From the home page:
“Starobulgarska Literatura” (“Medieval Bulgarian Literature”) is a specialized peer-reviewed journal dedicated to medieval Bulgarian literature and culture and their Byzantine and European contexts. Since Medieval Bulgarian literature constitutes an important segment of the European cultural heritage, our journal is addressed to an international audience and highlights the work of both Bulgarian and foreign scholars. The journal publishes original research in the fields of literary and interdisciplinary studies of medieval Slavic literatures, as well as editions of unpublished old Slavic literary works and their newly-discovered copies, critical reviews, surveys, information on national and international medievalist events, and current bibliography.
“Starobulgarska Literatura” is published in one issue per year. It contains materials in Bulgarian, Russian, English and German.
The current issue (Issue 71-72 [2025]) has some interesting-looking articles, like Dobriela Kotova’s “Constantine of Preslav as Translator and Preacher: Emotion and Reason in the Uchitel’noe Evangelie” and Lora Taseva’s “Old Bulgarian Translation Correlates of ἀμφιβάλλω ‘doubt; disagree, quarrel’.” Thanks, V!
A great site I recently learned about: Визуализация переписи населения Российской империи 1897 года [Visualization of the 1897 Russian Empire Census]. You can look up individual cities or guberniyas or see the overall imperial statistics. This is going to be a tremendous boon to anyone interested in Russia at the turn of the previous century.
This is going to be a tremendous boon to anyone interested in Russia at the turn of the previous century.
As well as Poland, Ukraine, the Baltics, etc. Lots of interesting data about Warsaw and Łódź for example. I’m not sure I would have guessed that Warsaw was the third largest city in the Russian Empire, and possibly would have had higher GDP than Moscow. That helps put the WWI Eastern Front conflict in context.
Apparently Finland was autonomous enough that it did not get included in the census?
Yeah, that’s an interesting point. I know Finland had a separate status that had been changing, but I don’t know why it wasn’t included.
I love Старобългарска литература, it is full of the weirdest and most interesting stuff. I also love it because it is so… Bulgarian in its view of Old Church Slavic and Church Slavic – I mean, excuse me, Old and Middle Bulgarian. A case in point, Taseva’s paper on the the “Old Bulgarian” translation correlates of ἀμφιβάλλω. Her material includes the Hamartolos Chronicle the Church Slavic translation of which is preserved in manuscripts from Moscow, Prague and Athos and was clearly done in Russian Church Slavic.
Yes, I was amused by that too.
bulbul : “I love Старобългарска литература, it is full of the weirdest and most interesting stuff.” Thanks, on behalf of Aneta 🙂 It’s only preserved in Moscow, Prague and Athos because the manuscripts in Turnovo were burned by the Phanariotes in the late 17th century.
If you ever wondered why there are so few women in historical philology, I can now reveal that they are all busy studying Old Bulgarian.
Apparently Finland was autonomous enough that it did not get included in the census — aspirationally complete enumerated headcounts, of the type held in Russia in 1897, were held in Finland for the first time in 1950 and the last time in 1980. Earlier and later censuses have been collated from the official registers which are anathema to Anglo-Saxon liberals.
I’m not sure what’s so Anglo-Saxon or liberal about wanting an accurate count of people.
Eh? My point was that you can get an accurate count from registers without the expense of a headcount. The Anglo Saxons do want the count but don’t want the registers, so are obliged to continue with expensive headcounts instead.
Oh, I see. I guess I’m not familiar with the system of registers; I don’t know how up to date they’re kept (I guess it differs between countries).
Theoretically, such registers should be up-to-date (you have to register all births and deaths and when you change your place of residence); but practically, it is well known that they are inaccurate. Not that I expect “headcounts” to be absolutely accurate, either (and modern censuses collect much more information than just the number of people), but it seems that in general they are more accurate than the information in official registers.
There you go; that’s just what I would have expected. Not some weird Anglo-Saxon liberal mania, just a desire for accuracy.
Censuses are a lot more widespread than, say, common law. Austria has them every 10 years even though the authorities know where you live.