sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ethnic groups in Europe, Hammerfest, Hammerfest (town), Jens Holmboe, Johannes Steen, Johan Sverdrup

COMPARATIVE STUDIES ON GOVERNMENTS AND NON­

1/ .:( - DOMINANT ETHNIC GROUPS IN , 1850-1940 · Ethnic Groups and Language Rights Volume III

~., i . 1 . Edited by { SERGIJ VILFAN in collaboration with 1 GUDMUND SANDVIK and LODE WILS

1. f' 1 ~... ,'

Non-existent Sami Language Rights in , 1850--1940

GUDMUND SANDVIK

European Foundation NEW YORK UNIVERSITY PRESS DARTMOUTH

128 .., 13 Non-existent Sami Language Rights in Norway, 1850-1940 GUDMUND SANDVIK

Background

The Samis are an ethnic minority in the and in . According to more or less reliable censuses, they number today about 40 000 in Norway (1 per cent of the total ), 20000 in (0.25 per cent), 4500 in (0.1 per cent) and 2000 on the Kola peninsula in Russia. Only Finland has had a regular ethnic census. The Samis call themselves sapmi or sabmi. It is only recently (after 1950) that this name has been generally accepted in the Nordic countries (singular same, samer). wrote about fenni;1 Old English had finnas;2 Historia NorvegitE () written about P80 had finni,3 and the Norse word was {imzar. 4 In medieval Icelandic and , Finnmork was the region in northern where the Samis lived. The northern­ most Norwegian fylke (county) of today, , takes jts name from the huge medieval Finnmork. But Samis of today still use the

name S4pnzi for the entire region where they live (See Map 13.1, ;].. which "shows S4pmiwith state frontiers and some Sami centres). 'Finner' is accordingly an authentic Norwegian name. The in­ convenience is that it may easjIy be misunderstood as denoting citizens ofFinland. The have had the same difficulty since the fifteenth century because they had to distinguish between the inhabitants of southern Finland (the ) and the Samis in the north. Theref9re the Swedes adopted lapp (plurallappar), a word of' Finnish origin, for the Sarnis under the crown of Sweden and LAppland for the region where tlley lived. This "name has become internationally known, but if it is used by Scandinavian citizens in a Nordic country today it might easily be considered an insult. The proper term therefore, even outside Scandinavia, should be Spmi (a singular noun and )andSamis (plural noun). ( TheSamilanguage belongs to the Fenn~Hungariangroup within

''"1n ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RIGHTS

the Ural linguistic family. Itis remotely related to the modern Finnish and Baltic-Finnish languages, all of them descending from proto­ Finnish spoken in the eastern Baltic area and northwards as late as 1500-1000 Be. The Sami language may, if seen as one language, be divided in six dialects. They are mutually understood if they are in neighbouring areas, but only with difficulty if apart. The dialects indicated on Map 2 transcend modem state frontiers. The western Sami dialects are:

-; • Lule and ; • , spoken in Norway, Sweden and Finland, along the Norwegian coast as well as in the mountains, by the majority of Samis (7(hgO per cent).

The eastern SaIni dialects are:

- in the rural community of Inari (Finland); - Eastern ('Skolt') Sami in western Kola and in some localities of Inari, and also, in an earlier period, in southern Varanger (Norway); - Kola Sami.

! The dialect break-up may have taken place during the first millen­ nium AD. From the seventeenth century up to the nineteenth century Sami dialects were put into writing, mainly for religious purposes. All six dialects are used in writing and printing today. A common orthography of northern Sami was established in 1979. The Samis are few in number and they inhabit a very large area. One can also say that this area has no natural centre, nor is it an area with natural borders. These are two of a variety of reasons why nothing resembling a Sami state has ever existed. Today and in Norway and in Finland are Sami majority kommuner (municipalities), but most Samis lived ana still live along the northernmost Norwegian , where natural resources are richest {for instance Varanger, Tanafjord, , Altafjord, KAfjord, Tysfjord). Here the Samis have become a minority and have acculturated or been assimilated to different degrees. Consequently the Sami language is in a precarious situation even in regions where it prevailed during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The assimilation process has been the result of immigration, industries, communications, education, intetrnarriage and deliberate norwegianisation, all different aspects of the dominant Norwegian culture from the south. The Samis on the coast to Varanger have, at least nominally, lived

130 SAMI LANGUAGE RlGHTS IN NORWAY

I. under Norwegian law since the fourteenth century. In the inland areas the Samis have lived under Swedish lawsince the fourteenth century (the border west of Varanger dates from 1751, when Finland was a part of Sweden; the Varanger border was agreed upon by Norway and Russia in 1826; Swedish law remained in the grand duchy of Finland after 1809). People were equal before the law. Sami customary law was not directly applied by civil servants and judges. They governed and applied (or adapted) national law to local conditions. and they did it in Nordic; that is, non-Sami and non­ Finnish languages. The language question was a practical one for civil servants and for judges as well as for the lcx:al population: how to make oneself understood. Mutual problems of understanding were due to arise during the ting (the regular meetings between the local , i 1 population and the authorities. such as the county governor, judge. . , ~ I i or tax collector). In the Swedish areas there is evidence of public ling : ; - interpreters since the seventeenth century, and in Norway since . ; the eighteenth century in the inner part of Finnmark which feB to I ~ Norway in 1751. There appear to have been fewer interpreters on the , i. coast, where Samisand lived doser to each other than ,

T did Samis and Swedes in Swedish Lappland. J . This is the essential background for the two general characteristics .. of language rights of the Samis in the Nordic countries: ., 1 • The Sami language has never had the status of a public language; • Between 1850 and 1940 the polidesofthe three Nordicstates were . i 1 aimed at linguistic assimilation of the Sami speaking citizens. j. : .' How was this poliCY,carried out? Whatwere its main points and what ~ were its causes? .

