Classical Studies in Bulgaria 1959-1979. The situation by 1979

I. Classicists and scholars, whose researches were related to Classics (who is who)
in memoriam
Todor GERASIMOV (1974)
Head of Section for Epigraphy and Numismatics at the Archeological Institute (since 1964).
retired (1968)
Co-author of Thracian Art (1973).
Makarij Portalski (1979)
retired (1976)
Co-author of Latin Grammar (1961)
Translation of Quintilian`s Institutio Oratoria (1982)

1. Professional profiles and main institutions classicists work in
a. Sofia University
(The main source for the CVs is Алманах на Софийския Университет "Климент Охридски" 1939-1988, А-Я. SU Press, 1988)
- Department of Classical philology
G. Mihailov – professor (1964).
(Or 1963 - Димитър Веселинов. Летописна книга на ФКНФ 1888-1965. SU Press, 2008)
Editor of Greek Inscriptions Discovered in Bulgaria (in Latin), t. III-IV. 590 p. + 329 pl. and 348 p. + 86 pl. (1961-1966). Author of The Thracians. 320 p. (1972).
Translations of Plato`s Dialogues (1979, selected).
Courses: Greek Syntax; Historical Grammar and History of Greek Language; Greek Epigraphy; History of Greek Culture.
Al. Nichev - professor (1963). D-r of the Moscow State University (1972).
Author of: The Tragic Guilt in Sophocles` Oedipus the King (in French). 108 p. (1962); Sofronij`s Translation of Aesop`s Fables. 122 p. (1963). Aleko Konstantinov. 326 p. (1964). The Riddle of the Tragic Catharsis in Aristotle (in French). 254 p. (1970).
Translations of: Plautus` Menaechmi and The Pot of Gold (1966), Miles Gloriosus (1978); Aeschylus, all plays (1967); Aristotle`s Poetics (1967); Lucian`s Dialogues (selected) (1971); Seneca`s Oedipus (1977); Euripides` Electra and Bacchae (1977); Aristophanes` The Assemblywomen and Ploutos (1978); Menander`s Dyskolos (1978); Terence`s The Brothers (1978)
Courses: History of Ancient Literature; Greek Literature; Modern Greek Grammar
K. Vlahov – associate professor (1967) and professor (1973).
Author of The Thracian Personal Names. 138 p. (1976). Articles on the Thracian language (650-700 p. in Bulgarian and German) (1963-1979)
Courses: Phonetics and Morphology of the Greek Language; Syntax of the Greek Language; Thracian Language
T. Sarafov - associate professor (1973).
Author of: The Literary Views of Apuleius. 48 p. (1966); The Thracian satres (sic!). 70 p. (1973); Transcription and Pronuntiation of Latin and Greek Personal Names in Bulgarian. 23 p. (1979). Articles on Thracian language and history (30 p. in Bulgarian and French) (1970-1978).
Translation of Aesop's Fables (1967).
Zorka POPOVA (b. 1921 in Razgrad). Graduated from the Sofia University, Classical philology (1944). Teacher in Latin language (1961).
Author of articles on the influence of Tibullus, Catullus, Horace and Propertius on the Latin epigraphic inscriptions (200-250 p.) (1967-1980)
Courses: Morphology of the Latin Language; Phonetics of the Latin Language; History of the Latin Language
Anna B. NIKOLOVA (b. 1939 in Sofia). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (1962). Assistant (1968). PhD (1975) with Chronology of Seneca`s De Ira and De Clementia.
Courses:
Bogdan BOGDANOV (b. 1940 in Sofia). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (1963). Assistant (1969). PhD (1976) with The Euripides` Two-parts Tragedies and the Question of the Description of the World-view Problematics of the Attic Tragedy.
Author of: From Homer to Euripides. Essays on Greek Literature. 192 p. (1971); Homer`s Epic. 127 p. (1976); Hellenistic Literature. 199 p. (1979).
Translations of: Theophrastus` Characters (1968); Plutarch`s Lives (1969, selected); Greek Novels (1975, selected); Plato`s Dialogues (1979, selected)
Courses: Introduction in the Classical philology (since 1979)
N. GEORGIEVA (b. 1947 in Elin Pelin, near Sofia). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (1971). Assistant (1979).
8 teachers (5 men 3 women): 4 Greek scholars (3 literature-culture, 1 language), 4 Latin (2 literature and culture, 2 language)
- other Departments and Faculties
V. Velkov – associate professor (1961) and professor (1970) at the Department of Old and Medieval History. Head of Section for Epigraphy and Numismatics at the Archeological Institute (1972-1989).
Author of: Slavery in Thrace and Moesia in Antiquity. 154 p. (1967); Cities and Thrace and Dacia in Late Antiquity (in English). 308 p. (1977). Roman Cities in Bulgaria (in English). 300 p. (1979);
Co-author of Thracians in Greco-Roman Egypt (in French). 118 p. (1977)
Courses: History of Ancient World (since 1961);
R. Radev – associate professor (1969) and professor (1977) at the Department of Philosophy. D-r of the Philosophical Sciences (1976).
Author of: Materialistic Principles in Aristotle`s Philosophy of Knowledge. 156 p. (1961). Through the History of Arab Philosophy. 164 p. (1966). Hellenistic Philosophy. 312 p. (1973). Epicurus. Life and Work. 168 p. (1976).
Courses: History of Ancient and Medieval Philosophy
Alexander FOL (b. 1933 in Sofia). Graduated from the Sofia University, History (1957). Assistant (1963). PhD (1966) with The Thracians in Italy and in the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire. Associate professor (1972) and professor (1974) at the Department of Old and Medieval History.
Author of: Political History of Thracians until the end of V c. BC. 216 p. (1972)
Co-author of: Epaminondas. 111 p. (1967); Thracian Military Art. 127 p. (1969). Thracians in Greco-Roman Egypt (in French). 118 p. (1977); Thrace and the Thracians (in English). 160 p. (1977).
Courses: History of Ancient Greece (from 1972); Thracian Sources (from 1972); Thracology (since 1979)
Margarita TACHEVA (b. 1936 in Shumen). PhD (1969) with The Migrants of Asia Minor Syria and Egypt in the Economic and Cultural Life of Moesia Inferior and Thrace I-III c. Chief Assistant (1974). Associate professor (1976) at the Department of Old and Medieval History.
Author of Ancient Thrace and the South-East of Europe (in Russian). 88 p. (1976).
Courses: History of Ancient World (1975-1979); Thracology (1979)
Krasimir BANEV (b. 1940). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (196…). Assistant in Methods of Teaching Classical Language (Department of Methods of Teaching Foreign Languages) (around 1970).
Dimitar POPOV (b. 1950). Graduated from the Sofia University, history (1973). PhD (1977) with Political and Religious Aspects of the King`s Institution by the Thracians. Assistant (1978) at the Department of Old and Medieval History.
Petar DELEV (b. 1951 in Sofia). Graduated from the Sofia University, history (1977). Assistant (1979) at the Department of Old and Medieval History.
7 teachers (6 men 1 woman): 4 historians, 1 archeologist-epigraphist, 1 philologist-methodologist, 1 philosopher

