How to search?
advanced search
Humanities and Social Sciences

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne

Description

HISTORYKA. STUDIES IN HISTORICAL METHODS is a journal dedicated to the theory of history, historical methods and history of historiography. The journal is published once a year since 1967.

ISSN
ISSN 0073-277X; e-ISSN 3071-6608
Publishers
Polska Akademia Nauk Oddział PAN w Krakowie, Instytut Historii Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego
HISTORYKA. STUDIES IN HISTORICAL METHODS is a journal dedicated to the theory of history, historical methods and history of historiography. The journal is published once a year since 1967
Dipesh Chakrabarty (University of Chicago),
Ewa Domańska (Stanford University; Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza),
Maciej Dymkowski (SWPS, Wrocław),
François Hartog (L'École des hautes études en sciences sociales, L'EHESS),
Allan Megill (University of Virginia), Tomasz Pawelec (Uniwersytet Śląski),
Jan Pomorski (Uniwersytet Marii Curie Skłodowskiej),
Maciej Salamon (Uniwersytet Jagielloński),
Rafał Stobiecki (Uniwersytet Łódzki),
Jan Skoczyński (Uniwersytet Jagielloński),
Veronica Tozzi (Universidad de Buenos Aires),
Anna Ziębińska-Witek (Maria Curie Skłodowska University)


EDITORS IN CHIEF

Krzysztof Zamorski (Jagiellonian University) is the editor of "Historyka. Studia Metodologiczne" since 2019. He was its co-editor in 1997-2019.

Zamorski works at the Institute of History at the Jagiellonian University and is head of the Chair of Historical Anthropology and Theory of History. He studied history and sociology at Jagiellonian University. He has held research fellowships at the University of Geneva and the EESH Laboratory of Historical Demography in Paris and the University of Liege. He was a visiting scholar at Columbia University and twice at Rochester University (1999, 2005).

ffAuthor of five books, co-editor of three, author of 170 articles. From 1993 to 2003 he was director of the Jagiellonian Library in Cracow, Poland. Member of the board of directors of the Polish Historical Society, he served as president of the Cracow Branch of the Polish Historical Society in 2013- 2022. He created the series "History of Life" published by the renowned Polish publishing house "Universitas".

His fields of research are: theory of history and history of historiography (recent publ. in English: “The Warsaw Congress: A Historiographic Reflection”, in With a Zest and in a Refined Form..., Krzysztof Makowski, Maciej Michalski, Tomasz Schramm, Karolina Filipowska eds., XXIII International Congress on Historical Sciences, Poznan 2022, 2020-2022); historical demography and social and economic history of modern and recent times (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. History, Memory, Legacy. Andrzej Chwalba and Krzysztof Zamorski. Eds., Routledge. New York and London, 2020.)

Marta Kurkowska-Budzan is Associate Professor at the Institute of History, Jagiellonian University in Kraków. She studied history and sociology at the Jagiellonian University and sociology at the University of Kent at Canterbury. She held postdoctoral fellowships at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC, and at the Remarque Institute for European Studies, New York University (under the supervision of Tony Judt).

Author of five monographs, editor of five collected volumes, and author of over fifty articles and chapters. She is a member of the European Citizen Science Association and the International Commission for the History and Theory of Historiography affiliated with the Comité International des Sciences Historiques (CISH). Co-founder of the Polish Oral History Association. Member of the Oral History Commission at the Historical Sciences Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences (since 2024). Member of the editorial boards of Acta Poloniae Historica (since 2024), Rocznik Antropologii Historii (since 2010), Stan Rzeczy (2011–2016), and Oral History Review ( 2008–2012).

Her research focuses on historical anthropology, theory of history, oral history, and heritage studies (recent publications in English: Embodied Labour, ed. with A. Galasińska, Routledge 2025; Sport and Polish Society, with M. Stasiak, Routledge 2024; "Transforming Workspaces into Sites of Public History" in: History in Public Space, Routledge 2024; "Oral History in Poland" in: Public History in Poland, Routledge 2021; "'Perpetrator Trauma' in Memoirs of Veterans of the Polish Home Army" in: Trauma, Experience and Narrative in Europe after World War II, Palgrave Macmillan, 2022).

