OANNES - International Journal of Ancient History

OANNES Journal aims to contribute to the knowledge of social sciences by publishing national and international scientific studies in the fields of Social Sciences.

The journal is an international peer-reviewed journal aiming to include comments, approaches and theories on the main topics in the fields of Ancient History, Archeology and Ancient Languages and Cultures, related, related or auxiliary issues, and is scanned within the scope of ULAKBİM TR Index.

Maximum attention is paid to ensure that the publications to be included in the OANNES-International Journal of Ancient History Studies are of the nature to contribute to the research of Ancient History, Archeology and Ancient Languages and Cultures in terms of subject and method. Studies in other fields are not accepted to the journal. No monetary fee is charged for the articles to be published in our journal.

Scientific articles on Ancient History, Archeology and Ancient Languages ​​and Cultures are published in Oannes Journal. Manuscripts submitted to Oannes Journal are evaluated by at least two referees. Articles that do not receive a positive report from both referees are not published. In case of a positive or negative report, the article is sent to a third referee. The evaluation period of the referees is 3 weeks. However, this period may be extended depending on the subject of the study. Oannes Journal accepts articles written in Turkey Turkish and English languages. Articles submitted to the journal should be between 4,000 and 10,000 words, including appendices, and the word count in block citations should not exceed 10% of the total word count of the article. As a result of the preliminary examination, the works that do not comply with the Writing and Publication Principles of Oannes Journal are returned to be corrected by the author. Submission of the work to Oannes Journal is considered an application for publication. No royalties are paid for the articles. The author(s) of the articles sent to the journal accept that they do not violate any copyright of a private, legal or third party. In addition, the authors are deemed to have accepted that the submitted work is not intended for any defamation, attrition or violating the privacy of any person's private life. The editorial board of Oannes Journal can make any changes it deems necessary to ensure that the Turkish and English titles of the articles are understood. Along with the title, authors should include an abstract stating the main thesis of the article and their original contribution to the field. Title and abstract should be in Turkish and English. Abstract and Abstract should be between 200 - 250 words and Turkish articles should have an Extended Abstract of at least 700 words. In addition, authors should include Turkish and English keywords of 5 words in order to index the articles. In the works sent to Oannes Journal, information such as the name of the author, his title, the institution where he works and the e-mail address where he can be reached should not be included. In addition, authors should remove the auto-added author information in the MS Office program. Authors are obliged to notify the editors of their ORCID ID numbers at the time of publication of the article. After the studies submitted to Oannes Journal are sent from the Dergipark page, the referee process can be followed from the same page. After this stage, it is necessary to wait for the reports from the referees to make the corrections. The author should upload the work that he has corrected upon the request of the referees to the page where the report of the referee requesting correction. Studies submitted to Oannes Journal must not have been previously published elsewhere or be under evaluation elsewhere at the same time.

WRITING RULES

1. Manuscripts should be written in Microsoft Word program and page dimensions should be arranged as follows.

Paper Size A4 Vertical

Top Margin 4 cm

Bottom Margin 3 cm

Left Margin 3 cm

Right Margin 3 cm

Paragraph Head 1 cm

Block Quote Left and Right 1 cm indented

Font Bookman Old Style

Font Style Normal

Main Text Size 11

Abstract, Abstract and Extended Abstract Text Size 10

Block Quote 9

Footnote Text Size 9

Line gap 6 nk

Line gap Single (1)

2. Details such as page numbers, headers and footers should not be included in the manuscripts.

3. Only the first letters of each word of the headings in the article should be capitalized, no other formatting should be included.

4. In terms of spelling and punctuation, the Spelling Guide of the Turkish Language Association should be taken as a basis, except for special cases necessitated by the article or subject.

REFERENCE GUIDE

Studies submitted for OANNES Journal must be written using footnotes. References in footnotes should be given in the References section at the end of the article, together with their clear and detailed tags. Footnotes should be given after the punctuation at the end of the sentence. As the footnote display method, the in-text footnote method given at the bottom of the page should be used. Books, articles, papers, encyclopedia articles, etc. The same footnote format should be used for all publications. In references to the works of the same author published in the same year, a lowercase letter such as a / b / c should be written next to the publication date. While the publications with three or more authors are shown in the footnote, only the first two authors should be given and abbreviations should be used for other authors. However, the names of all authors should be included in the bibliography. (There should be no footnotes in the text.)

