Talk:Olav V

The Bomann-Larsen hypothesis of his parentage

Should we add something about the new evidence that Olav was likely to have been fathered through artificial insemination, with the semen of the doctor's son? This is more than just a rumour, for sure. Kvaks 08:48, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sure this should be added. It has been the big thing the whole day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.109.141.33 (talk) 21:14, October 14, 2004 (UTC)

Here's the press release in Norwegian. I couldn't find an English version. [1]

14.10.2004

H.M. Kongens kommentar til ny kongebok

Enhver forfatter er i sin fulle rett til å presentere sin forståelse av historien, sier H.M. Kongen. Det gjelder selvsagt også for Tor Bomann Larsens biografi om Kong Haakon og Dronning Maud.

Kongen har ingen opplysninger som skulle tilsi at Kong Olav ikke skulle være sønn av Kong Haakon. Prins Carl ble etter folkeavstemningen i 1905 valgt av Stortinget til Norges konge som Kong Haakon VII, med sin hustru Maud som dronning og deres sønn Olav som kronprins.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuelsen (talk • contribs) 08:18, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

I think it is a bit silly that the bit about the rumor of the artificial insemination is bigger than the rest of the article about King Olav...This was never an issue during his life and was only a big thing in Norway for a few months when Bomann-Larsen was promoting his book. As far as I know Bomann-Larsen is not an educated historian (he is an author and comic book artist) and as the sourcing for his claims have been very criticized by educated historians it really isn't relevant any more. But someone has obviously done a lot of work on it in this article so maybe it can be moved to a seperate article about the book which it was presented in...Inge 17:02, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think that both Haakon VII's and Olav V's articles need a lot more information, and I agree that the artificial insemination story, though fascinating, is completely irrelevant to the king's historical legacy. --Leifern 18:34, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Now another review of Boman-larsen's claims has been produced by Bodil Katarina Nævdal at the university of Uppsala. She really has very little good to say about his work. Another historian is also critical. This theory is totally disproved. This part of the article should be moved or removed. Inge 20:34, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Inge, true or not true, this story belongs in the tabloids. Another good point that seems to not be mentioned here, is the kings dislecsy which clearly is a heredetary problem. King Haakon had it, so did King Olav and so do King Harald. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.202.235.121 (talk) 00:15, December 14, 2005 (UTC)

The matter should be mentioned in one sentence only. It's far too dominant now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karamell (talk • contribs) 19:18, June 4, 2006 (UTC)

I've just come across a 2004 newspaper clipping about this episode. Bormann-Larsen seems to undermine his own position when he's quoted as follows: "The question of whether King Haakon was Olav's biological father meant little for the legitimacy of the Norwegian royal family. Fatherhood these days is not something that is mainly biological. It's something social and legal". Which seems to be saying that even if his claim is 100% true, it wouldn't make any difference anyway. So what was the point of making the claim in the first place, other than to publicise his book? -- JackofOz (talk) 06:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The rumors (slander) published by the author has repeatedly been proved to be false, it is an old rumor like the more common ones about most royalities and other public persons, and as such sould be said to be so, that is slander, in an article about the author which wants to put his creditability at risk by publish such a rumor. It is completly irrelevant in an biography, especially as it also will imply liabillity to repeat such slander. Jeblad (talk) 17:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Show the Photos, if you got them

Will the Olav V of Norway site, post the photos (if you can get them) ,of the Doctor or Doctor's son , put the photo next to King Olav V photo ,so us Wiki readers could see the claimed physical resemblances? And thus make are own conclusions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.176.56.139 (talk) 23:08, October 23, 2005 (UTC)

