Humanities and Social Sciences

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne

Content

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2018 | tom 48

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The defi nition of disease differs in various cultural and historical environments and is a part of the “vision of the world and of man”. In the modern era, one can speak about the successive changes in the ideals of science, including the medical sciences, designing subsequent modifi cations of the understanding of disease. Different possible approaches, cultural, anthropological, and medical, use distinct language and metaphors to present the concept of illness.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jaromir Jeszke
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article deals with the issue of illness and suffering in Carmelite sermons of the 17th–18th centuries. The question of the origin of suffering is considered along with the role of God’s mercy and justice in the preaching discourse about the rightness and purposefulness of suffering of the human being. In addition, an analysis of the views of preachers about topics related to passing away and the attitude they advocate in the face of death is included.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Justyna Małysiak
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to shed light on the theoretical background of the inclusion of health in the standard of living studies, and the use of two of its specifi c measures — life expectancy at birth and body height. Hence, the article describes the idea of capabilities and functionings developed by Amartya Sen as a proposed solution to the limitations of the classic measurement of the standard of living.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Bartosz Ogórek
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In the fi rst half of the 20th century, the German historiography of medicine created genuine ideas of methodology of research on the history of the medical sciences and medicinal practice. They were a continuation of the native historiographic tradition which was present in German university didactics and literature about the history of medicine in the 19th century. The uniqueness of German anti-positivist methodologies was based on a perception of cultural context in the genesis of medical theories and doctrines. They were researching cultural factors in the overall structure and analysing their infl uence on academics’ and common folk’s perception. There were two rival methodological trends — neoromantic and sociocultural ones, and the second gained wider infl uence in the historiography of medicine. The sociocultural trend had a few research schools, among them: Kulturgeschichte der Medizin, Sozialgeschichte der Medizin and Alltagsgeschichte der Medizin. The main purpose of this paper is to show the genesis of German anti-positivist trends in 20th century, the most important achievements of sociocultural historiography in Germany till 1933 and after 1945, and its infl uence on the standard American historiography of medicine in 20th century. The paper also presents a wide range of literature printed in both Germany and USA about the aforementioned historiographic trends.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Bożena Płonka-Syroka
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article will consider the possibility of using sources in modernising the biological study of existence in history on the basis of selected trends of “modern historiography”. The problem of sources is considered in the context of the use of anthropology of knowledge, historical anthropology, microhistory, and chaos theory in historical-medical research. In this process, I see an opportunity to look for new research spaces and, therefore, ask new questions to source messages or to search for new ones. Therefore, it is important not to forget about the need to base the narrative on the source while introducing methodological innovations.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Tadeusz Srogosz
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Early modern medicine knew thousands of medicines and possible treatments that could be found in guidebooks, medical dissertations, herbaria, and dispensaries. The article presents the characteristics of the basic sources of the history of medicine, as well as their specifi city and the range of information they provide. The aim is to show possible source selection method in an attempt to describe a real picture of the therapeutic methods most commonly used by the offi cial medicine in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jakub Węglorz
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The aim of the article is to analyze literary images of women who had an impact on the history of Poland in the historical novel Gambit hetmański (2014), written by Robert Foryś. This type of fiction is a popular variety of the genre, its main theme is the conflict between political factions fighting for power. The leaders of the factions are women. The article focus on the answer to the question: whether Foryś creating scandalous portraits of women who reach for power is a threat or a chance for them to recall and preserve their presence in history.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Matylda Zatorska
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The text deals with the issue of “historical biography”. It aims to reconstruct the key concepts connected with the biographical publishing series “The Legacies of the progressive personalities of our past”. The text answers the question what conceptual framework surrounded and legitimised the edition.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Vaclav Sixta
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

According to UNESCO, in 2015, the sculpture as the artistic medium was third among financed public residency art programmes. Contemporary public art and cultural programmes across Europe were focused on finding a balance between cultural identity and cultural diversity among the communities. Therefore, aesthetics and function became a significant issue related to the exploration of participatory design on public sculpture. In this paper, an adopted model of Kurt Lewin’s force field analysis was used to explore the function of sculpture in the public space. The aim was to further evaluate inclusive design to answer the question: Does contemporary sculpture in the public space evoke a certain kind of group dynamic process?

