Law and History Review

861 papers and 4.1k indexed citations i.

About

The 861 papers published in Law and History Review in the last decades have received a total of 4.1k indexed citations. Papers published in Law and History Review usually cover Political Science and International Relations (421 papers), Sociology and Political Science (296 papers) and Law (221 papers) specifically the topics of American Constitutional Law and Politics (242 papers), Judicial and Constitutional Studies (94 papers) and Colonialism, slavery, and trade (93 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Law and History Review are Stuart Banner, Mae M. Ngai, Elizabeth Kolsky, Daniel M. Klerman, Lauren Benton, Rebecca J. Scott, J. M. Beattie, Richard M. Smith, Michael Les Benedict and Robert C. Palmer.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Law and History Review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Law and History Review. 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 Law and History Review.

Countries where authors publish in Law and History Review

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Law and History Review. 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 Law and History Review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Law and History Review more than expected).

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.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025