проучвания

The Committee for Classical Studies Eirene (Mir), established by the academies of the socialist countries at the invitation of the Bulgarian Committee of the National Assembly of the Republic of Bulgaria, organized this spring its Sixth International Conference in Plovdiv. The conference brought together many guests from abroad, specialists in various fields of the science of classical antiquity. They were fascinated by the fact that they were meeting in a city that, despite the strong beating pulse of socialist industry, has preserved as millennial witnesses of its past traces of Thracian, Greek and Roman culture, and in its Archaeological Museum preserves the unique and world-famous gold treasure from Panagyurishte. All foreigners undoubtedly took back to their homeland the most enthusiastic impressions of both the new life here and the old fragrance that wafted from antiquity. The organizing committee of the conference, headed by its chairman Acad. Vl. Georgiev had the excellent idea of ​​naming the meeting rooms of the individual sections in the hotel after the four old names of Plovdiv: Pulpudeva, Philippopolis, Eumolpiada and Trimontium. The meetings began on 24 and continued until 29 April 1962. Here Bulgarian linguists, historians, writers and archaeologists met with their distinguished colleagues from the USSR, Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Poland, the GDR and Yugoslavia. Two Western scholars were also present as guests - Pierre Chantren, President of the French Academy of Inscriptions and Literature and Ronald Syme (England), Secretary General of the International Council for Philosophy and Humanities at UNESCO.

In recent years, much has been written about Karavelov. His work and political activity are examined in the works of Bulgarian and Soviet writers, historians, philosophers, and linguists. A contribution to resolving a number of issues related to the enormous work of the notable Renaissance man is also represented by the studies included in the recently published collection "Studies and Articles on Lyuben Karavelov", published by the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, S. 1963. A significant part of the articles are devoted to the ideology of Lyuben Karavelov. This is perhaps due to an effort to finally resolve, albeit in general terms, the question of the nature of Karavelov's ideology, which has already been the subject of very lengthy disputes. It is to be regretted, however, that very little space has been devoted to Karavelov the writer and journalist. Two of the studies prove Karavelov's authorship of articles and other materials that have not been included in his legacy until now. The collection also examines issues related to Karavelov's attitude to the traditions of Bulgarian literature, Karavelov's work as an editor, etc. The subject matter of the collection is clearly too diverse, and this makes it very difficult to group the articles by problem. The authors have touched on different aspects of Karavelov's multifaceted activity, and uniting their studies would be rather arbitrary.