Zadužbine srpskih arhiepiskopa srednjeg veka

Abstract

Zadužbine poglavara Srpske crkve u srednjem veku uočene su kao posebna grupa manastira. Za razliku od vladarskih i vlasteoskih zadužbina, u njima je skoncentrisana vlast crkvenih lica i kao ktitora i kao duhovnih starešina. Pećki komleks hramova predstavljen je kao jedan od najreprezentativnijih ove grupe. Pored toga ukazao je i na ostale arhijerejske zadužbine. Pažnja je posvećena i ktitorskim pravima njihovih osnivača. Sagledan je položaj takvih hramova unutar Srpske crkve, kako u pogledu eparhijske organizacije, tako i u odnosu na ostale manastire. Određena je i politička i društvena uloga zadužbina srpskih arhiepiskopa u srednjem veku.

According to the former knowledge and interpretation of the position of monasteries in Medieval Serbia, patriarchal monasteries are not recognized as a special category, that is, in the conditions of Serbian Middle Ages they could be referred to as archbishop's monasteries. A special category of monasteries, the founders of which were bishops, is characterized by the fact that the power of church authorities and spiritual elders was concentrated. Thus, a great independence from secular authorities was achieved. This group of temples is in opposition to regal monasteries in which the power of rulers and founders was concentrated, whereas the power of the bishops was diminished. The necessity of forming these monasteries was indicated at the very beginning of Serbian Church activity. What is more, Byzantine role models may be recognized. The second Serbian archbishop Arsenije founded a monastery on the estate of Žiča property in Hvosno. It is believed that the process of making the complex of Peć was started after Sava's return from a holy land and that he played a great part in it. What is also being considered is whether the temple of Peć was from the very beginning imagined as an archbishop mausoleum, or it had acquired that role under the circumstances during the 14th century. The position of the graves, painting programme and other known data, indicate that Arsenije, Nikodim and Danilo II were buried in their endowments, in the graves they had prepared by themselves for a lifetime, as the founders of those temples. It seems that the founders and archbishops had usual founders' rights, which apart from burial and painting was manifested in publishing a monastery tipicon. The greatest number of archbishop endowments is concentrated in the Peć complex. Apart from the existing tepmle of Holy Apostles, firstly the archbishop Nikodim had built a church dedicated to St. Maria Odigitria and St. Nicolas, and all the buildings were connected by nathex with the bell tower. What is also denoted is the tendency that in the time of sudden ascent of Peć complex, the idea of canonization of Serbian archbishops started to appear. The endowment of the head of the Serbian church was not only limited to Peć cathedral. It was known that Nikodim had built churches dedicated to St. Sava in the town of Lizica. Moreover, Danilo was noted as a founder of St. George's temple in Maglič, whereas to our first Serbian patriarch Joanikije, the patronage of temples with Biblical names to Karmil and Tavor is assigned. When we talk about the position of the monasteries it may be concluded that they didn't have the significance, respectability and status of Byzantine patriarchal monasteries, and in Serbia they remained in the shadow of richer and more luxurious rulers' endowments.