Conference turris::scandia

  I was told that during the 30 years war in Europe that the Swedish troops
  went all the way to the Bodensee (Lake Constance) on the German/Swiss/Austrian
  border and that the occupied on island in the lake that still today belongs
  to them (flag flies, some sort of control, etc.).  Is this true??
  
  Also, what cultural impact did the Scandinavian troops have on Germany.
  I would assume (and have been told that it is true) that many stayed in
  Germany and didn't go back to Sweden after it was over.

  Maybe this explains all the folks who kind of look Scandinavian in 
  Baden-W�rtemberg, why Schw�bisch dialect is somewhat sing-song, etc.  :-)

CHad

    Here are some excerpts relating to Sweden's exploits during the Thirty
    Years' War, from the book, "Swedish History in Brief" by Ingvar
    Andersson and J�rgen Weibull. 
    
    [King Gustav II Adolf] first launched an attack against Poland, and
    siezed the most important towns in eastern Prussia, which were vital to
    Poland's commerce. Then he led his army into Germany against Hapsburg
    and the Catholic League, received support from France, and in 1631
    routed the famous General Tilly in the battle of Breitenfield (near
    Lepzig) in Saxony. The next winter he hed court in Mainz and Frankfurt
    in the Main, marched through Bavaria in the summer of 1632, and on 6
    November that year encountered Wallenstein, the Emperor's chief
    commander, at L�tzen, not far from Breitenfield. Wallenstein was forced
    to retreat, but Gustav Adolf fell in battle. 
    
    [War in Germany was to continue for sixteen more years, with Sweden's
    greatest statesman, Axel Oxenstierna, as Chancellor (Gustav Adolf's
    heir, Kristina, was then a child).] 
    
    The Peace of Westphalia (1648) gave Sweden a number of important
    possessions on the southern shore of the Baltic and on the North Sea,
    but the Polish ports had to be relinquished; . . . 

    Re -.1
    
    Question 1 : No, it's not true. After 1648 Sweden gained control
    over some areas in the north of Germany (Pommern...). In the peace
    of 1721 Sweden lost all its German soil... except a small cemetary.
    This cemetary still belongs to Sweden after 260 years. It's not
    a big one, it's about 40*50 yards.

    Question 2 : Maybe they did, but you must remember that most of
    the 'Swedish' troops was German 'Soldiers of fortune'. Sweden did
    not send that many people to Germany during the thirty year war.
    
    Question 3 : This of course answers this qustion also, it's not
    likely. Maybe the situation is different in the areas controlled
    by Sweden for 65 years, but I don't think so.
    
    Paul.

    Actually, there is a Swedish cemetary in Worcester, Mass, as well.
    Probably no territorial rights, though.
    
    I have a Swedish history question for you: Who killed Karl XII ?
    

    
    
    Re:.4
    
    Noone really knows. There exists two versions of this :
    
    First for those of who doesn't know. Karl XII was the last of the
    Swedish 'Warrior' kings. He fought against the Russians for about
    20 years until he met his Waterloo outside Fredrikstad in Norway.
    
    He was killed during a cold november night while the Swedish Troops
    were sieging (is that the name) a Norwegian Fort. He wasn't killed
    by a bullet, he was shot with a trouser-button.
    
    Ok, theory number 1 :
    
    A norwegian soldier killed him. Nice and easy. This was the main
    theory for many years.
    
    Number 2 :
    
    He was killed by Swedish officers that was tired of the Swedish
    campaigns all over Europe. They wanted peace and decided to kill
    the king.
    
    There are many proofs that confirms this theory. One of these are
    that the bullet cannot been fired from the fort! It must have been
    fired from one of the trenches, but which one ? A Swedish or a
    Norwegian one.
    
    So the answer is : No one knows, but the death is 'as clear as the
    Boston Harbour'...
    
    Paul

    Perhaps you 'll be more successfull:
    
    Is there a realtionship knewn in the history between Munich -
    Goeteborg?
    
    I tried to find it out, but nothing. Relationship means perhaps
    a marriage of king-kids, or a great deal or anything other.
    
    TOM jr.

    Re:.5
    
>   Is there a realtionship knewn in the history between Munich -
>   Goeteborg?
    
    No, not that I know of, (and I should know since I'm from G|teborg).
    
    The German influence on Sweden was gone when G. was founded in 1623.
    
    The Germans where a part in Swedish History between the 12th and
    the 15th centuries. The only time after this period that we encountered
    the germans (before the 20th C.) was during the thirty-year war,
    and what we did then was only trying to kill them...
    
    Paul.

    If you're intrested in history (From mid 15th century and forward...)
    then there is a new notesfile called STKCSC::HISTORY.
    
    (Press KP7 to add it to your notebook)
    
    Paul.

    RE 7
    
    Thanx !
    
    Hope the Swedish stoped killing us ? ;-)
    
    TOM jr.

    Always wanted to know, how far did the Svears go into Asia, when
    they decided to 'visit' Bizancio down the rivers.
    
    They say Finnish people called them 'Rus' (Ruotsi means Sweden in
    modern Finnish?) from where the word 'Russian' derives. What's sure,
    is that Rus is not an Slavic word.
    
    They say in Gotland and Hithabu explorers found a little image of
    Buddha. Anyone knows whether the Svears did reach beyond the Urals?
    
    Also: What connection did exist between the Lapps and the Svears?
    
    Thanks from Spain.

    RE: < Note 295.10 by MDRLEG::RUBEN "I will be your cancer!" >
        
>    Always wanted to know, how far did the Svears go into Asia, when
>    they decided to 'visit' Bizancio down the rivers.
 
    They did not go further east than the Black Sea, which means that
    they kept themselfes strictly in the European part of 'Russia'.
       
>    They say Finnish people called them 'Rus' (Ruotsi means Sweden in
>    modern Finnish?) from where the word 'Russian' derives. What's sure,
>    is that Rus is not an Slavic word.
 
    I doubt there exists a connection. I have never read of any 'Viking'
    colony so far east.
    
 >   They say in Gotland and Hithabu explorers found a little image of
 >   Buddha. Anyone knows whether the Svears did reach beyond the Urals?
  
    That is more than I know of but I strongly doubt that this is true.
      
>    Also: What connection did exist between the Lapps and the Svears?
 
    None, what I know of. 'Svearna' (Swedish form) did not make contact
    with the Lapps (or Samer,(their own name)) until the 16th century.
    They probably derivate from the eskimoo tribes. 
    
    Paul.

    A lot of people think that Russia got its name because of vikings
    that settled there. The teory is that the vikings came from "Roslagen
    (present name)" that is the name of the archipelago and coast north
    of Stockholm. Lots of vikings from the east coast of Sweden probably
    settled along the great rivers they used to get down to the Black
    Sea.
    
    		Olof

    Group soc.culture.nordic
    article 826

    From: [email protected] (Anders Andersson)
    Subject: Re: More thoughts on WW2
    Organization: Uppsala University, Sweden

In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Jan Eric
Larsson) writes:
>   I believe that there was no clear view like that. Sweden had a lot
>   of sympathy for Germany, and nobody knew who'd win. Just like Finland
>   and the Baltic states, Sweden would have fitted nicely in a Europe
>   dominated by a victorious Germany.

    Perhaps it should be mentioned that Sweden traditionally has had very
    close ties with Germany, leading back to the times of Hanseatic trade.
    In medieval time, German businessmen messed up our language and named a
    lot of streets in Stockholm. A lot of people today have family names
    clearly influenced by Germans (and probably not only the names). Even
    as late as the 19th century, German businessmen led mining in northern
    Sweden pretty much on their own. The first foreign language taught in
    public schools was German until around the fifties (I believe), when it
    was replaced by English.

    The "sympathy" Jan Eric is talking about was probably related to these
    ties. Many prominent persons held pro-German views, including a few who
    caught the Nazi infection. The Swedish Security Police of the time was
    pretty busy chasing alleged communists, while the brownshirts were left
    on their own. I don't really have any statistics as to how big the Nazi
    movement was in Sweden in comparison with other European countries at
    the time; maybe others can provide that. Nevertheless, the vast
    majority was of course clearly opposed to Hitler's madness, and Vilhelm
    Moberg were among the prominent intellectuals indirectly exposing the
    nature of these ideas in writing ("Rid i natt").

    It seems to me that Hitler recognized the Scandinavians as some kind of
    "fellow arians", whatever importance that had to him. Hermann Goering
    had a Swedish wife (in his first marriage), Karin, who (to the horror
    of her family) was completely engulfed by the high ideals she saw in
    the plans of her husband's company. She became some sort of mascot to
    the gang. Goering even spent some time in Sweden in the thirties, part
    of it in a mental hospital... Karin died before the war broke out, I
    believe. 
    
    -- 
    Anders Andersson, Dept. of Computer Systems, Uppsala University 
    Paper Mail: P.O. Box 520, S-751 20 UPPSALA, Sweden 
    Phone: +46 18 183170   EMail: [email protected]                       

Yeah, on a Lufthansa flight from Chicago to Frankfurt I read the in-flight
magazine.  There was a big article on the German influence in Sweded=n and
Stockholm.  There is I believe a big German church in Stockholm (which
still has German services).  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Chad

    Group soc.culture.nordic                   

    From: [email protected] (Robert Martensen)
    Subject: Re: Flax, WWII, neutrality, and beyond
    Organization: TeleLOGIC Uppsala AB

    Bill Thacker wrote

>... my understanding is that the Swedish iron ore considered
>vital to German production could not be shipped through the northern seas
>during winter, and the only railroads up to transporting it over land
>were in Norway...

    Right but wrong. During the winter the ore can only be shipped through
    the Northen sea (the sea outside Norway) as the "Bottenviken" (Gulf of
    Bottnia, north part of the Baltic sea) is very frozen. The North Sea is
    not. There are railroads through Sweden from the mining districts down
    to southern Sweden, but they have far too small capacity to handle that
    kind of traffic.

>>Actually, one of the gravest threat to Swedish neutrality came from
>>the Allies. During the winter war, they requested free passage to
>>Finland for a task force. Sweden (and Norway) refused. Later it has
>>been showed that the allied HQ planned a benevolent occupation of S&N
>>like the one of Iceland later.

>The official Soviet history of the war, for what it's worth, claims that
>Sweden was vacillating under Allied pressure, and preparing to allow
>passage under protest, until Soviet ambassadors warned that "Sweden needs
>to take great care to preserve her neutrality..."   After this thinly-
>veiled threat, Sweden redoubled her refusal.   Can any Swedes confirm or
>deny this story ?

    As far as I have gathered from books about the political plots during
    the early war, there were pressure from the French and British that
    they should be let pass, and from the Soviet Union and Germany that
    they should not. I have hovever not found any evidence that they ever
    seriously contemplated to let them pass (haven't found any evidence
    that they wouldn't either).

    Another interesting episode during the early war was the advanced
    Swedish plans to occupy �land  - Finnish island between Sweden and
    Finland in the Baltic sea). This was not a new awakening of the good
    old Swedish imperialist tradition (at least they don't admit to that)
    but some kind of peace-keeping mission. 
    
    When the Winter war began, �land was undefended. It had a strategic
    position but a treaty said that it had to be unfortified (a paragraph
    enforced by the Russians when �land was put in Finnish custody).
    Finland did not have the resources to defend it properly, and the idea
    was that if Sweden (as some kind of neutral) occupied it, none of the
    contestants would have to care about the island. It was some years
    since I read about it so my recollection is dim. I don't remember if
    uncooperative Finns, Russian (or German) threats or a sceptical
    government was the reason, but the plans was never carried out.

    Twenty years earlier Sweden did in fact occupy �land. It was in the end
    of the Finnish civil war and the Swedish troops came to ensure that the
    Russian troops left without too much fuss.