;.J

Parliament Sets the Tone

The only general debate on Sami questipns in the Norwegian Starling (parliament) between 1850 and 1940 was held in 1863. 5 The government had proposed the estabIishmentofa lectureship in the ,; .j Sami and Finnisi: languages at the University of Christiania/. The money was a trifle. The debate and its was not. It marked th~offidalbeginning of norwegianisation. The opposition was led by (Prime Minister 1891-93 and 1898-1902) and Johan , : Sverdrup (prime Minister 1884-89), both liberals. Johannes Steen claimed that the Samis now had . the New Testament and the catechism in Sami,agrammar and a Samireader. C I , i -' That was right and sufficient. It would be unfair to the Sami people to i. j actually create a Sami literature and thus maintain Sami "', \ "; 1 . ,i ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RlGHTS

by artificial means. That might be the conseq·uence ofa lectureship in Sami at the university. Instead, the Samis should be encouraged to move doser tothestate ofwhich they were citizens. 6 He proposed as a general measure that Sami children should be fostered in Norwegian families, so that they could return to their people as missionaries of norwegianisation. declared that the only salvation for the samis was to be absorbed by the Norwegian . He supported Steen by affmning that rarely had a good cause been so well defended in the Storling. If a Sami nationality was developed further, permanent difficulties mightresuIt. One had to be wary of Russia. It was not a humanitarian obligation for Norway to foster a Sami nationality. Such a policy 'would only prolong the death agony of that national­ ity, which is sad enough in itself'. Anton Martin Schweigaard (professor at the Faculty of Law) . defended the government. As to the assimilation of the Samis, he would leave it to God and to the Samis themselves. But the Samis were a weak race, numbering only 15 000 souls, and the Norwegians should € their protectors. He therefore supported the founding of a lectureship at the university. Later in the debate Schweigaard said that the Sami people would not perish but that there was a risk that the present state of things would continue. This was a state in which the mountain Samis ('a tough race and perhaps the toughest') felt isolated from the Norwegians, and the coast Samis felt that they were regarded like vermin. Two human races, Samis and Norwegians, could not fuse when One was neglected and despised and the other lived as a ruler. Only as equals could they eventually mix. When, as here, colonists lived next to an aboriginal population, one could become impatient because of the many difficulties. Anyhow, justice should be maintained. Two sorel1skrivere (local judges) and MPs of the time from Finnrnark, Frederik Norgreen and , also supported the government. Norgreen claimed that it was anadvantagefor the local population when civil· servants spoke Sami. As for the Samis themselves, they possessed one of the qualities required for consti­ tuting a-nationality, namely respect for the law. They were also loyal. They had never exposed Norway to such international conflicts as could· easily have been provoked if the Samis had wanted it. Norgreen concluded that Norway had to .show the same liberal attitude in language matters towards the Samis as did Russia and Sweden· across the borders. lens Holrnboe (amtmall11 or county governor in Finnmark, 1866-74; Minister ofJustice, 1874-84) said that it wasonlyfair to found a lectureship in a language which was spoken by 20 000 citizens. Euen Saxlund (sorel1skriver in Finnmark, 1838-52; Supreme Court

132 SAMI LANGUAGE RIGHTS IN NORWAY

I 186~94) • of Justice, refuted Steen's claim that Norway had done its full duty towards the Sami people. For the sake of balance he would stress that Norway as well as the neighbouring states had done a great deal in the opposite direction. He referred to the past when the Samis were pushed back 'by our forefathers' and constantly persecuted. Nevertheless, they were an entirely Joyal people who deserved the cultivation of their language. That would lead them to the . and literature and finally to adopt Norwegian civilisation. The development would thus go in the same direction as Steen wished. Steen concluded the debate by reaffirming the position that by working for a Sami literary culture, one prevented this fusion. The Starting accepted the government bill by a small majority(52. to 47). The lecturer in. question, lens Andreas Friis (1821-96) was ~ I . , t J appointed professor of the Sami and Finnish languages at the . ! ~ University in Christiania in 1866. But the Starting as a whole presumed that the Samis would either be absorbed or assimilated by . ! the Norwegians in the long run. This presumption and the eminent :J positions of the deputies who took part in the debate dominated Norwegian thinking about the Sami question fur several generations 1- to come. -t 1. Sami Language in Representative Assemblies? The first member ofthe Starting identifying himself as a Sami was Isak 1 Saba, who represented the rural constituency of Eastern Finnmark in 190fr.9 and 1909-12. He spoke Norwegian in the Parliament: no other : language would have been permitted. Neither did any other deputy, of fuIl or partialSami descent, use the Sami language in the Starting until 1975. The same applies to the amts- or fylkesting (county assemblies). As to the kommunestyrer (local or municipal assemblies) set up in 1837 in Norway, the Samis faced the dilemma of either speaking broken Norwegian or Sami (with the use ofa more or less .qualified municipal interpreter) or opting out of political activity ex~ept for especially crucial questions. This led civil servants from . 1 southern Norwaytpbenevolent. patTonisation of the Samis, often as . The first parliamentary documenLin Sami dates from 1974. The () Minister for Agriculture reported to the on econo.mic, social and cultural measures to be undertaken in the . cen.tral Sami settlement areas, mainly in Finnmark. The report was published in Norwegian and in SamL 6 Several deputies cOminented fa~ourably upon that in the debatein the Starting on 26 May 1975. In thIS debate Klemet . ~tta (Conservative Party vice-deputy,

, < ; ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RlGHTS

Finnmark) uttered the first Sami sentences ever publicly spoken in the Starting. He began by saying: 'Mr President. I would have preferred to speak in Sami about this report and the problems it takes . up, but as 1 am aware that the members of the Storting will have language problems, I have to speak Norwegian,' He then repeated this in Norwegian.' .

The Courts and the Sami Language

The same prindple of absolute· or exclusive priority for the .Norwegian language was applied in the courts of higher instance (regional high courts, Supreme Court of Justice). With some modifications it was also applied on the local level in Sami and Norwegian-Sami settlement areas. The main evidence isthe account given by the Ministry of Justice, when in 1901 it prepared for the abolition of the ling interpreters in the county of Finnmark.8 The inner part of Finnmark (Kautokeino, Avjovarre or Karasjok, and Utsjok west of the river ) had fallen to Norway under the frontier treaty between Norway and Sweden in 1751. As mentioned, the Swedish judges had used ting interpreters there, probably paid for by a tax on the local population. In 1782 the a17ltmamz of Finnmark proposed to the government in that a sworn interpreter be appointed for the whole of thecounty. Most of the inhabitants of Finnmark at that time were either Samis or Finns, andmany of them were not able to express themselves in Norwegian. That was, according to the Governor, the cause of a lot of disorder-He wanted the interpreter to have a perfect command of Sami, Finnish and Norwegian, so that he could assist the local authorities on their ting circuits, 'translating and explaining everything that was said in Sami and Finnish'. The salary could be provided by reducing the salary of the regional hangman by 25 per cent, a salary that was provided by a region?l tax levied on every grown upSami and Finnish male. The Samis in Kautokeino and Karasjok should, as before, pay this tax by one tongue each to the interpreter. The government agreed to the proposition and the resulting royal decreeof 7 August 17829 remained in force~ for 80 years. In 1833 the government tried to increase the salary, but the Storting refused. The statute of6June 1863 (Section 6)10 laiddown that in each tinglag(judidaldistrict, generally the same as a kom71lune) there should be ling interpreters, appointed by the local judge and approved by the amtmann, and paid through .local taxation by the a71ltsJing. The per diem for service was suppliedby the state (for instance the statute of 10 July 1894, Section 17/5, which fixed it at four Kroner).ll. . In 1898 the amtsting of Finnmark proposed the phasing out of the

