Humanities and Social Sciences

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne

Content

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2021 | tom 51 Spec. Iss. |

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In this article, I will sketch a particular way of thinking about existence in time, the consequence of which would be practicing historiography as a response to the voices of the dead coming from the past. This theoretical conception of history tries to understand history not so much as an unfolding process of succession over time but as some community of the living and the dead. If the voices of the dead, defined in terms of spectrality, are to be active somehow in the present, they cannot be prematurely suppressed by gestures of closing the past understood as blocking the transmission of these voices to the future. After analyzing the problem of false closures in history, I am trying to understand spectrality that would combine both past and present activity. The article aims to propose tasks for a historiography that would consist in regaining in con-temporary culture the ability to hear the voice, the gaze, and the expectations coming from the past, present in various forms which can be grasped by an encompassing notion of spectrality. Reflection on spectrality brings us closer to the meaning of the concept of counter‑time.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Maciej Bugajewski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article explores the reception of French Theory in Poland after 1989. I argue that post-modern tendencies entered the Polish humanities in a distorted form, having travelled via the USA. I propose the hypothesis that the transplantation of the concept of power‑knowledge, which was central to the US‑American take on Michel Foucault, led to something that I term “the Foucault Effect.” It became entangled in the processes of democratization and political and economic transformation taking place in the 1990s, meaning that on the one hand it “raised consciousness” of power mechanisms, while on the other hand promoting a sense of subjecthood that was a product of power relations and thus was deprived of agency. I argue that regardless of the critique of anthropocentrism that is prevalent in the contemporary humanities, the socio-‑political situation in the world today demands a return of the strong subject, whose figuration would take into account lessons learned from French Theory.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ewa Domańska
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Analytic philosophy is sometimes understood in opposition to continental tradition. In this article, I would like to show that a Lviv‑Warsaw School shared many fundamental traits with analytic orientation. In afterwar Poland, this tradition clashed with the dialectical materialism that lacks strong scientific tradition but had the full support of the communist party. This situation produced a unique scenario in which the methodology of science could strive as a mainstream area. A crucial role was attributed to the theory of history.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Piotr Kowalewski Jahromi
1

  1. Silesian University, Katowice
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

I assumed so far that the notion of historical thinking was a worthy and handy “sponsor” of meta‑historical enquiry. Therefore, I left both thinking and, in particular, historical thinking without even a quasi‑definition. In this paper I make an attempt to operationalize the notion of historical thinking using historical semiotics (semiotics of culture), a domain of humanities developed by the founding fathers of the Tartu–Moscow Semiotic School, Yuri Lotman and Boris Uspenskij. The association of cognition and communication not only enriches the study of language but also culture and historiography. Bearing in mind the meta‑historical contexts I found interesting, I significantly reorganized the lecture contents found in Uspenskiy’s Ego Loquens. This interpretation took the form of annotated diagrams, which represent and interpret key categories of Uspenskiy’s philosophy resultant from the semiotic concept of language and culture. Underlying it, there is the act of communication as both the act of anthropogenesis and the genesis of the subject of cognition. We point out the qualities of historical thinking which already flow from the qualities of thinking tout court. Along the way we introduce the problem of the status of the so‑called objective and virtual reality, typical of the philosophical aspects of historical semiotics and crucial for potential meta‑historical analyses.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Wojciech Wrzosek
1

