Prof. Vasilka Tapkova-Zaimova

A Biography with a Commentary

This text is written mainly on the basis of an interview with prof. Tapkova-Zaimova, conducted by Zoia Hristova-Dimitrova in December 2007. The interview is published in Bulgarian on the websites of the Association for the Development of the University Classical Education http://aduce.org/new_page_25.htm and the Department of Classics, http://kkf.proclassics.org/history02.php University in Sofia. The quotations in the main text, given in italics, are from the interview. Also, the biographical notes, published in the volumes, dedicated to her 60-th, 70th, and 80th anniversary, have been considered. Some corrections and additions have been made by prof. Tapkova-Zaimova herself during our meetings in the end of October 2010.
The commentaries with smaller letters are providing the necessary explanations in respect of the mentioned events, and also references to some important publications.


I. Origin and family

Vasilka Tapkova was born on the 7th of August 1924 in Sofia, in teachers’ family.
The ancestors of her father had lived in Thessaloniki. Her grandfather Dimitar Tapkov had founded in 1874 the Bulgarian school in Lerin (today Florina, Greece) and had taught there. Since 1882 he had been a teacher in Prilep, and later moved to Thessaloniki, where lived with his family till the end of his life.
The family of his parents had been Catholic (uniatic) and he himself had demanded to be buried in the Catholic cemetery of Thessaloniki. His second wife Vasilka Mircheva, from Prilep (the grand-mother of Prof. Tapkova) had been Orthodox. Five children had been born in this marriage – three boys (one of them had been Cyril, the father of Prof. Tapkova) and two girls.

The establishment and the functioning of the school in Lerin was similar to the ones of other Bulgarian schools in this region, which then was beyond the boundaries of the state. All of them were launched, supported and supervised by the Bulgarian Exarcheia (established in 1870). The situation of the Bulgarians in Macedonia in the last years before the Liberation was connected directly with the activity of the Exarcheia.
The literature, devoted to the Bulgarian-Greek Church conflict and the separation of the Bulgarian Church from the Patriarchy in Constantinople is enormous. See mostly Бурмов, Т. Българо-гръцката църковна разпря/Burmov, T. The Bulgarian-Greek Church Quarrel; Снегаров, История на съвременните православни църкви/Snegarov, History of the Contemporary Orthodox Churches. On the activity of the Exarcheia before the Liberation see Маркова, Българската екзархия 1870-1879/Markova, The Bulgarian Exarcheia; История на България, БАН, т. 6/History of Bulgaria, publ. by BAS (the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences), vol. VI.
There are 20 letters by Dimitar Tapkov, written in the period 1874-1876, published by prof. Tapkova herself and her daughter Raya Zaimova under the title За един български учител в Лерин през 70- те години на миналия век/In respect of a Bulgarian Teacher in Lerin in the 70-ies of the past century. See also the memoires of Kuzman Shapkarev, who had taught in Macedonia in this period. Материали за историята на възражданието българщината в Македония от 1854 до 1884 год./Materials for the History of the Bulgarian Revival in Macedonia from 1854 till 1884.

Cyril Dimitriev Tapkov (1885-1941) had studied classical philology in the University La Sapienza in Rome. After his graduation he had taught Latin and French in the Bulgarian school in Syar (nowadays Serres, Greece) and in Bitola till 1913. After the occupation of Thessaloniki during the Second Balkan War (called also the Inter-allies War), he had been forced to escape with his brother in Italy and after that they moved to Sofia.
In Sofia he had taught Latin in the state First Male and First Maiden’s gymnasia, and later in the private French college. Till 1935 he had worked as a translator and secretary in the commission for the reparations (paid by Bulgaria to the winners of the First World War).
Her mother Donka Boshnakova (1893-1983) had lived since childhood in Sofia and the families of her parents are from Stara Zagora and Gorna Oryahovitsa. She had received her university degree in political sciences in Brussels. In Bulgaria she had taught mathematics in the Second Maiden gymnasium and in the French language schools.
Her brother Dimitar Tapkov, born in 1929, is a composer, and professor for decades in the Musical Academy in Sofia. He had been a director of the Opera in Sofia.

In respect of the situation of the Bulgarians in Macedonia after the Liberation and the activity of the Exarcheia, which competed the activities of Serbia, Greece, Constantinople and the uniatic mission till 1913 see Георгиев, Трифонов. История на българите в документи, т. ІІ/Georgiev, Trifonov. History of the Bulgarians in Documents, vol. II.История на България, БАН, т. 7/History of Bulgaria, BAS, vol. VII ; Св. Елдъров. Католиците в България 1878-1989/ Sv. Eldurov, The Catholics in Bulgaria 1878-1898. On the Macedonian question and the developments till the end of the Inter-allies war see П. Милюков (1859-1943). Живата истина/P. Milyukov, The Vivid Truth; Уил Мънро. България и нейните хора/Will Munro, Bulgaria and its People; Данев, Стоян (1858-1949). Мемоари/Danev, Stoyan. Memoires.
On the organization of the pre-gymnasium and gymnasium education in Bulgaria immediately after the Liberation see mostly Дринов, Марин (1838-1906). Съчинения, т. ІІІ/Drinov, Marin, Writings, vol. III.
Almost all the teachers in the classical languages in the gymnasia before 1925, when the first classical philologists have graduated from the Sofia University, had received their education, similarly to Cyril Dimitriev Tapkov, in foreign universities. Famous among them are Ivan Brožka (1853-1927; he is the author of the first Latin-Bulgarian dictionary, with co-author Delidelvov); Perikli Chilev (1864-1925, who late becomes teacher of the king Boris III and prince Cyril), D. Delidelvov (teacher of Al. Balabanov in First male gymnasium.)
For them and the teaching manuals, used then see Геров, Б. Из историята на класическото образование в България от Освобождението до днес/Gerov, B. From the history of the Classical Education in Bulgaria from the Liberation till the present day. Бешевлиев, В. (1900-1992) Погледъ върху историята на класическите студии в нашите земи./Beshevliev, V. A Glance on the History of the classical studies in our lands.
The education in the first classical gymnasium in Sofia (1894-1899) is described in the memories of Ал. Балабанов. И аз на тоя свят/Alexander Balabanov. Me also on this world .
Very detailed information about the family of Prof. Tapkova’s father is given in the still unpublished manuscript, prepared by her and her daughter: Тапкова-Заимова, Василка и Заимова, Рая. Историята на една учителска фамилия в Македония / Tapkova-Zaimova, Vasilka and Zaimova, Raya. The History of a Teacher’s Family in Macedonia.


II. Secondary education

According to Vasilka Tapkova one part of the Bulgarian intelligentsia in Thessaloniki had preferred to send abroad their children to study in Italian higher education institutions. It should be added, that the majority of them have used as a major foreign language French. Her father had been a teacher in French, and for her, for her daughter and for her grandchildren the French language has always been the second language after the Bulgarian.
The beginning of her gymnasium education coincides with the reform, undertaken in 1937, when the middle variant of semi-classical secondary studies had been left behind, and the only the forms of “classical” and/or “real” classes had remained. She has been enrolled in the classical department of the French college, where both of the two old languages had been studied profoundly.
- By this time, she says, the classical gymnasia were established everywhere. The instruction in the college has been lead in French, and the classical and modern languages, including Russian, were studied with the usages of French textbooks/manuals. The matriculation exams (called “matura”) have been two – in French and Bulgarian. Vasilka Tapkova has finished the French catholic college in 1943 and has become a student in Sofia University, in specialty classical philology.

General information about the secondary (pro-gymnasium and gymnasium) education in Bulgaria till 1944 is given in Попов, Пиронкова. Образователната система в България/Popov, Pironkova. The educational system in Bulgaria. See also Колев, В. и др. Летопис на просветното министерство 1879-1995/Chronicle of the educational ministry 1879-1995 .The situation in Sofia is depicted by Минко Гечев in Образованието в София (1878-1944)/Minko Gechev. The education in Sofia (1878-1944). See also the general considerations on the gymnasium education by Ivan Georgov (1862-1935) in his writing On the reform in our gymnasia/Ив. Георгов. За реформата на нашите гимназии. The instruction in French in Bulgaria even before the liberation is discussed in История на България, БАН, т .6/History of Bulgaria, BAS, v. 6. Boris Gerov has written about the teaching of Latin and more exactly about the teaching aid-materials in his Из историята на класическото образование в България от Освобождението до днес/From the history of the Classical Education in Bulgaria from the Liberation till the present day. In his book Познайте ги по делата им/ You will know them by their deeds, Ivan Venedikov (1916-1997) tells about the instruction in the classical class of the First male gymnasium, where he has been enrolled in 1929.
Among the teachers in the inter-wars period very popular are the names of Christo Kodov (1901-1982), Iordan Bratkov (1901-1986), Mladen Tonev (1902-1940), Georgi Batakliev (1910-1994), Alexander Milev (1904-1980), Russka Gandeva (1911-2001), Makaryi Portalski (1915-1979), Mihail Voynov (1905 - 1985).