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Krzysztof Krzysztof
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article attempts to show Szczepan Twardoch’s novel Drach as a literary version of the counter- history, which constitute an alternative vision of the past. The theory of counter-history was taken from Michel Foucault’s writings Society Must Be Defended. By this conception Foucault tried to restore the history of those excluded from the offi cial historical discourse.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Katarzyna Limanówka
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article is a brief presentation of the relationship between the politics of memory and Facebook. This type of connection advantages aestheticism, pictures and emotional infl uence but discounts traditional instruments modelling collective memory. The article focuses on the answer to the question of how a popular culture aesthetic infi ltrates and changes the politics of memory.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Łukasz Włodarczyk
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Marc Bloch — one of the most distinguished 20th Century historians – is the author of Strange Defeat: A Statement of Evidence Written in 1940. Serving as a staff offi cer, Bloch witnessed the fall of France in 1940 from the front line. This book is so interesting from the methodological point of view, because we are presented here with a historical source created by a historian, who additionally knows how an ideal type of historical evidence ought to be written. This French historian thought that history is also written to give contemporaries lessons on how to avoid the mistakes of the past. This is an important message of Strange Defeat.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jan Pomorski
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article is an attempt to outline the theoretical and methodological reflection on public history in the context of some conceptual models and concrete examples of case studies. Considering discursive situations, suppositions, suggestions and interpellations on the enlightenment postulate with regard to public history (including the issues: magistra vitae, emancipatory project, affirmative history, emotive revolution, critical discourse in the public space, modus art based research) I deal with the issues: what is actually the content of public history: history or memory? Does the enlightenment postulate with regard to public history turn memory into history? Are we dealing with some project concocted by the intelligentsia and scientific elite? What are the current trends in the implementation of critical discourse in public history?

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ewa Solska
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article aims to analyse the context in which the phrase “historical truth” is present in the Polish public discourse regarding recent history. The author intends to show the ways and aims of the usage of historical truth in the competition to obtain and maintain power. Referring to the assumptions of the Web 2.0. paradigm, in the conclusion the author puts forward the thesis that the historical truths present in the public sphere do not only attempt to answer social expectations of what historical truth Poles need but they are also co-created by potential recipients.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Monika Napora
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

One of the major subjects that construct the emotional right-wing script is the history of the postwar Polish independence Underground and the related present-day politics and historical policy. The analysis of the right-wing press enables the distinction of four temporal categories to which specific toposes can be assigned as well as the moulded emotional elements: 1) the period of struggle, 2) the period of imprisonment and possible death, 3) the period of the Third Republic [of Poland], and 4) the period from the victory of the Law and Justice party (PiS) in the parliamentary elections until the present.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Mariusz Mazur
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article attempts to reach the elements that control the efforts of constituting a specific type of vision of the past, with which — as I believe — we are dealing in the contemporary public discourse about history.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marek Woźniak
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper examines the contemporary discussion of the concept of ‘national hero’. As the subject of analysis interpretations of the role of Roman Dmowski, the leader of Polish nationalist movement in the first half of 20th century, in the contemporary political and historical discussion in Poland was chosen. On that example the way in which political life is changing the previous assessment and meaning of the ‘national hero’ is observed.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Roman Wysocki
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to go beyond the usual scheme associated with Clausewitz, which narrows his life down to being a soldier and concentrates solely on his theory of war. By presenting his main methodological approach, the study examines the role of history in Clausewitz’s thinking and analyses how his historical studies tested and validated his evolving theoretical structure and how they could enable soldiers who had never fought or served as commanders to develop their battle intuition and enhance decision making process by learning from real world examples in times of peace.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Sebastian Górka
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper considers the vision of the world and the person of Józef Kazimierz Plebański (1831–1897), the Warsaw historian, one of two Polish students of Leopold von Ranke. In my article, I analyse the essential categories and objects which structure his thinking about reality, such as liberty, Providence, moral laws, state, nation, and humanity. At the end, I try to compare the worldview of Plebański with the worldview of historicism.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Rafał Swakoń

