In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

6. From Hero for All to Dissident and Back The review of Levski’s reception and appropriation in the interwar period, especially in comparison to the respective reception of Botev, shows that both figures, despite certain idiosyncratic trends in their legacy highlighted by different political groups, had been explicitly accepted as common national figures. Both were truly heroes for all. The assertion that Botev and Levski were pitched against each other already in this period, and that after 1944 the communists had elevated Botev as their exclusive symbol at the expense of Levski who was allegedly largely forgotten, was a later hyperbolic interpolation, dating from the 1970s and especially the 1980s, and serving a particular political idea. This does not mean that Botev had not become the slightly preferred figure in the first couple of decades after the end of the Second World War. As already shown, with his explicit endorsement of the communist ideal, he had been raised as the banner of the communist movement . The whole tenure of communist historiography at the time was also such as to posit a teleological and ideological evolution that had to be crowned with an embrace of the socialist idea. At the same time, the fact that Levski had become the patron of the fascist Legion movement , in no way diminished his status as a major figure in the heroic pantheon. On the contrary, September 9, 1944 was posited to be the materialization of Levski’s dream of a “pure and holy republic.”307 The best way to define the official attitude until the 1960s is to say that there was no fascination with Levski comparable to the one that began in the 1970s and continuing until today. Even as Botev might have been slightly privileged, there was nothing like an obsession with him. A look at the protocols of the Polit307 Otechestven front, August 8, 1946, cited in Claudia Weber, “Geschichte und Macht. Die kommunistische Geschichtspolitik in Bulgarien 1944– 1948,” in Angela Richter and Barbara Beyer, eds., Geschichte (ge)brauchen. Literatur und Geschichtskultur im Staatssozialismus: Jugoslavien und Bulgarien , Berlin: Frank & Timme, 2006, 86. 308 The Apostle of Freedom, or What Makes a Hero? buro dealing with anniversaries in the 1940s and 1950s, shows that the emphasis was on celebrations of communist events and figures: the yearly official celebrations of September 9 (1944) and of the Bolshevik Revolution, as well as commemorations of Georgi Dimitrov, especially after his death in 1949. This did not mean, however, that these celebrations entirely monopolized the public space. In 1946, the main events and individuals to be commemorated (outside of the official national holidays) were the following: the 70th anniversary of the Batak uprising of 1876; the second anniversary of the heroic death of 138 partisans from the “Anton Ivanov” partisan brigade; the 70th anniversary of Panaiot Volov, a national revolutionary; the 64th anniversary of Georgi Dimitrov; the anniversary of Iane Sandanski’s death (in 1915); the 330th anniversary of Shakespeare’s death; the 10th anniversary of Maxim Gorkii’s death; and the millennial anniversary of St. John of Rila (Sveti Ivan Rilski), the venerated medieval saint-patron of Bulgaria.308 There were celebrations scheduled to commemorate Botev’s 100th anniversary in 1948 but the budget was comparatively modest, and there was explicitly warning not to extend it further.309 The 80th anniversary of Levski’s death was commemorated in 1953 and the 80th anniversary of Botev’s death in 1956.310 In the deliberations about the celebrations, there is nothing to indicate any ideological preference. If Botev’s name is mentioned somewhat more often, it is because the day of his death—June 2—had become the national day commemorating the roll of honor from the struggles for national liberation against the Ottoman Empire, as well as against capitalism and 308 TsDA, Tsentralen Partien Arkhiv (TsPA), Politbiuro i sekretariat. Tematichni opisi-chestvaniia 1945–1967. 309 TsDA, Fond 1, op. 6, a.e. 531, Protokol 143, July 19, 1948; Fond 1, op. 8, a.e. 187, Protokol 26, October 23, 1948; Fond 1, op. 6, a.e. 568, Protokol 4, January 6, 1949. 310 TsDA, Fond 1, op. 8, a.e. 3092, Protokol 479, November 26, 1952; Fond 1, op. 6, a.e. 2829, Protokol 70, April 26, 1956. One can read a preference for Botev in the fact that it was decided to ask the USSR and the other people’s democracies to organize commemorations for Botev in 1956. On the other hand, the then ascending...

Share