Guidelines for Manuscript Preparation 
Before submitting their manuscripts, authors are required to scrutinize the “Author Guidelines” and “Ethical Principles and Publication Policy” sections of the journal and ensure that their work is prepared in full compliance with these norms. Manuscripts must adhere strictly to the official template provided on our website. Submissions that do not comply with the template will not be accepted for evaluation.
Submission Methodology 
Manuscript submissions are accepted exclusively through our official platform, [tarihbilim.org]. The Journal of Historical Science does not accept submissions via email or in physical form. During the submission process, the “Copyright Transfer Agreement” (within the framework of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License) must be completed and uploaded to the system via the “Supplementary Files” menu.
Preliminary Editorial Scrutiny and Formal Review 
Submissions are first subjected to a formal examination by the Editorial Board and the secretariat. At this stage, the presence of structural elements—namely the abstract, keywords, introduction, main text, conclusion, and bibliography—and the manuscript's compliance with the journal’s formatting guidelines are verified. The scientific merit of the text is not evaluated during this phase.
Editorial Scope and Merit Assessment 
Manuscripts that satisfy the formal requirements are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or the Field Editors. The editors evaluate the manuscript’s alignment with the aims and scope of the Journal of Historical Science, its degree of originality, and its potential contribution to the scholarly literature. Manuscripts deemed out of scope or insufficient may be rejected without being referred for peer review.
Similarity and Artificial Intelligence Screening 
The full-text files of all submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using Turnitin or comparable authoritative software; concurrently, a specialized scan for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) is conducted. Detailed reports are submitted to the Editor-in-Chief for the final decision. Manuscripts with a total similarity index exceeding 20% (excluding the bibliography) will be returned to the author immediately. Should multiple versions be uploaded, all corresponding reports are forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief.
Reviewer Selection and Assignment 
Manuscripts that successfully pass the similarity check are assigned to at least two—and where necessary, additional—expert reviewers. To ensure absolute objectivity in the evaluation process, the Journal of Historical Science implements a strict “Double-Blind Peer Review” system.
Reviewer Invitation and Procedural Timelines 
Invited reviewers first evaluate the request based on their specific areas of expertise, potential conflicts of interest, and academic availability. For reviewers who accept the invitation, the period for evaluation and reporting is established as a maximum of 10 weeks. In the event of a refusal, reviewers may be requested to suggest alternative experts.
Principles of Peer Review Assessment 
Reviewers conduct a rigorous examination to test the overall scientific adequacy of the manuscript. If fundamental methodological flaws or instances of data falsification are identified, the reviewer may reject the work without proceeding to a detailed analysis. Otherwise, the manuscript is scrutinized for its structural integrity, argumentative strength, and bibliographic accuracy. The reviewer then uploads a reasoned report containing a recommendation of “accept,” “revision” (major/minor), or “reject.”
Editorial Decision and Reconciliation of Reviewer Reports 
Prior to reaching a final decision, the editor conducts a comparative analysis of all reviewer reports. In the event of significant divergence or fundamental disagreement between reports—for instance, where one recommends “revision” and another “rejection”—the editor personally re-examines the process. If necessary, the manuscript may be referred to a third independent reviewer, or the process may be terminated. All outcomes are communicated to the Corresponding Author via the journal platform.
Author Notification and the Revision Cycle 
The Editorial Board transmits the anonymized reviewer reports and the resulting editorial decision to the author via the submission system. In cases where revisions are requested, authors are expected to address the reviewers’ critiques and upload the revised manuscript within the stipulated timeframe.
Submission of the Final Manuscript 
Following successful peer review and editorial approval, the author uploads the final and complete version of the text, including an English Extended Abstract, to the system.
Linguistic Scrutiny and Final Preparation for Publication 
The final version of the manuscript is subjected to a final editorial and philological review by the Turkish and English Language Editors of the Journal of Historical Science. Following these checks, the work is placed in the final publication queue by the Editorial Board and proceeds to the layout and typesetting phase.