Woman Church State E-Book

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/359760111
WOMAN –CHURCH - STATE. CULTS OF THE FEMALE SAINTS IN THE

WRITINGS OF SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH
Book · December 2021
CITATIONS READS
0 27
1 author:
Dominika Gapska
Adam Mickiewicz University
9 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Dominika Gapska on 24 May 2022.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

D o m i n i k a G a p s k a
A
s female cults in Serbian culture have continued to play
an important role in shaping religious and personal
attitudes, in creating spirituality and national identity,
WOMAN CHURCH STATE

the presentation of nine saints in the book, with a discussion
IN THE WRITINGS OF SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH

of their lives and legends, primarily on the basis of a corpus
of hagiological texts (vitae, offices, akathistas), provides
an extremely interesting panorama of the spiritual life of Serbia
CULTS OF THE FEMALE SAINTS

over the centuries in close connection with the history of the
country and the nation. These cults, as Dominika Gapska
describes them, may serve as signs which help to recognise
and understand the uniqueness of Serbian culture through
the perspective of faith and attachment to tradition, which
are its cornerstones.
From the review by Aleksander Naumow
WOMAN
Dominika Gapska, Ph.D. – Serbian philologist and medievalist.
Graduate of the Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań. Her scientific
Dominik a Ga psk a
interests focus on the history of medieval Serbian literature,
Slavic writing traditions, spiritual culture, and rituals of the
CHURCH
Orthodox Church. In her research she pays special attention
to the issues related to the sanctity and spirituality of women
and the hymnographic, hagiographic, euchographic texts
devoted to them.
ISBN 978-83-66812-73-4
9 788366 812734
STATE CULTS OF THE FEMALE SAINTS
WOMAN
CHURCH
STATE
DOMINIKA GAPSKA
WOMAN
CHURCH
STATE
Cults of the female saints
in the writings of serbian
orthodox church
Cracow 2021
Copyright © by Dominika Gapska, 2021
Copyright © by Wydawnictwo «scriptum», 2021
Translated by Marcin Turski
Book review by prof. Aleksander Naumow
The printing of the book was possible thanks to the Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań.
The publication was funded by the National Science Centre, Poland, within the project
“Preludium 15” No. 2018/29/N/HS2/00340 entitled: Kobieta – Państwo – Kościół. Serbskie święte
w tradycji i kulturze duchowej narodu (Woman – State – Church. Serbian female saints in the
tradition and spiritual culture of the nation).
Cover design: Hubert Grajczak

Cover photo: Dominika Gapska
DTP: Małgorzata Gumularz
ISBN 978-83-66812-73-4
Wydawnictwo «scriptum» Tomasz Sekunda

e-mail: scriptum@wydawnictwoscriptum.pl
www.wydawnictwoscriptum.pl
To my Mother…
Table of contents
Introduction.............................................................................................9
Part one
Chapter I: St. Anastasija (Ana Nemanjić) – June 21.......................................21
Chapter II: St. Helen of Anjou (Jelisaveta) – October 30 and February 8.... 47
Chapter III: St. Јеvgenija-Euphrosine/Jefrosinija (Princess Milica) –
July 19..............................................................................................................67
Chapter IV: St. Angelina Branković (of Serbia, Mother Angelina) –
July 30 and December 10..............................................................................85
Chapter V: St. Paraskеva-Petka (of Serbia, of Belgrade, of Epivates,
of Tarnovo, of Bulgaria, of Jassy, the Young, of the Balcans) –
October 14......................................................................................................99
Chapter VI: St. Zlata (Chrysa) of Meglen – October 13, 18....................... 133
Part two
Chapter VII: St. Helen of Dečani – May 21.................................................. 159
Chapter VIII: St. Jelisaveta-Jevgenija (Helen of Bulgaria,
Stracimirović-Nemanjić, Mother Of Uroš V) – December 2................ 165
Chapter IX: St. Jelisaveta (Jelena Štiljanović) – October 4 .......................... 175
Conclusion.............................................................................................. 181
Bibliography............................................................................................ 187
Introduction
Research on the culture of the European and Byzantine Middle Ages is showing
a growing interest in Orthodox church literature (hagiography and hymno
graphy) dedicated to women. It is of particular importance from the point
of view of cultural history and the description of the significance of women
for the development of the Christian tradition. It is also a valuable source of
information for reconstructing the image of medieval society. Research into
the sanctity of women in Eastern and Southern Slavic areas is particularly
important and imperative for the search for cultural identity and common
European roots. The previously marginalised significance of the Eastern
Churches in the construction of European civilisation requires further detailed
analysis, which will become the basis for future comparative studies. This will
facilitate a reinterpretation of the existing vision of Europe by taking into
account all of its components. The proposed approach to the work places
the Serbian female sanctity in the centre and places it in the mainstream of
contemporary research on the legacy of the Orthodox Middle Ages in southern
and eastern Slavdom, conducted in various countries and by many research
centres (mainly Russian, German, Italian, and American ones).
Serbian medieval culture as a permanent model, one that has been contin
uously updated until the present day, was influenced by such fundamental
factors as the persistence of the Orthodox tradition, including Orthodox
literature, whose authors contributed to the sacralisation of the history of
the state and nation; the idea of interdependence and cooperation between
church and state nurtured and propagated by it as well as the patriarchal
10 Introduction
tradition and folk literature, responsible for national myths and stereotypes1.
The core elements of the political, ideological, religious, and literary imagery
rooted in the Bible (Jn 15:6; Is 11:1 – branch/tree from Jesse) are a metaphor
of a “branch” (vine, tree, root, offshoot, grape; Serbian: loza) and the sanctity
of the dynasty2. The symbol of a tree or a vine grape used to describe Stefan
Nemanja (St. Simeon), the founder of the Nemanjić dynasty, repeatedly used
by medieval (and later) authors, combines a theological and political message:
it legitimises the power of God’s chosen ones in Serbia and makes their people
the chosen people, the New Israel. Nemanja’s descendants, symbolically
described as fruits from the good tree, miraculous grapes, continue his work
in subsequent centuries. They pay special reverence to the graves and relics
of their predecessors. The burial places of saints constitute a sacred space
where the living and the dead, the present and the glorious past meet. As
Izabela Lis-Wielgosz notes: “The tomb and relics enriched by iconographic
representations became the main centres from which the fame of the saints
radiated abundantly. (…) The Serbian homo religiosus became convinced that
he belonged to the great Christian culture, and having ‘his’ representative and
link, he experienced the longed for contact with the sacred”3. The cultivation
of ancestor worship (cults of rulers, monastic cults), strengthened by ritual
literature, iconography and pilgrimages to holy places, fulfilled religious and
political roles. It fostered the independence of the state and the autocephalous
character of the Orthodox Church. The cults of Serbian (Slav) saints became
a safeguard for the creation of a permanent national, ethnic, spiritual, and
religious bond.
Within this complex model we find women, Serbian nun rulers, later saints.
Female cults, focused around zadužbina (foundation) and sacred relics, have
always played an important role in the Serbian Orthodox Church. Appearing
at the very onset of its existence, they grew in importance over the centuries.
They were treated as auxiliary cults (mothers, wives of holy rulers), although
they should actually have been described as coexisting ones. Later they gained
autonomy, responding to the religious needs of the faithful. From the Middle
1
D. Gil, Prawosławie Historia Naród. Miejsce kultury duchowej w serbskiej tradycji i współ
czesności, Kraków 2005, p. 20.
2
С. Маријановић-Душанић, Владарска идеологија Немањића, Београд 1997, p. 112.
3
I. Lis, Śmierć w literaturze staroserbskiej (XII–XIV wiek), Poznań 2003, p. 98.
Introduction 11
Ages to the present, they have played leading roles in the creation of Serbian
spiritual culture and national identity. Academic research has not adequately
addressed this unique feature of the Serbian Church. This Church stands
out from other Eastern ones, even the Russian Orthodox Church, where the
number of female saints is high yet with a weaker social impact, e.g. in building
Russian self-identification. In Serbia, female saints are models of hierarchical,
official (e.g. rulers) and popular attitudes of ordinary believers. They are
the epitome of the Serbian, frequently subject to the extreme experiences of
crisis, war, slavery, and programmatic atheisation. They are indispensable in
the process of the current “re-Christianisation” and in the formation of the
model of a Christian, citizen and patriot.
We get to know their stories indirectly, through the testimony given to their
deeds by men, male authors of hymns and hagiographers. The literary images
of women-saints in the Serbian Orthodox tradition are based on a biblical and
theological foundation. The Mother of God is their Ur-model. The depiction
of Mary as the “Mother of God-Man” (Theo-Anthropo-Tokos4) is linked with
the idea of intercession, widely disseminated across the Orthodox Church.
The qualities attributed to Mary, i.e. fulfilment of God’s will, virtue, godliness,
witness to life, compliance with the commandments, witness to the holiness
of the Son and Her mission, become constitutive markers for the type of
sanctity ascribed to women saints, as well as for the construction of their
worship in Slavic (incl. Serbian) hagiography and hymnography. Moreover,
the saints reproduce the roles of mother, virgin, widow, hermit, martyr, wife,
nun, established in the (early) Christian tradition. This is combined with rich
symbols and metaphors.
Of importance from the perspective of this publication is the establishment
of women’s sanctity derived, among others, from St. Paul’s Epistle to the
Corinthians (1 Cor 11: 11–12): “Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not
independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came
from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God”. It
provides a perception of the first woman, the biblical Eve, not as the cause of
man’s fall and estrangement from God, but as a figure who ontologically has
the same status as Adam. In the subsequent chapters of the work dedicated
4
P. Evdokimov, Kobieta i zbawienie świata, transl. E. Wolicka 1991, p. 212.
12 Introduction
to particular saints, the biblical models of women’s personalities, constitutive

for female holiness, are recalled, as well as the Marian model, which to the
greatest extent defines the Christian concept of a woman, both internally,
especially as a mother, and externally, in the service to the Church – the
idea of deesis (intercession), Theotokos (protectress, patroness), Our Lady of
the Way (Hodegetria). The text moreover discusses concretisations of early
Christian models of a virgin, martyr and queen mother (patterned on St.
Helen, mother of Constantine).
The main part of the work is a discussion of how the veneration of holy
women function in the Orthodox Church. Making a very general division we
can distinguish: official cults, venerated locally (in specific region or in a group
of monasteries or in one) and/or by the entire Church, as well as unofficial
ones (which memory is perpetuated through folk epic, iconography). At this
point it is worth mentioning that the register of female saints in the Serbian
Orthodox Church is much larger than will be discussed. Outside the area of
interest are the all-Christian saints, whose cults have no practical bearing
on “national” Serbian spirituality. For this purpose, the presentation will
focus on nine figures of saints who represent the Serbian Orthodox tradition:
St. Anastasia (Ana Nemanjić), St. Helen of Anjou, St. Helen of Dečani, St.
Jelisaveta-Jevgenija (Helen of Bulgaria, mother of Uroš V), St. Jevgenija-
Euphrosine (Princess Milica), St. Angelina of Serbia (Angelina Branković), St.
Jelisaveta (Jelena Štiljanović), St. Paraskeva-Petka), and St. Zlata of Meglen.
The cults of the above saints were isolated via a functional rather than an
ethnic criterion, which was to highlight the significance of a particular saintly
woman, her inalienable role for the Church, state and nation. Furthermore,
they were subdivided into two groups (part one and part two of the book):
a more numerous one, containing studies of well-developed cults, and a smaller
one comprising less developed cults, with few ritual texts. As far as possible,
chronological arrangement has been preserved in this division, corresponding
to the historical development and transformations of Serbian statehood and
the Orthodox Church calendar. An attempt was also made to reconstruct the
development of given cults in time, their transformations (often it was more
than one) along with the changing situation of the country, different life of
the society. This is connected with an examination of the initial stages of their
existence, the first forms of their manifestation, as usually the oldest cults
Introduction 13
did not have an official Church decision on the canonisation of a saint, and
were traditionally regarded as cults accompanying the sanctity of husbands
or sons, or derived from the cults of saints venerated in the first centuries of
Christianity. Even then, the ecclesiastical, political and socio-cultural functions
of mothers and wives were appreciated, especially those of saintly rulers
and hierarchs such as Stephen Nemanjić, Sava, Stephen the First-Crowned,
Dragutin, and Milutin.
Decisive for the conception of female cults in Serbia were the histories
of the state and the Orthodox Church. While their initial stage is marked by
the building of power structures, autonomous from Byzantium and Rome,
their later stage is marked by the struggle to regain the independence lost
to the Ottoman Empire. Crucial for the development of female cults was
the emergence already in the 14th century of separate liturgical texts for the
corresponding rituals (Danilo II, Žitije kraljice Jelene Anžujske/Life of Queen
Helen). Of significance in this process were medieval and later authors, whose
texts and imagery of female sainthood supported, if not created national views
and Serbian religious and political ideology. As Izabela Lis-Wielgosz aptly
points out: “To articulate their history and identity, Serbian authors made
a comprehensive adaptation of Byzantine literary forms, not creating new
genre variants but endowing them with new (national) thematic and functional
values (…)”5. The Serbian hagiography and hymnography (liturgical poetry)
from ancient and contemporary times included in the work forms the basis
for an analysis of the portrayal and function of female saints in the Serbian
national and spiritual imaginaries. Many new texts dedicated to women have
been written in recent years as an addition to the existing corpus or completely
from scratch in the case of saints who never had works to frame the days of
their memory. This process has not ended, since hymnography and hagiography
dedicated to women (not only in Serbian, but also, for example, in Russian or
Romanian) is constantly being created and published in Serbia.
*****
5
I. Lis, Święci w kulturze duchowej i ideologii Słowian prawosławnych w średniowieczu (do
XV w.), Kraków 2004, p. 99.
14 Introduction
The dynastic and monkish characteristics of cults of Serbian saints, some

of whom were women, makes the cult of the ruler-(mother)-nun the most
prominent. This stems from the consistently perpetrated image of Serbia as
a “New Israel”, the theoforos-nation6. The high social position and ties with
the throne prevented the more and more autonomous sanctity of ruler nuns
from being confined to convent walls and limited to a community of religious
women. Following the example of holy rulers, founders of communities,
Chilandar Monastery included, their wives, as nuns often performing the
functions of ihumenia, through their charitable activities and material support
offered to the monasteries, were also intensively involved in fostering national
spirituality. On this basis, medieval authors showed their characters as active
participants in the life of the Serbian religious community, focused on constantly
supporting and motivating the existence of the church, state and nation. The
first to follow this model is St. Ana-Anastasija Nemanjić – wife of Stephen
Nemanjić (St. Simeon) and mother of Rastko (St. Sava) and Stephen (the
First-Crowned) and several daughters, not known by name. Together with
Stefan, she is the founder of the dynasty and mother of the nation. St. Ana-
Anastasija is not only a mother and wife. She goes far beyond this model as
the first ihumenia, the founder and promoter of the concordant coexistence of
church and state. Her example is permanently inscribed in the pages of Serbian
history and is a model for subsequent rulers of the Nemanjić, Lazarević and
Branković families.
The context of the activities of the first female rulers recalled and revived
the glorious past of the country, the figures of the rulers – the fathers of the
nation, the patrons of the state, the victims of the armed invasions of the enemy.
In a sense, the holy nuns became during the period of captivity functional
analogues of the cults of former kings, protectors of the Church, guardians
of the faith, patronesses of the faithful, mothers of the needy i.e. the poor, the
sick, widows and orphans. Times of crisis elicited from them virtues of self-
sacrifice, renunciation, fortitude, trust in God, the gift of prayer, suffering, and
the “preservation” of uncontaminated Orthodox faith for future generations,
which were particularly necessary for the formation of Christian attitudes.
6
I. Lis, Święci w kulturze duchowej Słowian prawosławnych w średniowieczu (do XV w.),
Kraków 2004, p. 97–134, D. Gil, Prawosławie…, p. 20–86.
Introduction 15
A vivid example of such a model is the sanctity of Princess Milica (nun

Jevgenija), highlighted during the Second World War, when Serbia was con
fronted not only with Germany but also with the fascist Ustasha movement,
hostile to the Christian Eastern tradition. It was then impossible to avoid the
instrumental, ideological treatment of the cult of the ruler, which the Prime
Minister of the puppet government of Serbia under German auspices, Milan
Nedić, used as part of the ideological underpinning of the concept of a “Greater
Serbia”, grounded in the ideal of the Kosovo martyrs.
Another example is the sainthood of Angelina Branković, whose story
encapsulates the fate of the entire Serbian nation i.e. the struggle to preserve
the statehood and religious identity, persecution, flight, wandering in search
of a place to live. During her lifetime, the saint is the depositary of the faith of
her ancestors. Her role concentrates on caring tasks in the spirit of charity and
the pious upbringing of her sons preparing them to become autonomous rulers
(samodržavni vladari)7. Venerated after her death, she becomes a heavenly
patroness, the mother of the nation. The presence of Angelina’s holy relics is
visible proof of God’s presence among the Serbs.
The decline of Serbian sovereignty made popular a woman from outside
Serbia and the royal dynasty, a Greek hermit, St. Paraskeva-Petka (of Trnovo, of
Bulgaria, of Serbia, of Iași, the New), patroness of the Bulgarian victorious wars
with the Byzantines of the early 13th century. In the 14th century Paraskeva’s
relics were brought to Serbia from Bulgaria, which had fallen prey to the
Ottomans. This became part of the dynastic policy programme of Stephen
Lazarević; it served to legitimise his power, to protect the country and the ruling
dynasty, and created the sacred topography of the new state capital Belgrade.
The Ottoman era saw the folklorisation of the saint’s cult; folk versions of
hagiography even created her Serbian lineage. In this image of sainthood, the
political and defensive functions fell into disuse, while the protective functions
according to the Marian pattern (i.e. Our Lady of Protection) came to the
fore. Paraskeva primarily took care of marriage, family, pregnant women,
women’s housework, and the prosperity of the home. Nowadays, after years of
marginalisation, the cult of Paraskeva is being restored to its former prominent
7
In the case of the Serbian state, this term denotes the sovereign governments of successive
dynasties since the Nemanjić era.
16 Introduction
position. It is developing in two directions – social tasks/functions (e.g. care

for the family, fight against alcoholism, help for emigrants) – and political
tasks already known from the past (patronage over the state).
The Ottoman slavery, the great national exodus from the lands of southern
Serbia to the north of the country (Vojvodina) and to Austria, the political and
economic crises in the Turkish empire were not conducive to the development
of national culture. At that time, Serbs focused on encoding, preserving and
passing on their indigenous heritage, values, and experiences to the next
generation (Izabela Lis-Wielgosz writes extensively on the culture of memory
in her book O trwałości znaczeń. Siedemnastowieczna literatura serbska w słu
żbie tradycji). At that time, the national spirit manifested itself mainly through
religious consciousness, a return to the past, a sense of spiritual and cultural
community among Orthodox peoples who were subjects of the Porta. During
this period (15th–19th c.) the mainstay of spirituality in the Balkans were the
large monasteries and in particular Mount Athos as a permanent reference
point for Balkan Orthodoxy. Alongside Greek monasteries, Slavic monasteries
– Serbian, Bulgarian and Russian – were erected there. In response to the
increasing Islamisation of Christians and their moral indifferentism, a group
of neo-martyr cults emerged on Athos, aimed at the simple people, to stop
the negative tendencies, to prevent conversions, to promote religious values
and Christian ethics via the new martyrs and to strengthen the local Church.
Among the neo-martyr cults was that of the young peasant girl Zlata, from
Meglen in Macedonia, martyred for refusing to marry a Turk and defending
Christianity. It quickly spread to other Slavic lands and was written into the
calendars of local churches, including the Serbian Church. The model of self-
sacrifice for the faith against Islam, formed around the figure of the saint, was
gradually supplemented by the idea of offering oneself on the altar of the state
(so-called žrtva za narod). This new image is currently gaining importance
in spiritual culture, having as its context the new political divisions in Serbia,
the question of Islam, as well as the expansion of the culture of consumerism,
which threatens the traditional ideas of Serbian identity.
In conclusion, women’s cults encompass the whole spiritual life of Serbia.
They are the patrons of ecclesiastical and state tendencies, founded on national
traditions and religious norms that underpin Serbian identity. Of importance
here is not only the state and the church in the Middle Ages, but also the state
Introduction 17
of affairs after the Second World War and after the break-up of Yugoslavia,
when the revisiting of old cults in newly created religious and political contexts
in relation to the domestic and international situation plays an important role.
The sanctity of women such as queen-nuns, ascetics and martyrs will, among
other things, impact the proclaimed ideas of cultural and spiritual revival or
help confront religious dissent.
Part
one
Chapter I
St. Anastasija (Ana Nemanjić) –

June 21
The first Serbian women saints, wives of rulers and mothers of heirs to the
throne who were later raised to the altars, were part of the sacred model
of medieval Serbian culture based on several key factors. These were: the
continuity of the Orthodox tradition, including literature, whose authors
contributed to the sacralisation of the history of the state and nation; the idea
of interdependence and cooperation between the Orthodox Church and the
state, nurtured and fostered by this tradition; and patriarchal tradition and
folk literature creating national myths and stereotypes8. Initially they were
venerated by virtue of being members of the ruling dynasty, compared to the
biblical vine, the holy tree of the Nemanjić family (Serbian: Loza Nemanjića).
This symbolism helped to develop the cult of the first female Serbian saint,
Ana Nemanjić (St. Anastasija), the wife of Stephen Nemanjić (St. Simeon)
and the mother of Rastko (St. Sava). From the start, the worship was strictly
inscribed in the ecclesiastical and state ideology of the time.
Historical data on Ana (1125(?)–1200) are scarce and come mainly from
hagiographical texts. Polish researcher Błażej Szefliński indicates that nothing
certain is known about her9. The name of the empress appears in The Life of
St. Simeon (Žitije sv. Simeona) by St. Sava10 and Stephen the First-Crowned
8
D. Gil, Prawosławie…, p. 20.
9
B. Szefliński, Trzy oblicza Sawy Nemanjicia: postać historyczna – autokreacja – postać lite
racka, Byzantina Lodziensia 2016, XXV, Łódź, p. 27–28.
10
Свети Сава, Сабрани списи, прир. Д. Богданивић, Београд 1986, p. 149–150. The hand-
written copy of the text comes from 1619 and is a part of the so-called Studenický c ollection,
22 Part I
(Žitije sv. Simeona)11. Scant information on the saint can be moreover found
in two lives of St. Sava by monk Domentijan of Chilandar, a disciple of the
first Serbian bishop12, and by Teodosije of Chilandar13.
The Lives of St. Simeon by the brothers Stephen and Sava indicate that Ana
was the wife of the first Serbian ruler, a mother of a number of his children: sons
and daughters. When Nemanjić founded a Holy Mary convent near Toplica
(in the village of Kuršumlija), she was entrusted with its management. When
her husband decided to enter a monastery, Ana followed in his footsteps and
on 25 March 119514 became a nun of the Kuršumlija religious community,
assuming the monastic name Anastasija:
А после свега овога учини да свима буде јављено дело овога премудрога
и дивнога мужа, и благословивши свет свој, остави од Бога дану му владавину
и све много своје изванредно и различно, пошто се Богу тако изволело
и пресветој Владичици Богородици да му неизрециву и свету жудњу засити.
Раздавши све своје имање ништима, изиђе од владавине своје и деце своје
и жене своје, богоданога првога венца, јер овај не постаде учесник другога
брака, но учини себе заједничарем неисказанога и часнога и светоанђелскога
и апостолскога образа, малога и великога, и би му наречено име господин
Симеон, месеца марта 25, на Свето Благовештење године 6703 (1195). У исти
now held in the National Museum in Prague – collection of Pavel Josef Šafárik, no. 144:
IX H 8 (šaf. 10).
11
Стефан Првовенчани, Сабрани списи, прир. Ј. Јухас-Георгиевска, Београд 1988, p. 66.
The only surviving copy of the full version dates back to the 14th century and can be found
in Zbornik no. Cod. Slave 10 at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, see ibidem, p. 61.
12
The work is preserved in three manuscripts: 1. a 16th-century Viennese manuscript in
the Serbian National Library, ref. Cod. Slav 57; 2. Šafárik’s 16th-century manuscript in
his Prague collection, ref. IX F 7 (Š 25); 3. a Peć manuscript at the Saltykov-Shchedrin
National Library of Russia in Petersburg, ref. ОР Гильф. 54 (<http://nlr.ru/manuscripts/
RA1527/elektronnyiy-katalog?prm=081E6F51-A2AC-4838-9085-CBE14298D1A7>, ac
cess: 11.09.2020). Доментијан, Живот светога Саве и Живот светога Симеона, прир.
Р. Маринковић, Београд 1988, p. 409, the Life available online: <https://domentijanmy-
blog.wordpress.com/>, access: 2.02.2019.
13
A printed edition was prepared by Đura Daničić based on a fifteenth-century manuscript,
destroyed in 1941. In the 19th c., plans were made to compile a critical edition of the Life
on the basis of two other manuscripts: Theodul’s from 1336 and Mark’s from the 1360s,
but the work was not completed. A translation into contemporary Serbian was published
in 1925 by Milivoje Bašić. For details see: Теодосије, Житија, прир. Д. Богдановић,
Београд 1988, p. 294–295.
14
Feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Serbian: praznik Blagovesti Bogo
rodice).
Chapter I: St. Anastasija 23
дан и богодана му жена, која је била госпођа свој српској земљи, Ана, и она
прими овај свети образ, и би јој наречено име госпођа Анастасија15.
In his work, Domentijan wrote about Ana’s imperial origin and it is after him
that later Serbian hagiographers usually assume that she was the daughter of
the Byzantine Emperor Roman IV Diogenes (1168–1171)16, although historians
rule out this theory. Probably, the link between Ana and the Diogenes family
may stem from the fact that her name was very popular in the Byzantine
cultural circle, as was her monastic name, Anastasija, as Marija Vušković
points out17. Błażej Szefliński, when reconstructing the genealogy of St. Sava’s
family, refers to the 1601 work of Mauro Orbini, The Kingdom of the Slavs
(Kraljevstvo Slavena), where the historiographer noted that Nemanjić’s father-
in-law was the Ban of Bosnia18. The Bosnian origin of Stephen Nemanjić’s
wife is moreover indicated by Serbian historian Jovan Rajić, who claims that
Ana was Ban Stephen Borić’s daughter19. The Rodoslov of Tronoša (Serbian:
Tronoški rodoslov20) claims that Ana was a daughter of a French family: “Због
његовог порекла, мудрости и храбрости, сам Краљ му је дао своју ћерку
Ану за сyпругу, па су и живели на краљевом двору у Француској”21.
Hypotheses related to the origin of the wife of the great magnate include one
15
Свети Сава, Сабрани списи…, p. 105.
16
С. Милеуснић, Свети Срби, Крагујевац 1989, p. 32. See an edition of the Life by Justin
Popović: Ј. Поповић: Житије Преподобног и Богоносног оца нашег Саве, првог Архиепи
скопа српског. Available online: <http://spc.rs/sr/arhimadrit_justin_popovitsh_zhitije_pre
podobnog_bogonosnog_oca_nasheg_save_prvog_arhiepiskopa>, access: 1.02.2020.
17
M. Вушковић, Монахиња Анастасија и манастир Свете Богородице у Куршумлији,
in: Стафан Немања и Топлица (тематски зборник), уред. Д. Бојовић, Ниш 2011,
p. 38–39.
18
B. Szefliński, op. cit., p. 28; M. Orbini, Kraljevstvo Slavena, prev. S. Husić, prired., uvod
F. Šanjek, Zagreb 1999, p. 310.
19
П. Пузовић, Госпођа Ана, незнаног порекла, “Српско наслеђе: историјске свеске”,
1998, br. 5. Available online: <http://www.srpsko-nasledje.co.rs/sr-l/1998/05/article-09.
html>,access: 12.01.2018. Ј. Рајић, Историја Срба, Беч 1874. Vaso Glušac, a historian of
Bosnia, mixes facts and calls Ana the daughter or sister of ban Borić. For details see e.g.
М. Пурковић, Принцезе из куће Немањића. Историјска студија, Београд 1996, p. 10.
20
Rodoslov describes the history of Serbia since the era of the Nemanjić dynasty to the turn of
the 16th c. in February 1791, it was re-written from an older version and partially edited by
monk Joseph from the Tronoša Monastery, see Јосиф Троношац, Троношки родослов,
прев. Д. Протић, Шабац 2008.
21
Јосиф Троношац, Троношки родослов, прев. Д. Протић, Шабац 2008, p. 24. Similar in-
formation can be also found in Chronicle of the Slavs of Illyricum, Upper Moesia and Lower
Moesia by Jerzy Branković from 1684–1688 (Ђ. Бранковић, Хроника Словена Илирика,
24 Part I
that indicates Boris Kolomanović, son of the Hungarian King Coloman I the
Learned, as her father22.
Historians believe Anastasija died on June 21 (1199 or 120023), following
a record by St. Sava in the Chilandar Typikon, chapter 35 – Kako treba pojati
panihide (How to sing panikhidas in memory of founders) 24. Her earthly remains
were interred first in Kuršumlija, to be subsequently transferred to Simeon’s
another foundation, the Studenica Monastery. The exact date of the translatio
or the details of Ana’s life, including her monastic life, are shrouded in mystery.
The cult of the first Serbian female ruler was undoubtedly initiated by her son,
St. Sava. His work made it possible to establish the day of his mother’s memorial
day in the annual calendar cycle as June 21. The earliest, yet unofficial phase of the
cult of Anastasija was, as in the case of St. Simeon, annual panikhidas (services
in honour of the dead),25 a reference to which is made in the aforementioned
record made by Sava in chapter 35 of the Chilandar Typikon26.
In fact, until the 1970s, the cult of Anastasija can be regarded as local, limited
only to the place of burial and the subsequent deposition of the relics, i.e. to
the monastic communities in Toplica (Kuršumlija), Studenica and Chilandar27.
A fresco on a wall of the Studenica Monastery depicts Ana as a nun, but not
as a saint. She kneels before the figure of the Mother of God and prays. The
painting is topped with an inscription: Пресвјатаја Дјево и Бога нашега ма
ти, прими мољенија рабје својеј монахинији Анастасији28. In Studenica she is
Горње Мезије и Доње Мезије, прев., пиред. С. Бугарски, предг. Ј. Ређеп, Нови Сад
1994, p. 31).
22
П. Пузовић, Госпођа Ана…, op. cit.
23
The year of death unspecified. Chilandar Typikon (1200) includes a recommendation on
how to celebrate a memorial service (panikhida) for Ana’s feast day, so, according to his-
torians, she must have died before or in the year of the completion of the typikon. See
Л. Павловић, Култови лица код Срба и Македонаца (Историјско-етнографска рас
права), Смедерево 1965, p. 188 and Ђ. Перић, “Мајка св. Саве, госпођа Анастасија,
према историји и предању”, Теолошки погледи: двомесечни версконаучни часопис
1986, год. 18, бр. 3/4, p. 220.
24
See Л. Павловић, op. cit., p. 188.
25
Д. Поповић, Под окриљем светости. Култ светих владара и реликвија у средњове
ковној Србији, Беoград 2006, p. 47.
26
Д. Поповић, op. cit., p. 47.
27
Л. Павловић, op. cit., p. 188.
28
Ibidem, p. 188. П. Пузовић, Преподобна Анастасија-Ана, in: idem, Прилози за исто
рију Српске православне цркве, Ниш 1997, p. 9–15 or П. Пузовић, Госпођа Ана…, op.
cit.
commemorated as a ruler of exceptional merit for the Nemanjić family, and

on Mount Athos as the co-founder of Chilandar29.
For a few centuries Ana’s name was out of the Serbian collective memory
and she was recalled by Metropolitan Jovan Georgijević (Đorđević)30 when
he was compiling a new calendar for the Serbs from the Metropolitanate of
Karlovici in 1741 (Zbornik molitava sa kalendarom). One of the laudatory
hymns of the calendar, General stikhera to Serbian saints (Stihira opća Svetiteljem
Srpskim under August 3031) reminded the Orthodox diaspora in the Catholic
Habsburg empire of the figures and deeds of persons distinguished in the
service of the Church and the state, among others Anastasija, the wife of the
country’s founder, mother of the first Serbian king and of the first bishop32.
Furthermore, as Laza Čurčić observes, reading out the Stikhera during a liturgy
was to highlight the uniqueness and autonomy of the Serbian Church and to
opposed increasingly intense Russification33. One version of a contemporary
Stikhera:
СТИХИРА СВЕТИМ СРПСКИМ ПРОСВЕТИТЕЉИМА, tone 5:

