Reflections on an Unreflected Sphere Archaeological Exhibitions and Nationalism

There is an open nationalism, clearly stated through national symbols as well a» through various rituals. However, there is al»o an underlying form of nationalism, operating on a structural level, so obvious that it becomes "invisible". This is not only true for the actions of people in general, but to a great cxtent al»o for the understanding of different normative institutions, not lea»t the museums. Nationalism i» included as a hidden facet in the communicating activities. This article sheds light on the role of archaeology in this context, with particular emphasis on archaeological exhibition». At a closer look, it becomes obvious that one elementary aspect of the archaeological communicating activities is missing —the conscious reflection.

of nationalism, operating on a structural level, so obvious that it becomes "invisible". This is not only true for the actions of people in general, but to a great cxtent al»o for the understanding of different normative institutions, not lea»t the museums. Nationalism i» included as a hidden facet in the communicating activities. This article sheds light on the role of archaeology in this context, with particular emphasis on archaeological exhibition». At a closer look, it becomes obvious that one elementary aspect of the archaeological communicating activities is missingthe conscious reflection.

THE NEED TO HAVE A HISTORY
Deeply rooted conceptions of the elder's right of precedence and the inferiority in lacking a history stand out in early Swedish attitudes. One obvious example would be the Geaticism (Sw. Göticism), dating as far back as the 15th century.
In 1434 the bishop of Växjö, Nicolaus Ragvaldi, contributing to a discussion about the order of precedence at a synod in Basel, identified his mother country as the original home country of the Goths. Ragvaldi's interpretation of the tribal stories of Jordanes was later entered into Swedish law, into the royal code of Christoffer of Bavaria's national law code of 1442: "The realm of Sweden has arisen out of a heathen world, out of a Swea land and a Gotha land; Swea the northern forest was called, and Gotha the southern one. Gotha is two in Sweden, Eastern Gotha and Western Gotha. There are no more Goths, except for outside of Sweden since they spread to other countries, as it is stated in the writing" (Nordström 1934:62,our translation). Ragvaldi's speech was translated in the 17th century from Latin to Swedish and was sold, for instance, at markets. In this way, the belief of the glorious past of the Swedes was spread throughout the country.
The Swedish era of great power (1611-1718) was highly Geatish in its appraisal, having the terrifying and at the same time protecting lion as one of its symbols. In differ-  2).
Early on, the Swedish prehistoric research characteristically also emphasized the importance of the physical monuments. In 1628 Johannes Bureus was commanded by the king to seek out old monuments and document them in writing, "in honour and appraisal of our country" (Schiick 1932-44:1, 121). Sweden's first law of ancient monuments from 1666 aimed at serving "our ancestors' and our whole country's imperishable glory" (Schiick 1932-44:1, 264). The Swedish identity was firmly anchored in the material remains, the monuments and the cultural landscapethus not in a national epic or an equivalent.
The belief in the material evidence remains strong in nationalist discussions through centuries, not only during but also after the Second World War. It is not a coincidence that the custodian of national monuments, Sigurd Curman, describes ancient monuments as "the irrefutable evidence of our ancient right of occupancy of this country" (Curman, in a 1940s film about the importance of ancient monuments in connection with the exhibition 10 000 Years in Swederi). Birger Nerman follows the same line of reasoning when he, in 1946, states that the Museum of National Antiquities, in its new rooms, is ready to "let the areas of knowledge it represents take their place within general education and thereby strengthen our people's sympathy for thousands of years of continuous cultivation with distinctive character" (Nerman 1946:219,our translation The view and use of archaeology at the tum of the century does not differ greatly from today. The role of archaeology is still selfassertive. The emphasis on technical skills and economic wealth as genuine, national, ancient qualities expresses a nationalism so obvious that we no longer see it. But when we speak exclusively about a Swedish prehistory, we forward a myth. The choice of words and accentuations is easily distorted when present conditions are applied to the past. We speak of our prehistory, our ancestors and our Swedish soil, instead of speaking of prehistoric people and cultural areas with other extensions than the present ones. This unreflected conception of continuity gives words like Swedish, our and us a usage that has no coverage.
