Aims & Scope
The series, directed by Lucio Milano, is devoted to the studies of the ancient and late-ancient world. It is intended for hosting both publications arising from the research activities of Ca’ Foscari and publications of Italian and foreign scholars and institutions that help to highlight the academic network of national and international collaborations in the field of Classical. It is divided into four sections: History and Epigraphy; Archeology; Oriental Studies; Philology and Literature.
Permalink doi.org | e-ISSN 2610-9344 | ISSN 2610-8828 | Language en, fr, it | ANCE E233745
Subseries
Archeologia
e-ISSN
2610-9344
ISSN
2610-8828
Filologia e letteratura
e-ISSN
2610-9352
ISSN
2610-8836
Storia ed epigrafia
e-ISSN
2610-8291
ISSN
2610-8801
Studi orientali
e-ISSN
2610-9336
ISSN
2610-881X
Copyright This is an open-access work distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction is permitted, provided that the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. The license allows for commercial use. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Latest published volume
The volume Wine Cultures. Gandhāra and Beyond represents the primary outcome of the MALIWI project (SPIN Ca’ Foscari 2021) directed by Claudia Antonetti. Adopting an interdisciplinary approach, this work seeks to explore the production techniques, social functions, and cultural significance of intoxicating drinks with particular reference to wine – an extraordinary beverage that has been intertwined with human history for millennia. This volume gathers contributions by scholars interested in studying wine and drinking culture in Gandhāra and neighbouring regions, including Ancient Assyria, Arachosia, and present-day India. The topic is explored from three fundamental perspectives, employing a diverse range of sources, including literary and historical texts, as well as linguistic, iconographic, archaeological, and anthropological evidence.
The Necessary Anomaly
July 18, 2024
The Broken Body
June 24, 2024
Un monde partagé : la Sicile du premier siècle av. J.-C. entre Diodore et Cicéron
Dec. 19, 2023
Wisdom Between East and West: Mesopotamia, Greece and Beyond
July 9, 2024
Opitergium Necropolis
May 30, 2023
Son of the Flash, Worthy of a King. A Veneto Horse and its Harness
Dec. 16, 2022
Libertatis dulcedo
Feb. 4, 2022
Paulo maiora canamus
Dec. 14, 2021
ΦΑΙΔΙΜΟΣ ΕΚΤΩΡ
Dec. 16, 2021
Headscarf and Veiling
Aug. 30, 2021
Stolen Heritage
March 31, 2021
Corpus of Nabataean Aramaic-Greek Inscriptions
April 26, 2021
Administration at Girsu in Gudea’s Time
June 3, 2020
Life in Nuzi’s Suburbs
May 21, 2020
Epigraphic Falsification
Dec. 16, 2019
Altera pars laboris
Dec. 11, 2019
The Gift of Altino
Dec. 16, 2019
Agrippina Maggiore
Dec. 3, 2019
The Soul of Things
Nov. 23, 2019
Elites and Culture
July 6, 2019
Before the Excavation
Nov. 20, 2018
The Unwound Yarn
July 4, 2018
Personal Names in the Aramaic Inscriptions of Hatra
May 18, 2018
Seleucid Tablets from Uruk in the British Museum
April 5, 2018
Epigrafia ostiense dopo il CIL. 2000 iscrizioni funerarie
Jan. 26, 2023
Digital and Collaborative Tools for Antiquity Studies
Nov. 29, 2017
Certissima signa
Sept. 1, 2017
The City of Ebla
June 13, 2017
Languages, Objects, and the Transmission of Rituals
July 12, 2017
The Protopalatial Building of the ‘Acropoli Mediana’ in Phaistos (Rooms CV-CVII)
March 1, 2017
The Reception of Sumerian Literature in the Western Periphery
July 8, 2016
Commensality and Ceremonial Meals in the Neo-Assyrian Period
Dec. 30, 2015
The She-Wolf on the Nile
Feb. 20, 2015
Egyptian Antiquities and Italy
Jan. 13, 2015
History and Stories of the Greek Language
Dec. 10, 2014
Powers and Legitimacy in the Ancient World
Nov. 25, 2014
Protopalatial Phaistos
Oct. 1, 2013
Aspects of the Ablaita Prepositional System
April 1, 2013
Microstories of Romanization
March 30, 2013
Use the form to submit a proposal.
Submit a proposalinput
The article processing charges are regulated by the Publisher. For more information please visit: Publish with us.
The series adopts double-blind peer review as its benchmark.
Therefore, the published works have obtained a favourable opinion from at least two evaluators who are experts in the field, through an anonymous review process (double-blind peer review) conducted under the responsibility of the Scientific Direction of the series. The reviewers have no direct contact with the authors and belong to research institutions other than the one to which the series is affiliated.
In rarer cases, the series may adopt other types of referencing processes, such as open review, i.e. a non-anonymous review, or a mixed review involving a member of the Scientific Committee and an external evaluator. These options are determined by the specific characteristics of the research subject of the publication, or by other peculiar factors that determine the greater effectiveness of the alternatives indicated here.
Every work published in Antichistica was accepted for publication by no less than two qualified reviewers as a result of a process of anonymous reviewing (double-blind peer review). The reviewers are independent of the authors and not affiliated with the same institution.
The Series’ Editor-in-Chief guarantees the proper execution of the peer review process for every book published in the Series.
Peer review policies for the different sections:
Ethical Code of Antichistica
Antichistica is a peer-reviewed scientific book series whose policy is inspired by the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Ethical Code.
