Talk:Kvens of the past/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Certain related talks

Some related discussions are at Talk:Kven (historical), and of course a full arsenal of quarrels are at Talk:Kven Suedois 17:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Some mergers

Contents of articles (now redirects) presently at Kvens (historical) and Kvenland (a fork of this article) have today 4 July 2006 got merged into this article. Edit histories of those texts are available at said page addresses: [1] and [2]. Suedois 17:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Problem with redirections is that search engines, like Google, now ignore Wikipedia's KVENLAND page completely. --Drieakko 06:13, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Mostly nonsense

The article makes a lot of claims without any substance. Like there is no evidence whatsoever that "Kvenland" and "Kainuu" are the same at all. Also redirection from Kvenland can be disputed.

Dear anonymous, please kindly sign your posts. Your opinions would be taken more seriously if they show that you are not afraid of showing your sig. I may agree (or whatever), but I cannot be bothered to check thse contents if just seeing a "nonsense" allegation by a writer whose stance cries anonymity, a position of nonsense in itself. Suedois 00:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Here are some main highlights that are incorrect:

1) Geography:

"By most accounts, the historic Kvenland can be identified as the entire Northern Scandinavian territory around and above the coast shores of the Gulf of Bothnia (a sea dividing today's Sweden and Finland) and the White Sea (part of today's Northwestern Russia), all the way up north to the coast of the Arctic Ocean and its Barents Sea in the extreme northeastern corner of the Scandinavian peninsula."

There is no historic account that says this. This is imagination which is loosely and incorrectly based on actual descriptions.

2) Living together with Sami people:

"The Finno-Ugric Sami population have traditionally inhabited parts of the same territories with the Kvens."

Again, there is no reference whatsoever in any source material that confirms this claim.

3) Sagas:

"Egils saga tells about Nór, founder of Norway, and his ancestors who lived in Kvenland."

Egils saga says no such thing. This is a reference to Fundinn Noregr, another saga.

4) Finnish mythology:

"Kvenland has also been associated with Pohjola - Ostrobothnia - in the Finnish Kalevala tradition folklore."

There is no evidence whatsoever about that association. And saying that semi-religious "Pohjola" would be the same as secular "Ostrobothnia" is just guessing. Also:

"In the epic Finnish Kalevala legend - as in the Finnish language in general - Kvenland has always been known as Kainuu, Kainu or Kainuunmaa."

is incorrect. There is no country known as Kainuu in Kalevala. And surely no Kvenland. Kalevala is also not a legend, it was written in 19th century based on heavily modified old Karelian songs. The claim that "Kvenland" would've always been known as "Kainuu" in Finnish is without factual basis and only a hypothesis.

5) Tacitus:

"In his 98 AD book, Tacitus also discusses the Fenni of the Northernmost Scandinavia. It is debated whether the Fenni in this context was a reference to the Finno-Ugric Sami population or the Finns."

What has this got to do with the Kven article?

6) Written sources:

"The Kvens are also discussed in early Norse literature, Viking Age sagas and other historical writings of the Medieval Period."

Kvenland is not mentioned in any early Norse literature. It is briefly mentioned in 2 Icelandic sagas from the 13th century and in one English account from year 890 which is based on an oral account from a travelling Norwegian. And that's all. Nothing more. Nowhere.

Also (speaking of Alfred the Great's account):

"According to this source, as well as some Russian 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."

is totally incorrect. There was no alliance in 9th century against Novgorod since there was no Novgorod at that time yet! Also Alfred's source says no such thing and no Russian sources have any information about Kvenland.

And so on. The article needs to be reorganized and rewritten. I can do that during upcoming weeks, if no objections are raised. Sorry for leaving my signature out. Drieakko 00:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Please do that! It will be appreciated. Unfortunately, this article has a sad history of extremely fierce edit wars. The previous contributors, including myself, lack the first-rate expertise you seem to possess. It is truly great if the ghost of national-chauvinistic pseudo-history, long-reigning in this article, will be finally buried.130.232.100.1 08:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, now done. I tried to follow the following principles:

- Present-day Kvens have their own article, no redundant information about them here

- Have the ancient sources referenced in their entirety instead of claiming them to say something that they do not say

- Sources that handle Nordic history without mentioning Kvens are not discussed Drieakko 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Faravid vs Southwestern Finland

How do we fit the quite accepted idea that Faravid was a chieftain somewhere in today Finnmark or its vicinity, with the idea that his Kvenland is today southwestern Finland? Suedois 19:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it does not fit here at all. Faravid is the Kvenland king in Egil's saga. The idea to place Faravid and his Kvenland to north is only based on Kyösti Julku's partial interpretation of Egil's Saga which many have accepted without actually reading what the saga says. The saga itself does not give any sufficient reason for that conclusion. Drieakko 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Drieakko is once again telling mythology: "only basded on ...Julkus....interpret..." A great number of scholars have made this connection in various forms, not to Finnmark, but to Gulf of Bothnia. Drieakko is one of the few, if not the only one?, who does not make this connection. Julku is in the midstream of an old tradition. But, according to Drieakko, only he talks about facts and no one else has ever before presented a theory based on facts, only Drieakko. Please stick to facts, Drieakko.

Southwestern Finland is on the Gulf of Bothnia. I think it is most probable that Kvenland and Faravid were on the Gulf of Bothnia. What has made you think that I object that idea? --Drieakko 16:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Please, read some more before you make these claims about Julku and Kvenland. Almost every researchers has placed Kvenland around the Gulf of Bothnia, but not in Finnmark or soutwestern Finland. Almost everyone. Nevertheless, the settlers of Kvenland migh come from southwest Finland where we have some Kaiunnu place names, but this can easily be disputed. Is Kainuu the Finnish word for Kven?

--84.216.52.22 18:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I open discussion for the Origin of the name Kainuu here.--Drieakko 20:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, there has been rather little research on Kvenland. Publications are mainly referring to Julku's work from 1986. The book is available in Finnish. Julku goes through the same sources than the article. His conclusion is different, and anyone with an access to the book can compare how this is possible. Julku was a historian in northern Finland and he wanted to prove that Kvenland was the same as his own neighborhood. However, his methods were not completely ok. Firstly, Julku's translations of old sources are not inline with what is commonly available. Checking further to the original language of the old accounts, it seems that Julku has made several questionable decisions to "polish" the texts to better fit his purpose. For example, just check how Julku "translates" Ottar's account and the original text (and neutral translation) here. Secondly, Julku concentrated on picking only those parts of the texts that suited his purpose. Parts that did not fit were just ignored. Thirdly, his conclusions created conflicts in the original texts that he did not bother to solve or even mention. Perhaps an article of its own should be written to go through Julku's work, but at least those with his book can do the checking already now. --Drieakko 21:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Oooh yes, nice translation of e.g qven to Fin in the Ottar story. Nice truly. Very creative. Why is Svealand not translated to Finland? That would even be nicer and more suitable.--130.237.165.114 10:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

If one is not aware of the Kvenland discussion in Finland/Sweden/Norway and translates Ottar's description of northern lands, I think he picks "Finland" for "Kvenland" without much hesitation. There is no Finland mentioned anywhere, Kvenland neighbours both Sweden and Norway and matches what would be expected from Finland of the time. --Drieakko 03:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Yyyhheee, I cannot say any more to this above statement. I am speechless to this fact finding mission of Drieakko. Truly! What kind of man are you? What is your profession? Why do you not translate Qvenland to China or Novgorod. Not even these nations are mentioned? China was a huge country already at that time. But not one word in the Icelandic saga. Not a word. Qvenland must therefore be China.

Kindly do not make headlines to my postings afterwards. --Drieakko 16:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

When I found this so called translation I understood that we should not discuss further. I could not believe that we are so far away from each other. I know we understand science, translations, objectivity, biased, neutral, etc very differently. Hope you can convince some people. But, better, write a book challeging Julku, Vahtola etc.--84.216.55.247 21:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Translation of Ottar's account used in the article is by the University of Victoria, Canada. Original text in Old English is included for sentence by sentence comparison. Please state the errors in their translation. I am not aware of any. However, the Finnish translation spread by Kyösti Julku does not match the original text. --Drieakko 23:34, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Once Qveenas is translated Fins and once Qveenas is translated Qveenas. --84.216.53.14 06:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Norðmen is also translated Norwegians and Northmen. More? --Drieakko 06:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

So translation Northmen and Norwegian can be compared with Qveenas and Fins?--130.237.165.114 12:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I pointed it out as a similar undecidedness about naming conventions. --Drieakko 13:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Well.are these examples of a rubbish translations? Or perhaps high quality translations?--84.216.55.133 05:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Kings of Kvenland

User:Haldog keeps inserting the link to webpage http://www.kvenland.com/ with fantastic unreferenced list of "Kings of Kvenland". Please keep an eye. `'mikka (t) 01:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

What is your problem? I didn't realize one person owned this page and could decide what people are allowed to contribute. Is there some reason other than your opinion of "unreferenced" lists that you are removing my link? If you keep doing it, I will give up and you will win if that's important to you but I understood Wiki to be an intellectual site and I'm very disappointed to think that perhaps it is not. There are many references to these kings -- maybe you should do a search and see what you find. I am going to put the link in once more and if it is removed, I will understand more than you realize. Haldog

Your link to www.kvenland.com is ok if you only gave references where the amazing information of 2000 year-old Finnish kings is coming from. As far as I can tell, it is in large part pure imagination that is just made to look like it would be real. Wikipedia is not a place to spread that kind of information. --Drieakko 04:33, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I do no longer believe that www.kvenland.com is far from Drieakkos reasoning. Clearly both are in the same field of science, as they defin the term.

Thank you for this constructive anonymous comment. --Drieakko 23:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Errors and Missing Content

User:WeBeToys and others, please write here if you find errors, missing information or just want conclusion to be reversed. I'm more than ready to correct the text, if it is incorrect. But please stay in the subject:

• Present-day Kvens have their own article, please keep all the related discussion there
• This is an article about Kvenland and Kvens of the past, so information not related to them needs to be discussed elsewhere. Article explodes if all ancient references to Finns, Sami people and whatever nations there have been in the northern Europe are loaded into this article as if they were "might-be" references to Kvens. Just concentrate on what there is about Kvens, please
• There are as many opinions of Kvenland as there are scholars. Since the information about Kvenland is very scarce, it can be referred to here directly instead of only referring to others referring to it

--Drieakko 13:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

This is the first time in my life, after reading some 150 articles about the history of North Calotte - that Kvenland is placed to southwest Finland. Remarkable conclusions!!! To say the least! The reference list is very impressive and one can get the impression that this article is based on the references. Perhaps there are a few, for me unknown, articles placing Kvenland to southwestern Finland. However, a few researchers believe that the place names with Kainuu-names in southwestern Finland is the oldest source for the origin on Kvenland around the Gulf of Bothnia, i.e people from southwestern Finland settled the Kvenland. But this is something else. The author of this article should clearly mark that a great number of reserarchers place Kvenland around today´s Norrbotten, Ostrobothnia and northern Västerbotten, i.e in the northernmost region of the Gulf of Bothnia. We have well established facts, as late as 1745 by a person from Denmark who visited the region and wrote a very detailed report claiming that the Kvens lived precisely in the same region where today's Tornedalians are settled. It would be very strange of Kvenland then was in southwest Finland. Remarkable that this kind of stuff is accepted in Wikipedia. There is no evidence what so ever that the Torne valley region has been abandoned after the Kvens and Saami arrived to the region. All evidence indicate that the settlers of the Torne valley where Kvens and Saami, and they have lived there since then. The label Kvens, most likely given by visitors (as the term Lapp meaning Saami), was changed to Torne valley finns after 1745. The reason is unknown. We do not know their own ethnonym, but have weak indications that the Kainulainen is the ethnonym of themselves. --84.216.52.22 13:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Please note that Swedes have lived close to the Torne Valley for at least 600 years and have not indicated in any way that people called "Kvens" lived there in any of the documentation or traditions. The word "Kven" has simply not been used or known by them, but only by Norwegians. Swedes surely would have recognized if they were asked if "Finns" lived there. --Drieakko 21:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The 1745 source, Peter Schnitler's report, was written by - as far as I know - a Danish person. He visited the North calotte region and tried to map the borders of the region and which peoples lived there. Very reliable source. We have very good evidence that the Kvens of Norway came from Torne valley, repcisely the same region which Schnitler claimed to be settled by the Kvens. Clearly to some extent the same region inhabited by the Kainulaiset. However, to make things more complicated, all Swedish Tornedalians - as my self - use the term Kainulainen meaning Swedish-speaking group living just outside the language border of Torne valley Finnish in the municipalities Överkalix and Kalix. Even Kalix and Överkalix are termed Kainus and Ylikainus in Torne Valley Finnish. I was born in Kainulas-järvi,i.e the 'lake of the kainulaiset'. Lot's of place names in that region has a Finnish origin. It might been that the original settlers were teh true Kainulaiset. This term Kainulainen is very old and frequently used in todays Torne valley Finnish or Meänkieli.