    Robbis
    --
    Real life:    Robert Martensson            Email:  robert@uplog.{se,uucp}
    Snail mail:   TeleLOGIC Uppsala AB         Phone:  +46 18 189441
                  Box 1218                     Fax:    +46 18 132039
                  S - 751 42 Uppsala, Sweden                                    

    From: [email protected] (Magnus Rimvall)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: Re: Sweden and WWII (was Lithuania & Sweden)
    Date: 26 Mar 90 14:32:32 GMT
    Organization: Schenectady, NY
 
    In article <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:
 
>	And one last item on the World Wars.  Yes, Sweden sold iron ore to the
>Germans.  But they also allowed much British intelligence-gathering to be
>conducted from there--and they were a refuge to people escaping from occupied
>Denmark and Norway.  
 
    The official policy of Sweden shifted with the course of the war. At
    the outset Germans were given many concessions (e.g. transportation of
    troops by train from Denmark to Norway, i.e. through Sweden). As the
    German successes dwindled, Sweden started to grant the allies more
    concessions. You may call this pragmatic or spineless, depending on
    your vantage-point. 
 
    Towards the end of the war, many Allied (in particular US) hit/wounded
    aircraft/crews landed in Sweden.  A funny anecdote/story from that time
    describes the radio conversation  between a hit B-17 and a Swedish flak
    unit:
 
    Swedes: You are approaching Swedish territory.
 
    B-17:   We know
 
    Swedes: If you do not turn westward now we will have to fire
 
    B-17:   We know
 
    ....
    ....
 
    B-17:   You are shooting too low
 
    Swedes: We know
 
 
    Magnus Rimvall
    Standard Disclaimer here

    I would like to hear more about the history of Swedish
    iron ore. Not specifically about its shipment to Germany
    during World War 2.
    
    First, is/was much of the Swedish iron ore exported
    by railroad through Norway and then by ship or coastal
    barge?
    
    Also, are (or were) the iron-ore hauling railroad
    installations considered militarily sensitive?
    Are they unique in design?
    
    Is the Swedish iron ore of special quality? Easy to mine?
    In great supply? Is Sweden's iron ore mining industry nationalized
    to some extent? What about the steel-making industry?
    
    What does the term "Swedish steel" connote? Stainless steel,
    high quality steel, special alloys, etc.?
    

    Re: .17 by HYDRA::MCALLEN:
    
    To quote from Fact Sheets on Sweden - The Swedish Steel Industry, a
    Swedish Institute (SI) publication:
    
    "The Swedish steel industry concentrates largely on special purpose
    products which require very high quality."
    
    Yes, the iron ore deposits of central Sweden are considered to be of
    high quality.
    
    Another quote from the abovenamed SI publication:
    
    Special steels, that is, alloy and high-carbon steels, comprise
    one-third of Sweden's total crude steel production, a higher proportion
    than in other major steel-producing countries."
    
    This includes stainless, high-speed tool steels, and others where
    durability and serviceability requirements are exceptionally high.
    Among the better-known products made of Swedish special steels are ball
    bearings, watch and valve springs, razor blades, saw blades, and rock
    drills.                                
    
    You can imagine the strategic military value of such resources!

    Thanks for the steel info.
    
    And I always thought razor blades were made from scrapped dreadnoughts!
    
    Why so many Swedes in Minnesota? Proximity to the Mesabe
    [and submerged, Lake Wobegonne] iron ore deposits?   :^)
    

    On the railway through Norway.
    
    The Kiruna - Narvik railway was built earlier this century (I think).
    There is no other railway line (i.e., running north/south) that
    far north in Norway.  At the time of building, it was said to be
    the most expensive stretch of rail per meter (lots of bridges &
    tunnels + arctic conditions). Much of the German motivation for
    the attack on Norway was specifically to secure Narvik (Oslo, Bergen
    et al were seen by many as merely the means to the end, which was
    Narvik). Part of the same complex of problems was the British mining
    of the waters off the Norwegian coast prior to 9th of April. This
    had underscored the vulnerablility of the transport channel by sea
    from Narvik to Germany.
    
    Significantly, the recapture of Narvik in (May?) 1940 by a combined
    Norwegian/Polish/French/British force was the first battle won by
    the allies in WW II (though Narvik was surrendered a few weeks later
    as part of the general surrender of Norway on 10th June 1940).
    

    Mauritz
    

    From: [email protected] (Lars Aronsson)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Date: 14 Jul 90 11:23:15 GMT
    Organization: Lysator Computer Club, Linkoping University, Sweden
 
    ....
 
    One of the titles of the Swedish king is "King of Svea, Gothia and
    Wendes" (Svea, Goetes och Vendes konung) although Svea and Gothia
    consisted of several kingdoms (now identified as landskap) and it is
    unclear where Wendes was. I think the Danish throne also claims Wendes. 
 
    Lars Aronsson
    [email protected]

    From: [email protected] (Thomas Sj|land)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Date: 16 Jul 90 10:06:39 GMT
    Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
 
    [email protected] wrote:
    >>it is unclear where
    >>Wendes was. I think the Danish throne also claims Wendes. 
 
    I read in a newspaper article (who knows how reliable those are...)
    that there is a small people now residing in DDR named "Venderna". This
    ethnic minority seems to have been run over by Poles, Germans, Russians
    etc.  and representatives of this "nationality" have recently applied
    for help by  the Swedish King who until the constitutional reform in
    1972 still had the title Aronsson refers to. The foreign office are
    reported to have answered politely that the king since 1972 (the same
    year Sweden got official relations on embassy level with DDR, btw.)
    does not any longer officially represents this  people.
 
    I can also inform you that various regiments in Sweden, e.g. one in my
    home town Kristianstad (located in south Sweden, the part taken from
    Denmark in  1648-58, Kristian was the Danish King Kristian IV) are
    still named after this people. The one I refer to is named "Kungl.
    Wendes Artilleriregemente".
 
	/Thomas
    --
    Thomas Sjoeland
    SICS, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
    Tel: +46 8 752 15 42  Fax: +46 8 751 72 30
    Internet: [email protected] 
    .......

    From: [email protected] (Thomas Sj|land)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: Swedish diplomatic attitudes in history
    Date: 11 Sep 90 08:11:21 GMT
    Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
 
    I got to read a wonderful little pamphlett from 1634, which was
    reprinted first in 1828 in the "Stockholms magasin", and later
    published in facsimile in 1985 by the swedish publishing house 
    Rediviva (ed: Teddy Brunius). Its title is "Fransmannen Charles
    d'Ogiers Dagbok vfver dess Resa i Sverige med Franska Ambassadvren
    Grefve d'Avaux Er 1634. Ett bidrag till  Fdderneslandets Sedehistoria
    fvr denna tid." ISBN - 91-7120-183-1 In english: "Diary of the
    Frenchman Charles d'Ogier over his journey to Sweden with the french
    ambassador count d'Avaux in the year 1634. A contribution to the
    cultural history of the fatherland of this time." Unfortunately for
    some the book is in Swedish (translated from Latin).
 
    I found a little piece that I'll try to translate. It is about the
    strange behaviour in swedish diplomacy the French author heard about
    during his stay in this (to him) strange nordic power. [Unfortunately
    we lose the original  old language in the translation.]
 
    ''Salvius berdttade oss fvr vfrigt mycket om den noggrannhet i
    ceremonier Svenskarna meste iakttaga vid underhandlingar med sina
    grannar. Ndr mvte  helles med Danskarne, meste det utsdttas pe negon
    bro, som etskiljer bdgge rikena; negra plankor upptagas midt pe bron,
    se att det dr en  vppning imellan Legaterna. [Det hade en geng hdndt,
    att Ddnska Kansleren Friis, fvr att visa sin Konungs fvretrdde, fvrst
    utropat dess helsning  till de Svenska; men dessa uttydde det tvertom
    sesom tecken till  undergifvenhet.] Vid mvten med Pelackerne, som
    vanligen hellas i tdlt, dro  tvenne bord stdllda midt emot hvarandra
    fvr hvardera maktens Sdndebud, och  midt imellan dem en tapet nedfdlld,
    som uppdrages sedan de blifvit samlade  och satt sig, se att de pe en
    geng mette fe se hvarandra och taga af sina hattar. Det berdttas, att
    en lvjlig hdndelse tilldragit sig vid  sammantrddet, de det sista
    sexeriga stillestendet afslvts imellan Sverige och  Pelen (er 1629).
    Sedan Gesandterne med rdknade steg mvtt hvarandra pe halfva  vdgen,
    ville ingendera, fvr att ej fela emot sin vdrdighet, begynna tala. 
    Pelska Kansleren Christopher Zaduich orkade ej ste ldngre fvr sina
    sjuka  fvtter, och sade slutligen: "Pe det hvfligheten me begynnas
    ifren ver sida  vnska vi Er, J gode Herrar Svenskar en god morgon."
    Axel Oxenstjerna svarade  strax: "Att vi icke me synas otacksamma, se
    vnska vi er, J gode Herrar  Pelacker, ett sundt fvrstend." Derpe skreds
    strax till sakernas avgvrande.''
 
    tr: ''Salvius told us, by the way, a lot about the care the Swedish
    have to undertake in the negotiations with their neighbors. When a
    meeting is held with the Danes, it must be set out on some bridge at
    the border between the two countries; some deals be taken out from the
    middle of the  bridge, so that there is an opening between the
    participants. [Once it had happened, that the Danish Chancellor Friis,
    in order to show the superiority  of his King, first stated his
    greetings to the Swedish; but these interpreted it contrarily as a sign
    of subordination.] At meetings with the Polacks, which are normally
    held in tents, two tables are standing facing each other, one for the
    messenger of each power, and in the middle between them there is a
    curtain, which will be pulled up once all have arrived and are seated,
    so  that they must see each other at once and take off their hats. It
    is being told that a ridiculous event occurred at the meeting when the
    last six year standstill was agreed between Sweden and Poland (1629).
    Since the messengers had met on half way with counted steps, neither of
    them would, in order not to conduct an error against their dignity,
    begin to speak. The polish Chancellor Christopher Zaduich could not
    stand up any more becaus of his ill feet, so he finally said: "That the
    courtesy be begun from our side we wish you, yee goode Swedish men, a
    good morning." Axel Oxenstjerna immediately replied: "That we shall not
    seem to be ungrateful, we wish you, yee goode Polish men, a healthy
    mind."  Thereafter the matter went into a conclusive phase.''
 
 
    --
    Thomas Sjoeland
    SICS, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
    Tel: +46 8 752 15 42  Fax: +46 8 751 72 30
    Internet: [email protected] 
    .......

    From: [email protected] (Markku Sakkinen)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Date: 19 Sep 90 09:33:46 GMT
    Organization: University of Jyvaskyla, Finland
 
    In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Klaus Ole
    Kristiansen) writes:

    > ...
    >At the congress of Vienna, held to tidy up after the the napoleonic
    >wars, the then Swedish Finland was given to Russia as a reward for
    >winning the war. Sweden had changed to the winning side in the last
    >minute, and got Norway as compensation. Either the Swedish negotiators
    >plain forgot about Iceland, Greenland and the Faroes, or the Danish
    >negotiators managed to convince the congress that Norway was sufficient
    >compensation. 
 
    No, it wasn't indeed Sweden that changed sides! The main reason why
    Russia started the war against Sweden in 1808 was that king Gustaf IV
    Adolf was an ardent opponent of Napoleon from the very beginning, while
    Alexander I and Napoleon were the best of friends at that time. The war
    ended in 1809 when the Russians had conquered Finland. Later, after
    they (A & N) had become enemies and Napoleon was defeated, it evidently
    appeared to the Congress of Vienna that Sweden ought to get some
    compensation. Of course, the great victor Alexander was not willing to
    give back Finland.
 
    These changes of ownership incidentally proved benificial both for
    Finland and Norway in the long run. (Now I may know too little about
    the Norwegian case, please correct if necessary.) In both cases, the
    old rulers had applied some measure of assimilation politics toward the
    subordinated countries, but the new status was more autonomous, more
    like a personal union (as the Kalmar Union had been at a time).
 
