Matti Laurila : Jääkäriupseeri, suojeluskuntapäällikkö, rintamakomentaja

Matti Laurila (1895 1983) This is a biographical research of a Jaeger officer, a Civil Guard Chief, a Field Commander Matti Laurila. A broader practice of qualitative methods was utilized in the research. The main aim is a permanent reconstruction and reinterpretation of past events through the experiences of the study object. The life and times of Laurila are intertwined with the crucial events that led to the Finnish Declaration of Independence. Afterwards he helped to ensure that the young republic also stayed independent. As a Jaeger in the winter of 1917 Laurila witnessed an incident he would never forget. After disobeying a direct order, Sven Saarikoski from Lapua was shot dead by his commanding officer, K. A. Ståhlberg, on the ice of the river Aa. Laurila faced the horrors of war at closer quarters, for he lost his father and his brother in the battle of Länkipohja on 16th March 1918. This battle was a major turning point for Laurila and profoundly influenced the rest of his life. The relationship between Laurila and his superiors was problematic almost throughout his military career, haunted as he was by the memory of Sven Saarikoski's execution and the losses in Länkipohja The position of Laurila as an authority in South Ostrobothnia was a key factor in preventing the extreme right from rallying enough Civil Guard troops to escalate the embryonic Mäntsälä rebellion of 1932. After the rebellion Laurila routinely opposed anything he saw as a threat to the independence of the Civil Guard. He would flatly refuse to even consider the integration of the Civil Guard into the national defence force. His uncompromising stand in this matter annoyed some among the higher ranking officers. After the Winter War Laurila got himself into a dispute with Jaeger Colonel H. E. Hannuksela that would have long-lasting consequences. The conflicts between them became widely known in the attack phase of the Continuation War in 1941 at the latest. Laurila had to give up his military career at the end of 1944. In the years that followed he did what he could to ensure that the South Ostrobothnia Civil Guard patrimony remained in the province. Laurila's position as a respected authority in South Ostrobothnia remained unchanged until his death.

Jac. Ahrenberg ja historian perintö : Restaurointisuunnitelmat Viipurin ja Turun linnoihin 1800-luvun lopussa

Jac. Ahrenberg and Patrimony Restoration Plans for Viipuri and Turku Castles at the End of the 19th Century This dissertation examines the unrealized restoration plans for two castles in the Grand Duchy of Finland one located at Viipuri (Vyborg, nowadays in Russia), the other at Turku (in Swedish, Åbo) during the last decades of the 19th century. Both castles were used as prisons, barracks and warehouses. From the middle of the 19th century on, their restoration and transformation into museums and "national monuments" were demanded in the newspapers. The prison reform in the 1860s stimulated the documentation and debate concerning their future, but it was only at the beginning of the 1880s when their restoration became an official state-run project. The undertaking was carried out by Johan Jacob (Jac.) Ahrenberg (1847 1914), architect of the National Board of Public Buildings. By combining written sources with drawings and photographs, this dissertation examines the restoration projects, the two castles' significance and the ways in which they were investigated by scholars. The plans are analyzed in connection with restoration practices in France and Sweden and in the context of contemporary discussions concerning national art and patrimony. The thesis argues that these former castles of the Swedish crown were used to manifest the western roots of Finnish law and order, the lineage of power and the capacity of the nation to defend itself. However, because of their symbolism, their restoration became a politically delicate question concerning the role of the Swedish heritage in Finland's nation-building process. According to Jac. Ahrenberg's plans, the two castles were to be restored to their assumed appearance at the time of the Vasa dynasty. Consequently, the structures would have resembled castles in Sweden. It is suggested that one aim of the restoration plans was to transform the two buildings into monuments testifying to the common history of Sweden and Finland. They were meant to consolidate the Swedish basis of Finnish culture and autonomy and thus to secure them against the threatening implications of Russian imperialism. It seems that along with the changing ideals of architectural restoration and the need for an original Finnish architectural heritage, the political connotations associated with the castles were one reason why Jac. Ahrenberg's restoration plans were never realized.