b. outside the University
- other universities (Tarnovo, Plovdiv, Medical academy in Sofia… no inf. yet)
* Theological Academy
Al. Milev - senior teacher in classical languages at the University (1964). Retired (1969). Professor (1970-1980).
Co-author of Latin Grammar (1961)
Translations of: Aristophanes` Clouds (1962), Homer`s Iliad (in cooperation) (1969); The Greek Lives of St Kliment Ohridski (1961); Plato`s Republic (1974
- Academy of Sciences
* Archeological Institute
Teofil IVANOV (b…). Graduated from Sofia University, classical philology. Head of Section for Ancient Archeology (1965-1982).
* Institute for Bulgarian History
(Edited Greek Sources for Bulgarian History (v. I-VI) until 1965)
G. TSANKOVA (b…) - junior researcher (senior since…)
S. LISHEV (b…) - junior researcher…(senior since…)
* Institute for Balkan Studies
Vasilka Tapkova-Zaimova - researcher at section Byzantium and the Balkan Peoples (since 1964)
* Thracology Institute
- elsewhere in academic and cultural institutions
* museums
Iv. Venedikov - senior researcher at the Archeological Institute (since 1962). Senior researcher (1973-1978) at the Thracology institute. Director of the section of Ancient archeology at the National Historical Museum (1973-1986).
Co-author of Thracian Art (1973).
6 classicists (4 men 2 woman): 2 archeologists, 2 philologists-editors, 1 philologist-historian, 1 Greek and Latin teacher and translator
- gymnasiums (the NGDEK)
Dimitar BOJADZHIEV (b. 1949). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (1973). Teacher of Latin language. PhD (1979)
Ivan GENOV (b. 1956). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (1979). Teacher of Greek language (since 1979)
Dorotei GETOV (b. 195…). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (197…). Teacher of Greek language (since 1978)
Maria KOSTOVA (b. 1948). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (1971). Teacher of Latin language (1978-1982)
Judith PHILIPOVA (b. 195…). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (197…). Teacher of Latin language since 1978
Ognyan RADEV (b. 1955 in Varna). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (1979). Teacher of Greek language and Ancient Culture (since 1979)
Rumen STEFANOV (b. 195…). Graduated from the Sofia University, classical philology (197…). Teacher of Greek language (since 1978)
7 teachers (5 men 2 women); 3 Greek language, 1 Greek language and culture, 3 Latin language
- no position in educational (academic, etc.) institution (or no information about)
G. Batakliev - Translations of: Apuleius` The Golden Ass (1964, in cooperation); Homer`s Odyssey (1971); Ovid's Metamorphoses (1974);
P. Radev - Translation of Apuleius` The Golden Ass (1964, in cooperation)
M. Markov - Translations of: Sallust`s Conspiracy of Catiline and Jugurthine War; Livy's History of Rome, I (1978); Aristotle`s On the Soul (1979).
Borislav GEORGIEV - Translation of Ancient Lyric (1970, selected)
Nikolina BAKARDZIEVA - Translation of Pliny`s the Younger Letters (1979)
Milko MIRCHEV - Translation of Thucydides` History of the Peloponnesian War (1979).
6 classicists (mostly known as translators) (5 men 1 woman): 2 from Greek, 3 from Latin, 1 both;
- left educational (academic, cultural) institution (fired, retired)
Y. Bratkov, retired (1967).
Co-author of Latin Grammar (1961)
B. Gerov, retired (1969).
Investigations on West-Thracian Lands in Roman Times. Parts I-IV. 540 p. (1960-1969)
D. P. Dimitrov, retired (1971).
Bulgaria – Land of Ancient Civilizations (in English) (57 p., 1961)
V. Beshevliev, retired (1972).
Head of Section for Epigraphy and Numismatics at the Archeological Institute (until 1964). Since 1964 senior researcher at the Institute for Balkan Studies.
Proto-Bulgarian Inscriptions (in German, 382 p., 1963; in Bulgarian, 1979). Late Greek and Late Latin Inscriptions from Bulgaria (in German, 235 p., 1964)
Vl. Georgiev, retired (1974).
Bulgarian Etymology and Onomastics (180 p., 1960). The Vocal System in the Development of the Slavic Languages (128 p., 1964)
Specialized courses: Contemporary Linguistics (1965-1974)
Hr. Danov, retired (1975)
Ancient Thrace (1968), 471 p. The Thracians (1979), 183 p.
R. Gandeva, retired (1978)
Senior teacher (1962). Associate professor (1969) and professor (1974).
Author of articles on Horace (200-250 p. in Bulgarian, German and Latin) (1963-1978).
Co-author of Latin Grammar (1961)
Courses: Morphology of Latin Language; Latin Syntax; History of Roman Literature
M. Vojnov (?) – at least until the end of 50s in the Institute for Bulgarian History
8 classicists (7 men 1 woman): 1 historian, 1 archeologist, I linguist, 2 philologists-epigraphists, 1 philologist-methodologist, 1 Latin literature teacher, 1 editor

2. Overview – 42 classicists (active and retired)
a. age
- old (over 60) - 14
- middle-aged (over 35) – 20 (?)
- young (under 35) - 8
b. gender, family, native region, place (city) they are based – 32 men, 10 women
Almost all work at Sofia.
c. professional field/educational degree/position
- philology (literature/culture, language/linguistic studies, edition of sources) – 12 (7 lit., 5 language)
- history and archeology, epigraphy - 10
- language teaching and translation – 17
- Greek, Latin studies (where clear distinction is possible) – 22 (11 Greek, 12 Latin)
- in educational institutions – 23 (7 secondary, 16 higher)
- outside educational/academic/cultural institution – 13
d. academic awards
e. administrative positions in academic institutions
Hr. Danov - Head of the Department of Ancient and Medieval History (1960-1975)
Al. Nichev - Head of the Department of Classical philology (1970-1978); Dean of the Faculty of Western Philologies (1970-1972)
V. Velkov – Head of the Department of Ancient and Medieval History (from 1979).
Al. Fol – Director of the Thracology Institute at the Academy (from 1972); Head of the Department of Thracology at the University (from 1979);
f. social and political activities and consequences of them
- social activities. Awards
- works, probably politically motivated (related to the political situation)
Hr. Danov – Critical Review of the Bourgeois Historiography on Antiquity in Bulgaria until September 9, 1944. 66 p. (1964). R. Radev – Criticism of Neothomism. 424 p. (1970); Neothomism – the “Modern” Philosophy of Catholicism. 67 p. (1976)
- political activities
* members of the Communist party
R. Radev (1962), Al. Fol (1966)
* high party and state positions (government, state administration, cultural institutions)
Al. Fol – Deputy President of the Committee of Culture (1974-1977);
Minister of People`s Education (1979-1986)
* state awards, titles
Vl. Georgiev – Hero of Socialist Labour (1969), Dimitrov Prize (1969), People`s Scientist (1971)
B. Gerov – Red Flag of Labour (1963), 25 Years People`s Power (1969)
Y. Bratkov – Active Fighter against Fascism and Capitalism (1966); Cyril and Methodius I degree (1971); People`s Republic of Bulgaria I degree (1972); Hero of Socialist Labour (1978)
Hr. Danov – Honoured Scientist (1978)
M. Portalski – Cyril and Methodius I degree (1976)
- penalties

II. Fields and directions of study

1. Production
a. researches (fields)
- epigraphy and source editing (Greek, Latin, Proto-Bulgarian, Byzantine) – Mihailov, Gerov, Beshevliev, Vojnov, Tapkova-Zaimova
- contemporary Bulgaria`s lands in antiquity (monuments of Roman and Greek presence, other peoples except Thracians) – Danov, Mihailov, Gerov, Beshevliev, Velkov, Tacheva, Dimitrov
- thracology (material culture, art, written sources, political history, religious cult, language) – Georgiev, Danov, Mihailov, Gerasimov, Venedikov, Velkov, Vlahov, Fol, Popov
- literature, theory (Greek tragedy, Aristotle`s views on literature) – Nichev, Bogdanov
- literature, history (history of Greek and Latin literature, Greek and Roman poetry) – Gandeva, Sarafov, Popova, Bogdanov, Nikolova
- philosophy (Greek materialism, Aristotle`s tradition in Middle Ages, Hellenistic philosophy) – R. Radev
- cultural studies (Greek, Thracian, mythology) – Mihailov, Velkov, Fol, Bogdanov, Popov
b. translations
- Greek authors (Homer, Aeschylus, selected works by Euripides and Aristophanes, selected lyric, Thucydides, Aristotle (Poetics, on the Soul), Plato (early dialogues), selected works by Plutarch and Lucian) novels – Milev, Batakliev, Nichev, B. Georgiev, Mirchev, Markov, Mihailov, Bogdanov
- Roman authors (selected drama, Sallust, Livy (book I), selected lyric, Ovid, Pliny the Younger, Apuleius) – Nichev, Batakliev, Bakardzhieva, Markov, Radev

2. Teaching
a. courses
b. manuals, handbooks

3. General tendencies

III. The classical studies and classical education in general

1. Institutions
a. secondary education
- The NGDEK (15)
The National Gymnasium for Ancient Languages and Cultures was opened in the autumn of 1977. First year 99 pupils were enrolled (32 boys, 67 girls) (Иван Еленков. Неосъщественият "Национален научно-методически център за подготовка усъвършенстване на кадри по древни езици и култури" в контекста на неосъществените проекти на Людмила Живкова. Paper, read on the conference in memory of prof. Dimitar Bojadzhiev, SU, 13-14 of November, 2009). From then every year about 80 pupils were enrolled with, if possible, an equal number of boys and girls.
In the program, which remains almost unchanged until today, were included as classical languages Latin, Greek and Old Bulgarian. The first year the pupils learned only Latin (4 hours for week); the second Greek was added (4 hours); the third they had Old Bulgarian too (2 hours). All these languages were studied as compulsory disciplines.
The discipline of History was taught mainly by university teachers (In the first years Ancient History (1st year, Greece, Rome, Thrace) was taught by D. Popov (then young assistant, now professor at the Sofia University) and K. Yordanov (researcher at the Thracology institute, now professor at the NBU); Medieval History, with special stress to Byzantine and Bulgarian relationships (2 year) – by G. Bakalov and P. Angelov, now both professors at the Sofia University. Modern Western History (3 year) – by R. Donkov and R. Guenov, now professors at the Sofia University too). Ancient Classical Culture and Medieval Bulgarian Culture were taught as separated disciplines. There were also courses in Ancient (including the ancient East), Medieval and Renaissance art.
At the fourth year began the Lyceum-degree (It was called so in the following years. According to the actual regulations Gymnasium education is completed at he end of the 3d year. At the following 2 years the pupils acquire the specialised Lyceum education (see http://www.ngdek.com/training.html). At this degree disciplines as Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry and Biology were no more studied. At their place began the specialized education, where at the beginning the pupils could choose between two “profiles” - Old Bulgarian Philology (Старобългаристика) and Sanskrit language.
b. higher education (Sofia University)
The situation in the Department of Classical philology and in other Departments and Faculties –exams, curricula, number of enrolled and graduated students.
c. elsewhere
d. theological schools
- secondary
- higher (Sofia University)

