Surveying the Cultural Heritage of the Swedish Countryside Success and Failure during the Twentieth Century

The surveys of the cultural heritage of the Swedish countryside have been carried out in accordance with different laws. This has led to a great specialisation of certain aspects of the cultural heritage, and the evaluation of them has always been a task for specialists. The same specialisation often has characterised the scientific research on ancient monuments, nature, etc. In general an enormous amount of knowledge has been gained, but the historic understanding of why the remains exist at all has never been given as much attention as their physical appearance. This has caused a major separation between the cultural heritage management and the nature conservation.

other countries has created a static view of what is typical for one's own country (fig.2).A vast docu- mentation and collecting ofplaces or "national spaces of conscious- ness" has led to a "natural heri- tage of culture" and an "archive of chosen places" (Sörlin 1998).
cultural heritage and the meaning and value it has for the general public, was lost (cf.Burström 1999).In spite of a certain aware- ness among some scientists, the man-made landscape was separated from the rest of the cultural heritage, and both cultural and nature conservation became a task for narrow speci- alists in each field (fig.I).It has been said (Liedman 1980:148fl that science lies some- where in the field between a very narrow specialist view and pure dilettantism, and the surveys of ancient monuments and nature values definitely have been connected with the first view.The generalist perspective has been most common outside the established institutions. A persuasive problem with the field sur- veys is not only that they inevitably lead to specialisation in performance, but also to the situation where a whole is divided into parts without any understanding of the dynamic processes.The documentation "freezes" an idealised state, which has consequences for the conservation and evaluation.As Sverker Sörlin has put forth, Sweden as well as many Fig. 2. In every survey it is necessary to register a 'frozen moment ".Therefore a register promotes an image of how reality ought to be.Usually society has puta high value on the typical national places of awareness in an archive of chosen places.Places like 8rösarps backar in the provin- ce ofScania are perceived as true and representative landscapes, although they are very rare today and often maintained with modern methods and great economical support.Photo: L. Gren I997.and the mapping in the field became much more precise when aerial photography was introduced.Originally the intention was to perform "complete surveys" with photos and detailed maps of single monuments in the cemeteries, etc. (Hallström & Gustawsson  1930).But due to small economic resources and the difficulties in following the rapid map production at the Land Survey Unit, it was necessary to tum the surveys into "rapid surveys" with only map markings and a short description (fig.5).The staff originally con- sisted of 7-8 archaeologists, but after the war it was obvious that it was necessary to hire a number of personnel during summer field work.During the most intensive years of the survey, in the 1980s, over 100 summer personnel participated.In later years the summer personnel consisted of university students, and thus the survey of ancient monuments had an unofficial function as an archaeological education institute.
Except for the northern highlands, the ancient monuments survey covered all of The Gothenburg survey was utilised as a model for the ancient monuments survey at the Central Board of National Antiquities, sources.In a long-term perspec- tive, the intention was to make surveys of the entire country.A register based on map markings and a standardised description was established.Some of the map markings were also printed on public maps, especially geological maps (Selinge 1988:7).
The modern ancient monu- ments survey was developed in connection with the introduction of the economic map in 1938.
Through a decision in the Swe- tsh Par 'amen tn t was Fig. 3. Duting the verv first field surveys for ancient monu- decreed that the state would take ments, the Central Board of National Antiquities registered responsibility for the marking out monun&entsi n biotopes that are very similar to the environment of all known ancient monuments that created the traces in the Iron Age.Unfortunately the on the economic map (fig 3) perspectives of the antiquatians were steered by the Ancient

General Director Sigurd Curman
Monuments Act and the typical biocultural heritage was never and Director ~arl Alfred Gus-regtstered.The meadow Hammarsäng, Lärbro parish, Gotland.
tawsson at the Central Board of National Antiquities took the initiative for the surveys.The surveys coincided with a political statement on the importance of heritage management in society, and the central antiquarian tasks were reorganised and divided into museum work and heritage management (Biörnstad 1988:6).
Why the ancient monuments survey at that time attained great political support has not been studied, but it seems relevant to put forth that the political turbulence with offensive dictatorships throughout Europe caused a lot of fear in Sweden (Gren 1994).Although the cultural politics already at this time were directed towards cultural heritage in a broad sense, the ancient monuments survey tended to consider only a narrow field of history, in particular prehistoric graves (fig.4).
