The main character of the thesis is Eduard Štorch (1878-1956). Eduard Štorch is one of the most famous Czech writers who wrote books for children and youth. He was born in Ostroměř in Eastern Bohemia. During the Austro-Hungarian monarchy he studied at the normal school in Hradec Králové. He worked as a teacher until 1937, when he retired. He taught in Eastern Bohemia, in Northern Bohemia and in Prague. His greatest pedagogical achievement was the establishment of a Children's Farm on Libeňský Island in Prague. All his life he was a keen amateur archaeologist. He discovered archeology at the beginning of the 20th century in Most. He was actively involved in photography. He photographed archaeological sites, life at the Children's Farm and trips abroad. He is buried alongside his wife, Božena, in the Lobeč cemetery, where they had a cottage. This work uses a biographical method and introduces Eduard Štorch on the basis of his six personalities or roles. Among these roles, besides writer and teacher, are also an archaeologist, photographer, student and husband. Key words: Eduard Štorch, amateur archaeologist, teacher, writer, photographer, student, husband, Ostroměř, Lobeč

This thesis is about gaining an understanding of the complex relationship of Australian Aborigines to their environment. By coming to an understanding of another cultures relationship to the environment, it is possible to come to a greater understanding of one's own environmental relationships. The problem involves the issue of context transference. Aboriginal and Western thought processes are different. Whereas in Western society analysis is achieved through hard factual evidence, in Aboriginal society hard factual evidence is replaced by feeling and intuition. A model was devised to study this problem which consists of the use of four different perspectives, each being the view of an ‘expert’ who has something to contribute towards a fuller comprehension of the Aboriginal/environmental relationship. The perspectives were that of an archaeologist, an anthropologist, the Australian Aboriginal, and the journal I wrote while participating on a Songline walk. An archaeologist digs into the past and finds clues into the behavior patterns of contemporary Aborigines. An anthropologist, through first hand experience, has gained many valuable insights into the complexity of this environmental relationship that is not accessible to the archaeologist. The Aboriginal illustrates this environmental relationship in his own words. And my journal is a record of a unique opportunity at knowledge enhancement through experiential learning. The use of Aborigines-as-teacher has revealed Western culture’s connections (and lack of connections) to the environment and the implications this knowledge can have for our society. Asa landscape architect, this knowledge can be used to influence design and land use decisions. / Master of Landscape Architecture

Archaeology is a popular subject that is often depicted in popular media. Archaeology is also an academic field that contributes to national and individual identities. Therefor archaeologists conducting research need to be aware of the political and ethical implications their work may have. This essay presents and discuss previous research done about archaeologists and their communication efforts. Moreover, the essay also presents scientist communication goals and tries to discuss it in relation to Uppsala University’s and the department of Archaeology and Ancient History goals and guidelines. The discussion is based largely on a survey made by the author. Questions discussed are: who should write about archaeology? Would a better communication create a more “correct” use of history? Who has the right to write about archaeology? Is Uppsala University’s goals in line with how the scientist perceive and conduct their communication mission? The essay is based on previous research and a survey conducted by the author. The survey was sent to eight archaeology professors active at Campus Gotland, Uppsala university. Five responded to the survey. The method used in the essay is comparative literature analysis. The result of the survey is discussed in relation to Uppsala university and departments goals. The essay shows that archaeologists need more time to be able to conduct their communication goals more efficient and at a higher volume than present. The essay also states that archaeologists often have other work-related priorities than communication with the adjacent society.