• Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage
• Publicationsclose
• Other research productsclose
• 2019-2023close
• DK close
• Danish close

This paper examines how Russian President Vladimir Putin incorporates the use of history in his speeches and articles with regards to how he positions Russia in its relation to Ukraine. The analysis is structured around three central places of remembrance (danish: erindringssteder): The Kyivan Rus which focuses on the close historical relation between Ukraine and Russia; the heritage of the Sovietunion in relation to how the union defined the borders of Soviet-Ukraine; World War II, ukrainian nationalism and its relation to nazism which centers around how Putin relates nazism to the current ukrainian political elite. The analysis concludes that Putin primarily utilizes the three places of remembrance to legitimize Russia's current invasion of Ukraine. Putin finds the distribution of territories during the soviet era to have been theft, and a complete violation of Russia's integrity. Furthermore, he seeks to protect ethnic russians within the borders of Ukraine from a genocide, instigated by ukrainian nationalists and neo-nazis, who continue the tradition of atrocities commited during World War II. Finally, Putin perceives Ukrainians and Russians as a single people, basing his claim on common history, language, and culture. Thus he implies that ukrainians should unite under Russia, as Russia is the more legitimate state.

Dette kapitel behandler forholdet mellem medier og historie med udgangspunkt i tv-serien 1864. Kapitlet fremhæver seks overordnede synsvinkler på medieret historie, som skal forstås som en række metaperspektiver på, hvordan medier bruger og behandler historie. Medieret historie kan forstås 1) som en attraktiv storindustri, 2) som en stilistisk og narrativ forståelse af fortiden, 3), som et nutidsspejl, 4) som et potentielt læringsrum, 5) som et historisk arkiv og 6) som et mødested mellem fag- og populærhistorie.

This article gives an introduction to linguistic complexity and investigates the complexity of sentences in Danish from a diachronic perspective. By taking a recursion-based approach to the phenomenon, it can be shown that in the old part of the corpus (eighteenth/ nineteenth century) sentences are more complex than in the new part (twentieth/twentyfirst century). For instance, the older texts are found to contain more clauses per sentence, more clause complexes and more subordinate clauses of a higher degree of dependency than the contemporary texts. The observation that a similar development occurs in Swedish and German should be considered when trying to explain the process of complexity reduction.

This article investigates Greenland as a setting in new Danish prose. I make the case that Danish literature about Greenland is a significant trend in the 2010s, and that the books can be divided into three dimensions: past, present and future. Focusing on space and place, I exemplify this division through short analyses of the novels Rød mand/Sort mand (2018) by Kim Leine, Godhavn (2014) by Iben Mondrup and Korsveje i Nord (2015) by Bjarne Ljungdahl, which are set in the past, present and future, respectively.

The book of Daniel is set in the diaspora. As a Jew in Babylon, Daniel exists between two worlds: the culture of the host land and the values of his ancestral land. This article focuses on the tension between these two in the court legends (chs. 1-6). I argue that the relation between the two worlds is a dynamic one that is construed differently in the single stories. In my reading of the six stories, I demonstrate that the consistent use of irony, satire, and utopia points to a fundamental ambiguity of diasporic existence.