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)

This talk page is a mess, just like the article itself

Anonymous, you have made this article into a long pot-pourri of prose and opinions, and the talk page is equally confusing. Why do you contually insist on inserting endless sections of dubious theories and then repeat them in the talk page without signing your own postings and with no regard for the policies regarding credibility of sources and format of talk pages? //Big Adamsky 11:49, 1 February 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 (and even by just-below-the-surface) historiography of Scandinavia? mikka (t) 03:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Answer to BluePlatypus

"...Swedish traders...but they are dated to 6th century."

That inaccurate statement was removed already long ago. Someone apparently had insisted in bringing it back. Thanks for removing it. - January 2, 2006 - Occational visitor

Answer to mikka

The Kven info - naturally - is only for those who are interested, which is the case with all topics in Wikipedia, of course. Lack of references and info were first cried for, and you personally, mikka, suggested conversation.

Now - suddenly - too much information and sources are refered to, and now you are implying that the subject might be getting too much attention. Well, never everyone is happy.

Your comments make one wonder about your own background and negativity, not the author(s). I site with the info offered, and I - for one - am not of a Kven background.

Judging by your past comment, you were not familiar with these people, whome e.g. so many royals of Europe descend from - according e.g. to several of the Nordic sagas as well as many related historical writings - etc. Why should not Wikipedia be on the top of the wave in the informational media relating to this topic, which right now is getting a good amount of visible attention in the Nordic Coutries.

Isn't it about time that the information about this important culture and important group of people, that the world renown epic, Kalevala, tells about, whose land - Kvenland - covered more area than today's Finland or Norway, is available to anyone interested in Wikipedia too.

"Kven" as a subject of discussions and a matter of interest has not received nearly enough attention - an that exactly has been a problem - i.e. not an excess of information, but instead the lack of it !

The Norwegian and Swedish governments have suddenly woken up to this "lack of attention" too, due to the international - also internal - preasures. Now e.g. the Swedish and Norwegian governments have on a very short run - within only a decade - granted their Kvens (i.e. the Tornedalians on the Swedish side, Kvens in Norway) a legal minority peoples status, and their languages a legal minority language status as well. - January 2, 2006 - Occational visitor

Answer to Big Adamsky

Your question regarding the credibility of sources and your inquiry regarding more neutral sources were further answered and fulfilled by BluePlatypus.

The Kven article has plenty of sources and references, both historical and those from the modern time. The list includes many of the outmost experts on the field, from various countries - and more can be added if it may furhther satisfy anyone.

You were defending the article already before, though complaining still about some excisting confusion. It was explained to you e.g. why this topic must be kept apart from Greater Finland, which is altogether a different subject.

You seem to create a bit "confusion" yourself, e.g. by your additions and deletions to the Kven site. You earlier added some Finnic groups to the site's See also list, who really have nothing to do with theKvens, thoug they too are Finnic peoples (yet, I personally do not have anything against the additions).

Yesterday you removed a map from the Norwegian Finns (Kvens) section. We shall go ahead and insert the map back to the site. The map shows where the great bulk of the people who today are refered to as Kvens recide. The same area is shared by the Samis. Throughout the known history the two peoples have inhabited pretty much the same areas in question (the Samis lived more south too, just like the Finns).

Chess points out to you correctly that the Kven is a well established term - although apparently not to you, prior to this. Anyone interested more about the Kvens and their culture can find a lot of information about them through the search engines, etc. Plenty of useful key words are offered on the Wikipedia Kven site.

The user Chess seems to have been a bit rushed, and therefore he seems to have just quickly drawn examples from here and there for you (e.g.: A Nordisk familjebok from 1911 though is not one of the best sources). Thank you user Chess.

I may not be familiar with some important modern or historic culture or a group of peoples somewhere, that perhaps you - or say the Wikipedian mikka - may be aware about. That does not make me fight against reporting about them to those who might be interested.

You were correct in writing against the childish unfactual accusations by someone visiting the site. Thank you for that. I hope to have some time to clearify some of the Kven info a bit later. Cheers, - Århus Feb 2, 2006 -

I ask you respectfully not to refer to me as "Chess". / Fred-Chess 21:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

How to proceed further

I was asked about my opinion what to do with this page.

I am at a complete loss here. I posted a request for comment at all North European wikipedian notice boards. You may see that some people responded. This is a situation never encountered by me: a narrow but valid topic vigorously pursued by a POV person (or clique), and no one else has sufficient knowledge/interest/stamina to counter. You might have seen from article history I periodically removed (and they periodically restored) some nonsense claims that go outside Kvenland. As to the rest, the following things must be resolved:

• First, investigate the suspected sockpuppetry. The article authors must read the policy wikipedia:Sock puppetry, which strongly discourages usage of multiple accounts. It is suspected that a number of accounts edited this page belong to only 1-2 people. If this is so, they must choose one account and denounce the rest, otherwise they will be forbidden to edit this article.
• Second, exact quotation for each dubious and far reaching claim must be provided in the talk page upon requests (I intended to do so, but the very immense size of the article makes it difficult to find the starting point).
• Third, vague references to sagas and ancient histgorians must be probably disallowed, since it requires an expert to interpret what old writings/saysing actually meant. The reasons abound: from language/(mis)translation ambiguities to naming mismatches, to verifiability issues. Only quotaitons in confirmation of published expert's opinions must be allowed. mikka (t) 19:11, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Fourth, the talk page became extremely noisy. Any discussions not directly related to statements of the article should be disallowed for some time.

For starters, I deleted most of texts not immediately relevant to the topic. This is not History of Scandinavia article. mikka (t) 19:11, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I also propose the following two measures:

• Temporary protection from further editing
  • This would a too drastic measure now, IMO and hardly fit policies. mikka (t) 20:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Disallowing (and if necessary deleting) long, irrelevant and unsigned comments that lack structure and a proper descripitive heading
  • This is an addition to my "fourth" and I understand it as "one issue at a time", rather than long multifaceted rants. mikka (t) 20:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

//Big Adamsky 19:42, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Article splitting

The article should probably focus on improving and verifying the current sections that deal with the Finnish-speaking people in Northern Norway, all the rest can be replaced with links. //Big Adamsky 19:42, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

• This could be a good suggestion: to initially split the article in two: Kven, dealing with the modern usage of the term, and hence easier for factual verification, and Kvens in history, which will require true experts. mikka (t) 20:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I just get crap for taking the time to translate from well-known standard reference works. I don't know what you people expect from the people on the notice board. You ask about legends, who do you think can tell for sure about that? No historians knows for sure about such matters. What can be said for sure, I have provided you. The rest is a matter of speculations. I think I deserve at least a polite response. / Fred-Chess 21:02, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Your translation services are appreciated, Fred, but let me ask you this: When you read through the article and all the facts and fiction, what do you make of it? How does it compare with the other articles that deal with stateless ethnic groups (e.g. the Basques), in your opinion? The collection of links and literature is mainly in Finnish, Swedish and Norwegian, effectively restricting verification to Nordic language speaker. Do you feel that this complies with what this was originally supposed to be? //Big Adamsky 21:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Adamsky.

I hope it's okay I don't read through the article in full. This kind of speculations I have seen before and is common when interpreting old sources. The same issue was recently with Furby, Sweden, old revision. I asked user:Wiglaf about it, who (now) holds a pd.D. in some kind of old Nordic history subject, who responded thus [5]. So I don't think further discussions will result in anything. / Fred-Chess 21:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Allow references to remain in the Kven text

User Fred-Chess. Appologies for the accidental copying of only half of you name coding. Thank you for your comments !

I agree with you. What else can be expected ? E.g., a good number of approximately millennium old texts were offered in the text. Already the user mikka has removed some, which only complicates things. Things will only seem more "mystical" if just one or two references are given for a certain claim that is meant to be brought accross.

All matters will receive more understanding and believability and their research will become more scientific, when something - e.g. a certain claim - can be verified from a number of sources from the period in question, but also from the modern day sources, such as e.g. recent archeological escavations, which in the case of the Kvens have been - among other references and proof - already bought forward.

Therefore, for clearification purposes alone , all those earlier offered references to the Kven wars and kings - etc. - discussed in the various Nordic and other historical writing offered - that tell the same story and match with each other, besides matching with other known and related historical proof - should be left to the text. They show a consensus, a common agreement and understanding about certain events and things that took place, at least in the light of a good amount of information and sources available. If there would be something available that would battle against this information, then that too can be and must be brought up to our attention.

Removing the availabe historical or reliable modern reference material in this or other similar cases is wrong and equals to vandalism.

The users Big Adamsky and mikka ought to give some respect for the historical Scandinavian writings and sources refered to in the Kven text, as well as the referred historians from various countries from the period in question - also the given experts from the modern day that are refered to - also the proof from archeological escavations, etc. - - January 3, 2006 Jonathan

Big Adamsky and mikka have no reasons to believe that User:Simply not your speciality (blocked) has enough knowledge to correctly translate and interpret historical Scandinavian writings. Please read wikipedia:Verifiability policy. Whatever you are, you are not better than a 12-year-old boy editing Pokemon articles, as long as you cannot prove your point without accusations of other people in ignorance.

Please understand: this is how wikipedia works. The main reason is because unlike scholarly journals, wikipedia is in no position to provide peer review, and all added material must rely on modern published sources, written by verifiable experts.

Many people don't like this situation, called anti-elitism, starting from Larry Sanger, one of the founders of Wikipedia, but this is just how it works. See eg Sander's article and Wikipedia:Anti-elitism.

Wikipedia is something in between Encyclopedi Britannica written by respected experts (but still lots of bullshit and heavy bias, especially older editions) and an unmoderated chat room or someone's blog. Some versions of the Kven article resembled the latter.

Warning: the above comments are for your information only, and this talk page will not be the place for discussing anti-elitism. Once again: please stick to the content of Kven, not to credibilitis of editors. Remember once and for all: with the exeption of trolls and vandals (please read wikipedia:vandalism about the exact meaning of this term in wikipedia and don't abuse it), all have equal rights here. mikka (t) 16:55, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

The map is not a Lapland map

The user Big Adamsky complicates things by insisting in removing perfectly valid information. E.g., the map which he now keeps removing - which he calls a "Lapland map" - does not in way represent Lapland, althoug the same map is wrongly used in another context in Wikipedia.

Let us bare in mind that there remains a lot ow missuse of things and wrong information in Wikipedia. Anyone in Scandinavia - including first graders -, and a whole lot of people elsewhere can assit you and tell you that the area darkened in the map * * * DOES NOT REPRESENT LAPLAND * * * !

Officially speaking, Lapland is the northernmost province of the current day Finland. Finnmark, on the other hand, is the northernmost province of today's Norway.

The area darkened in the map - which we shall now insert back to Kven text - shows rather accurately the area today inhabited by the Kvens and the Samis in Norway. Thus, it fits the portion of the Kven text that concentrates into the Finns of Norway. Those two groups have traditionally shared the same territories - by in large, anyway - in Norway.

Aren't you the Wikipedian who complained of being confused ? Then hold your horses, please.

The northernmost territory of Norway nor the area darkened in the map in question do not constitute now - nor have they ever constituted - an area called Lapland in any official sence, nor otherwise either (although the Samis have traditionally lived on those areas darkened in the map, and although now the areas described are their heartlands. The Kvens share much or the same territory).

Please, set your curser abobe the map, so you'll see the hyber text. We'll set a text under the map, too. -- January 3, 2006 Jonathan

This map is not Kvenland map. Where did you take it? mikka (t) 17:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

The major problem with Wikipedia

One of the major problems with Wikipedia is - of course -, that the "mystified" users of any given topic can go and change and remove the related - and often very valid - info as they please, simply because it may not be to their liking.

In the Kven article thremendously valid info was brought forward in a large and neutral scale by people who are quite familiar with the topic. No political or other ampitions or one sited conclusions or assumptions were represented.

Then we have users like Big Adamsky and mikka who have revealed that they have no knowledge about the issue here. Yet, instead of giving a chance for things to proceed in a good order and instead of respecting the numerous references, sources and opinions of those who know, they make the text their own playfield of their own views.

It is not thremendously hard to cause this sort of harm to any information in Wikipedia. The users Big Adamsky and mikka should try to avoid rushing into conclusions, and instead they should let the events play themselves out in the hands of those who are familiar with the topic.

We are not here to (only) teach the above users, but to offer information for the entire internet community. The user mikka wanted to discuss, and he was given that. The user Big Adamsky wanted references, and he was given those from multiple sources. Now these Wikipedia users seem to want to hit their heads against the wall and battle against the history itself.

Some respect, please ! The author(s) made it clear that the text was obviously a work in progress, and that it would be simplifief shortly. Let them narrate the article, when they have the moment available - - January 3, 2006 Jonathan

• Offensive user name "simply not your speciality" blocked indefinitely. mikka (t) 16:44, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Article only brings up one viewpoint

The following is a translation of the words of an eminent historia, who admittedly is no specialist in this subject but has read several books on it Several theories are abound surrounding the Kven. This article, despite a nice reference list, only seems to adhere to one of those theories. Missing from the list is a book by Kustaa Vilkuna, Kyösti Julku and Thomas Wallerström. Julki believes that Kvenland (mentioned in the Sagas) referred to the coast regions. Walleström believes that the Kven and Kainuulaiset terms are for finnish-ugric people who are not Saamii, all the way from the coastal region to the White Sea. --Stalfur 17:00, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

request for comment on article

A RfC on this article has been posted at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography. / Fred-Chess 08:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Answer to Stalfur

Those are distinguished researchers who you bring up to our attention. Thank you for that.

Yet, I don't see you bringing up anything new or different to the table. You refer to possible different view points. Yet, to my knowledge those men do not disagree or represent any significant different view points than those already brought up in the Wikipedia Kven text (although I haven't checked what has been cut off or added during the last week).

You wrote the following:

"Julki believes that Kvenland (mentioned in the Sagas) referred to the coast regions. Walleström believes that the Kven and Kainuulaiset terms are for finnish-ugric people who are not Saamii, all the way from the coastal region to the White Sea."

That is basically exactly the same what all known researchers are saying, and what our text already been relaying.

The bulk of the Kven population indeed historically concentrated around the "big waters", i.e. the Gulf of Bothnia, the Arctic Ocean and the White Sea, but Kvenland also consisted of all the territories in between those seas.

Is there any scientist who disagrees. If not, let us move forward. Haven't we already gone through this ? -- Michael -- February 9, 2006 --

To user mikka (t)

You said the following:

"... This map is not Kvenland map. Where did you take it? mikka (t) 17:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)".

After you saying that the map was gone (actually both two maps were removed). Why? Nobody had claimed that either one of the maps presented were showing Kvenland.

One map was under the headline Kvens today - the Finns of Northern Norway. The map there was showing the area of Northern Norway - and a bit of the surrounding areas - widely known to be the territory largely inhabited by the people referred to as Kvens today. The Samis happen to share the same area.

The other map, i.e. the map of the Greater Finland was shown to indicate in the historical context why the traditional Kven areas were included in the plans of the Greater Finland advicates - a very important part of the related Scandinavian history.

It is wisely said that "pictures tell more than thousand words" - and, the maps tell even more. These maps are important in helping to clearify the important matters having to do with the Kvens, and the areas inhabited by them - now or before - etc.

It is, however, ok to cut out some of the texts that simultanously were prepared pages of their own for, separately - i.e. we can cut out much of the texts having to do with the Tornedaleans, Bothnians and the Pjarmians, and something else, too. Yet, while doing that, we must make sure to provide introductions, sentences and links to the related info elsewhere in Wikipedia.

Let us repeat: Historically speaking, the Bjarmians were the easternmost Kvens - called Kainulaiset in Finnish -, and Bjarmia was part of the heartland of the historic Kvenland.

Bothnians, on the other hand, were the southernmost representatives ot the historic Kvenland - Kainu or Kainuunmaa in Finnish.

The Tornedaleans were also people inhabiting the Kvenland areas - Kainu or Kainuunmaa in Finnish - north of the Bothnians. Both of these groups were referred to as Kvens by the Norse as well - and Kainulaiset by the Finns (Kvens = Kainulaiset).

Those groups are centrally important part of Kvenland - Kainuunmaa or Kainu in Finnish - and those people were Kvens - Kainulaiset in Finnish.

What part of this is so hard to understand ?

There is no known researcher or scientist - to my knowledge anyway - who disagrees on this important matter, and you certainly have not even tried to suggest any, and neither has anyone else. Why do you then go ahead and remove this information, without leaving even links to these cruisally important peaces of information in the earlier main text ? Why ?

The historians provided as references have written much about the Bothnians, the Bjarmian, etc. They includ Vahtola, Anttonen, Julku, etc.

Now we need to bring the original text back first - to be better able to see what was there, in order to then go ahead and start cleaning and shortening the text such a way that at least links to the related important info is left.

I'll do that, and within the next two days or so I promise to work on the text, and simplify it. How's that ? Now I must leave shortly, but I'll be back.

- Dimitry Harakowsky, February 9, 2006 -

User Stalfur

Kyösti Julku is already - and has been for long - pointed out as a reference in the Kven text. Where does his view part from the Wikipedia Kven text in your opinion ? - Dimitry Harakowsky, February 9, 2006 -

---

Sturluson, Snorri is said to have been also a bishop in some sources.

River Kalix = River "Kvenland" = River Kainu (the original name)

--- a Kven from Northern Sweden ---

Moved text from article on Finnic peoples

The following was moved from Finnic where it was too specific (aswell as too dubious and unverified) to remain:

Kvens While the descendants of the Finnic peoples outside Finland and Estonia in the northernmost Europe - i.e. in the rest of Scandinavia and in today's entire north-western territories of Russia - have largely assimilated with the majority groups and populations in many cases, they still remain a more or less visible minority group in many areas, of which the areas inhabited by the Kvens of Northern Norway, the Tornedalians (the Tornedalian Kvens) of Northern Sweden and the Viena Karelians and East Karelians (historically the Bjarms - or Bjarmian Kvens) are among the most strong.

It is nowadays held for true, based on archeological findings and historical documents, that during the last centuries of the first millennium — and at least to a certain extent already since the end of the last ice age — the areas of today's Northern Sweden and Northern Norway were inhabited by Finno-Ugric peoples, and that the culture and traditions in these areas are continuous with that of the Finns and the Samis. In historical Norse writings, Viking chronicals and rime writings as well as in the Finnish epic Kalevala this area is usually referred to as Kvenland, the land of the Kvens.

However, the present-day Finnic inhabitants of Northern Norway and Sweden are - for the most part - considered to be descendants of later Finnic migrants from south-central and south-western Finland, the Tornedalians migrants during the Viking Age having moved up north mostly from Tavastland or the surrounding areas. 81.236.184.210 12:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Kvens truly are ancient people. In historical terms, Bjarms and Tornedalians also were Kvens, and their area Kvenland, i.e. Kainuu

Kvenland = Kainuu - or Kainuunmaa ("maa" meaning land) - in Finnish. Kven = Kainulainen in Finnish. In plural, Kvens = kainulaiset in Finnish.

Kainuu (sometimes written also Kainu, just like the newly agreed official name of the Kven language) - in historical terms - included the coastal areas of the three big waters - the Gulf of Bothnia, the Arctic Ocean and the White Sea - as well as all the territories between these coastal areas (the total area pretty closely forms a sguare).

It is a widely accepted view among the researchers that in historical terms, when referring to the Kvens, the past historians as well as the historical texts in Scandinavia - and elsewhere - were discussing a group of people that included the Bothnians, the Tornedalians and the Bjarms.

The archeological escavations show that the oldest signs of human life in Finland - and the entire Scandinavia - (if not the prehistoric signs of human life - dating perhaps over 130 000 years ago - from the Southern Finnish Susiluola escavations are counted) can be found from the heartlands of the historical Kvenland, particularly from Suomussalmi, dating approximately 8000 BC, i.e. to the time when the ice masses of the last Scandinavian ice age were still melting away.

These findings have given much new information for the scientists about the Suomusjärvi culture which excisted in Northern Finland already 10 000 years ago. The most recent archeological escavations - including interesting jewlery findings - from 2005 in the Lake Inari district and in Enontekiö in Northern Finland have brought - and keep bringing - yet more understanding to this important issue.

Thus, it seems that the users Big Adamsky and mikka had not fully realized the historical meaning of the term Kven - perhaps due to the lack of English language sources introduced to them so far, and the fact that the Wikipedia Kven page has still been partly a work in progress.

User Big Adamsky - the first two sentences of the Wikipedia Kven page give a rather good short description of the term Kven:

"The term Kven (alternative names: Kveeni, Kvaen, Kvæn, Cwen, Quen, Quain, Qwaen) - Kainulainen (Kainulaiset in plural) in Finnish - was historically, up to the end of the Viking Age - and in many cases still after - used in reference to all Northern Scandinavian people, who were of a Finnish origin.

In the modern terminology, however, only those of a pre twentieth century Finnish background living in Northern Norway are referred to as Kvens."

- Bergen not raining, February 21, 2006 -

A number of Viking Age references to the Kvens of the arctic Ocean

Fred-Chess must stop making unfounded changes in the Kven text. His theory of the Kvens being descendants of the 16th century Finnish immigrants - and not from before - has no scientific foundation, and that sort of theory is not supported by any known historian or researcher. Who.

It is very likely that also on the 16th century such migration took place. Yet, the modern research - also the research from the past - very much verifies what has been thought for long. The oldest Finnish settlements, to a large extend, started from the north. Thus, the very oldest settlements of humans in the area of the modern-day Finland have been detected from Enontekiö, Utsjoki, Inari and Suomussalmi in Northern Finland. The oldest such findings are from 10 000 years ago. In Southern Finland, on the other hand, only the findings from Ristola and elsewhere near the city of Lahti date as far back - up to 11 000 years ago.

The biggest reason for this of course is the fact that during the period in question the Northern Finnish territories were warm, and therefore best area for habitation in Scandinavia - walnut trees grew as north as Oulu -, and much of the other parts of Scandinavia were still covered by ice of the last ice age, including the entire area of the Southwestern Finland. The coastal areas of today's Norway were free of ice starting about that time, as well - and some of the Finnic forefathers are now claimed to have arrived via that route also, not only from south and southeast.

Several historic texts from the first millennium AD discuss the Kvens of the extreme northernmost Scandinavia. Taticus, Ottar, Alfred the Great, Al-Idrisi, Grammaticus, Sturluson and others already brought up in the Wikipedia Kven text are not the only ones at all. The Viking Age sagas and chronicles, for one, have much of references to the Kvens, using that name, written in old Norse, and in a version of the Swedish language of the period - Islandish too.

Besides, the archeological findings from the last decades, the most important ones - perhaps -from as recently as 2005, from Inari, Enontekiö, Utsjoki and Suomusjärvi show settlements from as far past as 10 000 years ago.

The over 10 000 years old cliff painting of the so called Alta man is believed to have been drawn by the Kvens as well.

In this comment the prehistoric signs of human life, dating up to 40'000 - 125'000 years ago, between the ice ages and much before the last ice age, from the Southern Finnish Susiluola escavations, are purposly left aside.

Please, if you are not Big Adamsky, stop behaving like him.

