How to proceed with fictional grandsons of Martin Luther, the Reformator?

Question

I own the latest books about the descendants of the Reformator Martin Luther, edited by the Society of Luther-descendants. That's why I regularily offer users who (think they) have a direct line to him to look up if their connection proves to be correct.

Until now, most lineages shown to me were from FamilySearch, and there were some fictional connections as well, like children from a granddaughter of Martin Luther who is proven to have died childless.

However, now I was shown a connection line on WikiTree. According to WikiTree, the oldest son of Martin Luther had a daughter and four sons. Accordng to my book, Hans had only one daughter. She married, but there are no children noted in the book. (Actually she might be the granddaughter of the example above, but I don't remember anymore.)

How to proceed with the "sons" of Hans who aren't his sons? Disconnection is logical, but these men all have connection themselves that could be legit. Should I write a "Research Note" where I explain that these men are no sons of Hans? How can we control that they aren't again connected to Hans?

I know, many questions in one post, but I really need help

Answer 1

Hello Jelena,
This problem is quite complex. There has been a very tough struggle for decades between the Lutherid Society (or the leaders there) and the descendants of Johannes Luther (1526-1574), who are doing everything they can to be recognized by the Society. I don't know exactly what it's all about in the end (probably also about personal animosities and/or money, as always), but the society still refuses to recognize the increasingly conclusive new research or at least to acknowledge it as a possibility and worth of a mentioning.
I'd rather say straight away that I myself have NOTHING to do with it and do not want to have anything to do with it. But, I have experienced and partly followed all the trouble elsewhere, and ended up in very unfriendly conversations.
However, I would at least like to point out here that there is also a different opinion to that expressed in the publications of the Lutherid Society. And (now I'm going out on a limb) I think they are much more conclusive than the old version.
But be that as it may. I'm just saying this so that perhaps people are aware of where this idea of missing sons comes from, and that it will come up from time to time. The fundamental research on this comes from the now deceased geneologist and Luther researcher Günter Luther, who "came from below", so to speak, found his link to Johannes Luther, and in this way shook up society's view of the world. As far as I know, according to their research, there is no longer a living bearer of Luther's name who is descended from the reformer directly, but only from his side relatives. So if Günter Luther were right, he would be a direct male bearer of the name; something that the other Lutherids lack. So perhaps the disputes are just a matter of offended pride?
The research has been very nicely traced and edited by Wolfgang Appell and is available on his genealogical Luther homepage. Everything else can be followed in detail there (It´s German, but can be switched into English by klicking on the flag). As I said, I'm only mentioning this to show the reason for the confusion, but I don't want to get caught up in it again :)

Comments

Sounds like a great problem for y-dna research…

---

Then we should just describe this conflict on the profile and mark the connection as uncertain.

---

Danny, in the latest book of the Society they explicitly mention an American branch where a researcher worked his way down up, and recognise the branch. That branch isn't yet completely added in the book, in fact it is only the direct line of that researcher (it should be broader in the new version). That is why I think offended pride is (or at least should) not be a reason not to recognize them. I'd rather say that locked archives, as mentioned in the text you linked, are a reason.
Well, I'm not a Lutherid myself, nor can I become one, so I am out of that game, but I agree with Flo to add another Research Note about the conflict on the profiles and mark the connection as uncertain.