Jakub Muchowski is an adjunct professor at the Department of History of Jagiellonian University, Poland. He studied History and Polish Studies at Jagiellonian University. He was a visiting scholar at the Corcoran Department of History of the University of Virginia, US (2011).

He is the author of two monographs, editor of two collective volumes and over fifty articles and chapters. He is a member of the International Commission for the History and Theory of Historiography affiliated with the Comité International des Sciences Historiques (CISH). Between 2011 and 2024, he served as assistant editor at Historyka.

His research focuses on the theory of historical writing, Polish memory cultures, transnational history of Poland and labour history. His ongoing work centres on reading historical writing, transnational relations between Poland and South Africa and forms of invisibility of labour in industrial museums. He has authored articles in journals including Journal of the Philosophy of History, História da Historiografia, International Journal of Heritage Studies and Rethinking History.

ASSISTANT EDITORS

Rafał Swakoń (Jagiellonian University)

LANGUAGE CONSULTANTS

Barbara Ratecka, Caroline Stupnicka, Robin Gill

e-mail: historyka@uj.edu.pl

Department of History

Jagiellonian University

Golebia 13

31-007 Krakow

Poland

Historyka is an open access journal with all content available with no charge in full text version. The journal content is available under the licencse CC BY-NC-SA 4.
Historyka is indexed in databases:
Arianta
BazHum
CEJSH
ERIH Plus

Historyka is archived in the repository of the Polish Academy of Sciences and made available on the academy's Journal PAS platform.


  • Volumes
  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication Ethics Policy
  • Peer-review Procedure
  • Reviewers

Select number

Content

Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55

1 Od redakcji
Marta Kurkowska‑Budzan , Jakub Muchowski
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 7
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Authors and Affiliations

Marta Kurkowska‑Budzan
Jakub Muchowski
ORCID: ORCID
2 The influence of the terrain of Galicia on Austrian military planning
Michał Baczkowski
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 9–29 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156558
Keywords: Galicia 19th century topography military history Austrian war planning
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Galicia, regardless of the territorial changes in 1795–1846, was a country open to possible aggression from the west, north and east. The only serious natural barrier – the Carpathian ridge – was the internal border of the Habsburg Monarchy. Austrian staff in the years 1779–1783 mapped Galicia and identified possible natural obstacles (rivers, hills) that could be used for improvised defence. Military plans from 1810–1848 most often stated that Galicia was impos-sible to defend against aggression (e.g. Russian), and that resistance should only be put up in the Carpathians. It was only from 1846 (annexation of Kraków), and especially from 1850 (new fortification plan for Austria), that Galicia was recognised as the area of a future manoeuvre war with Russia (or Prussia). Therefore, attempts were made to use the few natural obstacles to strengthen the country's defence: rivers (Vistula, San, Dniester) and, to a lesser extent, the heights of the Carpathians (mainly to secure communication routes for military purposes). The main military investments: the Kraków and Przemyśl fortresses and the strengthened San-‑Dniester line were intended primarily to protect the mobilisation of the monarchy’s own troops intended for the offensive against Russia. Secondly, they were given purely defensive tasks: blocking the operational line towards Vienna (Kraków) and Budapest (Przemyśl), using the existing river network and the hills of the northern slopes of the Carpathians. Galicia's modest natural values were also used in this way during World War I.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Michał Baczkowski
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Instytut Historii, Uniwersytet Jagielloński
3 Description of Baltic, Denmark, Sweden and Finland at the turn of the 20th century in reports by Maria Kleniewska. Topography and culture
Ewelina Maria Kostrzewska
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 31–49 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156559
Keywords: voyages of the landed gentry Maria Kleniewska (1862–1947) history of the Baltic Sea history of travel Scandinavian Countries
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