    During the 1800's, I think Finns were treated essentially as citizens
    if they went to Russia, but Russians were treated as foreigners in
    Finland. I also remember reading that the last Swedish king of Norway,
    Oscar II, who then finally dissolved the union that had become a pain
    in the neck, was very particular about Norway being a separate kingdom.
    He even learned the Norwegian language; no Russian emperor went so far
    with Finnish (it would have been an order of magnitude more difficult,
    too).
 
    As far as I know, there is no remarkable statue of any Swedish king
    anywhere in Finland, but the statue of Alexander II occupies the most
    prestigious place of the country, in the middle of the Senate Square in
    Helsinki. (Poles may have less fond memories of Alexander II, sorry
    about that.)

    Likewise, Karl XIV Johan has a monument in Oslo; are there any statues
    of Danish kings in Norway? He was the first king of the Sweden-Norway
    union, ex-field marshal Bernadotte from Napoleon's (!!) army.
 
    Markku Sakkinen
    Department of Computer Science and Information Systems
    University of Jyvaskyla (a's with umlauts)
    Seminaarinkatu 15
    SF-40100 Jyvaskyla (umlauts again)
    Finland
          [email protected] (alternative network address)

Re: 295.23

I don't believe the Norwegians were thrilled about being handed 
over to the Swedes. If my memory serves me correct they rose up 
aganist the Swedes and fought a brief war of independance before 
being crushed by Swedish troops.

Rgds.

Geoff

    re the last two
    
    1) There IS a statue of "Cristian Kvart" (Christian IV), probably the
    most popular of the Danish kings, on one of Oslo's large squares.
    Furthermore, "monuments" remain to him in the names of several cities
    (Kristiansund & Kristiansand---as well as Kristiania, former name of
    Oslo, though characteristically, this was changed to Oslo in 1929). He
    visited Norway frequently (I forget whether it was roughly 30 or 50
    times), founded industries, etc.
    
    2) Notwithstanding item 1, the situation in 1814 had a good deal more
    nuances than a more superficial history has presented it. Luckily, this
    more varied picture is now being tought in our schools.  Some of the
    mixture of events/positions that went on in the year of our
    constitutional convention of 1814:
     o There were essentially factions for and aginst Sweden at the time
     o The whole process of the independence movement had actually been
    instighated by the Danish monarchy, in order to retain control (they
    hoped to recover formal control subsequently) of Norway. It "got out of
    hand" in the sense that many were more interested in real independence.
     o Carl Johan (Jean Bernadotte) was instrumental in cooling everything
    down. Previous reference of the rebellion being "crushed" is
    overstating it a bit. Neither side wanted a war; each for their own
    reason. Carl Johan "gave in" to the Norwegian negotiators on just about
    all points in the constitutional negotiations (conducted between the
    17th of May and November of 1814). He had his own internal problems
    with the "Gustavians" (old royal dynasty) and secured support in Norway
    to help his position in Sweden (like the Danish king though, he also
    thought he would regain many of the powers he negotiated away at a
    later date)
     o Finally---and I think, perhaps most important---a number of truly
    knowledgable people at the time realized that Norway coulld not
    function as a viable economic unit without a strong association with
    Sweden.
    
    All of the above, of course, only gives a superficial indication of the
    many issues surrounding "independence"/"union". In summary, I think .23
    made some valid points that challenge popular stereotype interpretation
    of events in both Finland and Norway. In both countries, however, these
    feelings would vary over time, and by the early 1900's both were more
    than ready to break with "big brother".
    
    Mauritz
    

    From: [email protected] (Peter Anvin)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: Re: Driving on left/right in antiquity?
    Date: 21 Jan 91 18:50:10 GMT
    Organization: Northwestern University
 
    In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Tapani
    Tarvainen) writes:

   >I vaguely remember having read somewhere that the left-handed traffic
   >in Sweden was decreed by the king in the 16th century or so.
   >Anybody know better?
 
    Carl XII (that is Charles XII for all you who have read European
    History in English) of the early 18th century decreed *right-handed*
    traffic, as an effort to standardize with the continent (or just to
    butt out England). When Carl XII "fick en f�r tidig julklapp... i form
    utav en kulknapp" the new government *returned* Sweden to left-hand
    driving; why, I don't know, but it was most likely either
    conservativism or trying to make people forget Carl the sooner.
 
    (Carl XII was very progressive in some areas; he even tried to
    introduce quarsexagesimal [really octal] arithmetric as national
    standard.  If he had succeeded, think how much easier Sweden would have
    had in inventing and developing the computer than any other country
    would have had!)  :-)

   -- 
   H. Peter Anvin +++ A Strange Stranger +++ N9ITP/SM4TKN +++
   INTERNET:  [email protected]   FIDONET:  1:115/989.4
   BITNET:    HPA@NUACC                 RBBSNET:  8:970/101.4

    From: [email protected] (Marcus Gustavsson)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: Neutrality and other stuff.
    Date: 26 Jan 91 05:37:12 GMT
    Sender: [email protected] (Evald Nyhetsson)
    Organization: Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden
 
 
    In article <[email protected]> [email protected]
    (Kurt Swanson) writes:

   >       I disagree. History has shown us that for the most part, neutral
   >countries don't get invaded. Sweden and Switzerland in WW2, for example.
 
    	I don't know about other countries of course, but Sweden could
    remain neutral thanks to some extreme luck. The first and most
    important issue that helped Sweden was it's geographical location. No
    matter how neutral Sweden may have wanted to be, it would have been
    impossible to remain so if it's geographical location had been in
    western or central europe. 
    
    It must also be said something about the Swedish iron ore. I don't know
    how much this ore meant for the German war potential, but if memory
    serves me right, some 70 percent of all the iron ore used by Germany
    during WWII came from Sweden. (Please fill in if you have the exact
    percentage) It must be said that this export was very pro-axis, but in
    the long run Sweden ended up contributing roughly equal shares to the
    axis and to the allies. So since the Swedes gave the Germans what they
    wanted, there was really no need for Germany to invade Sweden.
    Especially since the Swedish armed forces ended up protecting the ore
    for the bear part of the way to the German factories. The Swedish
    government also managed to make the German high command believe that
    Sweden could defend itself and manage to destroy the mines before the
    Germans would get control over them in case of a German invasion.
 
    	And now an anecdote on how difficult it would have been for Germany
    to put us under their reign of terror. This anecdote is somewhat
    offline from the official Swedish view of our good defence during WWII.
    This was told to me by a retired news reporter from Lysekilsposten in
    Lysekil a small town on the west coast of Sweden. This story is much
    longer in it's original version, but I have omitted many bizarre and in
    a way funny parts.
 
    	During the first week of April in 1940 fishermen from Bohusl�n
    reported strange ships coming from the south, bound northwards. They
    were strange in that they had no light on, no light at all and that
    there weren't one but more than a hundred. Swedish government reacted
    fast and dispatched warnings to Norway. The Norwegians didn't believe
    they could be attacked and neither did the Swedes, because apart from
    warning the Norwegians we did nothing.

    During that infamous morning of april the 9:th reports started to drop
    in of massive air units on the west coast of Sweden and people started
    to believe that Germany was invading Sweden. The mayor of Lysekil who
    was chief of defence around the town, decided to act. That meant
    contacting the armed forces headquarter of west Sweden. He got an order
    to raise readiness, this he did by going down to the cellar and open an
    envelope, that was secure in a safe. Then he should follow the
    instructions in the envelope. This was quite easily done, because all
    they said was to put up signs, that said "RAISED READINESS".

    Later in the day a Swedish trawler picked up some German soldiers, that
    had been aboard a German freighter that was sunk by a Great British
    submarine. The mayor informed headquarters again and wondered what he
    should do. He now got the order to raise readiness again. A so called
    extra high readiness. There was a new envelope now and it said that the
    armed forces of Lysekil should be equipped and ready to meet the
    invasion. Only there were no armed forces and the equipment was some
    odd sabres, foils and rifles, some of them dating from 1700. The mayor
    dealt out the weapons to some 30 citizens and waited for the impending
    assault from Germany.

    Now headquarters in Gothenburg understood that something was happening.
    Since they had heard of the Germans on the trawler, they decided to
    send in  military from the I17 regiment in Uddevalla, some 50 miles
    away from Lysekil. The 36 sergeants that were available took a bus and
    off they went to reinforce the sabres and the foils....(It continues,
    but...)
 
    	The reporter knows, I know, I think every Swede knows that the I17
    regiment was responsible for the defence of Bohusl{n. That's some 180
    miles of coast. I'll say it again, thirtysix men to defend 180 miles of
    coastline.

    	Lucky for us we understood the value of misinformation.
    Headquarters started to give orders to nonexistant brigades, 100:s of
    people started to make false defences i.e. aa-guns made of wood. The
    Germans swallowed it. Their reports are full of examples like "Air
    defence over Lysekil has been improved with atleast 50 guns.".
 
    	I apologise for this being somewhat lengthy, but once you get the
    fingers moving... I'll also apologise in advance if this posting didn't
    suit this group. Hope you found it interesting.
 
	Best of wishes,
	Marcus "MOF" Gustafsson
  Chalmers  | USENET: [email protected]   | "You cried for night.
 University | SNAIL:  Marcus Gustafsson        | It falls.
     of     |         Harald Hjarnesgata 2     | Now cry in darkness." 
 Technology |         417 20 Gothenburg SWEDEN |                   - Someone
 --

    From: [email protected] (Mats Winberg)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: A Ghost Story (Long)
    Date: 30 Jan 91 17:05:46 GMT
    Sender: [email protected]
    Organization: Ericsson
 
 
       I've always been interested in stories and anecdotes about the past,
       history was one of my favourite subjects in school. The following
       ghost story I heard several years ago, and it's the best I've
       ever heard since it combines well-known historical facts with
       a certain twist. To understand it one must have some background
       facts, which of course is well known by any educated Swede. But
       to a foreigner, the main characters of this story may not be
       familiar:
 
 
       Karl XII (Charles XII) - the warrior king of Sweden, who in
       1697 lost his father only 15 years old and became king over
       a Baltic Empire including Finland, the Baltic States and 
       possessions in Germany. That same year the old castle Tre Kronor
       in Stockholm burned to the ground, and many regarded it as
       an omen of bad times to come. And indeed, in 1700 Sweden
       was attacked simultaneously by Poland, Denmark and Russia.
       The young king went to war with his army, defeated Denmark
       by a landing in Sjaelland and forced them out of the war.
       Next, he shipped an army of 10.000 men to Estonia and
       defeated  a Russian army of 80.000 men at Narva. Satisfied
       with that he turned his attention to Poland where he fought
       several campaigns to force August of Sachsen from the Polish
       throne. 
       For nine years he won almost every battle, until that fateful 
       day in late june 1709, when a Russian army defeated the Swedish
       at the Ukrainan town of Poltava. The defeated army capitulated
       later at Perevolotjna on the banks of the Dnepr. The king and
       his Guards fled to Turkey, where he as a not so 
       welcomed guest/prisoner tried to open a second front against
       Russia.
       In 1715 he returned to Sweden, and fell in battle during a
       siege on the Norwegian fortress Fredriksten (1718).
 
       There are several portraits of Karl by different artists such
       as Ehrenstral and David von Krafft. In all the paintings he
       is wearing the standard swedish cavalry uniform of those days,
       large boots, blue coat, yellow elkskin gloves and a big sword.
       Karl always wanted the paintings to be realistic, he never
       wore wigs, and he told the artists not to beautify him but
       to paint him as he looked.
    
       Though Karl not wanted to look better than he was,
       there was one episode when he was not satisfied of what
       he saw in a portrait. It's been told that when von Krafft
       made one of the last portraits in 1715, Karl got in a rage
       when he saw the unfinished portrait, took a knife and
       trashed the face. But then he calmed down, excused himself 
       and told the artist to restore it exactly like it was. 
       One could understand why Karl was disappointed in the portrait. 
       It shows an prematurely aged man though only 33 years old looking 
       like 50-55. And there is a cruel,mean and ugly expression around 
       the mouth.
       Did Karl get into a rage because he realized what all those
       years of war, death and destruction had done to him ?
       No one knows...
 
