As for Chydenius “most likely calling himself finne”, well, the term was in use at the time he lived, and indeed it could be used of a person from “Österland”
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96sterland).
Then again, as I wrote, the idea of “finnar” as all kind of people living in what roughly is Finland today didn’t really mature until the latter part of the 18th century if even then.

A country called “Sweden-Finland” never existed, not any more than the modern Sweden is referred to as “Sweden-Norrland” or “Sweden-SkÃ¥ne”. The whole idea of a “Sweden-Finland” was invented by nationalistic Finnish historians in the 1930s. Finland was a part of Sweden, and Chydenius likely called himself “finne” in the same sense somebody from Västergötland would have called himself “västgöte”.

I’m no Chydenius expert but I think he was a product of Osthrobothnia with it’s international tar trade suffering from mercantilism. Everybody there understood that their profits went to the pockets of the merchants in Stockholm. Chydenius found a way to channel this frustration in the “parliament” (valtiopäivät).

Which country should get the honor of him? Does Finland or Sweden still have some cultural or other characteristics that lead to the existence of such an extraordinary person? Yes, both do, though not that much. So everyone may call Chydenius a Finn but also a Swede and take credit of him to both countries (though not too much).

Nowadays all Finns, even savolaiset, are Finns of course. If you want to project that reality to the past, go ahead, but that’s, actually, the nationalistic thing to do, not the historic view I was talking about.

“Finn”, by the way, apparently meant originally the Sami. “Suomi” (or suomalainen) meant the people in Finland proper since about 5000 years ago, theorizes Unto Salo.

One thing I still remember is that his sermons at church were not always religious, but he instructed his congregation how to increase potato crops and build better carriages.

http://sydaby.eget.net/swe/jp_chydenius.htm

Your argument about Finland is bogus. After all, Finland proper is Southwestern Finland, nothing else. By your logic, we couldn’t use the concept of Finland to Karelians, Savonians and people of other provinces any more than we could to Swedish-speaking Osthrobothnians. In all these other provinces there was Swedish-speaking clergy exactly as in the ethnically Finnish municipality of Sotkamo where Chydenius was born. So you’d probably say any Swedish-speaker in any of these other provinces except for Finland proper would be “this Swede, not a Finn” while their Finnish-speaking neighbors would’ve been “Finns” to you, right?

And Finland proper has always had Swedish-speaking inhabitants historically referred to as Finns… What would you call 18th Century Swedish-speaking inhabitants of Turku, the capital of Finland at that time?

Then again, in some sense it would be correct to call him a citizen of Sweden-Finland – or perhaps even more to the point: a subject of the king of Sweden. That would prevent Sweden from “stealing” the history of Finland, something they still, even in recent history books, tend to do.

Tarja Halonen: Speech at the main celebration of the Anders Chydenius Jubilee Year (Kokkola, 1.3.2003).

The President of Finland, Tarja Halonen, points to the efficiency of a market economy combined with social justice as the underlying force behind our Nordic welfare society, and sees it as grounded in the fundamentally radical principles of freedom, equality and collective responsibility that were advocated at an early stage by Anders Chydenius.

(From http://www.chydenius.net)