At the turn of the 20th century. Scandinavia was a geographical region that attracted the attention of the Polish public. Two journeys by Maria Kleniewska, a landowner from Lublin, were part of this circle of interest. Her descriptions of Denmark, Sweden and Finland, introduced into the research trend of geohistory, make it possible to reconstruct the image of the countries of Northern Europe as seen subjectively by a representative of Polish landowning and women's circles. In accordance with such optics, Kleniewska linked natural landscapes with the economy, politics, customs and culture of the inhabitants of the Baltic regions in her accounts. She noticed and emphasised their diversity and at the same time, depicting the natural environment with descriptions of forests and fields, mountains and plains, sea and land, she noticed that they determined the life of the populations of Scandinavian towns and villages. From the perspective of the landed gentry, she assessed agriculture; from the perspective of women and their eman-cipation. The buckle that tied all the descriptions together remained culture and Kleniewska's authorial message that the transfer of Scandinavian patterns defined by the union of culture and nature could be a path leading to the recovery of Polish statehood.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ewelina Maria Kostrzewska
4 The boundaries and decanal-parish structure of the Latin diocese of Przemyśl from 1772 to the end of the 19th century, including the diversity of parish districts
Joanna Kumor-Mielnik
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 51–76 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156560
Keywords: diocese of Przemyśl deanery parish borders of the diocese faithful
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The aim of the article is to characterise the territorial structure of the Przemyśl diocese of the Latin rite and its changes at the turn of the 19th century and throughout the 19th century. The multiple and very short‑term changes to the boundaries of the diocese, which were introduced at the end of the 18th century, resulted in the fact that for almost twenty years the internal organisation of the diocese was not formed and stable, but was constantly reorganised. These changes took place under the influence of political factors, which were aimed at adapting the borders of dioceses and deaneries to the administrative division of Galicia. Shifts of the partition borders resulted in territorial and organisational transformations of the diocese. Difficulties related to the organisation of the network of deaneries and parishes also resulted from the uneven distribution of the Roman Catholic population in the Przemyśl diocese, diverse in terms of nationality and religion.

The density of Latins decreased significantly towards the east and south‑east of the diocese, where the Ruthenian and Greek Catholic population dominated. This directly influenced the size of deaneries, the diversity of parish districts and significant disproportions in the statistics of the faithful. Compared to the numerous 18th‑century transformations in the territorial structure of the Przemyśl diocese, there was relative stabilisation in the 19th century. During this century, the Austrian authorities changed the borders of the Przemyśl diocese only three times. After the last change, which took place in 1821, its borders remained constant until 1925.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Joanna Kumor-Mielnik
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Ośrodek Badań nad Geografią Historyczną Kościoła w Polsce, Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II
5 From Soviet to imperial memory: Russia’s politics of memory in the occupied Ukrainian territories
Yurii Latysh
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 77–98 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156561
Keywords: Russo-Ukrainian war politics of memory occupied territories Russian imperialism memory model
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The Russian government abuses history during the war, justifying its aggression. They devel-oped a plan to de‑Ukrainianise Ukraine, which included the assimilation of Ukrainians. For this purpose, it was planned to use the Soviet nostalgia of some of the Ukrainian population – bearers of the Soviet‑Russian memory model. The testing ground was the self‑proclaimed in 2014 “republics of Donbas”, where a special mnemonic politics aimed at breaking ties with Ukraine and rejecting Ukrainian identity was implemented.

Since the beginning of the occupation, Russia has been destroying monuments that are not related to the “common” history of Ukraine and Russia. First of all, these are monuments to the victims of the Holodomor of 1932–1933, participants in the Antiterrorist Operation in Donbas, and historical figures who opposed Russian influence. Russian‑controlled authorities introduced Russian textbooks and tried to reduce the use of the Ukrainian language.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Yurii Latysh
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. State University of Londrina
6 Build yourself a Soviet Republic. Nostalgia and memory in the light of a computer game
Marcin Maciejewski
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 99–112 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156562
Keywords: post-socialist nostalgia memory computer game post-communism
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Since the beginning of the 21st century, we have been able to observe an increasingly growing nostalgia and sentimental returns to the times of communism in the entire region of the former Eastern Bloc countries.

