Ryssän koulussa : Suomalaiset Venäjän stipendiaatit autonomian aikana 1812-1917

Finnish scholarship students in Russia during the autonomy (1812-1917) During the autonomy in Finland (1809-1917), an attempt to improve the knowledge of the Russian language was made through special language university scholarships. With these scholarships the students could go and study the Russian language and acquire cultural knowledge in Russia. Other member countries on the edges of the Russian Empire, like Poland and the Baltic provinces, did not have similar programs. The first two scholars started their journey in 1812. A system of travel allowances was introduced in 1841. Between the years 1812- 1917 a total of almost 400 students studied in Russia. The studies mainly took place in Moscow. These scholarship students were called the Master s of Moscow ". In this paper, Finnish-Russian relations are studied based on the attitude towards the Russian language and the people who studied it in Finland. Although the attitude towards them was neutral in the beginning, in 1844 there was a strong change. Students of Russian, and especially the scholars, received the stigma of being unreliable and unpatriotic, a stigma they were never able to get rid of. The study of the Russian language was voluntary in Finnish schools between 1863 and 1872. Starting from 1890, however, the study of the Russian language was enforced. In doing so, the Russians attempted to unify the Empire, while the Finns had the illusion that they had their own state. Thus, Russia saw the language as a way to unify the Empire and Finns as an attempt to make them Russians. The purpose of studying in Russia was to improve the student s practical language skills and overall knowledge of the customs and culture of the country. Besides knowing the language, knowledge of Russian culture and customs is essential in understanding Russia and Russians; therefore, the studies of literature, geography and history have been noted in this research. Without knowledge it is difficult to develop understanding. After their studies, almost all of the scholars returned to Finland and did not continue their careers in Russia. They worked mainly as teachers and civil servants, and managed to improve the Finnish people s weak knowledge of Russian and Russia through teaching, translations of literature and newspaper articles. Through these scholars, it is possible to see how the attitudes towards the language have been closely related to the political history between Finland and Russia. The language became the subject of resistance and these attitudes were transferred to its students. In 1917, the study of Russia and the Russian language ended and it was no longer possible to use the acquired knowledge of language and country in independent Finland.

Rossijskaja Karelija i karely v imperskoi politike Rossii, 1905-1917

Russian Karelians were one of the small peasant nations of the Russian Empire that began to identify themselves as nations during the late imperial period. At that historical moment Russian Karelia fell between an economically undeveloped empire and the rapidly modernizing borderland of Finland. The economic and cultural lure of Finland drew Karelians into the Finnish camp. This attraction was seen as a challenge to Russia and influenced the straggle between Russia and Finland for the Karelians. This struggle was waged from 1905 to 1917. This work is focused on the beginning stage of the struggle, its various phases, and their results. The confrontation extended into different dimensions (economic, political, ideological, church and cultural politics) and occurred on two levels: central and regional. Countermeasures against local nationalisms developed much earlier both in Russia and in other empires for use were also used in the Russian Karelian case. Economic policies were deployed to try to make relations with Russia more alluring for Karelians and to improve their economic condition. However, these efforts produced only minimal results due to the economic weakness of the empire and a lack of finances. Fear of the economic integration of the Karelians and Finns, which would have stimulated the economy of the Karelia, also hindered these attempts. The further development of the Orthodox Church, the schools and the zemstvos in Karelia yielded fewer results than expected due to the economic underdevelopment of the region and the avoidance of the Finnish language. Policizing measures were the most successfull, as all activities in Russian Karelia by the Finns were entirely halted in practice. However, the aspiration of Russian Karelians to integrate their home districts with Finland remained a latent force that just waited for an opportunity to push to the surface again. Such a chance materialized with the Russian revolution. The Karelian question was also a part of Russian domestic political confrontation. At the and of the 1800s, the Russian nationalist right had grown strong and increasingly gained the favor of the autocracy. The right political forces exploited the Karelian question in its anti-Finnish ideology and in its general resistance to the national emancipation of the minority peoples of Russia. A separate ideology was developed, focusing on the closeness of Karelians to the "great Russian people." Simultaneously, this concept found a place in the ultramonarchist myth of the particularly close connection between the people and tsar that was prominent in the era of Nicholas II. This myth assigned the Karelians a place amongst the "simple people" faithful to the tsar.

"Täydellinen itsenäisyys ulospäin. - Ja järjellinen järjestys sisäänpäin." : Ylioppilaat ja järjestyksenpitokysymys vuonna 1917

Vuoden 1917 maaliskuun vallankumous kaatoi tsaarinvallan Venäjällä ja synnytti autonomiseen Suomeen järjestysvaltatyhjiön. Sortuneen venäläisen järjestysvaltakoneiston tilalle muodostettiin suomalaisvoimin kunnallisia miliisilaitoksia yhteiskuntarauhaa turvaamaan. Tutkielmassa tarkennetaan ja havainnollistetaan aiemman kirjallisuuden kuvaa Helsingin miliisilaitoksen käytännön toiminnasta muistitietoon sekä Helsingin poliisilaitoksen arkiston aineistoihin tukeutuen. Erityisesti syvennytään kuitenkin Helsingin miliisilaitoksen palvelukseen joukolla hakeutuneisiin ylioppilaisiin. Ylioppilasmiliisien ryhmää tarkastellaan nk. Miliisikirjan eli miliisilaitoksen miehistömatrikkelin sekä ylioppilasmatrikkelin tarjoamien tietojen valossa. Lisävalaistusta opiskelijoiden käsityksiin ja käytännön toimiin vuonna 1917 on saatu ylioppilaslehdistä sekä ylioppilasaktiivien muistelmista. Monipuolinen, mutta sirpaleinen lähdeaineisto on mahdollistanut laaja-alaisen tutkimusotteen tilastollisesta tarkastelusta tekstien tulkintaan. Ylioppilasmiliiseissä heijastuivat opiskelijoiden pitkät perinteet järjestyksenpidossa ja työväen kanssa tehdyssä yhteistyössä. Taustalla vaikuttivat myös opiskelijoiden voimakkaat vasemmistosympatiat. Ylioppilaat pyrkivät sinnikkäästi ylläpitämään sovinnollista suhdetta työväestöön aina vuoden 1918 sisällissodan kynnykselle saakka. Opiskelijoiden ensisijaisena tavoitteena oli luoda oikeiston ja vasemmiston poliittiset kiistat ylittävä kansallinen rintama Suomen itsenäisyyden saavuttamiseksi ja turvaamiseksi.

