User talk:Lena Dyrdal Andersen

Danes at Smeerenburg

You would refer to the Danes at Smeerenburg as Danish, as the ships were sent from Copenhagen. Dalgard simply referred to them as "Danish", not "Danish-Norse" or "Danish-Norwegian", as there would be no point in doing so, seeing as how they did not come from Denmark and Norway. Jonas Poole (talk) 22:14, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I believe Norway was part of Denmark, not the other way around. Christian IV did reside in Copenhagen, did he not? Jonas Poole (talk) 22:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Denmark was united with Norway in the kingdom Denmark-Norway for 270 years see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark-Norway But Danish historians allways tried to call the best things Danish. I.e. Hans Egede was born and grew up in North Norway. He got educated in Copenhagen a short time of his life. Later he worked for the king in Greenland. The Norwegians have allways done a lot of whaling and polar stuff. Whilst Danish have been more sea traders. So I think the sailors/whalers that Christian IV have sent must have been mostly Norwegian. So a King-owned ship with some of the best whalers. This ship might have been a Norwegian built ship even.

This kingdom was a nation where ships were very important. So the shores were united (Danish) and the inlands were the fare away parts. The people along the Norwegian coast speak a language much closer to Danish than inlanders.

Could I see the source that you refer to of Sune Dalgaard?

--Lena Dyrdal Andersen (talk) 22:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now I found a book for sale it is called: "Dalgård Sune - Dansk-norsk hvalfangst 1615-60 - 1962" meaning: "Dalgard, Sune: Danish-Norwegian whaling 1615-60 (1962)"--Lena Dyrdal Andersen (talk) 22:46, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The men that actually did the whaling at Spitsbergen during these expeditions were at first Basque (1617-25) and later Dutch and North Frisian (1631-onwards). A harpooner shipped for a expedition to North Norway in 1615 was from Hamburg, but, at the time, that was the exception. The masters were mostly Basque, Danish, or Dutch, with a few Germans. One of the masters sent north in 1619 was one "Simen Jansen af Trondhjem"-- although I know only this bare fact, so he may have been an immigrant. The sailors were mostly Danish, Dutch, and German. The ships were at first converted warships (a few Swedish prizes from the 1611-13 war) or chartered from the United Provinces or a French Basque port (usually St. Jean de Luz). Later Johan Braem purchased a Hamburg-prize, which he used for several years in the 1630s. Later on (1640-50s) they usually chartered Dutch merchant ships; sometimes ones from Copenhagen or Hamburg. They certainly may have been built from Norwegian timber, but that's it. The expeditions were financed at first jointly by the King himself and merchants from Copenhagen; later by Copenhagen merchants alone or together with Dutch merchants. As you can see, Norway itself could have only played a very small part, if any, in the Spitsbergen whaling ventures during this time. Jonas Poole (talk) 01:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay well the king Christian the fourth was king of Denmark and Norway. If you know it you can just correct it. I will not correct it back.--Lena Dyrdal Andersen (talk) 16:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Avannaa

Hei Lena! I see that you have called for replacement of the following file: File:Greenland north.PNG. It depicts the extent of the (discontinued) Avannaa county − a part of the old administrative division, effective until 2008/12/31. It is used on en-wiki only in the Avannaa article, where it has value as an illustration of the old county borders. The name does not refer to the geographical region of northern Greenland, which is much larger. Regards, − Algkalv (talk) 22:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that in my sources the term North Greenland is not very well defined. Maybe it happened because Qaasuitsup was called North Greenland Kommune untill the naming. Do you have a source with a definition. By the way should we make links to our Danish profiles. How do I do that? I wanted to find you in the Danish user to see who you are but it took me too long. So Elgkalv maybe you would like to comment my page: http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Landsbybr%C3%B8nden#Tidligere_kommuner_i_Gr.C3.B8nland on Landsbybroenden. You are also there sometimes, correct ?--Lena Dyrdal Andersen (talk) 12:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not on da-wiki. You can make links to your Danish user page by appending 'da:' to the links, like so: da:Bruger:Lena_Dyrdal_Andersen, or adding a title: See Lena's user page on the Danish Wiki. Just an example.

'Northern Greenland' as a term may refer to several concepts. Avannaa is the Greenlandic term for North, and was used as name of the old county. The name of the county did not exactly correspond to the geographical region. You can find more on Kanukoka.gl (The municipal page, qaasuitsup.gl is only in Greenlandic).