Of course, nostalgia for these times does not only apply to the older generation. The experi- ence of communism is passed on as a kind of transfer of memory to the younger part of society. Sometimes it is the nostalgia of grandparents, but more often of parents who did not like the political transformation or were unable to find their way in the new market economy.

The idealisation of post‑communist history in the young generation is, for example, art, furni-ture, ceramics, etc., which were rejected by the mainstream in the 1990s and are now coming back and becoming attractive and cool.

An example of such an idealised world and the realities of life in the Eastern Bloc countries is the Workers and Resources Soviet Republic game released in 2019 by the Slovak studio 3Divi-sion. Using it as an example, I would like to analyse what the computer reality represents, what it can say about social memory, and how it can shape the player's vision of the functioning of the socialist state.

Adding new patches to the game constantly expands its functions, including new management mechanisms, such as those related to law and crime. Introducing, among other things, the security service and the political police whose task is to examine the level of loyalty of the citizens—one of the important measures in the game. All this will affect the player's immersion. If developers continue to develop it, it will become almost a simulator of a com-munist state.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marcin Maciejewski
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Uniwersytet Zielonogórski
7 Hybrid technologies in commemorative practices: media’s interpretation of historical narratives
Oksana Pochapska
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 113–134 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156563
Keywords: commemoration media literacy hybrid technologies media myth narrative memory
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The formation of a unified identity within the USSR gave rise to memorial practices which served as tools for consolidating power and promoted a shared historical narrative, particularly one centred on victory in World War II. These practices aimed to homogenise diverse ethnic groups, minimising their individual traits while highlighting their collective role in combating fascism. Russia, inheriting the USSR's legacy, consistently supports these narratives by reshaping facts and utilising factoids, not only revising collective historical narratives but also advocating for Ukrainian assimilation. The hybridisation of commemoration has facilitated the emergence of new narratives that serve as interpretive frameworks for understanding current events. These narratives not only elucidate ongoing conflicts to the Russian populace but also guide the formation of cooperative prospects and global understanding. They significantly influence public opinion and shape collective stances on contemporary issues. This study, drawing on agenda-setting (McCombs, Shaw) and framing (Goffman) theories, aims to examine the distinct characteristics of Russian propaganda's hybrid technologies within memorial practices and their role in shaping the “required” agenda. Survey results underpinning the research provide insight into the potential of commemorations in conducting information and hybrid warfare. Analysing the narratives propagated in the Ukrainian and Polish mass media, reliant on distorted historical facts and mechanisms for constructing a unified Soviet (with Russia) past, is crucial for fostering a secure information environment and enhancing media literacy among the public. Grasping and critically assessing these narratives are essential for navigating the challenges of information dissemination, guarding against misinformation, and cultivating a more enlightened society.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Oksana Pochapska
1 2
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Polish Academy of Sciences
  2. Kamianets-Podilskyi Ivan Ohiienko National University
8 The past as a space of cultural differences: decolonisation and public history during the war in Ukraine
Zbigniew Szmyt
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 135–159 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156564
Keywords: public history Ukraine the war in Ukraine orientalisation decolonisation postcolonialism
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Like any war, the war in Ukraine has an ideological dimension, and historical arguments are used both to legitimise the Russian invasion and to deconstruct Russian territorial claims. However, the war has become a catalyst for deeper processes than just immediate adjustments in historical policy. Almost all sides of the conflict refer to the concept of decolonisation in political and cultural dimensions, and historical awareness is treated as a crucial element of updated national identities. This article is dedicated to: 1) the utilisation of postcolonial dis-course in wartime public history, 2) the historical orientalisation of the enemy as a form of organising cultural differences, and 3) the formation of new national histories. These processes are examined from three perspectives: Ukrainian, Russian, and from the perspective of Siberian ethnic minorities.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Zbigniew Szmyt
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Instytut Antropologii i Etnologii Uniwersytetu Adama Mickiewicza
9 What is historical reality?
Frank Ankersmit
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 161–166 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156565
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Authors and Affiliations