Current Swedish Archaealagy, Vot. 8, 2000 of the law (1988:950), ancient monuments must fulfil slightly different prerequisites: be from "ancient times", originate through "ancient work methods", and be "perpetually abandoned".In both cases the law can apply to natural monuments connected with folklore, etc. , but not nature that is formed by man.The law does not stipulate that ancient monuments must be of a certain age.Never- theless the interpretation of the law has been much more narrow during the survey, and a great number of remains that in principle should be regarded as law-protected monu- ments, were never marked out as such, for example cottage foundations, furnace foun- dations, abandoned roads, etc.Until 1996 over 163 000 places with ancient monuments had been registered, and the total amount of monuments and other remains is about 642 000 (Jensen 1997:14).6).Nor- mally each person surveys 1-5 square kilo- metres per day (Selinge 1988:10).Conse- quently it must be emphasised that the survey can never be complete and finished.Ever since the start, the survey has closely followed the Ancient Monuments Act (1942:350), where the remains must fulfil three prerequisites: they must be "from an- cient times", be "abandoned", and be "remarkable".According to the latest revision  FOREST AND HISTORY SURVEYS AND THEIR LINK TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC As noted earlier, it may seem a paradox that a lot of the monuments registered by the ancient monuments survey at the Central Board of National Antiquities never were to a large one.In the 19'" century the archaeologists usually attained knowledge of prehistory through scattered finds from ploughed fields.It seemed very difficult to connect prehistory to a certain place in the landscape, and the spatial distribution of artefacts gave a random impres- sion.It was not until large-scale surveys, such as the Gothenburg survey, that it became possible to discern a pattern as to where to find certain types of ancient Fig. 6.All physical traces are defined by the knowledge and monuments.
perspectives connected with them, Expert historians seldom ancjent monuments or never participated in the surveys of the cultural heri tage.
survey started in I 93/ primarii For instance, there are oral traditions sayi ng thai the Swedi sh monuments like ancient graves, king Charles XII huri ed mili tary of icers in thi s large iran Age ship-formed monument in the beginning of the I8'" century.

runestones and rock carvings
The general public usually pavs great attention to such informa- tion, although it is not systematically registered in any sut.eys.
monuments had a small spatial Blomsholm, Skee parish, Iloituslän.photo: ca.Itt00, A7A.extension, and they appeared as points on the economic map.The Ancient Monuments Act from 1942 made it clearance cairns have been registered.A possible to protect an area larger than the single area can be as big as lx2 kilometres monument itself, but on the economic map and contain more than 1000 clearance cairns only the monuments were indicated.Gradu-  (Jönsson et al. 1997:23).
ally one realised that some ancient remains Withintheancientmonumentssurvey, the could be rather composite and appear as big development thus has gone from small monu- complexes.Already in the 1940s some vast ments to large complexes in the landscape, areas with ancient stone fences were regis- although the latter also can be considered as tered, and in the 1950s a few areas with separate monuments.The tendency of the ancient fields were marked out.Large and heritage management to often refer to single complex areas with ancient remains were monuments has been criticised by the georegistered in the 1960s when attention was graphers as a fragmented, formalistic and given to the abandoned medieval farmsteads non-historic perspective.The historic forms in the province of Jämtland.In the 1980s it in the cultural landscape, it is said, are given was evident that there were much greater too much attention in comparison to proces- areas with ancient remains than anyone had ses and meaning-content (Widgren 1997:12).
expected.Above all in the southern Swedish highlands a great number of areas with clearance cairns, house foundations, graves, rock carvings, heaps of fire-cracked stones, etc were discovered.Traditionally one never marked out ancient-monuments areas larger than a hectare, but since the field work in Svveden.The cairns, so-called hoe-cairns, date from the Bronze to the general public's opinion Age and Early lron Age (ca.1000 BC-400 AD).A lot of conof what constituted valuable temporaneous graves and settlement traces can be found in the same areas.In this example the prehistoric fields cover an area ca. 25 tintes bigger than theftelds that were used about 1800 AD. lic was underlined by the fact Mavsjö, Bri ngeto fta, Småland.Fi eld work and map by L Gren 1986.that the participating person- nel lived in their own fieldwork area, and that they conveyed their experiences to the local population.