Свети српски Просветитељи и Учитељи,
и преподобни Краљеви и Цареви и Кнежеви:
Симеоне Мироточиви, Саво равноапостолни,
Стефане Првовенчани, Владиславе краљу,
и Саво Други, са свехвалним Теоктистом,
преподобни Милутине, Никодиме, Данило,
29
Ђ. Перић, op. cit., p. 224–230.
30
Associated with the Peć patriarch Arsenij IV Jovanović; more in the book by the Š umadija
Bishop Sava Vuković: Српски јерарси од деветог до двадесетог века. Аѕбучни и хроно
лошки преглед, Београд-Нови Сад 1996–2012, p. 246.
31
See D. Gil, Serbska hymnografia…, p. 99–102. The text of the Stikhera and detailed com-
ments: B. Stefanović, Stihira Serbima svetiteljima – problem teksta, melodije i mesta njenoga
u službama svetim u Srbljaku, Beograd 1964; Л. Чурчић, Параклис Стефану Дечанском
Јована Георгијевића из 1762 године, in: idem, Српске књиге и српски писци 18. века,
Нови Сад 1988, p. 169; Ђ. Радојичић, Архиђакон Јован, писац стихова 18. века, in:
Књижевна збивања и стварања код Срба у средњем веку и у турско доба, Нови Сад
1967, p. 305.
32
The lyrics of the song evolved, with later hymnographers and composers interfering with
the text by adding the names of saints. In the older version (from the 18th c.), which listed
30 Serbian saints, there were three women, in 1943 there were four women saints, now
there are nine.
33
Л. Чурчић, op. cit., p. 160.
26 Part I
са Евстатијем премудрим, предивни међу страдалницима

Стефане, Дечана славо и Уроше часни,
Преславни и велики кнезе Лазаре,
који си пролио крв своју за веру и Отаџбину,
свехвалне царице, кнегиње и деспотице опевамо:
Јелену, Анастасију и Ангелину [underline – D.G.],
свети деспоти Георгије, Стефане, Максиме и Јоване
сирмијских и крушедолских обитељи славо,
свети Петре Коришки, Јоанкије Девички,
Прохоре Пчињски, Јоване Рилски
Свети чудотворче Науме, Давиде, Гаврило Лесновски
Иларионе Осоговски, свети Василије цудотворче захумски:
све вас прослављамо и славимо.
Јер сте велики заступници и представници рода српскога.
О, оци, и пастири добри!
Упутите Отаџбину (народ) ка пристаништу спасења,
и молите мир од Бога роду нашем! 34
Only in the 1970s35 did first hymns entirely dedicated to Anastasija appear.
They testified to a new approach of the Serbian Church to the ruler and to
a new potential of her spiritual impact – in 1972 protoiereus Mirko Pavlović
wrote a service in honour of the saint36. The text was published in Srbljak37 of
34
Музичка редакција Радио “Благовесника”, <http://muzickaredakcija.blogspot.com/2011
/05/blog-post_19.html>, access: 26.08.2020.
35
From the end of the Second World War and the coming to power of the communists
until the early 1980s, the Serbian Orthodox Church (hereinafter SOC) remained on the
margins of social and spiritual life in Serbia. Church members rarely spoke in public, only
the most important Orthodox holidays and anniversaries were celebrated. It was not until
the mid-1970s that there was a turn towards religious renewal, which in the mid-1980s
would result in the so-called Serbian “spiritual renaissance”. This was also the time of Jus-
tin Popović’s activities. Between 1972 and 1977, he wrote his 12-volume Žitija svetih. See
D. Gil, ‘Filary duchowości’ czasów współczesnych, in: Prawosławie-Historia-Naród. Miejsce
kultury duchowej w serbskiej tradycji i współczesności, Kraków 2005, p. 167–186. See also
M. Tomanić, Srpska crkva u ratu i ratovi u njoj, Beograd 2001, p. 9; M. Blagojević, Re
ligija i crkva u transformacijama društva. Sociološko-istorijska analiza religijske situacije
u srpsko-crnogorskom i ruskom (post)komunističkom društvu, Beograd 2005, p. 72, 169.
36
D. Gil, Serbska hymnografia…, op. cit., p. 144. Text: Србљак, Београд 1986 and Србљак,
Добрунска Ријека 2015.
37
Srbljak is a collection of liturgical poetry dedicated to the saints venerated by the SOC.
There were different editions, both handwritten and printed in following years: 1714, 1761,
1765, 1861, 1986.
1986 and 2015 (2nd edition in 2018)38, with the date June 21/2239. Another
text of a service in honour of the saint by nun Nazarija is written in English40.
A cursory reading of texts dedicated to St. Anastasija gives the impression
that her image there represents only the accompanying cult, an extremely
conventionalized type of sainthood usually called a “holy mother” or, more
correctly, a “mother of the saint”41. A thorough analysis of hagiographic and
hymnographic records leads to other conclusions. It is certain that the cult
of the “mother of all Serbs”42 emerges out of this tradition and owes its core
38
Novi Srbljak is supplemented and published at <http://www.novisrbljak.narod.ru/> on
an ongoing basis. It is an initiative of Zoran Staničević (Zorast), a contemporary Serbian
hymnographer. The aim of this project is to create the most complete possible database
of Serbian hymnography. On the basis of the more recent texts collected on the website,
a two-volume Srbljak came out in print. The first edition was published in 2015 (Добрунска
Ријека 2015) and the supplemented second one in 2018. More on contemporary Serbian
hymnography and its authors: Р. С. Левушкина, З. А. Станчевић (2017), “Сербское гим
нографическое творчество конца ХХ – начала ХХI веков”, Fontes Slaviae Orthodoxae
2017, 1, p. 31–41.
39
Sometimes in Serbian calendars and collections of lives, the memorial of St. Anastasija is
mentioned on June 22, instead of June 21; see SOC Calendar for 2015 at: <www.pravo-
slavlje.net/index.php?title=%D0%88%D1%83%D0%BB_2015>, access: 4.03.2016.
40
Г. Благојевић, Срби у Калифорнији: обредно-религијска пракса и етницитет верника
српских православних парохија у Калифорнији, Београд 2005, p. 192. Unfortunately,
I have not been able to get hold of the text of the service. Nun Nazarija is one of 20 sisters
of the Paisius Velichkovsky Monastery in California, USA.
41
In literature they are referred to by the term (title) “mother…”, which leaves no doubt
that their holiness is due to their holy child and is a projection of his “divine” aura. Often,
sainthood is attributed to both parents; in the lives and liturgical tradition, “holy parents”
or holy sons are venerated along with their mothers. The Serbian Orthodox Church ven-
erates, among others, St. Xenophon and Maria, parents of Jovan and Arkadija, worshipped
together with their sons, on January 26; St. Emperor Constantine and his mother Empress
Helena, on May 21; St. Stephen Lazarević and his mother, St. Jevgenija-Euphrosine (Prin-
cess Milica), on July 19; St. King Milutin, Teoktist (Stephen Dragutin) and their mother
Helen, on October 30.
42
The term is used in reference to her by contemporary writer Dragan Damjanović, whose
novels about the history of Ana Nemanjić bear the titles: Анастасија: Мајка свих право
славних Срба, Београд 2011; Пророчанство Немањине жене – света Анастасија,
Београд 2016 (2nd revised edition); Чуда српске светитељке – Анастасија, Београд
2018. Dragan Damjanović (1952–) – writer, journalist, publicist, and author, member of the
Serbian Royal Academy of Sciences and Arts (Српскa Краљевскa академијa научника
и уметника – SKANU). He has published more than 30 books, largely devoted to figures
and topics related to the Nemanjić dynasty. In one of his interviews we read: “Siguran sam
da mi kao narod, istorijski postojimo na čvrstom temelju od vremena Nemanjića, kada smo
se, kako se to kaže, venčali u Hristu, kada nas je Sveti Sava krstio kao narod i kao Božiju
28 Part I
patterns to it, yet at the same time it transcends its generally familiar features.
Part of the tradition is the scant biography, recreated on the basis of scant
information from texts by relatives (husband, offspring) and a prolonged
absence of separate, particular texts for the liturgy of the worship. However,
with respect to Ana Nemanjić the simple criterion of “reflected sanctity, used
by Maria C. Ferro in reference to some saintly women, makes no sense43.
The very idea of the sanctity of mothers has its roots in the Old and New
Testaments. It is there that we will find models which Slavic authors drew on
abundantly in building cults of women included in the pantheon of saints.
The Old Testament points to the continuity of the vocations of righteous and
just people44. The histories of Abraham and Sara as well as of Zechariah and
Elizabeth45 are frequent biblical references in liturgical texts. The announcement
of the birth of Isaac (Gen 17) to old Sarah, and later the sending of the long-
awaited son to Zechariah and Elizabeth, are harbingers of the supernatural
calling of another earthly mother, the Virgin Mary, to a hypostatic union with
God as Theotokos. The genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel according to Matthew
(Mt 1:1–16) will serve apocryphal literature (Protoevangelium of James) to
depict Mary as miraculously conceived, by the grace of God, a daughter of
Joachim and Anna, who in line with God’s annunciation was to become the
earthly Mother of God. Mary’s maternal vocation as the second Eve (Lk 1:28)
decu. Dakle, to vreme srednjeg veka, vreme Nemanjića, tada nastaje moderna srpska drža-
va, od tada imamo i svoj jezik, svoja slova, svoje crkve, bolnice, svoje običaje”. Slavica Đukić,
O Srbima, istoriji i Kosmetu, <https://www.bastabalkana.com/2017/10/dragan-damjanovic-
publicista-strpimo-se-i-otrpimo-sve-je-u-vremenu/>, access: 25.03.2020.
43
Maria C. Ferro believes that “reflected sanctity” of some female saints, originates in the
sainthood of their children or husband and their canonisation took place a priori, as they
gave birth to other important saints. See: M.C. Ferro, “Sante madri. Una tipologia par-
ticolare di sante della Rus’”, Studi Slavistici IV, Firenze 2007, p. 70; M.C. Ferro, Santità
e agiografia al femminile. Forme letterarie, tipologie e modelli nel mondo slavo orientale (X–
XVII sec.), Firenze 2010, p. 62–63. Ferro attributes considerable devotional “autonomy”,
despite the “reflected” sainthood, to St. Maria of Radonezh (†1337), mother of St. Sergius
of Radonezh, raised to the glory of the altars with her husband by the Russian Church in
1992. Cf. the life of the saint at: <http://days.pravoslavie.ru/Life/life6723.htm>, access:
11.10.2012.
44
E.g. Noah – Gen 6:9. Biblical identifications after: The Jerusalem Bible.
45
See Mt 7:17–18: “A sound tree produces good fruit but a rotten tree bad fruit. A sound tree
cannot bear bad fruit, nor a rotten tree bear good fruit”; Jn 15: the parable about the vine;
Lk 1:42: “Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed
are you among women and blessed is the child you will bear!”.
washes mankind’s original sin away and announces the coming of the Kingdom
of God (Rom 13:12)46.
The shared Christian tradition venerates many mothers of saints, to mention
but a few: St. Monica – mother of St. Augustine (May 4, August 27 and June
1547 – the memorial of St. Augustine), St. Emilia (January 1), mother of St.
Basil the Great, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Peter of Sebaste, St. Macrina the
Younger, St. Nonna (August 5), mother of St. Gregory of Nazianzus, and St.
Helen (May 21) – mother of St. Constantine the Great. The holiness of mothers
is enshrined in the ideal of the Mother of God, which is fully accomplished
in the mission of the Son. In his reflections on the sanctity of women, Paul
Evdokimov puts forward the thesis that in connection with the understanding
of the birth of Jesus as that of the New Adam (or a New Man), Mother of
God should not be called Theotokos, but rather Theo-Anthropo-Tokos48. The
portrayal of Mary as “God-Man’s mother” is linked to the idea of intercession,
widespread in the Orthodox Church. The utmost model of the orant is the
Blessed Virgin, “a figure of prayer” and “charism of intercession”49. Thanks to
her extraordinary communion with the Son and the Holy Spirit (and through
Him with the Church), and because she is Theotokos or Theo-Anthropo-Tokos,
her maternal care extends not only to the Child, but also to the whole world
and every human being. Christ’s words recorded by John the Evangelist (Jn 19:
26–27) will be the cornerstone of the idea of deesis50 and will assign a special
role of a mediator to Mary.
Through her maternity, Mary determines so-called ordo caritatis, the order
of love, opening oneself up to God, being a servant to Him and caring for other
humans (Lk 1:38)51. The qualities attributed to Mary, such as fulfilment of
God’s will, virtue, godliness, witness of life, observance of the commandments,
testimony to the holiness of the Son, and her mission, become the constitutive
46
See e.g. M. Kuczyńska, “Teologia maryjna Joanicjusza Galatowskiego. Zarys problemu”, in:
Krakowsko-Wileńskie Studia Slawistyczne, Seria poświęcona starożytnościom słowiańskim,
vol. 4, ed. M. Kuczyńska, W. Stępniak-Minczewa, J. Stradomski, Kraków 2009, p. 193.
47
Days of commemoration of the saints according to the old style, i.e. the Julian calendar.
48
P. Evdokimov, Kobieta…, p. 212.
49
P. Evdokimov, Prawosławie, op. cit., p. 163.
50
More on the subject: R. Mazurkiewicz, Deesis. Idea wstawiennictwa Bogarodzicy i Św. Jana
Chrzciciela w kulturze średniowiecznej, Kraków 2002.
51
M. Kuczyńska, “Teologia maryjna…”, p. 192.
30 Part I
markers of the type of sanctity attributed to holy mothers, as well as their

worship in Slavic (and thus also Serbian) hagiography and hymnography.
*
The concept of the cult of St. Anastasija of Serbia was set out in the most
general terms in the life of St. Simeon by Sava, and further specified by later
hagiographers, beginning with St. Stephen the First-Crowned. In his work,
Sava created a sacred dynastic idea, where not only the ruler himself, but his
whole family, i.e. also his wife and (legitimate) children represent the messianic
ruling of Nemanjić dynasty. The latter are heirs to the throne and to the state,
guardians of the order established by their parents and of the dynastic values
identical with those of the state52. Of key significance is the term “ruler of all
Serbian land” used with respect to mother (“госпођа свој српској земљи”)
and “a wife offered to Simeon by God” (“богодана му жена”). Sava’s vision
includes Ana in the supernatural order of history planned by God for Serbia,
in the universal history of salvation not only of her family, but of the whole
Serbian state and nation, entrusted by God to her husband to be ruled over. In
this way, Simeon’s wife is part of the idea of divine election and special earthly
mission; without her, the destiny of the country could not have proceeded in
the direction envisaged by divine providence.
Starting from the image of the mother-ruler, Sava included in his hagio
graphy the responsibility of the royal descendants to the entire holy dynasty.
Mother has a place equal to the male members of the dynasty, i.e. father-“ruler”
and the “noble” brothers. To this end he used the biblical image of the prodigal
son (Lk 15:11–32):
Овај блажени господин наш Симеон имађаше три сина. Један најмлађи –
немогу га назвати сином, већ робом – когаљубљаше изнад свих, а и овај
му неодступно работаше. Јер овај као млађи међу свом браћом и најмлађи,
и, просто рећи, видевши немоћ своје природе и умножење грехова својих,
учини као и блудни син, оставивши доброга оца и господина, и блажену
матер госпођу своју, и благородну, нећу казати браћу, већ господаре своје,
52
Sava constantly highlights that Simeon’s successor, the son Stephen, rules “the father’s
state”, in other words, Simeon in a spiritual sense remains on the throne, exercising power
through his legitimate heir, i.e. a person like him, validated and approved, as it were, legally
in the last blessing (a kind of anointing).
и обнажи све безумљем својим. И отидох у туђу страну далеко, хранећи се са

свињама, и не насићаваше се њихове хране, мртав би и не оживе, изгубљен
беше и нe нађе се53.
It is no coincidence that later Teodosije of Chilandar, in his Life of St. Sava,

will show how the young Rastko, before he left secretly for the monastery on
Mount Athos, came for permission to leave home, for a prayer and a blessing
to both his parents, father and mother:
[…] yђe к родитељима, украде отпуштење и замоли по обичају молитву

и благослов, говорећи: – Господари моји, рекоше ми да у оној гори – и поменуо
јој име – има много звери; ако нађем милост, ви ћете ме благословити и пустити
да идем у лов. Ако закаснимо, немојте се љутити, јер сам чуо да тамо има много
јелена. А отац његов, угађајући му, рече: – Нека је Господ с тобом, чедо, нека
те благослови и исправи пут твој. И мати, као свака мати [underline – D.G.],
загрли га и целива с љубављу, па га отпустише с миром, али му заповедише
да се брзо врати. Јер не cнађаху да неће тражити јелене […]54.
Importantly, Sava did not even present Simeon himself only in masculine
terms but saw the ideal of a ruler as a combination of the virtues of man and
woman, father and mother. When he extolled his caring attitude towards the
poor and orphans, he explicitly called him mother55.
The dynastic image of Ana, the complete unity with her husband and
successors to the throne, inherently includes all the virtues attributed to her
husband as the founder of an independent, Orthodox state, impenetrable to
external enemies, with the Orthodox faith, hatred of heresy, firmness against
enemies, care for subjects, and of course service to God, in whose name or by
whose authority the Serbian ruler reigns56. In Ana’s case all the attributes boil
down to one: “blessed” (blažena), which for example in Polish greatly narrows
53
Св. Сава, Сабрани списи…, p. 107.
54
Антологија српске књижевности, an e-version edited by the University of Belgrade Fac-
ulty of Philology, 2009. Available online: <www.antologijasrpskeknjizevnosti.rs/ASK_SR_
AzbucnikDela.aspx>, access: 13.02.2020.
55
Св. Сава, Сабрани списи…, p. 98. Sava’s imagery is heavily dependent on the biblical pat-
tern; this is how the Jewish authors of the Old Testament described God as the protector of
the people.
56
It is best demonstrated by Stephen in his father’s life: “[…] а некимa да, од рођења
матер њихових, буду земаљски господари као угодници његови, који се не старају
само за земаљске власти, него који угађаjу Господу, чинећи му по вољи са страхом,
па и са слободом. Међу њима беше и овај мој господин свети хранилац, угађајући
32 Part I
the understanding of this word in the Church Slavonic language, because it

can mean happy, just, full of virtues, or even holy.
In The Life of St. Simeon Stephen the First-Crowned dedicates very little
attention to mother, focusing more than Sava on the traits of her character.
At the same time, however, he makes Ana part of the Serbian theocratic and
foundational tradition. In reference to Simeon, the hagiographer describes
his mother with a rarely used term: helper (literally: handmaid), probably
taken from the description of the creation of the first woman in Genesis (Gen
1:18–20). In modernised translations it is often changed into neutral “wife”,
which strips Ana of the functional aspect, while Stefan sees in the mother the
co-founder and patroness of the Serbian Church, meritorious for the benefit of
female monasticism: in his work, Ana, together with her husband, builds and
strengthens the Serbian Church from scratch, and to her were ceded the rights
of patronage of the first female monastery, which she performed perfectly:
Дошав, нимало не задоцнев, поче журно зидати у отачаству својем,
у Топлици, храм пресвете Богородице, на ушћу реке по имену Косаонице.
И украсив га свима правима црквеним, установи у њему чрначки збор
са часним и богољубивим подружјем својим, по имену Аном. И предаде
јој храм Пресвете, да се стара о њему по сваком делу и о чрницама које
установи у том манастиру светом. А она слушаше са сваком послушношћу
и добродушношћу, чувајући храм пресвете Богородице, предани јој овим
нашим светим господином. Јер о овој речи мудри: “Часна жена у дому мужа
својега више вреди од бисера и драгог камења” (Prov 31:10). Земаљски мисле
о бисеру и камењу. Трошни су камен и бисери, а пророк мисли на онога
који је пун добрих дела, као бисера и драгога камења. На то се и она угледа,
творећи угодна дела пред Господом у дому мужа својега57.
The character of the ruler outlined in the biography does not, on cursory
analysis, deviate from a fixed pattern. The hagiographer uses the most obvious
biblical symbols and enumerates the typical general virtues attributed to
“good wives”: the biblical metaphor of the pearl and the precious stone (Prov
31:10), and the virtues such as honour, nobleness (časna and prečasna), piety
(bogoljubiva), obedience (poslušna), and good-naturedness (dobrodušna). This
Господу, желећи да ужива блага у дому Господњем”. Стефан Првовенчани, Сабрани

списи…, p. 64.
57
Стефан Првовенчани, Сабрани списи…, p. 66. И. Коматина, Црква и држава у срп
ским земљама од XI до XIII века, Београд 2016, p. 162.
approach may be associated with a paternalistic attitude to the role of the ruler
and mother, but it must be remembered that the context for this description is
provided by the wisdom books, especially the poem about the virtuous woman
(Prov 31:10–31), which presents the ideal of the Israelite woman as an object
of veneration for her family and community:
She is clothed with strength and dignity; she can laugh at the days to come. She
speaks with wisdom, and faithful instruction is on her tongue (Prov 31:25–26).
[…] Her children arise and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praises her:
“Many women do noble things, but you surpass them all.” Charm is deceptive,
and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised. Honour
her for all that her hands have done, and let her works bring her praise at the city
gate (Prov 31:28–31).
With the level of knowledge of the Bible at that time, these words rever
berated with meaning and added new significance to the queen’s praise by her
son. At least the elite of the state or educated people must have been aware of
this, and the author of the text certainly was. In addition, in this context, the
words about the virtue of obedience did not refer so much to the husband
understood in a colloquial way, but to the husband of a monarch, to God’s
anointed one, i.e. to the presence of God on earth. No matter what, in Stephen’s
metaphorical praise, Ana is regarded as the pearl in her husband’s crown and
completes his image of a ruler and his reign.
Nowhere does Stephen see his parents other than as an equal couple. St.
Sava’s life is told in the perspective of both parents. He places the responsibility
for the spiritual formation of the younger generation (including Rastko) in their
hands. He values their feelings equally. Mother and father have the same right
to pride in their children or anguish when they fail to fulfil their duties. The
misbehaviour of either parent may result in punishment by Divine Providence.
This communion (unity) of mother and father is formally illustrated by the
identical thoughts that come to Ana’s and Simeon’s mind when they are looking
for reasons why their youngest son runs away from home and fears God’s
possible judgment for his misconduct:
Гледајући сва ова добра дела господина ми светога, син његов млађи, уистину
целомудрени младић, живљаше неодступно, веселећи изврсним разумом
34 Part I
оца својега и матер, као што писац прича говори: “Син премудар весели
срце оца својега и матер”, и остало (Proverbs 1:1) […]
Када је приметио један од слугу његових да га нема, јави господину светоме
и пречасној, говорећи:
– Господо моја, син ваш млађи, кога сте ви однеговали, отпутова из овога
света.
А они, тргавши се од ужаса, говораху у себи:
– Да ли ће бити овај или други?
– Да ли је од нас отпутовао драги васпитаник наш?
– Да ли ће нам нанети тугу и жалост?
– Да ли ће се овим збити на нама искушење Јовово, као што искуша Господ
праведнога Јова?
– Али је ипак Јов био праведан, кога и Господ сам послуша правде његове
ради? (John 1:42)58
The frequent mentions in the lives of both Nemanjić family members of

Simeon leaving his wife (and children) and entering a monastery are obligatory
elements typifying the character according to the Gospel model (Mt 19:29), and
do not have to be taken as evidence of disrespect for the wife or the family in
general. Importantly, the teaching of the Church has always placed the secular
state lower in the hierarchy of salvation, and the married state the lowest, so
that spouses had to work harder to attain heaven. The best way to do this was
to “leave this world” and dedicate themselves to God, which was most often
done by the spouses (in their old age) deciding to separate and take up the
monastic life, considered to be the evangelical ideal, defined by the teachings
of Jesus, i.e. the most perfect life one can achieve on earth. This custom was
practised, among others, by members of Byzantine ruling families, as well as
by medieval Slavic rulers in the Balkans and Rus’.
The analysis carried out shows that the sons of Ana, using modest literary
means, immortalized in literature an interesting and original image of their
mother. They argued that she was not passive, hidden in the shadow of her
husband or reflecting his light (or holiness). On the contrary, they saw her
always together with him, cooperating with Simeon in various areas, not only
at home. They sealed the queen’s importance with expressions of respect and
love for her from the whole ruling dynasty.
58
Стефан Првовенчани, Сабрани списи…, p. 75.
The literary image of Ana Nemanjić created by her sons was the basis for
other texts in which the saint appeared. The most significant of them are the
works by Domentijan and Teodosije of Chilandar.
In The Life of St. Sava by Domentijan, who drew on Stephen Nemanjić’s
text, Ana is the only woman mentioned by name59. Her image encapsulate the
vision of an ideal, righteous, God-established royal dynasty in Serbia, which
visibly includes the female factor. As a result, Ana’s position is important not
only because of the fact that she entered a religious order together with her
husband, as Svetlana Tomin writes, but above all because the ruler’s wife is
a constitutive element of the supernatural action of God’s providence towards
Serbia. God’s agenda is realised with her and through her. She and Simeon
together establish a dynasty and are the political and religious cornerstone
of that dynasty:
[…] жупан Немања самодржавно царевао свом српском и поморском

земљом, и Диоклитијом и Далмацијом и Травунијом, са Богом дарованом
му супругом, са богочастивом Аном, живећи у царству своме по закону
господњем, и родише синове и кћери60.
The kingdom, as seen in the quotation, is theirs, not just Simeon’s, and
both must obey God’s law (literally living according to the Lord’s “order”). As
part of Domentjan’s dynasty theology, he extends to Ana the symbol of the
good root from which the royal family grows: “(…) заче богољубива Ана
и у својој утроби и роди по божјој воли сина, добро изникли изданак от
доброго корена, у коме родитељи његови примивши богосветлу радост,
благодарише добротвора свога, који не превиде мољења њехова”61. The
idea of the “holy tree” attributed to the Nemanjić family is enriched in the
approach of the hymnographer by the idea of “holy parents” and has its roots
in the biblical symbols of a tree, fruit and vine. It is noteworthy that even such
a seemingly feminine matter as the desire to conceive and bear a child becomes
a problem for both spouses, and the request for another offspring is written in
59
С. Томин, Мужаствене жене српског средњег века, Нови Сад 2011, p. 61.
60
Доментијан, Живот светога Саве, w: idem, Живот светога Саве и Живот светога
Симеона, уред. Д. Богдановић et al., прев. Л. Мирковић, Београд 1988, p. 55. Herein-
after abbreviated to ЖССа and ЖСС, respectively.
61
Доментијан, ЖССа, p. 55.
36 Part I
the plural, not the singular: “that we may give birth” rather than “that I may
give birth” (“Господе, дај нам да родимо чедо по вољи твога милосрђа”62).
Young Rastko, like other children, is born “of them”, not only of his mother
(“и родише синове и кћери”; “и нађоше безконачну радост молитвама
тога роћенога от них”). Nothing happens in the lives of the children without
the knowledge and consent of both parents.
The holy married couple is shown as a unity acting together and making joint
decisions; they pray together and bring up their sons together63 (hagiographers
do not mention the Nemanjić daughters64), jointly give their blessing to the
children and jointly give Rastko possession of his land (“А када узрасте до
петнаест година, оделише му родитељи један крај државе своје, како би
одлазио од оца и матере на забаву с велможајма…”).
The relation with the husband is founded on the principle of equality. The
wife is given to Nemanja by God as an equal; in Old Church Slavonic she is
referred to by the word сьврьстѩ, which meant equal in terms of age65, but
also in terms of status and rank. Later translations of the text into contemporary
Serbian use the word supružnica or podružije. An exception here is the 1930
translation of Milivoje Bašić, who used the term sinklitika, a reference to
a Greek word for a member of a high council66, which additionally highlights
Ana’s social role.
Teodosije highlights that Ana is on a par with her husband (“није ни по
чему заостајала у врлинама за мужем својим”)67.
The two aforementioned hagiographers, Domentijan and Teodosije, write
texts in honour of the saint applying a “leading image”, the image of a leader68
and the “principle of similarity”69. When they depict the parents of St. Sava,
62
63
Sedalan after polyeleos, tone 8; kontakion tone 4.
64
M. Purković writes about Nemanjić daughters in: Принцезе из куће Немањића, Вин
дзор 1956, p. 11–15.
65
On this basis, Serbian historians have tried to hypothesise the age of both rulers at the
time of their marriage, see Ђ. Перић, op. cit., p. 191–192.
66
Ibidem, p. 200.
67
Теодосије, Житије Светога Саве, прир. Д. Богдановић, Београд 1988, p. 102. Herein-
after abbreviated to: ЖССа.
68
69
“The new figure activating the model (…) wants to absorb as much as possible from
the model, to find all possible threads connecting her with the saints with their earthly
they refer to the messianic mission of the biblical childless married couples:
Abraham and Sara, Jacob and Lea (Gen 29:31–35), Zechariah and Elizabeth
and Joachim and Anna70. In the case of St. Anastasija the histories of Sara,
Lea and Elizabeth will be especially relevant as thanks to their prayers God
opened their wombs and they were able to give birth to offspring that put in
life supernatural plans for their entire communities71. Thus, as in the stories
of the biblical female patriarchs, the central event in the life of Ana, and more
broadly in the spiritual history of Serbia is the birth of a child, little Rastko,
“a support, a rock and a model to all the faithful”72:
И потом добро снабдевши чистоту на старост своју, и савећавши богомисаони

