tebetalende, stemmeberettigede gårdbrukere. ish but in . There is a close connection Det jeg imidlertid savner i denne oppsumme- between Sweden’s short but intense period as ringen er en diskusjon av makt som et motiv a Great Power and Swedish Neo-Latin litera- for en integrering. Hvem innordnet seg etter ture, which often aimed at praising the sover- hvem, og hvem presset seg frem på bekost- eign. Even if the chain of causes and events in ning av hvem. For å komme tilbake til en egen the gradual disappearance of Latin as a living kjepphest – hvem ble dannet av hvem til et po- means of expression has never been thoroughly litisk individ? explored, it is clear that there was by the end Trond Bjerkås sin avhandling er et viktig of the Great Power period also an end of the bidrag, og kan sees i sammenheng med den et- popularity of propaganda literature written in ter hvert store forskningsproduksjonen på fol- Latin. When ideas and ideals changed, Swedish kelig offentlig deltakelse i dens mange former i Latin literature was regarded as obsolete, still perioden rundt 1814, som belyser denne delen later it became literally incomprehensible, and av norsk historie. Den føyer seg også fint inn authors who had expressed themselves mainly i en nordisk forskningstradisjon, hvor vekten in Latin gradually sunk into oblivion. One har vært i Sverige. Han utfordrer også hege- example of such an author was Magnus Rön- monimodellen som har dominert synet på ene- now. It was not until the end of the twentieth voldsstaten under 1700-tallet, men er kanskje century, with the wave of scholars interested mer nyansert enn andre har vært den senere in Neo-Latin, that these forgotten authors tiden. Han viser i sin avhandling viktigheten slowly started to emerge into the light again. av at den normative makten må sees i sammen- There is still much to be done in this field, and heng med den normative praksisen – og vice Elena Dahlberg’s doctoral thesis on Magnus versa – for å få forståelse for maktens forut- Rönnow is a very welcome contribution. setninger og bruk. Who was Magnus Rönnow? He was the son of a clergyman in Åhus in , born in Marthe Hommerstad 1665, died in 1735. Thanks to generous royal grants (his father seems to have done Charles XI a favour), he got a very thorough education and could make extensive travels to Elena Dahlberg, The Voice of a Waning Empire: Se- and the Netherlands. Rönnow became a re- lected Latin Poetry of Magnus Rönnow from the Great nowned Hebraist and obtained the position as Northern War. Edited, with Introduction, Translation royal translator, Translator regni. He later worked and Commentary, by Elena Dahlberg, Acta Univer- as a secretary of protocols in Charles XII’s sitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Latina Upsaliensia chancellery in Lund, but saw himself forced 34 (: Department of Linguistics and to leave the post, probably because of low or Philology, 2014). 385 pp. non-existent wages. Disappointed and disillu- sioned, shortly after the death of Charles XII What do we mean by “Swedish literature”? he left Sweden for England, where he spent Do we mean literature written in Swedish the rest of his life. Rönnow was held in great or literature written by Swedes? The answer esteem as a Latin poet by his contemporar- that we give to that question has a huge im- ies, and as late as in 1768 Samuel Älf, a keen pact on the extent of our national literature, collector of Swedish Latin poetry, planned to since a considerable part of the literature writ- make an edition of his works (see Dahlberg ten by Swedes was, as late as the middle of 2014 p. 25). Times had changed, however, and the eighteenth century, written not in Swed- general interest in Swedish Latin poetry was

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7557/4.4161 133 Sjuttonhundratal | 2017 waning and Rönnow’s poems, as we can see, Dahlberg’s thesis is the first extensive study had to wait until 2014 to be made available to and modern edition of Rönnow’s work. Here, a greater public. as elsewhere in the thesis, Dahlberg shows that Elena Dahlberg’s doctoral thesis consists she is well read in the relevant secondary lit- of two and almost equally long parts. erature. The first one is a detailed introduction to Mag- Dahlberg has found some 190 poems nus Rönnow and his works and to Neo-Latin that can be attributed to Rönnow (in some poetry of the times of the cases, the attribution to Rönnow is not ab- in general. In the second part, Dahlberg gives solutely clear). Out of these, 170 (printed us editions of 11 of Rönnow’s poems (he and unprinted) make up part of Samuel Älf’s wrote around 190) together with translations collection, today kept at the Linköping Di- into English and detailed commentaries on the ocesan Library. Älf had originally planned to content of each poem. The book also contains edit not only Rönnow’s oeuvre, but also works indices. Dahlberg writes in her “Aim” that her by many other today forgotten Swedish Latin purpose, apart from offering a critical edition poets. Dahlberg provides no list of the titles of 11 of Rönnow’s poems, is to “give a pic- of all of Rönnow’s 190 poems in her thesis ture of Rönnow’s poetry in a broad compara- (as she