From the antiquarian viewpoint, the register &om the forest and history surveys seemed not very precise, and in some cases the presumed cultural monuments were nothing but natural forms in the landscape.But from an ethnological point of view, the register gave a much more representative picture of what the general public found to be noteworthy and valuable.Although the forest and history surveys have exercised a great "freedom" in what to register, the formal legal protection for these cultural monuments has been weak compared with the protection for monuments Current S&vedish Atchaeotog&:, Vot 8, 2000 Fig. 8.In the 19" century the population increased enormously and many had to find subsistence in what is today marginal woodland.The inhabitants of' the countryside today ate well aware of these settlement traces, although they are not classified as ancient monuments.The fotestry boardh in the forest and histoty proj ect nova survey such traces.Cottage foundation with a furnace cairn, Ladugården, Södra Åsarp parish, Västergötland.
Photo: M. Sjöbeck 1950, ATA.   in the ancient monuments survey.At present time there are advanced plans to find economic prerequisites to extend the forest and history surveys to all of Sweden, and to co- ordinate the surveys with the ancient monu- ments survey at the Central Board ofNational Antiquities.
of botany Rutger Sernander wrote about "extremely small areas of cultivation" in the Late Iron Age and "hundred mile wide trackless untouched forests" (Sernander 1905:4, my transl.).Nature was viewed as consisting of, in principle, constant types of biotopes, which Man in different ways destroyed.Even meadows and pasture were considered to be remnants of untouched nature (fig.9).
During the entire 20'" century the surveys of the cultural heritage primarily focused on different kinds of man-made physical traces.
But already at an early stage the surveys might have included also ancient man-formed nature, or the so-called biocultural heritage (fig.10).Several scholars have put forth that the environment ought to be apprehended as a totality of settlement, man-made traces and biocultural heritage.The historian Sune Ambrosiani realised what is still the main problem with environmental conservation: "Due to the tendency of specialisation within the different sciences, a distinct boundary has been drawn between the scholars of natural science and those of the historical sciences, and each kind and every scholar eagerly THE SPLITTING OF THE CULTURAL HERITAGE INTO ANCIENT MONUMENTS AND BIOCULTURAL HERITAGE Nature has often been associated with the forest, and among scholars the forest has been viewed as something wild and undisturbed outside civilisation (Ambjörnsson 1997:18f).
When the idea of nature conservation was conceived at the end of the 19'" century, it was thought that conservation was necessary for the last areas of untouched nature (Särling & Öckerman 1998).The influential professor Fig. 9.For 6000 years the Nordic farmers orga- ni sed the cultural landscape withi n the same struc- ture: settlement, fields, grasslandlbroad-leafed species, conifers.Due to the merciless older Forestry Act fi.om 1948 unused meadows and pasture had to be converted inta coniferous forests.T/~e most interesting areas with the old structure were never surveyed, and the authoriti es have never been prepared to preserve more than scattered fi agments.Kungslena parish, Väster- götland.Photo: M. Sjöbeck 1932, ATA.sut.e that ancient cultztre is ptedominant.This structure with a long nan.ow meadow reveals ancient traditions.Grass and trees vvere maintained to optimise the production of' food for the cattle.
guards his interests" (Ambrosiani 1913:75, my transl.).Ambrosiani also made the state- ment that man had formed much of the tradi- tional landscape.It is necessary, he meant, not only to preserve the nature values, but also to actively maintain species that are rare in our part of the world or are imported here from abroad.
The fact that many species near settlements and gardens need maintenance was realised by many other persons than Ambrosiani.But when the idea of nature conservation was put forth at the end of the 19th century, most scholars found it evident that all parts of nature outside the intensively exploited agrarian landscape were some kind of untouched nature.Thus most of the forests, meadows and pastures were seen as natural environments that were being exploited by the farmers.Some of the first national parks were established around 1910, and they con- sisted of meadows and pasture.The farmers were forbidden to maintain or utilise the land, because one wanted to preserve the nature values as best as possible.But already in the 1920s a few scholars realised what the far- mers had been saying all along, namely that the nature was becoming overgrown and turning into something different from what one wanted to preserve.