савет, помолише се Господу Богу сведржитељу, говорећи:
[…] Господе, дај нам да родимо чедо по вољи твога милосрђа, и по твоме
божанственом самотрењу, да безбројном силом твојом испуни своје отачаство,
богољубним твојим доброверјем, коме ми слуге твоје, по заповести твојега
божаства и твојих светих апостола положисмо почетак, надајуђи се примити
твоју божанствену награду. […] Исус Христос јуче и данас, исти је и у векове,
на крају година послуша љисту молитву и оних праведника, и даде као напред
реченим праведницима.
И потом заче богољубива Ана у својој утроби, и роди по вољи Божјој сина,
добро изникли изданак од доброга корена, у коме родитељи њего примивши
богосветлу радост, благодарише добротвора свога, који нe превиде мољења
њихова73.
А Богом дарованога сина крстивши у име Оца и Сина и светога Духа,
нарeкоше му име Растко, који ће ваистину веома узрасти божанственим
добрим делима; и то не само он него ће и своје отачаство привести на велику
побожност (…)74.
The marital purity of both spouses after the birth of the God-given Rastek
is the foundation sacrifice of the Serbian Church and, more broadly, of the
Orthodox state (after 1 Sam 1–4,7–16; 19:18ff; 25:1).
istories (…) in order to weave these threads into her own cord on which her worshippers
h
and followers can climb to heaven”, A. Naumow, Biblia w strukturze artystycznej utworów
cerkiewnosłowiańskich, Kraków 1983, p. 127–128.
70
A reference to the apocrypha Protoevangelium of James.
71
These images are also used in the service to the saint – ode 3 of the canon, ikos.
72
Canon, ode 9; matins, sedalan, tone 4.
73
74
38 Part I
When the son is in the foreground, the leading role is given to the image
of Ana as a holy mother, in the biblical, Marian convention. Her character
istics prove first of all that she was a suitable person to give birth to the most
important Serbian saint and founder of the Orthodox Church. The set of
virtues is chosen from the canon – piety, godliness, charity, humility, chastity75
– “with purity you shone like the sun, with your life in the (earthly) world you
set a model of piety”76. Hymnography extols her as the mother of a Serbian
enlightener77, a second John the Baptist78. Sava’s birth is like manna in the
desert79 and confirm his special role in the history of the country.
Domentijan’s lives of the first national saints is rooted in the understanding
of authority (principle of legitimacy) and in the religious and political ideology
(idea of being a chosen one, called to perform a specific task) expressed by
Nemanjić in Osnivačka povelja manastira Hilandara (Founding Charter of
the Hilandar Monastery, 1st version 1199, 2nd – 1200 and 1202)80. It uses
the biblical scenario and the model of biblical Israel, the universal history of
salvation, God’s covenants with people, and transfers it to Serbian soil, creating
the idea of Serbia as the New Israel. The Serbian monarchy, patterned after
the Byzantine Empire, was to be the inalienable buttress of Christianity, and
the “vladar, koji je prilikom uzvođenja na mesto velikog župana ili kralja,
u kasnijem periodu istorije, na sebe preuzimao i dužnost služenja [underline –
75
For the blessing of loaves, troparion, tone 4; sedalan, tone 4.
76
Stikhery ‘na stihhovne’, ton 2, samoglasne.
77
The Great Vespers (hereinafter: GV), stikhery for 8, tone 6, ‘samoglasne’; GV, other stikh-
ery, tone 8; glory, tone 6; canon, ode 2.
78
GV, glory, tone 2.
79
Matins, sedalan, tone 4.
80
“Искони створи Бог небо земљу и људе на њој, и благослови их и даде им власт
над свим створењем својим. И једне постави цареве, друге кнезове, друге господа-
ре, и свакоме даде пасти стадо своје и чувати га од свакога зла које наилази на њ.
Зато, браћо, Бог премилостиви утврди Грке царевима, а Угре краљевима, и сваки
народ раздели, и закон даде и нарави установи, и господаре над њима, по обичају
и по закону распоредивши својом премудрошћу. Стога по многој својој и неизмер-
ној милости и човекољубљу дарова нашим прадедовима и нашим дедовима да вла-
дају овом земљом српском, и Бог свакојако управљаше на боље људима, не хотећи
човечје погибли, и постави ме великога жупана, нареченога у светом крштењу Сте-
фана Немању”. Свети Сава, Хиландарска повеља Симеона Немање, and: idem, Сабра
ни списи, op. cit., p. 31.
D.G.] (…)”81. He should serve the state, the people and the church. From now
on, successive Serbian rulers (from the dynasties of Nemanjić, Lazarević and
Branković) and spiritual leaders, through their sacralised deeds, will sanctify
the Serbian land as “God’s chosen ones”, rooting in the nation the idea of its
vocation as God-bearing, a theophor or theodul (servant), and after the defeat
on the Kosovo Field as a victim nation82.
The term “founding saint couple” traditionally belongs to St. Simeon and St.
Sava, and while Ana is left out, as a wife and mother she is not just a shadow
of her husband or sons since without her the history of the family and the
state could not develop in the intended direction.
The appearance of this woman saint in the history of the nation is like
“a pillar of fire that enlightens and purifies from all dark misunderstanding/
all backwardness/all dark ignorance”83. Along with Simeon, by the sacrament
of baptism followed by proper upbringing, they introduced Rastko to the
Christian ecumene84. Through her virtuous and pious life and her wisdom,
mother sets the example of faith and knowledge for her children, and they are
the role models and teachers of the whole nation85. Actively participating in the
life of the heirs to the throne, she becomes at the same time a (co-)creator of
the state, and thus of the Serbian Church (canon, ode 4, 6, 9; sedalan, tone 3).
In Teodosije’ version, Ana comes closer to the viewer and has more indivi
dual features than in Domentijan, but she is equally united into an inseparable
couple with Simeon. The hagiographer presents the spouses as loving and
caring parents, united by strong ties with Rastko: “Родитељи, пак, његови,
81
S. Prodić, “Osnivačka povelja manastira Hilandara kao za istraživanje vladarske ideologi-
je Nemanjića”, Kultura polisa, br. 16, Novi Sad 2011, p. 112.
82
83
Canon, ode 9.
84
Теодосије, ЖССа, p. 103: “После мало времена породише га водом и Духом, про
светивши га божанственим крштењем, и дадоше му име Растко, и у Господу веома
добро Богу узрасте. А када је дете ојачало, дадоше га да се учи светим књигама”.
Also: The Great Vespers, stikhery ‘na Gospodi vozvach’, ton 4: Му́ дрыми словесы́ и те́плою
любо́ вію сы́ на своего́ Ра́ стка зако́ ну Христо́ ву научи́ ла еси́ , я́ ко подоба́ етъ па́ че всѣ́ хъ
Христа́ люби́ ти и любо́ вію Ему́ служи́ ти. Онъ же, послу́ шавъ совѣ́ ты твоя́ , до конца́ вся́
испо́ лни.
85
GV: stikhery ‘na stichovne’, glas 2, ‘samoglasne’; kontakion, tone 4: (…) ча́да же твоя́ кро́тко
учи́ ла еси́ па́че всѣ́ хъ Христа́ люби́ ти; Canon, ode 4: Науче́на Бо́гомъ, ты́ была́ еси́ лу́ чшая
учи́ тельница сы́ ну твоему́ , и́ же, науче́нъ тобо́ю, бы́ сть и́ стинный учи́ тель ро́да своего́.
40 Part I
осећајући натприродну, безмерну љубав према њему, неситом душом

увек на њега гледаху, а и велможе њихове са њима говораху да ће он
бити најбољи међу браћом својом”86.
Ana is particularly affected by her son’s escape to Athos, so much so that
Simeon is willing to give a high reward for his return home: “Ако се пожуриш,
те стигнеш и вратиш сина мојега, и тиме утешиш срце моје, а матери
душу од смрти ослободиш [underline – D.G.], заслужићеш многа добра
[…]”87. Eventually, despite the sense of great loss, the parents accept their
son’s choice and, following in his footsteps, join a religious order themselves.
Svetlana Tomin sees Ana’s decision as a reference to the model of medieval
Byzantine rulers, who not only hold office but also strive for spiritual perfection
by choosing a monastic life:
У овом чину, дакле, наглашена је њена побожност, али и жеља да поступи

као и велике царице, које су свој живот завршавале у манастиру. Византијска
историја у оваквим примерима није оскудевала. Поред тога наглашено је њено
уподобљавање Савином поступку, који је одабирањем монашког живота,
у ствари, показао пут својим родитељима88.
Ana’s life in a monastery is invariably depicted in the same way, highlighting

the features of an “angel on earth” and “a heavenly human”89. This image
loses any individuality and, based on an ascetic norm, it completely unifies
the queen with the monastic community. Ana departs from earthly matters
(canon, ode 7), works diligently on a spiritual transformation (Greek theosis),
embodies monastic values (humility, purity, wisdom), has the charism of tears
and prayer, with which she surprises even the angels90.
*
Other Orthodox Churches also venerate St. Anastasija, re-editing the Serbian
texts for their own purpose. Similarly, the image of the saint rooted in Serbian
86
Теодосије, ЖССа, p. 103.
87
Теодосије, ЖССа, p. 108.
88
С. Томин, Мужаствене жене…, p. 64.
89
See the service, esp. glory, tone 6. Преподобна Анастасија, мајка св. Саве (21. Јун.), in:
Срблјак, Београд 1986.
90
Litija stikhera commemorating the patron of the church and nun Ana, tone 4.
literature is reproduced, albeit with slightly more modest means. Ana is

mentioned e.g. by Dimitry of Rostov (1651–1709) in The Life of St. Simeon
(Житие св. Симеона руки Димитрия Ростовского) as “a likeminded wife”
[of Simeon – note D.G.] and a trusted aide in the matters of the state:
Посоветовавшись с единомышленною с ним супругою благочестивою Анною

Стефан Неманя призвал сына своего Стефана и, в присутствии вельмож
и властей со всего государства, вручил ему власть над Сербией, назначил
его великим жупаном, а сам объявил свое намерение отречься от мира91.
In an edition of St. Sava’s hagiography92 by Filaret Gumilevsky (1805–1866,

Lives of the Southern Slavs/ Святые южныхъ cлaвянъ. Описание жизни
ихъ), Ana is not mentioned by name, but is included in the concept of holy
parents that the bishop uses. The couple prayerfully asks for a son, naming
him Roscislav. Later, together they decide on his life, his education, assuming
power in their own district and a planned marriage. Together they also make
unsuccessful attempts to turn their son away from Athos.
Ana appears for the second time in Gumilevsky’s collection in The Dor
mition of St. Simeon (Преставление преп. Симеона-Стефана Немани,
владетеля сербского). This time the author mentions Simeon’s wife by name,
but only mentions her donning monastic vestments with her husband as
a significant fact of her life, and does not mention any other matters:
Затем тот же епископ [Kalinik – note D.G.] в обители Студеницкой облек

его и благочестивую супругу его Анну в иноческие одежды, назвав одного
Симеоном, а другую Анастасиею. В то же время раздана была щедрая
милостыня бедным, больным, иночествующим. Анастасия удалилась
в женскую обитель; Симеон остался в Студенице93.
91
Димитрий Ростовский, Житие св. Симеона, in: idem, Жития святых. Available online:
<https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Dmitrij_Rostovskij/zhitija-svjatykh/>, access: 14.03.2019.
92
Филарет Черниговский (Гумилевский), “Св. Савва, архиепископ сербский”, in: Свя
тые южныхъ cлaвянъ. Описание жизни ихъ, издание 4-е, Санкт Петербургъ 1894,
p. 13–24. Dostępne również online: <https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Filaret_Chernigovskij/
svjatye-yuzhnyh-slavjan/>, access: 15.03.2019.
93
Филарет, Преставление преп. Симеона-Стефана Немани, владетеля сербского, in:
idem, op. cit., p. 44–52.
42 Part I
The current of spiritual and moral renewal in Serbia in the early 21st century
has brought about an increased interest in the figures of female saints, in their
history, socio-cultural and political roles. The figure of Ana-Anastasija opens the
presentation of the female line of the Nemanjić dynasty, providing a role model
for subsequent female rulers. Her importance as mother of the greatest Serbian
saint is indisputable, although perhaps not always properly exposed. The image
of Ana in medieval texts is so vivid that it has seduced Serbian historians, who
consider it fully credible, although their interpretation of the role of the royal
wife is reductionist; namely, it removes Ana from any public space, reduces her
functions to the skilful management of the household and moral support for
her husband in order to provide him with comfortable conditions for running
the kingdom, which distorts the message of the main texts:
За све то време, кућа Немањина стајала је на жени његовој. Она је, не само била
мајка и васпитачица деце њихове, но и снажна морална потпора мужу своме,
која чини да се муж, срећан у дому и у породици својој, може свакодневном
снагом одати јавним и државним пословима94.
In recent years, however, the queen has been seen as the caring and bene
volent mother of all Serbs. In the image of the nun, she is supposed to counte
ract secularisation, since she exemplifies Christian zeal and embodies the
main evangelical virtues: faith, hope and love, which, according to the author
of one of the prayers, people need nowadays. His request for the softening of
adamant hearts through the intercession of the saint, so that they can enter
the path of salvation, is indeed moving:
Света мати Анастасија, када хвалимо врлину, хвалимо тебе јер је твоја
постојана љубав и ревност за Господа Бога пример и пут који треба да
следимо; моли се, стога, о најврлија, да Господ Бог умекша наша срца како
би и ми тежили истим спасоносним врлинама вере, наде и љубави и на тај
начин остали верни нашем Господу Исусу Христу, Коме приличи слава,
част и поклоњење, заједно са Његовим Беспочетним Оцем и Животодавним
Духом, сада и увек и у векове векова. Амин95.
94
Quoted after: Ђ. Перић, op. cit., p. 195.
95
Преподобна Анастасија Српска. Available online: <http://www.spc.rs/sr/prepodobna_
anastasija_srpska>, access: 25.03.2019.
Orthodox church songs dedicated to Anastasija, written by lay people,

praise her role in the creation of the Serbian community and her concern for
its stability and indivisibility. It is Anastasija who is to be the source of national
unity, expressed in the words of “Само слога Србина спасава” (Only unity
saves the Serbs):
СВЕТА АНАСТАСИЈА СРПСКА

У староме Расу на царскоме двору, свијала је мајка гнездо својих птића,
хранила је мајка своју свету лозу, светородну лозу царских Немањића.
РЕФРЕН: Мајка светог Саве вековима сија света Анастасија.
Опет бели голуб своја крила шири, лети према небу један храм да види,
у храму је овом она давно била, молитве је своје Богу узносила.
РЕФРЕН: Мајка светог Саве светим храмом сија света Анастасија.
Молила је Бога да се Срби сложе, и данас се моли помози нам Боже [all
underlines – D.G.],
ево ја те молим сада као дете, да ме штите мајко твоје руке свете.
РЕФРЕН: Мајка светог Саве целом Српству сија света Анастасија.
Њене свете мошти овде су донели, јер су њу Срби искрено волели,
у светоме храму она сада спава, Студеницу сунце због ње обасјава.
РЕФРЕН: Мајка светог Саве Студеницом сија света Анастасија.
Богородица је заштитница њена, света монахиња а и света жена,
мајка светог Саве то је била она, старим Расом брује студеничка звона.
РЕФРЕН: Мајка светог Саве старим Расом сија света Анастасија.
Одјекују звона на светоме храму, сећају на једну свету српску мајку,
Анастасија је завет нама дала да се српски народ никад не раздваја.
РЕФРЕН: Мајка светог Саве свим мајкама сија света Анастасија.
У нашим срцима она вечно живи, и свака се Српкиња мајци светој диви,
јер је она била мајка светог Саве, мајка Немањића свете лозе славне.
РЕФРЕН: Мајка светог Саве светим Савом сија света Анастасија96.
It should also be mentioned that the figure of Ana is connected with a folk
legend concerning the birth of Sava, written down by folklorists in four versions
on the basis of oral accounts: Kraljica Ana Nemanjićka i pravo prve noći, Kako
96
Performed by Belianđeo and vocalist of Stupovi band, lyrics: Maja Kovačević, song: Vio-
leta Sandić, arrangement: Katarina Božić, producer: Andrej Andrejević, ARTstudio, band
members: Katarina Božić, Miloš Zarić, Miloš Gašić, Svetozar Vujić, Darko Manić. Avail-
able online: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=y0xdddOn0Oo>, access: 16.
03.2020.
44 Part I
se rodio sveti Sava, Venčani prsten, Vlastelinka97. In addition to the previously

mentioned stories, there is also a song dedicated to Anastasia’s dormition Smrt
majke svetog Save, jotted down (or written98) by Kosta Ristić near Banat. It tells
of mother’s last meeting with Sava before her death, when she recommends him
to continue the work begun by Simeon of spreading Orthodoxy across Serbia:
Но добро је кад ми, синко, дође

Да ти мајка на умору каже:
Бабо ти је благо потрошио
Све на свете царске манастире,
Зарад српске вере православне,
Он је вери темељ ударио,
А ти, синко, тај темељ догради!99
Ana-Anastasija as the mother of all Serbs has also become the protagonist
of popular literature, of Dragan Damjanović’s novels: Anastasija: Majka svih
pravoslavnih Srba (Beograd 2011), Čuda srpske svetiteljke – Anastasija (Beograd
2018), and Proročanstvo Nemanjine žene – sveta Anastasija (Beograd 2016).
The author sees her as a dutiful wife and mother, a paragon of maternity, an
archetype of all Serbian mothers, but also as a learned Byzantine duchess,
who transferred her knowledge and skills to her sons so that they could fulfil
the historic mission entrusted to them, of creating an autonomous state and
Church, recalling also the lands Serbia has already lost:
Sveta Anastasija, majka svih naših majki i majka svih nas, ona je daleko u Hristu
ispred svih Srpkinja, trudila se da ostane u najdubljoj senci Nemanjinoj i Svetog
Save, kao i sinova vladara, Stefana i Vukana. A kao vrhunski obrazovana vizantijska
princeza, donela je ovim svetim članovima svoje i Božije porodice velika znanja
i saznanja, zahvaljujući kojima su oni u svom vremenu bili na nivou zadatka koji
je od njih postavilo srpstvo, a pre svega Gospod naš. Oni su stavili adresu na našu
zemlju, na naše Kosovo i Metohiju, Pomoravlje, Povardarje, na Kolubaru, Zetu,
Dalmaciju, Unu, Vrbas. Njena osnovna vizija je da ćemo opstati i postojati dokle
97
Complete texts edited by Ђ. Перић, op. cit., p. 202–207.
98
The song is part of an unpublished collection by Kosta Ristić. There are doubts as to
whether it was actually written down on the basis of a heard performance by a folk singer
or whether Ristić wrote it himself; see. Ђ. Перић, op. cit., p. 222–224.
99
Ђ. Перић, op. cit., p. 224.
god se budemo molili Gospodu Isusu Hristu, Sinu Božijem, dokle god budemo
svetosavski narod100.
The literary image of St. Ana-Anastasija penned by hagiographers and

hymnographers, became the foundation for subsequent texts of this type.
Đorđe Perić speculates that after Ana’s death, there must have been some
memories of her life among the members of the dynasty, which fostered the
legend of the first ruler of an independent state and mother of the family, but
they have not been preserved101. If in Serbia a dynasty defines the essence of
the state, then the successive wives and mothers of the Nemanjić dynasty (and
later also of the Lazarevićs and Brankovićs) are its inseparable component,
building up the prestige and authority of the family and the homeland. Like
Ana, they contribute to all ideas of dynastic statehood, and the authors of
texts dedicated to them use elements of the model created for the worship of
Ana-Anastasija.
100
Slavica Đukić, O Srbima, istoriji i Kosmetu. Available online: <https://www.bastabalkana.
com/2017/10/dragan-damjanovic-publicista-strpimo-se-i-otrpimo-sve-je-u-vremenu/>,
access: 25.03.2020.
101
Ђ. Перић, op. cit., p. 224.
Chapter II
St. Helen of Anjou (Jelisaveta) –

October 30 and February 8102
In the fourteenth century, the image of the holy Serbian queen, wife and
mother shaped by her predecessors would be perpetuated by subsequent
Serbian literary authors. The writings of Danilo II, Archbishop (1324–1337),
later proclaimed a saint (December 19)103, particularly contributed to the
vitality of this cultural model. An intense cultural and religious development
was evident in the state of Milutin (1253–1321), in whose court Danilo II was
active, after the conquest of the lands of the then Macedonia between 1282 and
1284. This development drew inspiration from the Byzantine tradition, above
all in the fields of art and architecture (the so-called Palaiologos Renaissance),
state administration and political philosophy104. Nevertheless, the needs of
the still relatively young Serbian Orthodox Church demanded that other
tasks be fulfilled. The developing cults of St. Simeon and St. Sava, as well
as their joint cult as the founding pair, required the preparation of texts for
the setting of the liturgy. The same was the case with completely new cults
102
The research findings presented in this chapter were previously published as an article:
D. Gapska, “Żywot królowej Jeleny Danila II jako wzór idealnej symfonii państwa z Ko-
ściołem”, Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne 2016, No. 10, p. 99–113.
103
Danilo II of Peć or Elder, archbishop of SOC, courtier of King Milutin. Author of lives of
saints and poet, best known for his collection of biographies of Serbian kings and arch-
bishops. Excerpts of his texts in Polish translation were published in the collection Dar
Słowa. Ze starej literatury serbskiej, ed. A. Naumow, transl. T. Wątor-Naumow, A. Nau-
mow, W. Kotwiczowa, Łódź 1984.
104
Г. Мак Данијел, “Данило Други”, in: Данило II, Животи краљева и архиепископа. Слу
жбе, Београд 1988, p. 9–10.
48 Part I
of saints included in the SOC calendar (e.g. St. Peter of Koriša). Hence the
intensive development of Serbian writing in the first half of the 14th century,
the culmination of which can be seen in the collection of lives written by
Danilo II and his disciples – The Lives of Serbian Kings and Archbishops (Životi
kraljeva i arhiepiskopa srpskih, 1317, 1340, 1375). The creation of this work was
motivated not only by current religious needs, but above all by the idea of the
legitimacy of the power of individual members of the ruling dynasty. Among
the texts, historically covering the period roughly from the reign of Radoslav
(1228–1233) to the first years of the reign of Tsar Dušan (1331–1355), for the
first time in the history of Serbian hagiography there is a separate hagiographic
text105 dedicated to a woman, the Serbian Queen Helen of Anjou (Serbian:
Jelena Anžujska, French: Hélène d’Anjou, c. 1236–1314).
Helen of Anjou occupies a special place in the Serbian history of Church. She
is the only saint who was a Catholic for most of her life (“Latin Christian”)106,
was venerated by the Orthodox Church not only in Serbia, but also in Russia
and Poland. She was one of the first national Serbian saints and one of the few
women saints to have an official ceremony to confirm her sainthood; it took
place at the Council of 1317. The establishment and development of Helen’s
cult are connected with the person of Danilo II, who wrote an extensive life
of the ruler.
Sources indicate that Helen died on March 8, 1314, but according to Danilo
it happened on February 15107. The burial of the queen was an official church
and court ceremony, attended by her son, King Milutin, Archbishop of Peć
Sava III, Bishop Danilo and Bishop Pavle of Raška, and envoys of Helen’s
second son Dragutin.
From the life of Danilo, we can reconstruct the beginnings of the cult of
Helen. Three years after her death, in 1317, she supposedly appeared in a dream
to one of the monks of the Gradac Monastery and ordered that her body be
105
Not linked with other worships.
106
The hypothesis that Helen did not convert to Orthodoxy is put forth e.g. by М. Злоковић,
“Градачка црква, задужбина краљице Јелене”, Гласник Скопског научног друштва,
XV–XVI, 1936, p. 75–77; С. Ћирковић, Историја Српског Народа, књ. I, Београд 1981,
p. 347–348; М. Васић “Архиепископ Данило II”, Прилози за КЈИФ, VI, 1926, p. 240–355.
107
М. Злоковић, op. cit., c. 85.
Chapter II: St. Helen 49
taken from the grave and placed in public view108. A Gradac igumen notified
the Bishop of Raška, who came to the monastery and together with the whole
council of bishops transferred the relics to the monastery church, confirming
with the consent of Sava III the sanctity of the queen. It was probably then
that the day of her memorial was established as October 30.
Despite the early recognition of her sanctity and the designation of an
individual feast day, the cult has developed and continues to develop slowly.
The day of remembrance is still more of an accompanying holiday than an
independent one, celebrated mainly in the Gradac Monastery. It has a local
character, but is well established in its territory, with a feast dedicated to the
queen also celebrated by the local community on May 21, on the memorial
of Emperor Constantine and his mother, Empress Helen109.
Helen’s origin has been studied by a number of scholars110. She was initially
thought to be directly related to King Louis IX of France, Charles I of Anjou,
King of Naples111 or to de Courtenay family, which has not been confirmed by
historical sources and remains a speculation to this day. A new, most probable
theory of Helen’s origin, corresponding to 13th-century Serbian reality and
strongly supported by documents, was put forward by Gordon L. McDaniel.
In his opinion, she was the eldest daughter of a Hungarian nobleman of Greek
origin, John Angelos112, steward of Srem and Count of Kovin (domino Sirmy
et comite de Kewe), and the French Matilda of Požega (Matildis dominae de
Posaga)113. Ca. 1250 Helen was married off to the Serbian King Stephen Uroš
I (1243–1276), by whom she had two sons: Stephen Dragutin (1276–1282)
and Stephen Uroš II Milutin (1282–1321). After Dragutin took power, Helen
108
The display of relics for public veneration before a formal canonisation implied consent to
official worship.
109
110
See e.g.: К. Јиречек, Историја Срба, II, Београд 1952; Ч. Мијатовић, “Ко је краљица
елена?”, Летопис Матице српске, 217, Нови Сад 1902.
111
Ч. Мијатовић, op. cit., p. 10–11.
112
John was the son of the Byzantine Emperor Isaac II Komnenus (1156–1204) and the Hun-
garian Princess Margaret (1175–1223), daughter of Bela III Arpad (1148–1196), who was
preparing to succeed to the Byzantine imperial throne, which plans did not materialise.
See M. Salamon, “Bela III, Aleksy”, in: Encyklopedia kultury bizantyńskiej, ed. O. Jurewicz,
Warszawa 2002, p. 74.
113
G.L. McDaniel, “On Hungarian-Serbian Relations in the Thirteenth Century: John Ange-
los and Queen Jelena”, Ungarn-Jahrbuch, vol. 12, 1982/1983, p. 43–44.
50 Part I
received from him the territories between Zeta and Skadar, which she ruled
until her death on 8 February 1314.
The queen is best known in history for her concern for the Church in
Serbia, of both denominations, Orthodox and Roman Catholic. Helen’s intense
foundations, according to researchers, occurred in the last decades of the 13th
c. At the same time, many doubts have been raised about her, since historical
records do not always directly mention her by name, and it happens that
chroniclers confuse her with her sister, Maria de Chau114. The biggest questions
arise in connection with the attribution to Helen of the foundation of the
monasteries in Ston (dedicated to the Mother of God and St. Nicholas). Gojko
Subotić argues that in principle there are no grounds to credit the queen with
the reconstruction of the monastic buildings after their destruction in the 13th
c., along with most of the town. In his view, the sources are too sparse and the
oldest of them dates only from the 18th c., which makes them inadequate.
Additionally, the historical picture is said to be obscured by the political and
religious debate surrounding Ston’s denominational past115.
The Franciscan foundations of Helen in Zeta are mentioned really only by
Danielis Farlati (1690–1773), an Italian Jesuit and historian of Christianity
(Illyricum sacrum). He claims that Helen’s foundations in Zeta included
a Franciscan monastery of 1288 in Bar116. The ruler allegedly also endowed it
with liturgical accessories and utensils (all the “necessary things”)117. Farlati
recalls that this very year, 1288, Helen was instrumental for the emergence of
three monastic communities, in Skadr (Virgin Mary), Ulčinj (Virgin Mary)
and Kotor (St. Francis)118.
In 1290, Helen began the reconstruction of a destroyed Church of St. St.
Sergius and Bachus (Serbian: Sveti Srđ and Vakh) on the bank of the River
Bojana; the work was completed by Milutin in 1318. Legend has it that the
church was to be erected here by Emperor Justinian himself119. Initially it
belonged to the Benedictine order, but Subotić is not clear if it remained
114
Г. Суботић, “Краљица Јелена Анжујска – ктитор црквених споменика у Приморју”,
Историјски гласник 1958, 1–2, p. 139–140.
115
Ibidem, p. 135.
116
D. Farlati, Illyricum sacrum, VII, Venetiis 1813, p. 13.
117
Ibidem, p. 44.
118
Ibidem, p. 59, 252 and 309.
119
Г. Суботић, op. cit., p. 141.
with this order upon the completion of the reconstruction. A 1306 document
issued by King Milutin shows that Helen generously provided also for another
Benedictine abbey, in Ratac (Sancta Maria de Rotezo)120.
Most of the churches and monasteries supported by her in Zeta and Pri
morje were Roman Catholic121. The exception is the Orthodox Church of St.
Nicholas on Vranjina (today Montenegro), which the queen supported with
gifts and confirmed the granting of an estate. Still in the 1950s, questions
arose as to the authenticity of the queen’s chrysobull, rewritten by the monk
Gavrilo, with which she confirmed the community’s previous property and
sent new gifts122. It was only the research of Božidar Šekularac that established
the authenticity of the document and proved that the earlier supposition that
Queen Helen also favoured Orthodox institutions in Zeta and Primorje was
correct123. In his studies, Miroslav Popović stresses that the queen’s financial
patronage extended to the entire Church, irrespective of the denomination.
Roman Catholic churches were built in seaside towns, while inland the queen
generously supported the Orthodox Church124.
As a ruler, Helen led an active political life, sometimes in opposition to her
husband’s actions, e.g. she openly offered her assistance to Dubrovnik during
the conflict with Uroš in 1255–1256, because of which she was even accused of
treason125. She also independently developed religious policy. Today we would
say it was ecumenical, because she maintained equally good relations with
the Orthodox and Catholic clergy. For many years, she officially supported
the Catholic bishopric in Bar and contributed to the episcopal chirotony of
her close associate, archdeacon Mar(t)in126. She is also known to have had
active contacts with the papacy, especially with Nicholas IV (1277–1292), who
worked for the unification of the two Churches. In a letter dated 6 August
1288, the pope praised the queen’s piety and her support for Roman Catholic
120
M. Поповић, Српска краљица Јелена између римокатоличанства и православља,
Београд 2010, p. 63.
121
Г. Суботић, op. cit., p. 147.
122
Ibidem, p. 137–138.
123
Б. Шекуларац, Врањинске повеље, XIII–XV вијек, Титоград 1984, p. 39–43, 146.
124
M. Поповић, op. cit., p. 64; Г. Суботић, op. cit., p. 147.
125
B. Ћоровић, Историја Срба, Београд 1997. Available online: <ww w.rastko.rs/rastko-bl/
istorija/corovic/istorija/3_4_l.html>, access: 5.02.2016.
126
M. Поповић, op. cit., p. 76.
52 Part I
churches in the territories she ruled. He also asked her to receive at her court
the envoys of the curia127. The directness of this request implies that the queen
may have favoured the unification he was promoting.
The queen’s close aides included the clergy of the Orthodox Church.
Among them a special place was occupied by Danilo II and Bishop Pavle
of Raška (?); at the queen’s request both kept vigil at her deathbed. Among
the clergy, the sources also mention Archbishop Joanikije I (?–1279), Jovan,
Bishop of Hum (1306–1316), and Dujam (Domnius I), Catholic Bishop of
Kotor (1280–1326). The nature of these relationships is poorly documented;
according to researchers, she “held them in high esteem” and “treated them
with due respect”128.
Three years after her death, the Serbian Church decided to raise her to the
altars. The canonisation ceremony was attended by the highest representatives
of the Serbian clergy, including Archbishop Sava III (1309–1316), Bishops
Danilo II and Pavle. Today, this move is considered part of a wider religious
and political agenda of the Nemanjić dynasty, designed to unify the country’s
religion, glorify the state, praise the nation, and legitimise its being a chosen
one129. Possibly, too, Danilo II was eagerly advocating Helen’s canonisation
process to placate the tension following the Lyon Council (1274)130 and to
pre-empt the claims of the Catholic Church which may arise in connection
with her foundation in Gradac and the territory which she ruled and which,
as late as 1303, she had committed to the care of Rome131.
A separate and extensive vitae of the queen from ca. 1317132, as I mentioned
previously, was penned by bishop Danilo II. The text was part of a mid-14th
century anthology of lives133. The oldest surviving complete collection of
texts by Danilo II dates from 1553 and was created in Mileševa (SANU ref.
A14509)134. In Poland, a 16th-century (ca. 1555-ca. 1574) copy of Danilo II’s
anthology can be found in the collection of the National Library in Warsaw
127
Ibidem, p. 82–82.
128
Ibidem, p. 78.
129
D. Gil, Prawosławie…, p. 58–60.
130
Ibidem, p. 60.
131
132
Г. Мак Данијел, “Данило Други…”, p. 17.
133
Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 79–108.
134
More details on the other manuscripts: Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 265.
(ref. no. Rps 12692 III, formerly BUL 198, Akc. 10780)135. The life of St. Helen
can be found in other manuscripts, too, with seleced excerpts of Danilo II’s
text: a 1526 manuscript (National Library of Russia in Petersburg, ОР Гильф.
55), a set by hieromonk Orest of 1536 (Hil. 482), a manuscript from the late
15th c. (until 1941 in NBS ref. 378 [21]), and a manuscript from the mid-17th
c. (NBB Sofia, ref. 267 [544])136.
A short life of the queen was also included in a mid-19th century Russian
hagiographical collection by Archbishop Filaret Gumilevsky. The author
dedicates a short account to Helen under the date of 30 October, which he
wrote into a larger text dedicated to kings Milutin and Dragutin137.
Contemporary Serbian hymnography dedicated to St. Helen-Jelisaveta was
included into the Novi Srbljak. It is not known when exactly the new Serbian
service of Queen Helen was written, however, it can be assumed that it took
place during the time of Bishop Hrizostom (Jovan Stolić), and perhaps it was
even written at his request or (according to another version) it was written
on the occasion of the completion of the renovation works in the monastery,
held intermittently from 1948 until 1975138, as indicated by a fragment of
a service ([na Gospode zavapih] [stikhera for Helen], tone 1): “Јелисавето
света, не презри нас, који у обновљеном храму твоме [underline – D.G.]
душе своје Богу уздижемо и усрдно молимо те: обитељ Градачку сачувај
неразрушивом”. The text was composed in the circle of the Gradac Monastery
and its author is probably nun Teodora139. However, despite the existence of
a separate text, a service in honour of St. Milutin by Danilo the Younger (14th
century) is commonly read on the day of remembrance of Helen, where she
135
On the manuscript: A. Kaszlej, “Odnaleziona kopia dzieła Danila II ‘Životi kraljeva i arhie-
piskopa srpskih’”, in: Zbornik Matice Srpske za slavistiku 1989, no. 36, Novi Sad, p. 109–112;
Rękopisy cerkiewnosłowiańskie w Polsce: katalog, ed. A. Naumow and Andrzej Kaszlej; col-
laboration E. Naumow and J. Stradomski, Kraków 2004 (manuscript marked as: Naumow
no. 1063). The e-version available at Polona’s website: <https://polona.pl/item/zivoti-kral-
jeva-i-arhiepiskopa-srpskih,Nzc2NTI4OQ/8/#info:metadata>, access: 11.05.2021.
136
Ibidem, p. 266.
137
Память о св. Милютинѣ, королѣ сербскомъ, братѣ его кралѣ Драгутинѣ и мате
ри ихъ Еленѣ, in: Филарет, op. cit., p. 252–265.
138
О манастиру. Историја и оснивање. Online: <http://manastirgradac.rs/o-manastiru/
istorija-i-osnivanje/>, access: 5.03.2013.
139
Her name appears in the text (“Твореније Теодорино” – sedalen after polyeleos), hence
the suspicion that she is the author of the entire text.
54 Part I
is mentioned mainly as the mother of two saints (the first stikhera of The
Great Vespers) and praised together with her sons (6th song, 3rd and 4th
troparion of the canon and synaxar [short life, so-called prologue]; 8th song,
2nd troparion of the canon). On the other hand, the service by nun Theodora
is used locally, during the commemoration of Helen in the Gradac Monastery.
The cult of Helen is also active outside Serbia. In 1999, the Russian hymno
grapher Tatiana A. Sienina (Sr. Kasya)140, of the Russian Extra-Canonical
Church, wrote an unofficial officium in honour of St. St. Dragutin and Milutin,
as well as their mother, St. Helen. However, she did this for private reasons,
not for public worship141. According to the words of the officium, Helen is
praiseworthy as a mother who brought up her sons in the Orthodox faith, as
a foundress (Serbian: ktitorka) and as a wife who was faithful to her husband
till her death142.
The best-known Serbian text dedicated to Helen is her life by Danilo II’s. He
wrote his text in accordance with monastic spirituality. The image of Helen was
idealised. The author gives few historical facts and the long and entertaining
reign of the queen is reduced to a few general statements. For example, she is
said to have led a “glorious and beautiful life” together with her husband and
after his death received from his son a part of the state in possession (“достојни
део државе земаља многих”143). There is also no in-depth characterisation of
the queen. What stands out is the figure of the holy nun queen, whose earthly
power, according to the theocratic idea, is subordinated to the realisation of
the supreme divine will; she seeks to realise the universal principles established
by God. Danilo, rejecting the historical facts of Helen’s life, creates an image
of the ruler (and the state) that will meet the needs of the Nemanjić dynastic
policy and implement the doctrine of diarchy, seeing the state and the Church
“as equally dependent on God – the sole sovereign, dominus, ruler (Serbian:
140
Kasya, a nun from St. Petersburg, at the church of St. Grand Duchess Elizabeth. Kasya’s
hymnography is available at: <http://st-elizabet.narod.ru/>, access: 10.03.2013.
141
See A. Naumow, “Współczesna hymnografka między tradycją a wyzwaniami świata“, in:
Nel mondo degli Slavi. Incontri e dialoghi tra culture, Studi in onore di Giovanna Brogi
Bercoff, ed. M. Salvo, G. Moracci, G. Siedina, vol. II, Firenze 2008, p. 391–403.
142
Ibidem, p. 397–398.
143
Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 82.
pantokrator, svedržitelj) of all that exists, an embodiment of absolute authority