2. Contacts between scholars and publishing
a. internal
- congresses, conferences etc.
- associations
- periodicals
b. external
- membership in foreign academic organizations. Awards
G. Mihailov – Corresponding Member of: British Academy of Sciences (1972); French Academie des Inscriptions at Belles-Lettres (1979); Member and President of the International Association for Greek and Latin Epigraphy (since its founding, 1972)
K. Vlahov – Member of the Committee for Classic Studies in the Socialist Countries “Eirene”.
V. Velkov - Member of: Austrian Archeological Institute (1972); German Archeological Institute (1972)
- meetings with academicians from abroad
* congresses, conferences etc.
* lectures (courses) of foreign scholars in Bulgaria
* lectures (courses) of Bulgarian scholars abroad
G. Mihailov – Fellow of the Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton (1977/1978)
Hr. Danov – Courses and lectures at Paris (Sorbonne) and Oxford (1974)
- publishing in other languages
* languages
* publishing houses, periodicals

3. Ideology of the classical studies
a. debates about Classics (in academic circles, media, the view of state and Party elite)
b. histories of classical studies (in Bulgaria and generally)
- general surveys, bibliographies etc.
B. Gerov – The Classical philology in Bulgaria (in German). 5 p. (1960)
G. Mihailov – The Epigraphy in Bulgaria (in French). 6 p. (1971)
- memoirs


IV. Education and studies in general

1. Institutions for education and research
(statistics)
Financing of science: 0.5% of GNP (1960), 1.2% (1965), 2,44 (1974)

a. primary and secondary education
(statistics)
3060 basic schools (I-VII class); 144 gymnasiums (VIII-XI class), 172 full secondary schools (I-XI class); 219 technicums; - 158 004 pupils and 8021 teachers in the high degree (VIII-XI class), 90 778 pupils and 4999 teachers in the technicums (1960/1961)
2812 basic schools; 137 gymnasiums, 127 full secondary schools; 246 technicums, 184 СПТУ; 9 art schools - 102 795 pupils and 6242 teachers in the high degree; 151 017 pupils and 8793 teachers in the technicums, 68 163 pupils and 4836 teachers in СПТУ; 2174 pupils and 434 teachers in the art schools (1969/1970)
- general
At the beginning of the 60s appear the “secondary professional-technical schools” (средни професионално-технически училища, СПТУ). Since 1964 mathematical gymnasiums are opened and since 1968 – sport schools.
The secondary education is obligatory for all (Constitution of 1971, art…). The obligatory basic education (and the pre-school education as well) is organized and secured by the regional and municipal people`s councils. They can select and appoint the teachers in the kindergartens and basic schools. They are responsible for the material conditions in these schools (Regulations for the tasks and functions of the regional and municipal people`s councils, 1969).
Since the beginning of the 70-ties the term of education in the high degree of the secondary polytechnic schools and the technicums becomes 3 years.
Since 1979 – “unified secondary polytechnic school”, USPS (единно средно политехтичесщо училище, ЕСПУ) with two degrees (10+2 years). In the second degree is given a certain professional preparation and the pupils participate in the production (manufacture) system.
- humanities

b. higher education
(statistics)
22 schools of higher education, 61 444 students, 100 000 university graduates (1961/1962).
26 schools of higher education (end of the 60s), 84 467 students (1965/1966) – 103 per 10 000. 70% - in technical, economic and agricultural schools. 160 000 university graduates. 2 000 subjects taught.
25 schools of higher education, 1 Academy for Social Sciences and Civil Administration, 6 High Military Schools, 1 Theological Academy (1975/1976).
Unified Centre for Mathematics and Mechanics (since 1971, created with an order of the Council of Ministers from December 30, 1970). The scholars of the Academy begin to read lectures at the universities and to be elected for members of University Departments (since 1972). Common Plans for Scientific Research of SU and the Academy (since 1973). The procedures of conferring academic and scholarly titles and degrees are performed by the specialized scientific councils at the unified centers (since 1972).
- Sofia University
(statistics)
Nearly 16 000 students in all educational forms (regular, corresponding) (1965), 15 000 (1971-1975), 11 000 (1979)
7 020 Bulgarian and 191 foreign students graduated (1972-1975).
836 regular staff (120 professors, 150 associate professors, 405 assistants, 161 lecturers). 269 part-time staff (27 professors, 15 associate professors). 261 PhD, 41 Doctor of Sciences. Average age – 43.5 years. 758 men, 347 women (mid-70s).
Every year (by the end of the 60s) the University academic staff publishes more than 1000 works (20% abroad).
In the period 1972-1975 387 university manuals and handbooks are published.

* general
Evening education (since 1961).
Scientific and Research Sector (Научно-изследователски сектор, НИС) – a form of “connection of the scientific work with economic problems and social practice” (since the beginning of the 60s; stopped after 1971/72, restored 1978).
The Faculty of Biology, Geology and Geography is divided into Faculty of Biology (specialties biology (8 Departments) and biochemistry with microbiology (3 Departments)) and Faculty of Geology and Geography (1962-1963). In 1963 the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics is separated into three new faculties – Mathematics (with 7 Departments until 1969; later – Mathematics and Mechanics), Physics (8 Departments), Chemistry (7 Departments). Department of Library Studies, Bibliography and Scientific Information (1968).
During the 60s 30% of the staff in the Faculty of Physics obtained their PhD (Candidate) degrees in USSR, 25% made long-period postdoctoral studies there.
Special meeting of the Academic Council of SU (July 1, 1966). Criteria for promotion (a “Candidate” and “Doctor of Sciences” degree is necessary for obtaining the titles of “associate professor” and “professor”).
Student scientific circles, connected with the Departments – 68 with 1019 participants (1960), 88 with 1380 participants (1971); student constructor bureaus at the Faculties of Mathematics and Physics.
Discussions of the Academic Council on the rights of the University in granting scholarly degrees and titles (1971-1972).
In the 9 Unified Centers (since 1972) is included 90% of the “scientific potential of SU”.
Plan for cooperation with the Moskow State University (1973).
From the beginning of the academic 1978/1979 is started the teaching according to new curricula (elaborated in the Departments and approved by the Faculty Councils and the Academic Council).
Rectors: Dimitar Kosev (1962-1968); Pantalei Zarev (1968-1972); Blagovest Sendov (1973-1979); Ilcho Dimitrov (1979-1981).
* humanities
The Department of Modern General History is divided into two parts: Early Modern and Modern General History and, on the other hand, Old and Medieval History (1964). A Department of Psychology is constituted (1964). Arabian Philology (1964). The Faculty of Philology is divided into two: Faculty of Slavic Philology and Faculty of Western Philology (1965). Departments in the Faculty of Western Philology: English, Roman (French and Italian), Spanish (since 1961), German, Classical, Eastern Languages , Methods of Teaching Foreign Languages. At the Faculty of Slavic Philology: Bulgarian, Russian, Polish, Czech, Serbo-Croatian; Department of Journalism (separated from the Faculty of Slavic Philology in 1974, after becomes Faculty); Department of General and Indo-European Linguistics and Department of Theory of Literature (196…).
The Faculty of Philosophy and History is divided into the Faculty of History and Faculty of Philosophy (1972). Faculty of Education and Faculty of Primary and Pre-school Education are created (mid-70s).
Council for Post-Graduate Qualification, presided by a vice-Rector (1971). Center of Qualification of Teachers (1975, branch of SU).

