This journal aims for a peer review process that is rigorous, constructive, and fair. To accomplish these goals, reviews proceed in the following manner.

 Articles

1.     Corresponding author submits their paper to ScholarOne and receives an email confirming receipt of the manuscript.

2.     The Managing Editor reviews the submission for appropriate formatting and fit, that is, that it contains no information which reveals the author’s identity, that it focuses on some element of the history of African peoples and societies, and that it is within the acceptable range of our 10,000-word limit requirement. Articles that meet these requirements are assigned to a Primary Editor based on geographic area. Submissions that include identifying information are withdrawn and the author is notified by email of the specific issues needing resolution before resubmission. Articles that are not topically appropriate or unduly long or short are desk rejected.

3.     The Primary Editor makes an initial determination of whether the paper warrants peer review. While the editors employ a liberal policy of obtaining peer reviewers for all viable papers, respect for the time and labor of our readers means editors will desk reject papers with clearly inappropriate methodologies (for example, not based significantly on primary source research), lack of a historical or historiographical argument, or an underdeveloped engagement with the existing literature on their topic.

4.     Papers which are selected for review are initially sent out to two or three prospective readers who the editor deems to be expert on the topic of the paper or a related field. Editors require at least two reports to issue a formal decision. If reviewer invitations are declined or go unanswered, the editors will expand the search over time by asking other potential readers. The journal aims to provide a timely decision, generally within four to eight months of submission.

5.     The Primary Editor will send a formal decision email—including the reader reports—to the contributor conveying one of three possible outcomes: Reject, Revise and Resubmit (R&R), or Accept with Revisions. R&R is the most frequent recommendation of reviewers, and the editors consider this a positive decision, as all of the published articles have gone through the revision process.

6.     Authors of Accept with Revision and R&R articles are expected to make a good faith effort to implement the suggested improvements before resubmitting via ScholarOne (please note that there is a six-month resubmission window on this platform, although it can be extended by special request to [email protected]). The editors hope that authors of rejected articles will follow the recommendations offered in the decision letter when crafting future submissions to the journal (please note the journal only considers one submission per contributor per twelve-month period).

7.     The Primary Editor will examine resubmissions to ensure the contributor has resolved the recommendations contained in the decision letter. If so, papers resubmitted as R&Rs are sent out for further review—with at least one reader, possibly including reviewer(s) from earlier rounds—which will again result in a decision of R&R, Accept with Revisions, or Reject. For papers accepted pending revisions, Primary Editors either approve the resubmitted version as final or send it back to the author for further changes. Please ensure the paper meets the journal’s style requirements to secure Final Approval. After Final Approval the paper is sent to the Managing Editor to coordinate copy-editing.

 History Matters (HM)

 The process for reviewing HMs is the same as that outlined for articles above, aside from the following:

1.     The initial determination of formatting and fit by the Managing Editor is designed to ensure the piece explores the contemporary relevance of a question in African history or the study thereof, and that the manuscript is 4,000–6,000 words in length.

2.     Primary Editor duties are assigned to a member of the team tasked with all HMs regardless of geographic focus.

3.     While peer-review remains double-blind, the desire to nimbly respond to current events means that reviewers are often (but not always) recruited from the journal’s Editorial Advisory Board and that a single reader report is required to inform the Primary Editor’s decision.

 Book Reviews and Featured Reviews

The journal has expanded the process through which it secures reviews of recently published books of significance to the field of African History. Book Reviews are expected to be between 800 and 1,000 words and Featured Reviews between 2,000 and 3,000 words. The majority of reviews are typically commissioned by the Reviews Editor. This process involves the editor inviting a scholar to assess novel and groundbreaking works, and particularly those authored by junior scholars. On occasion, the journal will also consider requests to review specific books, including from advanced graduate students. Individuals interested in reviewing should reach out to the Reviews Editor or the Managing Editor ([email protected]), and must disclose any personal relationship or shared institutional affiliation with the author of the book they propose to review. The Reviews Editor will determine if any such relationship is disqualifying.

Both commissioned reviewers and those whose proposals are accepted will submit their reviews via an email link to ScholarOne sent out by the Reviews Editor. Book reviews should provide analysis, rather than simply a description of the contents and argument of a work. The determination of how many rounds of revisions this requires to achieve is at the sole discretion of the Reviews Editor.

The Reviews Editor will consider a single response of up to 750-words by any author whose work has been reviewed in the journal in the past twelve months. If the response is accepted, the initial reviewer will then be offered a chance to read the response and compose a final statement of 500-words. The journal does not, as a policy, review works by current editors or any members of its Editorial Advisory Board.