Talk:Swedish–Novgorodian Wars

Untitled

Quote from the article Sigtuna: In 1187 Sigtuna was attacked by raiders from Couronia and Estonia.

Quote from the article Saint Sophia Cathedral in Novgorod: There are several mysteries concerning the main cathedral gates. Traditionally, they were said to be brought to Novgorod by Saint Vladimir from Korsun in Crimea. According to another legend, they were snatched by Novgorodian pirates from the Swedish town of Sigtuna in 1187. In fact, these bronze doors were wrought and sculptured by Magdeburg masters, most likely in the 1150s.

Some problematic things

Article claims that Novgorodians made pirate attacks to Sweden. Is this actually confirmed by Russian chronicles? According to my knowledge, the Swedish sources do not suggest it. Somebody looted and burned Sigtuna in 1187, but the original sources claim that it was a deed of the "heathen". It is difficult to know who these heathen were, but in the context of the late 12th century, Estonians or Couronians from Latvia would be suitable alternatives. A 14th century Swedish source attributes the raid to Karelians, in alliance with Novgorod, but this is too late to be certain. It might have been influenced by the conquest of Western Karelia by the Swedes and the current war against Novgorod.

Nowadays nationalists in Finland, Estonia, Latvia and possibly in Russia as well are convinced that the Sigtuna raid was done by their "ancestors". A ridiculous example of the silly wish to get political profit from an obscure historical event!

I am also sceptical of the claim that the increasing trade if the White Sea influenced the Russo-Swedish wars of the 15th century. As far as I know, the Swedes made no attempt to gain any foothold on the White Sea during those wars! These kind of attempts belonged to later history.217.112.242.181 19:11, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

1187 Karelian vassals of Novgorod attacked the swedish region of Melar (it referenced to First Novgorod Annal) and possibly Sigtuna. But Swedes earlier attacked the areas controlled by Novgorodians in southern Finland and Karelia in 1142 and 1156-57 (during the first Swedish Crusade in Finland) Ben-Velvel 00:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

1142 the first Swedish attacks to Novgorodians

1142 the Swedish troups attacked the Novgorod merchants in southern Finland and killed 150 Novgorodians; Novgorod lost the control over the south of Finland; Sweden started struggle against Novgorod in western Karelia. «Князь свейский и бискуп пришед в 60 шнеках». 1164, the 55 Swedish ships attacked Ladoga, but Swedes have been crushed by prince Svjatoslav and civilian governor (posadnik) Zakaria.

Source: The Novgorod "Karamzin's" Annals, the Full Collection of Russian Annals, vol.42, St.-Petersburg 2002

Ghirlandajo, IMO, it is necessary to distinguish territories, owned by Novgorodians (f.e. southern coast of the Finnish gulf, Neva, Ladoga, main part of Karelia) and territories, controlled by Novgorodians (southern Finland, Alands).

Ben-Velvel 00:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

There is absolutely no evidence of the Aland Islands or Southern Finland being "controlled" by Novgorod during the early 12th century. I think this is a very partial interpretation of the Russian sources. Occasional raids, although succesful, do not equal control. The Novgorodians attacked against the Jem, who may have been the Finns, in 1042 and 1123. Two raids against a distant country hardly mean that the country was controlled.

Moreover, there is no evidence whatsoever that the incident of 1142 would have occurred in Southern Finland. Equally well it might have been somewhere else in the Baltic Sea region. If I remember correctly, the Russian source says only that the Swedes came over the sea and attacked the Novgorod merchants, who came with three ships. Your suggestion that the Swedish "crusade" of 1156 - 1157 (possibly a fictive event) was targeted against Finland controlled by Novgorod lacks any support in the sources, at least as far the Finnish and Swedish historiography is concerned. Edit. I always thought that the battle of 1142 was lost by the Swedes. I am not certain of this, though. 217.112.242.181 12:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Leader of the 1240 campaign

The article mentions leader of the 1240 campaign to be Birger jarl. The original text is silent on the leader and Swedish sources do not mention the expedition at all. At the time the jarl in Sweden was Ulf Fase. Having Birger as the leader seems to have derived from much later sources that wanted to emphasize Birger's role in the Swedish history. --Drieakko 08:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

As there are no alternative primary sources, it should stay. I object to your calling medieval Swedish castles with their modern Finnish names. We've been through this mined ground many, many times before. Please consult WP:NC and don't start it over again. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 16:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

If you refer to Turku, it is a town, not a castle. The Russian original text describing the 1318 attack calls the town "Lyderev's town" because the lord of the local castle was a certain German called Lyder von Kyren. Most of the Swedish documents of the era are latin that use "Aboa" for the town, in many spellings. The current Swedish name is Åbo, also with several options to write it in old sources. Turku is the oldest name for the town, deriving from a Russian word for "market" and also the name recognized by the majority of today's audience. About the medieval castles in Finland, their names were not fixed at the time when they were built and they appear under very different names in different documents. Names for those castles in articles I have created are the ones used by the National Board of Antiquities of Finland, see [1]. Using some other authority to set the "right" name for them is not reasonable. --Drieakko 17:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I refer you to Talk:Gdansk/Vote if you want to get some idea what we've been through on related issues. In other words, it is wrong to say that Schopenhauer was born in Gdansk (although that's how the Poles have always called it); we should prefer the official name of the city in any given historical period. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 17:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. The Russian word "torg" is a Germanic loan, so it's not so easy to say from which source Turku took its name... --Ghirla ^-трёп- 17:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

