Kuviteltu aatelismies : Aateluus viholliskuvana ja itseymmärryksenä 1800-luvun Suomessa

An imagined nobleman Nobility as an enemy image and in-group identity in nineteenth-century Finland The focal point of this study is the difficult relationship between two seemingly very different 19th-century elite groups, the upwardly mobile bourgeois intelligentsia and the slowly declining traditional nobility. In the thinking of the bourgeois contender the two emerged as exact opposites, styled as conflicting ideal types: an outdated, exclusive, degenerate hereditary aristocracy versus a dynamic and progressive new force in society, recruited solely on the basis of personal merit, originating from the common people and representing the nation. The appearance of an important 19th-century novelty, print publicity, coincided with the emergence of the bourgeois intelligentsia. The institutions of the developing publishing industry were manned by the aspiring new group. The strengthening flow of progressive, democratic, nationalist ideas distributed via the printing presses carried an undercurrent of self-promotion. It transmitted to the developing readership the self-image of the new cultural bourgeoisie as the defender and benevolent educator of the nation. Having won the contest over the media, the intelligentsia was free to present its predecessor and rival as an enemy of the people. In its politics the nobility emerged as an ideal scapegoat, represented as the source for existing social evils, all if which would promptly go away after its disappearance. It also served as a black backcloth, against which the democratic, national, progressive bourgeois intelligentsia would shine more brightly. In order to shed light on the 19th-century process of (re)modelling the image of nobility as a public enemy I have used four different types of source materials. These include three genres of print publicity, ranging from popular historical and contemporary fiction to nonfictional presentations of national history and the news and political commentaries of the daily papers, complemented by another, originally oral type of publicity, the discussion protocols of the Finnish four-estate parliament. To counterpoint these I also analysed the public self-image of the nobility, particularly vis-à-vis the nationalist and democratic ethos of the modernising politics.