Print

Print


Dear members:

Most of people involved in academic world probably will agree (and happy) that HM meets the three matters mentioned by Tim. I imagine this will be very important, above all if we take into account the main requisites (at least regarding papers publishing) which are usually asked to researchers and young scholars in their home Institutions.

I suppose the only south-american member, mentioned by David, is me! ...a
nd not long ago. But, unfortunately,  this really not reflect the many other people in the region whose research interests are related to Archaeometallurgy. So, I hope the amount of foreign Society members increase in the future.

Some years ago, other colleagues and I created a Latinoamerican Journal on Historical Archaeology (in spanish), bearing in mind the lack of any regional publication dedicated to the speciallity, and the growing number of research on this topic during the past two decades. I think the original e-mail of Marianne is symptomatic of a growing quantity of works on Archaeometallurgy, which I can say is also appreciable in Southamerica.

So, I'm very confident that the mentioned changes by Tim will be very welcome on this southern latitudes. To make this possible, would be great if some of us could help in some way, for example with the regional editorship or referee activities, which have been pointed by David.

HMS, Congratulations for the 50th anniversary!


All the best,

Nicolás

 

Lic. Nicolás C. Ciarlo
Grupo de Arqueometalurgia
Programa de Arqueología Subacuática
Instituto Nacional de Antropología y Pensamiento Latinoamericano
3 de febrero 1370/78 (1426), CABA
Argentina
Tel: +54 (11) 4 782-7251



De: Tim Young <[log in to unmask]>
Para: [log in to unmask]
Enviado: martes, 19 de junio de 2012 11:58
Asunto: Re: Archaemetallurgy Journals

Dear David

I am heartened that others care as much about HM as we do, and we are working hard to position it more firmly at the forefront of the discipline. I haven't checked on the figures since a couple of issues ago, but at that point, the origin of the principal authors of published articles in the previous three years was:

35 papers : 20 from UK, 6 from France, 4 from USA, 1 from Canada, 1 from Russia, 1 from Germany, 1 from Italy and 1 from South Africa.

so, even then, it was certainly not as 'parochial' as it hadbeen and all recent meetings have had several international attendees (not all necessarily members - we encourage participation from those working in the field who are not necessarily sufficiently full-time in archaeometallurgy to be able to prioritise joining) . I thoroughly believe the society is on a very positive trajectory - and the imminent changes to the production/distribution of the journal are part of that. Both the diversity of origin and the total number of papers are, I hope, on a positive curve.

You are correct that the production of a major journal by a very small body of people is a severe challenge and the involvement of more people at the heart of the society would be very welcome!

We are in the middle of the process of determining the precise route for future publication and any partnerships that may involve, but thanks for the suggestion of that model.

The membership of HMS is changing rapidly too (they are no longer male, from the Midlands in boots and worn tweed either!!) - though we have to remember our founding fathers and we must still embrace the non-professional historical/archaeo-metallurgists, as well as the growing proportion of professional specialists (particularly in the younger generation).

Personally, I think things are looking good for the future, but not all changes can/will happen overnight. None the less, the 50th anniversary is a great excuse to push for those changes that are needed in order to bring the positive benefits for the coming decades. The changes are of course not limited to the journal - but affect most other aspects of the society, its activites and ouputs too.

Tim