 to speak here. The public turn in my title I am addressing of course we're doing outreach already for quite some decades, a fantastic example we just heard, but on the other hand there are still parts of archaeology that are not open to to participation of the broader public and so I will address metal detection most of it. What will I take with these of the Netherlands is a project where we gather objects found by private metal detection but I will argue a bit why we do that and why I think that deserves to be followed because opening up archaeology on many other fields that are still now closed and just managed by professionals is I think a good response to the current trend of mistrust against academics in times of Brexit, fake news and Trumpism, science and especially the alpha sciences are increasingly seen as elitist and taking up money consuming resources so to frame it more positive on the other hand there is this challenge to democratize science and of course archaeology so this democratization has three pillars the sharing, open access publication, anyone should be able to access it, it should not be behind the paywall, explaining outreach to the public and then well not in the easy way really by specialists who know how to bring this to the public in their own language and third is participation, doing research is not a monopoly of professionals. In the field of history heritage and archaeology this takes the form of the question who owns the past and implicit of course the answer is it's not owned by the professionals we're not the only one entitled to write up what our history was and already in 1952 UNESCO devoted papers to this and the human rights article 27 actually states the right to research but going in the different direction was the effect of not the meaning of course not the intention but the actual effect of La Valeta was an increasing professionalization a huge professional sectors and in the Netherlands there were for instance regulations that this task should be done by an archaeologist of this level and private people were actually for a time not able to participate in excavations. Attention for non-professionals returned at Faro and participatory heritage is luckily now a key term also in governmental circles so the case of metal detection archaeologists in many countries are opposed to it and that is partly because of our principle of preservation in situ later research is more affected if the site is complete and remains complete so when and damage to sites is feared and damage to the integrity of the fine collection and of course there are excesses by metal detectors but look I want to stay to pose a minute by the perspective of a metal detector hobbyists they just want to keep a piece of history they just want to do research they want to find and and and have the past in their hands so we should acknowledge that and second they are not aware of our principle is preservation in situ so they think archaeology is my finding stuff isn't it I'm finding stuff why is that not okay so we should explain better what our motives are and third is and they're right I think that plowing does the damage as soon as long as they're restricted to the topsoil they're not doing extra damage in most of the countries of mid and northwestern Europe so yeah they're not doing a lot of damage if they restrict themselves so I will not go too far into this because of course in several countries it is legally banned but I think then we are monopolizing archaeology and say we doing it you're not and there are good reasons for it but it well it is monopolizing and people are not understanding it and this could be a reason why they think archaeology is elitist and thanks and I've heard literally comments like you have those Arches want to keep everything for themselves so they get angry and then ignore the law so we should be really looking at their motives and then if possible by the law include them in research so this is why in the Netherlands the previous situation is 40 years of illegal but generally tolerated by the detection a low level of reporting so the rule was that chance fines had to be reported but they hardly did and well there are some backgrounds for that in 2016 the law was changed metal detection allowed in the 30 centimeters of the topsoil no extra damage of course banned on scheduled monuments find reports are mandatory as so we keep the information and actually science benefits scholarly work benefits from it and I can say already that the 2017 reporting rate is at least 50% higher than it was in 2015 before the ban and I say at least because at the moment still find reports over 2017 are coming in so why pan is for the scientific importance huge potential for the study of the past in the form of for instance distribution maps networks habitation human mobility etc societal relevance if we discover more sites reported by the metal detectors we know how to protect them if if for instance developments take place and we see it as a huge opportunity for citizen science an improved link between academia heritage and the broader public and really let them participate it's not yet give us your fines but they can take part in documenting them if they want so why in 2016 we feel a sense of urgency because metal detection started in the 70s and the first guys doing it are already very old or already passed away and we don't want the objects but of course we need the location so they have to pass it on to us already and of course the new heritage before that I could not legally apply for funding to do this of course so our aims are the systematic documentation of the collection of private people making the fines available for heritage and academic research and the broader public so not a black box not just a government database but true open access online publication in a durable national database linked open data principles improving the relationship between the detecting community and the professional archaeology and also doing this in a European sphere with for instance the Finnish partners and the British partners and the Flemish partners we're a broad national cooperation this is not just the undertaking of one university no several universities the heritage agency provinces and museums and of course associations of hobby archaeologists so their roles what rules could the private individuals undertake of course they could just declare that fine some say here's are it finds I don't know what to do with that you do it that's fine but after training some of them register their own collection and register the