The first scholar to discover the bio- cultural heritage was the autodidact civil servant at the state railways Mårten Sjöbeck, who promoted his perspectives in many papers from 1927 and onward.As a protest against the professional botanists, he claimed that the meadows, pastures and most of the northern forests with broad-leafed species were different kind of biocultural heritage.
Nature, he said, is never in a state ofbalance, but always changing dynamically under the influence of Man.A great deal of what was presumed to be wild species could perhaps not survive without the intervention of Man.
Since Man had formed almost all the land all the way up to the highlands since the introduction of agriculture and pastoralism 6000 years ago, it was hardly interesting to speculate on how nature might have been without Man.Although Sjöbeck pointed out that many nature values were dependent on maintenance, it did not affect the state's nature conservation.The national parks with the most typical biocultural heritage, such as Dalby, Garphyttan and Ängsö, were destroyed by the lack of maintenance after a couple of decades (fig.11).
The influence of Man on nature was soon evident for other scholars besides Sjöbeck.
For instance, the author Carl Fries put forth that nature is perpetually in a state of change where Man is a crucial factor, and that nature conservation and the conservation of cultural landscapes can not be separated (Fries 1954:9).The misconception among scholars that the cultural landscape and forests were Current öwezlish Archaeotogv, Vol.ö, 2000 more or less opposites was made clear by the professor of forestry Lars-Gunnar Romell  (1964).He treated nature as a laboratory (Söderkvist 1986:102) and explained in a scientific way how an extensive agriculture could utilise the woodlands through clearance-fertil isation in different kinds of slash and burn technology.The tradition of not separating Man from the development of nature is still primarily found outside the science of botany.For instance Mårten Aronsson recently has described the dynamic interaction of Man and nature, and how and why the landscape changes over time (e.g.Aronsson 1999).
It was absolutely evident to Mårten Sjöbeck that the cultural heritage comprised the old man-formed nature with its entire biocultural heritage, and he suggested that sur- veys of ancient cultural landscapes should take place.Within the traditional cultural heritage management there was a great inte- rest in man-formed nature and the creator of ancient monument surveys karl Alfred Gus- tawsson shared in principle the perspectives of Sjöbeck.For instance, when the island Björkö with the Viking Age settlement of Birka and it's cemetery was overgrown in the 1920s, the Central Board of National Anti- quities started clearance of the new forests in spite of the protests from the nature conser- vation movement (Gustawsson 1965(Gustawsson , 1977)).
However, there were no surveys of the biocultural heritage initiated by the cultural heritage authorities.Instead the work focused on keeping pace with the accelerated issuing of economic maps.The splitting of the cul- tural heritage into ancient monuments and nature became definite when the Nature Conservation Act was passed in 1964.As a consequence a corresponding authority was established, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (Sw.Natu&.vrirdsverket), and for some reason the ideas of Sernander and the academic view from the tum of the century became predominant in the official nature conservation.The task of conserving the biocultural heritages became an uncon- scious experiment and a responsibility for biologists, who seldom or never had any historical knowledge.And the central cultural heritage authorities did not demand that the history of land use should be a natural part of the conservation work.
For the founder of the history of land use, Mårten Sjöbeck, the separation of the cultural heritage into the conservation of physical traces and biocultural heritage was a disaster of course.Sjöbeck's anxiety did prove right when a lot of nature preserves (Sw.Natt&&- reservat) were established in meadows and pastures of the older cultural landscape.In generally the maintenance of the biocultural heritage became insufficient or was totally abandoned.Consequently many of the finest cultural landscapes of Sweden were "fi ee develop»re»t" is an eg&ensive e&rperirnent that is increlrsingly «sed todav For instance.tlre natio»al par.l.
A constant repetition ofthe mistakes from the first national parks in the beginning of the 20'" century has become a normal feature of the nature conservation.It has been put forth that the nature values of the agrarian cultural landscape usually have been much better conserved in the privately owned land than in the state's nature preserves (Gren 1997).Geographers have criticised the focus on forms instead of processes by the cultural heritage management (Widgren 1997:12).It should be noted, however, that such criticism is much more relevant with regard to nature conservation.

