digging hitler's arctic war

213 Pages·2017·23.23 MB·English

by  Oula Seitsonen

Department of Cultures
University of Helsinki
Helsinki, Finland
ARCHAEOLOGIES AND HERITAGE OF THE SECOND
WORLD WAR GERMAN MILITARY PRESENCE IN
FINNISH LAPLAND
Oula Seitsonen
ACADEMIC DISSERTATION
To be presented, with the permission of the Faculty of Arts of the
University of Helsinki, for public examination in auditorium XV, University Main
Building, on the 2nd of March, 2018, at 12 o’clock.
Helsinki 2018
© Oula Seitsonen / Flying deer
Layout Oula Seitsonen / Flying deer
Front cover: Original caption: “Supply road on the western shore of Kotikoski. Wagons part
of a German baggage train / Traffic on the Alakurtti Road” (SA-kuva JSdia006/ Alakurtti
(Salla)/ 26.09.1941).
Back cover: Original caption: “Line of reindeer (raito) follows the skiers” (SA-kuva
JSdia653/ Petsamo, Kukkesjaur/ 14.04.1942).
ISBN 978-951-51-4036-4 (pbk.)
ISBN 978-951-51-4037-1 (PDF)
Unigrafia
Helsinki 2018
Abstract
This dissertation discusses the material heritage of the German presence in
Finnish Lapland during the Second World War (WWII), as seen through
archaeological and multidisciplinary studies intitiated by the author in 2006.
Over a decade of fieldwork, the research has evolved from a purely
archaeological inquiry of the WWII materialities into an interdisciplinary
survey of long-term perceptions of and engagements with the ruins and finds
from the WWII. Since 2014 this has taken place within the project “Lapland’s
Dark Heritage: Understanding the Cultural Legacy of Northern Finland’s
WWII German Materialities within Interdisciplinary Perspective”, funded by
the Academy of Finland. The Nazi German presence as brothers-in-arms in
northern Finland has been a debated, difficult and downplayed issue on
multiple levels throughout the post-war decades. Until the past two decades
there have been few historical studies on the subject, and even fewer
archaeological enquiries. This study presents the first wider, problem-oriented
and theoretically informed investigation about the archaeologies, materialities
and heritage of the German WWII presence. However, even this work barely
scratches the surface of this multifaceted subject and sets out future research
directions.
The experience of WWII in Lapland was something completely different
from the war experience elsewhere in Finland. The German troops held the
frontal responsibility in Finnish Lapland in 1941–1944, and at the height of
their military build-up there were more German troops and their
multinational prisoners in the area than local inhabitants. After Finland made
a cease-fire with the Soviet Union in 1944, a Finno-German Lapland War
(1944–1945) broke out between the former brothers-in-arms under an
increasing Soviet pressure. This ruptured the earlier friendly relations and
ended with the Germans burning down most of Lapland during their retreat
to Norway. It is this brief showdown of WWII in the north that has been mostly
remembered and highlighted on the national level. Due to the persistent
nation-level downplay of the German presence, also the northern Finnish and
Sámi war experiences have become side-lined. Accordingly, the German
material remains have been treated dismissively as mere “war junk” littering
Lapland’s nature. However, for the local people these remains were well-
known throughout the post-war decades, as active material agents of
communal and familial memories, and as part of Lapland’s cultural
landscapes.
This dissertation has two main focuses. Firstly, I study the Germans’ and
their prisoners’ experiences in Lapland during the war through the material
remains and archaeological inquiries, and secondly, the various ways in which
the different stakeholders have signified and engaged with the traces of war in
the post-war decades. The material traces illustrate and highlight in many
3
ways the experiential aspects of the German soldiers’ and their prisoners’
existence in an unfamiliar northern environment. The feeling of alienness and
displacement appears to have taken many curious material and behavioural
forms, as documented by the archaeological studies of the site layouts, their
spatial configurations, and the material culture. The sheer number of German
WWII sites in Lapland is astonishing, and only a fraction of these have so far
been mapped. This is best illustrated by the increase in the number of known
German-run Prisoner-of-War (PoW) and labour camps in northern Finland in
little over a decade, rising from a handful of sites known in the early 2000s to
the over 180 camps mapped out in this dissertation.