How topical is this kind of self-assertion in a time when the "Swedishness" in a most fundamental way is changing? The consequences of this story-telling are reflected in the inner as well as in the outer works of the museums, within the preserving as well as the mediating activities. Henceforth we will shed light on the latter. During the 1930s, the national ideas of identity were influenced by new political ideas, and thereby were directed more towards the future than the past. The image developed of a special Swedish way, a kind of exceptional position that differed from other countries in Europe. Sweden was a model for civilization. Here the foundation was laid for a new national feeling -Sweden as a modernity. Sweden became a country that more and more identified itself with its own progressi veness.
In the exhibition 10000 Years in Sweden a new generation put forward its view of hi story.
After modernism was introduced, there was a striving for cultural conformity. The citizens should learn to speak the same cultural lan-guage. At least in its educational tone, the exhibition 10 000 Years in Sweden clearly subscribed to this goal. Its form and pedagogy represented the new nationalism, while the content of the exhibition was still based on tradition. In this situation, one repeated old patterns and motivated identity with race, soil and nation. The exhibition communicated a collective view of Swedish prehistory. Its content was presented as a truth, and not problematized. The faith in progress was strong. No foundlings were to be found in the new society. In this way, the exhibition fol- The exhibition 10 000 Years in Sweden was a temporary exhibition that became permanent. Its importance reached far beyond a common exhibition in that it was also a model for the exhibitionary arrangements at the county museums that were developing during the 1940s and 1950s. However, the progressiveness in fact was found in the form and in the technology, not in the content. "It is a modern exhibition technique ... , whose clear obvious   3).This was positive for the moment, but negative in the long run. Long after this exhibition there was stilla belief that history tells its own story, but this is not the case. Instead, a non-historical vaccuum emerged where the absence of interpretations and necessary relations to presentday society and issues was prominent.
In terms of a prepared exhibition with an educational purpose, l0 000 Years in Sweden was examplary in 1943, but further development made it futile since the national feeling sustaining it no longer was firmly established in time. The Nazis' politicizing of archaeology had discredited it. The counter-reaction was so strong that the possibility to act within a public debate disappeared. In this situation, archaeologists chose two variants of one and the same alternative. One was isolationscience in itself was sufficientand the other was to continue archaeological activities but to direct them towards areas that would not be considered offshoots of Third Reich archaeology. This could be done by refraining from interpretations and speculations and instead concentrating on descriptions of objects, something that was considered neutral. That was also how typology was perceived.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF POSITIVISM
The positivistic research in the 1960s and 1970s did not look upon human beings from a holistic point of view, science was dehumanised. Only work and the technical and material productivity were considered important.
There was no room for cult, religion or feelings. Research had to be ethically neutral. This way of thinking is evident in, for example, Per-Uno Ågren's comment on the permanent exhibition (1976 -80) of the county museum of Västerbotten: "Museums of cultural history are museums of work. .. Every object represents work". Work was highly valued as a productive force in society. (Kalina 1995:45).
On the permanent exhibition in Umeå, Ågren commented that even the periods which the museum had tried to describe lacked attitudes. "We do not speak for or against any matter. We treat matters equally. The matters we have brought forward have been done so on the basis of what we thought to be the most representative. .. We have not depicted the conflict between the Saami and the settlers. The Saami and the settlers also had a symbiotic relationship" (Kalina 1995:44, our translation). In accordance with the policy of compromise that was characteristic of the decades following the Second World War, conflicts were subdued in the Swedish political debate. Neutrality was also reflected within the activities of the museum. However, it is treacherous to study a subject in the belief that one is scientifically neutral. Such a neutrality is by necessity supportive of the existing, prevailing thoughts. Not taking a stand means that you have already done so. Indirectly, this means that you want everything to stay the same (Gjessing 1974:19).
Positivism also claimed to be politically neutral, at the same time as its usage shows something else. Even if Ågren did not see the ethnic conflicts, he depicted the class conflicts. Once again, it is demonstrated that the zeitgeist to a great extent decides the framing of questions. Ethnic conflicts were not dealt with in the 1970s, but class conflicts were.
The collective and exaggerated rational solutions of modernism eventually evoked a reaction. The conformism was exposed to hard criticism. Instead, one started to strive for an increased individualism. This in tum demanded increased personal positioning and an ability to relate to an unforeseeable and pluralistic world. History once again became important as a central point of reference.
Within museums this was accepted gratefully, and massive efforts were made to restore bistod&. "At twelve o'clock on March 21, 1993,Swedish Hi story starts", it was declared. The objective of this exhibition was to give the lost identity back to the citizens, but this was done without reflecting on what Swedish identity consisted of today. It was taken for granted. The exhibition The Swedish History Current Sivedish Archaeologs:, Voh 6, 7998 became the swan-song ofpositivism and thereby also the swan-song of modernism.