SURVEYS OF THE BIOCULTURAL HERITAGE
It was not until the end of the 1980s that the biocultural heritage became an object for systematic surveys, the so-called meadow and pasture surveys (Sw.Angs-och hag-  marksinventeringen).
Nevertheless the sur- veys usually were performed by biologists with no knowledge of the historical land use.destroyed, and this to considerable cost (fig. 12).
As Sjöbeck put forth, the nature conservation authorities have often been more interested in the decay and the scattered remains of the older cultural heri- tage than in the culture itself.).It can be eristed kince the I920s.IVhen L.G. Romell vikited Höjentorp added that the problems in the manar in l938 he said that it was wonderful that nature con- meadows and pastures of the cul-servation and landscape maintenance were at last properly tural landscape were severe until undertaken.It had been decided to prescribe the use of tradi- the "meadow and asture surve tional methodh to maintain the meadows.However, mast ofthe fa ". , ydi"d~p ; rgro n nd" ly t dt a Sw.Angs-ocn hagmarlcsinvendue to "lree development" in a nature preservation area.
the Environmental Protection Agency.In the forest, however, the problems with the inability to conserve the biocultural heritage have instead increased.
When the Environmental Protection Agency for the first time evaluated the conservation work in the cultural landscapes in 1997 it became evident that documentation was missing for the nature values that one intended to preserve.General goals were also lacking, and it was not possible to evaluate specific aims and values in the conservation plans.Less than one fifth of the nature preserves were acceptable with regard to the clearance of shrubs and bushes (Skyddade odlingslandskap 1997:8).Another study investigated the number of nature preserves that had been established mainly to preserve cultural-historical sites, and how the sites had been taken care of.It was shown that only 2% of the 1600 nature preserves in Sweden were established with the purpose of preserving cultural sites.Generally it was evi- dent that the cultural sites were not being maintained in an acceptable way (Winberg 1998:8f).
Current Swedish Archaeology, Vol. 8, 2000 Fig. l3.Both for the early hunter-gatherers and the farmers, game or livestock was the basis for subsistence.Life-giving water always was a necessary component in the cultural landscape.Settlement, pasture and meadows always lay close to smaller or bigger wetlands.Since the agrarian revoh&tion most of the wetlands have vanished, and we have no surveys that inform us were the best and most representative cultural heritage of this kind is preserved.Klinte parish, Gotland.
Photo: C. G. Rosenberg, ca.l950, ATA.Not until later, during the regional work of maintaining in the nature preserves, have the nature values sometimes been set in relation to cultural history.
Within the woodlands the forestry boards have conducted different surveys of nature values.A specific wetland-forest survey was carried out 1991-98.After a combined total of 70 years of work, more than a hundred thousand wetland forests had been surveyed, mainly by remote analysis.No studies on the history of land use were made during the survey, although advice on maintenance was put forward.In general a "free development" was recommended, that is to leave the forests untouched in areas with higher nature values (Skogsstyrelsen 3-1999).Among historians it is well known that Man always utilised and converted wetlands into pasture and later on also meadows, both for wild game and cattle (fig.13).The older settlements were to a great extent connected to the distribution of wet- lands.During the last centuries the farmers considered the wetland meadows as extremely valuable.It is not possible to deter- mine to what extent the wetland forest surveys have registered a biocultural heritage.
In the years 1993-98 the forestry boards conducted "key biotope surveys", that is surveys of forests with higher nature values, especially species that are in danger of extinction.The surveys, which still occur in the forests owned by large companies, are "unique in the world and also probably the largest nature surveys ever with respect to resources" (Skogsstyrelsen 1-1999, my transl.).Up to now more than 30 000 days of work have been spent, not to mention the equally great efforts by the forestry companies.One estimation says that about 80 000 key biotopes will be registered, covering about 200 000 hectares.But also these sur- veys have not relied on historical sources or knowledge.Nevertheless a couple of case studies have shown that the higher nature values consist of an overgrown biocultural heritage (Ekberg 1997; Antonsson 1997).This is supported by several general land- scape investigations based on quaternary geology (e.g.Lagerås 1997; Göransson 1999).
In spite of the huge investment in the key biotope surveys no connections have been made between the land use history and what kind of maintenance is necessary to preserve the nature (fig.14).
