WHAT IS MUSEOLOGY? Per-Uno Agren ~~ MUSEOLOGY - A NEW BRANCH OF HUMANITIES IN SWEDEN? Per-Uno Agren is researcher at HSFR, Teaches at the Deparment of ‘Museclogy, University of Umed, Sweden.‘When a new scholastic discipline is established, the time is ripe for looking back to what has been, to try and put things into a scientific perspective. Itis rarely a case of a completely blank spot on the research map; it is usually more a less wellknown area, which has been wandered through and dealt with in one ot another context out of one or another point of view by some researcher on his Way {0 another destination. After fitst briefly discussing the actual word ‘museology and its history, I shall attempt a description of how the field was earlier glimpsed or more thoroughly discussed in Sweden, I shall then proceed to sketch what a Swedish museology could look like (without anticipating the analyses and discussions which shall follow). Finally, T should like to give an indication of the tasks awaiting in the field. The earliest instance of the word museology, the science of muscums, has been located by the compilers of the Dictionary of the Swedish Academy in a text by Goran Rosander in Fataburen (1982), where he writes on the collecting Of objects by the cultural history museums, concluding that "from a museolog~ ical perspective’, this can lead to problems, as no attention is being paid to early industrial products. However, the editors of the Dictionary have apparently overlooked the treatment given museology and its significance by Vinos Sofka in an essay published in Museitelnik (1976), edited by Phebe Fjellstedm, Current Swedish dictionaries and reference works entirely Jack the entry "museology". . On the other hand, the word museivetenskap (museum science) can be found in the second edition of Nordisk Familjebok (1913), where Sune Ambrosiani writes the following under the entry for Musuem: "Out of the development of ‘the museum system in our days a specific museum science has grown, whereby can be understood knowledge on all that belongs to the task of a museum, its acquisition of objects and their conservation, storage and cataloguing. The practical application of this knowledge is called museiteknik (museum techno= Jogy)". Worth noting is that Sune Ambrosiani is one of the earliest writers in the area of museum technology with his publications "Guidelines to the Recording, of Peasant Material Culture” (published as one of the supplements to Svenska Landsmél, 1916), and Museiteknik (1917), Museum science is also the name given academic courses offered on the A, B and C-level by the Department of Curator and Settlement Antiquarian Education in Gothenburg since 1985-86 (later renamed Department of Cultural Preservation). Also in Gothenburg, at the Department of Archaeology, the first doctoral dissertation in museology was defended, Manniska och objekt i smyckeskrin (Man and Object in the Jewel Box) by Gundula Adotfsson (1987). ‘The basic significance attributed to museum studies by Sune Ambrosiani in 1913 was elaborated upon by Vinos Sofka in 1976. Here, further qualifications are added 0 the definition. The overall tasks of museology are said to include the history, communal role and goal of the museum system. Furthermore, it includes analysis of the activity itself ~ the sociology of museums, museum pedagogy, organizational and personnel questions. Ambrosiani's museum technology finds its counterpart in Sofka as museography.‘Ambrosiani refers to the German Musewmskunde as the counterpart of ‘museum science. "Museumskunds" is also the name of a German periodical ‘which appeared in 1905. Johan Botiger, ina review of this periodical published in the Handicrafts Association's magazine the same year, wrote that "The term ‘Museumskunde' came into being during the first half of the nineteenth century, and primarily embraces everything conceming exhibition and preservation of museum objects, along with the various questions having 10 do with the administration of a museum" "The French word muséologie appeats in bold relief against the background of Sofka's enumeration of the tasks of museology. However, according to French Gictionaries, this word appeared no eaflier than 1931. Yet Sofka mentions ‘courses in the field at Ecole du Louvre from 1927. Muséographie is traced back to 1842, But it is only after the war, when Georges Henri Rivigre began his international development work in the field of museums under the auspices of the newly-created organization ICOM, and his teaching activity with his "Cours dde muséologie générale" at the Sorbonne, that these words take on the signi ficance attributed them by Vinos Sofka. In French reference works and dictio- naries, the word museology is given considerable space. ‘Somewhat surprisingly, it seems that the earliest examples of the words “Museologie and Museographie are German. In 1727 a businessman in Hamburg, Caspar F. Neicke, published a pamphlet entitled Museographia, which provides instructions as to how a collection of “curiosities” ought to be arranged. The word Museologie appears in the ttle of a periodical, “Zeitschrift fir Museologic Jind Antiguititenkunde", dating from 1877 and published in Dresden twice monthly by Geheimer Hofrat J.G-T. Graesse. In his essay "Die Museologie als Fachwissenschaft” (1883), the publisher writes: "Should someone have spoken ‘of museology as a specific science thirty or merely twenty years ago, he would have been met by 2 disdainful, pitying smile, But now, things are certainly different!