III. Higher education

1. Professors and colleagues

At the time, when Vasilka Tapkova becomes a student, there are four habilitated professors in the specialty (Alexander Balabanov, D. Dechev, V. Beshevliev and Vladimir Georgiev) and two assistant-professors (B. Gerov, G. Mihailov). She mentions several colleague-students: Todor Sarafov, who later becomes associate professor in Latin in the department; Konstantin Kostakev, who later works as a teacher in a gymnasium; Magdalina Stancheva, who later becomes an archaeologist and specialist in the ancient history of Sofia; and Slavka Slavova - a future actress. Two years before the beginning of her studies, Al. Nichev had been enrolled as a student.
Many times in her interview she stresses on the high quality of the teaching in the department classical philology. However, the professors have differed in respect of character and style of instruction. What she is telling is confirmed by numerous other evidences.
Alexander Balabanov who had been lecturing in Greek literature, had never literary read his lectures and he had been very fond of provoking disputations with the students. Frequently he had invited them to walks and restaurant-dinners, by which the conversations had been even more relaxed. Sometimes, at these gatherings extra the auditoria, the students could meet scholars, writers and intellectuals, with whom Balabanov had been at friendly terms. In her interview Vasilka Tapkova mentions the art-theoretician Protich, and the archaeologists Venedikov and Dzhambov, who later becomes director of the Archaeological Museum in Plovdiv.
The rest of the professors had preferred to communicate with the students only in the auditorium. Dimitar Dechev and Vladimir Gueorgiev had taught respectively Latin literature and historical grammar of the Latin language. Their courses had been ordered and systematic. Beshevliev, who then had had a course in Alexandrian poetry, had been especially demanding from the more negligent students.
Boris Gerov had lead seminars, on which Latin authors, especially Horace was read and the text and the verses had been analyzed in detail. Georgi Mihailov had been a very inspiring lecturer. Speaking about him she says, that he has been more connected with the French school, whereas the other majority of the professors had been relying on the German researches.
- Otherwise all of them, she adds, knew French, German and English, I mean only their inclinations.
The specialty classical philology, divided into departments in Greek and Latin philology is created with a decision of the Academic council in the beginning of the year 1921/1922. First regular professors are Alexander Balabanov and Dimitar Dechev (1877-1958). But in fact, since the establishment of the University in 1888, there were number of courses in the classical languages, literature and history, delivered in the Historic-philological Faculty. The professors were: Nikola Mihailovski (1818-1892) in Greek language for the first three semesters and after him, till 1898 – Marko Balabanov (1837-1921). Gavril Katsarov (1874-1958) has been associate professor in ancient history since 1900. Bogdan Filov (1883-1945) becomes associate professor in archeology in 1911. Balabanov himself is habilitated as early as 1909, and in 1914 is published the volume with his lectures, entitled Класическа литература/The Classical Literature.
The best sources for the biographies of the first professors in the classical antiquities are: Алманах на Софийския Университет до 1928, съставен от Ив. Георгов, Алманах на Софийския Университет "Св. Климент Охридски" 1888-1939, А-Я и Алманах на Софийския Университет "Св. Климент Охридски" 1939-1988/The Almanac of Sofia University, edited by Ivan Georgov; Almanac of Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridsky” 1888-1939, A-Z, and Almanac of Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridsky” 1939-1988.
Detailed information about the foundation of the specialty, the activity of the scholars, working on antiquity and the University in general is to be found in Арнаудов, М. (1878-1978), История на Софийския Университет „Св. Климент Охридски” през първото му полустолетие 1888-1939 /M. Arnaudov. History of SU “St. Kliment Ohridsky” in its first half of a century 1888-1939.
Memoirs about the specialty and its professors are published: by Ivan Venedikov in Познайте ги по делата им/ You will know them by their deeds;Boris Gerov has published memories about Dimiter Dechev in Спомени за Софийския университет/ Memories about SU; in the same book Velizar Velkov writes about the specialty in general; also Emil Georgiev, although he had studied in another department; Dimitar Angelov (1917-1996), who had studied classical philology as a minor specialty, also writes about the professors in Спомени..
In the introduction of the autobiographical book by Alexander Balabanov И аз на тоя свят/Me also on this world, T. Borov (1901-1992) has written: “Balabanov was one of the most popular persons all over Bulgaria and the most famous professor in the University». Indeed, the memories, the references and the texts on him in general are probably more, than on all the other scholars of the antiquities in Bulgaria, taken together. Balabanov had never interfered in politics, but had been very active in the literary and cultural life.
There is the monography “Alexander Balabanov” by Anastasiya Purvanova (published by the Macedonian cultural institute in 1994); several special essays by Todor Borov, the largest of which (45 pages) is published in Живот с книги/Life with Books; the collection Александър Балабанов и Симеон Радев в спомените на съвременниците си/ Alexander Balabanov and Simeon Radev in the Memoirs of their Contemporaries, where several authors have written on him: Elin Pelin (1877-1949), Simeon Radev (1879-1967), Alexander Bozhinov (1878-1968), Dimitar Mihalchev (1880-1967), Konstantin Gulubov (1892-1980), Georgi Mihailov (1916-1991), Ivan Bogdanov (1910-1992), Boris Delchev (1910-1987), Christo Radevski (1903-1996), Velizar Velkov (1928-1993), and others. He is also depicted by Georgi Markov in “Memories on Sofia University”. It is worth taking into consideration the impressions of Cyril Christov (1875-1944) in Време и съвременници/Time and Contemporaries, not forgetting however, that Cyril Christov is extremely reluctant to praise anyone at all.

2. During the War

The regular academic process in Sofia had been possible in Sofia till the end of 1943. The first bombing of the English-American aviation over the city occurred on the 15th of November. Even more destructive had been the attacks in 1944, especially on the 10th of January, the 29th and the 30th of March.
Vasilka Tapkova had been evacuated with her mother, her brother (five years younger than her), the one of the grand-mothers and the family of her uncle in Dragoman, where they have remained till October. However, she had taken with her the Greek dictionary and the anthology “Alexandrian poetry ”, compiled by Beshevliev, saying about it:
- I have eaten it up with the hard-cover.
In Dragoman she had had enough free time and then she had improved her knowledge of Russian and German (by reading books, to which she had had access) and even she had had the chance to pass the regular (“lecturer’s”) exam in German, with Zhana Nikolova-Galabova as an examiner, who also had been evacuated in Dragoman. Initially she had intended to take the exam in French, but in order to pass it she had to travel to Sliven and her mother had advised her not to do it.
- How is that? You are going to travel from Dragoman through all these roads, under the bombs, heading to Sliven? There is no way!
When they had returned to Sofia, they found their house on “Tsar Assen” str. destroyed, and the neighboring house, which had belonged to their grandmother, only with punctured roof. But the furniture and the piano had survived (65 years later, during the interview, she has shown the interviewer Zoia the same chairs, that had been preserved despite the bombing).
While the reconstruction of the house was going on, they had been sheltered in the house of the other grandmother, on “Gurgulyat” str. There, of course, they had not been accommodated quite comfortable.
- All of us had slept on one sofa – my mother, me and my brother.
The greatest inconveniences in the every day life were connected with the destroyed houses.
- Literally we have remained in the street.
Food had been distributed on coupons as late as 1950. On this occasion she speaks of the friendly relations in the specialty.
- The father of Rayna Kabaivanska (the famous Bulgarian opera diva) was head of the commission for the nutrition of the population. Balabanov was familiar with him and went to him to beg for some additional coupon, and so, that’s how we were feasting, in the seminar room upstairs (on the last floor of the building – note of the transl.) with some sausages and bread.
I would add, that the tradition of these collegiate parties in the auditoria-offices of the specialty, in the attic of the building, which had began in these years (the central building had been consecrated in 1934, but some specialties have used it earlier), turned out to be very vivid. During the 80-es and the 90-es the soul of the company of this parallel academic life was Krassimir Banev (1940-1995), who was aware that it is his duty to keep alive the Balabanov’s spirit in the specialty. So, in the beginning of the 90-ies I was present to a party in the so-called Columbarium – the last floor of the Rectorate building, on which the offices of the classicists are situated, where Vasilka Tapkova had studied. At this party in the early 90-ies Venedikov himself was present – the author of the memories about the classical education during the 30-ies. During Banev’s time the parties were held either in the Columbarium - the attic, or, in the opposite place, in “The Egg” – the university restaurant, which has no windows, because it is situated in the basement. The crises after 1989 have created living conditions, similar in a way to the ones after the war. After that the colleagues have gathered around Anna Nikolova, and after her retirement in 2004, they are initiated – even till the present day – by doctoral students and bachelors, but mainly by these, who have graduated the NGDEK – The National Gymnasium for Classical Languages and Cultures.
On the participation of Bulgaria in the war in 1943-1944 and especially on the situation in Sofia see: the documents, published in България – своенравният съюзник на Третия райх/ Bulgaria – the Recalcitrant Ally of the Third Reich. Detailed evidence for the effect of the bombings are to be found in the Diary of Bogdan Filov/ Богдан Филов. Дневник,. Personal impressions could be read in K. Katsarov - 60 години живяна история/60 years of History. The consequences of the bombings for the University are described in: През годините на военни изпитания/During the years of the military hardships, in History of Sofia University, published in 1988. In Спомени за Софийския университет/Memoires of Sofia University could be found impressions by the professors M. Genovski, T. Taschev, P. Slavov, Svet. Ivanchev, D. Karanov, V. Vulchanov, A. Bunkov.