INVISIBLE INDOCTRINATION
Many exhibitions, even today, have a pronounced character of unreflected optimism for development. In accordance with the understanding of material culture within the idea of development, technical experiments were encouraged, whereas the questioning of qualities of the abstract content was absent. The intellectual depth and reflections are missing.
In the northern provinces of Jämtland and Härjedalen, the farmers and the people whom we call the reindeer-breeding Saami have lived side by side for thousands of years. But at Jamtli, the county museum of Jämtland, they are separated from each other. The Saami are characterized as the people of the silver-glimmering plains. In their paradise-like landscape there is a celestial tranquility. Nature, animals and people live together in harmony, an exquisite life-style, free from conflicts ( fig. 4). It was the farmers of Jämtland who "built the country". Their history is a positive story of progress and increasing knowledge. But is this reality? Have the Saami and the farmers lived so independently of each other?
A complex game can be discerned. The farmers of Jämtland exclude the Saami, and the latter respond by screening off and exoticising themselves. The exclusion becomes an act of self-defence. The majority controls the thinking of the minority to such an extent that the minority looks upon itself with the eyes of the majority. Jamtli communicates an imperialist way of looking at things. This affects the Saami as well as the hunter-gatherers of the Stone Age. Both are depicted in highly aesthetici sed environments, static in appearence since turning them into décors. The exhibition forces the visitor to think in terms of "us" and "them". By claiming that the landscape is a "special country", the self-esteem is strengthened at the same time as it acts to exclude the rest of society. The exhibition's "us" are portrayed in such a way that it protects against unfamiliar elements in time as well as in space. The patriotic strains are obvious.
When the values and opinions of society governing these exhibitions are not clearly stated, but are hidden as premises and truisms in what is called a scientific description, it is possible to speak about indoctrination (Keller Fi g.  Fig. 5. At the exhibition Vikings at Eriksbergshallen in Gothenburg in 1995, one did not succeed, despite goodintentions with different themes, in contradicti ng the myth r&f the Viking, but rather reinforcedit. This was accomplished by an exhibition design that acted against the intentions, with the result that the grandeur that was supposed to be toned down, was instead strengthened. Photo& Eriksberg, Göteborg. 1978:93).Museum exhibitions have this problem more often than is generally conceived.
The Viking is a perpetual prehistoric symbol for Swedishness. In the autumn of 1995 the exhibition Vikings was shown at Eriksbergshallen in Gothenburg. According to the press-release, the exhibitors had the ambition to portray one of Europe's great popular myths. But the concept of myth was vague at the exhibition. Myth and nationalism were mixed in a peculiar way with archaeological "facts". Nothing was done to contradict the myth of the brave Viking, but rather, the exhibition agreed with this myth (fig. 5) human that connects prehistory to the present, "us" to "them".
The Norwegian archaeologist Brit Solli has, however, questioned whether there is some form of identity ties between the people of today and the people of the past. She raises the question "whether people then were not completely different from us, despite the fact that they lived by the same fiords and mountains" (Solli, Aftenposten 1995-11-05). If history no longer is about "our" ancestors but is about people of unknown cultures, it will no longer be of interest to use prehistory as an argument in a highly nationalist spirit. In our opinion, it should be obvious that there does not exist a regional or a national identity bond, but something fundamentally human which is a common denominator for them and us. The idea of ancient roots has not only a mythical but also a mystical force, which especially fascinates Nazi and racist groups. The archaeological conception of continuity as well as the notion of the inferiority in not having a history supports these groups' strivings for a pure race and a "Swedish" Sweden.
This tendency can be stopped by archaeologists and museum staff only by changing their own way of looking at prehistory. In a time of a shrinking world, migrating people and fading borders, the need for cultural roots is of great importance. But these cannot consist of race, blood and soil, but instead of an understanding of the conditions of life. As well as life is history an ever ongoing process.
It is of no use to imagine prehistory as something complete, clear-cut or definitive. Borders have always been moved, people have always met. Prehistory was no less dynamic than today.
When the categorizations of research become goals in themselves, human beings disappear. Without the presence of a subject the dynamics, that is the motive for development, is lost. This is a relationship that enables a "cleansing" of prehistory. This is the very dilemma for archaeology as well as for society.