Verfügbarkeit: Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija

Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija: 2

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. Verfasser:	Popovski, Petar 1931- (VerfasserIn)
Format:	Buch
Sprache:	Macedonian
Veröffentlicht:	Skopje "Makedonski Sonce" (2007)
Online-Zugang:	Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract
Beschreibung:	605 S. Ill.

Internformat

MARC


LEADER	00000nam a2200000 cc4500
001	BV035134894
003	DE-604
005	00000000000000.0
007	t
008	081103s2007 a\|\|\| \|\|\|\| 00\|\|\| mac d
035			\|a (OCoLC)644548512
035			\|a (DE-599)BVBBV035134894
040			\|a DE-604 \|b ger \|e rakwb
041	0		\|a mac
049			\|a DE-12 \|a DE-Re13
084			\|a 7,41 \|2 ssgn
100	1		\|a Popovski, Petar \|d 1931- \|e Verfasser \|0 (DE-588)136557325 \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija \|n 2 \|c Petar Popovski
264		1	\|a Skopje \|b "Makedonski Sonce" \|c (2007)
300			\|a 605 S. \|b Ill.
336			\|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|b n \|2 rdamedia
338			\|b nc \|2 rdacarrier
773	0	8	\|w (DE-604)BV035134886 \|g 2
856	4	2	\|m Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen \|q application/pdf \|u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016802352&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA \|3 Inhaltsverzeichnis
856	4	2	\|m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen \|q application/pdf \|u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016802352&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA \|3 Abstract
940	1		\|n oe
999			\|a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016802352

Datensatz im Suchindex

_version_	1804138118558777344
adam_text	Македонската средновековна црковва дипломатка. Содржина Глава седма Македонската Италијанска православна enapxnjď камен на сопнување во односите меѓу Охридската и Римокатоличката црква ..............................................3 Глава осма Дипломатски врски и односи меѓу Охридската патријаршија - Прва Јустинијна и Османската држава ...................................................................87 Глава девета Црковната дипломати] а во служба на слободољубивите идеи и стремежи на македонскиот народ .............................................185 Глава десеета Генеалогија {каталог) на охридските поглавари, на епископите, архиепископите и патријарсите............ 337 Заклучок. ..............................................................415 Conclusion.............................................................. 461 Регистар на географски имиња ................................493 Регистар m лични имиња......................................... 505 Библиографи/а ......................................................523 Други извори .........................................................601 605 Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München Охридската патријаршија co силата, мудроста и со дипломатската вештина и умешност на своите поглавари, за цело време на своето постоекье успе- ала да ja сочува својата самостојност и независност. Таа уживала голем углед, влијание и достоинство. Најдобро сведоштво за тоа претставува искажува- њето на константинополскиот архимандрит Mios Do- xopatres, кој во 1143 година,по заповед на сицилијанс- киот крал Roter Л, извршил попис на патриаршиски- те престолни и на нивните епискошш. Во својот обемен извештај тој, меѓу другото, вели: Како кипарската еибугарската {македонс¬ ката б.н.) црква, независна и непотчинета на ии- КОЈ одврховните престоли, туку самовласно е уп- равувана и од свои епископи осветувана. Отлр- вин не се викала бугарска, по после, бидејќи била завладеаяа одБугарите, таа добила име бугарска. Таа остана независна и кога се истргна од бугар- скитераце иникогашне се присоедини кон цариг¬ радската црква. Врз основа на тоа,и денденешен, таа црква не добива поглавари од императорите, туку тие се ракоположуваат од своите епископи и се викаат архиепископи, бидејќисе самостојни. Архиепископи/ата имаповеќе од 30 єпископства над кои првенствува градот Охрид, како и над ме¬ стата што зависат од нив . (L. Р. Migne, Patrologia greaco-romana, t. CXXXII, Paris, 1868, col. 1097; Fr. N. Finck, Nilos Doscopa- tres Ταξιζ ttìv πατριαρχικον Θρόνων , Αιχενα, 1902,21 ; Й, Иванов, Български старини. .. ,562). The Ohrid Patriarchy with the strength, wis¬ dom and diplomatic skill of its chieftains through ali its existence has managed to maintain its autono¬ my and independence, it had great reputation, in¬ fluence and dignity. The best witness to that is the statement of the Constantinopoiitan archimandrite Niios Dodzopatres, who in the year 1143, under the order of the Sicilian king Rozer II, made an invento¬ ry of the patriarch s capitais and their episcopes. ín his detailed report among other things, he says; Just like the Cypress , the Bulgarian (Ma¬ cedonian) church is independent and is not sub¬ mitted to any of the supreme thrones, but it is autonomously governed and is sanctified by its own episcopes. At first it was not called Bulga¬ rian, but later, since it was governed by the Bul¬ garians, it got the name Bulgarian, it remained independent even when it got released from the Bulgarian governance and it never adjoined the Constantinople Church. On that basis, even to- day,that church does not get chieftains from the emperors, but they come from its own episcop¬ es and are called archbishops, because they are independent The archbishopric has more than 30 episcopacies over which presides the city Ohrid as well as over the places that depend on them. (L. P. Migne, Patologia ..., t. CXXXIÍ, coi. 1097; Fr. N. Finek, NilûsDoscopatres..., 2!; Й. Иван- <зъ,Българсш старша, .. ,562). CONCLUSION Ra h arely which Christian church in the east and in the west ^hemisphere had so much developed, active, skilled and successful diplomacy like the Patriarchy - First Junistiana Ohridian. That s not coincidence, because the Macedonian regions were the source of the Christianity, which through Macedonia and Via Igna¬ tius has been spread towards Europe and the world. The Ohrid s chu¬ rch diplomacy appeared on the historical scene long time ago, since in the first centuries of the Jesus religion, immediately after the es¬ tablishing of the first church communities on Macedonian land, first in Solun and in Ber, and later in Skopje and Ohrid, which were for¬ med by the first gospel-man, apostle Pavle together with his students Sila, Timotej and Luk, continuously was existing till the abolition of the Ohrid patriarchy. In a large number of cases, divine bearers of those missions were the superiors of the archbishopric-patriarchal cathedra and eparchial prelates and archbishops, who shown their selves as capable and skilled in the spirit, the word and the religi¬ on , to do religion-political missioner activity. They have traveled through church communities and through eparchies in special cano¬ nic visiting, with a task to spread the Christianity and to help in the establishment of the church order and the regime inside them. The need of regulation of the church affairs over canonic, spiritual-legal and political basis and for mutual linking and collabo¬ ration, forced those first Christianity cells to prepare own peoples for emissaries capable to do social church-national activities. For succe¬ ssful accomplishment of this social church function, people were recruited, not only to form the order of the church clergy, but also from the hermits. Skilled people have worked with them, who disti¬ nguished their selves in the accomplishment of that activity. First 461 D-r Petar Popovski they went in the church communities, among the hermits, and prea¬ ched the Christian religion; they allocated the acquired experiences in the arrangement of the church order and the regime, and estab¬ lished links for better mutual communication and collaboration in all spheres of the church life. Later, when large church institutions and organizations were created, the role and the function of those people became bigger and more complicated. Namely, they already began to do one kind of a diplomatic activity now, which was consisted in es¬ tablishing contacts and allocation of messages among separated chu¬ rch organizations from one site, and among churches and state or¬ gans and institutions from the other site. The first emissaries that began the road of the Macedonian church diplomacy in the early Christian period were the archbishop from Solun, Jovan, the metro¬ politan from Skopje Ursilij and the episcopes from Ohrid - Erazmo, Antonie and Lavrentie. They conducted intensive and very live dip¬ lomatic correspondence with the Constantinople church. Especially the metropolitan from Skopje, Ursilij, who have collaborated with the imperator for the East Rome Empire, with the emperor Leo, in occasion of the Halkidon s meeting, held in 451, highlighted himself. At this IV Universal meeting the Christian churches accepted the dogma about two natures in Christ, as indivisible but also as not united, judging it with that that the Nestorian and the monophysis heresy, which was spread with concerned measures. He and his precursor often traveled to Constantinople, on diplomatic mission for reconciliation of the church dogmas about territorial demarcation of the Christian communities and episcopes and about other issues re¬ lated to the Christian religion. After establishing of the Ohrid arch¬ bishopric (Junistiana Prima, 535), the church diplomacy got new wider dimensions. Her superiors - Katelijan, Jovan I and Leon sho¬ wed their selves as very skilled and experienced diplomats in a point of settling the issues related with the borders of the church commu¬ nities and episcopes, which in that time were very actual, and in the obstructing of the spreading of the monophysis hermit in the ortho- 462 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. dox environments. About the archbishops Jovan I and Leon is known that they participated at the universal council on which the stands for the Christian rules and for the integration of the Constantinople s church were reconciled adjusted in relation to the other orthodox churches, which at that time played a role of church coordinator. On one hand they worked on promotion of the episcopes relations and on the other on relations between the episcopes and the Archbis¬ hopric, from the other site. That s how the basis of the church order and the regime, the rules of behavior in the mutual communication and the collaboration in the sphere of the church culture and edu¬ cation were set. The Macedonian church has developed in a much higher stadium in the time of the Holly brothers Cyril and Methody, which had not only local, but also and international character. They opened new page in the Slavic civilization and with their diplomatic missions they confined new epoch in the history of the Balkan and of Europe. These spiritual giants, accompanied by their students, had the main role - to spread the letter of the Christianity and education and culture among the homogenous Slavic mass, simultaneously doing state-political and military function. The historical missions in Bregalnica, Polihron, Hazar and the mission in Moravia, presented high point of the Macedonian diplomacy in the early middle century, who blessed the Slavic generic with new Christian spirit and with new Slavic letter and literature. They left a massive and inerasable mark in the history of the human civilization. These giants rose up the Macedonian people in the world and set up it up as a founder of the first Slavic education and culture. The Macedonian people, first among the Slavic, have organized through their activity an Archbishopric, and after that Patriarchy, which led them through the centuries, kept them by the religious-national outrages and appetites and encouraged them and defend their spirit of surviving in the centuries of the slavery. Un¬ fortunately, for some historical periods we don t have specific info¬ rmation and data for that how the missioner-diplomatic activity has 463 D-r Petar Popovski unrolled, who were her bearers, from which environments they ori¬ ginated, and at what places and issues in the international works this activity has unrolled. Undoubtedly is that in those so called dark period from the historical development those activities didn t stop, which can be concluded from the rich diplomatic activity between the periods, respectively in so called shiny periods. For an example, there is nothing palpable in the reign of the Macedonian dynasty of the komitopuls, Shishman Morki, tsar Samuil and his inheritors - Gavril Radomir, Jovan Vladimir and Petar Deljan. After Kliment and Naum, till XIV centuries, there are only information about the Oh- rid s patriarch Jovan Debarski, who came on the Ohrid s throne with an official charter published by the Byzantine emperor Vasilie II the Macedonian killer. For him is known that he delighted in respect and reputation, both at his people and in the Byzantine yard. Thanks to the good relations with the royal court, he succeeded to keep the autonomy of the Ohrid s patriarchy with her clear Macedonian Sla¬ vic spirit and character. As a result of his skillfulness in leading of the church works, especially in the relations with the royal court, he succeeded to obtain three charters, with which the independence of the Ohrid s church was confirmed, and several eparches that were occupied by the Bulgarian Empire were returned to him. Here, we re not talking about classic diplomacy like we have it today, as an ins¬ titution and facility, as special administrative body respectively ser¬ vice or ministry that cares about leading of the external politic of one state or church, but strictly for individual attempts by the represe¬ ntative of the higher clergy, responsible or authorized to perform se¬ parate tasks in the mutual relations, to negotiate or to arrange with separate essential issues, which were from mutual interest for solvi¬ ng the mutual conflicts and misunderstandings or to obtain some kind of canonic or political law for realizing of some church s aims and interests that could help in raising the reputation, the influence and the positions at the people, society or in the international rela¬ tions. 464 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. There are many examples in the writing sources for the Ma¬ cedonian medieval church history that bears witness to the produc¬ tive missionary-diplomatic activity of some church dignitaries in the development and the promotion of the relations of the Ohrid church with other Christian churches and states, for solving the separate issues that were a barrier in the mutual understanding and collabora¬ tion, they encumber the relations and digressed them that affected negatively on the Christianity. For the period after Samuil s reign is characteristic that the prelates from the higher Macedonian clergy that were coming at the patriarchal and eparchy cathedras in the Ohrid church, and originated from the independent party, with all strengths they attended to normalize the already unsettled patriarchal relations, produced as a result of the Ottoman conquests on the Bal¬ kan, always striving towards affirmation of the main church Christi¬ an aim, towards the brotherhood and equality, freed by spiritual, educated and territorial pretensions, conquest and repaying and from the threats of throwing curse and similar. All ofthat was done by an approval with the traditional church canons and rules. There wasn t always an approval and support for this kind of strivings by the Constantinople s church, which although lost the positions in the Eastern provinces, and continued its attendance artificially to keep the primate of leading Christian church on the Balkan and in Asia Minor, although territorially was only in Constantinople, without its administration and without any eparchy. Those strivings came to expression in the second half of the XIV century, when in the Macedonian high clergy came a new gene¬ ration of intellectuals with highs spiritual, moral, political and patri¬ otic spirit. The new spirit that strived towards the mutual understa¬ nding, evangelical concord and toleration, and against churches ideological-political conflicts, has promoted the Ohrid s patriarch Matej I. He was a wise man, active and crafty diplomar, also res¬ pected to the Macedonians and Greeks prelates and archbishops. His mission in life was not only to keep the Ohrid church, her spiritual, 465 D-r Petar Popovski cultural and political influence and role in the Christian world, but also to connect all eparchies that have shown affection to Ohrid, and were nominal to the Constantinople s church. Acting in that directi¬ on he used so called high diplomacy, and as a result of that the Pat¬ riarchy the First Junistiana of Ohrid, as he titled it, he lifted it on a higher spiritual plain, after which it became the biggest and the most influent church in the Eastern provinces. With skilled diplomatic moves he got the affection of the small Asian prince Djuneid, mana¬ ger of the Ottoman governments in the Ohrid s area, which helped him to attach the Sofia s and Vidin s eparchies that before were under jurisdiction of the Constantinople s patriarchy and later he also attached the eparchies that were owned by the cancelled Trnovo s archbishopric. The Constantinople patriarchy was flaying to these moves made by the patriarch Matej I, and threatened that will throw a curse with a purpose to isolate and deprived the individuality in the orthodox world. Attending not to receive dramatic course and unwanted con¬ sequences Matej I went to Constantinople and said to the imperator Manuil Paleolog that the hrisovulite issued by the Byzantine impe¬ rators Junistian I, Vasili I, his son Leo VI and from Vasilij II, acco¬ rding to which, new attached eparchies and previous canonic belon¬ ged to the Ohird s church, after which he obtain new deed that with agreement by the Sinklitot and by the Patriarchal synod, gave him girths to rule with the Sofia s, Vidin s eparchy and with other epa¬ rchies from the imperator hrisovuli issued before Paleolog, and with which till then the Constantinople s patriarchy ruled in no canonic way. After the official state-legal borders regulating of the Ohrid s administration, the eparchies from the Dunav s princedoms were also attached, Vlashko and Moldavia (that has happened before 1393, when the state and religion authorities of the princedoms they de¬ sired to be in the Ohrid s patriarchy). With these attempts Matej I became in the history of the Macedonian Ohrid s church as the most creditable church landowner, who vastly extended the Ohrid admini- 466 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. stration, returning her canonic eparchies and territories from the time of Junistian I. He was a skilled diplomat and politician who in many complicated conditions fought to keep the independent status of the Ohird s patriarchy for a long time. Also his inheritors, Nikodim, Do- rotej, Prohor and Grigorij I continued his steps. Although they lived in