Respected Swedish Archaeologist Joins Cranks

It's always awful when someone you respect does something that crazy-destructive to your field. Have a tele-hug and a non-physical glass of home-brew mead.

If he truly is someone who, as you say, is respected, it seems only fair to ascertain his reason for "going over to the dark side" before trashing him. To a casual observer (me), this post seems a determination on your part to make sure the dark site is always properly regarded as dark.

This sounds more like a defensive rant than an attempt to understand something outside one's comfort range. Today's "consensus" of megalithic archaeology is made up of little more than educated guesses that are consistent with other educated guesses; sometimes one has to question the status quo in order to see different possibilities.

Not everyone who questions a consensus is Galileo, you know.

Questioning a consensus does not make one a Galileo, neither does it make one a Crank. Climbing "out of the box" is, however, a common trait of that kind of curiosity which often leads to valid discoveries. My point is, why should the academic world condemn such curiosity, other than that it takes itself too seriously for its own good, thus defending the status quo against all newcomers?

To play the devil's advocate for a moment here (and keeping in mind I am unaware of any of the protagonists or the issues surrounding this site), is it not possible that this is a perhaps misguided attempt at inclusiveness in research.

I know one archaeologist who has worked extensively on a particularly famous English megalithic site, who sometimes feels he has to allow erm...people with pagan tendencies shall we say, to be involved with research.

I once went on a small exploratory dig with him where the site had been 'identified' by a woman who thought the 'vibrations' were 'significant'. In other cases he is a very sensible head of department at a British University.

If an open-minded and interested person reads up on the archaeological controversies that N-A. Mörner and B.G. Lind have been involved in, I believe he/she will find that their disregard for evidence that contradicts their preconceived notions renders their work quite absurd. This, BTW, is in fact the position that all Swedish academic archaeologists except Dr. Duczko takes.

Could they damage something? I'd like to see it excavated in case there's something interesting. What silly theories the excavators spin with their finds seems relatively harmless to me as a layman--am I missing something? Has it not been excavated before by professional archaeologists?

SO where's the news?

The site has only seen small test excavations before. I agree that if a site is competently excavated, then the excavator's silly theories are pretty harmless. But Duczko has joined forces with people who know nothing about archaeological excavations, and are notorious for their crazy ideas about the past. I am exasperated to see him lend them credibility, and I am worried about what they might do if there were an excavation.

I'm too lazy to go back through the archives, but wasn't Lind the guy who'd been in trouble for harassing people and damaging sites by trying to excavate without training or permission?

Yep, that's the one. It isn't clear from the newspaper story what role Lind would have in the excavation project, but he's a frequent collaborator of Mörner's and he spends huge amounts of time at the site anyway. It would be impossible to keep him out of the trench.

Cranks or not, they do have an instinct for high-profile, interesting sites not inharmonious with your call for popular archaeology. I don't know how professional archaeologists can stand leaving the stone ship unexcavated for years, or sites like Skalunda -- aren't you dying to know what's in there? Haha I want to see you in an Indiana Jones hat.

Oh, I love the site, and it sure would be cool to see it competently excavated. But there are many cool sites, and very little money to excavate them. Fund me and I'll do it!

http://saltosobrius.blogspot.com/2006/03/field-archaeological-paradox.h…

I don't know anything about the case in question beyond what I've read here, but it may be worth saying this much:

I once went on a small exploratory dig with him where the site had been 'identified' by a woman who thought the 'vibrations' were 'significant'. In other cases he is a very sensible head of department at a British University.

I went to a paper not so very long ago in which a fairly sceptical Italian archæologist had to admit that Santa Maria Maggiore di Ravenna was actually located for him by a dowser, and then verified by geophysical survey. He didn't know exactly how to allow for this in his report... Though it must be said that the dowser in question apparently knew the main narrative source for the period cover-to-cover, which must have helped him guide his search...

Has not this site been scanned recently with radar and magnetic gear that can check what is left below?

The homeopath Bob G. Lind has been in the newspapers and local tv-channels frequently, in Scania, and he has a very aggressive attitude towards people that do not share his opinion.

It has been more about personal obsession and less about Ale. It is a very beautyful place where you can see Bornholm, the Danish island.

Yes, Ales stenar has seen geophysical mapping. Underground remains of two smaller stone ships known from 18th century drawings were found. But the most important piece of news was a large ring ditch nearby that may mark the place of a leveled megalithic tomb.