To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Patriarchate of Antioch (Melchite).
Journal articles on the topic 'Patriarchate of Antioch (Melchite)'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 23 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Patriarchate of Antioch (Melchite).'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Laham, Gregorios III. "The Ecumenical Commitment of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church." Downside Review 135, no. 1 (January 2017): 3–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0012580616657245.
Full textAbstract:
The Ecumenical Commitment of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church has been at the centre of its ecclesiology and theological thought especially in relation to its sister-church the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch since the Second Vatican Council. The Antiochene context has provided a unique and creative context for a renewed ecumenical engagement as viewed through the developing relations between the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch and the Melkite Greek Catholic Church. This paper sets out in detail how these relations have developed over the last decades, however, with the caveat that the author, Patriarch Gregorios III who has been deeply involved in these discussions, notes that the significant proposals mentioned in the final part of this article remain to be received within the wider ecclesial communities.
2
Panchenko, Constantin. "An Orthodox Atlantis: Bishoprics of the Patriarchate of Antioch in Eastern Anatolia (16th — 19th Centuries)." ISTORIYA 14, no. 10 (132) (2023): 0. http://dx.doi.org/10.18254/s207987840028587-4.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to the Greek Orthodox presence in Eastern Anatolia in the Modern period. The main sources of the research are historical works of the christian arabs, manuscripts, publications of archival documents, the press of the 19th — early 20th centuries. The objects of the analysis are bishoprics of the Church of Antioch in Upper Mesopotamia, Upper Euphrates valley and southern Georgian territories (Samtsckhe, Akhaltzih) included into the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Antioch after the Ottoman conquest. The research deals with demographic, linguistic and cultural situation of the local Greek Orthodox population, as well as reasons of their decline and disappearance.
3
Noble, Samuel. "Byzantine Adab and Falsafah in 11th Century Antioch." Journal of Arabic Literature 53, no. 3-4 (September 21, 2022): 246–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1570064x-12341460.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Both medieval Arab historians and modern Byzantinists have generally ignored the Arabophone cultural life of Antioch during its period under Byzantine rule from 969–1084 CE, preferring to equate Christian rule with Greek culture. Nevertheless, lay intellectuals closely connected to the Melkite Patriarchate of Antioch were active in promoting the translation of Greek patristic works into Arabic during this period. This article examines the career of the deacon ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Faḍl al-Anṭākī, whose translations, compilations, and original works evince close familiarity with contemporary intellectual trends in Baghdad and a desire to produce translations of high literary quality. Moreover, in Ibn al-Faḍl’s criticisms of local philosophers who had strayed from Christian dogma, we find further evidence for Byzantine Antioch as a center of Arabic literary and philosophical activity.
4
Kulikova, Ksenia. "Dialogue between Christians and Muslims: the position of the Patriarchate of Antioch." Islamology 5, no. 1-2 (November 5, 2012): 492–506. http://dx.doi.org/10.24848/islmlg.05.1-2.44.
Full text
5
Varghese, Baby. "Renewal in the Malankara Orthodox Church, India." Studies in World Christianity 16, no. 3 (December 2010): 226–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/swc.2010.0102.
Full textAbstract:
The Malanakra Orthodox Syrian Church, which belongs to the family of the Oriental Orthodox Churches, proudly claims to be founded by the Apostle St Thomas. Its history before the fifteenth century is very poorly documented. However, this ancient Christian community was in intermittent relationship with the East Syrian Patriarchate of Seleucia-Ctesiphon, which was discontinued with the arrival of the Portuguese, who forcefully converted it to Roman Catholicism. After a union of fifty-five years, the St Thomas Christians were able to contact the Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch, thanks to the arrival of the Dutch in Malabar and the expulsion of the Portuguese. The introduction of the West Syrian Liturgical rites was completed by the middle of the nineteenth century. The arrival of the Anglican Missionaries in Malabar in the beginning of the nineteenth century provided the Syrian Christians the opportunity for modern English education and thus to make significant contributions to the overall development of Kerala, one of the states of the Indian Republic.
6
Grouchevoy, A. G. "The Mixed Council in the History of Antioch patriarchate. The facts and their interpretation." Orientalistica 6, no. 5 (February 1, 2024): 886–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.31696/2618-7043-2023-6-5-886-899.
