Submissions

Author Guidelines

Manuscript Submission:

The Editors are interested in original research manuscripts about the contemporary study of Islam and Muslims. Typescripts must be in English and should be between 8,000 and 12,000 words. Authors should not submit manuscripts that are under consideration for publication elsewhere. Academic referees will assess all typescripts. Authors are asked to submit anonymised manuscripts online. Therefore, authors are asked to remove as many self-identifying features from their submitted manuscripts as possible, e.g., "by [Author Name]," obvious citations of the author's own work, etc. Submissions may be uploaded in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, or RTF document file format.

In peer review, we consider the originality of material and interpretation, clarity of thought, and interest of readers, as well as sources and style. Citations must be supplied as endnotes, and citation form must follow Chicago Manual of Style; see: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-1.html

Authors are responsible for securing all necessary permissions for photographs or other copyrighted illustrations in their articles.

Manuscript Format and Style: The entire manuscript should be double spaced. Submitted manuscripts should be in good English and conform to JCSI style as described below. In matters of capitalisation, punctuation, abbreviations, and the like, the journal follows the guidelines in The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th ed., rev. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010). Citations (footnotes) should be in the humanities style as laid out by the Chicago Manual of Style. For detailed examples, see the “Chicago Style Citation Quick Guide” (http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html).

Translation and Transliteration guide: The JCSI uses IJMES Translation and Transliteration guide, you can access the guideline from the link: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-middle-east-studies/information/author-resources/ijmes-translation-and-transliteration-guide 

Book Review Guidelines: 
The Journal of the Contemporary Study of Islam provides an international platform for scholars to
promote and disseminate research pertaining to Islam in the contemporary world. An ideal book
review will, therefore, evaluate the book through the lens of the study of contemporary issues in
Islam.
An academic book review is aimed at allowing the reader to make an informed evaluation about the
merits of the book and, accordingly, whether it should be read or purchased. An academic book
review is not a simple summary of a book but rather an overview of how it has been composed and
how it contributes to its academic field. Furthermore, an academic book review is not the place to
develop one’s own arguments on the subject.
A basic book review structure is as follows:
- a short summary of the main contribution or argument of the book (1 or 2 paragraphs);
- a short summary of the book, but not usually a chapter-by-chapter summary;
- the strengths of the book;
- the weaknesses of the book;
- a short overall assessment of the book (1 paragraph).
While the reviewer is not obligated to organize the review in this manner, this above suggestion may
prove helpful especially if the reviewer is suffering from writer’s block.
Reviews of multi-author works, as opposed to reviews of monographs, might focus on essays which
relate to contemporary studies of Islam and on whether the editor has managed to collect and
organise a good set of contributions. It should also be mentioned whether the contributions are
original contributions or not.
Other questions that might be addressed are:
1. What is the book’s argument?
2. Does the book do what it says it is going to do?
3. Is the book a contribution to the field or discipline?
4. Does the book relate to a current debate or trend in the field and if so, how?
5. What is the theoretical lineage or school of thought out of which the book rises?
6. Is the book well-written?
7. What are the book's terms and are they defined?
8. How accurate is the information (e.g., the footnotes, bibliography, dates)?
9. Are the illustrations helpful? If there are no illustrations, should there have been?
10. Who would benefit from reading this book?
11. How does the book compare to other books in the field?
12. If it is a textbook, what courses can it be used in and how clear is the book’s structure and
examples?
13. Is the book a translation (from what language)?
14. What are the unique features of the book?
15. What is the structure of the book (how many parts, chapters)?

Further guidelines:

- A book review should communicate what a book is about and engage in critical analysis
appropriate to specialists.
- It is good to employ tact and thoughtfulness when making critiques. Remember that the author
will likely be reading the review.
- As a general guideline, book reviews should be 1,500 words or less.
- All contributions must be in English.
- Generally, footnotes should not be necessary. References to the book under review can be made
in the text by placing the page numbers in brackets.
- Sometimes revisions to book reviews are required; the reviewer’s help may be requested.
- If reviews are not completed to the satisfaction of the editors or in a timely manner, then the
review book must be returned.
- Otherwise, if the book review is accepted and printed, you may keep the review book.
- At the top of the review, include:
o Information about the book in the following format:
Stereotyping Religion: Comparing Clichés, ed. Brad Stoddard and Craig Martin, 2017. London
& New York, Bloomsbury, xi + 183 pp., ills., maps, $29.95. ISBN: 978-1-4742-9219-1 (pbk).
o Your name and institutional affiliation. If you are an independent researcher, you may
simply list your city and country.