Humanities and Social Sciences

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne

Content

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2017 | tom 47 |

Abstract

The article attempts to evaluate Polish historiography dealing with the early modern period, published since 1989, the date marking the political transition in Poland. The transition has affected the way in which history has been practised in recent years, with a clear alteration in the subjectmatters and topics dealt with. Political history and the history of towns/cities and the bourgeoisie are beyond the scope of this discussion and assessment.
Go to article

Abstract

The shifting attitudes to sources and traditional paradigms of social history and history of the early modern period culture, and to problems of individuals and groups, are considered here. The author indicates discussion fi elds and specifi c results of work carried out by research groups (mainly French and German ones). He indicates trends and tendencies in discovering individuals in presenting historical events from the perspective of a collective hero
Go to article

Abstract

In the first part of the article, Krzysztof A. Makowski describes how the idea of granting Poland the opportunity to host the 23rd International Congress of Historical Sciences in 2020 in Poznań came about and how Poznań’s application to host the Congress was prepared. Moreover, the author presents the ongoing preparations for the Congress. In the second part of the article, Ewa Domańska discusses the origins and evolution of the idea of “alter-native modernities” and “epi- stemic justice” as leitmotifs of Poznań’s application. She stresses the need and importance of developing an intellectual alliance of East-Central European countries and lists activities that could help raise the region’s status as an important centre of knowledge building.
Go to article

Abstract

The author raises questions concerning the phenomenon of manifestos in science and specifi c theses advanced by the authors of The History Manifesto. The fi rst question is whether a manifesto on the role of historiography in the contemporary world, calling for a revival of a certain seemingly bygone ideal of science, symbolised by the works of Fernand Braudel, can be the subject of scientifi c criticism at all. The second question is whether the diagnosis of a crisis in the role of history as an expert science is accurate, and whether its claims to this role are altogether valid in the modern world.
Go to article

Abstract

In 2015, the academic journal Annales published a special volume dedicated to the acclaimed History Manifesto written by Jo Guldi and David Armitage one year earlier. In my article I analyse the background and content of the volume which can be viewed as a French reception of the manifesto
Go to article

Abstract

The paper discusses the English language reception of Jo Guldi and David Armitage’s The History Manifesto. It relates the most important responses to this powerful book, as well as pointing out the notions of the longue durée, the public and historians craft as the main topic that marshals the vast and diverse exchange
Go to article

Abstract

The paper presents well-known destructive obedience research which has been used as an unsuc- cessful attempt to explain the reasons behind the Holocaust using social psychology. It also com- ments on a psychological theory which is more pertinent for elucidating this phenomenon
Go to article

Abstract

The article invites a new interdisciplinary analysis of authoritarian movements, given the recent growth of authoritarianism in the United States and in Europe. The electoral victory of Donald Trump and the growth of right-radical movements in Western Europe show that authoritarianism is gaining ground in countries with long democratic traditions. The article calls for the integration of studies into authoritarianism into academic research programmes funded by education and learning authorities.
Go to article

Abstract

Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince has been one of the most extensively studied works of political theory since its original publication. The reason for the ongoing interest in this work is its radical modernity. This paper analyses an important dimension of this aspect which has been overlooked thus far, namely the author’s attitude towards his prince and the means he used to express it, by comparing Machiavelli’s attitudes with those of Guillaume Budé and Erasmus of Rotterdam.
Go to article

Abstract

This paper focuses on the development of critical methods and the growth of the erudite school in 18th-century Denmark-Norway. It shows how Hans Gram, Andreas Hojer and Jacob Langebek contributed to modernizing the study of history, turning it into a branch of science
Go to article

Abstract

The article compares and analyses tendencies in writings about Polish migrations to the United States and the history of the Polish ethnic group in the US. What are the similarities between the discourse and topics undertaken in Poland, Europe and the US in the mid-20th century and 2016? To what extents have historiographies across the ocean influenced themselves? Is the discourse coherent? Which topics being researched by scholars in the US are relevant to Polish academics?
Go to article

Abstract

The article presents the academic activities and methodological approaches of Russian historians Mikhail Pokrovsky (1868–1932) and David Riazanov (1870–1938) who worked in a difficult political climate. They both had their own criteria of objectivity in history and held their own political views. They shared the reality of Bolshevism, although their concepts of interpreting his- tory clashed with Bolshevist ways of thinking. Bolshevism practices and beliefs required drastic adjustments in academic studies, in particular in the social sciences. The article focuses on the interactions between the governing party and Pokrovsky Riazanov.
Go to article

