Място

The first to encounter his name in print were the readers of the magazine "Savremennost" in the autumn of 1906. The magazine was rather nondescript. Its loud name was probably chosen to remind us that the editors St. Donchev and G. Savchev, whom no one knows today, had the "new literary trends" at heart, i.e., symbolism. At that time, in the minds of some intelligentsia, susceptible to literary fashion, decadence was a sign of modernity. But in the cycle "Dedication" by the new poet Dimcho Debelyanov, there is no decadent "modernity" to be seen. The poems are not shrouded in a symbolic fog, they are clear, traditional". "The inspirations come from elsewhere - from the poet whose personality fills the young man's heart with adoration - Pencho Slaveykov. At that time, Dimcho Debelyanov, born in 1887, was nineteen years old. He had just graduated from the first Sofia male gymnasium. In the gymnasium, he earned a reputation as a warm-hearted and talented young man. Many loved him - for his bribing immediacy, although he was also inclined to solitude, for his directness, for the pure fervor with which he spoke and declaimed. One of his speeches on the feast of Cyril and Methodius was long remembered. He made an even deeper impression with his recitation in "Slavic Discourse" of Vazov's poem "Come and See Us". This time he even gained the attention of the monarch Prince Ferdinand himself, who had come to the solemn student matinee. And no wonder. Dimcho was not at all embarrassed by Coburg. Turning to him, he boldly threw the angry denunciations of the people's poet into his eyes:

An extraordinary amount has been written about the birthplace of Paisius of Hilendar - 3 of our prominent scientists, writers, publicists, and teachers have spoken. The writings, mostly published in newspapers, appeared in connection with the celebration of the 150th anniversary of the "Slavonic-Bulgarian History" in 1912, and later on the occasion of the notorious Kralevdol legend (since 1923). Based on the language of Paisius's history according to its Sofroniev transcript from 1765, Professor M. Drinov was the first in Bulgarian scientific literature to express the opinion that Paisius originated from the Razlog-Gornodzhumay region or from the Macedonian outskirts of the Samokov diocese. Meanwhile, separate legends about the birthplace of Paisius appeared: Dospeisko, Ralyovsko, Belovsko, Bansko, Razlovsko, Lavriotsko, and the collective Athos. Each of them has its ardent defenders (for details, see Prof. Yord. Ivanov, Istoriya Slavianobolgarskaya, Sofia, 1914, pp. XII-XIX). On this issue, Prof. Yord. Izanov summarizes: "Some of these reports have an undoubted literary basis, while others are based on overheard memories of some Athonite and attributed to Paisios. Until more reliable data and written information are published, the reported reports cannot be recognized by science and will remain only as "traditions", especially since they often contradict each other and do not coincide with the known positive information about Paisios" (p. XII).

In connection with the celebration of the 200th anniversary of "History of Slavs and Bulgarians", the question of the birthplace of its author was again raised in the press. The first to initiate this was Sl. Angelov with his article "The Question is Still Open" (Otechestven Front newspaper, issue 5397 of this year). To prove that Paisius was not from Bansko, he based himself mainly on the "irremovability" of the abbots of the monasteries. Elsewhere I prove in detail that this thesis is false, and therefore the conclusions drawn from it are incorrect. Here I will only be content with the following: Slavcho Angelov is wrong, since the abbots, as elected positions (and not titles), could be replaced or demoted. Such is, for example, the case of the nesfit Rilski in the Rila Monastery.