"Turku" comes from the Russian variant of the Germanic word "torg". The same Germanic word has also been loaned to Finnish directly, and it appears as "tori", meaning "market". Prior to Swedish conquest, Russian influences were heavy in Finland, e.g. the oldest layer of Christian words is from the east. Regarding the names of old Finnish places, we could actually confuse the situation a bit more: most of the population in Finnish towns in the Middle Ages were actually Germans, so there is always the option to pick a German name for them. Like in case of Vyborg, we could also call it Viborg, Wiburg and Viipuri, just depending on whose historical name, all old and original, is fancied most. Unless there is a really strong case to use an old name for a place, I'd strongly recommend using the one used by the respective article in order to prevent the name debate spread to too many places. If a name for a place is contested, let that be handled in the talk page of the respective article; unless there comes a decision on that, the default name given by the article should be applicable. --Drieakko 18:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you provide a single medieval English-language source which refers to "Abo" as Turku? You seem to ignore what I speak about. What was the population of the area in any given period is absolutely irrelevant. It is the official name that matters. Since Finland was part of Sweden, the Swedish name should be used. This is so obvious and has been discussed so often that I'm really surprized at your attitude. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 18:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Medieval Finland was:

• Country with the majority of the population speaking Finnish
• Country with most of the documentation written in Latin
• Country with town populations speaking mostly German
• Country belonging to a kingdom with majority of the people speaking Swedish

If you are looking for the closest guesses of the "official" names for people, towns or castles during that time, then they would be the Latin ones. --Drieakko 18:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I see that it's pointless to argue with you. Sigh... --Ghirla ^-трёп- 18:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, my point is that I object starting to use Latin names for Finnish places in articles handling medieval Finland. I don't see the reason for that. If you have come across English-language articles using "Abo" (which btw is not the name of the city in any known language) as the name for Turku, the text probably is a sloppy translation of an originally Swedish text or using Swedish text as its source. If someone wants to find articles talking about "Turku" in Wikipedia and does a search using that name, he should be able to get it all without having to know if there are some ancient names that are used in sets of articles which he would then miss completely. --Drieakko 18:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

As an additional note, please remember that there was no official language in the medieval Sweden. Furthermore, to name places in articles according to the official language of the era in question would soon result in many problems. Should we for example use French names for Russian cities in articles dealing with the late 18th century Russia, since the Russian Imperial court was using French as its official language at the time? And then shift to Russian names when French was dropped? And why is "Rome" not "Roma" like it should be in all articles talking about ancient Rome? In my opinion, old names make sense only if they have come to be elements in additional concepts, like Battle of Stalingrad or Siege of Leningrad. To start commonly use dead names for existing places just because those were the names at the time, would only result in plenty of unreadable material and bring no benefit to anyone. Like said as an opinion, reason to use an old name for a place should first be reasoned and requested by the respective article before starting to use it in other articles. --Drieakko 20:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

About the headline of this thread, I checked the original Russian chronicle and it claims the leader of the Swedish army have been "Spiridon" who was killed in the battle. Added that information with references in the article. --Drieakko 08:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

My policy is not to interact with guys who pursue original research in wiki-space. That talking to them is no use may be seen from the discussion above. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 16:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no original research whatsoever in the above written text. If you know any, please list them instead of making personal generalizations. --Drieakko 16:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Novgorod and Southern Finland

All claims that Novgorod controlled Southern Finland are pure nonsense. There is not a single document of this unbelievable claim. Nor did the Novgorodians had any control over whole Estonia. The Gulf of Finland was never, up to 1478, controlled by Novgorod Commercial Republic. An classic example of new-written history. And the claim that in mediveal Finnish towns most people spoked German goes to same category. All Russian "documents" of that period are exaggerated folklores, nothing else. Peharps it is good to remember that Suomi was inhabited country much before the Vikings entered into scene. Before 1100 there was no connections to Big-Russian (Eastern Slav) tribes at all in the Gulf of Finland area. Ingermanland was inhabited by Inkerikot (Izhoras) not Slavs. Germans. Prussians, Lihuanians, Latvians, Livonians, Estonians and Finns effectively closed Baltic Sea from Slav tribes and the natural linguistic water shed goes from Ingermanland to Piepsen Lake, to Väinäjoki (Daugava River) and then toward East Prussia. The most western outpost of Slavonic population was around Pskov (Pihkva / Pihkova / Pleskau / Pleskavas / Tolovas) where there was,as can see from many names for that place, a mixed population as well as in medeveal Novgorod. It was not a pure Russian town at all. The population was a colourful mixture of Russians, Poles, Polovitshes, Latvians, Estonians, Finns, Karelians and Swedes (Rootshis) in addition to Juuttis (Danes).

Peharps a little better study to the area´s history. Eesti Entsyklopedia Tallinn 1932-1938 is a good source to find more information as well as Iso Tietosanakirja Helsinki 1936. The first version of Pieni Tietosanakirja 1925-1929 is also published in Finnish web sides. Torg is not original Russian word. Torg appear in Estonian language meaning (market) square. Turku seems to came from ancient Wendi language. Also Germany is in Finnish language Saksa as well as in Estonian language. This means connections to Saxony and Wendes. The Hanseatic traders were called in Finland "kauppasaksat". "Hansat" or "hansakauppiaat" become much later in use in Finnish language.

JN

I don't see the article claiming that Novgorod would have controlled Southern Finland nor Estonia. --Drieakko 14:26, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

GAC on hold

This article is OK but it has to be improved to become a GA. Some of the points that need to be addressed are:

• I think that the Battle of Neva section needs to be expanded.
• I also think that the intoduction needs to be expanded.
• Overall the article lacks inline citations and also needs references to be put down.