Publisher’s responsibilities
The Publisher must provide the Book Series with adequate resources and the guidance of experts, in order to carry out its role in the most professional way, aiming at the highest quality standard.
The Publisher must have a written agreement that defines the relationship with the owner of the Book Series and/or the Editor-in-Chief. The agreement must comply with the Code of Behavior for Publishers of Scientific Journals, as established by COPE.
The relationship among the Editor-in-Chief, the Advisory Board and the Publisher is based on the principle of publishing independence.
Editors’ responsibilities
The Editor-in-Chief and the Advisory Board of Antichistica alone are responsible for the decision to publish the submitted works.
Submitted works, after having been checked for plagiarism by means of the anti-plagiarism software Compilatio that is used by the University and is made available to us, will be sent to at least two reviewers. Final acceptance presumes the implementation of possible amendments, as required by the reviewers and under the supervision of the Antichistica Editor-in-Chief.
The Antichistica Editor-in-Chief and Advisory Board must evaluate each submitted paper in compliance with the Book Seriesʼ policy, i.e. exclusively on the basis of its scientific content, without discrimination of race, sex, gender, creed, ethnic origin, citizenship, or the scientific, academic and political position of the Authors.
Allegations of misconduct
If the Antichistica Editor-in-Chief and Advisory Board notice (or receive notifications of) mistakes or inaccuracies, conflict of interest or plagiarism in a published book, they will immediately warn the Author and the Publisher and will undertake the necessary actions to resolve the issue. They will do their best to correct the published content whenever they are informed that it contains scientific errors or that the authors have committed unethical or illegal acts in connection with their published work. If necessary, they will withdraw the book or publish a recantation.
All complaints are handled in accordance with the guidelines published by the COPE.
Concerns and complaints must be addressed to the following e-mail ecf_support@unive.it. The letter should contain the following information:
Authors’ responsibilities
Stylesheet
Authors must follow the Guidelines for Authors to be downloaded from the Antichistica website.
Authors must explicitly state that their work is original in all its parts and that the submitted paper has not been previously published, nor submitted to other publishers, until the entire evaluation process is completed. Since no paper or book gets published without significant revision, earlier dissemination in conference proceedings or working papers does not preclude consideration for publication, but Authors are expected to fully disclose publication/dissemination of the material in other closely related publications, so that the overlap can be evaluated by the Antichistica Editor-in-Chief.
Authorship
Authors are strongly encouraged to use their ORCID iD when submitting a manuscript. This will ensure the authors’ visibility and correct citation of their work.
Authorship must be correctly attributed; all those who have given a substantial contribution to the design, organisation and accomplishment of the research the book is based on, must be indicated as Co-Authors. Please ensure that: the order of the author names is correct; the names of all authors are present and correctly spelled, and that affiliations are up-to-date.
The respective roles of each co-author should be described in a footnote. The statement that all authors have approved the final version should be included in the disclosure.
Conflicts of interest and financing
Authors, under their own responsibility, must avoid any conflict of interest affecting the results obtained or the interpretations suggested. The Antichistica Editor-in-Chief will give serious and careful consideration to suggestions of cases in which, due to possible conflict of interest, an Author’s work should not be reviewed by a specific scholar. Authors should indicate any financing agency or the project the book stems from.
Quotations
Authors must see to it that all works consulted be properly quoted. If works or words of others are used, they have to be properly paraphrased or duly quoted. Quotations between “double quotes” (or «angled quotation marks» if the text is written in a language other than English) must reproduce the exact wording of the source; under their own responsibility, Authors should carefully refrain from disguising a restyling of the source’s wording, as though it was the original formulation.
Any form of excessive, inappropriate or unnecessary self-citation, as well as any other form of citation manipulation, are strongly discouraged.
Ethical Committee
Whenever required, the research protocols must be authorised in advance by the Ethical Committee of Ca’ Foscari University of Venice.
Emendations
When Authors find a mistake or an inaccuracy in their own work, they must immediately warn the Antichistica Editor-in-Chief, providing all the information needed to make the due adjustments.
Reviewers’ responsibilities
Goal
By means of the peer-review procedure, reviewers assist the Antichistica Editor-in-Chief and Advisory Board in taking decisions on the submitted works. They are expected to offer the Authors suggestions as to possible adjustments aimed at improving their contribution submission.
Timing and conflicts of interest
If a reviewer does not feel up to the task of doing a given review, or if she/he is unable to read the work within the agreed schedule, she/he should notify the Antichistica Editor-in-Chief. Reviewers must not accept texts for which there is a conflict of interest due to previous contributions or to a competition with a disclosed author (or with an author they believe to have identified).
Confidentiality
The content of the reviewed work must be considered confidential and must not be used without explicit authorisation by the Author, who is to be contacted via the editor-in-chief. Any confidential information obtained during the peer review process should not be used for other purposes.
Collaborative attitude
Reviewers should see themselves not as adversaries but as advocates for the field. Any comment must be done in a collaborative way and from an objective point of view. Reviewers should clearly motivate their comments and keep in mind the Golden Rule of Reviewing: “Review for others as you would have others review for you”.
Plagiarism
Reviewers should report any similarity or overlapping of the work under analysis with other works known to them.
Edizioni Ca’ Foscari
Dorsoduro 3246
30123 Venezia
ecf@unive.it
T +39 041 234 8250
Evologi srl
P.IVA 04616450260