Frank Ankersmit
10 1939 alternatives: counterfactuals in the Polish historiography of the 1939 war
Adam Kożuchowski
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 167–188 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156566
Keywords: the 1939 war Polish post-1945 historiography counterfactuals the concept of defeat
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This paper attempts to reassess and reinterpret selected themes in the Polish post‑World War II historical discourse on the war of 1939. It focuses on the answers provided to three questions: could Poland have avoided or won the 1939 war, and should this war be regarded as a Polish defeat; in other words: it analyses the counterfactual scenarios regarding the military conflict itself and the immediate political developments before the war. It argues that although the so‑called historical alternatives are typically disregarded by the academic historiography as unprofessional, they are in fact omnipresent in their narratives and constitute a crucial part of the Polish discourse on 1939, as they are anchored both in Polish historical thinking and in the European tradition going back to Antiquity. Counterfactuals may possess some cognitive value of their own; most importantly, however, they respond to the ideological and political call of their time. This paper analyses the historical discourses of the communist and post‑communist periods, emphasising the continuity and correspondences between them, particularly as the concept of defeat and its im-plications are concerned. The paper attempts to illuminate the mechanism of production of these counterfactual scenarios about 1939 in a variety of narratives from 1945 up to the present day: academic syntheses and monographs, essays, and the amateurish historiography that seem
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Adam Kożuchowski
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Instytut Historii PAN, Warszawa
11 A mirror of literature: the historian as a character in a novel
Aurimas Švedas
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 189–213 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156567
Keywords: Graham Swift Penelope Lively William H. Gass novel history postmodernism historical metafiction historical imagination
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article analyses three novels of exceptional content and form, written at the end of the 20th century by Graham Swift, Penelope Lively, and William H. Gass, where the main characters are historians.

The historians’ portraits that emerge in the novels Waterland, Moon Tiger and The Tunnel are complicated, melodramatic personalities, rebellious figures bearing a complex fate who try to come to terms with the outcomes of their traumas. They live through the crisis resulting from their traumas and the change of time regimes, reflect on the meaning of the historian’s work, the value of history to people and society, and try to find an answer to the question of whether the ability to tell stories will help them deal with the scars history leaves behind as it breaks people’s destinies.

How should historians read and interpret these novels? Can the imagery of a scholar examining the past or lecturing on history created in the pages of a novel tell us something new about how today’s society understands the work done by a historian? How can such portraits of a historian (historians) help us in our analysis of society’s self‑awareness, its experience of time, and historical sensibility?