Abstract

The paper considers Timothy Snyder’s applied methodology of history. Snyder’s original field of interest as a professional historian was historical biography, but it did not take him long to put transnational history at the centre of his attention. The author posits that Snyder’s practice in this historiographic paradigm has laid the foundation for his greatest academic achievements, leading to him being recognized as one of the best historians working today.
Go to article

Abstract

The papers deals with methodological questions of writing a general history of science. We start by defining the scope of general history of science and its relation to general history, followed by a discussion on recent trends in history and philosophy of science. We also examine the impact of the developments in the humanities since the 1970s on disciplines reflecting on science. The second part of the paper focuses on the approach of science and politics as resources for one other, developed by Mitchell Ash, to describing scientific changes in times of radical regime upheavals. We also discuss the intersection between current science and politics framing historians as engaged intellectuals.
Go to article

Abstract

The article presents the discipline of celebrity studies and the perspectives of applying it to Polish historical research. Intended to be a discussion opener rather than a complete literature overview, it provides readers with basic information on the discipline, indicates potential problems, and explains the beneficial effects of developing research based on terms and definitions in celebrity studies.
Go to article

Editorial office

EDITORIAL BOARD

Jakub Basista (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Dipesh Chakrabarty (University of Chicago), Andrzej Chwalba (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Ewa Domańska (Stanford University; Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza), Maciej Dymkowski (SWPS, Wrocław), François Hartog (L'École des hautes études en sciences sociales, L'EHESS), Michał Jaskólski (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Marta Kurkowska-Budzan (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Allan Megill (University of Virginia), Tomasz Pawelec (Uniwersytet Śląski), Jan Pomorski (Uniwersytet Marii Curie Skłodowskiej), Rafał Stobiecki (Uniwersytet Łódzki), Jan Skoczyński (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Piotr Sztompka (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Veronica Tozzi (Universidad de Buenos Aires), Marek Waldenberg (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Wojciech Wrzosek (Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza), Anna Ziębińska-Witek (Maria Curie Skłodowska University)

EDITORS IN CHIEF

Maciej Salamon (Pontifical University of John Paul II), Krzysztof Zamorski (Jagiellonian University)

ASSISTANT EDITORS

Jakub Muchowski (Jagiellonian University), Rafał Swakoń (Jagiellonian University)

LANGUAGE CONSULTANTS

Barbara Ratecka, Caroline Stupnicka, Robin Gill

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2012

dr hab. Maciej Bugajewski (UAM), prof. Keely Stauter-Halsted (University of Illinois), dr hab. Violetta Julkowska (UAM), prof. dr hab. Zbigniew Libera (UJ) , prof. dr hab. Andrzej Nowak (UJ), prof. dr hab. Ryszard Nycz (UJ), dr hab. Łukasz Tomasz Sroka (UP), prof. dr hab. Rafał Stobiecki (UŁ), Dr hab. Wiktor Werner, prof. UAM (UAM), dr hab. Mariusz Wołos, prof. UP (UP), prof. Nathan Wood (University of Kansas), dr hab. Anna Ziębińska-Witek (UMCS)

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2013

Krzysztof Brzechczyn (Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza), Adam Izbebski (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Barbara Klich-Kluczewska (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Marcin Kula (Uniwersytet Warszawski), Wojciech Piasek (Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika), Radosław Poniat (Uniwersytet w Białymstoku), Isabel Röskau-Rydel (Uniwersytet Pedagogiczny im. KEN w Krakowie), Roma Sendyka (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Jarosław Stolicki (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Jan Swianiewicz (Uniwersytet Warszawski), Marek Wilczyński (Uniwersytet Pedagogiczny im. KEN w Krakowie), Piotr Witek (Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej), Marek Woźniak (Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej), Anna Ziębińska-Witek (Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej)

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2014

Jan Surman (Herder-Institut, Marburg), Zbigniew Romek (IH PAN), Andrzej Chwalba (UJ), dr hab. prof. UW Michał Kopczyński (UW), dr hab. Maciej Bugajewski (UAM), Marek Woźniak (UMCS), Piotr Witek (UMCS) , Barbara Klich Kluczewska (UJ), Marcin Jarząbek (UJ), Maria Kobielska (UJ)

