Metal Detecting in Focus Again — A Response to Immonen and Kinnunen, Winkley, Hardy, and Rogerson

Abstract

The current collection in Public Archaeology is by no means the first time a journal or other academic publication has chosen to focus on the issue of metal detecting and its impact on archaeology (consider, for example, Campbell & Thomas, 2013; Thomas & Stone, 2009; or Pitblado & Shott, 2015 for a wider overview of non-professional engagements with material culture, not only metal detecting). However, the revisiting or, indeed, broadening of the range of debate is welcome. In this collection of papers, we see not only an assortment of (European and Eurasian) geographic locations presented — each with their relative and different challenges, but we also see a diverse range of research methods and approaches discussed and tested. Hence in this collection we learn of the results from questionnaire surveys of different interest groups, the ‘go-along’ ethnographic method applied to metal detectorists, analysis of online open data, and a historical study utilizing the literature and archival sources. Visa Immonen and Joonas Kinnunen contribute by shedding further light on the situation in Finland. The research they carried out, in 2014, was significant for being the first such survey carried out in the country. They suggest that their research, although primarily collecting data through questionnaire survey — which they acknowledge did not allow for accessing ‘such complex phenomena as emotions’ — has nonetheless built upon previous ethnographically framed research (my own doctoral research included). Their study of metal detectorists has indeed provided new dimensions to our understanding of the hobbyists themselves. It also brings this and similar research previously published in Finnish (Immonen & Kinnunen, 2014; Siltainsuu & Wessman, 2014) to a more international readership, and helps to share more widely the Finnish experience. The issue of how to expand our ethnographic understandings of metal-detectorist communities is taken even further and tackled head-on by Felicity Winkley, inspired by her recent doctoral research in England. The ‘go-along’ method is a fruitful approach gaining popularity among ethnologists and others in a range of settings (e.g. Suopajärvi, 2014), and it is extremely encouraging to see this method applied public archaeology, Vol. 15 No. 4, November 2016, 245–248