Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Kvens and Kvenland

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Crusader Kings II 69867 Bug Reports 19707 User Modifications 10588 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6361 After Action Reports
Karikatyyri said:
Finnic and sami people were original people in scandinavia and fennoscandia. If not, then who? Someone came here first.
Click to expand...
:confused: If by "Finnic and Sami people" you mean populations that spoke the ancestral languages of Finnic and Sami languages, those were along the Kama River possibly as late as 2000 BCE. Scandinavia and Finland had been inhabited for thousands of years before that. Sami received loan words from the languages spoken in these parts before any still living languages, but the languages themselves have died out.
 
Karikatyyri said:
All this semantic babble about the names and languages are irrelevant. The real question is, who controlled the area Rurik lived?
Finnic and sami people were original people in scandinavia and fennoscandia. If not, then who? Someone came here first.
Finnic people controlled large area of sweden. Goth's controlled only the southernmost part for centuries. There is enough sources about Kvenland. Just google the word.

Finland was part of Sweden for 700 years. So they could have written our history as they like. Rurik became swedish and the original varagians were not finns, but swedish.

The speculation about the languages: My mother's lastname is Henriksson. Does that make her or me swedish? Also names can change their form.
Rurik's norse version is 'Rørik' if I'm not mistaken.

Do we even know what finns spoke 1200 years ago in sweden? Perhaps they adapt other languages and customs?
What is fenno-ugric culture? I'm asking, because I don't know. Our historians tell us, that our culture was similar to scandinavians.
Click to expand...

Who controlled area where Rurik lived? Obvious answer is the Swedes.

But sure, let's play along with this ridiculous evil Swedes stole our history charade. When exactly they did that? Norse sagas never try to hide the fact that there lived Sami and Kvens in the northern part of the Scandinavian peninsula. But it's true that the Swedes fabricated Finnish history. Swedes invented ancient Kingdom of Finland as part of their Gothicismus cultural movement, because it made the whole realm look more glorious if Finland had glorious past as a great kingdom.
 
Karikatyyri said:
All this semantic babble about the names and languages are irrelevant. The real question is, who controlled the area Rurik lived?
Finnic and sami people were original people in scandinavia and fennoscandia. If not, then who? Someone came here first.
Finnic people controlled large area of sweden. Goth's controlled only the southernmost part for centuries. There is enough sources about Kvenland. Just google the word.

Finland was part of Sweden for 700 years. So they could have written our history as they like. Rurik became swedish and the original varagians were not finns, but swedish.

The speculation about the languages: My mother's lastname is Henriksson. Does that make her or me swedish? Also names can change their form.
Rurik's norse version is 'Rørik' if I'm not mistaken.

Do we even know what finns spoke 1200 years ago in sweden? Perhaps they adapt other languages and customs?
What is fenno-ugric culture? I'm asking, because I don't know. Our historians tell us, that our culture was similar to scandinavians.
Click to expand...

Yeah... Swedes faked every source were Rurik was called Rurik. Insteed he was Väinö and the Swedes faked every source about him and his family to give them Norse names. They even faked the Russian sources!
 
Olaus Petrus said:
Norse sagas never try to hide the fact that there lived Sami and Kvens in the northern part of the Scandinavian peninsula.
Click to expand...

"Based on the Norse sagas and other medieval accounts, the ruling families of England, France, Iceland, Ireland, Normandy, Norway, the Orkney Islands, Russia, Scotland and Sweden - among many others - descended from the kings of Kvenland and Finland."

Check out the map of the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yfeDry8e5Y
 
Karikatyyri said:
"Based on the Norse sagas and other medieval accounts, the ruling families of England, France, Iceland, Ireland, Normandy, Norway, the Orkney Islands, Russia, Scotland and Sweden - among many others - descended from the kings of Kvenland and Finland."

Check out the map of the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yfeDry8e5Y
Click to expand...

Can't you find someplace else to troll?
 
Karikatyyri said:
"Based on the Norse sagas and other medieval accounts, the ruling families of England, France, Iceland, Ireland, Normandy, Norway, the Orkney Islands, Russia, Scotland and Sweden - among many others - descended from the kings of Kvenland and Finland."

