Lectori Salutem!

RussianStudiesHu is an online peer-reviewed academic periodical on Historical Russistics. It is published in two volumes per year, additions being made to the online content continuously over the course of the given year. Besides being available on its website, issues of the periodical are freely accessible at Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem’s repository (edit.elte.hu), that of the Central and Eastern European Online Library (CEEOL) (https://www.ceeol.com/) as well as in other major international databases. The publisher also makes the periodical’s material available in printed form.

Manuscripts are accepted in English, Russian and Hungarian on condition that the article has not been published elsewhere. RussianStudiesHu welcomes colleagues with an interest in any topic on Eastern Slavic, Russian, and Soviet History who submit a scientific paper that observes our rules of publication. These fields are understood in a broad sense (including their Hungarian and Eastern European aspects).

Our ‘Special Guest column’ provides space for representatives of Russian Studies in the widest possible meaning of the term, while ‘Opuscula Prima’ offers prize-winners in the nationwide competition ‘Thesis of the Year in Russian Studies’ an opportunity to publish. RussianStudiesHu does not prefer any ‘genre’, method or trend in history writing over another. However, historiography does stand at the centre of its founders’ scientific interest, research and publications. The core nature of this focus is demonstrated clearly by the articles on “Historiographies of Russia’s History (2000-2020)”, a project launched in 2021, which at present includes scholars from 17 countries, representing all five continents.

The russianstudies.hu webpage, which provides web coverage for RussianStudiesHu, was established in the autumn of 2019 by employees of Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE), by members of the legal successor to the Hungarian Institute for Russian Studies (founded in 1990) as well as by the ELTE Centre for Russian Studies. Academic and institutional support is provided by ELTE’s Institute of History.

The journal’s editors welcome everyone to the site, not only as readers but also as co-creators, providing an opportunity for colleagues specializing in Historical Russistics both at home and abroad to publish.

RussianStudiesHu has, from the very moment of its inception, exceeded the wildest dreams of its creators. As renowned scholars of international repute have joined our project, the journal has outgrown the limits not only of a workshop but also the scope of Hungarian Russistics, serving the cause of universal knowledge. As one author has put it: this “forum serves as a meeting place of various historiographies”; it is a bridge between Western and Eastern Russistics.

The creators of the russianstudies.hu research website, and its online periodical RussianStudiesHu hereby welcome its readers!

Gyula Szvák – Editor-in-Chief

  • Historiographies
  • Opuscula prima
  • Guest page
  • Historiographies
  • Essays
  • Opuscula prima
  • Essays
  • Reviews
  • Guest page
  • Essays
  • Guest page

Editorial board

Member of Russian Academy of Sciences Veniamin Alekseev – Institute of History and Archaeology, Ural Вranch of the RAS (Ekaterinburg, Russia) • Professor Evgenii Anisimov – St. Petersburg Historical Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences (Saint-Petersburg, Russia) • Professor Emeritus Chester S. L. Dunning – Texas A&M University (College Station, USA) • Professor Márta Font – University of Pécs (Pécs, Hungary) • Paul Mellon Distinguished Professor Wendy Z. Goldman – Carnegie Mellon University (Pittsburgh, USA) • Corresponding Member of RAS Andrei Golovnev – Kunstkamera. Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Saint-Petersburg, Russia) • Professor Claudio S. Ingerflom – National University of General San Martín (Buenos Aires, Argentina) • Professor Emeritus Tamás Krausz – Eötvös Loránd University (Budapest, Hungary) • Professor Andrei Medushevsky – National Research University Higher School of Economics (Moscow, Russia) • Professor Emeritus Peter Pastor – Montclair State University (Montclair, USA) • Professor Dmitrii Redin – Institute of History and Archaeology, Ural Вranch of the RAS (Ekaterinburg, Russia) • Corresponding Member of RAS Lorina Repina – Institute of World History, Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow, Russia) • Professor Endre Sashalmi – University of Pécs (Pécs, Hungary) • Professor Ludwig Steindorff – Christian-Albrecht University of Kiel (Kiel, Germany) • Professor Emeritus Léna Szilárd – University of Sassari (Sassari, Italy) • Professor Emeritus Gyula Szvák – Eötvös Loránd University (Budapest, Hungary) • Professor Igor Tyumentsev - Volgograd State University (Volgograd, Russia) • Professor Andrei Yurganov – Russian State University for the Humanities (Moscow, Russia) • Professor Jianhua Zhang – Director of the Center for World History, Beijing Normal University (Beijing, China)

Publishing Ethics

The work of the Editorial Board of the journal “RussianStudiesHu” is conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and Elsevier’s guidance on the ethics of scientific publications. Compliance with these standards is mandatory for all participants of the publication process.

“RussianStudiesHu” is an open access journal – all issues of the journal are available in electronic form for free on the journal's website. Manuscript processing and publication of materials in the journal are completely free of charge.