™. The fiold of study Graesse then proceeds to sketch has much in ‘common with Ambrosian’s conception of the task of musealogy in 1913. “Although the terms museography and museology seem to be avoided among, ‘English professionals today and are not listed in dictionaries of current English (except in Collins 1986), it may finally be noted that they were both used in an English classic, David Murray's Museums, Their History and Their Use (1904), ‘Museology, as its significance has been related here, works within the fields of cultural and natural research, with a specific historical source material (matorial objects), and can therefore be seen as a helping” discipline for history ‘and other cultural sciences, along with some branches of the natural sciences. But material objects also. exist outside of muscums, not only in the shape of Joose objects but also ancient remains, buildings and structures, some of which fall within the realm of the preservation of historical monuments. Before T return again to the question of definition, I should like to dwell upon the dlevelopment of the concept which concerns the relationship we and our society have with the material environment and the history of the elements of that environment, What in material reality has been ascribed historical value?‘The earliest document referred to is usually Royal Instructions for the “Antiquaries of the Realm (1630). The first of the fifteen paragraphs in the Tnstructions state that those who have been given the responsibility of preserv— ing the nation's antiquities shall seek and collect sundry ancient monuments and things with which to illustrate our Fatherland. Special emphasis is placed on ‘rune lettering in the first paragraph, and it is observed that the antiquarians hould write down whatever old tales there are on each and every stone. In the fourtecen paragraphs that follow, a grandiose inventory programme is developed embracing ninic staffs, placenames and national character, with the emphasis 6on inscriptions, documents and the oral historical tradition, in keeping with the ‘antiquity concept of that era, They were quite simply searching for historical sources, New instructions were issued in 1665, where the word antiquities is synonymous with “ancient relies and historic buildings". One year later, in 1665, the first ancient monuments-decree in either Sweden or Europe is issued, the Ordinance on Ancient Monuments. This dealt mainly with permanent ‘monuments, ancient relics and church buildings and their contents. “The next important legislative act which we shall note is the Ordinance from 1828. Permanent ancient monuments, which are referred to as archaic ‘monuments, ace defined as in 1666 by enumeration. In the new law, other fgreater or lesser objects are added "which might contribute to commemoration ef ancient holy use or other notable historic achievements, persons or words”. ‘The fact of adding Objects", said the Royal committee in 1913, “actually displayed a significant shift inthe interest in memorials itself, for the psycho Togical basis behind the protection which the ordinance of 1666 afforded the objects enumerated therein, one could undeniably find in a feeling of pride over those monuments which bore witness to the exploits of our forefathors; in the ordinance of 1828, this emotion had receded ~ here, the enumeration of objects worthy of preservation is obviously based on the assumption that all ancient Tnonuments which in one way or another had the ability to contribute in general to increased Knowledge about bygone days were worth preserving”. The ‘commentator of 1913 added that all objects worth preserving should submit to “the general demand, that they should be able to serve ‘as enlightenment to the History of the Realm”. This can be compared fo a statement made by King Carl X1 in 1695 on antiquities: their discovery and interpretation concerns “the lustre of our Swedish nation", During the nineléenth century we can note that Leonard Fredrik Raaf, in a famous article in Jduna in 1814 ("Thoughts on the Manner for Finding and Evaluating the Ancient Remains of the Fatherland”), had again expanded the meaning of “antiquities” to encampass even immaterial cultural relics: "A splendid portion of our antiquities", he writes "is made up by the Poetry, History, Myths, Festivals and Natural Philosophy of the Common People" “When a Royal committee was appointed in 1913 to make proposals for a new law for the preservation of historic relics and how the interest of society at large right be protected, it spoke consistently throughout its report of the care of mnonuments of society as its task and "public interest” as its responsibility. 