Reading History: The Dissemination of Official Historiography in the Age of Liberty, Sweden 1747—62

By Peter Hallberg, Stockholm University

One of the most distinctive features of the political cultures of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Europe is the prominence that the ruling elites of that time afforded to art, ritual and symbolic representation in the exercise of public authority. Perhaps the most tangible evidence of the proximal relationship between creative expression and politics is the way in which monarchies and oligarchies reserved specific public offices for the production of meaning. Among the many offices dedicated to political art and propaganda was the historiographer royal, whose general task it was to record and write history at the behest of the king or the state.

The general purpose of this article is to inquire into the conception and dissemination of official historiography in Sweden during the Age of Liberty, a period of early parliamentary rule that was initiated by the fall of absolutism in 1718 and terminated by a monarchical coup in 1772. Given the proximity of politics and history, the drastic change of government to what contemporaries viewed as a republic or monarchia mixta, the idea of official history underwent changes as well. Thus, the first historiographer of the Age of Liberty, Jacob Wilde, raised concerns when he in a projected Historia Pragmatica boldly set out to refute the idea of divine kings. Another striking sign of the radical character of the transfer of political power, as well as of the centrality of history in the exercise of that power, is the way in which public offices were renamed, including that of the official historiographer. After 1720, all appointments to the post were phrased not as historiographus regius, that is historiographer to the king, as had been the case during the previous era, but as historiographus regni, historiographer of the realm. The change of title effectively reflected the radical change in politics: bureaucratic loyalty to the crown had been replaced by loyalty to the nation, specifically to its representation in the Estates.

While the development, functions and organization of Swedish historiography has been thoroughly analyzed, we still lack studies devoted to its reception, even less about its effects on the minds of the men and women who consumed the fruits of the historian’s labors. In an attempt to move one step closer to the receiving end of historical literature during this politically crucial period in Sweden and Europe, this article seeks to answer questions pertaining to the character of the readership. Who were the intended audiences of official history in mid eighteenth-century Sweden? What were the social demarcations and geographical boundaries of the readership? In addition to providing empirical knowledge about the readership, the answers to these questions may form a basis for inquiries into more general patterns of eighteenth-century culture and the place of books and reading in it, as well as raise questions about the book as a force in history. Since two central purposes of official historiography were to raise the international status of a nation and to enlist the support of subjects and bureaucrats, knowledge about its actual spread may also cast light on the basic conditions of history as a means to the construction of national identity.

The object of analysis is the major official history of mid eighteenth-century Sweden, Olof Dalin’s four-volume history, Svea Rikes Historia, published by Lars Salvius in Stockholm between 1747 and 1762. This particular history was one of the most talked-about histories of the eighteenth century and caused some controversy. Gothic nationalists argued that Dalin dwarfed the country’s glorious past, and the clergy argued that the author, in his account of pre-history, used scientific hypotheses to falsify Scripture. Interestingly, the first history of the realm (rikshistoria) in Swedish was charged with lacking in patriotic spirit and damaging to the Protestant faith. In the annals of Swedish intellectual and literary history the work has — often without any serious consideration of the actual make-up of its audience — been acknowledged as the country’s first modern and popular history.

The results show that the readership was predominately drawn from the ranks of civil servants, but that women were also fairly well represented among the readers. In addition to further detailing the readership according to profession and estate, the study attempts to question the notion of eighteenth-century culture as divided into two realms of production and consumption, elite and popular culture. Instead, this article shows eighteenth-century publishing to be much more diverse in terms of targeted audiences. The readers of Olof Dalin’s work and the strategies of history publishing in general is invoked to further this argument.