Revelation Reviews - Guidelines for contributors

ISSN 1397-2936

Most recent revision August 3rd, 1999

Back · Back to TOC · Webmster's home · Guestbook
Adapted and used from the guidelines for contributors to Iodaios Review with permission from James R. Davila and David W. Suter, co-editors of Revelation Reviews. Thank you!
  1. Approach
  2. Length
  3. Format
  4. Deadlines
  5. Editorial matters
  6. Diacritics
  7. Font changes
  8. Greek transliteration
  9. Hebrew transliteration

1. Approach

The medium in which Revelation Reviews operates offers unique opportunities as well as freedom from some constraints placed on print publication. This will be more pronounced in some aspects of the Guidelines than others. At least, this means reviewers have scope for attempting things in Revelation Reviews that might not be possible in more traditional journals.

A reviews should typically include both summary and evaluation. The summary should give readers an overview of the book's central thesis or contribution and the means by which the thesis is put forward or the contribution made. Critique should assess both strengths and weaknesses; if a negative review seems necessary, criticisms should be offered in a forthright yet civil manner. As always, reviews should discuss the task and argument of the book in hand, not another question or argument proposed by the reviewer.

Reviews would also benefit from a clear statement of the readership for which the work would be most suitable, and an indication of the book's importance.

2. Length

It is in the length of the review that Revelation Reviews can afford to be especially flexible. A reasonable limit (not necessarily a goal to be attained) would be 2000 words. But there is no reason why reviews could not be somewhat longer or even much shorter than that. Revelation Reviews will also have occasion to publish brief comparative reviews or article reviews, and in these cases length restrictions might apply.

3. Format

The review should be headed by the full bibliographic data in the following order:
Benjamin G. Wright, <E>No Small Difference: Sirach's relationship to its Hebrew parent text</E>. Septuagint and Cognate Studies 26; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989. Pp. xx + 354.
In the body of the review, the author should be referred to by the author's surname.

The review should end with the reviewer's name, institution (if applicable), postal address, and e-mail address.

The format of the review presents problems as well as possibilities. Network mail must use only the characters that are able to pass through national boundaries and network gateways unscathed. Further, electronic publication does away with some of the conventions of print, notably means of citation (page numbers), font changes (italics, Greek, Hebrew), and diacritics. Revelation Reviews addresses these problems by means of "descriptive markup", that is, introducing "tags" which inform the reader of paragraph numbers, font changes, and diacritical signs. The CCAT (U of Pennsylvania) transliteration system for Greek and Hebrew has been adopted; the tables for fonts and diacritics are given below, along with some guidelines for their use.

Published reviews will have "logically" numbered paragraphs to facilitate citation. These can be added by the style editor, but contributors may wish to include them as they write. The suggested form would have introductory comments as sections 0.1, 0.2,...; summary material as 1.1, 1.2,...; and evaluation and critique as 2.1, 2.2... ;3.1... ; with the concluding paragraphs numbered 00.1 etc. Enter them thus:

Here are my introductory comments....
This is what the book has to say....
It also talks about these things....
This is what I like about it....
But there were several drawbacks....
And further drawbacks....
And I conclude with these remarks.

These conventions - as well as the "tags" for font changes - will make the electronic text a useful and easily searchable "database" in addition to facilitating citability.

FOOTNOTES are not easily read (necessarily being endnotes) in an electronic review. We request that reviewers keep use of notes to a minimum or avoid them altogether. If they are used, the index in the text should appear as<1> (the note number to follow punctuation marks) and the corresponding note at the END of the review thus:
<<1>> Here is the note.

4. Deadlines

Reviewers should attempt to have their reviews ready within six months of receiving the book, and preferably even within shorter time. If you do not think this will be possible (be ruthlessly honest with yourself) the assignment should not be accepted. This is shorter than the time usually allotted by print and other e-journals as well; we are seeking to maximize the potential of the electronic medium.

5. Editorial matters

The editors of Revelation Reviews retain the right of rejecting a review for publication with Revelation Reviews. On the other hand, Revelation Reviews would welcome for electronic publication reviews that will appear elsewhere in print publication. In such cases, reviewers are advised to seek the explicit permission of the print-journal editor.

6. Diacritics

     Tag:   Diacritic:     Examples:
     <'e>   acute          ex<'e>g<`e>se
     <`e>   grave
     <^a>   circumflex secte de Qumr<^a>n
     <"a>   umlaut         Pal<"a>stina
     <,c>   cedille
     <~n>   tilde
     <.h>   underdot       Na<.h>al <.H>ever

7. Font changes

<E>...</E> The point is <E>not</E> that...
<B>...</B> Sch<"u>rer, <B>History of the Jewish People</B>
<J>...</J> Morton Smith argued in <J>JBL</J> some years ago...
Sources (ancient)
<S>...</S> According to <S>Ant.</S> xviii.12-15, the Pharisees...
<G>...</G> ...the sense given to <G>SUNE/DRION</G> in...
<H>...</H> ...regarded as a court of law (<H>BYT DYN</H>).


1. Greek/Hebrew technical terms
Some terms, such as "midrash" or "kaige" have tended to become anglicized. This should normally be their appearance in Revelation Reviews, unless the citation depends on the term as a Greek or Hebrew term. In any event, an author's decision will be followed by the editors.
2. Sources
Sources should be italicized following the conventions set out in the style sheet to JBL.

8. Greek translitteration

I. LETTERS. Greek upper and lower case are both designated by upper case English. Greek upper case is indicated by preceding the transliterated letter with an asterisk (*): e.g. *PAU=LOS.
     Alpha   A          Mu      M
     Beta    B          Nu      N
     Gamma   G          Xi      C
     Delta   D          Omicron O
     Epsilon E          Pi      P
     Zeta    Z          Rho     R
     Eta     H          Sigma   S
     Theta   Q          Tau     T
     Iota    I          Upsilon U
     Iota subscript |   Phi     F
     Kappa   K          Chi     X
     Lambda  L          Psi     Y
                        Omega   W
II. Diacriticals. Diacritical marks are placed after the letter. A breathing mark always precedes an accent.

rough breathing (
smooth breathing )
acute accent /
circumflex accent =
grave accent \

Some examples:

9. Hebrew translitteration

The Hebrew, Syriac, and Aramaic texts are coded according to the Michigan-Claremont scheme:
     Hebrew     Coding       Hebrew     Coding

     alef       )            patah      A
     bet        B            qametz     F
     gimel      G            hireq      I
     dalet      D            segol      E
     he         H            tsere      "
     waw        W            holam      O
     zayin      Z            qibbuts    U
     het        X            shureq     W.
     tet        +            schwa      :
     yod        Y            holem waw      OW
     kaf        K            hateph-pathah  :A
     lamed      L            hateph-qametz  :F
     mem        M            hateph-segol   :E
     nun        N            maqqeph     -
     samek      S            dagesh      .
     ayin       (            rape        ,
     pe         P            ketiv       *
     zade       C            qere        **
     qof        Q
     resh       R
     sin/shin   #
     sin        &
     shin       $
     taw        T

Revelation Reviews - ISSN 1397-2936
Georg S. Adamsen, the Lutheran School of Theology in Aarhus, Denmark (or:
John W. Marshall, Princeton University, NJ. Opdateret d. 3.11.2001