To some extent the state has different strategies for the conservation of nature in different types of land.In the agrarian cultural landscape, the intention is to conserve by means of economic compensation, whereas the conservation of forests is based on land purchase.The reason for this is that the for- mer have to be maintained, while the latter are thought to be conserved through free development.Since the mid-1990s the Swe- dish government has investigated how more forests can be conserved, that is, be excluded from active forestry.The dominating motive Fi g.I 4. A very t emarkable culttrral heti tage con- sists of /tumas-ticlt soil.Ouring Itundkeds of&'ears fatnners lrave invested in the intptoventet&t of' the nteagte soils bv letting btoad-leafed specie» and gt aks cover at eas that othet~~ise vvould be covet c d by sptntce and pine and useless podrol.In this case, in a prehistoric area of clearance cairns, it is quite obvious that the huntus-rich soil is utt- stable and affected by Man.Norra Sandhjö, Små- land.Photot L. Gren, IW3.
is to conserve nature values, especially rare species (Naturvårdsverket   1997).
Up to now ca.4% of the Swedish forests are protected, and it is estimated that ca. 9- 16% ought to be protected, worth almost 18 000 million SEK.The investigations have suggested that at least 5% of the forest, worth ca. 5 000 million SEK, as soon as possible ought to be conserved and converted into nature preserves (SOU 1997:97).Although no studies of land-use history have been made, it has been suggested that most of the preserves should be left to free development; that is, if there is any biocultural heritage it will be gradually destroyed (cf.Kardell &.Fiskesjö 1999; Thorén 1999).In the last investigation of forests with broad-leafed species in southern Sweden, free develop- ment was recommended as the main alter- native or second alternative for two thirds of the 37 different types of forests (Naturvårds-  verket 1999-06-30).In a similar way, the forestry boards in their "Green plans" recommend ca. 5% of the forest to be protected as preserves within free development.

FUTURE SURVEYS
The surveys mentioned in this article have collected data from the whole country.For both economic and time-saving reasons, reference areas usually are used to get a re- presentative picture instead of conducting total surveys.One example of comprehensive data-collecting from different cultural en- vironments is the evaluation of the official food provision politics in the 1990s (LiM 1998).The government has announced that this kind of case study on the state of the cultural environment, etc. will be more frequently utilised in the rapidly changing society oftoday (Prop. 1997/98).Data collec- ting from certain reference areas, however, is intended more for decisions concerning official politics.It does not replace total surveys of the whole country for the purpose of preserving special sites in the landscape.
With regard to cul ture politics, the government has in several bills given a very broad definition of the cultural heritage (e.g.Prop, 1998/99:114).The bills state that the traditional definition of cultural heritage must be reconsidered to include not only ancient monuments but "also the nature utilised and affected by Man".Cultural heritage is defined as comprising both material and immaterial traces, what is perceived both by scholars and by the common public, what is unique as well as ordinary.The cultural heritage also consists of how we apprehend, interpret and promote the heritage.Consequently, from a political point of view there is support for a very broad definition of the cultural heritage.
Up to now surveys have been conducted for ancient monuments in the entire country.
Surveys of other cultural physical traces are occurring in the woodlands.Very seldom have any studies been made concerning the general public's apprehension of the cultural heritage, and surveys of non-material cultural heritage (Burström 1994; Burström et al.  1997) such as place-names, traditions and folklore are still lacking (fig. 15).
The biocultural heritage has in an un- Currem Snedish Archaeotogk:.Vot tt, 2000 Fig. l5.The lave and the su&.vey of' ancient monuments have alvvays fo- cused on measurable remains.Thereforeplaces vvith an obviotts history but tro ttaces have nevet been registered as larv-protected sites.Fo&.instance the ancient trachivay Runamo is u~ith- out pt otection, although it veas knovvn by the Danish historian Sareo in the l3'" centuty and it is still possible to define and matkits location today.
planned way been included in the different surveys of nature sites that did not take account of the historical prerequisites.
Regionally, at the county authorities, there has been a lot of co-operation between cultural heritage management and nature conservation.But at the central boards there is considerable divergence in the views on which nature values should be defined as a biocultural heritage, and how different nature values should be evaluated in relation to one another.On the whole, the most important task in conserving the cultural heritage seems to be to fundamentally reconsider nature on the basis of knowledge of the history of land use.
