No description available.

Denna studie syftar till att undersöka digitala läromedelstexter om Sovjetunionens kontroversiella historia och vidare i komparation till historieskrivningar om Romarriket, Nazityskland och Jugoslavien. De utvalda ämnesområdena innefattar olika grader av politisk känslighet och utgör samhällen som har uppstått och fallit under olika tidsperioder. Genom kvalitativa begrepps-, idé- och ideologianalyser har manifesta värdeladdade begrepp och den latenta historiesynen kunnat identifieras i de olika granskade narrativen. Vidare har tolkningarna integrerats i Francis Fukuyama och Mark Fishers teorier om historiens slut och kapitalistisk realism, för att därefter utkristalliseras i Peter Aronssons fyra historiekulturella grundtroper. Utöver nyansering av den ryska revolutionen påvisar studiens resultat en tydlig anti-sovjetisk historiesyn med explicit upphöjning av kapitalistiskt associativa begrepp, samt formuleringar som förkastar kommunismen och ser den som en olycklig parentes med ett tydligt historiskt slut. Den djupaste indikationen av kapitalistisk realism ingår i de narrativ som har uteslutits ur läromedlen, såsom redogörelser av positiva sovjetiska reformer och pluralism. Det går att tolka det ensidiga perspektivet och bortfallet av historisk fakta som en konsekvens av den partipolitiska känslighet som funnits i Sverige beträffande Sovjetunionen. Även 1990-talets politisk-akademiska debatt om totalitarismteorin har lämnat sina spår i historieskrivningen. I läromedelstexter om andra samhällen som har bildats och rasat går det att finna både likheter och skillnader med förklaringsmodeller om Sovjetunionen. Den största utmärkande åtskillnaden är att historieskrivningen om Romarriket och Nazityskland erbjuder ett mycket mer fylligt, pedagogiskt innehåll med tolkningsmöjligheter och olika narrativ om människors levnadsvillkor. Ett sådant resultat kan tolkas i relation till att Romarriket och Nazityskland, med anledning av tidsmässig och politisk distans från Sverige, enklare tas an med större mångsidighet. Likheterna rör däremot bortfallet av jugoslavers levnadsvillkor och titoismen, samt beskrivningen av Jugoslaviens kaosartade övergång från kommunism till marknadsekonomi och nationalism. Även Nazitysklands läromedelstexter har gemensamma drag med Sovjetunionens, då historiens slut efter andra världskriget mynnar ut i Berlinmurens fall och enandet i den fria marknadsekonomin. Slutligen visar studien en brist i samstämmighet mellan de granskade läromedlen och kritiserar den alltemellanåt låga kvalitét som presenteras i flertal texter, då somliga författare har uteslutit essentiella förklaringar, frångått objektivitet med värdeladdade begrepp och framfört felaktig historisk fakta. På så vis går det att dra slutsatsen om behovet av en mer systematisk läromedelsgranskning i Sverige av såväl stora förlag som kostnadsfria hemsidor.

In this essay the author analyses four works in the historical fiction genre: George Shipways’ Imperial Governor (1968), Lindsay Davis’ The Silver Pigs (1989), Simon Scarrow’s The Eagle’s Conquest (2001), and Adrian Goldsworthy’s Vindolanda (2017). All these works feature elements of the conquest and rule of Britain by the Roman empire. The study seeks to ascertain how the novels depict Roman imperialism and compare this to contemporary academic theoretical discourse, mainly post-colonialism and its influence on ancient studies and ancient archaeology. In this way, the study shows how the novels reflect British historical culture and the cultural memory of the Roman empire. The study has been conducted with the use of a qualitative text analysis. The results have been compared to the contemporary academic theoretical discussion. The result of this study indicates that historical fiction prior to the 1990s were mostly influenced by terminology and theoretical perspectives that are heavily tied to the 19th century British imperial projects. Postcolonial discourse, introduced in classical studies during the 1990’s, resulted in a change in perspective and the voices of the conquered peoples were considered far more frequently. The Roman imperial perspective was handled with more nuance and criticism. The result also indicates that the literary works, in line with their academic contemporary discourse, relate the discussion of ancient Roman imperialism to modern imperialism, especially British imperialism, thus affecting the British cultural memory and identity.

According to the orthodox priest John Meyendorff, the Byzantine dream consisted of the establishment of a universal Christian empire spiritually and politically governed by the emperor of Constantinople. This essay intends to shed light on the topic of Byzantine religious and political expansion in the context of Byzantine view on Barbaricum and the barbarians inhabiting it. The fundamental question asked is: how do the Byzantines view the barbarians outside the Byzantine Empire and in what sense, if any, does this view have implications for the Byzantine dream? To answer the question the essay examines four 6th century historians, namely: Procopius of Caesarea, Johannes Malalas, Menander Protector and Agathias of Myrina. The method being used is a hermeneutical method and the theoretical framework is made up of Edward Said’s Orientalism. The results indicate that the barbarians in Barbaricum were viewed upon with great distrust. The Byzantines considered the barbarians to be ontologically different from themselves. Furthermore, the Byzantines regarded the barbarians behaviour as uncivilized. The typical barbarian was deemed to be wild, cruel, irrational, mostly religiously backwards, lacking in education and, more often than not, displaying arrogance and boasting. At the same time they were mystified, and thought of as physically impressive beings capable of unnatural strength. Consequently, the barbarians were viewed upon as creatures of lust and physicality rather than, like the Byzantines, beings of rationality and sense. The conclusion can be made that the Byzantines regarded Barbaricum in much the same manner as the postcolonial powers regarded the Orient – through the construction of a dichotomy between the self and the other. Concerning the Byzantine adherence to the Byzantine dream as expressed by John Meyendorff, to spread the Byzantine Empire beyond its borders and consume Barbaricum by political and religious means, the results indicate that there are reasons to question Meyendorff’s assumption. It’s plausible that there indeed were Byzantine inclinations to transform Barbaricum. Furthermore, the results indicate that the Byzantine view of the barbarians played some part in shaping that inclination. It’s, however, also plausible that while the Byzantines may have strived to transform Barbaricum, it doesn’t neccessarily follow that it had to succumb to Byzantine imperial authority. The investigated sources seem to suggest that the primary Byzantine goal was solely to transform Barbaricum religiously and politically into something that resembled the Byzantine Empire but wasn’t necessarily a full fledged part of it.

This essay takes its starting point in Legenda Aurea, a hagiographical compendium written in the thirteenth century by an Italian catholic friar, Jacobus de Voragine. The essay aims to find out how the Roman history in the third century is shown in Legenda Aurea, a Christian book written about a thousand years later. The purpose of this essay is to show how a part of the history of the Roman Empire is understood and remembered during the Christian hegemony that was during the thirteenth century. The main results of this essay show that the history of the Roman Empire during the reign of named emperors is remembered as a violent, brutal and authoritarian history, but also that Christianity seems to have been widespread within the Roman Empire during this time.