The Revue belge de Numismatique et de Sigillographie (hereafter RBN) is published annually by the Royal Belgian Numismatics Society (hereafter RBNS) and normally appears in November of the year in question.

The quality of the Journal is monitored by the Commission of the RBN, composed of the president of the RBNS (ex officio) and the directors of the Revue. These are elected every three years by the General Assembly from among the working members of the RBNS. Their mandates are renewable without limit. The directors are assisted by a Scientific Council of eminent foreign numismatists, appointed by the Board of the RBNS, in consultation with the directors of the RBN. At the moment the Scientific Council counts seven members. The Commission decides autonomously and in solidarity. Appeals against its decisions are to be addressed to the president.

The RBN publishes longer studies on numismatic subjects as ‘articles’. Shorter contributions are published in the section ‘mixed contributions’. The Committee decides whether a manuscript submitted should be published as an article or as a mixed contribution. Articles are subject to a double-blind peer review by at least two independent reviewers. Mixed contributions will be reviewed by the Committee upon indication of one of the directors.

Authors may not submit their contribution to the RBN and another journal simultaneously. If they submit an article that has been rejected elsewhere, the authors must give detailed reasons for the rejection when submitting their contribution to the RBN.

For the technical aspects of submission (formats, image resolutions, copyright clearance, etc.), please refer to http://www.numisbel.be/publicatievoorwaardengb.htm.

The reviewers' reasoned assessment should take one of the following three forms (see http://www.numisbel.be/peerreview.htm): 1) suitable for publication without significant modifications; 2) suitable for publication subject to a number of changes or additions detailed by the reviewers; 3) not suitable for publication.

In the event of conflicting or contested reviews, the Commission may call upon an additional reviewer before deciding on the inclusion of a contribution. Versions which needed adjustments by their author will be resubmitted to the reviewers for a final assessment. Once a contribution has been positively assessed, it cannot be changed, neither by the author(s) nor by the Commission or its editor, except for minor corrections such as typing errors, minor miscalculations, etc. or stylistic changes needed to comply with the house style of the RBN. Such corrections or adjustments by the Commission or its editor will only become final after explicit approval by the author(s).

Authors are asked to provide a contact address (preferably an e-mail address) where they can be contacted by the RBN readers. Should this lead to significant corrections, it is expected that the author(s) will inform the Commission, so that, if necessary, a supplement or erratum will be published in a subsequent volume of the RBN.

The authors will receive electronic reprints of their contribution, which they must not distribute on the World Wide Web for a period of two years. The RBNS will only publish an abstract on its website during a period of five years. After that period, the full article will be available online for free, insofar as this is possible with respect of the copyright permits granted to the authors.

Contributions on all numismatic and sigillographic subjects in the broadest sense are eligible for inclusion in the RBN. However, contributions dealing with fraudulent numismatic material whose authenticity must be seriously doubted without this being explicitly mentioned in the text may be excluded by the Commission (warning readers of the RBN of the existence of fake or counterfeit pieces is of course possible); this is also the case for material whose origin is in violation of the UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illegal Import, Export, and Transfer of Cultural Property of 14 November 1970. The Committee will make an ad hoc assessment and may ask the author(s) for additional information about the material being studied.

If the Committee is unable to identify suitable peer reviewers, the author(s) will be informed. A contribution for which this turns out to be the case may then be included as a mixed contribution with the author's consent.

In seeking solutions to problems not foreseen above, the Committee will base its decision as far as possible on the guidelines and best practices recommended by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and will report its findings to the Board of the RBNS, stating its reasons.