- Roberto A., March 06, 2006 -

I and Big A. have been discussing this. We think you should write on Wikibooks instead. This article wants to focus on established knowledge. I will continue to remove speculations based on your interpretation of primary sources. Instead, a Wikipedia article is to be based on secondary sources such as established scholarly material of today. / Fred-Chess 14:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

What known, reliable source claims the Kvens to be descendants of "16th century" Finns - and not descendants of a much earlier stock, to which all notable and offered scientists agree ?

You Fred-Chess are quite obviously trying to enforce your nationalistic private opinions to Wikipedia.

First, let us state that on the "16th century" too, some Finnic migration to the northernmost Scandinavia took place. Yet, your claim totally incorrectly and in a priviously unheard way tries to insinhuate that the Finnish "Kven" history only begins from the "16th century".

Most recently you have - for instance - repetedly cut away the sources and information offered from the recent Utsjoki archeological escavations, which are yet another additional and undisputed proof of 7500-10000 years old Finnish settlements in the northernmost Scandinavia, from the period when the Southern Finnish and other Scandinavian territories were still getting free of the massive ice formations of the last ice age.

The artifacts discovered from the Norhtern Finnish escavations in Utsjoki, Inari, Enontekiö, Suomussalmi, Suomusjärvi, Oulu (Kaakkuri graves), etc., reviel information of the inhabitants who lived in the areas in question.

Understandably unable and due to a lack of any reliable source agreeing with you, dispite of many requests on this page you have not cared to even try to provide any sources to support your outragious claims regarding Kvens being a "Finnic minoriy that settled in northern Norway in the 16th century." (your spelling error is purposely left untacked)

You are attempting to begin the Wikipedia Kven article with a false, unfounded statement, which is not supported by any known researchers, historians or scientists. If you disagree, please finally answer, by who ?

As in the above comment the writer "Roberto" did, we too ask you to explain what do you have to support you claim with !

In your above comment you refer having "discussed this" with another Wikipedia user, Big Adamsky, who previously on this page already has proven to be a newcomer to this topic. He discribes the information of the Wikipedia Kven page - a subject he had not studied before - "fascinating". Please realize that we simply cannot base any Wikipedia information on his speculations.

As suspected here before, you two indeed come out as a one and the same person, using a different user name.

As his Wikipedia record shows, the user Big Adamsky has not provided Wikipedia with anything useful or constructive - only disconstruction, as stated here before.

Please, stop vandalizing Wikipedia, and try to hold your nationalistic feelings and pride at bay. Please, peacefully face the widely accepted and proven fact that the "Swedish" intervention and history in Northern Scandinavia only begins from the "16th century", whereas the Finnish history in the area provenly begins from the end of the last ice age.

Thank you for your cooperation ! Who says "16th century" ?, March 7, 2006

Listen to me carefully now. I will for now refrain from listing you at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_conduct partly because I don't like the extra work it would take. I will give you 48 hours to do something constructive. You have been told what we, me and others on this discussion page, request of you. The tags on the article page should be strong reminders in case you've forgot.

As writers of a serious media, we don't accept links to various speculating personal home pages. We need scholary literature with credit. Please use in text quoting, and see Wikipedia:Citing sources for policy, and Wikipedia:Footnotes for the methods.

Regards Fred-Chess 18:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Do as you are told to do, Fred-Chess !

As everyone knew, you would not be able to - and therefore would not, of course - provide any reference(s) and/or source(s) for your "16th century" claim, which you keep insisting in pushing to the Wikipedia's Kven text's opening paragraph, despite of several pleas and requests for explanation and reason for your actions.

Thus, as from here on, please stop vandalizing the Wikipedia information provided, which has been supported by provided credited sources and references - unless you first credibly reason your actions !

Many distinguished sources and references have been offered for the Kven information provided, but some earlier offered sources and references have been persistently removed, without explanation, by you and your partner, who - according to your message - talked you over to cooperate with him in this sort of vandalism.

Ottar alone is a principle source of Scandinavian history. He thoroughly describes his exploration of the Norwegian coast line and the northernmost areas of Scandinavia in the latter part of the 9th century AD, including the areas by the White Sea. He makes it very clear that the Kvens ruled the northernmost Scandinavian territories which he explored.

The Kven text - in the current form - goes on about Ottar in the following way:

"Ottar met the English King Alfred the Great in England in the end of the 9th century and made a thorough account to him of the life in Northern Norway and the Kvens, and about his exploration trip to the White Sea area. This account was included to the omissions and additions included to the Universal History of Orosius, republished by Alfred the Great (the book is partially work of Orosius and partially of Alfred the Great).

This was the first genuine and comprehensive account of the North, and thus it is a principle source in the exploration of the Nordic history."

What part of this do you not understand ? A whole number of other historic texts - from long before the "16th century" AD - make various sorts of references to the Finnic Kvens of the northernmost Scandinavia. Bringing up those sorts of historic texts, however, is of not much help, as there will be always some Mikkalai who does not realize that your type of people will inquire even those type of references, for extra verification - because for you, bringing up the scientists and their information is not good enough alone. Thus, we can try to go on pushing that sort of info for your types.

The scientists that have been offered as references are some of the outmost experts on the field, known and credited historians, professors, scientists.

Providing the sources and the references for the information does not seem to help, however. Some of the outmost experts and their book references offered for various peaces of information have been removed by Adamsky who specializes in vandalism - and to some extend by Mikkalai as well.

The offered historians and researchers naturally base their knowledge on an entire scale of different sources, including the historic writings, archeological excavations, DNA research, linguistic and other types of studies, etc.

Are you suggesting that we should now begin rewriting the entire Nordic and the Viking Age history. If we cannot rely on the outmost experts, who then ? Please, go ahead and advice your pal Adamsky to swallow his student pride at this point - and you do the same.

The scientists that have been offered as references for the Kven text - prior to you vandalizing it - are some of the outmost experts in the subject matter, known and credited historians professors, scientists. They include Anttonen, Edgren, Carpelan, Huurre, Julku, Nunez, Schulz, Shore and Vahtola - even Hallencreutz to large extend (and more can be added as time allows).

At least a few peaces of information and the related sources were removed by either Adamsky or Mikkalai, as I recall. Those sources included Allan Tiita, Seppo Zetterberg, etc.

Please, do us a favour. Do not at any time soon again attempt to call yourself a "writer of a serious media". You have not provided any "scholary literature with credit" - instead, you have only concenterated in vandalizing and removing some. - - Ted A., March 8, 2006 -

Prehistoric Finnic settlements since ice age are listed on the government site

Although the written history relating to the northernmost Scandinavian Finnic people, Finns and/or Kvens begins from the Taticus' writings in 98 AD, and although much of the historic references and sources relating to Kvens - using that particular term - written by marginally differing spellings - surface from the early Viking Age on, there is a wide range of other material and information available from numerous prehistoric housing sites (pottery, sculptures, different types of artifacts), rock painting sites, etc. - to reveal information about the Finnic inhabitants of the northernmost Scandinavian areas from the last ice age on, beginning approximately 11'0000 years ago.

The prehistoric Finnish and Finnic life in the northernmost Scandinavian territories can be viewed in a light of a lot sources and evidence. Entirely different matter - of course - is what title or name we choose to use for the people we are referring to.

For instance, from what time on should we call the Kvens by that term ? Should we call them by that title only starting from the oldest available written reference to Kvens by that term ? Or, can we call the same tribe or group of people "Kvens" from already the time prior to the first available written texts by humankind, when other evidence exists showing that the people in question are entirely the same ?

The official Finnish government's Virtual Finland website - for one - offers much information about the various Finnish settlements in the northernmost areas of today's Finland and the surrounding areas, for instance from the Northern Finnish Suomussalmi district and about the so called Suomusjärvi culture there, which is dated to have existed already 10'000 years ago - and perhaps even before -, based on different types of findings and discoveries from archeological excavations, rock painting sites, etc.

For instance, there on the page http://virtual.finland.fi/netcomm/news/showarticle.asp?intNWSAID=25920 Dr. Pirjo Uino (Docent, Curator, Department of Archaeology, National Board of Antiquities) writes about the Northern Finnish Suomussalmi findings, and more (only a section of the longer text is quoted here):

"... During the Combed Ware period the Finnish climate was warmer than it is today, the average annual temperature being 2°C higher than nowadays.

The most recent research suggests that Neolithic dwellings were — at least for the most part — no longer merely light essentially nomadic structures, but more solidly built houses partly sunk into the ground and intended for year-round occupation. Their sites are sometimes visible as shallow oval-shaped or oblong depressions on the ground. Over 3,000 such house depressions have been recognized in Finland.

Photo: National Board of Antiquities / Pirjo Uino. Värikallio, in Suomussalmi, is one of the most famous rock painting sites in Finland.

Burial grounds have also sometimes been discovered in the vicinity of such settlements. During the Stone Age, the dead were buried, with a thick layer of red ochre sprinkled over the body. The deceased was often accompanied in the grave by an assortment of artifacts such as amber ornaments and pieces of pottery. Discoveries from this period have also revealed skilfully finished sculptures of elk and bear heads as well as small human figurines, or idols, fashioned out of clay.

Photo: Värikallio rock paintings - human figures and elks.

Stone Age man has also left his mark on Finland's rocks. There are currently around 80 prehistoric rock paintings which have been discovered in Finland, most of which date from the Stone Age. The paintings were done close by bodies of water on vertical rock faces, often in extremely rugged places on the edges of ancient routes along the waterways. ..." -- S.T. 3.9.06

The key question is: How the "government site" calls them: Finns or Kvens? We already know people lived before Jesus Christ. mikka (t) 16:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

By now it should be clear to mikka (t) as well that for instance the multiple known Viking Age written texts called the people in question Kvens, and that the people in question from the Viking Age are commonly called Kvens all over in history books and elsewhere (in Finnish kainulainen - kainulaiset in plural), and their land was called Kvenland (Kainuunmaa and Kainuu in Finnish). Compare: Kainuunjoki (in Northern Sweden) - i.e. the Kvenland River, or River Kalix in Swedish.

As mikka (t) already was convinced and in many ways made clear about that fact (variety of sources and info were provided, and despite of pleas and inquiries no one opposed the info with any disagreeing sources), why in the world then has he still in recent days been repetedly converting the text to a totally new unfouded claim ("16th century"), made purposely up in a conspiracy by Chess and Adamsky. mikka (t) is contradicting his own criterias and earlier comments. Now, who is playing "pokeman" ? -- S.T. March 9, 2006, 19:56

Unfortunately, it is not at all "clear". I asked a simple question: are they called "kven" at the governement site? "yes" or "no" please. mikka (t) 18:06, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Nowadays prehistoric sites are not attributed to any modern ethnic categories.

Todo

It is important that the exact use of the references get noted. There are currently too many external links. If they contribute to any part of the article, please use a footnote system to denote this. Otherwise they will have to be removed.

Please also reference what the main sources are and how they are used. Don't just spew in lots of material: Provide the main references, and give exact links to minor references.

Thank you Fred-Chess 22:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Kven history does not begin from the first written references

We do not recall anyone having called those Northern Scandinavian prehistoric Finnish/Finnic residents - from the last ice age on - necessarily Kvens in the Wikipedia's Kven text - although they most probably were Kvens (even if there was nobody writing about them by that term or any term), and the (Finno-Ugric) Samis inhabited much of the same areas as well.

The time before written history - in this as well as in other cases, such as in the history of the Incas and Mayas for instance - is parted from the first written remark only by a tiny fraction of a second. Thus, linkage to the aerial human history prior to the first written notations of the people or the culture in question must be revealed. Or otherwise, should we for instance tell about the Incas only from the moment on when they were first called "Incas" in any known written document ?

There is ample evidence to suggest that the Finnic people in Northern Finland and the surrounding areas from thousands of years ago were by most likelihood the forefathers of Kvens, although evidentially proven migration up north also took place in the course of the last two millenniums, particularly from the Southwestern Finnish areas, such as Tavastland. The Tornedalians only brought yet another Finnish injection to Kvenland, not first by any means - based on a wide range of scientific evidence.

In light of archeological, linguistic and other sorts of research, findings and studies it appears strongly scientifically verified that the Kven history does not begin from Ottar circulating his pen on the 9th century AD, or some other sources talking about the Kvens in a written form even before.

The artifacts, rock paintings, grave findings and different sorts of linquistical and cultural peaces of evidence - etc. - show the Kainuulainen (i.e Kven), Kalevalainen (compare: Kalevala) culture to go back thousands of years.

Thus for instance, for the Finnish national epic Kalevala thousands of lines of text were combined based on the findings and collections made in Kainuu (Kvenland) in early 1800s. The entire epic is a result of exploration trips to Kainuu (Kvenland), from where a large collection of material and information was gathered, relating to the area's oral history, language, songs, folklore, art, heritage, traditions and culture.

As the Norwegian leader and explorer Ottar traveled the coast line of Northern Norway in the 9th century, he discovered that the area was ruled by Kvens. He made a thorough account of his findings which was thereafter included in the World History of Orosius, by King Alfred the Great.

The Wikipedian mikka (t) has kept removing a number of Viking Age Nordic and other international historic references and quotes referring to the Kven and/or Finnish kings ruling the Norwegian coast line, their "conquests" of Norway, their "possessions" in Norway, the Norwegian royal family descending from the Kvens, etc.

For the Wikipedia's Kven text, all those sources and references are a valid, important, useful and - importantly - essential pease in the puzzle to understanding the term Kven. Those sources, references and their exact quotes ere needed for people like Fred Chess who appears to have created his own and outrageous "16th century" theory. Unable, he refuses to offer any scientific backing for this nonsense (yet, now he has added the word "estimated", and by now he refers only to Northern Norwegian Kvens in his 16th century theory).

All factual evidence place the Finnic human history by and close the Arctic Ocean to have existed already during the the time when the ice masses little more south were still melting, i.e. some 11'000 - 10'000 years ago. Although the Kven title was not used in a written form of these Norwegian coast line residents before the 800s AD ("Fenno" by Tacitus already as early as 98 AD), it a appropriate to shine light to that period as well in this context.

The recent Utsjoki archeological excavations on the very border of Norway and Finland (relatively close by the Arctic Oceans' coast) has brought up yet additional proof for the understanding of this. These and other similar type of historically supportive findings - including the Kven area's so called Alta man from approximately 10'000 year ago, etc - seem to be acquired in attempt to explain how researchers can place the Kven history as far as they do (again, we are not saying that they call the people from 10'000 years ago by the Kven title).

Fred Chess explained that he had discussed the Wikipedia'sKven text with Big Adamsky. As a new reason for tagging (tags do not bather most of us) was apparently wanted, a decision apparently was reached between the two fellows. This time Fred Chess introduced a totally new theory, previously not introduced to science by any known source, claiming the Kvens (now changed by Chessinto "Norwegian" Kvens - also the word "estimated" was added) to be of a "16th century" origin.

It was needless for Chess to admit that he had discussed this matter with Big Adamsky. Only four minutes after the introduction of the Chess'es outrageous claim, at "11:12, 5 March 2006" Big Adamsky tagged the article in ecstasy, noting that "this article does appear to contain entirely new claims".

Chess seems to have spent time to shorten the Kven text yesterday. His efforts are welcomed, as any information is always easier to consume in a smaller package. The previous longer versions deserved some air time, however, as it was appropriate for some of the most enthusiastic Wikipedians first to be familiarized with the topic, so that eventually we can come to a some sort of consensus.

In his yesterday's changes and editions to the Kven text Fred Chess has got some things in an acceptable and somewhat accurate form. However, unfortunately some things he is presenting entirely inaccurately. The details must be dealt with. If no one else does, I'll try to take a moment for it in some point.

For instance, Fred Chess writes: "This area called Kvenland is esteemed to have been the south-eastern part of today's Finland -- the part Österbotten."

That sentence - for one - is entirely inaccurate. The historic Kvenland has in all known cases been placed from the modern-day Finland's middle part up, and never to Southeastern Finland.

Furthermore, Southeastern Finland has never been called "Österbotten". The Bothnian areas are in the midwestern parts of Finland, and previously they were also on the Swedish side, as - for instance - known Swedish historic maps reveal.

Also, it is a historically undisputable fact that Kvenland areas also reached the northern and northwestern areas of the modern-day Sweden, where the so called Tornedalians lived, areas where at least one migration wave can be traced to have taken place from the early Viking Age on, mainly from the Tavastland district of Finland.

That area was a part of Kvenland. Thus for instance, still today the Northern Swedish River Kalix is also knwon by its original Kven name, Kainuunjoki - i.e. the river of Kainuu (Kvenland in English). -- Wikipedia visitor Marcus, March 10, 2006 --

You remove the following:

"In the 16th century, the historical origin of the Kvens had already been surpassed and it was not certain if the Kvens and the historical Kvenland overlapped. The issue continued to be disputed for centuries. Additionally, ancient sources are generally unspecific as detailed maps did not exist."

I take it, it is not the kind of information you are proponing? I will none the less reinsert it.

Fred-Chess 18:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Secondly, please be more specific with the source stating were Kvenland was located. Sources I have looked at state this can not be said with certainty.

Fred-Chess 18:06, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Are Swedes of today related to the Swedes from eight centuries ago, Fred-Chess ?

Your three line paragraph above must be your own speculation, and therefore it has no room in Wikipedia. We have never faced such a view point before. Who says that, besides you suddenly in Wikipedia now ? Where is the science behind that ? Do you have a source or a reference, or how about at least a quotation from a distinquished and known historian ?

You are claiming that "the issue continued to be disputed for centuries". How did you come up with that assumption ? It is needless perhaps to even try to request sources from you for that. You simply made that up yourself, didn't you.

Are the Swedes of today related to the Swedes - or Sweos - from the beginning of the 12th century for instance ? Should we now go and add to the related Wikipedia's Swede text the following presumption of yours:

In the 16th century, the historical origin of the Swedes had already been surpassed and it was not certain if the Swedes and the historical Swedish areas overlapped. The issue continued to be disputed for centuries. Additionally, ancient sources are generally unspecific as detailed maps did not exist.

How does that sound to you, Fred-Chess ? Could you please get real now. I have no time now to check what you have deleated, left and added. It is Friday evening and my ice cream is waiting.

Ps.: The Bothnians very deffinately deserve a Wikipedia page of their own. I personally have no time for it - at least not now. Cheers.

21:05, March 10, 2006 - Roberto -

Some clarification and corrections

1. It is a well-established fact that Northern Scandinavia has been continously inhabitated for 10 000 years or more. However, is it far from obvious that these prehistoric archaeological finds can be associated with "Finns". Such associations are not made in archaeological sources mentioned in the article, so it is a clear case of mis-quotation. Many Finnish archaeologists would agree that it is impossible to connect prehistoric cultures with modern ethnic groups, which have actually formed during much later periods. And even those who are willing to try and label prehistoric finds with concepts like "Lapps/Sami" or "Finns" usually associate the northern finds with the Sami, not with the Kvens or Finns. This is the case with the souces cited in article as well.

2. During 800 - 1100 AD archaeological materials in the so-called Kvenland are very limited: only a handful of burials, some settlement sites, somes hoards and stray-finds. This is verified in the books by Torsten Edgren and Matti Huurre mentioned in the articles. The situation has not changed much after the 1960´s when Ella Kivikoski wrote the Prehistory of Finland, the only standard text of Finnish prehistory available in English. Recent finds in Inari are intriguing, but they do not essentially change the picture. The pausicity of finds is usually explained by the existence of nomadic hunter-gatherer population with an a-ceramic and non-lithic culture.217.30.179.130 19:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Coleague, you are fighting with the version of the text persistently restored by one editor who is pushing his theories on this page under multiple user accounts. Several users complained about his behavior, see the top of my talk page, User talk:Mikkalai. Now the Kven page is protected from editing by anonymous users.

Unfortunately I had to revert your contributions together with this dubious version. If you feel that I deleted something relevant to the current version, please write the suggested text here, in the talk page, and I will be happy to transfer it into the article. mikka (t) 20:00, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem, the current version is better and it does contain some modifications I made from a different IP address. As a Finn and a lover of history I do not appreciate the fact that someone, apparently my fellow countryman, tries to fill this article with his own dubious theories, possibly pursuing a national-chauvinistic agenda.

Distortion of history by Swedish eyes

I have inverted my answers in the text.

Based on your criteria, 217.30.179.130, all historic texts from the Viking Age - whether Arabian, Roman, German, Greek, Slavic, Nordic or what ever - can be characterized as not having any value, due to their "semi-mythological or fictious character", unless they happen to glorify your Swedish distortion of history.

What? I would suggest rersearchers to be careful with early medieval texts even when they a studying purely Scandinavian matters.

You added the word "mythological" (kings of ...) into the following sentence: "Fundinn Noregr discusses the kings of Finland and Kvenland and their conquest of Norway."

According to Finnish historians, they are mythological. See article by Mikko Häme in Faravid 1991, if you read Finnish. See also the article Suomen kuninkaat in Finnish Wikipedia.

Your aim proves to be the discoloring of information and facts, in your shallow - but childishly obvious - ways.

I do not need to comment.

Too many historic sources discuss Kven and Finnish kings - and their deeds and conquests, etc. - for them not to have existed and for them to not be taken seriously - as an additional valuable source. As a number of historical sources discuss these people and these events, the information becomes more scientifically valuable.

This is your own interpretation, it is NOT shared by the FInnish historians and archaologists, and it does not belong here. Don't you know anything about the rules of Wikipedia?

Burial sites of Vikings discussed by name in the Nordic sagas - for nstance - have been found in Finland.

Can you actually mention such sites and names, and present sources? I have not heard of a single case, despite quite extensive reading of Finnish archaological texts. I am quite sure such burial sites do not exist. However, I am aware of couple of burials, which have inspired scientific speculations of a possible service in the Varangian Guard by the deceased. One of them has been found in the celebrated cemetery of Luistari in Eura. But no one knows his name - and not a single "Viking" burial of pure Scandinavian character has ever been reported in the Finnish mainland. This is verified in the books by Matti Huurre, Torsten Edgren, Ella Kivikoski and Pirkko-Liisa Lehtosalo-Hilander, all of them Finnish archaeologists

The men were written to have served in the Byzantine guard. In this type of context and in these type of cases your mythology theories become well proven to be only pure "grab".

As you do not present a single scientific source, I must presume you are just making up your own fantasies.

Thus, all of the historic related sources must be revealed, and - importantly - without discoloration of any kind. This will enable and help us each make up our own conclusions. When all is revealed, the mythology view point of yours vanishes.

I am quite unconvinced.

Your choice of wording reveals your own believes and assumptions, and "draws very distorted and national-chaunivinistic interpretations". You are attempting to build history to your own liking, siding the sources that best fit your purpose, at the same time leaving out the part of historically true related facts which happen to not support your aims.

I was impolite to speculate about your personal motivations, and I need to apologize that. But I do not believe I have actually selected true facts. There is a difference between science and pseudo-science.

If you wish to contribute knowledge of history to others, you must allow the readers make their own conclusions, even as to what is "mythological" - in this case and others - and what is not.

I can agree with that, but I think it is fair to express clearly what is established scholarship and what is not.