134 SAMI LANGUAGE RlGHrS IN NORWAY

interpreter institution. The amtmimn accordingly asked the local judges for their opinion. Personally, he felt that it was wrong 'to pay _ fixed interpreter expenses in civil cases from the state or county treasury, whether the parties were Norwegian citizens or not'. The county governorproposed that all salaried ting interpreters should be dismissed and replaced byauthorised and sworn court translators. They mightbe employed and paid by the parties in civil cases.12 What 0' caused the amt77Ulnn to hint at non-Norwegian parties was the important Finnish immigration into Finnrnark since the 183Os. Many o I Finns had failed to regularise their Norwegian citizenship according to the forms of the statute on Norwegian citizenship of 21 April 1888.13 Consequently they were still citizens of the grand duchy of 1 .~. .~ Finland and as such subjects of the tsar. The sorenskriver of in western Finnmark said that ingeneral he

.~ held the same opinionas the But he would not propose the ; amtmann. dismissal of ling interpreters in the interior of Finnmark (Kautokeino with Karasjok). His reservation was not caused by regard for the exdusively Sami population here- it was the civil servants and the 1" judges who needed the ting interpreters. The lillg was nOot only :. I important for civil cases. In criminal cases and for the settlement of I J public 0 questions such as taxation, 0 transport by reindeer of civil '- servants and other travellers, guardianship and so on, interpreters

were indispensable. Even 'court witnesses' - in their capacity of 0 ,, ">;., representatives of the local population - needed interpreters. Only a 0'

I o few of them knew Nonvegian. But he was not in any doubt as to the kammuner along the coast, such as Alta. Here the office of ling interpreter should have been abolished long ago. In his opinion the 1 interpreter only helped to maintain a lasting and deplorable con­ , viction among the population that it was not necessary for them, even as resident Norwegian citizens, to learn the language of the -' country. The majority hue were able to speak this language but they did notwant to, at least not in court. The question in itself might seem a trifle~but he thought that dismissal of the ling interpreters here would promotenorwegianisation. The sorenskriver of (also in western Finnmark) in 1898 was the only local judge who defended the ling interpreters. With the possible exception of two Jcommunu in his district the ling interpreters were absolutely necessary. He did not feel confident even in a case ,< ;. 'where the parties and their witnesses spoke a broken Norwegian'. The witnesses might later claim that there had been a misunder­ standing on their part or on the part of the judge, and thus the sanctity of the oath, the maintenance and cultivation of which were so important, would suffer. In such cases he had always insisted that th. parties should make use of the interpreter. The judge fully agreed , ( ,I WIth the county governor that the state should do everything ~ _ .. J

:I .; \i c , ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RIGHTS

possible to persuade the inhabitants to speak Norwegian and to feel themselves Norwegian citizens, but the proper field for such activity should be schools and military drill grounds, in addition toeveryday company with Norwegians. The courts should ensure, in civil as well as in criminal cases, that the parties and the witnesses explained themselves clearly, exhaustively and truthfully, so that the courts should not lack anything that might contribute to the clarification of l the case. -4 The drill grounds were new. Conscription was not 15 extended to until 1898. . In 1901 the new judge ofHamrnerfest declared that he fully agreed with the amt77Ull1n,16 as did three local judges in eastern Finnmark (fana, Yarde and Varanger). The sorensmver in Tana said that it was inappropriate to pay the ting interpreter from the treasuryin civil cases. It was irrelevant whether the parties were Norwegian citizens . or not. The judge declared that if in this country anybody wanted to take a case to court, he should bear the expenses himself, translation included:

If the citizens of the realm refuse to use Norwegian it is their business, but the burden of all ensuing expenses should be theirs. The judge presumed that, when Samis and Finns fully realised that, there would soon be a change, and he did not foresee any partieularinconvenience. Of course, the government would have to provide court tran~lators, if the parties so wished and agreed to pay th~.

The amtmann consequently declared that he intended to submit the following proposal to the first amtsting:

(a) That the ting interpreters should be abolished as from 1July 1900; (b) That in civil cases the parties should pay the translators. In exclusively criminal or public cases or questions, the translators were to be paid by the county council until the statute of1863 was canceI)ed, and from then on by the government. .

The amt77Ulnn also wanted to hear the opinion of the government, andafter Some correspondence with Christiania the amtsting adopted the governor's motion in 1899. The decisionhad to be approved by . the government. In 1900 the Ministry ofJustice provided a historical account of the ting interpreter institution and.declared 'that on the whole it approved of the assembly's decision: 'The Ministry also considers it desirable to introduce an arrangement which as far as possible might limit the use of foreign (sic) languages in legal actions.' . The only exception, in accordance with the views of the local judge at Alta, was the interior of Finnmark or the tinglag of Kautokeino, including Karasjok: SAMl LANGUAGE RIGHTS IN NORWAY

The Ministry agrees with the county governor that one should as far as possible endeavour to norwegianise the foreign speaking part of the population of Finnmark. But-it is not possible to overlook the fact that almost the entire population in the district of Kautokeino has no mastery of the Norwegian language and thatthe administration ofcivil as well as of criminal justice and of other public cases requires dose contact between the judge or the authorities and the popuJation. The Ministry considers it necessary that in such public cases the dvil servant should make himself understood by the population and vice versa.

For such cases, the Ministry decided that the old ling interpreter should be maintained, but that indvil cases the parties should pay the interpreter themselves.. .. The royal decree of 14 December 1901 17 confirmed the proposition by the amtma1l11 and the decision of the amlsting of Finnmark, with •.. - one exception in the third and last clause: 'When an authorised translator is summoned by the court to serve the procedure or for otherpublic purposes, he shall be paid ... according to thestatute of j 6June 1863 by the county treasury.' A royal decree resulted only from .. ;. action within the government or the ministry concerned, never by 1 the Storting. The account from the Ministry of Justice on which the .~ 1 j preceding pages are mainly based was published post facio, in .. I January....:February 1902. Neither the Storting nor the Samis them­ 1 selves had any possibility of exerting any influence on the decision that was taken. The decree was not subsequently revoked until 1990. However, a large-scale revision of the statutes and rules concern­ , J ing courts and civil procedure was under way. A statute Domstolloven •I (Court Statute) was passed on 13 August 1915. Two sections in the .. ., statute contain general rules on the question of language in : 1 Norwegian courts. Section 135 says:

" If a person who does not master the Nonvegian language is going to take part in the proceedings, a translator appointed by or accepted by the court shall be used. The records will be kept in Norwegian. On important subjects the court may decide that the records shall also be kept in the foreign language ... and submitted for acceptance. A .; j translator is not required where the court and the court witnesses as well as the parties have mastered the foreign language. In cases other . , than criminal cases this also applies where the members of the.court master the language and the parties renounce translation. During investigations and judicial preJiminaryinvestigations, in criminal . , cases, an interpreter is not necessary if the judge masters the foreign .1. .J language.