fines for mothers and some of them are really not knowledgeable for instance I had great trouble finding in academic libraries literature on medieval keys there is a lot of collectors literature on medieval keys but hardly academic studies but there are detectors with a library of their own just on keys and they assist in the final edifications and they write up our standardized identification which I will say a bit more later and they receive of course the credit for that so they become co-authors of these identification sheets so how do we approach them because there is still mistrust between detector users and archaeologists and there are some illegal things happening but we're inviting to contribute those willing to report and we communicate best practices and we've come after one and a half years of talks we've come to a code of conduct so that was actually active talks what do you think that you that detectors should do and what and we explained what we think and how the principles work so actually there is a document that is half legal rules simple they are there and the other one is also conduct so not exactly the legal rules but rules of behavior and they were proposed by the detectorists they say yeah we know we shouldn't leave fences open and we should refill the holes because otherwise you annoy the landowner so yeah this was a co-creation and it was signed by all the amateur organizations so we have two national associations and they agree to it and advise their members to follow this we're winning that trust by protected data they of course their names are not visible online their location their exact location they give their exact location to us scholars can access them but not the anonymous visitor of the website because they don't like that other people are accessing their site so for instance this approach we know the exact find spot but online it's attributed to a whole municipality we take into account their wishes so the current states we're started well almost precisely three years ago over 600 metal detecting individuals take part 6,000 locations 60,000 finds registered among them are 61 horse and now some 21,000 are already fully processed and available online which is too low for my liking this 37% but the reason is as I already explained we're working with these standardized descriptions so you have to think a big dividing line here this is the actual find it's a fragment from a copper alloy yielded it has dimensions the material the ownership mostly private collection but sometimes they donated it to the museum so actual find and this is a standardized reference sheet and it takes of course quite a while to write this up but then if you have 100 of these objects you can simply connect them to the reference type so in the end it will save a lot of time but writing up these takes some time so pan is actually two things it's a documentation and publication of privately owned artifacts it's a reference collection for metal finds by ling you all the reference collection can be searched independently from fine reports objects and reference type are available as you arise with their each of their own makeup of their own format and international connections and expansions are possible so where we have a model at least for a European the Zoras digitally available so everything we do is open access of course limited open access we're not giving that site details to other detectives but scholars who are a recognized researcher can access them so our public website allows you to filter objects per period you can search the map for finds in in the municipalities or the provinces the reference collection you can access here it's a tree like structure so you start with broad categories and you can funnel that down to the objects you're looking for and after log-in scholars can analyze and export the data and volunteers have their own management tool the collection management tool so a bit about the results because I want to move now forward to my last point about the value for society there are simply some spectacular finds like this golden talk with an inscription very rare and were pleased that there was actually a new find made and truthfully declared interesting for the public objects I think are appealing to the public so these are also providing good tools for outreach and you and of course it's about the stories behind them and this is a very rare trumpet-headed brooch I'm from 101 by by the machine bag I call the very next and hope that is just was just known from Hungarian and we found one of these so you can tell stories about long distance movement along the limits for instance by single finds but it's not on the single finds only the distributions a bit more challenging to bring this to the general public the story behind this is fascinating and in this case it's a story of these dramatic roaches second-third century were there are casting molds found here so we're actually sure that it's made in the dramatic area second-third century lemes is is well active it's upheld it's it's it's this is the height of the lemes period of course but we see a quite meta quite a lot of these dramatic roaches are circulating within the profits so this tells a story that this lemes what was not an iron curtain it's not a closed line and Germanic people non-Roman's take part in this province it kept could be that their garrisons that garrisons consists of Germanic recruits the Germanic soldiers it could be that there is an intensive trade so that actually the four lines of the lemes provided food stuffs to the to the province but for the larger public this is an opportunity to explain that there is actually it's not a closed line long-distance movement was happening so opportunities for archaeology is two-fold I think allowing metal detectors metal detection answers to policies of participation citizen science helps to forestall elitist connotations of Roman archaeology and objects are very the second point is that objects the results of these kinds of projects is that objects are very suitable of course for public outreach object and object distributions highlight regional traditions and contact zones this helps us to underpin stories of cultural diversity and interaction to the broader public and I think that metal detected finds by non-professionals are positive conceived positively it's attractive for newspapers to write up that these were found by private people so if based on public finds these results are more acceptable and welcome to the general public at least that is what I believe I thank you for your attention