This article was downloaded by: [University of Windsor]On: 13 November 2014, At: 01:05Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Scandinavian Journal of EducationalResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/csje20

From a Narrative of Suffering towards aNarrative of Growth: Norwegian HistoryTextbooks in the Inter-War PeriodBrit Marie Hovlanda

a University of OsloPublished online: 18 Nov 2013.

To cite this article: Brit Marie Hovland (2013) From a Narrative of Suffering towards a Narrative ofGrowth: Norwegian History Textbooks in the Inter-War Period, Scandinavian Journal of EducationalResearch, 57:6, 625-638, DOI: 10.1080/00313831.2013.838695

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2013.838695

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

From a Narrative of Suffering towards a Narrative of Growth:Norwegian History Textbooks in the Inter-War Period

Brit Marie HovlandUniversity of Oslo

The article discusses changes and revisions of the Norwegian official Grand Narrative, asportrayed in primary school history textbooks. The selected corpus of textbooks of 1885–1940 shows narrative and historiographical changes supporting a hypothesis of adevelopment from a Narrative of Suffering towards a Narrative of Growth. Thereconfiguration of the Norwegian Grand Narrative plot is illustrated by the AssociationNorden’s pioneering history textbook revision, which aimed at removing old nationalenemy images such as the Swedish arch-enemy and antagonist in the NorwegianNarrative of Suffering. The Nordic textbook revision shows that a political call formore peaceable narratives between former enemies has to be addressed morecomprehensively, respecting both narrative implications and time needed to reconfigurea grand narrative of collective memory.

Keywords: history textbooks, textbook revision, narrativity, historiography

Introduction

The worst is if such phrases are based on obvious mistakes, and that is the case in thedepiction of the Nordic Seven Year War. Hæreid and Schjøtt both claim, withoutpausing to consider, that the Swedes used Trondhjem Cathedral as a stable (Lødøenas well: The Norwegian people’s history 1916, p.103). What we really know aboutthis incident is shown in O. Kolsrud’s book “Olavskyrkja” (p. 69) as follows: “Thelegend tells that the enemy used the Cathedral as a stable, and it might well be thatthe horses were stabled in the derelict longhouse.” This is thus about a legend and aruin, and there is no reason to indoctrinate our youth that the Swedes “used the Cathe-dral as a stable”. The words are unjust. (Den høiere skole [DHS], 1922, p. 309, mytranslation)

Dominant Norwegian primary school history textbooks proclaimed for decades that theSwedes used Nidarosdomen—the national Cathedral and symbol in Trondheim—as astable during the Nordic Seven Year War of 1563–1570. This historical incident, wayback in the sixteenth century, had been repudiated and was refuted in 1914 (Kolsrud,1914) before being criticized in a Nordic textbook revision (1919–1922), as cited above.The voluntary Association Norden had been established in 1919 to promote transnational

© 2013 Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research

Brit Marie Hovland, Department of Education, University of Oslo.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Brit Marie Hovland, University of

Oslo, Department of Education, Pb 1092 Blindern, Oslo, 0317 Norway. E-mail:b.m.hovland@ped.uio.no

Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 2013Vol. 57, No. 6, 625–638, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2013.838695

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

cooperation in the spirit of a regional “Nordicism”.1 One of the first incentives was the historytextbook revision, with the mandate to “investigate whether the textbooks description of ourcountry’s relationship to Denmark and Sweden makes injustice to our neighboring countries”(DHS, 1922, p. 308).2 They claimed that the traditional Grand Narratives contained enemyimages of the Nordic others, thus working against the desired Nordic sentiments. The endea-vor was part of a post-World War I zeitgeist pointing at patriotic nationalism as a major causeof the war. The revision and the Stable-Cathedral story exemplify incentives to rewrite thenational(istic) history into a new international framing. I shall investigate some implicationsof this reconfiguration and analyze the Grand Narratives in Norwegian textbooks in search ofconsequent changes.

The Stable-Chatedral Story and its Mythomoteur

The Stable-Cathedral story was criticized and refuted, yet retained in new textbook edi-tions. Hence, its justification was neither scientific nor political, but gravitated toward a nar-rative perception of history within collective identity (Rüsen, 2005). This constructivist andnarrative concept of history differed from the historicists’ focus on objective truth when thescience of history was established during the formative era of nation-states in the nineteenthcentury. The Norwegian historical School (parallel to the German) and Leopold von Rankesmemorandum “Wie es eigentlich gewesen” ascertained the origin of a historical defined Nor-wegian nation, which for centuries had been the weaker part of unions with Denmark 1380–1814, succeeded by Sweden 1814–1905 (Dahl, 1990). The union experience powerfullyimposed on the historicists’ Grand Narrative a plot of an ongoing liberation struggle forautonomy. A contextualization of this Grand Narrative and its Nordic conditions revealsthat the plot was heavily influenced by its political framing and, consequently, historiansas ideologues. Hence, the common theme of the historicist national Grand Narrative wasmoulded through stories of otherness and opposition to the Nordic others. The classicalNorwegian narrative was the story of struggle for national separatism.

The national theorist A.D. Smith (1991, 1995) claims that construction of common mythsand shared history is the foundation of separatist ethnic nationalisms like the Norwegian. Hedistinguishes phases in the historiography of nationalism, and states that while the tradition-alist/primordialist historicists perceived nations as determined from the dawn of time, latermodernists construed them as a modern product. Further, he notes that traditionalisthistory narratives fit a general pattern: a Myth of a Golden Age, a Myth of Decline, and aMyth of Rebirth (simplified version, Smith 1995, p. 192): “indeed, objectivity is not their[the historicists] main concern. Their aim is to retail the ‘past’, in such a way as to‘explain’ the lot of their community and prescribe remedies for its ills” (p. 191). TheStable-Cathedral story thus shows an example of how the Norwegian traditionalist historiansestablished a Narrative of Suffering, involving the Swedes as arch-enemy and national

1The Association Norden, Foreningen Norden, was established in 1919 by Sweden, Denmark, andNorway, joined by Iceland in 1922 and Finland in 1924. The region Norden: Sweden, Denmark,Norway, Iceland, and Finland and its associated territories. “Nordicism” was based on a perceivedcommon cultural identity and heritage in this region.