the time of expressive social and political antithetic, in which everything was arrayed on military-political and religion interests of the Ottoman empire that attended the seed of the Islam to sow in as many Christian environments , wisely and ably, leading the church affairs, however they succeeded to keep the acquisitions and the position of the Patriarchy, attending to improve with good diploma¬ tic moves, in the Ohrid administration and in relations with the other orthodox churches in the Eastern provinces. They led a big fight to protect their alphabet from the aggressive and unpredictable Islam, to strengthen the links between sister-churches and to protect the Macedonian character of the Ohrid church from foreign influences, especially from the Greek, continuously expending the education, culture and attainment. Some superiors directed the missionary-dip¬ lomatic activities towards the distraction of the church barriers that were made artificially by the Constantinople patriarchy with a pur¬ pose to rise as a leading church, imposing itself spiritually, educati¬ onal and political, although its positions in the Christian world were fully lost before the fall of Constantinople in the hands of the Turks (1453). With this kind of activities the Ohrid s superiors have risen as respectful spiritual pastors and successful missioners and diplo¬ mats among the church dignitaries, especially in the international, church and in church-state relations, and contributed the Ohrid pat¬ riarchy to receive the place that it deserved. Especially characteristic were the missionary-diplomatic activities of patriarch Nikodim, who wanting to strengthen the link and cohesion in the Ohrid s adminis¬ tration, was often going in a canonic visit to the farthest eparchies. He is creditable for the strengthening of the links with Vlashko and 467 D-r Petar Popovski Moldavia, where he was twice, once on a invitation by the Molda¬ vian duke Alexander Stari, when he named priest Teoktist for metro¬ politan of the Moldavian eparchy. On an invitation by the Russian bishop loan he visited Russia, with which he establish a tight coop¬ eration on a church and state level. Greek oriented eparchies were gained with wisdom, scattering church booL· and handwritings with free texts and opening schools for clerics, translators and transcri¬ bers, attending to rise the education in them on a higher level. In this view neither his successor, the patriarch Dorotej hasn t fallen behind, who bravely was following the steps of his predecessors . He was on a canonic visit to Vlashko, Moldavia, Minor Russia, twice to strengthen his authority over those eparchies that the Constantino¬ ple Patriarchy has used active pressure for putting them again under its influence. His correspondence with the Moldavian duke Stefan the Great is proving the close relation and collaboration between the Ohrid Church and the eparchies through the river Dunav; the predi¬ sposition of the pastvata in Vlashko and Moldavia towards Ohrid, and the efforts that were made for securing liturgy literature for the churches and the monasteries in those kingdoms. In his period the Slavic education was strongly expand in the Ohrid administration , including the eparchies that were not Macedonian, ant the diploma¬ tic experience was always improving . The development process of the Ohrid patriarchy in the area of the church diplomacy, significantly has improved in the period of the patriarch Prohor, who in the pastva was laudable as a keeper and a guardian of the autocephaly and of the Macedonian character of the Ohrid church, too, for what he, never compromised. He was solving the churches disputes and conflicts calmly, with diplomatic means, and he always has emerged as a winner. In the relations with the state he attended wisely and carefully , with high degree of responsibility and understanding towards the states things , with which he has enchanted the affection of the High gat and of the sultan too. His wise politic and strategy contributed the Ohrid church 468 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. to strengthened on the front position in the orthodox world on the Balkan and in Europe, creating Macedonian orthodox municipalities in Dalmaţia, Venice, South Italy {Sicily, Apulia and Callabria) and on Malta too, united in unique church institution, known as Italian {Macedonian) orthodox eparchy that although was situated in the heart of the Rome catholic church, with known exceptions continuo¬ usly existed more than three and a half centuries. In that period the Ohrid administration was on the biggest territory up to that time. The diplomatic abilities came to affection to him in the conflict with the Serbian metropolitan Pavle from Smederevo, who has separatist tendencies towards the Ohrid church. Namely, at his initiative the Serbian eparchies to separate from the Ohrid patriarchy wit an attention to renew the canceled Serbian church {Patriarchy of Pech), the patriarch Prohor used all gospel-canonic and diplomatic means with which he disposed and after two years fight he succe¬ eded to prevent this that could be fate for Ohrid. Separatist pheno¬ mena like these were present in other none Macedonian eparchies also, which were under strong influence by the Constantinople chu¬ rch. In the legitimate war against the separatism in the church he has got moral and political support from four eastern patriarchs, from the High gate and from the sultan, with which the risks were eliminated from disintegration and falling apart of the Ohrid church. In the historical sources the event is marked as typical separatist act and attempt in which the Ohrid superior showed wisdom, spiritual and political maturity and ability, but also a diplomatic skill, enchanting them on his site the most influenced state and religious subjects in the ottoman society in the battle against the phenomena of the Ser¬ bian church separatism. The tough economic situation in which was the Ohrid Patriarchy, because of the high church taxes, the Ohrid s superiors and the eparchies prelates and archbishops were forced to go around abroad for donations. Many old and rear subjects and handwritings with unusual value were pawned in the ottoman banks and courts, because the churches and monasteries hadn t got funds to 469 D-r Petar Popovski pay the high state taxes. Most of the trips were to Russia, where the state and the church authorities were willing to help the Macedonian Ohird Church to pull out from the tough economic situation, and to enable returning of the pawned churches items, because with their alienation the identity of the oldest Christian church could be lost. From narrative sources is known that beginning from patriarch Ma¬ tei, many superiors of Ohrid Church after him were traveling to Russia with two purposes: to obtain financial means from the Russi¬ an czar for returning of the pawned churches items, and to motivate Russia, as orthodox state and European great military force, to par¬ ticipate in liberation of the nations on the Balkan from the ottomans slavery. Persons from the high clergy were going on this kind and similar missions, who benefited a reputation in the church clergy and the pastva, known as good diplomats with high qualities and values that physically and spiritually were able to accomplish this kind of complicated tasks. In that regard the criterion of the Ohrid patriar¬ chal synod was very sharp. After patriarch Prohor, except in Russia, the Ohrid s superi¬ ors, among who and famous metropolitan and episcopes, were tra¬ veling to Poland, Czech Republic, and to the western European cat¬ holic countries {Germany, Austria, France, Italy, England, Belgium, Spain). Also, they were going there with same purposes and inten¬ tions; to supply donators means for outgoing of the economical con¬ ditions in the Church and to animate there selves in order the western castles to engage military for liberation of the captive Balkan s nations. From 1585 to 1650, ten Ohrid s superiors had traveled to Russia and to the western European countries, visits with clearly po¬ litical character. Some superiors often had accompanied famous me¬ tropolitans and prelates, who had political and missionary-diplomatic affinity. That has been a new generation of highly educational patriarchs, who got famous with diplomatic attempts. Their purpose was to motivate the western catholic world to start a war for expe¬ lling the Ottomans from the Balkan and from Europe. A first Ohrid s 470 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. superior who traveled through the Europeans castles and dukedoms with political purposes was Gavril I. accompanied by the metropo¬ litans Eremij Pelagoniski and Sofronij Grebenski, with many archi¬ mandrites and 13 servants, at first he visited Moscow, where he was welcomed by the Russian tsar Teodor Ivanovic, where he camei order to blandish the suzerain to cancel the spiritual dependency of Moscow from Constantinople, who supported the Greek influence in the Russian countires, and from the Constantinople s patriarch and the Synclit to seek a promotion of the Moscow metropolis in the Patriarchy and her inauguration for autocephaly. The suggestion of patriarch Gavril the I, was only and warmly acceptable by the tsar, after which a official procedure of exchange of documents between Moscow and Constantinople has started for that issue. After many reactions and contradictions from the Constantinople s Patriarchic Synod, the idea of the Ohrid s superior came trued in 1589 at the Church meeting in Constantinople, at which the Moscow s metropo¬ lis was declared as Patriarchy. The Ohrid s patriarch Gavril the I, the main initiator for this, as confession and gratitude for the efforts that he made for refusing the Constantinople s vedomstvo over Russia, he received a prize from the tsar in an amount of 40 gold coins. During the visit of Gavril in Moscow, the Russian suzerain for the first time has found out that the Ohrid s patriarchy was the only Slavic autocephaly churcK m the Eastern orthodox acumen and that under its vedomstvo has all none Greek orthodox nations on the Balkan Peninsula, including the princedoms Vlashko and Moldavia . The political mission of patriarch Gavril in Moscow contri¬ buted the Russian kingdom and the Russian church to turn more towards Ohird, which was especially important because the both churches and nations got closer. In Moscow áe Ohrid s patriarch was considered as important orthodox prelate that was given highly due that with his reputation and authority contributed the Moscow metropolis to be promoted in Patrairchy . Expressing the pleasure for the hel and the support that the Ohrid s patriarchygave to Russia 471 D-r Petar Popovski in the process of getting the independence of her national church, by that time guided by Greek prelates and archbishops, placed by Cons¬ tantinople, the Russian tsar, as annunciated donator of the Christian nations , gave means for ransom if the church s casks and vestme¬ nts, propertcy of the old monastery Prepodobna macenica Paras- keva , near Straga, pledged at the atheists , in amount of 60.000 aspri, after which he has been proclaimed as ktitor of the monastery. Then the patriarch Gavril stayed in Poland, in the city of Grodno, where in July 1586 has met with the king Stefan Batori, where he was warmly welcomed. He has complained to the king about the hard condition of the Christians in the Ohrod s patriarchy and for the obstacles that the catholic authorities were doing to the Macedonian orthodox communities in the Italian orthodox eparchy, at Sicily, Apulia and Calabria. Gavriel knew that the king Batori had close relations with the pope in Rome, so that s why he asked him to influence at him to pass the conditions. In order to help him, the king gave him a letter for the pope Sikst the V, in which he was asking him to carry out for the seeking of Gavril. After one month, the Ohrid s superior set off to Chez Republic, in Prague, where he met with the Austrian king Rudolph the II. After he presented the con¬ dition in Macedonia, he asked them, his country and the other cat¬ holic countries to engage military for expelling of the Ottomans from the Balkan and from Europe, whereupon he obligated in his dieceza to organize armed national resistance, that will be strong support to the liberation armies from the west. Due to the absence of relevant written sources, we can as¬ sume that some kind of agreement was reached at that meeting, because the western press at that time gave extraordinary publicity to the visit of Gavril I of western catholic states. On 31 of August he arrived in the German town Tibingen where he was magnificently welcomed. It was a big event for the town, everyone went out to see the beautiful patriarch of Macedonia . Everywhere he went he tal¬ ked about the dissatisfaction of the Balkan Christians from Turkey, 472 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. asking the royal courts in the catholic states to make coalitions in order to force the Turks out, this can be proved by a document from 08.10.1587 kept in the state archive in Insbruk. The Romanian writer Jorga said that the document belongs to the Ohrid superior of the church Gavril I who in the western states presented himself as a patriarch. Not only Gavril but all the former and preceding superiors of the church called themselves patriarchs, very often they used both titles. The Ohrid church in the time of emperor Samuil was named a Patriarchy but the names Archbishopric and Archbishops were also used out of respect for the founder Justinian I who established the Archbishopric for his own people the Macedonian people. On 05 of September 1587 Gavril I with his company went to Italy where he met the pope Sixth V whom he asked not to be an obstacle for the orthodox municipalities of Sicily, Apulia and Cala¬ bria in the performance of canonic sermons. Since there is no source for the outcome of the meeting it is assumed that he showed no understanding, because after one year the orthodox priests from tho¬ se areas were invited to a church meeting in Mesina where they were forced to join a union with the Roman Catholic Church. Some ortho¬ dox priests were convinced because of the pressure, those who didn t want to be subdued went to East. This tells us that Gavril s mission wasn t successful. Actually there were still no good conditions for accepting his suggestions about the forcing out of the Turks from the Balkans, not in Russia nor in the western European countries. The official Russian diplomacy wasn t much interested in the Slavic people on the Balkans, i.e. wasn t their protector. It was more intere¬ sted in the Greeks because Russian kings wanted to be descendants of Byzantium, especially after the marriage of Ivan III Vasilevic with the Byzantine princess Sophia Paleolog. This was also affected by the acknowledgement of the royal highness of Ivan IV Grozni by the Byzantine patriarch Joasaf in 1561, which was actually a way to get close to the Russian sovereign in order to receive donation. After Gavril failed to make Russia interested in the Slavic revolutionary 473 D-r Petar Popovski ideas he turned to West where he sensed some good signals due to the fear of the Islam in the western world. His descendant Nektarij I and later Atanasij I tried to use the encouraging signals. It was a period of intense rebellions in the Oh¬ rid and Dukljan area which contributed to accelerate the process of uniting the European catholic countries into a more determined fight against Turkey. The anti turkish mood on the Balkans was mostly expressed at the time of the Austrian - Turkish war. The pope Cle¬ ment VIII judged that the situation is good for a beginning of the creation of the Christian League, a first step towards the anti Turkish resistance, and fortifying the relations with the dissatisfied people on the Balkans with the establishing of permanent connections with their representatives and emissaries. At the beginning of June 1593 the superiors of the liberation movement of Macedonia and Mathia, led by Patriarch Nektarij I sent a letter to the pope in which they ask him to help them by sending an army and material goods promising that they will gather 40.000 fighters against Turkey. At the end of the request they wrote: Li vecchi di Macedoniae et Arvatié , beca¬ use of fear of conspiracy the names of the organizers were not mentioned. The letter is sealed with the Latin words: A Seal of the Kingdom of Macedonia and Arvaniď, which leads to a conclusion that there was an organized rebellion organization with its headqua¬ rters. This is also proved by the letter of the special emissary of the pope for the Balkans Aleksandar Komulovic originally from the Kingdom of Macedonia , which he sent to Rome after he got fami¬ liar with the war-political conditions in Macedonia and Arvania. According to the content it is assumed that the letter was sent after Komulovic met the patriarch Nektarij I who came back from Russia. Namely, Komulovic suggested the pope to get the support of Russia for the fight against Turkey, evidently after the suggestion of Nek¬ tarij who already had some knowledge about the Russian mood on this question. Komulovic was a great friend with the superior of the 474 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. Drach church Atanasij, later Ohrid patriarch, who also worked in the preparations for a rebellion in Macedonia and Arvania. Satisfied with the report pope Clement VIII accepted the su¬ ggestion of Komulovic, after which in January 1594 he sent him in Russia on a special mission to win over the support of the king Teodor for his plans against Turkey. He sent a special letter to the Russian king with which he informed him in detail with the creation of the Christian League and a Holy Alliance against the Turks. In the meantime, while Komulovic was traveling through Russia the heads of the Macedonian- Arvanian Kingdom led by the patriarch Nektarij I and Atanasij on 7 of November 1594 met in the monastery of St. Marija near Valona, where they decided to send Tomo Peleza as their emissary to the pope, he was known for his skills in talking and diplomacy, and he also spoke French and Italian. Peleza had some previous missionary experience, he was sent by the pope in Western Europe with a purpose to convince the authorities in Austria, Rome, Venice and Spain to help in the liberation of the Macedonian Kin¬ gdom from the Turks. This information leads to a conclusion that at that time Ohrid patriarchy had specially trained missionary-diplo¬ mats who traveled to Western Europe as special emissaries of the Ohrid patriarch. The sources lead to a conclusion that the brothers Marko and Gorgi Gini very close relatives of Atanasij were also a part of the missionary diplomacy. The church superiors in Macedo¬ nia later on sent the pope a special letter-memorandum in which they presented in detail the views and attitudes in tenns of the plan of the Holy Chair for the liberation of the enslaved Christian people on the Balkans. Tomo Peleza came to Rome in