This essay deals with heating installations put into medieval Gotland churches from the 1920s to the early 1950s. Focus is on the work of the restorer Erik Johan Fant (1889–1954) who was the most frequently engaged restorer of churches in Sweden from c. 1925 to 1950. His work has not been the subject of much academic research. The essay covers how Fant and authorities involved in the restorations perceived the aesthetical and practical issues of installing modern heating systems in medieval churches. It also places Fant’s work in the wider context of heating for comfort and conservation purposes in churches. Our knowledge of heating systems used in churches in the past is very limited: on what grounds was a certain system chosen, how was it designed, and what consequences did it have for the conservation of the church? From having been solely an issue of increased comfort and pleasing design, the development of heating technology increasingly involved the interests of conservation. In the first half of the 20th century, central or electric heating was introduced in many stone churches, but often without any analysis of the risks involved. Still in the 1920s, the typical Gotland church was heated with just one or two ovens. They were still not electrified. Two problems especially were connected to overheating before the 1950s: first the soiling of walls and vaults, and second the desiccation of organic materials, particularly painted wooden objects. Central heating, especially in the form of low pressure steam which was common before 1945, certainly made these damages worse. Despite these issues, almost all of the 2,700 churches in Sweden had some kind of heating installed by the mid-1950s, and the reason was that heating primarily was perceived by the Swedish Church as a matter of comfort. Shortly after the end of the period in question, damages caused by heating would attract more attention from the developing conservation field. / <p>Alternate Title: The church -- "a machine for sitting": the introduction of heating systems into medieval Gotland churches during the early 20th century. (English)</p> / Kulturarvet och komforten: frågan om lämpligt inomhusklimat i kulturhistoriska byggnader under 1900-talet

I uppsatsen görs en närmare undersökning utav den schism som skall ha uppstått mellan intendent F. W. Scholander och snickaren Olof Petersson, vid restaureringen av Kungsmaket på Kalmar slott 1856 – 1861. Historien fortsätter därefter tills samarbetet upphör 1877. Vid restaureringen stod Scholander som ansvarig ledare från Överintendentsämbetet i Stockholm. Medan Petersson var arbetsledare i Kalmar. Efter färdigställandet ville Petersson visa upp Kungsmakets dörr i en utställning för nygjorda arbeten i London. Vilken förmodas vara Världsutställningen 1862. Men hindrades av Scholander som ansåg rummet helt varande från 1500-talet. Från att ha varit positiv till resultatet med Kungsmaket ändrade Scholander därefter inställning och ansåg att Petersson gjort stora felaktigheter. Schismen kom därpå att leda till fler oenigheter. Uppsatsen syfte är att undersöka om det finns fler orsaker till en schism emellan parterna än vad som framkommit i tidigare litteratur. Samt varför de hade olika uppfattningar om vilken tidsperiod Kungsmaket tillhörde. Den syftar också till att belysa personerna bakom schismen. Främst Peterssons livs- och yrkesbakgrund och hur schismen påverkat honom. En genomgång av tiden under och efter Kungsmakets restauration redovisas främst genom primära källor och korrespondens från tiden. Där även restaurationen av Gyllene salen delvis inkluderas. Till detta kommer en orientering och undersökning av Scholanders och Peterssons bakgrunder. Samt beskrivning av Kungsmakets interiör. / The essay is a study about the schism that occurred between the Superintendent F. W. Scholander, from the authority of ÖIÄ, and the Carpenter Olof Petersson, during the restoration of the King’s Chamber at Kalmar Castle from 1856 to 1861. The story then continues until the cooperation ends around 1877. During the restoration Scholander was the responsible leader, through correspondence from Stockholm, while Petersson was foreman in Kalmar. After the restoration was completed, Petersson wanted to show the door of the King’s Chamber in an exhibition of newly made works in London. In this essay believed to be the International Exhibition of 1862. But he was then prevented by Scholander who thought the room totally as a remainder from the 1500s. From being positive to the result with the restoration, Scholander then changed setting and considered that Petersson had made major errors. After that the schism lead to more disagreements. Through an analysis of primary sources and letter correspondence from the time, the events are reported during and after the restoration of the King’s Chamber. In which the restoration of the Golden hall is partly included. Added to this there is an orientation and examination of Scholander´s and Peterson's backgrounds, and a description of the interior of the King’s Chamber. The essay aims to examine whether there are more reasons for a schism between the parties than what has emerged in the previous literature. And why they had different views on what period the King’s Chamber belonged. It also aims to show the people behind the schism. Mainly Peterson's life and professional background and how the schism affected him.