Talk:Kven people

Does Quens or Cwen make a difference?

The article is interesting, but more is needed on the difference between Quens and Cwen.

The difference between Quens (non-herders) and Fenni (reindeer-herders) is used from very early on (700 AD of the roman Paulus Diaconus). Quens as a population category must therefore be a different one than the one used for the much later Finnish immigrants (i.e. Kven or cwen) in Norway. Probably Quens was a general distinction in-between the Sami people relevant all over the Sami area.aprerogative 21 July 2005 (UTC)

- - - - - 

Answer to the above:

It has been viewed by many researchers that in this particular case the term "Fenni (reindeer-herders)" was meant to refer to the Fenno-Ugric (Finnic) Sami people. The Finns themselves were refered to as "non-herders".

Pretty much this same suxtaposing is relevant in the modern day Northern Finnish society. Reindeer-herding is known to have always been very important part of the Sami culture and society. However, outside Finland it is a less known fact, that throughout the known history also a part of the Finns - many of the ones who have inhabited the most northern parts - have strongly participated in Reindeer herding.

The Finns indeed have always been the ones the Norse (later Norwegians) have referred to when they've used the term Cwen (a.k.a. Kveen or Quen).

The faraway Romans could have easily confused the peoples in question - the Norse less likely.

- December 09, 2005 -

Comment on the answer from aprerogative 25 January 2006 (UTC)

What researchers are you referring to in your answer?

User 194.157.191.37 writes that: “The Finns indeed have always been the ones the Norse (later Norwegians) have referred to when they've used the term Cwen (a.k.a. Kveen or Quen).“

Let me correct some of what you are saying even if the subject is a bit off topic here.

First, today’s Norwegians are not equivalent with the Old Norse population. Norwegians today are descending from the Saami, the Cwens, immigrants from the European continent and all over the world, and a few Norwegians are descending from the Old Norse.

Referring to research done by Ole Jørgen Benedoctow: Most Old Norse people did not survive the Black Death (starting in the mid 1300 with the last victim in 1654, the majority of victims were in the more densely populated areas). In 1470 there was already 210.000 dead of a total Norwegian population of 350.000. Most of the survivors were in such weak condition after the plague that they could not even work for food. In Norwegian terms there was an immense immigration under and after the Black Plague for the most part of Dutch, Scots, German and Danes, and this explains the genetic homogeneity between some of the southern Norwegians and these European populations today. Immigration to Norway during the middle ages have been studied by the historian Erik Opsahl (Bind 1: Opsahl, Erik og Sogner, Sølvi: I kongens tid 900-1814( 2003)).

Second, the argumentation you gave is inadequate.

1) How do you know if the Romans confused the peoples in question?

2) The Vikings did not use the term “Quen”. The Cwen (Kven) population of Norway did mainly immigrate between 1600 and 1800.

The Norse Sagas (historical myths) and other old texts (e.g. Eidsivathings and Borgarthings law and Historia Norwegiæ) used several terms for the Sami (or the Saami) people and there are no doubt about that what people the old texts referred to. The terms “finnar” and “Jotnar” is examples of the equivalents to the Sami people. So “finnar” used by the Old Norsemen are not Cwens or the same as today’s Finnish population, except for the fact that there are Finnish Sami descendants of the “finnar”. To repeat, the Old Norse did not use the term “Quen”.

The old source Paulus Diaconus (555 A.D.) differentiated between the ”skridfinns” that herded reindeers and those who did not, i.e. the Quens. The term Quen in this context is not the same as Cwens. The latter describes people from Finland that immigrated from poverty to the traditional Saami areas roughly between 1600 and 1800.

The Norse sagas and the Finish Kalevala (the first edition appearing 1835) are of more recent origin. The last one is central in Finish identity building and has clearly been a part of a political agenda after the first publishing and I doubt that this text is a reliable historical source aprerogative 26 January 2006 (UTC.

Fuzzy boundaries between ethnic categories in north Scandinavia

The multicultural intermingling in the northern part of Scandinavia makes clear-cut categories too simplifying. Views and evidence on this subject is welcomed.

Marie Nelson (Uppsala, 1988) has in a book called “Bittert brød” an interesting perspective showing data of the multicultural composition in Swedish Lapland between 1861-1870. The same ethnic complexity is probably found in the people that migrated to north Norway. Nelson points out that the ethnic origin of the Cwens (i.e. people that came from Kvenland) could be a mix between of Sami, Swedish and Finnish. aprerogative 21 July 2005 (UTC)

What does this sentence mean?

The meaning of the following sentence is unclear: “It was previously assumed by historians that regions in Southern Lapland and below were not inhabited by South Sami groups, and hence Cwens were the aboriginals of those regions.”aprerogative 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Anachronisms?

"...Swedish traders...but they are dated to 6th century." Swedish and 6th century cannot be used in the same sentence as there existed no such a concept as 'Swedish'/'Sweden' at that time. Perhaps it should be replaced by 'Norse'?