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Oskar Halecki’s reception in French historiography is one of the interesting examples of diffi-culties in understanding Polish historical thought in France. As one of the leading authors of the concept of East‑Central Europe in world historiography, a descendant of the Viennese aristoc-racy and an ambassador of Polish humanities in the League of Nations Committee on Intellec-tual Cooperation, he promoted the history of the countries of the region, considering their independent of Russia cultural specificity, deeply connected with the values of the Christian Europe. Meanwhile, after the Second World War, the socio‑economically oriented historiogra-phy of “Annales” was gaining more and more popularity in Paris – and in Warsaw itself ...
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Anna Brzezińska
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. University of Lodz, Łódź
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In my paper I try to analyze Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty‑First Century as a history book. Thus, the following questions have been posed: at the intersection of which streams, tends, and traditions of the contemporary historiography could one place Piketty’s oeuvre? What can be said of those elements of the book that can be labeled as historical epistemology: source work, conceptualization of the object of study, etc.? As an attempt to revive serial history, does it inherit the baggage of “misdeeds” against which the entire movement of cultural history rose up? What role does the concept of longue durée play in the book? The historical aspects of Piketty’s thought have the potential to spark controversy among professional historians, but it is one of its many virtues.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Tomasz Falkowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Hayden White did not directly examine the issue of the independence of history as a discipline of knowledge in his theoretical reflection. He did not ask about the subject of historical studies, the specificity of the methods used in it, the difference between history and other fields, or the economic and social conditions of historical discourse. In this article, I revise White’s writing and reconfigure the extant research using the concept of autonomy.
White — primarily in his works from the 1970s and 1980s — devoted much attention to exposing and describing cultural compulsions resulting in historical practices and violating their autonomy. These actions also brought unexpected results. At first, the use of structuralism in these practices, and then poststructuralist concepts of “the death of the author” and textualism, suggested claims that freed historiography from its links with an author’s biography and world-view, and with the social context in which a given work is produced. Using Foucault’s descrip-tion of the order of discourse, in turn, brought the image of a strict rigor of historical discipline, which, however, is not equal to the strong autonomy of history.
A stronger delimitation of the field of history appears in his — already in the twenty‑first century — offer to use Michael Oakeshott’s division into the practical past and the historical past. Whilst censuring academic historical writing as sterile and rejected by readers because it fails to answer contemporary existential, social and political questions, White, most likely unintentionally, described the independence of historians’ actions from the demands of the societies to which they belong. According to commentators, his remarks can be a productive inspiration for reflection upon the distinctiveness of the discipline of history.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jakub Muchowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Jagiellonian University, Kraków
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article presents the concept of the economic history of Witold Kula. He understands economic history as historical and comparative anthropology. However, he does not see the need to change the name of the discipline because he understands anthropology in a traditional way. This name refers to a separate discipline of knowledge which is primarily interested in primitive societies. Taking account of the existence of different research styles in anthropology, it must be stated that Kula’s research on the economy represents the scientistic style of researching culture.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Wojciech Piasek
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The place of the history of historiography in Topolski’s comprehensive oeuvre has not been subjected to a holistic analysis yet. I will try to highlight some of the key topics rather than propose an exhaustive interpretation of them The article concentrates on the analysis of both the notion of historiography itself, as well as interpretation the main historiographic work of the Poznan historian.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Rafał Stobiecki
1

