The Wars for the Baltic 1600 to 1721

If I recall there were "joint operations" with the Jem and Swedish against Novgoros and Karelia but I wouldnt exactly call it 'part of the realm' in that time yet.

And suposedly the Jem revolted against the Swedish and christianity in 1237 and a second "crusade" was needed.

And If Sweden did have some power over Finland that time it would have been very loose if non-existant.

Originally posted by Mangudai There were swedes living in Finland from the 12th century, and most likely they were a part of the swedish realm. The first crusade to Finland may have been launched in 1155 by Erik Jedvardsson "The Holy", but it was probably more of a Viking raid than a Crusade... Actually there were some during the 18th century, because Finns, including the Swedish-speaking aristocracy, were tired of constant wars. You are refering to the Anjala alliance? Was it really an attempt to found an independent Finland? As far as I know it was a complott against the king Gustav III'd, not against the swedish goverment

Not only that. There were some Swedish-speaking intellectuals who did ponder the possibility. Of course, Finnish nationalism was unexistent at the time, so nothing significant. Just pointing out there were thoughts in that direction.

There were swedes living in Finland from the 12th century, and most likely they were a part of the swedish realm.

How? Prove it. What Swedish power reached Finland that could possibly have made them 'part of the Swedish realm'.

Edited by wilpuri

There were swedes living in Finland from the 12th century, and most likely they were a part of the swedish realm.

The first crusade to Finland may have been launched in 1155 by Erik Jedvardsson "The Holy", but it was probably more of a Viking raid than a Crusade...

Actually there were some during the 18th century, because Finns, including the Swedish-speaking aristocracy, were tired of constant wars.

You are refering to the Anjala alliance? Was it really an attempt to found an independent Finland? As far as I know it was a complott against the king Gustav III'd, not against the swedish goverment

Originally posted by Styrbiorn Originally posted by Kalevipoeg A natural part??? It was a conquered area as any other in history.  He means it was considered a natural part of the realm, different from other areas - eg Estland or Pommerania. As opposed the modern day ones, the Finns of old were and considered themselves Swedish citizens (there was no independence ideas until the Russian times) and the Finnish provinces were governed the same as any 'native' province.

Actually there were some during the 18th century, because Finns, including the Swedish-speaking aristocracy, were tired of constant wars. You are correct, though, Finland was a collection of provinces among others, but I'm pretty sure they were recognized, if not officially, as a separate people. The Swedish administration also suppressed Finnish language and culture. Hadn't Russia joined us into the Russian Empire, we might be another Ireland.. or at least close.

Viking age Finland and early medieval Finland is a fascinating area of history in my opinion. I will post an essay I've written on the subject. BTW, No part of Finland was under swedish rule in the 12th century, and even in 13th century it would have been shaky. The Swedish church had influence in S.W Sweden, but not the king.

Here is the Essay: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2837& ;PN=1&TPN=1

Edited by wilpuri

Originally posted by UnholyMenace Originally posted by Kalevipoeg I wrote my previous post in a rush, but i still think, the Soviets would not have been such hard nuts to crack. Their moral wasn't that high, we had the homefield advantage, our declaration of war might have driven other East-European nations, mainly Latvia and Lithuania into doing the same thing. Just look at soviet losses compared to others in WW2, enourmous difference. Stalin had annihilated most of the brains of the Red Army. God knows where he got people to fill the spots for officers and generals, not any smarter tacticians than the local peasant i guess filled those spots, literally. The moral and training of an Estonian soldier was very highly appreciated and ws compared to the Wehrmacht's. Reading it makes me wonder one thing - why the hell didnt they do it then? If you say thay might have had a chance to beat them, then why didnt they and why history turned up the way it did?

Because, there were so few Estonian soldiers. Well, I can't guess the number but not likely over 7,00. Russians were widesppreaded over the lands, here and there. Most ports were at their hands so help needed first to conquer the ports.

You, aswell, can't ask why history turns out as it does, it just does. And preferrably Russian took their generals and czars aswell from peasents. It has been a tradion for them, I think.

Originally posted by Kalevipoeg A natural part??? It was a conquered area as any other in history.

 He means it was considered a natural part of the realm, different from other areas - eg Estland or Pommerania. As opposed the modern day ones, the Finns of old were and considered themselves Swedish citizens (there was no independence ideas until the Russian times) and the Finnish provinces were governed the same as any 'native' province.


Edited by Styrbiorn

I wrote my previous post in a rush, but i still think, the Soviets would not have been such hard nuts to crack. Their moral wasn't that high, we had the homefield advantage, our declaration of war might have driven other East-European nations, mainly Latvia and Lithuania into doing the same thing. Just look at soviet losses compared to others in WW2, enourmous difference. Stalin had annihilated most of the brains of the Red Army. God knows where he got people to fill the spots for officers and generals, not any smarter tacticians than the local peasant i guess filled those spots, literally. The moral and training of an Estonian soldier was very highly appreciated and ws compared to the Wehrmacht's.

Edited by Kalevipoeg

"Old Estonians (age maybe 70 and more and who remember anything from the period during 1918-1940) usually say that the P�ts's time was great and etc...which is actually pretty strange thought. Of course it was time before the great war and also before Soviet time and deportation to Siberia - so the earlyer time seemed very good! They still made pretty big mistakes during the first independance period - but we have to admit that there was no chance that we could have done something to prevent what happened. "

I have always thought that we could have had a chance against the reds. They weren't that skilled at warfare. And Estonian men were known as much better soldiers in skill and from the point of moral. There were only 25000 reds in here, could have taken them.

Finland wasn't ruled by Sweden, it was Sweden. A natural part of the kingdom just like Svealand or G�taland

Originally posted by wilpuri Originally posted by Kalevipoeg We call the time of Swedish rule vana hea rootsi aeg (the good old Swdish time) here in Estonia as their rule is known to be the softest and more enlightened and cultural then of the others. Although the Estonian deaths that were payed by Swedish, Polish and Russian wars here must not be forgotten. Hehe, funny that, although I had heard about it before. For us its the otherway around, under Russia we had our cultural renaissansance (or Golden Age more like it) and much greater autonomy, etc. Under Swedish we were being swedified quite heavily, for example church sermons were only in Swedish etc and the only official language was Swedish. There was no such thing as a recognized Finnish culture. Only under Russia did this come about. Of course, the Russians didn't do this just because they're such a nice bunch of people, but to make sure Finns wouldn't want to jump over back to Sweden. Either way, it was good for us. Only towards the end of Russian rule did the oppression and Russification begin.

It is the after-affect of the last years of Soviet rule where everything was pretty much, well, soft. And my father also has said that during Soviets, he never saw a beggar or an unemployeed person on the streets. That reflected well on the early unemployment rate of capitalist Estonia. It is just a normal reaction i guess, just bitterness to throw at your current government.

While at the same time, Estonian parents and older people also have tons of stories about the stupidity of our big Eastern intruder here, really hilarious, maybe only to us, but nice to hear. No love for a soviet here to be seen, or towards Russians neither.