J Section 136 states that 'Documentsconcemingthe procedure must be ., } L .• I ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RlGHTS

written in Norwegian oraccompanied by a translation....The court may make an exception in full or in part if everybody concerned understands the foreign language.'18 These sections in the statute on the courts were not altered later in any major respect until 1990. 19 Official translations have been paid for by the government. It will be noticed that this statute was less strict than the 1901 decree. In practice civil proceedings Could take place in Sami if the judge had mastered the language, but the records and the decision had to be written in Norwegian. However, a Sami or a Finnish speaking citizen could not demand that the court should deal with the case in any other language than Norwegian. In a ruling dating from 1986, the Norwegian Supreme Court through its. Commission for Appeals, after having referred to Sections 135 and 136, dedared: In the present case there seems to be no real language problem. MKS is a teacher and it is presumed that she has mastered the Norwegian language. However, she is of the opinion that she as a Sami may rightfully claim that the judicial authorities shall address her in the Sami language and that she has a right to address herseH to them in her language. There is no title to such a right. The main and decisive point according to the Statute on Courts, Section 135, is whether the person in question does not 'know' Norwegian. A person who masters Norwegian can neither claim the right to use another language, nor that thisother language shallbe used towards her or him. The question whether one should have another arrangement as to the use of the Samilanguage is a question of legislation. 2U An awkward question arose in 1877 as to the problem of Sami participation in the courts. The statute on lagrettesme1l11 (lay members in the courts at the time serving as court witnesses and in certain cases as lay assistan~s to the judge) of 8 August 1854, Section 1, stated that Norwegian citizens who had the right to vote in municipal elections also had a duty to serve in the courts of fIrst instance. To that effect the councils of each townsh-ip and rural community should make a list, from which lay court witnesses and assistants could ~ drawn.21 The Sarnis had full voting ·rights, and apparently service as Jay members was not· considered a problem for the Sami communities, probably thanks to the institution of the ting interpreters.of the time. However, the question became awkward because of the .Code of Criminal Pro­ cedure of 1 July 1887. 22 Section 35 exduded from eligibility as lay judges in the courts of first instance and as jurors in the new juryin the lagma711lsrett (regional high courts, eventually of second instance and of appeal) those who because of 'insufficient knowledge of the language of the country are not capable of performing the duty of a jury or of a lay judge'. SAMI LANGUAGE RIGHT'S IN NORWAY

Irl a government bill presented to the Starting in 1890 the Ministry of Justice elucidated the problem:

In some parts of the county of Finnmark this section will lead to a , serious reduction in the number of eligible persons. For instance, in ,:., .. . ; Kautokeino and Varanger the number of eligible candida tes was only 5 and 26 respectively, that is, even less than the numberofjurors and lay judges who should be drawn according to the statute.

The Ministry therefore proposed that in districts with the (scrtalled) 1anguage mixture' one should accept that even 'persons without sufficient knowledge of the language of the country' could be drawn as court witnesses and lay assistants to the judges in civil cases in the first instance. This, the Ministry said, was a diificulty no worse than had to be expected in the administration of justice in such areas where an interpreter was necessary.23 . By a statute passed on 3 March 1890, in Section 4, the Starting decided that in kammulIer where, owing to the lack of knowledge of the language of the country (Norwegian), an insufficient number of persons was eligible for the list of full service in the courts, a special list should be made for the persons who were not qualified. From this special list could be drawn court witnesses, appraisers and lay I. assistants in civil courts of the 'first instance, .if persons with full knowledge of. the language of the country were not available, provided they could be assisted by an interpreter.24 This section was in part (court witnesses) transferred to Section 78 of the Statute on Courts of 13 August 1915 and remained there until abolished,by the statute of 22 May 1981.25 The rules from Section 48 ofthe 1887 Code of Criminal Procedure

were moved to Section 76 of the 1915 Statute on Courtswherebv it .:.. ·r acquired an addition relating to the Norwegian language. The clause, still in force, reads as follows:

As jurors and Jay judges should only be elected persons who by their honesty, ability and independence are regarded as particularly

qualified for the task, and who will not because of insufficient ;.: J knowledge of the NorWegian language or for other reasons, have difficulties inperfonning the duties which the task entails. 26 ~. Summing up; these rules meant that Sami (and Finnish) citizens who did not master the Norwegian language were excluded from democratic partidpationin the courts of the country to which other , I citizens of Norway were entitled.

, \ .• i • j 280 ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RlGf-ITS

The Civil Service and the Sami Language

The civil service used Norwegian, and in internal civil correspond- _ ence there was never any question of anything else. All official announcements in newspapers or in public places were written in Nonvegian. But where they concerned such things as reindeer husbandry, the use of natural resources such as lakes, trees, peatand so on, allowing dogs in public offices, and injunctions not to . spit on the floor, they were generally accompanied by a translation into Sami (sometimes into Finnish as well). Thus nobody could claim that they had not understood the rulings of the authorities. Samis, Sami communities (for instance, orreindeer husbandry groups) and the very few Sami organisations had to use Norwegian when addressing the authorities. The Sami language was not forbidden but it could have no effect. A Sami text would have to be accompanied by a Norwegian translation.