seen in soteriological terms”144.
From Danilo’s perspective, under the rule of Helen the imperium is
deeply merged with the sacerdotium. Euchographical texts (prayers) and
the epistolography, i.e. letters, which the queen was to exchange with her
spiritual directors, serve the author to present the field of activity of each
sphere directly. Quoting from the correspondence allows him to present the
functions of the clergy (the Church) through the mouth of the monarch, and
the duties of the king (the state) through the mouth of the clergy. This trick
makes it possible at the same time to indicate the source of some privilege or
task, and to express approval of the established rules. Danilo does not include
privileges in his biography, because he inscribes the earthly mission of the
State and the Church in the image of a vocation to the difficult service of God,
according to the theology of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5), and above
all the morality of the “narrow path” (Mt 7:13–14).
The interpretative key to the text and the image of Helen is found in the
introduction, where the author proclaims his praise of the sovereignty of God,
the Creator of the world, the source of earthly order and the only judge of man.
He bases it on the enthroning second Psalm (verses 10–12) about the Creator’s
true participation in the government of the world and the necessity for earthly
rulers to serve him with “fear” (Ps 2:11) as God’s anointed ones at risk of the
Lord’s righteous wrath. The hymnographer regards the exercise of power as
a life-long test by which one can attain heaven or, if one fails, be condemned
to hell. The criterion for evaluation is the attitude to the wealth received with
authority, which is the magnificent Serbian state, and to the subjects – people
weaker than themselves, deprived of access to goods – intellectual (knowledge)
and material (wealth) – because these are in the hands of the ruler.
The life of Helen in Danilo II’s text has the traits of an autonomous cult
of the ruler, i.e. independent of the sanctity of her husband and/or son. The
hagiographer made sure that she had all the attributes of an autonomous
monarch145, created her royal lineage, as required by cultural and biblical
tradition (see Mt 1:1–17), and ignored the time of her reign during her
144
145
Furthermore, the ideal of theocracy precludes the presence of two rulers in one country.
56 Part I
husband’s lifetime, “giving” the crown to Helen only after his death. The
queen’s position as God’s agent on earth stems, according to Danilo’s text, from
the plans of divine providence, according to which she was destined from an
early age to fulfil an important mission in life (see Eph 2:10)146:
Jелена била jе од племена фрушкога (францускога), кћи славних родитеља,

(…). Њу снабде добри и најмилосрдниjи Бог од њезине младости, унапред
знаjући све будуће. Ова благочестива (…) би дана од своjих родитеља да
буде жена великом српском краљу Урошу. Са њме проводећи живот славно
и дивно (…)147.
The moment of the queen’s assumption of power reiterates the rite of
monastic hair-cutting (penance, confession of sins, death to “the world”), and
is to show the transformation of a regular of “the world” into a holy monarch,
a servant of God, who joins the Supreme Sovereign in service, taking over the
care of the country and the subjects as His domain:
(…) и после смрти мужа њезина примивши од вазљубљенога сина свога

достојни део државе земаља многих и красних, сетивши се младосних грехова
својих и дошавши у велико покајање, умртвљује мисли телесне, и храни
свој ум благодаћу божанственога разума, као што је речено у Премудрости
Соломоновој: “Ризнице царске испуниће се златом, а умови истинитих
подвижника испуниће се богатим разумом” (acc. to Proverbs 16, 16)148.
Danilo sees the Serbian ruler not only as a priest-king typical for theo
cracy, but also as a monk-king, for whom the reign is a life-long “exercise”
(mortification) following the monastic model, and therefore subject to greater
discipline, both towards God and the subjects. This claim is confirmed by the
monastic and cloistered spirituality, which the author ascribes to the queen;149
the queen fasts, has the gift of tears, contrition, penance, and conversion, prays
incessantly, spends her nights in vigil, loves the “desert”, lives a monastic life
146
The prototype of such a vocation is recorded in the life of the Mother of God, whose com-
ing into the world was part of God’s economy of salvation.
147
Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 81
148
Ibidem, p. 81.
149
The topic deserves a separate study in the context of the flowering of Franciscan spirituality
at the turn of the 13th century (see A. Наумов, “Службата на преподобната Филотея
Темнишка като отражение на православната духовност през XIII век”, in: In Honorem
TРІАNТАΦϒΛΛО. Юбилеен сборник в чест на 60-годишнината на проф. д.фил.н.
Христо Трендафилов, ред. В. Панайотов, Шумен 2013, p. 430–431).
(“Трпи анђелски живот, свагда умом пустиње гонећи”150, attends liturgies

and received the Eucharist)151.
Danilo’s interpretation saw the state as a religious organisation whose
socio-political life cannot be separated from the spiritual one. The vision of
the nun-queen even brings to mind a closed monastery-state, especially since
Helen’s court was “cleansed” of all secular persons (the hagiographer left only
Helen’s closest family: husband and sons). At the same time, Danilo skilfully
linked the Serbian ruler and her state with the messianic promises, the bearer
of which by definition is every theocracy, building a life on the basis of the
wisdom books of the Bible ascribed to members of David’s messianic dynasty
(to David himself [Psalms] or Salomon). Danilo based the scene of Helen’s
spiritual transformation on a motto from the Book of Proverbs, ascribed to
Salomon152, on the fleeting earthly possessions and on the true servant153 of
the Lord. The motto was deliberately not quoted exactly, so it refers to other
parallel places in Scripture and broadens the semantics of the metaphors used,
which form the image of the holy king, a servant, disciple, “son” and heir of
God – on the basis of the virtues of voluntary poverty (Mt 19:27–30), suffering
(Mt 16:24), wisdom and spiritual sonship after being freed from the power of
the “elements of the world” (Gal 4:1–7).
Having assumed the “royal” state, Helen recognises God as her Supreme
Sovereign and takes a kind of oath of allegiance to Him. Her relationship with
the Lord is based on the virtues of fear of God, obedience and humility, rooted
in the Psalms. She expresses them in her prayers: “Зато треба да се прво
бојим Твога светога имена и да у свему чиним вољу Твоју, по Богооцу
Давиду: «Почетак сваке премудрости је страх Божји (Ps 111 (110),10)»”154.
150
151
These are features of monastic piety, especially regular penance and liturgical practice. See
J. Meyendorff, Teologia bizantyjska, Warszawa 1984, p. 249–250.
152
In this way, Helen imitates King Solomon and becomes the new Solomon (in other parts
of the text the new David), and the Nemanjić dynasty become the local messianic dynasty
of David.
153
The term podvižnik (подвижник) in the original is more than a servant. He is the vehicle
of the heroic virtue of suffering, valiantly answers Christ’s call to bear the cross and imi-
tate Him (Mt 16:24). The term cannot be translated precisely into English.
154
58 Part I
In Danilo’s view, God on earth is represented in Serbia by the Church.

The relationship between the queen and the Church is a reflection of the
arrangement between her and God. In the service of the Supreme Sovereign,
the religious and secular authorities complement each other, but are not
completely equal, for the king’s subordinate relationship to God elevates the
Church above the political administration. In the personal ideal of the ruler
promoted by the hagiographer, subordination to the clergy is inscribed, based
on the same virtues of fearfulness, obedience and humility, as well as profound
respect as in relation to God.
The hagiographer justifies the right to the primacy of the Church by the
sacred origin of the priestly state, literally by its partaking of the divine name
(after 1 Kings 8,16): “силни у имену Господњем”155. The place between God’s
throne and man makes the Church responsible for the spiritual realm in the
state. It implies a supernatural mission to the lay population of the country.
The queen humbly sanctions the supernatural function of the clergy, without
whom the laity could not gain salvation, and places her person, i.e. the throne,
under their protection. This declaration, a kind of oath of allegiance to the
Church like to God, whose representative she is, confirms the indissoluble
alliance of the Serbian state with the religious institution:
Господо моја и оци, сетите се да сте ви силни у имену Господњем, и зато сте
дужни да носите наше немоћи. Јер ево ми кои смо у сујети овога сујетнога
света, ако и хоћемо да духом живимо, (…), то не можемо да постигнемо. (…)
Но мoлите Господа за мене недостојну, не бих ли како богоугодним вашим
молитвама постала достојна (…), да доспем у богоугодна места156.
By the law of mediation in salvation, the Church includes the “throne” (the
state) also with a mission of education, teaching and control. It limits the scope
of the king’s freedom under penalty of eternal damnation for transgressing the
boundaries of his function, since the ruler, as a layman, has no possibility of
155
The biblical reference in these words (to Solomon’s act of consecrating the temple: 1 Kings
8:14–21) expands their meaning to include the context of a monarch’s blessing for the
Church and the idea of a covenant, in this case between Serbia and God, who dwelt in the
Serbian Church as Yahweh did in the Jerusalem Temple, allowing Serbian clergy to serve
His “name”.
156
Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 85–86.
standing up in his own “defence” before God. Obliged to take care about the
“interests” of the Divine Sovereign on earth, the clergy takes care above all to
preserve the existing order, instilling in the monarch the model of government
as dedicated service to God and the virtues that sustain and strengthen the
theocratic system, namely obedience and fear of the “King of Kings”:
А ови блажени оци доброразумним речима поучаваху ову (…): “Богољубиво

чедо наше, поверено нам у Господу, ево примивши кротке и богоразумне
речи твоjих писама, насладисмо се. Ако хочеш, можеш земаљским царством
искупити небесно (…). (…) Постиди се у садашњем веку онога који те је тако
заволео, да се не постидиш у доласку његова јављања. Служи му са страхом
као Владици по природи. Радуј му се са трепетом као цару по благодати”157.
Danilo places the queen in a position of a “spiritual child” of the Church,

a subject and a disciple (Helen calls the clergy “masters”, “fathers”, “teachers”)
who must be carefully guided in life. It imposes on her the obligation to accept
this guardianship with humility and gratitude, just as a ruler surrounded by
numerous spiritual fathers does, asking the clergy for help and advice in order
to earn the favour of the Church as God’s earthly arm for her rule: “И ова
блажена госпођа Јелена у сласт примаше све речи и поуке отаца ових,
и красећи се, радоваше се, говорећи речи Богооца Давида, колико су
слатке речи ових поука (…)”158.
The family ties by which the hagiographer linked the ruler to her religious
advisors reflect the close if complex relationship, dependencies, duties and
rights between the king (state) and the Church. The relation with Bishop
Pavle of Raška, whom Helen according to Danilo treated like her natural
father, enhances the meaning of the text: “За време свога живота блажена
Јелена га имађаше место телеснога оца, скоро казати као господина
и учитеља (…)”159.
Through the figure of the nun-queen, the hagiographer strongly emphasised
the seriousness of the monastic state in the Serbian theocracy. He connected
the queen with the monastic clergy as strongly as with the parish clergy.
He chose her spiritual directors from among the monks, and entrusted her
157
Ibidem, p. 86.
158
Ibidem, p. 86.
159
Ibidem, p. 106.
60 Part I
sins to their supernatural mission. He uses the ruler’s extensive network of

contacts with the most important monastic centres of the Christian world
– Jerusalem, Mount Athos, Sinai (St. Catherine’s Monastery), Rutho/Raithu
Monastery (today At-Tur, also known as Tur Sinai)160 to raise the prestige of
the state and to show Helen’s rule as supranational, universal and imperial:
“(…) и колико је имала духовне оце у светом граду Јерусалиму, на Синају
и Раиту и у Светој Гори Атонској, јер тамо одоше многи њезини дарови
(…), јер све имање тамо источивши, до смрти непрестано шиљаше часне
и достоверне и великоимените монахе своје”161.
The Church, for its part, recognizes Helen as a respectable “external bi
shop”162, chosen by God and appointed to office by an act of consecration.
The hagiographer makes it clear that the queen’s authority does not carry
a sacramental character which would entitle her to intervene in the work of
the Church. She fulfils her vocation in and through the Church, as the scene of
the consecration of oil by the “hands” of the clergy testifies163. The authority of
the kind over the Church extends to material care164 (Serbian: ktitorstvo) and in
the so-called right of presentation to ecclesiastical authorities a clergyman of
the king’s choosing to be elected bishop. In Gradac, for instance, Helen grants
a monastic rule (typikon), establishes the principles of operation and appoints
an igumen165. In return, the Church supported her in her reign.
The queen’s tasks towards the laity are the result of a religious understanding
of the highest political office in the state. The main earthly goal of the ruler
is to lead her subjects to God through a mission of a defender (protection
160
The Nemanjić family had links with monasteries in Palestine and Sinai throughout their
reign. Амфилохије (Радовић), “Синаити и њихов значај у животу Србије XIV и XV
века”, in: Споменица о шестој стогодишњици манастира Раванице, Београд 1981.
161
162
Constantine the Great is supposed to have said, “God himself has appointed me bishop of
the external Church” (Eusebius, De Vita Constantini, 4, 24; quoted after: A. Flis, Chrześci
jaństwo i Europa. Studia z dziejów cywilizacji Zachodu, Kraków 2001, p. 279).
163
“Тако блажена Јелена чинећи, никако се не умори нити измени своју нарав добрих
дела, како је навикла. Од суботе до суботе масла крстећи рукама многих јереја (…)”
(Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 91).
164
“(…) а трудила се о томе, како ће давати милостиње у божанствене храмове, и све
што је на потребу, стављајући божаствене књиге у своме дому, а исто тако и свештене
сасуде, златне и сребрне, украшене бисером и скупоценим камењем, изабране
одежде јерејима и сваке црквене правде, што је на потребу” (Ibidem, p. 85, 89)”.
165
Ibidem, p. 94–95.
from external enemies), guardian (strengthening and relieving from material

troubles166) and teacher (the formative role, teaching practical knowledge),
being part of the service to God and thus of a direct dependency on the Church.
Even Helen’s patronage of education she was famous for in her lifetime167 was
linked by Danilo with her glorification of God, patterned after the apostolic
command of care over orphans (after Jm 1:27): “Заповеди у целој својој
области сабирати кћери сиротих родитеља, и њих хранећи у својим
дому, обучаваше сваком добром реду и ручном раду, који приличи за
женски род”168.
In his literary portrayal, the hagiographer endowed the queen with all the
attributes required to effectively carry out the mission of a holy ruler entrusted
to her (she has “all the virtues”). He expressed them symbolically, through
a set of evangelical virtues, beatitudes (after the sermon on the mount, Mt 5)
and charisms, including that of wisdom, not too frequent among kings169.
This lavish image is inspired by the image of Christ the King and Judge (after
Matthew 25:31–41) and the figure of the virgin Mother of God, full of grace,
the bearer of all virtues. Sharing in the royal power of Christ and in the majesty
of the Mother of God, Helen embodies the archetype of the mother of the
nation170, a ruler who is gentle and strict at the same time, managing the area
166
“(…) много година проведе живећи у овом веку, љубећи ниште, и дајући милостињу
странима, одевајући наге, и уводећи у дом бескућнике” (Ibidem, p. 86); “(…) и у те
дане довољно милостиње дајући свакоме који је требао, насићујући гладне утробе,
и одевајући наге, а болнима и странима и који нису имали где главе поклонити,
беше ова блажена тврди покров и необорима кула” (Ibidem, p. 91).
167
She founded a school and orphanage for girls at her court in Brnjače.
168
169
Introduced into the canon of royal virtues by Eusebius of Caesarea (263–339), biographer
of Constantine the Great.
170
In creating a picture of the ideal Orthodox ruler and reproducing the medieval model
of hagio-biography, the author relies, among other things, on the figure and authority
of Stephen Nemanjić (St. Simeon; an evident affinity between them: “holy king-father”
(Nemanjić) – “holy queen-mother” (Helen). On parallels at the textual level in the lives of
the two saints, see A. Vukovich, “Motherhood as Authority in the ‘Life of Queen Helen’
by Archbishop Daniel II”, in: S. Kangas, M. Korpiola, T. Ainonen, (eds.), Authorities in
the Middle Ages Influence, Legitimacy, and Power in Medieval Society, “Fundamentals of
Medieval and Early Modern Culture” 2013, 12, p. 249–266.
62 Part I
given to her by the Lord in a spirit of responsibility towards Him171 for the
sake of the subjects172:
(…) подвизава се добрим подвигом, украшавајући се сваким добрим делима,

и освећујући се у сваком добром животу, уздржљвошћу изнад природе.
Овака је била нарав ове блажене: оштра речју, а блага по природи, непорочна
животом, у заповедању кротка (2 Sm 18:5), да обрати доброразумним речима,
да теши нелицемерно (Lk 6:41–42; 12,1) и безлобно, а колика је свесрдачна
њезина смелост к Богу (2 Cor 3:4–6), просто казати, била је украшена сваком
врлином. Опевану и свехвалну благодат имађаше (1 P 5), коју је примила
просвећењем св. Духа, познавајучи све књиге, била је готова да отговори
свакоме ко је пита (1 Cor 12:8).
Despite the foregrounding of the virtues of kindness, goodness and mercy,

the relationship between the queen and her subjects mirrors the hierarchical
relationship with the Church, only this time the dominant position is held
by a ruler upholding the interests of religion173 and determining the limits
of the rights of the people. Their transgression is punished by the seemingly
innocuous “gift of admonition” (literally “of sharp word”/oštra rečiju).
The author is not yet familiar with the concept of the official Church,
which occupies a privileged place in the state and enjoys special favours from
the king, but certainly Helen’s Serbia in Danilo’s study is not an ecumenical
theocracy. The hagiographer eliminated all Catholic advisors from the ruler’s
circle and limited the care of the Church to the Orthodox Church, without
mentioning any form of support offered to Catholic religious orders174, although
in terms of donations he accepted the Serbian monarch as one of the most
171
“(…) oн је једини Бог богова и Господ над господарима” – observed Danilo in the
introduction. Further on he writes: “целим својим умом (Helen – D.G.) брине се како
ће угодити Господу”.
172
173
Rejection of God is an unpardonable sin, which is why Helen prefers to be a slave with
the Lord for even two days, rather than serve others (literally, “the devil and sin”). She is
not afraid of any earthly law, she fears only the transgression of God’s commandments (cf.
Ps 119 (118)) and God’s wrath, because without God it does not even “pay to be born”:
“Мени је довољно ако и два дана будем робиња Теби Владици моме Христу (…),
а да не будем робиња (бесовима) и грeху. (…) јер боље би ми било да се нисам ни
родила” (Ibidem, p. 91).
174
See Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 92.
generous “new Helens”175. Popović justifies the fact by the assumptions of

the political and religious agenda of King Milutin: “Њен православни
култ је установљен у време писања житија 1317, а и једно и друго је део
Милутиновог програма да да легитимитет својим наследницима после
Драгутинове смрти (…)”176.
Danilo reduced the Queen’s wide-ranging policy of treating different faiths
equally to the evangelical virtues of love and mercy for all without exception:
her own subjects and strangers in need of help177, generous “alms” offered to
everyone and openly demonstrated humility: “Великога и малога, богата
и ништа, праведника и грешника, болна и здрава, свакога од њих једнако
је поштовала и свакоме дужну част одавала (…)”178.
Danilo points to the theocratic principles presented in the text as the greatest
value for king and country. They belong to the deposit of faith passed on to
young generations in the process of education. In addition to the qualities
befitting a ruler, holding office by divine anointing, the hagiographer also
shows Helen as a caring and affectionate mother. In the text we can distinguish
characteristic excerpts which include elements of the type of holiness of
a mother into the dominant type of holiness of a queen. The first of these is
the prayer for the sons: “Колоко је деце уторбе моје, који су моји синови
и слуге твоје, и синови робиње твоје, и за њих молим те, Владико Господе,
утврди их у страху од тебе, да се боје твога светога имена, и да у свему
чине твоју вољу”179. It can be interpreted in two ways: as a prayer for her
children, rulers of the state, Stephen Dragutin and Stephen Uroš II Milutin,
or, more broadly, as a prayer for the nation, over which the queen exercises
maternal care, being intermediary between the nation and God. Looking at
St. Helen through the perspective of the Marian model, we should see her as
the mother and servant of her sons, whom she raises to be Christian rulers.
Actively participating in the lives of the heirs to the throne, she became the
(co-)creator of the state and the Serbian Church.
175
See A.L. McClanan, The Empress Theodora and the Tradition of Women’s Patronage in the
Early Byzantine Empire. The Cultural Patronage of Medieval Women, Athens–London 1996.
176
M. Поповић, Српска краљица…, p. 57.
177
“(…) дајући милостињу странима” (Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 86).
178
Ibidem, p. 85.
179
Животи краљева и архиепископа српских од Данила Другог, прев. Л. Мирковић,
предг. Н. Радојчић, Београд 1935, p. 54; Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 89.
64 Part I
The realization of the ideal of theocracy is presented as a duty of the heirs

to the Serbian throne and a prerequisite for the existence of the state, as the
author says in Helen’s ideological testament to her sons, on whom the continuity
of the monarchy depends. Let me quote a longer passage from the biography,
as it is crucial to the topic at hand:
Децо моја љубима у Господу, (…) не одбаците поуке ваше матере, сећајте се
да сте пород и васпитање хришћанске вере и народа светога и благовернога,
од младости ваше вођени и крепљениДухом светим, никада не бојећи се,
от противљенија иноплемених народа, који вам чине насиље, него крсним
знаком ограђивани све такове победисте и низложисте, пошто је Бог због
свога човекољубља утврдио ваш престо да непоколебљиво владате у своме
отачаству. Зато за сва добра која вам учинио, дужни сте да му служите (…).
(…) Прародитељи ваши изнеше пред Бога добра дела и подвиге, држећи
земаљско царство, и у нему богоугодно живећи, управљајући смислено
и разумно своим имањем, делећи дарове божаственим црквама, милостињу
ништима и странима, и тако чинећи, нађоше себи Господа милостива (…)
а њихове молитве од Бога примљене утврђују ваше домове. Достојно је да
и ви ревнујете њихову животу, да се и ви не лишите вечних добара у животу.
(…) А синови блажене госпође Јелене у сласт и са страхом примаху речи
и поуке своје блажене матере Јелене, повинујући јој се са сваком радошћу
и истинитом побожношћу180.
Danilo II, in constructing this passage of the biography, stresses the im
portance of faith, the principle of election and the legitimacy of the Nemanjić
authority on Serbian soil. On the one hand, we have the image of a mother’s
concern for her children’s welfare and their upbringing in the Christian faith.
On the other hand, the hagiographer puts words of ideological significance
into the saint’s mouth; he points to the holiness of the nation (“a holy and
God-fearing nation”) and the inviolability of the authority given to Serbian
rulers by God and legitimized by the Holy Spirit (“God, through the great
love of man, has strengthened your throne”). St. Helen, despite being the head
of the state, is not portrayed in Danilo’s life as a “soldier of Christ” actively
fighting against the “onslaught of foreign peoples”. Rather, she is likened to
Mary, in whose feminine nature lies the inner strength to overcome evil, as
Evdokimov notes:
180
The Virgin is called to prayer, at the head of the heavenly hosts, not as
a fighter, but as one who by her very nature offers invincible, deadly resistance
to demonic forces; she is invincible by virtue of her dominant purity. She has
the power to crush the head of the dragon, not by active action (proper to
a man), but by what she is in essence, one who triumphs over evil and wields
invincible power181.
As an intermediary between the sacred and the secular, the queen is to
extend her motherly care over her sons and the entire nation. She is also to
pray to protect them from evil, which will be borne out by her sanctity and
extraordinary vocation: “блажена си јер крсним знаком ограђујући се,
растргла си мреже ђаволске; блажена си, јер Богу угодним ти молитвама
помажеш нама у ратовима”182.
*
Jelena lived to old age and just before her death she took the highest monastic
vows (holy schema) and assumed the name Jelisaveta. The saint’s dormition
in her hagiography is directly compared to the dormition of the Blessed
Virgin Mary: “it was similar to the falling asleep of the Mother of God, when
the apostles on the clouds were headed for her funeral”183. Solar symbolism
referring to the idea of divinization plays an important role in the death scene.
It marks the moment of the saint’s birth into heaven (dies natalis), which is
why hagiographers often mention that in hora mortis the face of the saint
shines with a miraculous radiance, thus resembling a luminous angelic face.
Jelisaveta’s face is compared to “the face of an angel of God” (“лице анђела
Божјега”) and to a “sunray, which shines with numerous virtues” (“зрака
сунчана која сија многосветлим лепотама”). A luminous face of a saint is
the visio beatifica, the ultimate mystical experience involving immersion in
true Light. Milutin’s ploratio shows her as a devout mother, feeder, teacher of
faith, source of wisdom and support:
181
182
Животи краљева…, p. 70; Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 102.
183
“(…) слично је било ономе као у оно време, када је било престављење Богоматере,
апостоли облацима по ваздуху узимани иђаху на њезин погреб (…)” (Данило II,
Животи краљева…, p. 100).
66 Part I
О мати моја и госпођо, како ћу ја недостојни заборавити жељу срца твога

