Countries where authors publish in Ancient Philosophy
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Ancient Philosophy. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers published in Ancient Philosophy with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ancient Philosophy more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Ancient Philosophy. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Ancient Philosophy.
About Ancient Philosophy
The 1.1k papers published in Ancient Philosophy in the last decades have received a total of 3.9k indexed citations . Papers published in Ancient Philosophy usually cover Philosophy (616 papers), Anthropology (142 papers), Archeology (146 papers), Classics (26 papers) and Theoretical Computer Science (8 papers) specifically the topics of Classical Philosophy and Thought (569 papers), Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies (136 papers), Classical Antiquity Studies (135 papers), Medieval and Classical Philosophy (82 papers), Byzantine Studies and History (24 papers), Ethics in medical practice (23 papers), Biblical Studies and Interpretation (16 papers) and Augustinian Studies and Theology (16 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Ancient Philosophy are Charles H. Kahn, J. H. Lesher, Carol Poster, Thomas C. Brickhouse, Nicholas D. Smith, Jennifer Whiting, Kevin L. Flannery, Lloyd P. Gerson, Daryl McGowan Tress and Roslyn Weiss.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.