could, perhaps, have done), but she tive perspective” (Dahlberg 2014 p. 17). Let gives a brief overview of their major themes. us state already here that Dahlberg fulfils every As the time of the Great Nordic War seems to promise given in the “Aim” and more than that. have been Rönnow’s most prolific period, it is Dahlberg’s thesis is a very thorough study, and quite natural that Dahlberg, aiming at giving her extensive reading in Swedish, Danish and a representative selection, has chosen the 11 Russian Neo-Latin literature makes it possible poems in her edition from this period. On pp. for her to put Rönnow’s poetry in its proper 30–34 in her thesis, she offers a very useful context in a way that very few, if any, other table of the 11 poems, showing for each one scholars could have done. As in every schol- of them the title, year of composition, metre, arly work, there are a (very) few things that number of verses, libraries and archives where could have been handled differently (and we it can be found and attribution. It would, will look at them briefly further on), but these however, have been very helpful if this table are only details. The thesis as a whole is solid, had also contained information on where the learned and in many ways groundbreaking. poems (i.e. the poems that do not only exist But let us go back to the beginning of the in manuscript) were printed. Generally speak- thesis. Dahlberg gives a description of Rön- ing, one could have wished for more practical now’s life (the description is short, since the information on the printing: who the print- sources are few) and the very little scholarly ers were, who financed the printing etc., and research that has been done on him before. also on how Rönnow’s and his contemporary After Samuel Älf’s aborted editorial project, colleagues’ poetry was financed and how the Rönnow seems to have been entirely forgotten poems spread. The lack of information is, until Kurt Johannesson mentioned him in his however, most certainly due to the fact that we I polstjärnans tecken: Studier i svensk barock (1968), simply cannot know. where he referred to him as the most outstand- The following sections, which treat the ing poet of his time (Dahlberg 2014 p. 25). historical background of the poems and the Although Rönnow has not been absent from role of the Latin propaganda literature during the general surveys of Swedish Neo-Latin the Great Nordic War, are doubtlessly some literature that have been written since then, of the most interesting and important in the

134 book. Dahlberg stresses the importance of the uses numerous examples not only from Rön- often overlooked Latin literature within the now but also from his contemporaries. The national literatures during this period. Divid- lack of secondary literature makes it crucial to ing the Latin propaganda literature into offi- go directly to the sources, and that is exactly cial polemical documents and occasional lit- what Dahlberg does. erature (fictive letters, allegories and orations In the excellent section on princely vir- and poems), she emphasizes the connection tues, Dahlberg’s text causes a small confusion between the occasional literature, often eulo- concerning the use of the word “Reformed”. gizing the sovereign, and the times of autoc- Dahlberg compares Humanist mirrors of racy. A modern scholar may sometimes wonder princes (for example Erasmus’ Institutio prin- if these glorifying and stylistically very com- cipis Christiani) with what she calls “Reformed” plicated poems actually had any readers even in ones. The context makes it more likely that she the seventeenth century. Dahlberg shows that rather means “Protestant”. they certainly had and that these poems played Moving on to Rönnow’s poetical models, a most important role in the political debate Dahlberg claims (successfully, as I think) that of the time. Rönnow’s poem Hercules Genuinus his chief model among the Classical poets was (no. 7 in Dahlberg’s edition) made the Dan- Horace. The list of lines borrowed directly ish authorities so enraged that it was used as from Horace (p. 110) is perhaps not very im- one of the reasons (or rather pretexts) for de- pressive (it would be more surprising if there claring war against Sweden in 1709 (Dahlberg were no borrowings from this great author), 2014 pp. 47 and 268–279). One of the great but the argumentation is sound and convinc- strengths of Dahlberg’s text here is that she ing. While the connection between Rönnow does not only discuss the Swedish propaganda and Horace is interesting, it is perhaps still literature in Latin, but also the Latin propa- more important that Rönnow’s contemporar- ganda literature written by representatives of ies compared him to the English Neo-Latin the other side, i.e. by Russians and Danes. poet George Buchanan (1506–1582) and his There have been studies before comparing Polish-Lithuanian colleague Casimir Mathias Swedish and Danish Latin propaganda, but as Sarbiewski (1595–1649) (Dahlberg p. 101). far as I know Dahlberg is the first scholar ever Very far from being unoriginal imitators of an- to compare Latin propaganda literature writ- cient authors, the Neo-Latin poets were inno- ten by Swedes and Russians. vative