Policies and publication criteria

The “Articles” section is composed of original, unpublished works submitted to the magazine for publication. All submissions are initially assessed by the editorial board, which decides whether or not the article fits the scope of the journal and is suitable for peer review. Submissions recommended for review are assigned to two independent experts, who evaluate the article for clarity, sound methodology and contribution to existing scholarship. The peer review process is double blind, meaning that authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. The reviewers will make a recommendation for rejection, revisions or acceptance. In case of a radical discrepancy the journal carries out a third evaluation. 

The ‘Readings section’ consists of an essay which analyzes two or more texts related to intellectual history. The editorial board evaluates the essays received for this section.

The "Reviews" section is composed of bibliographic analyses of recently published books, linked to intellectual history issues in a broad sense of the term (cultural history, history of ideas, history of mentalities, historiography, history of science, sociology of culture, etc.). The evaluation of the works received is carried out by the book review editors.