the summer of 1594 and he immediately met the pope Clement VIII and the cardinals to whom he presented the views of the church in Macedonia and the way in which the war against Turkey should be led. The Roman council accepted his views and attitudes, but for the rebellion in Arvania they decided to choose the appropriate time in order to avoid unne- 475 D-r Petar Popovski cessary loss of lives and assets. Due to the fact that Peleza led the negotiations in a very dignified, skillful and successful manner the council decided to reward him with money. After the death of Nek- tarij I, Atanasij I took over the preparations of the rebellion in Ma¬ cedonia and Arvania. From 1596 to 1615 he visited several European countries and rulers convincing them that he will spread the rebellion from Macedonia to the other neighboring countries if they help him with army and weapons. He was doing this secretly because he was constantly controlled by the Turkish authorities. The area Himara, east of Valona, in Mathia, present Albania was the centre of rebe¬ llious movement. He went to Ohrid only ifit was necessary when he was supposed to welcome emissaries from other churches, when there were church gatherings, meetings of the Synod of the Ohrid Patriarchy or big church holidays. Atanasij I established a living diplomatic relation with many countries in Europe, engaging highly educated people, educated in the West, appreciated people from the political life, patriots with a moral and political maturity and res¬ ponsibility and with already known diplomatic skills. Atanasij I acquired high clerical education in Paris, he spoke French and Ita- . Han, he had his own diplomatic team which followed the internal and external political conditions. His followers traveled abroad entered the royal courts in Europe, transferred the messages and explained the proposals for war projects in Macedonia. Apart from Marko Gini who signed as an Ambassador of Macedonia and neighboring areas in Turkey , a leading role in this diplomatic team was given to Alek¬ sandar Pashtrovic - Pashtro, who called himself Alexander Macedo¬ nian. Everywhere he went he presented himself and signed the offi¬ cial documents as Macedonian from the Kingdom of Macedonia and other neighbor provinces . Apart from that Atanasij I had a wide net of diplomatic representatives, Macedonians in all the big European centers like Dubrovnik, Naples, Rome, Torino, Venice, Prague, Paris, Tibingen and others. They were a living connection between Ohrid and the western catholic world, through them messa- 476 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. ges were sent from Ohrid and Macedonia to the European royal courts with which there were constant diplomatic relations. The revolutionary activities of Atanasij I were supported by the Macedonian high clergy, who took up this kind of activities not only out of religious reasons but also because of the revolutionary spirit of the people who wanted freedom, spiritual and national inde¬ pendence. It was a period when from Hercegovina in the north to Moréja in the south there were rebellious activities of the people. A lot of Western Europe rulers wanted to use the fighting mood of the Balkans Christian population. They believed that with a joined fight with the revolutionized people they will get new estates, workforce and mines. Atanasij I wanted to use their wishes in order to make his ideas for freedom come true. So, he followed very carefully the European politics and the activities of the European rulers for taking over the Turkish ruling territories. The biggest rebellious mood was in Himara, east of Valona, which was making troubles to the Turkish authorities for a long time due to the Spanish support, whose state interests reached these areas. In order to make the liberation ideas come true in 1596 through special representatives Atanasij I establi¬ shed contacts with appreciated persons from Rome {Vatican), Venice and Spain from whom he requested support and help in army and weapons. These requests were accepted with thrill. The pope s de¬ mands in return for the help were joining of the Ohrid Patriarchy into a union with the Roman Catholic Church , where as Venice didn t want to spoil the good relationship with Turkey because of Arvania and Macedonia . Only Spain accepted the call of the Ohrid Patriarch but when the time came to fulfill the arranged responsi¬ bilities they made some moves which endangered the whole move¬ ment. The vice king of Naples promised a lot but fulfilled nothing. Consequently, the rebellion in Himara failed because Spain, altho¬ ugh promised, didn t send army nor weapons. After this unsuccessful try Atanasij I went into mission through the European royal courts, aiming to search for new allies and military help. In Naples he met 477 D-r Petar Popovski the Spanish vice king Olivares, in Rome the cardinals Peter Aldo- brandini, Santa Severina and San Gorgio, in Prague he met the Aus¬ trian king Rudolf II and some provincial dukes in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. It is known from the correspondence with them that Atanasij I wasn t given firm promises, because of what he came back disappointed, first in Ohrid and then in Himara. Naples and Prague were reserved, but in Romeusing the difficult position he was again blackmailed to sign a declaration of union, which he rejected without discussion. Then, he again turned to Spain looking for help. But he was cheated for the second tíme. Because of that he decided to go to Russia, hoping to manage to win over the Russian king. He was convinced by Clement VIII to do this, he was trying to convince the Russian rulers to participate in the planned general Christian anti Turkish alliance. Atanasij I was escorted by Eremija, the head of the Pelagonia-Prilep church, who was regarded a skillful orator and diplomat, the superior of the Meglenian church Josif and the superior of the Trnovo church Dionisij. They were all accepted by the Russian king on 24 of June 1606, there are no relevant information about this meeting, but fo¬ llowing the Russian foreign politics of that time especially the relations with Turkey, there wasn t evident success of Atanasij s po¬ litical mission. At that time Russian rulers wanted to keep good and friendly relations with Turkey. In 1595 Russia rejected to participate in the anti Turkish alliance which was prepared by the pope Clement VIII and it didn t show much interest in the Slavic people on the Balkans and avoided protecting them from the central Turkish authorities and the Sultan. Its policy towards the Slavic people con¬ sisted only of material help for the churches and monasteries, which due to the very big taxes were in a very bad economic position. Having in mind these conditions, it is assumed that Atanasij didn t manage to gain the support of the Russian authorities for his project i.e. armed rebellion in Macedonia and the Balkans which would be supported by Russia. 478 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. After that Atanasij I returned to Ohrid disappointed, but ho¬ ping that he would still find allies for reviving his liberating ideas. Not being able to forget about the idea for a rebellion after the return he continued an intense political activity. Aiming to get to know with the situation and the mood of the Christian people and their readiness for a rebellion, he took up several months of traveling through the European part of Russia, he traveled through Macedonia, Greece, Bulgaria, Trakia, the Archipelagus, Serbia, Bosnia, Dalmá¬ cia and Arvania. These travels fortified his beliefs that the conditions for a rebellion were good and that the rebellious mood of the people should be used. Working intensely on the preparations for a rebellion this time he decided not to rely on foreign participation, but on their own force which was a proof that the rebellion will succeed. And when they were about to rebel with 12.000 rebels, at the request of the Spanish vice king in Naples, the count Boneventski asked from Atanasij to wait for a better time for a rebellion promising that when the time comes for a rebellion Spain will send help in soldiers and weapon. This leads to a conclusion that during the preparations there were diplomatic relations with Spain, that the Spanish vice king was informed about the preparations and the plan of the rebellion. Be¬ sides the bitter experience Atanasij I couldn t get rid of the big lies that he would get foreign help for the rebellion. But he was wrong because the promised help from Spain never came to Macedonia, and as a consequence of that all the hopes for a rebellion failed, because the rebellious people were discouraged by the frequent delays of the rebellion. Haunted by the thought of liberating Macedonia from the Turks with a Balkans rebellion and foreign help Atanasij I made one more try to convince the European royal courts to support the idea for a rebellion. At the beginning of 1615 he again went to Western Europe intending to go to Spain and meet the Spanish king Philip III, which wasn t allowed by the Naples vice king, out of fear that they might find out the truth about the political games and manipulations 479 D-r Petar Popovski that he was doing about not fulfilling the promise for sending mili¬ tary help for the rebellion in Russia. This time Atanasij I again re¬ turned disappointed because the European catholic countries weren t prepared to enter open war with Turkey, but with their promises they wanted to keep him under control and use him when it would be appropriate for them. That was the reason why Atanasij s efforts to gain the help of Europe failed, his efforts and hopes were particula¬ rly turned towards the Spanish court. This kind of behavior wasn t only characteristic for Spain but for the other European countries as well. They were interested in involving in this kind of uncertain and dangerous adventure but not out of compassion for the enslaved Christian people but out of their own state interests. Atanasij I wor¬ ked on his rebellious ideas for 20 years trying to awake the awa¬ reness, conscience and solidarity in these countries but he failed because he believed their false promises and was afraid to rely on their own force and abilities which weren t little. Due to the libe¬ rating ideas and efforts he deserved a high position in the orthodox world and established himself as a great spiritual leader, patriot, revolutionary, diplomat and people s tribune. During those cruel times financially very weak he spent his own money for traveling in order to bring the message about the cry, the horror and the aspira¬ tion of the enslaved Balkan people, who moaned under the occupa¬ tion of the Turkish Empire, searching for charity and kindness of the rich and powerful, which he never got. Atanasij I also contributed to the awakening and spurring of the national feeling and awareness of the Macedonian people, demanding from the special emissaries to present themselves as Macedonians , as ambassadors of the Kin¬ gdom of Macedonia , which was noted in many documents that are today kept in the Italian and Austrian state archives. The spiritual and revolutionary act started by Gavril I, conti¬ nued by Atanasij I for prestige and dominance of the Ohrid church over the Balkan orthodox regions, constantly taking care of the respect, dignity and unity of this church, especially in the realization 480 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy, of the aspirations of its followers towards spiritual and national freedom, was continued by the descendants - Ioakim, Nektarij II, Porfirij, Avramij, Dionisij, Atanasij II and many others. Without ne¬ glecting the church work, which due to the difficult economic situ¬ ation were in a very bad condition, they took active participation in the political life, constantly looking for ways, means and possibilities for getting rid of the Turkish occupation, through diplomatic connec¬ tions with the countries -members of war alliancies and anti Turkish coalitions, the Christian League and the Holy Alliance, i.e. with the countries which were preparing a war against the Empire, its forcing out from the Balkans and Europe. The main characteristic of the Ohrid superiors was the aspira¬ tion to develop, enlarge and deepen the relations with the Roman Catholic Church, contrary to its open, blackmail and aggressive aspi¬ rations for subduing the Ohrid patriarchy under its control, and also for establishing tight relations with Russia in which the orthodox people from the European part of Turkey and the Macedonian people recognized a savior from the tyranny. The Ohrid superiors as well as a lot of other church members were going to Rome and Moscow in order to look for material and military help, especially from the Russian kings, who regarded themselves as protectors, donors and helpers of the oppressed orthodox people. In order to achieve these aims, some of the superiors like Porfirij, Avramij, Atanasij II and others would even be determined to subdue to Vatican only to be saved from the tyranny and slavery. Another important reason for this kind of keenness of the superiors was also keeping the spiritual independence and sovereignty of the Macedonian, i.e. Italian Ortho¬ dox Eparchy, which has been existing as the Ohrid Patriarchy for more than three centuries. It s known about the Ohrid superior Por¬ firij that in the correspondence with the pope he acknowledged the superior of the Roman Catholic Church as a descendant of apostle Peter, about Avramij - that the pope Urban VIII acknowledged him as his superior and was himself doing service with him in Rome in 481 D-r Petar Popovski the church St. Peter in Italian and Slavic language, and about Atanasij II that he was allegedly a secret catholic. We can conclude from the written sources that these relations of Ohrid with Rome were not kept out of some conviction about the truthfulness of the catholic learning, but in order to get moral, military and material support from the European catholic states for eventual liberation from the Turkish occupation. The best confirmation for this are the political relations of Atanasij I with Rome and the negotiations of the cardinals Aldobrandini, Severina and Gjorgio in 1597 for starting a rebellion in Macedonia and Mathia - Arvania. The relations of the clergy with Russia were deeper and more important. They all aspired to establish permanent relation with Moscow, engaging for that purpose important clergy members who were also regarded as good and experienced politicians, because their trips to Russia had eco¬ nomic and political goals and character. Performing the role of spe¬ cial emissaries who traveled to Moscow, Naples, Rome, Prague and Dubrovnik in the written sources there are the names of Eremija, Nektarij Pelagoniski, Hariton Drachki, Evtimij Skopski and Pajsij Solunski, Who have acquired their high church education in Padova, Italy and except Russian they also spoke Italian, German and French. This proves that the special emissaries of the Ohrid Patriarchy were highly educated people, politically aware, with an affinity to perform such activities at that time. Ohrid superiors were at the same educa¬ tional level, with rare exceptions, being the reason for the lively and rich activity of the Ohrid church in international relations and relationships. Ohrid was closer to the European cities and royal courts than any other town on the Balkans. Almost every Ohrid superior visited Russia, even those with a Greek origin. After Atanasij I every patriarch traveled there, with a small or numerous escort. According to Russian sources the patri¬ arch loakim stayed in Moscow the summer 1609, Nektarij II in 1611, Porfirij in 1624, Avramij in 1634, Dionisij in 1652 and Atanasij II in 1656. They were going there with the same motives and needs - to 482 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. convince Russia to involve in the liberation of the enslaved Balkan people under the Turkish occupation, to provide religious literature for the spiritual institutions in the Ohrid diocese and to receive material aid for purchasing back the church objects pledged in the Turkish banks and courts. A general characteristic for them is that they were welcomed with great love, respect and dignity and with all the court honors. Russian people celebrated the Ohrid church as their own church, because the newly established Russian church - the Kiev metropolitan from the beginning was under the authority of the Ohrid superior, called patriarch . On the other hand Macedonian prelates informed their Russian hosts about the situation of the ensla¬ ved Balkan people and about other issues which were of interest for the Russian state. Occasionally, some of the Constantinople and Bul¬ garian prelates visited Russia in order to ask for charity but they weren t welcomed as the Macedonian, because the Russian sovere¬ igns showed due respect for Ohrid as being the oldest and the biggest Orthodox Church in the Christian world. They were rarely welcomed by the Russian kings, which shows the treatment of the official Russian politics to some of the orthodox churches and confessions. In the time of the Ohrid superi¬ ors Nektarij II, Avramij, Dionisij and Atanasij II in the Ohrid diocese there was a fierce fight between the Independence (Macedonian) and the Fanariot (Greek-foreign) party for dominance over the Macedo¬ nian spiritual space. The second one made big efforts to dominate the Ohrid throne, by which they wanted to create conditions for continuing the process of assimilation and denationalization of the Macedonian people, which started during the Byzantine ruling of the Macedonian territories. The biggest fighter against the big Greek aspirations, the Fanariot aspirations towards the Macedonian church was the Sisanian metropolitan Zosim I. Although ha was of Vlav origin but supporting Macedonians, he led an energetic and stubborn fight for the keeping of the Slavic spirit and character and the spiri¬ tual independence and sovereignty of the Ohrid Patriarchy. As a 483 D-r Petar Popovski leader of the Independence party he won the battle for the patriarchal throne, eliminating the Trnovo metropolitan Grigorij, a fanariot, who tried to take over the Ohrid throne by bribing the Turkish authorities. During the period that he was Sisanian metropolitan and when he came on the Ohrid throne Zosim was truly interested in the deve¬ lopment of the schools and education in general, especially in the rural areas. We can see in the written sources that in 1708 he issued several orders for the development of the schools. Led by the liberal ideas and activities of the predecessors Gavril and Atanasij I, before becoming a patriarch, through his special emissary with a Greek name Joan Gipropulos, through the prince Eugen Savojski he estab¬ lished the first diplomatic contacts with the Austrian government. In the letter he sent to the royal court he didn t ask for anything else but a moral emperor protection and support for a possible rebellion in Macedonia, three guarantee letters