- other universities and schools of higher education
* general
Institute for Foreign Students (1963). School of Higher Education at the Ministry of the Interior (…), Central Trade Union School.
Veliko Turnovo University “Cyril and Methodius” (since…). Higher Pedagogical Institute in Turnovo. Higher Pedagogical Institute in Shumen.
* humanities
c. elsewhere
- Academy of Sciences
* general
* humanities
In April 1972 with a decision of the Council of Ministers is created the United Centre for Study of History and Training of Specialists (Единен център за наука и подготовка на кадри по история) along with another 8 Centers for Science and Training of Specialists with Higher Education (Центрове за наука и подготовка на кадри с висше образование). The Center of History includes the Institute of History, the Institute for Balkan Studies, the Institute of Archeology, the Ethnographic Institute and the Thracology Institute – all of them parts of the Academy. With the same decision is created a separated Faculty of History in the Sofia University.
* Institutes:
The Institute for Bulgarian History is renamed in the early 60-ies in Institute for History.
The Thracology Institute was founded as a new part of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences with a decision of the Council of Ministers from 12.05.1972. His director from the beginning and until 1992 was Prof. Al. Fol.
- associations
d. financing
e. different events (projects, discussions) in (or concerning) the institutions for education and research (fields and way of research and study)
T. Zhivkov criticize the old position of the Party about the existence of a separate Macedonian nation (March 1963)

2. Educational and study policy
a. internal
- legislation
The education is based on the achievements of contemporary science and Marxist-Leninist ideology (Constitution of 1971, art…)
Act for Scholarly Degrees and Titles (197…)
- discussions and decisions of Government and Party leadership
Decree of the CC of the BCP and the Council of Ministers for “Further Development of Bulgarian Science and Increasing of its Role in the Socialist Conctruction” (1960).
The Political Bureau of the CC took decision “for improving the teaching and study of ideological subjects in schools of higher education” (January 1966) (История на Софийския Университет. SU Press, 1988. p. 320)
Decision of IX Congress of BCP for “introduction of computing technologies in different branches of people`s economy” (1966).
Discussion of “the problems of the reform and further development of education” on the Plenum of the CC of the BCP (July 30-31, 1969)(!) (About the significance of the Plenum for the higher education see University of Sofia “St Kliment Ohridski”. The first 120 years. “St Kliment Ohridski” UP, 2008. p. 191-195. According to Popov and Pironkova (Николай Попов, Мария Пиронкова. Образователната система в България. С., 2007) the decisions are labeled “basic principles of the reform of educational system in PR of Bulgaria” (p. 72). At the same place they say that “the educational system after the Act of 1959 is ruled not through laws, but through party documents – decisions of the Plenums of CC of BCP” (p. 72, 74 ))
Plenum of the CC of the BCP on the “problems of science and higher education” (September 1971).
Decree 153 of the Council of Ministers (April 21, 1972) on the integration of science and higher education.
Plenum of the CC of the BCP on the scholarly Unified Centres (the integration of SU and the Academy) (1972) (!)
Decision of the PB of the CC and of the Bureau of the Council of Ministers (July 11, 1978 - the term of education at the universities becomes 5 years) and November 11, 1978 (the nomenclature and the characteristics of the university specialties are approbated) (See Университетът. SU Press, 1999. p. 315).
On a session of the Presidency of the Committee of Culture on 30 May 1978, presided by L. Zhivkova, is adopted the proposed with a reporting paper by the first vice-President of the Committee Prof. d-r Al. Fol “Structure of the National Scientific and Methodic Center for Training and Qualification of Cadres for Ancient Languages and Cultures ”(!) (Central State Archive (ЦДА), ф. 405, оп. 9, а. е. 206, л. 1-17. Report and decision of the session of the Presidency of the CC, 30 May 1978 г. Cited in Еленков. Неосъщественият…)
Plenum of the CC of the BCP (July 1979), where are adopted “Thesises for Development of the Educational Work in PR of Bulgaria” (For a comment see Попов, Пиронкова, p. 72-76. Also Университетът, p. 315).

- coordinating and controlling structures, different from the Ministry of Education
Every year 1/5 of the High Attestation Commission members are newly elected (University of Sofia…, p. 176).
The State Committee of Science and Technical Progress (end of 1962).
“Science and Education” section of the CC of the BCP.
9 Unified Centres (10 faculties of SU and 32 institutes, 13 laboratories and 2 independent sections of the Academy) (Университетът, p. 305). Not the University, but the specialized scientific counsels of the Unified Centre already have the authority to award university degrees (since 1972).
Committee of Culture (L. Zhivkova (the first Chairperson of the Committee) had around her a group of intellectuals, most of whom occupied important positions at state institutions, responsible for the education and the cultural politics in Bulgaria. It seems, that especially influential for the decisions concerning classical education was prof. Fol. For the activity of the circle regarding the general cultural policy some information could be found at the book of Iv. Elenkov Културният фронт… 2009).
- Ministry of Education (autonomy in decision-taking, individual role of some ministers )
Ministers: G. Ganev (1962-1968); St Vasilev (1968-1973); N. Stanev (1973-1977); D. Valcheva (1977-1979); Al. Fol (1979-1986)
- “movements”, awards
Movement for “Technical and Scientific Creation of the Youth” (since the second half of the 60s).
Introduction of the system of summer and autumn brigades in help of the agriculture (since the end of the 60s).
Dimitrov Prize – new regulations. The financial part – 60 000 lv. (5 times the average annual salary) (1960).

- instruments of promoting the Party`s ideology in the education (higher)
* ideological subjects (specialties, departments), schools
(statistics)
From 250 members of the staff, teaching ideological subjects at SU, 9 were professors, 27 associate professors, 1 doctor of Sciences, 65 PhD (148 with no degree)
The subject Scientific Communism is introduced in Sofia University (since 1962 or 1966?).
In 1959/1960 the Department of Foundations of Marxism-Leninism is transformed into the Department of History of the Communist Party of the USSR (in 1967 – Department of Scientific Communism). Department of History of USSR (…?)
Scientific Communism, Philosophy, Political Economy, History of the BCP became obligatory for all schools of higher education. History of the Communist Party of the USSR – obligatory for the students of History in SU, in Higher Pedagogical Institute in Turnovo, in the Political Faculty of the Military Academy “G.S. Rakovski” (since 1966).
In May 1974 the Rector Council adopts program for teaching of ideological disciplines until 1980.
Faculty for Preparation of Lecturers and Propagandists (SU, 1976). Laboratory for Investigation of Personality Development of Students and of Communist Upbringing of Young People (SU, 1976). University Methodical Center for Ideological Sciences (1979?).
Evening Party University (at SU) with four Faculties: Marxist-Leninist Philosophy, Actual Problems of Marxism and Leninism, Political Economy, Aesthetics (70s?).
Higher Party School (…?).
* Communist Party structures
Conference of the Party Committee of the University with theme: “The Class and Party Approach in the Selection, Promotion and Upbringing of the Cadres” (April, 1968)
Plenum of the PC of the University (March 1975) declares measures for raising the methodological qualification of the teachers in the ideological disciplines.
- conflicts and repressions, concerning (higher) educational and studies
Zh. Zhelev (the future President of the Republic) is expelled from the Party for criticizing Lenin`s definition of matter (1965). Sanctions against the assistants of philosophy Ivan Slavov and Asen Ignatov (1968).
Three students in history are sentenced to prison for protesting against the military actions in Czechoslovakia (1968)
Prof. R. Likova is prohibited temporarily from teaching because of positive review about works of a dissident writer (G. Markov) (April 1972 with a decision of the Academic Council).

b. external
- events
Summer Seminar for Bulgarian Language and Literature for Foreign Scholars of Bulgarian and Slavic Studies (since 1963).
First Regional Congress on Balkan Studies in Sofia (August 26-September 1, 1966 ) (T. Zhivkov, R. Maellot - Director General of UNESCO were present) (intention of promoting Bulgaria as centre of the studies on the region)

3. Ideology of the education
a. researches on education (published in the period)
b. principles and aims of education (constitution, laws, Party documents)


V. Political situation

1. Political system
Bulgaria is a socialist state of the people from towns and villages led by the working class. The BCP is the guiding force (Constitution of 1971, art…). The system is called “developed socialism”.
a. legislation
Constitution, adopted on May 18, 1971.
b. discussions and decisions of Government and Party leadership
Plenum of the CC on ideological issues (spring 1962). VIII (November 1962), IX (1966), X (April 1971), XI congress of BCP (March-April 1976)
c. structure
d. principles

2. Governments

3. Party leadership

4. State policy
a. internal
b. external
The cooperation and mutual assistance with USSR is guiding principle of external policy (Constitution of 1971, preamble)

5. Events (projects, discussions), which probably influenced the state policy and the political system
a. internal
Unsuccessful preparation of coup d'etat against T. Zhivkov (1965)
b. external
Berlin (1958-1962) and Caribbean (October 1962) crises. L. Brezhnev becomes leader of USSR after Khrushchev (1964). China`s first nuclear weapon`s test on October 16, 1964. Events in Czechoslovakia (March-August 1968)

VІ. Geopolitical and geo-historical debates

- in the 60s and early 70s the possibility of joining USSR was not excluded
- ethnicity of the population in medieval Bulgaria; status of the lands of contemporary Bulgaria at the time of first invasion (VII c.)

VII. Religious situation

1. Bulgarian Orthodox Church

On 25 July 1971 the Metropolitan of Lovech Maxim is elected for Patriarch of Bulgaria (eparchies, parishes)
2. other Christian denominations
Status of Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant societies
3. other religions
Muslims and Jews
4. Events (projects, discussions), which probably influenced the religious situation
At the third assembly of the World Council of Churches (WCC) in India in 1961 the BOCh was accepted as a member (BOCh left the organization in 1998).