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2015

Sebastian Bernat (Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej), Tomasz Falkowski (Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza), Dorota Głowacka (University of King's College), Maciej Jabłoński (Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza), Bartłomiej Krupa (Instytut Badań Literackich PAN), Marcin Kula (Akademia Teatralna im. Aleksandra Zelwerowicza w Warszawie, Uniwersytet Warszawski [emeritus]), Mirosława Kupryjanowicz (Uniwersytet w Białymstoku), Jacek Leociak (Instytut Badań Literackich PAN), Maria Lityńska-Zając (Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN), Anna Muller (University of Michigan), Tomasz Pawelec (Uniwersytet Śląski), Katarzyna Pękacka-Falkowska (Uniwersytet Medyczny w Poznaniu), Wojciech Piasek (Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika), Bożena Popiołek (Uniwersytet Pedagogiczny w Krakowie), Roma Sendyka (Uniwersytet Jagielloński), Ewelina Szpak (Instytut Historii PAN), Wojciech Tylmann (Uniwersytet Gdański), Justyna Tymieniecka-Suchanek (Uniwersytet Śląski)

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2016

Tomasz Błaszczak (Vytautas Magnus University), Krzysztof Buchowski (UwB), Andrzej Buko (UW), Paweł Bukowiec (UJ), Ewa Domańska (UAM/Stanford University), Bartosz Drzewiecki (UP), Mateusz Jerzy Falkowski (New York University), Maciej Fic (UŚ), Piotr Guzowski (UwB), Joanna Janik (UJ), Maciej Janowski (CEU/IH PAN), Dariusz Jarosz (IH PAN), Elisabeth Johann (Austrian Forest Association), Klemens Kaps (Universidad Pablo de Olavide de Sevilla), Michał Kara (IAiE PAN), Andrzej Karpiński (UW), Edmund Kizik (UG), Barbara Klassa (UG), Jolanta Kolbuszewska (UŁ), Andrea Komlosy (Universität Wien), Jacek Kowalewski (UWM), Elżbieta Kościk (UWr), Adam Kożuchowski (IH PAN), Eryk Krasucki (USz), Barbara Krysztopa-Czuprynska (UWM), Cezary Kuklo (UwB), Jacek Małczyński (UWr), Konrad Meus (UP), Grzegorz Miernik (UJK), Michael Morys-Twarowski (UJ), Jadwiga Muszyńska (UJK), Jakub Niedźwiedź (UJ), Marcin Pawlak (UMK), Radosław Poniat (UwB), Bożena Popiołek (UP), Tomasz Przerwa (UWr), Rajmund Przybylak (UMK), Andrzej Rachuba (IH PAN), Judyta Rodzińska-Nowak (UJ), Isabel Röskau-Rydel (UP), Stanisław Roszak (UMK), Tomasz Samojlika (IBS PAN), Paweł Sierżęga (URz), Volodymyr Sklokin (Ukrainian Catholic University), Maria Solarska (UAM), Jan Surman (), Aurimas Švedas (Vilnius University), Michał Targowski (UMK), Robert Twardosz (UJ), Justyna Tymieniecka-Suchanek (UŚ), Jacek Wijaczka (UMK), Hubert Wilk (IH PAN), Tomasz Wiślicz (IH PAN), Elena Xoplaki (Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen), Anna Zalewska (UMCS), Marcin Zaremba (UW), Anna Ziębińska-Witek (UMCS), Paweł Żmudzki (UW)

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2017

Michał Bilewicz (UW), Anna Brzezińska (UŁ), Michał Choptiany (UMK), Jacek Chrobaczyńcki (UP), Rafał Dobek (UAM), Iwona Janicka (UG), Anna D. Jaroszynska-Kirchmann (Eastern Connecticut State University), Jolanta Kluba (Centrum Historii Zajezdnia), Piotr Koprowski (UG), Jacek Kowalewski (UWM), Wiktoria Kudela (NCN), Aleksandra Leinwand (IH PAN), Gabriela Majewska (UG), Łukasz Mikołajewski (UW), Stephan Moebius (Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz), Tim B. Müller (Hamburger Institut für Sozialforschung), Tomasz Pawelec (UŚ), Wioletta Pawlikowska-Butterwick (IH PAN), Wojciech Piasek (UMK), Radosław Poniat (UwB), Zbigniew Romek (IH PAN), Izabela Skórzyńska (UAM), Ewa Solska (UMCS), Rafał Stobiecki (UŁ), Michał Trębacz (UŁ), Jan Swianiewicz (UW), Anna Waśko (UJ), Tomasz Wiślicz (IH PAN), Piotr Witek (UMCS), Joanna Wojdon (UWr), Agata Zysiak (UW)