  1. University of Lodz, Łódź
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper examines the special historiographic evidence: the lost last book of the well‑known Polish historian and methodologist Professor Jerzy Topolski entitled “New Methodology of History”. Only its working outline in the form of an extensive table of contents has survived, but this does not prevent the author from making interesting hypotheses as to its meaning.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jan Pomorski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Maria Curie Skłodowska University, Lublin
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The aim of this article is to present selected methodological threads of the discussion on the status of historical sources which took place in Polish post‑war historiography. In the article, I present the concepts of the historical source formulated in 1957–1989, mainly by Gerard Labuda and Jerzy Topolski. Further in the text, I will present the discussion about Topolski’s concepts and characterize the peculiarities of contemporary history as regards historical sources. In the light of the presented classification of sources, I will reflect on the status of the documents created by the apparatus of repression of the Polish People’s Republic.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Krzysztof Brzechczyn
1 2
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań
  2. Historical Research Office, Institute of National Remembrance, Poznań Branch
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The subject of the article is the specific nature of historical narration in digital media (YouTube). Both the media where the Polish state is the channel owner and ones belonging to individual political parties and fractions are being studied. The relationship between the narration and national identity is analyzed. The question under discussion is to what extent national identity is a phenomenon ingrained in the ethnic and historical peculiarities of a given society. The authors contrasts the primordialist concept with Ernest Gellner’s modernist concept. In the second part the authors refer to the discussion about the significance of historical narration for the formation of identity: if historical narration is just an accidental component of identity formation processes or rather a fundamental one.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Dawid Gralik
1
ORCID: ORCID
Adrian Trzoss
1
ORCID: ORCID
Wiktor Werner
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The issues raised in the article focus on the ways of communicating family narratives from the perspective of reflection on this type of historical writing by the history of historiography. An expression of this reflection is the proposed classification of narrative strategies and genre types of narration within the set of family histories, and the conceptual category of family histories, which captures this set and opens the field for further discussions on the phenomenon of private family narratives.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Violetta Julkowska
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article offers a survey of the careers of 54 Polish female historians who received the habilitacja degree in 1945–1989 at seven Polish universities – four of those were founded soon after the Second World War (University of Łódź, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, University of Wrocław, Maria Skłodowska‑Curie University in Lublin), while three had been established earlier (University of Warsaw, Jagiellonian University in Kraków and the Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań). Analysis of personal files and various biographical materials has led the author to a number of conclusions about female historians’ academic careers. The careers reflected the discipline’s development, both in terms of the expansion of its field of inquiry, as well its methodological diversity and the conditions in which it operated. Career paths followed by women were not much different from those followed by men. Neither advancement requirements, nor employment policy at the schools of higher learning were discriminatory towards any of the sexes. However, as far as the female career advancement is concerned, there were some differences between the old and new universities: it was easier for women to obtain managerial positions at the latter.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jolanta Kolbuszewska
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. University of Łódź
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The text presents the procedures and techniques of the research method aimed at “evoking the historical source”, which is understood as the researcher’s prepared and implemented scientifi-cally rigorous participation in the creation by a witness of history of such a reminiscence material that could be a carrier of information and would be subjected to rudimentary historical analysis. The text presents the defined assumptions and subsequent stages of the research procedure.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marta Kurkowska-Budzan
1
ORCID: ORCID
Emilia Soroko
2
ORCID: ORCID
Marcin Stasiak
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Jagiellonian University, Kraków
  2. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The authors discuss possibilities and limits for applying a research model of the study of memory politics, originally developed by them with the aim to research the Polish case only, to other countries of East Central Europe which after the WW II formed the sphere of the Soviet domination. They pose a question whether it should be appropriate to combine it with the so called transnational approach.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Dorota Malczewska-Pawelec
1
ORCID: ORCID
Tomasz Pawelec
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Univeristy of Silesia, Katowice
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Andrzej Wajda’s films are interesting and serious historical narratives, which enter in dialog both with academic historiography and with other forms of familiarization with the past. Some of Wajda’s historical films are part of the paradigm of the affirmative vision of history. It is a vision that focuses on creating the positive picture of the bygone world, on showing those elements of the past that a given community recognizes as glorious and heroic, worth imitating, commemorating, and honoring, which can be the object of pride or even worship. The affirma-tive vision of history belittles, leaves in the background or omits all those themes from the past that fall outside positive evaluation for various reasons and could distort a consistent favorable picture of the past of a community. In the present article I would like to examine from the comparative perspective of two films, “A Generation [ Pokolenie]” (1954) and “Katyń” (2007). The comparison between Andrzej Wajda’s two films made in the space of fifty years shows that despite the fact that the two pictures were produced in entirely different historico‑cultural contexts, using different film styles, the two screen stories present the affirmation of diametri-cally disparate versions of history, it is the dramatic strategies for and techniques of affirmation of history that remain the same in either case.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Piotr Witek
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Maria Curie‑Skłodowska University, Lublin
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Life history is a term usually assigned in the history of historiography to the Italian school of microhistory. In fact, it is a concept typical for the natural sciences in the case of which it is a framework focused on studies of life history strategies as well as life cycles. Life history analysis has become the subject of numerous studies around the world and has been gaining in popularity in social sciences. The author presents life history as a certain research perspective for historical studies which is capable of incorporating both natural and cultural approaches. He draws inspirations of the life history perspective from recent research into history of modern Poland.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Krzysztof Zamorski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Jagiellonian University
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article analyzes museum representations of communism in Poland from the perspective of exhibition strategies influencing the public understanding of the past. Over the past forty years, Western museums have increasingly moved away from the affirmative model of presenting the past, dominating since the nineteenth century, towards critical paradigms and even those pro-moting social activism. The analysis of Polish exhibitions devoted to recent history carried out from this perspective allows us to reveal the functions fulfilled by museum institutions in the Polish social and political reality.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Anna Ziębińska-Witek
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Maria Curie‑Sklodowska University, Lublin

Instructions for authors

INSTRUKCJE DLA AUTOREK I AUTORÓW

1.    Przesłane teksty są poddawane procesowi recenzji i publikowane bezpłatnie.

2.    Teksty przeznaczone do publikacji powinny zostać przesłane pod adresem redakcji z adnotacją działu, w którym autor chciałby je umieścić.