The Swedish king Carl IX claimed to be king of kvens and swedes; in Swedish kväners och svears konung. This was about 1615?--130.237.165.114 11:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The title of King Carl IX was "Carl then Nijonde medh Gudz nådhe, Swerikes, Göthes, Wendes, Finnars, Carelers, Lappers j Nordlanden, the Caijaners, och Esters j Lifland, etc. Konung". This was during 1607-1611 CE. Note that his title has no Kvens anywhere. See Kings of Kvenland for more. --Drieakko 12:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

No discussion about the Kven in the Novgorod sources from 14th century. Kven-term is used a number of times in these sources defining the national border between Novgorod and Sweden, the very first national border in the east part of Sweden. No doubt that Kvensea was the northernmost part of Gulf of Bothnia in these fairly reliable official documents; no researcher has ever claimed anything else. The claim that the word Kven was invented by the Norwegians to distinguish the Saami (Finns) from the Finnish-speaking Finns is pure mythology. Lot´s of nonsense like this in the article. What interests and political perspective has the author of this article?--84.216.52.22 13:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. All the ancient (Iron and Middle Ages) references that I know about Kvenland and Kvens are currently handled in the article. Please let me know if there are any other. See article about Origin of the name Kven for more about where name "Kven" might have come. Term "kainulainen" was invented in the 20th century by a nationalist Finnish historian and politician Kustaa Vilkuna, if my memory does not fail me here. It never appears anywhere before that. "Kvensea" only appears in the Orosius from 890 CE and never again anywhere after that. Not a single Russian 14th or 15th century source handling Russian border uses name "Kven" or "Kvenland". You are probably mistaking it here with the name "Kajano more" (the Kajaani Sea) that the peace treaty from 1323 uses for Gulf of Bothnia. That name was probably adopted by Russians from the Karelians who used names "Kajaani" / "Kainuu" for all the northern areas where they settled from the 13th century onwards. --Drieakko 23:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Please read more about Russian border documents from the 14th and 15th century here. --Drieakko 21:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I do not support your position,e g. Kainulainen is used as an etnonym referring to the Kvens in northern Norway by the Kvens, not all, but some do that even today.

"Kainulainen" and "Kainuulainen" are very common terms related to today's Kainuu and of late origin. The word just means "an inhabitant of Kainuu". However, "kainulainen" as an ancient Finnish equivalent of "Kven" is imagination and not supported by any source. If you know a source that supports another view, please indicate. --Drieakko 12:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Empiric link between kven and kainulainen - here

Ph D. Irene Andressen from Alattio and teacher Terje Aronsen from Pyssyjoki (as well as few other persons) have a few informants telling them that their parents and older generations called tehmselves kainulaiset, i.e Kvens living in Northern Norway claiming to have the term kainulaiset in their traditions and not being kvens in their language. Kven is the Norwegian term. One informant told Irene Andreassen yesterday in telephone, August 23 2006, that her father said to her: "met olema kainulaiset" 'we are kainulaiset'. She is 87 years old and lives in Pyssyjoki-Börselv. She is a very reliable source, according to Irene Andressen. Well, Drieakko? Would a 87 year old woman try to be populistic? She does hardly understand the implication of what she is saying, i.e. not imbued with so called populistic theories. I believe Drieakko can get her telephone number and listen to her story?! --130.237.165.114 11:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, just go to a few villages near Pyssyjoki and Porsanger and ask the neighbours of who the Kainulaiset are/were. There were a few people living 3 years ago claiming that they heard the term the kainulaiset used by their parents and older relatives, i.e some of the Kvens in Northern Norway claim to have that term kainulaiset in their living memory. Reference: Ph.D Irene Andreassen in Alattio, Northern Norway (get here e-mail from the web), claimed this 2 years ago, 2004. Do you need better evidence? --130.237.165.114 12:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

So, where goes the line between people adopting a populistic theory about their own roots and them preserving information on their roots independently? To make a claim like this, evidence prior to theories needs to be presented. --Drieakko 13:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you reject reality and demand evidence from a reality before any theory was presented then you are truly free to invent reality. Evidence can be selected and rejected with very simple methods. Certainly those to use the term kainulainen should be checked on how and where they learnt it, but I assume that Irene Andreassen has acquired that quality in her profession.--130.237.165.114 13:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean with Kainuu, where is that according to you? But the term kainulainen in Finnish sources clearly denote people living in Ostrobothnia; lot's of examples in the dialect archives of Finland. They had thinner and longer faces than the Savolaxians, so the soruces claim. In my home region we said tha tthe Kainulaiset, who speak Swedish today, are thing-long faced with thin long legs.--130.237.165.114 13:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Kainuu is an old name for all of Pohjanmaa. It has been primarily used by people from Karelia and Savo. Today, the name is used only for the easternmost area of Pohjanmaa that was inhabited on the 16th century. People speaking the Kainuu dialect are unmistakenly from Savo. Savo dialect has also influenced northern Western Finnish dialects to which language spoken by today's Kvens belongs to because people from Savo also settled on the coasts of Pohjanmaa, which however was predominantly Western Finnish. Savo dialect (and Kainuu dialect) are Eastern Finnish dialects. There is no doubt in that Savo and Karelian people that settled on the areas which they called Kainuu would have also called themselves as "kainu(u)lainen" which just means "an inhabitant of Kainuu". The question is only about whether there is a direct connection between words "Kven" and "kainulainen" that goes unproved. It is difficult to accept that if there was an earlier tribe called "kainulainen", that people from Savo and Karelia would have adopted their name to mean themselves and areas where they settled. There is also no evidence available that dialects spoken in the north would have pre-migration (before 13th century) elements that would indicate earlier existence of Finnish language in the north. --Drieakko 13:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

So, who are those kainulaiset living in Sweden speaking Swedish? All Swedish Tornedalians - as my self - use the term Kainulainen meaning Swedish-dialect speaking person living just outside the language border of Torne valley Finnish in the municipalities Överkalix and Kalix. Even Kalix and Överkalix are termed Kainus and Ylikainus in Torne Valley Finnish. I was born in Kainulas-järvi,i.e the 'lake of the kainulaiset'. Lot's of place names in that region has a Finnish origin. It might been that the original settlers were teh true Kainulaiset. This term Kainulainen is very old and frequently used in todays Torne valley Finnish or Meänkieli. How do these link up with the kainulaiset of Pohjanmaa?--130.237.165.114 14:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I have no sufficient expertise to answer to you in a fully satisfying way. The issue itself is very interesting and I should get to know it better. However, a few words could be assigned to the Swedish area "Kalix" that Finns today call "Kainu(s)". A big river called "Kalixälv" (River Kalix) runs through it. The name seems to be a derivative of Sami "Gáláseatnu" that means approximately "a long cold river". Finns have used a similarly derived word "Kaallasväylä" (more here) for the same river. Since the Sami name most probably is the original one and both Finns and Swedes have one time adopted it, it seems that "River Kainuu" as the river is today known in Finnish, has a more recent origin. This would most probably also give a recent dating to the area with the similar name "Kainu(s)" around the delta of the river. Easiest explanation is that there was a later Karelian/Savonian settlement on the area that eventually started to speak Swedish, using the name "Kainuu" like they did on all areas in the north. Whatever the history behind "Kainu(s)" here is, its connection to "Kven" remains open. --Drieakko 15:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

An anonymous user 130.237.165.114 below here kindly informed that "kainulainen" is based on a Sami term "kainohalja" / "kainohaljo" which means a Swedish or Norwegian person. So the "kainulainen" people living in Sweden are Swedes which are just being called using a Sami term. Finns seem to have adopted the word in Kalix to indicate local Swedes. --Drieakko 12:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, as you said that was not a sufficient answer. The Saami kaalas can be something else. You claim that only Norwegians/Danes use the term Kven. You must be awre that Olaus Magnus ca 1540 wrote Qvenas in his map. He was a Swedish bishop, born in Sweden, the last catholic bishop who fled to Rome. He had no interest to imitate the Norwegians. Where did he got that term?--217.208.231.130 20:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Moreover. In Meänkieli the term kaalas 'cold, chilly' is well known, I use this word sometimes. There is no reason to believe that we have derived kainus from kaalas. We should say Kaalasväylä, as we in fact do in the northern part closer to the Saami region, i.e in Gällivare and Kiruna municipalities. But Kainhuun väylä refers only to the southern part of Kalix river where the Swedish speakers live, and where we have a number of Finnish place names, e.g Morjärvi, Talljärv, Räktjärv, Ansvar etc. Kaalasväylä is just referring to the Saami region and Kainhuunväylä to the Swedish-speaking region, as well as our Finnish-speaking region in its southern parts, i.e Tärendö parish and Korpilompolo parish.

• Gáláseatnu is the name of the Kalix River in Sami. The most probable development is that Finns took the name first (Kaallasväylä) and then Swedes took it from the Finns (Kalixälv). "Kainuu" seems to be a later name for the area in the south, not in any way related to original Sami based naming and having nothing to do with "kaalas" at all.
• "Kven" originally (pre-14th century sources) appears only in Norwegian (and Icelandic) sources, not in Danish at all.
• Olaus Magnus' map of Scandinavia from 1539 CE can be seen here in great detail. There is at least a small town named "Berkara Qvenar" on area that seems to be in Norway, north of Trondheim. Perhaps a reference to Kvens? Could you point other possible references to Kvens in his map since I can not find any. --Drieakko 21:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

The first Finnish settlers of Torne valley

You write: Easiest explanation is that there (valley of Kainuu river) was a later Karelian/Savonian settlement on the area that eventually started to speak Swedish, using the name "Kainuu" like they did on all areas in the north." Well, many researchers claim that the west Finns were the first settlers of the Torne valley, after the Saami. You seem to argue that Karelians were first in the Kainuu river valley. There is a cultural connection between Kainulaiset and todays Tornedalian finns in that sense that these along with the Saami are the only ethnic groups in Sweden who are rein deer herders; as the Finns in Finnish Torne valley are. There are 8 Saami villages in this region, including the south part of the Kainuu river, where they have not been speaking Finnish during centuries; still they are rein deer herders and members of a Saami village: Kalix Saami village. It is an indication of some older relationships. Were they not West Finns? Why do the Tornedalians use mie and sie and not west Finnish very frequent pronouns. How could they change typical very resistent pronouns to Karelian terms.--84.216.55.188 06:45, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Western Finns most likely settled there first. Old Finnish name "Kaallasväylä" which Swedes adopted from them as "Kalixälv" and which they had adopted from Sami, seems like a good evidence on that. However, Karelians were already then (around 12th and 13th century) active in the north, and Karelian influences are found in the local dialects around the Bay of Bothnia. Savonians (predominantly of Karelian origin) came last, around the 16th century. --Drieakko 15:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

This is beginning to be interesting! In Olaus Magnus map we have only qvenas and birkarls in Northern Sweden, Finland and Norway. And rex scrifinor and rex helsingorv - what ever that might mean. Rex 'king'? Why did he only mention these two groups? Not the Saami or the Finns? And I asked about Srifinoa, the meaning of that word in Olaus Magnus map? Finns or Saami?--84.216.53.26 12:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Third important notice is that Olaus Magnus mentions Helsingeby, which later got the name Kainuunkylä. What is the idea to explain this shift of names?--84.216.53.26 13:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Also this shift in names is easiest explained as a result of heavy Savonian immigration from the 16th century onwards. --Drieakko 15:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Kven as a Danish term and Qvenas as a Swedish term

1. Drieakkao did not respond to the term Kven used by the Danish officer in 1745 when visitng the region. Kven was used of the Tornedalians at least one time, very sepcific. Is that not a reliable source? 2. Olaus Magnus claims that Scrifinnia is the name of the Torne valley region, or Norrbotten and Torne valley. Well, earlier interpretations is that Scrifinns are Saami. No Finns then at all in northern Sweden, only Scrifinn Saami and Lapp Saami. Or is Scrifinni the same as Finns (suomalaiset), which should be the interpretation based on Olaus Magnus map? 3. Qvenas Bercara is not a town, but Olaus Magnus misinterpreted the stories he heard and read and claimed that birkarlar were mountain men, Bergkarl in Swedish, and these men were in some way linked to the Kvens, as he had learned. It does not seem like a town, no buildings around. And mountain men must live in the mountains, so he put them in the mountain between Norway and Sweden, though all sources point to the conclusion that the birkarls lived in the todays Norrbotten, Torne valley, an dperhaps further south. So, Kvens was accepted as a people by Olaus Magnus.--84.216.55.157 19:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Note that this article is handling ancient Kven sources from Iron and Middle Ages. Up until 13th century. Word "Kven" appears only in Norwegian and Icelandic sources from that era and quite clearly meaning all Finns. Both Olaus Magnus (the 16th century) and the Danish officer from the 18th century belong to a whole different time, separated by hundreds of years from the sources discussed in the article. Before the borders were set in the north and when people from different countries and especially from Norway could move freely in Lappland and Finnmark, "Kven" was most probably quite commonly used in local language about Finns in the north where Finns had started to settle there from 14th century onwards, until its usage retreated to present-day Finnmark in Norway when borders were finally drawn and closed in the 19th century. Both accounts mentioned here seem quite typical misunderstandings of local terminology that persons in question had never heard before anywhere else. --Drieakko 20:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

You are making it very simple by excluding all sources after 1500. Why not exclude all sources after 9th century? Then we have only Scrifinna, Finnas and perhaps Finnmark. No Kvens at all. Many centuries after Tacitus the Kven arrived to the region as an invention by the Norwegians. I believe the Danish officer had a tradition of Kvens in his context. And perhaps he asked the local people of what they are called by the Swedes?--84.216.55.188 06:47, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, all sources after about 1250 CE are excluded from this article. They should be handled in another article called Kvens. The Kven articles in Wikipedia were split without my influence. However, I support the split. Reasons to separate "ancient" and "contemporary" Kven sources are:

• All "ancient" sources of Kvens also mention "Kvenland". This name does not appear in later sources (after 13th century), but just "Kvens".
• There was a huge migration from the 13th century onwards in Fennoscandia that changed the balance of nations dramatically in the north. Especially the Finnish population expanded heavily during the 14th and 17th century. Sources during and after this migration are best handled separately from sources before it. "Ancient" sources are from era during which especially the Finnish population was in a rather static state, at least in comparison to the time after it.
• "Ancient" sources are from era (or describe an era) when Finns were not yet annexed by Swedes. This took place around 1250 CE.