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2018

Magdalena Barbaruk (University of Wrocław), Radosław Bomba (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Joana Brites (Universidade de Coimbra), Anna Brzezińska (University of Lodz), Marta Chmiel-Chrzanowska (University of Szczecin), Bernadetta Darska (University of Warmia and Mazury), Paweł Dobrosielski (University of Warsaw), Dariusz Dolański (University of Zielona Gora), Maciej Dymkowski (University of Social Sciences and Humanities in Wrocław), Tomasz Falkowski (Adam Mickiewicz University), Agnieszka Gajewska (Adam Mickiewicz University), Neil Galway (Queen's University Belfast), Ryszard Gryglewski (Jagiellonian University), Maud Guichard-Marneur (Göteborgs Universitet), Mariola Hoszowska (University of Rzeszów), Marcin Jarząbek (Jagiellonian University), Karina Jarzyńska (Jagiellonian University), Violetta Julkowska (Adam Mickiewicz University), Olga Kaczmarek (University of Warsaw), Barbara Klassa (University of Gdansk), Maria Kobielska (Jagiellonian University), Jolanta Kolbuszewska (University of Lodz), Paweł Komorowski (Institute of History, Polish Academy of Sciences), Jacek Kowalewski (University of Warmia and Mazury), Adam Kożuchowski (Institute of History, Polish Academy of Sciences), Lenka Krátká (Akademie Věd České Republiky), Cezary Kuklo (UwB), Iwona Kurz (University of Warsaw), Halina Lichocka (Institute for the History of Science, Polish Academy of Sciences), Anita Magowska (Poznan University of Medical Sciences), Paulina Małochleb (Jagiellonian University), Andrea Mariani (Adam Mickiewicz University), Adam Mazurkiewicz (University of Lodz), Lidia Michalska-Bracha (Jan Kochanowski University), Anna Muller (University of Michigan-Dearborn), Monika Napora (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Jakub Niedźwiedź (Jagiellonian University), Anna Odrzywolska-Kidawa (Jan Dlugosz University), Magdalena Paciorek (Institute for the History of Science, Polish Academy of Sciences), Tomasz Pawelec (University of Silesia), Joanna Pisulińska (University of Rzeszów), Sławomir Poleszak (Institute for National Remembrance in Lublin), Aleksandra Porada (University of Social Sciences and Humanities in Wrocław), Stanisław Roszak (Nicolaus Copernicus University), Paweł Sierżęga (University of Rzeszów), Kinga Siewior (Jagiellonian University), Izabela Skórzyńska (Adam Mickiewicz University), Dorota Skotarczak (Adam Mickiewicz University), Bogusław Skowronek (Pedagogical University of Cracow), Tomasz Ślepowroński (University of Szczecin), Rafał Stobiecki (University of Lodz), Ksenia Surikova (St-Petersburg State University), Adam Szarszewski (Medical University of Gdańsk), Justyna Tabaszewska (Institute of Literary Research of Polish Academy of Sciences), Paweł Tomczok (University of Silesia), Anna Trojanowska (Institute for the History of Science, Polish Academy of Sciences), Izabela Trzcińska (Jagiellonian University), Marek Tuszewicki (Jagiellonian University), Bożena Urbanek (Institute for the History of Science, Polish Academy of Sciences), Jan Krzysztof Witczak (Adam Mickiewicz University), Tomasz Wiślicz-Iwańczyk (Institute of History, Polish Academy of Sciences), Joanna Wojdon (University of Wrocław), Marta Zimniak-Hałajko (University of Warsaw)

Contact

e-mail: historyka@uj.edu.pl

Department of History

Jagiellonian University

Golebia 13

31-007 Krakow

Poland

Instructions for authors

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE

The following are the standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in publishing in the Historyka journal: the author, the journal editor and editorial board, the peer reviewers and the publisher.
All the articles submitted for publication in Historyka are peer reviewed for authenticity, ethical issues and usefulness.