Full textAbstract:
The Mixed Council is an especial form of political interaction of Christians with ofϐicials and diplomats of Ottoman and Russian Empires. The Council was formed in equal numbers form the representatives of hierarchs and seculars. The Council existed in all regions of Ottoman empire inhabited by Christian population. The sources show that the Mixed Council created in order and control all school Institutions as also the schools process was ϐirstly created in the Antioch patriarchy under the pressure of famous diplomat N.P. Ignatieff who was Russian ambassador in Constantinople in 1864–1877 years. The Mixed Council was considered also as a possibility to diminish or even to avoid the inner conϐlicts of Christian population in Syria and Palestine. The active participation of Russian empire in the inner problems of Christian patriarchates may easily be explained by the volume of ϐinancial investments of Russian Empire/ 80% of budget of Jerusalem patriarchate and 30% of Antiochene patriarchy was composed from the money of Russian origin.
7
Gerd, Lora. "Russian Church Policy in Syria in the 19th Century: Main Tendencies and Dynamics of Its Development." ISTORIYA 12, no. 8 (106) (2021): 0. http://dx.doi.org/10.18254/s207987840016649-2.
Full textAbstract:
The article is focused on the main tendencies of Russian policy in the Patriarchate of Antioch during the 19th century. Following the traditional support of Orthodoxy, in the situation of concurrence of the Great Powers in the Middle East Russia had to make a revision of the old methods of policy. The journey of Archimandrite Porfirii Uspenskii in 1843 and the foundation of the Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem in 1847 were aimed at strengthening of Russian positions in the region. The conflicts between the nations in the end of the 1850s and he struggle of the Arabs for church and national independence forced he Russian diplomacy to support them against the Greeks. The struggle ended in the election of an Arab Patriarch at the Antiochian see. The activities of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society for foundation of schools for the Orthodox Arabs as well as financing of the schools of the Patriarchate created a strong base for national education. The peak of Russian influence in Syria is in the beginning of the 20s century: at that time the sums for material support increase enormously. As a whole it was in Syria during the 19th century that Russian policy in the Christian East was most efficient.
8
Gerd, Lora. "Russian policy in the Patriarchate of Antioch from the 1840s to 1914: ‘soft power’ in Syria and Lebanon." Contemporary Levant 6, no. 1 (January 2, 2021): 9–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20581831.2021.1881715.
Full text
9
Zwierlein, Cornel. "Interaction and boundary work: Western merchant colonies in the Levant and the Eastern Churches, 1650–1800." Journal of Modern European History 18, no. 2 (March 7, 2020): 156–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1611894420910899.
Full textAbstract:
European merchants in their factories (‘nations’) in the Eastern Mediterranean under Ottoman rule were not really colonizers; in early modern times, they were somehow privileged guests. However, they deserve an important part in a long-term history of types of ‘close distance’ and forms of segregational coexistence. Different from recent studies that stress a strong overall interaction, understanding, sharing, and exchange between Europeans and Ottoman subjects, it is proposed to distinguish three levels: (1) The daily commercial interaction of Western Europeans with their Ottoman counterparts; (2) the stronger involvement in some politico-religious struggles (the 1724 schism in the patriarchate of Antioch serves as example): also here, one has still to distinguish between real interest in the religious cause and other activities as credit lending; (3) the care for and maintenance by the Europeans of their own Western national culture abroad: these cultural activities served more to (eventually unconsciously) perform ‘boundary work’ and to close up the ‘nation’. These early modern forms of close distance and segregation were only isomorphic but not homologous with later highly conscious colonial and modern imperial forms of contact between ‘West’ and ‘East’ as in the nineteenth-century European settlements in Istanbul.
10
Brun, S. P. "ЦерквиВостокапредкрестоноснымправителемзаморскойземли:князьБоэмундIVодноглазый ихристианеЛеванта." Istoricheskii vestnik, no. 20(2017) part: 20 (August 30, 2019): 58–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.35549/hr.2019.2017.35078.
