Humanities and Social Sciences

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne

Content

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2019 | tom 49 |

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article examines the theoretical discussions on the dualism of “form” and “content” in literature and art that took place in Soviet Ukraine in the mid-1920s. The subject is considered in the context of the development of two competitive approaches of study of literature and art — Russian formalism and Marxism. The problem is observed through the comparison of ethical and ideological positions of the modernists and Marxists in Russia and Ukraine in the 1920s.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Galina Babak
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Focusing on the period of unprecedented infl uence of popular science in Yugoslavia following the Second World War, the article examines a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches to linking science and Marxist philosophy of science against the backdrop of the dramatic political and cultural changes that were taking place in early socialist Yugoslavia.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Vedran Duančić
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This paper addresses the public discussions among Polish scholars and social scientists which took place following the Second World War. The debate on the sociological and historical genealogy of the Polish intelligentsia started with the publication of a lecture given by the sociologist Józef Chałasiński. Covering this debate, the paper shows the way in which the literary and publicist stereotypes came to be a research question for the Social Sciences and Humanities.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Aleksei Lokhmatov
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article deals with the three discursive strategies which were used by French intellectuals for establishing their attitudes towards the political sphere on the basis of different ‘truth speeches’. This paper states that the notion of truth, which represents a certain relation between reality and the knowledge, played a special role in the debates between French intellectuals over their social and political vocation in the 20th century — from the Dreyfus Affair to contemporary media debates.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Daria Petushkova
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Units of measurement appear as media of social confl ict in Witold Kula’s seminal study on metrication. Given the current discussions around political epistemology, Kula’s treatment of metrology is telling. He turns the supposedly neutral auxiliary science of weights and measures into a matter of concern. The reception of his concepts in the West is outlined (history of historical metrology, the Annales school, and the history of science), and the potential of this social history of measurement in times of accelerated data production is evaluated.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Anna Echterhölter
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Published for the fi rst time in 1721, Persian Letters has been relatively underestimated as a source of knowledge about Montesquieu’s philosophy of liberty. This paper analyses one of the main story lines of the novel, namely the relations between Usbek, the Persian traveller, and the wives remaining in his seraglio. It is demonstrated that these wives are in fact the fi gures of subjects — the fl attering and scheming subject of an absolute ruler, the law-abiding subject of a monarch, and the rebel who questions the very legitimacy of the lord’s authority. It is also demonstrated that the story of the seraglio wives’ rebellion explains why subjects rebel and how the rulers who abuse their power lose it.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Aleksandra Porada
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article discusses Stefan Kiełsznia’s collection within the theoretical framework of Gillian Rose’s concept concerning analysis of visual materials. Questions regarding the composition and contents of the photographs as well as the historical and social circumstances of their origin, together with the place of the series within Stefan Kiełsznia’s oeuvre, are juxtaposed with issues regarding perception of these images as documents of the non-existent Jewish quarter.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marta Kubiszyn
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Early modern Spain witnessed the birth of a new social group — veterans — many of whom described their services in the form of autobiographies. Its authors reveal themselves through a narrator and self-created “me” that represents their struggle to break social barriers. On the other hand, their grief and isolation may also stem from war-infl icted trauma. This paper analyses the autobiography of Alonso de Contreras, focusing on this duality in narration, that may explain the severe situation of early modern veterans.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Paweł Szadkowski
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper considers the idea of history as a science of Józef Kazimierz Plebański (1831–1897), the Warsaw historian and Polish student of Leopold von Ranke. In my article, I analyse assignments that Plebański set as history, the place of history in science in general, the problem of objectivity in history, and other major issues related to the study of the past in the thought of Plebański.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Rafał Swakoń
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Created in the distant past, attitudes and patterns of thinking have caused the mentality of contemporary Poles. The collective memory about the greatness delusions of old-time nobilities and the traumas suffered in the annexed territories today infl uence their thinking and behaviours as well national self-evaluation.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Maciej Dymkowski
ORCID: ORCID
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article concerns the mutual expanding and enriching influence of the social history and historical demographics research issues, visible in popular historiography, at least since the end of the 20th century. The author uses selected achievements of international historiography as a backdrop for a presentation of the main achievements of Polish historical demographers, who conducted modern studies into the forms and living patterns in the territory of Poland ranging from the late mediaeval times up to the 20th century, on a larger scale than ever in the past. The article highlights the presence of new sociocultural and demographic issues such as areas of solitary females, location and significance of the elderly, occurrence of the life cycle servants phenomenon in the Old-Polish society.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Cezary Kuklo
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article presents the author’s perspective on the achievements of Polish historiography in the field of economic, social and historical demography of the pre-industrial period. It also suggests new directions of research that would relate to trends, methods and theories prevalent in world historiography.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Piotr Guzowski
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The University of Krakow was founded twice, in 1364 and 1400. The jubilees of these two foundations were celebrated in 1864, 1900, 1964, 2000 and 2014. The paper present the role of university jubilees in the development of critical studies on the history of the University of Krakow until the end of the 18th century. The author analyses both the achievements and weaknesses of Polish university historiography, and shows the perspectives for its future development.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Krzysztof Ożóg
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper aims to propose a method of historical investigation of emotions in the past. The author rethinks the phenomenon of empathy as a potential research tool for grasping the emotions of past events’ agents. He provides a psychology-based defi nition and an overview of historiographic traditions associated with empathy. He discusses limitations regarding validity (accuracy) and intersubjective control of empathy. Subsequently, the author proposes how to overcome these limitations.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Michał Podsędek
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The main aim of the following article is to juxtapose two methodological perspectives, influential in the field of the widely understood history of ideas, that is to say, the Cambridge School with the German tradition of Begriffsgeschichte. Presenting both opportunities and pitfalls that may result from applying these perspectives, I sketch the propositions to overcome possible shallows. In concluding remarks, I draw potential challenges for the history of ideas in Poland.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Piotr Kuligowski
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article attempts to comprehend the event and eventfulness as a category of contemporary scientific and philosophical analysis. Trying to understand the causes of the modern “renaissance” of the event and the specifics of its use in historical science, the author turns to the reflections of twentieth-century philosophers, who interpreted the event as a break in historical time, as an event that is associated with a sudden and unexpected shift of the semantic field and therefore actualized the role of the subject, able to coordinate this shift in his experience, in consciousness and memory. It has been noted that marking the event as historical is defined not only by the scale of the research (spatial and temporal) but also by being part of a certain culture of memory, a certain tradition. Understanding of this fact made historians and philosophers introduce into the dictionary of the modern humanist one more concept — eventfulness — which fixes in its contents the refusal to consider the sequence of events as unambiguous compulsory causality (the linear concept of time), replacing it with cause-effect event series (event temporality). In other words, an event, its experience and conceptualization are increasingly beginning to be understood as a focus, in which different levels of temporalization embodying different human experiences, including the experience and actions of historians, are actualized. All this gives grounds for criticism of the opposition of event and structural history characteristic of traditional historiography. As the analysis shows, despite the fact that events and structures belong to different orders of temporality, structures, on the one hand, manifest and are comprehended through events, on the other hand, make it possible for an event to exist, to identify it as such, to allow it to take place.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Olga V. Vorobyova

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