Tornedalians

The Tornedalians are descendants of Finns who in some point in history settled to the areas of today’s Northern Sweden near the Torne Valley district and west from there.

Tornedalians migrated from today’s Southwestern Finland, mainly from Häme and Karelia. Settlement began around the northern end of the Gulf of Bothnia and along the river valleys nearby (River Kalix, Torne River, and Kemijoki River). Migration started at the latest in the beginning of the 14th century CE on areas loosely controlled by Russians and Karelians.

Torne river valley flag—Flag of Tornedalians on both sides of the Torne river.

The taxation of the Sami people, fur trade and large hunting grounds were among the most important factors contributing to the migration of the Tornedealians up north. Tornedalians also helped the Swedish expansion to the areas that today are part of northern Sweden.

Despite the Finnish and Russian demands of including much of today’s Swedish Torne River Valley territory into the autonomous Russian Grand Duchy of Finland, the area remained part of the Kingdom of Sweden as a result of the peace treaty signed between Russia and Sweden in 1809. The Swedish-Finnish border was drawn at the River Tornio, and that border has stood official up to date.

Cultural imperialism, in combination with a fear of Russia, led to Swedish attempts to assimilate and Swedify the Finnish-speaking population between 1850 and 1950. Since the 1970s, efforts have been made to reverse some of the effects of the Swedification, notably in education. The minority status of the Tornedalianswas officially recognized by the Swedish government in 1999 by the recognition of the local Finnish dialect Meänkieli as one of the acknowledged minority languages in Sweden. A written standard of Meänkieli has been established and taught, which has given rise to critical remarks from Finland, suggesting that standard Finnish would be of more use to the pupils.

08
07

Swedish-speaking Finns

Swedish-speaking Finns (often called Finland-Swedes, Finnish Swedes, Swedish Finns, see below) (Swedish: finlandssvenskar;Finnish: suomenruotsalaiset) constitute a linguistic minority in Finland. They maintain a strong identity and are alternatively seen either as a distinct subgroup of the Finnish people or as a separate ethnic group or even as a distinct nationality. They speak distinct dialects and a standard language that are both called Finland Swedish and are mutually intelligible with the dialects spoken in Sweden, as well as with other Scandinavian languages.

Swedish is the mother tongue of about 275,000 people in mainland Finland and of about 25,000 people in Åland, together representing about 5.5% of the total population (according to official statistics for 2009) or about 5.1% without Åland. The proportion has been steadily diminishing since the early 19th century, when Swedish was the mother tongue of approximately 15% of the population. According to a statistical analysis made by Fjalar Finnäs, the situation of the minority group is today stable. Most Finland-Swedes are bilingual with both their native and the Finnish language.

Unofficial flag of Swedish-speaking Finns.
According to a sociological study published in 1981, the Swedish-speaking Finns meet the four major criteria for a separate ethnic group: self-identification of ethnicity, language, social structure, and ancestry. However, not all Swedish-speaking Finns are willing to self-identify as representatives of a distinct ethnicity. The major political organisation representing the Swedish-speakers in Finland, the Swedish People’s Party, has defined the Swedish-speaking Finns as a people who express Finnish identity in the Swedish language. The issue is debated: an opposite view is still that the Swedish-speaking Finns are a sub-group of the ethnic Swedes, östsvenskar or “East Swedes”.

Medieval Swedish colonisation

The first Swedish arrivals in Finland have often been linked to the putative First Swedish Crusade (ca. 1150) which, if it actually happened, served to expand Christianity and annex Finnish territories to the kingdom of Sweden. Simultaneously the growth of population in Sweden, together with lack of land, resulted in Swedish settlements in Southern and Western coastal areas of Finland. The Second Swedish Crusade against the Tavastians in 13th century extended the Swedish settlements to Uusimaa. During the 14th century the population expansion from Sweden increasingly took the form of organised mass arrivals: the new settlers came in large numbers in large ships from various parts of Sweden’s Eastern coast, from Småland to Hälsingland. Their departure from Sweden to Finland was encouraged and organized by the Swedish authorities. The coast of Ostrobothnia received large scale Swedish settlements between the 13th and 15th centuries, in parallel with events which resulted in Swedish expansion to Norrland.

01
09

The territories of the Swedes [Sviar , Suioni]- Yellow.The Götar [Gauti , Geats] - Blue.And the Gutar [ Gotlanders] - Green, placed on the modern Swedish map.
South of all these where the Dani (Danes).
However, these borders changed over time too and though at this time there where no Swedish or Danish nations there would be wars and conflicts between these groups for many hundred years ahead (even after the nations where formed).
Today, people living in Sweden see themselves as ethnic Swedes, but distinction between Swedes and Geats was mentioned as more than a name more or less until modern time (1500s) and the Swedes (as you might have guessed) dominated from rather early on.

01
09

I thought i should post a map that gives an aproximate time period of what it claims to reprecent. Ca 500 AD.
Note that an exact map like this cant be done and in other timeperiods other tribal constellations would exist and tribes would be in other places.
Also, the Germanic tribes where not alone in all these areas with a few exeptions.
You might add Sviar, Gauti and Guti in Sweden too (as well as the Dani in todays southern Sweden, Scania and Hallandia + more)..