writers in their own right and regarded From the historical and political context, as such by their contemporaries. Dahlberg moves on to the question of ideas For all its inspiration from ancient sources, and sources for this kind of literature. She Baroque literature is something very different discusses the roles played by ancient topoi, from Horace and Vergil. Dahlberg aptly char- princely virtues, Christian motifs and Gothic acterizes the Baroque style of writing as “full references. While it is quite natural that An- of metaphors, bombastic epithets, metonymi- tiquity was a constant place of reference, it is cal phrases, allegory and emblematic language, very interesting that the Neo-Latin authors – all these devices of imaginative language being as shown by Dahlberg – made a point of mak- borrowed from or developed from ancient lit- ing their contemporary heroes surpass the old erature, but enhanced and exaggerated in the ones and antiquity itself. This is clearly seen typical Baroque manner” (p. 111). In describ- in Rönnow’s poem on Charles XII as the new ing Rönnow’s style, Dahlberg concentrates on Hercules that was mentioned above. In this his use of allegorical language and rhetorical section as well as in all the others, Dahlberg tropes and figures. The allegorical language in

135 Sjuttonhundratal | 2017 particular is absolutely crucial for the under- of Thorn (Torún) in 1703. The above-men- standing of the propaganda literature of the tioned Hercules Genuinus (no. 7), where Charles time. Dahlberg gives a good description of XII is called the real Hercules (and the ancient the origins and use of the well-known Swed- myth is called “nothing but a fairy tale of the ish Lion, Russian Eagle and Danish Elephant, poets”) has a subtitle where the Swedish king but she also discusses Rönnow’s new (?) in- is called “the Emperor of Great Scandinavia”: ventions the Russian Aurochs and the Danish a grave provocation against the Danes. In no. Tiger. Dahlberg also uses visual arts (pho- 8, Salva Scania, the hero is not Charles XII, but tos of Swedish and Russian medals from the his general Magnus Stenbock, who has de- time), and it is striking how well Rönnow’s feated the Danes in the Battle of . text and the images on the medals illustrate No. 9, In Imagines Politicas, is a deliberately in- each other. triguing poem aimed against a Pro-Russian Rönnow’s Latin is described in some very poet (see below). In no. 10, In triumphum … thorough chapters, where Dahlberg (among prope Urbem Gadebusch, another of Stenbock’s other things) makes lists of Neo-Latin words victories is eulogized. In the eleventh and last that are normally not found in dictionaries. poem, In auctos numero hostes Carolinos, written in These lists can be very useful for scholars who, 1715, the poet expresses concern as he quite excusably, do not know that Codanus sinus Charles XII’s many enemies and wishes for means “the Baltic Sea” and Chanus “Khan”. peace. We have now arrived at the second part of The editions and English translations the thesis, the edition of Rönnow’s poems with of the poems are very solid. Anyone who has translation and commentary. Dahlberg keeps tried to translate Neo-Latin texts, especially close to the text of the original (print or auto- Baroque poetry, knows that it is a most try- graph/manuscript copy), keeping the spelling ing and time-consuming task, but Dahlberg and some of the typographical features. The succeeds beautifully: she makes the poems only change of any importance is that she has perfectly comprehensible to a modern reader, modernized the punctuation. As all editors of and the text never sounds far-fetched or ri- Neo-Latin texts know, this is a question where diculous. The commentaries, crucial for the there are two different policies: to modernize understanding of most of the poems, are very or not to modernize… Both policies have ad- informative, and the argumentation is gener- vantages as well as disadvantages, and as long ally sound and convincing. In the commen- as the editor is consistent, the one is probably tary on the very interesting no. 9, In Imag- as good as the other. ines politicas, one could perhaps have wished Through the 11 poems in the edition, for a deeper discussion concerning the “little we can follow the rise and fall of the reign of book” ridiculed by Rönnow. It seems perfect- Charles XII. The subject of poem no. 1, Ad ly clear that its author was Feofan Prokopo- Carolum XII Augustissimum, is the failed Saxon vich, but can we really assume with perfect siege of in 1700. In nos. 2, In Victoriam certainty that his libellus was De arte poetica? Narvensem (the longest poem, 496 verses) and This book was, as Dahlberg writes, not yet 3, Ode ad Urbem Narvam, Rönnow eulogizes published at the time of the composition of the King’s victory at . In nos. 4–5, De Rönnow’s poem: is it possible that Rönnow Triumpho Clitsoviensi and Super Triumfum Clitzovi- was referring to another book by Prokopovich ensem, the subject is the Swedish victory over (today unknown), a book still more provoca- the Saxon-Polish army at Kliszow in 1701. tive in Swedish eyes? This is, however, just a No. 6, In Thorunium, is about the surrender speculation.