3. Before the work in the BAS. De-fascisation and reform in the education. The situation in the University and the specialty
Vasilka Tapkova many times stresses the collegiate atmosphere and the tolerance among the classical philologists. During the “purge” one professor in the department had been fired – V. Beshevliev. She mentions also the expel of the historian Ivan Duichev, with whom they later have worked together in BAS and of the geographer Dimitar Yaranov, with whom they have been neighbors for a while in “Gurgulyat” str. Beshevliev and Duichev, and Yaranov as well, have been accused in chauvinism and declared pro-fascist views.
- … because he (Beshevliev) and Duichev have done research in Macedonia, but they have been sent there, to study the Bulgarian antiquities there. And according to the accusation their writings have turned out to be “ pro-fascist”! Nothing!
From the students in the specialty one has been expelled – the one was Slavka Slavova, because of the phrase:
- I have been a member of the Brannik-organization and I am proud of that.
(Brannik was a youth organization, created with a special legislative act in 1940. After 1944 it has been forbidden and condemned as the Bulgarian counterpart of Hitleruegend - note of the transl.)
When the interviewer Zoia Hristova-Dimitrova remarks that this seems to her quite a negligible “sin” she replies:
- Ah, for that reason… there were much more insignificant reasons for expulsion.
However, all these are tiny and miniscule, compared with the events in the Faculty of History and many other places.
- The people who were (in the Department of Classics) belonged to a generation with good upbringing. They couldn’t change themselves, as had happened in the Faculty of history. There was a real horror!
The movement for the de-fascisation and the removal of the enemies among the professors and the students came mostly from the students’ circles. In the specialties, including Classical philology there were groups of activists, mainly members and sympathizers of the communist party and the People’s Front. Vasilka Tapkova mentions Al. Nichev.
- He was an utmost communist, he was studying two years in advance of me. He was already finishing his university studies, but he was commanding the parade. However, as a person he was a good man.
Her tone in general in the reference for him is benevolent.

***

When she had been a student in the third year of her study (in the academic 1945-1946) the news was spread that the classical languages will be removed from the secondary education. She had joined a students’ initiative – petition against this reform. She mentions that in the department of French philology the colleagues had not supported it eagerly, but the Director of the Alliance Française – George Hateau, who had lectured in the university as well, had signed it.
During her study, the ideological disciplines still have not been introduced as obligatory (History of the BCP etc.). However, later, she had been obliged to pass exams in these disciplines, when she already had the position of a researcher in the BAS.
- When I was a student, for example, still the study of Marxism and Leninism was not obligatory. Still, the study of the History of the Bulgarian Communist Party was not obligatory. All these, imposed later, were not studied by me, when I was a student. We were suppressed to death later, when I was already in the Institute. Then we were forced to pass exams in Marxism and Leninism, then we were forced to attend courses in the History of the BCP”.

The educational reform in the period 1944-1949 and the repressions against the university teaching faculty are described in the detailed research, published by Vessela Chichovska The Politics against the Educational Tradition/Весела Чичовска, Политиката срещу просветната традиция. Numerous valuable documents are published again by her and Vera Mutaphchieva in Съдът срещу историците/ The Court against the Historians. On these topics see also Национализираният университет/The nationalized university by R. Donkov/Р. Донков in the volume Университетът, and the relevant chapter in Sofia University. The first 120 years. The point of view of the ruling party in this period is exposed in История на Софийския Университет от 1988/History of Sofia University, 1988.
Some of the texts, written by V. Beshevliev and Ivan Duichev, that might have served as a pretext for their dismissal, are published in the journal “Prometheus” between 1941 and 1943.
Alexander Nichev really had published texts, in which the historical materialism evidently is taken as the philosophical basis of the historic and literary research. See his article Методологически въпроси в областта на античната литература. Methodological questions in the field of ancient literature в сп. “Септември”, 1950/ in the journal “September”, 1950, and the reaction to it by Balabanov, described by Ivan Bogdanov in Александър Балабанов и Симеон Радев в спомените на съвременниците/Alexander Balabanov and Simeon Radev in the Memories of their Contemporaries. Also История на класическата литература, History of the Classical Literature, 1949, written by Nichev and B. Gerov. Nichev is also the author of the relevant part, dedicated to the antiquity, in the handbook in literature for the secondary schools, which had been reprinted many times during the 60-ies and the 70-ies. There are all the necessary references to Marx and Engels, and some of the most significant Marxist-Leninist phraseology-staff.
Studies, which bear signs of the compromise with the power, had been published by other professors in the specialty as well. G. Mihailov is author of the Класовата борба на остров Лесбос VІІ-VІ в./Class struggle on the island Lesbos VII-VI c.,1950, and later Rousska Gandeva publishes За прогресивната идейност в Еврипидовата “Медея”, 1959/On the Progressive Ideas in the Euripide’s “Medea”.


III. Professional development till 1989. Family.

1. In the Institute for Bulgarian history
Soon after the graduation from the university Vasilka Tapkova begins to work as an assistant-researcher in the BAS – in the Institute for Bulgarian history. She says, by this time this has been the Commission for the publication of sources. But she hadn’t intended to work precisely in this area, because the structure of the BAS with its numerous institutions has been something new. The classical philologist, who had graduated from the university before the reform in 1947, could hope to be employed as a teacher in the classical languages in a gymnasium, or as a teacher in a modern language, especially if (s)he had obtained as a “minor” study second specialty in some western or Russian philology. In order to be allowed to teach, and this obligation has been kept later as well, one had had to pass through training practice in some gymnasium. When Vasilka Tapkova had went to the Third Male gymnasium (on “Pirotska’’ str.), where she had been assigned to practice, it had turned out, that her tutor would be a person, personally involved in the dismissal of her father from work in the beginning of the 40-ies.
- All of a sudden it turns out, that I receive as a patron somebody, who once upon a time had been a communist, but after that had flattered Filov and had become a protégé of Filov …So, I went to the Third Male gymnasium and I see: the person, who had sent the message to my father, now is supposed to become a tutor of mine!... So, I don’t know whether that person recognized me or not, but when we, the applicants for the pedagogical practice went there, we were told by him: ‘’Today we are not going to work together and tomorrow we are not going to work together, because we, the fighters against fascism, have an important meeting!’’
That’s why she had given up the pedagogical practice and after hearing that there is a competitive exam for an assistant in the Institute for Bulgarian history, she applied for the position and had the best result among 22 other applicants.
- See what comes sometimes out of despair!’’
The examining committee had been presided by Ivan Snegarov, and also the archeologist D. Dimitrov had taken part. The applicants had to translate a text by St. Basil the Great.
- It was funny, because my name is Vasilka and we had to translate St. Vassiliy/Basil the Great. That’s why I was lucky!
After the competition she had met the future archeologist Maria Chichikova, who had informed her about the very positive reference for her exam-results from Dimitar Dimitrov.
So, she had received the order for the appointment in the BAS, but almost immediately she had received the message that as a beneficiary of state stipend she is obliged to work on a ‘’destination’’. Despite of the lack of pedagogical practice, she has been assigned to work as a teacher in Bossilegrad.
- And do you know what was still there? Real horror. They were still fighting there. I was to be cast there.