2DHS (1922) “undersøke, om lærebøkernes omtale av vort lands forhold til Danmark og Sverige erslik, at den gjør uret mot grannefolkene” (p. 308).

626 BRIT MARIE HOVLAND

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

antagonist provided a unifying topic through history from Golden Age to Rebirth. But by1920, the ideological and political context had changed profoundly. Nationalism was cru-cially discredited as a major obstacle to international cooperation. This is the historicalcontext of the Stable-Chatedral story and the Nordic textbook revision 1919–1922.

The Stable-Cathedral story exemplifies vital connections of national identity, mass-edu-cation, and politics. Historical narratives are cultural tools for members of a collective asthey recount the past (Wertsch, 2008). “It is only through the knowledge of its history that asociety can have knowledge of itself,” says Arthur Marwick (as cited in Kvernbekk &Simpson, 2008, p. 17). Teaching of history is a key element: “history and its lessons mustbelong to us and tell our collective tale.…Hence our myths, memories and symbols must beconstantly renewed and continually re-told” (Smith, 1995, p. 208). Textbooks connect to thiscollective memory, and must be reconfigured in accordance with its needs. Textbooks thusfill the lacuna between the past, politics, and classrooms; yesterday’s heroes, today’s politicians,and the citizens of tomorrow. The book presents a narrative of who we are, where we comefrom, and where we are going, leaving the future citizens with a plot to fulfill. Or, asRicoeur (1994) states, referring to Hannah Arendt, it is a history’s duty to express the “who”of action and articulate the plot (p. 22). In his latest works, Paul Ricoeur (1992, 1994, 2004;Duffy 2009) approaches this narrative landscape of the past in his hermeneutics, and highlightsthe narrative and ethical relations between the writing of history, reconciliation, and peace.

Nordic arch-enemies had to be reconfigured in order to promote a Nordic community. Toremove an antagonist is a fundamental change in a plot. The alleged Swedish sacrilege of abeloved national icon is thus more closely related to a national “myth-symbol complex”—amythomoteur—than to history as science (Smith, 1995, pp. 58–68). Smith’s concept graspselaborated myths that provide the community with an overall framework of meaning—“amythomoteur, which ‘makes sense’ of its experiences and defines its ‘essence’” (p. 24).The Stable-Cathedral story was part of such a mythometeur: the Norwegian Narrative of Suf-fering. The Swedish antagonist thus reflected a Norwegian powerless protagonist (Decline)waiting for his historical moment to regain national glory (Rebirth). The Swedish horses trig-gered a whole national tableau, a mythomoteur with huge effects on the minds of the people.A removal of an antagonist in this sense implies a dramatic reconfiguration of the plot.

It is my hypothesis in this article that the political incentives for international cooperationbetween former Nordic arch-enemies implied both a narrative reconfiguration of the GrandNarrative and a historiographical shift away from traditionalist historicism. The shift fromthe historicist “Wie es eigentlich gewesen” implied a more constructivist philosophy ofhistory and historical truth: History and its corresponding national identity are not objective,but normative and political, and the narrative is not only a form that contains history, but ashape that delimits it. This is why the pioneering inter-war textbook revision sheds light onlater revisions and even today’s narrative peace-building efforts in post-conflict areas.

In this article, I shall inquire into the topic of how the Norwegian national narrative waschanged in the inter-war period and how the example of the Nordic textbook revision con-tributes to a general understanding of the complex dynamics of such changes. I will concen-trate on a selected corpus of Norwegian textbooks, and it is important to note that I amspecifically after the changes in the narratives coupled to a systematic pattern of structuralnarrative and historiographical change. Recent Swedish research suggests that the Nordicinter-war revisions had little, if any, effect (Elmersjö, 2013; Elmersjö & Lindmark, 2010;Holmén, 2006; etc.), supporting a Norwegian thesis of no major shifts in the traditionalistGrand Narrative until the 1960s–1970s (Lorentzen, 2005; etc.). I shall argue to the contrary:

FROMANARRATIVEOF SUFFERING TOWARDSANARRATIVEOF GROWTH 627

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

The Nordic textbook revision illuminates a reconfiguration of the Norwegian plot preparing anew Grand Narrative. First, I shall briefly describe the pioneer Nordic textbook revisions andcontextualize their work. Then, we shall take a historical stroll down the roads of the Norwe-gian inter-war narrative, investigating changes of its landscape of history.

Pioneering Nordic Textbook Revisions

The Association Norden’s history textbook revisions conducted in 1919–1922 and 1933–1935 are pioneers, paving a road engaging more than 20 countries, 20 international organiz-ations, and 50 national organizations in the 1930s (League of Nations, 1933; AssociationNorden, 1937; Carlgren, 1940; Elmersjö & Lindmark, 2010; Pingel, 2010). The firstNordic revision was set off by an article by a Norwegian teacher criticizing a Swedish text-book’s depiction of the previous union: “What Swedish students ought to know about 1814and 1905” (Refsdal Oct, 1919, as cited in DHS, 1919, p. 210; Odhner 1918/1988). Refsdalthought that biased and patriotic Swedish texts incited nationalistic bad blood amongst theneighbouring nations. To meet Nordic political sentiments, such obstacles had to beremoved from the textbooks. More important is the article’s reception story: ChristianL. Lange, Secretary General of the Inter Parliamentary Union precursor of the League ofNations, urgently called the recently established Association Norden (1919) to conducthistory textbook revisions and verify whether textbooks held such distorted images of “theothers” that could prevent the desired international cooperation.