107‘Apparently implicit in the term "monument" are "historic™ relics. When ine aarttee submitted its proposal it chose to introduce the term "preservation of historical culture” (kulturminnesvird) in place of the care of monuments (iminnesvcd), The motivation for this is given in the following statement: "AS the historical account for the development of government monuments care has Shown, government intrest in monuments has been expressed partly in the Greatien of certain rules of law, designed to protect the various monuments against harmful ineevention from the owner in question or others who may 10 seine way have a connection to said monuments, as well as making it possible for the state to take necessary measures without regard to private interests for their upkeep and for the benefits of science, and partly in an immectate preser™ Vation actvity..In the historical recount it has, however, ikewise been shown That above all, the gains of moder cultural history scholarship have meant that interest in monuments has expanded to include a number of groups of objects ‘Which have not been included under government care, As legislation concerning Cultral preservation has naturally not been able to Keep up with the growing interest in monuments, the above mentioned broadening of the field has meant that certain groups of monuments have been left unprotected up until now by the Mate The form of the name of the proposed law (the Act concerning the Care Sf Ancient Monuments and Finds) has been chosen taking into consideration the desirability to in a concentrated manner not only indicate the main characte of the new legislation but also connection with and difference feom the rules oF law ‘which have applied up to nov ia the field. In all of these respects the phrase ‘preservation of historical culture’ is considered to fulfil the requirements "The law proposal had a goneral scope which stretched from ancient relics and church buildings and their inventories to individual objects of cultural and historical value, This radical proposal was not implemented, as we knows society's legal protection from then on applied to ancient relies and histor buildings. ‘The. proposal for the organization of the preservation of cultural mronuments which was passed, tured out to be more successful in the long run. Tt included an enlarged board of national antiquities, an organization for county vTactodians and suppoct for provincial museums, a sketch which during Sigurd Curman's time as Chiof Custodian of National Monuments, was developed into that coupling between county custodians and county museums which functionally brought the preservation of cultural monuments and museums together, in other words macried governmentsupervised public interest 0 feclonal’iniative, Thus the comprehensive view of society's responsibility ewvard its material history, which had been intimated in the introduction to the 1913 report, was realized. "That report did not yet use the word heritage. Nor have I been able to find in MUS 68's terminology, in the reports Preservation of Cultural Monuments (1972) and Museums (1973). It seems, however, as though the word makes its debut in this context in the cultural policy debate of the 1970s. "The word itself, according to the Academy Dictionary, is first found during the nineteenth century. ‘The earliest instance cited originates in one of Viktor 108Rydberg's 1887 lectures on the history of civilization. There, and for a time into the twentieth century, the word is especially intended to refer to spiritual culture. According to a couple of examples in the Dictionary from 1929-30, a semantic shift then took place, toward a more concrete meaning, which eventu- ally became more and more prominent. ‘When the inquiry "Cultural Affairs” comments the goal of preservation in the summary of its roport New Cultural Policy (1972), the word "heritage" covers both material and immaterial culture, to the slight advantage of the latter ~ literature and music are especially emphasized. In the current proposal for a new inclusive legislation on cultural preservation , which is due to be read in parlia~ ‘ment this spring, the word has advanced as far as the first paragraph of the law, whore it states: "The environment created by man is a heritage passed down from previous generations and which it is a national concern to protect and preserve. The responsibility for this heritage is to be shared by all.” Here heritage has a definite material meaning, and we meet it in the form of an expanded concept of heritage, which likens the broadened concept of culture ‘which was and still is a central bone of contention in the debate over cultural policy. MUS 65 makes an important distinction (in my understanding of the report Kulturminesvard), between the "cultural-historical objects" of research and "cultural relics" worth preserving, Sverker Janson's book Kulturvitrd och samhillsbildning (1974), in its choice of wording and its attempt to bring together, in the not-so-easily comprehensible phrase “cultural care", a view of preservation and renewal of the social environment, is an important milestone ‘along the road to that care for the cultural environment now taking form, and toward the new legislation concerning cultural preservation. Heritage, with the specific definition "the essence of a common European and Swedish cultural tradition", has been devoted a great deal of attention in the last few years in the educational debate. But one also encounters the term in the latest issue of the Journal of the Council for Cultural Affairs (1988), where the complexity of heritage is discussed in a number of articles; the meaning of heritage is related to the socio-cultural position of the individual. ‘There is no special museum Jaw in Sweden. ‘The ambition and interest of society in exploring and protecting historical remains is mirrored in the legislation and the institutions developed parallel with the"laws concerning the preservation of cultural monuments. We have touched on the history of cultural preservation legislation and can observe how the concept "historical remembrance" has been f totality covering immobile, permanent "archaié monuments" as well as