You carry on with too many similar attempts to draw readers to side with your personal opinions and conclusions, for them all to be listed here. Could you just provide facts, and no more personal views, please.

I am providing facts and views shared widely among the research.

What do we have to make out of your following - rather useless - sentence: "However, nowaday many researchers consider it unrealistic to associate tribes mentioned in antiquity to modern ethnic groups."

To example, the Finnish nation really came into existence when a Finnish identity was born, i.e. during the 19th century. The Fenni mentioned by Tacitus may or may not have been our ancestors. At least they had a name which was a remarkably similar to the name of Finns. This does not, of course, mean that the Fenni of the Roman Iron Age should or could be directly associated to the modern Finnish or Sami nations, just like the Suiones mentioned by Tacitus were not the modern Swedish nation. It is very difficult to reconstruct the ethnic identities in prehistory, and ethnic names have carried very different meanings in the different periods of history.

Do you mean to say that many researchers do consider, and - perhaps - that many others do not ? Or what ? We all know how to compare the Navajo Indians now and then, or the people of Israel now and then, etc. Your attempt to diminish and downplay the value of facts is amusing, to put it in kind terms.

I do not understand this rather incoherent argument. But I presume the Navajo identity has not always been there.

What happened to the Kvens of today's Northeastern Sweden ? Nothing spectacular, of course. They did not vanish anywhere mysteriously. Many today can offer their family trees leading to the historic Kvens and Kvenland.

At least it is a fact that a Finnish-speaking people has been living in the riverine valleys of Northern Sweden for a long time. According to the stablished views, their ancestors settled there duri9ng the 12th century. I do not knoew was the connection between those settlers and the obscure Kvens of the Scandinavian texts. It's been a long time since I read the excellent dissertation of Thomas Wallerström abouth this topic.

It is common knowledge and well established, that the Tornedalians were granted special rights by the Swedes, for the Kvens to be able to continue their traditional type of life in north, including the taxation ot the Samis, etc. Those rights were the so called Birka rights - pirkkaoikeudet for your "Finnish eyes".

I know the Birkarlar (pirkkamiehet in Finnish) but how this fact is related with our disagreement? Pirkka rights are not necessarily earlier than the 13th century, if I remember correctly.

To a large extend, the Kvens became peacefully and gradually assimilated with the rest of the society expanding northwards. There is nothing mystical about that. The Kvens assisted in the expansion of Sweden up north, as is well known. The two folks peacefully cooperated.

Yeah, that's correct, if we understand the Kvens as the Finnish-speaking settlers of Northern Sweden. Of course they were never assimilated completely - Tornedalians are still there.

The areas furthest up north and east remained isolated - untouched and unaffected by other populations and cultures - for the longest. The very first road to the Northern Norwegian Bugoynes - for instance - was not built before 1950s.

I believe that.

As the newer version for the Kven text - among its other shortcomings - attempted to hide the obvious connection between the Kvens and the Kvens (really), also - ridiculously - Kvens and Kvenland, it was right for the older version to be brought back to drawing board. It of course needed cleaning, editing, cutting, too.

I think your text simply contained a lot of errors and dubious theories presented as facts. Of course, the present Kvens in Northern Norway have a connection with the Finnish-speaking medieval settlers in Northern Sweden and Finland.

Despite of many attempts, the provider of the newly offered theories and personal views refused to discuss his claims or to provide any sources for his theories. That kind of behavior fights against the essence and the nature of Wikipedia. The Wikipedia user mikka (t) supports this sort of vandalism with his blocking attempts and actions relating to the Kven text.

I do not need to comment. Mikkalai can aswer for his actions, although I do not see them as vandalism.

If that type of methods are chosen to be used, the provider(s) of unreferenced information who are not willing in any way to discuss - or scientifically back up - their personal theories and conclusions, must be blocked.

So, please, stop presenting unreferenced information yourself.

We agree with those suggesting for the Wikipedia user mikka (t) to be prevented of orchestrating vandalism on the Kven related information in Wikipedia. -- Swedish eyes must look at history more clearly - March 14, 2006 --

My Finnish eyes have looked history quite closely. I am sorry that I cannot sing under because my poor keyboard. I am the modifier with the IP addresses beginning alternatively 130 and 217. I live in Jyväskylä, Finland.

Thanks for your comments, user 130.xxx / 217.xxx. I know it is discouraging with all the comments by this one user who spams this talk page with his peculiar opinions. But you can be certain that we are very grateful of your expertice in this area. I speak for myself, Fred Chess, and probably for Mikka and Big Adamsky too. Most other comments on this talk page were written by one and the same user, but do not represent a shared opinion. / Fred-Chess 19:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

My contribution

I can see that the article no longer receives contributions from IP adresses or newly created accounts, which is a healthy thing in my opinion. But the extremely long comments on this talk page with a troll-ish condescending tone and speculations about other editors' agendas and intellectual capacities continue, it appears.

Anyhow, I propose adding the usual ethnobox, which is a common practice for Wikipedia articles dealing with ethnic groups. It could look something like this:

Kven

Regions with significant populations
Norway (Finnmark, Troms)
Languages
Norwegian, Kven Finnish [6], standard Finnish
Religion
Lutheranism
Related ethnic groups
other Finnic peoples

I would also recommend eventually adding these three links about the modern ethnic group known as the Kven Finns:

1. Ruija Kven Museum: Who Are the Kvens?
2. Images of the Kven: A Minority in North Norway
3. Varanger.com: The Kven People

In any case, I have fixed up a bit on the article about Finnic peoples to explain their varying degrees of inter-relatedness and likely common origin (it could still use additional help/comment, no doubt). I'm not going to put too much energy into this, but as always, I'd be happy to comment. //Big Adamsky 13:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Who are the Kven People ? Where is Kvenland ?

The Northern Finnish "Kainuu" people were called Kven by the Swedes, Norwegians and Icelanders - and the people were also referred to as Kvens in other historic texts of the Viking Age. The Kingdom of Kvenland ruled the North for hundreds of years. Kvenland people lived on the North half of the Gulf of Bothnia, on the Western, Northern and Eastern shores - and all the way up north to the Arctic Ocean from there, as well as on the territories east all the way to the White Sea, and - according to some evidence - possibly beyond.

These mysterious people ruled the North for millennia. They were a "Kalevala" people like the Karelians. The Finnish National Epic "Kalevala," which was largely composed of Karelian songs and stories, describes these heroic people of the North. Although they are related people, they often clashed in their struggle for control over certain areas.

The Kainuu people were after the riches of the fur and related trade. They settled at the main rivers such as Kainuunjoki (in modern-day Northern Sweden - River Kalix in Swedish) and Tornionjoki (River Tornio) in the north, and established trading centers at the mouths of these rivers. These rivers were at the Eastern end of the Atlantic trading area. The Kemijoki (River Kemijoki) area was also in the control of the Kvens. The river pointed toward the shores of the Arctic Ocean, which also belonged to the territories ruled by the Kvens, as for instance the Norwegian historian Ottar explained already in the late 800s AD.

The tributaries of these rivers offered good access to the land and its riches. On the eastern part of Kvenland, at the south shoreline of the White Sea, another town by the name Kemi was established, to unite the trading route to the town of Kemi at the mouth of the River Kemijoki by the Gulf of Bothnia. Both towns still today carry the name Kemi. Also, the Kven community of Sihtuuna was established on the shores of the River Kemijoki. Historians widely agree, that the name refers to the capital of the Sweos, Sigtuna. According to some sources, the community was named Sihtuuna only after the conquest of the Swedish capital Sigtuna in 1187, of which several historic Swedish sources blame the Finns. Some of the historic Swedish sources accuse the Karelians of the destroying of Sigtuna. However, at the time the Karelians and the Kvens had already united their forces, as the historic texts and information - Slavic and Nordic - of the Kven wars reflect.

In the distant past, these areas were partially the domain of the Sami people (Lapps), but due to their nomadic habits, they were easily displaced and placed under the taxation of the Kainuu people and their Kings. The Samis were gradually displaced from their traditional areas including Lake Laatokka (Ladoga), until today they live mainly in the northernmost territories of Norway, Sweden, Finland and at the Kola Peninsula in Northern Russia.

Sable skins were highly prized by civilizations all over the continent, in fact all the way in Arabia and beyond. Four hundred years ago the animal was still found in Kola, but now only in Siberia. The Arabian Ibn Ruste wrote in 912 that the "Rus" lived by hunting and trapping Sable and Squirrel. He referred to the Northern people who were known in the Eastern world as "Rus."

Some say that the Swedes were "Rus" - but according to Ibn, they were Western Finns, as they were the main providers of furs. The Kainuu people controlled the fur trade in the North, so it is likely that these were the people Ibn was dealing with. They became quite wealthy through this trade and by taxing the Lapps. The Samis moved away from their traditional areas which the Kainuu people now controlled. Their old Gulf of Bothnia dwelling places were taken over and they moved North and East, including the domains of Utajärvi, Pudasjärvi, Oijärvi, Tervola, Ylitornio, etc.

Ottar, or Othere - who was in King Alfred's service in the 800's - mentions these people and their lightweight boats with which they traveled from river system to system with ease in their movement West and Northwest into the Norwegian domain. According to Ottar, they came into contact with the Halogaland farming community.

Sources - Bibliography:

• Jutikkala, Eino, with Kauko Pirinen - A History of Finland. Amer-Yhtymä Oy, Espoo 1979.
• Patoharju, Taavi - Suomi tahtoi elää. Sanoma, Pitäjänmäki 1958.
• Zetterberg, Seppo / Tiita, Allan - Suomi kautta aikojen. Otava 1992.
• Kuussaari, Eero - Suomen suvun tiet. F. Tilgmann Oy, Helsinki 1935.

Drow Ssap - 18:02, March 15, 2006 -- revisited 19:30

Why are The Finnish forefathers settling from northerly direction forgotten here

The Wikipedia user 217.30.179.130 above claims the following:

"The situation has not changed much after the 1960´s when Ella Kivikoski wrote the Prehistory of Finland, the only standard text of Finnish prehistory available in English." That sentence from the contributor alone is yet another distortion of truth - in several ways.

Distorting business is on your side, thank you very much. My arguably lousy formulation meaned that Kivikoski's book is the only general text aimed for wide audience. Of course, the scientific texts in Finnish archaeology are usually published in English nowadays.

The situation indeed has changed much since that book first saw day light. Whereas in 1960s it was still commonly though that the Finnish ancestors arrived to the modern-day areas of Finland only from the southeastern direction, by today that theory is entirely all but forgotten among historians:

Another distortion. We were talking about the archaeology of Northern Finland, and there the reserach situation relevant to the Kven problem(number of finds from the 9th - 12th centuries AD) has not changed very much.

In light of much new information, such as the knowledge about the geneological backgroud of the Finns, and the findings from the archaeological and linguistic research from all over Europe - and beyond - etc., we now know for instance that the closest geneological relatives of the Finns are the Estonians and the Swedes - Swedes nearly as close as the Estonians, and that even the Brits are closer to the Finns geneologically than an average Russian is.

Correct, but I fail to see the relevance.

We now also know that people lived the Finnish Lapland - areas that once formed part of the historic Kvenland - already as the ice masses of the last Scandinavian Ice Age were still melting away. The entire southwestern areas of Finland were still under ice - later water -, when people were already living in the modern-day areas of the Finnish Lapland. The land gradually rose up in the large southwestern territories of the modern-day Finland, and that phenomena famously still continues today in some of the Bothnian areas - for instance - in a very strong and rapid way.

Correct, but I fail to see the relevance. These areas have been continuosly populated for more than 10 000 years, but who were the first inhabitants?

We now also know that much of the migration of the Finnish ancestors to the Nordic areas took place from the southwestern direction, not only from south or souteast from around - or north from - the Gulf of Finland. Today's scientists view much of this Finnic migration having used the Norwegian coastal route up and around the ice masses via the modern-day Northern Norwegian territories, then continuing spreading southeast to the modern-day Finnish areas of Finland.

This only one theory among the many theories, and you simplify it a lot. It is not clear if the Komsa culture of Northern Norway had anything to do with Finnic languages. The said idea is widely disputed. Unfortunately I cannot present sources right now, but as far as I understand, lately Finnish archaeologists have been sceptical if the Komsa culture influences penetrated very deeply in area of modern Finland. Petri Halinen very recently published a doctoral dissertation of the archaeology of Northenmost Finland, and it is in the English. I think it might contain some relevant new facts

Of course, the Fenno-Ugrian speakers were present in Northern Scandinavia very early, probably already in the Stone Age, but does this make them Finns? According to the established scholarship, the linguistical continuity from the Stone Age people of the North points towards the Sami, not towards the Finns. The Baltic-Finnish languages developed in Southern Finland, in the Baltic region, and in Northwestern Russia. The Finnish-speakers gradually expanded towards north at the expense of the Sami speakers. The latter were assimilated, or sometimes evicted. This is what the mainline history and archaeology tell us - in the same books you are refering to

While the Norwegian coastal areas were already free of ice, the large Scandinavian inland territories continued to be covered by thick ice masses for quite some time. Today's Northern Finland freed of ice much before than today's Swedish territories, for instance.

Not relevant.

These important facts - among others - were not discovered yet, when Kivikioski's book was published in 1960s.

Yeah, but as far as I can see they do not have much to do with the Kven problem.

The furhter information gathered about the climate changes has revealed how the historic Kvenland territories were very suitable for human inhabitation during the Viking Age, and how the so called Mini Ice Age of Scandinavia that followed presumably - and understandably, if true - led to at least some migration southbound.

Sounds logical, but present the sources anyway. The Little Ice Age (not Mini Ice Age) has not started yet during the 12th century, when the Finnish settlers are believed to expanded towards northern areas, previously inhabitated by the (Sami) hunter-fishers.

It should be also noted for those not familiar with the issue of the controlled history writing, that due to the Soviet controlled Finlandization policies in Finland the history writing and reading were very much controlled in Finland by KGB in 1960s, and they were ever since the end of WW2 until recent time - and some say, they still are in some Finnish medias to a certain extend.

Oh my god. I think this is nonsense. Of course, there was political pressure, but this thing about the KGB control of historiography? Ridiculous. But go ahead, make your own assumptions. But how about ultra-nationalistic pseudo-histories then? Are they any better?

Finally in 1991 the Finnish National Board of Librarians got to publish an article in its own publication regarding the Finnish library system's so called "myrkkykaapit" - poisen closets - into which a large number of literature had to placed during the long lasting Finnlandization policies imposed to the Finns. Much of history related material - for instance - was totally prohibited, destroyed or hidden from the public. Other literal material was available for the public's viewing only via these poisen closets of libraries. Appointments and signatures were required from those risking to be "listed" by KGB, if they wanted to view any of this prohibited material, which was considered poisen for the "Finnish eyes".:

I can see that you are bitter, and with a very good reason, but this stuff has absolutely nothing to do with the present discussion.

The following page - among others - reveales complaints and critizism about the behavior and vandalism by the Wikipedia user 217.30.179.130. There he is accused of vadalism, use of bad language, use of several user names, etc. Actions against him and/or his writings were suggested and ruled:

http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keskustelu_k%C3%A4ytt%C3%A4j%C3%A4st%C3%A4:217.30.179.130

Not true! No accusation of vandalism was made, and no action against me was ruled. I was once asked to avoid unnecessary confrontationism in the discussions. Once someone put a vandalism accusation on my page after confusing my IP address with another one; I complained on the discussion page of the said person.

The Kivikoski's work from 1960s is not the only book about "Finnish prehistory available in English, and the situation indeed has changed much, in contrary to your claims. Huurre indeed bases his theories to much more recent findings and much different information that was available to Kivikoski, for instance.

Yeah, but Huurre does not verify your own claims.

The Kven page even in its current form provides references to texts written in English. For instance, a reference text relocated under the headline "Further reading" has the following:

Nunez, Milton - Okkonen, Jari - Environmental Background for the Rise and Fall of Villages and Megastructures in North Ostrobotnia 4000-2000 cal B.C. Dig it all. Papers dedicated to Ari Siiriäinen. 1999.

But it is a blatant distortion of truth, in fact a outright lie, to claim that these sources support your own ideas. These important studies have nothing to do with Kven problem. The researchers are not talking abouth the Kvens, they are talking about people living in Northern Finland almost 3000 years before the first time the Kvens were mentioned. Continuity of settlement does not mean that no language-displacement processes or population moves occurred. According to the established views the distribution of the Kven settlement is due to such processes.

The Kvens in Finnish Wikipedia

It is reasonably to believe that the article abouth the Kvens (kveenit) Finnish Wikipedia is subject to more experticed scrutiny than this one. According to the FinnWiki, the name of Kvens is used of Finnish settlers who moved to Northern Norway from Northern Sweden and Finland during 18th and 19th centuries. Athe Finnish article discusses the Kvens of Old Scandinavian literature, too. The article claims that "probably the name Kvens has always been used of Finnish groups". Any explicit associations or claims of continuity between the modern Kvens and the Viking Age Kvens are not made, however.

The Kvens in Finnish Wikipedia

It is good to see someone coming along who has some understanding about this matter. I agree about some of opinions presented by 217.30.179.130, some I do not - not fully anyway.

I had never read the older version of the Kven text in its entirety. I added some information, but due to continuous cuttings and editings, the text became a cutting board of sorts. As I've stated before, as such it did not present my view. Peaces from here and there were left, and that is why the text became quite messy.

It is rather reasonable in the above context to mention the recent Finnish period of the so called poisen closets and the heavily controlled media - including history writing - imposed to the Finns under the Finlandization policies of KGB. The Finns could not only read certain literature, not to mention writing about historical events in a not censored way, without being marked. No deacent historian really wanted to write any censored nonsense. It was better to stay quiet and unnoticed.

Are you actually claiming that Finnish archaeology and medieval history were censored and controlled by the KGB? I think this is sheer moonshine and fantasy. Of course, the political environment effects all science, but you are taking this observation to absurd lenghts.

That in part explaines the lack of recent expert sources referred to. Since the Finnish-Soviet wars ending in 1940s - for instance -, there really has been only one comprehensively written history book published - decades ago - about the two Finnish-Soviet wars during WW2.

What? I have read several such books. And how this is related to the Kvens?

What might seem as "mythological" Viking Age kings to a student from the above mentioned period of Finlandization policies imposed to the Finns by KGB, was not necessarily at all mythological - but very real - to the historians and other writes of the Viking Age Several writers from the Viking Age period talk about Finnish or Kven Viking kings, their wars, contributions and life. Below are a few examples of such references:

This is, again, your own interpretation, based on wild and unfounded prejudices of the archaeological and historical research of the post-war period. We should not post our own theories here, but instead report the opinions of established scholarship. I have already mentioned the article of Mikko Häme, a source-critical overview of Fundinn Noregr, coming to the conclusion that those kings are mythological.

870 AD: Ottar from Hålogaland, a Norwegian explorer and leader writes a thorough account about his Northern Svandianvian and White Sea exploration trip, where he discusses the Kvens who - according to Ottar - rule large territories of the Northern and Northeastern Scandinavia, including the White Sea region of the modern day Russia.

Ottar mentions the Kvens, but the information is much too vague to put the home country of the Kvens exactly on a map.

890 AD: The English King, Alfred the Great, writes in the Universal History of Orosius about the Kven kings of Northern Scandinavia and the areas they rule.

Does he? I do not remember. You sure about that?

1154 AD: The Arab historian and scientist, Muhammad al-Idrisi tells that the King of Finland has possessions in Norway.

Actually, Idrisi mentions the king of country called FMRK. What the hell is "Fmrk"? Finland? Finnmark? And is a geographer working in Sicily a reliable source of North Scandinavian matters? Obviously not: al-Idrisi collected some vague information bits, probably misunderstood something, and interpreted the rest through his own "interpretative schemas". Source critical history and archaeology do not, and cannot, give much credence to the Idrisi tid-bits.

1187 AD: According to a Swedish chronicle, Karelians conquer the Swedish capital and destroy it.

Irrelevant. Actually, the early sources mention only "heathens" as the destroyers of Sigtuna (which, incidentally, was not the capital, as Sweden had no capital until the late 16th century). It is only during the early 14th century when the Karelians are blamed on the destruction of Sigtuna. No one knows if this information is correct. The early 14th century was the era of Karelian conquest, and this may have influenced the remembrances of the Sigtuna raid. On the other hand, the idea of Karelian raid against Sweden is plausible as such. But even if the Karelians actually did raid Sigtuna, a sea-raid does not necessitate existence "kings" or military organizations. You can find source information on the Finnish Wikipedia article Sigtunan tuho.

1200 AD: The Danish historian, Saxo Grammaticus, tells about Finnish kings.

1220 AD: The Icelandic bishop, poet, and historian, Snorri Sturluson, writes the Ynglinga Saga, in which marriages and wars of Finnish and Swedish royal families are mentioned.

I know. Maybe they were village chiefs, local "kings". "King" - kuningas - is a ancient Gothic loanword in Finnish language, so probably the Finns had "kings". Those kings must have been local chiefs, as there is absolutely no archaeological evidence of centralized political organization (see many texts of Professor Jussi-Pekka Taavitsainen, for example). Why the theme of Finnish kings was so important to the Scandinavian writers, and why it was given so exaggerated forms in the old Scandinavian literature? I do not know. Possibly because of some cosmological or mythological idea? Sami and Finnish shamanism and sorcery fascinated and terrified the early Christian Norse, apparently feeding their imagination.

1230 AD: In the introduction to the Orkneyinga Saga, Fundinn Noregr discusses the kings of Finland and Kvenland and their conquest of Norway. According to the saga, the ruling families of Sweden, Norway, the Orkney Islands, Normandy, and England descend from these Finnish kings.

Please read the article by Mikko Häme. As far I can see, he has effectively demolished the notion that Fundinn Noregr is anything but a mythological text.

I'll return to the question about the Viking|Varangian burial site with the name connection. I provided the information earlier in the Kven text, and the source, Vahtola. Must run now.

Professor Jouko Vahtola? I think this is a case of mis-quotation.

Drow Ssap - 16:05, March 16, 2006

Past scientists - even recent ones - have been proven wrong time after time

Wrong - I am not "bitter". Instead, I find myself always quite happy and quite balanced. I would characterize myself as a realist, including in regard to this topic.

My closest above text was written in a rush (this one too unfortunately). The copied headline - "The Kvens in Finnish Wikipedia" - is a blooper. The part between the headline marks, of course, was meant to be changed to reflect the topic. The unsigned text - similarly headlined - is not mine.

My above reference part, regarding some of the historic comments about the Viking Age Kvens and Finns, was also copied - in a rush - from a past Kven page draft. I had no time - and I didn't care - to tackle the texts themselves. Instead, I wanted to confirm your general reaction, which I thought I could predict. Of course, God alone knows the answers, Mikko Häme certainly not.

Scientist have been proven wrong time after time, including the ones of the time of at least one of your sources, the Kivikoski's 1960s', book which you have brought up. At that time, then quite commonly agreed upon related views - including the incoming direction of the earliest Finnic migration towards the modern-day Finnish areas, as well as the earliest estimated occurance time of the early settlement of Finland - were seen very much differently from today's widely accepted views.