About Olaus Magnus yet. Please look at the map closer. In the middle of the section B, there is a lake (or is it a fjord?) in Norway on the western side of the mountains and two small buildings drawn by the lake. Right under the buildings there is the text "Berkara Qvenar". The lake, the buildings and the text are roughly positioned on area between Lofoten and Tromsø which both are marked on the map. Easiest explanation is that the name is related to an early Kven settlement in northern Norway. --Drieakko 06:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Almost all other village names are put directly above/below the houses. Here we have a clearly marked distance to the houses, meaning that Qvenar is not a village, but the region where Mountainmen lived.--84.216.55.188 06:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

The names of the towns and villages are placed on all sides of the drawn symbols as visually most fitting. The fact that the name of the village on the lake is drawn a bit more loosely from the symbol is probably just because there has been more space and Olaus has wanted his map evenly filled and decorated. This does not have to mean that the village actually existed, Olaus might just have indicated Kven population in northern Norway using a symbol of a village. First few Kvens were already then living in northern Norway according to Norwegian tax documentation (see Kvens for more.) Also note that Olaus did not generally write tribe or people names on his map (unless he misunderstood them for place names). --Drieakko 08:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Not generally, but birkarls and qvenas are mentioned. Magnus visited the region and musta have met Saami and Tornedalians and kainulaiset i Kalix-Kainus. But, no Finns and no Saami, are mentioned, as far as I can see. But you argue that the qvenas was an invention and he misunderstood the term Scrifinni, or did I get it wrong? It is remarkable that Magnus only mentions the tradingpeople a couple of times, and an invented terms, but has nothing to tell us about reality, e.g the people who really lived there, the Saami and the Finns. Well, your ideas are seemingly demanding that not even Magnus understood what he was writing about. --84.216.53.26 12:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Recommendation to the editors of Wikipedia

Please give the article a warning flag or delete it completely if it is not revised entirely. Or label the articles as one example of modern mythology.--84.216.53.176 05:41, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

If Wikipedia is for the purpose to present new ideas, then the article is okay. But not if it as an encyklopedia to present existing ideas. Then these articles goes far beyond those limits. --84.216.52.195 19:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Please list the errors so that they can be corrected. I know that the article has a very dull conclusion, but sometimes history is not exciting. --Drieakko 23:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Note that the article does not really present any new ideas. It only goes thoroughly through the sources that there are about ancient Kvenland. My personal opinion is that in this kind of cases Wikipedia is much more useful when it presents the original material directly instead of referring to other publications referring to it which just leads the readers running after those other publications. --Drieakko 20:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

But this article is a new perspective on the history of Kvens, i.e. fairly new reserach hardly published in any paper. If everybody were allowed to present their own version of any term based existing sources then we would have a great number of "reserarch articles". I give okay for your article, but the editors of Wikipedia should reflect upon what kid of articles do they wan tto have.

I am myself looking here for an article that is unbiased, objective and exhaustive. My personal views, if such exist, should not be there. If some of the text feels like subjective handling of the material, please indicate it. I have gone through most of the earlier discussions around the subject which eventually seemed to have gone out of this world (my apologies to everyone) and there did not seem to be any other way to have it back on the planet but to go through the original sources, well-referenced. --Drieakko 12:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Drieakko writes " am myself looking here for an article that is unbiased, objective and exhaustive" I agree! I am also looking for that and finds only one biased subjective mythology of Kvenland. Finally we reached mutual understanding. Very good indeed.--84.216.54.147 20:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Place names and settlers, what do they tell us?

Drieakko claims that the term kainuu, kainulainen was given by Karelian tribes of people, regions along the Gulf of Bothnia. Well, that might be so. But it can hardly be the Karelians who gave name to all placenames with Kainuu all along the Finnish coast and along Kalix river, as well as in south western Finland. The first settlers gave the name Kainuu and from that perhaps the term kainulaiset was given by the Karelians, though it seems to be a dubious conclusion. We have very few place names with Kainuu in Karelia, so the term was foreign to them. And I don't belive, or I know, that the place names with Kainuu are overwhelmingly many. So it might been their own term. We who live here are Kianulaiset, because our name of the village is, e.g. Kainus/Ylikainus. How can Drieakko explain his view?

Name Kainuu has been used by Karelians and later by people from Savo (predominantly of Karelian origin) seemingly for all the northern areas. Origin of the name Kainuu is not clear. Practically all the inhabitants of today's Kainuu in Finland are from Savo from the 16th century onwards and speak a dialect very close to Savo dialect. Name "Kainuu" appears also in place names all over Pohjanmaa basically everywhere that people from Savo settled between the 16th and 18th centuries. Majority of the settlers on those areas were from Western Finland so name "Kainuu" did not overwhelm "Pohjanmaa" as the name for the entire area and eventually remained only for the easternmost part of it as well as for individual places here and there. If also the first settlers from Western Finland had used "Kainuu" as the name for the area, it is difficult to reason why they dropped it in favor of "Pohjanmaa". Theories about an earlier Finnish tribe in the north prior to migration period (before 13th century) lack both archaelogical and linguistical evidence. -Drieakko 08:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe that you mean that the Savonians gave the Kainuu place names in south western Finland, quite a number. Why do we have the Kainuu place names in Satakunta? Who gave them names? There has not been any Savonians en mass in Satakunta. Please describe your opinion on this issue, then the rest follows about Pohjanmmaa which was inhabited by Savoninans and western Finns. Pohjaanmaalainen might be just another term competing with kainulainen and the latter one lost ground. In southwestern Finland kainulainen has never been used in any region, not in texts, though we have lot of place names with Kainuu. No, Drieakko, I belive you close your mind then and then in your reasoning and when you claim that the Karelians and Savonians invented, or began to use, the term Kainulainen. There is no perspective which is not contradictory in some parts. --130.237.165.114 11:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

If I remember correctly (and I may be wrong here), all just about a dozen names of insignificant places possibly related to this issue in southwestern Finland (mainly in Varsinais-Suomi) start with "Kainu-", and "kainu" is some sort of a farming equipment in the local dialect. But this may be wrong information and I need to do some checking. --Drieakko 20:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot about this. "Kainu", also "kainus", is in the local southwestern Finnish dialect "työreen keskimmäinen kaplas, kyseistä kaplasparia yhdistävä poikkipuu". Very difficult to translate to English, but it is related to the cross beam of a work sleigh. More here. The word was thus known in Western Finnish dialects, but used for a very different purpose. --Drieakko 04:26, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Drieakko writes: "There is no evidence that names "Kvenland" and "Kainuu" would be related." I believe it is a very strong statement, not unbiased and not base don facts. You just reject all those who have done these conclusions and say "no evidence". Did you not say: objective and neutral analysis.--84.216.53.155 19:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Please write article about the Origin of the name Kainuu and provide evidence. --Drieakko 20:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Kven-kainulainen and Kvenland -Kainuu/cajana and variations have been interlinked by some 3-6 researchers. Only Drieakko and the professors Holm and Sköld do not find any connection. It is not good writing style then to claim that "no evidence" exist. The majority has claimed a link, so Drieakko is in a minority and claims to be able to just reject: "no evidence". About 12 place names with Kainuu in Satakunta. And only a few Kainuu place names in todays Kainuu. These 12 place names are very important, obviously. If the Karelians invented the term Kainuu we should find a number of kainuu words, Kainuu place names in Karelia. But, we find only place names with Kainuu where the west finns have been first or been early settlers. Hence, a better conclusion is that the Karelians came to Ostrobthnia-Kainuu and heard for the very first time the word kainulainen and started to use the term. That is how we learn new terms (cultural diffusion), not just pure inventions directly downloaded from heaven. Conclusion: The words kainulainen and Kainuu were foreign word for the Karelians when they arrived to Pohjanmaa, and began to use them after that. Cajana is just a variant of Kainuu. I could say: There is "no evidence" to claimt that the word Kainuu was invented by the Karelians. Show me the evidence, please. I have shown mine: One hundred Kainuu place names in west Finnish regions.You: Nothing, aboslutely nothing. No evidence, Drieakko, pure speculations, I would say using your own terminology. In an scientific article I would use other wording. But this is a discussion page.--130.237.165.114 07:25, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so please write the article about the connection, reference it properly and let's see what we have then. I am very interested in reading it and always ready to change my opinions in the face of good evidence.

Few words about place names. Using place names normally works so that if you live on an area that is generally called XXX, you seldom use that XXX in the place names on that area. So, if you live in Sweden, you do not name places "Sweden-" in Sweden. Only when you move away from that area or you are a minority or you live on a border area, the general area name starts to appear in place names as well, or in case you need to differentiate yourself from something similar that your neighbours have. How many places starting with "Pohjanmaa-" are there in Varsinais-Suomi? There surely are not many places starting "Kainuu-" in Savo or Karelia - why ever would there be any? They used that name for northern areas; why would they have used the same name on their original areas? That would not be expected. Names starting with "Kainuu-" should thus not appear in Savo nor in Karelia. The fact that Karelians and people from Savo used "Kainuu" so heavily, points quite probably into the direction that there were no earlier people using the same name about themselves. If they had met people calling themselved "Kainu" or "Kainulainen" already there, it would not be expected that they had adopted that same name for their own usage. If however "Kainuu" in that form or another was an already existing local word without any other than geographical meaning, then the case is of course different. --Drieakko 09:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

So, you believe that the Karelians downloaded the word Kainuu from heaven, and you argue that this is a neutral statement? And, moreover, despite the fact that the Kainuu is very old in western Finland, nevertheless the Karelians invented the term. Why the heck would they not use the west Finnish term, but rejected that and invented a new term precisely the same as the west Finnish term? Is that not mythology and mere speculations based on a will to present a modern theory which is believed to be non-nationalistic? Is a non-nationalistic position neutral, whereas the nationalistic position is not? Are they not two sides of the same coin?

Hmm. You can read what I wrote above there and see that I made no such strange claims. --Drieakko 03:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Sweden and Kainulasjärvi are not comparable terms. Kainuu was low land, as Vahtola and others tell us. Pohjanmaa is a new term, later than Kainuu; I believe. Pohjanmaa means 'land of the north'. That would be a good Karelian term, a good understandable term. But what the heck is Kainuu? and where did you get that word? One Karelian would ask if a Karelian traveller returning home claims too have been in Kainuu. He invented the term when he arrived for the very first time at the shores of Gulf of Bothnia. Why not the land of the North?

"Pohjanmaa" is clearly a name given by Western Finns and it became dominant everywhere that they were majority settlers. --Drieakko 03:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, what is Pohja in Kalevala?--84.216.53.117 11:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Poems in Kalevala are both secular and religious, mixing myth, actual history, free innovation and Lönnrot's own poetry in a way that is not meaningful to be brought into this discussion. --Drieakko 13:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

So, once again, the word Pohja was downloaded from heaven? I do not believe that the Icelandic sagas are much more reliable sources, perhaps slightly. But Pohja occurs in Kalevala, and the term was hence known in Karelian tradition. Pohjanmaa and Pohja are very similar concepts. As well as Joikahainen and joukhainen 'swan'. And swans are mythological birds in Karelian tradition. Joukhainen is the North Finnish word for swan.Might be a connection--84.216.55.247 15:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

No, Drieakko, please try to delete all mythology from your article and stick to facts, and facts only, and then you will perhaps find something else. Please do not use terms such as "invented" the term, without explaining how and why they invented the term. All words come from somewhere, and we know that Kainuu do exist in Varsinais Suomi. Ther4e is no reason to believe two parallel developments of the word Kainuu. That is an amazing conclusion we can draw from your article; as long as you do not claim that the Karelian gave name to the Kainuu-places in south western Finland.

Please note that there is nothing about the origin of the name Kainuu in the article. You seem to have forgotten that the article handles ancient sources that mention Kvenland. --Drieakko 03:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

If I move to a new region which has no inhabitants, and it is a low country, and I have the noun kainuu in my vocabulary mening lowland I would say let's stay in this kainuu, good place for argiculture near the coast. The Karelains have other terms for lowland, I am sure of that. And if the Karelians come there later on asking who live there the neighbours perhaps would say it is those kainulaiset or the persons concerned would claim that they live live in Kainuu. In fact, my home village Kainulasjärvi, is told to has it roots from a person from Kainus (Kalix) who moved to the lake Salmijärvi. The lake was said, most likely by neighbours and newcomers, to be the Kainulaisen järvi. Well I am kainulasjärvilainen, as my neighbours and I call my self. I have no time to write an article, but it is attempting. Some day!!

This Kainuu discussion is not in the right discussion forum but anyway it is interesting. Karelian language/dialect started to spun off from the Western Finnish only after 800 CE. It sounds really strange that Karelians would have after that invented a new word for "low land" while Western Finns would have used an "original" one. --Drieakko 03:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, look at the empiric link in Northern Norway above between kven and Kainulainen. This is brand new information. Just make a phone call and check if it is a reliable source who claims to heard the term kainulainen, one 87 year old Kven woman--130.237.165.114 11:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC).

Many happy returns to the lady! --Drieakko 03:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

If these links between Pohjanmaa and Kainuu is etablished then we have better ground. The name Kainuu was given by the first settlers and later on lost by some reason perhaps by the competing term Pohjanmaa, pohjanmaalainen etc. And the very same region was called Kvenland in one Icelandic source and by Ottar 860. The Swedish king was not very excited to accept other ethnic groups in Sweden and perhaps the term Kven was a pure Norwegian term and the Swedish King adopted the Finnish/russian term Kajaani/Kainuu (with variations) meaning Kvens. Remember that the Swedish king had more contacts eastwards than to the warrior Danes and Norse in the west. More information in Finnish, we may assume, also terms for ethnic peoples. Well, Drieakko, perhaps there is no etymological link between Kainuu and Kven but that these are two terms used of one and the same region and kvens and kainulaiset are one and the same people as Swedes and Ruottalaiset are (no link between these terms). One term in Norse and one term in old Finnish and todays Torednalen Finnish, Meänkieli.

