The Rise of Collective Research Projects in Scandinavian Historiography (1965-1985)

The mid-1960s marked a significant institutional shift in Scandinavian historiography, moving from individual scholarship toward collective research projects. This transformation was enabled by the establishment of national research councils, which began funding large-scale, collaborative endeavors in the humanities. In Sweden and Norway, such collective projects became dominant, allowing historians to tackle questions requiring vast data sets. Denmark followed a different path, where external funding more often supported individual researchers, though the thematic trends remained similar across the region.

These new projects allowed historians to address ambitious questions in social history, aiming first to describe and then explain changes in past social structures. Pioneering initiatives included the Swedish studies on 'The Functions of the Swedish Class Society: The Popular Movements' and 'The Emigration from Sweden to North America', and the Norwegian project 'Norwegian Social Development, 1860-1900'. A core methodological challenge was developing parameters to compare occupational data from membership or passenger lists with general census material, translating this into analyses of social stratification and mobility.

Methodologically, these projects leaned heavily on quantitative analysis and theory from the social sciences. Historians applied concepts like 'push and pull' migration theory, 'diffusion of innovations', and models of social mobility, inspired by sociologists and earlier work by economists and geographers. They also drew inspiration from demographic historians like Peter Laslett and from Stephan Thernstrom's paradigm-setting studies of social mobility in Boston. Scandinavian pioneers like Ingrid Semmingsen provided a crucial regional model for this quantitative, theory-informed approach.

The output of these projects was substantial, generating numerous doctoral dissertations that cemented quantitative methods within the discipline. In Sweden, Sune Åkerman and Hans Norman achieved high methodological sophistication in measuring the social dimensions of migration. In Denmark, Hans-Christian Johansen produced detailed demographic studies on mobility and redistribution, while Kristian Hvidt completed a major individual dissertation on Danish emigration parallel to the Swedish collective work.

Beyond migration, other projects explored popular movements and class formation. Within the Swedish study of popular movements, scholars like Bo Öhngren analyzed class in relation to geographical mobility. Later, Ingrid Åberg introduced new theoretical dimensions from American political science, an approach further developed by Torkel Jansson using historical materialism to analyze voluntary associations. This demonstrated the projects' evolving theoretical engagement.

Norwegian projects in Ullensaker and Kristiania (Oslo) displayed a similar trajectory from descriptive stratification to theoretical analysis. Scholars employed frameworks from Ferdinand Tönnies (Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft) and Talcott Parsons. Key works included Jan E. Myhre's study of urban structural change, Tore Pryser's analysis of the Thrane movement, and Sivert Langholm's refined examination of social elites and elections, all implicitly connecting social structure to political behavior.

The scale of collaboration expanded further with projects of vast scope and inter-Nordic networks. Examples include Sven Tägil's Lund-based study of European boundary conflicts and a project on scientists and engineers during the Industrial Revolution. Notably, inter-Nordic projects were formed on topics like 'The Seventeenth-Century Society', studying the impact of war, and desertion in the Middle Ages, fostering comparative history across Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland.

A significant subset of collective work focused on Second World War studies, with parallel national projects. Jørgen Hæstrup led the Danish study on underground resistance, Magne Skodvin coordinated the Norwegian project on occupation and warfare, and Stig Ekman directed the Swedish investigation into the war's social effects. Each generated a substantial output of dissertations and monographs, solidifying the war as a key field of empirical research.

Despite the dominance of collective projects, influential individual scholarship continued. Internationally recognized historians like Niels Steensgaard (Asian trade routes) and Kåre Lunden (Norwegian agrarian history) often worked independently. In Denmark, Niels Thomsen pioneered historical press studies, while Francis Sejersted in Norway reformed twentieth-century economic history by focusing on the domestic market.

The collective project model faced critique from a revival of Marxist thought, whose adherents preferred the label historical materialists. They criticized the large projects as overly empirical and theoretically deficient. This perspective was strongest in Denmark, centered in Aarhus and expressed through journals like Den jyske historiker. In Sweden and Norway, materialist influence was more integrated, with scholars like Christer Winberg and Jan Lindegren applying its premises to questions of proletarianization and demography within broader scholarly debates.

Consequently, the period 1965-1985 was defined by the collective research project as a dominant form. While often employing social science theories and methods, these projects were complemented by persistent individual scholarship and challenged by materialist perspectives. The era ultimately broadened methodology, solidified quantitative approaches, and strengthened comparative Nordic frameworks, leaving a permanent institutional and intellectual legacy on the discipline.