Addendum

Detailed CVs of alive classicists
CV (until end-seventies) of the classicists, scholars and public figures, who influenced directly or indirectly the classical studies. With book-titles and terms in the original language.


***


This text was discussed at the Focus Group Fellow Seminar Classical education and classical studies in Bulgaria - The period of 1959-1979
at Collegium Budapest - June 3, 2010

Classical Studies in Bulgaria 1945-1995: Methodological Questions

І . Starting conditions (February 1938 - December 1943)

(According to the amendments of the Education Act from 11.02. 1938 the gymnasiums could be only classical and “real” (to have classical and “real” sections, without the form of semi-classical).
In December 1943 began the first heavy air-raids of American and British aviation against Sofia)

Department of Classical Philology at Sofia University - 2 professors (Greek and Latin philology), 1 extraordinary professor and 1 assoc. professor, and 2 assistants (Greek and Latin philology) (15-20 students for year); maybe part-time lecturers for languages
Other Departments - 2 professors (1 full, 1 associate) in ancient history, 2 professors (1 full, 1 associate) in classical archeology
SU - 7 faculties, 306 teaching staff, 5 184 students (1938)
5 schools of higher education, about 10 000 students (1939). 8 schools of higher education
with 25 180 enrolled students in 1944/1945
1 assoc. prof. in ancient history in the Bulgarian University at Scopje.
(All 5 full professors were graduates of German universities (Leipzig, Jena, Freiburg, Gottingen); the docents and assistants graduated (with 1 exception) in Sofia)
Researchers in museums (number?); teachers in secondary education (several decades – in the classical sections of the gymnasiums)
26 full secondary schools (gymnasiums) – 11 male (real and classical), 6 female, 9 pedagogical (5 male, 4 female) (1906/1907); 40 full secondary schools (1911/1912; On 9 Sept. 1944 - 135 full secondary schools (14 in Sofia).
Association of the Friends of Classical Culture in Bulgaria (since 1930)
Journal for classical culture “Prometheus” (1937-1943, 6 booklets yearly)

Translations of ancient authors (titles) - 1879-1918 – 129 (3.3 for year); 1919-1944 – 157 (6,3 for year)

Population of Bulgaria - 3 154 375 (1887), 7 029 349 (1946)


II. Development

1. 1944-1959

Department of Classical Philology – 8 persons teaching staff (1 woman)
Other Departments - 5 persons teaching staff at least (0 women)
ideological subjects (specialties, departments), schools (since 1948 – official ideologisation of higher education)
SU – 10 faculties, 5-years term of study; 6 806 students (5 014 regular, the other - correspondent) (1954/1955)
Academy of Sciences with Institutes for Archeology, Bulgarian History – 8 researches with classical background at least (2 w)
no classics in secondary education (private foreign schools are closed; since 1950 - gymnasiums with teaching of Russian, English, French and German languages)

Political assessment of all University teaching staff. On 3 November 1944 the Bill for lustration of persons, accused for fascist activity, is published. It provided administrative (definitive or temporary) firing for persons, whose fascist activity is proved.
30 academics lost positions (6 from the Faculty of History and Philology) permanently, 27 temporarily (Nov. 22, 1944 – Jan. 1945); 80 academics from all higher education institutions and 495 teachers from the lower schools were fired. Altogether 1378 students expelled (beginning 1949); almost 500 expelled in autumn 1956 - their students rights were restored in 1957-1958.
5 professors, ministers during the War, were sentenced to death (2 of them in absentia)

Education, based on Marxism-Leninism (Bill of H.Ed., 1947).

Population - 7 613 709 (1956)

Translations of ancient authors (titles) - 16 (1,1 for year)


2. 1959-1979

Department of Classical Philology – 8 persons teaching staff (3 w)
Other Departments - 7 persons teaching staff at least (1 w)
SU - 836 permanent teaching staff (120 professors, 150 associate professors, 405 assistants, 161 lecturers) and 269 part-time staff (3 times more than 1938).
Average age – 43.5 years; 758 men, 347 w (mid-70s.)
25 schools of higher education + 1 Academy for Social Sciences and Civil Administration, 6 High Military Schools, 1 Theological Academy (1975/1976) (3 times more than 1943)
Academy of Sciences with Institutes for Archeology, Bulgarian History, Balkan studies, Thracology – 5 researches at least (2 w)

gymnasiums (the NGDEK) - 7 teachers at least (2 w)
The National Gymnasium for Ancient Languages and Cultures was opened in the autumn of 1977 (admission of around 80 pupils (40b/40g) for year, 90% finish successfully)
137 gymnasiums, 127 full secondary schools (different from the gymnasiums); 246 technicums, 184 СПТУ; 9 art schools (1969/1970) (5 times more than 1943)

“The education is based on the achievements of contemporary science and Marxist-Leninist ideology” (Constitution of 1971)
Plenums with Decrees and Decisions of the CC of the BCP for “Development of the Education and Science”.
250 from the 1105 teachers in SU teach ideological subjects

Translations of ancient authors (titles) - 25 (1,3 for year)

Population - 8 727 771 (1975)
(Between 1887 and 1975 the population was increasing with nearly 62 000 for year)

3. 1979-1995

Department of Classical Philology – 12 persons teaching staff (7 w)
Other Departments - 8 persons teaching staff at least (3 w)
other universities - 3 persons teaching staff at least (2 w)
Academy of Sciences with Institutes for Archeology, Balkan studies, Thracology, Philosophy, Cyril and Methodius` Studies - 5 researches at least (4 w)
30 schools of higher education with 14 409 teachers and 101 507 students (1985/1986) (10 times more students than 1939); 31 611 scientists and teaching staff
SU - 15 561 students (10% of them foreign); 1627 teaching staff (37 % associate professors and professors) (1988). 23 233 students (18 360 financed by the state). 1295 foreign students from 48 countries (end of 1995)
gymnasiums (the NGDEK) - 13 teachers at least (8 w)

Reduction in the teaching load of the staff by 30% (decree of the Government, end of 1984).
Abolition of the ideological subjects (Marxism, Scientific Communism, History of the BCP, Political Economy – December, 1989)
Bill for the autonomy of the universities (January 1990)
Students declare the elections from July 11, 1990 “not fair” and occupy the central building of the University (until July 9). Second occupation (Nov. 5 – Dec. 17, 1990). Third occupation (Nov. 1993 – March 1994).

Translations of ancient authors (titles) - 62 (44 before 1989 – 4,4 for year; 18 after – 3.0 for year)

Population - 8 992 000 (1989) – 28% increase from 1946; 8 384 700 in 1995 and 7 563 710 in 2010 (16 % decrease from 1989)
Around 800 000 emigrated between 1990 and 2005; 53.4 % of the new-born children in 2009 were born out of wedlock (in comparison with 12,4 % in 1990)
(it is possible to conclude that Bulgaria as a whole did not benefit from the change in 1989)

Conclusions:

* Continuous growing of number of permanent work-places for classicists in SU and appearance of jobs in the Academy and other universities (from 11 in 1943 to 28 in 1995) (numbers are approximate)
* Abolishment of classical education in secondary schools in the mid-1940s; restoration after 30 years (Sofia-based)
* Abrupt break of classical researches after WW II; very slow growing until 1977; fast development until 1989; considerable retardation after that (number of translations as criterion).
* Feminisation of higher classical education and studies (seems irreversible) (The increase of the women`s share in all academic/research staff with classical background goes like that: 0% (1943), 14% (1959), 30% (1979), 57% (1995); only in the Dept. of Classical philology at SU - 64% (2010)
* Open (officially introduced and regulated by state) marxist-leninist ideologisation of humanities during 42 years (1947-1989). It is unclear how to judge the negative and positive effects on the education and society.
* Dramatic increase of the number of secondary and higher educational institutions, teaching staff, students – 200-900% (3-10 times) between 1939 and 1989.
* Severe demographic and social crisis after 1989. After an increase of population with nearly 30 % for 40 years, there is decrease with nearly 15 % for 20 years (and continues to decrease).