Full textAbstract:
The article is dedicated to the ecclesiastical policies of one of the most outstanding Crusader rulers of Outremer Bohemond IV the Oneeyed, Prince of Antioch (1198 1199/ 1201 1216/1219 1233) and Count of Tripoli (1187 1233). During the long years of his reign, Bohemond IV was excommunicated several times by both the Pope of Rome and the Latin Patriarchs in the East. He spent a major part of his campaigns fighting Christian, rather than Muslim adversaries. He was guilty of persecuting Latin clergymen, fighting an open war with the Knights Hospitaller, of murdering the Latin Patriarch of Antioch. At the same time, Bohemond IV went much farther than his predecessors in patronizing and contacting the Eastern Christian communities. He allowed his son Philip to join the Armenian Apostolic Church. With a significant part of his nobles and retinue he accepted sacraments and took part in church services, performed by Byzantine and Melkite clergy. Moreover, he reinstated the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch in the Levant an act which had lasting consequences, and whose legacy outlived both Bohemond IV and the Crusader domination in the East. The acts and policies of Bohemond IV reveal an entirely new phase of Crusader interaction with the Christian East, a phase that breaks a great number of stereotypes and thus has immense significance for our understanding of Medieval HistoryСтатья посвящена церковной политике одного из самых выдающихся крестоносцевправителей УтремераБоэмунда IV одноглазого, князя Антиохийского (11981199/ 12011216/12191233) и граф Трипольский (1187 1233). За долгие годы своего правления Боэмунд IV был несколько раз отлучен от церкви обоими Папой Римским и латинскими патриархами на востоке. Он провел большую часть своих кампаний, сражаясь с христианскими, а не мусульманскими противниками. Он был виновен в преследовании латинских священнослужителей, в открытой войне с рыцарямигоспитальерами, в убийстве латинского Патриарха Антиохии. В то же время Боэмунд IV пошел гораздо дальше своих предшественников в покровительстве и контактах с восточными христианскими общинами. Он позволил своему сыну Филиппу присоединиться к Армянской Апостольской Церкви. Со значительной частью своей знати и свиты он принимал таинства и принимал участие в церковных службах, совершаемых византийским и Мелкитским духовенством. Более того, он восстановил греческий православный патриархат Антиохии в Леванте акт, который имел длительные последствия, и чье наследие пережило как Боэмунда IV, так и господство крестоносцев на востоке. Действия и политика Боэмунда IV раскрывают совершенно новую фазу взаимодействия крестоносцев с христианским Востоком, фазу, которая ломает множество стереотипов и поэтому имеет огромное значение для нашего понимания средневековой истории
11
Pashkov, Petr. "Ideas about the criteria of the Ecumenical Council in Byzantium in the 1st half of the 15th century and the concept of the Pentarchy." St.Tikhons' University Review 106 (June 30, 2022): 25–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.15382/sturii2022106.25-43.
Full textAbstract:
This article examines the views of Byzantine theologians and church leaders of the 1st half of the 15th century on the criteria for an Ecumenical Council in connection with the controversy about the Union of Florence. The consideration also includes the ecclesiological tradition of the previous century, reflected in the documents of negotiations with Rome on church union and anti-Latin writings of Archbishop Nilus Cabasilas. It also briefly examines the results of Byzantine theological development, formulated in the first decades of Ottoman rule. The author shows that Orthodox theologians of the late Byzantine period, following a tradition dating back to the 1st millennium, did indeed recognize (contrary to popular beliefs) the existence of strict formal canonical criteria for the Ecumenical Council, which were defined in their eyes by the concept of the «Pentarchy» of the ancient Patriarchs: Council could be considered Ecumenical if it was recepted by representatives of the Churches of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. At the same time, other local Churches were assigned a secondary role. The significance of individual bishops was completely leveled out; the subject of church activity was the Patriarchy. This system of ecclesiological concepts by the 15th century already to some extent did not meet the requirements of reality; nevertheless, thanks to its collegial character, it gave the Orthodox Church the means to overcome the crisis caused by the Union of Florence. The rejection of those teachings of the Roman Church, in which it deviated from Orthodox dogma, on the part of the patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, their rejection of the union (confirmed, among other things, conciliarly in Jerusalem in 1443) and the support of its opponents in the Patriarchate of Constantinople played in this process defining role. Due to this, the Council of Ferrara-Florence could not be considered Ecumenical from the point of view of the Byzantine tradition. At the same time, the development of ecclesiological thought in the 15th century. strengthened Orthodox theologians in the conviction that an Ecumenical Council was possible without the participation of Rome. The «Pentarchy» thus passed into the «Tetrarchy».
12
Chumachenko, Tatiana. "The Issue of Declaring Bishop Vladimir Kotliarov, Moscow Patriarchate Representative to the Patriarch of Antioch and All the East, Persona Non Grata in 1966." State, Religion and Church in Russia and Worldwide 35, no. 1 (2017): 41–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.22394/2073-7203-2017-35-1-41-63.