mobile, individual cultural objects. This comprehensive view of material cultural heritage is especially evident in the Bill Proposition of 1921 from the ancient relics Royal committee of 1913. ‘A rich Jterature exists on the topic of the preservation of cultural monuments and its central and regional institutions, from Henrik Schick's eight-volume ‘work on the history of the Royal Academy of Letters (published between 1932 109and 1944), to the Festschrift Past and Future dedicated to Roland Palsson, Chief Custodian of National Monuments, upon bis retirement in 1987. There are omprentnsive inquires, most notably the fot of the Committee on ancient cer from 1913. But & prominent place must Be given Bengt Hildebranc's Tnvestigation C.J. Tromsen and his Scholarly ‘Connections with Sweden, 1816— 37, a work of great ideas and a survey of « Scandinavian ‘cultural situation. T “ the history of research into Nordic antiquity and custom", published in 1937-38, describes the scholarly environment forming the basic attitudes upot ‘which rests the whole of our cecum development and coltural preservation work during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. = “Thus one approaches indirectly the preservation goals which guided the collecting efforts of tho museums and the ed Js which informed their outward activities, the conten i emmarizing, "history of museums’, one must OM to jndividual institutions (insofar as they have’ actually been written), ‘Best provided with their own histories are ‘naturally the national museums in Stockholm and the museum of Gothenburg: there also special studies like Yagve Lowegren’s Nawural History Collections ‘and the Teaching of Natural ‘History in Secondary Schools (1974), Furlhermor (and once again), we have at ‘our disposal the 1913 report ofthe commits OW ancient relics, with its pains~ taking survey of provincial museums, ‘and, much tater, MUS 65's Museums (1973). However, neither of these #0 Very deeply into the actual purpose of cexting, nor do they offer more than general comments about the goal for otward directed activities of museums (which 25 far as MUS 65 is concerned ad already been discussed by the Simmultancously working investigator of ‘eulturat policy). Instead, the lst volume of MUS 65's study Bxhibitions (1974) fers a starting point for discussion about the public aims of running a museum fa its appendix "Visiting Museums and Exhib ion from a Sociological View~ point. Goran Rosander has worked! tirelesaly for raising awareness ofthe signi= Brtance of the museum work of collecting, Pres Oe ‘and exhibiting, expecially by laying the theoretical foundation for “he SAMDOK organization and in his Caatrbution to Documenting Society inthe Fula (1982). Ag fat as applied museotogy is concerned. there is an early Swe tribution to the field, which also acted attention abroad, Linnaeus "Objectives and Usefullness of Collections of Natural Specimens to a catalogue of the collection of King “Adolf Fredrik (1754), edited by 10a aus The preamble of that preface is i itself not 8 ‘bad description of the objectives of a museum: those wino will view collections of natural specie are commonly 100 hasty in their judgements: Even before We Ar has carefully examined the quality of the case and come to reason ‘with definite evidence, they pronounce Areir judgement, whereupon the one Hem is considered a wonder, another @ fruitless joke and a waste of ime; I bid my Reader have the patience to first tMlow himself to be informed asco what such 2 ‘collection signifies, in order that hhe might see it with a keen eye.”Koowing thyself isthe frst step to all Wisdore and in days of od that was tne motto of our wise Master Soon, written in ‘golden letters above the entrance to the Temple of Diana.” je who would sty that he Knows himself mus! at the very least know whonatine is descended, where he lives, and what his duty.” have already mentioned Sune Ambrosiani's ‘pamphlets, as well as Musei= en from a later period (1976) i¢ may return ‘the problem of delimiting teleology, we have seen Row in Sweden We material remains of history, Mihether concerning ancient relics, buildings Ot objects, are perceived a rom the preservation perspective of society: heritage is coherent ralthough reference 10 other models have appeared, responsi- iiity for the two components of heritage he immobile and the mobile, Bas Uy Tee on the doorstep of & variety of instnaions, agencies of cultural preservation and museums. In the vrrarerhfe, the criteria determining the task Df preservation have been developing slong parallel ines. This logical connec” cron surviving in Swedish socal history sine the seventeenth century, makes it seal 10. permit the development of the ‘material heritage constitute inuseology's field of research. itis important to point out here that & corresponding outlook can be applied to*natural heritage", that which ies within he ‘working area of nature preserva dad the museums of natural history. Since a view of nature is Mag (natural phenomena decmed worthy of protection are con by employing cultural criteria), natura) Menai is closely related to attra heritage and thus belongs within the field of museology. The material cuains of history ~ and nature ~ are studied DY TAA? scientific disciplines. A Tefection of objects deemed worthy of being protected and preserved by the Of umal preservation, nature preservation and muss) ‘becomes our tage, a term which may include both OOF cultural ‘and our natural