Origins of the names Kven and Kainuu

Articles would be needed for Origin of the name Kven and Origin of the name Kainuu. --Drieakko 13:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Faravid - famously - led two nations, Kvenland and Finland

The area amusingly (no historian supports this outrageous and hilarious scam) shown in the Wikipedia article's map now as Kvenland is - of course - the historic Finland, approximately speaking (easily confirmable), not Kvenland, silly ! - - Art Dominique 16:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC) ---> Ps.: Wikipedia - as a known historian put it - is a place for amateurs, not for professionals (truer words have never been spoken) !

Thanks for your comment. Please tell the source of the information that Faravid led two nations since at least I am not aware of it. Kindly read the article as well. Please point out the mistakes and let's correct them immediately. --Drieakko 14:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I really can not find source of your information about Faravid leading two nations, Finland and Kvenland. All that sagas say about Faravid is here and here. It seems to me that your claim is fictional. --Drieakko 13:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

--> For those not familiar with what the sagas say about Kvens, please see the below correction of the obvious blooper:

This is getting very confusing. An anonymous user “signing” as Art Dominique, an infamous puppet master, starts a discussion about Faravid and then accuses Drieakko for not understanding that he is referring to Fornjotr. Then (s)he posts a long rant written earlier by one of his sockpuppets about something that has nothing to do with neither Faravid nor Fornjotr leading two nations. --Labongo 04:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Fornjotr - famously - led two nations, Kvenland and Finland

It appears that you were previously using the user names 130.234.75.183 and 217.30.179.130, among several others (which names already have been pointed out in the past).

It ought to be obvious to you then that these issues have already been discussed in this forum. Why not review what already has been stated and/or agreed upon. For instanse, the following past answer to you below should point out the above pure unintentional blooper - we are, of course, referring to Fornjotr, not Faravid in this context.

You ought to be this much aware as to what is said in the the historic sagas, if you chhose to make such strong statements and conclusions in reference to Kvens in Wikipedia !

-->

Max wrote to you for instance the following in the past:

" ...

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.

Max: 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 ...

... Art Dominique, 8 August 2006

Ok, so you mistook Faravid for Fornjót. However, Fundinn Noregr says about Fornjót as follows:

"There was a king named Fornjot. He reigned over Gotland, which we now know as Finland and Kvenland."

You can check the "neutral" translation here. I very much doubt that this sentence can be used to say that Fornjót ruled over two nations, since the text is very convoluted and can originally have been almost anything. Also, another version of the saga completely downplays Fornjót's role here saying that he was just "a man" with no reference to Finland / Kvenland / Gotland, as you can see here.--Drieakko 04:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

And another thing, I have nothing to do with users appearing under IPs 130.234.75.183 and 217.30.179.130 nor have I ever used any other username in Wikipedia. --Drieakko 04:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I am not Drieakko and Drieakko is not me, although I applaud for Drieakko´s expertise. Finally we have got someone who can definitely thrash these national-romanticist fantasies.217.112.242.181 10:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

You are a known, proven and admitted abuser of Wikipedia and its rules. Why should we believe you this time around ?

Wikipedia is - in many ways - a roaming ground for dubious characters like you. Here you can freely and anonomously practice foul play, to push your personal believes and views. You were asked to provide sources in many ocasions. You refused. You asked why should you do our homework. Please do not worry. We have done our homework.

We provided distinguished sources. Mr. Mikkalai (another abuser of Wikipedia) finally stated, that nobody was to tamper with our well references and sourced Kven text, without first providing known and easily verifiable sources (such as known and respected historians, findings of science, etc.). Mr. Mikkalai then again fell under the spell of criminal elements. What does that go to show to us ? - - Wikipedians agains vandalism - - August 21, 2006 - -

If this was targeted at me, I'd appreciate some more clarification what an earth that was about. You are free to list any errors and mistakes in the article. Please do that. --Drieakko 18:57, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Kvenland was not called Kvenland in all languages, of course

Naturally, for instanse the country of Sweden is called by different names in different languages, Sverige by the Swedes themselves, and so on. Thus, the beginnig of the Kvenland text was quickly improved for now as follows:

Kvenland (a.k.a. Cwenland or Quenland) is an ancient name for an area/nation which today forms the territories of the modern day Northern Scandinavia, Finland and the extreme Northwestern Russia. Many references to it - by different spellings and names - can be found particularly from the 9th century up to the 13th century.

Historic Swedish, Russian and other sources talk about Kvenland by different names and spellings, whereas the term Kvenland is believed to thrive from the old Norse language and - accordingly - by that spelling (or close to that spelling) it has only therefore been used in the historic Norwegians and the Islandic sources.

Many historians believe Kvenland to have been a country of its own in the modern-day Northern Scandinavia and Fennoscandia which has been referred to as Kainuu or Kainuunmaa in the Finnish language. *** Another Wikipedia user's quick clearification ***

I am sorry but I reverted the change. Reasons:

• There is no exact geographical definition of Kvenland in any source. So the claim that it "today forms the territories of the modern day Northern Scandinavia, Finland and the extreme Northwestern Russia" can not be made. This definition itself already covers area that are clearly excluded by the available sources. For example, Orkneyinga saga says that Kvenland was east of Gulf of Bothnia, that immediately chops off everything north of Kemi.
• There are no historic Swedish or Russian sources handling Kvenland in any acceptable variation of the name. If you know any, please reference them before making claims. Otherwise we end on the earlier situation that the article is filled with all kinds of claims saying this and that, with all due respect. Article needs to concentrate on sources with a recognizeable form of names Kvenland and Kven. Otherwise, if the most probable alternative that Kvenland and Finland are the same is accepted, then the history of Finland needs to be loaded here. Or if a popular claim that Kainuu was Kvenland is accepted, then welcome the entire history of Pohjanmaa. And so on. There would be no end for this article.
• Old Norse is a language that was spoken in all Scandinavian countries in the Viking Age. Despite of that, all sources mentioning Kvenland are from the area where the Norwegian dialect of Old Norse was spoken. See Origin of the name Kven for some speculation for this.
• Claims about Kainuu as Kvenland are frequently presented but they are always made without archaeological or linguistical evidence that would support them. If there was an early Finnish nation in the north it needs to have left its mark on the ground and on the language spoken in the north. These are both missing. --Drieakko 14:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

The note that Kvenland surely has its equivalent in other languages is now taken into account in the article's preface. This article however needs to handle only sources that do have Kvenland by that name. If speculation about Kainuu as Kvenland needs to be discussed (and that discussion itself is a very good thing), then the entire history of Pohjanmaa/Kainuu would be need to be loaded into this article as well which is not meaningful. Readers willing to have thorough handling of the matter please first make an article about Origin of the name Kainuu and then write an article about History of Kainuu or continue article Ostrobothnia (historical province) that already exists. --Drieakko 14:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Dear Drieakko, I must admit that I hardly understand what you are talking about (here above). You claim the people invent term here and there and argue against Kvenland as a nation. Old Norse word kven was used in the Norway region, but perhaps not in Mälardalen, where the Swedish writer lived, as the word autto is not used in Oulu or even less in Heslinki, but frequent in Northern Finland. The language varieties of Norway and Sweden still may be called old Nordic dialects. Norwegian is clearly a dialect as well as Swedish of a Nordic language, if these two nations were united. Pohjanmaa has not been a nation, and, e.g., not Svealand or Norrland.

I claim that the sources claiming that kvens and Kvenland is around the Gulf of Bothnia fits very well with the Finnish/Russian sources that Kainuu and kainulaiset lived in the same region - more or less. That I do claim. I have no standpoint in the idea of a kingdom in Kvenland; I truly do not know, the sources are too fragmentaric, and I have not discussed that at all. But your so called objectivity, neutrality, and unbiased approach, as you argue, I do not belive very much on. I believe Vahtola, e.g., is more unbiased than you are. You cannot accept that most of your theory falls apart if we have the word kainulainen in the living memory of the Kvens and that the word Kainuu is not an invention by the Karelians. No, you are very much biased, as was my first impression when I read the article. More biased than many researchers in the field. You pretend that you accept new facts but you have invested too much thoughts in the construction of your theory. You do not want to destroy that construction. However, it was an interesting discussion and I leanrt a lot. Now you seem to have lost your arguments, which were quite sharp for a while. --84.216.55.158 21:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your point of views which are appreciated. Some comments:

• I do not argue that Kvenland was not a nation. It surely was and according to old sources probably the same as Finland 1000 years ago. Archeology has not reveiled any unknown nations in Fennoscandia, so it is difficult to support other assumptions.
• There are no ancient or later Swedish sources using name Kvenland or Kven. Like today, "Kven" has been a dialectal Norwegian term also in the past. It simply seems to have meant all Finns first and later only those that settled on the Sami area.
• I have not claimed that word "Kainuu" was an invention of Karelians. But the word has clearly been used by them and later by people from Savo as a geographical name for the northern areas where they settled. The area today called "Kainuu" is inhabited by people from Savo and Kainuu dialect is very close to the Savo dialect. We can not make this fact disappear. I would very much like to see earlier suggested articles about Kainuu to be written since the matter with Kainuu is very interesting and there seem to be plenty of people knowing much about it.
• If there are mistakes or "inventions" in the handling of the sources in the article, please list them. This should not be a matter of belief.
• No source says that Kvenland was "around the Gulf of Bothnia". Please indicate if you know any or how you reached that conclusion.
• Perhaps we also need an article Kainulainen that goes through the usage of the word. At least it is a rather common family name in Finland with 3697 living holders according to [www.vaestorekisterikeskus.fi Väestörekisterikeskus]. An interesting thing would be to know more about their background. --Drieakko 04:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Todays kainuu is not intersting. We know that historyy very well and it is of recent origin. You start to repeat youself and denying your own statements. Your theory, using your own terms is often without any evidence and mere speculations. You have some points you made that is why I read your article, but you fail to link the facts together and had to invent ideas and present them as facts. As I said in my first writing: Facts are intertwined with phantasies, inventions and preconceptions. You create modern mythology, which you try to cover up by arguing that those before you did. That is good, and may be used in some form of modern mythology stories. But you should not present this article as a theory based on facts. A mythology based on facts is better - nice as such.--84.216.53.176 05:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Just one example: You write: "Term "kainulainen" was invented in the 20th century by a nationalist Finnish historian and politician Kustaa Vilkuna, if my memory does not fail me here. It never appears anywhere before that." You invent ideas not Vilkuna. Daniel Juslenius in Finland wrote in hic dictionary 1745 (ca 150 years before Vilkuna) that cainulainen is a pohjanmaalainen. It is ridiculous to claim that he was imbued with populistic ideologies. He wrote a word exisitng in a long tradition. I do not need even go further than to my own vocabulary to prove your failure. I and the Tornedalians have used the ther far earlier than the 20th century. Vilkuna did not invent that term. Just make a visit to the dialect archive in Helsinki and you get 100 notes about kainulainen. But perhaps all 18th terminology in my lasnguage is purely populistic ideology?--84.216.53.176 05:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

You write: "There is no doubt in that Savo and Karelian people that settled on the areas which they called Kainuu would have also called themselves as "kainu(u)lainen" which just means "an inhabitant of Kainuu". The question is only about whether there is a direct connection between words "Kven" and "kainulainen" that goes unproved." Question: What kind of connection; linguistic or what? "It is difficult to accept that if there was an earlier tribe called "kainulainen", that people from Savo and Karelia would have adopted their name to mean themselves and areas where they settled." So, if they not invented the term, and did not borrow that term from people living in Pohjanmaa, so where did that wortd come to the midns of the Karelians? Tell me and clarify your position.

You say: " Easiest explanation is that there was a later Karelian/Savonian settlement on the area that eventually started to speak Swedish, using the name "Kainuu" like they did on all areas in the north. Whatever the history behind "Kainu(s)" here is, its connection to "Kven" remains open. --Drieakko 15:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)" --84.216.53.176 05:39, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for comments. I am sorry that I repeat myself. Some points:

• Today's Kainuu, however poor and boring it might sound, should be interesting to everyone writing history of Kainuu from any point of view. To omit it because it is inconvenient for some theories, is not meaningful.
• Term "kainulainen" as an equivalent for Kven was invented by Kustaa Vilkuna in the early 20th century. Sorry for an earlier sloppy sentence that I thought to have clarified already. "Kainulainen" itself refers to an inhabitant of Kainuu and is used in Finland for inhabitants of today's Kainuu which is a part of historical Pohjanmaa. With that meaning it surely existed already in the 18th century if not before that as well. It seems clear that also settlers with Finnish background in Sweden (in Tornio Valley) have used that term about themselves, but I can not see how that would be independent from the usage of the same word on the Finnish side.
• Like said, Origin of the name Kainuu would be nice to read to see the evidence between words Kven and Kainu(u). Where do names come from - where did Tavastland come, Savolax or Karelia? Whether Karelians invented the term "Kainuu" or not, is not an issue but whether there existed an earlier tribe using that name about themselves which seems unlikely. Major difference between terms Kven and Kainuu is that Kven has already in the 9th century existed as a name for people, but Kainuu has existed as a name for an area, at least for Karelians and people from Savo and thus clearly without earlier tribe specific meanings around the time when the name was taken into usage by them.
• And still, since you say that article is "without any evidence and mere speculations", please list the errors and let's correct them. So far I have only received comments on my postings in discussions that are mostly not even handling the article any more. --Drieakko 11:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

But we do know from where the term Kainuu and kainulaiset come from. The name Svear in Svealand was perhaps not used first by those living in Svealand, but we do not need to search for long distance travellers giving inhatitants the name of the place with an neding. The place name may be very small, and then expand successively. The roots to Tavastland, Savolax and Karelia, as well as other terms are well known; just look for a book in Finnish etymology. What is so mystical about Kainuu and kainulaiset that the close neigbours could not invent theterm kainulainen? -lainen is one of the most common Finnish endings. It is just you who reject reality and invents your own reality that you want to impose on existing facts. You reject a number of evidence showing that Kainuu means more or less the same region as the Kvenland and you reject the trivial conclusion that Kainuu and Kvenland was inhabited by Kainulaiset and Kvens, as I am a kainulasjärvilainen. Amazing ideas and way of reasoning. Kainuu has no source in Karelian language and dialects and place names, only in west Finnish (besides later Kainuu). Sorry, but you have lost the grip of the subject. Yes, mere speculations, Drieakko, most of the content your article. I have only focussed attention on a few parts. Nice piece of modern mythology, I do admit. --130.237.165.114 12:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Any compliment is at least a compliment, so thank you for that :) But at least I do not know where the term Kainuu and Kainulaiset come from. Please express it and preferably by investing your time to write the article Origin of the name Kainuu. I also fail to see the "trivial conclusion" that Kainuu and Kvenland was inhabited by Kainulaiset and Kvens. You could also include that in the article. Kindly try to find the time to read the rest of the Kvenland article as well.

