Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

"The Middle Ages. Studies on the history of the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times" (Srednie veka. Studies on Medieval and Early Modern History) is a leading Russian academic scientific journal on the history of the European Middle Ages and early Modern times.One of the oldest Russian periodicals in the field of history. For many years, until recently, it was the only specialized scientific publication on medieval studies.

At present, the journal publishes original research materials of both Russian and foreign historians, concerning predominantly West European medieval and early modern history, and articles that deal with neighbouring regions and adjoining disciplines. The journal publishes articles on economic, social and political history, including international politics. The subjects include studies of popular movements of a different kind; history of the town and its numerous institutions; history of village and peasantry, including internal life of a community, peasant and seigneurial economy. There are also materials concerning the history of medieval culture, both spiritual and material. A significant place is given to publishing sources in Russian translation, historiographical overviews, and information about main Russian research centres dealing with medieval history. On a regular basis, there are materials for those teaching in secondary schools and higher educational institutions, reviews of Russian and foreign books, bibliography of Russian editions concerning the history of Western Europe during the mid-4th – mid-17th centuries.

The journal has recurring rubrics (‘Many faces of Medieval Studies’, ‘History of Russian Medieval Studies’, ‘Historian’s Workshop’, ‘Neighbouring regions and adjacent disciplines’), with articles and materials on historiography, source study, and special historical disciplines (e.g. genealogy, heraldry, numismatics, codicology, etc.), reflecting the present state of medieval studies, and also different approaches and methods applied in the research during recent years. The policy of the editorial board is to encourage multidisciplinary research, which is reflected in the topics of the published articles. A broad range of disciplines is involved, such as the history of science, law history, historical geography, archaeology of the Middle Ages, historical anthropology, etc.

The journal reflects the medieval studies of both research and educational centres in Russia and also in neighbouring and other countries. The journal publishes the articles of both recognized and young researchers.

Peer Review Process

Institute of World History, the Russian Academy of Sciences, as a founder, represented by the Editorial Board and the Editorial Council, is committed to the strict supervision of the published research materials. All reviews and research papers received by the editorial office are subject to mandatory unilateral anonymous (‘blind’) reviewing.

• Members of the Editorial Board and the Editorial council and leading Russian and international experts in corresponding areas invited as independent readers perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief and executive secretary choose readers for peer review. The review process takes 1–2 months.
• Each article is sent to two reviewers.
• Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations (each decision should be substantiated):
  
  • to accept the paper for publication in its present state;
  • to invite the author to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before the final decision is reached;
  • that final decision be reached following further reviewing by another specialist;
  • to reject the manuscript outright.
• If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial staff would suggest the author either implement the corrections or reasonably dispute them (partly or completely). Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 1 month and resubmit the adapted manuscript within this period for final evaluation.
• We politely request that the editor be notified verbally or in writing should the author decide to refuse to publish the manuscript.
• If the author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding the revision of the manuscript, the Editorial board can send it for additional reviewing. In case of a conflict, the editor-in-chief resolves it by his own authority.
• The editorial board reaches the final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing, according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation. The refusals are 15% of the submissions. 
• Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
• Kindly note that a positive review does not guarantee acceptance, as the final decision in all cases lies with the Editorial board. By his authority, the editor-in-chief rules the final solution of every conflict.
• Every issue ready to be published is reviewed by two experts that do not belong to either the Editorial Board or the Editorial council of the edition. Based on these reviews, the academic council of the founding organization decides on the publication of the issue. Original copies of the reviews are kept for 3 years.

Publication Frequency

The journal is published 4 times a year

Indexation

The journal is indexed in:

• RSCI
• Scopus
• CrossRef
• Google Scholar

Publishing ethics

1. Introduction.
   1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more, it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for the journal: "Srednie Veka"
   1.2. The Editorial board has a supporting, investing, and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process and is ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications. The journal does not publishe commercial advertisements.
2. Duties of Editors.
   2.1. Publication decision. The Editor of a scholarly journal "Srednie Veka" is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the "Srednie Veka" journal’s Editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor may confer with other reviewers and members of the Editorial Board in making this decision.
   2.2. Fair play. An Editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
   2.3. Confidentiality. The Editor and the Editorial board of "Srednie Veka" must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
   2.4. Vigilance over a published record. An Editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.
   2.5. Involvement and cooperation in investigations. In conjunction with the Editorial Board and the Editorial council, the Editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
3. Duties of Reviewers
   3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions. Peer review assists the Editor in making editorial decisions, and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method.
   3.2. Promptness. Any selected referee can refuse to review and, in that case, should notify the editor of "Srednie Veka" and excuse himself from the review process during 2–3 working days after getting the proposition of reviewing.
   3.3. Confidentiality. Any manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential document. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the Editor. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
   3.4. Standard and objectivity. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
   3.5.Acknowledgement of Sources. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call the Editor’s attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
   3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
4. Duties of Authors
   4.1. Reporting standards. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
   4.2. Originality and Plagiarism. 4.2.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
   4.2.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, such as ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), and claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
   4.3. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication. 4.4.1. An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
   4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
   4.4.3. Publication of some articles (e.g., translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, reflecting the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
   4.5.Acknowledgement of Sources. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
   4.6.Authorship of the Paper. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Wh ere others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
   4.9. Fundamental errors in published works. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the Editor of "Srednie Veka" journal and cooperate with him to retract or correct the paper. If the Editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to retract or correct the paper promptly