III. The question of basic premises and limitations in conceiving what happened

1. Limitations

a. typical for the collegium of classicists

- limited experience in historical research (especially in modern/recent history) (Methods; working in archives, interviewing people)
- limited or no experience in political debates (also: widespread lack of articulated and reasonably founded personal political convictions (different from usual patriotic, cosmopolitan, leftist or rightists feelings)
- unsufficient orientation in the problems of modern history and of contemporary social and political situation

b. other

- decrease of number of people, having personal experience of the period (inevitable) (personal experience hinders gross ideologisation of historical events)

2. Premises

a. about classical studies

- the situation of classical studies all over the world

i. autonomy of classics
(Are classics a autonomous discipline like psychology or linguistics? Or they are a temporally/geographically and culturally confined section of history like “medieval studies”? Or helping and technical discipline in the way archival science is? Or a sine qua non like anesthesiology for surgery? That are questions about the place of classics in the system of humanities)

ii. “classics” is West-European discipline.
(No concept of classics (not to speak about Roman classics) in Byzantium. Classics began as a Latin-based study of pre-Christian literature. They gave ground for a secular (religiously independent) humanitarian education, unknown in Orthodox East before XVIII c.)
The role of German conception for classics. “Full classics”. The completely educated classicist – “a perfect European”
(German neo-humanists of the XIX c. lived in a non-catholic and non-Romance language society. They saw classics as fundamental European humanitarian education based equally on Latin (Roman) and Greek pre-Christian traditions and regarded this education as potentially normative for all humanity. In this way they were preparing the image of Germany as a possible cultural and political unifier of the West and the East of Europe, following the example of the bilingual and Greek-educated Empire of ancient Rome and pretending, with much better chances for success, for global leadership. Despite the greatness of this project, it had little to tell to the public in countries like Bulgaria, whose ambitions were incomparably smaller; and where this model of Classics was introduced from abroad, together with the whole system of University higher education. Unexpectedly, the German model found a ground in the old and vital concern of Orthodox Bulgaria to stay at almost equal ecclesiastical distance between Roman Catholics and the Greek Patriarch in Constantinople).

iii. decline of Europe as basis of states-superpowers. Classics in the age of post-colonialism
(Classics with their eurocentrism are now excluded as possible ground for global humanitarian education. In USA the classical languages were far less popular than in Europe even before WW I. After WW II classics are already a discipline of local (strictly academic, maybe commercial) interest, analogical to Egyptology, Mesopotamian Studies, Aztec and Maya studies, Comparative Mythology, Astrology, History of Magic and Superstition, Extraterrestrial Intellect and others. Although having their place in academic curricula, classics are conceived by the broader public more and more as a kind of innocent private hobby. Even academics are not far from such an estimation of the role of their discipline. Hence the unhealthy atmosphere in some departments, characterized with an attitude to the work what I call with regret “infantilisation of classical studies”)

b. (former) communist countries

- different local (cultural, geopolitical etc.) context in the countries under investigation

i. old differences
(linguistic: Slavic-other; geopolitical: west-oriented/dominated – Russia-oriented/dominated; religious: catholic-protestant-orthodox)

ii. how can they be politically together?
Today Central, East- and South-East Europe is a constellation of national states emerged in the last 200 years as result of the rivalry of central Europe/west Europe/USA versus Russia. This rivalry contributed to the successive disintegration (sometimes to the appearance as well) of several large states as: Ottoman Empire, Austro-Hungary, Germany (temporary), Soviet Union, Yugoslavia.
Europe, after being temporary divided in Moskow-controlled and USA-controlled areas (that is the so-called communist period, 1945-1989) developed geopolitically after 1989 as a USA-supported (or controlled) federation (EU). In the time to come this project depends almost entirely on the steadiness of USA world-leading role.

- how to discuss communism?

i. possibility of moral judgement. (Principle of right moral judgement- “look first at yourself”)
(It is preferable for the historian to condemn rather ideas/attitudes than persons. There are people, who were adult in the considered times, but speak so as if they had lived somewhere else. The younger, who blame the conformism of their fathers without seeing anything wrong today and around themselves, could be suspected in conformism as well)

ii. past and contemporary communism
(The opinion that the communism as a political practice already belongs to the past, became widespread after 1989. That is true only for the Soviet version of communism. In fact, nearly 20% of world population lives today in communist states (because of the PR of China, a communist state and candidate for world-leadership), meanwhile the population of USA and EU together does not exceed 12% of world population)

iii. alternatives of communism. Conceiving contemporaneity
(How to name the contemporary political regime in the former soviet-communist countries, and moreover, in Europe and the “West”? The word “democracy” covers fundamental differences. Do we have one and the same regime in Kosovo, Czech Republic and Russia? How similar are the political systems of Switzerland, Bulgaria, EU and USA?)

c. more general

- the question of historical truth

i. necessity of a general view to history and human nature
(Even if somebody had passed much of his/her life in a communist country he cannot evaluate this reality without conception of today`s political and ideological situation. Everybody would have preferred the better accounts/explanations than the worse. But “better” - when said about a statement - means “true”. The proposal for gathering many different accounts/explanations and just leaving them to exist together is satisfactory only in case we are not interested in truth.
The communism is a global secular movement, relying on the imposed material equality and demanding abstention from unnecessary consummation. It pretended to have understood the principles of human life (biological, social and spiritual) and hopes to offer security for the majority and justice for all.
Many people, including honest scientists and intellectuals believe in these dogmas because of the “technological fallacy”. They suppose that if man is able to control a machine, more powerful than him, he should be able control himself too. If humanity is able to construct radio, airplane, rockets, atomic bomb, it should be able to construct a just society as well)

- the Evil

**

This text was discussed at the Conference
Gnothi Seauthon - Classics and Communism
The History of the Studies on Antiquity in the Context
of the Local Classical Tradition of the Socialist
Countries (1944/45-1989/90).
supported by the Fritz Thyssen Foundation
Collegium Budapest - June 24-26, 2010

Demosthenes and the Unity of the Greeks II

Philip II

(continues from Friday, April 27)

III. The failure of Athens

Demosthenes himself seems to hold the opinion that Athens is already decaying as political and military force and therefore doesn't possess good potential for struggle against Macedonia. Besides, the mood in the different speeches is different: prior to the entrance of Philip in Phocis and even before the capture of Olynthus, Philip seems threatening, but still fightable. But after his march to the south of Thermopylae it becomes clear, that the capacities of Athenians to confront him are suspicious, and, what is worse, that the peace seems hardly negotiable.
It already clear that Philip doesn't want a lasting peace with anybody, whereas the Greek states, including the Athenians, have deluded themselves that he is offering them peace. That’s why the mood from the First Philippics onwards becomes more pessimistic, although Demosthenes keeps on speaking about the necessity of resistance and points to the proper measures to be undertaken. However, his attention splits: on the one side he speaks about the coordinate actions between the cities and the organization of the resistance, but on the other he is more frequently ruminating on the topic: “Why this happened?”
A step aside. Today Europe is not threatened either by an over-ambitious conqueror as Philip, or even by the Islamist terrorism, but rather by the fear, that “the things are not going as earlier”. Indeed, it is slightly believable that peoples will become richer and richer, and this will go on endlessly. Always comes a moment, when their wealth and even their culture begin to raise the interest of the neighbors. Then comes the time to act. And Europe really acts through its present day leaders, but some of the effects lead to undesirable changes (people do not merely get richer; sometimes other things happen) and the discontent appears. It is this discontent, caused by the fear, that is the real enemy of Europe today. And due to the fact that today it seems quite strong, the politicians and the troubled citizens, just like Demosthenes, ask themselves both the questions: not only “What is to be done?” but also “Why it happened like that?” And if the asking of the latter question becomes more and more frequent, this will be a sign that the situation worsens.
Demosthenes sees the following causes for the weakness of Athens. First of all, paradoxically, the democracy with its procedures impedes the necessary reaction of the state in critical circumstances. Unlike the Athenian politicians, Philip of Macedon takes all the decisions by himself: he commands the army, he presides the negotiations (if not he in person, the messengers lead them instead of him; these people would never dare to work in favour of another Macedonian, opponent to Philip); he allocates the money and is unaccountable to anyone. No one can sue against him; no one can interrupt him after speaking for a certain time at the assembly; his proposals are not subjected to a vote, because he is not making proposals, he just commands. All this still does not mean that Demosthenes is complaining of the democracy. But he says, that there are moments, when the city should behave as one, and not only the city, but also all Greeks. If this does not happen, the democracy the independence itself, which cause such delays in the communal decision-making, will be destroyed.
The second problem is the corruption. There are Athenian politicians, Demosthenes says, who are simply working for Philip; the are paid, or at least something is promised to them, or they are just hoping to gain power over the city, after the loss of its independence. However, no one can prove their guiltiness indisputably and condemn them. And the people do not worry about their deeds, because they, unlike Demosthenes, assure the citizens, that everything is in order, that the city is powerful enough, and Philip is harmless; or even that he is already an ally.
And finally, the mere laziness of the Athenians is a problem and it is caused by the irresponsible redistribution of the money of the state. The Athenians are accustomed to many feasts, and moreover they are visited by many foreigners. The mere presence of the Athenian people as audience at these feasts is paid by the state treasury and no one can offer these money to be spent on something else – for example on shipbuilding. Shortly, the Athenians are convinced that they live better than the rest of the Greeks and they are reluctant to be deprived from this social acquisition. That’s why they think the situation is not that serious, as described by Demosthenes. Such a city seems sentenced to loose its political significance and precisely this had happened. In the centuries that followed the polises had made several attempts to gain independence – either from Macedonia, or from Rome – but Athens didn’t take part in these developments, and the center of resistance had moved to the south - to Corinth and the Peloponnesian cities.