• Swedes (Svear) did indeed exist at that time. Sweden as a nation in the modern sense did not, nor did the people known as Swedes in the modern sense exist. So it is only anachronistic depending on what you mean. It can be used to mean Svear, in reference to that particular Norse tribe, or it can be used more loosely as a collective term for all Norse tribes then living in what is present-day Sweden. How is "Norse" a better term? No people has ever existed who called themselves "Norse", it's merely a collective adjective for all tribes using that language, and certainly no less of an anachronism. "Norse" would refer to all tribes in Scandinavia. "Swede" in the broad sense would refer to Svear, Geats (Götar), Gotlanders and (presumably) Rus'. and "Swede" as in "Svear" would refer to that one tribe. --BluePlatypus 10:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

I marked this as needing cleanup. The factual accuracy of this article seems dubious (confusing Ostrobothnia and Kainuu, if nothing else), the article uses the name "Cwen" throughout although it links to an existing article called "Kvenland" etc. I'll try to do what I can, but my knowledge on this subject is very limited. Aarnepolkusin 16:24, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

This article is indeed in need of a comprehensive rewrite. Many outlandish claims, such as the latest additon by User:213.216.199.2, makes all kinds of unsourced speculations about dubious origins and links, some apparently based solely on the similarity of words (for example the English word "queen"). It also has sections on the Tornedalians that is actually longer than the main article itself. In addition, undue emphasis (i.e. in bolded letters) is added throughout the article on every single ocurrence of the word Cwen, not only in this article but in many other articles (I myself recently removed the emphasis of the word in the artciel about Nordland). I suggest the following revisions:

1. removing all unsourced speculations (if disputed)
2. removing unnecessary emphasis (as consistent with the manual of style)
3. moving in-depth text on other peoples to their proper articles (e.g. Tornedalians)
4. considering possibly renaming the article into Kvens or some other spelling (in the plural), preferably the autonym
5. adding an ethnic group box like any other identifiable definable people

Please discuss these propositions so that this article can eventually conform with the standard set by the other ethnic group articles, e.g. Latvians, Garifuna, Sorbs, Persians.

//Big Adamsky 18:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

No sources!

This article still lacks sources, even if it is clean otherwise. I am re-adding the tag, but I will try to dig up some on my own later tonight. --Foofy 00:31, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

The anonymous contributor persistently removes the tag and refuses to comply with wikipedia rules. therefore all his edits will be reverted as nonverifiable. mikka (t) 18:38, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Once again, contribution of 213.216.199.6 reverted as persistently nonconfirmed. mikka (t) 20:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

WARNING

Unless the editor or editors 213.216.199.xxx wil start discussing their changes in Cwen, Varangian and other articles, the accounts will be blocked from editing wikipedia. mikka (t) 19:03, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

- - - - - - -

In the "Varangians" article it appears stated in Wikipedia now that "the Varangians (Russian: Variags, Варяги) were Scandinavians who travelled eastwards, mainly from the northeastern parts of Scandinavia, in what are now Norway and Sweden".

That sentence tells part of the throught. We ought to let the Wikipedia readers also know who were the people living in north-eastern Scandinavia at the time. Earlier, we could see Wikipedia informing its readers as to who (which peoples and/or tribes) lived in north-eastern Scandinavia (where the Varangians "mainly came from") during the Viking age.

In Scandinavia and elsewhere there is a widely and commonly accepted understanding and consensus among historians and researchers regarding the undisputed fact that during the Viking age the people inhabiting the north-eastern Scandinavian areas were Finns who were also known as Cwens in historical texts, and Samis, both being members of the so called Fenno-Ugric family of peoples.

At the time, from the north-western coastal areas of the Scandinavian Peninsula also the Norse were making advances up north towards the north-eastern coastal areas of the Scandinavian Peninsula. Similarly, from the east (south-east) the Finnish Karelians and Slavic groups such as the Novgorodians were making advances towards the area in question as well.

Please, allow this important fact remain in the text. We shall now make a reference to the text regarding the historical Cwenland area in northern and north-eastern Scandinavia, part of which belongs to the modern day Republic of Finland, not only to the kingdoms of Norway and Sweden.

RfC - Request for Comment

• I am not a Scandinavian expert, but it's obvious that the article has no references or sources. Doing a Google search[1] did not help to verify much of the information, either, except of course from sites that mirrored Wikipedia content. Unless some kind of reference can be produced (even if it's in another language), this article might be a candidate for deletion. Elonka 06:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

• "In a slight contrast to the Cwens, traditionally - also today - the Fenno-Ugric Sami people have inhabited - and presently inhabit - the areas just slightly more inland from the seas and oceans (than the Cwens) - within Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia -, whereas the bulk of the seafearing Cwen population up to these days has concentrated mainly to the coastal areas of the northern seas and large lakes and rivers."

- This is not correct. The Sami people, in Finnmark and northern Troms have always lived in the fjords and even along the coast, which also provided summer grazing areas for the reindeer (far from all Sami did have reindeer, fishing in the fjords and river, for instance, was important). As the etnic Norwegians arrived in numbers in the late middle ages, they became a minority at the coast and in some fjords, and gradually, slowly, started losing their culture. But even up to the present day, they are named Sjøsamene (the sea sami). Those Sami living in the interior preserved their culture because there were very few Norwegians there, and they were the ones with large reindeer herds. Ethnic Norwegiand have been living in numbers for a lot longer time in Nordland and southern Troms, as the climate here would allow grain to be harvested. There were powerful Viking leaders at Bjarkøy and Harstad, and even into the fjords (as Lodve Lange, who lived at Saltvik near Narvik, and participated with Olav Tryggvason in the Battle of Svolder in the year 1000). And of course, Ottar from Hålogaland, who in 890 knew very well how to sail to Bjarmaland (Arkhangelsk), but lived at or near Senja in Troms. Orcaborealis 21:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore: "The immigrants now were - for the most part - poor farmers looking for land in areas that today form the Norwegian provinces of Nordland, Troms and Finnmark. " - Most likely not correct. I have lived for 27 years in Nordland, and never ever heard or seen any mention about Kven settlement in this county. They came to Finnmark and northern Troms. Orcaborealis 21:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