The Norwegian branch of the Association Norden immediately engaged in the matter:

…the Association Norden should seek to prevent that textbooks from any of the countriesproffer arguments which might offend the other countries. Especially one should avoidthat the history textbooks preserve outdated and misleading representations of theother countries’ history. (DHS, 1919, p. 307–8)

The revision committee was constituted by well-known Norwegian scientists and tea-chers, crowned by Professor Halvdan Koht, the most prominent Norwegian historian.3 TheStable-Cathedral story is from this committee’s report: Such stories and sentiments oughtto be eliminated so as not to offend the Nordic others . Similar investigations were conductedin Sweden and Denmark.

The pioneer Nordic textbook revision of 1919–1922 illuminates some important aspectsrelated to this analysis:

(1) The revision was initiated by the Norwegians.(2) The Danes responded by suggesting reciprocal revisions, immediately rejected by

the Norwegians, who emphasized content of history textbooks as a strictly nationalmatter.

The Norwegian initiative and rejection of reciprocity might seem contradictory, but con-nects to the Norwegian history culture, the strong traditionalist narrative and a “new” small

3Members of the Norwegian textbook committee of 1919–1922: Anna Rogstad, Lars Eskeland,Arne J. Juland, Axel Sommerfelt, Halvdan Koht, Fredrik Paasche, and Christian Lange. DHS1919–1922; 1932–1935: Halvdan Koht, Haakon Vigander, and Einar Boyesen.

628 BRIT MARIE HOVLAND

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

nation’s eagerness to be seen and valued by the others. This explains why Swedish textbookswere conceived as a Norwegian problem in the first place, and why reciprocal revision by theantagonists was unacceptable. However, a second Nordic textbook revision, conducted1933–1935, was reciprocal, engaging all five Nordic countries. A main conclusion is thatthe first revision had little, if any, effect. Textbooks in all countries still contained “numerouspositive errors and misconceptions”, nationalistic bias, and offensive phrases that “do notbelong in an objective and understandingly [forståelsesfull] historical representation”(Association Norden, 1937, p. 12). Recent Swedish research repeats this impression(Elmersjö 2013; Elmersjö & Lindmark, 2010). On the contrary, I shall argue that theNordic disputes about mutual revisions (1920) and the second reciprocal revision (1932–1935) reveal a fundamental process of change away from a traditionalist narrative andits corresponding history culture. Again, illustrated by the Narrative of Suffering and itsNordic antagonists, mutual revisions implied a major historiographical shift by the Norwe-gians as “weaker part” in the traditional Nordic balance of power. The process towardsreciprocity might also explain why the Nordic inter-war pioneers later constituted amodel of international textbook revision. Members of the Nordic revisions such as Chris-tian Lange and Halvdan Koht personally conveyed impulses to and from other actors as theInter-Parliamentary Union, the later League of Nations, and the International Committee ofHistorical Sciences (Koht was its first president in 1926) (Erdmann, 2005). The NordicModel was referred to by both UNESCO and the Council of Europe when traversinginto highly conflictual narrative landscapes illustrated by the Franco-German and theGerman-Israeli textbook discussions in post-World War II Europe (Pingel, 2010; Schüdde-kopf et al. 1967)

Mutual textbook revisions represent a paradigm shift from a traditionalist history cultureand historiography. The Nordic revision implied not only reconfiguration but reconciliationthrough a joint narrative engagement. The Danish proposal in 1920 required a shift awayfrom a former paradigm conceiving history a wholly intra-national issue, towards an open-ness for “otherness” and “we” as seen by the others, concepts central in Paul Ricoeur’s(1992) phenomenological hermeneutics “Oneself as Another”. In his dialogue with SorinAntohi on “Haunting Memories” and reconciliation through reconfigured histories,Ricoeur said one had to “agree to let mimesis be produced by the other. That is difficult”(Ricoeur & Antohi, 2005, p. 24). This would mean letting the mythomoteur be produced(or refigured) by the other. Ricoeur’s reconciliation through “Oneself as Another” thus under-lines the epistemological shift. The reciprocity itself reveals a fundamental new openness tochange towards the (Nordic) other. It is important to keep in mind that such a major change inthe history textbooks and collective memory is and must be a slow process, as the analysis ofNorwegian inter-war history textbooks, below, will indicate.

The former traditionalist historical narrative embraced the nation through maintainingdistance to, borders against, and negative enemy images of the (Nordic) others. Conversely,the effort made by the Association Norden was itself an example of internationalization and,while the intended outcome was political/cultural, a refigured mythomoteur and plot was ahitherto unidentified prerequisite. Hence, according to Smith, myths, memories, andsymbols had to be renewed and re-told as the established narrative landscapes were de-con-structed. Enemy pictures crumbled and left the narratives in disarray, with a great need to bere-told within a new framework. Removal of the antagonist largely drained the plot of itsmeaning, but to change the Grand Narrative in textbooks is a slow—and unpredictable—process.

FROMANARRATIVEOF SUFFERING TOWARDSANARRATIVEOF GROWTH 629

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

The Norwegian Historical Narrative 1885–1940

The Stable-Cathedral story is one of many changes and amendments in the Norwegiancollective tale. Hæreid first resisted, but the story was removed in 1933. The Nordic revisionsushered a process of change as the first international textbook revision, commencing a newhistoriography and philosophy of history. In this section, I shall inquire further into the topicand analyze changes in the Norwegian history narrative. Textbook revision is one of severalfactors of influence.