***
In the Institute their duties were to translate and comment Greek sources for the Bulgarian history. In their group the classical philologists Genoveva Tsankova and Strashimir Lishev had been included, as well, and the person in charge had been Mihail Voynov.
- It was a very meticulous work.
Firstly, they had typed the Greek texts in columns, after that they had cut them with scissors and besides they pasted the columns with the Bulgarian translation. Beneath the commentary had been added. After that Boyan Mirchev was employed as a typist.
- He was from the family of the famous Mirchevs, the scholars in the Slavonic studies. Because he had worked as a journalist in ‘’Zora’’, and consequently – persecuted for that, he was not allowed to have any other work, except the one of a typist. He was intelligent person, and although he didn’t know Greek, he was typing punctually in Bulgarian. Without mistakes.
In the commission, which had supervised their work, Beshevliev and Gerov had been included, and the Bulgarian text had been corrected by Stoyan Romanski.

***
In the period till 1963 Vasilka Tapkova-Zaimova has attended conferences, scholarly meetings and working visits in Krakow (1959), in Dubrovnik for research on sources (1963) and Leningrad (1963). She has been a secretary of the Organization Committee of the VIth Conference of the Organization for the study of the classical antiquity “Eirene” (held in Plovdiv, in 1962). In 1963 she has specialized for three months in the Moscow Institute for history.
***
In 1950 Vasilka Tapkova marries the linguist (specialist in Bulgarian language) Yordan Zaimov (1921-1987). They have two children: Velislav Zaimov, born in 1951, who is a composer and professor in the Musical Academy; and Raya Zaimova, born in 1957, senior associate researcher (equal to a professor) in the Institute for Balkan studies, a specialist in the French-Ottoman cultural relations.
For the structure of the BAS and the inner composition of the separate institutes, including the Institute for history, see Ралева, О., Пейчева, Р. БАН след 9.IX.1944 /BAS after the 9. IX 1944. For the events after 1944, the restructuring and the enlargement of the Academy see История на БАН 1869-1969/History of BAS 1869-1969. The new structure is enacted by the special Act for the BAS from 1947. After the arrest of Bogdan Filov in April 1945 for a president of the Academy has been elected Dimitar Mihalchev. In January the same year for a regular member has been elected Todor Pavlov – he is the first Marxist-member of the presidium of BAS.
He becomes president in 1947 and is re-elected by the General assembly in 1948 and 1956, remaining a president till 1962.
In the beginning of 1958 the BAS has 8 Sections, 4 of which are humanitarian and they comprise the separate institutes. The Institute for Bulgarian history is included in the subsection History and Pedagogy. By this time there are 88 academicians and member-correspondents and 372 scientific or scholarly researchers. Among the academicians are Sp. Kazandzhiev, D. Mihalchev, G. Katzarov, A. Protich, Ivan Snegarov. V. Beshevliev and D. Dimitrov are member-correspondents.
By that time director of the Institute for Bulgarian history is Dimitar Kossev. There are 5 Commissions for the publication of sources in the section of archeography and bibliography of Bulgarian history: for the publication of Greek, Latin, Slavonic, Turkish and Hebrew sources. Vasilka Tapkova works in the Commission for the publication of the Greek and Latin sources. In the volume БАН след 9. ІХ. 1944/ BAS after 9. IX. 1944 among the senior researchers are mentioned D. Angelov and Ivan Duichev, whereas M. Voynov with the other publishers of sources, is included among the junior researchers.
The first 6 volumes Гръцките извори за българската история/The Greek sources for the Bulgarian history, are published between 1954-1965. Among the translators are mentioned also Dimitar Dechev, Velizar Velkov, Lyubomir Yonchev, Petar Tivchev. The publishing of the Greek and the Latin sources continues later, and the last – for the time being – 32th volume. Some of them can be seen on the web: http://www.kroraina.com/N1/. Prof. Tapkova-Zaimova has taken part in the preparation of 11 of the Greek and 2 of the Latin volumes.
Many details about her researches till 1963 are given in the book: Василка Тъпкова-Заимова. Биобиблиография. Велико Търново, 1985.

2. Members of the BCP and non-members in the BAS. The ideologization. The dossier files of Vasilka Tapkova-Zaimova and Yordan Zaimov
Vasilka Tapkova has worked in the Institute for Bulgarian history till 1963.
- There was the opinion: “ They are not going to be allowed to become senior researchers”, because the editing and the publishing of sources was not reckoned (by them) to be a proper scholarly work.
Mihail Voynov is mentioned several times in the interview with explicit respect and cordiality.
- If somebody is to be pointed at as my teacher – this is Voynov.
He had advised her and the other younger colleagues to concentrate their work only on the sources, in order not to be forced to publish ideological texts. Many years after that Prof. Georgi Bakalov has told her: “Only in your writings there are no such passages”.
However, by doing this, they have sentenced themselves to a lack of publications. A book or article in history without the Marxist and the Leninist phraseology could hardly appear in the 50-ies and the early 60-ies. That’s why she had accepted the invitation of Nikolai Todorov and Vladimir Georgiev to move to the brand new Institute for Balkan studies, in the section for the history of Byzantium and the Balkan people.
- I gave this name to it.
However, they couldn’t appoint her as a scientific secretary, which would be equal to a deputy director, because such a position could be obtained only by a member of the Party. Her husband Yordan Zaimov had also abstained from becoming a member of the Party.
- So, also, one day Nikolai (Todorov) came and told me: ‘’Well, we don’t have a deputy director, and the scholarly secretary has to be a Party-member, as well”. So, Vladimir Georgiev told me: ‘’Let’s accept you and your husband as Party-members’’. So, we were both proposed, but we rejected. I have already told you, that Nikolai (Todorov) was a good man, he was a Party-member, doing the necessary party-deeds, but he didn’t torture the people. He never raised the topic again.
**

To the question of Zoia whether the Party-secretaries in the organizations had been external people, Vasilka Tapkova replies that they have been researchers and scholars like all the rest. As her story confirms, it depended on the person to accept or to reject the proposal to become a member, and nevertheless in the latter case to remain on the same working position. But to occupy a leading prestigious position without being a Party member, for a very long time had not been possible. However, Yordan Zaimov had become a deputy director of the Unified Center in Linguistics in 1986 – one year before his death.
The relations between the Party-members and the non-members on the working place could be very stressful. The Party-members could have easy access to the leading persons in charge in the BAS and this had created options for intrigues and pressure. Thus, Mihail Voynov had been dismissed and for a certain period had to earn his living as a carpenter.
- A carpenter! Well, although fired from the institute, didn’t he have allowance for some other job?
- No, no, he didn’t. So, he made the shelter for the hens of a neighbour.
Obviously everyone, who had not become a Party-member could be pressed, especially if one had made the impression of an uncompromising person.
- And we heard what slanders were made against us; they went to the Head-department of the academy in order to report that we are unfit for this job, that we should be expelled, we should be fired, and so.
Still, the non-members could rely on the support of some high-ranked colleagues-Party-members, who had respected them for their professionalism or simply had tried to act according to justice. Vasilka Tapkova says good words for Todor Pavlov, who had restored Mihail Voynov to his earlier appointment. Also she mentions quite positively Nikolai Todorov, who had never demanded any demonstrative ideology in the publications. There are no generalities in the interview about the Party and the ideology, nor the advantages and the shortcomings of the regime are discussed.
Vasilka Tapkova and Yordan Zaimov had had prolific files.
- The dossier file of my husband consisted of 145 pages.
She had read them and even had taken copies of some pages, which later had sent to their authors. Some of them had not been “slanders” from special informers, but mere so-called characteristics (something as a regular reference), written by Party-secretary, intended for administrative and Party usage, but probably they had been used by the State Security, as well. They had been written regularly.
- So, was there a report every year?
- Aha!
Vasilka Tapkova distinguishes an “early” and “late” part in her dossier-file. In the early part there had been reports about her meetings with French citizens in the Embassy of France, especially with the director of the French college in Plovdiv – Father Oson – who had been held under the suspicion that he is an agent of a foreign service. However, later it had become clear that she is visiting the Embassy, because she gave lessons in Latin to the daughter of the ambassador. However, this contact of her had not been quite safe.
- If I’ve been ‘’included’’ in the Catholics’ case, I was endangered to be sent to a camp. So, you know, in 1952 several Catholics were shot. And because of the fact that I have graduated from the French college, they write in my file that in the Embassy I am regularly meeting the Director of the French college in Plovdiv: “she met with him today, tomorrow, the day after tomorrow”…
Her husband, likewise her father before 1944, has been followed by the secret services in connection with his beliefs mainly on the Macedonian question.
In respect of the pressure, exercised by the Party on the historians, working in the field of the study of antiquity and the middle ages see again, Съдът срещу историците/ The Court against the Historians op. cit., and also the autobiography of Georgi Bakalov in the volume, dedicated to his 60-th anniversary. On the other point of view see the memoires of D. Angelov.

