In today's paper issue of main Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter is a news item headlined "Hobby Researcher Gives New Signs to Stones" (currently not available on-line, but here's another relevant piece). It relays a few statements from museologist Ewa Bergdahl of the Swedish National Heritage Board regarding the Ales stenar visitor's sign debacle. Bergdahl is head of the Heritage Tourism unit.
--There isn't just one single truth. This place is so incredibly more complex than previously believed, says Ewa Bergdahl, unit director at the National Heritage Board.[...]
The Heritage Board has long stood on the side of the academics. But now the organisation takes a more neutral stance.
--You have no privileged position with us just because you do research at a university, says Ewa Bergdahl.
To the dismay of professional scholars, both theories are now represented on the signs.
--Amateur researchers may feel that they have been vindicated somewhat. But that doesn't mean that they are right.
-----
--Det finns inte bara en enda sanning. Den här platsen är så otroligt mycket mera komplex än man tidigare trott, säger Ewa Bergdahl, enhetschef på Riksantikvarieämbetet.
[...]
Riksantikvarieämbetet har länge stått på akademikernas sida. Men nu intar myndigheten en mer neutral inställning.
--Man har inget företräde bara för att man forskar på ett universitet, säger Ewa Bergdahl.
Till de professionella forskarnas förtret finns nu alltså båda teorierna representerade på skyltarna.
--Det är möjligt att amatörforskarna känner att de fått en viss upprättelse. Men de har inte fått rätt för det.
Now, by far the most of the Board's employees are university-trained archaeologists, and I'm sure they don't share Ewa Bergdahl's and the other top bureaucrats' stale 80s post-modernist and anti-science ideas on this matter. There has long been a discussion about separating the Board's regional contract archaeology units from the central administration and making them standalone organisations. The new evidence for anti-scientific hyper-relativism among the Board's central directors shows that this separation is urgent indeed. And when it is completed, I hope the Ministry of Culture sends the Heritage Board through a radical pro-science personnel purge. It's either that or close the outfit down. The Swedish Heritage Board clearly suffers from Mad Cow Disease.
Update same evening: In a short new piece in Dagens Nyheter, the head of the Heritage Board Inger Liliequist is quoted as saying "We pay attention to local historians and amateur researchers. But we don't place them on a level with tested research. If that is how our message has been received, then we will have to adjust the signs." Archaeology professors Herschend and Burström are quoted voicing severe criticism against the new signs, and I must say that both names come as a pleasant surprise to me.
Update 25 July: According to Aftonbladet, another bright star and non-archaeologist at the Heritage Board, comptroller and temporary press liaison Ulrika Salander, says "Regarding Ales stenar, there is not and may never be any absolute truth or any unambiguous 'right' or 'wrong'." These people know absolutely nothing about the philosophy of science, nor about archaeology's place in the larger landscape of science. Can't Inger Liliequist put a muzzle on the clowns she employs?
[More blog entries about archaeology, Sweden, skepticism, postmodernism, alesstenar; arkeologi, skepticism, skepsis, postmodernism, alesstenar, riksantikvarieämbetet.]










Email this entry to a friend
View the Technorati Link Cosmos for this entry
Comments
Is this the result of that pomo is accepted within archaeology in universities? It might maybe be a reason for that university archaeology is not seen as trustworthy as it once was? And then perhaps other alternatives are considered to be worth to also support?
Posted by: JG | July 24, 2007 08:19 AM
It's actually the other way around. Po-mo reached academic archaeology and museology in the mid-80s. Many of the current directors at the heritage Board studied archaeology and museology at that time. They then brought this brain virus with them to their jobs. Po-mo is much stronger at the Heritage Board than it is in current academic archaeology.
Posted by: Martin R | July 24, 2007 08:26 AM
Thank you Martin! This topic seems more clear now.
Posted by: JG | July 24, 2007 08:34 AM
Looks like it's worse than I thought!
Posted by: Mary E. | July 24, 2007 11:35 AM
Sad, sad sad. Yes, we seem to be closer to Orwell's 1984 than I thought. Big Brother has found that there is no use to stick to truth and science. No, strength is obviously weakness and war is peace.
Posted by: JG | July 24, 2007 11:49 AM
Thanks for the photo of the info-sign. The sign as well as the article in DN are a base for a lot of questions and thoughts. Some you have summarized, others you have illuminated or answered.
As I read the contents of the sign a few questions popped up in my head. One regards the sign; Is this the complete sign or is it just the Swedish part of the sign (or are there several signs in different languishes)? It seems strange to make a sign in only Swedish, nowadays they are almost always translated into at least English and German. Other questions regard the content of the sign. I made a post of it at Testimony of the spade.
Magnus Reuterdahl
Posted by: Magnus Reuterdahl | July 24, 2007 01:32 PM
There are currently no English-language signs, just four different Swedish ones. Number two is the one with Lind's model on it.
Posted by: Martin R | July 24, 2007 04:23 PM
It is a pleasure to find out that the head of the NHB has much more quality than some of its limbs. It now seems so that it was not quite as bad as we thought for a while.
Posted by: JG | July 25, 2007 01:32 AM
The current head of the Heritage Board leaves her sub-chiefs a lot of freedom to formulate the Board's policy.
Posted by: Martin R | July 25, 2007 01:50 AM