This whole article looks very speculative, might need to be shortened drastically. Kvens along Vikings to the British Isles?? I've read a lot about the viking age, never heard of this. Orcaborealis 08:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

- - - - - - -

Answer: Just because you've haven't researched the very issue - or because you may not agree -, does not mean that the information offered by the Brittish scientists would not have merrits or would not be correct. The article points to research done by Brittish scientist who have come up with this sort of results (the article uses the word "claims") - names for leads were also already given (however, perhaps someone - who had "never heard of this" before - already removed them). They are a good start for your research.

The latest geneology and DNA studies also point to the direction of the Brittish "claims" offered. We can not fake DNA results, can we.

Myths die hard. For various reasons, outcomes of wars and battles - especially - are sometimes tought terribly wrong by historians, who just "cannot believe" what really took place or who simply are victims of a well organized propaganda.

We'll offer you just one example of a much more recent war history which must be corrected. This - perhaps - will help you understand why it can be hard to tackle events that took place over a millennium ago:

* * * * * * *  

For instance, the ignorance of even the best-informed observers in the West about Finland's part in World War II is astounding.

Take British Major-General H.M. Tillotson's book Finland at Peace & War - 1918-1993, for example.

It was written, in close collaboration with Finland's Foreign Ministry, Ministry of Defense, Defense Staff, Commission of Military History, Military Archives and Military Museum, to mark, in 1993, the 75th anniversary of the armed forces in independent Finland.

Yet, in its 354 pages, the book has room for only one sentence about the single most important battle, perhaps, fought in Finland's Continuation War, Tali-Ihantala. There the Finnish concentration of artillery fire was the heaviest in the country's military history. It has been described as even heavier than the Soviet fire in the siege of Berlin.

The artillery fire aimed at Finnish targets - shortly before - has been described by some researchers as the most massive in the world military history.

The all-out support given the British general by the Finnish military authorities is pointed up by the fact that the Preface to his book was contributed by Admiral Jan Klenberg, who is there titled "Commander-in-Chief," though that title belongs in peacetime to the President of the Republic.

The commanding officer of the Finnish Defense Forces praises the book, stating that it "has a central role in illustrating the history, the present time and the future of the national defense of Finland for foreigners." This makes it all the harder to understand how Tillitson's book fails to recognize the momentous significance of the Finnish victories in the battles of Tali-Ihantala and Vuosalmi, which halted the massive offensive of 1944 and won for Finland a negotiated armistice and saved the country from enemy occupation.

The Canadian-born Finnish-American scholar Leo Vuosalo fought in this battle as a young recruit. Returning to America after the war, he studied at several California universities and a wrote a thesis dealing with the campaigns on the Finnish front. For the next 35 years or so, he taught courses in history and political science at various universities and other educational institutions in California.

"My academic colleagues," he recalls, "persisted in propagating the myth of Finland's capitulation. They obstinately refused to accept the facts I presented to prove they were wrong."

He sites the case of a Stanford University history professor named Kennedy who wrote much-used textbook dealing with U.S. foreign policy in which Finland gets a passing mention as having been "flattened" by the Red Army. In quite a recent edition of the book, this gross distortion of historical fact remained uncorrected.

* * * * * * *

This goes to show us that even the world's leading university - in the amount of Nobel prizes anyway - can get it wrong.

When ever the latest modern DNA research results are brought up to support earlier research results and "claims" offered by historians and other scientists - be they controversial in your opinion or not - they ought to be brought to our attention. - 07:23 PST, January 25, 2006 -

The Kven article - should it be deleted, and not moved

The information provided in the article about the Cwen people is skewed and erroneous and more than anything it reflects the personal myths of the author.

Can an historical expert please take action? The article is not cleaned up now at all and need references to reality, to old texts and to research.

I agree with Elonka, this article should be deleted. My suggestion is to delete large parts of this article and build up a new one based on facts, and please use researches results and conclusions in a humble way and use a more humble language than this article expresses per date. aprerogative 26 January 2006 (UTC)

- - - - 

Answer:

Quick tracing of your personal info and your IP Address reveals that you have really nothing useful to offer to Wikipedia - or if you do, it does not show. Complimenting your own comment(s) with a different name does not help you, or impress anyone else.

The related references are offered in the Kven article. The locals of the particular area and others familiar with the topic know that the information offered is based on the truth. All information given in the Kven article is based on historical facts, as far as they have been and can be traced. Possible unintentional bloopers can be worked on, like in any writings about any historical topics.

Of course, the clean up work, additions and improvements must continue, like with any article in Wikipedia. The - more or less - occational contributers on this forum do not get paid money for their work. As we know, it is always very easy to critizise anything, and especially when you are not familiar with the subject you're critizising, or if the reality in guestion just simply does not comply with your liking.

What might be the real issues in your life that - I assume - make you search for venues for outbursts ? Why not concentrate in contributing something to a topic / topics that you have most knowledge about, instead of winding around !