The post-war relations to, perceptions of, and engagements with the
German material remains underline the social value of these as part of the local
long-term heritage and lived-in cultural landscape. The locals’ resilient sense
of place, folklore, traditional stories, belief systems and ancestral spirits all
secure people into their “own lands” through the personified, corporeal
landscape biographies, and the German material traces have become
incorporated and embedded into this cultural continuum. Many enthusiastic
locals see themselves as custodians of their “own past”, including the WWII
legacy, wish to control access and engagement with the sites in their local
landscape, and often feel that the (southern) authorities neglect their heritage.
Thus, the traces of German presence have become one symbol of the
continuing north-south confrontations, and the marginalization of the north.
These issues tie in with Lapland’s long colonial history, and the Finnish State’s
slowness in answering, and often even recognizing, the complex and
fluctuating colonial issues, intertwined for instance with the questions of land
ownership and landuse rights.
The vast differences in approaching, and engaging with, the German WWII
material remains, and an inability to engage in a meaningful dialogue from the
opposing perspectives, appear to derive from fundamentally different mental
templates with which the people perceive the subject and its importance. The
people propagating the “clearing” of “war junk” appear to approach the
subject, and the landscape, with a “western” gaze, by drawing a division
between “nature” and “culture” and labelling the locals’ historical cultural
landscape as a natural wilderness. Conversely, in the northern environmental
awareness it is not meaningful to separate between “nature” and “culture”.
Instead, the landscape and its various layers form an overarching web of
relations, which tie together the past, present and future into a cognitively
controlled and embodied unity. It appears that the different stakeholders
should come to recognize and accept the differing standpoints from which they
engage into the discussions, before a fruitful dialogue can be instigated. This
is one major challenge for the future discussions about the heritage value of
Lapland’s WWII material legacy, and about the connected ownership and
custodianship questions. These should be somehow elucidated, preferably in
a common agreement with all the involved stakeholders, to allow the German
and other WWII remains official recognition, heritage status and protection.
4
DEDICATED TO
MY FAMILY
AND
THE MEMORY OF
SAKARI PÄLSI AND ARI SIIRIÄINEN
–
WITHOUT THEM I WOULDN’T
BE DOING ARCHAEOLOGY
5
Acknowledgements
First and foremost I want to thank my outstanding colleagues in the best
project of them all, Lapland’s Dark Heritage: Vesa-Pekka Herva, Eerika
Koskinen-Koivisto and Suzie Thomas – who, coincidentally, happen to be my
PhD supervisors. All the other colleagues and friends who have been involved
in this great project, in one way or another, deserve huge thanks for the
discussions archaeological and beyond, good company on field, and so on. To
name but the most important ones, thanks to Áile Aikio, Iain Banks, Lee G.
Broderick, Annukka Debenjak, Natasha Ferguson, Suvi Harju, Heli Heinäaho,
Anu Herva, Mirkka Hekkurainen, Juha-Pekka Joona, Hanna Kelola, Tuuli
Koponen, Hannu Kotivuori, Mika Kunnari, Hanna Kyläniemi, Kalevi
Mikkonen, Jaisson Lino, Gabriel Moshenska, Eija Ojanlatva, Maria Persson,
Mari Olafson Lundemo, Reinhard Otto, Meaghan Peuramäki-Brown, Sanna
Seitsonen, James Symonds, Anni Tolppanen, Wesa Perttola and Juha West.
My friends Ulrika Köngäs, Heidi Mehtonen, Kerkko Nordqvist, Áile and
Sanna, of course, were digging with me in Lapland long before Lapland’s Dark
Heritage was even imagined, and already earlier than that at Drozdovka on the
Kola Peninsula, Russia, and on the paradise island of Melkøya, Norway. They
and these trips contributed significantly to the birth of the wider research
project discussed in this thesis. Through the years Rantamari has given way to
PaPaNa, butAnár still is, and will always be, Anarchy.
This work would not have been even imaginable without the positive, keen
and fascinated attitudes of numerous “normal people”, for instance, in Inari,
Kilpisjärvi, Salla, Sodankylä, Vuotso and elsewhere! Without an interested,
active and communicating public I would never have gotten this far. Most
importantly, I owe huge thanks to Marjo Harjula, Eino Havas, Maunu Hetta,
Raija Hugg, Erkki Karisaari, Matti Lehtola, Jari Leskinen, Eila Magga, Iisakki
Magga, Oula Magga, Pekka Moilanen, Sirpa Mänty, Hans Niittyvuopio, Leo
Onkamo, Seppo J. Partanen, father Rauno Pietarinen, Martti Remes, Minna
Rissanen, Aki Romakkaniemi, Maxi Rödel, Alpo Siivola, Marita Siljanto,
Jarkko Sipola, Annette Stenroos, all Vuotso villagers and schoolchildren, and
many, many others, for sharing their invaluable and interesting memories and
information. I am also grateful to Antti Peronius for the magnificent
photographs taken by his grandfather, gold panner Max Peronius.
