Discussion of the parallel characteristics of Petõfi and Eminescu is not new in the comparative history of East European literatures, but those who have investigated the problem failed to grasp the common Danubian peculiarities of these two great poets and thinkers. Their analyses were bound to fail, because they compared more or less isolated poetic details and purely literary resemblances or contrasts; in brief, they were limited to aesthetic considerations. Nobody has tried to present the whole personality, the whole human attitude, of the two eminent writers, although the most important aspects of their literary and political activities can be understood only by a thorough knowledge of their intellectual and emotional reactions. The aim of this study is, not only to fill this gap, but also to attract the attention of foreign readers to the parallel phenomena of Middle and East European cultural life.

The three-volume Soviet History of Diplomacy, published during the recent war, can properly claim to be the first attempt to survey the whole range of the diplomatic history of Europe from the Marxist point of view as it is currently understood in the Soviet Union. The problems which Soviet scholars have faced in rewriting history on the basis of the Marxist interpretation have been many, and a solution acceptable to the Communist party of the Soviet Union was reached only after considerable experimentation. While the broad lines of the interpretation had indeed been sketched by Marx and Engels, its practical application was a subject of long controversy. After an initial period during which historical research in the traditional sense was for various reasons largely neglected, a school of literal economic materialists was founded in the early 1920s by M. N. Pokrovskij (1868-1932), and its work found expression in the journals Krasnyj arkhiv and Istorik-marksist.

From the very beginning of his literary career, Andrej Belyj (pseudonym of Boris Nikolaevič Bugaev, 1880-1934) had assumed the role of a daring experimenter and innovator, because his individualistic nature could not be satisfied with any established form of prose or poetry. Believing that he was one of the new generation of man, Belyj felt that the traditional forms of prose and poetry were too limited to satisfy the creative urge of a modern spirit, one who has broken with the heritage of his fathers.

Belyj's third “symphony,” The Return, first published in 1905, typifies Belyj's literary art. Like his first book of verse, Gold in Azure, and his first two symphonies, The Return exemplifies the adventurous spirit of its creator and his remarkable sense of rhythm. Like the rest of Belyj's works, it reflects also his dualistic concept of the world.