Please say what is the "number of evidence showing that Kainuu means more or less the same region as the Kvenland". This itself is an amazing claim since e.g. there are no late 9th century archaeologically verified settlements anywhere in historic Pohjanmaa/Kainuu when Ottar described Kvenland as a land comparable to Sweden and Norway. How do you manage to convince yourself that facts like this just do not matter? --Drieakko 13:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Archeology and Kvenland: Here is the evidence needed

To write such an article of that kind takes a tleast 4 weeks, and I have not more to say than what, e.g. Vahtola and Julku have expressed. You are not a linguist, but perhaps an archealogist? But as far as I have learnt we have a number of stone age findings from Swedish Torne valley. So at that part it should not be a problem. It would be strange if we have not stone age finding from Pohjanmaa? But we have not discussed archeology, but history, etymology, mythology, etc. Kainuu-Kvenland connection is provided by at least 20 shcolars from 17th century onwards. If a person lives in Kainulasjärvi it happens that some might call him Kainulasjärvi-lainen. Could you not image that the same happens of Kainuu+lainen and Kvenland-Kven? Most scholars find very little problem with that connection. The problem for you is on what grounds do you reject these scholars and say "no evidence"? Holm and Sköld are opposing the linguistic connection between Kven and Kainuu, not that these terms are used of one and the same region. You lack the evidence to reject, not the scholars who make this obvious connection. That is one of your blind spots in your reasoning.--130.237.165.114 14:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Well. Hmm. Let's repeat the very basic archaeological point of view:

• A source says that Kvenland exists around 890 CE, is inhabited, armed and willing to fight, and is remarkable enough to be compared to Norway and Sweden
• From that time, there are no archaeologically verifiable settlements found anywhere in the area later known as Kainuu whether it is said to be some part of historical Pohjanmaa or even all of it, the northeastern Sweden included
• Conclusion: area known as Kainuu and Kvenland of 890 CE are not the same

If there is a scholar that ignores this, I don't know what to say to him. And, dear me, Stone Age ended already more than 2000 years before 890 CE. --Drieakko 14:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Drieakko at least in this sense: Stone Age finds have absolutely nothing to do with Kvenland. Pohjanmaa has lots of Bronze Age and Early Iron Age finds too, and some from the Terminal Iron Age as well. However, all these are either too old or too young to have any relevance for this discussion.217.112.242.181 16:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, even this statement above by unknown? was based on traditional knowledge. See below. --84.216.53.117 07:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, perhaps stone age is little bit too old. But if I remember right there are ongoing discussions even among archeologists arguing that the region has never been empty after the stone age, i.e. it has been settled all the time. Is it correct, if you are an archeologist? There was a dissertation quite recently in Umeå discussing in this direction. If so, then stone age material has relevance, but we need also material from the missing periods.

First. If historical evidence and linguists evidence are sufficient then we may make the connection Kvenland-Kainuu. If the archeologists have no evidence to support the history it is easy to claim that they have not been digging everywhere. Not before you have been digging almost everywhere can you make this conclusion. And you may not make the conclusion if you have linguistic and historical evidence pointing in another direction.

A saga tells us about a king and warriors. Stick to facts. A saga, which should be treated as such. I am not an archeologist. But are there not any evidence of existence during 9th century and all remains can be dated to that time in the whold Pohjanmaa down to at least Umeå in Sweden. I believe we have lots of remains in Luleå, Piteå, Kalix from that time, but as said, I am not the expert in the field. And most part of Pohjanmaa and Torne valley has bene digged? Can you claim this? Is it not so that we have much archeological evidence around old universities, and less from Norrland and Northern Finland.--84.216.52.24 17:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, if we have archeological evidence from around 100 AD in Pohjanmaa we have good basis for a discussion on Kvenland stretching some 800 years bak in history. According to Julku, Tacitus (ca 90 after date) mentions Siothins (or something like that) who were ruled by women. This women story was repeated by Adam from Bremen some 1000 years later and it has been interpreted as an misunderstading of the word kven (kvinna). Julku believes on that story - why not - and if archeology supports such a view then I am prepared to follow. Do we have those findings in archeology?--84.216.52.24 19:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, as an amateur I used Google and this quote is the first one I got from east of Sangis in Norrbotten,i.e precisely at todays linguistic border between Finnish and Swedish and where we may expect remains from a period ca 0-1000 AD: "Kan vara järnålder Storträsk ligger 25 meter över havet, boplatserna ligger från 25 till 10 meter över havet. Någon datering är inte gjord men enligt Carina Bennerhag lutar det åt järnålder, från cirka 500 f.Kr och fram till medeltid. En period som man vet lite om vid Norrbottens kustland. Därför är fynden intressanta. Utöver skörbränd sten och avslag efter redskapstillverkning har bland annat kvartsit och slagg som innehäller järn hittats."

http://www.kuriren.nu/%5CGEN_Utmatning_Ettan.asp?CategoryID=2764&ArticleID=1263239&ArticleOutputTemplateID=125&ArticleStateID=2

If you cannot read Swedish I give a brief conclusion. The site is considered to be not older than 500 BC and not younger than Middle ages; a period which we know little about in Norrbotten. I repeat: we know little about the period between 500 BC-1000 AD says an archeologist. Well, you might not be an archeologist after all, only an amateur historian. That would explain a lot to me.--84.216.52.24 19:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The seocnd Google finding: "Gravarna i kustlandet består av stora rösen eller flacka stensättningar. De flesta rösena byggdes under bronsåldern ( 1 500- 500 f. Kr) och många av stensättningarna under järnålder (500 f. Kr. - 1 000 e.Kr.)." Source: http://www.bd.lst.se/kultur_fornl/default.aspx?propID=10003941

Brief translation: ...and many stonearrangements from the period 500 BC- 1000 AD. This in the coastal region of Norrbotten, i.e. part of the historic Kvenland. Do you need more from an amateur? --84.216.52.24 19:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

A third site from Sangis is dated to about 800 AD. Source: www.vasterbottensmuseum.se/avd-2/assets/files/Rapport%20Kalix-Haparanadakopia.pdf. A site from 800 AD and compare that with waht Ottar writes about the Kvens 860 AD. Could we be more precise?--84.216.52.24 20:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the links. I can read Swedish. Firstly, the first links say that there is no dating made for some excavated settlements in the north, but the period is something about 500 BCE - 1000 CE. The last source says that there are two graves of that kind in entire Norrbotten and the other one of them is from about 800 CE. I am sorry but this is very far from what is expected to make a nation comparable to Sweden and Norway. --Drieakko 21:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Please, do not falsify what we all can readand check. We have found two graves so far in Norrboten, not that "there are two graves ...in entire Norrbotten", which is something else. Next decade we may expect to have 100 graves with this speed since the 1980s. And the second source says: "...många av stensättningarna under järnålder (500 f. Kr. - 1 000 e.Kr.)". Not two, but many stone arrangements in Norrbotten coastal region.

I expected that you reject even archaeological findings. No evidence is sufficent for you because you have your own method of understanding history: Reject reality and invent a new one. The findings have increased en masse since early 1980s. My examples are very new ones. I do not believe that a nation the size of India with 1,3 billion people lived in Norrbotten at that time, but perhaps a few 100 or thousand?--84.216.52.24 21:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Drieakko, remember. You said no archeological findings was from this period. Was that a correct statement? Now, you reject the few ones we have in Norrbotten. We have few sites, most likely because we have not been digging in the right spots; mostly searching for sites in the inland.

The grave mound in the picture was common in Sweden during at least about 500 - 1000 CE and they have found 2 of them in northern Sweden and as far as I know, none on the Finnish side. An individual grave itself is not a settlement. People were moving all around the wilderness of Finnmark at that time and surely left their marks there. My exact words were "no archaeologically verifiable settlements" can be dated to the late 9th century on the area which unfortunately is the present situation. It is not sufficient to say that perhaps something is found in the future or that perhaps some undated small settlement just happens to be from the 9th century. Tens of thousands of graves need be found to justify existence of a nation there. Kvenland was not described to be a petty village around 890 CE. --Drieakko 02:43, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, we have nations far smaller than tens of thosuands even today. Where have you read that definition of a nation? Iceland has been a nation for a long time, and in the 12th century the population was truly small. From archeological findings? I am not searching for a nation. I am searching for settlement in the coastal region during the period 0-1000. And I got them in 10 minutes in Norrbotten. More than 3 as you say, because you do not bother to read even sources provided. Who have told that these graves and sites are from hunters? Not in the sources I provided. You just make a new conclusion without having any evidence. You do that all the time. The latest site from Sangis is described "boplatserna". Does not "boplatserna" mean precisely places where some people, more than a few, live more than one night, or do you understand "boplatser" in another way? I quote: "Vid förra årets utredning hittades fyra fasta boplatser" in Sangis. Researchers seem to interpret that the settlement was inbahited by fishermen and hunters. Well, continuous settlement, anyhow. Source: http://www.svenskhistoria.se/arkiv/833.html.--84.216.53.117 08:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, no archeological evidence from Pohjanmaa, said Drieakko, and later added, as far as I understand. I as an amateur picked once again in 10 minutes the evidence needed. Here is a quote: "Resultaten av forskningsprojektet kunde publiceras 1991. Umeåforskarna kunde påvisa bebyggelsekontinuitet i Österbotten från förromersk järnålder till medeltid." And we do not talk about hunters: "De tio pollenanalyserna som ingick i projektet gav besked om att odlingen varit kontinuerlig inom regionen Malax-Korsholm-Vörå under hela järnåldern. I sju av projektets tio pollenanalyser förekom sädespollen under vikingatid och korstågstid (Fig. 1). Det vanligaste sädesslaget var korn medan havre och råg spelade en obetydlig roll." The project was lead by professional archologists from Umeå university. This is what is dicussed in recent time, but Drieakko does not read results from recent projects. :::::::Source:

http://sydaby.eget.net/swe/ark.html. Almost every important principle claim of Drieakko has been challenged, and he still argues: No evidence. It is ridiculous.--84.216.53.117 07:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Furtrermore, "korn var det helt dominerande sädesslaget under järnåldern. Detsamma gäller för järnåldersboplatserna Gene i Ångermanland och Trogsta i Hälsingland". Same source. Hence, these locations in Ångermanland and Hälsingland have been settled by farmers all the way from iron age. Moreover: "...ytterligare tre järnålderslokaler, där kornet dominerar helt: Katajamäki i Salo (300-tal), Ristimäki i Vammala (400-500-tal) och Domargård i Karis (900-1000-tal)." Remark: We do not speak about Savonians using kaskiviljely and "ruis", but "korn", siis ohra eikä ruis.

Comments:

• Please understand that the number of graves and number of inhabitants are not the same. For example, Åland alone has about 10 000 graves from Viking Era (800-1000 CE) and it was still a small place at that time and never mentioned in sources.
• Kindly read what Ottar said 890 CE. He described the nations in Fennoscandia in his time. Kvenland was comparable to Norway and Sweden in his description. There is no Finland mentioned at all and there were plenty of people and wealth in Finland at that time.
• Repeating my own words again: "no archaeologically verifiable settlements" in Pohjanmaa at the end of the 9th century. I am fully aware that it is speculated that the apparent collapse of Southern Pohjanmaa (jumping 500 km to other direction from the other sites you mentioned) during the 8th century might have spared a sparse and poor population on the area, even though all earlier sites there seem to have been abandoned and the heavily excavated area is void of findings until Middle Ages. However, I would myself expect some evidence to surface about the remaining population even though it seems to have been poor and few. But again, settlements have not been found yet. --Drieakko 08:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Old theories of settlement in Kvenland

"Anhängarna av den seglivade tomrumshypotesen har ordrikt hävdat att kustområdena, det vill säga de regioner som i dag utgör Svenskfinland inklusive Åland, var folktomma under vikingatiden (800 — 1050 e. Kr.). Tomrumsförespråkarna anser att finskspråkiga grupper fyllde på från inlandet och "så småningom", som termen lyder". More: "Tomrumshypotesen är testad och därmed är tomrummet avfört från en seriös vetenskaplig diskussion. Numera vilar bevisbördan på eventuella kvarsittare i tomrumsskolan." Source: http://sydaby.eget.net/swe/ark.html. Thus old empty theory is precisely what Drieakko is in favour of. He does not follow development in modern research but remains in the knowledge he (I believe it is a he) acquired in his youth (I believe Drieakko is older than say 40). However, I am not convinced that all settlement in Pohjanmaa during iron age was by people speaking old Nordic dialects. --84.216.53.117 07:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

So here we are now in the Pohjanmaa history: "Forskarlaget från Umeå kunde konstatera att det fanns en fast bygd i Österbotten under hela järnåldern in i medeltiden. Boskapsskötsel och odling av i första hand korn på fasta kraftigt gödslade åkrar var de viktigaste näringarna kompletterade med jakt och fiske. Byggnadsskicket följer en nordeuropeisk byggnadstradition.". Hence, the buildings may very well be of Finnish origin, or constructed by a tribe called Kvens.Ottar had information already 860 AD, and these are now proven to be correct, at least in some parts of Kvenland-Kainuu --84.216.53.117 07:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I recommend Drieakko. Please revise your article entirely.--84.216.53.117 08:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for comments again. I actually read everything you write, even though I have the feeling that I do not get the same honor.