My selected corpus of history textbooks consists of five textbooks in 15 different editions.Of these, I select for detailed analysis the three oldest books in 12 different editions. Thebooks are O. Jensen (1885), Jens Hæreid (1909), O.I.K. Lødøen (1910), Pål Kleppen(1927) and Tormod Knutson (1934). Jensen’s book was written in 1885, four years priorto the epoch-making Primary School Act (Folkeskolelovene) of 1889, which introducedhistory as a compulsory subject. The advisory Curriculum of 1890 introduced designatedhistory textbooks. The range of such books exploded, in turn causing the need of an approv-ing authority. The National Authorization Committee (Godkjenningsordningen) was estab-lished in 1908. Two textbooks in our corpus date from this regulatory period: Hæreid(1909) and Lødøen (1910). The remaining two books, by Kleppen and Knutson, werereleased 20 years later—in a totally different setting. Despite the 49-year time span (1885–1934) these five books were all used in the same period, meeting about 80–90% of theinter-war market. Jensen and Hæreid were the classics, providing the vast majority ofNorway’s future citizens their path from the past to the future.

A brief comparison of the five textbooks’ table of contents, main periods, plot, peripeti(sudden shifts) and mythomoteur shows a distinct change in emphasized periods. Table 1shows that while the eldest textbook by Jensen emphasized older history, the Viking Age,and the Middle Ages prior to 1340, with a total of 46%, the latest book by Knutson inverselyemphasized modern history after 1814 by 39% The same tendency is found throughout thetextbook corpus of 1885–1940. An organizational change of emphasis is a strong indicationof a major change of narrative. The oldest books exhibit a glorifying emphasis on Vikingsand the Norse Middle Ages, a negative emphasis on the following Union Period, succeededby the contemporary redeemed nation. This dramaturgy constitutes a plot similar to A.D.Smith’s (1995, p. 192) threefold movement through history: the Myth of a Golden Age,the Myth of Decline, and the Myth of Rebirth. Smith’s model shows the generality of theNorwegian example. The traditionalist Norwegian Grand Narrative’s growth and decline,daylight and darkness, is connected to the idea of the nation as natural, with a potential glor-ious eschatology, and leaves every period of decline “unnatural”, in need of an externalexplanation. The Norwegian historicists thus labeled the union period “the 400-year night”(“400-års-natten”), a metaphor closely reminiscent to Smith’s similar allegory: the SleepingBeauty, pricked by external forces of evil and put to sleep until a national dawn restores thecommunity to its true “golden age” (p. 191ff). This is the mythomoteur played up by theStable-Cathedral story. The change of content in later textbooks may involve a weakeningof this national or even national romantic philosophy of history. The Golden Age faded(more) from view. I shall inquire into this field and investigate whether the turn awayfrom the Golden Age is further reflected in stories and sentiments.

The classic paradigm held the natural state to be national glory, each down-period causedby external forces representing foreign or “unnatural” ruptures, such as the rude Swedisharch-enemies throughout the Norwegian tale. The Stable-Cathedral and similar stories

630 BRIT MARIE HOVLAND

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

were removed in editions prior to World War II, corresponding to two correlated changes:(Table 1) first, a change in vocabulary, notably a renaming of the union period. The old“Time of Powerlessness” (Vanmaktstid) was changed to “Time of Decline” (Nedgangstid).This renaming is dramatic and very telling. To be powerless invokes an image of a stateof no power, no possibilities—easily disarmed, overrun, or overtaken. It points to somethingforced from the outside, implying a powerful enemy. The term decline, on the other hand,points to an inner recession. To be powerless gives little hope. While a decline is unfortunate,it can be fought and overcome. The subject retains power of its own destiny. The change frompowerlessness towards a potential growth is highlighted by Ricoeur’s conception of trans-formation from a fallible man to a capable man—empowering the human and nation(Ricoeur & Antohi, 2005, p. 17). The new Time of Decline refigured a national core and anational evolution through good and bad towards the nation’s destined future. Thus, therenaming coincides with a second change, a more evolutionistic historiography. Theformer national (romantic) landscape with its fluctuations of day and night, was leveledout in an emerging parallel tale of steady national development through good and badtimes. Both the renaming and the evolutionistic approach might be traced to Ernst Sars—the main historian and ideologist of the Left’s (liberal political party) oppositional fight for

Table 1From Golden Age to Rebirth >1340 and 1814–1905< - a change of dispositional emphasis in the textbook corpus

Book Cover illustrationGoldenage (%)

The ruptureDecline (traditionalist)

Rebirth(%)

O. Jensen (1885, 1928edn.)The history of Norway,for school and home

Parliament 46 Period of powerlessness(Vanmaktstid)

24(19+5)*

J. Hæreid (1909, 1933edn.)The History ofNorway, told for schooland home

A Viking raid 39 Period of powerlessness 36(28+8)

O.I.K. Lødøen (1910,1931 edn.)The history of Norway

Kings coin 40 3531+4

P. Kleppen (1927, 1934edn.)The History ofNorway, incl parts ofWorld History

Norse dragon’s head 42 Period of decay(Nedgangstid)

28(17+11)

T. Knutson (1934) Thehistory of our people

A peasant rural farm 36 Period of decay 39(25+14)

From “Drums and Trumpets”towards more social and

cultural history

> A renaming of thenarrative rupture and

peripeti

<

*24 is total no. pages on the period 1814–1905. Bracketed values show breakdown e.g. (19+5) 19 pages on theperiod 1814–1905, 5 pages on the period after 1905.

FROMANARRATIVEOF SUFFERING TOWARDSANARRATIVEOF GROWTH 631

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

parliamentarism (1884) and national autonomy (1905). While the Norwegian HistoricalSchool’s main focus had been the Golden Ages, Sars saw a national evolution through theperiod of Decline. Later, Koht redefined Sars’ national project to a class struggle, strengthen-ing these evolutionistic, materialistic, and social perspectives (Dahl, 1990). A renamed unionperiod and a historiographical change toward more evolutionistic perspectives both supportmy contention of an underlying change of narrative in the inter-war history textbooks. Below,I will discuss some telling examples from three different books, inviting all into the poeticnarrative of history.