Hopefully you achieve this and if you do I will pass the article. Good luck. Kyriakos 14:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Small point

Good luck on the GA review. One thing I quickly noticed, though - can someone correct the piped link Ladoga, as it is unclear whether you mean the lake or a town.--Estrellador* 10:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

GAC failed

Sorry, but in the last week the article has failed to show any signs on improvement. This I am forced to fail it. But if these points are addressed, please put it forward for another GAC. Kyriakos 23:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Toponyms of Finland

The conduct of presenting a Swedish place name as primary and having the Finnish=English names in brackets is unnecessary. Places that still exist (especially when the majority language place name has remained unchanged throughout history) should still be named accoring to current policies. We don't call London Londinium even if we speak about London's Roman period. In the same way it is unnecesary to speak about anything other than e.g. Turku's Swedish period (and have perhaps the secondary language place name in brackets). Clarifer (talk) 14:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

1188

Lelis, Arnold A. (2005). "The View From the Northwest: the Chronicle of Novgorod as the mirror of local experience of Rus' history, 1016–1333". Russian History. 32 (3/4). Brill: 389–399. ISSN 0094-288X. JSTOR 24663271. Retrieved 6 October 2024. makes the following remark: In 1188, Novgorodians were plundered in Gotland and Novgorod imposed a trade embargo.

This is an interpretation of NPL s.a. 1188. In the 1914 English NPL edition of Michell & Forbes, The Chronicle of Novgorod 1016–1471, p. 34, this passage reads: The same year the men of Novgorod were plundered by the Varangians in Gothland and by the Nemtsy [Germans], in Khoruzhk and in Novi-torg, and in the spring they let no man of their own go beyond sea from Novgorod, and gave no envoy to the Varangians, but they sent them away without peace.

I think Varangians in Gotland don't really count as "Swedes". It was likely a robbery or act of piracy than a battle, let alone a war. The Novgorodian chronicler seems to treat them as a separate people with whom they had trade relations, that were suspended due to this incident. I thought I might mention here that I think this incident is beyond the scope of this article. NLeeuw (talk) 22:02, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

1228 and 1229

Ok let's go through the 1228 / 1229 incident(s).

• NPL Michell & Forbes 1914, p. 69:

The same year [1228] the Yem people came into lake Ladoga....

A.D. 1228. A.M. 6736. (...) The same year the Yem people came into lake Ladoga in boats [lodka] to make war, and the news reached Novgorod on the Saviour’s Day. And the men of Novgorod having taken seat in their boats, rowed to Ladoga with Knyaz Yaroslav. And Volodislav, Posadnik of Ladoga with the men of Ladoga, not waiting for the men of Novgorod, went after them in pursuit in boats where they were making war, and came up with them, and fought with them. And night came on, and they retired to a small island, and the Yem people [remained] on the shore with their plunder; for they had been making war at the landings and at Olonets. And that same night having sued for peace, the Posadnik and the men of Ladoga did not grant it; and they [sc. the Yem people] having slaughtered all their captives, themselves fled into the forest on foot having cast the boats adrift. Many of them fell there, and they burned their boats. The men of Novgorod remaining several days on the Neva held a council; and they tried to kill Sudimir, but the Knyaz hid him in his boat. Thence the men of Novgorod, without waiting for the men of Ladoga, returned to Novgorod. And the Izhora people who had stayed behind, met them as they fled, and there killed a great many of them. And the rest fled asunder; but these the Korel people, whichever way they went, whether by the woods, or by the fields, or to their tents, discovered and killed. It is thought that 2,000 or more of them had come; God knows, and few of them escaped to their own country; all the rest perished.

No mention is made of Svei or "Swedes". There is an implication that the Yem carried off "plunder" from "landings", although where is unclear; the only toponym used is Olonets, 150 km north of Staraya Ladoga. "Saviour's Day" (Спасовъ день, compare sr:Спасовдан)) in Novgorod probably meant Feast of the Ascension (ru:Вознесеньев день), which always falls 39 days after Easter somewhere in May or June, so we may date this Yem raid on Lake Ladoga to May/June 1228.