Full text
13
MORDVINTSEV, Vyacheslav, and Roman Potiomka. "The stay of the Antioch Patriarch Macarius in Kyiv in the middle of the 17th century." Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. History, no. 157 (2023): 55–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/1728-2640.2023.157.8.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction. The journey of the Patriarch of Antioch Macarius through the Ukrainian lands and the city of Kyiv took place during the church reform in the Moscow State. At the invitation of Patriarch Nikon, the Antiochian delegation went on a trip in October 1652 with the aim of participating in the Moscow Church Councils and receiving financial aid from the tsar to support the Antiochian Patriarchate. The position of the patriarchy starting from the 20s of the 17th century. was in a financial crisis and therefore this trip was very important for Patriarch Makarios and his entourage. The route of the Antiochian delegation ran through Constantinople, Wallachia, the Principality of Moldavia, Ukrainian lands to Moscow. In Kyiv, the Antiochian delegation stopped twice, in the summer of 1654 and returning to Antioch in the summer of 1656. Archdeacon Pavlo Alepskyi left the Kyiv period of the delegation's stay in his diaries. The relevance of the research lies in understanding how Kyiv of that time developed based on the materials of the diaries of Pavel Alepsky, its political and religious position in Eastern Europe. The goal is to reconstruct the territory of the city of the second half of the 17th century on the basis of diaries and special historical literature, to highlight the main moments of the Antiochian delegation's stay in Kyiv, to explore the monuments of church architecture before the reconstruction of the 18th century. Methods. The article is written based on the principle of historicism and a systemic-structural approach. The work used general scientific and special historical methods, historiographic (descriptive), problematic - chronological. historical - comparative methods. Results. The origin of the diaries of Archdeacon Paul of Aleppo was investigated, data were provided regarding the figure of Patriarch Macarius and the reasons for his trip to Central Eastern Europe. The Kyiv period of the delegation from Antioch's stay is highlighted. Stratification and social topography of the city of Kyiv in the second half of the 17th century were researched and represented based on the materials of the diary. Conclusions. The diaries of Paul of Aleppo about the trip of the Antiochian delegation led by Patriarch Macarius constitute a valuable source for the history of the study of Kyiv in the second half of the 17th century. Records began to attract the attention of scientists from the first half of the 19th century. To date, five copies of the diary of the 17th - 18th centuries have been preserved, which are actively studied among world Arabists and historians. The diaries represent the main districts of Kyiv at that time (Pechersk, Upper Town, Podil), and provide a detailed description of the Kyiv temples and monasteries of that time, which will later be rebuilt.
14
Kopot`, E. M. "Битвазапрошлое:храмсвятогоГеоргия вИзраавэпицентре церковно-политическойборьбыконцаXIXв." Istoricheskii vestnik, no. 20(2017) part: 20 (August 30, 2019): 256–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.35549/hr.2019.2017.35088.
Full textAbstract:
The article brings up an obscure episode in the rivalry of the Orthodox and Melkite communities in Syria in the late 19th century. In order to strengthen their superiority over the Orthodox, the Uniates attempted to seize the church of St. George in Izraa, one of the oldest Christian temples in the region. To the Orthodox community it presented a threat coming from a wealthier enemy backed up by the See of Rome and the French embassy. The only ally the Antioch Patriarchate could lean on for support in the fight for its identity was the Russian Empire, a traditional protector of the Orthodox Arabs in the Middle East. The documents from the Foreign Affairs Archive of the Russian Empire, introduced to the scientific usage for the first time, present a unique opportunity to delve into the history of this conflict involving the higher officials of the Ottoman Empire as well as the Russian embassy in ConstantinopleВ статье рассматривается малоизвестный эпизод соперничества православной и Мелкитской общин в Сирии в конце XIX века. Чтобы укрепить свое превосходство над православными, униаты предприняли попытку захватить церковь Святого Георгия в Израа, один из старейших христианских храмов в регионе. Для православной общины он представлял угрозу, исходящую от более богатого врага, поддерживаемого Римским престолом и французским посольством. Единственным союзником, на которого Антиохийский патриархат мог опереться в борьбе за свою идентичность, была Российская Империя, традиционный защитник православных арабов на Ближнем Востоке. Документы из архива иностранных дел Российской Империи, введены в научный оборот впервые, уникальная возможность углубиться в историю этого конфликта с участием высших должностных лиц в Османской империи, а также российского посольства в Константинополе.
15
Tsiotras, Vasileios. "Ο Ιάκωβος Αργείος (ca 1660-1736) στην Πατριαρχική Σχολή." Gleaner, no. 30 (January 3, 2024): 115–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.12681/er.36096.
