Page:EB1911 - Volume 10.djvu/400

 had hitherto been dominant in Finland, and the Finnish “nationalist” party which, during the latter half of the 19th century, had been determinedly asserting itself linguistically and politically. With some exceptions, however, the whole country united in defence of its constitution; “Fennoman” and “Svecoman,” recognizing that their common liberties were at stake, suspended their feud for a season. With the accession of Nicholas II. (see ) the constitutional conflict became acute, and the “February manifesto” (February 15th, 1899) virtually abrogated the legislative power of the Finnish diet. A new military law, practically amalgamating the Finnish with the Russian forces, followed in July 1901; Russian officials and the Russian language were forced on Finland wherever possible, and in April 1903 the Russian governor, General Bobrikov, was invested with practically dictatorial powers. The country was flooded with spies, and a special Russian police force was created, the expenses being charged to the Finnish treasury. The Russian system was now in full swing; domiciliary visits, illegal arrests and banishments, and the suppression of newspapers, were the order of the day. To all this the people of Finland opposed a dogged and determined resistance, which culminated in November 1905 in a “national strike.” The strike was universal, all classes joining in the movement, and it spread to all the industrial centres and even to the rural districts. The railway, steamship, telephone and postal services were practically suspended. Helsingfors was without tramcars, cabs, gas and electricity; no shops except provision shops were open; public departments, schools and restaurants were closed. After six days the unconstitutional government—already much shaken by events in Russia and Manchuria—capitulated. In an imperial manifesto dated the 7th of November 1905 the demands of Finland were granted, and the status quo ante 1899 was restored.

But the reform did not rest here. The old Finnish constitution, although precious to those whose only protection it was, was an antiquated and not very efficient instrument of government. Popular feeling had been excited by the political conflict, advanced tendencies had declared themselves, and when the new diet met it proceeded as explained above to remodel the constitution, on the basis of universal suffrage, with freedom of the press, speech, meeting and association.

In 1908–10 friction with Russia was again renewed. The Imperial government insisted that the decision in all Finnish questions affecting the Empire must rest with them; and a renewed attempt was made to curtail the powers of the Finnish Diet.

Ethnology.—The term Finn has a wider application than Finland, being, with its adjective Finnic or (q.v.) or Ugro-Finnic, the collective name of the westernmost branch of the Ural-Altaic family, dispersed throughout Finland, Lapland, the Baltic provinces (Esthonia, Livonia, Curland), parts of Russia proper (south of Lake Onega), both banks of middle Volga, Perm, Vologda, West Siberia (between the Ural Mountains and the Yenissei) and Hungary.

Originally nomads (hunters and fishers), all the Finnic people except the Lapps and Ostyaks have long yielded to the influence of civilization, and now everywhere lead settled lives as herdsmen, agriculturists, traders, &c. Physically the Finns (here to be distinguished from the Swedish-speaking population, who retain their Scandinavian qualities) are a strong, hardy race, of low stature, with almost round head, low forehead, flat features, prominent cheek bones, eyes mostly grey and oblique (inclining inwards), short and flat nose, protruding mouth, thick lips, neck very full and strong, so that the occiput seems flat and almost in a straight line with the nape; beard weak and sparse, hair no doubt originally black, but, owing to mixture with other races, now brown, red and even fair; complexion also somewhat brown. The Finns are morally upright, hospitable, faithful and submissive, with a keen sense of personal freedom and independence, but also somewhat stolid, revengeful and indolent. Many of these physical and moral characteristics they have in common with the so-called “Mongolian” race, to which they are no doubt ethnically, if not also linguistically, related.

Considerable researches have been accomplished since about 1850 in the ethnology and archaeology of Finland, on a scale which has no parallel in any other country. The study of the prehistoric population of Finland—Neolithic (no Palaeolithic finds have yet been made)—of the Age of Bronze and the Iron Age has been carried on with great zeal. At the same time the folklore, Finnish and partly Swedish, has been worked out with wonderful completeness (see L’Œuvre demi-séculaire de la Société de Littérature finnoise et le mouvement national finnois, by Dr E. G. Palmén, Helsingfors, 1882, and K. Krohn’s report to the London Folklore Congress of 1891). The work that was begun by Porthan, Z. Topelius, and especially E. Lönnrot (1802–1884), for collecting the popular poetry of the Finns, was continued by Castrén (1813–1852), Europaeus (1820–1884), and V. Porkka (1854–1889), who extended their researches to the Finns settled in other parts of the Russian empire, and collected a considerable number of variants of the Kalewala and other popular poetry and songs. In order to study the different eastern kinsfolk of the Finns, Sjögren (1792–1855) extended his journeys to North Russia, and Castrén to West and East Siberia (Nordische Reisen und Forschungen), and collected the materials which permitted himself and Schiefner to publish grammatical works relative to the Finnish, Lappish, Zyrian, Tcheremiss, Ostiak, Samoyede, Tungus, Buryat, Karagas, Yenisei-Ostiak and Kott languages. Ahlqvist (1826–1889), and a phalanx of linguists, continued their work among the Vogules, the Mordves and the Obi-Ugrians. And finally, the researches of Aspelin (Foundations of Finno-Ugrian Archaeology, in Finnish, and Atlas of Antiquities) led the Finnish ethnologists to direct more and more their attention to the basin of the Yenisei and the Upper Selenga. A series of expeditions (of Aspelin, Snellman and Heikel) were consequently directed to those regions, especially since the discovery by Yadrintseff of the remarkable Orkhon inscriptions (see, p. 473), which finally enabled the Danish linguist, V. Thomsen, to decipher these inscriptions, and to discover that they belonged to the Turkish Iron Age. (See Inscriptions de l’Iénissei recueillies et publiées par la Société Finl. d’Archéologie, 1889, and Inscriptions de l’Orkhon, 1892.)

.—The general history of Finland is fully treated by Yrjö Koskinen (1869–1873) and M. G. Schybergson (1887–1889). Both works have been translated into German. The constitutional conflict gave rise to a host of books and pamphlets in various languages. Mechelin, Danielson and Hermanson were the leading writers on the Finnish side, and M. Ordin on the Russian. Most of the political documents have been published and translated. A finely illustrated book, Finland in the Nineteenth Century, by various Finnish writers, gives an excellent account of the country; also Reuter’s Finlandia, a very complete work with an exhaustive bibliography. The constitutional question was fully discussed in English in Finland and the Tsars, by J. R. Fisher (2nd ed., 1900). The Atlas de Finlande, published in 1899 by the Geographical Society of Finland, is a remarkably well executed and complete work. The Statistical Annual for Finland—Statistisk Arsbok för Finland—published annually by the Central Statistical Bureau in Helsingfors, gives the necessary figures.

Finnish Literature.

The earliest writer in the Finnish vernacular was Michael Agricola (1506–1557), who published an A B C Book in 1544, and, as bishop of Åbo, a number of religious and educational works. A version of the New Testament in Finnish was printed by Agricola in 1548, and some books of the Old Testament in 1552. A complete Finnish Bible was published at Stockholm in 1642. The dominion of the Swedes was very unfavourable to the development of anything like a Finnish literature, the poets of Finland preferring to write in Swedish and so secure a wider audience. It was not until, in 1835, the national epos of Finland, the  (q.v.), was introduced to readers by the exertions of (q.v.), that the Finnish language was used for literary composition. Lönnrot also collected and edited the works of the peasant-poets P. Korhonen (1775–1840) and Pentti Lyytinen, with an anthology containing the improvisations of eighteen other rustic bards. During the last quarter of the 19th century there was an ever-increasing literary activity in Finland, and it took the form less and less of the publication