The name connection with the Varangian/Viking information (a rune connection, as originally treported in the Kven text, can be foud in Professor Jouko Vahtola's book Suomen historia (the History of Finland), page 28.

- Drow Ssap, March 27, 2006 -

Oh boy. Why do you have to elaborate so obvious things? Wikipedia is not a fortune-telling site, so we are happy here with the views of present scholarship and do not try to predict how the research in future might to assess these questions. It is really as simple as that.

Viking/Varangian burial site name reference in Finland

To an outsider it apperas, hta none of the old Kven text versions has got to present well enough at all what really took place in the historic Kvenland during the Viking Age, or before. Perhaps too much relevant info has been edited away or deleted wrongly, time after time, to invite those with healthy perspectives to participate in this particular forum.

It is good progress, however, that now the text is at least containing some of the truth, although way too much is lacking. Some things are presented entirely wrong, it appears. Those matters must be faced by those who have the time and energy to correct the related infoprmation.

The Varangian/Viking name connection questioned above by the Wikipedia user 217.30.179.130 can be found from Professor Jouko Vahtola's above mentioned book - Suomen historia - page 28. The referenced information from his book was revealed in the Wikipedia Kven page in the past the following way in a "Revision as of 16:48, 2 February 2006; view":

" ... such Vikings ... - commemorated in the historical Viking rune stones - as Otrygg and Egil were buried in Finland, a Finlandi in the Viking writings. Otrygg is described to have been buried in Finland around 1020 AD. Egil, on the other hand, is described to have been laid to rest between 1030 and 1050 AD in Finland's Häme (Tavastland) region, a Tafaeistalandie in the historical Viking texts in question. The same Egil is described to have participated in the war tournee of the Viking leader Frögeir. Shortly before, - in the historical Viking texts - Frögeir and his men are described as having served in the personal body guard unit of the Byzantine Ceasar.

Oh , so it is this well-known stuff again. Earlier you were talking about burial sites, so I didn't make the connection - rune-stones are not usually situated on burial sites, and these (nowadays vanished) rune stones were in Sweden, not in Finland. No one knows the exact site where Egil and Otrygg were buried. You formulation "Viking age age burial site name reference" is quite misleading in this context. Please be more careful with your formulations!

But of course it is interesting that couple of Vikings died in Finland. I didn't know that Frögeir is mentioned having served in the Varangian Guard. Of course, this has very little to do with the Kvens, so I do not understand why it had to be taken into this discussion in the first place. 130.xxx.xxx.

The above information and further references can be found e.g. from Suomen historia (History of Finland), Jääkaudesta Euroopan unioniin, by Dr. Jouko Vahtola, 2003."

Following to that, the old Kven text makes a reference to the Finnic migration to the "Torne Valley region", and the origins for that migration from the Tavastland area of Finland, stating that known historians seem to agree - "including Jouko Vahtola".

Yeah, this is what I have tried to say. This migration - rather a slow settlement expansion - occurred during the 11th or 12th centuries AD. It does nor solve the 9th century problem: who were the Kvens of Ottar, and where did they live.

More revealed, as time allows. -- Drow Ssap, March 17, 2006 -

All what you "reveal" has no relation to this article. For example, who said that Otrygg was Kven? Please provide references about Kvens, not about whole ancient Finland. Stick to the topic, please. mikka (t) 19:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Apparently, a related name reference source was requested above. Besides, the here quoted information was relevant in the context it was presented in one of the past Kven drafts.

It also appears that in no point Matti Huurre or Torsten Edgren have been presented under the Sources or References headlines in the Wikipedia's Kven article, and neither have Christian Carpelan, C.F. Hallencreutz, Milton Nunez, Jari Okkonen or Hans-Peter Schulz.

They all have been presented only under the the Further reading column all along, it seems. Since their submittal the content of the text has kept changing. -- J.A., March 18, 2006 --

Lack of public funding a major cause for lack of information

The recent political decisions and the over all direction taken by many Nordic leaders are a salutable igniter for the rapidly and positively changing attitudes towards Kvens and towards the way their past is viewed in history writing.

The lack of public funding for research and for critical examination of history has continued to be a broblem, which in Finland - for instance - has stemmed from past attitudes and a consensus rooted deep by the illfated policies imposed during the Finlandization period of Finland. Thus, a wake up call goes out now for those in charge of public funding.

Yeah, personally I wish I could have more funding for my own research.

It's not going to happen, however.

Last week a Finnish national TV channel aired a YLE (National public proadcast system, heavily reculated and controlled by the government) documentary, in which top scientists revealed that the old Finland's prehistoric migration theory has fully now been sent to garbage can. Arrows were shown in a map, some pointing up Norwegian coast north, next to the vastly thick ice masses of the last Ice Age (which ended approximately 10'000-11'000 years ago). The migration towards the Finnish areas of today were shown going around the ice masses via Northern Scandinavia. This is no longer at all "only one theory among the many theories" as user Wikipedia user 217.30.179.130 let's believe.

I can accept that Northern Scandinavia was one of the migration routes, but were these migrants Fenno-Ugrian? I seriously doubt there is any consensus of that, and that is what I meaned when I used the formulation "one theory among many theories". Did you misunderstand my point, or deliberately distort it?

Professor Kalevi Wiik was shown explaining that - according to his research based understanding - Finno-Ugric language/s were the "kantakieli" - the ancient mother tongue - of the the people inhabiting the Central European areas approximately 6000 years ago, for instance.

Theories of Professor Wiik are widely disputed among the linquistics, and Wiik has only few followers. I do not have competence to evaluate his theories, but a controversial theory should be presented as a controversial theory. And in any case, this has absolutely nothing to do with the Kvens. No one doubts that Fenno-Ugrian speaking population have been living in Northern Scandinavia for a very very long time. Not all Fenno-Ugrians are Finns. It is an insult to the Sami identity to forget this. Why do you keep blabbering of this stuff, which is certainly interesting but also quite inessential for the Kven discourse?

Although the user 217.30.179.130 says that "The situation has not changed much after the 1960´s when Ella Kivikoski wrote the Prehistory of Finland, the only standard text of Finnish prehistory available in English", it actually has in the research level. Writing of the findings thumbles behind however, unfortunately.

So you keep distorting my points of view, disregarding my clarifications and putting my sentences out of context.

User 217.30.179.130 reports having "read several" books about the last Finnish wars. Yet, in his March 4th, 2006 Helsingin Sanomat article, Professor Jouko Vahtola writes an opinion where he accuses the lack of public funding for the lack of published examining ("tutkimuksellinen") scientific work.

Vahtola reminds that the first scientific book about Finland's Winter War was published nearly 40 years after the war. Thanks to the opening political atmosphere, the related research has speeded up during the last decade, but not with a support of public research funding, but thanks to private efforts ("... etupäässä opinnäytteinä, Maanpuolustuskorkeakoulun virkatöinä, ja yksityisten tutkijoiden harrastuksesta").

OK. I misunderstood your previous formulation, which could have been more presice.

Talking about myhology, this Vahtola calls a "national myth" (he refers to the lack of interest shown my the national decision makers). -- CONSERNED, March 18, 2006 --

I don't think I will continue this dialogue, as it seems that no essentially new points of view are coming forth, and I find it quite frustrating to constantly see my arguments and statements systematically mutilated and distorted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.234.5.136 (talk • contribs)

User:130.234.5.136, I can truly empathize with you and no one will blame you for abandoning this article (I, too, have given up), and I would like to commend you for taking the time and effort to address the objections and claims of the possessive editor(s)-with-multiple-aliases. Still, if you feel that Wikipedia is a cool place to exchange knowledge and insights you might want to make your presence here more permanent and lern more about how everything works in here. PS: If you are unable to sign your postings on talk pages due to keyboard limitations, simply use the tilde sign (x4) in the non-English graphemes collection below the edit box. You could also copy and paste tildes from the talk page itself. :v) //Big Adamsky 10:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Latest unverified claims

Sigh...apparently I am not able to keep my hands clean of this nonsense. Someone had - again - put some very dubious claims to the article.

Claim Number One: "Tavastians (a group of Southern Finns) were present on the Arctic Ocean alreydy during the Viking Age". Where is the published source? As far as I know, there is not ANY archaeological proof of this. Accordin to the established views, the South Finnish expansion towards the Arctic Ocean started only during the 11th or 12th centuries. (Occasional trading and hunting trips may have been made considerably earlier, but I understood correctly, someone claimed that here was a permanent South Finnish inhabitation in Northern Norway already in the Viking Age. Edit Oops, actually I did mispresent the claim a bit. I apologize. But we are still missing sources proving that Finns were living on the Arctic Ocean before the 16th century. Finns (i.e. Finnish speakers) were certainly present in Northern Sweden and Northern Finland, but in Norway?

Claim Number Two: "Some believe that the Kvens were the original inhabitants of Northern Norway". Is there any established scholar who actually thinks so, or even considers it a possibility? If this view is shared only by some ultra-nationalist amateur researchers, it must made clear in the article that it is a view NOT endorsed by scientific research.

Claim Number Three: " According to Ottar, the Kvens were living in Northern Norway and around the White Sea". I do not think this is true. I cannot remember all the details, but I think Ottar does not make any explicit mention of the Kvens living in the immediate vicinity of the Arctic Ocean. Around the White Sea, the inhabitants were called as the Bjarmar, apparently a obscure Fenno-Ugrian group. I someone wants to prove me wrong, he/she should present appropiate citations from the Ottar text.

 " According to Ottar, the Kvens were living in Northern Norway and around the White Sea".

Were those really the words

Semi-protection added

Nobody wants to daddy this page anymore. There just isn't much more to say about the Kwens then the article does, and all major contributions by anonymous users have been speculations. I'm semi-protecting it. Any correcting you wish to make of the article, state on this discussion page. / Fred-Chess 22:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Fred-Chess forces personal views, not supported by science

Wikipedia user Fred-Chess participates in vandalism the following way:

Over and over again the Wikipedia user Fred-Chess has been asked on this discussion page to present a known historian or another acceptable source, quote or reference to back up his claims, for instance about his "16th century" Finnish migration theory to Northern Norway, etc.

Fred-Chess has refused to respond to any of these pleas for sources. Now, that Mr. Chess has changed the Kven text to reflect his personal theories - which are not supported by science - he is attempting to lock and protect the site from reverts and/or further edits.

The Wikipedia user Fred-Chess is forcing his personal views into the Wikipedia Kven text. Those views are not supported by science. Not willing to present any sources for the peaces of information inserted by him, the Wikipedia user Fred-Chess is participating in vandalism.

Let it be known, that most parts of the Wikipedia Kven text remaining as of today, which were left standing from earlier contributors, seem accurate. However, Mr. Chess has attempted to include into the text some of his own ideas, which do not seem to match the opinions of any known historians.

If Fred Chess disagrees, we once again ask him to provide sources for his claims - even just one source, which could be considered distinguished and reliable.

In his earlier discussion comment above, Fred Chess praises and thanks a respond from user 217.30.179.130. However, even that commentator sides against Fred Chess, who - without any scientific foundation, or without any sources presented - tries to present the Northern Norwegian Kvens as a separate and totally non-connected group from the medieval Kvens of Northern Scandinavia.

Wikipedia user 217.30.179.130 correctly states: "Of course, the present Kvens in Northern Norway have a connection with the Finnish-speaking medieval settlers in Northern Sweden and Finland."

Wikipedians against vandalism, March 22, 2006

Vandalism by 217.30.179.130

Below are three misquotations by user 217.30.179.130, from his unsigned message above (his previously used IP address 130.234.75.167 shows that the message is his):

Claim Number One: "Tavastians (a group of Southern Finns) were present on the Arctic Ocean alreydy during the Viking Age".

Claim Number Two: "Some believe that the Kvens were the original inhabitants of Northern Norway".

Claim Number Three: " According to Ottar, the Kvens were living in Northern Norway and around the White Sea".

When you choose to quote someone, please use the copy and paste technique. No one has said any of the three sentences above. You simply changed the wording, to make up goofy sounding sentences, which you claim some one actually wrote.

Please, explain: When and where were those sentences written ? You are simply participating in vandalism, aren't you.

You've also changed the content of a comment written by another Wikipedia user to this discussion page (and we do not mean you placing your responses between the lines, although for that too you ought to ask a permission from the writer of the comment).

At 13:45, 19 March 2006, using the IP address 130.234.5.136 you added the following sentence to the text which another Wikipedia user had written under the headline Lack of public funding a major cause for lack of information:

"It's not going to happen, however." You did not return to fix that act of vandalism which you published as a page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kven&oldid=44501610.

You did not write that sentence in italic text, nor did you margin that sentence with your text, as you did all your other parts of your comments. Purposely or not, you made it appear as if the other party would have written that comment.

From here on - to avoid further such temptations and/or accidents - please refrain from placing your comments in between the lines written by other participants on this discussion forum. The above mentioned particular insert of yours has as of yesterday been changed to reflect the fact that it is a part of your response, and not a part of the text of the other party.

Wikipedians against vandalism, March 22, 2006

Comment from the guilty party: I apologize for misquoting. However, I must say I would like you to do the same for your earlier equally offensive and unacceptable distortions of my comments. You are keeping up double standards, aren't you?

But it is true that my previous frustration made me to read your latest modification too hastily and also to read into it even more dubious claims that actually were made. My attempt to summarize your arguments misfired.

However, I am still waiting for sources to prove that 1) Ottar actually made a connection of any kind between the Kvens and the White Sea, 2) that someone has claimed the Kvens to be the "original and inginous" settlers (whatever that means) of Northern Norway. 3) And who exactly believes that the Finnish settlement of Northern Sweden/Finland had expanded to the Arctic Ocean before the 16th century? Having said that, I'll leave here for good.

The correct quote for the suggested first paragraph

Whether correct or not, the accurate quote for the suggested first paragraph for the Wikipedia's Kven page in the "Revision as of 20:10, 20 March 2006" was the following:

"Kvens (alternate spellings: Cwen, Kven, Kvæn, Kveeni, Quen) in modern terminology is a name used nowadays for the Finnish minority living in Northern Norway. Many of the Finnish migration waves to Northern Norway can be pinpointed from the 16th century on. However, already much earlier known Viking Age settlement of the Finnish Tavastians to the Torne Valley region of today's Sweden - for instance - is belived to have reached also the shorelines of the Arctic Ocean in the modern-day Northern and Northeastern Norway.

Thus, for instance in 870 AD Ottar from Hålogaland - a Norwegian explorer, historian and leader - wrote a thorough account about his Northern Svandianvian and White Sea exploration trip, where he discusses the Kvens by name, who - according to Ottar - ruled large territories of the Northern and Northeastern Scandinavia, including the White Sea region of the modern day Russia.

Many consider the Kvens original and inginous residents of most of the Northern Scandinavian territories, including Northern Norway.

Originally, the term Kven was used in early Norse sources, Viking Age sagas and other historic texts where it referred to an ill-defined group inhabitating the northern parts of Scandinavia and Finland during the 9th - 12th centuries AD. Usually it is assumed that these ancient Kvens were a Finnic group too, possibly coming from Southwestern Finland to utilizate the northern wilderness and later settling there permanently. These ancient Kvens seem to have operated mainly in the areas of Northern Sweden and Finland, whereas the contemporary Kvens live in the vicininy of the Arctic Ocean in Northern Norway."

Due to the above mentioned misquotations in regard to that insert, that text will now be reverted back.

It can be added that for instance Jouko Vahtola - a Professor of Finnish and Scandinavian history in the University of Oulu - states in his book Suomen historia (History of Finland) 2003, page 27, that it is not confirmed (or certain) at this point, that the Finns already had formed permanent all-year-round recidences in today's Northern Norway on the 9th century AD.

Vahtola also reminds, however, that "Othar" indeed came in contact with the Finns up in north already in the 9th century, and the "Finns" in question were refered to as Kvens by the Norse (Vahtola's exact quotes can be added - others' too).

Thus, the following types of centenses spread to the Kven text by Fred Chess, as "Usually it is assumed that these ancient Kvens were a Finnic group too", can be set aside - also the type of terms of his as "obscure", etc.

Known scientists seem to agree that the ancient Kvens were Finns, Mr. Fred Chess.

Wikipedians against vandalism, March 22, 2006

My arbitrary dispute solution

I can't separate IP-user 213.xxx and 131.xxx and 80.xxx, if they are the same, who is who, etc. I also know that all suspicious edits are made by the rude sockpoppet user such as Drow Ssap ("Pass Word") who just ads speculations. So I'm going to arbitrarily revert all changes by anonymous people or people with suspicious user names.

An editor with apparent knowledge of the topic said in the previous section that he was fed up with the unbased speculation that he had to respond to. Furthermore, several people have responded on this page, and given their opinions on other pages such as Mikkai's talk page, and all have expressed how tired they are of how the editor presents the article.

I also don't have the time to check every fact, but I have the impression the current article version is acceptable, so I'll leave it that way.

Dear user: one of the cornerstones of Wikipedia is Wikipedia:Verifiability that states "verifiability, not truth". Read it carefully and ponder if Wikipedia is your media, or if you should modify your behaviour to make it more acceptable.

Finally, if someone can think of a better dispute resolution, let me know.

Fred-Chess 12:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Fred-Chess' reasonings are called "weird" by Splash

Whereas other writers seem to have presented sources for their Wikipedia's Kven text contributions (whether depatable or not), Fred-Chess has - despite of many pleas made to him - stubornly, and obiously unable, refused to provide any sources for his claims, which are unsoported by science.

Dispite of many well fouded complaints on this page regarding the behavior of Fred-Chess, he only seems to act even more strongly against the rules set by the Wikipedia community.

Fred Chess' behavior fights against the very essense of the guidelines set by the Wikipedia community. Yet, now Fred-Chess is threatening to take his vandal actions even a step further. Now he is publicly threatening to revert edits by other contributors, stating above that "I'm going to arbitrarily revert all changes ...", etc.

Fred Chess' reasonings for protecting the Kven page are called "weird" by the Wikipedia user Splash at "22:32, 22 March 2006" in the Kven page's history page (user Splash: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Splash).

By the "editor with apparent knowledge of the topic" Fred Chess apparently means the editor [[User:217.30.179.130|217.30.179.130].

However, even that editor correctly sides against Fred Chess in a fundamentaly important issue. That editor, 217.30.179.130, states:

"Of course, the present Kvens in Northern Norway have a connection with the Finnish-speaking medieval settlers in Northern Sweden and Finland."

Please do not misuse my words as a part your personal animosity against Fred-Chess. 195.237.90.72 12:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC) (217.30.179.130).

Fundinn Noregr Kvens were very real, not "fictious" or "mythological"

1. The words "mythological" and "fictious" are unacceptable in the following sentence of the Wikipedia's Kven text:

"1230 AD, in the introduction to the Orkneyinga Saga, Fundinn Noregr discusses the mythological kings of Finland and Kvenland and their fictitious conquest of Norway."

That presents a misquote. Noregr does not use those two terms in the related writing. What an editor here might consider having possibly been "fictious" or "mythological", was apparently very real to Noregr and his contemporaries, and that is apparently exactly why Noregr and his contemporaries chose to discuss those matters in the way the did.

Therefore, the correct form for that part of the Kven text must be as follows:

"In 1230 AD, in the introduction to the Orkneyinga Saga, Fundinn Noregr discusses the kings of Finland and Kvenland, and their conquest of Norway."

2. As stated in a referenced comment - Jouko Vahtola, Professor of Finnish and Scandinavian history - Suomen historia (History of Finland), page 27 - above, whom "Othar" came in contact with in north, and who he referred to as Kvens, were Finns - nothing more, nothing less.

If editor Fred-Chess wants to continue objecting that point, which is widely agreed upon among known scientists, he must present a reliable and acceptable distinguished historian, who questions this issue in any way.

If Fred Chess will not and/or cannot do that, this speculative statement of his shall be corrected.

3. Editor Fred-Chess uses the term "Kwen" in the Kven text. Why ? That term shall be changed to Kven in that particular context.

4. According to known historians (a couple of sources given below) Kvens lived all around the Gulf of Bothnia.

Sources - Bibliography:

• Jutikkala, Eino, with Kauko Pirinen - A History of Finland. Amer-Yhtymä Oy, Espoo, 1979.
• Patoharju, Taavi - Suomi tahtoi elää. Sanoma, Pitäjänmäki, 1958.
• Zetterberg, Seppo / Tiita, Allan - Suomi kautta aikojen. Otava, 1992.
• Kuussaari, Eero - Suomen suvun tiet. F. Tilgmann Oy, Helsinki, 1935.

5. Several other similar type of missleading statements or words must be corrected. For instance, it should be noted that "provenly" and "vefifiably" living all-year-round on the coastal shores of Northern Norway does not necessarily constitute the same as ruling the area, which for instance Othar referred to in regard to the Kvens. - Mark, 24.3. 2006 - revisited 25.3.2006

Thus, the new suggestion for the relevant part of the Kven text is as follows:

"Many historians suggest for (at least some of) the Viking Age usage of the term Kven to have referred to all Finns in general - Source (in reference to "Othar's" writings): Suomen historia (History of Finland), page 27, Jouko Vahtola, Professor of Finnish and Scandinavian history.

Accordingly, based on this theory, the White Sea culturally rich Bjarmaland region - visited by Ottar - can be considered to have been part of the historic Kvenland as well, which historic writings have many references to.

Yet, it appears that the Finnish Karelians were usually referred to as a separate group from the Kvens. According to History Professors Seppo Zetterberg and Allan Tiitta (Suomi kautta aikojen - Finland Through All Times - 1997) for instance, the Karelians themselves began to call the Kvens by the Finnish language term kainulainen, based on the area they lived on, Kainuu, which incuded the coastal areas of the Gulf of Bothnia."

Anyone opposed to this part of the suggested edition for the Kven text is asked to please provide a source for any objecting related views. - Mark, 15:27, March 25, 2006 -

You seem very confused. Apparently you think that Fundinn Noregr is person. Actually Fundinn Noregr is a part of a wider text written by Snorri Sturluson. Your suggestion is not very useful in this particulal sense as it gives an impression that those kings could have been actual historical persons. The suggested connection between Bjarmaland and Kvenland is weird.

Are the historical Kvens related to the Norwegian Kvens?

This has, IMO, been an important issue of the debate of this page. The anyonmous Kven-user who has edited so much is confident they are related. He just removed the sentence: "However, those Kvens bear no immediate heritage of the historical Kvens.". However, many others seem to disagree with him, and think the sentence is accurate. Opinions, comments?

Fred-Chess 18:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

All Kvens are connected in many ways

In reference to your Kven text sentence in which you deny the heritage connection between the historic Kvens and the Kvens of today), Mr. Fred-Chess, you falsely claim that "many others seem to ... think that the sentence is correct".

We ask, who thinks so ? Is there a single such person, besides you ? We have not heard of any ! In reality, no one besides you seems to think that way. No one else denies the connection between the remaining Kvens of the northernmost Scandinavia and the Kvens of the historic Kvenland.

Indeed, you have been asked several times before to provide a source for your goofy claim(s), a known historian for instance. No one so far has been mentioned siding with you on that matter. Unable, you are not even trying to provide sources. Instead, you have tried cleaning up that statement, while waiting for someone to appear for your rescue.

