Nauki Humanistyczne i Społeczne

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne

Zawartość

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2020 | tom 50 |

Abstrakt

The aim of this paper is to partially capture the state of theoretical debate amongst Polish historians on their own discipline in the second half of 20th century. To achieve this we analyse the content of the first twenty five volumes of journal Historyka published in the period when Celina Bobińska was its editor-in-chief (1967–1995). We assume that Historyka – the only journal dedicated to the theory of history and history of historiography – was situated in the centre of exchanges on academic historical practices. We do not treat its content as a reflection of contemporary studies in the theory of history, but as a dominant position in the self-understanding of the discipline competing with other utterances. The paper is a reconstruction of this offer, which is composed of the definitions of subjects of historical studies, descriptions of productive methods, hierarchy of masters of historical writings and their influential books.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Jakub Muchowski
Rafał Swakoń

Abstrakt

The paper examines the special historiographic evidence: the lost last book by the well-known Polish historian and methodologist Professor Jerzy Topolski entitled “Methodology of History at the Beginning of the 21st Century”. 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.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Jan Pomorski

Abstrakt

The article describes features of Jerzy Topolski’s narrative in economic history. It focuses on four important threads and moments in his research on this field: great manor property, estimation of national income in the history of Poland, the birth of capitalism in Europe, social dependencies in the manor economy system.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Krzysztof Zamorski

Abstrakt

Jerzy Topolski was one of the most outstanding Polish historians of the late 20th century. He wrote numerous works, including a synthesis of the history of the Polish-Lithuanian Com-monwealth in the 16-18th centuries, which is the object of the analyses presented in this article.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Jacek Wijaczka
Krzysztof Mikulski

Abstrakt

The aim of this article is to present the understanding of social history of Jerzy Topolski, from the theoretical side and as it was used in practical research work. The source basis, aside from the few direct quotes from the historian from Poznan on social history, are mainly analyses of his selected original works and works edited by him. The article also takes note of the discussion surrounding the term ‘social history’ itself and the research scope of social history as a historic discipline or sub-discipline which took place in the second half of the 20th century, which is the period in which Topolski published his works.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Cezary Kuklo

Abstrakt

In the extensive polemic with the book Haunting History: For a Deconstructive Approach to the Past by Ethan Kleinberg, the reviewer comments on the innovative potential of deconstruction as it enables the conception of various scenarios of the future. Kleinberg’s reflections on the ontology (or hauntology) of the past are located within the current discussion about “the ontological turn.” The reviewer compares Kleinberg’s take on a deconstructive approach to the past with similar considerations presented by Sande Cohen in the US as well as by Keith Jenkins, Alun Munslow and, more recently, Berber Bevernage in Europe.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Ewa Domańska

Abstrakt

This article is a review of Ethan Kleinberg’s Haunting History. For a Deconstructive Approach to the Past (Stanford, 2017). I focus on three issues related to that work. These are: historians’ attitude towards the deconstruction; the idea of ontological realism and its critique; the role of young historians in modern academia. This text is based not only on the book reviewed but also on its different analyses and ways it was used in other research. In the conclusion, I present how Haunting History can be used as an emancipatory tool by scholars who are starting their academic careers now.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Artur Kula

Abstrakt

The goal of the article is to propose a different approach to – and therefore a new concept of – the history of thinking. Reflecting on the history of philosophy, it suggests a broader understanding of the latter. Yet traditional studies in the history of philosophy are not to be rejected; they need to be reformed, and such a reform could be performed basing on the experiences of the discipline of historiography. Thus conceived, the history of thinking could open us to a different future.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Jakub Dadlez

Abstrakt

In the article, I try to show the world of the past as the world of games. First of all, history appears as a game – the game of the historian with his subject of study or cognition. Secondly, history itself can be conceptualised by the metaphor of the game. The history of Portugal is treated as an example of the object of historical research, which changes along with the theories applied. The act of theorising sets the limits of the known past. On the basis of selected examples from the history of Portugal in the 20th century, I try to show how the use of various research tools allows us to ask new/different questions.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Karol Kasprowicz

Abstrakt

This article is an attempt to represent the aspirations of the Polish aristocracy during the First World War by imagining the dreams of Maria Lubomirska – wife of Prince Zdzisław Lubomirski, arguably the most important Polish politician in Warsaw at the time. Lubomirska and her circle attended séances led by a popular medium, and they saw what they wanted to see, just as they perceived the changing political tides in the same way. Though aristocrats were in some sense already anachronistic at this time, they still wished to maintain their superior social and political position into the future. Lubomirska in particular envisioned an independent Poland led by a king. The idea of Poland becoming a monarchy may seem absurd in hindsight, but as the article shows, if we return to this moment in history without teleological presumptions it was a likely outcome until the last days of the war. Text in italics comes directly from Lubomirska’s diary.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Zachary Mazur

Abstrakt

This article analyses the first traces of postsecular turn in historical theory, arguing that they first emerged in Dominick LaCapra’s book History and Its Limits: Human, Animal, Violence (2009) and in Allan Megill’s subsequent polemic with that work. The author claims that what prevails in LaCapra’s narrative is the rhetoric of “resisting apocalypse”, thus demonstrating how he inscribes postsecular themes with the issue of trauma, together with its religious connotations. The discussion between LaCapra and Megill is treated here as a point of departure for considering the forms that the postsecular can take in historical theory.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Tomasz Wiśniewski