• Once again correcting that Ottar was in England 890 CE, not 860 CE.
• Åland surely was not empty during Viking Age, it had plenty of population unlike your reference claims.
• I am myself quite sure that entire Fennoscandia had at least a sparse population 1000 years ago even though most of it was negligible and was assimilated without a trace during migrations between the 14th and 18th centuries. However, dialects spoken today do not support idea of early Finnic tribes in the north in addition to Sami people. --Drieakko 09:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

It depends on what you mean with a Finnish tribe? If a Finnish tribe spoke some kidn of wes-teast Finnish variety mixed with Saami and Swedish influences inlfuences then we might have that one. Problems occur of course to date the various elements in Mäenkieki. We have very few specific words in Meänkieli without any source in Saami or Finnish.So, yes, no linguistic traces of a particlar variety. But almost no traces of a proto-Saami either.--84.216.55.247 15:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

"Tomrumshypotesen" is not quite as old and empty as 84... imagines in Pohjanmaa, although some local ethno-nationalists there would like us to think otherwise. Modern research does not fully support the existence of a significant agricultural Iron Age population after the 8th century in Pohjanmaa. The settlement continuity claims made by the Swedish archaeologists in Umeå have not been generally accepted by their Finnish collegues. It is an interesting question, and I do not personally think it impossible that the Swedes are right, but it is certainly too early to give a final judgement for their favor. Hard, unquestionable evidence is still lacking, despite many excavations.217.112.242.181 16:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The article has commented this (and still does) as follows: "Earlier thriving Southern Pohjanmaa seems to have lost most of its population and at least all of its economical significance by the end of 8th century since archeological findings on that area are almost non-existent between the 9th and 13th centuries." I think this needs not be revised (except for a few typos). However, this is just a side note in the picture since the area where settlements earlier existed was small. --Drieakko 18:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I fear that your article on the Kvens of the past will be an footnote of odd stories in the history of the Kvens.--84.216.52.203 17:36, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I am quite sure that the article will be heavily disliked by all Finns in the north. And we have seen that already in this discussion forum. --Drieakko 18:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Not only in the north, but by almost all scholars in the field.--84.216.52.203 18:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

New modern mythology of Kvenland

I believe that Drieakko wants to prove that there was a Kingdom of Finland before the Swedish King went to Finland and conquered the western parts in the name of God. This is his political position which he wants to impose on Kvenland and on history. And as always these kind of efforts are hidden in phraseology of unbiased, neutral, objective reasoning. If he had not this political agenda - this is not a theory - in mind he would be more open to search for another position. However, if there had been a Kingdom of Finland we would surely noticed this in the Russian and Swedish doscuments, as well as other sources. Drieakko is one of the new neo-nationalists of Finland who have some kind of aversions toward Sweden.--84.216.55.247 14:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Drieakko wants to prove no such thing. There has been no kingdom of Finland nor anything like it in the past. Finland was a term used to indicate a territory inhabited by Finns. It had no centralized political organization at the time of the Swedish conquest around 1250 CE. --Drieakko 16:34, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Kven language = Kainu

When the user Drieakko understands why the Kvens of Norway themselves officially call the so called Kven language Kainu, he will likely then understand also much more essential related to this topic.

When he also understands that the closest linquistic relatives of this newly legalized language Kainu are Meänkieli (spoken in Northern Sweden) - also known as Tornedalean Finnish, Tornedalen or Tornedals Finska in Swedish - and on the other hand the Kainuu dialect of Finnish language, he will then be even more on the right track. Pleasant studies to you, user Drieakko.

It already has been pinpointed to you, user Driakko, why Kvenland can also be seen to have included the territories starting all the way from the Norwegian mountain chain eastwards, based on historic saga information. Take a moment to review the past comments, please.

Furthermore, also other than Scandinavian sources, for instance historic maps drawn by non-Scandinavians, have used the term Quen - written by various spellings. Some of these maps in question show the areas of the Kvens to include the territories by the Artic Ocean and|or the White Sea (to review some of these maps please check for instance the said 1986 book of the Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku.)

Steve Wondering 17:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Please reference the "historic maps drawn by non-Scandinavians" that have "various spellings of Quen". If they are half a millennium younger than sources handled in this article, please discuss about them in the Kven article. Kindly discuss the situation with present-day Kvens also there. There has been plenty of talk here about all kinds of things but practically nothing about the article itself. The article exists to discuss ancient sources of Kvenland. Again asking for errors in the article to be listed. --Drieakko 18:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

In this discussion site a great number of errors have been pointed out for you by many writers, but you reject all of them as "no evidence" and has nothing to offer for your rejection. Some of your rejections I do support, but far from all.--84.216.52.24 19:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Plenty of claims have been presented, but almost nothing is said about the content of the article. People also seem to be more interested in Kainuu than Kvenland. --Drieakko 02:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

All old maps of Fennoscandia and especially of northern parts of it are zoomable here. I fail to find references to Kvens anywhere outside Carta Marina which was discussed earlier. All maps before 1635 call Pohjanmaa as "Botnia" (Boddia etc.) but after that "Kainuu" (Caiania etc.) takes over. Maps from the 18th century then use both names. "Kainuu" appears as the name for Pohjanmaa during the time when movement from Savo was strongest. --Drieakko 03:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

By the way, even if I should not open this discussion on this forum, I can not avoid mentioning that the official Internet site of the Norwegian Kvens has no idea that the official name of their language is "Kainu". See the site here. This (along with most of your other postings under various sock puppets) seems to be your personal invention for strange reasons not immediately apparent. --Drieakko 04:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Kainuu dialect spoken in Finland is also not a "closest linguistic relative" of the Kven language. They belong to altogether different dialect groups. Kven language is closest related to Western Finnish dialects and Kainuu dialect to Eastern Finnish dialects. See dialect map here. --Drieakko 04:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Terra Feminarum and Sitones

Added section listing Terra Feminarum and Sitones as possible references to Kvens. --Drieakko 09:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Positioning Kvenland using Sweden or Norway?

Added another interpretation of Ottar's words to cover more alternatives. --Drieakko 06:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Spin out Kven Sea as its own article?

As the article is rather long now, I am thinking of spinning out "Kven Sea" as its own article with some more content about the name and its meaning. Any comments for that? --Drieakko 13:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. Kindly see Kven Sea for more. --Drieakko 06:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Kainuunmaa / Kainu(u) / Kvenland

1. The dialect listing - which you offer – does not support you in any way. We certainly know where the Kainuu dialect is spoken, with or without that listing. It is spoken in the area of Kainuu, naturally. Nor does that listing in any way fight against what was said to you earlier. Just because the Kainuu dialect is listed there under what those folks call the eastern dialect group, does not at all mean that the Kainuu dialect would not be related to Meänkieli (Tornedalian Finnish) and/or the Kven language. Those three indeed are closely related !

We also know much about the areas that once were part of Kainuu. A quick search shows a number of place names in Northern Sweden, for instance, with the term Kainuu in them, with varying spellings. The term "Kven" on the other hand appears in the Tromsa (Northern Norway) area's historical place names at least 12 times, in varying spellings.

Old Russian and Swedish official documents also discuss Kainuu. The Kainuunjoki (the “River Kainuu”) in Sweden - better known in Sweden as the River Kalix – stands as a monument of its own of the past territorial history. There is indeed plenty of evidence - different types - of the geographical location and size of the historic Kainuu/Kainuunmaa/Kvenland.

Knowingly or not, in one matter you do touch a token of truth. The Medieval immigration to the Torne Valley region from the approximate area of the modern-day Häme in Finland did bring some Southwestern Finnish elements to the language historically spoken in Northern Sweden, particularly the Torne Valley region.

2. The fact that some website may not mention the Kven language by its Kven language name – i.e. Kainu – is unfortunate, but proves nothing, except – perhaps - the poor informational content of that particular website. Besides, that website is written in the Norwegian language. In Norwegian the Kven language is not called Kainu, of course. In Kven language, however, the language is called Kainu. Again, when you will have learned and understood the meaning of this, we can begin to start discussing this matter in more depth. Please compare: An English language website would not call the Swedish language Svensk, or the Norwegian language Norsk. Why would they ? After all, they are writing in English, not in Swedish or Norwegian.

Please understand that Wikipedia is not meant for your personal learning and depating groung, but -instead - for an informational tool for all users.

3. It appear that no one commented the following unintentional blooper: “Kvenland can also be seen to have included the territories starting all the way from the Norwegian mountain chain westwards”. That was now corrected to “eastwards”, as the text was - of course - meant to be stating.

4. The map collection which you offer does not show “all old maps of Fennoscandia”, as you claim. That is a collection of maps from the Lapland library better known as "maakuntakirjasto".

In some old maps Kainuu is referred to as “Caiania”. Such is the case for instance in the map of the German Phipip Clüver. Also the German Christoph Cellarius (a.k.a. Keller) positioned Kainuu to his map.

In the map of Andreas Bureus (Anders Buren) from 1611, Kainuu – “Cajania” in the map – is clearly positioned to the map. The map can be found from the collections of the Uppsala University. That map, among many others, is missing from the “all old maps” collection which you offered. The term “Cajaniaeqve” is also mentioned in Bureus’ map texts.

The Anders Buren map from 1626 is also missing from the collection which you offered. “Cajania” clearly exist there too.

Your map collection does seem to include the highly regarded Olaus Magnus’ Carta Marina map from 1539. It appears, however, that you failed to notice the importance of the term “Qvenar” (Kvens) in that map. That term is clearly positioned in the map to the current-day area of Northern Sweden.

Furthermore, the map of Egidius Tschudi (1505-1572) shows “Kaienska Senpla” (North Bothnia) covering the Torne Valley district and parts of Today’s Northern Sweden, also parts of the Modern-day Northern Finland.

The 1570 map by Abraham Ortelius shows Kainuunmaa/Kvenland - “Caienska Semla” in the map – covering territories by the Arctic Ocean. Same is the case for instance in the map of Gerhard Mercator’s from 1595.

In the map by the Dutch man Simon van Salinghen the Kvens – “Querrnen” in the map - are positioned to two different places near and by the Torne Valley territories. Next to those texts also is written the term “Kayenshe finnen” (“kajaanilaiset suomalaiset” or “kainuulaiset” - Kvens - in Finnish).

5. You wrote the following sentence: “Again asking for errors in the article to be listed”. Why should we do that ? We are converting the article back to the one which had already reached a consensus, after an extensive depate. The user Mikkalai thereafter declared that nothing should be changed in that text (now reverted back) without appropriate and easily verifiable valid sources. You must obey with that ruling, just like everyone else ! Give us your suggestions and valid references point by point, if you wish to change something. You must provide respected, distinquished sources to back any possible change that you may decide to suggest. That is your job - not ours -, to prove it, if you assume that something is stated wrong. We are not willing to begin depating something that has alredy been depated. What part of that do you find hard to understand ?

Steve Wondering 11:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Some comments:

1. I do not understand your reasoning here. Kainuu dialect, one of the Savo dialects, has influenced Western dialects spoken in Lappland, including the one today called as the Kven language, but originally they belong to different dialect groups. Many people from Savo moved to areas inhabited by Western Finns during the 16th and 17th centuries and later also to northern Norway. This discussion however should take place in the Kven article.

2. Searching for '"kvensk språk" kainu' in Google reveals that "Kainu" is used as the name for the Kven language by "Ruijan Kaiku" magazine that is published in Tromsø. Internet site here. All articles at least in the Internet version seem to be written by a person named Liisa Koivulehto. To me this looks like that there is a strong need to have "Kainu" established kind of afterwards as the new name for the Kven language among some people.

3. The claim that “Kvenland can also be seen to have included the territories starting all the way from the Norwegian mountain chain westwards” does not make sense. For example, Orkneyinga saga says clearly that Kvenland was east of Gulf of Bothnia. It is not believable that Kvenland was spread here and there and different sources just tell about different parts of it.

4. Your map correction is right. Carta Marina is however included (the map from 1539 CE). Andreas Bureaus maps from 1611/1626 CE have the same naming conventions than the map from 1635 CE. "Kaienska Semla" in the late 16th century maps is still placed outside of Pohjanmaa. The map by Simon van Salinghen (from 1601 CE?) I could not find but I take your word for it. For none of this there is no change in the overall understanding that Savo people started immigrating to north in the 16th century and used the name Kainuu extensively. At the same time, Norwegians kept calling northern Finns as "Kvens" at least in some of their dialects, the way they had called Finns before. Whatever the case, all these maps belong to a period of time that is long after the scope of this article and should be handled in the Kven article.

5. The very old article that was copied to replace the current one was not referencing its sources, was overlapping with both the Kven and Kven language articles and listed lots of unrelated materials that had nothing to do with the Kvens at all. Therefore I needed to revert it. --Drieakko 12:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The article is currently strictly sticking in material about Kvens of the past, like its name says. History of Kainuu and Origin of the name Kainuu should exist as separate articles even though speculation about their connection to Kvenland seems to have dumped the entire discussion here. If they have a reference to the early Kven material, that should be reflected in those articles. --Drieakko 12:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

From the Norwegian mountain chain to the White Sea, from the Gulf of Bothnia to the Arctic Ocean

To the user Drieakko:

1. You state above the following: "To me this looks like that there is a strong need to have "Kainu" established kind of afterwards as the new name for the Kven language among some people".

You ought to realize, user Drieakko, that the Kven language became legalized only last year, 2005. So nothing is happening "afterwards", as you see the matter, but right from the beginning, i.e. last year, and already well before that, and also right now as we speak. You yourself perhaps follow these issues a bit late, it seems. Some of us others have been well aware of all ot this development all along. One should not write about these sort of matters to Wikipedia - or anywhere really -, if they are not well enough informed.

