Umeå University's logo

This article examines how historians positioned themselves within academia and society, as reflected in Swedish press debates about historical research during the second half of the twentieth century. Focusing on debates from 1950, 1978, 1993, and 1999, the study explores the evolving relationship between the humanities and the social sciences, as well as the tensions between academic and popular history. Drawing on concepts of contextualisation, it examines how historians articulated the societal relevance of their discipline. Through a close examination of press material, the study shows that historians consistently balanced scientific rigour with the need to engage a wider audience. While popular history gained prominence in the 1990s, its roots extend back to the post-war period. The findings also demonstrate how the increasing influence of social scientific methods placed the humanities in a more defensive position. The article underscores the importance of distinguishing between historical actors’ self-understandings and historians’ contextualisations, warning that overreliance on the former can obscure broader historical dynamics. This research provides insights into the public discourse that has shaped the discipline, reflecting the shifting boundaries and ongoing challenges faced by historians.

This article addresses the ways in which Swedish history textbooks for upper secondary schools published between 1994 and 2011 deal with the most recent past. The textbooks are chronologically organized and follow history into the textbook authors’ time, and each new edition of the textbooks includes the latest developments. The article inquires as to whether this gradual addition of events is to be regarded as historiography at all, or what the possible difference is between contemporary commentary and historiography. It examines which events and developments are selected, how they are presented, and how they can be interpreted with regard to periodization and the use of history. 

Can a silk glove be an expression of power? In this carefully curated volume, internationally renowned historians have come together to explore the interconnected perspectives of gender, materiality, and politics. As the authors elaborate on these topics, the volume offers contributions covering a period from the sixteenth century to the present day, investigating political culture and diplomacy, women's work and assets, sexuality and queer perspectives, and the role of materiality and objects. The volume is dedicated to the historian Svante Norrhem, who has published extensively on these topics and contributed invaluable empirical findings and methodological advances throughout his career. In his work, as in this volume, the detail of power is teased out through ground-breaking ideas and innovative research. 

Women's and gender history has established itself as a prominent part of contemporary historical research. In this essay, the trajectory of women's history as an academic field of research is discussed, focusing on the expression "problematizing the situation of women", which, as it turns out, has been a recurring phrase in defining what counts as women's history. Nyström argues it points towards a continuity in women's history research, useful when questioning power relations and theorizing gender. Instead of presenting the historiography of women's history as a progressive narrative, which moves from the non-theoretical situation to the theoretical, he suggests that the ways in which women's history has been conducted mirror the contemporary societal context in which the researchers work. Even though certain theoretical advances can be acknowledged, it is also possible to understand women's history research as theorizing gender differently in different times. 

This article studies how the social studies subjects – civics, geography, history, and religious education – in Swedish upper secondary education describe and conceptualise the categories of gender, class, ethnicity, and sexuality. The background is that the syllabi stipulate that analytical perspectives based on these categories should be used to interpret subject-specific content. These categories connect implicitly and explicitly to intersectionality theory and to anti-discrimination policy making. Through a text analysis of syllabi and textbooks, the article revolves around the questions: What kind of multi-categorical approach is being constructed in the different social studies subjects? How does that relate to intersectionality theory? Is the purpose of a multi-categorical approach to fight against discrimination? The result shows that there are slightly different emphases being made depending on school subject. History and geography give priority to the category of gender, whereas civics and religious education present a more varied utilisation. All subjects employ a so-called additive intersectional model, where categories are treated separately. Civics and religious education include discussions of both identity constructions and structural factors. Geography and history focus mainly on a structural level. Religious education is the only subject that explicitly discusses intersectionality theory. To the extent that writings with an anti-discriminatory message occur, the message is often that it is important that the individual show respect and tolerance towards others.