Author Guidelines

Aethiopica invites submissions on current academic topics as well as on recent research in philology, linguistics, archaeology, history, cultural anthropology, religion, philosophy, literature, and manuscript studies focussing on Eritrea, Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa.

If you are unsure whether your topic fits within the scope of Aethiopica please contact us.

We encourage you to bring newly published books and completed dissertations to the attention of the editorial team.

Aethiopica expects all authors and other contributors to respect and closely follow Aethiopica’s Publication Ethics.

Contribution Types

Aethiopica publishes contributions in the form of Research Articles, Miscellanea, Review Notes and Review Articles.

Research Articles 

Research Articles are expected to range between 5,000 to 10,000 words, including abstract (150–300 words) and bibliographic references.

The author is expected to provide a title page indicating

  • Title of the contribution
  • Names and affiliations of all contributors
  • Contact data, including email address and telephone of all contributors
  • Brief biographical details, including current employment, research fields and projects of all contributors
  • Three to six keywords, suitable for indexing. These words should not appear in the title of the article.

Articles should have a clear internal structure

  • Introduction
  • Sections and subsections (one or more, numbered or not depending on the presence of subsections)
  • Conclusion
  • References
  • Short bibliographical citations in footnotes
  • Abstract in English.

Each articles starts on a new page, but this can be an even or an odd page.
Articles are

  • Open submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer-reviewed.


Miscellanea are similar to articles but normally shorter (3,000–6,000 words) and of a more technical nature. This type of contribution is recommended to present latest and urgent research results in a shorter form in order to make them known and accessible.

The author is expected to provide a title page indicating

  • Title of the contribution
  • Names and affiliations of all contributors
  • Contact data, including email address and telephone of all contributors
  • Brief biographical details, including current employment, research fields and projects of all contributors
  • Three to six keywords, suitable for indexing. These words should not appear in the title of the article.

Depending on the content, it is advisable that miscellanea also have a clear internal structure:

  • Introduction
  • One or more sections
  • Conclusion
  • References
  • Short bibliographical citations in footnotes
  • Abstract in English.

Each miscellanea starts on a new page, but this can be an even or an odd page.
Headers for miscellanea are different from articles’.
Miscellanea are

  • Open submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer-reviewed


Authors are usually contacted by the editorial team on suggestion of the editorial board to write an obituary. Unsolicited submissions are also welcome.
The length of an obituary can vary depending on the way the author has decided to structure the information but should not exceed 3,000–4,000 words.
The author of an obituary can choose whether or not they want to provide a selected bibliography of the deceased scholar. If a bibliography is provided, the author should make sure they adhere to Aethiopica’s guidelines and the information is complete and correct.

The structure of personalia can vary, however they would be expected to

  • Not have a division in sections
  • Have full bibliographic references in footnotes
  • Have (if the author chooses so) a list of selected publications by the deceased scholar.

Personalia do not have a summary.

Personalia follow each other and are divided by a section break and two spaces (style to be used: first paragraph without indentation).
Personalia are

  • Open submissions
  • Indexed.

Review Articles

Review Articles consist in reviews of current research in a particular field with references to more works.
Review Articles range between 2,000 and 3,000 words.
If the Review Article focuses on specific publications, e.g. comparing and analysing them, these should be presented at the outset in the same way as in a Review Note.
Review Articles do not require any internal division.
Review Articles require a list of bibliographical references and an abstract in English at the end.

Each Review Article starts on a new page, but this can be an even or an odd page.
Review Articles are

  • Open submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer-reviewed.

Review Notes

Review Notes focus on one book.
Authors are usually contacted by the editorial team on suggestion of the editorial board and asked to prepare a review. Unsolicited submissions are also welcome.
Review Notes should range between 600 to 1,200 words.
Each Review Note should be headed by the following information: Author(s) (written out, no abbreviation), Title, Place, Publisher, year, number of pages, price, and ISBN number. For example:
Anaïs Wion, Paradis pour une reine: Le monastère de Qoma Fasilädäs, Éthiopie, xviie siècle, Histoire ancienne et médiévale, 112 (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 2012). 488 pp., illus. Price: €40.00. ISBN: 978-2-85944-693-2.

Review Notes should

  • provide a comprehensive overview
  • include a critical but fair assessment of the main research issues with constructive comments about the strength and weaknesses of the book
  • assess the theoretical framework and employed methods
  • evaluate its contribution to the field of discipline and to the ongoing scientific debate
  • indicate the intended audience of the book
  • be accessible to knowledgeable readers who are not specialist of the issue.

Reviewers should express their own ideas and should not focus on minor mistakes or list exhaustively typing errors. If the book is a collective volume written by different authors, reviewers are asked to concentrate on the main themes of the book and its overall contribution, its unifying or diverging perspectives (instead of detailing each author and chapter). Book reviews should not be a mere summary of the book.