3. Other appointments and teaching till 1989

In the Institute for Balkan studies it has been much easier for her. The section History of Byzantium and the Balkan people had been initially directed by Beshevliev and after his retirement – by Vasilka Tapkova.
- Then they didn’t demand from us to write accordingly to Marxism, because Nikolai Todorov was an extremely intelligent man.
So, she was given then the opportunity not only to publish sources and to translate, but also to write texts of her own. She has remained in the Institute till 1989, when she has retired. She has began to teach in 70-ies (1970-ies) in the Academy for the Arts.
- I was teaching medieval history, but in the Department of Theory of Arts. This was a position, previously held by (Alexander) Fol, who has left it, because then began his career (literary: they have begun to pull him higher). So after him, the position was proposed to me.
She becomes professor in 1973 (as part-time appointment) and keeps lecturing in the Academy till 1993.

***

In the period 1964-1973 she attends conferences, scholarly meetings and working visits in Athens, Berlin, Bucharest, Brno, Venice, Zagreb, Ljubljana, Moscow, Paris, Strassburg, Hamburg, Schwerin, and many Bulgarian towns. She delivers lectures in Bucurrest (1966) and Paris (1972). She and her husband receive the state honour “Cyril and Methodius” for the book Битолски надпис на Иван Владислав /The Bitola inscription of Ivan Vladislav. In 1973 she becomes senior associate researcher of first degree in BAS, which corresponds to the rank of university professor.
Since 1975 she is a part-time lecturer in the University of Veliko Turnovo. Between 1974 and 1984 she participates in conferences and scholarly meetings in Ankara, Athens, Belgrade, Berlin, Birmingham, Budapest, Bucharest, Brno, Vienna, Greifswald, Dumbarton Oaks, Kiev, Krajova, London, Moscow, Muehlhausen, Paris, Prague, Rome, Thessaloniki, Strasbourg, and many places in Bulgaria. She has delivered lectures in the University of Cologne (1984). She has been since 1979 a vice president of Association Internationale des Etudes du Sud-Est Europeen – AIESEE.

On the activity of Nikolai Todorov see his Дневник/Diary. On the scholarly and public activity see the volume, collecting his articles ant interviews Самотният пешеходец/The Lonely Pedestrian. About him and the circle of intellectuals, close to the BCP and Lyudmila Zhivkova see Н. Неделчев. Тоталитарни идеологии в историята/N. Nedelchev, Totalitarian Ideologies in History; Ив. Еленков. Културният фронт/Ivan Elenkov, The Cultural Front; Хр. Христов. Тодор Живков. Биография/Hristo Hristov. Todor Zhivkov. Biography.
For her scholarly work till 1984 see again Василка Тъпкова-Заимова. Биобиблиография. Велико Търново, 1985.



IV. After the retirement

In 1993 she receives proposal to resume work, but this time in the Section of history in the Institute for Cyril-and-Methodius studies in the BAS and works there till 2003. But also she has been lecturing in several universities: in Sofia and in Plovdiv (2000-2002), Blagoevgrad South-West University (1992-1996), and mostly in the University in Veliko Turnovo (from the end of the 70-ies). Till 2001 she has been a member of the Leading committee of the Union of the scientists in Bulgaria. She has lectured also in this period in Athens, Munich, Thessaloniki, Yoannina.
In 2003 she becomes doctor honoris causa of the university in Bucharest, and in 2004 she eceives the same honour from the University in VelikoTurnovo.

***


I am personally acquainted with Prof. Tapkova-Zaimova from the autumn of 1993, when for a very short time I was an assistant of her in the course Byzantine literature and culture in the specialty Modern Greek philology in University of Sofia. Since then we have had three longer conversations on her biography: in July 2001 on a cocktail reception in the Embassy of France; in July 2007 in a cafe after the promotion of the dissertation of Yanko Dimitrov, whose work was reviewed by her and me (later Yanko became husband of the interviewer Zoia Hristova); and finally, in the last week of October, 2010 at her home on “Praga blvd” in Sofia, when we discussed this biographical paper.

***

Translation from Bulgarian - Dimka Guicheva-Gocheva

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

Classical Heritage and Classical Education in Bulgaria

Reasons for the Development of the Classical Studies in the past 150 years

1. Geographical and Political Conditions for the Classical Studies

Diplomatic contacts between Bulgarian rulers and the East Roman Empire had been established around the middle of the VII-th century, before the settlement of the Bulgarians to the south of the Danube. The attitude of the Empire to the Bulgarians of khan Asparuh after the year 680 AD is similar to its attitude to the Goths, who had settled in Thrace 300 years earlier – during the reign of the emperor Valent. In the same pattern as the Goths prior to them, the Bulgarians are converted into the Christianity and translate the Scripture and the liturgical books in a language, different from Latin and Greek. In the year 800, during the pagan ruler of Bulgaria khan Krum, the city of Serdica is included in the boundaries of the state.
The boundaries of the present day Bulgarian state are settled at a distance shorter than 200 km from then Constantinople and less than 100 km – from the North Coast of the Aegean Sea. Sofia yet, as the ancient Serdica is renamed since the XIVth century, is still situated on the main road, which connects Constantinople (Istanbul) and the East with the cities of Western Europe.

2. Ancient monuments in the Bulgarian lands

Monuments from the religion, the everyday life and the art of the Thracians had been discovered and till the present day continue to appear on the territory of the contemporary Bulgarian state and mainly to the South of Stara Planina (Haemus mountain). The most remarkable among them are the tombs (of the rulers), with their decoration (wall paintings, sculpture) and different objects for everyday and ritual application. Very few inscriptions in a Thracian language have survived and their decoding is quite uncertain.
The archeological findings with Greek and Graeco-Roman origin are extremely abundant. Among them, the epigraphic texts posses the greatest importance for the classical philology, and the majority of them are from the Hellenistic and the Roman epoch.


3. The Christianity as state religion

Soon after the middle of the IXth century, during the reign of Boris the First, the Christianity becomes state religion of Bulgaria. Before that, Boris has maintained for several years correspondence both with the Episcope of Rome (The Pope Nikolai the First) and Constantinople (Patriarch Photius). Finally, the Patriarchy of Constantinople is preferred and it becomes the Church-mother of the Bulgarian Church. One of the main reasons, which had led the prince (kniaz) Boris-Michael to this choice, had been the possibility for gaining independence for the Bulgarian Church, similar to the independence of the other Eastern Patriarchies, an independence never to be offered by the Roman Bishop.
But in the communication with Byzantium the impediments had been inescapable, as well. The reason is that the Bulgarian state then had been not only politically independent, but also territorially too close to Constantinople. The establishment of an independent Bulgarian Church, governed by a principal, who on his part could ordain Bishops among other people, would help this country to become a Christian empire, analogous to and competitive with Byzantium. Several centuries after that Russia had transformed into such an empire, but it hasn’t been a rival to Byzantium.


4. The translations from Greek to Slavonic

However, since the reign of Boris-Michael onwards Bulgaria remains connected with the Orthodox East. Boris succeeds to manage the already existing conditions for liturgical service in Slavonic language. Only one decade before his baptism the brothers Cyril and Method, born in Thessalonica, elaborate an alphabet for Slavonic language and make translations of the liturgical texts of an utmost necessity. After the unsuccessful end of their mission to Moravia some of their disciples are welcomed in Bulgaria and are put in charge of the governance of the educational centers in the both ends of the country – Pliska and Ohrid. The aim is to assure the liturgy in Slavonic all over the country and the empowering of the Slavonic language as a competitor of the Greek.