Full textAbstract:
Iakovos Argeios (ca 1660-1736) at the Patriarchal Academy of Constantinople. New evidence and answers for an old riddle
Research into the history of the Patriarchal Academy at the beginning of the 18th century has been primarily based on the works of Manuel Gedeon and Tasos Gritsopoulos. These two historians have recorded and reconstructed all the testimonies and information they had gathered about the operation of the Academy. However, the sources at their disposal were extremely scarce for this period in terms of teachers, such as Iakovos Argeios (1660-1736), on whom the present study focuses, and their teaching activities at the School. The aim of this article is to present the new data which emerged from the identification and study of unknown manuscripts as well as from the study of the scholar’s personal correspondence. These facts militate against Tasos Gritsopoulos’ dominant view that Iakovos was exclusively a home teacher of the Mavrokordatos’family and that his teaching career at the Patriarchal Academy was limited in time (i.e. confined in the years 1707-1715).In this study I examine and reconstruct all the existing testimonies and evidence that I found on the life and work of Iakovos Argeios, “the supreme of the Great Church philosophers”. Through these new data it becomes possible to study and trace the career of Iakovos Argeios at the Patriarchal Academy from the mid-1680s until his death (1736). Iakovos was initially a student in the philosophy course of the Academy (1684), when Antonios Spantones was a professor of philosophy. He completed his studies around 1686/87 and he attracted the interest of his teachers and of the Grand Dragoman Alexandros Mavrokordatos. He subsequently served as tutor to the Mavrokordatos’ family (since the beginning of the 1690s) for at least 20-25 years, while almost at the same time he was appointed professor of rhetoric at the Academy. As a prominent professor he delivered two encomiastic addresses to the Ecumenical Patriarchs Kallinikos II (1698) and Gabriel II (1703).Then, probably in 1702, he was appointed Academy’s headmaster and professor of philosophy. He taught rhetoric theory and practise and Aristotelian philosophy from the textbooks of Theophilos Korydalleus, as evidenced by the manuscripts of his students presented in this article, mainly Antonios Byzantios, Nikolaos Kritias and Azarias Tzigalas: Physics, Logic, On the Soul, On generation and corruption. He also received from the Patriarchate the highly-esteemed office of the “supreme of thephilosophers” (around 1707-1709), through Mavrokordatos’ intervention, as a recognition of his philosophical expertise. He retained this title and remained head of the Academy until the end of his life. From his letters we know that Iakovos was present in Methodios Anthrakites’ conviction (1723). He supported in deeds and words the efforts of Silvestros, the Patriarch of Antioch, to establish a Greek and Christian seminary in Aleppo (1724-1726). Unfortunately, the last years of his life were painful due to health problems and the ingratitude of his old friends. Iakovos found solace only in teaching at the Academy and in correspondence with his dear friends and old students, such as Makarios Kalogeras, who had founded a school on the island of Patmos. For the teachers and students of the School of Patmos, Iakovos was their mentor and spiritual guide. In conclusion, Iakovos Argeios had an important influence on the course of the Patriarchal Academy with his long lasting and constant teaching activity. In his time the Patriarchal Academy became a true “Faculty of Philosophy”.
16
Копоть, Е. М. "A spin doctor unwilled: archim. John (Wendland) in the election of the Antiochian patriarch Theodosius VI (Abou Rjaileh) (1958-1970)." Istoricheskii vestnik, no. 46(2023) (December 18, 2023). http://dx.doi.org/10.35549/hr.2023.2023.46.007.
Full textAbstract:
В статье анализируется история взаимоотношений Русской и Антиохийской Православных Церквей в ХХ веке. На основании впервые вводимых в научный оборот документов Государственного архива Российской Федерации, которые ранее были засекречены, раскрывается ключевой сюжет миссии первого представителя Московского патриархата при Антиохийском патриархе архим. Иоанна (Ведланда). Избрание в 1958 г. патриарха Феодосия VI (Абурджели) стало поворотным моментом в истории двусторонних отношений Русской православной церкви и Антиохийского патриархата. Выступая инструментом советской внешнеполитической деятельности, архим. Иоанн (Вендланд) возглавил избирательную кампанию просоветского кандидата митрополита Александра (Жихи). В условиях политического соперничества СССР и США на Ближнем Востоке миссия архим. Иоанна потерпела поражение, что стало следствием недостатков внешнеполитической деятельности Московского патриархата в предшествующее десятилетие. The article analyses the history of relations between Russian and Antioch Orthodox Churches in the 20th century. The mission key plot of the first Moscow Patriarchate representative to the Patriarch of Antioch Archimandrite John (Wendland) is revealed based on documents from the State Archive of the Russian Federation, which were previously classified, being introduced into scientific circulation for the first time. The election of Patriarch Theodosius VI (Abou Rjaileh) in 1958 was a turning point in the history of bilateral relations between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Patriarchate of Antioch. Acting as a Soviet foreign policy instrument, archimandrite John (Wendland) headed the election campaign of the pro-Soviet candidate, Metropolitan Alexander (Zhikha). In the context of political rivalry between the USSR and the USA in the Middle East, the mission of Archimandrite John was defeated, which was a consequence of the shortcomings in the foreign policy activities of the Moscow Patriarchate in the previous decade.