and three flags for the Macedo¬ nian areas in order to encourage the revolutionized people that Austria supports these activities. He was also convincing the Aust¬ rian government that ш a period often days he would gather 12.000 well armed men and that when the Austrian army approaches Ma¬ cedonia a lot of people will sacrifice their estate and their life to attack the enemy . Although Eugen looked at the call of Zosim with reserve he still didn t want to miss the opportunity and from the military camp near the town Futok on 15 of July 1716 he sent a call to the orthodox people of Macedonia, in which he praised the deci¬ sion of the conspirators and promised support from the Austrian court and protection by the emperor Carlo VI, promising them they will fully respect the privileges and freedom of their religion and he called them to a joined fight. After the first contacts the diplomatic activity between the Austrian and the Macedonian side intensified, the military-political platform, strategy and the responsibilities of the joined fight were precisely arranged. From the successful correspondence between Zo¬ sim I and the Austrian government we can see that the Macedonian 484 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. side completely fulfilled its promises, the Austrian side failed to fulfill all the promises following their state interests at that time. The cooperation was characterized by frequent visits of special emissa¬ ries until 21 of July 1718 when a piece agreement was signed bet¬ ween Austria and Turkey. This ruined the hopes of Zosim I because Austria, which during his time was the biggest Turkish enemy, was his only hope for his liberation ideas. Then the Macedonian people once again were deceived. After the piece agreement, until 1736 all the diplomatic relations between the Macedonian and the Austrian side were terminated, and the political situation became worse. A new war started, this time between Austria and Russia on one side and Turkey on the other. Using this situation, in December 1736 Zo¬ sim I tried to renew the terminated diplomatic contacts with Austria. Through the emissary the metropolitan Pajsij Emanuil Pogonat he sent a several letters to the Austrian king Carlo VI, in which he reminded him of the previous contacts and asked him to send a ma¬ nifesto for a mutual agreement. Unfortunately, only one letter is kept, from which we can see that Zosim I demanded from the Aus¬ trian sovereign during the process of the possible forcing out of Turkey from the Balkans to confirm the spiritual authority of the First Justiniana Ohridian over Macedonia, Arvania, Serbia, Bosnia and Bulgaria , according to the old laws issued by the Byzantine emperors. Some of the requests were rejected, but most of them were accepted, there were also confirmations for help and protection of the sovereignty and the autocephalous status of the Ohrid Patriarchy. The war reawakened the hopes of the Macedonian people, who started outbursts and rebellions to help the allies. Apart from the Macedonian population the high clergy also participated, among whom the Ohrid Patriarch Joasaf IV prepared his own special Project for war- political cooperation with Austria, the catholic Archbishop of Skopje, Mihailo Suma, and the Patriarch Arsenie IV Jovanovich of Рек participated as well. When the Austrian army approached Nish, they contacted the Austrian court, offering help in armed re- 485 D-r Petar Popovski beis. Based on the promises given by Austria in Macedonia, espe¬ cially eastern Macedonia there were outbursts and rebellions. As a member of the Independence party in the Austro-Russian war against Turkey the patriarch Joasaf put himself on the side of Austria and Russia. Together with the patriarch Arsenie IV of Рек through their legates they led negotiations with Vienna in the biggest secrecy. The diplomatic activity was led through two channels: the Ohrid superior, the patriarch Joasaf IV, he made his contacts with the Austrian court through the catholic Archbishop in Skopje, Mihailo Suma, and Arsenie IV through Nikola Dimitrievich, the episcope of Temishvar. They were both convincing Carlo VI that when the Au¬ strian army enters Nish the Christian people írom the Balkans will start an armed rebellion against the Turks and thus by attacking from their back they will help the Austrian going to south, promising food for the army and other necessities. They also promised to rebel the whole Iliric nation . Unlike Arsenie IV, who for the participation of the Serbian people in the war demanded only protection of the Christian people and right of religious freedom, the Ohrid Patriarch, anticipating a chance for realization of the ancient dream of the Macedonian people, in the negotiations with Vienna he acted like a real representative of enslaved people. He demanded that after a successful war, the territory of the Ohrid diocese gets a treatment of an autonomous state within the Habsburg monarchy, i.e. joining of Serbia, Arvania, Bosnia and Bulgaria with Macedonia and creating one state within the borders of the old Ohrid Archbishopric (Patriar¬ chy), which would enter the Austrian empire as an autonomous state. In the negotiations with Vienna the patriarch Joasaf IV acted like an equal partner who asked for help and at the same time offered favors. The autonomy that the Ohrid superior suggested consisted of 4 demands: 1. Freedom of religion, i.e. acknowledgement of the free¬ dom of the Orthodox Church; 2. Acknowledgement of the right of the Ohrid Patriarch to spiritual and secular authority in the planned Balkans confederation based on previous confirmation of the Justi- 486 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. nian law of the Ohrid Archbishopric (Patriarchy); 3. A place and vote in the Vienna Raichstag; and 4. Privileged customs duties for importing and exporting goods These demands are testified in one very important document, which is kept in the castle Oberzen, in Bavaria, where, there are biographic information about the comman¬ der of the Austrian army, the count Sekendorf. Some of the demands were accepted, and for some only promises were given. Still, they were all received and confirmed by the government. We can see from the content of the document that in the negotiations with Vienna Joasaf represented not only the Macedonian people but also all the orthodox people who until 1557 when the Рек Patriarchy was renewed were under the jurisdiction of the Ohrid Patriarchy. This wasn t contrary to with the present situation although it was signi¬ ficantly changed. With this the patriarch Joasaf expressed the view of the Macedonian high clergy, who regarded the Рек patriarchy as a non canonic church because it was renewed by the force of a state order, with a state document not within the church and the orthodox, evangelic rules. The requests of the Ohrid Patriarchy for a church-political jurisdiction of the whole Iliric, which the Austrian government dec¬ lared as too big aspirations , were an expression of the aspirations and needs of the high clergy from the Ohrid Patriarchy and their religious and class interests for jurisdiction of the Ohrid church over all the orthodox nations on the Balkans, and they were actually an expression of the state aspirations of the Ohrid Patriarch Joasaf. Because of the fact that with the same Justinian authorities the Рек patriarch Arsenie IV established his right on the jurisdiction over the orthodox people of the whole Iliric, from whom Vienna expected a big benefit, Joasaf angrily terminated the negotiations. He saw that Austria had a restrictive attitude towards Ohrid in terms of the conditions for giving support to the war, but a privileged one to Рек. He also realized that Austria doesn t have enough strength and me¬ ans to be able to pull through such a huge move, so he concluded 487 D-r Petar Popovski that further negotiations would be led in vain, although he was constantly promised that his requests would be accepted. Some other factors also influenced the end of the negotiations. First, there was a real danger that Turkey would find out about the secret negotiations, which could result in huge consequences for the Patriarchy and the Macedonian people as well. The fear became bigger when the Gre¬ eks found out about the negotiations, the prelates with a Greek origin doing service in the Ohrid Patriarchy. In these complex circumsta¬ nces Joasaf IV was sure that the aggressive Fanariot party won t miss the opportunity to finally get back at the Independence party espe¬ cially because this would contribute to the realization of their aspi¬ rations and interests for Ohrid. There was a danger of questioning the existence of the Archbishopric as a spiritual institution. This was a good opportunity for the Constantinople church because it was constantly showing aspirations for Ohrid, for subdu¬ ing the Ohrid Patriarchy under its own jurisdiction, for spiritual, educational and political dominance on the Balkans. The Greek Jo- van Ipsilanti, junior, who was a high ranking clerk and a close friend of the Constantinople Patriarch tried to use this situation. Finding out about the connections of Joasaf with Vienna he accused the Ohrid superior in front of the grand vesir of being disloyal to the Turkish government and that with his spiritual flock he worh against the Turkish Empire , contrary tojts interests. He also asked from the grand vesir to discharge the Patriarchy , calling it disloyal to the empire , and subdue its eparchies under the authority of the Cons¬ tantinople patriarch . But this wasn t accepted by the authorities because they didn t know the motives. On the other hand, knowing the methods the Greeks used against the Ohrid church in their per¬ sistence to realize their hegemonic purposes, they thought that this was an intrigue Ipsilanti paid with his life for his discoveries about the negotiations of Joasaf and Vienna. Still, the suspicions remained. The Austro-Russian-Turkish war ended exactly as Joasaf thought. After the big defeats at the battlefield on 01 of September 1739 Aust- 488 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. ria signed a piece agreement with Turkey in Belgrade, and on 18 of September Russia signed a piece agreement with Turkey. The war ended as the two sides wanted but the Balkan people, among which the Macedonian people remained disappointed although they develo¬ ped significant revolutionary activities at the back of the Turkish front. Disappointed again by the western catholic countries, after this war they turned their hopes to orthodox Russia, which at that mo¬ ment had big influence on the Balkans. After the war the relations between the central Turkish autho¬ rities and the Ohrid patriarchy significantly cooled. The suspicions of the Turks about Joasaf s connections with Austria remained be¬ cause the Turkish authorities were constantly receiving letters with information about the secret plan between Ohrid and Vienna. Using this situation the Constantinople church started a large campaign against Ohrid, making all sorts of intrigues to discredit Ohrid in front of the Turkish authorities. At that time the Fanariot party became stronger, especially in the southern Macedonian eparchies, and it be¬ gan destroying the religious unity of the people built over centuries. The Constantinople patriarchs had a leading role in this process. What couldn t been done by the patriarch Kalinik with Ipsilanti was done by Samoil Handzeri. With the help of the corrupted Turkish authorities, with intrigues and bribe he first managed to destroy the Рек patriarchy (1766) and the Ohrid patriarchy (1767). Using a lot of money Handzeri managed to get an order from the Sultan with which the eparchies of the Ohrid church were joined to the Constantinople church. Due to that vicious, pretentious and revengeful act the torch of the old Macedonian spiritual education and culture, which for 1716 years, from the time of Apostle Paul, from 51/52 year after Christ was enlightening the Slavic regions and people with noble spiritual education, culture and literacy, was distinguished. The unjustly abolished Ohrid church was renewed 200 years later, in 1967 in ancient Ohrid in the Peoples Republic of Macedonia, which was at that period existing within the frames of FNRJ. With 489 D-r Petar Popovski this act the spirit, letter and glory was returned to the ancient epis¬ copacy founded by apostle Paul, in 535 promoted into Archbishopric by Justinijan I from Skopje, in 545 confirmed by the pope Vigilius, and in 976 promoted into Patriarchy by king Samuil and in 999 confirmed by the pope Gregory V. The first person who sat at the throne of the renewed Archbishopric {Patriarchy) throne was the episcope Toplichki, Dositej (1967-1982). During his, not very long, rule he managed to bring back the spiritual shine of the Ohrid chu¬ rch, provide a significant place in the Christian world and open new horizons and ways for further affirmation and prosperity. After this short genealogical observation which is based on authentic sources, documents and facts, we can conclude with plea¬ sure that that Macedonian church diplomacy, starting from the time of patriarch Jovan Debarski (1019) to the time of patriarch Arsenie (1767) was characterized with a high level of professionalism, spiritual ethics and dignity. During those difficult and complex his¬ torical periods Ohrid superiors kept, sometimes occasional, someti¬ mes permanent diplomatic relations and contacts with the Byzantine Empire, than with the Turkish Empire, with the churches of the East Ecumene, with the Constantinople church, Jerusalem, Alexandrian and Antiohian church, with the countries of civilized Europe, with the royal courts and dukedoms, with the orthodox and catholic chu¬ rches, especially the Roman catholic church, even with some digni¬ fied spiritual centers. There are a lot of written documents and testi¬ monies which have the motives for mutual contacts based on which there was diplomatic activity. Apart from the church-educational, cu¬ ltural and economic issues a special purpose of the Macedonian church diplomacy was to convince and spur the European catholic states and orthodox Russia to involve in the liberation of the Mace¬ donian as well as other enslaved Balkan people by the Turks and force them away from the Balkans and Europe. It is almost impossible to assume that during those times, full with danger, uncertainty and temptations, they could travel in so far 490 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. away countries like Russia, England, Spain, France, Italy, Austria, Germany, Poland and Czech Republic. But the desire to establish contacts with the contemporary civilized European world was stron¬ ger than anything. The aim was to approach Ohrid as a biblical, spi¬ ritual center and Macedonia as ancient country, to the world, which was interested in the ancient early Christian spiritual and cultural opus. As a result of these contacts, the city Ohrid, as a patriarchal throne, and Macedonia known as the cradle of Christianity very soon became very close and well known to medieval Europe as no other town, church, country on the Balkans. They became a bridge through which the East approached the West in a spiritual, cultural, political and any other way. The Macedonian medieval church diplomacy had a significant contribution for a reaffirmation of the Macedonian name. The Ohrid superiors and their legates involved in the diplomatic net, regardless of their origin Macedonian or Greek, aware or unaware, promoted the name Macedonia and Macedonians wherever they went. When they presented themselves or signed in the European royal courts they would always put the name^Macedonian or Macedonian from the Kingdom of Macedonia . In the correspondence they used those titles, translated in the language of the country to which court they sent the letters. The Patriarch Gavril traveling through Europe signed in the language of the country he visited German, French, English, Italian and Russian like Archbishop of the First Justinian Ohridian and Patriarch of whole Bulgaria, Serbia, Macedonia, Albania . The Patriarch Atanasij I was doing the same presenting like Patriarch of Justiniana Prima - Ohrid, whole of Bulgaria, Serbia, Macedonia, Arvania, Hungaro-Vlahia, Moldavia, Russia and all the western te¬ rritories , he meant: Bosnia, Dalmaţia, Venice, Southern Italy, Sicily and Malta. This kind of signing was registered in many documents from 1585, 1597, 1617, 1691, 1694, 1707 etc. Apart from Macedonia, Serbia, Bulgaria and Arvania which are most often found in the 491 D-r Petar Popovski written documents they would also put Bosnia, Bogdania, Moldavia, Húngaro-Vlahija, Malorussia even Russia. Because of these titles and because of the fact that those re¬ gions were under the Ohrid patriarchy, as a separate spiritual center, and because they knew that Ohrid is in Macedonia there were people who thought that Macedonia encompasses all the regions which were under a spiritual guidance of the Ohrid church. Due to the popular and reaffirmed name of Macedonia a lot of people from Serbia, Bos¬ nia even Vlashko and Moldavia presented themselves as Macedoni¬ ans and their regions as parts of Macedonia. The above mentioned examples and facts testify the popularity of the Macedonian name at that time, especially after the XV century thanks to the capability, wisdom, and successful leading of the church work by the Ohrid superiors, who were also skillful in the leading of the so called high diplomacy. Due to their responsible, skilled and visionary leading of the church the Ohrid Patriarchy kept its autocephalous status and spirit, which was not the case with the other churches, led by their hegemonic aspirations, viciously and pretentiously are denying this historical fact. Based on the facts we can say that the XVII century autocephalous status of the popular Ohrid church proves that Mace¬ donia has a canonic, historical and political right to its autocephalous church in the form of the Macedonian Orthodox Church, i.e. the re¬ newed Ohrid Archbishopric {Patriarchy). 492