This article seeks answers to the questions raised above.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Aurimas Švedas
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Vilnius University, Faculty of History
12 Historical narrative on Mathias Zündt’s map Tabula complectens totam Belgicam…, 1568
Rafał Szmytka
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 215–235 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156568
Keywords: Low Countries map cartography the Dutch Revolt narrative
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The main goal of this article is to analyse the map published in 1568 by Matthias Zündt (1498‑1572), titled Tabula complectens totam Belgicam.... This artefact of early modern carto-graphy located nowadays in the collection of the Jagiellonian Library in Kraków depicts the Low Countries and surrounding lands at the onset of the Dutch anti‑Spanish uprising. In addition to topographical details, the Nuremberg‑based cartographer included illustrations of political events and annotated them with commentary, creating a historical narrative. While the year of 1568 is the main axis of the events and concentrates on the battle of Heiligerlee and the first invasion of William of Orange of Brabant in the autumn of the same year, Zündt creates broader context putting the Low Countries into the centre of European rivalry between great powers: France, the Holy Roman Empire, England and Denmark—the key to the Baltic sea trade. This interpretation is suggested by the figures of four knights riding on sea monsters and bearing representative flags. This narrative is subjected to a comparative analysis with chronicle‑like works and contemporary relational engravings of the authorship of men like Johannes Sleidanus or Frans Hogenberg. The key questions addressed in this text are to what extent Zündt may have drawn inspiration from the works of contemporary writers, humanists and engravers, where did he obtain his knowledge of the events depicted, and what constitutes the historical narrative presented in his map.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Rafał Szmytka
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Instytut Historii, Uniwersytet Jagielloński
13 Do histories of Europe represent? Challenging representationalism in history
Eugen Zeleňák
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 237–256 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156569
Keywords: histories of Europe historical works plurality in history representationalism non-representationalism
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Several case studies explore the plurality of historical accounts discussing past events of limited scope. In this paper, I focus on two historical works about the history of Europe. I show that even works of this large a scale offer specific perspectives on how to approach the past. After analysing two historical books I explore the background and the views of their authors which motivate their accounts. My examination implies it is problematic to see historical works as straightforward representations, for it is implausible to analyse them in terms of a correspon-dence between historical texts and the past reality. Hence, I use the case study to challenge representationalism. Instead, I argue, history should be approached differently, along the lines of non-representationalism focusing on the concrete steps historians take, on the special origin of their works and specific motivation informing their accounts.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Eugen Zeleňák
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Catholic University in Ružomberok
14 The generation or generations of March '68. Between oral history and biographical method
Andrzej Czyżewski
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 257–275 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156570
Keywords: ’68 generation biographical method oral history
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The main aim of the article is an attempt to answer the question of to what extent the analytical frame of the biographical method allows a new approach to the problem of the different experiences of the participants of March '68. Using Fritz Schütze’s concept of "biographical process structures", the author tries to go beyond the existing patterns of interpreting interviews with representatives of the generation of '68 in Poland in the broad sense. The intention of the research proposal formulated in this way is not to undermine existing findings in this area, but to deepen and nuance them. On a broader level, the author is interested in the question of the possible benefits and dangers stemming from the implementation of elements of a qualitative sociology framework into research conducted from the perspective of oral history. The source basis for the analysis proposed in the text are interviews with participants of the so-called March events in Łódź.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Andrzej Czyżewski
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Instytut Studiów Politycznych, Polska Akademia Nauk
15 Changes in the research practices of Polish historians. The borders of the discipline and career-building strategies
Agnieszka Kolasa-Nowak
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 277–296 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156571
Keywords: historical science in Poland young generation of historians sociology of science interdisciplinarity global mobility
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article concerns changes in the perception of historical science in Poland, its identity, and the specificity and boundaries from the perspective of academic historians of the younger generation. Reflections on the condition of history in Poland today focus heavily on its relations with the social sciences. The starting point is usually the statement that the autonomy of historical science is weakening and its distinctiveness and coherence are becoming limited. The article is about the practices and beliefs of the younger generation of Polish historians. The article is written from the perspective of the sociology of science, based on interviews conducted among researchers of the past, selected for their exploratory and open approach. I was particularly interested in the influence of the social sciences on history. Strategies for building academic careers were also an important thread in the interviews. The issue of international mobility and participation in the global circulation of science is seen from the perspective of the core-periphery division.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Agnieszka Kolasa-Nowak
