Talk:Historical provinces of Finland

Importance of historical provinces?
I think the importance of these should be scaled down. It's a major annoyance every time I try to link to the article about the Finland Proper region I have to type the '(region)' there. Historical provinces are far less important in my opinion than current regions, if only for the fact that articles about current municipalities in those regions are easier to link there when the article actually has the same name as the region.

So I suggest adding (historical province) to the titles of the Finland Proper, Finnish Karelia, Ostrobothnia, Savonia, and Tavastia articles. Then moving the Finland Proper (region) article to Finland Proper, and for the rest writing articles that are not about any administrative regions but the actual areas that the names pertain to (because they are different). I might do that myself in a few days, if nobody objects. - ulayiti 14:27, 23 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Done. Still hoping nobody minds. - ulayiti (talk)  13:22, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Region /=/ province
Now there's a major issue that causes confusion, provinces of Finland, former provinces of Finland and regions of Finland. This article should be named Historical regions of Finland because the translation is region, maakunta landskap. Province would be lääni/län. So, a historical province could be Turku and Pori Province but not Finland Proper for example. All articles in this article should be named (historical region of Finland). --Pudeo⺮ 12:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't 'Historical Provinces of Finland' an oxymoron since Finland was part of Sweden up until a certain point? Mhjelm


 * It depends on how you define the "historical provinces". If you refer to the actual historical administrative entities which evolved during the Middle Ages and were abolished in the 17th century, you are quite correct that the "historical provinces" are meaningful only in connection to the Sweden as a whole. However, the "historical provinces" are not only historical entities but remain an important mental construct which is still used for self-identification. This is the result of the fact that the provinces formed the basis of the nationes of the University of Helsinki, whose students played a pivotal role in the formulation of Finnish national identity. In addition, they were well featured in Maamme kirja by Zachris Topelius, the most important basic geography and history textbook of the Finnish primary schools for half a century. In his book, Topelius presented stereotypical characterizations of the Finnish "tribes" of different provinces. These stereotypes are still alive in the popular imagination (open, lively Karelians, slow, still Tavastians, hard-working, easily provoked Ostrobothnians). Thus, the historical provinces are much more important to the present-day culture as mental constructs than as actual historical entities. As mental constructs, they are Finnish, not common to Finland and Sweden. --MPorciusCato (talk) 15:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Dialects
"The spread of dialects of Finnish language approximately follow their borders" I think this is wrong information. 81.17.197.132 (talk) 13:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Accuracy of Ostrobothnia?
I'm pretty sure that at the time of Swedish rule in Finland, Ostrobothnia wasn't as large as this article claims. I've also heard of some people saying that Kainuu and areas west and north of it are "historically" Kainuu. Can somebody help? –– ♫ Mara ♫ 21:05, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Historical provinces of Sweden
The title ”Historical provinces of Finland” seems like an oxymoron, as the provinces (landskap) were of Sweden in what is today the borders of Finland, hundreds of years before the nation of Finland even existed. Calling the article ”Historical provinces in Finland”, would be more correct, but in its current form it suggests that these provinces were historically owned by the nation Finland, which they were not.

The article also states that they’re ”a legacy of the country’s (Finland) joint history with Sweden”, which is also factually incorrect, as Finland never was a nation before 1917, but the provinces rather were integral parts of Sweden just as any other Sweden provinces 78.69.118.151 (talk) 22:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)