Vähemmistövaltiokirkon synty : Ortodoksisen kirkkokunnan ja valtion suhteiden muotoutuminen Suomessa 1917-1922

The Birth of the Minority State Church Development of the legal relationship between the state of Finland and the Finnish Orthodox Church 1917 1922 Mika Nokelainen, University of Helsinki, Finland. The present research seeks to explain how the legal relationship developed between the state of Finland and the Orthodox Church of Finland. The main focus is on three statutes: 1) the Statute of the Orthodox Church in Finland as stated by Prime Minister J. K. Paasikivi s cabinet in November 1918, 2) The Republican Constitution of July 1919 and 3) The Freedom of Religion Act of 1923. This study examines how different political goals influenced the three statutes mentioned above. Another important factor that is taken into account is the attitude of the Lutheran Church of Finland, the church of the national majority, towards the Orthodox minority and its judicial position in the country. Finland became independent in December 1917, in the aftermath of the November Revolution in Russia. The Orthodox Church already had hundreds of years of history in Finland. In the 19th century, several statutes by emperors of Russia had made the Orthodox Church an official state church of Finland. Due to the long history of the Orthodox Church in Finland, Prime Minister Paasikivi s cabinet made the decision to support the church in the spring of 1918. Furthermore, the cabinet s goal to occupy East Karelia increased its willingness to support the church. The Finnish-national Orthodox Church was needed to educate the East-Karelians. A new statute on the Orthodox Church in Finland came into force in November 1918, reorganising the administration, economy and legal relationship between the church and state in Finland. With this statue, the cabinet gained some authority over the church. Sections of this statute made possible, for example, the cabinet s interference in the internal affairs of the church. The Republican Constitution of 1919 included the principle of freedom of religion. The state, which previously had been Lutheran, now became non-denominational. However, the Republican Constitution explicitly mentioned the Lutheran as well as the Orthodox Church, which indirectly confirmed the position of the Orthodox Church as the second state church of Finland. This position was finally confirmed by the Freedom of Religion Act in 1923. In general, the Lutheran Church of Finland did not resist the judicial position of the Orthodox Church. However, some Lutherans regarded the Orthodox Church with suspicion because of its intimate connection with Russia.

Lippu, uhri, kansakunta : Ryhmäkokemukset ja -rajat Suomessa 1917 1945

This dissertation deals with the notions of sacrifice and violence in connection with the Fin¬nish flag struggles between 1917 and 1945. The study begins with the basic idea that sacrificial thinking is a key element in nationalism and the social cohesion of large groups. The method used in the study combines anthropological notions of totemism with psychoanalytical object relation theory. The aim is to explore the social and psychological elements of the Finnish national flag and the workers flags during the times of crisis and nation building. The phenomena and concepts addressed include self-sacrifice, scapegoating, remembrance of war, inclusion, and exclusion. The research is located at the intersection of nationalism studies and the cultural history of war. The analysis is based primarily on the press debates, public speeches and archival sources of the civic organizations that promoted the Finnish flag. The study is empirically divided into three sections: 1) the years of the Revolution and the Civil War (1917 1918), 2) the interwar period (1919 1938), and 3) the Second World War (1939 1945). The research demonstrates that the modern national flags and workers flags in Finland maintain certain characteristics of primitive totems. When referred to as a totem the flag means an emotionally charged symbol, a reservoir of the collective ideals of a large group. Thus the flag issue offers a path to explore the perceptions and memory of sacrifice and violence in the making of the First Republic . Any given large group, for example a nation, must conceptually pursue a consensus on its past sacrifices. Without productive interpretation sacrifice represents only meaningless violence. By looking at the passions associated with the flag the study also illuminates various group identities, boundaries and crossings of borders within the Finnish society at the same time. The study shows further that the divisive violence of the Civil War was first overcome in the late 1930s when the social democrats adopted a new perception of the Red victims of 1918 they were seen as part of the birth pains of the nation, and not only the martyrs of class struggle. At the same time the radical Right became marginalized. The study also illuminates how this development made the Spirit of the Winter War possible, a genuine albeit brief experience of horizontal brother and sisterhood, and how this spirit was reflected in the popular adoption of the Finnish flag. The experience was not based only on the external and unifying threat posed by the Soviet Union: it was grounded in a sense of unifying sacrifice which reflected a novel way of understanding the nation and its past sacrifices. Paradoxically, the newly forged consensus over the necessity and the rewards of the common sacrifices of the Winter War (1939 1940) made new sacrifices possible during the Continuation War (1941 1944). In spite of political discord and war weariness, the concept of a unified nation under the national flag survived even the absurdity of the stationary war phase. It can be said that the conflict between the idea of a national community and parliamentary party politics dissolved as a result of the collective experience of the Second World War.