3.    Redakcja przyjmuje artykuły o objętości do około 45 000 znaków (wraz z przypisami i ewentualną bibliografią).

4.    Artykuły przeznaczone do druku powinny być dostarczone w formie pliku pdf  lub wydruku i towarzyszącej wersji elektronicznej (poddającej się edycji). Artykuły mogą być pisane w dowolnym edytorze.

5.    Każdy artykuł powinien zawierać nazwisko autora/ki oraz podaną poniżej afiliację.

6.    Autorzy artykułów zobowiązani są do ujawnienia wkładu ewentualnych współautorów w powstanie publikacji (z podaniem ich afiliacji oraz kontrybucji, tj. informacji kto jest autorem koncepcji, założeń, metod, protokołu itp. wykorzystywanych przy                              przygotowaniu publikacji).

7.    Autorzy artykułów zobowiązani są do wskazania źródeł finansowania publikacji, wkładu instytucji naukowo-badawczych, stowarzyszeń i innych podmiotów.

8.    Do przesłanego tekstu należy ponadto załączyć:
a)    abstrakt w języku angielskim (do 500 znaków);
b)    krótkie streszczenie w języku angielskim (1200 znaków);
c)    słowa kluczowe w języku polskim i angielskim (5 słów kluczowych);
d)    krótką notę o autorze (do 500 znaków).

9.     Redakcja Historyki przyjmuje do druku wyłącznie materiały niepublikowane wcześniej.

10.   Redakcja pragnie zaznaczyć, że praktyki „ghostwriting”, „guest authorship” traktowane będą jako przejaw nierzetelności naukowej, a wszelkie wykryte przypadki będą demaskowane, włącznie z powiadomieniem odpowiednich podmiotów. Redakcja będzie                 dokumentować wszelkie przejawy nierzetelności naukowej, zwłaszcza łamania i naruszania zasad etyki obowiązujących w nauce.

11.    Autorzy otrzymują jeden egzemplarz pisma, w którym ukaże się ich publikacja.

PROCEDURA RECENZJI


Podstawowe zasady recenzowania publikacji w czasopiśmie opracowane przez Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego RP:
1.    Wszystkie artykuły publikowane w Historyce podlegają procedurze recenzji.
1.    Autorzy zobowiązani są do uczestniczenia w procesie recenzji.
2.    Do oceny każdej publikacji powołuje się co najmniej dwóch akademickich ekspertów.
3.    W przypadku tekstów powstałych w języku obcym, co najmniej jeden z recenzentów jest afiliowany w instytucji zagranicznej innej niż narodowość autora pracy.
4.    Rekomendowanym rozwiązaniem jest model, w którym autor(zy) i recenzenci nie znają swoich tożsamości (tzw. double-blind review proces).
5.    W innych rozwiązaniach recenzent/tka musi podpisać deklarację o nie występowaniu konfliktu interesów. Za konflikt interesów uznaje się zachodzące między recenzentem/tkom  a autorem/kom:
a) bezpośrednie relacje osobiste (pokrewieństwo, związki prawne, konflikt),
b) relacje podległości zawodowej,
c) bezpośrednia współpraca naukowa w ciągu ostatnich dwóch lat poprzedzających przygotowanie recenzji.
6.    Recenzja musi mieć formę pisemną i kończyć się jednoznacznym wnioskiem co do dopuszczenia artykułu do publikacji lub jego odrzucenia.
7.    Zasady kwalifikowania lub odrzucenia publikacji i ewentualny formularz recenzencki są podane do publicznej wiadomości na stronie internetowej czasopisma lub w każdym numerze czasopisma.
8.    Autorzy są zobowiązani do uwzględnienia sugestii zmian w artykułach zasugerowanych przez recenzentów.
9.    Nazwiska recenzentów poszczególnych publikacji/numerów nie są ujawniane; raz w roku czasopismo podaje do publicznej wiadomości listę recenzentów współpracujących.


ZASADY ETYCZNE

1. Wydawcy i redaktorzy dołożą wszelkich starań, aby rozpoznać i przeciwdziałać publikacji artykułów, które naruszają zasady dobrych praktyk akademickich.
2. Gdy wydawca lub redakcja czasopisma spotka się z zarzutami o naruszeniu tych zasad, podejmie stosowne kroki, aby je wyjaśnić.
3. Wydawcy i redaktorzy zobowiązują się udzielając łam pisma na publikacje korekt, wyjaśnień i przeprosin, jeśli będzie to niezbędne.
 