(I’m keeping your attention on these events, because without some knowledge about them it is impossible to understand the way in which the classical antiquity is regarded in Bulgaria till the present day)

The politics of Boris have been continued by his son Simeon and his grandson Peter. So, for less than 100 years the dialect of the South Slavs becomes the official one and the only one of the Bulgarian state and Church.
During this period a part of the ancient literary heritage, preserved in Byzantium, is transmitted by translations in Bulgaria. This activity is interrupted during the XI and XII centuries, but after that is resumed again during the XIII and XIV centuries. Thus testimonies about the ancient history appear in Bulgarian through the chronicles beginning with Malalas (VI c.) till Manasses (XII c.), separate writings – The Jewish War by Joseph, the Novel about Alexander, and also through numerous lives of the saints; testimonies about the mythology (the Troyan parable, inserted in the chronicle of Manasses); the philosophy of nature (The Hexaemeron by John Exarchus, based on the Greek Hexaemera, mostly on the one, written by St. Basil the Great); the rhetorics (the Poetical figures by George Choiroboscus). Another source for the antiquity are the translations of the works of the early fathers of the Church (Athanasius the Great, Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom).


5. The Ottoman rule XV-XVIII century

The bigger part of this literature is forgotten or entirely lost during the first centuries of the Ottoman invasion. The Bulgarian Church, which regained its independence in 1235 year, joins again the patriarchy in Constantinople, which is a condition for the limitation of the liturgical services in Slavonic.
The possibilities for a Christian and Mundane education are almost the same all over the East, with the exception of Russia. On the territory of Bulgaria and in the other parts of the Orthodox East as well no universities are established. The printing of books penetrates slowly.
(the first book printed in Bulgarian appears relatively early – in 1519, in Venice. But till 1801 the overall number of the known printed books in Bulgarian is only 91)
The Bulgarians preserve the language and the liturgy mostly in the monasteries which are small but numerous. They have primary schools in them – by the end of the XVIII century they are no less than 100.

6.

Since the beginning of the XIX century, the national education starts its development. An impulse for this undoubtedly is received by the autonomy and the independence of the neighboring countries – Greece, Serbia, Romania, in some of which there are already universities. In the first half of the century the first Mundane manuals in Bulgarian for the primary education appear and the first secondary mundane schools with teaching/instruction in Bulgarian are founded (Gabrovo, 1835). The number of the Bulgarian books multiplies, although almost all of them are printed beyond the boundaries of contemporary Bulgaria (Constantinople, Thessalonica, Smyrna, Bucharest, Belgrade, Budapest, Vienna). The first publishing house for Bulgarian books on the territory of contemporary Bulgaria appears in the 60s in Ruse.
But translations from the works of ancient authors are seldom published. Between 1801 and 1878 the number of the books printed in Bulgarian is approximately 1800; but no more than 15 from them contain translations from ancient authors.

The middle of the XIX century is the time of the Bulgarian-Greek ecclesiastic conflict, well-known in the Orthodox world, and the subsequent separation of the Bulgarian Church from the Constantinople Patriarchate.
This conflict and the establishment of the Bulgarian Uniat Church (which will be mentioned in a while), are made possible after the announcement of the edict for religious tolerance of the Sultan Abdul Medzhid from 1856, known as Hati Humayun.
The Bulgarian Autocephaly, although recognized by some local Orthodox churches, remains unaccepted by Constantinople till 1945. This conflict impedes enormously the Bulgarian-Greek relations, which have always been tensed, and probably cooperates for the limitation of the interest to the Greek antiquity. On the other hand the instruction and education in Latin before the Liberation unavoidably is perceived by the Bulgarians as connected with the activity of the Roman-Catholic Church, which is activated noticeably after the middle the XIX century and leads to the establishment of the Uniat Church (1861). However then the majority of the Bulgarians, being Orthodox, have negative attitude to the Unia and to Catholicism in general. This might have impeded the spread of the Latin language education, especially before the Liberation.

7.

The specialized classical education in Bulgaria appears with the creation of the independent Bulgarian principality. (The Classical gymnasium opens doors on the 7th of January 1879. In a report written by the headmaster of the school it is noted especially that The Latin language is a new subject, which never had been taught in Bulgaria so far).
In 1888 a State University is created – the present day Sofia University. The teaching of classical languages and philology is done initially in the Faculty of History and Philology. In 1921 the specialty Classical philology is opened with two departments – in Greek and Latin Philology. Since then till the Second World War a number of students, varying from 10 to 15 receive yearly their instruction there.
We can judge the intensity of the classical studies during this period on the basis of the number of the published translations. For approximately 60 years – from the Liberation till 1947 - almost 300 publications appear with Bulgarian translations of ancient authors. This number includes not only the separate publications, but also the ones in anthologies and periodicals.

8.

In the first years after the Second World War the changes are significant. The teaching of the classical languages in the secondary schools is put to an end. The University itself is in a difficult situation. The contacts with the western universities are interrupted. The teaching obligations of the professors are doubled and the demand for permanent physical presence on the working place is introduced. The new-coming scholarly literature is drastically reduced or its incoming is stopped altogether.
One of the results from all these is the fact, that for the period from 1947 till 1955 there are only two new publications with translations from a classical language (these are the Antigone by Sophocles and the De rerum natura by Lucretius).
The Department in Classical philology is kept under the title Institute for classical philology. By the way, several years after that the traditional division of the university in faculties is restored. There is a Party organization created in the department, but there are no purges of teaching faculty in an active age.
Since 1956 there are attempts for the return to the classical education and studies. The number of the translations gradually increases and for the last 12 years (of the socialist period from 1978 till 1989) it is several times bigger than the number for the period of the previous 30 years (from 1956 till 1977 – 21 publications, from 1978 till 1989 – 51 publications). This is an increase in a proportion 5.5 compared to the period 1947-1977.
After 1989 there is already decline in the number – the translations between 1990 and 2001 are 31. In the same time it should be noted that the production from 1977 till 1989 (which gives 4.3 publications per year) is lesser than the one for the 60 years from 1878 till 1947 ( approximately 5 per year).
However, it shouldn’t be forgotten that a great number of the translations, published before 1947 are translations of parts of the texts, not of the entire works. After 1956 full translations of the classical authors began to appear:
all the works or almost the entirety of the works of the epics were translated (for the first time Hesiod and new translation of Homer);
the Greek drama (Aeschylus, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Menander); the Greek classical historiography (Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon); the Roman poetry from the time of August (Vergil, Horace, Ovidius); some Roman historians (Caesar, Sallust, Suetonius). Also – Plato in 4 volumes, Quintilian, Greek and Roman novels.
(After 1989 full translations of Polybios and Pausanius were added to them, the majority of the letters and the treatises of Seneca, a fifth volume of Plato and many of the treatises of Aristotle, which were not translated till then. Out of print are the first 6 volumes of the translation of Livius).
A full edition of the Greek epigraphic monuments, found on the territory of the country was made, and an edition of some of the Latin inscriptions.
The classical education gained a lot from the creation of a National Gymnasium for ancient languages and cultures (1977). Since then between 80 and 90 pupils are enrolled yearly, who study there intensively Latin (for 5 years) and Greek (for 4 years).
Also, in the 70-ties the Institute for Thracian studies was created as a branch of BAS. There is also a separate Archeological institute with a museum (AIM) and there is a section in Classical archeology.
The classical languages nowadays are studied in almost all humanitarian faculties of the SU, and also in the universities of Turnovo, Plovdiv and Blagoevgrad.

***

An abridged version of this text was read at the Conference
Gnothi seauton! Classics and Communism. The History of the Studies on Antiquity in the Context of the Local Classical Traditions in Socialst Countries 1944/45-1989/90
Warsaw, 5-6 Dec. 2009

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 Historical Novel III

Apollonius Rhodius in Modern Literature: the Interpretation of Robert Graves


1. The unsuccessful First Version

In the postscript to his novel “The Golden Fleece” Graves tells us the following:

“When he recited the poem or a part of it in the Muses` Hall, he was met with a storm of hissing, caterwauling and a storm of plates for writing. He went away relatively safe and sound, but was afraid of a public persecution, because his rival, the court poet Callimachus declared him a “abominable ibis”; and he decided to leave Alexandria for a time. After several years he returned and recited publicly the revised version which got ovations even from his former enemies; so that after the position of a curator of the Library was vacated, king Ptolemy naturally appointed him as the next curator (1).
The original version is not preserved, but its defect hardly was a lack of sonority and fascination. More probably, relying on the support of the Alexandrian women, Apollonius revealed in his epic too honestly the humiliations of Zeus by the Moon Goddess: what provoked the anger of their husbands.”

And a little after:

“The mysteries that were added to the ordinary Greek rites from the classical epoch, were nothing other than revelation of ancient religious secrets to people, who weren’t expected to divulge them in order to cause a public scandal; and in these mysteries the object of worship was the Goddess Mother… I believe, that the chief error of Apollonius was that he recited in a public hall a version of the Golden Fleece’s tale, based upon ancient sources; and that this version sounded to the initiated as a desecration of their most deeply cherished religious beliefs”(2).


