1.Focus and Scope
2.Open Access Policy
3.ARYS indexation
4.Plagiarism Policy
5.Ethical and good practices guidelines
6. Gender perspective
7. Evaluators’ ethical obligations
8. Percentage of articles rejected

Focus and Scope

Edited by the UC3M Institute of Historiography together with the ARYS Association. It is dedicated to the interaction between religious and social phenomena in the ancient world. It has an annual periodicity and is multilingual. Each volume contains a monographic section, with its own scientific edition, a miscellaneous section and a book review section.

Open Access Policy

The content of this publication is available online in open access, immediately after its publication and at no cost to the user, who can read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link the full texts of articles published for academic purposes.

ARYS does not charge authors any article processing charges (APC).

The documents include the Creative Commons 4.0 license: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Copying, reproduction, distribution and public communication of the work is permitted, provided that the original author is cited and acknowledged. Derivative works may not be created or used for commercial purposes.

ARYS indexation

Indexed in ESCI (WoS), SCOPUS, CIRC, Dialnet, DICE, ERIH PLUS, Humanities Source Ultimate, EBSCO Discovery Service, Interclassica, Latindex, MIAR, RESH, L'Année Philologique, ATLA RDB, Catálogo 2.0 LATINDEX, REDIB, ANVUR (Agenzia Nazionale di Valutazione del Sistema Universitario e della Ricerca, Italia), CAPES (Brasil): A3 classification in the Subject Area History, DOAJ, approved its inclusion in the next edition of CARHUS Plus +.

ARYS. Antigüedad: Religiones y Sociedades has has renewed the excellent journal certificate and the FECYT quality seal in 2024.

Plagiarism Policy

To ensure the journal's academic integrity, ARYS is currently using Feedback Studio to review article submissions in order to identify poor citation practices and to avoid plagiarism.

Ethical and good practices guidelines

ETHICS AND GOOD PUBLICATION PRACTICE GUIDELINES OF ARYS (ANTIQUITY, RELIGIONS, AND SOCIETIES) JOURNAL

Aiming to preserve and promote a scientific output that suits the principles of integrity, honesty and transparency which reflect the ethics applied within the academic community, this editorial team lets its readers know the guideline on ethics and good publication practice, following, among others, those stated by the Code of Conduct of the COPE (Committee On Publication Ethics).

 1.      Object, ownership, management and publishing policy.

a)      ARYS is a journal edited at the University Carlos III of Madrid.

b)      It is edited by the Institute of Historiography Julio Caro Baroja together with the ARYS Association.

c)      The ARYS journal is dedicated to the interaction between religious and social phenomena in the ancient world.

d)      ARYS has an annual periodicity. The date of publication is December.

e)      Editors are responsible to identify and prevent the publication of papers in which malpractices have taken place. ARYS will by no means tolerate, admit or promote that kind of misconduct.

f)       In case misconduct was detected after having taken place, ARYS is committed to publish corrections and retractions whenever needed. 

 2.      Definition, duties and obligations of the editors.

a)      The editorial team of this journal is made up by: its Director, its Co-Director, its Secretary, its Technical Secretaries, its Editorial Board, and its Advisory Board. All of these positions are designed to ensure the scientific and academic quality of the journal, and to make sure that the ethical standards are met. The full names and affiliations of the editorial team’s members are provided on the website of ARYS.

b)      Editors must answer the requirements and complaints of both readers and authors.

c)      Editors must work for a constant improvement of the journal.

d)      Editors must ensure the quality of the material they publish, through a series of processes, such as the peer review and the anti-plagiarism system (currently, Feedback Studio).

e)      Editors must look after the implementation of the freedom of expression.

f)       Editors must respect published works, keeping them unaltered, except when retractions or corrections are needed.

g)      Editors must prevent any political or economic needs from affecting academic standards.

h)      Editors must be willing to publish any corrections or apologies when required.

i)       Editors must promote academic integrity.

j)       Editors must encourage debate and exchange of ideas.

k)      Editors must ensure that the performance of their duties is always balanced and fair, avoiding any discrimination on grounds of the gender, age, sexual, religious or political orientation of the authors, and of the contents of their articles.