Northern Greenland as a geographical region also varies in usage. In its strict interpretation, and abstracting from the Northeast Greenland National Park, it is the region north of Melville Bay, including Qaanaaq and all settlements of the old county. Within Greenland, the term is used for the entire western coast north of and including the Aasiaat Archipelago, and that rougly corresponds to the area covered by the new Qaasuitsup municipality. Then there are the geographical regions: the far north (from Savissivik to Peary Land), northwestern Greenland (Uummannaq Fjord and Upernavik Archipelago, or from Nuussuaq Peninsula to Melville Bay), and the Disko Bay region from the southern coast of Nuussuaq Peninsula to Attu in Davis Strait. − Algkalv (talk) 12:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I started out that way also with Qaasuitsup=North Greenland, because I read a kanukoka document but then I saw the map of Avannaa. And that was when I made my complaint. But then I found the same North Greenland boarders in a 1986 atlas of Greenland we have here at home. From Kanukoka I also found an article or two from Kanukoka that showed a confusion. So I now have the theory that the understanding has at some time been that North Greenland should in future be changed to be the area corresponding to Qaasuitsup Kommune. The Kommune Qaasuitsup was actually for some time called the north Kommune. Further there was a south kommune and an east-west kommune. My conclusion is that the counties is still used North Greenland, west Greenland and East Greenland as the language/culture has this division. But the new administration areas is divided after industries/climate/ecology and has a minimum of 8.000 inh. in each. A result because they were divided as a result of negotiations between the former kommunes. So they do not follow the old counties. In the eighteenth century they also had a north council and a south council. I wonder how the division was then.... But I decided to follow the idear country parts independent of the new kommunes. And then I found out that they call the old kommunes "lokalområde" = local areas. So I am thinking about renaming the old kommunes "lokalområde" because the areas will still be having the same structure: a number of small townships depending on one main town. Look at the Danish version of Greenland where I placed the two maps of division besides each other. --Lena Dyrdal Andersen (talk) 17:52, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The comparison of old and new is good, but I think that this information might rather be included in a separate article, such as we have on en-wiki: Administrative divisions of Greenland. There is no equivalent on da-wiki. Perhaps you could write an article? The 'lokalområder' you refer to are in no way formal − since the introduction of the new administrative divisions the old municipal towns lost their importance, as they are treated the same way as small settlements. Ergo, Uummannaq is no different than Ukkusissat in the new system. On the other hand the municipalities struggle less, as the resources are pooled and economic growth more uniform. The only exception of sorts seems to be Qaasuitsup, which is struggling financially. There is a wealth of information on the ongoing development at Sermitsiaq, which I read daily. They don't have a good archiving system, so a search engine is necessary to weed out the info. Lokalområder may still be of some interest, for parish information, but I think the focus should be on the 4 new municipalities. On en-wiki we have articles for ~~each~~ some of the old municipalities (see Ittoqqortoormiit Municipality for example) - for historical record-keeping.

Oh, and I just helped you out with a cross-wiki link on your user page ;) Regards, − Algkalv (talk) 18:16, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for the crosswiki. I think you are right that the townships get more equality with the towns. Also they do not have to have so much administering personel. But the old counties are so far still in use. As you say the parishes: There are still three prior preasts one in each county. And the 17 priests stay in each town. The police is still operating in the same way with 16 police offices, also the medical divisions are keeping on. So the structure of the country cannot just change suddenly. The ships go to port in the same places. Bye the way: Recently they hired a head police officer in Denmark for Greenland. I called the contact in the jobadvert. Noone thought it important with Greenlandic... When I realized this that is when my understanding why they want to administer things themselves grew. What I find natural after the political development would be to change the job description of the police officer from being a lawyer to a bilingual leader. But even the Danish justice ministery could not hear the voices and are ignoring the independence law and keeping the same administrative routines. So now I understand they say we are still in the colonial ages. In the state ministery "Statsministeriet" that administers Greenland top level there is not a single person bilingual ( They are 4 people full time). They cannot see the relevance. I called the ministery and talked to a person that remarked that she did not think the new gouvernment in Greenland found it so important with the language. Offcource they have an office in Greenland that handles the language nescessities. I also follow the Sermitsiaq and I found a lot of interesting facts there also.--Lena Dyrdal Andersen (talk) 19:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The counties are gone, too. All the old municipalities, and all the counties (Avannaa, Tunu, and Kitaa) do not exist anymore. The only administrative division is that of the four municipalities, the Northeast Greenland National Park, and the unincorporated area around the Thule Air Base in Pituffik.

Indeed, the aministrative personnel costs were slashed, but what really matters is that poorer regions do not have to spend what little financial support they had for administration. Ivittuut and Kangaatsiaq come to mind, for example. As for parishes, I have no data on this, but what you say sounds just right, since in European countries the parish divisions tend not to follow the political changes. This is a piece of information that is missing on en-wiki, and I'd love to borrow some from da-wiki ;)

Yes, things that has nominally changed after the referendum in 2008 are the policing and judicial matters. The self-governance is in effect only from June 2009, and they face a huge problem of running things themselves for the first time. Good thing that you have called − it may be that the administration in Denmark is quite detached from what is happening behind the ocean. There is a quite heated debate about financing and not least, the language. Recently the Greenlandic-only requirement for public officcers was scrapped, so bilingualism is still the reality, and I think it will be for a very long time. Whilst some have tried to push for promotion of the language, others pointed that without proper educational materials and language studies offer from the local educational institutions they cannot go very far with this. And quite rightly so − I have combed the internet myself, looking for language books, and found none. I have browsed the bookstores in Sisimiut and Nuuk, and all I found was Greenlandic for Travellers, by Birgitte Hertling, a word book. I presume you have it, too? ;) More below. − Algkalv (talk) 20:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh silly me, the fact that you are Danish briefly escaped my mind, and I forgot that you might have a ton of materials on Greenlandic in Denmark, none of which are available to folk limited to English such as yours truly ;) − Algkalv (talk) 23:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way did you see the german picture of SermersooQ? It seems Narsaq Localarea is going more north?--Lena Dyrdal Andersen (talk) 19:47, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replied mid-text above. Outdenting and continuing here.

The sketch map on German wiki is very imprecise, and that graphic should not really be used. But then the municipal borders on the Greenland ice sheet do not matter that much whilst there is ice ;) I have made several SVG sketches, which I believe are far better:

plus vectorized the coats of arms:

I see you have done a lot of hard work improving the Greenland articles on da-wiki. Great! Very few people work on the topic, at least here... Cooperation is a good thing. If then I can be of help with respect to Greenland matters or wiki, just ping the fox, which will take you to my talk page, and I'll try to help or answer any questions you might have. − Algkalv (talk) 20:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC) Thankyou I will and same to you.--Lena Dyrdal Andersen (talk) 19:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]