17
Bozoyan, Azat. "ԱՆՏԻՈՔԻ ԴԵՐԸ ԼԵՎՈՆ ՄԵԾԱԳՈՐԾԻ ՔԱՂԱՔԱԿԱՆՈՒԹՅԱՆ ՄԵՋ THE ROLE OF ANTIOCH IN THE POLICY OF LEVON THE." ԱՆՏԻՈՔԻ ԴԵՐԸ ԼԵՎՈՆ ՄԵԾԱԳՈՐԾԻ ՔԱՂԱՔԱԿԱՆՈՒԹՅԱՆ ՄԵՋ THE ROLE OF ANTIOCH IN THE POLICY OF LEVON THE, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.57155/nonw5415.
Full textAbstract:
Starting from 1176, a group of high-ranking Armenian clerics close to Nersēs of Lambron, the Bishop of Tarsus, in response to the 9th point of the demand set forth by Manuel I Komnenos (1143–1180), proposed the emperor to recognize the Armenian Catholicos as Patriarch of Antioch. According to Nersēs, only such a change in the hierarchical system of the Ecumenical Church could enable the emperor to participate in the election of the Armenian catholicoi. The Armenian church leaders were guided by the principle that such a change could mitigate the conflict between the Byzantine, Western Syrian and Catholic churches over the patriarchate of Antioch, which had already lasted for several centuries. By achieving this goal, the Armenian Church hoped to commune not only with the Byzantine but also with the Roman, West and East Syrian churches. This endeavor was also present in the activities of the Armenian Catholicos Gregory VII of Anavarz (1293–1307). The efforts of Leo the Great (1187–1219) to unite the Cilician state with the Crusadеr state of Antioch are also noticeable – a policy that ended in complete failure.
18
Novotortseva, A. M. "Metropolitan Ioann’s (Wendland’s) daily as an example of a source of personal origin in the study of the history of the external relations of the Russian Orthodox Church." LOCUS: people, society, culture, meaning 1 (2024). http://dx.doi.org/10.31862/2500-2988-2024-15-1-28-39.
Full textAbstract:
The article introduces for the first time into scientific circulation an original source of personal origin – the diary of Metropolitan of Yaroslavl and Rostov Ioann (Wendland) for 1959 from the personal archive of his spiritual daughter, journalist and writer E.L. Mezhennaya. A unique research experience is presented in studying the history of external relations of the Russian Orthodox Church with other Orthodox churches in the “Khrushchev era” in correlation with materials from other groups of published and unpublished historical sources. Personal records of Metropolitan Ioann in the status of the representative of the Moscow Patriarchate to the Patriarch of Antioch in Damascus allow us to clarify various dates and facts, events and their chronicle, and most importantly names. The article adds some touches to the portrait of an outstanding personality of our representative in the Middle East and to the personalities of other church and socio-political figures of XX century.
19
Gerd, Lora. "Russia and the Greek-Catholics of Syria." Scrinium, April 5, 2022, 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18177565-bja10055.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract In the 1840s the Russian government for the first time made steps toward systematical use of religious and cultural diplomacy in its Middle East policy. The mission of Porfirii Uspenskii to Syria in 1843–44 was aimed at gathering information on the state of the Orthodox Church and education, and was at the same time fruitful for reconverting Uniates to Orthodoxy. The joining of Bishop Makarios of Amida to the Patriarchate of Antioch in 1846 marked similar actions in the future decades. Porfirii elaborated a strategy of relationship with the non-Orthodox Christians of the Orient, which was used as a means of ‘soft power’ by Russia until the First World War. The article argues that in the conditions of competition as part of the Eastern Question, the Russian government was looking for new methods of church policy and paid special attention to converting the Greek Catholics and other non-Orthodox communities into Orthodoxy.
20
Брюн, С. П. "Factors and Conflicts of Identity in the Antioch-Armenia Wars." Istoricheskii vestnik, no. 31(2020) (June 1, 2020). http://dx.doi.org/10.35549/hr.2020.2020.31.005.