This is exactly why Boman-Larsen used the photoes. People think it is a good proof of kinship. Maybe because we are accustomed to look at old pictures of grandparents and great grandparents to find out who we ourselves can contribute our looks to. But if you have done this you might have noticed that sometimes you might see more simmilarities in some pictures than in others. You might also have noticed that sometimes it seems like you don't even "look like yourself" in some pictures of yourself. And add to that that you sometimes find people hwo you are not related to but still might share many of your features. This might be why so many scholars are very critical of Boman-Laren when he claims the pictures as proof. I have seen the pictures and the two men look similar. But in my oppinion this is much because of the similar hairline and hairdo, posture, clothing and the quality of the pictures. Now this is the only picture I have seen of the doctors son, but I have seen many pictures of King Olav from the same period and the resemblance isn't very strong in those. In addition I can mention that I have a picture of my great uncle where he looks very much like Olav and the doctor's son in these pictures. So am I related to King Olav or the doctor? Hmmm....:)Inge 13:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Anyone who wants to claim that Olav wasn't his father's son needs to look at photos of Carl/Haakon as a boy/young man before he got married. His son as a young man was the spitting image of him. 76.202.192.102 (talk) 22:59, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Removal of so called slander

Removal of the so called slander should be discussed here first. That is a controversial edit and the case has references and sources. -- Atluxity (talk) 22:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

The same so called slander was also removed here. --Kjetil r (talk) 00:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I've asked for help at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Norway#Help_on_Olav_V_of_Norway. Nsaa (talk) 14:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The question is not whether this fringe theory should be censored from Wikipedia, but whether trying to give it a balanced discussion merits so so much space in Olav V. A better solution would be to create a separate article either for Bomann-Larsen or for his book, and hash out the argument there. Then the Olav V article could contain a single wikilinked sentence on the lines of "A recent book by Bomann-Larsen has suggested that Olav V was conceived by artificial insemination using sperm from an English donor; others dispute the evidence for this claim." betsythedevine (talk) 18:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

This issue has been debated before. I support the idea of creating a separate page for the book, if it is deemed notable enough. Though I might have some doubts as to that notability. It would certainly be a more fitting place for this information. The debate here is not whether the claim has been made. It has been. But the point is that the information is of such a low quality that it does not merit inclution in the article. The claim has been denied by all the historians who have bothered to comment on it. (the author of the book is not a historian). As a controversy it is not notable either. The claim was used by the author to promote the book. There was no public controversy regarding Olav Vs legacy or legitimacy.

Since the content has been debated and it was agreed to remove it before, and since it was readded without a debate, I believe it is legitimate to remove it pending consensus.Inge (talk) 15:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

de Beauharnais

I fail to see the relevance of Empress Josephine de Beauharnais in this article. She had nothing whatsoever to do with Norwegian succession nor any other items relevant to Olav and Märtha.

They have thousands of common ancestors, and undoubtedly all such should be mentioned, if Josephine is mentioned.

Therefore, I ask further reasons why just Josephine is highlighted here.

(Besides, if Olav was not biologically son of Haakon, then he is NOT a descendant of Josephine de Beauharnais, since Haakon's mother was his only link to Josephine. His wife undoubtedly is.) 62.78.121.189 11:15, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Photo of Olav V Statue ,too cold

Maybe I'm being picky but, I think a photo of King Olav V would be more appropiate for this article. There's something cold about the statue, it shouldn't be the top (only) photo of the article. Just my opinion User:GoodDay 21:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC).

Olav on the tram

Could someone post a picture of Olav when he is on the tram? I think it is a very good picture that really shows what kind of man he was. http://www.nrk.no/underholdning/store_norske/4544536.html This is a link to the picture and an interview with the girl who sat next to him on the tram, but I dont know how to add it to the article nor do I know the copyright laws, so instead of pissing anyone off I'm asking if any of you can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.249.188.3 (talk) 21:18, March 7, 2006 (UTC)

It seems that photo is owned by Scanpix.Inge 08:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

That needs not stop us. That image is iconic and could easily be given an article on its own. To Norwegians and connoisseurs/friends of Norwegian culture it is as emblematic as the photo of Phan Thị Kim Phúc by Nick Út or the more recent Falling Man sequence to an international audience. Thus, a fair use rationale for discerning placement accompanied by a pertinent discussion should make such use possible. __meco (talk) 07:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Isn't there a norwegian stamp with Olav skijumping in Holmenkollen? A picture of that stamp would be great in this article. I've searched the net, but cannot find it anywhere. (Unsigned comment added by Karamell 19:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC))

There really needs to be a more modern photo of King Olav in this article; there must be thousands to choose from. His rounder face and generous smile are fondly remembered, still, by most Norwegians. - Hordaland (talk) 12:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Medaille d'Installation Solennelle?

