Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World

Sources and Interpretations
Aims & Scope

This series is devoted to the social-cultural study of early modern knowledge cultures (ca.1450-1750). It promotes studies that highlight the importance of science as a collective praxis, understood as a contested field informed by political, philosophical and confessional struggles for cultural hegemony, and in connection with social and economic interests. In how far did political antagonisms, ideological struggles, and religious tensions hinder scientific development or underpin it? How did the modern construction of identity along confessional, linguistic, and political lines affect the ethos and epistemic values of the sciences? The goal of our series is to publish source-based studies that combine the online presentation of historical sources with accompanying critical monographs.

General info

Boards
  • peopleBoards
    Editor in Chief
    Pietro Daniel Omodeo, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, Italia    

    Editorial Board
    Tina Asmussen, Deutschen Bergbau-Museum Bochum, Deutschland    
    Marius Buning, University of Oslo, Norwen    
    Elaine Leong, University College London, United Kingdom    
    Pietro Daniel Omodeo, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, Italia    
    Jonathan Regier, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, Italia    
    Claudia Stein, University of Warwick, United Kingdom    

    Editorial Manager
    Rodolfo Marau, Universität Hamburg, Deutschland    

    Advisory Board
    Algazi Gadi, Tel Aviv University, Israel    
    Dana Jalobeanu, Universitatea din Bucuresti, România    
    Lauren Kassell, European University Institute, Firenze, Italia    
    Martin Mulsow, Forschungszentrum Gotha der Universität Erfurt, Deutschland    
    Nydia Pineda de Ávila, University of California, USA    
    Antonella Romano, EHESS, Centre Alexandre-Koyré Paris, France    
    Silvina Paula Vidal, Universidad Nacional de San Martín, Argentina    

Proposal / Submission

Use the form to submit a proposal.

mode_edit FORM

Head office
Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia
Dipartimento di Filosofia e Beni Culturali
Palazzo Malcanton Marcorà, Dorsoduro 3484/D
30123 Venezia
knowledgehegemonies@unive.it
APCs

The article processing charges are regulated by the Publisher. For more information please visit: Publish with us.

Peer review

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.

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:

  • Complete volume/issue: subject to peer review
  • Monographs/essays/articles: subject to peer review
  • Introductions, prefaces: no peer review
  • Reviews: no peer review
  • Editorials: no peer review
For a complete description of the process, please visit: Scientific certification.

Policy
  • listPolicy

    Ethical Code of Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World. Sources and Interpretations

    Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World. Sources and Interpretations 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 Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World 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 Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World Editor-in-Chief.

    The Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World 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 Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World 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:

    • complainant’s personal information;
    • title, author(s), publication date, DOI;
    • complaint(s);
    • declaration that the complainant has no conflict of interest, or declaration of an actual or potential conflict of interest.

    Authors’ responsibilities

    Stylesheet

    Authors must follow the Guidelines for Authors to be downloaded from the Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World website.

    No multiple submissions

    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 Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World 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 Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World 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 Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World 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 Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World 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 Knowledge Hegemonies in the Early Modern World 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.