3.      Guarantees offered to readers and digital archive policy.

a)      All contributions that reach readers via this journal will have passed a rigorous evaluation process, carried out by specialists, whose qualification is certified by the editors.

b)      The evaluation process will be impartial and objective in all cases, avoiding any possibility that personal criteria could affect the publication.

c)      All contributions will be written in accordance with the publication guidelines.

d)      Readers can address the editorial team whenever they have any suggestions or complaints.

e)      ARYS is an open access journal. The content of this publication is available online in its digital version, immediately after its publication and at no cost to the user, who can read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link the full texts of articles published for academic purposes.

f)       The published contents of ARYS, should the journal cease its activity, would still be accessible through its website, which would in any case be kept as an article repository.

 4.      Relationship with authors and authors’ obligations.

a)      Publishing and submitting to ARYS does not involve the payment of any fee from authors.

b)      Authors are obliged to submit the work that they want ARYS to publish to the double blind peer review process established by this journal.

c)      All authors that sign a paper must have significantly contributed and participated in its research.

d)      Authors are obliged to make the appropriate corrections when they are asked to.

e)      All authors must acknowledge and cite properly the works that they have used and from which their research has profited, adapting references to the publication guidelines stated in the journal’s website. Likewise, papers must be accompanied by a list of references cited and used by authors.

f)       Should authors need to reproduce any content from other sources, it is their responsibility to obtain the appropriate permissions.

g)      When a research if the product of a specific funding source, authors must state this clearly in their papers.

h)      All manuscripts must be strictly original. It is forbidden to send for publication a paper that has already been published, or to submit an article to ARYS at the same time as to other journals. When authors consider that their paper could overlap with the contents of previously published works of their own, they must warn the editors, and facilitate those other texts so that editors can compare them properly.

i)       It is also not acceptable for authors to break up or segment data from a single research and create from it different manuscripts for publication.

j)       Each paper will be appropriately and explicitly signed with its authorship. ARYS will also state clearly the date of receipt and acceptance.

k)      Whenever an author detects a significant error in his or her work, whether it has been already published or is still being evaluated, it is the author’s obligation to notify this information to the editors, and to cooperate with them to retract the paper.

l)       The editors’ decision on accepting or not a contribution will always be based on its importance, relevance, originality and clarity, and it will be subject to its adequacy within the journal’s research areas.

m)   Once a paper has been accepted it cannot be rejected even though there were changes within the editorial team, except if there were any severe problems with the paper that had gone unnoticed before.

n)      The journal is fully committed to publish its publication guidelines, so that authors can adapt their manuscripts to suit them. The same applies to the process of evaluation of contributions.

o)      Authors have the right to know the reasons of rejection of their works, and may appeal the editorial decisions on them.

p)      All of the information needed to submit work for publication, as well as the selection criteria, is accessible through the journal’s website.

 5.      Evaluation process and relationship with reviewers.

a)      All contents published by ARYS will have passed successfully the established evaluation process.

b)      The process of evaluation will be carried out by external reviewers, experts in the field to which the manuscript to be reviewed belongs.

c)      Reviewers must not keep, use, or alter the manuscripts that they receive. The aim of giving them access to such manuscripts is exclusively for the purpose of the evaluation.

d)      Reviewers are obliged to look after the scientific and academic quality of the manuscripts that they evaluate, and thus, their reviews must be based upon these criteria, never conditioned by any kind of personal preference.

e)      Reviewers must inform duly to editors if they detect any kind of dishonest practices or misconduct in the article they evaluate.