PRAWA AUTORSKIE I DOSTĘP


Historyka jest czasopismem wydawanym w wolnym dostępie na licencji CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 


Publication Ethics Policy

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.


Peer-review Procedure

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.

Reviewers

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)

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2019

Maciej Bugajewski (Adam Mickiewicz University), Agnieszka Czarnecka (Jagiellonian University), Tadeusz Czekalski (Jagiellonian University), Isabelle Davion (University of Paris), Alexander Dmitriev (Higher School of Economics. National Research University), Tomasz Falkowski (Adam Mickiewicz University), Dariusz Grzybek (Jagiellonian University), Marc Hertogh (Universitet of Groningen), Maciej Janowski (The Tadeusz Manteuffel Institute of History, Polish Academy of Science), Violetta Julkowska (Adam Mickiewicz University), Krzysztof Korzeniowski (Institute of Psychology, Polish Academy of Science), Karol Kościelniak (Adam Mickiewicz University), Przemysław Krzywoszyński (Adam Mickiewicz University), Stefan Machura (Bangor University), Marianna Michałowska (Adam Mickiewicz University), Łukasz Mikołajewski (University of Warsaw), Magdalena Najbar-Agičić (University of Zagreb), Bartosz Ogórek (Pedagogical University of Kraków), Tomasz Pawelec (University of Silesia), Zdzisław Pietrzyk (Jagiellonian University), Jure Ramšak (The Science and Research Centre Koper), Myroslav Shkandrij (University of Manitoba), Paweł Sierżęga (University of Rzeszów), Volodymyr Sklokin (Ukrainian Catholic University), Dorota Skotarczak (Adam Mickiewicz University), Janusz Smołucha (Ignatianum University in Kraków), Ewa Solska (Maria Curie-Skłodowska University), Anna Sosnowska (University of Warsaw), Krzysztof Stopka (Jagiellonian University), Aurimas Švedas (Vilnius University), Mikołaj Szołtysek (University of Warsaw), Urszula Świderska-Włodarczyk (University of Zielona Gora), Wiktor Werner (Adam Mickiewicz University), Jacek Wijaczka (Nicolaus Copernicus University), Marcin Wolniewicz (The Tadeusz Manteuffel Institute of History, Polish Academy of Science), Jakub Wysmułek (Institute of Political Studies, Polish Academy of Science), Mateusz Wyżga (Pedagogical University of Kraków)

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2020

Urszula Augustyniak (University of Warsaw), Radosław Bomba (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Krzysztof Brzechczyn (Adam Mickiewicz University), Maciej Bugajewski (Adam Mickiewicz University), Karolina Ćwiek-Rogalska (Polish Academy of Sciences), Marek Drwięga (Jagiellonian University), Wojciech Gajewski (University of Gdansk), Antoni Grabowski (Polish Academy of Sciences), Piotr Guzowski (University of Bialystok), Adam Izdebski (Jagiellonian University), Maciej Janowski (Polish Academy of Sciences), Marcin Jarząbek (Jagiellonian University), Małgorzata Kołacz-Chmiel (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Bartosz Kołoczek (Jagiellonian University), Piotr Koryś (University of Warsaw), Danuta Kowalewska (Nicolaus Copernicus University), Piotr Kowalewski Jahromi (University of Silesia), Adam Kożuchowski (Polish Academy of Sciences), Sławomir Łotysz (Polish Academy of Sciences), Rafał Matera (University of Lodz), Włodzimierz Mędrzecki (Polish Academy of Sciences), Tomasz Mojsik (University of Bialystok), Bartosz Ogórek (Pedagogical University of Cracow), Wojciech Piasek (Nicolaus Copernicus University), Stanisław Roszak (Nicolaus Copernicus University), Jan Skoczyński (Jagiellonian University), Ewa Solska (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Marcin Stasiak (Jagiellonian University), Rafał Stobiecki (University of Lodz), Jan Swaniewicz (Stołeczne Centrum Edukacji Kulturalnej im. Komisji Edukacji Narodowej), Piotr Weiser (Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University), Wiktor Werner (Adam Mickiewicz University), Marek Więcek (Małopolskie Centrum Nauki Cogiteon/ Jagiellonian University), Jacek Wijaczka (Nicolaus Copernicus University), Magdalena Zdrodowska (Jagiellonian University)



This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more