Skip to main content Accessibility help
Review process

This journal uses a double-anonymised model of peer review. Neither author nor reviewers know the identity of each other. 

Peer Review

All submissions are considered by the Editor in the first instance. Research, Method, Debate and Project Gallery papers are peer-reviewed by a minimum of two experts. Peer reviewers are selected for their knowledge and expertise, and may include, but are not limited to, Antiquity’s Editorial Advisory Board. 

Reviewers are asked to comment on a paper’s potential international interest, originality, clarity and strength of argument.

This journal operates a double-blind peer review policy for Research, Method, Debate and Project Gallery submissions.

All submissions to ScholarOne are subject to the CrossRef Similarity Check.

The Editor and Deputy Editor regret that they are unable to enter into correspondence regarding articles that are not accepted for publication. The editorial team base decisions on a range of factors, so despite a paper being a strong submission and well received by the peer reviewers, there may be others with even stronger support, larger datasets, or that showcase underrepresented regions. Resubmissions of papers declined following peer review will only be considered when invited by the Editor. Please note that the opportunity to resubmit a paper in no way indicates acceptance. All resubmissions will be subject to further peer review.


To appeal an editorial decision, please contact the Editor (at and specify the reason for your appeal. 

Your appeal will be reviewed by the Editor and/or an Editor who did not review the manuscript. The final decision regarding your appeal will rest with the Antiquity Editor and Editorial Advisory Board.