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Instytut Socjologii, Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej w Lublinie
16 The Political History of Inequality Regimes. Some Remarks on Thomas Piketty’s Capital and Ideology
Tomasz Falkowski
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 297–308 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156572
Keywords: Thomas Piketty’s oeuvre history of inequality regimes ideology history and politics longue durée
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In this paper, I aim to analyse Thomas Piketty’s latest book, Capital and Ideology, from both the methodological and historiographical perspectives. What kind of presuppositions does Piketty adopt in his research focusing on the history of so‑called inequality regimes? Does he continue to create historical knowledge in order to propose social and political solutions concerning contemporary world issues? What role does the notion of ideology play in the book? These questions outline the structure of my argument presented in the following paper. Then, I show how Piketty understands the concept of ideology and how he weaves it into the concept of inequality regimes. It consists of three elements: the system of ownership, the political dimen-sion, and ideology. A good illustration of this intertwining, as I demonstrate, is the French ownership system of the 19th century. Importantly, ideology for Piketty does not mean a dis-course that has the characteristics of hypocrisy; rather, it defines certain ways of thinking that are insurmountable for a given regime. This is evidenced, for example, by discussions about re-parations for slavery, which are directed towards former owners rather than the enslaved, as I elaborate in the text.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Tomasz Falkowski
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
17 Crossing Boundaries: Jan Lucassen on the Historian's Craft in Labour History
Marta Kurkowska-Budzan
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 309–322 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156573
Keywords: labour history historical methodology Jan Lucassen global history social history
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This interview with Dutch historian Jan Lucassen explores his intellectual journey from student activism to developing analytical frameworks that challenge both Marxist orthodoxy and Western‑centric historiography. Lucassen discusses his approach to writing accessible yet rig-orous history, shaped by the principle of explaining academic work to thinking citizens regard-less of their educational background. The conversation examines his departure from Marxist analysis, leading to the development of alternative methodological approaches in labour history. Lucassen reflects on his role in building the research department at the International Institute of Social History in Amsterdam, creating an international scholarly community focused on com-parative analysis across different geographical and temporal contexts. The interview addresses contemporary concerns about artificial intelligence and automation in relation to historical patterns of technological change and labour displacement. The conversation concludes with reflections on mentoring doctoral students and the collaborative nature of historical research.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marta Kurkowska-Budzan
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Uniwersytet Jagielloński
18 Oral History in Research Practice and Social Education: Notes on Marcin Jarząbek's Handbook of Oral History
Marcin Brocki
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 323–336 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156574
Keywords: oral history research methodology memory archiving
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article provides a critical analysis of Marcin Jarząbek's 'Handbook of Oral History', ex-amining its contribution to oral history methodology and practice. The review highlights the Handbook's approach to teaching oral history methods, from theoretical foundations to practical applications. The book successfully combines theoretical knowledge with practical guidance, making it accessible to both academic and non‑academic audiences. It covers key aspects of oral history work well, including interview preparation, interviewing, interpretation, and archiving. A particular strength of the Handbook is its detailed treatment of memory mechanisms and their implications for oral history research. While the book excels in its methodological guidance, some areas, such as its dealing with trauma‑related interviews and ethical challenges in different cultural contexts, could benefit from more detailed coverage. Nevertheless, the Handbook makes a significant contribution to the field, effectively positioning oral history at the intersection of different disciplines while maintaining its distinctive methodological identity. The review argues that this work successfully bridges the gap between academic rigour and practical application, making it an invaluable resource for oral history practitioners.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marcin Brocki
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Instytut Etnologii i Antropologii Kulturowej, Uniwersytet Jagielloński
19 Ankersmit on the Death of the Past
Krzysztof Zamorski
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 337–342 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156575
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Authors and Affiliations

Krzysztof Zamorski
ORCID: ORCID
20 W 90. urodziny profesora Jerzego Maternickiego
Krzysztof Zamorski
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 343–344 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156576
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Authors and Affiliations

Krzysztof Zamorski
ORCID: ORCID
21 XXI General Congress of Polish Historians in Białystok (September 17–20, 2024). Report
Tomasz Wiśniewski
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 345–355 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.156577
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Authors and Affiliations

Tomasz Wiśniewski
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
22 Gloss on the article: Krakow Traditions of Research into The History of The British Isles in the 20th and 21st Centuries
Jakub Basista
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2025 | tom 55 | 357–363 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2025.157592
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Authors and Affiliations

Jakub Basista
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Uniwersytet Jagielloński

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