So with over 300 votes cast, here are the results of our earlier poll. Remember that this was limited to journals that publish in more than one period in the history of philosophy.
| 1. Journal of the History of Philosophy (Condorcet winner: wins contests with all other choices) |
| 2. Philosophical Review loses to Journal of the History of Philosophy by 146–109 |
| 3. Philosophy & Phenomenological Research loses to Journal of the History of Philosophy by 182–73, loses to Philosophical Review by 158–70 |
| 4. British Journal for the History of Philosophy loses to Journal of the History of Philosophy by 203–44, loses to Philosophy & Phenomenological Research by 127–126 |
| 5. Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie loses to Journal of the History of Philosophy by 198–40, loses to British Journal for the History of Philosophy by 131–106 |
| 6. History of Philosophy Quarterly loses to Journal of the History of Philosophy by 219–29, loses to Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie by 150–79 |
| 7. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society loses to Journal of the History of Philosophy by 200–37, loses to History of Philosophy Quarterly by 126–91 |
| 8. European Journal of Philosophy loses to Journal of the History of Philosophy by 191–38, loses to Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society by 103–86 |
| 9. Canadian Journal of Philosophy loses to Journal of the History of Philosophy by 216–21, loses to European Journal of Philosophy by 101–87 |
| 10. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly loses to Journal of the History of Philosophy by 212–16, loses to Canadian Journal of Philosophy by 102–82 |
|
Runners-up for the top ten were Journal of the History of Ideas and Philosopher's Imprint |
These results don't look crazy to me, with the important caveat that no one should conclude that, e.g., Journal of the History of Philosophy is a better place to publish a piece in ancient philosophy than, say, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy or Phronesis. For a journal barely a decade old, Philosopher's Imprint continues to do remarkably well in these polls, in a way that may even understate its reputation in many parts of the profession. Notice that British Journal for the History of Philosophy and PPR essentially tied. Beyond the "top ten" and the two runner-ups, I would not give much credence to the results, and, of course, even within the journals listed above, I think the approximate range of the rating is more useful than the precise ordinal rank.
Thoughts from readers? SIGNED COMMENTS ONLY. How should one weight the more general history journals as against those that specialize in a particular period or figure? Comments on other issues welcome as well.