Important financial and other support for my research has been provided
by the University of Helsinki, National Board of Forestry, Sámi Museum Siida,
Lapland Society for Military History, National Board of Antiquities,
Nordenskiöld-samfundet i Finland, Karelian Cultural Fund, Salla Search
Group for the Dead of the War, and Salla Museum of War and Reconstruction.
I want to also thank АукцЫон, Burning Spear, Nick Cave, Howlin’ Wolf,
Ravggon, Tinariwen, Tom Waits, and Wimme for the inspiring soundtrack.
“Dialogues with the Past” workshops have also helped in this process.
Thanks to all the people who have taken part in those and commented on my
work, especially Anna Beck, Barbara Busova, Martin Conlon, Julie de Vos,
6
Bettina Ebert, Johanna Enqvist, Jason Falkenburg, Ingar Figenschau, Alfredo
González-Ruibal, Siân Jones, Jakob Orri Jónsson, Mark Leone, Laura
McAtackney, Johanna Mäkinen, Andrine Nilsen, Nik Petek, Þóra Pétursdóttir,
Julianne Rustad, Anna Shoemaker, Tim Flohr Sørensen, and Evgeniya Tkač.
FAFAA! Finnish Association of Forensic Archaeology and Anthropology
has allowed important pastime, fooling around with various issues in the
shadow of Huhtiniemi, with Olli Kunnas, Liisa Kunnas-Pusa, Tarja Knuutinen,
Otso Manninen, Tiina Mikkanen, Riku Mönkkönen, Mikko Suha, Niklas
Söderholm, Heidi Vuorenmaa, and others. If all the board meetings could be
as fun and, sometimes, also useful.
Mongolia is in no direct way related to my dissertation, but mentally it has
been extremely important for me to trace the footsteps of the great Finnish
explorers Sakari Pälsi, G.J. Ramstedt and J.G. Granö from Urga to Altai and
back. Thanks to my friends and colleagues on those trips: the “Khanuy Beatles”
Jamsranjav Bayarsaikhan, Jean-Luc Houle, Peter Woodley, and Lee, as well as
Julia Clark, Resa Nelson, Bob and Pam Service, and Jerry Tuvshinjargal. There
is always time for another birthday snowman on the white steppe!
East Africa needs to be acknowledged as well. Thanks to all the people with
whom I have roamed the savannahs, most importantly to Ceri Ashley, Mikael
Fortelius, Kennedy Gitu, Martti Koponen, Paul Lane, Vesa Laulumaa, Stephen
Manoa, Israel ole Molel, Gilbert Oteyo, Mary Prendergast, Daryl Stump, David
Wright, and the departedwazee Joseph Mutua and Ari Siiriäinen.
Karelian Isthmus, Lake Ladoga, Siberia, Borshevo and the rest of Russia
have also contributed positively through the years for carrying out this and
other reserch. Thanks to Stanislav Belskiy, Dmitrij Gerasimov, Inna
Gerasimova, Marianna Kulkova, Sergei Lisitsyn, all the other Russkies, and
the occasional Estonian, Aivar Kriiska. Кипписздоровьесекс!
A host of other colleagues and friends from archaeology, geography and
beyond should also be mentioned. To name but a few, thanks to Marja Ahola,
Rolf Bade, Theo Gil Bell, Mippe and Tom Blencowe, Danielle de Carle, Petri
Halinen, Pasi Heikkilä, Knut Helskog, Anders Hesjedal, Elisabeth Holmqvist,
Bryan Hood, Piritta Häkälä, Anna Kajander, Anna Karhu, Vladimir Kekez,
Andreas and Riina Koivisto, Satu Koivisto, Antti Korpisaari, Antti Lahelma,
Mika Lavento, Sarita Louzolo, Kristiina Mannermaa, Adrian Myers, Teemu
Mökkönen, Yrjö Norokorpi, Sini Pöytäniemi, Lauri Seitsonen, Mika Siljander,
Timo Salminen, Katri Tegel, Gustaf Wollentz, my parents, Outi and her family,
and everyone else not listed here. You know who you are.
My schooltime friends Eero Vahala and Erkki Viljanen also deserve thanks
for being out there! It might be time for another Monday night beer soon.