иа болове трудова твојих, што си поднела за мене Христос удахну дух
у мене, а ти ме васпита, упућујући ме разумним речима твојих поука, као
из неисцрпнога извора медоточних уста твојих. Но, о добра моја хранитељко,
и крепка и необорива тврђаво очинству своме, ево пуни се срце моје ридањем
и плачем многим, у недоумници сам какво ћце пјеније изрећи уста моја
у твоју похвалу, блажена184.
The scene of St. Helen’s death is particularly important because of the

relationship that is created between her and her surroundings. It can be referred
to the archetypal figure: master/mistress – disciple. T heir relationship is based
on the charisma of the mother, who is the bearer of God and the bearer of the
Spirit, and at the moment of dormition also becomes a teacher and bearer of
the Word of God185.
The above examples and the entire text of the biography dedicated to St.
Helen highlight the idea of a holy Christian queen, ruling the Serbian lands
with no less skill, dexterity and commitment than her male predecessors
and successors. We should also stress her role in building the so-called ordo
caritatis. In relation to her subjects, St. Helen became the mother of the nation,
its servant and parent. This fulfils the idea of Svetosavlje, which as a specific
modus vivendi is based mainly on the virtues of love (agapism), work and
benevolence (ergonism)186.
184
Данило II, Животи краљева…, p. 102. “My mother (Mt 46–49) and empress, how can
I forget, unworthy, the desires of your heart and the sorrow of your toil, which you have
borne for me? Christ breathed his spirit into me (Gen 2:7), and thou hast brought me up,
guiding me by the wise words of thy instruction, from the inexhaustible fountain (e.g.
Num 21:16–17) of the honey-flowing (Deut 4:11 in the context of Job 20:17; Ps 19 (18):11)
of thy mouth. But, my good nourisher (Ex 2:7), sturdy and steadfast fortress (Ps 91 (90):2)
of my homeland, my heart is filled with weeping and sobbing, I hesitate as to what song
my lips should sing to your glory, o blessed one!”. Translation of the quotation – D.G.
185
I. Lis, Śmierć w literaturze staroserbskiej (XII–XIV wiek), Poznań 2003, p. 46–47.
186
I. Lis, Święci w kulturze…, p. 106–107.
Chapter III
St. Јеvgenija-Euphrosine/
Jefrosinija (Princess Milica) –
July 19
Milica187 (ca. 1335–1405) belongs to the pantheon of the most popular Ser
bian women saints who were monarchs and later nuns. Apart from the official
Orthodox cult, the figure of Milica is known to folk tradition, where she
appears as a daughter of legendary Jug Bogdan (identified with Bratko),
father of nine Jugović brothers, hailed in epics poems188. Importantly, the
historical lineage ties Milica to the Nemanjić dynasty on the spear side; her
father Bratko was a great-grandson of Prince Vukan, first-born son of Stephen
Nemanjić189. According to historical facts, Bratko was one of the significant
courtiers of Tsar Dušan, which helped his daughter to participate in court
life, receive a thorough upbringing and a sound education. Ca. 1353 Milica
married Lazar Hrebeljanović. Some historians assume that the marriage was
arranged by Tsar Dušan himself, which additionally raised its status190. To
confirm the above conjecture, historians point to the Narrative about Prince
Lazar (Povesno slovo knezu Lazaru): “Тако и по заповести самодржца, узе
187
Parts of the chapter were published in the article: "Kult carycy Milicy w Serbii. Zarys prob-
lemu", w: Obraz świętości – świętość w obrazie, red. I. Lis-Wielgosz, W. Jóźwiak, P. Dziadul,
Poznań 2014, p. 74–82.
188
Selected bibliography: В. Караџић, Српске народне песме, Беч 1845; С. Новаковић, Косово,
српске народне песме о боју на Косову, Београд 1906; Сабрана дела Вука Караџића,
Београд 1988; Н. Милошевић-Ђорђевић, Косовска епика, Београд 1990; Б. Сувајџић,
Народна књижевност. Епске песме у старијим записама, Београд-Крагујевац 1998;
Антологија епских народних песама, прир. С. Самарџија, Београд 2001.
189
See e.g. Ж. Фајфрић, Света лоза кнеза Лазара, Београд 2000. Available online: <www.
rastko.rs/kosovo/istorija/zfajfric-lazarevici.html>, access: 15.04.2012; В. Ћоровић, op. cit.
190
Ж. Фајфрић, op. cit.
68 Part I
себи за садружницу сродницу цареву, кћер неког велможе. И она од рода

светла и славна и одлична, корена неког царског, од племена Симеуна
Немање, првог господара Србаља”191. Milica and Lazar had five daughters:
Mara, Dragana, Teodora, Jelena, and Olivera and three sons: Stephen, Vuk
and Dobrivoj (who died soon after birth). Lazar’s death in 1389 in the Battle
of Kosovo was a symbolic and actual end of the glory of the Serbian state and
strengthened Turkish control of the country. However, with regard to the
princess, it opens the time of her regency, lasting until the coming of age of
her eldest son Stephen.
After the Battle on Kosovo Field, in the autumn of that year Hungarian King
Sigismund of Luxemburg (1368–1437) attacked Serbia from the north, getting
as far as Šumadia. Milica’s advisors were of the opinion that in this situation it
would be easier to reach an agreement with Turkey, which did not pose such
an immediate threat (after consolidating his throne, Bayezid I, 1354–1403, no
longer attacked Serbia with his troops), and this political decision was finally
taken. Serbia accepted the sovereignty of the sultanate in exchange for help
in driving out the Hungarians and relative peace. The agreement between
Lazarević and Turkey was sealed by the marriage of Olivera to Bayezid I in
1390192. According to Turkish chroniclers, she had an unusually great influence
on the sultan, so much so that, while in captivity at Timur (1336–1405), he
committed suicide because he could not bear the shame he brought upon her193.
Milica’s sons Vuk and Stephen, fulfilling their duties of vassals, fought on
Bayezid’s side in successive battles. In January 1398, Bayezid I set out to conquer
Bosnia yet was ultimately unsuccessful. Stephen Lazarević fought on the side
of the Turks. In return for his faithful service to the sultan, he received some
191
“Повесно слово о кнезу Лазару”, прев. М. Башић, in: Стара српска књижевност, књ.
III, ред. Д. Павловић, Нови Сад-Београд 1970, p. 115.
192
Olivera is also known as Maria or Despina, see S. O’Shea, Morze Wiary – islam i chrześci
jaństwo w świecie śródziemnomorskim doby średniowiecza, transl. R. Kot, Poznań 2009,
p. 251. In the Life of St. Stephen Lazarević and his mother, Milica by Filaret Gumilevsky,
the name Salomea appears also (“Баязетъ »просилъ у деспотиссы Саломiю меньшую
дочь ея въ супругу себѣ […]«”); further on Filaret calls Bajazyt’s Serbian wife Mary:
“Такъ высоко о себѣ думал Тимуръ, и однако освободилъ Марiю (…)”; Филарет,
“Воспоминанiе о св. Стефанѣ Лазаревичѣ и о матери его Милицѣ”, in: Филарет, op.
cit., p. 141 and 142.
193
See С. Ћирковић, Историја Српског народа, књ. II, Београд 1982, p. 48.
Chapter III: St. Јеvgenija-Euphrosine 69
of the estates of Vuk Branković (1345–1397)194, which made him the biggest
Serbian magnate of the time195. This situation did not suit the other magnates
claiming Serbian lands. They accused Stephen before the sultan, blaming him
for the failure of the Turkish army in the conquest of Bosnia and the secret
talks with Hungary. Letters from Dubrovnik to Princess Milica show that in
spring 1398 first she and then Stephen were staying at the Turkish court196.
Most likely both visits to Bayezid I were to lift the unfounded charges off
Stephen Lazarević and proved successful. The journey to the sultan’s court
had another important effect, as Milica managed to transfer the relics of St.
Petka from Vidin to Belgrade. Milica also maintained good relations with
Dubrovnik; counting on its support in possible conflicts, she supported the
pleas of Dubrovnik tradesmen with the sultan to allow the free flow of goods
through the Turkish territories197.
Milica’s state policy included measures to strengthen the Orthodox Church
by erecting and providing for monasteries. She helped to erect the Sisojevac
Monastery near Ravanica, and in 1392 granted privileges to the Chilandar
Monastery on Mount Athos. In 1395, she endowed the Ruthenian monastery
of St. Panteleimon and the tower of St. Vasily on Athos198. However, the most
important foundation of Milica is the Ljubostinja Monastery, where she died
as a nun. There, in the Church of the Most Holy Mother of God, she received
the minor schema (ca. 1393) and the name Jevgenija, and, shortly before her
death, the major schema and the name Euphrosine199. Filaret Gumilevsky
refers to it in his lives of the saints:
Въ граматѣ Стефана Лазаревича 2 дек. 1405, данной Дубровнику, мать Стефана
называется почившею кира Евфросинiею. Запись на Вулковомъ хиландарскомъ
типикѣ: “м.ноеврiя 11 дьнь престави се монахи Евфросини, подружие светаго
194
Vuk Branković – one of Serbian magnates, son-in-law of Lazar. He fought on his father-
in-law’s side in the Battle of Kosovo Field, from which he withdrew without major losses.
The image of “Branković the traitor”, probably created by the Lazarevićs themselves, has
been preserved in the folk tradition, see. D. Gil, Prawosławie…, p. 263.
195
С. Ћирковић, Историја…, књ. II, op. cit., p. 61–62.
196
Ibidem, p. 62–63.
197
В. Ћоровић, op. cit.; М. Пурковић, Принцезе…, p. 92.
198
М. Пурковић, Принцезе…, p. 91.
199
Д.М. Грујић, “Велика схима кнегиње Милице, удовице Лазареве”, Гласник Скопског
научног друштва, бр. 11, 1932, p. 237–239; “О монастире Любостинiи”, Христи
анское чтение 1865, ч. 2, p. 141–142.
70 Part I
кнеза Лазаря”. Въ хиландарскихъ граматахъ: “азъ благовернаа монахы Евгенiа

и с богодарованными сынови моими” (Миклошича Monum. № 246–251). По
этимъ памятникамъ кн. Милица предъ смертiю приняла великую схиму и съ
тѣмъ вмѣстѣ имя крещенiя своего, имя Евфросинiи; а по кончинѣ супруга
была монахинею Евгенiею200.
Milica is credited with the authorship of a poem of mourning for her husband
Lazar, My Widowhood’s Bridegroom (Udovstvu mojemu ženik, ca. 1403)201.
In spite of Milica’s significant role in the history of the Serbian state and the
Orthodox Church, in spite of her glorification in literature, the princess was
not individually venerated as a saint in the Orthodox Church. Her sanctity
was built around the dependence on her husband and son and around the
events connected with the Battle of Kosovo. Interestingly, however, the mother-
son relationship is much stronger from the perspective of the cult than that
between wife and husband. It is evident, firstly, in the testimony of Constantine
the Philosopher (also known as Constantine of Kostenets, ca. 1380 – ca.
1431) and, secondly, in the saint’s feast day, July 19, celebrated together with
Stefan Lazarević (the date of Stefan Lazarević’s dormition). It is one of the
most important holidays in the calendar of the Serbian Orthodox Church.
Its importance has also been recognised by other local Orthodox Churches,
including Russian and Polish. Milica is also invoked as Lazar’s wife during
Vidovdan (June 15), yet in this case far more emphasis is placed on the memory
of the prince’s sacrifice on the Kosovo Field than on the merits of his wife202.
The saint’s cult originated in and radiated from Ljubostinja. In the 18th c., the
Rodoslov of Tronoša included miracles occurring at Milica’s tomb and stressed
that the empress’s body was intact and the casket gave off a pleasant smell203.
The question of establishing an official cult of the saint remains unresolved.
In 1930, this topic was raised by Čedomilj Mijatović in Vreme magazine204 (and
200
See Филарет, op. cit., p. 144.
201
A translation into modern Serbian in: Списи о Косову, прир. М. Грковић, Београд 1993,
p. 110–111. More on the text: Z. Brzozowska, “Twórczość literacka kobiet w średniowiec-
znej Serbii (XIII–XV w.)”, in: Vade Nobiscum 2011, no. VII, Łódź, p. 44–47.
202
She is moreover commemorated on November 11, the day of her dormition.
203
204
Nos.: 2889 (11 January), 2892 (14 January), 2894 (16 January), 2895 (17 January), and
2902 (24 January) of 1930.
once in Dnevnik205); a letter was sent to Serbian patriarch Dimitry to include

Princess Milica in a group of Serbian saints for her merits as “the wife of the
Serbian saint Prince Lazar”, “doubly as mother of the Serbian saint Stephen
the Tall (Stephen Lazarević)” and “in the service of the Serbian people in its
difficult moments after the Kosovo disaster”. Leonid A. Matveyev, a Russian
religious studies scholar replied to this call, saying that the Russians “had had
for long” included Milica among their saints with Stephen Lazarević. However,
he does not give the exact date of her canonization, supposing only that it
must have taken place before 1903, which was the last official canonization
in the Russian Orthodox Church before the 1917 revolution. To confirm his
claim, he cites the list of saints from the 1928 Orthodox calendar printed in
Czechoslovakia, in which Milica is mentioned under the date 19 July together
with Stephen Lazarević206. Risto Kisić entered the debate207 and said that the
Bulgarian Orthodox Slavic Calendar (published by Sveslovensko društvo in
Sofia) mentions Milica with her son among the South Slavonic saints208. Vreme
moreover published a letter by the igumen of the Ljubostinja Monastery,
Sevastijan Putnik, a witness to a living folk/local worship of the princes in
the monastery209. Nothing conclusive was established, however, and still in
the 1960s Leontije Pavlović wrote: “Званично проглашење није извршено”
(“Official proclamation [of sainthood – D.G.] has not taken place”)210.
The story of the holy life of the ruler is part of the lives of her husband and
son by two authors: Archbishop Danilo III211 – The Narrative about Prince
Lazar (Povesno slovo knezu Lazaru (1392/1393–1398)212 and Constantine the
205
No. of 9 February 1930.
206
No. 2892 (14 January) 1930.
207
Publisher of so-called Little Library, in which texts by Sima Pandurović, Svetozar Ćorović,
etc. were printed.
208
No. 2895 (17 January) 1930.
209
No. 2894 (16 January) 1930.
210
211
Opinions vary as to the authorship of the text; mention is made of an anonymous author
from the Ravanica Monastery, “Повесно слово о кнезу Лазару”, in: Стара српска књи
жевност…, p. 411. <www.digitalna.nb.rs/wb/NBS/Knjige/Srpska_knjizevnost_u_100knj
iga/II-153244-003#page/225/mode/1up>, access: 12.09.2016.
212
И. Руварац, “Повесно слово о кнезу Лазару”, Летопис Матице Српске, 117, 1875,
p. 108–121. The text was first published by S. Novaković, Гласник Српског Ученог
Друштва 1867, књ. XXI, p. 158–164, translation into contemporary Serbian by Milivoje
Bašić, Из старе српске књижевности, превео и саставио М. М. Башић, Београд 1926.
72 Part I
Philosopher – The Life of St. Stephen Lazarević (Žitije sv. Stefana Lazarevića,
1431). The Narrative has been preserved in a 16th-century copy (no. 79,
Patriarchal Library Belgrade). Copies of Constantine’s Life date back to the
15th and 16th c.213. Filaret Gumilevsky observes, following Victor Grigorovich,
that there were three different editions of Constantine’s text: “Сколько могу
догадываться, есть нѣсколько рецензiй сего житiя. Одна – подлинная съ
подробностями; другая та, которая ходитъ по Россiи; третья – внесенная
въ цароставникъ и Никонову лѣтопись”214.
Milica’s biography is mentioned by Gregory Tsamblak (c. 1365–1420) in the
1404/5 The Narrative of the transfer of St. Petka’s relics from Tarnovo to Vidin
and Serbia (Slovo o prenosu moštiju svete Petke iz Trnova u Vidin i Srbiju),
praising her diplomatic efforts to regain the saint’s relics215.
A contemporary life of the saint was written by Justin Popović, who
compiled it on the basis of the texts of Constantine the Philosopher, Danilo
III and historical data. His image of Milica was that of the many Serbian
widows who wept for their husbands after the Battle of Kosovo. He evoked
the biblical image of the weeping Rachel (Jer 31:15; Mt 2:18), depicting
the entire Serbian nation as her children. Through this analogy and the
unsurpassed model of the holiness of the Mother of God, for Orthodox
Serbs Milica became the Ur-mother of the Serbian nation and the patroness
of Serbian mothers (Serbian: mајkа hrišćanka), especially in her capacity
as carer for the needy: widows, orphans, the sick, and the suffering: “После
Косова она беше као нека српска Прамати Рахиља која плакаше над
оном побијеном и овом поробљеном српском децом својом. (…) Она је
For a more recent edition in modern language see “Повесно слово о кнезу Лазару”, in:
Стара српска књижевност…, p. 113–118.
213
More on the subject: Константин Филозоф, Повест о Словима. Житије деспота
Стефана Лазаревића, прир. Г. Јовановић, Београд 1989, p. 12–13. The first publica-
tion of the original text: Б. Јагић, “Живот Стефана Лазаревића”, Гласник Српског
Ученог Друштва 1875, књ. XLII, p. 223–328. The first translation into modern Serbian:
Л. Мирковић, “Живот Стефана Лазаревића”, in: Старе српске биографије XV и XVII
века ‒ Цамблак, Константин, Пајсије, Београд 1936, p. 41–125.
214
В. Григорович, Oчерк путешествия по европейской Tурции, Казань 1848, p. 221,
quoted after: Филарет, op. cit., p. 140.
215
Г. Цамблак, “Слово о преносу моштију свете Петке из Трнова у Видин и Србију”, in:
idem, Књижевни рад у Србији, ред. Д. Петровић, Београд 1999, p. 157–159.
мајчински збрињавала сирочад и удовице, тешила уцвељене, хранила

гладне, одевала наге”216.
Princess Milica appears also in Filaret Gumilevsky texts for the feast of
Stephen Lazarević (July 19) – Воспоминание о св. Стефанѣ Лазаревичѣ
и о матери его Милицѣ217:
Счастлив был Стефан, имевш ий такую мать, какова была кн. Милица; умная,
энергическая, благочестивая, она много облегчала тяжкую долю народа, над
которым начал тяготеть меч турок, восстановляла народные храмы, напр.
Дечанской обители, у тешала бедность и вдовство бесприютное. Летопись
говорит о Милице: “по смерти мужа своего, недалеко от Крушевца, в Рассии,
созда монастырь, зовомий Любостиня, и тамо постриглася в иночество
и совоку пила многия сестры, наипаче великих госпожи, котории вдови
изостали по мужех избитых с Лазарем на Косову. И тамо преставилася
и погребена. А како она тамо Богу угодила, свидетельствуют чудеса повсе
дневныя над немощными, котории приходят к гробу ея, многократ и миро
истекает от гроба ея”. Она скончалась в великой схиме нояб. 11, 1405 г.218
The feast of Milica acquired a new meaning in 1942, when Bishop Nikolai
Velimirović wrote a service dedicated to her, patterned on texts in honour of
holy monks (so called prepodobnyj). This service is used to celebrate Milica’s
memorial days in Ljubostinja. Work on the 1989 edition of Srbljak, which lasted
intermittently since 1926, indicates a desire to spread the cult and to establish
a separate feast in honour of Milica as part of the church-wide calendar.
Velimirović’s service was included in the collection in the original language,
i.e. Orthodox Slavonic219. An Office commemorating Milica in Srbljak (Pamet
prepodobne matere naše Jevgenije) next to the earlier Office in Honour of St.
Angelina (Pamet prepodobne matere naše Angeline, despotice srpske) concludes
earlier work on the Belgrade Srbljak by metropolitan Mihajlo (1861) and
fulfils the plan to include texts dedicated to women saints220. Supplementing
the Srbljak was basically due to the need to update old models of spirituality:
216
See Спомен свете матере наше Евгеније – Ефросиније, Српске царице Милице, <https://
svetosavlje.org/zitija-svetih-8/20/>. The same under a different title: Преподобна Евгенија
(Лазаревић) <www.spc.rs/sr/prepodobna_evgenija_lazarevitsh>.
217
Филарет, “Воспоминание о св. Стефане Лазаревиче и о матери его Милице”, in:
Святые южных славян, Санкт Петербург 1894, p. 140.
218
Филарет, op. cit., p. 143.
219
On work on the Srbljak see D. Gil, Serbska hymnografia…, p. 105.
220
Ibidem, p. 82.
74 Part I
The remembrance of the old cults of the anchorites who lived in the distant 10th–
12th centuries in the area between Kosovo and Ryla (today’s Serbo-Bulgarian and
Bulgarian-Macedonian border) is not only a complement to the image of the great
figures of the historical past, but implies a specific attempt to renew the anchoritic
and monastic model of life, or simply an attempt at spiritual renewal, so much
needed today as perhaps never before221.
In the above set, the service in honour of Milica is a separate text under
the date identical to the memorial of Stephen Lazarević (July 19).
Between the world wars, attempts were made (in 1926 and 1935) to
publish another version of the Srbljak, which according to the bishops and
archimandrites, was to include all available texts of the offices in honour of
Serbian saints, including those dedicated to saintly women. Unfortunately, the
outbreak of World War II prevented the publication of the entire volume222.
Nikolai Velimirović can be credited with the promotion of cults of women
saints in the two decades after World War I. Probably when working in the
publication of the Srbljak, Bishop Velimirović wrote the Office of St. Jevgenija
(Princess Milica). He also referred to the princess in his sermons linked to
the Battle of Kosovo, and especially in those preached during his stay in the
1940s at the Ljubostinja Monastery founded by Milica:
Ми се данас налазимо пред једном од прамајки наших која се таквом водом

појила и благодарећи томе, све ударе судбине поднела, а са снагом која
изненађује. Царица Милица је Српкиња са најдраматичнијим животом:
прво, царица и срећна мајка, затим црна косовска удовица и најзад смерна
калуђерица и ктиторка овога светог храма. Госпођа Милица прва у Србији,
на Балкану, ћерка властелина Југ Богдана, царева супруга, сестра Бошка
Југовића, мајка великог господара Србије Стефана Високог. […] Царица
Милица је као јунак: после Косова је сав терет на њој, све очи упрте у њу,
све наде везане за њу, али она има јаку дуђшу223.
Milica’a image as a saint is based on a text of The Narrative about Prince

Lazar (1392/1393) by her contemporary hagiographer, Archbishop Danilo III.
221
Ibidem, p. 106.
222
Ibidem, p. 103–104.
223
“Царица Милица као пример охрабрења и наши страшљивци – Беседа владике
жичког Николаја у Љубостињи”, Политика 1940, бр. 11489. Available online: <https://
svetosavlje.org/kosovo-i-vidovdan/15/>, access: 1.03.2019.
He observes that until 1393, when she handed over the helm of the state to her
son, Milica ruled the country “with a manly hand”. The author highlights the
empress’s links to the royal dynasty, symbolised by the Loza Nemanjića, and
created a figure patterned on the model of a saintly male ruler, the then standard.
One of the main qualities of the queen is thus a kind of “manliness”, reflected
in her strength, uncommon for a woman (“she rejected women’s weaknesses”)
and her ability to rule (“she undertook a ‘manly endeavour’ in affairs of state”).
Danilo III’s view, symbolically “stripping” Milica of her feminine traits for
the duration of her regency, is reflected in her later historical and religious
portrayals: “[…] кнегиња Милица ce као мушка глава [underlines – D.G.]
борила са свим унутрашњим и спољним неприликама које су на Србију
наишле после боја на Косову”224; “Била је, што бисмо рекли, »мушко«
(»мужанствена жена«) и имала је све врлине”225.
In the earliest phase of the development of the saint’s cult, her greatness
and importance for the Church and the state was due to her son’s biographer,
Constantine the Philosopher, who inserted extensive passages dedicated to the
princess into the 1431 biography of Stephen Lazarević. Constantine shows her
dual capacity of a mother (“Достојна славе и веома мудра мати [Милица],
која превазилазила многе изабране матере […]”) and a perfect guardian of
the country, which she continues to be despite handing over the rule to her son:
“[…] знала је светске [ствари] у којима је тешко снаћи се”226. Constantine’s
text records two politically important facts in which Milica played a leading
role: a diplomatic mission to Sultan Bayezid to put an end to rumours about
Stephen’s alleged alliance with Hungary against the sultanate and to prepare his
visit to the sultan’s court, as well as to defuse Stephen’s conflict with Suleiman
because of the ruler’s younger brother Vuk. Milica did not set off alone on
her journey to the sultan’s court, but had a distinguished companion, nun
Jefimija (Jelena Mrnjavčević), widow of Despot Uglješa Mrnjavčević, famous
in literary history as the first Serbian woman writer227. Both women’s merits
224
С. Новаковић, Срби и Турцу XIV и XV века, Београд 1960, p. 246.
225
М. Пурковић, Принцезе…, p. 90 (underline mine – D.G.).
226
Both excerpts in: Константин Философ, Житије деспота Стефана Лазаревића,
прев. Л. Мирковић, Београд 1989, p. 197.
227
On Jefimija see: B. Lomagistro, Jefimija monaca: storia di donna nella Serbia medievale,
Parnaso, 2020; M. Koch, …kiedy dojrzejemy jako kultura…Twórczość pisarek serbskich na
początku XX wieku (kanon – genre – gender), Wrocław 2007; I. Lis-Wielgosz, “Tworzona
76 Part I
are highlighted by both Constantine the Philosopher and Gregory Tsamblak.

As Svetlana Tomin and Izabela Lis-Wielgosz aptly indicate, the literary works
that mention the two widows “do not focus exclusively on feminine piety,
generosity and good deeds in general, but also on women’s wisdom, intellectual
qualities, courage, and fortitude”228. The diplomatic efforts of Milica and
Jefimija, who supported her, proved successful and the journey resulted in
the transfer of St. Petka’s relics from Vidin to Belgrade. The significant role
of Milica (and Jefimija) during the transfer of the ascetic’s body is testified
by Gregory Tsamblak. He emphasises the significance of this event in the
history of Serbia and considers the acquisition of the saint’s relics to be of
paramount importance for the preservation and strengthening of Serbian
national identity. According to Tsamblak, during an audience with the sultan,
Milica spoke as follows: “Ако хоћеш све што бисмо имали да замениш
за жељене нам мошти, готови смо то уступити”229. St. Petka’s Adventus
reliquiarum is not the only one recorded in Serbian history230, However, in
the unique historical situation, it acquires exceptional political and religious
significance. Transferring the saint’s relics to Belgrade was intended not only
to protect them from destruction by the Turks, but also to raise the prestige of
the state, the city (Stefan Lazarević proclaims Belgrade the capital of Serbia)
and the ruler through the person of a new “holy defender” of the country and
the faith, who confirms God’s election of Serbia and proves the continuity
of God’s protection over it. The presence of relics sanctifies the land and the
nation. It is a kind of theophany through which God enters the fate of the
state, placing it in the broader context of the salvific design.
przez mężczyzn – odtwarzana przez kobiety. Kultura i literatura staroserbska”, in: Męskie
światy w życiu kobiet. Literatura – historia – język, ed. B. Walęciuk-Dejneka, Kraków 2018,
p. 199–214. С. Томин, “Допринос жена српској култури средњег века”, у: Књиженство
теорија и историја женске књижевности на српском језику до 1915. године, уред.
проф. др Б. Дојчиновић, проф. др А. Вранеш, проф. др З. Бечановић-Николић,
Београд 2015, с. 1–26. And on the website of the project Knjiženstvo. Teorija i istorija
ženske književnosti na srpskom jeziku do 1915. godnine: <http://knjizenstvo.etf.bg.ac.rs/
sr/autorke/jelena-mrnjavcevic-jefimija>, access: 9.10.2020.
228
I. Lis-Wielgosz, Tworzona przez mężczyzn…, p. 210.
229
Quoted after: С. Томин, op. cit., p. 34.
230
The most significant example is the hagiographer’s testimony of Stephen the First-
Crowned being presented with relics of the Holy Cross sent to him by Simeon of Mount
Athos, see Д. Поповић, op. cit., p. 255.
Since the dawn of Serbian statehood, relics have been a kind of dynastic
vexillum231. Danica Popović observes that collecting saints’ relics in Belgrade
(St. Petka’s as well as those of Empress Teofano and Emperor Constantine) was
an attempt to proclaim an ambitious political agenda of Stephen Lazarević. The
capital city gains its special layout and a spiritual identity; it was designed as
a sacred space patterned after the New Jerusalem232. The time between the Battle
of Kosovo (1389) and the fall of the despot (1459), followed by the division
of Serbia into Turkish pashaliks is seen as a turn to the past, offering patterns
of conduct and strength for struggle, hence the growth in Serbia at that time
of the cult of Stephen the First Crowned and the saints of all Southern Slavs,
guardians of states, their capitals and imperial dynasties, such as Paraskeva-
Petka of Tarnovo (of Bulgaria, of Serbia, of Belgrade, the Young, the New),
who, since the 13th c. and the famous Battle of Klokotnitsa (1231), was the
patron saint of the Bulgarian empire reborn after the Byzantine captivity.
Prince Lazar, whose cult spread thanks e.g. to his wife, an author of a eulogy
of the slain ruler, is another of those saints.
The princess’s policy constantly sought to maintain Serbia’s relative inde
pendence from the sultanate, which led her to marry her youngest daugh
ter, Olivera, to Sultan Bayezid. Although she did this to secure peace, it was
traditionally perceived as consent to send her own child to the sultan’s harem.
Constantine the Philosopher likened Olivera’s fate to that of the biblical Esther
(Book of Esther) and depicted her as a symbol of the supreme sacrifice for the
preservation of the nation and the state, and for the preservation of the native
faith. Legend has it that the road from her native Kruševac, which Olivera
took to the court of the sultan, was strewn with roses by common people233.
According to Islamic law, no Christian woman could become the wife
of a Muslim unless she changed her faith, but Milica demanded that the
sultan agree that her daughter would not be forced to follow these rules and
abandon her Orthodox faith. Indeed, historical sources testify that during
the entire twelve-year stay in the harem, Olivera did not change her religion,
231
Ibidem, p. 254.
232
Ibidem, p. 261.
233
Excerpts N. Giljen, O. Šaranović, P. Jovićević-Jov, Princeza Olivera, zaboravljena srpska
kneginja, Beograd 2009, p. 2, online: <www.princezaoliverafond.org.rs/flash/download/
biografija.pdf>, access: 4.07.2012.
78 Part I
corroborated by the fact that the Turks fulfilled their obligations of allies by
returning the body of Prince Lazar from Pristina to Ravanica and allowing
Olivera to provide for the Orthodox Church. For example, she sent as a gift
to Studenica a veil for the reliquary of Stephen the First Crowned234. The
figure and story of Olivera gained importance between the 18th c. and the
second half of the 19th c., when so-called žrtva za narod became a special
form of martyrdom, although to this day the princess has not been canonised.
Material evidence of her popularity are, among others, portraits of women
martyrs: Mileva (Olivera), Mary (daughter of Despot Đorđe Branković) and
Jelena (daughter of Lazar Branković) commissioned by Innocent (1898–1905)
Metropolitan of Belgrade for the altar of the Belgrade archdiocesan church
and the stained-glass windows depicting Mileva in the Church of St. George
in Novi Sad235. Princess Milica’s decision to marry her daughter to a Turk in
order to protect Serbia is seen as a moral act equal to the sacrifice of the life
of her husband, Prince Lazar, on the Kosovo Field: “Жена по својој природи
одређена да штити живот, посвећује се продужењу живота, њена оданост
идеји не иде до апсурда. У складу са природним дужностима Миличин
став је високо моралан и равночастан са Лазаревим”236. It means foregoing
personal pain and humiliation for the sake of the nation:
Мач славног кнеза Лазара сину своме Стефану Високом си дала, а ти си Крст
Христов као мач духовне победе узела, на спасење душе своје и рода Србског
Богоносног од зла турског: Зато се и сада моли за нас и за све Православне
Хришћане који те са љубављу прослављају, мати мироточива237.
Bishop Filaret of Chernikhov describes Milica according to the model of

the ruler. Stephen Lazarevic’s mother appears in the text as an independent
and strong ruler, guardian and defender of her minor son’s right to the throne.
She is wise and resourceful, and accomplishes everything she sets out to do.
Her abilities underline the extremely complicated conditions she has to cope
234
J. Vučićević, Zaboravljena srpska princeza koja je iz turskog harema mnogo učinila za Srbi
ju, online: <https://rs-lat.sputniknews.com/kultura/201812291118300231-princeza-Oli-
vera-Lazarevic-despina/>, access: 5.07.2012.
235
Л. Павловић, op. cit., p. 293–294.
236
Р. Павловић, Именон и делом Милица. Размишлања о кнегињи Милици, quoted after:
С. Томин, op. cit., p. 35.
237
Service, troparion 4. Available online: <www.crkva.se/srbi_evgenija.htm>, access: 29.06.2012.
with, such as the wartime destruction of her homeland, the strong internal
opposition, the division of the country by political rivals, and the Turkish threat:
После страдальческой кончины кн. Лазаря старший сын его Стефан остался
ещё малолетним. И мать Стефана, умная кн. Милица, приняла дела Сербии
в своё ведение. Сперва удалось Вуку Бранковичу достать себе большую
половину Сербии. Но умная деспотисса мало-помалу улучшила дела свои
и Сербии. На первых порах много надобно было трудиться, чтобы сколько-
нибудь поправить разоренный войною край. К большему горю, явились
раздоры: некоторые предлагали вступить в союз с Венгрией и вместе с нею
воевать против султана. Мысль эта до того увлекла иных, что составился
заговор лишить Стефана прав деспота. А другие недоброжелатели доводили
до сведения султана, что Стефан – враг султана238.
The Russian bishop focuses on Milica’s diplomatic skills and courage to

make difficult decisions in the interest of the country as her major traits. What
could be perceived as humiliation, a mother’s tragedy and Serbia’s misfortune,
i.e. a servile visit to the sultan’s court, an alliance with the Ottomans and
marrying a daughter to a Turk, is transformed by Filaret into effective tools
in the fight against the enemy, into the ruler’s strength and success. He boldly
shows that thanks to the courageous decisions of Stephen’s mother, the country
can still enjoy freedom, and he himself retains his rights. After the princess’s
visit, the sultan, according to the Russian, did not so much demand but asked
for Olivera’s hand, treating her brother as a son:
Деспотисса сама явилась к султану с изъявлением покорности. Султан принял