Place-names

Towards the end of the 1860s the amtmamz of Finnmark began to : demand that farms should be given an official Norwegian name, together with the current Sami orFinnish name, in public documents .- and registers. The demand became more strict underSection 3fof the royal decree of 5 May 1876: 'The farm shall be given a Norwegian name with the possible current Sami or Finnish name added in brackets,' and was repeated verbatim in Section 3f of a new royal decree of 1 June 1895. Finally, Section 5d of the royal decree of 7 July 1902 excluded Sami and Finnish property names for new farms and building lots: 'The property shall be given a separate, Nonvegian name'. This decree remained in force until the statute of 12 March 1965. 27 . . . . From around 1900 Sami place-names were removed as much as possible from official maps and replaced by a translation into Norwegian or by an entirely new Nonvegian name. nus strict principle was modifieq by the National Geographic Survey in the 1920s and 193Os. In 1928 and 1929 the Ministry of Defence gave the following guidelines for the use ofSami place-names on official maps:

1) Ifthe local population uses only Sami names, they shall be entered on the map. If the Sami name ends with one of the following generic names, the generic name shall be translated into Norwegian: dallo - farm javrre - lake or jakJaz - river

1- SAMl LANGUAGE RIGHTS IN NORWAY 1 .­ l jogas - brook, stream luokta - bay njargga - promontory sUolo - islet, island.' Other similar'generic names may be translated if, in consultation with the toponymic expert, an appropriate translation can be found. 2} If the local population uses both a Sami and a Norwegian name then as a rule only the Norwegian nameshall be entered on the map. If the Sami name characterises the place particularly well this name shall also be put on the map if there is sufficient space. 3) Sami names may be translated as a whole where the Norwegian name is convenient and dearly illustrates the ~eaning of the name. If the Norwegian name sounds very different from the original the Sami name may be entered on the map together with the translation. "." .: . 4) Norwegianised name forms, where the entire name is transcribed J" according to its Norwegian pronunciation, shall as far as possible be put on the map when these forms are commonly used.

These nonns were put into effect more or less consistently until the 195Os. The practice since the 1960s is to use the same names on the .: 4- mapas are used by the local population, and to spell Sami names with 1... correct orthography. This often leads to both Sami and Norwegian (or Finnish) names for one locality, so more space is required. This may be provided by the new map series (M 711) which is on the scale I of 1:50 000.2B (fhe Lou om sladnanm (Statute on place names) of 18 May 1990 puts Norwegian, Sami and Finnish toponymes on equal footing.) 1 ,Place-names are part of the evidence of Sami presence in many parts of Norway. During the norwegianisation period, this evidence was to a large extent suppressed. Very often Sami place-names have been written in an inadequate or broken way. Even so, through official use they have become finnly established. One example among many is Russeluft (at the southern end of Altafjord), which seems to have the absurd meaning 'Russian air'. But the name is derived from Sam! luokla (bay) and thus is toponymic evidence of barter with Pomor vessels from Archangel. Up to 1914 they had broughtRussian rye to many a bay in Finnmark and sailed home with ~-- .~ fish as bulk cargo.-

A Soft Approach? -, I

Judges and civil servants were not required to know Sami but knowledge of the Sami language was considered a positive quali­ , 1 i fication, an asset that made the work of the authorities more efficient. , Many judges and civil servants learned some Sami during their stay f\ , 1

'\ ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RlGHTS

in districts where they had to deal with Samis. The positions of amtmann and sorenskriver in far-off Finnmark were usually entrusted to gifted and reliable young men. Five years in northern Norway was considered an advantage for the subsequent career of a civil servant and possibly also for laterservice as experts (at times patronising and Iknow-it-all') on Sami questions and on northern questions as a whole. But the school director of Finnmark 1902-20 inveighed in his correspondence with the government against such lenient judges 29 and priests. He maintained that they obstructed norwegianisation. . Erik Solem was one of several civil servants who took a genuine interest in Sarni culture. He served as sorrnskriver in Tana., eastern Finnmark, between 1912 and 1920, and was a member of the Supreme Court of Justice 1938-47. Solem was an eminent specialist oncivil procedure. In 1918 he published the first standard comment­ ary on the statutes on courts and on court procedureof1915. In Tana he learned to 'master the foreign language' of the Samis, aimed at in Sections 135 and 136 mentioned earlier. Together with his colleague in Alta he was in conflict with the school director about the use of the Sami language in courts. In 1933 Erik Solem published his pioneer. work in comparative law and legal , LAppiske rettstudier· ('Lap Legal Studies'). The monograph is mainly based on his own experience and research.

sCI"T(C::: "'1I'r/l/, compult' r.,- II~IH\' "'lindt', Unin'rsil\' oj Tmmsu. frum ofiicial censuses. 51.,1 I~I I~ .;c';,Ir.,I/'I/r;i.· . sll't'dc'", Henning Joh.,~H·m, 'S.,nll.'rn.l i c.kn sn'l1skii bdolkning511l\"lxk­ lingen', FlIr:,k"f<' 1I1111~·lcJlklli".'\:'I,.,IS'Il". PF'- 32tl-8lJ. Fi"I""d. Erki Asp. Tlte FI/I";:I,lill" III lite LII'I':': A (I'~' tIt A((/llt,,,,,,titll/_

1;1') ; - SAMl LANGUAGE RlGHTS IN NORWAY

-. Why?

The Sami popul"'tion Was small. Numbers -in censuses are minimal and were to a large extent based on linguistic criteria, leading to ,-II underregistration. In addition, negative social disairnination made many Samis hide their ethnicity. The apparent stagnation in population growth since 1890 has such causes. The Samis were also scattered over a huge non-insular area with no natural borders, they had no state and no intellectual centre of their own. .SaIni culture in the period 1850-1940 was considered backward, old-fashioned and primitive, and so was the language. Norwegians probably shared this attitude with most European peoples with respect to non-dominant ethnic groups. Modernisation of the educational system in Norway started in the 186Os. Norway was not a federal state, and in any event Norwegian would have had to become the common language of the realm. Even if ting interpreters (and Sami teachers) existed at that time it would have been a formidable task to establish a dual school system and to cultivate the Sami dialects and language for public and literary use. It would at least have required a not insignificant part of the modest fraction of the gross national product which the Starting claimed for public use. Anyhow, the debate in the Starting in 1863 on a . lectureship at the university shows that, politically, such ideas were completely out of the question. The authorities embarked upon the : ~ path of norwegianisation in. the schools, in the courts, in the civil service and even in toponymy. In the state Church norwegianisation was more hesitatingly pursued. Russia had annexed Finland from Sweden in 1809. It was pro­ claimed a grand duchy under the tsar and remained as such until 1918. A glance at the map shows how this created anew strategic situation in the north, closely watched by western powers as well. From the 1830s there had been considerable immigration to Finnrnark and northern from Finland. Finnish immigrants had been called kvener (singular kven) from the , and in the 1860s

fears arose (hintep at in Starting debates) that the mingling of Samis ., 1 and Kvens might lead to a kvenification of Finnmarkand northern Troms, resulting in Norway acquiring 'a Slesvig in the north'. These , security considerations lay' behind the policy of deliberate , , : ( norwegianisation. Even if such considerations were seldom brought into the openthey mingled with the common national goal of making 1 I Norwegian the only language in northern Norway, part of fa missian I . i civilisatrice (the civilising mission) for those latitudes. This particular . , .I J aspect has recently, and for the first time, been discussed in public by professional historians.30 .. .. : 1 -' .. A similar attitude towards the Sami and Finnish languages seems :"•.. _1I n ;~ J

'! ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RIGHTS

to have prevailed in Sweden from the 1880s, at least along the Finnish border and southwards along the Gulf of Bothnia. The inland area, near the Norwegian border, has always been a Sami area. Here the . Swedish authorities were more positive to the Santi culture as a whole, even if in a patronising way. The common saying was that'A Sami shall live as a Sami'i that is, from reindeer husbandry, inland fishing and hunting. After 1814 and especially since the 186Os, the question of the Norwegian language has been complex, to say the-Ieast,31 but none of the conflicting parties adopted a positive attitude towards the real in Norway. The Finns have passed remarkably generous legislation for the Swedish speaking minority but none of the groups have shown any special consideration for the Sami language. Thus Nordic experience shows that parties in linguistic disputes, for all the apparent idealism, may be quite coIdblooded and certainly not altruistic towards real linguistic .minorities.. From the 1850s to 1914 the population in northern Norway increased more than in the rest of the country. Migration from the south to the north and emigration to the USA were all part of the same picture. The southerners settled along the coast (for instance, the parents of. in 1862) and mingled. with the local Norwegian fishermen and small farmers. Thus the coast became the basis for economic and political activity and a fertile soil for ideals of social democracy, modernisation, norwegianisation and disapproval of old Sami ways of life. The Samis on the coast were placed in a difficult minority position from which the only escape seemed to be acculturation or assimilation, such as, for instance, from Sami into the Norwegian language. . The -liberal and left-wing political parties did not adopt a positive attitude to the Sami language. Sami voters were few and very seldom a political asset. Liberals (such as Sverdrup and Steen) and leftist politicians denounced the danger of 'kvenification' of northern Troms and Finnmark, aiming of course at reactionary tsarist Russia and after 1918 at ultra-rightist tendencies in Finnish politics. On the conservative side the same factors played their role. In any event, conservative politiciansdo not seem to have found values in the Sami . language worthy of deliberate conservation and cultivation. The election of Isak Saba as Sami Member ofParliamentin1906 and 1909, as well as some organisation-building and a few periodica1sin the Sami language in this period, were the first Sami steps against norwegianisation.32 But the years around 1900 were a period of nationalism or even jingoism, and Norway was no exception. If it may be said that 'the liberation of the Sainis had tobe the Samis' own work', it is nevertheless hard to see how, in such enormous areas, 'pan-Sami' feelings of community and national or Nordic Sami

144 SAMI LANGUAGE RlGHTS IN NORWAY

organisations could possibly have developed before the time of modem means of communication and mass media. In northern Norway this development did not take place until the 1960s.

Conclusion

The case ofthe non-existent language rights of the Samis 1850-1940 demonstrates how a small language was kept as dialects (of con­ siderable interest to linguists), but was denied its development as a public and literary language, even in regions where the Sarni language was predominant among the i~l1abitants. . -, ....:!'"'.•....

Notes

1 Tacitus, Grrnumia, 46. 2 Othere, in Baldy (1980) pp. 13-16. . ~, 3 Storm (1880), pp. 78,82-7. ., I 4 Fritzner(1973), pp. 416-7. 5 Storlhtngstide7lde (Records of the storting) (1863), pp. 390-402 - Steen, pp. 390, 398, 401; Sverdrup, pp. 392-3, 400-1; Schweigaard, pp. 390-2,399,.400; Norgreen, pp. 394-6, 401; Holmboe, pp. 396-9,400; Saxlund, p. 402, 399. About the experiment of fostering in Raros, , in Stortlri71gs Forlumd­ li7lgu (Proceedings of the storting) (1862/63). 6 In Storti7lgsforlralldli7lgu (1974-75). , ; 7 Stortiilgstidende (1974-75), p. 4365. 8. DqxIrio7lmis-Tide71de for 1902 (Ministry Information) pp. 67-74, 00-7. 9 KOllgelige Rescripter (Royal Rescripts), III, p. 48. 10 Love (Statutes) 17 (1862-4), pp. 507-8. ]] Norsk Loutide7ld~ (The Norwegian Legal Joumal) (1894), p. 284. 12 Deparlements-Tide7lde for 1902, p. 67. . 13 Norsk Loutide7lde (1888), pp. 61-7. 14 D'1Jt1rto7lents-Tidende for 1902: Alta, p. 68; Hammerfesl, pp. 6&-70. 15 Norsk LoutidOlde(]897), pp. 207-9. ,. ~: ]6 Departemmts-Tidel/de for 1902: Hammerfesl, pp. 8.>-6; Tana, p. 70; amtsti7lg decision, p. 71; foreign languages, p. 83; interior of Finnmark, pp. 84-5. 17 Norsk Lovtidellde (1901), R. 523. 18 Ibid. (1915),pp. 503-48. 19 Norges Joua (The Statutes of Norway), 1685-1989 (1988), p. 140. To the Samdoven (The Sami statute) of 12 June 1987 the Storting attached Chapter30n Sami language of2] December 1990, Sec;tion .J--4 allows the use ofSami language inthe judicial systems of most of Finnmark and KAfjord inTroms. .. 20 NorskRdstidrn.ck(TheNorwegian Court Journal) (]986), p. 574. This legislation came four years late (Note 19). 21 L.oue, 14 (1853-5), pp. 539-50. 22 Norsk Loutidend~ (1887), pp. 2~90. 23 StOTthings FC1Thandling~r (1890), p. 3. 24 Norsk Loutidrnde (1890), pp. 91-2. 25 . Ibid. (1981),' p. 352.

. I, ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RIGHTS

26 Ibid. (1887), p. 208 (cp. Sec. 35); 1915, pp. 76-7; Narg~ lover, 1685-1987 (1988), p. 363. _ .. 27 ~,25 (1876), p. 174; Norsk LotJtUfmd~ (1895), p. 120; 1902, p. 609; 1%5, pp. 271-2. 28 NOU (The official reports of Norway) 1983:6, Stadl/amn (Place names), p. 45. Furtherdocumentation is given in this official report on place-names in Norway, mparticular by Thor Frette on Sami place-names,pp. 42-45. 29 Eriksen og Niemi (1981), pp. II5-(). 30 Eriksen og Niemi, op.dt. 31 Haugen (1966). 32 Jemsletten (1986).