Authors and Affiliations

Jan Surman
Alexander Dmitriev
Riccardo Nicolosi
Dietlind Hüchtker
Monika Wulz
Karl Hall
Bernhard Kleeberg
Kornelia Kończal
Katherine Lebow
Emilia Plosceanu
Joanna Wawrzyniak
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In this article I try to think about the terms “stories” and “ontologies” in Ewa Domańska’s works: Mikrohistorie. Spotkania w międzyświatach (1999; 2005), Historie niekonwencjonalne (2006), Historia egzystencjonalna (2012), Historia ratownicza (2014) and I try to compare my conclusions with her latest publication. I am interested in the turning point in her thoughts, giving up the theory and methodology of history and switching to the ontology of the dead body. In order to do this I look through these publications and indicate which threads could help work out the excellent, innovative, and fresh conception of Nekros. The main part of the article is a detailed discussion of this. In the other part, I consider how to interpret more traditionally a past description like “cultural memory” and whether Domańska’s works accidentally invalidate them. I suggest a short statement of Marcin Napiórkowski’s and Stephen Marks’ works to show closer (Marks) and further (Napiórkowski) parallels or completely different presentations of similar problems.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marta Tomczok

Instructions for authors

Guidelines for authors

1) General information:
► submitted texts are reviewed and published free of charge;
► Historyka accept for publication only materials not previously published;
► Historyka accepts articles of 6000-8000 words (including footnotes and references); ► articles should be submitted in files *.doc or *.docx;
► The submitted paper should be accompanied by:
(a) a 200-word abstract (does not apply to reviews and review notes);
b) five keywords (does not apply to reviews and review notes);
c) author's ORCID number (can be generated here: https://orcid.org/signin);
d) the author's affiliation.

2) Main text:
►font: Times New Roman, 12 points
► spacing: 1.5 lines;
► longer, multi-line quotations should be separated from the main text and set in smaller font (10 points), separated from the main text with one empty line from the top and bottom; ►omissions in the quoted passage should be marked with square brackets [...];
► titles of books, newspapers, magazines, journals, films, musical works, works of art, etc. should be italicized, whereas titles of articles or book chapters, etc. should be marked with quotation marks;
► in the main text, please give full names at least the first time a given character appears, e.g. John Kowalski (the next time - it can be just the surname; avoid the form: J. Kowalski); ► in numerical expressions that specify a range (e.g. 3-20 [pages], years 1888-1900), use a semi-clause -, not a dash -;
► please do not use full clause -;
► once the paper has been prepared according to the above guidelines, please check that it uses one type of font (Times New Roman), especially if some parts of the text (e.g. web addresses) have been copied from external sources. Hyperlinks should be removed;
► quotations from foreign language sources should be translated (without giving their original wording, unless it belongs to the body of the paper) - if the author of the translation is the author of the article, it should be noted in a footnote in the first example: "Citation in translation by the authors of the paper".
► expanded numbers in the records of acts, scenes, chapters: in the third act, in the fifth scene, the eighth chapter.
► titles of legal acts: without quotation marks, first word in the title in capitals, e.g. Decree on the Punishment of Fascist Criminals.
► terms in foreign languages: in italics (e.g. terrorscapes).

3) Figures:
► files: *.jpg or *.tiff;
► resolution: min. 300 dpi at long side 10 cm, compression min. 10;
► Figures for publication must be of good quality, standardized form and descriptions;
► each figure should be provided as a separate file with its name (consistent with the description); tables, diagrams, charts, drawings and photographs should be numbered and adequately described;
► description of the figure: figure number, description, date (and place if not obvious from the context), information on the author or source.

