авторството

Along with other unresolved issues in the history of our old literature, there is also the question of the historiographical works that it had. That is why every initiative that has been noticed recently, related to Bulgarian medieval historiography, is commendable. I am referring to the studies of Goran Todorov "The Origin and Initial Development of Bulgarian Historiography (681-1018)" and "Bulgarian Historiography in the 11th-14th Centuries"1 and Konstantin Mechev "The Bulgarian Chronicle of the Early 15th Century (Historical Content, Ideological and Artistic Appearance, the Question of Its Authorship")2. The reason for these notes is given to me by the study of K. Mechev. I say notes, since I do not intend to dwell in detail on the issue touched upon by it; I would rather just like to take a position on the question posed - To what extent can the author's thesis be accepted, according to which the famous Old Bulgarian (South Slavic) writer Isai Serski also wrote the anonymous Bulgarian chronicle from the beginning of the 15th century? I want to take a position because our science still has so many important questions to solve, which is why there is no need to divert the efforts of the few scientific workers with publications that are insufficiently argued. It is better to direct these efforts to other issues. The answer is all the more compelling, taking into account the fact that the publication is published without an editorial note, it is not presented as a discussion one.