Between Modern Historicity and Mythological Time

Eden, Paradise, and the Noah’s Ark were the opening stories in Jensen’s (1885) Norway’shistory for school and home. The Biblical introduction was followed by Old Norse mythol-ogy, legendary Vikings and their victorious raids. From the preface of Jensen’s 1912 edition,we know that this edition was approved by professor Koht, and by then also officially auth-orized (1909). Neither Koht nor the authorizing committee would have approved the 1885edition. In 1912, the Biblical origin was removed and the Old Norse mythology relocatedto a section on Vikings everyday life, work, culture, religion, and faith. The former narrativeembraced Norway’s history from the Biblical and mythological misty past. The reconfigurednarrative was influenced by modern scientific historicity.

The resulting demystification and secularization were reinforced by more economic,social, and cultural history—the everyday life, culture, and beliefs in turn reducing the tra-ditional kingly chronicles as unifying theme. But while the structure changed, other narrativeaspects remained mythological—some were even reinforced or written into new allegories.Jensen’s 1885, 1889, 1905, 1924, and 1928 textbook editions thus exhibit a contradictorydevelopment. In some ways, the narrative became more descriptive and scientific accordingto contemporary historiography. But the national tale was still shrouded in a mythologicalmist, exemplified by a new mythomoteur-like allegory: the Nidaros Cathedral.

In his 1889 edition, Jensen provided a new ending to his textbook, introducing a closingallegory embracing the traditional mythomoteur of Golden Age, Decline, and Rebirth. Thelast two pages (of a total of 96) was a tale of the Nidaros Cathedral—the national andholy symbol:

Trondhjem’s Cathedral coincides closely with the history of the country. In Norway’sdays of prosperity it was built up and reached a glorious peak during the country’sheyday. But the church declined along with Norway. Little by little the country lost itsindependence, and it sank and sank until it mostly lay in ruins. It was decided in 1814that the country’s kings should be crowned in the Cathedral. The Norwegian peoplehad regained its autonomy and felt the urge to restore the church to its magnificentshape. (Jensen, 1889, p. 95, my translation [only brief changes in 1912, 1924, and1928 editions])

The cathedral thus epitomized the traditional Norwegian Narrative of Suffering. Jensen’stale of the national cathedral embraced the Norwegian history, employing the destiny of afamous existing building as an allegory. The glorious days of prosperity, centuries inruins, 1814 ushering the ongoing restoration of the ancient grandour all fit into Smith’s para-digm, reinforcing the traditional Norwegian mythomoteur. The allegory of the national

632 BRIT MARIE HOVLAND

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

cathedral remained unaltered in Jensen’s later editions, the 1905-edition even depicted thesunrise behind the cathedral as cover illustration. Despite the evolving source criticism andother historiographical developments, this metaphor of the Norwegian Narrative of Sufferingseems to withhold the revised textbook narrative in mythological time.

The contradictory tendencies, one the one hand the apparently more scientific anddescriptive narrative, and, on the other the reinforced mythological mist by the Nidaros alle-gory, reveals the complexity of the revision project within collective memory and nationalidentity. Jensen’s text nevertheless exhibits three (correlated) historiographical tendenciesof change: from kingly chronicles to thematic historical narrative, a modern emphasis onmore social and cultural history, and a more radicalized Saga source criticism. The contradic-tory use of mythological allegories might support the previous thesis that a major change ofhistorical narrative drains the plot of its meaning—Jensen’s solution seems to have been toemploy a symbolic framing to the more scientific historical narrative.

The Retreat of the Antagonist

Hæreid’s (1909) History of Norway told for school and home is a classic, for decades themost used textbook, and for generations Hæreid’s patriotic narrative of national heroes withits vivid illustrations was tantamount to history and the past. Even though the book was firmlycriticized for being overly nationalistic and patriotic, Hæreid resisted most changes throughits publishing history prior to World War II.4 The authorization committee (1908) made himrewrite the book (1909) to be authorized (1910). A second check in 1932 revealed—like lasttime—what was said to be a “worrisome…national complacency”. Nevertheless, E. Boyesenapproved the book in 1932 due to its established position in schools (Boyesen was one ofthree members of the second Norwegian textbook revision committee) (Ødegård, 1983).Hæreid was faced with several allegations of being nationalistic, as the opening Stable-Cathedral example showed. The patriotic approach reinforced the national self by a negativeimage of the other: the Norwegian Narrative of Suffering and the Swedish antagonist. Even ifthe Stable-Cathedral story was disapproved of and subject to tough criticism, the story wasunaltered in his 1925 edition—but removed in 1933. Hæreid’s resistance to change is astrong indication of the arch-enemy’s central role in the narrative plot—the politically motiv-ated removal of the antagonist clearly implies a narrative reconfiguration.

Despite worrisome “national complacency” as late as in 1932, there was a slow adap-tation to the principle of a weakened enemy image of the Nordic others. Former cruel,bloody, and hostile stories of border battles between Sweden and Norway disappeared, orwere shortened, retold with less malice, or reconfigured in a more descriptive manner.Thus the 1913 and 1925 editions present the battles between Norwegians and Swedes inthe Seven Year War (1563–1570) in vividly hostile way: “The Swedes behaved likesavages, used the Cathedral as a stable and built gallows for hangings all over the place”(Hæreid, 1925, p. 96). The antagonistic descriptions of the Swedes and depiction ofblood-filled trenches were removed or moderated in the 1940 edition (Hæreid, 1940,p. 99). A traditional “Drum and Trumpet History”, with kings as protagonists and war as

4Hæreid’s textbook was reissued after World War II by Sverre S Amundsen. The new title was Viere en nasjon [We are a nation]—a citation taken from a famous Norwegian national song, known as“The little boys’ anthem” written by the poet Henrik Wergeland in 1841.

