Reviews should be helpful to the reader. They should:

  • Accurately convey the book’s ideas, arguments, evidence, and structure;
  • Situate the book within the broader field of scholarship related to it;
  • Determine the purpose and best uses of the book;
  • Tell the reader something that they didn’t already know.
  • Point out factual or methodical issues that the reader should be aware of.

Reviews should be fair to the author. They should:

  • Take the work seriously and sincerely, on its own merits;
  • Recognize the author’s objectives and point of view;
  • Be constructive, rather than critical for the sake of being critical.

Review Format

Reviews should be up to 2000 words in length, not including the Table of Contents and Discussion / Q&A sections.

Please start your review with a full citation of the work being reviewed:

Sarah A. Rous, Reset in Stone: Memory and Reuse in Ancient Athens (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2019).

Then include your full name as you would like it to appear, your institution, and your preferred email address. The body of your review should be styled according to the guidelines below. At the end of your review, please provide the table of contents, with page numbers in parentheses:

Table of Contents
Introduction (3–30)
1. Creating Social Memory through Reuse That Accentuates (31–78)
2. Perpetuating Social Memory through Reuse That Preserves (79–125)
3. Altering Social Memory through Reuse Meant to Be Invisible (126–75)
4. Upcycling and Athenian Social Memory over the Longue Durée (176–212)
5. Epilogue (213–18)

Use any spelling system you prefer (British, American, Canadian, etc.).

Use the author’s name rather than the author’s initial or “A.”

Use the en-dash (–) to separate ranges of numbers, e.g., 139–45.

Spell out numbers one through one hundred, except in citations: ten kraters, 4,500 soldiers, pp. 5–17.

Use CE and BCE, without periods, rather than AD and BC or C.E. and B.C.E.

Please include translations of any passages not in English.

Full references to other secondary literature should be provided in footnotes.

When citing specific pages and notes in the reviewed work, please use “p.” and “n.,” and follow this format: “p. 78” or “p. 78, n. 5”.

Form the possessive with ‘s except where names end in the -eez sound: Collins’s, Psellos’s, but Euripides’, Thucydides’.

To form numerical ranges, refer to The Chicago Manual of Style 9.61 and these examples: 10–17, 100–105, 201–6, 211–16.

Citation Examples

Averil Cameron, The Mediterranean World in Late Antiquity, 395­–700 AD, 2nd ed. (Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2012).

Matthew P. Loar, Carolyn MacDonald, and Dan-el Padilla Peralta, eds., Rome, Empire of Plunder: The Dynamics of Cultural Appropriation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017).

Ann Steiner, “Public and Private: Links between Symposium and Syssition in Fifth-Century Athens,” Classical Antiquity 21, no. 2 (2002): 347–80.

Catherine H. Zuckert, “Practical Plato,” in The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Greek Political Thought, ed. Stephen Salkever (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 178–208, at 182.

For Graduate Students

Rhea Classical Reviews is proud to publish reviews by emerging scholars who are currently completing their graduate education. In recognition that not all graduate students have equal resources available to them, graduate student reviewers receive mentorship throughout the review process. If you are a graduate student interested in reviewing a book for Rhea, we ask that you identify yourself as such when you contact us, and our Chair of Graduate Mentorship (currently Dr. Dylan K. Rogers) will reach out to you with additional information.