The review process

PEUCE Journal New Series. History and Archaeology Studies and Research


Peer review is an evaluation system applied to scientific works, when two peers verify the compliance with the publication norms, identify deviations from the standard and make suggestions and recommendations. 


The manuscripts received at the editorial office are forwarded by the editor-in-chief or the editorial staff secretary (electronic or hard copy) to the researchers considered experts in the respective field (referees).

Each referee writes (within 20 days) an evaluation on the manuscript he/she receives, according to the existing criteria and scoring, and sends it back to the editor, who is responsible for keeping in contact with the authors and sending them the observations made by the referees. At the referee’s request, he/she may remain anonymous to the author of the reviewed article.

In the end, the referee’s evaluation must include one of the following recommendations for the reviewed manuscript:

  • To unconditionally accept the manuscript;
  • To accept the manuscript provided the author make the changes specified in the evaluation;
  • To reject the manuscript.

In case of evaluations with opposed recommendations, the editor may request an additional evaluation from a third referee.

The authors are obligated to make the changes in the paper, as required by the scientific referees.

Evaluation criteria

The following criteria will be considered in the review process:

  • Compliance with publication norms and structural standards; the manuscript must have: title (Romanian and English), abstract (Romanian and English), key words (Romanian and English), introduction, methodology, results, conclusions and bibliography;
  • The topic subsumes to the journal’s profile (ancient history, archaeology, art, architecture, epigraphy, numismatics, anthropology, archaeozoology, palynology, geology, metallography etc.)
  • Chronologically, the topic of the article approaches a period from the Palaeolithic until the end of the Middle Ages.
  • Geographically, the article studies an area focused, broadly, on the regions directly connected to the Black Sea, especially the Lower Danube;
  • The quality of the scientific content;
  • Originality;
  • The text is clear, concise and accurate;
  • Lack of errors, incorrect concepts and ambiguities;
  • Relevance of bibliography. 

Peuce Journal does not publish papers that have already been published or are to be published in another publication at the same time, except for (if the editorial staff agrees) articles published in foreign journals to which Romanian readers have little access.

Reviewers’ evaluation form:

Please evaluate the manuscript as follows:

  1. Written evaluation – observations and comments (1-3 pages)
  2. Evaluation based on the form below.


1. The title is relevant and reflects the topic of the paper.
2. The abstract sums up the content of the paper.
3. The introduction is relevant to the study in the respective field and quotes the main results obtained by other authors in that field.
4. The paper subsumes to the selected field and is scientifically relevant.
5. The article is coherent and approaches the topic appropriately.
6. The paper is original.
7. The conclusions represent a relevant synthesis of the research results.
8. Bibliography is appropriate, complete, and recent.
9. The work uses an academic language, doesn’t contain errors.
10. Graphic quality

(The score is from 0 to 10 for each of the criteria specified in the form)

  1. Recommendations:
  • To unconditionally accept the manuscript;
  • To accept the manuscript provided the author make the changes specified in the evaluation;
  • To reject the manuscript.


Date                                                                                                                                                                       Signature