Sources

Dqx:rtonmts-Tid"ld! (Ministry Information), for 1902, pp. 67-74, 81-87: Christiania. Kangdig~ R~pt!T, RtSOlutiolJ~r og Coll~gial-Br~ for Norge, itidsrummd 1660-1813 (Royal Rescripts, Resolutions and Ministry Letters for Norway, in the Period 1781-1796) 1~1: 1781-1796, Fr. Aug. Wessel Berg (ed.) (1843): Christiania. ~, Allordl1illgcr, KU1/dgjerdscr, ao/me Brror:, Resolutioll!T 171. M. (Statutes, Ordinances, Announcements, Open Letters, Resolutions, etc.), 14 (1853-5), 17 (1862-4), 25 (1876), Statutes, etc.: Christiania. Narges laver (The Statutes of Norway), 1685-1989 (1990), Statutes: Oslo. Narges off~ntJige utredning!T (NOW, 1983:6 Stadnamn (place-names); 1984:18 am samenes rettsstilling (on the rights of the Samis), Official reports: Oslo. NaTsk lovtidende, 2nd section, 1887, 1888, 1890,1894,1895,1897,1902,1915; .. ,,2nd section, 1965; ..., 1st section 1981: (Christiania/Oslo). Narsk Rdstidwde (1986), Judgements from the Supreme Court of Justice: OsJo. Slartltings Forlrondlinga (1862/63), Anden Dee!, S. No 4, Litr. A; pp. 115-22; 1890, Tredie Del, Oth. Prp. No. 11: Christiania. Startingsfarholldlillg!T (1974-75), 3. del, Stortingsmelding nr. 13, Parliamentary documents: Oslo. StaTthingstidel!de (1863), pp. 390-402; Stortillgstidellde (1974-75), Stenographic reports: Christiania, Oslo.

Bibliographical Note

Literature on Sami questions is quite rich, especially within and folklore. Analytical or synthesist works are weak on the historic dimension and mostly confined to one country or to one region. The subjects are generallyseen from the outside, by more orless inlormedloreign observers, at times much influenced by reindeer and nomadism. Historical statistics are also weak, because of vague criteria and the policy of norwegianisation. . . Sami studies may begin with maps covering the whole of Norway, Sweden, Finland and, jf possible, the Kola peninsuJa, followed by (0) language textbooks for beginners, (b) analytical or synthesist works, (c) monographs, and then find one's own way in (d) bibliographies. ' (n) Dauvill ('In the North'), I-JIJ is a series ofelementary textbooks with cassettes in Northern Sami, edited by the three Nordic broadcasting corporations (The Norwegian version, Oslo, 1983-5). . (b) Not quite modem, but recommended synthesist works are Asbjern Nesheim, Samm~ og d!T~ kultur (The Samis and their culture), Norsk Folkemuseum, Oslo,

Uri SAMI LANGUAGE RIGI-ITS IN NORWAY

1961); 0mulv Vorren og Ernst Manker, Sam~kulturm (The Sami Culture) (2nd ed., Tromse, 1976); and Israel Ruong, Samrrna i histori~/l ach nutidm ('The Samis in history and in the present day', 4th entirely revised ed., Stockholm, 1982-Ruong, himself a Sami, was professor of Sami language and culture at the University of Uppsala). They may be updated with the background material in Norg~ off~/ltlig~ utr~dniltger (NOU, The official reports of Norway') 1984:18, Om samenes rdlsstilli/lg ('On the rights of the Samis', Oslo, 1984, pp. 69-378). Phebe Fjellstrom of the Ethnological Institution, Ume~ University, gives a new approach based on recent research in Sammlas samlwIle j tradition ac /lutid ('The society of the Samis in tradition and today', Stockholm, 1986). New historical research by Regnor Jemsletlen, himself a Sami, in SameberJtgdsm i Norge: Ide og strategi, 1900-1940 (The Sami movement in Norway:

Idea and strategy, 1900--1940', Tromse 1986). : r. (c) The SaIni language seen as a question oflinguistic rights (Sprachmrecht) has not , 1 been treated earlier. Two useful monographs are Helge Dahl, Sprdkpolitikk og I skDlestdl i Finnmark 1814-1905 ('Linguistic policy and schools', Oslo, 1957) and Mi~o Korhonen, lohdatlls lapin belen historian (, 1981). Dahl describes norwegIan­ isation (favourably), Korhonen gives an introduction to the history of theSami ~ language. Decisive for the norwegianisation policy was the conception ofa 'Finnish ; I - menace' (Eriksen og Niemi, Den fluskefarr, Oslo, 1981, an epoch-making work).). Legal aspects have been treated by Solem, UzT'l,i!'k( rdts.c;tudit:r ('Lap legalstudies', I 0510,1933) and by Sverre Tennesen, Rt:fle/l til jorden i Fimmmrk('The right to the land \ of Finnmark', , 2nded., 1979), both pioneer works. Tennesen's LL 0 thesis is ~ one of the foundations for the official report of 1984 on the rights of the Samis. Since Robert Paine published his thesis (Oxon.) on Coast Samis in Western 1 I Finnmark, Coast Lapp Society, I: A Study of Neighbourhood ill Rrosbotn (Troms0 ::Ii. museums skrifter VoL IV, 1, Tromse, 1957), he has been a leading authority on Sami social anthropology. Later works include Coast Lapp Society, II: A Study of Eco"oll1ic I Developmellt alld Social Value~ (Tromse museumsskrifter Vol. IV, 2, Troms0, 1%5) and 011111 11 River, Dall1l1 a People? (Copenhagen, IWGIA, 1982). Harald Eidheim has I produced the short and pertinent Asp~cts of flteL:rppish Millority Situation (Oslo, 1971). Statistics, also historical, on Samis in Norway are presented with professional and j critical comments in Norwegian and English by the sociologist Vilhelm Aubert, Dell samiske befolkllilrg i Nord-NorgefThr Lnppislt Papulation ill Northerrr Norway (Artikler fra Stalistisksentralbyra nr. 107, Oslo, 1978. - By error, 'Bak'te' has been given as 1 Aubert's last name). , . h:' addition to NOU 1984:18 some other official reports from Norwegian govern­ ment committees deserve attention: NOU 1978:18A, Finnmarksviddl1, 1U1tur - kultur (The mountain plateau of Finnmatk, nature-culture'); NOU 1980:53, Vall av urbefolktrirrg~r ('Protection of '); NOU 1983:6, Sladrtamll ('Place-names'); and especially NOUs 1985:14, 1985:24 and 1987:34, Samisk kultut og utdallnirrg ('Sami culture and education'; among other , 1 . 1 subjects, it deals with the position of the Sami language today, with proposals for its :; j use in the civil service courts and schooLs; Cpo Chapter 3 on Sami language of 21 December 1990 in theSami Statute). ' " ; I The NOU 1984:18 resulted in the Samdov of 5 June 1987, a statut.e establishing an ;I ~Jecfed, representative and consultative Sami assembly for Norway (Samdinget), and :,;. ,j In the amendment of 21 April 1988 to the Constitution, Section 11Oa: 'It is incumbent on the government authorities to take the necessary steps to enable the Sami .I population ,to safeguard and develop their language, their culture and their societal life: (d) All the works under (b) and (c) contain exhaustive bibliographies. I Universitetsbiblioteket, Avdeling B, , embarked in 1979 on the I ambitious project of a general Sami bibliography. The first result is: Inga Britt Blindh ETHNIC GROUPS AND LANGUAGE RlGHTS