IV. The unity of the Greeks

/follows/

(Philip II of Macedon: victory medal (niketerion) struck in Tarsus, c. 2nd BCE. Cabinet des Médailles, Paris. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, English - "Demosthenes")

The EU Constitution and the Greek Political Thought

(with some remarks on Plato)


I. What is the sense in this topic?

1. The European constitution and the Athenian democracy

The text of the first European constitution has been signed from the heads of the 25 member countries in June 2004 (1). At the end of 2004 it has been ratified firstly by Lithuania and since then the process of the ratification is going on in Europe - either by the parliaments, or via referenda.
The constitution begins with a short preamble, expressing the political will of these countries to establish a union with an uniform legislature and pointing to some of the reasons for the creation of this union. The preamble itself starts with a motto - a phrase by Thucydides (II, 37), which says: "Our constitution is called democracy because the power is in the hands not of a minority, but of the whole people". (2)
The mere choice of this motto will mean, that the contemporary European Union will look for its ancestor in the Athenian democracy (or in the community of the Greek states in the pre-Hellenistic epoch). It looks like declaration for participation in a tradition in the same manner, as the usage of elements from the ancient temple architecture in countless European buildings from the Renaissance till the present day. This is also declaration for participation in a certain tradition. The motto may serve as occasion for a discussion of the relation between this contemporary political project (in which we also participate as citizens of countries, connected in various degrees with the EU) and the Greek political theory and practice. Anyway, if we want to approach this topic from its very beginning, we will have to say a few words about the more general grounds for the thinking of a connection between Europe and ancient Greece. It couldn`t be a case, when we have just one name - the fact, that some Greeks had said: we are in Europe.
To begin with, every political or cultural project needs a paradigm - either a contemporary one, which could be imported from somewhere, or a traditional one, which yet had been documented somehow, or one, invented as purely intellectual undertaking. Europe has the confidence of a place with traditions and is still remembering the time, when it had been the leader of the world. It is still a leader in some respects - for example, the number of states with high living standard (see HDR 2005 of the UN). This means that it wouldn`t accept to import external paradigms or that it wouldn`t agree, that it is doing this. Here we will already find a sure resemblance with Greece, and particularly with Athens. The whole phrase by Thucydides, from which has been excerpted the text, quoted above, says: "Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighbouring states; we are rather a pattern to others than imitators ourselves. Its administration favours the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democracy (translated by Richard Crawley). (3)
On the other hand, its political experience from the past 200 years is reasonable enough, the continent to be intimidated by a purely speculative political project. What is left is to face the tradition.

2. Greece as a political paradigm

But why Greece can be a political paradigm?
It is sometimes said, that the culture of Europe - this is the antiquity and the Christianity. However, the church shouldn`t propose political projects. Its task is different, as every ecclesiastic would agree: it is not occupied with the changes in this world, because of the fact, that the state, which is in the thoughts of every Christian as such, is not from "this world". Hence, the paradigm might come from Rome and its immediate continuation to the East - Constantinople. Such attempts had been made, but nowadays Europe - the one after the Second World War and after the Cold War - is longing to be democratic and non-imperial; whereas Rome had acted imperialistically even in the times, when it had still been democratic. Therefore, what remains is classical Greece.
What is there in Greece, besides democracy, with which it can boast (not only in Thucydides, but before him in Herodotus, and after that in Demosthenes)? What is the reason Europe in the XX and the XXI century to seek a connection with it? Here we reach to a point, whence we get immediately in a heated debate in the Union today. According to the Greek authors from the epoch, Europe (with the community of the Greek polises as its leader) is not-Asia; it doesn`t spread far beyond the Aegean, and even less beyond the Mediterranean sea, although, on the other hand, it wishes to settle on their east costs and thus to posses them as internal boundaries. Today the adversaries of the expansion should speak of the �natural boundaries� of Europe. Still, even in the Greek fifth century Europe had had something as natural boundaries - the utmost point, reachable by sea.
Secondly, the beginning of the historical and cultural documentation is in Greece; later on it had been accessible to every educated European. This means that the Greeks had been unable to quote a single author earlier than Homer, but all the Europeans after that were able to read Homer, and the later authors, who know him, as well. A written monument from a non-Greek (or non-European) origin becomes accessible for the participants in this tradition only in the III century B.C. - the translation of the 70-ies.
Hence, if the European wants to distinct oneself from the Christian or the Jewish tradition (and there are different reasons for that), the earliest important text, which could be reached by him, will be Homer. In this case, the beginning of the tradition, creating through the centuries a community of people, reading and thinking with words, and referring to common texts, will be in Greece.
Lastly, there is a third reason, approached by us in the upper lines. There is nothing in Greece, which to resemble a church, and to unite the people with common theses (the Credo of the faith, for example) regarding the question what they are. Obviously, the church would like to unite all the people around certain theses, because it claims, that they are the truth. But in the mundane Europe the political influence of the church (or the churches) is explicitly limited. No one is expected to confess one or another religion, or whatever faith. The situation in Greece is similar - it is secular.
In conclusion, it seems plausible to say, that Europe is referring to Greece upon necessity (thence, with the exception of the Bible, come the oldest texts, read by every generation), or because it finds there what it wants to be (democratic, mundane), yet remaining culturally and spatially confined (non-Asian). It might occur to someone that the limit could be put to the West, as well, and this also had been invented in Greece - Europe would like to be non-American, just like Plato had fancied Greece as non-Atlantic.

Nevertheless, we should keep in mind, that:

a. Greece, although standing in the tradition, does not offer Europe only one tradition (because in Greece there is not only democracy and tolerance, but also enough of tyranny, oligarchy, and also xeno- (barbaro-) phobia and all kind of discrimination); nor it is the only beginning of the European tradition (the Jewish-Christian is older).
b. Also it is not clear whence comes the obligation by all means to begin with the oldest in the incessant tradition (there is no general agreement to think, that we are or that we ought to be what we had been in the initial times).


II. What kind of Europe is suggested in the project for the European Constitution

1. The reasons for the appearance of the Constitution

Now, we have to say something about the causes, which lead to the idea of the EU and for its successful (for the time being) 50-years long development.
I would like to dwell on one of them: this is the shared desire of the most and the more powerful states (supported, obviously, by the societies, whose states they are) to handle with political means the great political uncertainty, which is going on in Europe for more than 200 years. This uncertainty is derived, firstly, from a disputation as old as Europe itself: how to discover and how to reach the just social order? And secondly, it is derived from another dispute, the solution of which is no easier: which are the European communities, which have to posses their own states; which are the nations?
During the last 200-220 years Europe has survived the following kinds of collisions: civil wars aiming at the change (or the preservation) of the political establishment; wars between the states; collapse of the states and appearance of new states; dictatorships and totalitarian regimes; genocides. I have in mind mainly: the French revolution and the Napoleon`s wars; the shaping out of big states as Germany and Italy; the dissolution of the Ottoman empire and the appearance of many small independent states on the Balkans; the Soviet revolution. And still: the two world wars and, besides them, the emergence of totalitarian, dictator`s or simply non-democratic regimes in Italy, Spain, Germany, the Soviet Union; the deletion of million Armenians and Jews in the beginning and in the middle of the century by the Turkish and the German rulers (respectively); the deletion of million of Soviet citizens by their own government; the division of Germany; the creation and the dissolution of the Soviet Union; the creation and the disintegration of Yugoslavia.
The initiative for the creation of the European Union, which now reaches the attempt to establish, via the constitution, a union, resembling a state, aims at the counteracting to this rather prolonged, tragic and at first glance desperate tendency. Someone might dislike the comparison, but the situation in Europe during these two centuries differs slightly from the situation in the Near East during the second half of the XX century. Even if it differs, I wouldn`t dare to claim, that the comparison would be in favour of the Europeans. For all these things, which I tried to remind you with a few words, there is an allusion in the preamble of the constitution with the very reserved expression "bitter experiences". (4)
This is the task of the EU, which is now aimed at through the constitution - to stop the process of the fall and emergence of states and to announce the solution of the question, "which one is the better political/social order".

(follows)

(1) This text was read at the symposium "Rights and Values in Expanding Europe: A Mutual Enrichment through Different Traditions", June 3-4, 2006, organized by the Italian Cultural Institute in Sofia, Goethe Institute, Institute for Axiological Research - Vienna, Sofia University - Graduate Programme in Philosophy Taught in English.

(2) Here I quote the text and its translation in the way they are written in the constitution. The Greek text is: ...

(3) ...

(4) See the "Preamble".