Full textAbstract:
Аннотация Статья рассматривает ряд определяющих факторов, связанных с войнами Антиохии-Армении, т.е. с циклом военных столкновений между княжеством Антиохийским и королевством Армения. Этот цикл войн, протекавших с небольшими перерывами в период между 1185 и 1226 годами, обескровил христианские государства северного Леванта, и по праву может считаться одним из наиболее интенсивных и сложных конфликтов эпохи крестовых походов. Исходными факторами в продолжающихся конфликтах служило стремление франкских князей Антиохии восстановить свое господство над давно утраченными территориями Киликийской Равнины и прямо противоречившее этому стремление гораздо более сильной стороны – армянского «властителя гор», а позднее первого короля Армении – к утверждению своего господства над Антиохией. Цикл войн Антиохии-Армении самым парадоксальным образом разделил жителей Киликии и северной Сирии. Abstract The article examines a series of factors, connected to the Antioch-Armenia wars, in other words — the cycle of military conflicts between the Crusader Principality of Antioch and the Kingdom of Armenia. This cycle of wars, which raged — with brief interludes — between 1185 and 1226, bled-dry the Christian states of the northern Levant, and can be rightfully called one of the most intense and complex conflicts of the Crusades. There were two motives for the continuing wars: the ambition of the Princes of Antioch to reclaim their rule over the longlost Cilician Plain, and the opposing desire of the far stronger ruler — the Armenian “Lord of the Mountains” and later on — the King of Armenia — to assert his authority over Antioch. The cycle of the Antioch-Armenia wars divided the inhabitants of Cilicia and northern Syria in the most paradoxical ways. The “Crusader” ruler of the Principality of Antioch and the County of Tripoli — Bohemond IV — completely ignored the demands and interdicts of the Roman pontiff, literally murdered (or rather — ‘condemned’ to slow and painful death) the Latin Patriarch, restored a Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in Antioch (from which — for about 2 years — he and his nobles accepted the sacraments), along with the Muslim rulers of Syria and Anatolia he continuously raided the Christian lands and settlements of the Kingdom of Armenia… Nevertheless, this excommunicated ruler was supported not only by the Latin population (including a significant part of the nobility) of Syria, but also by the Knights Templar. Bohemond IV’s main rival — King Leo (Levon) I the Great — proved to be an equally complex statesmen, willing to renounce the religious and social ties traditional for the medieval world in order to secure the desired political alliances and to promulgate his own aims. To secure the recognition of his state and regnal title he forced the Armenian Church to accept the Union with Rome (even though the Armenians did have a plethora of the Union’s proponents, including the great theologian — the Armenian Archbishop of Tarsus St. Nerses of Lampron). In his war for Antioch he secured the support of the Knights Hospitaliers and a major part of the Frankish nobility of Antioch. Yet he proved equally acute to the ethno-religious balance in Antioch: if initially (in 1193) he tried to take Antioch used the forces of the fervent Armenian Miaphysite Hethum of Sasoun, later on the first Rex Armeniae entrusted the war for with the predominantly Greek Orthodox city and Principality to a Chalcedonian Armenian (Greek Orthodox) baron — Adam of Baghras.In his attempts to secure the sympathies of northern Syria’s population, King Leo I welcomed the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch in his kingdom and handed over to him a significant part of ecclesiastic properties, confiscated from the Latin Church. This step, naturally, ensured a papal excommunication for the newly-enthroned ‘Catholic’ king. But even after a formal excommunication from the Roman Church, Leo I continued to enjoy the support of two Catholic military orders — the Hospitaliers and the Teutonic Knights. Also, this monarch — whom later-day Armenian historiography viewed as a hero of Armenian nationalism — left his kingdom to a regent who was an adherent of the “Greek faith”, and a suitor for his young daughter — whom — in any scenario would be a Latin. Obviously, the article examines not only the motivation of the heads of state, but also of social, regional and ethno-religious communities that made this series of wars and a radical deconstruction of medieval norms and alliances possible. The author also examines the traditional chronology of this war cycle, especially the campaigns of the so-called War for the Antiochian Succession.
21
Gerd, Lora. "Russia and the Melkites of Syria: Attempts at Reconverting into Orthodoxy in the 1850-s and 1860-s." Scrinium, May 10, 2021, 1–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18177565-bja10038.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Having entered into union with Rome in the 18th century, the Melkite Arab community of Syria preserved their Eastern rites and traditions. The attempts at Latinization in the mid-19th century brought a split in the community and provoked a diplomatic effort by Russia to bring the Melkites back to Eastern Orthodoxy. The raise of Arab nationalism in the 1850-s and traditions of church independence created a fertile soil for separatism. The relative weakness and inconsistency of Russian support, and especially a lack of material resources and strong diplomatic pressure from France, resulted in most of the newly converted Melkites returning to Rome by the early 1860-s. The article argues that Russian church policy in 19th century Middle East, strongly bounded by the limits of Orthodox canon law was largely ineffective. The Melkite affair was the last attempt to integrate the Arab Christians in the traditional system of the “Greek” Patriarchates. Thereafter Russian diplomacy took the course of Arabizing the Patriarchate of Antioch. The episode did, however, contribute to the elaboration of a new Vatican policy towards the Eastern Catholics: respect for their rites and traditions.
22
Թորոսյան, Վահե Հ․. "Հայ-լատին և հայ-բյուզանդական եկեղեցական հարաբերությունները 1230-ական թթ. վերջին և 1240-ական թթ." ՀԱՅՈՑ ՊԱՏՄՈՒԹՅԱՆ ՀԱՐՑԵՐ, June 23, 2023, 3–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.59523/1829-4596.2023.1(26)-3.