Review Notes do not require and should not have any internal division or summary.
Footnotes should be kept to a minimum in reviews.
If bibliographical references need to be provided in a review, these appear as a full bibliographical reference (no short citation) in footnotes (in some cases in the body of the text if the reference is part of the review’s narrative).
Bibliographical references in reviews should be limited to works the reviewer wants to refer to, but not include bibliographical references used in the reviewed text, as this would just be a duplication.

Reviews follow each other and are divided by a section break and two spaces (style to be used: first paragraph without indentation).

Reviews are

  • Open submissions
  • Indexed.

Dissertation Abstracts

Dissertation Abstracts should be approx. 1,000 words.
DAs do not require any internal division or summary.
Bibliographical references should not be provided and footnotes are not expected to be used in DAs.

DAs follow each other and are divided by a section break and two spaces (style to be used: first paragraph without indentation).
DAs are:

  • Open submissions
  • Indexed.



Cut-off Dates

Aethiopica accepts submissions for all contributions types throughout the year.

Although Aethiopica takes any endeavour to publish every contribution as soon as possible, as a general rule of thumb, authors can expect that their contributions be likely published in the same year when

  • Articles and Miscellanea are submitted by the end of January (due to the peer-review process);
  • Personalia and Review Articles are submitted by the end of April;
  • Review Notes and Dissertation Abstracts are submitted by the end of May.

The Editorial Board and the Editorial Team should share as early as possible any information on particularly important or urgent contributions which should appear in the same year even if delivered late, in order to plan and make arrangements with the authors accordingly.

1. Submission

In principle, Aethiopica does not solicit the submission of

  • Articles
  • Miscellanea
  • Review Articles
  • Dissertation Abstracts.

Aethiopica usually solicits the preparation of

  • Review Notes
  • Personalia.

Each manuscript must be an original unpublished contribution which has not yet been submitted for publication elsewhere.
The manuscripts must adhere to the requirements and to the submission guidelines. If these instructions are not followed (for example overly long contributions, inappropriate format), the submission cannot be processed and will be either returned for reformatting or in some cases fully rejected. It is a condition for publication that authors sign a licence agreement with Aethiopica.

Contributors are requested to submit the final version of their manuscripts online and, in so doing, to accept Aethiopica’s copyright note.

No change, alteration or addition to the content, including the bibliography, is allowed following the submission unless

  • This is requested by Aethiopica
  • Actual or factual errors are found by the author
  • There is proven necessity for the sake of the academic value of the contribution—this should be first discussed with Aethiopica and approved.

2. Editorial Board Review

During one of its scheduled meetings, the Editorial Board will review the contributions and establish whether

  • They suit the standards and lay within the scope of the journal
  • They should be sent for peer-review
  • They must be rejected and why
  • They can be accepted and proceed to the editing stage
  • They do not require proof-reading for any reason.

The Editorial Team will notify the author of the decision taken, including the case in which a decision could not be made and the contribution will be re-evaluated at a later stage.
Based from experience so far, during this stage

  • More attention should be paid to any image to be included in the contribution, e.g. number, size, quality of the submitted photos.
  • Any particular instruction for the editorial work should be given at this stage, e.g. if proof-reading is not required, any particular layout requirement, etc.

3. Double-Blind Peer-Review

The Editorial Team submits an anonymous version of the contributions to the reviewer(s) identified by the Editorial Board.

4. Feedback to Author

Following completion of the peer-review process, the Editorial Team will share the outcome of the peer-review with the Editorial Board and with the author.The submitted article can be evaluated either as

  • (a) accepted as it is
  • (b) accepted with minor revisions
  • (c) to be resubmitted with major revisions (i.e. declined for now, future acceptance possible), or
  • (d) rejected.

In the case of (b), the author is given a timeline to address the reviewer’s remarks.

5. Editing and Proofs

Once when a contribution is formally accepted for publication by the Editorial Board, the editorial process will commence and will follow these steps:

  • Initial communication with author: The Editorial Team contacts the authors to inform them that their contribution is accepted. The Editorial Team informs the authors that
    1. Their submission is regarded as final and no changes to the content are expected.
    2. The editorial process consists of laying out and editing the text based on Aethiopica’s guidelines as well as, for non-English native speaking authors, of proof-reading the text by an English native speaker, who will make any effort to limit his interventions to correcting mistakes while respecting the style of the author. None of the editorial and language interventions are to be considered questionable or negotiable, unless the author has reasons to believe they led to mistakes or change of meaning.
    3. If the author wishes to use their own proof-reader, this must be done before the editing process begins and must be discussed with Aethiopica.

  • ‘Englishing’: The Editorial Team sends the accepted manuscript to the proof-reader. This step can be skipped in case of English native speaking authors and of authors who opted to have their contributions proof-read by someone else.

  • Layouting and Editing: The Editorial Team layouts the contributions based on the contribution type and edits them based on the Oxford Style Manual and on our house-rules.