Last, but conclusively not least, I want to thank Sanna, Sohvi, Elsa and Elvi
more than I can express, for tolerating my occasional – mental and physical –
absences and eccentric journeys, for taking part in the surveys and
excavations, sometimes through the snow and ice, and for travelling together
in Lapland and everywhere else!
Sanna, that bear still talks – and sings.
7
Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................... 3
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................... 6
Contents ......................................................................................................... 8
List of original publications ........................................................................ 10
Abbreviations ................................................................................................ 11
1. Introduction ........................................................................................ 12
Why an archaeological study of WWII? .................................. 18
Digging into WWII in Lapland 2006-2016 ............................. 24
2. Waffenbrüderschaft: The northern brothers-in-arms 1940-1945 . 31
“Arktis ist nichts”: “Hermans” come to Lapland .................... 34
Germans, prisoners and civilians: Business as usual ............. 40
Of Nazis and Jews: The most unlikely brothers-in-arms....... 45
“Ragnarök”: The eve of destruction and beyond ................... 50
3. German WWII material legacy in Lapland ...................................... 58
From an SS officer’s club to overgrown pit toilets .................. 58
Breaking the law? Cultural heritage and “war junk” .............. 66
4. Strangers in a strange land: Germans and their prisoners in an
alien Arctic landscape ................................................................................. 70
Soldiers’ and prisoners’ places and landscapes ...................... 72
Martial things and civilian things ............................................ 90
Prisoner’s things ........................................................................ 97
”…if I’d send all the madmen from Berlin to Lapland…” ..... 100
Entangled with the north: Placelessness and dislocation .... 103
5. Ignored and forgotten, familial and remembered: Post-war
significance of the German WWII remains .............................................. 114
8
Past: Rising from the ashes and slow decay .......................... 115
Past?: Clearing of “war junk” .................................................. 118
Now: Heterogeneity of time .................................................... 124
Now: Haunting and haunted heritage.................................... 126
Now: ”Can you love a Nazi?” or “Wir waren freunde” ......... 130
Now: Dietl-mania..................................................................... 135
Now: Stalkers and metal men ................................................ 140
Materialities of a haunting past - or present? ....................... 144
6. Fifty Shades of Dark (Heritage) ....................................................... 152
Future: Positive uses? .............................................................. 155
7. The end .............................................................................................. 161
Wartime experiences and their material traces: Displacement
and alienness ......................................................................................... 161
Social and heritage value of “War junk”: Colonialism and land
disputes .................................................................................................. 166
List of figures .............................................................................................. 171
References .................................................................................................. 177
Appendix 1. Map of the German-run PoW and labour camps in northern
Finland ....................................................................................................... 201
Appendix 2. List of the German-run PoW and labour camps in northern
Finland ....................................................................................................... 204
9
List of original publications
This thesis is based on the following original publications:
I Seitsonen, O. & Herva, V.-P. 2011. Forgotten in the Wilderness: WWII
PoW Camps in Finnish Lapland. In A. Myers and G. Moshenska (eds.)
Archaeologies of Internment:171–190. New York: Springer.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9666-4_10
II Seitsonen, O., Herva, V.-P., Nordqvist, K., Herva, A. & Seitsonen, S.
2017. A Military Camp in the Middle of Nowhere: Mobilities,
Dislocation and the Archaeology of a Second World War German
Military Base in Finnish Lapland. Journal of Conflict Archaeology
12(1):1–26 (online first).
https://doi.org/10.1080/15740773.2017.1389496
III Thomas, S., Seitsonen, O., and Herva, V.-P. 2016. Nazi memorabilia,
dark heritage and treasure hunting as “alternative” tourism:
understanding the fascination with the material remains of World
War II in Northern Finland.Journal of Field Archaeology 41(3):331–
343.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2016.1168769
IV Herva, V.-P., Koskinen-Koivisto, E., Seitsonen, O., and Thomas, S.
2016. ‘I have better stuff at home’: treasure hunting and private
collecting of World War II artefacts in Finnish Lapland. World
Archaeology 48(2):267–281.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2016.1184586
V Seitsonen, O. 2017. Crowdsourcing Cultural Heritage: Public
Participation and Conflict Legacy in Finland. Journal of Community
Archaeology and Heritage 4(2):115–130.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2016.1252129
The publications are referred to in the text by their roman numerals.
First letter of every chapter is adapted from the traditional historical owner’s
marks (Fi.:puumerkki), following the example set by Finnish explorer Samuli
Paulaharju.
10