The Journal of the Australian Early Medieval Association publishes articles on all aspects of early medieval studies. Especially, it seeks material that crosses traditional disciplinary boundaries and takes new approaches: all disciplines, methodologies, and approaches are welcome. JAEMA publishes scholarly articles, book reviews, and short notices. There is no cost to contributors for the publication of their material in JAEMA. Contributors are responsible for obtaining and paying for permission to use copyrighted material.
Annual submission deadlines:
- for inclusion within issue 1 – 30 April
- for inclusion within issue 2 – 1 September
Articles, Creative Work, Review Essays & Translations
Original articles, creative work, review essays, translations and correspondence about all of the former should be sent to the Editor at journal@aema.net.au. Please see the Articles page for further information.
Book Reviews & Short Notices
Books for review and correspondence about reviews should be sent to the Reviews Editor at reviews@aema.net.au. Please see the Book Reviews and Short Notices page for further information.
Peer review process
All published research articles undergo double-blind peer review. The author’s identity is not known to the reviewer and reviewers’ identities are not known to the author. A submission should only include a title and should not include the author’s name or any other comments that enable a reviewer to identify the author.
The Editor undertakes initial determination of the appropriateness of a submission for publication in JAEMA and then selects peer reviewers. When the Editor is the author or has any other competing interest regarding a submission, another member of the Editorial Board will be assigned to oversee peer review. Normally two reviewers external to the association membership will be sought who have expertise and an international reputation in the field. In exceptional circumstances a decision to publish can be based on one review report. In such cases the Editor may act as a second reviewer if sufficiently expert in the field, although in that circumstance, for the sake of transparency, the Editor will make that known to the author.
The reports from reviewers is expected back in a timely fashion of approximately six to eight weeks after accepting the review request. It is the responsibility of reviewers to reveal any potential conflict of interest when approached with a request to review a particular submission. The report should offer critical evaluation of the originality of the submission’s argument and its contribution to scholarship, appropriateness of method, engagement with relevant literature and accuracy of referencing, accuracy of interpretation or fact, validity of conclusions, and offer a recommendation to the Editor about suitability for publication based on detailed reasoning and recommendations to the author about improvements to make a submission publishable where necessary.
Peer reviewers should abide by the principles of COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer-reviewers with regard to maintaining professional standards of integrity, courtesy, and confidentiality. The Editor will consider the peer-reviewed reports when making a decision, but is not bound by the opinions or recommendations therein. Authors receive the peer-review reports with the editorial decision on their submission. Any concerns about the peer-review process by authors or reviewers should be raised with the Editor in the first instance.