• Sundberg 1999, p. 205 wrote: In 1228, the Tavasts avenged the attack with a ravaging campaign in Karelia. They go by boat to Ladoga and ravage along its shores. (...) It is not entirely clear that this is a Swedish war. The Tavasts behave very independently towards Novgorod and an important goal for the Novgorodians is to subjugate Tavastland. (...) He mentioned the Novgorod [First] Chronicle (NPL) as his primary source, and goes on to speculate whether the Tavastians were allied with the Swedes or not, while granting that there is no evidence of that in the sources.
• Philip Line (2007), p. 447 and 448 Nevertheless, according to the Novgorod chronicles, the trade route to Ladoga continued to be the target of Scandanavian attacks, though nothing suggests that these were more than raids. Whether any of these were sponsored by the king of Sweden is uncertain. It is also possible that an alignment of hämäläiset with Sweden and Karelians with Novgorod occurred before 1240. In 1142 both Swedes and jem raided, although there is no indication of co-ordination. Raids by jem alone are recorded in 1149 and 1228. Nor is it certain that there was any Novgorodian instigation behind the twelth-century raids of Karelians into Häme. (emphasis by me). Line thus denies that the Swedes were behind the 1228 Yem raid on Lake Ladoga.
• Shkvarov 2012 p. 21: [In 1227,] “Yaroslav went from Novgorod across the sea to the Yem, where not a single Rus' prince could [go], and he captured their entire land.” The number of prisoners taken was so great that they could not take them all with them, so some were killed and some were simply released. In response, the Finns attacked the shores of Lake Ladoga in 1228, burned and destroyed many villages, but were repelled and all were destroyed. In 1229, a Swedish attack on Ladoga and the villages at the mouth of the Volkhov River by forces of up to 2,000 people was recorded in the chronicle. It was repelled with losses for the enemy, but also with significant losses on the Novgorod side. It is unclear which chronicle Shkvarov is quoting here, but it's not the NPL, because there is no mention of Swedes in the NPL under 1229 (although there is mention of a Lithuanian raid on Novgorod, Lyubno, Moreva, and Serigeri in January 1229). The phrase where not a single Rus' prince could [go] (Shkvarov идеже ни един князь Русский не возможе бывати) seems a modernised version of где же ни един от князь рускых не взможе бывати, which I have tracked down to an entry sub anno 6734 (1226) in the Laurentian Codex (Lav.). However, Lav. does not say anything about a 1228 "Finnish" raid of Lake Ladoga, nor of a 1229 "Swedish" raid on Ladoga. At most, Lav. records that В лето 6737. Месяца априля, придоша мордва с Пургасомъ к Новугороду, и отбишася их новгородци. И зажегше мана стырь святое Богородици (...) (In the year 6737 [1229], in the month of April, the Mordva came with Purgas to Novgorod, and the Novgorodians repulsed them. And they set fire to the mana shrine of the holy Virgin Mary (...)). Mordva were not "Swedes". So where did Shkvarov get the idea that there was a "Swedish" (шведов) raid on Ladoga in 1228 or 1229? The figure of "2,000" is only recorded in the NPL under 1228, and refers to the Yem people. Where did Shkvarov get the idea that there was an attack on Ladoga and the villages at the mouth of the Volkhov River (а Ладогу и селения в устье р. Волхова)? That is a conjecture based on the Yem people [remained] on the shore with their plunder; for they had been making war at the landings and at Olonets. These "landings" might have been at the mouth of river Volkhov and the town of Staraya Ladoga, but the text doesn't say; and Olonets is 150 kilometres further to the north.
• In conclusion, neither the NPL nor Lav. says anything about a "Swedish" raid or attack on Novgorod, Ladoga, Lake Ladoga or anything, nor that the Swedes were in an alliance or otherwise behind the Yem raid of May/June 1228, nor the Lithuanian raid of January 1229, nor the Mordva raid of April 1229. Line denies Swedish involvement, Sundberg doubts Swedish involvement, while Shkvarov makes a confusing case for Swedish involvement that does not stand up to scrutiny, but appears to be a mis-reading of several chronicle entries, asserting that Swedes were directly involved without evidence, and with evidence to the contrary (the "2,000" figure most likely refers to the Yem raid of May/June 1228). So, I think we could scrap 1228 and 1229 off the list of wars. NLeeuw (talk) 14:16, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

@Dushnilkin and TylerBurden: Do you agree? NLeeuw (talk) 21:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree Dushnilkin (talk) 06:12, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I'm going to scrap it from the list. NLeeuw (talk) 10:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I have a question, why did they delete the attack on Jam and the campaign at Narva in 1256? Dushnilkin (talk) 06:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I think you mean this? You'd have to ask Tyler why. I would recommend you start a separate talk page section about 1256 below. This section is about 1228 and 1229. NLeeuw (talk) 09:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

@Dushnilkin So since you restored Yam based on the content in Yam fortress "In 1395, Swedes unsuccessfully assaulted Yam. A garrison led by Prince Konstantin defeated the Swedish army, which then fled", are you then going to add the other instances from the article, which includes Sweden capturing the fortress several times? Or might it be that it is also a reach referring to these battles as "wars". Either way, I expect consistency, especially when you previously accused me of being "selective". You appear to have been selective here since you specifically chose only one battle out of several that also happens to have the outcome you constantly argue for. TylerBurden (talk) 14:52, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Swedes never captured this fortress as part of a separate conflict during the time of the Novgorod Republic, this is not in the text of the article. If you think that under the term war in the 13th-15th centuries, you need to mean only successive conflicts, followed by a peace treaty, then delete the entire page except for the "Kexholm War" and 1348-1351. Such information should be in the article due to the peculiarities of time, because without it, conflicts will remain incomprehensible. Also reply to the message below. Dushnilkin (talk) 15:10, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. TylerBurden (talk) 13:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! NLeeuw (talk) 16:21, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

1256

Hello, I would like to discuss the reason for the removal of the "Campaign in Narva 1256" to begin with, about the conflict itself, here is what the Novgorod first chronicle writes: В лѣто 6764 [1256]. Приидоша Свѣя и Емь и Сумъ и Дидманъ со своею волостью и множество рати и начаша чинити город на Наровѣ. (In 1256, the Swedes, em and Sum came to Narva with a large army and began to build a city) further, it is reported that Prince Alexander authorized two campaigns and stopped the construction of the city, after which he invaded Finland: И поиде князь съ своими полкы и с новгородци; и бысть золъ путь, якоже не видаша ни дни. ни нощи; и многымъ шестьникомъ бысть пагуба, а новгородцовъ богъ соблюде. И пришед на землю ѣмъскую, овыхъ избиша, а другых изима силою честнаго креста и святыя Софѣя; приидоша новгородци съ княземь Александромъ вси здрави. (And the prince went with his Novgorod regiments to the land of Yemi and killed many there, baptized others, the Novgorodians themselves and the prince returned in full health) Not only did the conflict itself provoke Russia's retaliatory actions, as a result of which central Finland was plundered, but such a conflict fully correlates with those indicated in the article: Tott's Russian wars, Assault on Nyslott. So I suggest that you return this to the list of conflicts, as well as specify it here if we haven't done it yet. Dushnilkin (talk) 14:15, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for commencing a separate discussion about this. I disagree with this assessment. The NPL under the year 1256 (6764) does not describe a battle between Svei and Novgorodians. In the 1914 Michell & Forbes edition, p. 95, it says:

There came Svei and the Yem and Sum people, and Didman with his province, and a quantity of armed men, and they began to make a town on the Narova. And the Knyaz was not then in Novgorod, and the men of Novgorod sent to the Low Country to the Knyaz for armed men, and themselves sent throughout their province, thus gathering armed men. And they, accursed ones, having heard, fled beyond the sea.