2. The version of Graves

The novel of Graves, although captivating and written with a good sense of humour, contains at some places his view on the “real history” of the Greek Gods, expressed in a simple, straightforward and rather too prosaic way. These passages do not look like parts of a book of fiction. In them he declares, that the old, non-Achaean (and moreover non-Indo-European) population of Thessaly, and even of all Greece, named “pelasgoi” worshiped one supreme female deity – the “Triple Goddess” (or the “White Goddess”) – in different persons and named her with different names. The first (and the more peaceful) Greeks, coming from North – the Ionians and the Aeolians (called Minyans as well) – joined this matriarchal cult.
But the Achaeans, who invaded the peninsula several centuries later, imposed by force the cult to the God - Father and Warrior. They reformed (in a council at Olympia, convoked especially for this purpose) the local religion, created the classic pantheon with six gods and six goddesses, proclaimed the Goddess sister and obedient wife of Zeus and began to pursue the people who persisted in their adherence to the old religion.

Otherwise the novel gives us a detailed account of the expedition, where virtually all sources for the Argonauts have been taken into consideration. Graves mentions them in the postscript. Except Apollonius, we have the versions of Pindar, Apollodorus, Diodorus of Sicily and Valerius Flaccus - all of whom, although in different style and length, present the full story. Some separate episodes are poetically adapted by Euripides in the famous tragedy; there are Theocritus and Ovid too; lastly, the scarce (but important, regarding its early age) information, given by Herodotus. Of course, there are a number of sources of minor importance.
There is a passage in the postscript, concerning the temporal standpoint of the teller, on which I would like to draw your attention. On the p. 511 Graves says:

“I render the story of Argonauts in the form of a historical tale; and every author of history must clearly express his point of view in the time. In this case it would be inappropriate to tell it in the style of the XIII cent. B.C – this would mean to write using poetic pictograms. It would be equally inadequate to write it from a present day position, because then I would have been compelled to render the dialogues in an unsuitably contemporary style; besides, that would have hindered me to believe sincerely the story.
The only plausible decision was to depict the events from the viewpoint of an epoch, when the faith in the legend was still alive, but preserving the necessary critical objectivity; and with a clear, but, on the same time, serious literary expression. This is the reason for using in some places phrases like “till the present day”, and ”today”. The last page will suggest to the historians, that “today” means “no later than 146 B.C.”, when Lucius Mummius sacks Corinthos. This is the year, when Argo, put in the temple of Poseidon, disappears for ever – maybe reduced to a heap of splinters by the drunken Roman soldiers.”

What the Graves’ reader could add, is that the story seems to be told by somebody, who knows who are the “real” ones among the Greek Gods, although prefers to represent priests, clairvoyants and believing-in-gods heroes rather than the gods themselves. And their “real” relations are the ones Graves sees as a historian of mythology, a poet and perhaps a psychologist. The main point is the superiority of the female Goddess, whose power over the mankind is usurped by her rebellious son; but usurped not without her condescending consent.


3. “The White Goddess” as aesthetic and history-of-culture manifesto

The information I got about Graves when working on this paper, made me suppose that the “The White Goddess” is his most popular non-poetic and non-fictional text.
I’ll say several words about this book not only because the theory, presented in it, practically coincides with the views of the teller in the “Golden Fleece”, but also because - as Graves himself tells us - the very idea of this long essay was born in the process of the work on the novel. This explains why the two books appear in a relatively short time: the first edition of the “Fleece” is in 1944, and this of the “Goddess” – in1948. In a concluding note, written for the edition from 1960 he tells the following:

“I am often asked how I took to write the "White Goddess". The history is as follows.
In 1944 in a village in Devonshire, when I fled from the present day by working on a historical novel of the Argonauts, my work suddenly was interrupted. An obsessing idea forced me to get involved in the study of a subject I still didn’t know and didn’t understand. I stopped to trace on the vast military map of the Black Sea (and with the help of mythographs) the course of the Argonauts ship, who sailed from the Bosporus to Baku and back. Instead, I was thinking about the mysterious Battle of the Trees, which occurred in ancient Britain, and all night I couldn’t find peace; and the next day too, so that my pen barely followed my thoughts. For three weeks I wrote a book in 70 thousand words...
I’m not a mystic and I always avoided involvement in witchcraft, spiritualistic séances and yoga exercises; I never listened to predictions, didn’t believe in automatic writing and so on. I live a simple peasant kind of life in the circle of my family and of a large number of mentally healthy and intelligent friends. I do not belong to any religious cult or secret society or philosophical sect, and I also don’t trust my historic intuition, if it couldn’t be verified by the facts.
But working on the book on the Argonauts, I discovered that the White Goddess of mount Pelion becomes more and more important for my narrative... I, who suddenly fell under the power of the European White Goddess, wrote about her totems in the context of the Argonauts’ story and plunged in the ancient secrets of her cult Wales, Ireland and all over the world.
When, immediately after the war, I returned to Majorca, I started working again on the book which I already called "The White Goddess ", and wrote in more details about the Holy King as a divine victim of the Moon Goddess, keeping in mind that every poet, who honours his Muse, should somehow die for his Goddess whom he worships - just like the King died...” (3)


4. Graves and the new Western spirituality

These facts I drew your attention on, give us reason to admit, that the story of the Golden Fleece whose largest version we owe to Apollonius, influenced the views of R. Graves as a poet and as a historian, and at the same time was artistically worked out by him on the ground of these same views. It seems, that the Graves’ “Fleece” is expected to be read as the “real story” of the Argonauts, told from the viewpoint of an enlightened but at the same time initiated Greek author from the last centuries B.C.
Besides, “The Golden Fleece” is produced according to a conception for the ancient mythology and the western religion, which, as Graves suggests, is founded largely on the mythological researches of J.G. Frazer. They both belong to a tradition in the European humanities, whose representatives do not regard themselves as Christians, reject the Eurocentrism and work for the cultural emancipation of the East and in general of the non-Western world from the European (or Euro-American) domination. Lastly, they are people who oppose the spirit of the classical European academism and try to reconsider the role of the university in the Western societies and its claim to dominate the education and even the spiritual life of the West.
This tradition include and is supported by many influential non-academic intellectuals, among whom I would prefer to mention the English and American followers of Mme H. Blavatsky; a little earlier, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche in Germany; and from the XVIII century – Voltaire.

The new that Graves is offering us, is that he writes a lot of poetry and thinks about himself mainly as a poet; that, secondly, in difference to Blavatsky, he doesn’t pretend for possessing any exceptional spiritual abilities; and thirdly, what seems to me very important, he lived two terrible wars. Maybe exactly this experience gave him strong reason to doubt the alleged superiority of Western civilization and the truth of its main religion. But nevertheless he expresses a kind of religious hope. At the end of his conclusion to the “White Goddess” from 1960 he writes:

“The idea of a Creating Goddess was rejected by the Christian theologians almost two thousand years ago, and by the Jewish theologians even earlier. Most scientists, caring for their social comfort, worship God; but nevertheless I do not understand why a belief in the creation of the universe by a God-Father seems to them more scientific than the belief in the creation of this artificial system by a Goddess-Mother...
Since the source of creative power in poetry is not the scientific education, but the inspiration (no matter what the scientists would say), then why not name as its source the Lunar Muse, since in Europe this is the oldest and most common term defining the source of inspiration? According to the ancient tradition, the White Goddess appears through human beings – that could be a priestess, a prophetess, a queen mother. No poet, dedicated to the Muse, thinks about the Muse herself, but always thinks about the woman, in whom the Goddess at least partially is incarnated; just like an Apollonian poet is unable to perform properly his function, if he doesn’t live under the power of a monarchy or quasi-monarchy. But the poet, who really worships the Muse, is capable to distinguish between the Goddess as the supreme incarnation of power, glory, wisdom and female love from one hand, and the ordinary woman, whom the Goddess makes Her representative for a month, a year, seven years or perhaps more – from another hand. The Goddess is eternal, and perhaps he will know Her again through another woman.
Prophets like Moses, John the Baptist or Mohammed, speaking in the name of the male deity, say: "So said God!" I am not a prophet of the White Goddess and I’ll never venture to utter: "So said Goddess!" But since poetry came to the world, the poets, who worship the Muse, usually speak with love: "In all the universe there is nobody above the Triple Goddess!"”