If we would delete this particular information, or if we would begin deleting other similar articles and topics, then we might as well start deleting all articles relating e.g. to the Finns, Swedes,Americans etc.

Yet - on the other hand -, thank you for your critizism, if it indeed was meant purely in a creative and positive way (your delete term makes one doupt). We others - too - understand, that clean up work must be done. We'll get to it, given a chance. Until then - Cheers !

- Greetings from Värmland - January 26, 2006 -

Response on the above text and on the article from aprerogative 27 January 2006 (UTC)

213.216.199.2 writes: “Quick tracing of your personal info and your IP Address reveals that you have really nothing useful to offer to Wikipedia - or if you do, it does not show. Complimenting your own comment(s) with a different name does not help you, or impress anyone else.”

Do not incorrectly accuse me to comment my own postings in different names and please do not edit any of the text written by me in this discussion. Please respect this etiquette and keep your responses independent. The rest of your irrelevant personal attacks I simply choose ignore.

I) 213.216.199.2 write the following: “The related references are offered in the Kven article.”

Where are the references that allow and justify to intermingle (fuse) the terms “Kveen, Kvaen, Cwen and Quen” in the article, can you please give the references to concrete sources or researchers? The term “Quen” has been used for the Saami people, and this term is not the same as the term Cwen or Kven. You ignore this fact in the article. I have already mentioned the old source Paulus Diaconus (555 A.D.) in this context. The term “Quen” was used in relation to the term “[2][Skridfinns]”. In addition I recommend you to read the following article to better understand how the Old Norse used the term “Finnar”: ”[[3]Coexistence of Saami and Norse culture – reflected in and interpreted by Old Norse myths]” of professor Else Mundal.

II) 213.216.199.2 write the following: “Due to the mixing of populations and cultures in the historical Kvenland territories, the descendants of Kvens e.g. in the Gulf of Bothnia and the White Sea areas are usually no longer referred to as Kvens by the local residents.”

Most probably and initially the ancestors of the present “Cwen or Kven people” that migrated northwards from the Gulf of Bothnia was an ethnic mixed population. Even though many Cwen people in Northern Norway have a distinct culture and a particular Cwen dialect of Finnish there are some aspects that is complicating the matter of “a distinct Cwen ethnicity”. Marie Nelson (Uppsala, 1988) points to the multicultural composition of the population in Swedish Lapland between 1861-1870, the area from where the ancestors of present Cwens migrated. The research done by Nelson shows that the ethnic origin of the Cwens (i.e. people that came from Kvenland) could be Sami (Saami), Swedish or Finnish or people of a mixed ethnic origin. Additionally there has been a mixing of people with different ethnic origins in the Cwen areas of Norway (referring to research done by Einar Niemi).

III) 213.216.199.2 writes: “The locals of the particular area and others familiar with the topic know that the information offered is based on the truth. All information given in the Kven article is based on historical facts, as far as they have been and can be traced.”

This is an encyclopaedia, and as most know “truth” is not one-dimensional. There are many aspects of “truth” and “facts” are disputable. In this context it is important that the reader are allowed to trace the information used from reliable sources, therefore it is recommendable to hyperlink directly to the relevant sources or research(er).

IV) 213.216.199.2 writes: “Only the Kvens of Northern Norway by the Arctic Ocean and particularly its Barents Sea in north-eastern Scandinavia - who up till the latter part of the 20th century have been rather isolated of the rest of the society aroun them - still today proudly and visibly carry the Kven title, traditions and heritage.”

The Cwen people that migrated to the northern part of Norway have intermingled ethnically with the Saami people that originally populated the area and also with non-Saami Norwegians. This is shown in the official census reports (counts) of the relevant geographical areas. [[4]Einar Niemi] has studied the ethnic processes between the Cwen and the Saami people in the counties of Finnmark and Troms and his work will provide further insight to the subject. The added article (available in Norwegian only) does also address the racism of the Cwen people in Norway.

V) 213.216.199.2 writes: “Already during the first millennium A.D. the northernmost Finns on the Scandinavian peninsula were called Kvens by the Norse (today Norwegians) -.”

I have already commented on the incorrectness in this text. The Norwegians of today is not equivalent with the Old Norse. Population patterns are under constant change and during the Middle Ages and as a consequence of the Black Plague population patterns in Norway underwent a noteworthy change, as mentioned in the answer under the heading “Does Quens or Cwen make a difference?” References to research are given.

VI) 213.216.199.2 writes: “…thank you for your critizism, if it indeed was meant purely in a creative and positive way (your delete term makes one doupt). We others - too - understand, that clean up work must be done.”

When too much of the information given is inadequate, skewed or erroneous it is less time consuming to rewrite the article. Indeed I see that you have corrected some of the text (cleaned up some of it) and then my criticism was constructive. Keep it up, a lot more cleaning are needed and learn from the suggestions and research references given in this response. This comments was on the first part of the article – The people - and the first sentence of the history part. I strongly recommend you to read the references and research mentioned. End of comment from aprerogative 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I for one don't think the article should be deleted alltogether. After all there is such a thing called Kvens - or whichever other spelling may or may not be equivalent to the modern group of people (I have my doubts as to the proposed connection with past peoples for whom a similar-looking exonym is used). I also do not believe that lapsing into childish unfactual accusations will help us remove speculations and eventually end up with a decent article on the Kvens. The current article does not deal with the Kvens. It deals with many Finnic peoples collectively and with Greater Finland, so the title is simply wrong. Moreover, the article currently contains far too many speculations and myths that are stated as if they were facts rather than hypotheses. The consequence is that the informed reader will simply shake his or her head and shrug his or her shoulders at the messy mix of fact and fiction. I'm not saying that it isn't fascinating; it just isn't historical in the proper, scientific sense. Please see my suggestions for how this article can be made more respectable and how its title can better reflect its actual content. //Big Adamsky 08:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

PS: Please sign your comments, because I refuse to do that for anyone, anonymous or not.

