Latecomers and Forerunners: Temporality, Historicity, and Modernity in Early Twentieth-Century Finnish Historiography

Jalava, Marja

doi:10.1057/9781137362476_3

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At this time, temporal comparison did not lose its rhetorical power, but neither was it particularly sensitive politically. Comparison as a strategy remained a key ingredient in the formation of a political culture (Kettunen, 2006; Jalava, 2014).…”

Section: Sources and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Discussions in earlier research have focused on how state, nation, and constitution should be defined, whether or not such criteria were fulfilled, and how some key historical actors understood these political concepts (e.g., Jussila, 1969, 1987; Kemiläinen, 1964; Klinge, 1996), but only few studies include a more comprehensive account of how the historical understanding of these concepts changed (Jussila, 1969; Krusius-Ahrenberg, 1934; Liikanen 2003; Pekonen 2014; Pulkkinen, 2003). Some studies refer to practices of comparison as a way of temporally aligning Finland (Jalava, 2014; Rantala, 2019; Stenius, 2004), but such practices have not been directly linked to the issue of state- and nation-building in the early 19th century.…”

Section: Introduction: the Night Of The Statementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Catching up through comparison: The making of Finland as a political unit, 1809–1863

Kurunmäki

Marjanen

2021

Time & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The creation of Finland as a grand duchy within the Russian Empire in 1809 opened up the question of what Finland was, in fact. Comparing Finland synchronously with other countries and diachronically with itself before and after its elevation into a grand duchy gained temporal features in which its level of development was assessed. Such temporal comparisons during the first half of the 19th century were used to shape Finland as a political unit, as they facilitated assessment of which parts of society needed to improve in order to make the country comparable with imagined or real others. Given that the Diet (the Estate Assembly) was not convened between 1809 and 1863, these comparative notions largely dealt with questions of political constitution and state institutions. The comparative mindset of the Finnish actors also developed in the process of conducting temporal comparisons. These comparisons can be analyzed through the analytical categories of descriptive synchronization, comparative synchronization, and participative synchronization, the last mentioned being possible only when Finnish actors began to think that Finland, indeed, had developed to a level of maturity.

show abstract

Section: Sources and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%