2. You appear to have woken up late also to another point discussed above. Thus, please, allow me to repeat the following correction which I already made before your above comment. Once more: The sentence in question was of course meant to say "eastwards" from the Norwegian mountain chain. That correction to this unintentional blooper was already made earlier to the comment in question itself, before your last comment (see the original comment above). This matter and the related saga information - as stated in my above comment - was already discussed long ago in this forum (please see the archive).

So, to say that we have suggested that "Kvenland was spread here and there", is simply wrong. The historic Kvenland, or area "ruled" by the Kvens - which ever you prefer -, based on much of evidence, likely included the territories stretching eastwards from the Norwegian mountain chain all the way to the White Sea, and from the shores of the Gulf of Bothnia all the way to the Arctic Ocean. The area of Tromsa in Norway alone has at least 12 prehistoric Kven place names (written in varying spellings). Source information for this can also be found from the archive.

3. What needs to be done is the following: The two Kven texts must be united, as they were before. That is why the earlier version was brought back already several times. So, when ever anyone sees the last Diki Wiki version been tampered with - and particularly if it is without proven and valid sources -, please go ahead and bring back the united and last Diki Wiki version (see history), which had reached a concensus among many writers contributing to this topic in Wikipedia.

As is known, innocent Wikipedia users have been blocked from contributing to this topic in Wikipedia, without valid reasons. When this ill-fated blocking was done, this sort of wrongful action - a splitting of the Kven article - was made possible and was manipulated to Wikipedia by a user, Leifern, who admitted to not knowing anything about the Kvens. As the Norwegian website does - the site which you call "official" above -, the Kvens and their history must be dealt with in one place, that is to say one article. The same has been done with numerous other groups in Wikipedia.

We are now reverting the text back to the Diki Wiki article which had reached a concensus recently. All changes made to it must be well backed up by known historians and/or other sources, like the user Mikkalai and others clearly requested a while back. Thank you.

The heading for this article must be changed back to be simply Kven. We are talking about one group of people. In this article the roots and the history of this group are dealt with in the light of science and information gathered by known historians and other specialists.

Steve Wondering 18:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I do not see any reason to unite the articles. The study about references to ancient Kvenland is clearly its own issue and it is properly linked to Kven article as is the Kven article to this one. Other related articles exist as well, like Kven language, Kings of Kvenland, Origin of the name Kven, Terra Feminarum and Sitones, and soon Kven Sea. Why dump all in one when everything can be handled in detail in separate articles? My awareness of the previous discussions is good enough, also about the hordes of your sock puppets under whose names the article has been played around with. --Drieakko 19:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

One thing I fail to understand. There now is an article that goes through in great detail all ancient references to Kvenland. It took plenty of time to write and it is well referenced. Now you, or your newest sock puppet, demands that the article must not exist and it needs to be replaced by only very short general claims about the same sources without referencing the actual sagas, without going through their texts or even without linking to them. Why is it that you don't want Kvenland sources to be handled or even displayed in detail in Wikipedia? --Drieakko 19:40, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

You read me wrong, in similar way as you read the Kven history wrong. And you keep making wrong conclusions, as you used to under your previous user names. Your conclusions do not match reality, not relating to many essentially important pieces of information any way.

Please read this part again below (as I stated before you remind me of the proven sock puppeteer. Isn't it a bit hilarious, that after that accusation was made just some days ago he suddenly appeared to deny it, - importantly - together with you. Strange coincidence):

I do completely agree that the article Kvens should be in one and the same place'. Swedes, Finns, Tornedalians, Saami, etc have all one article. Why should we discriminate this group? There is not reason what so ever for this discrimination. Then the shortcomings and mythology of the "Kvens of the past" will be obvious. --84.216.52.220 19:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC) ---> carried here from the Kven article

Kainuu in Saami language

In the article which I would call "The modern mythology of Kvens and Kvenland" most facts contradicting the conclusions of Drieakko's political, ethnic perspective on history are excluded and/or neglected. One good source for the connection between Kainuu and Kvens is what the Saami called these kainulaiset and who they were. In Suomen Kielen Etymologinen Sanakirja from 1987 kainulainen in Saami dialects and languages means: 'farmer, non-saami, farmer in Swedish coastal region' kainohalja 'Swedish or Norwegian woman', kainohaljo 'Swedish or Norwegian man'. Hence, we may assume that the 'Swedish/Norwegian man/voman' lived in the coastal region of Northern Norway and in the coastal region of Tornio. This can easily be verified by looking into the archives of Saami language. Conclusion: The meaning of kainulainen in Saami languages/dialects is obvisously the very same meaning as Kven in e.g, Schnitlers report. More information could be aquired by digging in to the language databases of Saami in Finland, Norway and Sweden.--130.237.165.114 08:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. Please note that the scope of the article about Kvenland does not include history of Kainuu, even though it mentions the speculated connection between the names along with other speculations. The article handles only ancient references to Kvenland. Article Origin of the name Kainuu is meant for a more detailed analysis of the name Kainuu, its usage and possible connections to other names. Please invest time to write it if you have any. Kvenland article is already linked to it to provide more information on the subject for those who are interested in it. --Drieakko 09:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I personnally find acceptable your idea that the name "Kainuu" used by Karelians and Savo people in the north was taken from the Sami people. They seem to have used it to indicate people of non-Sami origin who also predominantly lived on the coasts while Sami people themselves lived inland. I don't question that Kvens fell into the category of kainohalja, along with Swedes and Norwegians. --Drieakko 09:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I have slight reservation to one of your points that if Sami people used the word kainohalja for Norwegians, this differs from the term Kven in a sense that Norwegians did not consider themselves to be Kvens. Even though Kvens may have also been regarded as kainohalja, all kainohalja were not Kvens. --Drieakko 09:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you often find some intelligent responses. Yeaah. To those I am as often in discussion with you: Speechless.--84.216.52.203 17:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Based on the very useful talkback here, there seem to be two kind of usage of the word "Kainu(u)" in the north:

• "Kainulainen" (or "Kainu") used to indicate non-Sami people on coastal areas (especially Swedes and Norwegians, but possibly also Finns/Kvens), and extensively used at least in the Tornio and Kalix areas; word originating from a Sami word kainohaljo with the meaning "Swedish or Norwegian man"
• "Kainuu" used for the northern areas by Karelians and Savo people, and especially in the 17th century generally used to indicate all of historical Pohjanmaa; origin of the word unclear, but may be based on the same Sami terms adopted by Karelians during their early expansion to the north in the 12th century.

In the light of this summary, special connection between "Kainuu" and "Kvens" seems a very remote possibility. Anyway Origin of the name Kainuu seems to have enough meat now. --Drieakko 12:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeeah, Drieakako. Go for that!--84.216.53.123 18:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Everybody else does not include me and many others: "many sockpuppets reverting the Kven articles back to a version everybody else is disatisfied with...". I have not seen the earlier versions, but the article written by Drieakko of ancient Kvenland rejects all reserach by some 20 scholars, without discussion.--130.237.165.114 07:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that the older versions had lot's of structural shortcomings, and all presentations were not accurate.

If Kvenland has its own article, then it should include all from the very beginning to the year 2006. Ancient Kvenland and Kvenland of 1742 should be in the same article and then mythology will be revealed by the reader. There is no reason to discuss one term in several articles.--130.237.165.114 07:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

A compromise is that Drieakko gets his own category: Modern mythology of Kvenland, which as such is of importance for history. If you look at Finland, Swedne, NBorway, Finns, Norwegians etc you have them all in one article, as far as I know.--130.237.165.114 07:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Go ahead and verify that I and Drieakko are not the same person.
• Please compare the quality of the current Kvenland article with the Digi Wiki version.
• (no comments)

• See my comment above

Labongo 07:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

"Kvenland", the ancient one, has a very small content. Modern Kvenland from 14th century up until now has almost nothing. Normally modenr means something after 1800 or something like that. But for Kvenladn it means 14th century. "Finland" contains enormous amount of information. Nevertheless Drieakko/Labongo wants to keep two articles. Labongo is hence also in favour of the Modern mythology theory of Kvenland. Well, discussions with Labongo/Drieakko is useless. They "both" use the same way of reasoning.--130.237.165.114 07:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Drieakko and Labongo are different persons though I highly respect Labongo's common sense.

The current article about Kvenland goes through the known ancient sources about it and presents plenty of different possibilities how they can be interpreted. Tell me if something is missing. I have sadly noticed that closer examination of the sources is not welcome to all.

Kvenland mentioned by the mid-18th century Danish person could be listed in the Kvenland article if something was done to its other heading "Kvens of the past". The article is meant to handle highly disputed old sources that all mention Kvenland and end around 1250 CE, by the time when Swedes took over Finland. The Danish person gave his account about 500 years after the previous known Kvenland reference. Not a single reference to Kvenland in between, though a few scattered Kven references during the 16th and 17th centuries. No other mid-18th century sources (which are plentiful) use name Kvenland for anything. --Drieakko 08:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Take a close examination of Schnitlers report. Labongo had never read about him. Nevertheless he is confident in his opinions about the Kvens. Schnitlers report can be borrowed in any major library. Source: Peter Schnitler. GRENSEEKSAMINASJONSPROTOKOLLER 1742-1745. Band I-III. Sammanställt av J. Qvigstad, K. B. Wiklund, Lars Ivar Hansen och Tom Schmidt. First volume was published 1929.--130.237.165.114 08:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Kvens - the modern-day and the past - used to be under only one article, Kvenland under another

The above heading tells how things were, and how they should be now. Therefore, your above statement is not accurate, user Drieakko.

I demand for the Kvens of today and the Kvens of the past to be handled in one article, under the heading of the term Kven (also Kvens, etc., must be forwarded there). In the past depate in this forum it has clearly been shown and agreed upon how the modern Kvens represent the very same group of people as the Kvens of the past.

Personally, I do not mind at all that the term Kvenland has a separate article in Wikipedia, just like the terms Finn and Finland can be - and probably are - handled in two separate articles.

In fact, Kven and Kvenland were two separate articles up till quite recently. No on was fighting that point to my knowledge.

The Kvens of the past and Kvens of today must be united into one article, because we are discussing here the one and the same group/tribe of people. The article - of course - must also deal with the roots/history of this group/tribe of people, in light of the information available and in light of the known findings of respected historians and/or other scientists.

A calm and a consensus had recently been reached about the Kven article (which was largely composed by the user Art Dominique). There was then only one united article about the Kvens, another about Kvenland, also another about the Kven language. I was not against that separation.

Then came Mr. Leifern (now also known as Labongo) to the stage. For the beginners he declared that he knows nothing about Kvens. Nevertheless, he now came to demand for the modern Kvens and their ancestors to be split into two separate articles. This despite of the recent consensus reached, and despite the ruling posted by Mr. Mikkalai, based on which no one any longer was to tamper with the Kven article without first providing proven, valid and easily verifiable sources.

At that point the user Mikkalai had stopped his attempts to block the user Art Dominique. Some time before that Mikkalai had attempted to block Art Dominique, to no prevail. The user Art Dominique complained, first publicly announcing that he/she launched the user account of Digi Wiki, to be able to place his/her complaint to the administrators' site about the unfair block in question (Art Dominique could not write there either).

Mr. Mikkalai did another unfair blocking of Art Dominique at this point, proving how he keeps contradicting himself. He allowed Mr. Leifern to split the Kven article, without the sources and/or valid reasoning he had shortly before been after. Mr. Mikkalai too has announced that he is not knowledgeable about the Kvens. That figures. These two mates do not belong to this stage ! They both act cowardly and childishly, and neither one possesses the knowledge required !

Steve Wondering 18:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Yet another long post from Art Dominique. --Drieakko 18:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Sigh. Yesterday I was accused of being the same person as Drieakko today I am Leifern. For the record, I don't use multiple account as Art Dominique/ Digi Wiki/ Steve Wondering probably does. Also, I hope this user soon realizes that these long nonsense comments, personal attacks, and endless reverts don't improve the quality of the articles.Labongo 11:09, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

A recent King of the Kvens, outside of Norway

Finland became slowly integrated into what is known as Sweden-Finland, not so much through any wars between the Swedes and the Finns, but rather through scirmishes between the Finns themselves, others sympathizing with the catholic Swedes in the west, others with the orthodox Russians in the east.

Finland for along time consisted only of the Southwestern part of what today is considered Finland. That integration in question did not for a long time - for centuries to come - include the Kvenland areas that are a part of today's Finland up north.

The King of Sweden made sure to announce it publicly when he felt he had the right to call himself the King of the Kvens (and yes, in Swedish and Finnish that particular term/word - generally speaking - was not used in reference to the Kvens. Nevertheless, the King was refering to the Kvens).

Please, check the expert views - and there are numerous - which point out that the term "Caijaners" (the people of Kajaani or the "Cajanians") refers to the people of Kainuu of course, in other words the Kvens. Even in the present day the capital of Kainuu is called Kajaani. The Swedish King said he now was also the King of the "Caijaners"

Steve Wondering 18:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC) / touched Sept. 1, 2006

The issue is handled in article Kings of Kvenland. The "caijaners" were arguably the same as the inhabitants of Kainuu in the middle of which the Kajaani castle was established in 1604 CE, close to Russian border. Inhabitants of Kainuu were predominantly immigrants from Savo during the 16th century. The king held the title during 1607-1611 CE. His son dropped it. Any relation to Kvens is unfortunately imaginatory. --Drieakko 06:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Kvens were called by different names in different languages

To the user Drieakko (one of his user names) & everyone else:

As we all know, Kvens were called by different names in different languages, of course. In Norwegian and Icelandic - whose ancestors also were largely from Norway (although the founders of Iceland were also from Ireland, Scotland, and - besides Norway - also from some other areas of Scandinavia) - the Kvens were called Kvener, or Kvæn etc.