136 Magnus Rönnow was indeed the voice of a Christoffer Gjörwells Bref Om Blandade Ämnen waning empire, this empire representing both (1754), samt Catharina Ahlgrens Brefwäxling Sweden as a Great Power and the empire of (1772-1773, tre delar). Neo-Latin poetry. In Elena Dahlberg’s doc- Tidskrifterna har tidigare uppmärksam- toral thesis, the voice of Magnus Rönnow, mats av forskningen, men Forselius anger tre long silent, can be heard again. The thesis is syften för sin studie som komplement till, och an excellent example of modern Neo-Latin i flera fall med en polemisk udd mot, den ti- scholarship. Let us hope that it will inspire digare forskningens slutsatser. Huvudsyftet är other scholars to explore other neglected au- att placera dem i ett mediehistoriskt samman- thors from the Great Power period and let the hang, ett annat att särskilt undersöka de reme- Swedish writers that did not write in Swedish dierade breven i tidskrifterna. Ett tredje syfte once again be a part of our national literature. är att se hur brevteori och praxis skiftar över tid och hur detta återspeglas i de publicerade Johanna Svensson breven under 1750- och 1770-talen jämfört med 1730-talet. Den centrala frågeställningen rör hur brev- formen användes för olika ändamål i tidskrif- Tilda Maria Forselius, God dag, min läsare!: bland terna. En teoretisk utgångspunkt finner hon i berättare, brevskrivare, boktryckare och andra bidrags- tanken om remediering: Jay David Bolter och givare i tidig svensk veckopress 1730–1773, Eureka. Richard Grusins begrepp för ett mediums Ellerströms akademiska nr. 42 (Lund: Eller- representation i ett annat medium, det vill ström, 2015). 327 s. säga relationen mellan ett äldre och ett nytt medium (Remediation, Understanding New Media, Tilda Maria Forselius arbete undersöker de 1999) Det finns flera studier av äldre press mediehistoriska förutsättningarna för den som utgår från dessa perspektiv, men Forse- framväxande periodiska pressen i Sverige un- lius’ är den första undersökning som kombine- der frihetstiden och tidig gustaviansk tid. Med rar brevet och den periodiska pressen. fokus på hur brevet användes och varierades Arbetet inleds med en genomgång av Spec- över tid i svenska tidskrifter vill Forselius ge tator-genrens uppkomst och spridning genom nya perspektiv både på skrifternas och på brev- Europa, de svenska förhållandena, samt en läs- formens förändringar och medialisering under ning av förorden till Mercurius och Argus. Slut- 1700-talet. Boken är en omarbetad version av satsen blir att tidskrifterna innehåller en ny avhandlingen från 2014. form av tilltal, vilket anges inbjuda till dialog, I centrum står ett antal svenska veckoskrif- men även att det finns ett exkluderande tilltal ter från 1730-, 1750- och 1770-talen. De har där mankön och svenskhet utgör ramen för ge- rötterna i den så kallade Spectator-genren, Jo- menskap. I kapitel 3-6 sätts tidskrifterna in i seph Addisons och Richard Steeles nyskapande ett mediehistoriskt sammanhang. Här flyttas mediala form för veckoskrifter för den brittis- uppmärksamheten från den tidigare forskning- ka marknaden, där humor och moral kombine- ens fokus på upphovsmän till produktionen rades i en läsarvänlig och säljande form. Det och distributionen av skrifterna, läskunnig- svenska materialet består av nio veckoskrifter heten, läsvanor, censorsämbetet, kaffehusen, från 1730-talet, med ett särskilt fokus på Ed- samt de samtida medier som veckoskrifterna vard och Carl Carlssons Sedolärande Mercurius konkurrerade med. (1730-1731) och Olof Dalins Then Swänska Kapitel 7 och 8 behandlar det andra syftet: Argus (1732-1734). Därutöver behandlas Carl att beskriva, tolka och diskutera brevens inne-

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7557/4.4162 137