12
29

It is true this map says “predominant”, but it still lumps large groups like Slavs together while it is almost detailed about Germanic groups.

It is historical hogwash though.
There are no Saxons or Franks today. And if you insist on using those migration period, terms i would not be “Scandinavian” but Gauti (or at least “Norse”).

Anyone in Sweden (exept to a part the Saami) sees themselves as ethnical Swedes regardless of tribe.

One time period or the other please.

Oh, and btw: Icelanders are not Scandinavian. If you are thinking of the viking settlers the term is “Norse”, if you are thinking of modern Icelanders the term is “Nordic”.

Besides, Icelanders probably has Q Celtic genes too (via Scotland and Ireland).

Many have complained about ending up in the wrong “group” (where i found this map) large parts of northern Italy is really Celto - Germanic as well as Romance for instance..
France and Benelux are Celto - Germano _ romance as well.

Sicily has Germanic genes (via the Normans and Vandals).

The Saami of Scandinavia are far more spread (FAR MORE), Spain and Portugal are put down as Celtic and “near eastern” (what fucking ethnicity is that???) and the Germanic influence of the Visigoths, Suebi and the Vandals are skipped over (you find a lot of Germanic loan words in modern Portuguise),

Scotland is put down as “Scots” (The Scoti are actually Gaels = Irish, so technically partly correct), In actuallity the Scottish people are a mix of Gaelic, Pictish, Anglo - Saxon and Norse (Scandinavian, mainly Norwiegian and Danish).

The Irish are put down as Irish Celts (???).
If you use the terms Scots for Scotland (Scoti = The Roman term for Gael) you should do so for the Irish too.

Either Scots OR Gaels OR Q Celtic.

In actuality the Irish people are a mix of Gaels, Scandinavian and Romance (via the very “French” Normans) genes.

Whole Scottish Clans are of mainly Scandinavian origin MacDonald, MacIver (Ivarson) MacAuley (Olofsson), Gordon, MacLaeod to mention a few.

Scots, Doric (Scotland), Ulster Scots and the extinct Norn (Shetland, Orkney) are actually Germanic languages.

Gaelic and Manx (Isle of Man) are Q Celtic languages originating in Ireland.

Balts (???) as Slavic? Ever heard of Estonians. Estonians are Finnic not Slavic.

ALL of northern Africa is put down as Berber??? . There are other large groups, Semitic and Copts for instance. Sarmatian being another.

Russians are put down as distinct from Slavs witch is not incorrect in a sense. Russia probably got it´s name from Germanic peoples (mainly from Sweden according to theory) and as a country has many etnicities like Saami and other Finnic groups.
True, the confusing and rather scetchy colour field indicate Uralo - Finnic in the north and and Slavo - Germanic in a little clique but it is so simplified that it´s almost comical to anyone with a bit of a historic interest.

Then we have the problem with the term “ethnic”. Are we talking “blood?”
If so you can take any area of Europe and probably find a mix of Germanic, Celtic, Slavic and Romance genes AND culture.

I can prove that there where Arabs in Scandinavia (at least Denmark), being a part of society and sharing the (“heathen”) religion during the iron age.

I can prove (we are talking DNA, Strontium, anthropology, and archeology in general here.) that people travelled all the way from the Alps to eastern England in Neolithic times (stone age).

A normal Englishman most probably have Brythonic (P Celtic), Romance (Romans and later Normans, even if they where mainly Germanic), Anglo - Saxon and Scandinavian genes.

If we go by culture or linguistics the same mix applies.
And then ALL of these groups are in turn mixed up the same way.

Germanic and Celtic groups interacted so much that they where sometimes undistinguishable to the Romans (and some tribes still are).

The terms Germani and Keltoi where of Roman and Greek origin anyway (speaking of lumping together).

Groups like the Ostrogoths interacted the same way with Slavic tribes.

And then we have other ways of ethnic identification, like religion.
If “Christian” was the ethnic group with witch a viking identified himself, and “Asatru” (in lack of a better term) the way another viking in the same area identified (witch was in a sense sometimes the case at the start of the high middle ages in Scandinavia), they would have “Norse” as an ethnicity in common but still see themselves as religously (and thus to a part culturally) different ethnicities.

Serious anthropology and ethnology can never make a simple map or diagram describing something as complex as mans sense of “group” or belonging through history and pre history since the dawn of mankind.

My father is African, still both he and i consider me Germanic, Scandinavian (and Gautish to be extreme. That is i am of the Gauti / Götar tribe).

He counts himself as Creole. However, part of the mix that makes him Creole is Portuguise and Spanish (thus probably including Sephardic Jews, Moorish blood….oh, and he has some Chinese).

Funny though, the Suebi where in nothern Portugal, the Vissigoths where all over Spain and Portugal and the Vandals passed too.

So he would (possably, actually probably) have several strains of Germanic genes (as well as Romance, Carthagian, Celtic) witch might even bring us back to Sweden (some theories says that the Vandals and Goths came from Sweden and most accept that the “Germanic” peoples as a distinguishable group originated in southern Sweden ,Scania, and Denmark anyway (proto Germanic, around 500 BC).

Sorry! I´m simply far to interested in European history / ethnology / anthropology / archeology to have it simplified into some romantic doodle.

Forn Sed

Tornedalians

Swedish-speaking Finns

Medieval Swedish colonisation