In other words, the Svei (Swedes) fled as soon as they heard the Novgorodians were coming. That's not a Swedish-Novgorodian "battle", let alone a "war".

If we want to describe battles between the Yem and the Novgorodians that happened before or after the Swedes fled, we can. But that is a separate topic, namely, the Finnish–Novgorodian wars. They do not belong in this article, and not in the list of "Swedish"–Novgorodian Wars. As we have agreed before, we cannot assume that the Yem people were always acting in an alliance with Sweden or in coordination with the Swedes. That is WP:OR/WP:SYNTH. I think TylerBurden was right in removing this from the list. Good evening. NLeeuw (talk) 16:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

This is described as a failure of the Swedes, you do not need to give a battle to succeed in territorial issues, if only direct clashes need to be included in the list, then I agree that this should be removed.

We need to check other deletions anyway. Dushnilkin (talk) 16:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Good that we agree! NLeeuw (talk) 16:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

PS: It definitely was a Swedish failure, but not a "war" in which they were defeated due to fighting with the Novgorodians, and that is what matters here. NLeeuw (talk) 17:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

There are apparently some Danish sources about Estonia at this time. Based on those, "Didman" is identified with Dietrich von Kywel, a Danish vassal. See, for example John Lind (1996) Erik Menveds Østpolitik, p.7. I don't think this changes the above consensus, though. Lind is also saying (if my Danish is correct) that open conflict broke out only later when Viborg was built. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Deleted content

I will create this page for the convenience of further discussion, tag the most active user @Nederlandse Leeuw

Here is what is written in the chronicle (1950), which we constantly quote: In the same year, the Svei and the Murmans came from nowhere to the Dvina, killed many and burned them, and took others captive. When the Dvinyans found out about this, they came and killed them, others were sent to Novgorod about four hundred (or forty). Their commanders, Ivor and Peter, and the third (unknown) died.

Original text
Того же лѣта приидоша Свѣя Мурманѣ безвѣстно за Волокъ на Двину ратью, на Неноксу, повоевавъ и пожгоша и людеи пересѣкоша, а иных в полонъ поведоша. Услышавше то двинянѣ, придоша вборзѣ, иных иссѣкоша, а иных прислаша въ Новъгород с четыредесятъ; а воеводы ихъ, Ивора и Петра и третьего, убиша.

In this case, Shkvarov quoted everything exactly, so I think the conflict can be returned, since there is both a mention of the battle and an accurate classification of enemies. Dushnilkin (talk) 17:18, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

The link does not work, but I've looked up the quote, and found it here, in the Younger Redaction of the Novgorod First Chronicle (NPLml) under the year 1445. I think you meant to translate Свѣя (Svĕya) as "Swedes" rather than "Jews"? (When I Google Translated СвЂя, as it is rendered on that website, it thought it said "Saint", Svyata). This shows we must be careful with machine translations, because they often make errors.

Michell & Forbes 1914 translated it as follows:

The same year the Murman Svei¹ came in force by surprise to the Dvina² beyond the Volok, to Nenoksa, plundering and burning, killing people and making many captives. And the people of the Dvina having heard, came up quickly, slew some and sent about forty to Novgorod, putting to death their Voyevodas Ivor and Peter and a third one; a few others jumping into their boats escaped.

1. Norsemen.
2. The Northern Dvina (White Sea).

There is a lot to unpack here. NLeeuw (talk) 17:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

1: Yes, I meant the Swedes, I think you understood referring to the translation below, it is almost identical to mine, except that I translated on my own so there may be some misunderstanding, but your translation is accurate.

So what are you thinking about including this in the list of conflicts? Dushnilkin (talk) 18:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok so, the most remarkable fact is that Michell & Forbes chose to translate СвЂя / Свѣя as generic "Norsemen" here, rather than "Swedes" specifically. That may be because the Norsemen who lived along the Murman Sea (now the Barents Sea and White Sea, in which the Northern Dvina flows), weren't necessarily connected to Sweden. It's perhaps comparable to the Kola Norwegians, who still live around those same seas today, but are called Norwegians rather than Swedes. But in this case, it is not clear that the people that the NPL calls Svĕya fell under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Sweden at this time. Even at its height in the 17th century, the File:Swedish Empire.svg does not have seem to have had control of the entire Murman / Barents and White Seas. It could be that these were just a bunch of pioneer settlers who spoke Old Norse but had no formal ties to the Kingdom of Sweden based in Stockholm, hundreds of kilometres to the southwest. I could be wrong, but at this stage, I'm not yer convinced that "Sweden" was involved. But we'll see if there is secondary literature to back it up. Whatever happened, it is surely an interesting entry in the NPL that deserves further study. NLeeuw (talk) 18:14, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

PS: It seems that the city of Murmansk is named after this "Murman Sea", and that Murman derives from "Northman" or "Norseman". I didn't know that, that is quite interesting! This may help to explain why Michell and Forbes understood them as "Norsemen" rather than "Swedes", even though that is what the text says. But the Novgorodian text could be mislabelling people, or simply have a different perspective on how to group various peoples. Like, what they called Chud', we understand to be Estonians, or perhaps a subgroup of Estonians. Likewise, the Yem or Tavastians were probably Finns or a subgroup of Finns. Novgorodians themselves are generally considered a subgroup of the Rus' (Русь). Not all Rus' were Novgorodians, and not all Novgorodians were Rus'. I think that's kind of what we're dealing with here. Not all Norsemen were Swedes, and not all Swedes were Norsemen. We really need secondary sources for a reliable interpretation of this chronicle entry. NLeeuw (talk) 18:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Sweden also has access to the White Sea within their borders, I think without enough literature we will never know who the real attackers were. So you'd better start looking for one, I'll try to look at something too. Dushnilkin (talk) 18:37, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I found something in Karamzin's: What were the consequences of measures so important and formidable? Our chronicles say only that the Livonian Knights, the King of Sweden and Prussia (that is, the Grand Master of the German Order), in 1448, having had a battle with the Novogorodians on the shores of Narova, went back; and the Dvinians near Nenox defeated the Swedes, who came there by sea from Lapland. - Neither the Tatars, nor the Volokhs, nor the Muscovites helped Novogorod: "I give him Princes, but without troops," Kazimir wrote to the Germans. The Order's papers mention only some famous man who in 1447 rode from Moravia with six hundred horsemen to help Prince Yuri of Novogorod, the son of Lugveniev.