1. Wikipedia editor Splash (a sharp PhD student) unsprotected your recent sprotection of the Kven text. Splash - rightfully - calls your reasoning "weird".

2. Another writer 217.30.179.130 (whom you praised), stated on this page: "Of course, the present Kvens in Northern Norway have a connection with the Finnish-speaking medieval settlers in Northern Sweden and Finland."

3. You are apparently confusing the 20th and 21st century Finnish immigrants to Northern Norway with the Norwegian Kven population:

The Norwegian Kven population consists of the (presumably) indigenous Kvens of the area and those Kvens/Finns who settled to the area from the historic Kvenland territories before the 20th century, before the time when other - more recent - mixing or assimilation of populations in Northern Scandinavia had yet taken place.

The pre 20th century migration to Northern Norway originated to a large extend only from the historic Kvenland territories in Northern Sweden and Northern Finland (see more detailed comment below), and that is largely why only the pre 20th century Finns/Kvens and their descendants are referred to as Kvens in Norway.

The more recent Finnish immigrants to Northern Norway are not referred to as Kvens, but simply as Finns, instead. And those Finns - of course - are not necessarily as closely related to the historic Kvens of Kvenland, as the Northern Norwegian Kvens are.

You, Mr. Fred-Chess, removed the related information from the Wikipedia's Kven text, same time apparently confusing yourself, as well as many other Wikipedia visitors.

The earlier Kven text was due for editing to a shorter version. Yet, while doing that, you Mr. Fred-Chess cut out some of the most essential peaces of information. You also added some of your own assumptions, which consist of some of the least true words ever been spoken.

213.216.199.10 - March 31, 2006 GMT

Kven = kainulainen = person from Kainu

Kven = kainulainen = person from Kainu.

Historians in general seem to agree (many of them are listed on this page) with the fact that the areas around the Gulf of Bothnia were an essential part of the historic territories of Kainu, which the Norse referred to as Kvenland.

Still as late as in 1809 Russia and Sweden were about to draw the border of Finland to the River Kalix in the modern-day Sweden, as the area was a part of the Finnish speaking historic Kainu area, also known as Kvenland. That Kainu area is also known as Kainuunmaa (Kainu land) in Finnish, and River Kalix has historically been known as Kainuunjoki ("joki" = river), i.e. the "River of Kainu/Kainuu" or the "River of Kvenland".

In their book Suomi kautta aikojen (Finland Through All Times), page 31, Professors Allan Tiitta and Seppo Zetterberg explain that whereas still on the 12th century the Norse and the Kvens cooperated in the taxing of Lapland (Egil's saga, for instance, talks about this cooperation), coming to the 13th century the Norwegians had to give up this taxing for the benefit of the Kvens.

The same professors explain that the Karelians began calling the Kvens by the Finnish language term kainulainen, based on the area they lived on, Kainuu (historically also known as Kainu), which - according to Tiitta and Zetterberg, among others - included the coastal areas of the Gulf of Bothnia.

The modern-day Kvens and the Norwegian law makers have officially named the newly legalized (in 2005) Kven language as Kainu. It closely resembles Meänkieli, which is spoken in Northern Sweden. That - of course - is due to the fact that the Northern Swedish areas in question were a part of the historic Kainu lands, or a land known as Kainu, Kainuu or Kainuunmaa (land of Kainuu / "maa" = land) in Finnish, which the historic non-Finnish written sources referred to as Kvenland.

Although Professor Vahtola in his book, Suomen historia (History of Finland), page 27, suggests that we cannot as of now tell for sure whether or not the Finns (whom - according to Vahtola - the Norse referred to as Kvens) were living in north all-year-round already on the "9th century", when Ottar came in contact with them, we do know for fact that the modern day Kvens of Northern Norway and the Kvens of the Torne Valley region - i.e. the Tornedalians - have close cultural and linguistic ties between each other.

For instance, a number of Northern Norwegian communities received a proven migration wave from the Torne Valley region, the Northern Bothnian areas and Lapland (the Northern Swedish area also was known as Lapland) in the 18th century AD, all parts of the historic Kvenland.

Those modern-day Northern Norwegian Kven communities which received a large majority of their 18th century incoming migration from the above mentioned historic Kainu - or Kvenland - territories include for instance the following (Kainu name for each community is also included):

Lyngen (Yykeä), Nordreisa (Raisi), Kvaenangen (Naavuono), Porsanger (Porsanki), Karasjok (Kaarasjoki), Polmak (Pulmanki), Bonakas (Punakakkanen), Borselva (Pyssyjoki), Alta (Alattio) and Lakselv (Lemmijoki - a Kven name in use since at least 1595 in Northern Norway).

Also other Kven communities of Northern Norway received the large majority of their known migration from the historic Kainuu (Kainu) territories, i.e. Kvenland. The Northern Norwegian communities of Bygounes (Pykeija), Neiden (Näätämö), Pasvik (Paatsjoki), Vestre Jakobselv (Annijoki), Skalelv (Kallijoki) and Vadso (Vesisaari) reveived a majority of their 19th century incoming migration from the Torne River Valley region, as well as from Oulu, Kemi, Kemijärvi, Sodankylä and Kuusamo.

Also in the medieval time people migrated to the coast of the Arctic Ocean from the modern-day areas of Northern Sweden and Northern Finland. Those people were referred to as Kvens by the Norse. The Swedes granted the Finns of the modern-day Northern Sweden (i.e. Kvens) - a.k.a. Tornedalians - and their trading partners, mainly from Southwestern Finland, special rights that are also referred to as "Birk right", better known as pirkkaoikeudet in Finnish.

The Kvens were allowed to continue their traditional businesses in north as normal, including fur trading and taxing the Samis. Through the last centuries of the Middle Ages the Kvens didn't disappear anywhere. The Swedes and the Kvens cooperated. The Kvens continued living their lives the traditional ways - as normal -, at the same time helping the expansion of the Swedish Realm in the Northern Scandinavian area, as the Swedes had hoped.

However, already before the Northern Scandinavian national borders were ever first established, the Kvens were already there. It is very much possible - even likely, according to the modern migration theory of Finland - that the Kvens have been inhabiting the Northern Scandinavian territories ever since the end of the last ice age.

The holy town of the Hopi Indians is said to be the oldest continuously inhabited community in North America, over 10 000 years old. The human traces found in Northern Scandinavia - on the other hand -, some dating to the time when the ice masses of the last Ice Age were still melting away approximately 10 000 years ago, can very well belong to the forefathers of the Kvens.

As today scientists claim at least part of the ancient Finnish/Finnic settlement to have arrived from around the ice masses, via the Northern Scandinavian route, it is in no way an "insult" towards the Samis to view the forefathers of the Kvens/Finns (what ever we may wish to call them in reference to the time prior to first written documents) in the same drawing board with the Finno-Ugric Sami population, when discussing the indigenous inhabitants of Northern Scandinavia. - Max, March 29, 2006 -

You are so confused. It is completely absurd and unscientific to attribute names of historical tribes to the Mesolithic settlers of Northern Scandinavia. "Forefathers of the Kvens" these settlers may very well have been, at least to some degree - generally it is reasonable to assume some genetical continuity from earliest settlement to this day. However, genetical continuity does not necessarily mean there was a linguistical continuity - and certainly not ethnic continuity. Ethnicity means conscious self-identity and self-affiliation, and it is absolutely out of question to ascribe historical ethnic identities to the cultural groups of the Mesolithic Stone Age. Any Finnish archaeologist would tell you this.

The Finnish language is an important part of the modern Kvenic identity. According to the linguistics, the Baltic-Finnic languages (Finnish, Estonian, Karelian, etc.) developed from the Proto-Baltic-Finnic language, which was spoken in Southern Finland, in the Baltics, and in North-western Russia. In other words, it was not developed in Kvenland. Thus the Finnish language spoken by the Kvens is not a "aboriginal language" in Northern Scandinavia. It spread there only in a late phase of pre-history. Apparently it was spreading in the 12th century, maybe some centuries before. In any case, the Finnish language has nothing to do with the Stone Age populations of Northern Scandinavia. Some or all of these Stone Age populations may have been speaking early Finno-Ugrian dialects, but in Northern Scandinavia these dialects gave birth to the Sami language, not to the Finnish language.

"As today scientists claim at least part of the ancient Finnish/Finnic settlement to have arrived from around the ice masses, via the Northern Scandinavian route"

This is a very strange claim. You try to present "Finnish" as a synonyme of "Finno-Ugrian", which is extremely confusing and false.

I think your main problem is constant mixing-up between genetic, linguistic and ethnic continuity. These are completely separate concepts, and should be treated as such. Let me clarify:

1. GENETIC: Some of the settlers of Northern Scandinavia arrived by the "northern route", by the ice-free shore of the Arctic Ocean. Their genes might very well still be present in the population of the Northern Scandinavia. Probably the later Finnish immigrants were sometimes inter-marrying members of the indigenous populations (nowadays represented by the Sami). Propbably some Sami adopted the Finnish language and assimilated in the settlers. Thus the 21st century Kvens actually might have some genetic connection to the Mesolithic pioneer settlers! I have no expertise on this, so I will not say more.

2. LINGUISTICAL: There are a lot of different theories of the earliest origins of the Finno-Ugrian languages. Some scholars assume that the earliest Mesolithic settlers of SOUTH-EASTERN Finland may have been speaking an early form of the Finno-Ugrian proto language. Other experts are willing to date the arrival of the Finno-Ugrian languages to later phases of the Stone Age, for example to the beginnings of the Neolithic in Finland. In any case, most theories assume that Finno-Ugrian language spread from south, or rather from south-east. If this is correct the northern settlers, arriving by the Arctic shoreline, spoke unknown language[s] and later adopted the Finno-Ugrian.

3. ETHNIC: Modern ethnic identities of Finns and Kvens are result of the 19th century nationalism. "Finns" and "Kvens" are very old terms, but they were used by the Scandinavians to classify foreign groups who might not have classified themselves by the same categories. Iron Age groups may have had their own ethnic identities, but about these things we have very little knowledge. According to the anthropologists, all human groups have not strong ethnic identities. And historical ethnic identities were usually very different to the contemporary national identities.

217.30.179.130 09:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes - so ? Anything new ? There's not much there - really - that we havent come across before.

You appear to be back in the business of whistling dixie. Your misquoting strategy has had to give way for misrepresentation strategy, it appears. How do you wish to bleed this time ? Guilty, again ?

I don't remember anyone claiming those old folks having spoken any particular languages. Where ? Please, do give us an exact quote, when you make such claims. However, you catching up with the use of the term "Finnish/Finnic" - in that context - could be predicted.

We'll work on the details as time allows.

Well, well, well, I am sorry - not for misrepresentation, but for misunderstanding. Your arguments are arguably often so incoherent and terminologically confused that is is very hard to get your proper meanings. I am referring now to your (so far) incomprehensible attempts to bring the Stone Age archaeology in the discussion of the origins of Kvens. I have no disagreement with the claim that the 21st century Kvens are, at least to a remarkable degree, descendants of the Finnish-speaking settlers, whose existence in Northern Finland and Sweden is documented from 12th century onwards. (And possible, but certainly not proven, from earlier times. Thus the connection between present Kvens and the Kvens mentioned by Ottar in the 9th century is unclear. Not impossible, not improbable, but unclear. The same name, used by distant foreigners, does not tell us what else was the same).

If you wish to make the claim that Mesolithic settlers were "Finnish", you need to specify what the concept of "Finnish" means in the said context. Ethnic, linguistic or genetical coonection with the historical Finns? If you do not clarify this, your arguments will remain worthless and your essential points impossible to understand. So far you have refused to do this, without presenting any counter-arguments that could be taken seriously.

Having no psychic abilities, I am glad to forgive myself for not understanding correctly the muddiest parts of your innecessarily long postings. I find it boring to have to repeat myself, but I cannot avoid it, as you keep constantly repeating the same inclarities and presenting the same strange interpretations of archaeological theories. If this is based only on misunderstanding, the fault is not entirely of mine. 217.30.179.130 08:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion

From the previously anonymous user 130.../213...: I would suggest a change in a sentence in the introduction: "(The modern Kvens)...have no known link to the historical Kvens". This is not completely true. My suggestion: "The modern Kvens are a result of the long-lasting, gradual expansion of Finnish settlement and language in northern Scandinavia. This process started during the medieval period, possibly slightly before, and many researchers think that the historical Kvens mentioned in Old Scandinavian sources represent an early phase of the Finnish settlement expansion". I think this is a fair description of the scholarly status quo, without any nationalist strain Kraak 08:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

More crappy details

"According to this source as well as some Slavic sources, the Norwegians and the Kvens united their forces on the 9th century against the attacks by the (Finnish) Karelians who - with the assistance of Novgorod - made advances up North, particularly coming to the 11th century."

Bollocks. There is no evidence of Karelians in the North during the 9th century. "Slavic sources" (poor term for the Russian chronicles) hardly suggest anything like this. In the Egil´s Saga an anti-Karelian alliance between the Kvens and Viking is mentioned. However, according to Finnish historians, the possible historical base of this story must be some 12th century incident, erroneusly attributed to the 9th century in the Saga.Kraak 10:23, 7 April 2006 UTC)

"In 1200 AD, the Danish historian, Saxo Grammaticus, tells about Finnish kings."

"In 1220 AD, the Icelandic bishop, poet, and historian, Snorri Sturluson, writes the Ynglinga Saga, in which marriages and wars of Finnish and Swedish royal families are mentioned."

"In 1230 AD, in the introduction to the Orkneyinga Saga, Fundinn Noregr discusses the kings of Finland and Kvenland and their conquest of Norway. According to the saga, the ruling families of Sweden, Norway, the Orkney Islands, Normandy, and England descend from these Finnish kings."

I think it be would fair to say that in Old Scandinavian sources the term "Finn" usually or always refers to the Sami, not necessarily living to Finland, but in the Scandinavian peninsula. These obscure details have no relevance whatsoever in the discussion of the origins oh the Kvens. Snorri´s using the concept "kings of Kvenland" might be included, if properly elaborated and explained - but even in this case article would need some consideration of the scientific views about Iron Age societies of ancient Finland and Kvenland. Theories about unified kingdoms originate fom amateur researchers, some of whom are ultra-nationalistic nutcases, and they are completely rejected among the Finnish scholars.

Of course, at least some of the historical evidence has been interpreted poorly, and many among us still have misconceptions about the actual historical development and events that took place. That is, because we are human. By all accounts, it is possible that some historic writings discussed both groups by one term. Who and what each time was exactly referred to by the terms Fennos, Fin(n)s, Finnmark ("mark" meaning land - Compare: Denmark), etc, is currently being depated, as we know.

The term Fin(n) - by varying spellings - was used from early on also in some other documents - not Scandinavian -, such as catholic Popal letters (to the "Swedes") and geographical and historical accounts, and not in reference to the Samis (although in some cases the Samis/Lapps may have been meant to be included when the term was used). - - Donald, April 7, 2006 - -

You just do not want to answer straight? I do not understand at all what you are musing about in your first sentences. Neither do I care. I would like to discuss about the tangible problems here, but you do not seem to be very intertested in that.

To be quite exact, "mark" does not mean land, but a border area, like in titles margrave or marquis. Danmark = mark of the Danes. I think this applies in Finnmark as well. But this is not the most important point.

I have not seen debate of the meaning of the word "Finns" in Old Scandinavian sources originating from Norway and Iceland. I think it is quite commonly accepted - at least among the scholars - that a "Finn" means a northern hunter-gatherer, a "Sami", in these texts. Norwegians would have met more often the Sami than the ancestors of the people nowadays known as Finns, i.e. agriculturalists of Southern Finland. It does not necessarily matter how the word "Finn" was used in other, non-Scandinavian or Swedish sources.217.30.179.130 07:23, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

"Based on some evidence, the Kvens - possibly also other Finnic groups - are believed to have participated in the Varangian/Viking conquests in the modern-day Russia, and possibly elsewhere."

On WHAT evidence? WHO´s believing? In Southern Finland, a couple of possible "Varangian" burials (burials of local type, with some hints of possible participation in the Viking activities) are known. How about Kvenland? I haven´t heard of a single case. I am pretty sure a single case does not exist. And the "possibly elsewhere" part is simply unncessary speculation.217.30.179.130 07:41, 10 April 2006 (UTC)07:35, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Problems in moderate version, too

I have sympahties with Fred-Chess, but I do think that his version has problems as well. As I suggested above, there might very well be a link between the historical Kvens and modern Kvens, although the link is distant one. "No known link" is too strong expression, as these links have been seriously postulated by Finnish (and Swedish) scholars. And the following sentence is erroneous:Mikkalai

"Before the 8th century there are scarsely any remains of the Kvens."

On the contrary: the archaeological evidence of agricultural settlement on the Finnish side of the Bothnian Gulf is strong before the 9th century, and it gets weaker during the Viking period. This settlement may have connection with the Kvens mentioned by Ottar.217.30.179.130 11:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I'll correct it.

May I suggest you create a user name? Then you can (after a brief waiting period) be involved as an editor yourself.

Fred-Chess 13:14, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

THE VARANGIANS: Who were they ?

Historians often mention the Varangians in connection with certain events on the eastern shores of the Baltic, and in Northern Russia. Let's look at some explanations from different perspectives. The term is generally thought to come from Swedish, but many Finnish researchers, such as Kuussaari, claim it has a Finnish origin.

One Finnish source identifies the Varangians as "Scandinavians", but in reality - more precicely - they were propably Fenno-Scandians. (Kuussaari, 1935) The Finns are conspicuous for their absence in both, the Swedish and Russian (Slavic or "Great" Russian) accounts. Varangians quite likely originally were Baltic Finns, distinguishable from Swedes by their Uralic language. They lived on the shores of Western Finland and Estonia/Livonia and the Baltic islands, and were later joined in their guard duties by the Swedes, who - among some others - were called Vikings.

(Kuussaari, 1935) This is called the "Riga, Åland, Gulf of Finland triangle." Vikings are often equated with Varangians, who came to consist of both Finns and Swedes, as the latter turned eastward and joined the Finns in the beginning of the second millennium. Varangians never invaded the British Isles - those invaders are called Vikings (the Finns are thought to have participated on those tours as well).

Russian accounts suggest that eventually there were more than one kind of Varangian. They knew of several types of Varangians, and they generalized the term to include Swedes, as the Finns became a part of the Swedish realm. A symbiotic relationship formed between the Finns and Swedes who helped to fend off the Slavs. The Finns and the Swedes got along well, and there is no written record of any significant fighting between the two cultures. The relationship, however, slowly turned rather parasitic in the beginning of the 1600's, since Sweden benefitted from the Finnish soldiers, but Finland - on the other hand - suffered.

When the Vikings went East, it was with and under the sanction of inhabitants of the Baltic shores - eg the Finnish Tavastians, Karelians and Ingerians. Originally they were, according to Kuussaari, Finnish soldier merchants, who had an excellent reputation as good guardsmen because they had to protect their western and eastern flanks. Unfortunately, the Varangian theory - which became to be taught in schools - was the Swedish version, which took away from the Finns their ancient heroic Kalevalan heritage.

During the "great migrations", these people developed into various warrior types such as Kaleva, Kolbias, "kalpamiehet", Karelian "kylfings", and others who had come to some type of mutual understanding regarding what territories each group controlled, and - above all - the organization of armies. They were merchant warriors that formed an alliance to protect against Viking raids from the west so that some warning system would be in place even during their long journeys. They were soldier traders who travelled all the way to the Volga to trade with the Bolgarians - and beyond.

They had developed elaborate early warning systems, based on relay shoreline fires, so that the minute a Viking or any other unfriendly ship appeared, the curl of smoke could be seen in fires, off into the distant Baltic. It was previously thought that these seafaring people had adopted the Viking ship as their means of transportation as they built excellent large ships with at least a hundred oarsmen.

However, the early Finns had Viking style ships of their own, and they were seafaring people already from earlier times, long before the Viking raids began to the eastern shores of the Baltic, as we can also clearly see from the ancient rock art found in Karelia. This rock art resembles similar early art found in Sweden. Mikkalai Kuussaari claims that the word Varangian comes from the Finnish word "vara/vartio", which in Finnish means "guard" and "vaara" means "danger" or "hill." Fires were lit on hills, which were part of their early warning system. This worked very effectively and the people in charge of the organization became known as Varangians. The Finnish epic Kalevala mentions these people, their activities and the vaaras - the fells - where they lit fires at. Place names with "vara" stems were located in the Varangians' domain. The prefix was extensively used in the coastal and island areas controlled by the Finnish tribes who had adopted spme Swedish seafaring ways, which included ships with oarsmen:

For example (In Finnish and - the closely related - Kven languages): Varangin vuono (the Varangian Bay - Varangerfjord in Norwegian, Varjag vuoda in Lapp (i.e. Sami); Varangin niemi (the Varangian Bay); Vargava, Varanka, Varanpää (Lokalahti); Also Vargata, Varjakka, Varkal, etc.

(Kuussaari, 1935) The term var, according to Thomsen, comes from the old Swedish word var (= faithful), but Kuussaari does not agree, that this meaning is connected with the word. The Vikings too were faithful. However, they never were referred to by that term. The var word is therefore connected with guarding. In the absence of hard facts to prove these assertions, one has to consider all possibilties, keeping in mind that the Finnish position in the North is always downplayed, while the Russian and the Swedish roles are magnified by royal historians.

Thus for instance, the Finnish language is often considered to have received words from the Germanics and Slavs, instead having been the donor. Dictionary.com: http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=varangian - varangian \Va*ran"gi*an\ reveals one of the Northmen who founded a dynasty in Russia in the 9th century; also, one of the Northmen composing - at a later date - the imperial bodyguard at Constantinople.

Not everyone agrees therefore, that Varangians were Baltic Finns, and the search for the source of the word "Varangian" and "Viking" is continued by some scholars. Up to recently, a Swedish derivation of most related words has received acceptance. However, the term in some English dictionaries - for instance - is said to be from the old Norse word "Väring."

The Finnish Theory of Rurik and Varangians

The mere fact that this confusion exists amongst scholars, tells us that the Varangian term broadened so that no clear denotation could be made. The Vikings probably could not travel East without first having come to terms with the guardians of the Eastern Baltic shores. When the Vikings came to Russia, they came accompanied by the Finns who knew every river, forest and lake, and were excellent warriors, and guards. They also knew where all their ancient trading centers were located. When they met the Russians for the first time, it was natural that the Russians would refer to them as Varangians, and they soon came to realize that there were different kinds of Varangians.

The meaning of "Varangian" which is most pervasive, is that of guardianship. It was the Finns who had the reputation for being good guardsmen, while the Vikings had the reputation for being sea wanderers, traders and raiders (notice: Vanrangian guards, not Varangian sea-wolves; Varangian guards, not wanderers). That is the legacy of the excellent reputation for guarding that the Baltic Finns acquired in the ancient world, which merged with the term "Viking." Confusing ? Much of ancient history is, because everyone wanted credit for themselves at the expense of other ethnic groups; it is the duty of historians to dig down to the truth.

