Bulgarian Revival period

This article examines one of the main research projects of Nedka Kapralova, namely, the practice of sponsorship during the Bulgarian National Revival and its importance for understanding the processes that accompanied the transition to modernity in the Bulgarian lands. The new historical era gave rise to new social actors. Literature would begin to “produce” those actors and circulate them as cultural models. The Enlightened European, the National Awakener, and the Teacher became symbolic images charged with the notions of a new and desired cultural space. These figures had their antipodes: the Phanariot and the Pseudo-Civilizer, both rooted in the enemy aggressor stereotype. The collective self-envisioned images of “We, the Bulgarians” and “We, the Enlightened Bulgarians” were gradually affirmed by being juxtaposed with, and contrasted against, the above-mentioned antipodes. The phenomenon of sponsorship, as analyzed by Kapralova, reveals the mechanisms through which new normative frameworks were established. It highlights notable cases in the legitimization of an emergent modern culture, with its guilds and its respective new social networks and circles. The study further attests to the mentoring ethos of the men of letters and offers intriguing insights into the self-determination of the Enlightened. Another line that is traced is represented by the shifts in attitudes and moral orientations of successive generations of intellectuals of the Revival period.

Thе article examines Bulgarian responses to American missionary edu- cators in the Ottoman Balkans during the nineteenth century, tracing a spectrum that ranges from curiosity and engagement to suspicion and intolerance. It ex- plores how Protestant ideas and cultural ideals intersected with Bulgarian literary and spiritual life, education, and the activities of educators and church figures. The reception of missionaries’ work — both favourable and highly critical — is documented in the literature, in periodicals, pamphlets and brochures, as well as in personal correspondence. The article also considers how interpretations of missionary contributions shifted over time, with broader reassessments emerging more than a century after the official beginning of their work among Bulgarians.

In the 19th century Bulgarian poetry, two contradictory tendenc- es could be outlined. The first one is represented by intensified interest in fo- reign cultures and cultural models. The second one is driven by the idea of national self-preservation. The term “regional” refers to a limited scope of nationally-centered uses. They are based on the locality, nationality, Balkan and Oriental identities, regarded in an essentialist approach, and function as a protective framework of belonging to a group. These spheres were deliberately distinguished from the broader European context and, even more so, from the notion of the universality, which remained influential in Western intellectual discourse at the time. The paper also examines the dynamics of regional discourse, tracing its development from local to national levels, and the strategies through which the Bulgarian identity was legitimized through language, cultural heritage narratives, and certain Occidentalist attitudes.

The present article examines the reception of George Sand in Bulgarian Revival culture, considering it as a process of selective appropriation of Eu- ropean modernity. The main thesis is that nineteenth-century Bulgarian society did not adopt Sand’s work directly or in its entirety, but rather “domesticated” it by adapting it to its own moral and ideological norms. The study draws on 270reception aesthetics (Jauss, Iser), the theory of translation as rewriting (Lefevere), cultural transfer theory, and polysystem theory in order to demonstrate that translation functions as an active mechanism of filtering and rearranging foreign texts. In this context, Bulgarian translators act as cultural mediators who select and adapt Sand’s works according to the “horizon of expectations” of the National Revival reader. The analysis shows that predominantly moralizing and pastoral works entered the Bulgarian cultural milieu, while the more radical novels addressing issues of female autonomy, sexuality, and the critique of marriage remained outside the translated corpus. This selective appropriation transforms Sand’s image from that of a socially critical emancipatory writer into a “safe” moralist, compatible with the patriarchal values of Revival society. At the same time, her translations perform an important cultural function: they introduce new aesthetic models, romantic motifs, and social sensibilities, while contributing to the formation of the national literary system. The reception of George Sand in the Bulgarian National Revival is thus strictly selective and adaptive, admitting only those elements of European modernity that can be in- tegrated into the local moral and cultural context. This process reveals a broader mechanism of cultural mediation, whereby modernity is appropriated not as a direct transfer but as a transformed and ideologically refracted phenomenon.

This paper focuses on the reflections of the National Revival poet P. R. Slaveykov concerning falling in love and the nature of love. It traces the meta- morphoses of infatuation and the foundations that establish the new family unit from the perspective of three mutually exclusive worldviews, which compete 290with each other within the Bulgarian sociocultural space, neutralizing the traditional model as a regulator of family planning. Slaveykov’s insights reflect a civilizational curve entering the difficult to control zone of emotional charge and social coercion. He follows a reverse trajectory: from feelings of shame and awkwardness, through the unleashing of instincts, to the pragmatic logic of the marriage market, which transforms love into an economic transaction

The text interweaves personal memories of Assoc. Prof. Nedka Kapralova, PhD, with a presentation of her most significant literary contributions to the field of the Bulgarian National Revival. The paradoxical connections between various themes, figures, and works outlined in her research is traced here to present sketches of the colorful and multifaceted image of the National Revival period, as well as the importance of her numerous translations – some of them foundational for Bulgarian literary studies and culture.

The article traces how Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nedka Kapralova became one of the prominent researchers of culture and literature of the Bulgarian Revival. Having left us untimely, she did not realize her ideas, did not fulfill her research dreams. Her research is primarily in the field of Revival culture, with her scientific interests mostly focused on the phenomenon of philanthropy. She is interested in the connection between folklore and literature, researches female initiation as a phenomenon, etc. The topic of philanthropy is her doctoral thesis. She treats the facts and the documents with respect, which is evident in her book dedicated to the letters of Elisaveta Karaminkova. Over the years, she has been involved in various projects, the result of which is her latest book, dedica- ted to Ekaterina Vasileva. She bequeathed to the Bulgarian cultural community some precise translations of modern French scholars, cultural theorists and philosophers such as Claude Lévi-Strauss, Fernand Braudel and Pierre Bourdieu.

The sponsorship during the Bulgarian Revival is part of an ancient, centuries-old tradition and is a kind of continuation of the donation from previous historical epochs. Religious books are an important part of the books published during the Renaissance. In the period 1806–1856, a total of 77 books were published with assistance, and 24 of them were religious (or 31%). Religious books “in simple Bulgarian language“ set and achieve the goal of maintaining, upholding and strengthening the religious identity of Bulgarians.

The article notices the first critical assumptions about “Ivanko“ dramatic work by Vasil Drumev. It also directs towards the detailed comment by Yordan Trifonov about the historiography sources which the author used to construct the plot. After Drumev develops the character of Ivanko, it becomes attractive to other Bulgarian writers, too. The emphasis of the text is upon the fact that after the work of the playwright from Bulgarian National Revival, the image of Ivanko becomes recognizable and discussed historiographic character. Due to Drumev’s writer finding and the scientific interest of Trifonov, the historiographic plot about him develops right after its literature one.