Talk:Ragnvald Ingvarsson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the Norse people, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	Middle Ages Portal Ragnvald Ingvarsson is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:

[edit] Pritsak's speculations

So Pritsak is reported to identify the Ragnvald mentioned in Ed as the daughter son of Fastve with a Ragnvald of the Jarlbanke clan. Mats G. Larsson mentions the first stone in his study "Väringar" about Scandinavians in Byzantium. He is not averse to some speculation, but he does not even mention the Jarlabanke connection, as fas as I can see. The name Ragnvald was not that uncommon. /Pieter Kuiper 13:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

No, Pritsak does not identify Ragnvaldr of Ed as the "daughter of Fastve". On what do you base that interpretation? Where does it say that Ragnvaldr was a girl?--Berig 13:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Does not the dating of the Pr 4 style to the second half of the 11th century pose a bit of a problem for Pritsak's theory? /Pieter Kuiper 14:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

It depends on how certain we can be about the dating of the styles. This source says that the style pr1 began to be used c. 1010, but Rundata dates Ög81 to the late 10th century.--Berig 14:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)