Famously, also for instance the following other spellings and names for the Kven people appear in historic writings in different parts of the world and during different periods: Cwen, Quen, Qven, kveeni, kainulainen, Kajaner (Kajaani is Kajana in Swedish) and Caijaner (Julku / Kvenland - Kainuunmaa, pages 171, 187, etc. / 1986), Sithon (Julku / Kvenland - Kainuunmaa, pages 51, 52 / 1986) ... and so on.

It is of course wrong and unfounded for you to claim that as the Finnish people call the Swedes by the Finnish language term ruotsalaiset, they - based on the entirely different name and/or spelling - are not talking about the same group of people. Are you indeed attempting to claim that only the Swedish term Svensk is fit to be used in reference to the Swedish people, and only "Sverige" in reference to the country of Sweden ?

Is it therefore correct to claim that, according to you - based on your theory and reasoning -, all other names used of the Swedish people simply cannot mean the Swedish people, not even the english language term Swedes ? Are we reading you correct here ? Is this really your reasoning and view ? Hello, knock knock !!

Whereas we have continuously kept offering quotes and statements from the utmost experts as references for these questions, you continue refusing to offer any counter claims from the same caliber experts, or anyone really. And everyone certainly knows Why ! Because you simply are unable to offer any such references. There truly aren't any such references, where any reliable historian would site with you on this issue (and in many other issues as well) ! It really is as simple as that.

Thus, you are being a nuisance for the Wikipedia community ! You can only refer to your own writings and opinions, the opinions of a student, who happens to be on an extremely wrong track. Your pointless - and naturally unreferenced - efforts mount to vandalism, nothing more, nothing less !

The above topic has already been discussed in this forum in the past. You were there - using another user name, and you lost, remember ! You truly are very hard headed.

Here is yet another statement for you. The very most respected expert on this topic, the Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku from the University of Oulu in Finland states is his 1986 book KVENLAND / KAINUUNMAA, page 187, the following (exact quote / the original text was also written in English):

"Once King Karl IX had strengthened his hold on the crown of Sweden he appended to it the title "King of the Kainulaiset", apparently using it for the first time on 16.3.1607.

The king was crowned 1607 CE. Construction of the Kajaani castle close to Russian border started 1604 CE. Adding "caijaners...konung" to his title during 1607-1611 CE was a provocation to Russians, nothing more. His son dropped the title. --Drieakko 17:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

This title was later dropped, but Kainuu, or Ostrobothnia, occupied a separate position from the rest of Finland for a long time to come. Thus when Queen Christina appointed Count Pehr Brahe as Governor-General, he became officially Governor-General of Finland, Åland and Ostrobothnia.

This can only be interpreted, of course, as implying that the incorporation of Ostrobothnia into rest of the country by international agreement was still a recent event and remained fresh in people's memories."

The Kajaani/Caijaner - Kvenland connection is not recent news, by all means. Numerous scientists - from many countries - have made the connection. In the same book, KVENLAND / KAINUUNMAA, page 171, the Emeritus Professor Julku writes also for instance the following, in reference to Kajaani (compare, the people of Kajaani, in Swedish: "Caijaners):

"The most mature contribution to the Kainuu discussion to emerge at this stage was the short work published by Gabriel Lagus in 1853 on the baronies of Kajaani and Oulu. Lagus clearly demonstrated a familiarity with all the sources employed up to that time in research into the Kainuu question and the works of all the historians who had touched on the subject, and was of the opinion that the onomastic forms Qvenland, Qvener, Kainuu, kainulainen and Kajaani were of a common origin. ...

... Russian sources demonstrated an acquaintance with the name Kajana ... Ancient Kainuu was in effect entirely coincident with Norrbotten as mentioned in later sources.

As if the vast amount of evidence were not enough to any beginning researcher, just consider the following for the beginners: Anyone viewing historic maps knows that the areas of "Bothnia" covered territories of both sides of the Gulf of Bothnia, and the name Kainuu - in varying forms of spelling - can also be found from the both sides of the Gulf of Bothnia.

Yet, once in a while we still come across some Drieakko, who is in a serious denial, and - of course - without anyone, no historian or any scientist at all, to back him up. Who ?

- - What on earth 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why this long post is relevant for the topic of the article (the Kven minitory group in Norway). The history of Kvens before they moved to Northern Norway should be discussed elsewere. Labongo 15:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

This above posting is of outmost relevance for the debate, not Labongo's. Well written, and in most parts, I am of the same opinion that he/she is. Rethorics is the way Labongo is using as a way to debate, after that he revealed himself not even read the most common articles of Kven issues. Please, present fact, not ethno-political theories only. Facts, pure facts and then try to impose your ethno-political ideas on facts. Wikipedia is not for rethorics (it has its own entry), it aims to present more or less objective presentations of history. Objective is to present all facts and then give an interpretation of the facts.--84.216.52.203 17:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

And still Drieakko is using his one and only username. Kainuu as Kvenland is one of the many theories about Kvenland. Kindly write article about Origin of the name Kainuu to handle that. Article about Kvenland is about Kvenland, not about Kainuu. Kainuu, Terra Feminarum and Sitones are all mentioned as possible references to it. Professor Matti Klinge would have plenty of other "Kvenlands" here and there to add, but I have not referenced those yet. The article is well linked to Kainuu, if readers are willing to read more about that theory. --Drieakko 17:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Those are synonyms, same thing in different languages - Kainuu/Kainuunmaa and Kvenland, according to the outmost experts. Should we therefore - based on your strategy - have separate articles for instance for Sweden, Sverige, Ruotsi, etc, in the English Wikipedia (all mean the same thing). Let the experts decide whether or not Sweden and Sverige mean the same thing. We here must not try to make that conclusion, especially not without any valid and appropriate sources !

Kindly reference all the proof by writing the article Origin of the name Kainuu. Otherwise, I will be writing it soon myself. --Drieakko 19:44, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Also note that Kainuu never appears in any sources during the time from which all Kvenland sources are from (before conquest of Finland around 1250 CE). Kainuu (Kajanaland in Swedish) becomes a popular name for Pohjanmaa only in the 17th century, after the construction of the Kajaani castle 1604 CE in the middle of Kainuu. What exact sources about Kainuu should be handled in the article then as none of them is from the same era than Kvenland sources? --Drieakko 20:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

The article now references three "utmost experts", Finnish professors, that have expressed heavily contradicting theories about Kvenland. The wildest theory is arguably by Matti Klinge, but he is also held in highest regard. --Drieakko 20:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Kvens are indigenous to today's Northern Norway

Thank you kindly, user 84.216.52.203 !

The user Labongo may not understand that the Kvens are indigenous to Northern Norway, in my view anyway, and many of the best experts seem to agree. We are not moved by the personal assumptions and/or believes of the user Labongo, but science instead, of course, as you seem to agree.

The user Labongo: Please read the related writings from this column's archive. The Norse are not indigenous to the extreme Northern Norway of today. The Kvens are. The Northern Norway's Tromsa area alone has at least 12 prehistoric Kven place names.

Historians and linguistics experts have been able to come to this conclusion, for instance based on the words and spellings that were used prior to the time - and/or during the time - when the first Norwegian/Norse immigration to Iceland took place. The relevant sources have been given in this forum, for instance KVENLAND / KAINUUNMAA, 1986, by the Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku.

Where are your sources for counter claims, user Labongo ? Do we only have your personal narrow view point, which even appears to be based on no sources at all. If there are sources behind your views, what are they in relation to this matter for instance ?

The related and quoted experts - earlier mentioned in this forum - are not basing their views only on the writings of Ottar, or Alfred the Great, or Tacitus, or any other before mentioned or not mentioned historian, or other scientist, writer or leader alone, of course. Ask yourself for instance, who might be behind the prehistoric jewelry hidings that have been discovered only recently from Inari, not that far from the coastline of the Arctic Ocean.

Examine and read more. Only after having done that, make your own conclusions, not before, please. In the meanwhile, let the experts make their conclusions, based on all the material and sources they have available. Wikipedia is here to reveal the findings of science, not the opinions of yours.

What on earth 18:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Diki Wiki's united Kven text version must be brought back

To the user Drieakko (also others):

What needs to be done is the following: The two Kven texts must be united, as they were before. That is why the earlier version was brought back already several times. So, when ever anyone sees the last Diki Wiki version been tampered with - and particularly if it is without proven and valid sources -, please go ahead and bring back the united and last Diki Wiki version (see history), which had reached a concensus among many writers contributing to this topic in Wikipedia.

As is known, innocent Wikipedia users have been blocked from contributing to this topic in Wikipedia, without valid reasons. When this ill-fated blocking was done, this sort of wrongful action - a splitting of the Kven article - was made possible and was manipulated to Wikipedia by a user, Leifern, who admitted to not knowing anything about the Kvens. As the Norwegian website does - the site which you call "official" above -, the Kvens and their history must be dealt with in one place, that is to say one article. The same has been done with numerous other groups in Wikipedia.

We are now reverting the text back to the Diki Wiki article which had reached a concensus recently. All changes made to it must be well backed up by known historians and/or other sources, like the user Mikkalai and others clearly requested a while back. Thank you.

The heading for this article must be changed back to be simply Kven. We are talking about one group of people. In this article the roots and the history of this group are dealt with in the light of science and information gathered by known historians and other specialists.

Steve Wondering 18:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I do completely agree that the article Kvens should be in one and the same place. Swedes, Finns, Tornedalians, Saami, etc have all one article. Why should we discriminate this group? There is not reason what so ever for this discrimination. Then the shortcomings and mythology of the "Kvens of the past" will be obvious. --84.216.52.220 19:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC) ---> carried here from the Kven article

The posts above by Art Dominique's sock puppet have already been posted to this discussion forum once, see above. --Drieakko 19:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles handling Kven related subjects are currently:

• Kvens
• Kvenland (the same as Kvens of the past)
• Kings of Kvenland
• Kven language
• Origin of the name Kven
• Kven Sea

and the potential Kvenland/Kven references:

• Terra Feminarum
• Sitones
• Kainuu

with still missing as potentially related issues:

• Kalanti
• Origin of the name Kainuu
• History of Kainuu --Drieakko 12:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I still miss the heading "Modern mythology of Kvenland.--84.216.52.231 11:47, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Minor modifications

Although my sympathies are with Drieakko and I consider the Art Domique´s version as a long rant of national-chauvinistic nonsense, I still think that even Drieakko´s version had certain bias. I hope my minor adjustements have given the article more neutral and palatable tone.217.112.242.181 12:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Some earlier wordings from me have clearly been too provocative, and tuning them down is welcome. --Drieakko 13:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Neither one of the signers Drieakko and217.112.242.181 knows what they are talking about. You appear to be the same person (the latter signer is a proven and admitted sock puppet).

It has been quite pointless to keep requesting sources from you, with the detailed book and page information, or for exact quote from known specialists, to support you statements. There are't such sources, as has been stated so many times before. If you disagree, please provide these easily verifiable sources, as Mr. Mikkalai requested from you already a while back.

Not being able to do that shows to everyone that you are nothing more than a persistent anarchist, most obviously the one single one as was revealed before. Go on, - once again - what do you have to counter or argue against the statements (exact quotes were provided) and proof provided for instance yesterday by the most known and respected current Kven historian in the world, the Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku.

To accuse the Professor Emeritus Julku - or for instance Professor Jouko Vahtola, or other professors provided - national-chauvinistic mounts to anarchy, nothing more !

You, user 217.112.242.181 (with proven and admitted other user accounts) have continuosly declined to provide sources in the past, too ! You are a proven and admitted vandal, who has verifiably participated in various sorts of foul play. Do you again want evidence published here ?

Are the references to original documents insufficient? Should we reference a printed document referencing another document instead? Professor Julku gets more room in the article than two other professors, Klinge and Vilkuna, combined. Main reasons to go through the original sources are that different specialists have very conflicting views on the subject and there is no proper English presentation of the Kvenland sources available. --Drieakko 16:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the summary section could be moved either to the begining or the end of the article? Labongo 11:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd say at least some modifications or omissions are needed in the preface of the article. --Drieakko 13:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Neutralized now the preface and rewrote much of the presentation of the Ottar's account. --Drieakko 17:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Your arguments are foolish, user Driekko

Once again, you appear to be quite hard headed. We just got through handling this issue !

Your arguments are foolish, user Driekko. Therefore, please leave the reasoning for specialists, and let us only reveal the findings of science in Wikipedia, not the goofy views and opinions of you.

You state for instance the following on the related column: "Also note that Kainuu never appears in any sources during the time from which all Kvenland sources are from ... "

Please realize, user Drieakko, that the reason for that is simple. The "Kainuu" word thrives from the Finnish language. Even any beginning history student could tell you: The written Finnish language from that time - before 1250 AD - is not available. That is the reason why.

Do you understand that ? That is also largely the reason why the names for Kvenland in other languages - in varying spellings - appear later (some for the Kvens also before. Compare for instance Tacitus' "Sithons" during the first century AD). Similarly, the Finnish language term for Sweden, Ruotsi, does not appear in any existing know written document, because the term is from the Finnish language !

The Finnish epic Kalevala, however, largely concentrates to the history even much older than the Viking Age. Kalevala - to a great extend - deals with the history, culture, poetry, songs and other legacy of Kainuu (Kvenland), also Karelia (Karjala,) going back to way back when.

Steve Wondering 13:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Area later known as Kainuu and entire Pohjanmaa are mainly void of findings during the time when Kvenland is said to be a nation comparable to Norway and Sweden, so there is not much to tell about it, whether it is mentioned in sources of that time or not.

Sitones were said to be a Germanic tribe similar to Swedes in Tacitus' Germania, ruled by a woman. Relation to Kvens is unlikely.

Your Kalevala comment has very little in common with Kalevala itself. --Drieakko 17:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)