Naturally the surveying of the cultural heritage of the countryside is not unaffected by the scientific research.But in the same way as both the cultural heritage management and the nature conservation ought to be united into an overall view, the scientific research ought to be less narrow or more dilettantish so to speak.It is significant that the most ingenious research on the history of land use was done several decades ago (Sjöbeck 1973).Within the biological research a lot of eAort is spent on which prerequisites are necessary for different species.Nevertheless there are few scientists who study why the species live in our part of the world at all.The University of Forestry and Agriculture is spending tremendous amounts of money on increasing the production, but relatively little on research for conserving the special environments, even if the government in the last years has declared that the goals for production and environment shall be of equal importance.

CONCLUSION
For a long time the survey of the cultural heritage of the countryside has been synony- mous with the survey of ancient monuments.
As a consequence, Sweden has probably attained the best register of ancient monuments in the world, and in some sense become one of the leading countries in settlement archaeology.Through very strict and effective legislation, resources and attention have, in some kind of interaction, been focused on ancient monuments.It may seem paradoxical that the strict legal protection for the pre- historic part of the cultural heritage has implied that the remains from historic times and the biocultural heritage have often been overlooked.Furthermore the surveying has from the start been a task for experts, and consequently things that the general public may find interesting and valuable have usually not been registered.
It is first in recent years that more atten- tion has been given to traces from historic time through the forest and history surveys although traces that are valuable in the eyes of the general public are still not registered.
Current Svvedish Archaeotogy, Vo!. 8, 2000 Fig. l6.All surveys register the tracek and forms that are seen in the landscape.It is therefore paradoxical that the registers, which should be used to preserve the cultural heri- tage, promote a static vievv without ntuch understanding of historical processek.The efforts fron& both the cultural heritage and nature conservation boards thuk have failed to a great e&rtent to maintain traditional methods in the landhcape.Fatnner collecting leaves fiom broad-leafed species in Sundreparish.Photo: C. G. Rosenbetg, ca.1950, ATA.
The split in the management of the cultural heritage is most serious concerning the biocultural heritage, because surveys of nature values almost never have included historical knowledge.Unfortunately this has led to a severe risk for an accelerating destruction of the biocultural heritage.In Sweden the extremely comprehensive nature conservation as a rule has become a task for biologists when in reality it should be a task for cultural historians and cultural heritage management.
Unfortunately it is easy to have a pessimistic view of the future management of the total cultural heritage.Nevertheless, from an official point of view enormous environ- ment values and a huge amount of money could be saved by creating an overall per- spective of the cultural heritage of the countryside and by giving sufficient attention to why the values are there instead of how they look (fig.16).In this way new fields of scientific research for the purpose of connec- ting different values would be wide open.
Through an extended dialogue with many groups in society the evaluation of the cultural heritage as defined within the wide framework of legislation would be a task for many other people than just the experts.
English revised by Laura Wrang.

Fig
Fig. 5.The surveys for anci ent monun&ents by the Central Boa&d of Nati onaf A nti qui ti es alvvays gave

Fig. 7 .
Fig. 7. Area vvith prehistoric clearance cairns in the south of veys were linkedmore closely

Fig. l0 .
Fig. l0.Wzete grassland and bt oad-feafed species are shapi ng the landscape, one can be quite

Fig.
Fig. ll.IVat«&e co»ser vation thn&«gh split up the environment when the state is making surveys.One boardis responsible for surveying ancient monu- century.But the principles for sur- ments, another late historica( traces in the forest, still another ey'ng ancten monumen s tn the biologi cal values.Mound cemetery from the late Iron Age modern sense were not developed specialists in Dimbo village, Dimboparish, Västergötland.Phoro: L. Gren until the second half of the 19'" I985.century.The most important pioneer work was the "Gothenburg survey" ca 1880-1923.Inspired partly by earlier Danish surveys, different kinds of monuments and remains were surveyed in large areas of Sweden, and the work also utilised written information from different Current Swedish Archaeotogy, Vol. 8, 2000 Sjöbeck Fig l2.The awareness ofhow to conserve nature vaiues has 1949:34, my transl.