  • Proofs: The Editorial Team sends the proofs to the author as a PDF file marked as follows:
    • Editorial changes marked in yellow: no feedback required unless the author identifies mistakes.
    • Proof-reading changes marked in blue: no feedback required unless the author identifies mistakes.
    • Any problematic or unclear point marked in red with a comment next to them: the author is expected to respond to the comments, ideally in the same PDF file, exceptionally in a separate document or email. Any new Word version of the contribution submitted in response to the proofs will be disregarded.

      The author is given a timeline to respond to the comments. Any extension to this should be discussed with the Editorial Team as soon as possible. The author is expected to check the proofs thoroughly and carefully and to provide feedback on each and every point.
  • Finalization and Imprimatur: The Editorial Team incorporates the feedback from the author and produces new proofs. When there isn’t any open point left, the author will be asked for their imprimatur for the publication both in print and online.

Basic Formatting Rules for the Authors

The publications format is based on the New Oxford Style Manual, with minor adaptations and ‘house rules’. These rules may change over time and are not to be considered negotiable or questionable by the authors, although sector differences are accepted and open to be discussed.
The following basic formatting rules are expected to be followed by authors when submitting a manuscript:

  • Manuscripts are to be submitted in Microsoft Word, double-spaced with 11 point standard font for the main text and 9 pt for the footnotes. Alternatively RTF is also acceptable.
  • Pay close attention to the uniform and consistent arrangement of your manuscript.
  • Do not use any special formatting feature, apart from paragraphing, italics, and tabs (where necessary).
  • Words and phrases selected to be emphasized should be in italics; other ways of marking should be avoided.
  • The manuscript should use Times New Roman as a font.
  • Mark off very clearly non-Latin scripts like Ethiopic, Arabic, Greek, Hebrew, etc.
  • Use UNICODE scripts only. If the use of non-UNICODE fonts is indispensable, the font must be submitted together with the manuscript.
  • Transliteration of non-Latin alphabets should be full and consistent throughout the article.
  • For Ethiopic, use Aethiopica’s transliteration guidelines:
  • For Arabic, use Hans Wehr transliteration (1961/1979, not 1994).
  • In special cases, alternative transliteration systems might be used following discussion with Aethiopica.
  • Refer to the Encyclopaedia Aethiopica for the spelling and transliteration of names.
  • Be absolutely consistent in the spelling and transliteration of names.
  • Use only internationally recognized acronyms, spell out all other acronyms on the first reference.
  • Give inclusive page numbers; do not use ff.
  • For non-Common Era dates specify the calendar used and provide the Common Era equivalent (e.g. h 450/1058 ce).
  • Quotations:
    • Short quotations in the text should be punctuated with single quotation marks.
    • Lengthy quotations (over 50 words) should be displayed, indented, in the text, without quotation marks.
    • The quoted text must be absolutely identical to the original. Any difference (e.g. emphasis, ellipsis, etc.) must be clearly indicated by the author.
  • Use footnotes, not endnotes.
  • Avoid the use of abbreviations wherever possible. Do not use abbreviations for publications, institutions, libraries, etc. Common abbreviations (e.g., i.e., etc., cf.) are acceptable only in notes, not in running text.
  • A translation in English is necessary for text in any language apart from Italian, French, German, Portuguese, Spanish, and Latin. For these languages, it is the author’s choice to provide a translation or not. If a translation is provided, this should be done consistently throughout the manuscript.

Rules on Images for the Authors

  • Where special items to be printed are included (such as, for example, illustrations, tables), the author must ensure they are numbered, provided with an individual caption/title, and an exact reference.
  • The author must indicate the exact point where images, tables and other special items should be placed, as well as any requirement in terms of size of the images and/or level of detail.
  • Whenever third party material is used, authors are solely responsible for obtaining the permission from the copyright holder and to be compliant with any requirements the copyright holder may have pertaining to this reuse.
  • Images must be submitted as separate JPEG or TIFF files.
  • The resolution for images must be at least 600 dpi.
  • Authors should be aware that, in the printed version of the journal, images will be published black and white, although some colour images can be used in exceptional cases. In the online publication, all images can be in colour.

References and Citations

Examples of Citations


Fritsch 2001, 197
Getatchew Haile 1993, X, 233–234.

Volume with different page numbers for edition and translation of a text:

Conti Rossini and Ricci 1964, I, 27 (ed.); 1965, I, 16 (tr.).

Encyclopaedia article:

‘Gädlä sämaʿǝtat’, EAe, II (2005), 644b–646b (A. Bausi)
‘Latson, Apa’, CE, V (1991), 1427b–1428a (R.-G. Coquin).

Online Encyclopaedia article:

‘Ibn Ḥad̲j̲ar al­Haytamī’, EI2 online (2012), (C. van Arendonk and J. Schacht), accessed on 14 July 2016.