4) Footnotes:
► use Chicago style ( https://www.citationmachine.net/chicago);
► font: Times New Roman, 10 points;
► line spacing: 1 line;
► please write consecutive bibliographic entries in footnotes in a consistent manner;
► please write the full name of the authors, editors, translators of the texts at the first appearance (only the surname in subsequent editions);
► do not use abbreviations in either English or Latin (e.g. idem, eadem, ibidem, or ibid.)
► in footnotes, include the publishers of the works cited; Example:
Michel Foucault, Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason, trans. Richard Howard (New York: Random House, 1988), 67.
► the first time an publication appears in a footnote, the full title (i.e., title and subtitle) of the work must be given; example:
Allan Megill, H istorical Knowledge, Historical Error. A Contemporary Guide to Practice (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2007), 55–65.
[in subsequent footnotes] example:
Megill, Historical Knowledge, 65.
► example of a footnote of an article in a collective volume:
Marek Tamm, „Future-Oriented History”, in: Historical Understanding. Past, Present, and Future, ed. Zoltán Boldizsár Simon, Lars Deile (Bloomsbury: London, 2022), 163.
[in subsequent footnotes] example:
Tamm, “Future-Oriented History”, 176.
► example of a journal article footnote:
Bruno Latour, „Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern”, Critical Inquiry 30 (Winter 2004): 225–248.
[in subsequent footnotes] example:
Latour, „Why Has Critique”, 110.
► Further guidelines for Chicago-style citation: ( https://www.citationmachine.net/chicago)

5) Acknowledgements:
The article should be accompanied by acknowledgements, which include information about:
► the contribution of any co-authors to the publication;
► sources of funding for the publication, contributions from scientific and research institutions, associations and other entities.

6) References:
► the article must be accompanied by references listing all works cited;
► the bibliographic notation in the references is different from that used in footnotes:
a) Book:
Megill, Allan. Historical Knowledge, Historical Error. A Contemporary Guide to Practice. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2007.
b) Multiauthored volume: Tamm, Marek. „Future-Oriented History”. In: Historical Understanding. Past, Present, and Future, ed. Zoltán Boldizsár Simon, Lars Deile, 163–190. Bloomsbury: London, 2022.
c) Article in journal:
Latour, Bruno. „Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern”, Critical Inquiry 30 (Winter 2004): 225–248.

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.
12) Reviewers use the following form when evaluating an article

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)