Abstrakt

The article will consider research directions on a social history of disability based on the social and the human-rights models of disability, as well as the concept of disability included in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The article contains the basic methodology of historical research on the subject, the main research fields, and an overview of primary sources. In addition, the periodisation of the subject was introduced.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Zbigniew Głąb

Abstrakt

The article places the environmental history on the map of historical research. It contains a problematised definition of environmental history, outlines its key determinants, describes its research issues and methodology, and analyses the question of the historical sources that are used by environmental historians. The article also reflects on the relationship between environmental history research and theoretical reflection, primarily from the field of post-human studies and postcolonial studies. It also considers the interdisciplinary potential of these in relation to the humanities as well as natural and earth sciences. The article also contains a review of the state of research on environmental history in the Polish historiography of the last five years.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Małgorzata Praczyk

Abstrakt

The aim of the paper is to provide hints on how to read Acemoglu and Robinson’s institutional hypothesis. First, we recall the meaning of their inclusive and extractive institutions. Then, we classify and compare the concept to certain approaches present in development economics. Additionally, we outline the perspective of historical research of institutions, raising the approach of historical natural experiments and comparative methods. We claim in the paper that to understand Acemoglu and Robinson’s institutional hypothesis and their strong rejection of other hypotheses on economic development one has to turn back to the basic notion of institutions. We argue that the authors of Why Nations Fail are focused on considering formal institutions only, which impoverishes the research perspective presented in that book.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Joanna Dzionek-Kozłowska
Rafał Matera

Abstrakt

This short essay presents how complex and difficult it is today to study the ethnic, cultural, and civilisational transformations in the areas subjected to Rome. It seems it is no longer enough to use the term ‘Romanisation’ to describe all the complicated and diverse phenomena of adaptation, acculturation, or assimilation in the Roman world.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Maciej Piegdoń

Abstrakt

The main aim of the article was to present two emerging discourses of contemporary historiography in the field of digital media. In the first example, the authors present the thought of Niels Brügger, called the Web History and Web-minded historiography, which concentrates upon the digital source itself. The other school is marked by the works of Friedrich Kittler and Wolfgang Ernst, and called media archaeology. It underlines the concept of the medium itself as a primary object of research.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Wiktor Werner
Adrian Trzoss

Abstrakt

This article aims to look at the Roman interest in the past beyond the context of traditional historiography, focused on the great politics, events and individuals. It suggests that antiquarian writing was not so much a separate literary genre, but rather an alternative model of historical reflection focused on studying the distant past in all its manifestations: everyday life, culture, religion, language or law.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Bartosz Jan Kołoczek

Abstrakt

The main goal of this paper is to present a fully developed concept of Paul A. Roth’s philosophy of history to the Polish reader. Of course, it is just an introduction, but with the interview it should be a good starting point for further analysis. These seem desirable given Roth’s very ambitious programme, which in addition is based on “old facts”; that is, an analytical philosophy of history and science. The rapprochement between the two “visions” is not only a philosophical consideration, but also responds to the often-raised voices of practitioners. This introduction refers primarily to Roth’s latest book, indicating a possible interpretation. This “reading” is conducted by indicating the historical context, recalling philosophical analyses and determining the validity of the proposed solutions in order to decide how much science there is in history and vice versa.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Piotr Kowalewski Jahromi

Abstrakt

This interview with Paul Roth was conducted after a symposium dedicated to his latest book The Philosophical Structure of Historical Explanation, which took place at the European Network for Philosophy of Social Sciences conference on August 30, 2019. This interview is authorised. Translation from English and all footnotes – Piotr Kowalewski Jahromi.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Piotr Kowalewski Jahromi

Abstrakt

Artykuł jest recenzją książki: Ziemianka w XIX-wiecznym kurorcie. Listy Stefanii z Lemańskich Rzewuskiej do męża z pobytów w zagranicznych uzdrowiskach, oprac. Jarosław Kita, Urszula Klemba (Łódź: Księży Młyn, 2017).

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Dariusz Janota

Abstrakt

Tekst jest recenzją pracy: Violetta Julkowska, Historie rodzinne. Narracje – narratorzy – interpretacje (Poznań–Bydgoszcz: Instytut Historii UAM i Oficyna Wydawnicza EPIGRAM, 2018), 272 ss.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Jan Pomorski

Abstrakt

Recenzja książki Katarzyny Pękackiej-Falkowskiej, Dżuma w Toruniu w trakcie III wojny północnej (Lublin: Towarzystwo Naukowe Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 2019).

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Stanisław Witecki

Abstrakt

Artykuł stanowi recenzję monografii Agnieszki Pawłowskiej-Kubik, Rokosz sandomierski 1606–1609. Rzeczpospolita na politycznym rozdrożu (Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 2019), ss. 522.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Agata Kwiatek

Abstrakt

Kilka uwag na temat książki ks. Dawida Stelmacha, Interpretacja teologiczna problemu społecznego porozumienia w historii politycznej Polski lat 1980–1989. Rozprawa doktorska napisana na seminarium naukowym z Katolickiej Nauki Społecznej pod kierunkiem ks. prof. dra hab. Pawła Bortkiewicza TChr (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Kontekst, 2016), 175 ss.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Przemysław Sołga

Instrukcja dla autorów

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 


Zasady etyki publikacyjnej

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.


Procedura recenzowania

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.

Recenzenci

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)

Ta strona wykorzystuje pliki 'cookies'. Więcej informacji