       Verner von Heidenstam - poet, author and Nobel Prize winner,
       and also a member of the Swedish Academy (1859 - 1940) very
       much regarded during his lifetime, but nowadays mostly
       neglected. Still, in my opinion his 'Nya Dikter' (1915) are
       among the most beautiful poetry ever written in Swedish.
       In 1897-98 he wrote 'Karolinerna' which is a collection
       of short stories from the Great Nordic War. In these stories
       the hero is not Karl, which one might believe, but rather
       the swedish people that endured the long war. Indeed, Karl
       is often described as ruthless, cruel and indifferent to
       the sufferings of his people. But in the end there is also
       something reconciling about Karl and the tragedy of his life.
 
 
 
 
       This story begins when, in the winter of 1897-98 Heidenstam
       is writing 'Karolinerna'. For several weeks he has been
       stuck, his inspiration is faltering and he now sits in his study
       late at night in the tower chamber of his estate Olshammar near
       the lake Vaettern. He is stuck in the middle of the story
       from Bender, Turkey where Karl and his Guard of 300 are besieged
       by several thousands of janissars. He can't continue because
       he doesn't know what actually happened. Then he hear heavy
       footsteps in the stairway leading up to the chamber, suddenly
       the door is opened and Karl stands before him. Heidenstam
       recognizes the slim figure immediately from all the paintings 
       he have seen.
       The king is wearing the blue uniform, big boots and a sword, but
       there is something about him that doesn't fit with the descriptions
       of him. It's just a detail but Heidenstam notices it after a while.
       The ghost starts to speak and tells Heidenstam exactly what
       happened in Bender and many other things and concludes by saying 
       that the book will be a success and that 'you have my blessing, go on!'
 
       Heidenstam tells a friend, von Rosen, about the episode and
       they are both present when 20 years later the tomb of Karl XII
       is opened in Riddarholmskyrkan in Stockholm. All persons that
       are present are silent when the lid of the coffin is removed.
       The king's body was embalmed, but no one knows what state the
       corpse is in now. But now he lies there, as if he only was asleep,
       the king that was feared and admired throughout Europe, several hundred
       years before. He is wearing a 'clean white shirt' exactly like the 
       chaplain told the dying soldier Bengt Geting in one of the stories of
       'Karolinerna'. (*)
       Von Rosen is looking at the face of Karl XII where the terrible
       gun shot wound in the head are clearly visible, death must
       have been instantenous. Then he feels a hand on his shoulder,
       it is Heidenstam who whisper in his ear: The gloves! He has
       got WHITE gloves, not  yellow , white... just as he had
       when he visited me...
 
 
 
    (*) In the story Bengt Geting is assured that he will not be placed in
        a mass grave but will be buried in a clean white shirt, according to
        his wish. And the last thing the chaplain says is :
        'the king himself, who doesn't value himself higher than a foot
         soldier, will also be buried in a clean white shirt'.
 
      
      P.S. The uniform Karl wore when he was shot is on display
           at the Royal Castle in Stockholm.

   From: [email protected]
   Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
   Subject: Sweden in WWII (was Kings and Fascism)
   Date: 20 Jan 92 01:47:04 GMT
   Sender: [email protected]
   Organization: Research School of Physical Sciences, ANU
    
    In article <[email protected]>, 
    [email protected] (Martin Gilje II Jaatun) writes:
 
   > ...but to me it seems that in Norway it
   > is the accepted wisdom (if not fact) that Gustav Adolf had very
   > right-leaning sympathies before and during the second WW, which is why
   > it was so easy for Hitler to send his soldiers by train trough Sweden
   > to attack Narvik...? Would anybody with a firmer foundation in history
   > than myself care to comment on this? 
 
    First, I think you've got the kings mixed up. (That's a *very* good
    reason to use their number; it has been very common in Swedish history
    that two or three kings in sucession have the first name in common.)
    During WWII Gustav V was king, and unless my memory fails me (wouldn't
    be the first time, if this is the case), he used *no* second name.
    Gustav VI Adolf was crown prince at the time (but was of course as-yet
    unnumbered).
 
    Gustav V was the monarch, and as such was the one who had what little
    influence the king could muster in those days. (When it comes to *real*
    influence, I don't think that 1940 was very different from 1992.) Crown
    prince Gustav Adolf was on the other hand old enough to probably try to
    influence the king, so I don't know if you're referring to no.5, no.6
    or both.
 
    When it comes to the king, or the crown prince, or both, being "to the
    right", I think you're true. The monarchy exists for historical
    reasons, and if you think that it should be preserved in some way or
    another (which reasonably must be the case with a monarch who doesn't
    abdicate), you're probably conservative in one way or another, and
    that's "right".
 
    To equate right = nazism = fascism as you at least to some extent do is
    not right. I think you should be *very* careful with this kind of
    reasoning if you actually "really don't want to start a flame war". 
 
    Let's take care of the stupid and untrue accusation that Sweden helped
    Germany invade Norway in 1940 first. Your name, if not your email
    adress, indicates that you're a Norweigan. I'm quite astonished that
    you don't have more accurate knowledge about the invasion of Norway
    (and Denmark) on April 9, 1940! In best German fashion, the attack came
    as a surpise for most people. To negotiate and then move a lot of
    troops to northern Sweden before the attack wouldn't have been too
    smart, and it wouldn't have made much sense, since it would have
    destroyed the surpise. And the Narvik area is much easier to access
    from sea, than over some of the highest mountains in Scandinavia. The
    attack on Narvik was carried out by German troops carried on board
    mainly a number of (rather small) destroyers. They were attacked by the
    Royal Navy, and several of them were sunk just outside Narvik. Quite a
    lot of Krigesmarine sailors made it to shore, and were quickly
    converted to infantrymen, in part using Norweigan rifles from captured
    mobilization stores.
 
    We (= Sweden, don't look at my email address!) behaved far from
    perfectly in WWII, but we did most definitely *not* invade Norway or
    help Germany invade it!
 
    Sweden did give Germany access to Swedish territory on a few occasions.
    Unarmed German soldiers, part of the occupation troops in Norway, on
    their  way home to Germany were transported by train through Sweden on
    several  occasions. (Their weapons and equipment were left in Norway
    and used by  new soldiers transported to Norway by ship; I suppose that
    soldiers with  experience from Norway were used on the eastern front,
    while inexperienced  soldiers were deemed sufficient to guard Norway
    from liberation attempts.)  One complete German infantry division
    (sorry, I don't have the number right now) was transported (equipment
    and everything) through Sweden to Finland on one occasion, and saw
    action against the Red Army in northern Finland. This was of course not
    "neutral" but it happened anyway. Just as a few things that were of
    help to the allies happened, especially towards the end of the war.
 
    There was *some* support for Hitler in Sweden during the war, but never
    in more important places. (The conservative party actually expelled its
    entire youth organization a few years *before* the war because it had
    become somewhat pro-nazi.)
 
    Swedish support for Germany did not happen because the government was
    pro-nazi. It happend partly becuase Sweden was, and had been for a long
    time (= wayyyyy before 1933), rather pro-German, and more important, 
    because of pragmatism. The coalition government that ruled Sweden 
    1940-45 (formed after the invasion of Denmark and Norway, and
    consisting  of four of the five parties in parliament; no-one wanted to
    include the  communists) was, however, determined to keep Sweden out of
    the war to  the extent that they allowed violations of the
    self-proclaimed  neutrality that easily could be interpreted as
    cowardice (and often has been, by Swedish post-war commentaries). "Was
    Sweden neutral in  WWII?" is a question that has been asked several
    times in Sweden.  A good answer is "no, not really, but we managed to
    stay out of it".
 
    I could continue the "lecture" on Sweden (and the other Nordic
    countries) in WWII, but I'll stop here for now. If we really want to
    discuss this,  it could probably make an interesting discussion
    subject.
 
    I just think I should add that towards the very end of WWII (late 1944
    or  1945), a Swedish general (the highest-ranking army officer, I
    think)  wanted to abandon the neutrality. Germany was almost defeated,
    and it  was clear that WWII in Europe would end in a matter of months.
    He didn't like the prospect that *his* army wouldn't take part in the
    biggest war ever, so he suggested (and actually drew up campaign plans,
    I think) that Sweden should march into Norway to liberate it from
    German troops.
 
    Tomas 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
! Tomas Eriksson          Exp. Surface Physics Group, Dept. of Applied Maths, !
!                         Research School of Physical Sciences & Engineering, !
! [email protected]  Australian National University, Canberra            !
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

    Let me compliment Tomas Eriksson in .29
    
    This is possibly the most honest statement on the Swedish position
    during WW II that I have seen from a Swedish source.
    
    On the one hand, he correctly tackles the myth of Swedish support of
    the German invasion, but at the same time admits the break with
    official neutrality that occurred from the transit shipment of troops.
    
    Most Swedish sources that tackle the issue (that I have seen) seem very
    defensive and come up with all king of legalistic phraseology to show
    that Sweden was indeed "genuinely neutral". Most Norwegians tend to
    resent this kind of argument. On the other hand, most Norwegians
    certainly accept pragmatism as an acceptable motive, and that staying
    out of WW II was certainly worth breaking a few "rules". The resentment
    then can be paraphrased by "Well, then, why don't the Swedes just admit
    that they bent with the wind to stay out of the war?" It is the
    impression of hypocracy that turns a lot of people off.
    
    This impression of hypocracy was actually strengthened by the late Mr
    Palme. His "speaking out courageously" against US (balanced with
    Soviet) repression of peoples here & there, and attacking "fascists" at
    an appropriate distance, would elicit comments like, "when they had
    REAL fascists right next door, they weren't quite so brave..." and
    words to that effect. 
    
    This was, of course, unfair to Sweden (and Swedish government policy);
    Palme was a different person from <xxx> PM & ministers in '40-'45, and
    functioned at a different time. My criticism here would be purely of
    Olof Palme; as a man of great intellect, it was strange to me that he
    did not have a greater sense of (sensitivity to) historical context.
    <In line with a non-hypocritical tone, I feel absolutely no obligation
    to mouth positive platitudes about Olof Palme just because he is
    dead---so are a lot of other people>.
    
    Mauritz
    

    From: [email protected] (Mark Brader)
    Newsgroups: rec.puzzles,soc.history,soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: Calendar Changes again (was: REQUEST:Mysteries)
    Date: 6 Feb 92 05:34:27 GMT
    Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
 
 Now here is the posting from 1986:
 
| ....						    Sweden was to gradually
| adapt to the Gregorian style by dropping all leap days, starting with the
| year 1700! Since this would bring us ONE day closer for every fourth year
| it also would mean that Sweden was to have a unique calendar for the FORTY
| years it would take to overbridge this ten-day time slip!! Truly a solution
| of the "splendid isolation" type! 
| However, it didn't work out that way. The king was away on endless war-tours
| in Russia and the government at home neglected to fulfill the plan (if there
| was a reason, I don't know it). So, when 1704 came along they happily enjoyed
| their leap day, and the same happened in 1708. When 1712 was in sight someone
| obviously had got tired of this one-day-ahead-or-ten-days-after style. It was
| decided to make an end to it by -listen to this!- going BACK to Julian style!
| 
| This is why Sweden got two leap days in 1712, making a 30-day February! 
| Is there anything like this on record in any other coutry...?
| 
| The final change to Gregorian style, by the way, was made in 1753, when
| March 4 was immediately followed by March 15.
| 
| 
| _____________________________________________________________________
| 
| Anders Berglund, ELLEMTEL, Sweden   =  ...mcvax!enea!erix!etel!anders
 
-- 
Mark Brader				"I shot a query into the net.
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto			 I haven't got an answer yet ..."
utzoo!sq!msb, [email protected]				-- Ed Nather
 
Original text in this article is in the public domain.

