Length: 2,500 words. Longer reviews are possible upon consultation with the editors.

Deadline. Reviews will be due fourth months upon receipt of the book. Extra time will be available upon request.

Content and Coverage. Reviewers should include a summary of the book’s content. In the case of longer edited volumes, reviewers can be selective about which chapters they devote most of their attention to with the proviso that we expect all chapters to get some attention. Reviewers should provide balanced reviews that summarize the content, which pay attention to the quality of the arguments presented, the evidence deployed, and their familiarity with the relevant scholarship. Pinpointing factual errors should be given minimal focus, but where there are significant problems, reviewers we can include an addendum with those problems. Indeed, lists of typos and errors should be kept to a minimum, unless essential.  We have a zero-tolerance policy on inconsiderate comments should also be there. Reviewers should be considerate, but if a negative review is merited, one should be provided. Simply disagreeing with the scope and logic of a publication does not merit a negative review; insufficient application of scholarly standards or widely untenable conclusions do.

Practical Guidelines: avoid direct quotations from the publication; aim for a balanced discussion of all points, not the points the reviewer may be more interested in. Additonally, reviewers should evaluate a book on its own terms; in other words, reviewers should not criticize an author for not writing the book that they would have wanted. Reviewers should disclose any links to the author, publisher, or their respective institutions. PhD candidates are invited to submit without a nomination from their supervisor.

Formatting and Format: ideally, reviewers should submit their reviews as a word file. References to primary sources can be abbreviated, using the standard abbreviations found in the Oxford Classical Dictionary and Anne Philologique. References to modern works should be given in full in footnotes.