DUTIES OF EDITORS

Monitoring the ethical standards: Editorial board is monitoring the ethical standards of scientific publications and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices.
Fair play: Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, citizenship, or political ideology.
Publication decisions: The editor is responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should or should not be published. The decision to accept or reject a paper for publication is based on its importance, originality, clarity, and its relevance to the scope of the journal.
Confidentiality: The editor and the members of the editorial board must ensure that all materials submitted to the journal remain confidential while under review. They must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Disclosure and conflict of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted manuscript must not be used by the editor and the editorial board in their own research without written consent of authors. Editors always precludes business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
Maintain the integrity of the academic record: The editors will guard the integrity of the published academic record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. Plagiarism and fraudulent data is not acceptable.
Editorial board always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
Retractions of the articles: Journals editors will consider retracting a publication if:
- they have a clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
- the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (cases of redundant publication)
- it constitutes plagiarism or reports unethical research.
Notice of the retraction should be linked to the retracted article (by including the title and authors in the retraction heading), clearly identify the retracted article and state who is retracting the article. Retraction notices should always mention the reason(s) for retraction to distinguish honest error from misconduct.
Retracted articles will not be removed from printed copies of the journal nor from electronic archives but their retracted status will be indicated as clearly as possible.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. The paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. The fabrication of results and making of fraudulent or inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and may cause rejection or retraction of a manuscript or a published article.
Originality and plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others they need to be cited or quoted. Plagiarism and fraudulent data is not acceptable.
Data access retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data for editorial review, should be prepared to provide public access to such data, and should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication of their paper.
Multiple or concurrent publication: Authors should not in general publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Authorship of the manuscript: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the report study. All those who have made contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Acknowledgement of sources: The proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. The authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the scope of the reported work.
Fundamental errors in published works: When the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer reviews assist the editor in making editorial decisions and may also help authors to improve their manuscript.
Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.
Confidentiality: All manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except those authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify the relevant published work that has not been cited by authors. Any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper should be reported to the editor.
Disclosure and conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relations with any of the authors, companies, or institutions involved in writing a paper.


GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS

1)    No fees or charges are required for manuscript processing and/or publishing materials in the journal.
2)    Articles to be published in this journal should be sent to historyka@uj.edu.pl.
3)    The editorial office will accept articles no longer than 45 000 characters (including notes and bibliography).
4)    Contributions should be submitted in electronic version (editable).
5)    Author’s name and affiliation should be placed on the left top corner of the front page.
6)    Author is expected to reveal the contribution to the article of third persons (including their affiliation and a measure of their contribution). All authors have to significantly contribute to the research.
7)    All authors are obliged to list all of the references as well as financial support of academic, scientific and other institutions that contributed to the  research which results are presented in the article.
8)    Submissions should include:
a.    an abstract (500 characters);
b.    a short summary (1200 characters);
c.    five keywords;
d.    and a note about the Author (500 characters).
9)    Historyka accepts only original, unpublished contributions.
10)     Editing board underlines that the practice of ghostwriting and guest authorship will be treated as a violation of the principles of best academic practice. All detected cases will be disclosed and brought to the attention of the appropriate institutions.  
11)     Authors will receive one copy of the issue where his contribution is included.



PEER-REVIEW PROCESS

1)    All submissions to Historyka are subjected to peer-review.
2)    Authors are obliged to participate in peer review process.
3)    Peer-review is defined as obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from at least two academic experts in the field.
4)    Publishers and editors make sure that the appointed reviewers have no conflict of interest.
5)    Reviewers are required to offer objective judgments, to point out relevant published work which is not yet cited.
6)    The review has a written form and concludes with unequivocal decision concerning submitted article.
7)    The reviewers judge whether or not the submission qualifies for publication, taking into account the following criteria (among others): whether the subject is treated in an innovative manner; whether the article takes into account recent subject literature; whether the methodology is adequate; the article’s impact on the current state of research in the field.
8)    Reviewed articles are treated confidentially (double-blind review process).
9)    The reviews remain confidential.
10)    All authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
11)    Once a year in the printed issue of the journal as well as on the website of Historyka the editorial board will publish a list of reviewers collaborating with the journal.



COPYRIGHT AND ACCESS

Historyka is an open access journal with all content available with no charge in full text version. The journal content is available under the licencse CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 


ARCHIVING

In the event the journal is no longer published the electronic backup and access to the journal content will be secured by National Library of Poland, Department of History at Jagiellonian University and Polish Academy of Science.


Open Access policy

Historyka is an open access journal with all content available with no charge in full text version. The journal content is available under the licencse CC BY-NC-SA 4.

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more