This chapter analyzes the epistemological hierarchy around the middle of the nineteenth century in Sweden through efforts to mobilize support for natural science in scholarly periodicals. It is argued that scholarly communication was key to achieving legitimacy for natural science, but that such efforts were mitigated by a dominant view of the humanities in general and classical humanism in particular as more valuable to society. Tensions between natural science and classical humanism were expressed in negotiations of the nebulous concept of bildning – the Swedish equivalent of the German Bildung – and the article demonstrates how natural scientists tried to navigate its semantic usage and advocate the view that natural science could achieve the educational goals associated with classical humanism.

In 1798 the Royal Academy of Science instituted a classification of its members, designating the last class to be filled by those engaged with world of learning and beautiful arts. This study maps the population of this “learned class” and analyzes the negotiation of epistemic virtues and merits linked to the nebulous field from which the class drew its members. The article argues that a previous understanding of this class as merely honorary needs to be nuanced, in particular regarding the second half of the century. From 1850, the extant nominations of new members illustrates that although learning and erudition was important throughout the period, scientific skill and profound research, proven by publications, were crucial for this proto-humanistic field of knowledge. Moreover, as the political and cultural sphere seized to be arenas from where the class recruited members, the second half of the century saw an increasing population of university professors linked to traditional humanistic disciplines, noted for their scientific creed, rather than their cultural standing. As a result, the article concludes that although other scenarios would have been viable, the “learned class” developed into a “humanistic class” during the second half of 19th century.

Purpose — The purpose of this article is to investigate attempts to safeguard classical humanism in secondary schools by appealing to a cultural-historical link with Antiquity, voiced in the face of educational reforms in Sweden between 1865 and 1971.

Design/methodology/approach — By focusing on the content of the pedagogical journal Pedagogisk Tidskrift, the article highlights a number of examples of how an ancient historical lineage was evoked and how historical knowledge was mobilized and contested in various ways.

Findings — The article argues that the enduring negotiation over the educational need to maintain a strong link with the ancient past was strained due to increasing scholarly specialization and thus entangled in competing views on reform and what was deemed “traditional” or “modern”.

Originality/value — From a larger perspective, the conflict over the role of Antiquity in Swedish secondary schools reveals a trajectory for the history of education as part of and later apart from a general history of the humanities. Classical history originally served as a common past from which Swedish culture and education developed, but later lost this integrating function within the burgeoning discipline of Pedagogy. The findings demonstrate the value of bringing the newly (re)formed history of humanities and history of education closer together.

This article investigates attempts in the Swedish public and academic sphere to imbue natural history with humanistic values and to align its epistemological goals with those of classical study during the first half of the nineteenth century. By tracing the claims made by 21 naturalists in response to a proposal for a new school ordinance in 1818, the study demonstrates how natural history was linked to Bildung and mental development and that material and practical usefulness was downplayed in favor of moral values. The article argues that a knowledge regime favoring the humanities in general and classical study in particular informed Swedish and European societies at this time and thus underpinned the naturalists’ claim that the study of nature should be seen as part of classical education. The article concludes that natural history became a key component in the struggle between different forms of knowledge due to its malleability and that the knowledge regime was easily accepted and perpetuated among naturalists due to the fact that they were to a large degree humanists themselves. The findings suggest that the history of science needs to include the development and impact of the humanities in its overall narrative of the nineteenth century.

The article traces the circulation of the pedagogical notion of formale Bildung from Germany to Sweden during the first decades of the nineteenth century. At that time, educators and scholars agreed that the goal of secondary education was not to provide practical knowledge, but to train the mind and cultivate moral character. This notion, formulated in full by Friedrich Gedike in the late eighteenth century, proved resilient and shaped Swedish educational policies for much of the century. Yet Gedike was never identified as the source, not by his contemporaries nor by later historians. Moreover, the questions of how, when and why this knowledge appeared in Sweden and how it became part of a general consensus have never been explored. In this essay, it is argued that an important node of circulation between Germany and Sweden was influential educator Carl Ulric Broocman and that the concept of circulation offers a means of revealing previously obscured patterns of knowledge.

The purpose of this article is to explore the formation of a new scholarly pedagogical persona through a study of Carl Ulric Broocman (1783-1812), one the most influential Swedish educators of the early 19th century. By analyzing how Broocman presented himself and his scholarly ideals to his peers, identifying what repertoires of virtues he drew on and what exemplary models he invoked, the article explores the tensions between old and new masculinities as regards the role of both teacher and scholar. Furthermore, the article pursues the question of how Broocman was described as having embodied these virtues himself after his premature death and how his own failing body and suffering due to prolonged sickness were incorporated as aspects of a pedagogical persona that lingered in the public sphere. 

The term “history of knowledge” has gained traction in recent years. This forum section seeks to explore a prominent concept in this new field—circulation—as well as to demonstrate the value of studying knowledge circulation for the history of humanities. While the study of the transmission of knowledge has been pursued in adjacent fields, such as the history of science or media studies, it is argued that circulation of knowledge has the capacity not only to build on existing scholarship but also to combine and galvanize previous and future efforts. Specifically, we believe that the interaction between the humanities and other forms of knowledge—in particular, natural science—can be fruitfully explored with a focus on how knowledge circulates. Detailed historical studies of how knowledge circulates across the divide between “the two cultures” could also be instrumental in fusing the history of humanities and the history of science. Discussing both possibilities and challenges of studying knowledge circulation, this introduction points to a set of valuable questions that probe how the knowledge of humanists has been mobilized, negotiated, contested, downplayed, and forgotten in its historical settings.