Comment from aprerogative 27 January 2006 (UTC.

Big Adamsky writes: “whichever other spelling may or may not be equivalent to the modern group of people”.

You are right about that, but as I have pointed out it is not only about the spelling, but also about use and abuse of historical sources.

The following statement is given in the Cwen article: “The spelling Quen in reference to the Kvens is used in Latin texts from the 17th century on.”

The terms “Quen or Quens” should not be substituted with the terms “Cwen or Kven” and if such a substitute is done it have to be based on historical findings and in a reasonable and relevant argument. Such an argument is missing in the text. The given statement demonstrates an uncritical and disrespectful use of historical sources.

Further one of the authors of the Cwen article states: “…the Viking Age Norwegians often called the Samis either Skridfinns or Finns, to separate them from the Kvens, who in reality actually were - of course - also Finns, more so than the Samis, though they too are members of the Finnic (a.k.a. Finno-Ugric or Fenno-Ugric) family of peoples.”

Paulus Diaconus (555 A.D.) used the term “Skridfinns” for the Saami people before the “Viking age” (roughly between 800 and 1000 A.D.). As pointed out earlier the Old Norse had several names for the Saami people. I do not think that the authors of the Norse Sagas or more generally the Vikings intentionally used terms like e.g. “finnar” to separate the Saami people from the Kvens/Cwens.

Another very questionable statement in the Cwen article is this one: “the Kvens, who in reality actually were - of course - also Finns, more so than the Samis “.

Can the author please comment on this statement and share the knowledge and research that supports such a view? End of comment from aprerogative 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Answer to aprerogative and Big Adamsky

You are discussing some fine tuning here - like in your comment above. That is no reason to “delete“ the article, as the user Big Adamsky says. Let's not swet about minor, debatable - and correctable if needed - issues, on our way to higher goals.

On those sorts of bases - and by your standard in your “delete“ request - nearly all these type of history related articles could be delated.

The references offered include all the information given. There - of course - can be some different views regarding some minor issues, e.g. when some particular spelling was first used, etc.

The people in question in the areas discussed in the Kven article were refered to as Kvens already during the first millennium AD, as the article points out, and - Big Adamsky - the spelling of the vast majority of the words of course was more or less different.

Nevertheless, these are the type of things that only tend to stretch this article - as well as other articles - too much. We had to offer more references to the historical texts, etc., and to explain a bit further the Kvens in different parts of the historic Kvenland, so that one can understand why they all must be included when we are discussing the Kvens and the entire Kvenland.

Good and interesting reading for Big Adamsky - that we would recommend for the starters - is the Kalevala. The entire epos, its ancient stories, poems, songs, etc. were collected from parts of the historic Kvenland - much from the modern day Finnish province of Kainuu, and much from the historic Bjärmaland.

Those areas were part of the heartlands of the historic Kvenland, and that is why they are mentioned in the Wikipedia article of the Kvens. How could they be reasonaly left out.

The term Kven is probably derived from a North Norwegian form of the Old Norse word ”hvein” which means flat and humid land. In Finland, Kainulaiset was used about the same group, and Kainu or Kainuunmaa about the coastal areas around the Gulf of Bothnia - a flat and humid land -. Yet, again, Kainu - or Kvenland - also reached far north and east from there.

Big Adamsky, the terms Kven and Kainulainen - Kainulaiset in plural - have indeed been used in reference to the different peoples described in the Wikipedia article. I suppose you were not aware about that fact, and that is why - I suppose - you request(ed) for the information to be carried to some different department(s), such as Greater Finland.

Nevertheless, there is a very big difference with the two subjects, eventhough there also are - of course - some parts that link the two topics, in similar way like for instance a higway and a city parking garage have something in common.

I recall you adding some of the different Finnic peoples - who are not Kvens - into the list under the headline See also in the Wikipedia article about the Kvens. They all - some more, some less - may have to do with Greater Finland, one way or another, i.e. a topic which must be handled separately from this topic, the Kvens, in Wikipedia.

The historical area refered to as Kvenland is a very large territory, and it included people quite far from each others, distance-wise. Besides the term Kven, other names for those people were used.

Some of us have a limited time for the contributions to Wikipedia. We shall work on this and other topics if and when possible.

E.g., we may have to cut off some of the excess info - perhaps -, and also we may have to add a section for the Bothnians, who - accurately speaking - were the southernmost people (Kvens) of Kvenland, south from the Tornedalians (just like they are today).

User aprerogative: The given info in the Kven article can be found from the sources offered. Perhaps I will look for possible bloopers if and when I get a chance. Also, some things perhaps could be explained in a better way, I am sure.

What we have is a good start, nevertheless, - and in this particular case, I believe, it was better to lay out much of the info already for the starters, and to do possible clean up after, if needed and when time allows. The reason for this is the fact, that too many people just aren't aware what took place in this part of the world over a millennium ago.