5. A reader’s impression

At a certain place Graves says, that a poet might be evaluated as such, taking into consideration the degree in which he is familiar with the Goddess and is able to depict “Her and Her island”. And adds: “Shakespeare had known her and had been afraid of her”. As a reader of Graves I would dare to share, that even before the acquaintance with this book, I already was convinced that he is obsessed by a painful fear of the presence of a kind of woman. She is a woman, longing for power, who establishes a relationship with an influential man, dominates him and weaves intrigues against everybody else, hoping to rule through him. She does not love him, but uses him and is always ready to sacrifice him and to look for another, who would fit for the same purpose. Livia in “I, Claudius” is like that, Theodora and Antonina in “Count Velisarius” are like that, Ino, in the very beginning of the “Fleece” is like that. They are images of a woman, who exerts over the man the power, given to her from the Goddess and thus revenges for the subjugation, imposed on her by force and counter-naturally in the epoch of the old Achaeans. She is not a personification of the Muse, but of Hecate. Graves was afraid of this woman.

(1) Graves freely retells the two short Vitae Apollonii, published in the edition of the Scholia (C. Wendel, Berlin, 1935). There we find no mention about hissing, caterwauling or plate throwing, but the rest is exact – the anonymous authors indeed say, that the Apollonius work at first was met negatively, but the second version was applauded. (Zlatnoto runo. Pohodat na argonavtite, p. 504-505. See note 2)

(2) During the work on this paper I was using the Bulgarian translation of the “Fleece” – Robert Greivs. Zlatnoto runo. Pohodat na argonavtite. Translation Irina Vaseva. Fakel, 1993. The reverse translation to English is mine, N.G.

(3) This text, together with the full Russian translation of the “White Goddess” is available at http://www.druids.celtica.ru/page.php?pagename=greivs. Russian translation by L. Volodarskaja. The reverse English translation is mine.

*this paper was read at the International Conference "The Argonautica and World Culture" - Tbilisi, Georgia, 1-5 October 2007). I would like to express my gratitude to professor Irine Darchia from the Institute of Classical, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies at the the Tbilisi State University, for inviting me to this conference.

Writing and Erudition in XXI century

1. From the history of the written word

The culture to which we belong shows a considerable interest in the preservation of the memories of the past. This interest had been stated directly for the first time by Herodotus. It should be noted that his “History” is the most voluminous unified text, created by the Greeks in the classical epoch. The beginning of it says explicitly:

“These are the researches of Herodotus of Halicarnassus, which he publishes, in the hope of thereby preserving from decay the remembrance of what men have done, and of preventing the great and wonderful actions of the Greeks and the Barbarians from losing their due meed of glory; and withal to put on record what were their grounds of feuds.” (Herodotus, I, 1. Translated by G. Rawlinson)

Since then the Greeks and the inheritors of their culture had made considerable efforts in order to continue the deed of Herodotus. It could be said, that they had developed a whole technology of the reminiscence. In the beginning they had written down what had happened, but also what might happen, creating thus the forms of the word, which we nowadays call history and literature.

“It is, moreover, evident from what has been said, that it is not the function of the poet to relate what has happened, but what may happen - what is possible according to the law of probability or necessity. The poet and the historian differ not by writing in verse or in prose. The work of Herodotus might be put into verse, and it would still be a species of history, with meter no less than without it. The true difference is that one relates what has happened, the other what may happen. Poetry, therefore, is a more philosophical and a higher thing than history: for poetry tends to express the universal, history the particular. By the universal I mean how a person of a certain type on occasion speak or act, according to the law of probability or necessity; and it is this universality at which poetry aims in the names she attaches to the personages. The particular is - for example - what Alcibiades did or suffered” (Aristotle, Poetics, 9. Translated by S.H. Butcher).

They had added to that the records of the circumstances and the conditions in which things could happen and even of “what are” these things, which had created the scientific and the philosophical genres of the word.
Later on simultaneously with the production of new and new records antiquity had guided its concerns to the preservation of the available texts (and thus appeared the libraries and the philology) and – what is even more respectable – antiquity had guided its cares to make the access to them easier. Thanks to that, in the first centuries CE the traditional scroll had been replaced by the codex, because the codex had a very important advantage – it had been most suitable to unfold. In the Middle Ages the large square letters /majusculus/ by and by had been replaced by the small rounded letters /minusculus/; so the lines in each page could be much more in number and the writing down – much faster. In the Renaissance the paper became thinner and the separate volumes gathered much more text. The publishing of books became mundane; the market dealing with books and the total prints had increased. However, all that had been no more than an approach to the ancient way of propagation of the written word. The main problem, connected with the prolonged handwork on each separate copy of the book remained unsolved. It is evident, that the discovery of the print press led really to a great change: suddenly it had appeared, that the books could be many in number and cheap. Nobody had to copy with months one and the same book; nobody had to dictate to copyists, but the books could be propagated in a few hours in an unseen total print. In the next 500 years nothing considerable had happened again: the development relied – as before – on a paper of greater quality and on smaller letters.
The invention of Gutenberg has led to an unknown and incredible by that time propagation of the documents of the past. The memories of the deeds and the thoughts of the ancestors begot much more and much richer libraries. In the private houses appeared special places for the books: that was something, which had been of a great rarity in the times before. The need of the inconvenient and expensive travelling of the individual to the educational center had vanished: not only because the centers increased in number, but also because man already had enough means for his association to the word inheritance. Then appeared another problem that had been familiar to the antiquity, but that became serious only in the 15-th century, when the book wealth suddenly increased. At once appeared enormous quantities of new texts of a very low value. These were books of less importance: books-ephemera, deprived of the spring of their own culture; books-weeds, that had grown up thanks to the deed of Gutenberg, but they had strived to replace the old valuable texts, because of which the printing press itself had been invented. Their existence became a hindrance to the good education, and it did not disappear. On the contrary, by and by it became much more difficult to overcome it. How to help the one, who wishes to get really acquainted with one’s own culture – that means, to be “reminded” of what is essential of it – and that’s why he relies on the accessibility of the written word, but precisely because of this accessibility he gets quite another thing? The market and the libraries had been full of very quickly made similarities of literature; of very superficial retellings and compilations of the good historical texts (very often these were retellings of other retellings and compilations); also, very prolonged references of strictly made but aimless collections of facts; also, writings, containing senseless statements and untested or simply fancied evidences; and at last, clumsy, short-witted or incomprehensible sequences of words which claimed to be philosophy. The memory of what really had happened never reached these people, lost in the book jungle: instead of that their brains had been overloaded by words without clear content, and from them remained only several phrases, used with an ease. The education got by these texts resembled to the furniture of a house, the owners of which can afford themselves only cheap furniture from the common shops. When these houses are new, they suppress with the lack of taste of their keepers and with their overburdeness; but the bad furniture is very soon worn out and a feeling of blunt, negligence and poverty appears at once.
Let see what happened after that. Now, 500 years after Gutenberg we possess another device of preservation of the word – it is the computer record. The first and the most obvious result of that is the sharp increase of the volume of the information which is in the physical space around us. The whole ancient Greek literature from Homer to Proclus could be gathered in one CD – this object with its package is smaller, compared with the smallest edition of Herodotus, that could be produced with the means of the traditional editing. Thanks to the CD records all of the well-known literary monuments, belonging to all earth civilizations, could be placed in a modest library shelf. But there is something more. The virtual library of Internet gives freedom to the reader and deprives him from the duty even to bye books, recorded on CD. Today everyone could read Herodotus in the original language, in which he had written or translations of it on the screen of one’s personal computer without possessing no record whatsoever of the text. All the reader needs is an Internet connection that could be acquired by everyone. The free access to the whole word inheritance of the world is already secured.


2. The problem of the erudition

All this happened very quickly and as if astonishing easily – from the point of view of the one who remembers how many efforts and means it has taken to get one or another book. It seems, that everyone, who today wishes to use the written monuments of the past is no longer in isolation. One even does not need the knowledge of different languages, which has been inevitable until late and took a lot of time, because today almost all important texts are translated into English. That’s the way in which the modern man is released from the fragmentary and ideological selection of the texts, forced by the milieu where one got one’s education before. At the same time, the problem of every free and mundane society, where the monopoly on the creation of the word does not exist, remains the same. Who will explain what is useful to be read or whether it is useful to read anything at all? Does it make no difference in what way exactly the people in the XXI century will get their education?
From the point of view of the philologist (I use this word in the broadest sense; something like “specialist in word education’) the advantage of the present-day situation is in the fact, that it secures good conditions for a conscious choice.

(follows)