Much of ancient history unfortunately is merely ancient propaganda. Mongolians are said to be bad invaders. But were they worse than Russians or Romans? Were the Russian invaders gentle, while the Mongolians were fierce. Did they spare less people? Probably not, as everyone was cruel to their enemies in those days. We should read about history from as many sources as possible to avoid getting a historical bias. Still today the Russians lament the Mongolian raids, and the Finns lament the Russian raids. Can anyone claim they were better, including the Finns ? Who were worse off, the Russians under attack by Mongolians or the Uralic people under attack by the Slavs ? Could the results answer that: the destruction of the Uralic tribes; survival and increase of Slavic population.

Could the Varangian's world have been part of the ancient Kingdom of Finland mentioned in the Nordic sagas ? The Finns' heritage, the knowledge of their vast ancient kingdom - was it taken away by the new Swedish rulers and the Slavs from the south ? The Nordic Sagas and other independent sources of the time seem to indicate just that. When the Catholics brought their religion to Finland via Sweden, did they also change Finnish history ?

And the Slavic historians cannot - unfortunately - be trusted with even their own history, let alone that of another ethnic group, due to their documented omission and falsification of history to glorify themselves at the expense of other ethnic groups. Even today, a strange silence about the original people prevades the official descriptions of Russia. Very little is mentioned about even the people shown in official travel pictures, which obviously aren't Slavs, while they go to great lengths in describing the glories of Slavic (equated with Russian) culture.

Very few people are aware of the fact that the Slavs murdered most of the ethnic Finno-Ugric cultural heros, both in this century and in centuries gone by. Considering that the whole north, from the Ural Mountains to Norway, was populated by Finnish tribes, it seems odd that no great importance has been attributed to them in the Swedish or Russian literature. Something - of course - must be said. That little, unfortunately, is often lies, or a stretched truth. Thus, the Russians openly claim that the Finnish people were never in any high positions.

Russian history sources would never tell you for instance, that in the inauguration ceremony of the last Russian tzar, three of the seven generals of the tzar's personal body guard unit were actually Finnish, or that a couple of the last governors of Alaska during the Russian rule were Finnish. No Russian would be able to tell you that Finnish-Swedish Jaakko De la Gardie (he grew up in Finland, where he was brought up by his Finnish grandmother --> Finland was then part of the Swedish realm, a.k.a. Sweden-Finland)) marched his Finnish army of Finnish spldiers to Moscow, nor that De la Gardie also held his army of Finnish men (the army also included some merchant soldiers) in Novgorod for six long years.

Today the fascists in Russia claim that the North never even belonged to the Finns, and that the Slavs are the original people of the North. The Finns merely squatter. Clearly, a lot of work remains to be done to reveal the true nature of ancient Finnish civilization in the North, of which the Kalevala and the Nordic Sagas tell about.

When the Vikings eventually joined the Varangians (now they were Vikings, Varangians and Rus too) in their guard duties, about the time the slavs were setting up shop in the north, the Russians referred to them too as Varangians. Possibly others such as Angles who may have joined them. Vikings were never referred to as Varangians on their own raids to western Europe, which is natural, since they were Vikings, not Varangians. In Sweden, they were Vikings, but when they entered the Finnish realm, they too became Varangians.

The Finnish term "Varakko-ruotsit" (Varangian-Rus) refers to these seafaring Finnish people according to Kuussaari. The word (ros=row in old scandinavian) "ruotsi"in Finnish used to mean "rower," but later the word meant "Sweden." Some Swedish sources say that "Rus" comes from the word "Roslagen" which is a town in Sweden, and some say it came from a Swede called Ruser.

The "Varangians" established trading posts on the Volga and assisted the eastern Finns, and even the Slavs in the business of trade. Rurik and his accompanying Varangians camped around in the Finnish areas and in the north of Novgorod amongst the native Finnish-speaking population. We can be fairly sure that many of Rurik's men were Finns. The Varangian routes spread out through Russia to the Mediterranean. Eventually the Varangians became trusted guards of the Emperor in the Byzantine Empire.

Many Varangian trading posts were situated along the rivers such as the Neva and Volga, and the Lake Ladoga. All those areas were in the possession of the local Finns. The story is told that when Rurik defeated the strongest Slavic settlement, Novgorod, in A.D. 862, the Varangians became the rulers of northern Russia, with Finns assuming many of the leadership roles (according to Finnish history), especially north of Novgorod. As explained above, the Russian history denies that the Finns were ever in any leadership roles - what-so-ever - in Russia, but the truth is that the local Finns demanded Finnish speaking representatives. We must be careful in judging history from just one perspective. This area in some 14th century maps was still labelled Rurima (Rurikland or Rurinmaa in Finnish).

For political reasons, the Swedes and the Slavs tended (and continue to do so today) to downplay the role of the Finnish related people in the north. It is in no way "fanatical nationalism" to correct history - nor is it revisionism. It is simply the search for the truth. As in geneology, one must be prepared to find a horse thief or a murderer, or to stop digging. However, historians of Soviet Russia, the Kings of Sweden and the Czars were obliged to glorify their crowns and to erase the heroic deeds of the adversaries. This type of protected totalitarian history writing has attempted to present Finland as a place which was inhabited by savages before the Swedes.

The epic Finnish poetry of the Kalevala reveals, that the Finns had a high level of civilization for a long time before either the Swedes or the Russians came to their lands. Thus, it is not at all an accident that a number of non-Finnish historical sources discuss Finnish and Kven kings. Since the Finnish history was carried on in a rich oral tradition, it could not be destroyed in a fire, or robbed, and it is through this evidence that the Finns are able to contradict the later Swedish and Russian written accounts about the role and extent of the Finnish civilization in the north prior to Swedish rule. This is why any serious student of Finno-Ugric history must have a working knowledge of the Kalevala.

One thing is for certain: The Finnish traders traveled east long before they were joined by Swedes. Would it make sense that the Russians came into contact with Finnish "Varangians" or traders first, then both Swedish and Finnish when the Finns came under the Swedish kings in the second millennium ?This may be the reason Vikings were not called Varangians in Britain. Russians came into contact first with Finnish speakers, then Swedish speakers. Did the Russians change the name when the Swedes joined, or did they keep the original term ?

Under the Swedish rule, the Finns were obliged to serve in the Swedish (Sweden-Finland) army. Their strength was greatly reduced by the Swedish kings' ambitions far away from Finland, especially in Poland, and the disastrous march on Moscow that followed. During this time, while the door to the henhouse was open, Russia helped itself to Finland, Ingria, and Estonia. The Slavs had arrived on the shores of the Baltic while the Swedish army was destroyed on the same road Napoleon took years later. The Russians were now free to establish permanent cities closer and closer to Finnish northern and Baltic strongholds, especially St. Petersburg - on Ingerian Finnish land.

In 1701 Sweden-Finland's army invaded Poland, enthroned their loyal king Stanislaw Leszczinnsky, and made the country the Swedish Realm's new ally. Then Karl XII decided to finish Russia once and for all. Timeline to Disaster:

• In 1708 Karl XII detached a well-trained army of 60,000 to Moscow.
• September of 1708, the Russians smashed Leeuwenhaupt's corps in the battle of Lesnaya. The anti-Moscow campaign failed. No supplies from Poland were provided.
• Hoping to capture provisions, Sweden invaded Ukraine. However, the Swedish Army failed again.
• Russians left Swedes behind and gained the Hetman's quarters of Baturin City with the main food storehouses.
• In spring of 1709, forces of Karl XII besieged Poltava, and the decisive battle broke out. Russians enjoyed a significant numerical superiority of 45 000 soldiers against 22 000 soldiers of Sweden-Finland. Again, the Swedish assault on the Russian line failed. The battle of Poltava was the turning point of the war that came to end with Russian triumph in 1721.
• Russia consolidated its grip on the Baltic shore.

Parallel history (Hungarians, Norwegians and Northern Finno-Ugric tribes):

Hungarians have left their ancient home near the Ural mountains by 835 and in around 878 are just about twenty years from entering their new homeland in the Carpathian Basin.

In England, Alfred battled the Viking Guthorm on Salisbury Plain, near Ethandun (now called Edington). Guthorm retreated back to Chippenham after the battle. Alfred pursued him there and surrounded the Viking camp. He killed the loose cattle and the men he found outside the walls, keeping all food and water from coming into the Viking Guthorm's camp. Within two weeks, in late May, 878 AD, Guthorm and his army surrendered and accepted total defeat of the plan to conquer Wessex. - - Max, April 12, 2006 - -

A Reply to Art Dominique/Max

"(Kuussaari, 1935) This is called the "Riga, Åland, Gulf of Finland triangle." Vikings are often equated with Varangians, who came to consist of both Finns and Swedes, as the latter turned eastward and joined the Finns in the beginning of the second millennium. Varangians never invaded the British Isles - those invaders are called Vikings (the Finns are thought to have participated on those tours as well). "

Do you seriously think that an obscure text, written during the national-chauvinistic 1930´s, is proof of anything???? If you do, you have absolutely no idea of scientific source criticism, and not too much common sense either (a rare disability in a Finn).

As far as I can remember, Kuussaari´s book is never referenced in any Finnish scientific publications, so it is obvious what the scientific status of the said book is. It is not taken seriously. I confess I have not read the book - but even if I did, I simply could not immediately accept those claims that you have presented. Why not? Well, because I have no linquistical competence, I cannot say if the etymologies suggested by Kuussaari are total bullshit or not. Probably they are, as they are apparently never referred in any work that could be taken seriously. But to be quite sure, I would need an opinion of a modern linguistical researcher. It is astonishing that you fail to realize this and take Kuussaari´s theories as valid facts.

Kuussaari´s theories must checked against the historical and archaeological materials. Archaeological material absolutely does not support those wild ideas of Kuressaari. Some uncertain "Varangian" burials are known in Southern Finland, some Finnish artefacts from the Viking Age are known in Russia. It is certainly possible that some "Finnish" individuals or small groups participated in the Varangian movement; indeed, it would be strange if no one did. But the Finnish participation could have been only a minor part of the whole process. In Sweden the archaeological evidence of frequent travelling on the Russian riverine routes is, quite simply, huge compared to Finland. Inhabitants of Sweden - call them "Swedes" if you really have to - were visiting North-western Russia already in the late 8th century, as is very well proven by archaeology. I do not need to cite references, as there is a huge array of books telling about the "East Viking" archaeology.

Unfortunately, we know very little about the sea-faring technology of Viking Age Finns, as our maritime archaeologists have not found so many prehistoric wrecks.

"During the "great migrations", these people developed into various warrior types such as Kaleva, Kolbias, "kalpamiehet", Karelian "kylfings", and others who had come to some type of mutual understanding regarding what territories each group controlled, and - above all - the organization of armies."

This old theory is wildly speculative and has no convincing evidence, to say at least!

"The Finns' heritage, the knowledge of their vast ancient kingdom - was it taken away by the new Swedish rulers and the Slavs from the south ? The Nordic Sagas and other independent sources of the time seem to indicate just that....""Thus, it is not at all an accident that a number of non-Finnish historical sources discuss Finnish and Kven kings."

Maybe they seem do that for you, but I have different ideas. The "Finnish (Sami)" or "Kven" "kings" in the Sagas can be explained away quite easily (paper by Mikko Häme has been referred to), and archaeology blatantly contradicts those nationalistic fairy tales about "vast ancient kingdom" (for example, see the doctoral dissertation of Professor J.-P. Taavitsainen). For starters, I have modified a source critical essay "Suomen kuninkaat" in the Finnish Wikipedia.

"The epic Finnish poetry of the Kalevala reveals, that the Finns had a high level of civilization for a long time before either the Swedes or the Russians came to their lands."

Even the most "primitive" hunter-gatherer tribes can have epic poetry and impressive rich mythology.

"This is why any serious student of Finno-Ugric history must have a working knowledge of the Kalevala."

If you had any working knowledge of the Kalevala, you would know that Kalevala is a 19th century compilation, and it does contain a lot of stuff invented by the compilator Elias Lönnroth. To use the old Finnish-Karelian epic poetry you need to forget the Kalevala and go straight to the original litterations in the Suomen kansan vanhat runot series. And then you need to have deep folkloristical expertise to be able to say anything that has not been said and refuted before.

"Today the fascists in Russia claim that the North never even belonged to the Finns, and that the Slavs are the original people of the North."

Russian fascists and national chauvinists are utterly disgusting, but the Finnish ones are hardly better. I am not calling you a fascist, but the theories you constantly keep referring to have an ultra-nationalistic background.

"One thing is for certain: The Finnish traders traveled east long before they were joined by Swedes. Would it make sense that the Russians came into contact with Finnish "Varangians" or traders first, then both Swedish and Finnish when the Finns came under the Swedish kings in the second millennium ?"

Here you actually manage to bring forth a half-truth. There is archaeological evidence of contact networks among the Fenno-Ugrian populations of Fennoscandia and Northern Russia already from the 4th century onwards. However, no one knows if it was "Finnish traders" visiting Russia, or eastern Fenno-Ugrian ("Permic") traders visiting Finland. Possibly it was both ways. Or possibly it was gift-exchange between neighbouring groups.

Of course, the "Swedes" arrived in the scene lot before the second millennium, but it is certainly conceivable that their early expeditions were sometimes based on the earlier Fenno-Ugrian contact systems. I think that a famous Swedish archaeologist Ingmar Jakobsson (I am not sure of the name) has written or lectured about this. However, this does not prove that the etymology of the "Varangian" would be Finnish.

"Under the Swedish rule, the Finns were obliged to serve in the Swedish (Sweden-Finland) army."

Could you please start sticking to the point? I believe everyone here is sick and tired of your infuriating habit to write extensively of topics which have absolutely nothing to do with the articles or discussions at hand. That´s why so many modifications made by you have been removed from different articles - not necessarily because they were substantially incorrect, but simply because you have put them into a wrong place.

The first known written mentioning of the Kvens appeared in 98 AD, when the Roman historian Gaius Cornelius Tacitus wrote in his book, Germania, about the Sithons who were ruled by a woman (Kvenland, 1986, page 51, Emeritus Professor Kyösti Julku).

Well, this was not the best idea of Professor Julku. The Sithoni mentioned by Tacitus and the Kvens mentioned 800 years later have two thing in common: at least the Kvens and possibly the Sithoni as well were living somewhere in North-eastern Fenno-Scandinavia, and both were associated with "female rulership", the later apparently being a literary trophe in the Latin ethnography. The Viking Age Kvens may or may not have been descendants of the Sithoni (now one knows for sure where the Sithoni actually lived). Anyway, there is hardly any reason to claim that the Sithoni and Kvens were essentially a same group. Between them were 800 years of cultural change and re-formulation of ethnic identities, and possibly no connection at all...

"In 1187 AD, according to a Swedish chronicle, the main Swedish business and trading center ("capital"), Sigtuna, is conquered and destroyed by an attack from easterly direction."

Only a minor correction here; Sigtuna was not a "business and trading center" like earlier Birka, but an important royal and administrative center and a see. "Capital" is a poor expression here, as Sweden did not have a capital until the late 16th century.

Why do I bother? 130.234.75.183 08:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Reply to 130.234.75.183 / 217.30.179.130

Yes indeed, why do you bother ? Didn't you already leave twice for good ? Indecisive ?

Your language and rough expressions point to insecurity and imbalance, perhaps to "bitterness" and "confusion" too, to use your expressions. For instance, using women's private parts ("vittu") in your commentating is uncalled for in Wikipedia. Wouldn't you agree ? A Wikipedia page reveals that this sort of language use may be characteristic to you.

We are not here to engage in a low level of conversations, or accusations or anarchy. Misquotations, tampering the content of others' discussion texts - which both you have admitted to having done -, etc cannot be tolerated. You have also provably participated in misrepresentations and misinterpretations, claiming someone to having stated something which they in reality had not (above on this page). When asked for a quote of any such statement, you declined, and instead defended yourself by saying that you had misunderstood the contributor.

Would you not call such a person "so confused" in your language. Loyal to your standards, you are also misinterpreting or not respecting the teachings of some of the utmost experts on the field (you downplayed Wiik and Julku, and you needed to verify Vahtola's burial site comment, etc), and yet, you give no same caliber sources of your own, to back up your personal views. In celebration of Easter, allow us to just quickly pick up a couple of examples (and allow us to just surpass much of the other "crap"):

1. You have seriously downplayed the value of Fundinn Noregr as a source for the Wikipedia Kven text.

Max: You added the word "mythological" (kings of ...) into the following sentence: "Fundinn Noregr discusses the kings of Finland and Kvenland and their conquest of Norway."

You: "According to Finnish historians, they are mythological. See article by Mikko Häme in Faravid 1991, if you read Finnish. See also the article Suomen kuninkaat in Finnish Wikipedia".

Max: You have now admitted to having written that particular article, Suomen kuninkaat ("the Finnish kings"), yourself, and still you seriously expect us to view that "crap" as a reliable source. You can't be serious ! Are you Mikko Häme ?

Max: In 1230 AD, in the introduction to the Orkneyinga Saga, the Fundinn Noregr text discusses the kings of Finland and Kvenland and their conquest of Norway. Based on the saga, the ruling families of Sweden, Norway, the Orkney Islands, Normandy, and England descend from these Finnish/Kven kings.

You: "I think it be would fair to say that in Old Scandinavian sources the term "Finn" usually or always refers to the Sami, not necessarily living to Finland, but in the Scandinavian peninsula. These obscure details have no relevance whatsoever in the discussion of the origins oh the Kvens."

Max: The highly respected expert on the field, the Emeritus Professor Kyösti Julku, says in his book, Kvenland (1986), page 69, that Fundinn Noregr ("Founding of Norway" - "Norwegia Inventa" in Latin) is "one of the most interesting and certainly also one of the most important sources when Kvenland and the Kvens are examined". Professor Julku also states for instance on page 66, that "geographically the given information is extremely accurate. Not a single error can be pinpointed". And the Professor continues: "Can't we therefore also expect the description of the journey of Norr to have been laid out accurately". What is there not to believe, and why ? Besides, the Fundinn Noregr description of Kvenland does in no way contradict or fight against the description given by Othar. Quite the opposite, the descriptions support each other, as Professor Julku points out.

Thus, let us repeat: What may seem "mythological" to you, seems very much accurate, clear and real to an increasing number of experts, based on all the very accurate geographical information given alone. Thus, we must provide this important information in Wikipedia, and without your personal twisted opinions or remarks added. If remarks must be added, they must be from a distinguished source, such as Julku for instance.

2. You: "I think it be would fair to say that in Old Scandinavian sources the term "Finn" usually or always refers to the Sami, not necessarily living to Finland, but in the Scandinavian peninsula". "... the meaning of the word "Finns" in Old Scandinavian sources originating from Norway and Iceland. I think it is quite commonly accepted - at least among the scholars - that a "Finn" means a northern hunter-gatherer, a "Sami", in these texts." ... "The "Finnish (Sami)" or "Kven" "kings" in the Sagas can be explained ..."

Max: In his 98 AD book, Tacitus also discusses the Fennos of the Northernmost Scandinavia. Previously many thought Fennos in this context to - possibly - have been a reference to the Finno-Ugric Sami population. However - according to Professor Kyösti Julku - that school of thought has now been challenged (Kvenland, Kyösti Julku, 1986): Perhaps Tacitus referred to the Finns - and not to the Samis - by "Fennos".

In the beginning of the Fundinn Noregr text, at very first it is announced that Fornjotr ruled/governed two nations, which were Finland and Kvenland. According to the Emeritus Professor Kyösti Julku, the first nation here "of course means Finland, i.e. which in later language use was Varsinais-Suomi" (--> i.e., meaning Southwestern Finland, which indeed was "Finland" in the beginning).

The location of Finland was not described in Fundinn Noregr, because it can be seen to have been - according to Julku - self-explanatory and clear. Kvenland's location, on the other hand, is discussed. Thus, Finland in this Scandinavian text, for instance, was not referring to a land of the Samis, as you keep claiming, but to the land of the Finns, as we understand them today.

Now, where is your example, proof and a distinguished source claiming Finland in a certain incident definitely having meant the land of the Samis, rather than the land of the Finns, as we know them today ? There may be such a case, but we are interested in seeing which particular case you would choose for an example. Or is that just speculation from your behalf ? What you describe as being "commonly accepted", certainly is not ! Quite the opposite.

The term Fin(n) - by varying spellings - was also used from early on in some other documents - not Scandinavian -, such as catholic Papal letters (to the "Swedes") and geographical and historical accounts, and not in reference to the Samis (although in some cases the Samis/Lapps may have been meant to be included when the term was used).

3. You: Unfortunately, we know very little about the sea-faring technology of Viking Age Finns, as our maritime archaeologists have not found so many prehistoric wrecks.

As you must be aware, there is no need to use "sea-faring" equipment going via the Karelian Isthmus towards Moscow, Kiev, etc. The Finns/Kvens are known to have used light boats, as revealed in Othar's writings for instance: "Kveenit kantavat veneensä maataipaleiden yli näihin järviin, ja sotivat pohjanmiehiä vastaan". Besides, there are not a great number of any sort of Viking/Varangian Age wrecks left for our generation to study.

4. Max: "... Finnmark ("mark" meaning land - Compare: Denmark)."

You: "To be quite exact, "mark" does not mean land, but a border area, like in titles margrave or marquis. Danmark/Denmark = mark of the Danes. I think this applies in Finnmark as well. But this is not the most important point."

Max:In this context, mark is generally understood as land. It is true that it can also be understood in some contexts as "border country", or field. Please, check for instance the Norwegian and Swedish dictionaries, or Google:

In Swedish: mark -en -er = land, land area, terrain ...

In Norwegian: mark = land, territory / Example: "i skog og mark" = out in the country / villmark = wilderness / ødemark = wasteland ...

5. There was a reason why "capital" was written in quotation marks. That can be clarified, however, if that is what is standing on the Wikipedia's Kven page.

6. You: "The modern Kvens are a result of the long-lasting, gradual expansion of Finnish settlement and language in northern Scandinavia. This process started during the medieval period, possibly slightly before, and many researchers think that the historical Kvens mentioned in Old Scandinavian sources represent an early phase of the Finnish settlement expansion."

Max: We simply do not know, that "this process started during the medieval period, possibly slightly before". For instance, the Emeritus Professor Kyösti Julku points out that Taticus' Fennos in the first century AD being Samis has now been challenged. The Fennos possibly were Finns/Kvens (Kvenland, 1986, Julku). According to Julku, in Tromsa alone there are at least 12 prehistoric Kven aerial names. Thus, we cannot state what you suggest. As well we might say, that it is very much possible, that the forefathers of Kvens have lived continuously at the Arctic Ocean shores of Northern Scandinavia since the end of the last Ice Age. For instance, the so called Alta man cliff painting in Alta, Northern Norway, dating to approximately 10 000 years back in history, may well be art created by the forefathers of the Kvens.

7. You were interested in hearing more information about the Finnish Varangians/Vikings. When you were answered above, you requested in sticking to the topic (of Kvens). Indecisive ? There is a lot more related info of course, and the Kvens have to do with much of it, one way or another. After all, not only Fundinn Noregr describes Kvenland having been the entire area east of the Norwegian mountain chain (except in south, although that area appears to have been conquered by the Kvens as well, based on saga-information), and for instance some of the old maps show the southwestern shores of the White Sea to have been part of Kvenland as well. Important Swedish historians agree, that today's Northern Sweden was part of Kvenland.

