Makedonskata srednovekovna crkovna diplomatija: 2
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book |
| Language: | Macedonian |
| Published: |
Skopje
"Makedonski Sonce"
(2007)
|
| Online Access: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Physical Description: | 605 S. Ill. |
Staff View
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 | ||
Record in the Search Index
| _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 |