og Justin Siegert, S4mi bibliografia,oflIosat Norggas1966-1980/Samisk bibliografi, lltgivdsa i Norgt 1966-1980 (Trondheim, 1984).

Bibliography

Bately, Janet (ed.) (1980), The Old English OrOSiliS. 'Othere's report to King Alfred', pp. 13-16, Early English Text Society, London. Eriksen, Knut Einar og Einar Niemi (1981). ~r finsk~ fau: Sikkahdsprobl~erog minaritdspolitikk i nord, 1860-1940, pp. 352-74: English summary (The Finnish menace: boundary problems and minority policy in the north), Oslo. Fritzner, Johan (1973), Ordbog over d~l gaml~ norsu Sprog, (Dictionary of the language) 1, Christiania 1886; 3rd ed. Oslo 1954; 4th ed. Oslo 1973.. Haugen, Einar (1%6), LA,rguage conflid and language planning: The ClZS~ of modan No~gian, Harvard. . . ]emsletten, Regnor (1986), Samebevegdsen i Norge. Idiog slral~gi, 1900-1940 (The Sami movement in Norway. Idea and strategy), Thesis, polycopied MS, University of Troms". . Solem, Erik (ed.) (1933), Lappisk~ rettsstudia (Lap legal studies), pp. 275-314, with a German synopsis, Institutt for sammenIignende kulurforskning (Institute of comparative research on cultures). Serie B skrifter XXIV: Oslo. Reprint 1970, Universitetsforlaget, Oslo. . Storm, Gustav (ed.) (1880), 'Monumen~ Historica Norvegica', Historia Norvegiae, pp. 82-7, De Finnis: Christiania. Tadtus, , Penguin Classics - Tacitus, The Agricola and the Gerrnania, ed. 1975.

ldR " . ~o ·.4 ~. . ~ ~... 4.., ...../ ...... ;"'-11/ II r ...... "0-"04 I.." .. :

_. I ---.. "---' ... I" I...... l.nc ::: J:: .. R "0.... :...~ I-- AT LAN TI C .,.....,~ S' ., ...... , c: < x: 8arerrs Sea I IUtIl~::: 3 I OCEAN J*j--(' 1" • '" J:.. .. KAfjord Karasjok. i Uisjoki ~ ".'. ~< El_. z"·:! ~ 0 , .. ' " \ :_ ., ',.' Petsamo ::1 :1 til I' ,eKaUlokelno' 4 ,(,' . ::r .. ,'., ~ ," I,_.',". ",t •( o r1 El ') ",,,,', '", ,Enarll 0; ;} _. 5 in /"'" , " - ,f ro 'lno ... _. \ elowosero :J /'\, ,, ..... El_."~ \Q .. ~ ,j 2 ' , 6 OJ ""'\1\ OJ .. / I 7" __ ( -::J ...... " , e ::1. til r' """ \ tIlg i \ \ .. - \ El_. :rr1 I SWEDEN .. ;} FINLAND " VI I til m" J \1\III El_. Snha 1 n" ,. \ ;:l N '.' 'I ...... I tAr-' "C: "J ....o ".... , ...::- .. c. Saml centres V'l=' , • .. no Sapml border ~.~ O'In --- Dialect borders o km 300 I I State frontier ~~ S,3.. ... "

-:.. ::l

;'"",., '.'.::li ~ ... .. l •.• •· 0.;." , :~_,_,.,.",.J" ..,....",""',,,.,..,,...... " ",...--.:,,-v;..;.J i-.,...... - .... ~ ...... I' Y Varanger __ .{ Tltna;a l::7" Porsanger 0 "F=~ M .'UIJ (0_, FINNMARK' . ·~o Lowosero ~ I Utslokl/ ~ •E. A ,Alta _,. nar! ''''eo ~ Karasjok - A .J 'KAford-' _0, """'".",-:PJ' I• KautokelOo • -'\.: ~ •• ~'.- ... I ~ ~ TROMS ,,,,, 0 EnontelClo • , - , ,~ • ""'I ... ,' '- "' '';;;: l I _ 0J Karesuando LAPPLAND • "'I;: -"" ~ \ , .... "l;;;1 ...... Tysfjord. 0'; . '\ \ . U.S.S.R. NORRBOTIEN . '!S ! • '\ \ . .l/ A I • . -" 7 Jolclcmoklc J I "'"0 ORDLANO ~ePIOg \. I.. • "I' • Arvids;aur. I .=!f -. ~ .. Sorsele •• FINLAND . \. \ .1 H'nfj.Ild,l. VAsT'RBamN oJ;ijj! , -; •• • Vilhelmina 0 Sn~s~. . . I I. J . NORD ('._ . F----{ I TR~NDELAG' JAMTLANO r " :A ~ L---l I-GULF:::""" /' ...- '\-OF~ ,/ -(7 S\!'JR TFl¢NDELAG 0\ f -r / R¢ros-'- f T rBOTHNIAJ.., / ~ 7 . "'- ./ ':J I t SWEDEN 'I .'---/ r '7 '-\ .... \. I 7 7 HEDMARK· v -, ( ""'" _V- I \ , ~ I ~ . - -r3.1 ... o NQRWAY,\ ~ I'~. ~ . \. I ) \.' J .;"\ L . I , ( ,.. -...... ,,;' L A B\ 'fA riO ,.. / , I "'\ - 0-:- State frontiers • Sami centres "- ""'\ ~ 0 km 300 - County frontiers ( I

M.lp 13.2 S~pmi ;iInd some Sami centres Source: Nina Hveen Carlsen, ]988

150