MANUSCRIPTS REVIEWERS 2021

Ada Arendt (University of Warsaw), Gabriel Borowski (Jagiellonian University), Lidia Bracha (Jan Kochanowski University), Krzysztof Brzechczyn (Adam Mickiewicz University), Maciej Bugajewski (Adam Mickiewicz University), Anita Całek (Jagiellonian University), Stanisław Czekalski (Adam Mickiewicz University), Bartosz Działoszyński (University of Warsaw), Jerzy Franczak (Jagiellonian University), Brygide Gasztold (Koszalin University of Technology), Małgorzata Głowacka-Grajper (University of Warsaw), Agnieszka Gondor-Wiercioch (Jagiellonian University), Violetta Julkowska (Adam Mickiewicz University), Andrzej Karpiński (Polish Academy of Sciences), Edmund Kizik (University of Gdańsk), Małgorzata Kołacz-Chmiel (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Danuta Kowalewska (Nicolaus Copernicus University), Marcin Kula (University of Warsaw), Piotr Kuligowski (Polish Academy of Sciences), Marta Kurkowska-Budzan (Jagiellonian University), Jacek Leociak (Polish Academy of Sciences), Arkadiusz Marciniak (Adam Mickiewicz University), Magdalena Matczak (University of Liverpool), Konrad Matyjaszek (Polish Academy of Sciences), Jerzy Mazurek (University of Warsaw), Maciej Michalski (Adam Mickiewicz University), Wojciech Opioła (University of Opole), Joanna Orzeł (University of Łódź), Michał Pawleta (Adam Mickiewicz University), Ivan Peshkov (Adam Mickiewicz University), Jarosław Pietrzak (Pedagogical University of Cracow), Jan Pomorski (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Radosław Poniat (Uniwersytet w Białymstoku), Maciej Ptaszyński (University of Warsaw), Anna Ratke-Majewska (University of Zielona Gora), Andrzej Radomski (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Paweł Rodak (University of Warsaw), Tadeusz Rutkowski (University of Warsaw), Roma Sendyka (Jagiellonian University), Izabela Skórzyńska (Adam Mickiewicz University), Maria Solarska (Adam Mickiewicz University), Ewa Solska (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Monika Stobiecka (University of Warsaw), Jan Swianiewicz (Stołeczne Centrum Edukacji Kulturalnej w Warszawie), Rafał Szmytka (Jagiellonian University), Wiktor Werner (Adam Mickiewicz University), Hubert Wierciński (University of Warsaw), Wiesław Caban (Jan Kochanowski University), Jacek Wijaczka (Nicolaus Copernicus University), Tomasz Wiślicz (University of Warsaw), Władysław Witalisz (Jagiellonian University), Stanisław Witecki (Jagiellonian University), Piotr Witek (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Marek Woźniak (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Anna Zalewska (Maria Curie-Sklodowska University), Jakub Zamorski (Jagiellonian University), Edyta Zierkiewicz (University of Wrocław).

REVIEWERS 2022

Michał Jacek Baranowski, University of Warsaw; Katarzyna Błachowska, University of Warsaw; Zofia Brzozowska, University of Łódź; Kathryn Ciancia, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Amir Duranovic, University of Sarajevo; Agnieszka Dziuba, Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski; Gabor Egry, Hungarian Academy of Sciences; Tomasz Falkowski. Adam Mickiewicz University; Andrzej Gałganek, Adam Mickiewicz University; Theresa Garstenauer, University of Vienna; Wacław Gojniczek, Uniwersytet Śląski; Elisabeth Haid, Hungarian Academy of Sciences; Marcin Jarząbek, Jagiellonian University; Eriks Jekabson, University of Latvia; Violetta Julkowska, Adam Mickiewicz University; Katarzyna Kącka, Nicolaus Copernicus University; Andrzej Karpiński, University of Warsaw; Naoum Kaytchev, Sofia University 'St. Kliment Ohridski'; Barbara Klich-Kluczewska, Jagiellonian University; Iwona Krzyżanowska-Skowronek, Jagiellonian University; Cezary Kuklo, University of Bialystok; Dorota Malczewska-Pawelec, University of Silesia; Sean Martin, John Carroll University; Mariusz Mazur, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University; Roberto Mazza, University of Limerick; Janusz Mierzwa, Jagiellonian University; Andrzej Misiuk, University of Warsaw; Giuseppe Motta, Sapienza Università di Roma; Robert Miklos Nagy, Babeș-Bolyai University; Joanna Orzeł, University of Łódź; Martin Pelc, Silesia University in Opava; Radosław Poniat, University of Bialystok; James Pula, Purdue University North Central, PAHA; Konstantinos Raptis, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens; Tamás Révész, Hungarian Academy of Sciences; Klaus Richter, University of Birmingham; Dariusz Sikorski, Adam Mickiewicz University; Dariusz Śnieżko, University of Szczecin; Maria Solarska, Adam Mickiewicz University; Ewa Solska, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University; Jan Surman, Czech Academy of Sciences; Alessandro Vagnini, Sapienza Università di Roma; Philipp Wirtz, SOAS University of London; Andrew Wise, Daemen College; Stanisław Żerko, Institute of Western Affairs; Aleksandar Zlatanov, Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski



This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more