unlike the original, they don't carry the specific declaration that it was all just done for fun.

Answer 3

If you work on it long enough and have northern European roots (French, German, English, BeNeLux) there's an 85% chance you can get to Charlemagne. Most of us do it through an illegitimate child of a king. Henry II of England, for instance, would couple with anyone who held still for 20 minutes.

Doing this requires faith in the lady who came up pregnant without benefit of husband and told her parents it was the King.

Once you get to Charlemagne, there are trees you can copy that take you back to Adam. The path to Charlemagne is full of kings and dukes, some of whom are Vikings.

Charlemagne -> Adam assumes the Bible is 100% correct and the Royal Clerk who traced the lineage didn't cut any corners, out of loyalty to his master. (Or fear for his head.)

When I look at someone else's work, I look at their sources. If they are "Smith.ged" or "WFT" I tend to discount them. If they don't list their sources I tend to discount them too. As others have said, you can't tell where the mythical people start.

Answer 4

You don't know where the factual ends and the assumptions begin. That's the whole problem. SOME ancient families (generally royalty/ nobility) will have better documented lineage, since they may have inherited a throne.
Many of these "files" are preceded by disclaimers, like "I have no idea if any of this is accurate.. but, oh well, it's all for fun, and I thought someone might like to have it". You see something like that, and you wonder if they bothered to verify who their own gr grandparents were, or would even know when something is glaringly false.
Which, of course, often leads to the NEXT person who SWEARS they have now researched their family, copy it, and "it must be proven, I found it on the internet".
*Wendy tears her hair out in frustration*
I'd rather have 20 persons in my file, that I absolutely know to be correct, than 2,000.

Answer 5

Basically you don't, you only trust what you can prove and after that you are working on probability. Genealogy is not a exact science, some records are missing and some you just cannot read at all, Be honest, be true and trust your own work, our Victorian forebears embellished there tree's so just take care.

Answer 6

I do not know for sure, but I guess the New Testament was written by norwegian people.
By the norse language barn means child.

Answer 7

I have a feeling they don't have documentation to back it up if they go back to biblical times.