ее ласково. Затем и юный деспот отправился к Баязету. […] «Если ты, –
прибавил султан, – будешь делить мои походы, ты будешь покоен, – принимаю
тебя за сына, дети мои, чувствую, перессорятся; тогда придет время, что ты
не только будешь владеть покойно своею страною, но приобретешь соседние;
при мне поступай так: смиряй сильных твоих и держи их в руках». Никто не
ожидал, чтобы грозный султан так отечески принял молодого Стефана, и –
тем более было радости для Сербии. Баязет «просил у деспотиссы Саломию,
меньшую дочь ее, в супругу себе и обещался принимать Стефана за сына».
Для покоя Сербии умная Милица согласилась исполнить желание султана.
Это было в 1393 году. Чрез год после того в 1395 году Стефан с войском
238
Филарет Черниговский (Гумилевский), Воспоминание о св. Стефане Лазаревиче и о
матери его Милице…, p. 140.
80 Part I
своим отправился в поход в помощь Баязету, воевавшему с Венгрией; […].

За то Сербию миновали разгромы, нанесенные Баязетом крестоносцам,
Венгрии и Греции239.
Even when Stephen assumes independent rule, his mother must save him
from disaster by making another bold diplomatic intervention with the sultan:
Старший сын Баязета вступил после того в союз со Стефаном, уже как
независимым владельцем. Зато Вук, оскорбившись на брата, поспешил к
Сулейману; Милица поспешила за ним вслед, чтобы уговорить; не догнав его
в Сербии, неустрашимая явилась в ставку Сулеймана и успела примирить
султана со Стефаном240.
The period of Milica’s life from the moment of her entry into a religious
order is dealt with briefly by the hagiographer, but at the same time he associates
it with constant activity – foundation of monasteries and care for the poor and
the needy, including widows of Serbian knights killed on the Kosovo Field:
Счастлив был Стефан, имевший такую мать, какова была кн. Милица; умная,
энергическая, благочестивая, она много облегчала тяжкую долю народа, над
которым начал тяготеть меч турок, восстановляла народные храмы, напр.
Дечанской обители, утешала бедность и вдовство бесприютное. Летопись
говорит о Милице: “по смерти мужа своего, недалеко от Крушевца, в Рассии,
созда монастырь, зовомий Любостиня, и тамо постриглася в иночество
и совокупила многия сестры, наипаче великих госпожи, котории вдови
изостали по мужех избитых с Лазарем на Косову. И тамо преставилася
и погребена. А како она тамо Богу угодила, свидетельствуют чудеса повсе
дневныя над немощными, котории приходят к гробу ея, многократ и миро
истекает от гроба ея”. Она скончалась в великой схиме нояб. 11, 1405 г.241
The image of the princess as a ruler is preserved in the public consciousness

thanks to epic folk songs dedicated to the Battle of Kosovo242. Milica was
239
Ibidem, p. 141–142.
240
Ibidem, p. 143.
241
Ibidem.
242
The texts were collected in two series of epics: prior to Kosovo – Жеднидба кнеза Лазара,
Царица Милица и змај од Јастрепца, Зидање Раванице – and after Kosovo – Цар
Лазар и царица Милица, о боју косовском, Царица Милица и Владета Војвода – all
symbolically “crowned” as empress, just as Lazar was crowned emperor, in

recognition of their activities and merits for the country and its Church243. In
texts, authors identify her with the daughter of Jug Bogdan, sister of the famous
nine Jugović brothers. The princess is portrayed as a faithful and devoted wife,
who, sensing an impending disaster, tries to keep at the court at least one of
the nine brothers going to the Kosovo Field. She is the first to learn of Lazar’s
death, and of Jug Bogdan’s and his sons’ deaths, and the first to mourn the fate
of the orphaned nation. Epic songs dedicated to Milica and her husband are
known in Russia244, where Milica is also venerated as the patron saint of the
country, “strengthening and comforting the suffering Serbia”245. Epic series
from before and from after the Battle of Kosovo in honour of the princess and
the prince are known in Greece, too. Their popularity is due to the analogy
between the Battle of Kosovo and the fall of Constantinople246. Interestingly,
authors of Greek translations of Serbian texts emphasise in their commentaries
the powerful impact of women on their husbands in medieval Serbia. Milica
represents here the type of a Serbian noblewoman of old, a wise advisor and
supporter of her husband, while Lazar exemplifies a Serbian patriot, a soldier
fighting for his homeland247.
World War II was certainly an important moment for the autonomy of
Milica’s cult. This was the time when the churches with relics of leading Serbian
saints, Tsar Uroš, Prince Lazar and Stefan Štiljanović, were desecrated in the
collected in Vuk Karadžic’s Српске народне песме from 1845. One of the songs appears
outside series: Сан царице Млице.
243
М. Милосављевић, “Највољенија српска царица”, Православље. Новине српске пат
ријаршије, Информативно-издавачка установа Српске Православне Цркве 2007, бр.
959, Београд. Available online: <www.pravoslavlje.org.rs/broj/959/tekst/najvoljenija-srps-
ka-carica/>, access: 5.04.2012.
244
See Хрестоматия по истории средних веков в трех томах, ред. С.Д. Сказкин, том
II, X–XV века, Москва 1963. Excerpts available online: <www.illuminats.ru/component/
content/article/31---xi-xv-/1275-the-songs-on-the-battle-of-kosovo-qmurat-on-the-ko
sovo-fieldq-qking-lazar-and-queen-milica-serbia>, access: 13.04.2012.
245
“Вместе со своим мужем она подает силу свыше и утешение страждущей ныне
Сербии”. The life available online: <http://days.pravoslavie.ru/Life/life6935.htm>, access:
13.05.2012 (my translation – D.G.). the saint’s memorial in Russia: July 19 .
246
Ј. Ђорђевић-Јовановић, “Цар Лазар и царица Милица у грчкој књижевности”, При
лози за књижевност и језик, историју и фолклор, књ. 76, Београд 2010, p. 95. Available
online: <www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0350-6673/2010/0350-66731076095D.pdf>, access:
15.05.2012.
247
Ibidem, p. 100.
82 Part I
territories under Croatian rule. Intervention with the Germans resulted in

their remains being handed over to the Serbs. The then puppet government of
Milan Nedić made this event a national and religious holiday. The relics were
brought to Belgrade on 14 April 1942 in a solemn procession and placed in
the capital’s Cathedral. The next day, deputy of the arrested patriarch Gabriel
Dožić, Metropolitan Joseph Cvijović, celebrated a solemn supplication liturgy
(moleben, Greek paraklis) in the presence of the government. The Eulogy to
Prince Lazar (Pohvala knezu Lazaru) by Milica was read out during the liturgy.
Due to the saint’s connection with the tragedy on Kosovo Field and the
situation of the country today, “after Kosovo”, the veneration of the princess
gains particular significance in the context of the separation of Kosovo and
Metohija from Serbia. In a 2005 sermon by Bishop Jovan (Purić) delivered
during the celebrations of St. Sava248, Milica is invoked as a ruler devoted to God
and the nation, and also, or perhaps above all, as the ruler of an enslaved state.
The situation of Serbia during Milica’s reign is a benchmark for the present,
when the clergyman rhetorically asks: “Шта би нам данас ова Света књегиња
поручила после окупације Косова и Метохије?”249. Quoting excerpts of the
saint’s Life by Danilo III, the preacher replies: “Сетимо се само њеног житија,
како богољубива и народољубива Милица се трену из своје и свеопште
туге и »узе на се ревност мушку« те поче храбро и мудро владати својим
народом. Да ли ми имамо ту мудрост и да ли је молимо од Бога данас?”250.
The cult of the saintly ruler is thus updated by analogy to past events; Kosovo
was again lost to the “dissenters”, hence the focus on those who fought for
Kosovo, its Serbianness and the Orthodox Church (Svetosavlje), who with
Prince Lazar’s “loza” extend the sacred Loza Nemanjića, set up to strengthen
Orthodoxy in Serbia. Milica’s treatment of the relics of the national saints,
“a blessing of the Serbian land” and “a consolation of the nation” is shown
as exemplary, especially her efforts to transfer the relics of St. Petka and her
concern for the safety of the mortal remains of Prince Lazar and their transfer
from Pristina to Ravanica. There is also the motif of just punishment for the
248
Text online: <http://pravoslavlje.spc.rs/broj/909/tekst/ukrepi-decu-moju-u-blagovernos-
ti/>, access: 20.05.2012.
249
“Ukrepi decu moju u blagovernosti”. Available online: <http://pravoslavlje.spc.rs/broj/909
/tekst/ukrepi-decu-moju-u-blagovernosti/>, access: 20.05.2012.
250
Ibidem.
sins of a nation that does not keep its commitments to (“its”) God, unlike
“forefather” Lazar. Jovan (Purić) introduces him into literature by quoting the
words of Milica’s prayer preserved in the Dečani Monastery: “Умилостиви
се на грехе моје, укрепи децу моју у благоверности и благоденствију, да
у благочешћу послуже Теби, Богу своме, као господин и родитељ њихов
Светопочивши кнез Лазар”251. Furthermore, the prayer draws attention to the
monastic dimension of Milica’s holiness: her special devotion to the monastic
life expressed in fasting and prayer, in helping the sick, the abandoned and
all those in need.
In the contemporary teaching of the Orthodox clergy, she becomes a para
gon of understanding the magnitude of spiritual matters, of the supernatural life
being superior to the temporal one. Let us quote an excerpt from the sermon of
Bishop Jovan of Šumadija on the feast day of saint Despot Stephen Lazarević:
Нисам скептик, верујем у победу, Хришћанин мора да верује у победу,

али ми се чини, да се овај наш Српски народ и данас налази у оним истим
временима, у временима као пред пресудну битку на Пољу Косову. Чини ми
се да се и данас пред нас, пред Српски народ, поставља питање, коме ћемо
да се определимо, за које царство, земаљско или небеско. А знамо за шта су
се определили и Свети кнез Лазар и деспот Стефан и царица Милица – за
Царство Небеско. Зато их данас и спомињемо, зато се данас и окупљамо око
ове деспотове задужбине, да га замолимо да нам Бог буде милостив, да нам
да мудрости, да нам да крепости252.
Once again, history comes full circle. Despite the passage of centuries,
Serbia is today at a pivotal point in its history, and the nation is constantly
being forced to make dramatic choices, like Milica in the past. What Serbia
lacks, however, is the princess’s great spirit, fortitude, awareness of faith,
courage, and soundness of choice.
251
“Ukrepi decu moju u blagovernosti”. Available online: <http://pravoslavlje.spc.rs/broj/
909/tekst/ukrepi-decu-moju-u-blagovernosti/>, access: 20.05.2012.
252
Носите бреме један другога (Галатима 6, 2). Беседа епископа шумадијског госпо
дина Јована на дан прослављања светог деспота Стефана Лазаревића у Светонико
лајевском Манастиру Павловцу на Космају, <https://www.eparhija-sumadijska.org.rs/
библиотека/item/1230-носите-бреме-један-другога-галатима-6-2>, access: 06.09.2020.
Chapter IV
St. Angelina Branković

(of Serbia, Mother Angelina) –
July 30 and December 10
The day of commemoration of St. Angelina253 connected with the date of

her dormition, 30 July 1520, was probably added quite quickly to the feasts
in the Orthodox calendar. At first, her cult was connected with the figure of
St. Theodora of Alexandria (5th c.)254. Shortly after her death (between 1520
and 1526 or 1520 and 1530), the ruler began to be venerated as a saint as
“Mother Angelina”. The cult of Angelina as a saint of the Branković family is
most strongly developed in Vojvodina. In 1523, the tomb with the body of
Metropolitan Maxim (Branković), Angelina’s son, was opened, and probably on
the occasion of this ceremony the monks of the Krušedol Monastery began to
venerate as saints all members of the Branković family, including Angelina255.
Angelina Branković’s high position among Serbian saints is confirmed by the
number of her feast days. She has an independent holiday on July 30 (the day
of her dormition) and is also commemorated on December 10, the memorial
day of her son Jovan. Her name is mentioned in the Stikhera to Serbian saints
(Stihera Srbima Svetiteljima) for August 30. The saint’s name also appears in
hymnography dedicated to other Brankovićs: in a service in honour of their
son Jovan (December 10) and in an office dedicated to the entire family256.
253
The parts of the chapter dedicated to the hymnography were presented in the paper: “An-
gelina Branković: święta władczyni w hymnografii. Zarys problemu”, Poznańskie Studia
Slawistyczne, 5, 2013, p. 103–115.
254
See D. Gil, Serbska hymnografia…, p. 72; C. Милеуснић, op. cit., p. 176.
255
M.J. Јаковљевић, “Света мајка Ангелина (жена српског деспота Стефана Бранко
вића)”, Гласник Српске православне цркве 1961, бр. 10, p. 271.
256
Л. Павловић, оp. сit., p. 153.
86 Part I
Furthermore, Angelina is venerated by other local Orthodox Churches.

The Russian Orthodox Churc h commemorates her in the calendar on July 1
and December 10 as “Queen of Serbia, the righteous”, “despotess”.
The first veneration centre was the smaller Krušedol Church of the Meeting
of the Lord. In the 19th c., the saint’s cult spread further. The number of pilgrims
coming to Krušedol, especially women, increased. The order of the main
monastic feasts also changed; the feast of St. Angelina (July 30) replaced the
feast of St. Maxim (January 18), which had been celebrated as the most important
Krušedol slava until then. Around the mid-19th century, the July celebrations
turned into national demonstrations257. In his sermons, Archimandrite Nikanor
Grujić presented Angelina not only as the mother of Branković but transposed
this ideal of maternity onto the national level, regarding Angelina as the mother
of the entire Serbian people258. It was not long before the veneration of St.
Angelina in Vojvodina eclipsed the hitherto equivalent cults of two other native
saints, St. Anastasia and St. Helen of Anjou. Thanks to the Belgrade edition of
Srbljak (1861) by Metropolitan Mihailo, the cult of the saint also spread to the
Serbian Principality (Kneževina Srbija)259, although here, due to the different
socio-political situation, the ideals represented by Tsarina Milica and the mother
of the Jugović family come to the fore.
The whole Branković family cultivated the tradition of care for the Orthodox
Church initiated by the Nemanjić dynasty, founding monasteries and churches
and supporting them financially. In 1486 and 1496, the Branković family
also issued privileges for the Chilandar Monastery, an act which, according
to Svetlana Tomin, was a programmatic gesture and indicated the spiritual
and ideological bond between the two dynasties260. In 1499, Angelina and
Jovan donated money to another monastery on Mount Athos, Esfigmenu
(Esphigmenou), founded in the 5th century by the Byzantine Empress
Pulcheria, probably to support its restoration after it had been plundered
by pirates and burned in the 14th century. According to Momčilo Spremić,
257
M. Тимотијевић, “Од светитеља до историјскицх хероја. Култ светих деспота Бран
ковића у ХХ веку”, Култ светих на Балкану, 2002, бр. 7, p. 128.
258
See ibidem, p. 129.
259
A state that emerged from the Serbian national uprisings of 1804–1815 and existed be-
tween 1815 and 1882. In 1882 it was transformed into the Kingdom of Serbia.
260
C. Томин, Мужаствене жене…, p. 182.
Chapter IV: St. Angelina Branković 87
following the Nemanjić dynasty, the Brankovićs were the most generous
donors to the Athos monasteries261.
The cult of Angelina Branković is one of the most important Serbian cults
in the liturgical calendar. It has the status of a secondary holiday262. Little
is known about Angelina herself; she was born around 1440 in Albania as
the only child of George (Golem) Arianiti Komnen (ca. 1400–1461; 1383–
1462) from his marriage to Maria Muzaka. The family was distinguished in
the struggle against the Porta as George instigated an uprising against the
Ottoman Empire (1432–1436). Angelina’s marriage to the blind despot Stephen
Branković (1417–1476; 1458–1459) probably took place in 1460. After the
fall of Smederev, the whole family took refuge in Italy (Friuli region), where
Stephen died in 1476263. It is not known exactly how long Angelina stayed
in Italy after his death. What is certain is that in 1486 she returned to Srem
at the urging of Hungarian King Matthias Corvinus, from whom the family
received estates near Kupinov. The sons were given the right to use the title
of despot again yet they were obliged to perform military service and protect
the Hungarian borders against the Turks264. The relatively peaceful life of
the Branković family was disrupted by the death of their younger son Jovan
in 1502. Angelina, together with her son Đorđe, by then monk Maksim (as
of ca. 1497), was again forced into exile, this time in Wallachia, hosted by
hospodar Radu IV the Great (1467–1508; 1495–1508). Fearing desecration
by the Turks of the bodies of Stephen and Jovan, which by then had been
considered as relics, she took them with her. Before long, Maksim became
an important person in Wallachia and received the position of Wallachian
261
M. Спремић, Бранковићи и Света Гора. Друга казивања о Светој Гори, Београд
1997, p. 98.
262
The Orthodox Church distinguishes between three categories of holidays – grand holi-
days (mainly related to the Lord and St. Mary), secondary ones (a few cults, 6–8, in the
calendar) and small ones (most local saints). See R.F. Taft, “The Veneration of the Saints
in the Byzantine Liturgical Tradition”, in: Θυσία αἰνέσεως. Mélanges liturgiques offerts à la
mémoire de l’Archevêque Georges Wagner (1930–1993), eds. J. Getcha and A. Lossky, Paris
2005, p. 353–368. The text is available online in a 2007 Russian translation by S.V. Golova-
nov: Р. Тафт, Почитание святых в византийской литургической традиции. Online:
<http://www.kiev-orthodox.org/site/worship/1660/>, access: 11.07.2016.
263
B. Ћоровић, Историја Срба, Ниш 2001, p. 376.
264
P. Самарџић, P. Веселиновић, T. Поповић, Историја српског народа у 6 књига. Срби
под туђинском влашћу 1537–1699, књ. 3, т. 1, Београд 2000, p. 131.
88 Part I
Metropolitan265. He also became involved in diplomatic activities on behalf of

voivode Radu. The situation changed in 1509, when Mihnea I the Wrongdoer
(?–1510; 1509–1510), son of Vlad the Impaler (1431–1476; 1448, 1456–1462
and 1476), became the Wallachian hospodar. The new ruler was not favourably
disposed towards the Brankovićs, so they decided to hit the road once more
and returned to Srem via Buda. Angelina placed the relics of her husband and
son in the Krušedol Monastery266. It is assumed that even before 1509 and her
return to Srem, Angelina became a nun at the Obeda Monastery (founded by
Maksim Branković in 1501), which is confirmed by her signature “smerna
monahinja” (“humble nun”)267 in the letter she sent to the Muscovite Prince
Vassily III (1479–1533; 1505–1533). She spent the last years of her life in
a convent near Krušedol. She probably died between 1516 and 1520268. She
was buried in the monastery’s Church of the Meeting of the Lord, which she
herself had founded. When it turned out several years later that the body of
the deceased remained intact in the grave, it was solemnly transferred to the
Krušedol Monastery and placed together with the remains of her husband
and sons269. In 1716 the Turks burned the monastery and the mortal remains
of the Branković family members in revenge for the lost battle. Angelina’s left
hand is still preserved today in Krušedol270.
The corpus of hagiographical texts dedicated to Angelina consists of
two prologue (i.e. short) lives. The older of the two is found in the Krušedol
collection in a manuscript July minea from the 16th c.271 and was published
in Rimnički Srbljak. A more recent version, slightly different from the earlier
one, was written in the 19th century by Metropolitan Mihailo, who prepared
the Belgrade edition of Srbljak272.
In Filaret Gumilevsky’s set of texts, the life of Angelina was not distinguished
as an independent one on July 30 (day of her death). She is venerated together
265
Ibidem, p. 131.
266
See C. Томин, Деспотица и монахиња…, op. cit., p. 5.
267
Ibidem, p. 9, 11, 12.
268
Ibidem, p. 9; Л. Павловић, op. cit., p. 152.
269
C. Томин, Деспотица и монахиња…, op. cit., p. 90.
270
271
Ibidem, p. 152.
272
D. Gil, Serbska hymnografia…, p. 71; Л. Павловић, op. cit., p. 152, 154.
with her son Jovan and husband on December 10: Память блаженныхъ
деспотовъ Iоанна и его родителей Стефана и Ангелины Бранковичей.
The service, which originated in the Krušedol Monastery, may have been
of great importance for the dissemination of the cult. The original text, which
has survived to the present day, is preserved in the Museum of the Serbian
Orthodox Church in Belgrade under No. 164. We do not know the author
of the service; the only hint relating to his person can be found in the third
stikhera “na chvalite”, which mentions the Krušedol Monastery, with which
the author was most likely tied273. Đorđe Trifunović believes that a separate
Office in Honour of St. Angelina (Služba prepodobnoj Angelini) was written
between 1520 and 1530, shortly after her death (if we accept the year 1520 as
the correct date) or only 10 years later274.
In the typicon, the feast of Angelina belongs to the medium holidays of
the first rank, it is marked with a red cross and a red semicircle, which means
that the liturgy consists of an all-night vigil with a polyeleos, at the matins
the bogorodichen is read out along with two canons of the saint and a great
praise (slavoslovlje). As the only one of the offices dedicated to the women
saints of Serbia, it was reprinted in all editions of Srbljak (1714, 1761, 1765,
1861, and 1986)275. The tropar and kondak in honour of the saint are also
part of the Zbornik compiled in the years 1730–1740 by hieromonk Gavrilo
Stefanović276.
In the earliest editions of the Srbljak from Rakovac (1714) and Rimnik
(1761), the Office is among the texts bridging texts dedicated to Serbian rulers
from the so called Raška period with hymns dedicated to the Branković dynasty
as continuators of the spiritual and political tradition277. Archbishop Mihailo,
when compiling another edition of the Srbljak in Belgrade (1861), included
the text of the service among the works newly added to the earlier corpus.
273
D. Gil, Serbska hymnografia…, p. 72.
274
O Србљаку. Студије, ред. Ђ. Трифуновић, Београд 1970, p. 331.
275
In a general-interest edition of Srbljak (1970), edited thanks to the efforts of Đorđe Trifu-
nović, the Office of Angelina was prepared for a wide readership and to promote the saint.
The authors of the volume provided the collected texts in a modernised transcription along
with the New Serbian versions of the works. A Polish translation of an excerpt of ode IV
of the canon of the Service to Saint Angelina Branković is available in: Dar słowa…, p. 167.
276
277
Ibidem, p. 34.
90 Part I
The reason for such a shift was the hierarch’s hesitation over the printing of
hymnography dedicated to holy women of the Serbian Church, for which he
saw no place, as follows from his letter to Archimandrite Hrisant of Peć278.
In the Srbljak from the mid-1980s, the service in honour of St. Angelina is
one of four dedicated to Serbian women rulers, symbols of breakthrough
moments in the history of the nation: St. Ana Nemanjić – a symbol of the
origin of an independent state and Church; St. Jevgenija (Milica) – a symbol
of the defeat suffered on the Kosovo Field; St. Angelina – a symbol of the fall
of the Serbian empire; and St. Zlata of Meglen – a symbol of the struggle for
independence with the Turks.
The foundation of the concept of power and the image of the reigning
monarch are founded on the perception of Angelina as co-heir and co-partici
pant in the sacred dynastic tradition of the Brankovićs after the Nemanjić
dynasty, most clearly shown in the text dedicated to Jovan (Office in honour of St.
Jovan Branković, the despot [Služba sv. Jovanu Brankoviću despotu srpskom])279.
In the spiritual chain of “heirs”, she is mentioned after St. Sava, Simeon, Stephen,
and Maksim280. The role of wife and mother places her at the centre of the
genealogy, giving her the function of continuing the sacred history of Serbian
rulers and passing on the sacred deposit to future generations. The author
of the text mentions the name of the son Jovan after that of his mother. The
traditional symbol of the vine, planted and nurtured by the hand of God
to produce offshoots similar to itself (Jn 15:5), grapevines, fruit of the vine
(wine grapes) or olive shoots – signs of God’s election, blessing, prosperity,
success of the dynasty, its country and subjects – all apply to St. Angelina. The
same meaning is conveyed by the image of a tree planted by running water,
which bears fruit in its time, its leaves never wither (Ps 1:1–3; Jer 17:5–8)281
278
Ibidem, p. 82–84.
279
“Служба св. Јовану, деспоту српском”, у: Срблјак, Београд 1986, p. 174–191.
280
GV, glory, tone 6. Similarly, in the glory after the Litija stikheras, tone 5: “(…) let the na-
tions marvel at the grace we have received again, let the holy church of the Divine Mother,
which has at first a foothold in Simeon and Sava, and now in Stephen the despot and the
Reverend Angelina (…)”.
281
“You are like a tree planted at the mouth of waters, which has borne its fruit for God, and
its leaves have withstood the winds of the devil; gather us in the shade of your branches.
(…)”, GV, stikhera for ‘Gospodi vozvach’, tone 6.
or a fertile land to which mother is likened in the service in her honour282.