adam_txt	Македонската средновековна црковва дипломатка. Содржина Глава седма Македонската "Италијанска православна enapxnjď камен на сопнување во односите меѓу Охридската и Римокатоличката црква .3 Глава осма Дипломатски врски и односи меѓу Охридската патријаршија - Прва Јустинијна и Османската држава .87 Глава девета Црковната дипломати] а во служба на слободољубивите идеи и стремежи на македонскиот народ .185 Глава десеета Генеалогија {каталог) на охридските поглавари, на епископите, архиепископите и патријарсите. 337 Заклучок. .415 Conclusion. 461 Регистар на географски имиња .493 Регистар m лични имиња. 505 Библиографи/а .523 Други извори .601 605 Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München Охридската патријаршија co силата, мудроста и со дипломатската вештина и умешност на своите поглавари, за цело време на своето постоекье успе- ала да ja сочува својата самостојност и независност. Таа уживала голем углед, влијание и достоинство. Најдобро сведоштво за тоа претставува искажува- њето на константинополскиот архимандрит Mios Do- xopatres, кој во 1143 година,по заповед на сицилијанс- киот крал Roter Л, извршил попис на патриаршиски- те престолни и на нивните епискошш. Во својот обемен извештај тој, меѓу другото, вели: "Како кипарската еибугарската {македонс¬ ката б.н.) црква, независна и непотчинета на ии- КОЈ одврховните престоли, туку самовласно е уп- равувана и од свои епископи осветувана. Отлр- вин не се викала бугарска, по после, бидејќи била завладеаяа одБугарите, таа добила име бугарска. Таа остана независна и кога се истргна од бугар- скитераце иникогашне се присоедини кон цариг¬ радската црква. Врз основа на тоа,и денденешен, таа црква не добива поглавари од императорите, туку тие се ракоположуваат од своите епископи и се викаат архиепископи, бидејќисе самостојни. Архиепископи/ата имаповеќе од 30 єпископства над кои првенствува градот Охрид, како и над ме¬ стата што зависат од нив". (L. Р. Migne, Patrologia greaco-romana, t. CXXXII, Paris, 1868, col. 1097; Fr. N. Finck, Nilos Doscopa- tres "Ταξιζ ttìv πατριαρχικον Θρόνων", Αιχενα, 1902,21 ; Й, Иванов, Български старини. . ,562). The Ohrid Patriarchy with the strength, wis¬ dom and diplomatic skill of its chieftains through ali its existence has managed to maintain its autono¬ my and independence, it had great reputation, in¬ fluence and dignity. The best witness to that is the statement of the Constantinopoiitan archimandrite Niios Dodzopatres, who in the year 1143, under the order of the Sicilian king Rozer II, made an invento¬ ry of the patriarch's capitais and their episcopes. ín his detailed report among other things, he says; Just like the Cypress', the Bulgarian (Ma¬ cedonian) church is independent and is not sub¬ mitted to any of the supreme thrones, but it is autonomously governed and is sanctified by its own episcopes. At first it was not called Bulga¬ rian, but later, since it was governed by the Bul¬ garians, it got the name Bulgarian, it remained independent even when it got released from the Bulgarian governance and it never adjoined the Constantinople Church. On that basis, even to- day,that church does not get chieftains from the emperors, but they come from its own episcop¬ es and are called archbishops, because they are independent The archbishopric has more than 30 episcopacies over which presides the city Ohrid as well as over the places that depend on them. (L. P. Migne, Patologia ., t. CXXXIÍ, coi. 1097; Fr. N. Finek, NilûsDoscopatres., 2!; Й. Иван- <зъ,Българсш старша, . ,562). CONCLUSION Ra h arely which Christian church in the east and in the west ^hemisphere had so much developed, active, skilled and successful diplomacy like the Patriarchy - First Junistiana Ohridian. That's not coincidence, because the Macedonian regions were the source of the Christianity, which through Macedonia and Via Igna¬ tius has been spread towards Europe and the world. The Ohrid's chu¬ rch diplomacy appeared on the historical scene long time ago, since in the first centuries of the Jesus' religion, immediately after the es¬ tablishing of the first church communities on Macedonian land, first in Solun and in Ber, and later in Skopje and Ohrid, which were for¬ med by the first gospel-man, apostle Pavle together with his students Sila, Timotej and Luk, continuously was existing till the abolition of the Ohrid patriarchy. In a large number of cases, divine bearers of those missions were the superiors of the archbishopric-patriarchal cathedra and eparchial prelates and archbishops, who shown their selves as capable and "skilled in the spirit, the word and the religi¬ on", to do religion-political missioner activity. They have traveled through church communities and through eparchies in special cano¬ nic visiting, with a task to spread the Christianity and to help in the establishment of the church order and the regime inside them. The need of regulation of the church affairs over canonic, spiritual-legal and political basis and for mutual linking and collabo¬ ration, forced those first Christianity cells to prepare own peoples for emissaries capable to do social church-national activities. For succe¬ ssful accomplishment of this social church function, people were recruited, not only to form the order of the church clergy, but also from the hermits. Skilled people have worked with them, who disti¬ nguished their selves in the accomplishment of that activity. First 461 D-r Petar Popovski they went in the church communities, among the hermits, and prea¬ ched the Christian religion; they allocated the acquired experiences in the arrangement of the church order and the regime, and estab¬ lished links for better mutual communication and collaboration in all spheres of the church life. Later, when large church institutions and organizations were created, the role and the function of those people became bigger and more complicated. Namely, they already began to do one kind of a diplomatic activity now, which was consisted in es¬ tablishing contacts and allocation of messages among separated chu¬ rch organizations from one site, and among churches and state or¬ gans and institutions from the other site. The first emissaries that began the road of the Macedonian church diplomacy in the early Christian period were the archbishop from Solun, Jovan, the metro¬ politan from Skopje Ursilij and the episcopes from Ohrid - Erazmo, Antonie and Lavrentie. They conducted intensive and very live dip¬ lomatic correspondence with the Constantinople church. Especially the metropolitan from Skopje, Ursilij, who have collaborated with the imperator for the East Rome Empire, with the emperor Leo, in occasion of the Halkidon's meeting, held in 451, highlighted himself. At this IV Universal meeting the Christian churches accepted the dogma about two natures in Christ, as indivisible but also as not united, judging it with that that the Nestorian and the monophysis heresy, which was spread with concerned measures. He and his precursor often traveled to Constantinople, on diplomatic mission for reconciliation of the church dogmas about territorial demarcation of the Christian communities and episcopes and about other issues re¬ lated to the Christian religion. After establishing of the Ohrid arch¬ bishopric (Junistiana Prima, 535), the church diplomacy got new wider dimensions. Her superiors - Katelijan, Jovan I and Leon sho¬ wed their selves as very skilled and experienced diplomats in a point of settling the issues related with the borders of the church commu¬ nities and episcopes, which in that time were very actual, and in the obstructing of the spreading of the monophysis' hermit in the ortho- 462 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. dox environments. About the archbishops Jovan I and Leon is known that they participated at the universal council on which the stands for the Christian rules and for the integration of the Constantinople's church were reconciled adjusted in relation to the other orthodox churches, which at that time played a role of church coordinator. On one hand they worked on promotion of the episcopes' relations and on the other on relations between the episcopes and the Archbis¬ hopric, from the other site. That's how the basis of the church order and the regime, the rules of behavior in the mutual communication and the collaboration in the sphere of the church culture and edu¬ cation were set. The Macedonian church has developed in a much higher stadium in the time of the Holly brothers Cyril and Methody, which had not only local, but also and international character. They opened new page in the Slavic civilization and with their diplomatic missions they confined new epoch in the history of the Balkan and of Europe. These spiritual giants, accompanied by their students, had the main role - to spread the letter of the Christianity and education and culture among the homogenous Slavic mass, simultaneously doing state-political and military function. The historical missions in Bregalnica, Polihron, Hazar and the mission in Moravia, presented high point of the Macedonian diplomacy in the early middle century, who blessed the Slavic generic with new Christian spirit and with new Slavic letter and literature. They left a massive and inerasable mark in the history of the human civilization. These giants rose up the Macedonian people in the world and set up it up as a founder of the first Slavic education and culture. The Macedonian people, first among the Slavic, have organized through their activity an Archbishopric, and after that Patriarchy, which led them through the centuries, kept them by the religious-national outrages and appetites and encouraged them and defend their spirit of surviving in the centuries of the slavery. Un¬ fortunately, for some historical periods we don't have specific info¬ rmation and data for that how the missioner-diplomatic activity has 463 D-r Petar Popovski unrolled, who were her bearers, from which environments they ori¬ ginated, and at what places and issues in the international works this activity has unrolled. Undoubtedly is that in those so called dark period from the historical development those activities didn't stop, which can be concluded from the rich diplomatic activity between the periods, respectively in so called shiny periods. For an example, there is nothing palpable in the reign of the Macedonian dynasty of the komitopuls, Shishman Morki, tsar Samuil and his inheritors - Gavril Radomir, Jovan Vladimir and Petar Deljan. After Kliment and Naum, till XIV centuries, there are only information about the Oh- rid's patriarch Jovan Debarski, who came on the Ohrid's throne with an official charter published by the Byzantine emperor Vasilie II the Macedonian killer. For him is known that he delighted in respect and reputation, both at his people and in the Byzantine yard. Thanks to the good relations with the royal court, he succeeded to keep the autonomy of the Ohrid's patriarchy with her clear Macedonian Sla¬ vic spirit and character. As a result of his skillfulness in leading of the church works, especially in the relations with the royal court, he succeeded to obtain three charters, with which the independence of the Ohrid's church was confirmed, and several eparches that were occupied by the Bulgarian Empire were returned to him. Here, we're not talking about classic diplomacy like we have it today, as an ins¬ titution and facility, as special administrative body respectively ser¬ vice or ministry that cares about leading of the external politic of one state or church, but strictly for individual attempts by the represe¬ ntative of the higher clergy, responsible or authorized to perform se¬ parate tasks in the mutual relations, to negotiate or to arrange with separate essential issues, which were from mutual interest for solvi¬ ng the mutual conflicts and misunderstandings or to obtain some kind of canonic or political law for realizing of some church's aims and interests that could help in raising the reputation, the influence and the positions at the people, society or in the international rela¬ tions. 464 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. There are many examples in the writing sources for the Ma¬ cedonian medieval church history that bears witness to the produc¬ tive missionary-diplomatic activity of some church dignitaries in the development and the promotion of the relations of the Ohrid church with other Christian churches and states, for solving the separate issues that were a barrier in the mutual understanding and collabora¬ tion, they encumber the relations and digressed them that affected negatively on the Christianity. For the period after Samuil's reign is characteristic that the prelates from the higher Macedonian clergy that were coming at the patriarchal and eparchy cathedras in the Ohrid church, and originated from the independent party, with all strengths they attended to normalize the already unsettled patriarchal relations, produced as a result of the Ottoman conquests on the Bal¬ kan, always striving towards affirmation of the main church Christi¬ an aim, towards the brotherhood and equality, freed by spiritual, educated and territorial pretensions, conquest and repaying and from the threats of throwing curse and similar. All ofthat was done by an approval with the traditional church canons and rules. There wasn't always an approval and support for this kind of strivings by the Constantinople's church, which although lost the positions in the Eastern provinces, and continued its attendance artificially to keep the primate of leading Christian church on the Balkan and in Asia Minor, although territorially was only in Constantinople, without its administration and without any eparchy. Those strivings came to expression in the second half of the XIV century, when in the Macedonian high clergy came a new gene¬ ration of intellectuals with highs spiritual, moral, political and patri¬ otic spirit. The new spirit that strived towards the mutual understa¬ nding, evangelical concord and toleration, and against churches' ideological-political conflicts, has promoted the Ohrid's patriarch Matej I. He "was a wise man, active and crafty diplomar, also res¬ pected to the Macedonians and Greeks prelates and archbishops. His mission in life was not only to keep the Ohrid church, her spiritual, 465 D-r Petar Popovski cultural and political influence and role in the Christian world, but also to connect all eparchies that have shown affection to Ohrid, and were nominal to the Constantinople's church. Acting in that directi¬ on he used so called high diplomacy, and as a result of that the Pat¬ riarchy the First Junistiana of Ohrid, as he titled it, he lifted it on a higher spiritual plain, after which it became the biggest and the most influent church in the Eastern provinces. With skilled diplomatic moves he got the affection of the small Asian prince Djuneid, mana¬ ger of the Ottoman governments in the Ohrid's area, which helped him to attach the Sofia's and Vidin' s eparchies that before were under jurisdiction of the Constantinople's patriarchy and later he also attached the eparchies that were owned by the cancelled Trnovo's archbishopric. The Constantinople patriarchy was flaying to these moves made by the patriarch Matej I, and threatened that will throw a curse with a purpose to isolate and deprived the individuality in the orthodox world. Attending not to receive dramatic course and unwanted con¬ sequences Matej I went to Constantinople and said to the imperator Manuil Paleolog that the hrisovulite issued by the Byzantine impe¬ rators Junistian I, Vasili I, his son Leo VI and from Vasilij II, acco¬ rding to which, new attached eparchies and previous canonic belon¬ ged to the Ohird's church, after which he obtain new deed that with agreement by the Sinklitot and by the Patriarchal synod, gave him girths to rule with the Sofia's, Vidin's eparchy and with other epa¬ rchies from the imperator hrisovuli issued before Paleolog, and with which till then the Constantinople's patriarchy ruled in no canonic way. After the official state-legal borders' regulating of the Ohrid's administration, the eparchies from the Dunav's princedoms were also attached, Vlashko and Moldavia (that has happened before 1393, when the state and religion authorities of the princedoms they de¬ sired to be in the Ohrid's patriarchy). With these attempts Matej I became in the history of the Macedonian Ohrid's church as the most creditable church landowner, who vastly extended the Ohrid admini- 466 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. stration, returning her canonic eparchies and territories from the time of Junistian I. He was a skilled diplomat and politician who in many complicated conditions fought to keep the independent status of the Ohird's patriarchy for a long time. Also his inheritors, Nikodim, Do- rotej, Prohor and Grigorij I continued his steps. Although they lived in the time of expressive social and political antithetic, in which everything was arrayed on military-political and religion interests of the Ottoman empire that attended "the seed of the Islam to sow in as many Christian environments'", wisely and ably, leading the church affairs, however they succeeded to keep the acquisitions and the position of the Patriarchy, attending to improve with good diploma¬ tic moves, in the Ohrid administration and in relations with the other orthodox churches in the Eastern provinces. They led a big fight to protect their alphabet from the aggressive and unpredictable Islam, to strengthen the links between sister-churches and to protect the Macedonian character of the Ohrid church from foreign influences, especially from the Greek, continuously expending the education, culture and attainment. Some superiors directed the missionary-dip¬ lomatic activities towards the distraction of the church barriers that were made artificially by the Constantinople patriarchy with a pur¬ pose to rise as a leading church, imposing itself spiritually, educati¬ onal and political, although its positions in the Christian world were fully lost before the fall of Constantinople in the hands of the Turks (1453). With this kind of activities the Ohrid's superiors have risen as respectful spiritual pastors and successful missioners and diplo¬ mats among the church dignitaries, especially in the international, church and in church-state relations, and contributed the Ohrid pat¬ riarchy to receive the place that it deserved. Especially characteristic were the missionary-diplomatic activities of patriarch Nikodim, who wanting to strengthen the link and cohesion in the Ohrid's adminis¬ tration, was often going in a canonic visit to the farthest eparchies. He is creditable for the strengthening of the links with Vlashko and 467 D-r Petar Popovski Moldavia, where he was twice, once on a invitation by the Molda¬ vian duke Alexander Stari, when he named priest Teoktist for metro¬ politan of the Moldavian eparchy. On an invitation by the Russian bishop loan he visited Russia, with which he establish a tight coop¬ eration on a church and state level. Greek oriented eparchies "were gained with wisdom, scattering church booL· and handwritings with free texts" and opening schools for clerics, translators and transcri¬ bers, attending to rise the education in them on a higher level. In this view neither his successor, the patriarch Dorotej hasn't fallen behind, who "bravely was following the steps of his predecessors". He was on a canonic visit to Vlashko, Moldavia, Minor Russia, twice "to strengthen his authority" over those eparchies that the Constantino¬ ple Patriarchy has used active pressure for putting them again under its influence. His correspondence with the Moldavian duke Stefan the Great is proving the close relation and collaboration between the Ohrid Church and the eparchies through the river Dunav; the predi¬ sposition of the pastvata in Vlashko and Moldavia towards Ohrid, and the efforts that were made for securing liturgy literature for the churches and the monasteries in