Original text

Какие были следствия мер столь важных и грозных? В наших летописях сказано единственно, что Ливонские Рыцари, Король Шведский и Прусский (то есть великий Магистр Немецкого Ордена), в 1448 году имев битву с Новогородцами на берегах Наровы, ушли назад; а Двиняне близ Неноксы разбили Шведов, которые приходили туда морем из Лапландии. - Ни Татары, ни Волохи, ни Москвитяне не помогали Новгороду: «Я даю ему Князей, но без войска», - писал Казимир к Немцам. В бумагах Орденских упоминается только о каком-то знаменитом человеке, который в 1447 году ехал из Моравии с шестьюстами всадников на помощь к Новогородскому Князю Юрию, сыну Лугвениеву.

Dushnilkin (talk) 18:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

In our entry for Battle of Neva (1240) Murmans is translated as 'Norwegians', but the sourcing for that article is not great. In Heikki Kirkinen (1963) "Karjala idän kulttuuripiirissä" Murmans is consistently interpreted as 'Norwegians'. The 1445 conflict is on page 169. Kirkinen also tells that three other chronicles (but not the First Novgorod Chronicle) mention a retaliatory attack by the Karelians against the Norwegians the same year. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 19:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Interesting!! NLeeuw (talk) 19:31, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

In the chronicle itself, Murmans are not used separately, perhaps they mean Norwegians under Swedish citizenship, you can guess about this for a long time, so far we have two sources who claim that the Swedes were the attackers. Personally I would interpret the text of the chronicle as an attack by the Norwegians with the support of the Swedes. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:24, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the source you provided, it describes this conflict, but Google cited it as "the Swedish Norwegians attacked...»

Then this confirms my theory. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

That part is the direct translation of the chronicle, but just before the quote he refers them as Norwegians (norjalaiset):

Todennäköisesti norjalaiset hyökkäsivät ensin, sillä Novgorodin ensimmäinen kronikka kertoo näin: »Tänä vuonna hyökkäsivät Norjan ruotsalaiset yllättäen Zavolotseen [...] Jähmefyysikko (talk) 19:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

This does not contradict my words, it probably means the origin of the attackers, and the Novgorod chronicle also named their political affiliation. Based on the fact that we have only this primary source, we can agree either that the attackers were Swedes (according to Russian sources) or Norwegians, under the Swedish protectorate.

In general, I suggest returning this to the list, only in the same way as in the case of sitguna, do you mind? Dushnilkin (talk) 19:40, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Do we have some source that refers to the 1445 attackers as Swedes, without interpretive effort on our part? Jähmefyysikko (talk) 19:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, look above, I quoted from Karamzin. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:48, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, although I'm confused about the years that Karamzin gives. Anyway, M&F (below) refer to the Dvina attackers as Swedes, so I guess we can add the attack with a question mark, or as Norwegians or Swedes. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Just what I suggested, since we think so, then let's wait for @Nederlandse Leeuw answer on this matter. Dushnilkin (talk) 20:03, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Please add sources to the fact that the attackers were Norwegians, I created this table because another user did not respond. Dushnilkin (talk) 08:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Of course the Swedes had access to the mouth of Northern Dvina river, because it was on the coast. Anyone with ships has access to coasts (unless the sea is frozen, which the Barents Sea sometimes was).

What I am more interested in is the identity of these "Murman". All other times they are mentioned in the NPL, they are apparently not Swedes. For example:

1240.6748. The Svei came in great strength with the Murman, Sum, and Yem people in very many ships.

Here the Murman are clearly not the same as the Svei, but a distinct group.

In a commentary on page xxxiii, M&F wrote: In 1411, the Novgorod governor of the Dvina is ordered to guard against Norwegian raiders. Vyatka marauders and Novgorod outlaws burn Kholmogori in 1417, and capture several Novgorod notables; in 1419 return the Northmen or Murmani, ravaging far and wide in the Trans-Volok, and sacking the Michael Monastery on the site of the present city of Archangel. Lastly, in 1445, the Swedes attack the Dvina and are driven off. See the Chronicle of Novgorod, 1398, 1401, 1411, 1417,1419,1435,1436,1445. Strangely, here they simply call them "Swedes" under 1445, but in all other cases, they call them "Norwegians" or "Northmen". So, it's complicated.

It seems that the region we now know as Kola in the Murmansk Oblast was at the time known in Rus' as Murman because some Norsemen had settled there (probably amidst Finno-Ugric peoples that already lived there, such as the Saami and Karelians). Some of these Murman were from Norway, others from Sweden, but neither Sweden nor Norway (nor Novgorod) seems to have had direct military or political control over Kola / Murman. It was kind of a late Viking colony like Greenland before 1262. There is one obscure reference under the year 1338, in which the Knyaz of the Svei is found in "Murman country":

The same year the men of Novgorod sent Kusma Tverdislavl and Olexander Borisovich with others, and the Vladyka on his part sent his nephew Matvei, beyond sea on a mission to the Knyaz of the Svei; they found him in Lyudovl town in the Murman country and concluded a peace with him on the terms of previous documents. (Thereafter they discussed the Korel people (Karelians) as a people they both have some control over.)