The divine origin of all the royal dynasties of Serbia and their supernatural,
messianic mission for the world is further expressed by the idea of the “last
families”, which is a transformation of the biblical image of the last times (days)
(Deut 28:13; Heb 1:2), which at the same time conveys the idea of the eternal
continuity of the dynasties and their domain under divine protection. Each of
the aforementioned figures encapsulates the prospect of indestructibility. St.
Angelina is special here in that she is directly related to eschatological reality:
“Like a bright candlestick thou hast revealed thyself to the last families by the
light of thy miracles; thou dost enlighten us always, Angelina the illustrious,
and lighten the devil’s darkness (…)” (Litija stikhera 1, tone 2)283.
The idea of continuity provides a point of support for the autonomy of
the figure of the saint, so that she can be presented not only as a reflection of
her predecessors on Serbian thrones, but also as a matrix charting a course
for her successors. The autonomy of the image is expressed through the iden
tification of her person with St. Paul’s holy root (Rom 11:16; GV, sedalen
after 2nd kathisma, tone 4), customarily used among symbols of myths of
the origins, foundation theories, informing the supernatural of the described
phenomena. Such a root in the Office in honour of St. Jovan Branković, the
despot (Služba sv. Jovanu Brankoviću despotu srpskom) is St. Simeon, the
founder of the Serbian state, the organiser of the Church. Continuing in the
manner of biblical representation, the hymnographer shows how Angelina,
the offshoot from the sacred root, unites with the root, turns into it, gives
birth to and sustains everything that grows from it and continues to develop
(Rom 11:17–18). She gives birth to and raises sons who become “food” for the
Serbian people (Jovan’s service). In this way, through Angelina, a community
of rulers and a nation is built, drawing potential from the community of the
dynasty with the only true “founder” and “owner” of the Serbian vineyard,
God. The Brankovićs, like the Nemanjićs before them, a dynasty “born” of God,
sacralise the nation, continuously called the New Israel (GV, glory, tone. 3)
and the holy flock (canon 9, 4). The unity of the vision of continuation and
new beginning in the figure of Angelina is expressed by the succinct praise of
282
GV, stikhera 2 for ‘Gospodi vozvach’, tone 6; canon 3, 4.
283
If not otherwise stated, all quotations and descriptions are from Office in honour of St.
Mother Angelina,in: Срблјак, Београд 1986.
92 Part I
the saint, placed under her icon in Srbljak from Rimnik: “Venerable mother,
glorious Angelina,/ having praised your children and husband fervently,/
you yourself proved worthy of them/ having seen their famous death…”. The
image of saintly rulers, “fathers of the nation”, consisted of duties towards
their subjects. This image during Angelina’s lifetime is reduced to the tasks of
guardianship in the spirit of Christian charity and the pious education of her
sons for the holy rule of the new Serbian Israel. The concept of supernatural
patronage develops the full ideal of the “mother of the nation”; her image is
defined by the assumptions of the national identity established since the time
of the Nemanjićs, based on the symphony of state and church, Orthodox faith,
love of the homeland and service to the Church.
Angelina is the personification of holy monarchs and, following the model
of the Mother of God, an intercessor for the salvation of the world (ikos
after ode 6 of the canon)284. She is depicted in the figures of the helmsman of
a boat tossed by a storm (canon 1, 4), the archangel Michael fighting against
Satan (e.g.: canon, ode 6, 1), a solider of Christ285, guardian of a house (ikos),
defender of true faith (GV, sedalen after polyeleyos, vol. 8), enlightening the
infidel (Litija stikhera 2, tone 2). She has the principal features of a commander,
charismatic gifts of the spirit; she is strong (canon 7, 3), invincible (GV, sedalen
after polyeleyos, tone 8), and follows the good of her people. Images of dynastic
intercession for the people recur several times in the text. They are captured
in the scene of deesis or prayers offered to God by Angelina and the rest of
the dynasty (canon 6, 3; 9, 4). Her intercession helps in every need, heals the
sick, comforts the grieving, protects from enemies, and guarantees peace286:
“Come, all of you, … bring your requests from the depths of your soul, asking
God to give you grace, to heal you of all diseases, to forgive you your sins, and
for all things that we ask for” (GV, glory, tone 8).
284
The quotations cited below, unless otherwise stated, are from: Office in honour of St. An
gelina Branković. “Служба св. Ангелини Бранковић деспотици српској”, у: Србљак,
Боеград 1986, p. 469–479.
285
“You have received strength from God,/ to bring health to those suffering from impure
spirits/ and to chase away deceitful spirits/ you have armed yourself with God’s guidance
and defeated the prince of darkness (…)”, canon 7, 3. The topos of a soldier is present also
in ode 3, troparion 3 and 4.
286
The cult is centred around the saint’s relics; they will guarantee the fulfilment
of the ruler’s duties as visible proof of God’s presence among the Serbs. Since
the beginnings of the Serbian state, relics have had political and spiritual
significance. As Izabela Lis notes: “Tombs and relics became peculiar defensive
shields, places where the nation made requests and gave thanks, where the
sick recovered; finally, they were the vertical link between the sacred and
the profane and the horizontal line of community”287. The importance of the
mortal remains of the saint is indicated by their identification with the ark of
the covenant (canon 8:4), which is not only a divine attribute but also a biblical
sign of power, strength in defence, victory (Numbers 35–36; 1 Sm 4:3).
The mausoleum with the body of the saint and other Brankovićs has in
relevant literature the meaning of the centre of the country, which gathers
the nation, uniting it around the ruling dynasty in common faith, Church,
prayer, life experience288, and struggle. The relics of “father with his sons,
mother with her children” are depicted as a flower of a fragrant rose, whose
aroma surrounds and sanctifies the faithful (GV, glory, tone 4). The spiritual
message of the rulers additionally opens outwards, to other countries, also to
the non-Serbian, non-Orthodox element, in order to integrate it with itself
or to fight against it:
All the surrounding lands and cities,/ come to New Israel,/ let us gather together/
in honour of our mother Angelina,/ with joyful soul and heart/ let us surround
her miraculous tomb,/ the grace of healing receiving/ from the grace that lives in
her/ for she generously grants it/ to those who come with faith to her/ and calls
to a wedding all her countrymen,/ to honour her holy memory,/ by calling out to
her: / Angelina the venerable,/ blessed Stephen,/ saint Maximus,/ Jovan the just,/
your flock which you have gathered/ and the Orthodox Church which you have
loved/ protect from foreign invasions/ and pray for our souls (GV, glory, tone 3)289.
Krušedol, sanctified by the presence of the relics of the Branković, and

then also of other distinguished Serbian spiritual leaders: Patriarch Arsenije
III Čarnojević, Metropolitan Isaja Djaković, Patriarch Arsenije IV Jovanović
287
I. Lis, Śmierć…, p. 107.
288
As “the glory of faith and life” of her subjects, suffering misfortune, cruelty and violence
from “strangers”, Angelina personifies the nation (canon 6, 3; 9, 4; GV, glory, tone 3).
289
See also glory in tone 2 for small compline.
94 Part I
Šakabenta, will in the 18th c. become a metropolis and a spiritual centre of

Serbs in Vojvodina290.
The model of government with theocratic features, developed in all cults
of the dynasty, provided a new rationale for the religious and political agenda
of the Church motivating the process of taking over state functions by the
Church, which began after the loss of independence in the mid-15th century291.
The sanctity of the Brankovićs also became a kind of tool in the struggle to
consolidate the ecclesiastical power of the renewed patriarchate in Peć, when
religion began to function as “synonymous with statehood”292.
The image of Angelina created by the author of the Office is rooted in the
idea of martyrdom, exemplified by the sacrifice of Lazar Hrebeljanović on the
Kosovo Field. An unyielding faith in the righteousness of the struggle and the
ultimate spiritual victory rewarded with a wreath of glory, a symbol of eternal
blessing (1 Cor 9:24–25; 2 Tim 4:6–8; Phil 3.14; 4:1)293, are also going to be
significant in ideological terms. The personal struggles of the saint are related
to the conditions of Serbian captivity, which, in the struggle to preserve their
religious and national identity, will need the values represented by Angelina:
trust in God (after Is 40:31), unity of faith, community of the Church and the
nation, mercy, fortitude, and perseverance in struggle.
The idea of the divinity of power in the Office is rarely manifested directly;
more often than not we find it in the label of the situation and in the symbolism
used, developed in earlier centuries294. These, however, constitute the universality
of the image of a saint nun-ruler. She therefore becomes the ideological and
spiritual centre of the nation, the symbol of the lost statehood, as well as a factor
consolidating the nation, which in times of captivity enabled the nation to
preserve its national identity by cultivating the memory of the past, arousing
religious and patriotic feelings, while after the restoration of independence it
fostered the national ideology.
290
Ђ. Слијепчевић, Историја Српске Православне Цркве, књ. I, Београд 2002, p. 264.
291
Subsequent patriarchs, implementing the idea of the Orthodox head as an ethnarch, will
call themselves “political leaders” and continuators of Stephen Nemanjić’s work (D. Gil,
Prawosławie…, p. 75–77; M. Dąbrowska-Partyka, Literatura pogranicza, pogranicze lite
ratury, Kraków 2004, p. 125).
292
293
O Србљаку…, p. 35, 66.
294
See ibidem, p. 45–46.
The ideas of the sacred dynastic tradition are also continued by the cult of
Angelina Branković. The founding activity places the Branković dynasty within
the framework of the tradition of St. Sava; they are its heirs and continuators.
It will determine the direction of clearly ideological ecclesial and political
activity, which will focus on the memory of the splendour of ancestors and
the Orthodox faith.
With concern for the mortal remains of her husband and sons, and for their
dignified burial in their homeland after years of wandering outside Serbia,
Angelina initiated their liturgical cult. The Office played an important role
in the process of creating and consolidating the image of the saintly ruler in
the spiritual culture of the Orthodox Serbs. Apart from its strictly liturgical
function, from the very beginning it also served to convey to the faithful an
elementary set of national religious and political ideas. It became an expression
of the SOC’s aspiration to maintain the Serbian native tradition, despite the
changing and turbulent fortunes of the state and the Church over the centuries.
The hymnography used to frame the cult of St. Angelina was a response to the
social and religious need to elevate more native saints to the altars, who would
attest to God’s protection of Serbia during the period of captivity, strengthen
the national spirit, and contribute to stabilizing the situation of the country.
The first decades of the 16th century were favourable for such activities, as
they were marked by relative peace and an easing of conflicts between the
Serbs and the Porta. In the absence of foreign assistance, the Serbs, as Đoko
Slijepčević writes, came to the conclusion that armed struggle was futile and
stopped the actions begun with the Battle of Marica in 1371295.
Angelina and the other members of the Branković dynasty, as the last
rulers of independent Serbia and as the continuators of the traditions of
St. Sava and of Kosovo, anointed to this function by God, were created as
patrons of the idea of the spiritual and political rebirth of the nation. The
hymnography represented by the Office reflects a turn towards its own tradition
and spirituality. Its vivid example is the attempt by Smederevo metropolitan
Pavle in the first decades of the 16th century to restore the patriarchate in
Peć, the capital of St. Sava296. There is some debate as to how successful this
295
Ђ. Слијепчевић, op. cit., p. 212.
296
See different historians’ opinions on the date of this attempt: ibidem, p. 212–213.
96 Part I
attempt was. The supporters of the positive results of this event claim that they
are proved by the restitution of the patriarchate and the decisive steps against
the initiator of the undertaking, taken by the Archbishop of Ohrid Prochor
in 1532 and 1541;297 he convened two synods to prevent the autonomy of the
Serbian Church. The time span between the synods raises the possibility that
Pavle came to the patriarchal throne earlier than Makarije, appointed in 1557298.
Metropolitan Pavle’s action, then seen as a “rebellion” against Ohrid, drew
the attention of the Porta to the Serbian efforts to renew the autocephalous
Church, but the Turks did not try and prevent them. It should be emphasised
that the Turkish authorities in their policy towards their subordinate states
were guided by Sharia law, which recognised the inseparability of secular and
religious life, which ensured relative religious tolerance for the Serbs and, in
a broader context, also contributed to the Porta’s favour towards the renewal of
the patriarchate in 1557, which assumed the role of the spiritual and political
leader of the nation. Vladimir Ćorović and Đoko Slijepčević also stress that the
early 16th century was favourable for the development of writing and a whole
series of books were printed not only abroad, in Venice (Božidar Vuković’s
printing house, 1519–1538), but also in domestic printing houses: in Mileševa,
Goražde, Gračanica, Rujna, and Belgrade299.
The Office formulates only part of the saint’s image, mainly her being a nun,
where the features of the model of a holy ruler are represented to a lesser
degree300. The overall picture consists of all the works in which she appears.
Apart from hagiography, the hymnography dedicated to Jovan Branković is
especially important.
Angelina’s memory is celebrated in the all-Serbian annual commemoration
of the Orthodox Church. On this occasion, in addition to the festivities in
Krušedol, an icon of the saint and her life (in which the Orthodox Church
recalls her bravery, piety and devotion) appear on the SOC Patriarchate website,
along with a prayer for intercession:
297
The positions of researchers are divided on this issue, see ibidem, p. 212–213.
298
P. Грујић, “Павле, архиепископ пећки”, in: Народна енциклопедија СХС, књ. III, Загреб
1928, p. 260; B. Ћоровић, Историја…, p. 416–417.
299
B. Ћоровић, Историја…, p. 416; Ђ. Слијепчевић, op. cit., p. 200–204.
300
The poetic characterisation of the saint as a nun is conventionalized and repeats the topoi
established in hymnography. The text contains few historical facts from the ruler’s life.
Теби, изабраној војвоткињи Христовој, која си својим благочестивим

и страдалним животом и великом љубављу према ближњима стекла слободу
код Господа, узносимо топлу синовску молитву: Помози нам, Мајко наша, да
се спасемо од зла овога света како би једном наследили Царство Небеско и
угледавши тебе у њему ускликнули: Радуј се, Преподобна Ангелина, Мајко
небеске доброте и милости!301.
301
Преподобна Ангелина – мајка небеске доброте и милости, <www.spc.rs/sr/prepodob-
na_angelina_majka_nebeske_dobrote_milosti_2>, access: 12.08.2020.
Chapter V
St. Paraskеva-Petka (of Serbia,

of Belgrade, of Epivates, of Tarnovo,
of Bulgaria, of Jassy, the Young,
of the Balcans) – October 14302
Petka, as can be guessed from the number of nicknames, is one of the most
venerated women saints in Slavic lands (including Poland303 and Russia), and
in Romania, where her body is buried today. The figure of the hermit was
probably from the start associated by the Slavs with the martyrs of by same
name, Paraskeva of Rome (26 July) and Paraskeva of Iconia (28 October)304,
which must have expedited the dissemination of her cult. The 1900 liturgical
calendar included all these saints. More or less until the end of the 20th century,
some Orthodox circles omitted the August celebration in honour of Paraskeva
of Rome, now reinstated by some parishes305. In popular piety, the feast of the
Roman martyr and hermit has been fused into one, called “summer Saint Petka”,
crowning the so-called “women’s summer work”, and the hermits and martyrs
of Iconium, “autumn Saint Petka”. The first feast commemorates Paraskeva the
Roman and the transfer of relics of Paraskeva the anchorite from Bulgaria to
Serbia, while the other day commemorates the dormition of the hermit. Petka
302
Excerpts of the chapter have been published as an article: “Św. Paraskiewa-Petka z Epiwatu
– kilka uwag o serbizacji kultu”, Latopisy Akademii Supraskiej 10: Вѣнецъ хваленїѧ. Studia
ofiarowane profesorowi Aleksandrowi Naumowowi na jubileusz 70-lecia, 2019, p. 145–155.
303
Not only in the Orthodox Church, but also in the Greek Catholic Church.
304
M. Kuczyńska, Południowosłowiańska poezja liturgiczna w zbiorach bibliotek polskich,
Szczecin 2003, p. 126–167; J. Stradomski, “Święta Paraskiewa (Petka) w literaturze, kul-
turze i duchowości Słowian południowych i wschodnich”, in: Święci w kulturze i duchowoś
ci dawnej i współczesnej Europy, ed. W. Stępniak-Minczewa, Z.J. Kijas, Kraków 1999, p. 84.
305
В. Никчевић, “Пренос моштију Преподобне Петке Срске”, in: Света Петка – слава
и заштита верних, уредио протојереј-ставрофор Р. Нкичевић, Цетиње 2009, p. 73.
100 Part I
of Epivates in Serbia is called “of Belgrade” or “of Serbia”. The summer Petka,
the martyr, is (erroneously) nicknamed “of Tarnovo”, “of Trnovo” or “Trnovka”.
Contemporary researcher Darko Ivanović, who himself links the anchorite
with Petka of Rome, observes: “Велики број српских цркава посвећеној
је много познатијој преподобној мати Параскеви (Трнова Петка), те је
неки верници замењују са »римском« Светом Петком, а посвећена им је
и заједничка црквена слава”306. It is hard to ascertain today when the mix-up
occurred307. One can guess that from the beginning of the presence of Petka’s
remains in Serbia, some holidays were deliberately combined in order to
more easily introduce a new feast into the calendar. This must have been the
case with the memorial day of the transfer of Petka the hermit’s relics, which
both in Serbian manuscripts and in old prints is identical with the feast of
Paraskeva of Rome308.
The memory of the hermit became widespread among the Slavs when her
mortal remains were transferred from Greece to Bulgaria by Tsar Ivan Asen II
after the victory in the Battle of Klokotnitsa (1231). Having defeated the army
of the Byzantine Emperor Theodore Komnenus, the Tsar annexed to Bulgaria
vast lands in Thrace, Macedonia, Albania, opening to his country access to the
Black, White and Adriatic Seas. The circumstances in which the relics were
acquired made Paraskeva a symbol of the dignity of the Bulgarian ruler and
his state, a sign of the victory of Bulgarian army over the enemies, as well as
of God’s protection of Bulgaria. The author of a biography in honour of the
saint wrote: “(…) he [Ivan Asen II – D.G.] asked for true honour and glory
and fame, joy and merriment, invincible help and strengthening of his empire
not only in this century but also in the next one”309.
306
Д. Ивановић, “Црква Свете Петке у Великом Орашју”, Саборност 2008, 2, p. 247.
Available online: <https://casopis.sabornost.org/files/sabornost_II_2008_12.pdf>, access:
28.12.2018.
307
Преподобна мати Параскева. Житије, акатисти, чудеса, духовне песме светитељки,
прир. C. Лазаревић, Рума 2014, p. 183.
308
И. Руварац, Критика. I – О раду Милоша С. Милојевића у Гласнику, Летопис МС,
књ. 115, Нови Сад 1873, p. 172–178. Available online: <https://archive.org/details/Zbor
nikIlarionaRuvarca/page/n95 >, access: 28.12.2018.
309
Ziemscy aniołowie, niebiańscy ludzie. Anachoreci w bułgarskiej literaturze i kulturze, ed.
and introduction G. Minczew, Białystok 2002, p. 114. Transl. B. Kotyk.
Chapter V: St. Paraskеva-Petka 101
St. Petka was created as one of the most important saints in the pantheon of
Bulgarian holy men and women, on a par with St. Ivan of Rila. Authors wrote
new texts in her honour on the basis of already existing Greek ones, resulting in
an exceptionally rich corpus of hagiographies and hymns. The first life known
to scholars was apocrypha310, burned on the order of Nicholas IV Mouzalon
(1147–1151), Patriarch of Constantinople. A new version of the text was
written by deacon Basilik311. Neither of the texts have been preserved in their
originals; the latter is known in its 17th-century re-working by Metropolitan
Matthew312. In the second half of the 14th c., Bulgarian Patriarch Euthymius
of Tarnovo (ca. 1320/1330–ca. 1420)313 wrote an extensive life of the saint on
commission from Tsar Ivan Shishman (1371–1395). He drew on the so-called
first Prologue Life and the Greek life of deacon Basilik. Already in the 14th
century there were two editions of the text; the earlier one was longer (the
earlier copy from Zografski Zbornik comes from the latter half of the 14th c.)
and the abridged version from a later time (two copies from the 15th and 16th
century)314, probably both original, including one with an appended account of
the translatio of the saint’s relics by Gregory Tsamblak (ca. 1362–ca. 1419/20).
The re-edited text of St. Petka’s Life by Euthymius, with the Tsamblak text, is
the most widespread (over 20 copies), especially in Rus’315. On the basis of
the life by Euthymius, in the early 16th century Deacon Moses wrote a much-
abridged version of it, which later entered a book printed in Venice in 1536/38
by Božidar Vuković316. This edition was the core of the Modern Bulgarian
310
See e.g. С. Новаковић, “Апокрифно житије свете Петке”, Споменик СКА, ХХIХ, Бе
оград 1895, p. 28–32.
311
Ј. Stradomski, op. cit., p. 85, and also: Ziemscy aniołowie…, p. 99–101.
312
К. Иванова, “Житието на Петка Търновска от Патриарх Евтимий”, Староблгарска
литература 1980, 8, p. 14.
313
The translation of the life and translatio into Polish in: Ziemscy aniołowie…, p. 99–115.
Both texts translated by Beata Kotyk. An earlier transition of the life: Siedem niebios i zie
mia. Antologia dawnej prozy bułgarskiej, sel., transl., intro. T. Dąbek-Wirgowa, Warszawa
1983, p. 195–206.
314
Ziemscy aniołowie…, p. 100–101.
315
J. Stradomski, op. cit., p. 88. Emil Kalužniacki (Werke des Patriarchen von Bulgarien Eu
thymius (1375–1393), Wien 1901, p. LXV–LXXXV) mentions three manuscript editions
of the Life: 1. original; 2. extended; 3. abridged.
316
J. Stradomski, op. cit., p. 87. Text publication: S. Novaković, “Život sv. Petke. Od patriarha
bugarskoga Jeftimija”, Starine IX, Zagreb 1877, p. 48–59.
102 Part I
text, often published in damaskins and also widespread317. It was used by

Metropolitan of Moldova Varlaam (1590–1657), who in 1643 translated St.
Petka’s life in to Romanian. Varlaam’s Prologue Life was the basis for a new
version of the text, compiled by Dimitry Kantemir in the 17th century318.
A set of lives dedicated to St. Paraskeva and written in Bulgaria would not
be complete without a short anonymous text about the transfer of the saint’s
relics from Kalikratia to Tarnovo; it was discovered by Stefan Kozhucharov in
a 15th-cenutry manuscript from the Rila Monastery library (ref. 2/8 (27))319.
The Bulgarian hymnography dedicated to the saint was impressive. Authors,
also using Greek prototypes, composed several different editions of the services.
A copy of the oldest Slavic service is found in the thirteenth-century Dragan’s
Minei from the library of the Zograf Monastery on Holy Mount Athos and
is a combination of the Slavic text of the service with the Greek service of
St. Paraskeva the Martyr320. An original text is so-called Tarnovo service in
honour of St. Petka, written after Kozhucharov in Tarnovo when the saint’s
body was placed there, possibly in the last decades before the fall of the capital
of Bulgaria321.
On the ideological level, the transfer of the saint’s body to Tarnovo, the
capital of the country and the seat of the renewed patriarchate (1235), was
part of the vivid religious and cultural policy of the Bulgarian emperors. The
act of transferring the holy remains was primarily an element of the medieval
317
More on this: P. Olteanu, “Damaskinský” prúd v slovansko-rumunskej literatúre: referáty
a prednášky prednesené na VII-om kongrese slavistov, Varšava 21–27.VIII.1973, Bucurș ti
1973, p. 31–33.
318
J. Stradomski, op. cit., p. 87.
319
С. Кожухаров, Неизвестно произведение на старобългарската поезия, “Старобълга
рска литература”, кн. I, София 1971, p. 289–322, text of the service on p. 303–322. Polish
translation: Ziemscy aniołowie…, p. 113–115.
320
Paraskeva’s hymnography was studied by Marzanna Kuczyńska, who divided the texts pre-
served to this day into five compositional types, differently interrelated: type I, type II,
type IIa, type III, type IV, type V (M. Kuczyńska, Południowosłowiańska…, p. 130–138).
Type I is the most represented – 24 copies; it is a variant of the oldest Slavonic service from
Dragan’s minea. In Polish Cyrillic manuscripts there are 41 copies of services in honour of
St. Paraskeva. Interestingly, in the Polish variants of the service we do not find any infor-
mation about the transfer of Paraskeva’s relics to Jassy; the only mention of this is given in
the Modern Bulgarian life included in the so-called Berlin damaskin.
321
M. Kuczyńska, Południowosłowiańska…, p. 128. The existence of this variant of service in
Serbian manuscripts has not yet been studied in depth, see T. Суботин-Голубовић, op.
cit., p. 349.
idea of translatio imperii, most often implemented via translatio Hierosolymi322,

a manner of sanctifying a place and space323. Relics are the focus of the cult,
express the saint’s dynamis and praesentia in the world. The faithful gather
around the relics, praying for deliverance from the enemy. Faith in their
protective power in moments of danger is the hope of salvation/deliverance.
Moreover, the advent of the holy remains stimulates literary activity. It gives
artists the impetus to translate, re-edit old texts or write new ones. Petka’s
flexible and conventionalized formula of holiness provided excellent literary
material in this respect. In the hagiographies and hymns created in Bulgaria,
the all-Christian literary image of the saint is expanded with new attributes
and functions. The theological meaning of the texts is also enhanced; the saint
is called “the bridegroom’s chosen one”, “the pure dove of Christ”, “the wise
virgin”, “the lily found among thorns” (Pnp 2:2), “the heavenly King’s chosen
woman”. As Ivan Biljarski notes in his reflections, Petka is endowed by analogy
with epithets related to the image of the Mother of God as the defender and
protector of Constantinople (Pokrov)324, for example:
You are the ornament, the advocate and the guardian of Bulgaria! (…) Thanks to
you our town is strengthened and victorious. How many kings and barbarians
wanted to destroy and humiliate your famous city of Tarnovo, where your reverend
body lies! But thou, like a brave king, hast driven away their shameful faces with
the power given to thee by thy Bridegroom Christ.325.
Constructing St. Petka’s image as an imago Virginis had a clear religious

and political objective: Thanks to the presence of the holy relics, the then
capital of Bulgaria was to become the New Jerusalem, and the protection of
the heavenly patroness was to legitimise the authority of the ruling dynasty
and guarantee security and peace in the country. There are also elements
related to the protection of the state/city and the dynasty, expressed e.g. in
the final fragment of the Tarnovo service in honour of St. Petka: “And send,
322
323
М. Кучинска, “Сакрализация болгарской земли по текстам балканской агиографии”,
Palaeobulgarica 2015, vol. XXXIX (201), no. 3, p. 29–38.
324
И. Билярски, Покровители на Царство. Св. цар Петър и св. Параскева-Петка,
София 2004, p. 45–94.
325
The Polish version of the fragment in: Ziemscy aniołowie…, transl. B. Kotyk, p. 109.
104 Part I
we beseech thee, peace to our lives, prosperity to our churches, and power
against enemies to the tsar and the state. Protect his boyars and warriors, and
the people over whom he rules by the will of God”326. The saint was elevated to
the rank of patroness of Tarnovo and a prayerful intermediary for the defence
against the infidels.
After the occupation of the Bulgarian capital by the Turks (1393), the saint’s
remains were transferred to Vidin, still unoccupied by the Turks (1394/1395).
This was done by Ivan Stracimir (1356–1396/97), the last emperor of medieval
Bulgaria. The “Bulgarian” leg of the journey of the saint’s relics ends in Vidin.
We do not know any details about the cult and veneration of the saint from
this short period (1394/1385–1396).
In 1398, the Serbian princess Milica, as nun Jevgenija, asked for Petka’s
body from the Sultan Bayezid I (1389–1402) and brought it to her homeland.
The journey of the body to Belgrade probably took place in two stages: first
it was in the palace church of St. Stephen in Kruševac or in Ljubostinja, and
in 1406/7 it was transferred from there to the capital. Researchers associate
the introduction of the saint’s relics to Belgrade with the dynastic political
agenda of the son of Princess Milica, Despot Stephen Lazarević (1377–1427).
Following the example of Bulgaria and the Byzantine Empire more generally, it
was intended to sanctify the site and give it its proper rank. At the same time,
it was to sanction the authority of Stephen. The exact place where it lay is not
known today327. Janko Maglovski says that it was most probably the Church of
the Three Hierarchs (later St. Petka), built by Stephan Lazarević in 1404–1406
as the metropolitan church, which belonged to the Fenek Monastery328.
The cult of the holy hermit existed in Serbia long before her remains were
brought to Belgrade. When the relics lay in Tarnovo, it had an even stronger
impact. From the moment the body was deposited in Belgrade, the name of
Paraskeva-Petka acquired significance, and in the consciousness of the faithful
she began to function as Belgrade or Serbian Petka (not “of Epivates” or “of
Tarnovo”). With the death of Stephen Lazarević, the importance of the cult of
326
Ibidem, p. 115.
327
See Ј. Магловски, “О београдском култу свете Петке и манастиру Фенеку”, Зборник
Народног музеја XVIII–2. Историја уметности, Београд 2007, p. 117–150; Д. Поповић,
op. cit., p. 289.
328
Ј. Магловски, op. cit., p. 123, 131.
St. Petka wanes. This may have been influenced by the further tragic fate of the
country and the progressive consolidation of Turkish power in Serbia and the
entire Balkans. Stephean’s successor, Despot Đurađ Branković (1427–1456),
did not move the saint’s relics to the new capital Smederevo. He chose St. Luke,
whose relics he brought in 1453, as the city’s patron saint329. Danica Popović
therefore puts forward the hypothesis that the protective power of St. Petka
began to be doubted. All indications are that before 1456 (the Turkish siege
of Belgrade), the relics of the saint were once again moved, this time to the
Belgrade church of the Dormition of the Mother of God (Saborna Crkva)330.
They remained there until Suleiman II captured Belgrade in 1521. We know
that after the fall of Belgrade in 1521, together with the holy remains of Tsarina
Theophano and St. Mercury, they were taken to Constantinople. In 1641, the
Moldavian voivode Vasily Lupu received them from the Patriarch together
with the title of the defensor orthodoxiae and moved them to their final resting
place in the Romanian town of Jassy.
Although physically the relics were no longer in Serbia, there are testimonies
that in the following centuries her cult was alive especially in the area of
Belgrade, the Belgrade metropolis and the south-eastern part of Srem331. The
churches of St. Petka were not numerous and most of them were located in
present-day Macedonia, except for one, situated in Sredačka county near the
Šara river332. The Fenek and Petkovica Monasteries come from the Ottoman
times and churches in Surčin and Boljevce, near Fenek, from the early 18th c. In
the 19th c. historical records mention only three in the Belgrade Metropolis; the
Church of St. Petka Izvorska n. Paraćin is the best-known333. The distribution
of the above religious centres in the territory of Serbia venerating the memory
of the holy hermit, it can be seen that they lay in close proximity to each
other, concentrating around the most active place of worship of Saint Petka
for centuries at the Kalemegdan fortress.
329
Л. Мирковић, Хеортологија или историјски развитак и богослужење празника пра
вославне источне цркве, Београд 1961, p. 72.
330
Ј. Магловски, op. cit., p. 124, 148.
331
Ibidem, p. 122–129.
332
М. Пурковић, Попис цркава у старој српској држави, Скопље 1938, p. 42–43.
333
Ibidem.
106 Part I
In the following centuries, one can witness the marginalisation of the

veneration of Petka in favour of the cults of all-Christian, “national” Serbian
and later Russian saints. At the beginning of the 19th century, one can notice
a revival of the memory of St. Petka connected with the ideas of Romanticism
and national revival. This was facilitated by the conviction ingrained in the
popular consciousness of her “Serbian” origin334, referred to in church texts
used in Serbia and by clergymen in their homilies (e.g. Milutin Ratković,
Nikola Begović, Nikola Kokotović)335. Furthermore, in 1867 buildings were
erected on Kalemegdan that surrounded the holy source of St. Petka (vodica,
agijazma)336. Evidence of its existence still in the Middle Ages is found in the
text of Stephean Lazarević’s life by Constantine the Philosopher, who in his
description of the Belgrade fortress mentions the existence of a spring of “the
sweetest water” (“најслађе воде”)337.
The late 19th century saw a certain weakening of the cult of the saint in
Belgrade. Janko Maglovski claims that this may have been caused by the
publication in 1873 of Ilarion Ruvarac, an extremely respected historian of
the time, rector of theology at Karlovci, member of the Academy of Sciences
and archimandrite of the Grgeteg Monastery338; he criticises the attribution
of Serbian origin to Petka the hermit339. The cleric’s polemic with supporters
of other views has reverberated so much in scholarship that it is still noted in
biography entries devoted to Ruvarac. The e-version of the Historical Library
contains the entry Ruvarac, which reads as follows:
У свом делу Правила св. Петке Параскеве српске, у издању Српског ученог
друштва, Милојевић је објавио текст за који је тврдио да представља
историјски доказ о српском пореклу ове светитељке. Иларион Руварац је
у свом чланку О раду Милоша С. Милојевића објављеном у Гласнику Матице
српске из 1873. године веома оштро критиковао Милојевићеве тврдње изнете
у овом делу, а такође се критички осврнуо и на Милојевићев целокупни
334
И. Руварац, Критика…, p. 172–178.
335
Л. Мирковић, Хеортологија…, op. cit., p. 72.
336
J. Магловски, op. cit., p. 145.
337
Константин Филозоф, Житије деспота…, op. cit., p. 102.
338
Today, members of the Serbian Academy of Sciences have ranked Ruvarac among the 100
most eminent Serbs. See “Иларион Руварац”, in: Историјска библиотека. Енцикло
педија на српском језику. Available online: <www.istorijskabiblioteka.com/art:ilarion-
ruvarac>, access: 18.12.2018.
339
И. Руварац, Критика…, p. 172–178; Ј. Магловски, op. cit., p. 129, 125–129.
списатељски рад. Темељно и на научан начин Руварац је доказао да је овај