This medal is mentioned, but there seems to be no other record of it anywhere. Is the name correct? How come Olav is the only person on the planet who received it...?

Evert (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

This page from the Royal House lists the medal as one awarded by the Netherlands (look under Nederland) in 1948. I guess it is a medal awarded by the dutch royal house to participants of the installation of Juliana of the Netherlands on the throne. These more or less "internal" royal house medals are not commonly mentioned as regular people rarely get them, I again guess. Also the name could be in a different language.Inge (talk) 11:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced statement about 4 million bodyguards

I`m pretty sure that I`ve read King Olav said this, but some Googling produced an article from NRK (norwegian) : http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/innenriks/4792640.html Maybe that part should be rewritten? I think it is an important part of the article, to show that King Olav really was held high in regard in Norway. Trondos 20:44, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Olaf VS Olav

Shouldn't Wikipedia remain consistent, and keep its Olaf > Olav policy when it comes to Norwegian royalty in English?

--Jorsalfarer (talk) 00:15, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

No. He called himself Olav. We don't translate the names of monarchs into English unless it's commonly done. That's why the article for King Baudouin of Belgium isn't listed under Baldwin. There's no consistent rule on this, but monarchs whose names were normally rendered in English untranslated are kept that way. Since the various King Felipes of Spain were known as English as Philip (even though Juan Carlos didn't become John Charles, go figure), and the King Henris of France were called Henry in English, we translate those. But King Olav of Norway was called Olav, so Olav it is. Jsc1973 (talk) 03:53, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Fled/went ... to the UK in WWII?

Hi,

aren't there enough synonyms in English to formulate this better? "Escape" offers itself, a little less inglorious than "fleeing", isn't it? "Went into/ joined the monarch in exile"? (The NO GOvernment styled itself "eksilregjeringen", IIRC). If English had been German, I'd have written something like " ... sich dem Zugriff der deutschen Besatzungsmacht (or something) entzogen ...", i.e. "avoided" (?) capture by the (xxx) by going ..." (?). Since not a native speaker, I don't know how to put this right. Perhaps someone could assist. TiA, if so.

T 88.89.219.147 (talk) 00:58, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Olav V of Norway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160305043732/http://badraie.com/guests.htm to http://badraie.com/guests.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070224190249/http://www.skiforeningen.no/holmenkollen/holmenkollen_historikk to http://www.skiforeningen.no/holmenkollen/holmenkollen_historikk

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:59, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Ancestral table

Ancestors of Olav V

8. Christian IX of Denmark (= 14) 4. Frederick VIII of Denmark 9. Princess Louise of Hesse-Kassel (= 15) 2. Haakon VII of Norway 10. Charles XV of Sweden and Norway 5. Princess Louise of Sweden and Norway 11. Princess Louise of the Netherlands 1. Olav V of Norway 12. Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha 6. Edward VII of the United Kingdom 13. Victoria of the United Kingdom 3. Princess Maud of Wales 14. Christian IX of Denmark (= 8) 7. Princess Alexandra of Denmark 15. Princess Louise of Hesse-Kassel (= 9)

Does anyone find verification of reliable sources among the ancestors of King Olav V? --49.150.110.214 (talk) 10:40, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

"Olav VI of Norway" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Olav VI of Norway has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 7 § Olav VI of Norway until a consensus is reached. estar8806 (talk) ★ 15:04, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

"Olav VI" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Olav VI has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 7 § Olav VI until a consensus is reached. estar8806 (talk) ★ 15:05, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Haakon VII of Norway which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:46, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

RfC of interest

(non-automated message) Greetings! I have opened an RfC on WT:ROYALTY that may be of interest to users following this article talk page! You are encouraged to contribute to this discussion here! Hurricane Andrew (444) 19:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)