The native people of Sweden have in the last decade or so fallen under the spotlight when it comes to their rights. In the last few hundred years, the Sámi people have experienced what can only be described as colonization, racism, and discrimination from the Swedish state. During the 17th and 18th centuries, the Swedish crown got more invested in the land that has previously been occupied by the Sámi people. The discovery of natural resources in Lappmarkerna along with the drawing of the border between Sweden and Norway/Denmark lead to the mapping of the north. With the drawing of the border came the first legal document, Lappkodicillen, to recognize the Sámi people as an ethnic group. Lappkodicillen concluded that the Sámi had to become citizens of either Sweden or Norway and lost the land that they had held on the other side of the new border. While the intention of the document was to preserve and protect the Sámi people, with time it gave the Swedish crown the opportunity to claim more control over Lappmarkerna and its natives. In the process of colonization, the Sámis’ right to ownership of land was starting to be questioned and the Swedish crown started to claim more and more of it as theirs. This paper analyses the relationship between the Sámi people and the Swedish crown during the years 1670 to 1770,a time when the natives of Sweden lived through both recognition and oppression.

This study aims to unfold and explain the historical Swedish view upon the Samic people. The fundamental question asked is: ”In which manner, or manners, are the Samic people in the so called Lappmarkerna portrayed by Swedish missionaries during the 17th century? The study makes use of five Swedish missionaries’ written accounts of their travels in Lappmarkerna during the 17th century. The primary sources are examined through a hermeneutic method and the results are analyzed from a postcolonial theoretical framework based mostly on Edward Said’s Orientalism and Ania Loomba’s Colonialism/postcolonialism. The results unfold a view of the Samic people as indeed something other than the rest of the Swedes. The Samic people were described as cowardly, lazy, small in stature, not particularly strong, vigorous, fairly intelligent, disgraceful in the context of trade and very skilled with a bow and at hunting in general, but lacking any inclination towards war. The view of the Samic people as the other is however mostly not based on a suggestion that there were any ontological differences between the Samic people and the Swedes. On the contrary, the described differences were mostly ascribed to historical and cultural causes. It’s plausible that the explanation for the limited claims about any fundamental differences is found in the Swedish missionaries’ purpose of producing accounts of their travels. The Swedish missionaries were probably inclined to emphasize the basic similiarities in order to establish that the Samic people were possible to convert to Christianity as well as foster into becoming proper Swedish subjects.

The purpose ofthis study is to examine how Sweden and Denmark explain their colonial experience in textbooks. A comparison will be made between Sweden’s colonization of Sápmi and treatment of Samer, and Denmark’s colonization of Greenland and treatment of Innuits. To conduct this study a comparative method was utilized, as well as hermeneutic theory which was used to try to understand how the countries explain their colonial experience. The theory applied for this topic was selective traditions in a textbook perspective. The results show that Sweden tones down their colonial experience, and the textbooks differ a lot in (if) and (how) they mention Sweden’s experience. The colonization of Sápmi is toned down as well as the treatment of Samer in books written before the new curriculum. The textbooks written after the new curriculum present a less toned down version of Sweden ́s treatment of Samer. This change is due to changes in society, as Samer have gained a lot more rights in Swedish society, which can be seen in Swedish textbooks. Denmark does not hide their colonial experiences, and the books also have more consensus in their description of Denmark’s colonial experience. The books before the new curriculum describe Denmark’s colonial experience as proof of the greatness of Denmark’s past. The books after the new curriculum describe Denmark’s colonial experience in the perspective of slave trade. Slave trade was one of the 29 canon points that entered the Danish curriculum, which could have influenced the Danish textbooks. Denmark’s textbooks often describe Denmark as a “good” colonial country, and the textbooks do not describe the treatment of Innuits, which could be explained by that, Denmark’s treatment of Innuits does not match with Denmark’s national image.