The author of a received manuscript retains all rights with relation to its content. No one who has access to the content of a received manuscript may use it for personal goals.

Authors:

1.1. Shall ensure that their articles are not pending in the editorial office of another journal and have not been published before.

1.2. Shall be responsible for the content of the article. Articles must be original scientific works. If material is borrowed from other researchers, a proper, correct reference must be made, drawn up in accordance with the rules for arranging journal articles. Reviews and overviews should also be accurate and objective, and works expressing the author's personal opinion should be explicitly noted as such.

1.3. Shall be responsible for the presence of intentional or unintentional plagiarism. Unauthorized borrowing and reproduction of any elements of the article (text, graphics, primary data etc.) are absolutely unacceptable. Borrowed elements reproduced with the consent of the copyright holder must be presented in the right form and accompanied by an appropriate reference.

1.4. Information obtained in the course of confidential activities, such as reviewing manuscripts or grant applications, should not be used without the written consent of the author of the work that was the subject of this activity.

1.5. Shall be responsible for indicating the sources of financial support for the project, the results of which are presented in their article, and for indicating all persons who have contributed to the research (including co-authors).

1.6. When the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the published work, the author is obliged to promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate with the editors in refuting or correcting the erroneous statement. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that the published work contains a significant error, the author must promptly refute this error or correct the paper.

1.7. Authors retain unlimited copyright for their articles.

Editors:

2.1. Shall be responsible for making decisions on the proposed articles. The Editorial Board’s decision to accept or reject an article for publication is based exclusively on the scientific value of the article, its significance for the given branch of science and the quality of the presentation of the material. This decision will also be made in accordance with the current legislation regarding libel, copyright infringement or plagiarism.

2.2. Shall be responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of information about articles submitted for editing and about their authors. Access to this information is provided only to a narrow circle of persons who are directly related to the article and the process of its preparation for publication. Unpublished materials contained in the submitted manuscript should not be used in the editor's own research without the written consent of the author.

2.3. Shall undertake to agree the final version of the article with the author before sending the material to print.

2.4. Shall undertake to evaluate scholarly articles solely on their intellectual level and scientific novelty, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, political views and other personal characteristics of the authors.

2.5. Shall guarantee the transfer of authors’ articles for review on an anonymous basis.

2.6. An editor who has obtained conclusive evidence that the content or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should contact the publisher to arrange for the prompt publication of amendments, retractions or other communication relevant to the situation.

2.7. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. ask a co-editor, assistant editor, or other member of the Editorial Board to replace them in the review and review process) from reviewing manuscripts if there is a conflict of interest arising from a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) organizations associated with the papers.

2.8. Editors should take reasonably responsive measures upon receiving complaints of an ethical nature in relation to the submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Such measures usually involve contact with the author of the paper and responsible consideration of the complaint on its merits, but may also involve further interaction with relevant organizations and research groups.

Reviewers:

3.1. Shall undertake to perform an anonymous ("double blind") review.

3.2. Shall undertake not to disclose to outsiders information about the articles submitted for review.

3.3. Shall undertake to respect copyright and under no circumstances use original materials or fragments presented in their research or for personal purposes.

3.4. Shall undertake to conduct a scientific examination of the articles within the deadlines set by the Editorial Board of the journal. If reviewing is not possible within the specified time frame or the reviewer feels insufficiently qualified to evaluate the research presented in the paper, the reviewer must immediately notify the editorial staff thereof.

3.5. Shall undertake to carry out reviews on a voluntary basis.

3.6. Shall undertake to abide by the requirements of maximum objectivity. The only criterion in assessing the article is its scientific significance. Any decisions based on personal preferences of the reviewer are not allowed. Reviews should be made objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their views clearly, supporting them with arguments. In the event of the presence or occurrence of a conflict of interest in any form between the reviewer and the author, the reviewer is obliged to immediately notify the editorial staff thereof and refrain from reviewing.

3.7. Reviewers should identify works that are relevant to the paper but which were not referred to by the authors. Every allegation that an observation, conclusion or argument has been made previously must be supported by a reference. The reviewer should also draw the editor's attention to any significant similarities and intersections between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which he or she is personally aware.

Conflict of interest:

All interested parties should avoid the occurrence of conflicts of interest in any form at all stages of the process of the article’s passing into print. In the event of a conflict of interest in any form, the person who first discovered such a conflict must immediately notify the editorial staff thereof. The same applies to any violation of generally accepted ethical norms and rules.

The Editorial Board organizes the reviewing process in a way that excludes any conflict of interest arising from personal preferences, competition, partnership or any other relations between the author and any companies, organizations or individuals involved in the reviewing process.

In the event that the Editorial Board are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct they will deal with it appropriately, taking reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred.

The Editorial Board commits to publish clarifications, retractions and apologies in relation to such conflicts as arise, as well as corrections of the material when needed.