This might indicate that the king of Sweden was trying to get Murman within his sphere of influence. But that is just me speculating. Do you know a town called Lyudovl in Murmansk Oblast? If we can confirm this story with other sources, then perhaps there was a sort of Norse colony in Kola known as Murman, that was later controlled by Sweden, and from where "Swedes" conducted a raid on the Dvina in 1445. I don't rule it out as impossible, but I'd like to see more evidence. Greetings, NLeeuw (talk) 19:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

The user indicated an interesting source above, I will quote: Vuonna 1445 kerrotaan molempien osapuolten sotaretkistä. Todennäköisesti norjalaiset hyökkäsivät ensin, sillä Novgorodin ensim- mäinen kronikka kertoo näin: Tänä vuonna hyökkäsivät Norjan ruotsa- laiset yllättäen Zavolotšeen Vienajoelle, Nenoksaan, hävittäen ja polttaen ja surmaten ihmisiä ja ottaen toisia vangiksi.

Based on the text, it is our case that is meant here, as I assumed, it may have been the Norwegians under the Swedish protectorate, in this case the sources differ in interpretation. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:36, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

There's no such interpretation in Kirkinen. He's just translating "Murman swedes" as "Norjan ruotsalaiset" without any special implications. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 19:39, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, this is a direct quote from the source, given other literature, it can hardly be interpreted in any other way. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:41, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

What I mean, is that it does not add anything to the Chronicle, it is just a word-to-word translation. If we quote this, we are essentially quoting the Chronicle. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 19:43, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, as I wrote above, some people translate it differently, I'll re-read the page again, but it's something anyway. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Jähmefyysikko. This is not yet strong evidence for the idea that these were Norwegians under Swedish jurisdiction. It is just a Finnish translation that could be interpreted as such, but that would still be WP:OR. NLeeuw (talk) 19:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I do not agree that this is WP:OR, in any case, we have quotes that the attackers may have been Swedish, and if we directly turn to the original source, we get Свѣя Мурманѣ

Свѣя -swedes

Мурманѣ - Norwegians

I do not know how it can be described in another way, if you have any suggestions, then express them. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:58, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

No sources here, but let me point out that Norwegians did establish Vardøhus Fortress north of Kola Peninsula in 14th century, so their presence in that region is possible. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 19:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

[2] Here is a link to Karamzin's book, if that's what you mean.

Shkvarov on pp. 36-37 also calls the attackers Swedes, first quotes the chronicle, and summarizes below:

1445 - Reflection of the Swedish attack at the mouth of the northern Dvina. Dushnilkin (talk) 20:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I just meant say that I do not have any good sources discussing the Vardohus Fortress and early Norwegian settlement near Kola peninsula. Sorry for being unclear. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:10, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Let's take a look at the entry for 1419: The same year the Murman people¹ to the number of 500 men coming in vessels and boats made war on the Korel² villages in [the dis-trict of] Arzuga and on the villages³ of the country beyond the Volok, namely: Nenoksa, the monastery of St. Nikola in the Korel² country, Konechny village, the Yakov gulf, the Ondreyan shore, Kig and Kyar islands, Mikhail monastery, Chiglonim and Khechinima; they burned three churches and slew Christians and monks. But the men from beyond the Volok destroyed two boats of the Murman people; the others escaped out to sea.
1. Northmen, or Norwegians.
2. Korilsky.

So, Michell and Forbes are saying that these Murman people were "Northmen or Norwegians". They don't mention Swedes. We cannot assume that all Murman were Swedes, nor under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Sweden. Here they are portrayed as an autonomous or independent people who acted on their own. Moreover, Novogorodians are not mentioned either, only Murman and Korel. Fortunately, this passage contains so many toponyms that we could probably pinpoint where this raid supposedly happened. Is the Volok the same as the Vologda (river)? NLeeuw (talk) 20:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

As for this, we cannot accurately superimpose 1419 and 1445 due to the time interval, besides, the interpretation is different, I think that in this translation of the chronicle the Normans meant the Murmans, not Svei, besides, in the later edition of 1950 is no such this. And also, in 1445, instead of Korels, the Dvinyans are mentioned, there are too many differences for me.

Due to the lack of sources, it is very difficult to establish anything, so the option is prepositional @Jähmefyysikko I support more

P.S. A Volok is a space between rivers, we have a term Novgorodian Volok and Dvinian volok the latter, according to the Russian Wikipedia, means the path from the Volga to Sheksna Dushnilkin (talk) 20:22, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

In general, the discussion is very much delayed and is unlikely to progress due to the narrowness of the source base, so I suggest ending with the option that I and @Jähmefyysikko proposed. We will return this conflict, but we will also add Norwegians to the list of participants on the Swedish side, marking them with a question mark.

|1445

|Attack on Dvina river

| Kingdom of Sweden?
Norwegians?

| Novgorod Republic

Waiting for your reply @Nederlandse Leeuw Dushnilkin (talk) 20:31, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Dushnilkin already answered, but "Beyond the Volok" is Zavołochye, ru:Заволочье. Kirkinen describes the location: The attack by the Norwegians was an obvious revenge for the Karelians' previous expeditions to the Norwegian territories. They didn't direct the attack to the Dvina River first, but to the Western shore of Dvina Bay, the mouth of the Varzuga River, from where they destroyed the coast as far as the Arkhangelsk Monastery. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Kåre Selnes (1972) "Norge-Russland : grannefolk gjennom tusen år" offers one explanation for the puzzling "Murman Svei": I sitt forsvar mot den svenske ekspansjon mot øst i denne epoke skjelnet russerne naturligvis ikke mel- lom nordmenn og svensker i en tid da begge folk hadde samme konge, da det ikke var noen egen norsk kongemakt lenger til å hevde Norges interesser. Et tydelig vitnemål om dette er meldingen i den russiske krøniken om de «svea-nordmenn» som var på tokt mot Dvina-traktene i 1445. En har vanskelig for å tro at det skulle delta svensker i et norsk strandhogg på disse kantene nå. Russerne hadde også hatt et felles språklig begrep for skandinaver» tidligere, nemlig varjager. Det ble nå heretter etter hvert erstattet med et annet, nemlig begrepet «tyskere», kanskje på grunn av hanseatenes maktstilling i Norden for tiden. This is during the Kalmar Union time. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 22:12, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