Buríal sites: There are ethical problems related to the opening of any of the vast amount of prehistoric burial sites in Finland. Also, there are other problems, such as funding, etc. Much needs to be done. The Finnish government site modestly refers to the Finns likely to have participated in the Viking/Varangian tours. They bring up the rich Eura burial sites and findings from Åland, etc. The Finnish history books reveal information and images of old burial sites, including an image of a first millennium (AD) warrior burial site. The image shows a long sword and the remains of a shield next to the corps.

The 'Virtual Finland' website of the famously modest Finnish Ministry of Foreign Affairs states the following:

"During the Viking Age (800-1050 AD) the Vikings' road to the East passed close by Finland and the Karelian Isthmus, along the Gulf of Finland and across Lake Ladoga to the great rivers of Russia en route to Byzantium and the Black Sea, or even as far as the Caspian Sea. It is almost certain that some Finns also went along on these expeditions. There is evidence of this in graves at the Luistari burial ground in Eura, for example. It was at this time that Åland became culturally Swedish, which it has remained to the present day.

The growing economic activity around Lake Ladoga also stimulated economic development in Karelia, a process which reached its peak during the era of the Swedish Crusades (1050-1150/1300 AD), while Viking Age silver coins from Western Europe and the Arab world also tell a tale of extensive trading links. The waterways were still vital traffic routes at this time, but the overland 'Bull Road' (Härkätie) from Turku to Hämeenlinna probably also dates back to the Iron Age." - - Happy Easter - - Max, April 13, 2006 - -

Amusing...

Max is obviously running out of arguments as he needs to use so much time for hysterical personal attacks and lies, as well as trying to put words into my mouth. I will not lower myself to the same level, but answer only to his substantial claims.

You have now admitted to having written that particular article, Suomen kuninkaat ("the Finnish kings"), yourself, and still you seriously expect us to view that "crap" as a reliable source. You can't be serious ! Are you Mikko Häme ? I have modified (not entirely written) a good source critical view in that particular article. I did not want to unnecessarily repeat my arguments here.

(you downplayed Wiik and Julku, and you needed to verify Vahtola's burial site comment, etc),

I am not the only one to downplay Wiik (most of the Finnish researcers do: Petri Kallio, Aslak Aikio, Vesa-Pekka Herva...). The Vahtola episode is due to the amazing confusion you made between the Viking burial sites in Finland and rune-stones in Sweden. You claimed that burials of members of the Varangian Gurd are known in Finland, but you could refer only to a couple of Swedish runic inscriptions. After such a mistake I think I am entitled to call you "confused" - not as an estimation of your mental state, but as an evaluation of your archaeological knowledge.

"If remarks must be added, they must be from a distinguished source, such as Julku for instance."

I agree. Professor Emeritus Julku is an esteemed researcher. However, he is not an expert of the Old Scandinavian literature, unlike Mikko Häme, who is much more authoritative here. Julku is certainly not above making serious errors and mistakes, especially when he's talking about things not directly related to this area of competence. At least my "twisted remarks" are a neutral and fair description of the scholarly status quo about the existence of "vast ancient kingdom" in Iron Age Finland. About the identity of the Kvens and Finns mentioned in the old Scandinavian texts, see below.

What may seem "mythological" to you, seems very much accurate, clear and real to an increasing number of experts, based on all the very accurate geographical information given alone.

Are we talking about the "vast ancient kingdom" here? Unfortunaly you have not referred to a single expert. I think the "increasing number" is nothing but your own imagination.

" In his 98 AD book, Tacitus also discusses the Fennos of the Northernmost Scandinavia. Previously many thought Fennos in this context to - possibly - have been a reference to the Finno-Ugric Sami population. However - according to Professor Kyösti Julku - that school of thought has now been challenged (Kvenland, Kyösti Julku, 1986): Perhaps Tacitus referred to the Finns - and not to the Samis - by "Fennos"."

Who knows? This is, indeed, possible but it is just speculation, one alternative among many. In fact, not everybody agrees that the Fenni (please use the Latin form) lived in Fenno-Scandinavia. Some Polish researchers place them in the modern Belarus. I do not know if that holds any water, but it shows how ambigiuous text the Germania is. My problem was your attempt to present the speculative connection between the Sithoni and the Kvens as a fact. I agree that my earlier opinion was pretty overstated here. Edit However, I have been talking mostly bout Old Scandinavian literature, and not of Tacitus. The Fenni of Tacitus and the "Finns" of Old Scandinavian literature may not refer to the same ethnic or linguistical group. These terms were used by foreigners, so their referential meanings probably changed a lot during those 1 100 years that are separating Tacitus and Snorre Sturluson. In a recent volume of Historiallinen Aikakauskauskirja there was an article of the meaning of the word Finns in Old Scandinavian texts. According to this view, the "Finns" were Sami.

You were interested in hearing more information about the Finnish Varangians/Vikings. When you were answered above, you requested in sticking to the topic (of Kvens). Indecisive ?

I do not understand this accusation. I think that you told me something about "Finnish Varangians" and I told you back that it was all bullshit.

As well we might say, that it is very much possible, that the forefathers of Kvens have lived continuously at the Arctic Ocean shores of Northern Scandinavia since the end of the last Ice Age. For instance, the so called Alta man cliff painting in Alta, Northern Norway, dating to approximately 10 000 years back in history, may well be art created by the forefathers of the Kvens.

Who has disagreed that there might be some genetic continuity? Not me. Arrival of new settlement during the 12th and 13th centuries is, as far as I can understand, an established fact. But of course there was earlier settlement, not necessarily of farmers or Finnish-speakers, but at least of Sami hunters, and it is reasonable that there was some intermixing between the indigenous groups and the later Finnish settlers. You are apparently slowly reaching the insight that a partial ancestor of a Kven is not necessarily a "proper Kven", and should not be called as a Kven. Good for you. By the way, what is an "aerial name"? I think is another terminological confusion.

Important Swedish historians agree, that today's Northern Sweden was part of Kvenland.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, but Northern Sweden was not a major starting point for Viking/Varangian expeditions.

Buríal sites: There are ethical problems related to the opening of the vast amount of prehistoric burial sites in Finland. Also, there are other problems, such as funding, etc. Much needs to be done. The Finnish government site modestly refers to the Finns likely to have participated in the Viking/Varangian tours. They bring up the rich Eura burial sites and findings from Åland, etc. The Finnish history books reveal information and images of old burial sites, including an image of a first millennium (AD) warrior burial site. The image shows a long sword and the remains of a shield next to the corps.

Problems are due to funding and not because of the ethics. Otherwise I can compliment you for finally finding some competent information. This is, more or less, what I have tried to tell you before! However, this stuff does not deal the "Finnish traders" preceding the Swedish ones in Russia. The main point here is the fact that no one claims the majority of Varangians to have been "Finnish". No one expects the future research to change that opinion. We are lacking many detailis of the Viking Age Finland, but it is unlikely that the "big picture" will change. After all, archaelogical activities have been active in Finland from the 1860's.¨¨

Mikko Häme appears to be wrong

Reply to 130.234.75.183 / 217.30.179.130:

We asked you whether or not you are Mikko Häme. You did not answer. We see that you keep referring to your own "bullshit" writings (your expression borrowed). We do not care about them much. Those are your twisted and destorted opinions, as seen by many others.

You (here you - in ugly way - generalize your view to be the view of the Finnish historins in general --> Note: there is no room for this sort of behavior among the Finnish scholars): "Please read the article by Mikko Häme. As far I can see, he has effectively demolished the notion that Fundinn Noregr is anything but a mythological text." ... "According to Finnish historians, they are mythological. See article by Mikko Häme in Faravid 1991, if you read Finnish. See also the article Suomen kuninkaat in Finnish Wikipedia."

Max: You admit to using yourself as a source, by stating that "For starters, I have modified a source critical essay "Suomen kuninkaat" in the Finnish Wikipedia." Thus, we suggest, that you would please stop referring to your own opinions and writings as a source for information. You appear to be using yourself as a source for knowledge, and that is why - we believe - you keep viewing certain matters in a wrong way.

The highly respected expert on the field, the Emeritus Professor Kyösti Julku, says in his book, Kvenland (1986), page 69, that Fundinn Noregr ("Founding of Norway" - "Norwegia Inventa" in Latin) is "one of the most interesting and certainly also one of the most important sources when Kvenland and the Kvens are examined". Professor Julku also states for instance on page 66, that "geographically the given information is extremely accurate. Not a single error can be pinpointed".

And the Professor continues (the Professor's words here and above are freely translated from Finnish, trying not to twist the meaning): "Can't we therefore also expect the description of the journey of Norr to have been laid out accurately". What is there not to believe, and why ? Besides, the Fundinn Noregr description of Kvenland does in no way contradict or fight against the description given by Othar. Quite the opposite, the two descriptions support each other, as Professor Julku points out.

You: "I think it be would fair to say that in Old Scandinavian sources the term "Finn" usually or always refers to the Sami, not necessarily living to Finland, but in the Scandinavian peninsula."

Max: In the beginning of the Fundinn Noregr text, at very first it is announced that Fornjotr ruled/governed two nations, which were Finland and Kvenland. According to the Emeritus Professor Kyösti Julku, the first nation here "of course means Finland, i.e. which in later language use was Varsinais-Suomi" (--> i.e., meaning Southwestern Finland, which indeed was "Finland" in the beginning).

The location of Finland was not described in Fundinn Noregr, because it can be seen to have been - according to Julku - self-explanatory and clear. Kvenland's location, on the other hand, is discussed. Thus, Finland in this Scandinavian text, for instance, was not referring to a land of the Samis, as you keep claiming, but to the land of the Finns, as we understand them today.

Now, where is your example, proof and a distinguished source claiming Finland in a certain incident definitely having meant the land of the Samis, rather than the land of the Finns, as we know them today ? There may be such a case, but we are interested in seeing which particular case you would choose for an example. Or is that just speculation from your behalf ? What you describe as being "commonly accepted", certainly is not ! Quite the opposite.

Besides, the term Fin(n) - by varying spellings - was also used from early on in some other documents - not Scandinavian -, such as catholic Papal letters (to the "Swedes") and geographical and historical accounts, and not in reference to the Samis (although in some cases the Samis/Lapps may have been meant to be included when the term was used).

You (In reference to the problems related to the opening of prehistoric burial sites): "Problems are due to funding and not because of the ethics."

Max: In recent weeks the Finnish proadcasting company YLE has aired a series about archaeology in Finland. In the most recent program aired, a Finnish archaeologist mentioned very first the ethical problems related to the opening of such prehistoric burial sites. As Max mentioned: "Also, there are other problems, such as funding, etc. Much needs to be done."

Thus, why would you rather not use expressions such as "in my view", "in my opinion", etc, in cases like this. Your opinions do not necessarily match the opinions of others, or the reality at hand. Your opinions do not stand for facts (not necessarily anyway).

You: "Otherwise I can compliment you for finally finding some competent information."

Max: This "competent" information brought up by Max - which you appear to be referring to - has been common knowledge for long, at it does not fight with the information Max has presented previously. These "competent" sources rather support the information laid down by Max.

Those are just a couple of examples of how you generalize things, and make your personal views sound like a consensus among scientists. One can't help but think that you are attempting to offer some "outright lie"s on this page (to borrow your expression).

Finally, let us not argue about minor details, or matters of opinion. Instead, let us provide distinguished sources and the views of the utmost experts, in search for historical truth. Let us avoid repeating misinterpretations of the past. Let us avoid unnecessary name calling, when the views of the specialists do not please us, or when we disagree. - - What comes around, goes around, 17.04.2006 - -

User mikka (t) is blocking innocent registered users from editing the Kven page

It appears that innocent registered users have been unfairly blocked of editing the Kven page, due to actions by mikka (t) .

Splash, thank you for unsprotecting the Kven article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kven at "22:32, 22 March 2006 Splash (unsprot: weird reason to protect and it's been long enough anywa)".

We now ask for the assistance of administrators in reference to the same article, please, for the following reasons:

Despite of many pleas for him to do so, the above mentioned user with "weird reasoning" - Fred chessplayer - has not provided sources for his claims, which are not - to our knowledge -supported by any known historians and/or other scientists.

Furthermore, users opposing the views of Fred-Chess have provided their distinguished sources on the Kven discussion page, and particularly in the Kven text version itself, which Fred chessplayer (now also mikka (t)) keeps reverting into his own text version, which includes his unfounded claims (the given sources do not agree with his views).

Below are just a couple examples of the serious shortcomings of the Kven text version by Fred chessplayer, which the user mikka (t) has now blocked several users of correcting, or of reverting to a version furbished with information which is approved by historians, together with matching sources. The following exact quotes given first are from the currently standing Fred chessplayer's Kven text. Fred chessplayer's claims are followed by correct information (the sources offered in Fred chessplayer's own text version agree with this correct information, but not with the claims of Fred chessplayer):

1. "Kvens (alternate spellings: Cwen, Kven, Kvæn, Kveeni, Quen) were a historical group of people that lived in the coastal areas around the Gulf of Bothnia, part of today's Finland."

There is a wide concensus among historians, that large areas of today's Northern Sweden, particularly the areas around the Gulf of Bothnia, were also part of the historical Kvenland.

Thus, the historic Kvenland areas are not only "part of today's Finland", but also part of today's Sweden (and - according to many historians - perhaps also part of today's Norway, even parts of today's extreme Northwestern Russia according to some evidence, including historic maps).

2. "Possibly, Kvens referred to all Finnish people. (Suomen historia (History of Finland), page 27, Jouko Vahtola, Professor of Finnish and Scandinavian history. )."

On the above mentioned page, Professor Vahtola does not claim such a thing. He only says that in 870 AD the "Kven" reference made by the Norwegian explorer was - perhaps - ment to refer to Finns in general. He is not discussing there any of the numerous other references to Kvens.

Professor Vahtola himself indeed has - in his various books - made it clear that Kvens are a separate group within the Finnish/Finnic people, and that the term "Kven" - used in various historic texsts - has not referred to the Finnish people in general, but to a historic group/tribe of people. There is a wide concensus about this matter among historians.

3."In literature, the first known occurance of the Kven in the Account of the Viking Othere, a chronicle in the time of King Alfred the Great in the 9th century AD."

According to the distinguished Kven expert, the Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku, the first reference to the Kven people in literature was made by the Roman historian Gornelius Julius Tacitus in 98 AD.

4."Before the 8th century there are scarsely any remains of the Kvens."

"On the contrary: The archaeological evidence of agricultural settlement on the Finnish side of the Bothnian Gulf is strong before the 9th century, and it gets weaker during the Viking period."

The Wikipedia user Mikkalai has also kept reverting to the above mentioned Kven text version by the user Fred-Chess. Despite of requests, neither one of those users have provided sources for the claims by Fred chessplayer, nor have they answered to the questions about the above mentioned and other shortcomings, misrepresentations and distortions of facts.

Some of the less important peaces of information in the current Kven text is correct, thanks to the contributions by users other than Fred chessplayer or Mikkalai. Much of the current text, however, is not reflecting the opinions of the utmost experts of the Scandinavian and Finnish history, nor does the current information match the views of the sources and references offered on the current Kven page.

On the other hand, the text version of "16:20, 18 April 2006 Ppt" provides valid information with maching distinguished sources and references, including a couple of exact quotes of the wordings by known Kven experts, etc.

Administrators, I need to be unblocked immediately, please. I am not an anonomous user, and I must not be mixed up with any other users, regardless of what computers they might have used. I ask user mikka (t) to please now proceed and provide ecidence of any wrong doing by me, or otherwise for him to unblock me immediately. - - Art Dominique, April 26, 2006 15:08 - -

Contradiction

Thank God the edit war seems to be over. However, I would like to kindly remind that a blatant contradiction still exists in the text:

"Many prehistoric burials are known from the Finnish side of Gulf Of Bothnia to the 8th century, but afterwards only a handful of burials are known."

Compare:

"Before the 8th century there are scarsely any remains of the Kvens."

217.30.179.130 20:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

More biased views

"The first known written mentioning of the Kvens appeared in 98 AD, when the Roman historian Gaius Cornelius Tacitus wrote in his book, Germania, about the Sithons who were ruled by a woman (Kvenland, 1986, page 51, Emeritus Professor Kyösti Julku)."

According to another Emeritus Professor, Unto Salo, the Sithoni (note spelling) were Finns of SW Finland. Incidentally, neither Unto Salo or Kyösti Julku are experts of Latin literature. The possible connection between the Kvens and the Sithoni is speculation and should be presented as such. Most certainly it is not a commonly accepted fact. Digi Wiki/Art Dominique/Max/Pifarre etc. (you are not cheating anyone, so why are you using so many different user names?) seems to think that one Emeritus Professor, Kyösti Julku, is correct in every question. A wider look into present Finnish historiography would be beneficial.

The notion of female rulership in the writings of Tacitus (98 AD) and Adam of Bremen (c. 1080 AD) is only a cliche from the Greek and Roman ethnography, apparently based on the Amazon myths and confusion between Scythia and Scandinavia. For exapmle, Adam of Bremen situated the mythical Riphaian Mountains, mentioned in ancient geography, in Scandinavia as well.

"In his 1986 book, Professor Julku brings up new evidence, such as historic maps that before have not been properly included it the main studies published. Among other evidence, Julku also discusses prehistoric Kven place names in today's Northern Norway, at least 12 such names in the area of Tromsa alone."

This has absolutely nothing to do with the Sithoni mentioned by Tacitus. "Prehistoric" does not mean those names existed during the life of Tacitus.

"Recent archeological findings have, however, brought new findings to be examined. For instance, in 2005 a kilogram of silver, and some silver jewlery dating to the 12th century AD were discovered from the northernmost area of Finland, in Inari. Recent prehistoric findings from Utsjoki (in colose vicinity to the Arctic Ocean), Enontekiö and Suomussalmi, Finland, are currently also being investicated."

The problem is that there is no any archaeological evidence of the Kvens during the Viking Age. Post-Viking finds do not, obviously, change this fact, but the article seems to be implying otherwise now. A deliberate attempt to mask the lack of archaeological proof from the time of Ottar and his Kvens?

Finally, some direct citations from the Finnish Wikipedia (my translation), apparently telling us how the present medieval historians (the post-Kyösti Julku generation) in Finland perceive this question:

Kainulaiset: "The Kainulaiset were a wilderness hunting nation, mostly a reconstruction made by the nationalist historians of the 20th century. Proper historical, archaeological or even mythological evidence of the Kainulaiset do not exist. The Kainulaiset have been perceived as the inhabitants of lost Kvenland, ruling a wide kingdom in Northern Finland."

Kvenland: "Kvenland is a territorial name mentioned in Old Norwegian and Icelandic sources on a couple of times. It was situated somewhere on the coastal areas of present Western Finland. Probably it was another name for Finland (i.e. Finland Proper, translator´s note) in the Norwegian dialects, used until the early historical times. The name is never mentioned in the Swedish or Russian sources.

According to a nationalist interpretation, Kvenland was the hypothetical country of Kainuunmaa in Northern Finland during the Iron Age. However, no archaeological or even mythological evidence of Kainuunmaa exist. The connection between Kvenland and Kainuunmaa is entirely theoretical."

The Kvens: "The name of Kvens has been unhistorically connected with the Kainulaiset."

217.30.179.130 09:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok. This is your opinion. Where are your sources ? Are you again holding your own opinions as a source ? Did we not already discuss this problem ?

Once again, you are making a generalization, which does not match reality. That is in regard to the "post-Kyösti Julku generation", which I am part of. Please talk on behalf of yourself, not on behalf of us others.

"The problem is that there is no any archaeological evidence of the Kvens during the Viking Age." You must be aware that this statement is not based on truth. For instance, there is valid such proof from the Tornio River Valley area.

We must rely on respected known sources in Wikipedia, and those sources must be revealed.

Art Dominique talk, May 4, 14:31, 2006

Requests for comment

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kven users RfC. `'mikka (t) 20:57, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Rever war

Digi Wiki, Please stop the revert war and explain each addition/deletion. In particular, the section "Kven language" is not necessary: we have a separate article. Please follow other wikipedia traditions, if you want to contribute. `'mikka (t) 23:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

mikka (t), I agree with you about there not being need for a Kven language paragraph in the Kven article now (in either version), as there is the Kven language article separately. However, earlier the Kven language article was lacking much, after being played with by various users

Shortly After making corrections to the Kven language article, I was not able go back to delete the similar paragraph from the Kven text, due to your blocking action.

Art Dominique (t), May 9, 2006, 18:30

Some notes

Once again, you are making a generalization, which does not match reality. That is in regard to the "post-Kyösti Julku generation", which I am part of. Please talk on behalf of yourself, not on behalf of us others.

Dear Art Dominique, I would not bother to talk on behalf of you. As I wrote down perfectly clear, I was talking about "the post-Kyösti Julku generation of medieval historians". Maybe that is a slight generalization - but, frankly, I do not believe that you are a historian. Whatever your generation is, I was not referring to you.

Anyway, it is unacceptable that personal views of distinguished Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku are presented as more or less uncontested truths. They should be presented as one theory among many theories. Unfortunately you have furiously and arbitrarily rejected the more recent study of Mikko Häme, possibly without even reading it. And I can make it known that I am not Mikko Häme, and I have never met him.

"The problem is that there is no any archaeological evidence of the Kvens during the Viking Age." You must be aware that this statement is not based on truth. For instance, there is valid such proof from the Tornio River Valley area.

Oh yeah, "valid proof" from the 9th and 10th centuries? (Single finds are not valid proof, and finds from the 12th century or later do not count here). I would like to see some references, as this is not what I was told in the university. If such finds have emerged recently, it is more or less a sensation. 217.30.179.130 09:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

You keep discrediting all known historians referred to, while you offer no sources of your own. Please stop referring to your own Wikipedia writings as a source for information.

If your only source (?) so far, Häme, indeed suggests the above - possible (?) - non-connection between the terms "Kainulainen" and "Kven", etc., please give the exact quotes, the name(s) of the book(s) and the pages for each quote ! Otherwise, you are whistling dixie to the walls, as you are a known and admitted committer of various sorts of faulplay, including misquoting which you have admitted to yourself on this page. You generalize things and mislead people, for instance by making it sound as if there is a some sort of concensus behind your thougts, when in reality there is not. Please, begin offering detailed sources and exact quotes, if you believe someone else thinks like you in certain respects.

Art Dominique, May 10, 2006, 15:18

I have offered sources, user mikka

However, as the Kven talk page reveals, Fred-Chess has not responded to the pleas for sources. He refuses to give even a source for his ridiculous claim that the Kvens only inhabited areas that a part of today's Finland. Historians on a wide scale claim differently, Swedish ones including. Fred Chess says: "..., part of today's Finland. If he studied history, he knows that the areas on today's Swedish side were "Bothnian" areas as well (please, see old maps for instance), and the Kvens inhabited areas that are part of today's Northern Sweden. How many times have we asked for a source from him for his counter claim (Pls., see this talk page) !