f)       The evaluation process, a double blind peer review, will be carried out in a completely anonymous way. After the reception of a manuscript, two external evaluators, unconnected with each other, will be given a copy of the text. They will not know the authorship of the manuscript that they are evaluating. After reading the text, reviewers will issue a report to the editors, in which they must specify and reason if they consider that the article should be published or not. In case of finding mistakes or problems, reviewers should include corrections and recommendations, so that authors have the opportunity to modify their manuscripts and make them suitable for publication. In addition, all articles will be reviewed through an anti-plagiarism software (Feedback System). Once this process is over, and in case of obtaining a favourable result, the article may be published.

g)      Reviewers must also notify whenever they detect the author has not cited major works considered relevant for the research.

h)      Reviewers will be informed clearly and precisely of what is expected of their evaluation task, including a form that has to be completed.

i)       The identity of reviewers will always be anonymous.

j)       Honesty is required, and reviewers must let the editorial team know if they think there may be a conflict of interests in a particular evaluation, which may compromise the process’s impartiality.

Gender perspective

ARYS is strongly committed to the promotion of gender equality in academia. For this reason, ARYS guarantees a balanced presence of women and men in the executive and secretarial team, in the scientific committee and on the editorial board, as well as among the reviewers chosen for the double-blind peer review process.

Likewise, the journal supports and considers as a criterion for scientific evaluation the adoption of a gender perspective in the studies submitted for publication. The implementation of this perspective in the research activity processes entails, on one side, eliminating androcentric biases in the design, content and outcomes of the research, assessing the relevance of incorporating sex or gender as a variable of analysis and, if incorporated, presenting and analysing data disaggregated by sex or gender and determining its impact on the results obtained; on the other side, it involves including and giving visibility to the scientific contributions of women and guaranteeing gender balance in the research team.

In addition, the ARYS editorial guidelines prescribe the use of inclusive and non-sexist language (see the corresponding section within the author guidelines).

Evaluators’ ethical obligations

The double-blind peer-review system heavily relies both on the willingness of the academic community to participate in it and on the mutual confidence between the reviewers and the journal. Its correct functioning requires that all those involved in this process act in a responsible manner. The evaluators have the obligation to carry out their commitments in accordance with ethical requirements. Clear communication between journal and reviewers is essential in order to facilitate a consistent, fair, and appropriate review. The journal is confident that the reviews will provide useful guidance for researchers and represent a solid reference for the journal’s decision-making process. Anyone in charge of an evaluation agrees that the work to be reviewed is a confidential and sensitive document up to its publication, both during and after the review process. On the one hand, the commitment must be rejected in case of possible suspected conflicts of interest, kinship, friendship or enmity, shared publications or institutions with the author, or any other circumstance that may interfere with the evaluation itself. On the other hand, in no case should the reviewer disseminate or use the information, documents, images, details, hypotheses, arguments, interpretations or conclusions contained in the text under review for his/her own benefit or that of other people, or to harm third parties. Failure to comply with this principle of confidentiality and any unethical behaviour exonerate from liability ARYS and its management.

Percentage of articles rejected

ARYS 18 (2020)

Accepted / rejected articles: 19 / 7

Percentage of articles rejected: 36,8%

ARYS 17 (2019)

Accepted / rejected articles: 16 / 4

Percentage of articles rejected: 25%

ARYS 16 (2018)

Accepted / rejected articles: 19 / 4

Percentage of articles rejected: 21%

ARYS 15 (2017)

Accepted / rejected articles: 15 / 1

Percentage of articles rejected: 6,7%

ARYS 14 (2016)

Accepted / rejected articles: 14 / 7

Percentage of articles rejected: 50%

ARYS 13 (2015)

Accepted / rejected articles: 10 / 2

Percentage of articles rejected: 20%

ARYS 12 (2014)

Accepted / rejected articles: 20 / 3

Percentage of articles rejected: 15%

ARYS 11 (2013)

Accepted / rejected articles: 19 / 0

Percentage of articles rejected: 0%

ARYS 10 (2012)

Accepted / rejected articles: 22 / 3

Percentage of articles rejected: 13,6%