It is important to bare in mind, of course, that the Samis and the Kvens have been confused with each other from time to time, presumably in some historical writings as well. Therefore I understand your concern, aprerogative.

- California Cheer Leading Association of Los Angeles, January 30, 2006 -

Also answering to aprerogative

For instance, in the original first comment of aprerogative he already contradicts his later comment about the spelling Quen (which really only first time appeared on the 1600s in the Latin texts). First aprerogative commented:

"The difference between Quens (non-herders) and Fenni (reindeer-herders) is used from very early on (700 AD of the roman Paulus Diaconus). Quens as a population category must therefore be a different one than the one used for the much later Finnish immigrants (i.e. Kven or cwen) in Norway. Probably Quens was a general distinction in-between the Sami people relevant all over the Sami area.aprerogative 21 July 2005".

Then aprerogative commented later on this page the following:

"The Vikings did not use the term “Quen”. The Cwen (Kven) population of Norway did mainly immigrate between 1600 and 1800."

The Kven article however, importantly, has not suggested that the Vikings would have used the term Quen. Instead, it makes it clear that the term was used in Latin writings from the 17th century on. This argument either, therefore, is no valid reason at all to "delete" the Kven article.

In other words, first - according to aprerogative - the term Quens was "used from very early on (700 AD ...". Then, by the time aprerogative has studied the subject further, he comments:

"To repeat, the Old Norse did not use the term “Quen”".

aprerogative keeps contradicting himself and battleing himself.

Also, the user aprerogative first refers to "(700 AD of the roman Paulus Diaconus)", and then later "Paulus Diaconus (555 A.D.)".

Furthermore, until the user aprerogative gained better understanding as to who were the people who inhabited the territories of Northern Scandinavia and northwestern Scandinavia in the Viking age, he did not tamper with the Wikipedia text about the Variags. There it stated for a long time, that the Variags were people who moved eastwords mainly from the areas of the norhtwestern Scandianavia.

When aprerogative learned that the Kvens (together with the Samis, also some Norse in the most southwestern parts of the area in question) were the once ruling the area, he immidiately araised that portion of the Variags Varangians text.

Now aprerogative has also suggested for the entire Kven to be "deleted" on these sort of unfounded accusations. Besides contradiction himself over and over again the user aprerogative is quoting the Kven article wrongly and making childish unfactual accusations just as the user Big Adamsky stated.

Wikipedians, how about putting a stop to aprerogative. He really has not contributed anything useful to Wikipedia. His most recent "delete" suggestions include the one he inserted for the most interesting article regarding the latest DNA research results about the Prehistoric Finns in Americas. The article correctly questions many issues and makes no deffinate conclusions. Time allowing, we shall find external links and more resources for these findings.

User aprerogative: Of course the Black Death killed lots of peole all over, and the population got mixed with each others in many ways all over as well. Today's Norwegians, nevertheless, carry more of the Norse genes and background than any other known peoples.

Even the Finnish geneological background - e.g. - is only approximately half that of the general historic Finno-Ugric origin. aprerogative is apsolutely correct, however, about the large mixing of the population, family background and genes.

Yet, all this sort of detailing tends to make this article and other similar articles too long. We can look into the wording of the text, perhaps, so that it will become clear for those who are interested, that today's Norwegians - of course - are, besides being partially descendants of the Norse (who historically inhabited parts of today's Norway), are also descendants of other populational elements.

To Aarnepolkusin: The Bothnians indeed were referred to as Kvens by the Norse and in the Viking sagas, etc. Also Bothnia (Botnia) was once considered a part of Kvenland (Kainuunmaa, Kainu) from the Finnish point of View, too.

As you state, you are not familiar with subject, but are nevertheless intending to make a "correction". I would recommend for you to first study the sources offered, for instance by Dr. Jouko Vahtola, etc. - even the links which after your comments have been added for the Kven article.

Furthermore, to aprerogative:

The sources seem to also have been given in reference to the so called Skidfinnen, among them on the following site (also other sites and given references seem to agree):

http://victorian.fortunecity.com/christy/32/asr.html

Source: ORIGIN OF THE ANGLO-SAXON RACE, THOMAS WILLIAM SHORE FIRST EDITION 1906, REISSUED IN 1971 BY KENNIKAT PRESS

They too state:

"As the Lapps were called Skidfinnen by the Norse, and are still called Fins by them, some confusion has risen in the use of this name".

They use the term Cwen. We, however, site with those choosing to headline the Wikipedia article as Kven.

- Norwegians for human rights, 21:25 on Jan. 31, 2006 -

Page move

The old article Cwen is moved under the title Kven. The newly created Kven is moved to Kven/Version, so that you could transfer your changes into the old article. Please continue to work on a single article. mikka (t) 20:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Please DON't remove the warning labels. Unfortunately you lost the credibility by persistent addition of highly disputable (not to say false) information in this article. Until only you edit this article, the labels will stay. mikka (t) 20:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Please sign your comments by typing four tildas (~~~~). mikka (t) 20:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Page renaming

Please DON'T create two same pages under different name. The article stared as Cwen in 2004. Please continue it thus, unless you have serious reasons to rename it. also for renaming there is a function "Move this page", which preserves the edit history of the article. mikka (t) 21:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

You have also to explain what exactly you are doing with this article. mikka (t) 21:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Answer:

Kven indeed is a more used - and the more appropriate - term for the people, culture and language in question. Someone had originally started the writing with the name Cwen. As you are familiar with the way to convert the title to Kven through a appropriate prochedure, please go ahead do it - so that it will get done correctly for once and for all. If you do not see this message, we'll try getting to it later.

