--- name: the-burlington-magazine description: Use when targeting The Burlington Magazine or deciding whether a connoisseurship, attribution, or object-based art-history manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit as the leading venue for connoisseurship, attribution, provenance, and museum/exhibition scholarship, the evidentiary bar for object-based claims, primary-source command, house style, image-rights expectations, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics. --- # The Burlington Magazine (the-burlington-magazine) ## Journal positioning The Burlington Magazine is the pre-eminent venue for **connoisseurship and object-based art history**: attribution, dating, provenance, technical and conservation findings, and the scholarship of collections, exhibitions, and the art market. Its defining expectation is a precise, well-documented contribution that advances knowledge of a specific work, group, or body of evidence — a new attribution, a rediscovery, a documentary or technical finding, or a corrective to the record — argued from direct examination of the object and the primary sources. Broad theoretical essays with no object at their center, or speculative claims unsupported by close evidence, are a poor fit here. This skill is a **fit / venue-selection / re-framing** aid. It does not replace the journal's current submission guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live Burlington Magazine author instructions. ## When to trigger - The author names The Burlington Magazine for an attribution, provenance, technical, or museum/exhibition manuscript and wants a fit/framing check. - An object-based finding must be tightened around its documentary and visual evidence and its place in the record. - The author is choosing between The Burlington Magazine and a generalist or theory-driven art-history journal. - The author needs the journal's connoisseurship/evidence bar and desk-reject heuristics. ## Scope & topic fit - Attribution, re-attribution, and dating of works, argued from direct examination, style, and documentary evidence. - Provenance research, rediscoveries, and corrections to the historical record of specific works or groups. - Technical art history and conservation findings — materials, technique, underdrawing, and scientific examination — bearing on attribution or understanding. - Documentary discoveries: archival finds, inventories, contracts, and correspondence that reshape what is known about a work, artist, or collection. - Scholarship of collections, museums, exhibitions, and the history of taste, collecting, and the art market. - Catalogue and corpus-level contributions that advance the documentation of an artist or school. ## Method & evidence bar - The contribution is a **precise, well-grounded object-based claim** — an attribution, finding, or correction — stated clearly and supported by direct evidence. - Close visual and material examination of the work(s) is central; stylistic and technical observation is described exactly and tied to the conclusion. - Command of primary sources and documents — archival records, inventories, provenance trails, technical reports — is thorough and read critically. - Where relevant, technical and scientific evidence (imaging, materials analysis) is reported accurately and its limits acknowledged. - Engagement with the existing literature and catalogues situates the claim against prior attributions and the documentary record. - Conclusions are proportionate to the evidence; alternatives are weighed, and uncertainty is stated rather than overclaimed. ## Structure & house style - Focused article or shorter note built around a specific object, finding, or documentary discovery; re-check current article types and length expectations on the live guide. - Citation follows the journal's current style with full notes; provenance and archival references follow the journal's form. - Anonymization for review per current policy where applicable (self-citations and acknowledgements). - Image rights are central and the journal is illustration-led: secure high-quality reproduction permissions for every work discussed, including comparative images and technical photographs, and budget for fees before acceptance. - Figures must meet the journal's specifications (high resolution, format, captions, credit lines, dimensions and medium) with permissions and an illustration list. - Foreign-language documents are quoted and translated per policy; transcriptions of archival sources follow the journal's conventions. ## Official-submission checklist - Before giving submission-ready advice, read `../../resources/source-basis.md` and `../../resources/official-source-map.md`; start from the journal's publisher anchors, then cite the current Burlington Magazine page you checked. - Search the live site for "The Burlington Magazine submission guidelines" and follow the current version. - Re-check article types (article vs. shorter note), length expectations, and any abstract requirement. - Confirm the citation/style format and any anonymization for review. - Re-check image-reproduction permissions, high-resolution figure specifications, the illustration list, and any reproduction-cost policy. - Re-check competing-interest, funding (if applicable), and AI-use disclosure, plus any translation/transcription policy for archival sources. - If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win. ## Pre-submission self-check - [ ] The object-based claim (attribution, finding, or correction) is stated precisely and is the center of the piece. - [ ] Close visual/technical examination and documentary evidence directly support the conclusion. - [ ] Primary sources, provenance, and prior catalogues are addressed and the claim's uncertainty is stated. - [ ] Anonymization for review (where required) follows current policy. - [ ] High-resolution reproduction permissions are secured and figures meet specifications. - [ ] Archival transcriptions and non-English documents are quoted and translated per policy. ## Common desk-reject triggers - A broad theoretical essay with no specific object or documentary evidence at its center. - An attribution or provenance claim that overreaches the evidence or ignores prior catalogues. - Vague stylistic assertion not anchored in close examination or technical/documentary support. - Speculative reconstruction unsupported by archival or material evidence. - Missing high-resolution image permissions, or figures below the journal's specification. - Wrong venue: a conceptual or theory-driven argument better served by a generalist or theory journal. ## Re-routing decision - Broad, all-periods generalist art-history article → `the-art-bulletin`. - Theoretically and methodologically reflective art history → `art-history`. - Contemporary art, criticism, theory, or the avant-garde → `october`. - Interdisciplinary critical theory across the humanities → `critical-inquiry`. - Aesthetics / philosophy of art is the core contribution → `the-journal-of-aesthetics-and-art-criticism`. ## Output format ```text [Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason) [Target] The Burlington Magazine [Field/period/region] [Argument] [Objects/images] [Sources/documentation] [Image permissions] [Top risk] [Official items to re-check]
[Re-route suggestion] ```