    From: [email protected]
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: Re: Text on old coins
    Date: 26 Feb 92 19:44:49 GMT
    Sender: [email protected]
    Organization: Research School of Physical Sciences, ANU
 
    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Marc S.
    Jensen) writes: 

 > On most older Danish coins (i.e. before 1875 or so), the inscription usually
 > says something like "<King> <Number> D.G. Daniae [Norvegiae] V.G. Rex." (as
 > in "Christianvs VIII D.G. Daniae V.G. Rex")
 > 
 > What does the V.G. Signify?  I have seen it as "Vandal. Goth." but I'm
 > still not sure exactly what areas those are...
 > 
 > And how about the following (from a fairly rare coin which I certainly don't
 > have in my collection):
 > 
 > "D.G. Rex Dan. Nor. Van. Go. Dvx Sl. Holst. Dit & Old."
 > 					       ^^^^^^^^^^ What are these?
 
    What we have here is a fine example of the good old days when the
    Danish and Swedish monarchs used each others titles freely. And let's
    just say that this wasn't because they were such good buddies so they
    didn't mind... I'm afraid I'm not 100% sure of the geographical
    demarcation of all those areas, or their names in English, if they
    actually have any English names at all.
 
    The Swedish king used to call himself "Svears, G�tars & Venders Konung"
    in those days. (Those are the words used in the 1809 Swedish
    Constitution, plus a few other titles.) There you have the same G. and
    V. as above. I'm suddenly unsure who actually should call himself "V."
    in this context, but the Danish king was definitely not monarch of
    G�taland; Gothenburg is in that part of Sweden... Dit. & Old. probably
    means Ditmarn & Oldenburg, which you probably should search along the
    German coast with the Baltic Sea. Hmmm... I think the Swedish king
    claimed to "own" these in 1809 as well, perhaps a revenge for "Goth."
    (or the other way around).
 
    The Scandinavian monarchs have stopped this "borrowing" practice. It
    wouldn't do much sense today anyway, since one doesn't announce a king
    by reading a ten-minute-long list of titles anymore. At least not in
    Scandinavia.
 
 Tomas 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Tomas Eriksson              Exp. Surface Physics Group, Dept. of Applied Maths,
 [email protected]      Research School of Physical Sciences & Engineering,
 ([email protected])   Australian National University, Canberra
 (Swede in exile)                                   "Disclaimers are for wimps!"

    From: [email protected] (Lars Aronsson)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: Atlantis revisited (was: Nordic influences) (long)
    Date: 27 Feb 92 11:16:03 GMT
    Sender: [email protected] (Lord of the News)
    Organization: Lysator Computer Club, Linkoping University, Sweden
 
    In Uppsala, there is an old Bible called the Codex Argentus written in
    the now extinct Gothic language. The Gothic language, together with
    Scandinavian and German, counts as a Germanic language. The Gothic
    people is said to have lived along the Baltic south shore, but then to
    have moved and settled somewhere close to the Adriatic Sea (if I
    remember my history lessons correctly), where they adopted Christianity
    and developed their writing under Roman influence. The Swedish word for
    the Gothic people is 'goter' and the adjective is 'gotisk' (used to
    describe one medieval building style).
 
    The Anglosaxon Beowulf poem from the 8th century mentions the hero
    Beowulf to be of the 'gaut' people. In my Swedish translation, this is
    accepted as a synonym to 'go"t' (in plural 'go"ter'), the people living
    in Go"taland in southern Sweden. In many words, Old Norse 'au' has
    turned to Swedish 'o"' (for example aust, haust, haug, hauk), so this
    is easy to believe.
 
    Sweden is known (or believed?) to have formed somewhere between the 6th
    and 11th century after uniting Go"taland with Svealand. Two Swedish
    landskap (ethnic regions) carry this name: Va"stergo"tland (west)
    around town Skara and O"stergo"tland (east) around town Linko"ping.
    When a new town was founded close to A"lvsborg by king Gustav II Adolf
    in the 17th century, it was given the name Go"teborg (Gothenburg).
 
    The Baltic Sea island Gotland has not always been Swedish and I have
    never seen it's name written with 'o"' or 'au'. The people of Gotland
    are called gutar (in singular 'gute'). This is a long 'u'.
 
    The Norwegian word for boy is 'gut' (in plural 'gutter'). This is a
    short 'u'.
 
    The mainland part of Denmark is called Jylland in Swedish (and Danish I
    assume). In English, the name is Jutland. Also, the Danish adjective
    Jydsk has a 'd' making it close to the 't' i Jutland.
 
    Since 'o"' is a 'soft wovel' in Swedish, the G in 'Go"taland' has a
    soft pronunciation (as in General, as opposed to G in Governor). This
    makes 'Go"taland' and 'Jutland' sound quite similar.
 
    Adding to all this is the Scandinavian and German word for Jew 'jude',
    and Jewish 'judisk'.
 
    It seems we have six similar words here referring to different
    geographic/ethnic regions:
 
     1) goter (people) - gotisk (gothic, adj.)
     2) Go"taland (Gautaland, land) - go"ter (people)
     3) Gotland (land) - gutar (people) - gutsk (adj.)
     4) gut (a noun)
     5) Jylland (Jutland, land) - jydsk (adj.)
     6) Judaland (southern Israel, land), judar (Jews, people), judisk
        (Jewish, adj.)
 
    [email protected] (Louis Janus, Scandinavian Dept, U of Minn)
    writes:
 
   >The name of "Geysir" derives from the verb geysa, 'to gush', also
   >related to the verb gjo'sa 'to pour'.  Some also relate the English
   >noun "gust" -- a sudden blast of wind to this verb.  I've also seen
   >Goth, Gotland, Go"teborg related to the verb.  The people came from a
   >place that flooded over.
 
    This is a most interesting theory, what piece of land was flooded? A
    new Atlantis in the Baltic Sea? I think we can assume that the Jews
    entered this linguistic arena independent of this flood.
 
    Swedish TV-producer Dag Sta*hlsjo" (who died recently in a car
    accident) is known for his 'Svearikets vagga' series where he presented
    the idea that Sweden's origin was to find in Va"stergo"tland (around
    Skara) rather than in Uppland (around town Uppsala). Last year, soon
    before his accident, Dag Sta*hlsjo" completed a new series called
    Atlantis.
 
    In this series, the novel historic idea is presented that after the
    island Atlantis sunk in the Atlantic Sea, people landed on the west
    shores of Europe. With their superior knowledge, they built all the
    megalithic monuments we find today, for example the famous Stonehenge.
    After this, the same people settled in Egypt and built the pyramids.

    --

    Lars Aronsson, Lysator, Linkoping University, Linkoping, Sweden

    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    From: [email protected] (Anders Andersson)
    Subject: Re: CIA World Factbook 1991 on nordic countries
    Sender: [email protected]
    Organization: Uppsala University, Sweden
    Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 00:21:32 GMT
 
    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Fredrik.Ostman) writes:

  > [email protected] (Anders Andersson) writes:
  > >So, what is our real Independence Day?  June 6, 1523 (Gustav Vasa being
  > >elected king of Sweden after his successful Liberation War against
  > >Denmark), maybe?
  > 
  > That's 1521. 1523 he marched into Stockholm.
 
    Well, that may be a matter of definition.  In January of 1521, Gustav
    Vasa was appointed "rikshovitsman" by some assembly of local people,
    and in August the same year he was appointed "riksforestandare". As
    both these terms are probably best translated into English as "regent",
    he wasn't really a king yet, only acting in place of one.
 
    With Gustav Vasa as leader, the war against Denmark went on, and
    approached completion in 1523.  At this time, Frederic I succeeded
    Christian II as king of Denmark, and there were fears Frederic was
    about to claim the Swedish throne as well.  To forestall this, a
    parliamentary session (riksdag) in Strangnas on June 6, 1523 proclaimed
    Gustav Eriksson Vasa as king of Sweden.  Later the same month,
    Stockholm fell into Swedish hands, and Gustav Vasa marched into the
    town (at this time, Uppsala was the capital of Sweden).
 
    However, the Union of Kalmar wasn't formally ended until 1524, when
    Frederic I renounced his claims to the Swedish throne at a meeting in
    Malmo (which still belonged to Denmark at that time).
 
    This is to say, it isn't easy to pinpoint a single day (or even a
    single year) when Sweden became "independent".  Sweden had had serious
    complaints over the way Denmark ran the Union for most of its duration,
    and Sweden was in effect interchangeably ruled by Swedish regents and
    Danish kings, a few years at a time, for the second half of the 15th
    century.  However, I think getting a king of our own has a nice
    symbolic touch to it, and it happened on a suitable date, too...
 
    Still, some people believe a union would be a good way to prevent
    future wars in Europe. ;-)
 
   Source:  Bonniers svenska konversationslexikon, 1937.
   --
   Anders Andersson, Dept. of Computer Systems, Uppsala University
   Paper Mail: Box 520, S-751 20 UPPSALA, Sweden
   Phone: +46 18 183170   EMail: [email protected]

    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    From: [email protected] (Till Poser)
    Subject: Re: Pirates & Privateers 
    Sender: poser@frzeus (Till Poser)
    Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
    Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:13:47 GMT
 
    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
    (Antti Karttunen) asks:
 
  |>Does anybody know has there been any real pirates on Baltic Sea?
 
    Klaus Stoertebecker and the "Vitalienbrueder"
 
    During its heyday ~1350 , the Hanse [Hanseatic League - based in north
    Germany] had a crippling grip on the commerce in the Baltic through
    economic measures such as boycott, tariffs and other strongarm tactics.
    Its political power grew so strong that in the Peace of Strahlsund the
    Hanse managed to get a veto right on the Danish royal ascendancy.
 
    During that time, it was very profitable to either smuggle goods into 
    boycotted towns and countries, or to hunt down the Hanse cogs, or both.
    This is what the Vitalienbrueder (Victuals Brotherhood), also known as 
    Likendeeler (equal sharers, also equalisers), were doing with too much 
    success, specifically around Rostock, Wismar and Luebeck and Stockholm.
                                           
    They supplied the beleaguered Stockholm between 1389 and 1395 with
    victuals, hence the name, and pillaged Wisby in 1392.
 
    In 1402, the chief of the Vitalienbrueder, Klaus Stoertebecker, was
    captured before Helgoland, according to legend due to treason, and was
    executed with all of his crew on the Schindanger of Hamburg.
 
    If You believe the folklore, they were a mixture of Robin Hoods and
    Real Heavy Baaad Dudes. Take Your pick.
 
         Till Poser         Internet: [email protected]
    -F35- ZEUS DESY/Freiburg  Bitnet:   POSER@DESYVAX
    bldg.1b-235, Notkestr.85  Hepnet:   VXDESY::POSER (13313::Poser)
         D-2000 Hamburg 52      Tel.: -49-40-8998-2004

    From: [email protected] (MIRALA PETRI J)
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: Some basic Swedish & Finnish history
    Date: 1 Dec 92 17:15:14 GMT
    Sender: [email protected] (Uutis Ankka)
    Organization: University of Helsinki, Computing Centre
 
 
    THE PRE-1809 KINGDOM AND ITS DIVISION
 
    It is useless to speak about "Finns" or "Swedes", "Sweden" or "Finland" 
    without defining what you mean. The pre 1809-Kingdom of "Svear, g�ter
    och vender" (commonly called Sweden) was a multinational, multilingual
    empire where the two most commonly spoken languages for centuries had
    been Swedish and Finnish. People speaking these or other languages
    moved freely within the ever-changing borders of this empire (which for
    a while included even Delaware). 
 
    The "Forest Finns" were one of these groups that moved from one place
    to another within the realm of their king. They could not possibly know
    that there place of origin would one day  be in one state and their
    destination in another, or that such things would  matter. Modern
    nationalism - the reason for most modern wars - did not exist  or was
    at a very embryonic level in 1809, when the half-wit King Gustav IV 
    Adolf lost the eastern half of his realm to Emperor Alexander I of
    Russia.  Thus the division of the realm was not into two modern
    nation-states but into domains of two monarchs (the King of Sweden and
    the Emperor of Russia/Grand Duke of Finland.
 