FROMANARRATIVEOF SUFFERING TOWARDSANARRATIVEOF GROWTH 633

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

main plot, was weakened. New social, cultural, and economic categories were introduced. Aformer narrative of foreign dominance and control during the “400-year Night”was graduallyexpanded by the inclusion of social and cultural everyday heroes; the big picture suggestinggrowth, development, and capability through the union. The Swedish antagonist becamemore peripheral, while a capable Norwegian protagonist became empowered.

The classical NorwegianNarrative of Sufferingwas not replaced, but expanded by a moreevolutionary perspective that brought with it broad social, cultural, and economic categories,as one of Hæreid’s changes in 1925 illustrates: The legend of the pastoral wife AnnaKolbjørnsdatter’s hazardous and heroic efforts during the Nordic War (1700–1721) was fre-quently repeated in textbooks. When a Swedish army of 600 men arrived at the rectory, Annamost warmly welcomed and treated them, while at the same time advising the Norwegiancommander to ambush their drunken enemies in the middle of the night. This story was cri-ticized by the revisions, but Hæreid never replaced it. On the contrary, the 1925 edition wasextended by the heroic effort of 60 local peasants: “For nine hours they stood firmly againstthe tenfold majority before surrendering” (Hæreid, 1925, p. 106, 1940, p. 109). The newattention and positive view of the efforts of ordinary people, both of the heroic Anna andthe devoted peasants, embodied a popular Norwegian national identity and wish for indepen-dence—the capable man in a Narrative of Growth.

The bloodstained border battles emphasized the nation by foregrounding its landscapeand, importantly, its borders and battles against the others. This focus was downplayed,while the landscape’s capita, their everyday life, and their patriotic sentiments were stressed.Having the nation as the pivotal point provided a different plot with regards to the unionperiod: a nation facing the challenges of loss of sovereignty and foreign rule not solely byblaming the enemy, but by enhancing and vitalizing national virtues, growth through adver-sities, and popular strength. Such a Narrative of Growth provided the dissolution of the union(s) in 1814 (and 1905) with different explanations—from external coercion to internal evol-ution. The historical maps illustrate this shift. Hæreid’s maps of Norway in 1913 and 1925included the areas lost to the Swedes: Jemteland and Herjedalen, lost in 1645, and Ranriket(Baahuslen), lost in 1658. These maps illustrated the Narrative of Suffering—the nationalphantom limb of the nation. The Norwegian “phantom limb map” was removed in 1940.The new maps illustrated a Norway without its phantom limbs, (re)located in its Nordicand Baltic environs. The narrative changes imply a historiographical shift towards cultural,social, and economic categories, refiguring the political history of the ruled and the regent.Mr. and Mrs. Anybody—the people—were introduced as co-characters of the national nar-rative. They represented the comeback of a national protagonist, facilitating the retreat ofthe antagonist.

A Decisive Peripeti

The structural changes in Lødøen’s History of Norway, smaller version for primaryschools (1910) sum up some main narrative and historiographical developments of theperiod. Lødøen authored his first textbook in 1905—the symbolic milestone of Norwegianhistory. The downsized version issued in 1910 seemed better to meet educational needs,and was re-edited for decades. The editions of 1912, 1920, and 1940 show a threefold struc-tural development embracing our preliminary findings and hypothesis of a reconfigured struc-ture and plot in the inter-war period.

634 BRIT MARIE HOVLAND

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

The 1912 edition of Lødøen’s book has 11 chapters, including a chapter on social studiesfollowed by historical maps. The manifold chapters give an impression of a fragmented col-lection of incidents: The Norwegians in Ancient Times: 800–1030 (p. 3), The Late Iron Ageor the Viking Age: 1030–1130 (p. 5), Norway’s Time of Glory: 1130–1184, The Era ofLanded Men [Lændermandsvældet]: 1184–1319 (p. 40), The Kings of Norway ReignSupreme: 1319–1597 (p. 50), Norway’s worst Time of Recession: 1537–1660 (p. 60), TheEra of the Danish Nobles: 1660–1814 (p. 73), Era of Total Sovereignty: 1814–1830(p. 84), Era of the National Civil Servants: 1830–1884 (p. 107), The Peasants Gain Powerin Parliament—Implementation of Parliamentarism: 1885–1905 (p. 115), and The Unionwith Sweden Dissolves (p. 138), followed by a chapter on social studies How NorwayShould be Ruled (p. 145) and historical maps (Lødøen, 1912). Kings, great men, their domin-ion, and their wars were central figures and events provided chronological order leading upto 1814.

The 1920 edition represented a profound change. The number of chapters was halved intothree main chapters embraced by a short four-page opening chapter and the closing socialstudies chapter and historical maps: Norway’s Prehistoric Era (p. 3), The Era of the Sagas:800–1319 (p. 7), The Time of Powerlessness:(1319–1814 (p. 63), and After 1814 (p. 111),followed by How Norway Should be Ruled (p. 148) (Lødøen, 1920). The former fragmentedchronicle was reconfigured into a narrative with a defined plot: the time of the Sagas—Powerlessness—Constitutional Kingdom. The 1920 edition thus represents Ricoeur’s fallibleman in Smith’s historical paradigm of Golden Age, Decline, and Rebirth.

The three main periods herald the historically-defined contemporary nation. The reconfi-guration emphasizes the national tale moulded into the national paradigm of Golden Age,Decline, and Rebirth, providing the nation with a clear destiny and, hence, a definedfuture. The narrative reconfiguration accentuates the national project more explicitly.While details, stories, and happenings became more descriptive, as both contemporary histor-iography and Nordic policies required, the overall narrative plot sustained and strengthenedthis national paradigm—sentiments we usually associate more with expressions of the middleof the nineteenth century.