those kingdoms. In his period "the Slavic education was strongly expand in the Ohrid administration", including the eparchies that were not Macedonian, ant "the diploma¬ tic experience was always improving". The development process of the Ohrid patriarchy in the area of the church diplomacy, significantly has improved in the period of the patriarch Prohor, who in the pastva "was laudable" as a keeper and a guardian of the autocephaly and of the Macedonian character of the Ohrid church, too, for what he, never compromised. He was solving the churches' disputes and conflicts calmly, with diplomatic means, and he always has emerged as a winner. In the relations with the state "he attended wisely and carefully", with high degree of responsibility and "understanding towards the states ' things", with which he has enchanted the affection of the High gat and of the sultan too. His wise politic and strategy contributed the Ohrid church 468 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. to strengthened on the front position in the orthodox world on the Balkan and in Europe, creating Macedonian orthodox municipalities in Dalmaţia, Venice, South Italy {Sicily, Apulia and Callabria) and on Malta too, united in unique church institution, known as Italian {Macedonian) orthodox eparchy that although was situated in the heart of the Rome catholic church, with known exceptions continuo¬ usly existed more than three and a half centuries. In that period the Ohrid administration was on the biggest territory up to that time. The diplomatic abilities came to affection to him in the conflict with the Serbian metropolitan Pavle from Smederevo, who has separatist tendencies towards the Ohrid church. Namely, at his initiative the Serbian eparchies to separate from the Ohrid patriarchy wit an attention to renew the canceled Serbian church {Patriarchy of Pech), the patriarch Prohor used all gospel-canonic and diplomatic means with which he disposed and after two years fight he succe¬ eded to prevent this that could be fate for Ohrid. Separatist pheno¬ mena like these were present in other none Macedonian eparchies also, which were under strong influence by the Constantinople chu¬ rch. In the legitimate war against the separatism in the church he has got moral and political support from four eastern patriarchs, from the High gate and from the sultan, with which the risks were eliminated from disintegration and falling apart of the Ohrid church. In the historical sources the event is marked as typical separatist act and attempt in which the Ohrid superior showed wisdom, spiritual and political maturity and ability, but also a diplomatic skill, enchanting them on his site the most influenced state and religious subjects in the ottoman society in the battle against the phenomena of the Ser¬ bian church separatism. The tough economic situation in which was the Ohrid Patriarchy, because of the high church taxes, the Ohrid's superiors and the eparchies' prelates and archbishops were forced to go around abroad for donations. Many old and rear subjects and handwritings with unusual value were pawned in the ottoman banks and courts, because the churches and monasteries hadn't got funds to 469 D-r Petar Popovski pay the high state taxes. Most of the trips were to Russia, where the state and the church authorities were willing to help the Macedonian Ohird Church to pull out from the tough economic situation, and to enable returning of the pawned churches' items, because with their alienation the identity of the oldest Christian church could be lost. From narrative sources is known that beginning from patriarch Ma¬ tei, many superiors of Ohrid Church after him were traveling to Russia with two purposes: to obtain financial means from the Russi¬ an czar for returning of the pawned churches' items, and to motivate Russia, as orthodox state and European great military force, to par¬ ticipate in liberation of the nations on the Balkan from the ottomans slavery. Persons from the high clergy were going on this kind and similar missions, who benefited a reputation in the church clergy and the pastva, known as good diplomats with high qualities and values that physically and spiritually were able to accomplish this kind of complicated tasks. In that regard the criterion of the Ohrid patriar¬ chal synod was very sharp. After patriarch Prohor, except in Russia, the Ohrid's superi¬ ors, among who and famous metropolitan and episcopes, were tra¬ veling to Poland, Czech Republic, and to the western European cat¬ holic countries {Germany, Austria, France, Italy, England, Belgium, Spain). Also, they were going there with same purposes and inten¬ tions; to supply donators means for outgoing of the economical con¬ ditions in the Church and to animate there selves in order the western castles to engage military for liberation of the captive Balkan's nations. From 1585 to 1650, ten Ohrid's superiors had traveled to Russia and to the western European countries, visits with clearly po¬ litical character. Some superiors often had accompanied famous me¬ tropolitans and prelates, who had political and missionary-diplomatic affinity. That has been a new generation of highly educational patriarchs, who got famous with diplomatic attempts. Their purpose was to motivate the western catholic world to start a war for expe¬ lling the Ottomans from the Balkan and from Europe. A first Ohrid's 470 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. superior who traveled through the Europeans castles and dukedoms with political purposes was Gavril I. accompanied by the metropo¬ litans Eremij Pelagoniski and Sofronij Grebenski, with many archi¬ mandrites and 13 servants, at first he visited Moscow, where he was welcomed by the Russian tsar Teodor Ivanovic, where he camei order to blandish the suzerain to cancel the spiritual dependency of Moscow from Constantinople, who supported the Greek influence in the Russian countires, and from the Constantinople's patriarch and the Synclit to seek a promotion of the Moscow metropolis in the Patriarchy and her inauguration for autocephaly. The suggestion of patriarch Gavril the I, was only and warmly acceptable by the tsar, after which a official procedure of exchange of documents between Moscow and Constantinople has started for that issue. After many reactions and contradictions from the Constantinople's Patriarchic Synod, the idea of the Ohrid's superior came trued in 1589 at the Church meeting in Constantinople, at which the Moscow's metropo¬ lis was declared as Patriarchy. The Ohrid's patriarch Gavril the I, the main initiator for this, as confession and gratitude for the efforts that he made for refusing the Constantinople's vedomstvo over Russia, he received a prize from the tsar in an amount of 40 gold coins. During the visit of Gavril in Moscow, the Russian suzerain for the first time "has found out that the Ohrid's patriarchy was the only Slavic autocephaly churcK'm the Eastern orthodox acumen and "that under its vedomstvo has all none Greek orthodox nations on the Balkan Peninsula, including the princedoms Vlashko and Moldavia". The political mission of patriarch Gavril in Moscow contri¬ buted the Russian kingdom and the Russian church to turn more towards Ohird, which was especially important because the both churches and nations got closer. In Moscow "áe Ohrid's patriarch was considered as important orthodox prelate that was given highly due that with his reputation and authority contributed the Moscow metropolis to be promoted in Patrairchy". Expressing the pleasure for the hel and the support that the Ohrid's patriarchygave to Russia 471 D-r Petar Popovski in the process of getting the independence of her national church, by that time guided by Greek prelates and archbishops, placed by Cons¬ tantinople, the Russian tsar, as "annunciated donator of the Christian nations", gave means for ransom if the church's casks and vestme¬ nts, propertcy of the old monastery "Prepodobna macenica Paras- keva", near Straga, "pledged at the atheists", in amount of 60.000 aspri, after which he has been proclaimed as ktitor of the monastery. Then the patriarch Gavril stayed in Poland, in the city of Grodno, where in July 1586 has met with the king Stefan Batori, where he was warmly welcomed. He has complained to the king about the hard condition of the Christians in the Ohrod's patriarchy and for the obstacles that the catholic authorities were doing to the Macedonian orthodox communities in the Italian orthodox eparchy, at Sicily, Apulia and Calabria. Gavriel knew that the king Batori had close relations with the pope in Rome, so that's why he asked him to influence at him to pass the conditions. In order to help him, the king gave him a letter for the pope Sikst the V, in which he was asking him to carry out for the seeking of Gavril. After one month, the Ohrid' s superior set off to Chez Republic, in Prague, where he met with the Austrian king Rudolph the II. After he presented the con¬ dition in Macedonia, he asked them, his country and the other cat¬ holic countries to engage military for expelling of the Ottomans from the Balkan and from Europe, whereupon he obligated in his dieceza to organize armed national resistance, that will be strong support to the liberation armies from the west. Due to the absence of relevant written sources, we can as¬ sume that some kind of agreement was reached at that meeting, because the western press at that time gave extraordinary publicity to the visit of Gavril I of western catholic states. On 31 of August he arrived in the German town Tibingen where he was magnificently welcomed. It was a big event for the town, everyone went out to see "the beautiful patriarch of Macedonia". Everywhere he went he tal¬ ked about the dissatisfaction of the Balkan Christians from Turkey, 472 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. asking the royal courts in the catholic states to make coalitions in order to force the Turks out, this can be proved by a document from 08.10.1587 kept in the state archive in Insbruk. The Romanian writer Jorga said that the document belongs to the Ohrid superior of the church Gavril I who in the western states presented himself as a patriarch. Not only Gavril but all the former and preceding superiors of the church called themselves patriarchs, very often they used both titles. The Ohrid church in the time of emperor Samuil was named a Patriarchy but the names Archbishopric and Archbishops were also used out of respect for the founder Justinian I who established the Archbishopric for "his own people" the Macedonian people. On 05 of September 1587 Gavril I with his company went to Italy where he met the pope Sixth V whom he asked not to be an obstacle for the orthodox municipalities of Sicily, Apulia and Cala¬ bria in the performance of canonic sermons. Since there is no source for the outcome of the meeting it is assumed that he showed no understanding, because after one year the orthodox priests from tho¬ se areas were invited to a church meeting in Mesina where they were forced to join a union with the Roman Catholic Church. Some ortho¬ dox priests were convinced because of the pressure, those who didn't want to be subdued went to East. This tells us that Gavril's mission wasn't successful. Actually there were still no good conditions for accepting his suggestions about the forcing out of the Turks from the Balkans, not in Russia nor in the western European countries. The official Russian diplomacy wasn't much interested in the Slavic people on the Balkans, i.e. wasn't their protector. It was more intere¬ sted in the Greeks because Russian kings wanted to be descendants of Byzantium, especially after the marriage of Ivan III Vasilevic with the Byzantine princess Sophia Paleolog. This was also affected by the acknowledgement of the royal highness of Ivan IV Grozni by the Byzantine patriarch Joasaf in 1561, which was actually a way to get close to the Russian sovereign in order to receive donation. After Gavril failed to make Russia interested in the Slavic revolutionary 473 D-r Petar Popovski ideas he turned to West where he sensed some good signals due to the fear of the Islam in the western world. His descendant Nektarij I and later Atanasij I tried to use the encouraging signals. It was a period of intense rebellions in the Oh¬ rid and Dukljan area which contributed to accelerate the process of uniting the European catholic countries into a more determined fight against Turkey. The anti turkish mood on the Balkans was mostly expressed at the time of the Austrian - Turkish war. The pope Cle¬ ment VIII judged that the situation is good for a beginning of the creation of the Christian League, a first step towards the anti Turkish resistance, and fortifying the relations with the dissatisfied people on the Balkans with the establishing of permanent connections with their representatives and emissaries. At the beginning of June 1593 the superiors of the liberation movement of Macedonia and Mathia, led by Patriarch Nektarij I sent a letter to the pope in which they ask him to help them by sending an army and material goods promising that they will gather 40.000 fighters against Turkey. At the end of the request they wrote: "Li vecchi di Macedoniae et Arvatié", beca¬ use of fear of conspiracy the names of the organizers were not mentioned. The letter is sealed with the Latin words: "A Seal of the Kingdom of Macedonia and Arvaniď, which leads to a conclusion that there was an organized rebellion organization with its headqua¬ rters. This is also proved by the letter of the special emissary of the pope for the Balkans Aleksandar Komulovic originally from the "Kingdom of Macedonia", which he sent to Rome after he got fami¬ liar with the war-political conditions in Macedonia and Arvania. According to the content it is assumed that the letter was sent after Komulovic met the patriarch Nektarij I who came back from Russia. Namely, Komulovic suggested the pope to get the support of Russia for the fight against Turkey, evidently after the suggestion of Nek¬ tarij who already had some knowledge about the Russian mood on this question. Komulovic was a great friend with the superior of the 474 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. Drach church Atanasij, later Ohrid patriarch, who also worked in the preparations for a rebellion in Macedonia and Arvania. Satisfied with the report pope Clement VIII accepted the su¬ ggestion of Komulovic, after which in January 1594 he sent him in Russia on a special mission to win over the support of the king Teodor for his plans against Turkey. He sent a special letter to the Russian king with which he informed him in detail with the creation of the Christian League and a Holy Alliance against the Turks. In the meantime, while Komulovic was traveling through Russia the heads of the Macedonian- Arvanian Kingdom led by the patriarch Nektarij I and Atanasij on 7 of November 1594 met in the monastery of "St. Marija" near Valona, where they decided to send Tomo Peleza as their emissary to the pope, he was known for his skills in talking and diplomacy, and he also spoke French and Italian. Peleza had some previous missionary experience, he was sent by the pope in Western Europe with a purpose to convince the authorities in Austria, Rome, Venice and Spain to help in the liberation of the Macedonian Kin¬ gdom from the Turks. This information leads to a conclusion that at that time Ohrid patriarchy had specially trained missionary-diplo¬ mats who traveled to Western Europe as special emissaries of the Ohrid patriarch. The sources lead to a conclusion that the brothers Marko and Gorgi Gini very close relatives of Atanasij were also a part of the missionary diplomacy. The church superiors in Macedo¬ nia later on sent the pope a special letter-memorandum in which they presented in detail the views and attitudes in tenns of the plan of the Holy Chair for the liberation of the enslaved Christian people on the Balkans. Tomo Peleza came to Rome in the summer of 1594 and he immediately met the pope Clement VIII and the cardinals to whom he presented the views of the church in Macedonia and the way in which the war against Turkey should be led. The Roman council accepted his views and attitudes, but for the rebellion in Arvania they decided to choose the appropriate time in order to avoid unne- 475 D-r Petar Popovski cessary loss of lives and assets. Due to the fact that Peleza led the negotiations in a very dignified, skillful and successful manner the council decided to reward him with money. After the death of Nek- tarij I, Atanasij I took over the preparations of the rebellion in Ma¬ cedonia and Arvania. From 1596 to 1615 he visited several European countries and rulers convincing them that he will spread the rebellion from Macedonia to the other neighboring countries if they help him with army and weapons. He was doing this secretly because he was constantly controlled by the Turkish authorities. The area Himara, east of Valona, in Mathia, present Albania was the centre of rebe¬ llious movement. He went to Ohrid only ifit was necessary when he was supposed to welcome emissaries from other churches, when there were church gatherings, meetings of the Synod of the Ohrid Patriarchy or big church holidays. Atanasij I established a living diplomatic relation with many countries in Europe, engaging highly educated people, educated in the West, appreciated people from the political life, patriots with a moral and political maturity and res¬ ponsibility and with already known diplomatic skills. Atanasij I acquired high clerical education in Paris, he spoke French and Ita- . Han, he had his own diplomatic team which followed the internal and external political conditions. His followers traveled abroad entered the royal courts in Europe, transferred the messages and explained the proposals for war projects in Macedonia. Apart from Marko Gini who signed as an "Ambassador of Macedonia and neighboring areas in Turkey", a leading role in this diplomatic team was given to Alek¬ sandar Pashtrovic - Pashtro, who called himself Alexander Macedo¬ nian. Everywhere he went he presented himself and signed the offi¬ cial documents as "Macedonian" from the "Kingdom of Macedonia and other neighbor provinces'". Apart from that Atanasij I had a wide net of diplomatic representatives, Macedonians in all the big European centers like Dubrovnik, Naples, Rome, Torino, Venice, Prague, Paris, Tibingen and others. They were a living connection between Ohrid and the western catholic world, through them messa- 476 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. ges were sent from Ohrid and Macedonia to the European royal courts with which there were constant diplomatic relations. The revolutionary activities of Atanasij I were supported by the Macedonian high clergy, who took up this kind of activities not only out of religious reasons but also because of the revolutionary spirit of the people who wanted freedom, spiritual and national inde¬ pendence. It was a period when from Hercegovina in the north to Moréja in