    As the realm was not divided according to our 20th-century logic, the 
    ethnic/linguistic boundaries did not count when the new border was 
    drawn. Consequently, two bilingual (multilingual really, remember the 
    Sami) states were created. There were (and are) people speaking Swedish 
    in western Finland - and Finnish in northern Sweden. Both these
    "minorities" (to use a 20thC nationalist term) remained loyal subjects 
    of their respective monarchs and later, their respective modern nation-
    states. The language of the ruling elite of the pro-1809 kingdom was 
    Swedish. Thus it remained the language of administration in the both
    halves  of the realm. Everybody in the Finland of 1809, even
    Finnish-speaking  peasants wanted it remain so, because they were
    afraid that it might be  replaced by Russian. 
 
    POST-1809 SWEDEN
 
    The villain of our story, the modern nationalism, reached both halves
    of the old kingdom in the 19th century. Writers and historians tried to
    forget the defeat of 1809 by creating and propagating the modern
    concepts of "Sweden" and "Finland". In Sweden, where the
    Finnish-speaking minority was small, the new national identity became
    strongly connected with the Swedish language, "�rans och hj�ltarnas
    spr�k". This explains to our non-Nordic readers why some Swedes are so
    surprised when they realize that the Finnish-speaking people of
    northern Sweden have lived there and spoken Finnish since time
    immemorial, i.e. before Sweden (in the modern sense) existed.
 
    POST 1809-FINLAND
 
    In what became Finland, the picture was more complicated. The country
    was ruled by the traditional (Swedish-speaking) elite under the Russian
    emperor. The common people (c. 90% Finnish, 10% Swedish-speaking) did
    not have much say in affairs of state. However, from the 1860s onwards
    a nationalist movement evolved, which wanted to make Finnish, too, an
    official language. This was achieved in a series of reforms starting in
    1863. 
 
    The fight between the "Finnish" and "Swedish" parties in Finland was
    very bitter (not bloody, though) at times. The latter party was formed
    by the most of the old elite who sought an alliance with the
    Swedish-speaking common people. Some "Swedish" extremists tried to
    label the Finnish-speaking people as racially and intellectually
    backward "Mongols" and likewise some "Finnish" extremists portrayed the
    Swedish-speaking people as foreign colonists who should start speaking
    Finnish or emigrate "back" to Sweden. This struggle continued into the
    1930s. 
 
    This background might again explain to non-Nordics why [it is
    important] to distinguish between the Swedish-speaking elite of 19thC
    Finland, modern Sweden and modern Swedish-speaking Finns.
                      
    So you could say that there have always been Swedish-speaking Finns and 
    Finnish-speaking Swedes. The emigration of both Finnish- and Swedish-
    speaking Finns into Sweden in the 1960s is another matter.
 
    Petri Mirala
    ([email protected])
 

    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    From: [email protected] (PC Jorgensen)
    Subject: SCANDINAVIAN WHAT-IF
    Sender: [email protected] (Mr News)
    Organization: UiO
    Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 17:58:06 GMT
 
    In 1814, the Double Monarchy of Denmark-Norway was forced by the
    winners of the Napoleonic Wars to cede Norway [actually just Norway
    proper, not Greenland, Iceland and the Faroes, which originally was
    included in the Norwegian part of the kingdom - this means that the
    French-born Swedish king Charles XIII unintentionally "lost" a lot of
    real estate....] to Sweden, who thus got a sop for losing Finland to
    Imperial Russia.
 
    The original intention of the Swedish government was to incorporate
    Norway into Sweden, just as Scania had been incorporated. The
    Norwegians, however, surprised all the victors of the war by writing a
    liberal constitution and putting up a fight. They furthermore had a lot
    of sympathy from England.
 
    This resulted in a personal union, with the King of Sweden
    simultaneously being King of Norway. The kingdoms were said to be
    equal, but Norway was in reality a junior partner.
 
    Scandinavians are very much alike, and ordinary Scandinavians have
    always got on well. But the Swedish elite made loyalty to the union
    very difficult for the Norwegian people. Among other things - Norway
    has always looked to Great Britain as a political ally, while the
    Swedish upper and middle classes as a rule were Germanophile up to
    1945. And while Norway in 1884 was transformed into a parliamentary
    monarchy, the reactionary king Oscar II and the nobility still held the
    power in Sweden.
 
    The final straw was the King's denial of Norwegian diplomatic and
    commercial stations - i.e., consulates - abroad.
 
    In 1905, the Norwegian ministers resigned, and the parliamentary
    parties would not put up a new government for Norway. They therefore
    reckoned that the King had thus put himself out of office, by not being
    able to supply a government that would rule in accordance with the
    people's will [Nice bit of sophistry, dontcha think?].
 
    Both sides prepared for a martial showdown, but intense diplomacy by
    the great powers and a widespread unwillingness to fight in Sweden
    ensured a peaceful solution. Norway became a state in its own right and
    elected the Danish prince Carl as its King Haakon 7.
 
    the question is this, then:
 
    WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THE NORWEGIANS AND SWEDES FOUGHT IT OUT?
 
    Sweden was bigger and more industrialised, but the Norwegians had a
    more modern Army and Navy [for example, the Swedes still believed in
    cavalry attacs and sabre steel, but the Norwegian Army had quietly
    purchased the best machine guns on the market - this means that the
    Swedish General Staff's plan of a cavalry thrust thru Ostfold county to
    Oslo would have caused much grief in Sweden]. England was firmly on
    Norway's side, and so was even anti-revolutionary Russia, but Germany
    was a very fickly ally of Sweden, and in fact hoped to win the
    diplomatic goodwill of both sides.
 
    An interesting military point is that the Norwegian Army prepared a lot
    of armoured trains - the weapon that Trotsky some years later put into
    good use.
 
    Well, 
 
    anyway,
 
    what would the results have been?
 
    How would this affect intra-Scandinavian relations (which usually have
    been close this century, especially after WWII)?
 
 
    In fact, a Norwegian SF writer, Per G. Olsen, has written a short story
    ["The Back Side of the Medal"] about such a war, which soon peters into
    a stalemate, with mainly sniping and some trench warfare, but lingers
    on until 1937. 
 
    But there is room for a lot more speculation here.
 
    Yours,
 
    PC
 
    PC Jorgensen
    grad.student (Russian linguistics)
    University of Oslo
    Norway
 
    home address: 8326 Sogn S. by, N-0858  OSLO, NORGE - NORWAY

    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    From: [email protected] (Simon Tardell)
    Subject: Re: Socialism in Sweden v. communism in SU
    Sender: [email protected] (Usenet)
    Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
    Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1993 17:03:19 GMT
 
    In <[email protected]> [email protected] (Per
    Westerlund) writes:
 
   >How was the swedefication of the newly incoporated provinces from
   >Denmark and Norway in the 17th century (Scania, Halland, Blekinge,
   >Bohusl�n, J�mtland, H�rjedalen) carried out?
 
    By the sword and the fire... A few years ago there was some fuzz about
    the people of Blekinge objecting to putting Karl XII (17th centrury
    king, conquered said provinces) on the 500 kr bills. Obviously, in that
    part of the country he is not known for being a military genius as much
    as he is for burning down Blekinge...

  -- 
  Simon Tardell, Fysik, KTH, [email protected]              V�ga v�gra cgs!
  CERN, experience ATLAS

   Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
   From: Stein J�rgen Rypern <[email protected]>
   Subject: Historically challenged ? (Norway, long)
   Sender: [email protected] (Stein J�rgen Rypern)
   Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway
   Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1993 17:15:06 GMT
 
 
    Hi,
 
    I have tried to condense the salient points, and put things into
    chrono- logical order, including quite a bit of the history preceeding
    the union, since that explains the attitudes and actions in 1814. 
 
    I am certain that  there will be plenty of spelling mistakes, since I
    don't have time for a thorough spell-checking. Sorry about that.
 
  /Stein "A fanatic ? Me ? Well, perhaps a little when the subject is history"
 ============================================================================
 Stein Rypern, grad.student I "Cattle die, kinsmen die,
 Dept of Informatics        I  You yourself must likewise die,
 University of Oslo, Norway I  But one thing never dies:
 [email protected]         I  the verdict on each man dead" (Viking Haavamaal)
 
 
---- start of included file: HISTORY/pre_union.txt ----
 
  Denmark-Norway, Norway, Sweden and the Union 1780 - 1814
  ========================================================
 
    Attribution
    -----------
    The following is condensed and translated by me from a norwegian
  textbook on military history:
 
   R. Holtermann (Major),
   "Laerebok i Norges Krigshistorie",
   Oslo 1938, p 205-317.
 
   It is not used any longer, I suspect, since even the norwegian armed
  forces have advanced beyond the cavalry charge and close order fighting
  these days :-)
 
   I got my copy from a used-book store in Oslo a couple of years back, and
  kept it as a curiousity.
 
    Neutrality 1780-1801
    --------------------
    In 1780, Denmark-Norway, Sweden and Russia signed a treaty to
  ensure free trade and shipping (contraband excepted, of course).
  This was deemed necessary because of the turmoils following the
  french revolution.
 
    In 1799 England demanded the right to inspect neutral shipping,
  even if escorted by neutral warships. On 16. january 1801, Denmark-
  Norway joined the armed neutrality alliance, which had been created
  in 1800 by Russia, Preussen and Sweden.
 
 
    The Brittish Attack on Copenhagen 1801
    --------------------------------------
    On 12 March 1801 a brittish fleet, under the command of Nelson and
  Parker set sail from Yarmouth. On April 2nd 1801, the brittish attacked
  the danish-norwegian fleet in Copenhagen harbour. The danish-norwegian
  fleet was damaged, but the brittish also had bad losses. A 14 week
  ceasefire was decided upon.
 
    On march 23rd, the russian Tsar Paul was murdered, and the neutrality
  alliance fell apart. England then made peace with each of the member
  states separately (with Denmark-Norway in october 1801).
 
    War with England 1807
    ---------------------
    In 1807 France and Russia made peace and joined into an alliance in
  Tilsit. England feared that the french-russian alliance also would get
  their hands on the remnants of the danish-norwegian fleet, which still
  was of significant size, and prepared to seize or destroy this fleet.
 
    The english arrived in peace, saluted the forts normally, and then
  landed a force of some 11-12 000 men near Copenhagen. They crushed the
  few professional danish troops in the area, and started bombarding
  Copenhagen on september 3rd. On september 7th the town surrendered, and
  the english grabbed the entire fleet.
 
    Norwegian army units were also mobilized, but saw no combat against the
  english in 1807. Since english ships were patroling the Skagerak, Norway
  had to organize it own government to function while separated from the
  danish-norwegian government in Copenhagen. A bad famine started, since it
  was no longer possible to import grain from denmark.
 
    Sweden vs Denmark-Norway 1808 - 1809
    ------------------------------------
    After Russia declared war on Sweden on february 10th 1808, the danish-
  norwegian king followed suit with a declaration of war against sweden on
  february 29, 1808.
 
    This was not neccessary acording to the terms of the alliance with Russia
  (which had been reinstalled after the brittish attack) but the danish king
  felt that a war with Sweden was due to happen, since Sweden was a close
  ally of England, and prefered war with a powerful allied to war without
  allies.
 
    On 21 february 1808, the russian army attacked Finland, binding a large
  Swedish army. Norwegian forces mobilized on March 1st 1808.
 
    The da-no plan included an attack by a french-danish army, under the
  command of a certain marshall Bernadotte :-) on Skaane, followed by a
  smaller attack from norway into western sweden. Due to the presence of
  brittish warships in the straits between denmark and sweden, this plan
  never was put into action.
 
    A Brittish expeditionary force, consisting of some 11 000 troops and
  140 ships was then dispatched to Gothenburg in Sweden, to cooperate with
  Sweden in waging war against Denmark-Norway. The fleet arrived in early
  May 1808, but returned to England without seeing action on july 3rd, since
  the Swedish and English commanders couldn't agree on where to attack.
 