The revision of 1940 reveals an even more stunning reconfiguration and overarching reor-ganization of the plot. A new chapter is introduced in the midst of the narrative. The Time ofPowerlessness: 1319–1814 of the 1920-editition is halved, and a brand new period is intro-duced with a new chapter: Norway Progressing Toward Autonomy: 1537–1814 (Lødøen,1940, pp. 73–110). The effect is dramatic. By this change, the period of powerlessnesswas shortened to 200 years. The central “400-year Night” of the Norwegian Narrative of Suf-fering crumbled, introducing a brand new historical turning point: the new decisive peripeti isin the year of 1537.Whilst the year 1536 represented the nadir of Norwegian history, markingthe beginning of total Danish dominance until 1814, 1537 represents the official introductionof the Reformation. Lødøen chose the positive potential in the darkest of times to usher adevelopment towards restored national glory.

The new Narrative of Growth reconfigured 1537 as the peripeti of Norwegian history, adecisive turning point from a plot of powerlessness toward growth. The tendencies inHæreid’s editorial change seem to be developed into a major structural change that modifiesLødøen’s narrative plot profoundly. The new peripeti supports an empowered national pro-tagonist and plot—the nation is no longer a victim, but a capable subject. The empowermentof the protagonist allows the retreat of the antagonist, while the plot has a parallel theme,namely national development and growth within the thus modified tale of suffering. This

FROMANARRATIVEOF SUFFERING TOWARDSANARRATIVEOF GROWTH 635

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

reconfiguration was sustained by a more evolutionistic, teleological, and dialectical historio-graphy and a more internationalized history culture. The Narrative of Growth relocated aNorwegian lonesome tragedy within a Western tale of Development.

Conclusion: an Empowered Protagonist in a Narrative of Growth

What did they learn in school those days? While Norwegian children at the threshold ofthe twentieth century were taught a Norwegian Grand Narrative of Suffering through centu-ries of repressive Nordic unions leading up to the ongoing national struggle for independence(1814, 1884, 1905), this historical paradigm was expanded and challenged by a Narrative ofGrowth in the wake of World War II. The opening Stable-Cathedral story illustrates theimplications of this change—the enemy images of the Nordic others had to be removedfrom the Norwegian narratives. The hyper-nationalism of World War I had made the needfor revision of patriotic historical narratives and their enemy images abundantly clear. TheNordic history textbook revision was a pioneer in the inter-war tide of such revisions.

The inter-war revisions have been assumed to be of little effect. Textbook research, text-book revision research, and historiography all suggests that the traditionalist Grand Narrativeremained highly unaltered into the postwar period. This study suggests otherwise: There wasa gradual change from a traditionalist Grand Narrative of Suffering towards a challengingNarrative of Growth, which, at the same time, enabeled a reposition of Norway in an inter-national frameworking. The Association Norden’s revisions expressed the same, as did theInternational Committee of Historical Sciences (1926) in their hope to overcome nationalismand deep gaps between historians and historiographies of nations (Erdmann, 2005, p. ix).Textbook revisions meant a shift away from the national paradigm to a reciprocal opennesstowards “the other”. The Nordic dispute on reciprocity, 1920–1932, thus illuminates a funda-mental epistemological and historiographical period of change.

Textbook revisions of the kind discussed here by no means come easily. The removal ofthe caricatured Swedish antagonist (e.g. the Stable-Cathedral story) involved reconfiguringthe entire Narrative of Suffering. This plot, or mythometur, had made the union period mean-ingful in a national paradigm of Golden Age, Decline, and Rebirth. A removal of the antag-onist thus left this narrative without a main plot. A reconfiguration was needed. The textbookanalysis shows a turn from Golden Ages to contemporary Rebirth and a renaming of theperiod of Decline, all empowering the national protagonist, whilst wiping out the antagonist.The “Drum and Trumpet History” was filled in by stories of social, cultural, and economicstrength and development. The bloody border battles receded into the background, as illus-trated by the disappearance of the “phantom limb maps”. Lødøen’s change of peripeti was,nevertheless, the prime example of this historiographical reconfiguration of the Grand Nar-rative. The new chapter, Norway Progressing Toward Autonomy 1537–1814, headlinedthe Era of Growth and called for a social and cultural perspectived narrative and historiogra-phy, all connected to contemporary evolutionistic, materialistic, and social historiography.

The Swedish horses triggered a whole national tableau, a mythomoteur with huge effectson the minds of the people. A removal of such an antagonist implies a dramatic reconfigura-tion of the narrative, mythomoteur, and plot. The analysis shows that the retreat of the antag-onist was filled in by foregrounding an empowered Norwegian protagonist. But this capableprotagonist was inconsistent with a Narrative of Suffering. The Narrative of Growth with itsnew peripeti, on the other hand, provided 1814 and 1905 with alternative explanations ofinner growth. Smith’s model could be maintained, while antagonistic external forces

636 BRIT MARIE HOVLAND

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

receded (more) into the background. The old paradigm embraced a new plot. This stabilitymight explain the previous hypothesis on no major changes in Norwegian (or Nordic)history textbooks in the period.

In the introduction, I stated that history textbooks are official stories telling us who we are.Political incentives might, as we have seen, lead to or empower a reconfiguration of the his-torical narrative of a nation. This points to the importance of history and history revisions topolitics, national identity, and international relations. The Nordic inter-war example showsthat political calls for removal of enemy images and more peaceful narratives must beaddressed comprehensively, respecting both narrative and historiographical implicationsand the time needed to process a reconfiguration of the Grand Narrative and collectivememory. If history really tells us who we are, where we come from, and where we aregoing, textbook revisions thus reveal our duty to take responsibility for a reconfiguredpath towards tomorrow.