It would be unjustified to keep the title as Cwen. That is a very little used term in reference to the Kven people, worldwide, and not used at all for example in Scandinavia (Finland included).

Kvens are a historically and many other ways important part of the Scandinavian - and even the world - evolution and development (not the only ones, of course) as well as an important part of the modern Nordic society. There is no reason why they should not be told about - in Wikipedia especially -, just like all other peoples, their languages, cultures etc. are told about.

Who would the denying policy serve in this case or other similar cases ? Do they need your or my cooperation ? Do we not want to seek for the truth, and then report it, even when the truth might not be to our liking, or even when we might not have been familiar with the topic at all prior to this. There are people whome the reporting of some factual historical events hurts. Whose fault is that ? Should we take them into consideration primarily and first ? Should their needs go ahead of the reporting of the truth ?

E.g., in the case of the Kvens, only last year their language received a legal status in Norway. That action - now taken - was long over due, like the over all proper recognition of the Tornedalians (they too, importantly, were historically refered to as Kvens) and the Norwegian Kven people - the Samis too - by the Nordic governments, as well as the Russian government in the case of the Karelians (not only the Viena Karelians).

Kvens - like many other groups in the world - deserve their rightful place in history as well as in the modern day society, just like you and I. How would we even be able to understand important historical writings - such as the ones offered in the Kven article - if we were not allowed to learn about the Kvens.

In order for us to be able to understand ourselves - and where we are going to -, we must know where we came from. We must be given the true historical facts correctly, so that we can succeed in this exploration of own soles and being.

Due to many illfated policies of totalitarian leaders, for example, - particularly Stalin and Hitler - Kvens have had to suffer disportionately. They, of course, are not the only ones.

Now - let us go ahead and remove those unnecessary notices above the Kven text, mikka. We can continue, of course, working on the article - shortening it, too, etc. Perhaps I'll get to it myself, when time allows. However, first we needed to offer the historical and other references which were requested.

It can be hard to please everyone in this sort of forums, as you may know, mikka. Without many historical and other references, someone in Georgia, USA, would have already wanted to delete the entire topic.

We ought to especially write about topics that have - for one reason or another - been left for less attention than they deserve to be left. I believe you agree on that. You seem to have done it yourself - and we others did not accumulate too many unnecessary notices above the information you provided.

Please, as you convert the text name to Kven, remove those unnecessary notices above the text at the same time, which - I suppose - you just now reinserted. After all, you are the one who first inserted them, and you are the one who needed to "discuss" this matter, before the notices would be removed.

Your original question has now been answered here - I hope -, and the proper references have been offered to the Kven text.

- January 29, 2006 -

Regarding user Aprerogative

A Wikipedia visitor Aprerogative has not offered any reasons for his disputing of the Kven article. He should therefore get himself familiarized with the related Wikipedia policies.

We suggest for Aprerogative to concentrate to contributing for the topics he may be knowledgeable about, and for him not to tamper with the Wikipedia articles without any reasons offered for his actions.

In the Kven article all information given is based on research done by the outmost experts on the field and the subject matter, as well as all known and available historical writings having to do with the Kvens, by known historians from various countries. The multiple references are offered clearly.

Apparently, Aprerogative suggested a deletion of another article yesterday, using another user name. There, his reason offered (he sent a message to a Wikipedian) for the deletion of the article was the fact that - according to Aprerogative - he had discovered the writer of the article having spent "an hour" preparing the article and making additions to it. That, however, is not a valid reason for deletion of any articles or information contributed to Wikipedia.

Unless the Wikipedia visitor Aprerogative - whose information shows no positive contributions to Wikipedia, based on his/her computer IP Address and the Wikipedia user name - offers reasons for his radical actions, they will be disregarded as vandalism, and the user's computer will be a subject for Wikipedia blockage - first temporarily."

The noncompliance to reply for requests for reasoning the actions taken by "Aprerogative" will be reported to the proper authorities of Wikipedia.

- January 29, 2006 -  Help keep Wikipedia clean of vandalism and unnecessary radical actions

Answer to aprerogative

The user aprerogative does't realize that eventhough the spelling for the Kvens differes in the later Latin writings from the 17th century on, they too - of course - are refering to the same people. Also other spellings have been used.

The "Cwen" spelling was tested here in Wikipedia and aprerogative himself fell for that test right away, as his writings here prove. It only took one writer to write a book using the term Quen in Latin and the others followed the suit - just like one writer offered the spelling Cwen here (Kven is the appropriate spelling) and already at least one website outside Wikipedia also seems to have changed the spelling.

Yes, always all known researchers have seen the Samis for he most part as reindeer herders - and before also deer herders -, the Norse (also Norwegians) as fishermen, the Finns and their descendants - i.e. historically Kvens up north - as farmers (grain harvesters) and fishermen, but also herders, just like they are today in the province of Lapland in Finland (the Samis too). Nobody is really contradicting that.