the south there were rebellious activities of the people. A lot of Western Europe rulers wanted to use the fighting mood of the Balkans Christian population. They believed that with a joined fight with the revolutionized people they will get new estates, workforce and mines. Atanasij I wanted to use their wishes in order to make his ideas for freedom come true. So, he followed very carefully the European politics and the activities of the European rulers for taking over the Turkish ruling territories. The biggest rebellious mood was in Himara, east of Valona, which was making troubles to the Turkish authorities for a long time due to the Spanish support, whose state interests reached these areas. In order to make the liberation ideas come true in 1596 through special representatives Atanasij I establi¬ shed contacts with appreciated persons from Rome {Vatican), Venice and Spain from whom he requested support and help in army and weapons. These requests were accepted with thrill. The pope's de¬ mands in return for the help were "joining of the Ohrid Patriarchy into a union with the Roman Catholic Church"', where as Venice "didn 't want to spoil the good relationship with Turkey because of Arvania and Macedonia" . Only Spain accepted the call of the Ohrid Patriarch but when the time came to fulfill the arranged responsi¬ bilities they made some moves which endangered the whole move¬ ment. The vice king of Naples promised a lot but fulfilled nothing. Consequently, the rebellion in Himara failed because Spain, altho¬ ugh promised, didn't send army nor weapons. After this unsuccessful try Atanasij I went into mission through the European royal courts, aiming to search for new allies and military help. In Naples he met 477 D-r Petar Popovski the Spanish vice king Olivares, in Rome the cardinals Peter Aldo- brandini, Santa Severina and San Gorgio, in Prague he met the Aus¬ trian king Rudolf II and some provincial dukes in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. It is known from the correspondence with them that Atanasij I wasn't given firm promises, because of what he came back disappointed, first in Ohrid and then in Himara. Naples and Prague were reserved, but in Romeusing the difficult position he was again blackmailed to sign a declaration of union, which he rejected without discussion. Then, he again turned to Spain looking for help. But he was cheated for the second tíme. Because of that he decided to go to Russia, hoping to manage to win over the Russian king. He was convinced by Clement VIII to do this, he was trying to convince the Russian rulers to participate in the planned general Christian anti Turkish alliance. Atanasij I was escorted by Eremija, the head of the Pelagonia-Prilep church, who was regarded a skillful orator and diplomat, the superior of the Meglenian church Josif and the superior of the Trnovo church Dionisij. They were all accepted by the Russian king on 24 of June 1606, there are no relevant information about this meeting, but fo¬ llowing the Russian foreign politics of that time especially the relations with Turkey, there wasn't evident success of Atanasij' s po¬ litical mission. At that time Russian rulers wanted to keep good and friendly relations with Turkey. In 1595 Russia rejected to participate in the anti Turkish alliance which was prepared by the pope Clement VIII and it didn't show much interest in the Slavic people on the Balkans and avoided protecting them from the central Turkish authorities and the Sultan. Its policy towards the Slavic people con¬ sisted only of material help for the churches and monasteries, which due to the very big taxes were in a very bad economic position. Having in mind these conditions, it is assumed that Atanasij didn't manage to gain the support of the Russian authorities for his project i.e. armed rebellion in Macedonia and the Balkans which would be supported by Russia. 478 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. After that Atanasij I returned to Ohrid disappointed, but ho¬ ping that he would still find allies for reviving his liberating ideas. Not being able to forget about the idea for a rebellion after the return he continued an intense political activity. Aiming to get to know with the situation and the mood of the Christian people and their readiness for a rebellion, he took up several months of traveling through the European part of Russia, he traveled through Macedonia, Greece, Bulgaria, Trakia, the Archipelagus, Serbia, Bosnia, Dalmá¬ cia and Arvania. These travels fortified his beliefs that the conditions for a rebellion were good and that the rebellious mood of the people should be used. Working intensely on the preparations for a rebellion this time he decided not to rely on foreign participation, but on their own force which was a proof that the rebellion will succeed. And when they were about to rebel with 12.000 rebels, at the request of the Spanish vice king in Naples, the count Boneventski asked from Atanasij to wait for a better time for a rebellion promising that when the time comes for a rebellion Spain will send help in soldiers and weapon. This leads to a conclusion that during the preparations there were diplomatic relations with Spain, that the Spanish vice king was informed about the preparations and the plan of the rebellion. Be¬ sides the bitter experience Atanasij I couldn't get rid of the big lies that he would get foreign help for the rebellion. But he was wrong because the promised help from Spain never came to Macedonia, and as a consequence of that all the hopes for a rebellion failed, because the rebellious people were discouraged by the frequent delays of the rebellion. Haunted by the thought of liberating Macedonia from the Turks with a Balkans rebellion and foreign help Atanasij I made one more try to convince the European royal courts to support the idea for a rebellion. At the beginning of 1615 he again went to Western Europe intending to go to Spain and meet the Spanish king Philip III, which wasn't allowed by the Naples vice king, out of fear that they might find out the truth about the political games and manipulations 479 D-r Petar Popovski that he was doing about not fulfilling the promise for sending mili¬ tary help for the rebellion in Russia. This time Atanasij I again re¬ turned disappointed because the European catholic countries weren't prepared to enter open war with Turkey, but with their promises they wanted to keep him under control and use him when it would be appropriate for them. That was the reason why Atanasij' s efforts to gain the help of Europe failed, his efforts and hopes were particula¬ rly turned towards the Spanish court. This kind of behavior wasn't only characteristic for Spain but for the other European countries as well. They were interested in involving in this kind of uncertain and dangerous adventure but not out of compassion for the enslaved Christian people but out of their own state interests. Atanasij I wor¬ ked on his rebellious ideas for 20 years trying to awake the awa¬ reness, conscience and solidarity in these countries but he failed because he believed their false promises and was afraid to rely on their own force and abilities which weren't little. Due to the libe¬ rating ideas and efforts he deserved a high position in the orthodox world and established himself as a great spiritual leader, patriot, revolutionary, diplomat and people's tribune. During those cruel times financially very weak he spent his own money for traveling in order to bring the message about the cry, the horror and the aspira¬ tion of the enslaved Balkan people, who moaned under the occupa¬ tion of the Turkish Empire, searching for charity and kindness of the rich and powerful, which he never got. Atanasij I also contributed to the awakening and spurring of the national feeling and awareness of the Macedonian people, demanding from the special emissaries to present themselves as "Macedonians", as "ambassadors of the Kin¬ gdom of Macedonia", which was noted in many documents that are today kept in the Italian and Austrian state archives. The spiritual and revolutionary act started by Gavril I, conti¬ nued by Atanasij I for prestige and dominance of the Ohrid church over the Balkan orthodox regions, constantly taking care of the respect, dignity and unity of this church, especially in the realization 480 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy, of the aspirations of its followers towards spiritual and national freedom, was continued by the descendants - Ioakim, Nektarij II, Porfirij, Avramij, Dionisij, Atanasij II and many others. Without ne¬ glecting the church work, which due to the difficult economic situ¬ ation were in a very bad condition, they took active participation in the political life, constantly looking for ways, means and possibilities for getting rid of the Turkish occupation, through diplomatic connec¬ tions with the countries -members of war alliancies and anti Turkish coalitions, the Christian League and the Holy Alliance, i.e. with the countries which were preparing a war against the Empire, its forcing out from the Balkans and Europe. The main characteristic of the Ohrid superiors was the aspira¬ tion to develop, enlarge and deepen the relations with the Roman Catholic Church, contrary to its open, blackmail and aggressive aspi¬ rations for subduing the Ohrid patriarchy under its control, and also for establishing tight relations with Russia in which the orthodox people from the European part of Turkey and the Macedonian people recognized a savior from the tyranny. The Ohrid superiors as well as a lot of other church members were going to Rome and Moscow in order to look for material and military help, especially from the Russian kings, who regarded themselves as protectors, donors and helpers of the oppressed orthodox people. In order to achieve these aims, some of the superiors like Porfirij, Avramij, Atanasij II and others would even be determined to subdue to Vatican only to be saved from the tyranny and slavery. Another important reason for this kind of keenness of the superiors was also keeping the spiritual independence and sovereignty of the Macedonian, i.e. Italian Ortho¬ dox Eparchy, which has been existing as the Ohrid Patriarchy for more than three centuries. It's known about the Ohrid superior Por¬ firij that in the correspondence with the pope he acknowledged the superior of the Roman Catholic Church as a descendant of apostle Peter, about Avramij - that the pope Urban VIII acknowledged him as his superior and was himself doing service with him in Rome in 481 D-r Petar Popovski the church "St. Peter" in Italian and Slavic language, and about Atanasij II that he was allegedly a secret catholic. We can conclude from the written sources that these relations of Ohrid with Rome were not kept out of some conviction about the truthfulness of the catholic learning, but in order to get moral, military and material support from the European catholic states for eventual liberation from the Turkish occupation. The best confirmation for this are the political relations of Atanasij I with Rome and the negotiations of the cardinals Aldobrandini, Severina and Gjorgio in 1597 for starting a rebellion in Macedonia and Mathia - Arvania. The relations of the clergy with Russia were deeper and more important. They all aspired to establish permanent relation with Moscow, engaging for that purpose important clergy members who were also regarded as good and experienced politicians, because their trips to Russia had eco¬ nomic and political goals and character. Performing the role of spe¬ cial emissaries who traveled to Moscow, Naples, Rome, Prague and Dubrovnik in the written sources there are the names of Eremija, Nektarij Pelagoniski, Hariton Drachki, Evtimij Skopski and Pajsij Solunski, Who have acquired their high church education in Padova, Italy and except Russian they also spoke Italian, German and French. This proves that the special emissaries of the Ohrid Patriarchy were highly educated people, politically aware, with an affinity to perform such activities at that time. Ohrid superiors were at the same educa¬ tional level, with rare exceptions, being the reason for the lively and rich activity of the Ohrid church in international relations and relationships. Ohrid was closer to the European cities and royal courts than any other town on the Balkans. Almost every Ohrid superior visited Russia, even those with a Greek origin. After Atanasij I every patriarch traveled there, with a small or numerous escort. According to Russian sources the patri¬ arch loakim stayed in Moscow the summer 1609, Nektarij II in 1611, Porfirij in 1624, Avramij in 1634, Dionisij in 1652 and Atanasij II in 1656. They were going there with the same motives and needs - to 482 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. convince Russia to involve in the liberation of the enslaved Balkan people under the Turkish occupation, to provide religious literature for the spiritual institutions in the Ohrid diocese and to receive material aid for purchasing back the church objects pledged in the Turkish banks and courts. A general characteristic for them is that they were welcomed with great love, respect and dignity and with all the court honors. Russian people celebrated the Ohrid church as their own church, because "the newly established Russian church - the Kiev metropolitan from the beginning was under the authority of the Ohrid superior, called patriarch". On the other hand Macedonian prelates informed their Russian hosts about the situation of the ensla¬ ved Balkan people and about other issues which were of interest for the Russian state. Occasionally, some of the Constantinople and Bul¬ garian prelates visited Russia in order to ask for charity but they weren't welcomed as the Macedonian, because the Russian sovere¬ igns showed due respect for Ohrid as being the oldest and the biggest Orthodox Church in the Christian world. They were rarely welcomed by the Russian kings, which shows the treatment of the official Russian politics to some of the orthodox churches and confessions. In the time of the Ohrid superi¬ ors Nektarij II, Avramij, Dionisij and Atanasij II in the Ohrid diocese there was a fierce fight between the Independence (Macedonian) and the Fanariot (Greek-foreign) party for dominance over the Macedo¬ nian spiritual space. The second one made big efforts to dominate the Ohrid throne, by which they wanted to create conditions for continuing the process of assimilation and denationalization of the Macedonian people, which started during the Byzantine ruling of the Macedonian territories. The biggest fighter against the big Greek aspirations, the Fanariot aspirations towards the Macedonian church was the Sisanian metropolitan Zosim I. Although ha was of Vlav origin but supporting Macedonians, he led an energetic and stubborn fight for the keeping of the Slavic spirit and character and the spiri¬ tual independence and sovereignty of the Ohrid Patriarchy. As a 483 D-r Petar Popovski leader of the Independence party he won the battle for the patriarchal throne, eliminating the Trnovo metropolitan Grigorij, a fanariot, who tried to take over the Ohrid throne by bribing the Turkish authorities. During the period that he was Sisanian metropolitan and when he came on the Ohrid throne Zosim was truly interested in the deve¬ lopment of the schools and education in general, especially in the rural areas. We can see in the written sources that in 1708 he issued several orders for the development of the schools. Led by the liberal ideas and activities of the predecessors Gavril and Atanasij I, before becoming a patriarch, through his special emissary with a Greek name Joan Gipropulos, through the prince Eugen Savojski he estab¬ lished the first diplomatic contacts with the Austrian government. In the letter he sent to the royal court he didn't ask for anything else but a moral emperor protection and support for a possible rebellion in Macedonia, three guarantee letters and three flags for the Macedo¬ nian areas in order to encourage the revolutionized people that Austria supports these activities. He was also convincing the Aust¬ rian government that "ш a period often days he would gather 12.000 well armed men" and that "when the Austrian army approaches Ma¬ cedonia a lot of people will sacrifice their estate and their life to attack the enemy". Although Eugen looked at the call of Zosim with reserve he still didn't want to miss the opportunity and from the military camp near the town Futok on 15 of July 1716 he sent a call to the orthodox people of Macedonia, in which he praised the deci¬ sion of the conspirators and promised support from the Austrian court and protection by the emperor Carlo VI, promising them they will fully respect the privileges and freedom of their religion and he called them to a joined fight. After the first contacts the diplomatic activity between the Austrian and the Macedonian side intensified, the military-political platform, strategy and the responsibilities of the joined fight were precisely arranged. From the successful correspondence between Zo¬ sim I and the Austrian government we can see that the Macedonian 484 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. side completely fulfilled its promises, the Austrian side failed to fulfill all the promises following their state interests at that time. The cooperation was characterized by frequent visits of special emissa¬ ries until 21 of July 1718 when a piece agreement was signed bet¬ ween Austria and Turkey. This ruined the hopes of Zosim I because Austria, which during his time was the biggest Turkish enemy, was his only hope for his liberation ideas. Then the Macedonian people once again were deceived. After the piece agreement, until 1736 all the diplomatic relations between the Macedonian and the Austrian side were terminated, and the political situation became worse. A new war started, this time between Austria and Russia on one side and Turkey on the other. Using this situation, in December 1736 Zo¬ sim I tried to renew the terminated diplomatic contacts with Austria. Through the emissary the metropolitan Pajsij Emanuil Pogonat he sent a several letters to the Austrian king Carlo VI, in which he reminded him of the previous contacts and asked him to send a ma¬ nifesto for a mutual agreement. Unfortunately, only one letter is kept, from which we can see that Zosim I demanded from the Aus¬ trian sovereign during the process of the possible forcing out of Turkey from the Balkans "to confirm the spiritual authority of the First Justiniana Ohridian over Macedonia, Arvania, Serbia, Bosnia and Bulgaria", according to the old laws issued by the Byzantine emperors. Some of the requests were rejected, but most of them were accepted, there were also confirmations for help and protection of the sovereignty and the autocephalous status of the Ohrid Patriarchy. The war reawakened the hopes of the Macedonian people, who started outbursts and rebellions to help the allies. Apart from the Macedonian population the