JOURNAL ON EUROPEAN HISTORY OF LAW


Guidelines for authors

 

 

 

Guidelines for authors

 

The Journal on European History of Law publishes posts from the field of history of law, history of legal thought and Roman law.

 

The length of a post cannot exceed 90.000 characters. It must be written in English or in German languages. All the works are reviewed. The executive editor decides on whether to publish the materials and in which order. After the review, the decision will be sent to the author by email.

 

The authors are responsible for the lingual and formal level of submitted papers. These levels are checked by the editorial office and some small necessary changes can be done by the editor. Corrections are possible only upon prior request.

 

Corrections done by the author must be returned within 4 days and no significant changes are permitted.

 

The papers must be sent to the email address of editor‘s office: info@historyoflaw.eu

 

The papers must be in the formats DOCX, DOC or RTF (MS Word). In the Word editor, use the font Times New Roman, font size 12, spacing 1,5. If your text contains pictures or tables (only black and white), mention their meaning in the text. If the pictures are sent by electronic mail, they must be in JPG, TIFF or EPS format. All the tables, pictures and graphs must be placed somewhere in the text and also sent separately.

 

Since the European Society for History of Law is a non-profit organisation and there is no payment for the papers published in the Journal on European History of Law, the society cannot provide the authors with free prints of the Journal. Nevertheless, each author receives an electronic version (via email) of the issue in which his or her paper was published.

 

Each work must contain:

1. Title. It contains (in this order, always in a new row):

Short and understandable title;

If the Title is in German, please provide us with English translation, too.

The full name and last-name of the author/s including academic titles and working-place;

Address of the author/s, including the code of the country before the postal code (for example CZ). Afterwards write down your email address; ORCID number.

 

2. Abstract. Summarizes the content of the work. Usually up to 10 rows. It should describe clearly the main question of the research, solution, sources and methodology (according to the type of research).

 

3. Keywords. Several terms (not more than 20 words) that characterize the work. Words from the title can be repeated.

 

4. Division of the proper text. For better orientation in the text, it should contain headings. The headings should be numbered (f.e. 1., 1.1, 1.1.1). Please, use footnotes, not endnotes. Footnotes should be placed after punctuation. Each note

should have a dot in the end. Do not include bibliography at the end of the paper.

 

An example of a paper may be found here:

 

If the requirments on the papers are not complied with (mainly the prescribed form of quotation from publications), the paper will not be accepted and presented to reviewers.

 

Quotation from publications in German languagewrite down in the underlined comments in such a way:


BRAUN, A., Kirchenrecht. Wien, 2005, S. 151-152.

BRAUN, A., Zur Entwicklung des Kirchenrechts. In: Journal on European History of Law, vol. 6, Nr. 1, 2016, S. 25-34.

BRAUN, A., Zur Entwicklung des Kirchenrechts. In: KLEIN, O. (Hrsg.), Enzyklopädie der österreichischen Rechtsgeschichte. Wien, 2016, S. 25-34. 

 

Quotation from publications in English language – write down in the underlined comments in such a way:


BRAUN, A., Kirchenrecht. Wien, 2005, p. 151-152.

BRAUN, A., Zur Entwicklung des Kirchenrechts. In: Journal on European History of Law, vol. 6, Nr. 1, 2016, p. 25-34.

BRAUN, A., Zur Entwicklung des Kirchenrechts. In: KLEIN, O. (Ed.), Enzyklopädie der österreichischen Rechtsgeschichte. Wien, 2016, p. 25-34. 

 

 

 

Peer review process

 

Submitted manuscripts first undergo an in-house review by the Editors who decide on acceptance or rejection for the full review procedure, on the grounds of conformity to the formal and substantive requirements of the journal.

If accepted, the article is then sent to two reviewers, experts in the given area of research.

 

Every effort is made to maintain both professional and personal independence between the author and the reviewers; however we ask the authors to indicate the persons who have read the paper, and/or have cooperated in its completion before its submission.

 

Also, the author may state in a separate letter the reasons why he wishes specific person should not be contacted for reviewing

purposes; the Editors however reserve the right of final decision on the reviewers. Please allow usually six months for the completion of the review process. Based on the verdicts, we will either:

publish the article as it is or after minor revisions (specified and subsequently reviewed by the Editors), or

ask the author for a major revision and resubmission, after which another round of external reviewing will take place, or

decline the text for further consideration.

 

Although the opponents' reviews are of crucial importance, the final decision on acceptance of the article for publishing, or its rejection, is solely the right and responsibility of the Editorial team and the Editor-in-Chief. In case of contradictory or otherwise conflicting reviews, a third one will be solicited.

 

 

Guidelines for authors to download