    Then a swedish ground attack was planned, with 4 attack groups from the
  Swedish Western Armt under the command of Gen Armfelt in south-eastern
  norway, and a 5th attack group from the Northern Army demonstrating against
  Trondelag.
 
    Some of the groups were delayed, and the first attack in the south,
  starting on april 14th 1808, consisted only of the right (northern) wing
  of the swedish army at the start. These forces were frustrated by steady
  resistance of norwegian detachments in the difficult terrain, and had to
  fall back before the left wing of the swedish forces could be brought to
  attack the defenders.
 
    The summer of 1808 was fairly quiet, and then the norwegians went on the
  offensive with a raid into Jaemtland and Haerjedal in August 1808. On
  december 7th, both sides agreed to a temporary ceasefire in the southern
  districts.
 
    In march 1809, the swedish western army marched off to stockholm to
  remove king Gustaf IV Adolf, and "get peace for the nordic countries".
  The norwegian CinC, crown prince Kristian August of Denmark, kept within
  the ceasefire terms in the south.
 
     However, in june 1809 the general-commanding Trondelag, von Krogh, was
  ordered to attack Jaemtland and Haerjedal. The norwegian forces from
  Trondelag destroyed some fortifications, and then marched back to Norway
  after learning that swedish general von Do"beln was marching to attack
  them. A new ceasefire was negotiated in the Northern districts as well.
 
    In july 1809 Kristian August was elected heir to the swedish crown, and
  danish prince Fredrik of Hessen was appointed CinC Southern Norway.
 
    On december 14th the ceasefire was expanded to cover all armed forces of
  the two countries, and the final peace treaty were signed in Jo"nko"ping
  on december 10th 1809. No territorial changes were made.
 
 
    The years from 1809-1814
    ------------------------
    The war against England continued, mainly as naval actions along the
  coast and an english sea blockade of the Norwegian part of Denmark-Norway.
 
    Sweden had lost Finland to Russia in the peace treaty of Fredrikshamn,
  on september 17th 1809. The Swedish Crown Prince Kristian August died
  in 1810, and Marshall Jean Baptiste Bernadotte was made swedish Crown
  Prince, under the name Karl Johan. He immediately started working for
  making Norway part of Sweden, as a compensation for the loss of Finland.
 
    In 1812, sweden joined Russia in a secret alliance to acquire Norway,
  and in 1813 England and Prussia also decided to support the swedish claim.
  On september 3rd, 1813 war starts between Denmark-Norway and Sweden.
 
    In Norway, Crown Prince Kristian Fredrik took over from Fredrik of
  Hessen as CinC. He was ordered to advance into Sweden, but demured, citing
  lack of money and supply problems as reasons.
 
    Approximately one month after the defeat of Napoleons forces in the
  battle of Leipzig (16-19 october 1813), Karl Johan received the permission
  of the russian Czar to move on the danish province of Holsten with the
  swedish parts of the allied armies.
 
    On january 14th 1814, the danish king Fredrik IV surrendered the
  norwegian throne to Sweden in the Kiel treaty.
 
    In the meantime the norwegians had been mobilizing, and were preparing
  for war with sweden. Having managed on their own for 6 years and having
  fought back a major swedish attack in 1808, they were not very pleased
  at learning that they were going to become swedes.
 
    Since the swedes were not showing up, parts of the army was demobilized
  in march and not recalled until june. On may 28th 1814, Karl Johan returned
  to sweden, but it would take another two months before he started moving
  on Norway.
 
    In the meantime, the norwegians had a constitutional assembly at Eidsvoll
  outside Oslo, and signed their constitution on May 17th 1814. Danish Crown
  prince Kristian Fredrik, the former CinC southern norway, was elected king
  of Norway and CinC for the norwegian army.
 
    The war of 1814
    ---------------
    The norwegian defense plans were based on the swedes following roughly
  the same atatck plans as in 1808, ie attacking straight west against
  upper Ostfold and Akershus counties. The swedish plan was to attack from
  the south, along the coast, supported by the fleet.
 
    On juli 26, the swedish attack started by a naval operation against the
  Hvaler islands, off southern Ostfold county. The norwegian naval forces in
  the district was ordered by the king to fall back to the other (western)
  side of the Oslo fiord. On july 27 and 28th swedish ground forces was
  landed to secure the islands.
 
    At the same time swedish forces advanced on Tistedal, near Halden. The
  southern part of Ostfold was only lightly defended, and the norwegian high
  command was slow in regrouping to face the attacking forces.
 
    The norwegian forces were attacked and defeated in detail, and suffered
  several setbacks: at tistedal on august 1st, in ingedal on august 3rd. The
  town of Fredrikstad surrendered on august 4th, after token resistance.
 
    The town commander had only unwillingly taken the job, and the fall of
  the island coastal batteries (on Kraakeroy, taken by the swedes on august
  3rd) made the fall of the town nearly inevitable. Still, the loss of the
  town was a major setback for norwegian morale.
 
    The norwegian forces fell back to behind the river Glomma in the southern
  parts of Ostfold. In the northern part, the norwegian forces tried to
  concentrate in Rakkestad. But king Kristian Fredrik again lost his nerve,
  and fell back to Langenes, leaving a small rear guard to be defeated in
  detail.
 
    On august 9th there were heavy fighting at Langenes, but the king again
  ordered the norwegian forces to fall back. The swedish losses were
  estimated to approximately 100 men, the norwegian losses at 20 men. Three
  attacks had been repelled when the order to withdraw came, and the
  norwegian troops became very discouraged after receiving the order.
 
    On august 10th the swedes concentrated on securing the areas they had
  conquered, and also landed troops from their fleet behind the glomma
  river line at Onsoy. On august 11th the swedish fleet secured the
  approaches to Moss and the right wing of the norwegian army was threatened
  by envelopment.
 
    On august 12 and 13th the front was quiet.
 
    In the meantime another swedish group of troops had advanced from Eda
  in Sweden (july 31st) to Lier near Kongsvinger (august 2nd). This attack
  was intended as a feint, and the swedish troops fell back after failing
  to gain possesion of the Lier fortifications. The norwegian forces follow
  then and destroy the smaller swedish forces at Skotterud on august 5th.
 
    The fortress of Fredriksten (in Halden) had been invested on july 31st,
  and was bombarded from ships on august 2nd, 4th and 5th. The town
  surrendered, but the fortress held out.
 
    The ship guns could not damage the fortress significantly, so the swedes
  put up several artillery batteries on land. August 13th was the day with
  the worst bombardment. The bombardment continued until both sided received
  word of the peace treaty on august 15th.
 
    On august 7th Karl Johan had offered negotiations, on the conditions of
  Norway going into union with sweden and swedish recognition of the
  norwegian constitution. These suggestions were accepted by the norwegian
  negotiators, and the treaty of Moss was signed on august 14th 1814.
 
    A demarcation line was determined between the two armies, and king
  Kristian Fredrik abdicated. The norwegian parliament, Stortinget, was
  convened to negotiate with the swedes.
 
    Norway and Sweden had become the Union of Norway and Sweden.
 
---- end of included file: HISTORY/pre_union.txt ----               

   Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
   From: [email protected] (Torkel Franzen)
   Subject: Re: Charles XIV, King of Sweden and Norway
   Sender: [email protected]
   Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
   Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1993 17:40:51 GMT
 
  In article <[email protected]> [email protected]
   (Denis Reid) writes:
 
   >Who were the parents of Jean Baptiste Jules Bernadotte, Aka:
   >Charles XIV, King of Sweden and Norway (r. 1818-1844)?
 
    His father was a lawyer in Pau, Henri Bernadotte (1711-80), his mother
    was Jeanne Saint Jean (1728-1809).
 
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   From: [email protected] (Tapani Hietaniemi)
   Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic,soc.culture.baltic
   Subject: Re: The Baltic Sea and the limits of "Norden"
   Date: 30 Oct 1993 15:42:01 +0200
   Organization: University of Helsinki
 
K. Roland Larsson ([email protected]) wrote:

 > In <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:
 
 > > And the Estonians have re-established the statue of Gustaf II Adolf
 > > in Tartu/Dorpat - a similar statue to that in Turku/Aabo.
 
 > I know that Estonia was part of Sweden in the 1600:s (if not before, at
 > least after the 30-year war), but what exactly is the reason why they
 > have a statue of Gustaf II Adolf? For example, in Gothenburg there is
 > a statue of him becuase he founded the place.
 
    Most obviously because Gustaf II Adolf (the beloved king of Swedes,
    Finns and Estonians :-) founded the Tartu/Dorpat University in the last
    year of his life, in 1632. The Soviet rulers ousted the monument in the
    fourties, of course.
 
    BTW, the day of the death of Gustaf II Adolf is approaching; 6th of
    November is traditionally celebrated as Svenska dagen/Swedish day in
    Finland.
 
   med ba"sta ha"lsningar
   Tapani Hietaniemi
   Helsinki/Helsingfors

  Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic,sci.anthropology
  From: [email protected] (Matz Bjurstroem)
  Organization: Microsoft Sweden
  Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 12:15:41 GMT
  
    The first notion of a Swedish 'country' was from the 9th century. In
    the 10th century, King Erik Segersaell, won the battle of Fyris and for
    the first time united the 'Svear' under one king. The Swedish name for
    herself is 'Sverige' which is derived from 'Svea rige' ('rige' is an
    elder form of 'rike'), meaning the kingdom of the Swedes.
 
Matz

  From: [email protected] (Simon Tardell)
  Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
  Subject: Re: Tre kronor?
  Date: 28 Apr 1994 16:31:26 GMT
 Organization: The Royal Institute of Technology
 
    I think it is quite common knowledge that the kings up to Gustav VI
    Adolf gave themselves the title Svea, G�te och Vendes konung -- for
    instance it says so on old currency still circulated.
 
    What is perhaps not so common knowledge is what Vende is. After the
    breakup of the Kalmar union in the 1520:s the new Danish king Kristian
    III kept the claim on the Swedish crown and marked this by adding the
    line "Gothers konge" to his list of titles. Gustav Vasa, the new
    Swedish king revenged himself by "claiming" Venden, a formerly Danish
    province (at the time of Valdemar Seir or so) in modern Northern
    Germany (on the  Baltic side). He did so by adding "Vendes konung" to
    his title. This was mostly mouth weather, of course. The name Venden is
    derived from the slavic people Vends (who, if I recall correctly) are
    realted to  the Sorbs, and remotely to the Polish. They have nothing to
    do with the  vandals.
 
    On the connection between "G�tar" (Swedish tribe) and the various Goth
    people (f.ex. Vandals) it is almost completely mythical. According to
    Jordanes the Goths had their origin in central south Sweden somewhere
    and went to continental Europe because of population explosion in
    prehistoric times (ehh, prehistory in Scandinavian terms probably means
    200 AD or so, I don't recall exactly). On of the first tribes to go
    were supposed to have been the Vandals, and when  passing Venden they
    sort of transferred their name to the Vends.
 
    This is entirely mythical. But the myth have been supported by many
    important persons (like Gustav Vasa) before history become a serious
    subject. I don't think there is much hope to prove or disprove the
    story.
 
    The bottomline is that G�tar och Vender in the former royal  title of
    the kingdom refers to the province and inhabitants of G�taland and
    Venden.

  -- 
  Simon Tardell, Fysik, KTH, [email protected]              V�ga v�gra cgs!

    From: Torkel Franzen <[email protected]>
    To: International Swedish Interest discussion list
    	<SWEDE-L%[email protected]>
    
      The oak trees planted on Visings� in 1829 by decision of the Diet
    have now reached maturity and the naval authorities have been
    notified that the trees are ready to be felled and used in the
    building of warships. However, the navy has declined to use the trees,
    and as a result the oaks, which have been carefully tended since
    1829, will remain in the care of the government, but as parkland
    rather than as supplies for shipbuilders.