legacy. The social and is value-based. Museology studies the 2 fon of nature and the view of culture i by that legacy: te relationship of man 10 Bis or a history. What in material reality has best imbued chat it has been selected a8 an environment heritage, toa gus particular ways? What have the citer been, how varied for? What role have nature, cultural heritage and history played in cultural tradition, imuseology seeks pretation of the material cultural heritage. In dfder to ur oa significance museology must study, among ‘other things, world views and social views which at different times have ‘determined social values. That means that museology is especially interested in the perwoen that which is the visible world and hhistory. The envit ‘components of nature i fal, concrete, physical. History is the immaterial, abstract, conceptu ‘and opinions with which we have tadowed the environment ae stored in histor}y ‘by our observing and describing ui.it, by moulding it according to our ideas and intentions and with the technology ‘we have developed. Cultural heritage receives its meaning from the historical testimony which can be associated to its various elements, In principle, the preservation of cultural monuments, nature protection and museums all have the same tasks, based on study of the material environment. ‘They are associated with identical or kindred problems concerning selection, classification, care, conservation, mediation and the process of bringing this all to life, functions which represent a similar number of branches of museology. For an understanding of the totality museology is dependent upon the results of ‘many historical disciplines and is therefore decidedly interdisciplinary. ‘Museology can be said to have three main perspectives: = a historical perspective, which seeks to describe and understand the envi- ronmental heritage of a certain era and a certain place; a sociological perspective, which studies the institutions and activities which have come into being as the result of the notion of @ cultural and natural heritage; = a communicative perspective, which applies to the attempts to mediate the environmental heritage in time and space. Thus the study of museology first concerns the historical definition of the cultural and historical heritage. What documentation exists on the meaning and significance of monuments and things? Why has someone said, "This must not bbe lost!"? These historical studies of selection and collection lead to investig~ ations of the definition of the environmental heritage in contemporary programmes for the care of culture and nature, as well as the collection and documentation programmes of the museums. Further, the task of museology concerns the institutional structures which are developed in order to administer different components of the environmental heritage, the programmes and systems of rules which guide the institutions, the role they have played in society and will play in the future. Which groups in society have built up and defined the environmental heritage? And for whom hhas mediation been intended? Finally, the task of communication, How is the material presence of history mediated nationally, regionally, locally? What does the institutional working process look like - documentation, care and storage? How has the process of turning data culled from documentation into information, the structured basis for knowledge, occurred, knowledge which at various times and with various intentions people have sought to transmit by activating different components of the environmental heritage? What significance have symbolically-charged ‘monuments, "souvenirs", held as aids to the transmission of historical tradition? ‘And what is their significance today? How does mediation occur? The distinctiveness of museum communication is not that it makes meaning legible, but that it makes it visible, materially present. Thus the exhibition is perceived as a form of mediation unique to the museum. tn that area one has 112been able to witness how the aesthetic model's pedagogy has been superseded by the historical understanding’s pedagogy, and parallel to that, how display~ ‘case and podium presentation more and more are replaced by a contextual exhibition interpretation. Hore then we investigate the conditions of visual interpretation of history, which was the theme of Gundula Adolfssons doctoral dissertation. Inall three areas ~ documentation, preservation, mediation ~ 1 would like to once again emphasize the fundamental: museums and environmental care have their primary points of departure in the tangible and the visual, and their common goal is visually-mediated understanding of the material environmental hritage's historical significance and relation to the present. Thave attempted to preseat, in general terms, some of the tasks which await us within the research field of museology, the material cultural and natural heritage, from comprehensive theoretical questions (What do we collect? And why have we collected and preserved? Why do we exhibit? And why have we exhibited? Whose cultural heritage do we communicate, build up and legitim— ize?), to practical questions of applied museology (How do we collect and preserve? How do we care for what we collect? How mediate? How exhibit? ‘Who is reached by our mediation and just how successful is it?). At the centre of it all stands the material cultural heritage and the society, institutions and people who manage it.