It is strange that in this case, in 1419, the chronicle separated the Norwegians and the Swedes, but now it is not, the term Germans in relation to participants in naval raids was used as early as 1392, this shows that the chroniclers regularly divided the participants by nationality. Anyway, it's good that you found it, I'll ask you to add this source to the list, via {{efn| we can describe who is mentioned in this raid. Dushnilkin (talk) 08:09, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

In general, the ethnic labels used in the chronicle (and every other available source from this time period) are quite inconsistent and need interpretation, for which we must use secondary sources. For the entry of year 1392, M&F p.165 says The same year some Nemtsy² pirates came from over sea into the Neva, taking the villages on both sides of the river to within five versts of the town of Oreshek. The footnote 2 says: Here probably Swedish. Is this the passage you meant? It seems to make my point. I'll add the reference later. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 09:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I meant it, the Swedes were also called Germans in some other cases. But the most popular name is Svei

If there is a text, as in the case of 1445, we cannot simply decide the nationality of the enemies of Novgorod, so it is better to leave the text neutral. Dushnilkin (talk) 09:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I think it is acceptable to state "Kingdom of Sweden? Kingdom of Norway?" in the table for now. We don't really know whether they were Swedes, Norwegians, both, or neither. Until we find more secondary sources, we can't say anything definitive. NLeeuw (talk) 20:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Fine with me, although I reserve a right to change my mind if there are convincing secondary sources, which truly discuss these raids. But even then we will proceed through discussion. I have no opinion on whether these raids are significant enough to be included in the list of wars (which is also being discussed elsewhere). To resolve that, one would need to define the inclusion criteria of the list more carefully. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 03:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Murman

Hey everyone, I'll be a bit busy today so I won't be able to fully participate in this discussion. I'd just like to add that "nationality" didn't exist until the 19th century. Most people were rights-less subjects of monarchs, unless they had citizenship of certain cities (i.e. they were burghers). It is oft|en impossible to know the legal status of any person or group of people mentioned in medieval sources as these, especially by their opponents. The NPL calling these Murman Svĕya in 1445, while all other times they called them only Murman, and separated them from the Svei, should not be taken at face value. I've been reading up a bit about the Middle Ages in Murman (now Murmansk Oblast, mostly Kola but also the land between Murmansk, Finland (Lapland) and Norway (Finnmark), and it appears that virtually all these Norsemen were from Norway, and under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Norway (including during the Kalmar Union and Denmark–Norway). What the Novgorodians called "Murman" seems to have been an extension of the Norwegian Finnmark, perhaps even part of it, before the current borders were established centuries later. I should emphasise that this is only a tentative assessment of what I've read, and not yet based on RS literature. But I would recommend that we examine all 7 mentions of Murman in the NPL as a group, rather than only looking at 1445 separately. It could be that we're dealing with "Norwegian-Novgorodian" battles here, rather than "Swedish-Novgorodian". There appears to be no other article on English Wikipedia that examines these Murman conflicts in detail yet. NLeeuw (talk) 10:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Ethnic origin and cultural characteristics have always existed, chroniclers often received an assessment directly from voivodes or politicians, and they could separate the foreigners. The modern term nation appeared in the 17th century during the Thirty Years' War.

The Murmans have always been referred to as Norwegians, but in this case another ethnonym refers to them. In any, we need to see if there are similar expressions in the NPL (svei Murman) and evaluate these years using WP:RS. Dushnilkin (talk) 10:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Words change meaning all the time, countries and "peoples" come and go. What 17th-century sources called nationes had more to do with the jurisdiction soldiers or students came from than with ethnicity or culture. E.g. the Army of Flanders had a "Burgundian nation", but I don't think it is widely believed in 2024 that there is still a "Burgundian nation" today. Bourgogne-Franche-Comté is just an administrative region of the French Republic. We can't just use the terminology we've got today and apply it to 7 centuries ago. We will inevitably make mistakes, and fail to understand what happened in the past. This is the reason we we've got policies such as WP:OR. Good day. NLeeuw (talk) 10:50, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I do not deny that words change their meaning, I just wanted to correct you that it was impossible to distinguish the attackers within the framework of this conflict. Dushnilkin (talk) 11:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

The article Treaty of Novgorod (1326) notes that there were decades of preceding border skirmishes between Norwegians and Novgorodians. But it also claims that the peace treaty remained in force until the 19th century, suggesting that there were no more Norwegian-Novgorodian skirmishes after 1326. Well, the NPL mentions several instances of conflict between Novgorod and the "Murman", so maybe that's not entirely accurate. It also suggests that Birkarls from Swedish Finland sometimes tried to impose tribute on the Sami, so there is room for Swedish involvement in the Murman region. It's just very complicated and requires further reading of literature. NLeeuw (talk) 10:42, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

It was precisely because of this agreement that Shkvarov apparently decided that in 1419 it was not the Norwegians who attacked, but the Swedes, although it is still doubtful, so I deleted it. The topic is too poorly studied, I fully support you in using as much literature as possible. Dushnilkin (talk) 10:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)