    From: Peter Ravn Rasmussen <[email protected]>
    Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
    Subject: Re: Scania
    Date: Wed, 21 Jun 95 09:48:55 PDT
    Organization: Berlingske
  
    The Vender/Wender/Wends/Wands lived on the island of R�gen in northern
    Germany. They were a pagan people, conquered by the Danish King
    Valdemar  in the early 13th century (as I recall). For a lively account
    of this period in Danish history, see the "Gesta Danorum" of Saxo (also
    known as the "Saxo Grammaticus", this work is the mythologized account
    of the lives of the Danish kings leading up to Saxo's patron, King 
    Valdemar. 

    It is the source of many fictional characters later made national 
    icons by the neo-romantic movements of the 19th century). Among other
    things, Saxo describes the conquest of the capital city of the Wends,
    during which the great pagan idol of the Wendish god 
    Svantevit/Svantovit was toppled, chopped to pieces with axes, and
    burned,  at the direction of Bishop Absalon (incidentally the same man
    lauded as the founder of Copenhagen and Lund in Skaane/Scania). A model
    of peaceful co-existence among Nordic nations? ;-)

    The Goter (normally *called* Goths in English, a misnomer as they had
    no  relationship to the central-European Goths) lived on the
    (now-Swedish) island of Gotland. During Valdemar's campaigns in the
    baltic area, he managed to conquer Gotland (well, more or less), on
    his way to Estonia (where, incidentally, the Danish national flag, the
    Dannebrog, fell to earth during the battle of Tallinn, as a sign that
    the Danes had God's favour - or so the story goes).

    Once, both Gotland and R�gen were the homes of flourishing (if small)
    seafaring nations. If history had taken a different turn, there might
    still be [independent] Vender and Goter among the Nordic nations.
 
    Peter Ravn Rasmussen

    From: Roland Johansson <[email protected]>                           
    To: List for those interested in things Swedish
    Subject: St.Barthelemy
    
    S:t Barthelemy was under more or less Swedish rule between 1784 and
    1878. Here is a brief summary of the islands Swedish history:
    
    In the year 1784, the king Gustaf III visited the French king Louis XVI
    in Paris. He was then given the colony, in exchange of economic
    benefits in a complicated political transaction. He was a little
    dissapointed: The island was only some 21 square km, had 950 people
    living there, of whom 400 where black slaves. It had very few natural
    resources, and became more of a transit harbour than a real colony. It
    didn't even have natural drinking water.
    
    It was not ruled by the king, but by a consortium called "V�stindiska
    Compagniet", that among other things traded slaves. The French navy
    used it in the 1794 recapture of Guadelope.
    
    In 1800 Sweden joined the "neutrality alliance" against England, and
    England as a consequense of this, invaded the island in 1801. In 1806
    the V�stindiska Compagniet ceased to exist, and the island was ruled
    by a governor.
    
    In 1810 there was fighting between English and French groups on the
    island. When Sweden joined the allied forces against Napoleon in 1813,
    the british handed it over to the crown prince Karl Johan Bernadotte,
    together with Guadelope. Guadelope was handed back to the French in the
    Paris peace treaty of 1814.
    
    During the years up to 1830 it was used as transit port during the
    English blockade of the United States, and began to be profitable to
    the crown, but when the English-American trade opened up again, it's
    importance was lost. In 1847 the slavery on the island had seized,
    since the Swedish government had issued money to buy the last of the
    slaves free.
    
    In 1877 a referendum was held, in order to confirm an agreement with
    the French, about a sale of the island. Only one person voted in favour
    of staying Swedish.
    
    On March 16, 1878, the island was handed over. The last living daughter
    of the last Swedish governor died in 1944, and the governors flag and
    some other "Swedish" belongings where handed over to the museum of
    maritime history in Stockholm.
    
    There is a S:t Barthelemy society in Sweden, that encourages research
    about the island, and its history.
    
    Hope this was informative.
    /Roland
    =====================================================================
    Roland Johansson        Mail: [email protected]
    c/o Falkner             Web:  http://www.bahnhof.se/~floyd/
    Saetra torg 12
    S-127 38 Skaerholmen    Phone: +46-8-88 56 11
    Sweden
    Scandinavian Genealogy page:  http://www.bahnhof.se/~floyd/scandgen/

    Re: .24 by COPCLU::GEOFFREY "RUMMEL:
    
    >I don't believe the Norwegians were thrilled about being handed
    >over to the Swedes. If my memory serves me correct they rose up
    >aganist the Swedes and fought a brief war of independance before
    >being crushed by Swedish troops.
    
    Consider the following train of events:
    
From: [email protected] (Stein J. Rypern)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Norwegian history 1814 (May 17th) (Was: Important dates)
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 15:34:04 LOCAL
Organization: SN Internett
 
1814 in Norway - A summary
--------------------------
 Jan 14 - The peace treaty of Kiel 
          Denmark-Norway was on the losing (french) side. Sweden was 
          on the winning side. Sweden had lost Finland to Russia (also
          on the winning side) in 1809.
 
          Denmark was ordered to give Norway to Sweden.
 
 Jan 24 - the regent of Norway, danish prince Kristian Fredrik, is 
          ordered to prepare the surrender of Norway to the Swedes 
          and to return to Denmark
 
          He was rather unwilling to do so, and started preparing for
          declaring Norway independent with himself as king.
 
 Feb    - After consulations with a number of leading citizens, he
          became convinced that he couldn't just proclaim himself 
          as sovereign. It was decided to convene a constitutional
          assembly at Eidsvoll on April 10th.
 
 Apr 10 - The constitutional assembly convened at Eidsvoll. 112 
          men of means. About half government employees, 40 or 
          so farmers, and the rest mostly merchants or owners of 
          sawmills or iron foundries. The electoral rules ensured 
          that only men of means were elected. No representatives
          for northern Norway was able to get to the constitutional
          assembly, due to the poor communications.
 
          There were 12 proposals for a new constitution, of which 
          the most important one was authored by Johan Gunder Adler
          and Christian Magnus Falsen.
 
          The main principles in the constitution were the same as 
          in the US and french constitution - a division of power
          between an elected parliament who would give the laws and
          decide on the taxes, an executive (the king in our case)
          and the courts, which were to be independent of the 
          legislative and executive branches.
 
          Freedom of press and freedom of religion were established
          in principle, albeit with a very ugly exception : it was 
          forbidden for "jews and jesuits" to enter the kingdom.
          
          This paragraph was one the great poet Henrik Wergeland 
          (who was born in 1808, his father was the priest at 
          Eidsvoll) fought against all his life. Wergeland died
          in 1845, but the paragraph was not repealed until 1851.
 
          Anyway, the assembly agreed upon the constitution fairly
          quickly, as the swedish-friendly party of Wedel Jarlsberg
          only had about 30 of the 122 members.
 
 May 17 - A copy of the agreed upon constitution was signed by 
          all members of the assembly. The same day the election 
          for king was decided and prince Kristian Fredrik was 
          unanimously elected king of Norway.
 
 May 19 - Kristian Fredrik accepted the election as king of Norway.
          (Surprise, surprise :-)
 
 May 20 - The constitutional assembly took the oath: "united and 
          faithfull until the Dovre mountains crumble". The crumbling
          of said mountains is rather unlikely to happen in the near 
          future :-)
 
 Jun    - The major powers (England, Russia, Austria and France ?)
          sent representatives to Copenhagen and to Norway to investi-
          gate whether this "rebellion" was a danish ploy to keep 
          Norway part of Denmark.
 
          An british representative was able to convince King Kristian
          Fredrik that he would not get any support for an independent
          Norway, but that the british would support constitutional 
          guarantees for Norway.
 
 Jun 9  - The parliament was called in for an extra session to decide 
          the matter of union with Sweden. It was decided to mobilize,
          partly as a signal to other nations, partly to reassure 
          norwegian public opinion.
 
 Jul 28 - War between Sweden and Norway. 
 
          The war lasted only for about 2 weeks and both sides 
          behaved in such a manner that the war became known as 
          the "kitten war". 
 
          The norwegian army fell back from the area east of River 
          Glomma and the two fortresses in this area - Fredriksten 
          (Halden) and Fredrikstad were soon surrendered. 
 
          The norwegian forces won some minor skirmishes in the 
          Kongsvinger area.
 
          Swedish Crown Prince Karl XIV Johan (born Jean Baptiste 
          Bernadotte,  a former marshall of Napoleon, and a man 
          who had also tried becoming king of France) then offered 
          very good terms for negotiations.
 
 Aug 14 - The treaty of Moss was signed. 
  
          The main points in the treaty was that the norwegian 
          parliament would be reconvened no later than october 
          7th to negotiate with swedish representatives on what 
          changes would have to be made in the constitution.
 
          The swedish king promised to respect the new norwegian 
          constitution apart from the changes neccessiated (sp?) 
          by the change of status from Norway being an independent 
          monarchy to a member of a union with Sweden.
 
 Oct 10 - King Kristian Fredrik abdicates and leaves Norway.
 
 Oct 20 - The union with Sweden was accepted in principle by the 
          norwegian paliament after hard negotiations, which made
          sure the Kiel peace treaty was not accepted as the 
          foundation for norwegian membership in the union, thus
          in principle making it a "voluntary agreement" which 
          could later be cancelled.
 
          This strategy was mainly the work of the president of
          the norwegian parliament, Wilhelm Frimann Koren Christie.
 
          That is a reason for why his portrait was on all 
          norwegian bank notes printed between 1901 and 1945.
 
 Oct 30 - The constitution was amended to allow for union with 
          Sweden.
 
 Nov 4  - Swedish king Karl XIII was elected king of Norway too.
 
 
 1815 onwards - 
  
          The king never came to Norway in the four years between
          his election to king of Norway as King Karl II of Norway,
          and his death in 1818, and he left all matters of state
          to the crown prince, Karl Johan.
 
          Karl Johan (King Karl XIV Johan of Sweden, King Karl 
          III of Norway) was then king of the united kingsdoms 
          of Sweden and Norway until his death in 1844. The main 
          street in Oslo is still named "Karl Johans gate".
 
          In 1821 King Karl Johan suggested major changes in the
          constitution, but this was refused by the norwegian 
          parliament on May 17th 1824, on the 10th anniversary
          of the constitution.
 
          People celebrated the anniversary of the constitution.
          Karl Johan made it clear that he didn't really appreciate
          this :-) and for some years the celebrations were rather 
          subdued.
 
          But on 17 May 1829 there was an incident in Christiania
          (the then name of Oslo). It was a beautful spring sunday
          and a lot of people was out strolling on the quayside, 
          and the coastal boat from the west coast was welcomed
          to town with greetings and cheering as the custom was.
 
          But on that particular day the name of the boat was 
          perhaps a _little_ inflamatory :-) 
 
          It was the "constitution".
 
          Some officials lost their head and ordered the crowd 
          to disperse, having the riot act read out loud three
          times and then ordered cavalry to disperse the crowds.
 
          This was done without casualties, but people were 
          seriously pissed off by this treatment. Henrik Wergeland 
          wrote a sarcastic play about "the battle of the city 
          square" and questions were raised in parliament.
 
          The parliament severely criticized the commander of the
          fortress of Akershus and the Swedish viceregent of Norway,
          the Swedish count Platen.
 
          The effect of this "battle" was that the resistance 
          against the celebration of the day was given up, and 
          that it became politically impossible to appoint a new
          swedish viceregent in Norway when count Platen died later
          that year.
 
          The position remained vacant until norwegian count Wedel 
          Jarlsberg was appointed viceregent many years later. Platen
          was the last swedish viceregent of Norway.
 
          In 1884 parliamentarism was introduced, as Selmer govern-
          ment was impeached by the parliament. This was part of the 
          struggle between King and parliament, and parliament won.
 
          In 1905 the norwegian parliament dissolved the union with
          Sweden and Norway again became independent.
 
 Whew, I promise this is the last history lesson from me in a long 
while.
 
 Smile,
 Stein
 
--
Stein J. Rypern  I "If we do happen to step on a mine, Sir, 
Ostbyvn 21       I  what do we do ?"
N1920 SORUMSAND  I "Normal procedure, Lieutenant, is to jump 200 feet
NORWAY           I  in the air and scatter oneself over a wide area."