References

Association Norden. (1937). Nordens läroböcker I historia: Ömsesidig granskning verkställd avFöreningarna Nordens facknämnder [Nordic history textbooks: Reciprocal investigation initiatedby Association Norden’s special committee]. Helsingforsk: Finska litteratursällskapets tryckeri A.B.

Carlgren, W. (1940). Omstridte spørsmål I Nordens historie [Contested questions in the history ofNorden]. Oslo: Foreningen Norden.

Dahl, O. (1990). Norsk historieforskning i det 19. og 20. Århundre. [Norwegian historiography in the19th and 20th century]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

Den høiere Skole (DHS). (1919–1922). Norwegian education journal containing Refsdals article insti-gating the Nordic textbook revision 1919, the Norwegian textbook Committees’ report of 1920(1922), and a recap of this first Nordic revision activity.

Duffy, M. (2009). Paul Ricoeur‘s pedagogy of pardon: A narrative theory of memory and forgetting.London: Continuum.

Elmersjö, H. Å. (2013). Norden, nationen och historien. Perspektiv på föreningarna Nordenshistorieläroboksrevision 1919–1972 [The Nordic, the nation and the history: Perspectives onthe Association Norden’s history textbook revisions 1919–1972]. Umeå: Nordic AcademicPress.

Elmersjö, H. Å., & Lindmark, D. (2010). Nationalism, peace education, and history textbook revisionin Scandinavia, 1886–1940. Journal of Educational Media, Memory, and Society, 2(Special edn.“Contextualizing School Textbook Revision”). Braunsweig: Georg Eckert Insitute.

Erdmann, K. D. (2005). Toward a global community of historians: The International HistoricalCongresses and the International Committee of Historical Sciences 1898–2000 (J. Kocka, W.J. Mommsen, & A. Blänsdorf, Eds.). Oxford: Berghahn Books.

Hæreid, J. (1909). Norges historie fortalt for skole og hjem [The history of Norway told for school andhome]. Kristiania/Oslo: H. Aschehoug & Co. (W. Nygaard). Editions: 1913, 1925, 1933, 1940.

Holmén, J. (2006). Den politiska läroboken. Bilden av USA och Sovjetunionen i norska, svenska ogfinländska läroböcker under kalla kriget [The political textbook: Images of USA and theSoviet Union in Norwegian, Swedish, and Finnish textbooks during the Cold War]. Uppsala:Uppsala universitet.

Iggers, G. G. (1997). Historiography in the twentieth century: From scientific objectivity to the post-modern challenge (with a new epilogue by the author). Middletown, CT: Wesleyan UniversityPress.

Jensen, O. (1889). Norges historie for skolen og hjemmet [Norway’s history for the school and thehome]. Kristiania/Oslo: H. Aschehoug & Co. Editions: 1885, 1889, 1912, 1924, 1928.

FROMANARRATIVEOF SUFFERING TOWARDSANARRATIVEOF GROWTH 637

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Kleppen, P. (1927). Norges historie for folkeskolen [Norway’s History for Primary school] (1934edn.). Oslo: Gyldendal norsk forlag.

Knutson, T. (1934). Vårt folks historie [Our people’s history]. Oslo: Nasjonalforlaget. Editions: 1927,1934, 1939.

Kolsrud, O. (1914). Olavskyrkja i Trondheim [The Olav’s Cathedral in Trondheim]. Kristiania: NorigsUngdomslag og Student-Maallaget.

Kvernbekk, T., Simpson, H., & Peters, M. A. (2008). Military pedagogies and why they matter.Rotterdam: Sense.

League of Nations. (1933). School text-book revision and international understanding. Paris: Leagueof Nations.

Lødøen, O. I. K. (1910). Lødøens Norgeshistorie mindre utgave [History of Norway, smaller versionfor primary schools]. Kristiania/Oslo: J.W. Cappelens forlag Editions: 1912, 1920, 1931, 1934.

Lorentzen, S. (2005). Ja, vi elsker: skolebøkene som nasjonsbyggere 1814–2000 [“Ja, vi elsker”:Textbooks as nation building 1814–2000]. Oslo: Abstrakt forlag.

Ødegård, D. (1983). Fra Norges historie fortalt for skole og hjem til „Vi ere en nasjon”. Norges- ogverdenshistorie: en studie i to av Jens Hæreids lærebøker i historie for folkeskolen [FromNorway’s history told for school and home to “We are a nation”. Norweigan and worldhistory: A study of Jens Hæreids two history textbooks for primary school]. Hovedoppgave i his-torie: Universitetet i Bergen.

Pingel, F. (2010). UNESCOs guidebook on textbook research and textbook revision (2nd rev. ed.).Paris/Braunsweig: Georg Eckert Institute for International Textbook Research.

Ricoeur, P. (1992). Oneself as another. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Ricoeur, P. (1994). History and Rhetoric. Diogenes, 42, 7–12.Ricoeur, P. (2004). Memory, History, Forgetting. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.Ricoeur, P., & Sorin A. (2005). Memory, history, forgiveness: A dialogue between Paul Ricoeur and

Sorin Antohi. Janus Head, 8, 14–25.Rüsen. (2005). History: Narration, interpretation, orientation. New York: Berghahn Books.Schüddekopf, O. E., Bruley, E., Dance, E. H., & Vigander, H. (1967). History teaching and history

textbook revision. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Smith, A. D. (1991). National Identity. London: Penguin Books.Smith, A. D. (1995). The ethnic origins of nations. Oxford: Blackwell.Wertsch, J. (2008). The narrative organization of collective memory. Ethos, 36, 120–135.

638 BRIT MARIE HOVLAND

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

1:05

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14