Humanities and Social Sciences

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne

Content

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2000 | vol. 30

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This essay is constructed of two parts: the first is a historiographical sketch of several theories concerning nationalism and gender; the second part puts some of these theories into practice in interpreting an article from a fin-de-siecle Polish illustrated weekly magazine.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Nathaniel D. Wood
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The purpose of the paper is to examine the problem of the so-called "death of scientific historiography in the postmodern era". According to the Author, the relation between "history as a social science" and "history as a narrative art" has become more complicated in the late twentieth century than many critics of contemporary historiography say. Not all historians have capitulated to relativism and relevance for it is of no doubt that many of them continue to cherish the canons of their craft, to respect the regularities of the historical past, and maintain high methodological standards.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jan Pomorski
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article surveys the development of historical research on women: from women's history to history of gender. It focuses on the shifts in theory and goes into the implications for history at large. More specificall, it discusses the use of post-structuralist theory and method, using Joan W. Scott's Gender and the politics of history (1989) as an example. The Author argues that, so far, historians have not made full use of post-structuralism. As a result, history of gender still has to be written.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Maria Van Tilburg
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In the article, Author tries to find connections between the way of thinking in traditional societies and methods of constructing narration in modern historiography.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Wiktor Werner
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The Author analyzes the meaning of the notion "heretics" in the legislation of the Christian Emperors of the Roman Empire. He manifests that evident differences existed also in the understanding of this term among the Fathers of the Church and explains why was it so.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Michał Stachura
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article polemizes with traditional interpretations of a certain phenomenon of culture - the conspiracy theory. The point of reference is provided by Daniel Pipes' analysis of it. Referring in a critical way to the American historian's views, the Author suggests his own, culture oriented view on the notion of conspiracy and the theory of it.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Piotr Witek
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In the article the Author tries to show that the particular character of the vision of the world and history is specially revealed in the cultural and historical metaphors prevailing in that culture and history. The Author presents two ways of understanding the term (metaphor) in historical research; the advantages and the limitations of investigation based on one of them.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marek Woźniak
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The Author presents the metaphysical and ethical principles of Thomas Hill Greens political doctrine, first of all his idea of individual self-realisation and the common good.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Bogdan Szlachta
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

One of the most prominent English historians, Thomas Babington Macaulay belongs to a group of thinkers which developed what H. Butterfield in 1931 called the ,,Whig interpretation of History". Although Butterfield criticised this kind of writing about the past, Macaulay's ,,History of England" became the most influential interpretation of English history in the 19th century. One of the most important issues for Thomas Babington was the process of the formation of the English political system. The English constitution, a fundamental element of political system of the largest empire in the! 9th century, was a very important model for every political thinker. This is why a presentation of Lord Macaulays view on the most important events which influenced the formation of the British political system is a key to understanding not only the English constitution but also the role and importance of historians and their works for English politics. The article presents one of the most influential interpretation of the English constitution in the 19th Century, written by the eminent historian and statesman Thomas Babington Lord Macaulay.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Arkady Rzegocki
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The Author confronts various opinions on king James II and Restauration era, presented in numerous Histories of England published over the period of one and a half of century after the Glorious Revolution
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Dariusz Bąkowski-Kois
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article presents a dispute on problems connected with the shape and condition of contemporary science. The starting point is provided by the Author's criticism of two cultural formations (postmodernism and religions fundamentalism) based on his own paradigm of enlighted rationalistic fundamentalism. The Author discusses with Ernest Gellner's suggestions, presents a different, constructive interpretation of competing paradigms.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Piotr Witek
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The author presents a psychobiography of Isaac Newton, which has already been published in Polish translation. In his view the book may be considered as an instructive exemplar of psychohistorical (or psychobiographical) approach which is rather unknown in Poland. That is why some basic theoretical assumptions of psychobiography, together with various elements of psychohistorical research strategy and "applied methodology", as revealed by Frank Manuel's study, are discussed there. In this way the author strives to demonstrate that psychohistorical writings really broaden conceptual background of historical studies and provide historians with new sources and new questions to the past.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Tomasz Pawelec
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The reviewed book questions the assumption of rationality of financial market retering to numerous financial criseses in the history of capitalist economy. The author of the book calls for on economic theory which does not neglect historical facts but is well based upon them. His book raises important methodological questions about the relationship between economic historians and economists who claim the ability to theoretically explain real economic processes.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Aleksander Surdej

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