 * * * * * *

Page move

The old article Cwen is moved under the title Kven. The newly created Kven is moved to Kven/Version, so that you could transfer your changes into the old article. Please continue to work on a single article. mikka (t) 20:01, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Please DON't remove the warning labels. Unfortunately you lost the credibility by persistent addition of highly disputable (not to say false) information in this article. Until only you edit this article, the labels will stay. I am not an expert to judge the bulk of your text. the only possibility to verify all your statement is to attract many people with diverse area of expertise and different poiints of view. mikka (t) 20:01, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Please sign your comments by typing four tildas (~~~~). mikka (t) 20:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

To all

The Finnic Varangian connectios are also given in many of the sources and the related links at the Kven site - for instance on this site, THE URALIC FAMILY HOME PAGE:

http://peacecountry0.tripod.com/earlyfin.htm

The Wikipedian aprerogative seems to want to delete all information relating to the Finnc connections having to do with the Vikings. That equals to shouting against the wind !

If we cannot relate to the numerous historical sources from the Viking sagas, historic Nordic texts and known historians from all over the world - those from the past and those from the modern day -, as well as the latest DNA research and archeological findings - then whom, what and which sources can we believe ? What is left ?

If these numerous sources cannot be revealed, what then ? After all, these same sources are largely referred to in the writing of the entire Viking history.

Besides of the claimed Finnic roots of the term Variag (given e.g. on the above link), also an increasing number of scientists and researchers are linking the term Rus to Finnic roots (a great number also have prior todate). The descendants of the modern day Finns (who of course are not fully of the historic Finno-Ugric background) used the term Ruotsi in reference to their western neighbors. It is largely viewed that the term Rus is derived from the Finnish term Ruotsi.

Similarly, the term "Perm" is derived from the Finnish word for hinterland, and the Permians are known to be the northeastern forefathers of a vast number of the modern day Finns of Finland.

The offered references given on the Wikipedia Kven site include those of Greek, Roman, Arabian, English, American, Norse, Slavic and various Nordic sources. How much more do we need ? -- Andy, on the last day of January, 2006

• Please sign your comments by typing four tildes (~~~~). mikka (t) 20:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Signatures and formatting

Please don't create chaos in the talk page. Please register yorself user names and use a standard way of signing the comments: by typing four tildes (mikka (t) 20:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)). They will automatically convert into your signature.

Please read Wikipedia:Talk pages about proper formatting of conversations in talk pages. mikka (t) 20:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Neutral sources

To fulfill the wish above for neutral sources, here are a few. The name "Kwens" appears to be well estalished, although this article perhaps attributes them a little too much attention.

The article on Swedish Wikipedia writes (based on Nationalencyklopedin)

Kväner, benämning på finsk minoritet som bosatte sig i Nordnorge under 1500-talet. Ursprungligen nämns termen i tidiga nordiska källor, där de förknippas med ett västfinskt folkslag, eller snarare ett förbund av jägare, fiskare och krigare som härjar runt i norra Skandinavien (se Kvänland) mellan 800 till 1100-talet. I Egill Skalla-Grímssons saga omtalas även en kung vid namn Faravid, som regerade över kvänerna. Birkarlar har sedan länge anses vara dess efterträdare.

which translates to

"Kwens, name for a Finnish minoriy that settled in northern Norway in the 16th century. Original the term was used in early Norse sources, where they referred to a West Finnish tribe -- or rather to a cooperative of hunters, fishermen and warriors -- that ravaged in northern Scandinavia (See Kwenland) between from the 800s–1100s. In Egill SkallaGrimsson's tale a king by the name Faravid is mentioned to have ruled the Kwens. Birkarlar have since been considered their successors.

Another longer texts which basically says the same can be found in Nordisk familjebok from 1911 (online text in Swedish here). I'll translate that too (roughly and somewhat abreviated):

Kväner1. According to Egil Skallagrimsson's legend, Thorolf Kveldulfsson met with the king of the Kwens, Faravid. Faravid asked for his help against the Karelias which ravaged his country. In King Alfreds anglosaxian version of Orosius' world history from around 830, this is written "The Kwens ravage occasionally the Norwegians [possibly Northerners], as they travel across the fjelds , while the Norwegians do the same. And there are plenty of great lakes on the other side of the fjelds, and the Kwens carry their ships over land to the lakes and ravage from there the Norwegians"

It is also mentioned in the Danish King Sven Esitrdsson's story from Adam of Bremen (ca 1070), where he mentiones how there from the fjelds occasionally come onto the plains a kind of people, who are of avarage height but so strong and agile, that the Swedes hardly count measure up to them.

The name Kwen is only accounted in Icelandic and Norwegian sources and ought to be used only west of Kölen (?). Its meaning is uncertain. The old Kwens nationality has been the subject of much discussion; they were likely Finnish woodland wanderers. It is also probable they were the ancestors of the birkarls.

Literature: K. B. Wiklund, "Om kvänerna och deras nationalitet" (i "Arkiv för nord. filol.", bd 12), och K. Grotenfelt, "Über die alten Kvänen und Kviln-land" (i "Annales acad. scient. fenn." B, bd 1). - 2.

2 Norwegian name of the Finnish people living in in northern Norwegian since the early 1700s. In the 1500s and 1600s it was used in Norwegian texts as a name for Finnish wanderers, and is likely to have a connection with its meaning in the medieval age.

Fred-Chess 23:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

You are a very polite person, Fred. "A little too much attention" is a very mild evaluation of what's going on here. Why I have an impression that the author(s) of this article are not recognized by the mainstream historiography of Scandinavia? mikka (t) 03:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)