high clergy also participated, among whom the Ohrid Patriarch Joasaf IV prepared his own special Project for war- political cooperation with Austria, the catholic Archbishop of Skopje, Mihailo Suma, and the Patriarch Arsenie IV Jovanovich of Рек participated as well. When the Austrian army approached Nish, they contacted the Austrian court, offering help in armed re- 485 D-r Petar Popovski beis. Based on the promises given by Austria in Macedonia, espe¬ cially eastern Macedonia there were outbursts and rebellions. As a member of the Independence party in the Austro-Russian war against Turkey the patriarch Joasaf put himself on the side of Austria and Russia. Together with the patriarch Arsenie IV of Рек through their legates they led negotiations with Vienna in the biggest secrecy. The diplomatic activity was led through two channels: the Ohrid superior, the patriarch Joasaf IV, he made his contacts with the Austrian court through the catholic Archbishop in Skopje, Mihailo Suma, and Arsenie IV through Nikola Dimitrievich, the episcope of Temishvar. They were both convincing Carlo VI that when the Au¬ strian army enters Nish the Christian people írom the Balkans will start an armed rebellion against the Turks and thus by attacking from their back they will help the Austrian going to south, promising food for the army and other necessities. They also promised to "rebel the whole Iliric nation". Unlike Arsenie IV, who for the participation of the Serbian people in the war demanded only protection of the Christian people and right of religious freedom, the Ohrid Patriarch, anticipating a chance for realization of the ancient dream of the Macedonian people, in the negotiations with Vienna he acted like a real representative of enslaved people. He demanded that after a successful war, the territory of the Ohrid diocese gets a treatment of an autonomous state within the Habsburg monarchy, i.e. joining of Serbia, Arvania, Bosnia and Bulgaria with Macedonia and creating one state within the borders of the old Ohrid Archbishopric (Patriar¬ chy), which would enter the Austrian empire as an autonomous state. In the negotiations with Vienna the patriarch Joasaf IV acted like an equal partner who asked for help and at the same time offered favors. The autonomy that the Ohrid superior suggested consisted of 4 demands: 1. Freedom of religion, i.e. acknowledgement of the free¬ dom of the Orthodox Church; 2. Acknowledgement of the right of the Ohrid Patriarch to spiritual and secular authority in the planned Balkans confederation based on previous confirmation of the Justi- 486 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. nian law of the Ohrid Archbishopric (Patriarchy); 3. A place and vote in the Vienna Raichstag; and 4. Privileged customs duties for importing and exporting goods These demands are testified in one very important document, which is kept in the castle Oberzen, in Bavaria, where, there are biographic information about the comman¬ der of the Austrian army, the count Sekendorf. Some of the demands were accepted, and for some only promises were given. Still, they were all received and confirmed by the government. We can see from the content of the document that in the negotiations with Vienna Joasaf represented not only the Macedonian people but also all the orthodox people who until 1557 when the Рек Patriarchy was renewed were under the jurisdiction of the Ohrid Patriarchy. This wasn't contrary to with the present situation although it was signi¬ ficantly changed. With this the patriarch Joasaf expressed the view of the Macedonian high clergy, who regarded the Рек patriarchy as a non canonic church because it was renewed by the force of a state order, with a state document not within the church and the orthodox, evangelic rules. The requests of the Ohrid Patriarchy for a church-political jurisdiction of the whole Iliric, which the Austrian government dec¬ lared as "too big aspirations", were an expression of the aspirations and needs of the high clergy from the Ohrid Patriarchy and their religious and class interests for jurisdiction of the Ohrid church over all the orthodox nations on the Balkans, and they were actually an expression of the state aspirations of the Ohrid Patriarch Joasaf. Because of the fact that with the same Justinian authorities the Рек patriarch Arsenie IV established his right on the jurisdiction over the orthodox people of the whole Iliric, from whom Vienna expected a big benefit, Joasaf angrily terminated the negotiations. He saw that Austria had a restrictive attitude towards Ohrid in terms of the conditions for giving support to the war, but a privileged one to Рек. He also realized that Austria doesn't have enough strength and me¬ ans to be able to pull through such a huge move, so he concluded 487 D-r Petar Popovski that further negotiations would be led in vain, although he was constantly promised that his requests would be accepted. Some other factors also influenced the end of the negotiations. First, there was a real danger that Turkey would find out about the secret negotiations, which could result in huge consequences for the Patriarchy and the Macedonian people as well. The fear became bigger when the Gre¬ eks found out about the negotiations, the prelates with a Greek origin doing service in the Ohrid Patriarchy. In these complex circumsta¬ nces Joasaf IV was sure that the aggressive Fanariot party won't miss the opportunity to finally get back at the Independence party espe¬ cially because this would contribute to the realization of their aspi¬ rations and interests for Ohrid. There was a danger of questioning the existence of the Archbishopric as a spiritual institution. This was a good opportunity for the Constantinople church because it was constantly showing aspirations for Ohrid, for subdu¬ ing the Ohrid Patriarchy under its own jurisdiction, for spiritual, educational and political dominance on the Balkans. The Greek Jo- van Ipsilanti, junior, who was a high ranking clerk and a close friend of the Constantinople Patriarch tried to use this situation. Finding out about the connections of Joasaf with Vienna he accused the Ohrid superior in front of the grand vesir of being "disloyal to the Turkish government" and that "with his spiritual flock he worh against the Turkish Empire", contrary tojts interests. He also asked from the grand vesir "to discharge the Patriarchy", calling it "disloyal to the empire", and "subdue its eparchies under the authority of the Cons¬ tantinople patriarch". But this wasn't accepted by the authorities because they didn't know the motives. On the other hand, knowing the methods the Greeks used against the Ohrid church in their per¬ sistence to realize their hegemonic purposes, they thought that this was an intrigue Ipsilanti paid with his life for his discoveries about the negotiations of Joasaf and Vienna. Still, the suspicions remained. The Austro-Russian-Turkish war ended exactly as Joasaf thought. After the big defeats at the battlefield on 01 of September 1739 Aust- 488 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. ria signed a piece agreement with Turkey in Belgrade, and on 18 of September Russia signed a piece agreement with Turkey. The war ended as the two sides wanted but the Balkan people, among which the Macedonian people remained disappointed although they develo¬ ped significant revolutionary activities at the back of the Turkish front. Disappointed again by the western catholic countries, after this war they turned their hopes to orthodox Russia, which at that mo¬ ment had big influence on the Balkans. After the war the relations between the central Turkish autho¬ rities and the Ohrid patriarchy significantly cooled. The suspicions of the Turks about Joasaf s connections with Austria remained be¬ cause the Turkish authorities were constantly receiving letters with information about the secret plan between Ohrid and Vienna. Using this situation the Constantinople church started a large campaign against Ohrid, making all sorts of intrigues to discredit Ohrid in front of the Turkish authorities. At that time the Fanariot party became stronger, especially in the southern Macedonian eparchies, and it be¬ gan destroying the religious unity of the people built over centuries. The Constantinople patriarchs had a leading role in this process. What couldn't been done by the patriarch Kalinik with Ipsilanti was done by Samoil Handzeri. With the help of the corrupted Turkish authorities, with intrigues and bribe he first managed to destroy the Рек patriarchy (1766) and the Ohrid patriarchy (1767). Using a lot of money Handzeri managed to get an order from the Sultan with which the eparchies of the Ohrid church were joined to the Constantinople church. Due to that vicious, pretentious and revengeful act the torch of the old Macedonian spiritual education and culture, which for 1716 years, from the time of Apostle Paul, from 51/52 year after Christ was enlightening the Slavic regions and people with noble spiritual education, culture and literacy, was distinguished. The unjustly abolished Ohrid church was renewed 200 years later, in 1967 in ancient Ohrid in the Peoples Republic of Macedonia, which was at that period existing within the frames of FNRJ. With 489 D-r Petar Popovski this act the spirit, letter and glory was returned to the ancient epis¬ copacy founded by apostle Paul, in 535 promoted into Archbishopric by Justinijan I from Skopje, in 545 confirmed by the pope Vigilius, and in 976 promoted into Patriarchy by king Samuil and in 999 confirmed by the pope Gregory V. The first person who sat at the throne of the renewed Archbishopric {Patriarchy) throne was the episcope Toplichki, Dositej (1967-1982). During his, not very long, rule he managed to bring back the spiritual shine of the Ohrid chu¬ rch, provide a significant place in the Christian world and open new horizons and ways for further affirmation and prosperity. After this short genealogical observation which is based on authentic sources, documents and facts, we can conclude with plea¬ sure that that Macedonian church diplomacy, starting from the time of patriarch Jovan Debarski (1019) to the time of patriarch Arsenie (1767) was characterized with a high level of professionalism, spiritual ethics and dignity. During those difficult and complex his¬ torical periods Ohrid superiors kept, sometimes occasional, someti¬ mes permanent diplomatic relations and contacts with the Byzantine Empire, than with the Turkish Empire, with the churches of the East Ecumene, with the Constantinople church, Jerusalem, Alexandrian and Antiohian church, with the countries of civilized Europe, with the royal courts and dukedoms, with the orthodox and catholic chu¬ rches, especially the Roman catholic church, even with some digni¬ fied spiritual centers. There are a lot of written documents and testi¬ monies which have the motives for mutual contacts based on which there was diplomatic activity. Apart from the church-educational, cu¬ ltural and economic issues a special purpose of the Macedonian church diplomacy was to convince and spur the European catholic states and orthodox Russia to involve in the liberation of the Mace¬ donian as well as other enslaved Balkan people by the Turks and force them away from the Balkans and Europe. It is almost impossible to assume that during those times, full with danger, uncertainty and temptations, they could travel in so far 490 Macedonian medieval church diplomacy. away countries like Russia, England, Spain, France, Italy, Austria, Germany, Poland and Czech Republic. But the desire to establish contacts with the contemporary civilized European world was stron¬ ger than anything. The aim was to approach Ohrid as a biblical, spi¬ ritual center and Macedonia as ancient country, to the world, which was interested in the ancient early Christian spiritual and cultural opus. As a result of these contacts, the city Ohrid, as a patriarchal throne, and Macedonia known as the cradle of Christianity very soon became very close and well known to medieval Europe as no other town, church, country on the Balkans. They became a bridge through which the East approached the West in a spiritual, cultural, political and any other way. The Macedonian medieval church diplomacy had a significant contribution for a reaffirmation of the Macedonian name. The Ohrid superiors and their legates involved in the diplomatic net, regardless of their origin Macedonian or Greek, aware or unaware, promoted the name Macedonia and Macedonians wherever they went. When they presented themselves or signed in the European royal courts they would always put the name^Macedonian" or "Macedonian from the Kingdom of Macedonia". In the correspondence they used those titles, translated in the language of the country to which court they sent the letters. The Patriarch Gavril traveling through Europe signed in the language of the country he visited German, French, English, Italian and Russian like "Archbishop of the First Justinian Ohridian and Patriarch of whole Bulgaria, Serbia, Macedonia, Albania ". The Patriarch Atanasij I was doing the same presenting like "Patriarch of Justiniana Prima - Ohrid, whole of Bulgaria, Serbia, Macedonia, Arvania, Hungaro-Vlahia, Moldavia, Russia and all the western te¬ rritories'", he meant: Bosnia, Dalmaţia, Venice, Southern Italy, Sicily and Malta. This kind of signing was registered in many documents from 1585, 1597, 1617, 1691, 1694, 1707 etc. Apart from Macedonia, Serbia, Bulgaria and Arvania which are most often found in the 491 D-r Petar Popovski written documents they would also put Bosnia, Bogdania, Moldavia, Húngaro-Vlahija, Malorussia even Russia. Because of these titles and because of the fact that those re¬ gions were under the Ohrid patriarchy, as a separate spiritual center, and because they knew that Ohrid is in Macedonia there were people who thought that Macedonia encompasses all the regions which were under a spiritual guidance of the Ohrid church. Due to the popular and reaffirmed name of Macedonia a lot of people from Serbia, Bos¬ nia even Vlashko and Moldavia presented themselves as Macedoni¬ ans and their regions as parts of Macedonia. The above mentioned examples and facts testify the popularity of the Macedonian name at that time, especially after the XV century thanks to the capability, wisdom, and successful leading of the church work by the Ohrid superiors, who were also skillful in the leading of the so called high diplomacy. Due to their responsible, skilled and visionary leading of the church the Ohrid Patriarchy kept its autocephalous status and spirit, which was not the case with the other churches, led by their hegemonic aspirations, viciously and pretentiously are denying this historical fact. Based on the facts we can say that the XVII century autocephalous status of the popular Ohrid church proves that Mace¬ donia has a canonic, historical and political right to its autocephalous church in the form of the Macedonian Orthodox Church, i.e. the re¬ newed Ohrid Archbishopric {Patriarchy). 492
any_adam_object	1
any_adam_object_boolean	1
author	Popovski, Petar 1931-
author_GND	(DE-588)136557325
author_facet	Popovski, Petar 1931-
author_role	aut
author_sort	Popovski, Petar 1931-
author_variant	p p pp
building	Verbundindex
bvnumber	BV035134894
ctrlnum	(OCoLC)644548512 (DE-599)BVBBV035134894
format	Book
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01287nam a2200301 cc4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV035134894</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">00000000000000.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">081103s2007 a\|\|\| \|\|\|\| 00\|\|\| mac d</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)644548512</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV035134894</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">mac</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-Re13</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Popovski, Petar</subfield><subfield code="d">1931-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)136557325</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija</subfield><subfield code="n">2</subfield><subfield code="c">Petar Popovski</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Skopje</subfield><subfield code="b">"Makedonski Sonce"</subfield><subfield code="c">(2007)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">605 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">Ill.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV035134886</subfield><subfield code="g">2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016802352&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016802352&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016802352</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
id	DE-604.BV035134894
illustrated	Illustrated
index_date	2024-07-02T22:25:39Z
indexdate	2024-07-09T21:23:06Z
institution	BVB
language	Macedonian
oai_aleph_id	oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016802352
oclc_num	644548512
open_access_boolean
owner	DE-12 DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR
owner_facet	DE-12 DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR
physical	605 S. Ill.
publishDate	2007
publishDateSearch	2007
publishDateSort	2007
publisher	"Makedonski Sonce"
record_format	marc
spelling	Popovski, Petar 1931- Verfasser (DE-588)136557325 aut Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija 2 Petar Popovski Skopje "Makedonski Sonce" (2007) 605 S. Ill. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier (DE-604)BV035134886 2 Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016802352&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016802352&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract
spellingShingle	Popovski, Petar 1931- Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija
title	Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija
title_auth	Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija
title_exact_search	Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija
title_exact_search_txtP	Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija
title_full	Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija 2 Petar Popovski
title_fullStr	Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija 2 Petar Popovski
title_full_unstemmed	Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija 2 Petar Popovski
title_short	Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija
title_sort	makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija
url	http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016802352&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016802352&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA
volume_link	(DE-604)BV035134886
work_keys_str_mv	AT popovskipetar makedonskatasrednovekovnacrkovnadiplomatija2

Verfügbarkeit

Es ist kein Print-Exemplar vorhanden.

Fernleihe Bestellen Achtung: Nicht im THWS-Bestand! Inhaltsverzeichnis

MARC

Datensatz im Suchindex

Es ist kein Print-Exemplar vorhanden.

Ähnliche Einträge