Check out the map of the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yfeDry8e5Y
Click to expand...

Your rather useless map shows that Scandinavians or Vikings as it calls them controlled Roslagen and thus it answers to your earlier question. BTW Hversu Noregr Byggðist and Fundinn Noregr, just like other legendary sagas, aren't really valid historical sources.

Krayt said:
Did these kings rule around the time of the felling of the Great Oak, or perhaps they took part in the raid for the Sampo?
Click to expand...

Considering that they are Jötnar (giants) and not humans your dating is quite possible.
 
Olaus Petrus said:
Your rather useless map shows that Scandinavians or Vikings as it calls them controlled Roslagen and thus it answers to your earlier question. BTW Hversu Noregr Byggðist and Fundinn Noregr, just like other legendary sagas, aren't really valid historical sources.
Click to expand...

But when we talk about "vikings" then sagas are suddenly very useful. Not very honest. Historians also use the sagas. And as I already mentioned, there is lot of other sources beside the sagas.

I have a history book about Sweden written by a swedish man. No single word about kvens, kvenland or finnish kings.
So far no real arguments. Only ignorant, doubtful minds and trolling. You like to argue, but you really don't have a clue.
Sources are overwhelming. Look after them or not. Be ignorant or not. It's up to you.
 
Next you'll be telling us that Nightwish are the only true musicians in the whole of Scandinavia.
 
Thure said:
And why did Rurik and his descadents use Norse names? If you give him the Finnish culture he will use Finnish names... And wouldn't be named Rurik... Hablogroups didn't say much. Polishmen are more germanic than Germans in the DNA. So should the Polish characters ingame be German culture?
Click to expand...

Polish people are not Germanic at all genetically, but you Germans sure are quite Slavic.
 
Ofc Rurik was Finn like atleast of half russians tsars and nobility. Also Suvorov and half other famous Russians were actually Finns. (protip they were not) Also Varangian isnt samething as viking.
 
Last edited:
Karikatyyri said:
But when we talk about "vikings" then sagas are suddenly very useful. Not very honest. Historians also use the sagas. And as I already mentioned, there is lot of other sources beside the sagas.

I have a history book about Sweden written by a swedish man. No single word about kvens, kvenland or finnish kings.
So far no real arguments. Only ignorant, doubtful minds and trolling. You like to argue, but you really don't have a clue.
Sources are overwhelming. Look after them or not. Be ignorant or not. It's up to you.
Click to expand...

Legendary sagas aren't useful and there are lot of Scandinavian historians who admit that legendary sagas don't describe historical events, but are combination of folk tales and myths. But then there are sagas which are historical and describe real events. And then there are semi-legendary sagas which are partially based on real events, but combine them with folk tales. Same literary work can contain all of the three. Descriptions of the earliest times are pure legend while history of the recent events is often based on real knowledge about the events. Old Norse, Norman and Russian accounts often give conflicting stories about the legendary events and there are several different origin stories and genealogies to Norse rulers. Among other things I wrote an essay about the topoi in the Scandinavian, Norman and Russian founding myths when I did my masters degree in history, so I'm at least somewhat familiar with this particular topic.
 
Last edited:
Karikatyyri said:
All this semantic babble about the names and languages are irrelevant. The real question is, who controlled the area Rurik lived?
Finnic and sami people were original people in scandinavia and fennoscandia. If not, then who? Someone came here first.
Finnic people controlled large area of sweden. Goth's controlled only the southernmost part for centuries. There is enough sources about Kvenland. Just google the word.

Finland was part of Sweden for 700 years. So they could have written our history as they like. Rurik became swedish and the original varagians were not finns, but swedish.

The speculation about the languages: My mother's lastname is Henriksson. Does that make her or me swedish? Also names can change their form.
Rurik's norse version is 'Rørik' if I'm not mistaken.

Do we even know what finns spoke 1200 years ago in sweden? Perhaps they adapt other languages and customs?
What is fenno-ugric culture? I'm asking, because I don't know. Our historians tell us, that our culture was similar to scandinavians.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are a Swede. Go to Sweden, Swede- Finland is for the Finns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back