Examples of Footnote Method:

Single Author: Gökçek, 2015: 61.

With Two Authors:  Yıldırım – Pekşen, 2013: 35.

With Three or More Authors: Hout – Thalmann, et. al., 2000: 27.

Antique Artifact: Strabo, Geographika, XII.3

References:

If the book is: GÖKÇEK, L. G., 2015. Asurlular, Bilgin Kültür Sanat Publishing, Ankara.

If the article is: PEKŞEN, O., 2016. “Eski Mezopotamya’daki Savaşlarda Tanrıların Rolü”, History Studies, 8 / 2, ss. 55 – 68.

If the conference paper is: YILDIRIM, E., 2013. “Antikçağda Cyrhhus ve X. Fretensis Lejyonu” I. Uluslararası Muallim Rıfat, Kilis ve Çevresi Sempozyumu Bildiri Kitabı, Kilis 2013.

If the translation is the book: HOUT, J. L. – THALMANN, J. P. – VALBELLE, D., 2000. Kentlerin Doğuşu, trans.: Ali Bektaş Girgin, İmge Kitabevi Pblishing, Ankara.

The chapter in the edited book is: PEKŞEN, O., 2017. “Asur Devlet Emperyalizminin Meşrulaştırılması Açısından Tanrı Aššur’a İsyan Olgusu”, in: Prof. Dr. Recep Yıldırım’a Armağan, Eds.:                                                                                         Pınar Pınarcık – Bilcan Gökçe – Mehmet Salih Erkek – Sena Coşğun Kandal, Bilgin Kültür Sanat Publishing, Ankara, pp. 355 – 370.

If the thesis: YILDIRIM, E., 2011. Pers Hakimiyetinin Bitiminden Bizans Hakimiyetinin Başlangıcına Kadar Olan Dönemdeki Antik Çağ Yazarlarının Eserlerinde Orta Fırat Bölgesi, Selçuk                                                     University Institute of Social Sciences, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Konya.

The encyclopedia article is: YILDIRIM, E. – DUMANKAYA, O., 2017. “Alçiçek Höyük”, Kahramanmaraş Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, Ed.: İbrahim Solak, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University                                                                                                                 Press, Kahramanmaraş, pp. 213 – 214.

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement, Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011)'na dayanmaktadır.



Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board



Fair play and editorial independence

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.



Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.



Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.



Publication decisions

The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.





Duties of Reviewers



Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavour.



Promptness

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.



Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.



Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.



Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.



Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.



Duties of Authors



Reporting standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.



Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centre), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.



Originality and plagiarism

Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.



Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.

The publication of some kinds of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.



Authorship of the manuscript

Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.



Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should—at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).



Acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.



Peer review

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of “revisions necessary”, authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.



Fundamental errors in published works

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.



DISCLAIMER

Neither the editors nor the Editorial Board are responsible for authors’ expressed opinions, views, and the contents of the published manuscripts in the journal. The originality, proofreading of manuscripts and errors are the sole responsibility of the individual authors. All manuscripts submitted for review and publication in OANNES - International Journal of Ancient History (OANNES), go under double-blind reviews for authenticity, ethical issues, and useful contributions. Decisions of the reviewers are the only tool for publication in the journal and will be final.



References

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf



Yayın Etiği ve Yayında Suistimal Beyanı, Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011)'na dayanmaktadır.



Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board



Fair play and editorial independence

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.



Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.



Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.



Publication decisions

The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.





Duties of Reviewers



Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavour.



Promptness

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.



Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.



Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.



Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.



Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.



Duties of Authors



Reporting standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.



Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centre), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.



Originality and plagiarism

Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.



Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.

The publication of some kinds of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.



Authorship of the manuscript

Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.



Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should—at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).



Acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.



Peer review

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of “revisions necessary”, authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.



Fundamental errors in published works

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.



DISCLAIMER

Neither the editors nor the Editorial Board are responsible for authors’ expressed opinions, views, and the contents of the published manuscripts in the journal. The originality, proofreading of manuscripts and errors are the sole responsibility of the individual authors. All manuscripts submitted for review and publication in OANNES - International Journal of Ancient History (OANNES), go under double-blind reviews for authenticity, ethical issues, and useful contributions. Decisions of the reviewers are the only tool for publication in the journal and will be final.



References


Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf

OANNES-International Journal of Ancient History is a free journal and there is no article submission/process management fee.