19th February 2007, 05:43 PM
I happpen to work in Scandinavia and think that whilst Norwegian and Swedish heritage protection has a lot going for it, it also has its disadvantages (very much like the situation in the UK and Ireland).
Not so sure about suggestions that Swedish protected sites are owned by the state either. I don't think Swedish archaeological site protection changes the ownership of the land (or purchases it), it just protects the remains. (Much the same as UK law). Mind you a Norwegian farmer did get fined close to 1 million kroner (£80,000) last year for trashing a burial mound after being told specifically by the county archaeologist to leave it alone. So maybe there is a lesson to be learnt there...
But why not read what a local archaeologist thinks. Check out Dr Martin Rundkvist's fantastic Swedish archblog (Aardvarchaeology) at
http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology...php?page=3
for a 'local' opinion. In English (mainly).
Not so sure about suggestions that Swedish protected sites are owned by the state either. I don't think Swedish archaeological site protection changes the ownership of the land (or purchases it), it just protects the remains. (Much the same as UK law). Mind you a Norwegian farmer did get fined close to 1 million kroner (£80,000) last year for trashing a burial mound after being told specifically by the county archaeologist to leave it alone. So maybe there is a lesson to be learnt there...
But why not read what a local archaeologist thinks. Check out Dr Martin Rundkvist's fantastic Swedish archblog (Aardvarchaeology) at
http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology...php?page=3
for a 'local' opinion. In English (mainly).