Talk:Olav V

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

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)

Will the Olav V of Norway site, post the photos (for comparison) ,of the Doctor or Doctor's son next to King Olav V ,so us Wiki readers could see the proposed physical resemblances? And thus make are own conclusions? 23 October 2005

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)

Press release in Norwegian

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.