Full textAbstract:
В 1230–1240 гг. армяно-латинские и армяно-византийские церковные отношения заметно активизировались. Об этом свидетельствует переписка Папы Римского Григория IX, пат-риарха Константинопольского Германа II и Мануила I с Като-ликосом Всех Армян Костандином I Бардзбердци, королем Киликийской Армении Хетумом I и королевой Забел. Изучение этих документов показывает, что рассматриваемые отношения были взаимосвязаны. Чтобы противостоять требованию Григория IX принять главенство латинского Патриархата Антиохии, которое было представлено армянскому католикосу, Костандин I Бардзбердци и Хетум I начинают переговоры о церковной унии с императором Никейским и с греческим патриархом Константинополя. Дипломатические усилия армянской стороны в итоге увенчались успехом, поскольку Григорий IX, обеспокоенный армяно-византийским сближением, отказался от своего требования. Armenian-Latin and Armenian-Byzantine church relations became noticeably more active in 1230–1240. This is evidenced by the correspondence between Pope of Rome Gregory IX, Patriarch Germanus II of Constantinople and Manuel I with Catholicos of All Armenians Kostandin I Bardzberdtsi, King of Cilician Armenia Hethum I and Queen Zabel. As the study of documents shows, Armenian-Byzantine and Armenian-Latin church relations were interconnected at that time. In order to resist the Pope's demand to accept the primacy of the Latin Patriarchate of Antioch, which was presented to the Armenian Catholicos, Kostandin I Bardzberdtsi and Hethum I began negotiations on an ecclesiastical union with the Emperor of Nicaea and with the Greek Patriarch of Constantinople. The diplomatic efforts of the Armenian side was crowned with success, as Gregory IX, worried about the Armenian-Byzantine rapprochement, withdrew his demand.
23
Kopot, E. M. "Российская военная разведка в Азиатской Турции и Сирии во второй половине XIX в." Istoricheskii vestnik, no. 30(2019) part: 30/2019 (December 18, 2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.35549/hr.2020.70.64.010.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Analyses of the materials of the Foreign Policy Archives of the Russian Empire and the Russian State Military-Historical Archive allows a reconstruction of the formation of the Russian Intelligence methodology of data gathering in Syria, as a possible battleground in 18701890. The Russian Caucasus Army Intelligence officers acted under cover of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Empire. Despite the bureaucratic infighting between the War Ministry and the Foreign Ministry which often emerged into an open confrontation, the new philosophy of Scientism, rapidly spreading across the establishment, have helped to drive more rational political decisions both during war and peace times. The article highlights the switch of the Military Intelligence focus. The accent shifted from exclusively military issues, to the issues of social ethnology and the search for Russias potential allies in the region. In Syria, the adherents of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch were seen as such.Аннотация Анализ материалов Архива внешней политики Российской империи и Российского государственного военно-исторического архива позволяет реконструировать становление российской военной разведки на курдо-сирийском театре военных действий в 1870-1890-х гг. Деятельность разведчиков Кавказского военного округа осуществлялась под прикрытием МИД российской империи. Невидимая аппаратная борьба военного министерства и внешнедипломатического ведомства нередко переходила в открытое противостояние, однако она не могла помешать распространению среди военно-дипломатического истеблишмента новой культуры сайентизма, которая должна была способствовать выработке рациональной политики населения как в военное, так и в мирное время. Статья посвящена малоизвестному сюжету трансформации внимания военной разведки от топографических исследований, наблюдению за комплектованием вооруженных сил Османской империи к изучению населения вероятного театра военных действий и поиску социальной опоры России в регионе в лице православных арабов антиохийского патриархата.Аннотация Анализ материалов Архива внешней политики Российской империи и Российского государственного военно-исторического архива позволяет реконструировать становление российской военной разведки на курдо-сирийском театре военных действий в 1870-1890-х гг. Деятельность разведчиков Кавказского военного округа осуществлялась под прикрытием МИД российской империи. Невидимая аппаратная борьба военного министерства и внешнедипломатического ведомства нередко переходила в открытое противостояние, однако она не могла помешать распространению среди военно-дипломатического истеблишмента новой культуры сайентизма, которая должна была способствовать выработке рациональной политики населения как в военное, так и в мирное время. Статья посвящена малоизвестному сюжету трансформации внимания военной разведки от топографических исследований, наблюдению за комплектованием вооруженных сил Османской империи к изучению населения вероятного театра военных действий и поиску социальной опоры России в регионе в лице православных арабов антиохийского патриархата.