Captivating History, by anonymous authors, takes history in small chunks and presents them in easily readable text. Wars are briefly covered, not battle by battle. Kings and historical figures come alive with a few strokes. In this sense, the book is a success. Unlike the most standard Finnish history text by Jutikkala and Pirinen. I use that as strictly reference, 10 pages at a time. It is also dated, from the 1970s in the available (used) edition. And as it turns out, I don't have a favorite book of Finnish history other than a school text meant for 15-year old readers. Once they get to long narratives of events, most of them sound rather similar. In English, the Matti Klinge book is also worth a look: A Brief History of Finland Paperback – January 1, 2000. The updated version has Finland in the EU.
The book does attempt to bring Finns into a Scandinavian culture that was the way to trade and interact in the Baltic in the Viking age. I would just like to add the prehistory prior to that. How Finland was settled is quite well established, once we have Finnic people there in the bronze age. Read this Wikipedia article, as there are no books in English for the general public on the Baltic Finns. Itämeren suomalaiset in Finnish.
I have access to books in Finnish, and certainly did not need this book in any way. But it does cover the history of the early part well. The Scandinavian part. We are talking about mostly Sweden and European history from 1300 to the 1700s and this ends with the Napoleonic wars. The loss of Finland by Sweden is barely covered, we just get the big picture. To Finns, the so-called Finnish War (Suomen sota) is a major event, covered by Runeberg in poetry and writing in the 1800s. It was an embarrassment to Sweden and Sweden ceased to be a military power in 1809.
So the faults of the book..written no doubt by the same person who wrote the similar book on Sweden...lie mostly with the point of view. It is never the view from Finland. Well, briefly as on page 62-63 with the nationalist movement, it is brought up. There is some attempt to polish that toward the end and an independent Finland. It does give the realistic description of the 1900s wars and poltics. And to be fair, you cannot describe developments within Finland in 100 pages, you simply list the things that were done TO Finland up till 1900.
So the faults of the book..written no doubt by the same person who wrote the similar book on Sweden...lie mostly with the point of view. It is never the view from Finland. Well, briefly as on page 62-63 with the nationalist movement, it is brought up. There is some attempt to polish that toward the end and an independent Finland. It does give the realistic description of the 1900s wars and poltics. And to be fair, you cannot describe developments within Finland in 100 pages, you simply list the things that were done TO Finland up till 1900.
The wars of the 1900s cover a bit of the social history and economics as well as the effect of being next to Russia where a revolution took place. The Civil War in 1918 has this: "The war was bloody for such a small counry, and for the losing Reds, capture often meant death. It's estimated that close to ten thousand Red soldiers and sympathizers were gunned down." In the WWII section we get the basics in twelve pages, with a map of the Manerheim Line. Maps are rare in these books. Unlike the other Nordic countries, Finland had a major role in the world war.
Linguistics is not covered much, and prehistory is mostly through the Vikings. Finland had a Bronze Age like all the areas of Europe and was settled mainly through Estonia. Archeology and linguistics would cover that era. The author does point out all the water ways and the easier connection to the Baltics at one point.
Linguistics is not covered much, and prehistory is mostly through the Vikings. Finland had a Bronze Age like all the areas of Europe and was settled mainly through Estonia. Archeology and linguistics would cover that era. The author does point out all the water ways and the easier connection to the Baltics at one point.
Note about the Finnish King (listed in the section on 1918 events). Thre was never a Finnish king. Wikipedia (in Finnish) explains: With Germany's defeat in the Great War already looming, Friedrich Karl was advised by Berlin to delay accepting the crown. However, the delegation of the Finnish Parliament led by Speaker Lauri Ingman handed him the official notification about the royal election, Friedrich Karl announced that he would postpone his answer. In the end, he never accepted the election or arrived in Finland, but announced in his letter dated December 14, 1918 that he would renounce the crown offered to him. Friedrich Karl did not visit Finland later either.
The rather dry A Concise History of Finland (Kirby) does give a better view of the 1800s and the rise of Finnish nationalism. In the early part of the Grand Duchy the Finns held on to Swedish practice as much as possible. The danger as part of Russia was that the property rights would go toward the Russian model. Finnish farmers and the less wealthy rural people held on to their personal freedom, serfdom did not arrive. The Kirby book gives a lot of numbers to better place Finland among the developments of the 1800s, as well as industry later on. But as pointed out, this is where the books start sounding like written by an academic for his audience. The years 1939-1956 are described in detail, including the war with Russia. Readers will see that Finland was brought into the Winter War with no choice. The short war demonstrated to Russia what Finland was capable of. At this point the US and other powers were not in the war. Then we get the picture a few years later. Finland seeems to have sided with Germany, concluded all players in Europe that were into politics and defense issues.
Kirby writes page after page about the internal politics and various people involved in the Continuation War period. Mannerheim, Ryti and so on. How does the reader make sense of all this? There is a big question here, perhaps the biggest for Finland in history: why did Finland enter World War II on the Nazi side?
If you look up the same period in the standard Finnish school book (mine is a bit old, Vehvilä and Castren) you find out that it was mainly Hitler that steered Finland into war. Making moves that allied Finland to Germany, Germany then proceeded to attack Russia. This was mainly due to Hitler not ever being able to invade England, only to bomb it. As soon as Germany attacked Russia, Russia started bombing Finland. It assumed, correctly, that Finland was part of Hitler's Russia plan. In this case it does NOT make sense to list all the internal squabbles of Finns, as Kirby does. I would assume he is trying to present all options, as if Finland has a chance to resist Hitler.
In the end, even Kirby lists the "reality of Hitler's domination of Europe" as the final outcome of the debate. The major countries had already picked sides in Europe, and Sweden was not going to help Finland. In fact the Winter War ended with Finland blocked from Swedish help by the peace treaty. With Germany as a sort of ally....the two countries seemed to be at first waging independent wars against Russia...the Finns eventually crossed the Russian border to "reclaim lands" lost after the Winter War. There was then no way to back out anymore. Kirby describes prison camps for Russian soldiers and also some camps to house the Russian speaking population from Karelia with the words "ethnic cleansing." The chapter on the war seems to never end, with continuous politics and contacts abroad to try to affect a softer landing as peace talks would come up. In the end it was again Germany's status that ran things. Germany lost and Finland had no claims. In 1946 we get Paasikivi as president, a banker. Russian demands led to embarrassing blame games and Mannerheim, leader in two world wars, had to leave Finland.
It goes on to describe the post war years in a sensible manner. The entire Kirby book is a mix of good "captivating" narrative and then sections of policial history that gets a little harder for the non-academic reader. Modern Finland is there, pages p.276-305 covering the years past Kekkonen.
A History of Scandinavia: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland by T K Derry.
Who should read the Captivating History book? Well, anyone interested. You can easily read the whole book. Add info from the Kirby book for a better picture. If Finland in the World Wars is your interest, fill up with some war books after reading this. I recommend Frozen Hell by William Trotter on the Winter War. The leaders of Russia, Sweden and briefly Napoleon have their role in this brief account. The European events briefly take Finland and Sweden into the events that shaped the countries of Europe. A Swedish king was even assassinated. The turmoil from 1790 to mid 1800s was experienced by all of Europe.
OTHER OPTIONS
The Nordic history book:
A History of Scandinavia: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland by T K Derry.
