Alternatives to Autocracy: Counterfactual thinking in Roman imperial historiography

The project questions the widely held assumption that one-man rule was perceived as inevitable by the historians of the Roman Empire (31 BCE - CE 476).

Inspired by research on counterfactual thinking in cognitive science and recent pioneering work on rhetorical tropes that activate alternative pasts in narrative texts, I will provide the first in-depth analysis of which and how alternatives to autocracy are suggested and/or shut down in historiographical texts from the period.

The project is timely as a reaction to contemporary anxieties about a global resurgence of autocracy.

By identifying and analysing examples of counterfactual thinking about the rise and continuation of one-man rule in Roman imperial historiography, I hope not only to shed light on the preoccupations and political horizons of imperial historians, but also to develop a method for the investigation of how writers living in autocratic systems of government activate and/or shut down alternative realities.

Ultimately, the project aims to increase our collective capability to deconstruct autocratic rhetoric and deepen our understanding of how narratives – through the strategic deployment of rhetorical devices – may guide readers to adopt specific beliefs about what is and was inevitable. The project will be carried out at Lund University from January 2024 to December 2027.

The research team consists of the PI and a part-time researcher.