Retraction of papers:

If the Editorial Board recieves information that the paper published in the journal "RussianStudiesHu" contains plagiarism, that or the publication of the submitted data is contrary to the legislation of Hungary, the Editorial Board will raise the question of retraction (withdrawal) of the paper. The retraction process is organized as follows:

The author, reader, reviewer, editor or publisher shall notify the editorial office of the violation in writing.

Upon receipt of a complaint, the editor is obliged to record it in writing and, after careful consideration, draw up a report indicating all the factual issues in the case for further submission to the Editorial Board.

The Editorial Board considers the appeal and makes a decision on retraction or refusal of the paper. If a decision on retraction is made, the Editorial Board sends a letter to the author with a description of the detected violations.

A statement about the paper’s retraction is published in the printed and electronic versions of the journal along with an explanation of the reasons for this.

The editors withdraw the paper from all citation databases and electronic resources, including the journal itself.

Privacy Statement

Names and email addresses entered on the website of this journal may only be used only for the purposes denoted by the journal and may not be used for any other purposes or provided to other persons and organizations. The editor-in-chief and his deputies do not disclose information relating to the submitted manuscript to anyone other than its author, reviewers, potential reviewers, assistants to the editor-in-chief and publisher in the prescribed manner.

The Peer-Review Process

1. All manuscripts considered for publication in the journal "RussianStudiesHu" must undergo a process of anonymous peer review and approval by the Editorial Board.

2. Submitted manuscripts will be reviewed by the editors to determine if they reflect the aims and scope of the journal, and to check the appropriateness of the format. Manuscripts that do not meet the criteria outlined above will not be considered for publication, and authors will be informed of this decision.

3. If a manuscript meets the required criteria, it will be checked for plagiarized material. Should such material be discovered, the manuscript will be rejected and the authors informed of this decision. The manuscript will also be rejected if material within it is found to have been published previously.

4. If the manuscript meets all of the criteria above it will be forwarded to two reviewers within two weeks of submission. Authors will be informed of the commencement of the review process. This process may not exceed six weeks from the date of receiving the manuscript. Reviewers may decline to undertake a review within one week of receiving the manuscript and must inform the journal of their decision.

5. The review process is anonymous for the author and the reviewers.

6. The review process is confidential. Reviewers and members of the Editorial Board must keep all reviewed material confidential. Reviewers and editors must not share materials submitted for review with third parties.

7. All reviewers have expertise in areas reflected in the submitted material and have published in the field in recent years. Reviewers may be selected from among the members of the Editorial Board and among experts from various research and higher education institutions across the country and abroad. If the manuscript is of an interdisciplinary nature, experts from appropriate fields may be invited to take part in the review process.

8. Neither the author nor any of the co-authors are permitted to be reviewers. Academic supervisors of graduate students or colleagues from the institution where the author is currently employed cannot be invited as reviewers. Invited reviewers must inform the Editorial Board about any potential conflict of interest.

9. The review should include an expert analysis of the material, an objective and well-supported evaluation and constructive recommendations. The review should be concluded with a final decision concerning the suitability of the manuscript for publication as follows: 1) the manuscript is recommended for publication; 2) the manuscript is recommended for publication following revision; 3) the manuscript is not recommended for publication.

10. In the event of a positive assessment from both reviewers, the manuscript must then be approved by the Editorial Board. Upon acceptance, the authors will be informed by email. This email may include a list of suggested revisions. The Editorial Board retains the right to reject the manuscript even if a positive assessment was given by both reviewers. Authors of such manuscripts will be fully informed of the reasons for rejection.

11. In the event of negative assessments from both reviewers, the authors will be provided with the reasons for rejection. In the event of two conflicting reviews, the final decision concerning the manuscript will be made by the editor-in-chief. In the event of disagreement between the reviewers, the manuscript may be forwarded to a third independent expert. The selection of reviewers can be determined by the Editorial Board, or by the editor-in-chief, or by a deputy editor.

12. The Editorial Board will forward copies of anonymous reviews to the author upon request.

13. Reviews will be kept for a period of five years.

  • RussianStudiesHu
  • Editor-in-Chief: Gyula Szvák
  • Dep. Editor-in-Chief: Endre Sashalmi
  • Editor: Bálint Mezei
  • Members: Vladimir Boldin (Moscow),
    Gábor Gyóni, László György,
    Ádám Farkas
  • Contact: centre@russianstudies.hu
  • RussianStudiesHu
  • Editor-in-Chief: Gyula Szvák
  • Dep. Editor-in-Chief: Endre Sashalmi
  • Editor: Bálint Mezei
  • Members: Vladimir Boldin (Moscow),
    Gábor Gyóni, László György,
    Ádám Farkas
  • Contact: centre@russianstudies.hu
ISSN 2677-0660

Copyright © 2019- Foundation for the Russian Language and Culture
All rights reserved