Demosthenes and the Unity of the Greeks

(An essay on the Demosthenes` political speeches)


"United in diversity"
(motto of the EU, according to the first European Constitution)


The purpose of this text (1) is, first of all to examine the question: to what extent were the Greeks unified as a community in the second half of the IV century B.C., and what kind of unity was that? However, on the other hand, what I am going to say will by all means refer to the present situation in Europe. The past two weeks have revealed quite clearly, that the Europeans are not sure they want to live in one state, or in a union resembling a state.
This has caused concern in those among them, who for the last 50 years have believed that the existence of such a state will be for the good and who have devoted their efforts for its creation, or who have merely hoped it to appear. The concern is no less for those who, for the time being, live outside the political boundaries of what is going to become such a state, but who wish to be part of it. It has become clear now that many citizens of European countries who have cooperated, agreed with, or at least tolerated the establishment of this state already declare they are not going to cooperate or even endure it any more. It is not easy to say what will happen. Let us assume that the question now is: how united can Europe be? And further on: how big can Europe be and still remain united? And lastly: can Europe not be united to the extent presumed in the Constitution, and also to the present-day extent, and nevertheless remain peaceful and free? By virtue of my profession, and also out of necessity – since this is the part from human history I have dealt mostly with - I will make an attempt to consider these issues with the help of what happened in Greece at the end of the epoch of the free city states. For during the 4th century B. C. and earlier as well, Greece encountered difficulties with its unity. It was sometimes willing to be united, but never – apart from some rare occasions, for a short time and only partially – did it achieve that. So, I am going to look at these difficulties, which seem to me not quite different from the ones we encounter today, and I am going to do this with the help of what Demosthenes stated in his speeches.


I. Demosthenes’ s cause

Demosthenes is known mainly for his speeches against Philip of Macedon, or, more particularly, for his speeches arguing for the necessity of an active and unified Greek resistance against Philip, who by that time seemed quite ambitious and unlikely to be satisfied solely with the conquering of south Thrace and north Greece up to Thessalia. But from his earlier political speeches it is evident that he would embrace such a cause on another occasion as well. In his “On the symmoriai” (On the Navy-Boards) the subject is the need for intensified military preparations against the Persian threat, and in his “On the Liberty of the Rhodians” he pleaded for immediate military intervention in Rhodes, where democracy had to be re-established and the local oligarchs – removed, since they were dependent on Artemisia, the queen of Caria (the widow of the famous Mausol). These speeches reveal that Demosthenes took the following position as a politician.
The Greek cities, according to him, each by itself and as a whole, were threatened by a barbarian invasion. The dangers from the barbarian invasion seemed to lay not so much in the damages, accompanying each war (because the Greeks themselves used to cause enough such damages to one another), as in the fact that it inevitably, and maybe permanently, destroyed liberty. Since barbarians were not familiar with democracy, they were always under monarchy rule, which was equal to tyranny. (Demosthenes did not use the distinction ‘tyrant – king’ employed by almost all influential political thinkers, including Aristotle). But, on the other hand, even if some Greeks did not deem monarchy or oligarchy unacceptable (and there were such people), they should be worried by the threat of the barbarian as a non-Greek – that is someone who could commit all kinds of crime, anything. The Greeks were unable to handle separately with the pressure of the strong barbarian states, and therefore they needed union. That union should have an initiator, who should at the same time possess the potential of being a leader. And there was Athens, strong enough as a city to be a leader. Moreover, it had already been one. And something more. Athens, being a democratic city-state, could guarantee the freedom of all Greeks even if accepted as the only leader, because it never supported tyrants and oligarchs, but offered its opposition – the self-governing, i.e. democracy.
So, Demosthenes is the spokesman of those Athenians who see the future of their city as a leader of all Greeks in the face of a serious and incessant threat. The unity he is advocating is a “must” if the Greeks want to evade the yoke at all. Otherwise, there is no necessity for them to be united, because nowhere in his speeches he mentions that peace and welfare are satisfactory ends in themselves.


II. The balance of the powers

When speaking about Athens as a leader and initiator of the Greek union, Demosthenes refers to something as a tradition in the Greek history during the previous 140-150 years. This is the tradition of the unions electing the cities, which become “patrons of the Greeks”. Prior to the Persian offensive against the European Greeks the polises had been disunited, they hadn’t established great unions and they lead regular, although insignificant wars against each other. Moreover they had been over-occupied with their internal warfare, which had impeded the consistent diplomatic activity and made all unions and pacts unreliable. It could be assumed, that for the first time the Greeks began to consider a union during the Ionian revolt (499-494 B.C.) against Persia, which was reigning over the Greeks inhabiting the coast of Asia Minor through city-monarchs (tyrants), controlled by the Persian king. This union could both be successful and sustain the independence of Asian Greeks, had it been more resistant. However, in a fatal sea battle near Miletus the Greeks were defeated. According to Herodotus, that happened largely through the fault of the men from Samos who were strong in naval affairs, but suddenly hesitated, left the united navy, and although dependent on the Persians, managed to keep their island and its inhabitants safe and secure. This union didn’t have an outstanding leader, but had an initiator – the polis of Miletus, lead by a couple of its citizens. They were tyrants of the city for some time - supported by Persia - but later decided that they were too closely and severely controlled by the king – in other words, that they could fall victims of his arbitrariness at any time, and therefore organized the uprising.
The next union appeared after the victories of the European Greeks in 490 and 480. It was more lasting, but had one, and very strong at that, leader – Athens, which managed to win almost on its own the important battles at Marathon and Salamis. After the second victory the Athenians enhanced the democracy in their city, formed an anti-Persian union embracing many islands and continental cities outside Peloponnese, allocated a relatively large budget of the union and eventually usurped the right to manage this budget almost uncontrolled. Thus Athens acquired extraordinary wealth, and not a single from the cities-contributors, which saw how their money was spent, could leave the union against the will of the Athenians. The most decisive separatist attempt was made by the citizens of Samos (440-439 B.C), but Athens was already too powerful and attacked the island retaining it in the union.
Thus the Athenians lost their credibility with the majority of Greeks and provoked the enmity of Sparta. This enmity, according to Thucydides, caused the Peloponnesian war. And judging from the speech delivered by Pericles, which he included in his “History”, and also from some actions such as the unexpected and quite spectacular expedition to the West against Syracuse, the pretensions of Athens had grown too much for the 60-70 years following the Peloponnesian wars and they intended not only to preserve the union, but also to expand their influence far beyond the Aegean Sea. They even considered something as an empire, which was to include all the Greeks and not only them. However, they were defeated in the war and thus the first serious project for the unification of Greece collapsed at the end of the 5th century. That project seemed to have been an imperial one. The Athenians never managed or dared to repeat it again, and did not even think about it, as it can be assumed from the speeches by Demosthenes. He speaks explicitly about the danger for one polis (whichever it might be) to become over-powerful. As it can be seen in the “History” by Thucydides, Athens from the middle of the 5th century boasts with its political model and its achievements, and points out its advantages over Sparta. Athens from the middle of the 4th century, 100 years later, continues to insist on the merits of democracy, but sees its role simply as a leader which will offer the Greeks protection both against any foreign invasion, and also against increased domination of any of the Greek polises over the rest. Hence, it is not going to be a patron, demanding unconditional leadership over the others, but rather a center of the resistance against the barbarians and a guarantee for the independence of any Greek city, as much as possible. In brief, Athens does not want an empire, but a union of independent states, which may grow into a military union upon necessity, but provided that the separate states remain sovereign.
When speaking about these matters, Demosthenes has in mind the developments after the end of the Peloponnesian war. The Lacedaemonians did not allow the devastation of Athens, probably because they were aware that it would only lead to a change of the enemy, since then the center of influence in the North would move to Thebes, Corinth or even to their old rival Argos. For them, an oligarchic and controlled Athens was more convenient. Or maybe they just feared the very abrupt change in the entire Greek world, which might follow the disappearance of such a powerful state.
However, only ten years later the Lacedemonians had to fight against a coalition of several cities, one of which was Athens, once again democratized and recovering; and they had to resort to the support of the Persian king. Twenty more years later they were heavily and ignominiously defeated by Thebes, which made Thebes so mighty, that the Spartans in turn were threatened with destruction and then Athens helped them. Thus the balance of the powers was kept once again and it was becoming clear that the polises were not simply unwilling, but in fact would never allow any of them to achieve exceptional domination. It also became clear that this type of union seemed already impossible, and preserving the status quo would only provoke new and ever graver wars. All that would not have seemed so horrifying, if Philip of Macedon (382-336 B.C.) had limited himself with the control over the territories between the Adriatic Sea, Thessalia and the Black Sea Straits. But it was already evident that he was eager for much more.

(1) This text was read at the symposium “European Integration in Philosophical Perspective”, 10-11 June, 2005, organized by the Italian Cultural Institute in Sofia and the Philosophical Faculty at the Sofia University.

(follows in Monday, October 15)