My sources have included Vahtola, Julku, Zetterberg, Tiitta, etc., as well as others listed on the Kven article and its talk page (not only Julku, as your Finnish friend - the one commentating above - claims). More sources - many, new and those from the past - can be given. So, your concern is not valid.

However, Julku represents highly valued view. He correctly cinsiders the first reference to the Kven people in literature the one from 98 AD. I've provided that source. Where is the source for the counter claim ? Even the Finnish fellow with multiple IP addresses - the one above - has declined pleas for sources, except for Mikko Häme.

Art Dominique talk, May 9, 2006 - 18:04

Obsessions and passions with Kyösti Julku

I think it is against the Wikipedia rules to acclaim Professor Julku´s Fenni theory as the "correct" one. Equal space must given for the views of other experts, such as presented by Tuomo Pekkanen (in the book Suomen väestön esihistorialliset juuret), or by Unto Salo in many different places (for example, in the book Suomen historia 1). These researchers associate the Fenni mentioned by Tacitus with the Sami. This has not been proven wrong, although different interpretations have been presented now and then. (In fact, not everybody is convinced that the Fenni were living in Finland or Scandinavia at all).

Art Dominique mentions above other sources, such as Suomi kautta aikojen by Seppo Zetterberg and Allan Tiitta and Suomen historia by Jouko Vahtola. These books are popular presentations of the Finnish history from big commercial publishing houses. They are written by experts, but their approach is, unavoidably, quite superficial - you cannot go very deeply into details and arguments when you are trying to tell a story of 10 000 years in one book. Thus I think academic dissertations and articles published in scientific journals would be much more authoritative sources. Besides, it would be good to present as many sources as possible in English. Most users of this Wikipedia cannot read Finnish and are thus unable to check the references. Scientific publications are often in English, and may be more readily available for the non-Finnish users than the popular books aimed exclusively for the Finnish audience.

217.30.179.130 16:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Prehistoric settlements & findings, Tacitus' Sithons, Jouko Vahtola, etc.

For instance, Jouko Vahtola - besides Julku - ranks at the very top among the Kven experts. A number of historians have been referred to. You only refer to Mikko Häme and your own Wikipedia writing.

Julku, page 184, Kvenland, 1986 (Direct quotation from an English language text): "If we now set out from these assumptions, we must note first of all that Pentti Koivunen and Thomans Walleström, in their excavations at Kainuunkylä in the parish of Ylitornio and Hietaniemi in Övertorneå, have been able to demonstrate peasant farming settlement dating back at least to the 11th century. In other words they are dealing with permanent prehistoric settlement associated with the Iron Age."

I was not referring to the Tacitus' remarks about "Fenno", allthoug the tide has been changing in that respect too, as Julku points out, now that even the settlement routes of the areas of the modern-day Finland are seen in a different light than in 1960s (despite of your earlier thoughts, that not much have changed since 1960s). I was referring to the Tacitus' reference to the "Sithons", which the Emeritus Professor Julku points out as a clear reference to the Kvens in 98 AD. Julku reasons this point in his book.

So, never mind your concern about the many years between Tacitus and Othar. You are only you. You cannot be used as a source for Wikipedia ! Now, where is your source for your counter claim, which fights against this view from the top ? I am not saying, that there would not be any such claim by anyone. Yet, I am interested to see what source you might have, if any. Can we finally here about that, please?

We continue making interesting prehistoric findings in the terrritory which was in the past referred to as Kvenland (or Quenland, etc.) in historic writings and maps. An example: Recently an English hiker found a piece of silver jewlery in Inari, Northern Finland (yes, according to several historic accounts Inari was part of Kvenland). The jewlery has been dated to the 12th century. Last year a Finn found a kilo of silver in Inari, including beautiful and elaborate jewlery (four necklaces). The findings have been dated to the 11th and 12th centuries.

Are these signs of hunter-gatherers (Samis) to you, or traders (Kvens) ? Please note, that still in the Medieval times "Caienska Semla" (= Kainuunmaa/kainuu, i.e. Kvenland) was written right on top of Inari for instance in the Abraham Ortelius' map of the Nordic lands from 1570, also in the Gerhard Mercator's map of Norway and Sweden from 1595, etc.

User 217.30.179.130: You keep making sensational claims, for which you decline to give any sources from credited historians or Kven experts. Numerous known and distinquished historians of today, Finnish and Swedish, and through the centuries have made the clear connection between the terms Kven and Kainulainen. Indeed, there is a wide concensus among the experts of the Finnish and Scandinavian history about this matter. For instance, in the Finnish history book from 1997 by the historians Seppo Zetteberg and Allan Tiitta this connection is made.

According to the History Professors Seppo Zetterberg and Allan Tiitta (Suomi kautta aikojen, 1997 - "Finland Through All Times" - page 31) the Karelians began calling the Kvens by the Finnish language term kainulainen, based on the area the Kvens lived on, Kainuu, which - according to the same Professors - included the coastal areas of the Gulf of Bothnia. Other historians who participated in the compiling of this book included such top Kven experts as Matti Huurre and Jouko Vahtola, also such credited historians as Seppo Aalto, Ilkka Teerijoki, Pirkko Leino-Kauniainen, Martti Turtola, Timo Vihavainen and Risto E.J. Penttilä (more an expert of modern times).

As the Sweden's Uumaja university linquistics Professor Olavi Korhonen points out (Julku, 2006, page 48), 18 place names in today's Northern Sweden include the term Kainuu in them. Is this a mere coincident to you ? Can we now finally have some sources for your outrageous claims regarding the non-connection, which you are suggesting ?

You keep discrediting all known historians referred to, while you offer no sources of your own. Please stop referring to your own Wikipedia writings as a source for information.

If your only source (?) so far, Häme, indeed suggests the above - possible (?) - non-connection between the terms "Kainulainen" and "Kven", etc., please give the exact quotes, the name(s) of the book(s) and the pages for each quote ! Otherwise, you are whistling dixie to the walls, as you are a known and admitted committer of various sorts of faulplay, including misquoting which you have admitted to yourself on this page. You generalize things and mislead people, for instance by making it sound as if there is a some sort of concensus behind your thougts, when in reality there is not. Please, begin offering detailed sources and exact quotes, if you believe someone else thinks like you in certain respects.

Yet, we are still only in the beginning with much of the research work already planned for the coming years, as Julku points out. For instance, only 1/500 to 1/1000 of known prehistoric burial sites have been examined in Finland so far, as Julku points out (since 1980s the situation has not subtantially changed in this respect).

Several prehistoric human living quarters in Northern Finland and Northern Sweden are currently of great interest to historians, archaeologists and others. For instance the settlement in Siuttavaara, Angeli, has been intensively inhabited during the time period of 900-1300 AD. Some of these settlements in question were likely inhabited by the Samis, other by the Kvens.

Art Dominique, May 9, 2006, 22:51 / revisited May 10, 2006, 15:18

Oh well, for the interpretations of the Sithoni check out the said works of Tuomo Pekkanen and Unto Salo. Otherwise I have stressed over and over again that the number of Viking Age archaeological finds from Northern Finland is not hugely different than during the 1960´s.

In other word, there seems still to exist a yawning "void" of evidence about farmer settlement before the 11th or 12th centuries (or the Terminal Iron Age), at least if compared to the similar evidence in Southern Finland. I have never meaned that many other things and views have not changed since the 1960´s, because that would be quite untrue. Unfortunately you keep misquoting again and again, distorting my views, lying, completely disregarding all my explanations.

Then you again tell us about finds from the 11th and 12th centuries (things I already know very well), when I ask about the 9th and 10th centuries. A find from the 12th century has nothing to do with the Kvens mentioned by Ottar. The fact that settlers arrived in Northern Finland during the 12th century has been known for some time. (Neverthless, some archaeologists have interpreted these famous northern silver hoards from the Late Iron Age/Early Middle Ages as votive hoards of the Sami hunter-garherers).

This "confuse the facts" strategy of yours is really tormenting, so please, I beg you, stop it now! (Somewhere above, I have referred to the doctoral dissertation of Thomas Wallerstöm, the Swedish archaeologist mentioned by Julku. Wallerström's book is the standard text of the early medieval settlement of Northern Sweden, thus being highly relevant for the Kven problem. I think any interested person should check it out - Art Dominique is apparently living in or near Oulu, so he can probably get the book by contacting the library of the Oulu University).

Despite the increasing archaeological activity in Northern Finland, not a single cemetery (=burial site) from the Viking Age is known northwards from Vaasa (check out any standard book of Finnish prehistory!). Older cemeteries from the Roman Iron Age and Migration period have been found during the 1980's and 1990´s. Why would the Viking Age cemeteries have escaped from the notice of the archaeologists, when the older cemeteries did not? We should have at least a couple of examples of Viking Age cemeteries by now, if significant number existed in Northern Finland.

Of course, it might be that the "Kvens" simply practised different burial rites than the Southern Finns and did not leave recognizable cemeteries. In this case, the settlement-site excavations and pollen analysis would demonstrate the existence of the Kven settlement. As far as I know, the proof does not exist yet (and you have not supplied references to prove anything on the contrary). The situation might change some day, but we have not seen the day yet.

Edit. Additions made after Art Dominique modified his posting above.

About the "sensational claim of non-connection between the Kven and the Kainulaiset". I hardly made a such "claim". I only translated some sentences from the Finnish Wikipedia, originals not written by me. (I have modified those articles, but the "non-connection claim" was made by a user called Drieakko). If you think those are incorrect claims, please go ahead and modify the Finnish Wikipedia. Do not whine at me.

However, the claims seem to be valid. As far as I know, not a single primary source refers to a ethnic group called the Kainulaiset in medieval Finland. The concept of Kainulaiset and their country, Kainuunmaa, are reconstructions made by 20th century historians, based on a diffuse array of primary data, some of which is described above by Art Dominique.

Even if we accept the Kvens/Kainulaiset connection, their existence in Northern Finland and Sweden is not proved before the 11th or 12th centuries AD. And that´s the essential point.

About Mikko Häme: Apparently you have not even read his essential paper you have fiercely rejected during the earlier rounds of discussion (I repeat the source: Saagoista ja muinaisista kuninkaistamme, Faravid 1991)! Mikko Häme does not discuss the the Kvens - Kainulaiset connections, he just proves that the "kings of Kvenland" mentioned in the Fundinn Noregr are mythological entities.

"For instance the settlement in Siuttavaara, Angeli, has been intensively inhabited during the time period of 900-1300 AD. Some of these settlements in question were likely inhabited by the Samis, other by the Kvens." Yet again - Art Dominique seems to practice his "confuse the facts and hope no one notices it" strategy. You start listing the settlement sites excavated by archaologists in the Sami areas and then you claim that some of these sites must have been "Kven" settlements - of course, without presenting any sources! Unfortunately that strategy is not going to fool anyone.

"as you are a known...committer of various sorts of faulplay (sic), including misquoting" Here Art Dominique makes an excellent and well-proven description of himself. I admit that I quoted Art Dominique carelessly for a couple of times, and that´s bad; however, Art has been continuosly doing the same thing for me.

217.30.179.130 09:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I have in no point claimed that there is or is not a "void" or shortage of findings from certain periods. The said silver findings date to the 11th and 12th centuries.

I added more information and answers to your above guestoning into my comment above.

It is true, that the burial traditions have changed. Traditions as well as other things change today, and they did in the past. For instance, the rock pile burials tradition of the Pronz Age changed to the "polttokenttäkalmistot" of the Iron Age. The "punamulta" burial site of the Suomusjärvi culture ended with the Stone Age, and so on.

I do believe, that we keep finding much more as time goes by. Isn't it a bit strange that our great composer Jean Sibelius made the First Finnish prehistoric gliff painting discovery only in 1900s, and that since then there has been a whole lot of similar discoveries. In total there are already approximately 100 gliff painting site discoveries in Finland.

We just have to begin looking, and we also have to reconsider where to look from. For instance, not enoug attention has been paid for the rapid land rising of the Bothnian areas, etc. In Kaakkuri, Oulu, we have an interesting burial site discovery with Scandinavian-Germanic elements assosiated with it. The items discovered point to especially developed culture. The site has been dated to 500-600 AD. The site points to a permanent settlement in the area during the period.

Art Dominique, May 10, 2006, 15:18

Well, this time there´s not much to disagree. I would only like to correct some terminological errors ans small inclarities. (I also modified my posting above after you modified yours)

• Pronz Age - Bronze Age ("Pronz" is German, not English)
• Rock pile burial - cairn
• Polttokenttäkalmisto - level-ground cremation cemetery
• Punamulta grave - red-ochre grave
• Gliff painting - rock painting (apparently you were thinking the word "cliff", but the cliff painting is not the correct term)

In Southern Finland, the cairn burial were made well into the Iron Age, level-ground cremation cemeteries came into use only during the 7th century AD. The celebrated burial site in Kaakkuri is the best-known example of those Migration period burial sites that have been found in Northern Finland. As I said, archaeologists have not found burials post-dating the 7th century until the Terminal Iron Age. The Kaakkuri site proves nothing of the Kvens.

Your opinion "not enough attention has been paid for the rapid land rising" is quite incomprehensible. The shore-displacement effect is something every Finnish student of archaeology becomes very familiar with during the first year of his studies!

"We just have to begin looking, and we also have to reconsider where to look from." Finnish archaeologists know very well where to look, and they have been looking in Northern Finland for many years by now! Please do not presume to teach the experts.

Somehow it seems to me that is bickering is not making any progress. We should start to wotk out towards a compromise. 217.30.179.130 14:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

That quick response of mine was really meant for your eyes only. I knew you'd understand Finnish, and that you'd be able to properly translate those terms into English, if you wished to so. The "rock paintings", for instance the Värikallio rock paintings, etc., have been discussed on this page prior to this, as you must recall.

In response to "bickering" and "compromise", please allow me to state the following, below:

Art the Cliff Dominique, 13:09, May 12 2006 (UTC)

User 217.30.179.130 plays against Wikipedia's rules

User 217.30.179.130, you stated: "Somehow it seems to me that is bickering is not making any progress. We should start to wotk out towards a compromise."

Answer: There is no compromising with lies and|or any other sort of foul play in Wikipedia, as there is not with terrorists in the world politics. When you were earlier accused - also proven - of foul play, you admitted guilt. Before that, you were proven of having offered misquotations, full with quotation marks. Faced with the clear provided evidence, you - importantly - admitted guilt.

When you visibly can be seen - perhaps - to have finished these sort of ugly habits, which fight against the nature and rules of Wikipedia, we can stop bringing these serious problems -having to do with you behavior - into daylight, in the related talk pages.

Now, it seem quite obvious, that these tactics of yours - including also lieing, it appears - are a part of your standard methods in your pushing of your personal views as facts and as a source of information for the Wikipedia community. For instance, recently you offered a certain text as a source. Later you admitted of being the author of that particular text, to a large extend anyway.

When you claim that a certain historian, for example, sees things a certain way, we simply cannot take you seriously, in the light of all that we've had to face with you. Thus, for you to tell us to read such and such book simply is not a good enough response. That is precisely why we have asked for you to give the name of the source, the page number and the exact quote, where such and such person presents these views, which you claim they do. What part of this procedure cannot you understand ? The burdon of proof is in your side, when you make these type of claims.

You generalize falsely, you stretch the truth, you set words in peoples' mouths, you offer misrepresentations and misquotations. The latter mentioned ways of yours have been proven before on the Kven talk page, although in one case - for instance - you simply explained having misunderstood someone having claimed for the forefathers of the Kvens having spoken a certain language. Backed by this "misunderstanding" of yours, you proceeded in offering a long lecture about linguistics, ethnicity, etc. How far can you stretch the definition of misunderstanding ? What may or may not you as easily "misunderstand" in your Kven history related views ?

This indeed appears to be one the biggest differences between our approaches. I've categorically proceeded by for instance offering exact quotes from the texts written by e.g. the Professors Kyösti Julku, Allan Tiitta, Seppo Zetteberg and Jouko Vahtola, etc., as well as Othar and other authors of the Viking Age, including quotes from the Viking Age sagas and other historic texts, etc. In case of all the modern time historians, and their related sources offered, the names of their works have been given in detail, also the publishing years of the works in question, and the page numbers of each of the quotes used. When translations have been used, that too is usually clearly indicated, even in the talk page texts.

I do not recall you, or the users Fred-Chess, mikka (t) or Big Adamsky having so far offered a single quote from even one modern time historian, as a source for claims made in the Wikipedia's Kven text, or even on its talk page. However, if there is such a case, could we please now receive the exact quote and the place where the quote was presented.

The above makes it even harder to understand, why the Wikipedia users who have repeatedly asked for the above named users to come up with sources - even a single one - for their highly disputable claims, have now themselves been unfairly blocked by the above named user mikka (t).

A complaint of the methods of the users Fred-Chess and mikka (t) was placed on the Administrators' page, first on April 26, 2006, after which the users in question rose up to their defense by setting up a counter attack page at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kven users RfC.

Incredibly, for their defense, the two accused users brought the above named Big Adamsky and you. Apparently, your attempt to hide your trail of continuous foul play has led you to use several Wikipedia user accounts. Two comments of yours (4. and 5.), used for the defense of the accused Wikipedia users, Fred-Chess and mikka (t), on their defense page, were written from two different user accounts of yours. They are presented as if they have come from two different users. Your user accounts include at least the following:

130.234.75.181

130.234.75.167

130.234.75.183

217.30.179.130

Prior to this, you've been caught of having used exceptionally bad language in Wikipedia, including provably setting women's private parts in a sentence where they do not belong. Now, to top it all, you've made a very serious claim of I having lied and having used "misquoting again and again". If you now fail to prove this latest claim of yours, by providing the exact misquotions you claim me of having done (this time correct ones, please - not changed or distorted), will we now have your permission to begin calling you a lier ?

I have not misquoted you or anyone else. Perhaps, in your opinion, there may have been a misinterpretation. For such misinterpretation you can perhaps - at least in part - blame yourself, because you often appear to contradict yourself. Here's yet another example:

1. "During 800 - 1100 AD archaeological materials in the so-called Kvenland are very limited: only a handful of burials, some settlement sites, somes hoards and stray-finds. This is verified in the books by Torsten Edgren and Matti Huurre mentioned in the articles. The situation has not changed much after the 1960´s when Ella Kivikoski wrote the Prehistory of Finland, the only standard text of Finnish prehistory available in English."

2. "Finally, some direct citations from the Finnish Wikipedia (my translation), apparently telling us how the present medieval historians (the post-Kyösti Julku generation) in Finland perceive this question:"

It appears as if you were originally claiming, that not much of the related views changed since 1960s, but later you were saying, that in reality there is already even a "post-Kyösti Julku generation" (his much quoted book, commented here, was written in 1986, and since then the Professor Emeritus Julku has been active and highly regarded historian up to date).

Finally, the wondering minds are now questioning, whether or not you really understand the meaning of "quoting", and whether or not you understand when the quotation marks can or should be used. Please, do no longer abuse the quotation marks, at least not to set words in my mouth, which - in reality - I have not used.

Art Dominique 13:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Revert war continued

In this talk page:

• For each deleted sentence please present the proof that it is wrong.
• For each inserted fact please a reference in a reputable source. If it is non-English, please provide the translated quotation.

`'mikka (t) 15:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, mikka (t).

Art Dominique 14:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Some remarks

As for source references, I have only limited time to do this. I have referred to several essential studies and esteemed researchers by name. That´s enough for me. I am not going to do your homework. Publication years you can get from the Internet. You ask for "exact quotes". Unfortunately, presenting citations out of context often equals distorting them.

Arguably you list your sources fairly well. Unfortunately, the range of sources you use is very limited and biased, thus providing an one-sided and distorted view of the Finnish research.

"The latter mentioned ways of yours have been proven before on the Kven talk page, although in one case - for instance - you simply explained having misunderstood someone having claimed for the forefathers of the Kvens having spoken a certain language. Backed by this "misunderstanding" of yours, you proceeded in offering a long lecture about linguistics, ethnicity, etc. How far can you stretch the definition of misunderstanding ? What may or may not you as easily "misunderstand" in your Kven history related views ?"

Sad to say, but your lengthy "stream-of-consciousness" essays are often ill-focused, your argumentation lines hard to follow and your use of English terminology rather bad (as we can see above). This certainly calls for mis-understandings, as I have never mis-quoted intentionally. Of course, careless and sloppy reading from my part contributed, but at this point, I am beyond any intention to apologize.

"Now, to top it all, you've made a very serious claim of I having lied and having used "misquoting again and again". If you now fail to prove this latest claim of yours, by providing the exact misquotions you claim me of having done (this time correct ones, please - not changed or distorted), will we now have your permission to begin calling you a lier ?...I have not misquoted you or anyone else. Perhaps, in your opinion, there may have been a misinterpretation"

You have, again and again, misleadingly attributed to me an extremely idiotic claim that "nothing has changed" (in the field of Finnish archaeology or history) since the 1960's. My original, slightly impresice formulation could be misunderstood if read very carelessly. However, afterwards I made very detailed explanations in several separate occasions, clarifying what I meaned. Art Dominique must have noticed all this, but he chose to ignore it and continue the systematical misquoting. Or if "misquoting" is a wrong word here, we can talk about systematical distortion.

Do I now have your permission to call you a dishonest practicer of double standards?

Here we go again:

"It appears as if you were originally claiming, that not much of the related views changed since 1960s, but later you were saying, that in reality there is already even a "post-Kyösti Julku generation" (his much quoted book, commented here, was written in 1986, and since then the Professor Emeritus Julku has been active and highly regarded historian up to date)."

I was referring to the "post-Kyösti Julku generation" of historians. Do you know the difference between a historian and an archaeologist? How are you able to confuse things so badly?

Such a generation of historians exists among the the younger Finnish medievalists (Jukka Korpela, Tuomas M. S. Heikkilä, Mika Kallioinen, etc.), who have emerged during the 1990´s. This has nothing to do with the archaeological research situation. They have critiqued intensely the earlier research of the Finnish Middle Ages, which was sometimes of remarkably dubious quality. I do not know exactly how this has influenced the Kven research. But Kyösti Julku is certainly not a god.

The worst problem in the present article version fanatically championed by Art Dominique is that Kyösti Julku´s silly theory of the connection between the Ancient Sithoni and the later Kvens is falsely presented as an established fact. And it should be said in a much more clear way that the presence of the Kvens in Nothern Fennoscandia cannot be established archaeologically before the 11 or 12th centuries, at least not in the present stand. Even Art Dominique had to finally admit that fact, although he tries to downplay and confuse it. Otherwise I do not see so serious problems in that version anymore.

217.30.179.130 16:47, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, 217.30.179.130. Personally, I do not feel the same in regard to helping with "your homework".

Art Dominique 14:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Split off new article

After having watched the various arguments here, I decided to get bold and split off a separate article on the historical Kvens. There are a couple of reasons for this:

• I frankly think it's a bit offensive for modern-day Kvens to put such emphasis on the historical Kvens at their expense.
• The disputes that have taken place here are all about the historical Kvens, not about contemporary Kvens
• Contemporary Kvens are a distinct group with their own history, culture, etc., and deserve their own article, unmuddled by other stuff.

--Leifern 13:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)