спис пун анахронизама и да је на њему Милојевић вршио недопустиве измене
и допуне српске историје. Милојевић је на ову критику одговорио 1881.
личним увредама упућеним Руварцу, кога је назвао бугарофилом и издајником
српске народности, међутим, без правих аргумената, Милојевић није могао да
уђе у неку озбиљнију полемику с Руварцем. Милојевићев рад су још његови
савременици оценили као поптпуно неоснован с историографске тачке
гледишта и без икакве научне вредности340.
The above-mentioned monastery celebrates a variant of the service of

St. Petka by Euthymius (without the small compline, with some stikhera
added) transcribed by the monk Bartolomeus in 1780 in Ruthenian341. It is
reasonable to assume that Ilarion Ruvarac may have become acquainted with
the text during his time as archimandrite of the monastery, which led him to
discuss the origin of the saint. Miloš Milojević’ text, published in Glasnik of
1871342, compares Ilarion Ruvarac with the text of St. Petka’s service printed
in Božidar Vuković’s minea, indicating excerpts which Milojević apparently
added to prove his own opinion that St. Petka came from Serbia. Milojević
was already known in his time for falsifying literary texts that he collected and
wrote down during his travels through the Serbian lands. It can therefore be
assumed that he also did this in the case of the text dedicated to St. Petka, in
order to subordinate it to the national ideas he proclaimed343.
The lesser importance of the saint at the end of the 19th century is also
shown by the Srbljak published in Rakovac, which omits the service to honour
the saint. The same is true of older versions of the Srbljak (1761, Rimnik). The
idea of introducing the Service into the volume during the preparation of a new
edition of the collection after World War II was proposed by Archimandrite
Avgustin Bošnjaković, who was appointed editor of the anthology344. However,
as the contents of the 1986 Srbljak show, the idea did not gain ground. A new
340
Иларион Руварац…, op. cit.
341
Вартоломеј, монах, Служба и житије Свете Петке, 1780, ref. РР III 42. Available on-
line: <http://digital.bms.rs/ebiblioteka/pageFlip/reader/index.php?type=publications&id
=2146&m=2#page/44/mode/2up>, access: 10.10.2019.
342
М.С. Милојевић, “Правила св. Петке Параскеве Српске”, Гласник СУД XXXI (1871),
p. 311–346.
343
Љ. Раденковић, “Кривотворење фолклора и митологије: Неки словенски примери”,
Зборник Матице српске за књижевност и језик 2005, 53 (1–3), p. 34–36.
344
108 Part I
version of the Srbljak, published in 2015 (2nd, supplemented ed. of 2018),

includes a service of St. Petka, a reprint of a text rewritten by monk Bartolomeus
from the Grgeteg Monastery. This variant is also found in the Russian “green”
menaion345.
In his text on Slavic saints, Filaret Gumilevsky (among others) claims that
Slavs were the parents of Petka, which is not reflected in Euthymius’s text they
drew on346.
The beginning and subsequent decades of the 20th century show that
monasteries of women religious became important centres of Petka’s cult.
Among them, Fenek on Fruška Gora with its church dedicated to St. Petka of
Serbia (built in 1563 or earlier) and a holy spring played an important role.
The main slava of the monastery is celebrated on October 14, the day of the
remembrance of the saint’s dormition347. The monastery celebrates services
in honour of St. Paraskeva of Rome (July 26), which feast coincides with the
memorial of the translatio of St. Petka of Serbia’s relics348. The second most
important monastery was St. Petka Izvorska in Paraćin (built in the Middle
Ages and renovated in 1824). Originally, it was dedicated to the memory of St.
Paraskeva of Rome, the martyr, and solemn celebrations of the monastery’s slava
are held both on October 14 and July 26, as in the above-mentioned Fenek. Ince
1942, the monastery became an all-female congregation, when schi-igumenja
Jefimija (Mićić, 1896–1958) moved there from Kovilj together with 46 sisters349.
According to the 1924 register, there were about 180 churches and chapels
dedicated to the saint in Serbia, in the central and southern parts of the country
(around Niš), in Macedonia, in the Montenegro-Pomorje metropolis, in the
Upper-Carlovia bishopric, and also, though not many, in Vojvodina (Srem)350.
345
The Menaion published between 1978 and 1989 by the Moscow Patriarchate. In 2002, un-
der the patronage of the Patriarch of Moscow, Alexey II, a renewed edition of The Menaion
was published, complete with new texts and feasts. The services are preceded by short
hagiographical studies.
346
И. Руварац, Критика…, p. 63.
347
J. Магловски, op. cit., p. 129.
348
Манастирска слава. Available online: <http://www.manastirfenek.com/manastirska-
slava>;<http://www.manastirfenek.com/images/stories/monografija.pdf>, access: 10.05.
2019.
349
Монашки живот. Available online: <http://www.svetapetkaizvor.com/manastir/>, access:
10.05.2019.
350
Ј. Магловски, op. cit., p. 127.
The places of worship within the Belgrade fortress were also remembered.
The destroyed chapel surrounding the holy spring was rebuilt in 1937 thanks to
the efforts of Patriarch Barnabas (1930–1937). The consecration was done on
27 October 1937 by Bishop Vicar Sava (Trlajić). The chapel and the spring are
still visited by the faithful today, especially on Fridays, “young Fridays”351 and
on the slava days in the nearby Ružica Church. According to a tradition that
has probably lasted since the 16th century, a liturgy is celebrated twice daily
in the church, with the reading of the saint’s canon and kissing of the relics352.
In the interwar period, the spread of the cult of women saints, including St.
Petka, was also fostered by the ministry and writings of Archbishop Nikolaj
Velimirović. The Serbian clergyman supported the renewal and establishment
of new women’s monasteries and wrote texts commemorating the activities of
the nuns living in them353. Serbian women’s testimony of faith and devotion to
Orthodoxy over the centuries was, in the Archbishop’s opinion, an important
part of the Serbian legacy, hence Velimirović’s vigorous efforts to preserve
women’s cults. Since the veneration paid to St. Petka over the centuries in Serbia
and other Orthodox regions of the Balkans cannot be compared to any other
cult of its kind, the Ohrid Prologue, first published in 1928, also contains an
abridged life of the saint, a poetic work extolling her virtues, and a meditation
(rasuđivanje), in which Velimirović quotes a passage from the extensive life of
the saint about how her relics were found354. He also describes a miraculous
event that took place in 1442 on the Greek island of Chios:
У цркви Св. Петке служио је вечерњу јеромонах Амвросије. У цркви није било
никога. При крају удари страшна киша са векиом хуком и падаше целу ноћ.
351
Friday, which coincides with the new moon phase.
352
Преподобна мати Параскева…, p. 185. The spring has its own slava on the memorial
day of St. Apostle Onesimus (February 15/28), a disciple of St. Paul. Legend has it that
during the occupation of Serbia during World War I, the Kalemegdan spring ran out of
water, and miraculously reappeared on the day of St. Onesimus, in February 1918. This
event was interpreted as a sign of the imminent end of hostilities, which actually hap-
pened in November that year. Since then, the slava has been celebrated at the spring, with
liturgy and the consecration of water, as well as the sharing of slavski kolac.
353
Н. Велимировић, “Блажена Стојна”, in: Изабрана дела: Владика Николај у служби
Богу и роду. Живот светог Саве. Чланци, беседе и посланице. Свети Срби. Блажена
Стојна, Београд 1996.
354
Prologue for 14 October. Available online: <https://svetosavlje.org/dan-prologa/14-okto-
bar-po-julijanskom-kalendaru/2019-10-27/>, access: 11.03.2019.
110 Part I
Амвросије није могао изићи из цркве. Мислећи, да је острво цело пропасти од

потопа он се поче молити св. Петки, да спасе домовину његову и умилостиви
праведно разгневљеног Бога. Пред зору ухвати га сан, и он виде као да неста
крова на цркви, и у висини један светао облак и у њему благообразна жена
на молитви Богу. По молитви она рече свештенику: “Амвросије, не бој се,
спасена ти је домовина”. И киша одмах престаде. Од тада се на острву Хиосу
врло свечано празнује дан св. Петке”355.
The archbishop also supported the so-called “movement of the pious”356,
set up in 1920 in Krnjevo (now Velika Plana district), from where the brethren
disseminated its ideas to the nearby villages of Markovac, Miloševac and
Veliko Orašje:
Zbog takvih i sličnih pojada ustao je vladika Nikolaj čuvenim člankomu “Glasniku”:
“Ne odbacujte ih!” Iztoga Se Vladičinog apela vidi gde leže koreni nerazumevanja
i nezadovoljstva. Bogomoljački pokret je, naime, nastao i kao izvesna reakcija na
našu svešteničku inertnost… “Na bogosluženjima – piše Vladika – bogomoljci sa
zapetošću očekuju da li će se njihov sveštenik rešiti i progovoriti bar rečicu… (…)
Starajte se da razumete bogomoljce. Uzdržite se od bacanja kamena na njih, jer
možete lako udariti Hrista. Ne odbacujte ih da oni vas ne odbace!”. Ubrzo posle
ovoga, sveštenički organ “Vesnik Srpske Crkve” preštampao je ovaj Vladičin apel
i doneo “Otklik na poklič Ne odbacujte ih”, otpočevši čitavu seriju članaka u korist
bogomoljačkog pokreta, te se stanje nešto popravilo.
The spiritual life of the believers and the activities of the church fraternity
in Veliko Orašje were concentrated around the Church of St. Petka the Roman
(July 26)357: “Храмовна слава св. Параскева римска слави се у Цркви са
резањем колача, без народног весеља”358. Today, the church bears the name
of St. Petka of Epivates.
The situation of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the first decades after
the Second World War was dramatic. There were no clergy, monasteries and
churches were destroyed and plundered. In addition, the seizure of power
355
Св. Параскева (Св. Петка-Петковача), написао по житијама свјатих Велимир П. Ис
аковић, Библиотека Српска Слава, Београд 1934, p. 28–29.
356
Tihi glas. Available online: <https://svetosavlje.org/tihi-glas/47/?pismo=lat>, access: 17.03.
2019.
357
The church was probably built before 1173, which is proven by archaeological excavations
and an inscription found during them: “1173. лета од Христа обновљена – сеи манастир
Света Петка”. Д. Ивановић, Црква Свете Петке…, p. 241.
358
Ibidem, p. 269.
by the communist party promoted secularisation and atheisation of society.

Nevertheless, places of worship such as St. Petka’s Chapel in Kalemegdan were
regularly visited by the Orthodox and representatives of other denominations
(Catholics, Muslims) even during the period of intensified and politically
driven atheisation of Serbian society359. In addition, a turn towards religion
and popular religiosity is visible at this time. Cultivation of the memory
of the holy hermit is visible in rural communities, where it acquires folk
characteristics and becomes folklorised. At the same time, she is one of the
most popular saints, especially in the southern part of Serbia and Dalmatia.
There are testimonies from the post-war years that the cult of St. Petka was
alive especially in the villages. In particular the krsna slava – Petkovaca, was
regularly celebrated on October 14 in various regions of Serbia (south, Srem),
as well as in Dalmatia360. Icons of the saint could be found in many homes,
including Roma households:
Као дечак упамтио сам, да је света Петка у нашем тамнавском крају после
Пресвете Богородице била најпоштованија. Сматрала се заштитницом
српског народа, поготово деце. Није било куће у Тамнави у којима су неговане
и поштоване иконе, а да није имала икону свете Петке.
Такође је у том времену, крајем шездесетих и почетком седамдесетих година
прошлог века, јако била поштована међу Ромима. Улазећи у њихове кућице
од ћерпича, скоро у свакој је била само икона свете Петке, често од папира,
рајсладном причвршћена за зид361.
The renewal of spirituality preceded by the above-mentioned turn towards

popular religiosity began in the former Yugoslavia in the 1970s, involving
first Catholics and then, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, also Orthodox
Christians362. At that time, the process of restoring the memory of national
saints, their significance for Orthodox spirituality and tradition, as well as
their role in building a national identity based on the religious element began.
As part of this trend, the memory of Petka’s name began to be intensively
359
D. Radisavljević Ćiparizović, “Religioznost hodočasnika u Srbiji: Studija slučaja tri sve
tilišta”, Filozofija I drustvo 2012, XXIII (1), p. 56.
360
Н. Недељковић, Српске славе: чувари огњишта, Београд 2013, p. 222.
361
Раб Божји Ђорђе Сандић, Света Петка Параскева – писане речи из мог срца. Avail-
able online: <www.crkvaub.rs/crkva/najbolji_vaspitac/item/2710-sveta-petka-paraskeva-
pisane-reci-iz-mog-srca>, access: 28.04.2018.
362
D. Radisavljević Ćiparizović, op. cit., p. 56.
112 Part I
restored at the beginning of the 21st century. Today, according to different

sources, there are about 240 to 250 churches dedicated to her in Serbia. Some
churches have been renamed and given the hermit’s name, others were built
from scratch (e.g. in Stubal Monastery) and dedicated to her. Places related to
her cult are becoming more vibrant. This applies e.g. to the Fenek Monastery,
St. Petka Izvorska Monastery, where a fragment of her relics was transferred in
2007; nun Evpraksija wrote the saint’s akathist hymn on this occasion. There
is also the Stubal Monastery, where Petka’s pokrov363 was brought in 2000 from
Jassy in Romania, etc. Religious tourism is also developing intensively in the
places dedicated to Petka. Additional pilgrim houses are built and devotional
literature is published. Educational and preaching initiatives for the youngest
are expanding. Children learn about Petka in schools; art contests are held
to commemorate the saint and pupils dedicate poems to her. Here are two
works by sixth graders:
Света Петка
У граду, на обалама Мраморског
мора, Света Петка рођена је.
Као мала, побожна била је,
своје родитеље поштовала је.
После њихове смрти замонашила
се и богатства одрекла се.
За материјалним она није жалила,
већ је у монаштву само Христу служила.
Кући се вратила, мало је живела,
лепо је сахрањена али издвојена.
Она Богу данас служи и са
Христом вечно се дружи.
Да ли и ви мислите исто што
и ја да је Света Петка жена најбоља364.
Maksim Maksimović
Света Петка Параскева

Свету Петку воли ти,
363
Pokrov – a veil or scarf.
364
The song was written by Maksim Maksimović, a sixth-grade student. Available online:
<www.crkvaub.rs/crkva/veronauka/item/2793-sveta-petka-kroz-likovne-radove-osnova-
ca>, access: 22.03.2018.
можда ти није слава крсна,

слави је 27. октобра.
Веруј Светој Петки,
помоли се њој,
теби биће боље,
имаћеш мир свој.
Бог Отац прославио је њу,
ти јој се обрати
и осетићеш снагу њену.
Воли је срцем свим,
и моли јој се ти.
Ближи нам се Света Петка,
обратимо јој се,
славимо је јер она,
нашу славу заслужује365.
Anastasia Lepović
The memory of Petka the hermit has no doubt been enhanced by the
growth of the cult of Paraskeva the Roman, who also has a growing number
of shrines named after her in Serbia366.
*
Parallel to the official one, the folk cult of St. Petka developed, combining
canonical and non-canonical elements367. Researchers related the figure of
Petka with the apocrypha The Story about the Twelve Fridays 368 and indicate
the symbolic link of the saint’s name with Friday, the day of the Passion of the
365
The song was written by Anastasia Lepović, a student of VI3. Available online: <www.
crkvaub.rs/crkva/veronauka/item/2793-sveta-petka-kroz-likovne-radove-osnovaca>, ac-
cess: 22.03.2018.
366
St. Paraskeva the Roman is venerated on July 26 (August 8 according to the n.st) in such
places as the Berkasovo Monastery (Fruška Gora), which was converted to a monastery
from an Orthodox church on August 8, 2008, churches in the villages of: Staničenje, Šanac,
Ljaplje Selo (Kosovo), Čukarica, etc. At some of them, there are also holy springs, and the
memory of the transfer of relics to Tarnovo (sometimes also understood as the transfer of
relics from Tarnovo to Serbia) is celebrated, which gives further evidence of the interweav-
ing of cults.
367
A. Sulikowska-Gąska, “Kult świętej Paraskiewy na Rusi”, Ikonotheka 2008, vol. 21, p. 165–
181.
368
Polish edition: Apokryfy i legendy starotestamentowe Słowian południowych, ed. G. Min
czew, M. Skowronek, Kraków 2006, p. 203–205.
114 Part I
Lord, etc.369 Christian G. Parker observes370 that affirmation of femininity and

the female perspective in contrast to the official patriarchal culture and the
ecclesiastical subculture is a feature of folk religion. Mary and her protective
functions (the Feast of Pokrov also translated as the Feast of the Intercession
or Feast of the Holy Protection) is the central object of worship. In folk
spirituality, St. Petka follows the Marian model and refers to the figure of the
pagan goddess of the earth Mokoš371. The latter is linked to the female realm
of life, maternity, women’s household chores, care of the family. She helps to
knit, weave and sew and forbids doing these works on Friday (dedicated to
her) and Sunday. It is believed that the feast of Petka (October 14) is a women’s
holiday. That day women and girls should not do any housework (cooking,
washing, sewing) so as not to incur the wrath of the saint. A woman who sews
on Friday is believed to pierce the eyes of the saint with a needle372 and may
incur a stringent punishment for that. Slightly older girls should decorate
their houses with flowers to live in peace and harmony all year round, and
younger girls should wear new dresses to be happy next year. Girls should
eat a piece of slavski kolač (celebration cake) and keep the crumbs, so that at
night they will see their fate and future husband373. St. Petka is also venerated
as the protector of children, the unborn and the sick. She frequently appears
in women’s dreams as a woman dressed in black, which is stated in numerous,
even contemporary, testimonies374:
369
E. Kocój, Pamięć starych wieków. Symbolika czasu w rumuńskim kalendarzu prawosław
nym, Kraków 2013, p. 268.
370
C.G. Parker, “Współczesna religia ludowa. Złożony obiekt badań dla socjologów”, in: Soc
jologia codzienności, ed. P. Sztompka, M. Bogunia-Borowska, Kraków 2008, p. 817–818.
371
More on this: И. Левин, “Христианские источники культа св. Параскевы”, in: eadem,
Двоеверие и народная религия в истории России, перевод с английского А.Л. Топо
ркова и 3.Н. Исидоровой, Москва 2004, p. 141–161.
372
R. Popov, “Paraskeva and her ‘sisters’: Saintly personification of women’s rest days and
other themes”, in: Cult of the Saints in the Balkans, ed. M. Detelić, G. Jones, [b.m.], p. 92,
<http://www.mirjanadetelic.com/docs/CULT%20OF%20SAINTS%20IN%20THE%20
BALKANS.pdf>, access: 4.01.2019.
373
Danas je Sveta Petka, veliki praznik i crveno slovo: Žene ne bi trebalo da rade ove stvari pre
ma narodnom verovanju. Available online: <https://www.telegraf.rs/vesti/srbija/2906869-
danas-je-sveta-petka-veliki-praznik-i-crveno-slovo-jednu-stvar-ni-slucajno-nemojte-da-
radite-a-to-nije-sve-foto>, access: 7.01.2019.
374
Раб Божји Ђорђе Сандић, Света Петка…, access: 12.01.2019. Translations – D.G.
Testimony 1: Био ми је прво дете каже његова мајка, мушко, касније сам
родила и кћерку пар година млађу од њега. Како сам се удала свекрва ме
само прекорно гледала и очекивала кад ћу родити. А на селу то мора бити
прво мушкиње, па после може и неко женско. Родих ја прво, па мушко и мој
положај у кући поста важан и лакши. Али кад се дете разболе, поста по
мене тешка ситуација. Из дана у дан, све горе. Лекари не помажу. Тако једну
бесану ноћ исцрпљена, ни у седећем, ни у лежећем положају заспах. На сан
ми дође жена у црном и нежним мајчинским гласом рече: “Не бој се жено.
Оздравиће он. Ја ћу ти помоћи”. Тргох се. Већ је свануло. Сва радосна похитах
да помузем краве, а успут ме свекрва прекоре, како могу бити весела кад ми
дете ни живо, ни мртво. Нисам јој ништа рекла, али тај дан јесте рекао свима
нама много. /He was my first child, says his mother, a boy; later I also gave birth to
a daughter a few years younger than him. When I got married, my mother-in-law
watched me all the time and waited to see when I would give birth. In the village,
the first child must be a boy and then it can be a girl. I gave birth to a boy first, so
also my position at home became important and easier. But when the baby fell ill,
the situation became difficult for me. Day by day his condition was getting worse.
The doctors did not help. On one of those sleepless nights, I was so exhausted
that I fell asleep, neither sitting nor lying down. In my dream a woman dressed in
black came to me and said in a tender, motherly voice: “Do not be afraid, woman.
He will recover. I will help you.” I woke up from my sleep. It was already dawn.
I joyfully rushed to milk the cows. My mother-in-law crossed the road and asked
me how I could be so happy when my baby was neither dead nor alive. I did not
answer her, but that day told us a lot/.
Testimony 2: На једним од путовања у Свету Гору на празник свете Петке
затекао сам се у манастиру Хиландару. Запрепастило ме то, што су радници
који су ангажовани из Србије, да за манастир крче растиње око маслина
тај дан радили. Таман када сам хтео да питам зашто, настала је расправа са
једним радником који није хтео да ради. Надређени сав бесан му се унео
у лице и викао: “Васељенска патријаршија не признаје данашњи дан као
црвено слово. Ако нећеш да радиш сутра ујутру се пакуј и идеш за Србију”.
Стварно сутрадан, док смо чекали минибус испред капије манастира човек
спусти своје ствари уз наше. Међутим, само што је спустио ствари приђоше
му један монах и цивил. Цивил му нешто рече, он одмахну главом, али кад
му монах нешто прозбори, он узе ствари и оде према згради где су радници
боравили. Ми приђосмо монаху и питасмо га шта се десило. Монах нам
објасни, да га је лично игуман Мојсије замолио да остане, и да је игуман још
рекао: “пустите сад наша правила, јер кад би моја покојна мајка чула, да сам
неког натерао да ради на свете Петку и мртва би ми разбила главу”. /During
one of my trips to the Holy Mountain on the feast of St. Petka, I found myself at
the Chilandar Monastery. I was surprised to see that the workers, who had been
116 Part I
hired from Serbia to cultivate the olive trees, were working that day. Just when
I wanted to ask why, a discussion took place with a worker who refused to work.
The livid foreman shouted in the worker’s face: “The Ecumenical Patriarchate does
not recognize today as a red-letter holiday. If you don’t want to work, tomorrow
morning pack up and go back to Serbia”. The next day, when we were waiting for
the minibus in front of the monastery gate, that man put his belongings next to
us. However, a moment later a monk and a civilian came to him. The civilian said
something to him, shook his head, but when the monk asked him something,
he took his things and went to the building where the workers were staying. We
approached the monk and asked him what had happened. The monk explained that
igumen Moses personally asked the worker to stay and said: “let us now indulge
our principles, because if my late mother heard that I forced someone to work on
St. Petka’s day, she would bash my head in from the hereafter/.
Petka heals the sick: the blind, those suffering from eye diseases (in Greece
and among Balkan Slavs you can find icons where Petka holds a metal vessel
with a pair of eyes in it) and women’s illnesses. She is the patron saint of
merchants and drives out evil spirits from women375. One of the main evidence
of folk beliefs are the miraculous springs dedicated to the saint. The faithful
are deeply convinced that their water has healing properties. According to the
oldest beliefs confirmed by testimonies of healings among Orthodox believers,
the healing power of springs dedicated to Petka helps fight fever, skin rashes,
various female ailments, and aids digestion. The websites dedicated to these
springs recount folk tales about their origins: “Po predanju čudotvorni izvor
svete Petke, nastao je prilikom prenošenja Njenih svetih moštiju, iz Carigrada,
preko Srbije, dalje putem za Rumuniju do grada Jaši. Na svim mestima gde je
povorka zastajala da prenoći, nastajao je čudotvorni izvor sa svetom i lekovitom
vodom”376. The spring in Železnica was mentioned in 19th-century newspapers:
Kažu da je ova voda ljekovita tako da se mnogi bolesnici od nje izleče i postanu
zdravi kao drijen. Svijet tu odavna ide, najviše mlade nedelje i petka, a i sad sve
jednako dolazi iz mnogijeh krajeva pa čak iz Podrinjskog okružja i okupi ih se
jednog dana i po 40 duša te se kupaju i piju vodu, pa i pare bacaju u vodu i godišnje
se nakupi i po 200 groša. Zato su Železničani postavili jednog čoveka te kupi ove
375
Ив. Левин, “Христианские источники кулъта св. Параскевы”, in: idem, Двоеверие…,
p. 151.
376
Izvor svete Petke. Available online: <http://www.izvorsvetepetke.com/>, access: 6.02.2019.
pare, pa vele da od njih onđe naprave jednu zgradu, da im se ima đe narod skloniti
od rđavog vremena377.
According to folk legends, miraculous springs are also places of apparitions
of St. Petka, e.g. the saint allegedly appeared to a blind shepherd in the village
of Dobra Voda on the outskirts of Vukovar. She told him to wash himself in the
spring water, as a result of which he regained his sight. The news of the healing
properties of the water spread to the surrounding villages and the faithful began
to come to pray for healings. In 1811, a small Orthodox church dedicated
to St. Petka was built there378. The same is true in Železnik; a pilgrim who
visited the spring there in 2016 also claims that Saint Petka appeared to her:
Bila sam pre nekoliko godina na ovom izvoru s dve drugarice i ostale smo da
prenoćimo. Ležala sam kao da me neko uspavao, zaspala sam kao jagne i kad sam
se trgla u snu, videla sam ispod vrbe lik Svete Petke. Od tada verujem da ovde
zaista nešto postoji, kažu da je to što mi se desilo blagostanje koje ne može svako
da doživi. Od tada sam je sanjala mnogo puta, pa zato opet dolazim379.
Compared to other cults of female saints, the cult of Petka has a unique and
elaborate literary setting. Such a wealth of literary material is not found even
in the greatest Serbian saints, including St. Sava. The works in Petka’s honour
represent different liturgical genres: hagiography, hymnography, euchography.
Hymns are by far the most abundant and intriguing group. The texts are of
Byzantine, Bulgarian and native Serbian origin. In 2009, a rather extensive
illustrated study was published, titled Sveta Petka – slava srpska i zaštita vernih
(St. Petka – Serbian glory and protection of the faithful, ed. by archpriest Radomir
Nikčević, Cetinje 2009). Its promotion reverberated in the media as an example
of restoring the memory of true spiritual values380. The book is an excellent
depiction of the “Serbianisation” of the saint’s cult and her inclusion in the
377
A.V. Bogić, Opis vračarskog sreza, Topografski rječnik, Beograd 1866, quoted after: Н. Лу
кић, Историја Железника 1528–1945, Чукарица 2011.
378
Преподобна мати Параскева…, p. 197–199.
379
L. Stošić, S. Stojanović, Čudotvorni izvoru Železniku: Vernici hrle po spas, reportage from
21 September 2016. Available online: <http://mondo.rs/a940979/Info/Drustvo/Izvor-Sve
te-Petke-u-Zelezniku.html>, access: 30.01.2019.
380
Монографија о Светој Петки. Available online: <http://www.rts.rs/page/stories/ci/sto
ry/8/kultura/245851/monografija-o-svetoj-petki.html>, access: 10.05.2019. Света Петка
118 Part I
history of Serbian sainthood by, among other things, showing her resemblance
to Jovan Vladimir. In 2014 alone, a few different lives of Paraskeva came out,
including one by St. Justin Popović and one for children, illustrated (Sveta
Petka. Prepodobna mati Paraskeva, Niš 2014)381. The most comprehensive
book with literature dedicated to the saint was compiled by Sreten Lazarević382,
including hymns, euchography, and a catalogue of miracles383. This is the largest
Serbian edition of Paraskeva’s liturgical texts in the Serbian language to date.
It contains the lives of three saints named Paraskeva, acrostics (Serbian and
a translation into Serbian from Romanian), prayers dedicated to the saint,
testimonies of miracles from Serbian and Romanian sources, and poetry
written in honour of the saint.
The oldest surviving Serbian copy of a service in honour of the hermit
dates from the 13th century, (No. 361 of the SANU Archive) and was probably
written at the Studenica Monastery384. The text is incomplete and ends at the
beginning of the third troparion of ode nine385. In terms of structure it comes
close to the service of Dragan’s Minea386. The manuscript proves that the cult
of Paraskeva developed in principle synchronously throughout the Balkans,
as noted by Radoslava Trifonova387. Studies on the manuscripts of St. Petka’s
service undertaken by the Bulgarian researcher in Serbia was continued by
Tatjana Subotin-Golubović, who has so far identified fifteen manuscript books
with the saint’s service, from the 13th to the 18th c.388.
– српска слава и заштита верних. Available online: <http://www.spc.rs/sr/sveta_petka_

srpska_slava_zastita_vernih>, access: 10.05.2019.
381
All can be found at: <https://www.mikroknjiga.rs/store/find.php?find=%D1%81%D0%
B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B0+%D0%9F%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BA%D0%B0&x=12
&y=19>, access: 5.02.2019.
382
Interest in the topic of the holy hermit by protopresbyter Lazarević should be attributed
to his service at the Church of Paraskeva-Petka in Nová Pazov.
383
Преподобна мати Параскева…, op. cit.
384
Т. Суботин-Голубовић, Утицај преноса моштију св. Петке у Деспотовину на развој
њеног култа у српској средини, в: България и Сърбия б контекста на византийската
цивилизация, София 2005, p. 343–354.
385
T. Суботин-Голубовић, Утицај преноса…, p. 347.
386
The text of the service with the version of the Dragan’s minea was published by Radosla-
va Trifonova: Р. Трифонова, “Сръбски препис на най-ранната служба за св. Петка
Търновска”, in: Търновска Книжовна Школа, vol. 7, Велико Търново 1999, p. 181–198.
387
A detailed discussion in Trifonova’s article, see Р. Трифонова, op. cit.
388
T. Суботин-Голубовић, Утицај преноса…, a detailed list on p. 345–346.
In the first thirty years of the 15th century, the older type of service was
superseded by a newer version, adapted to the requirements of the Jerusalem
rite (small and great vesper, matins). The spread of this variant of the service
was further encouraged by its publication in Božidar Vuković’s festive minea
in 1536/1538389. In the Serbian literary tradition, the service is sometimes
called Služba prenosu moštiju svete Petke (Service in honour of the translation
of the relics of St. Petka)390. Serbian researchers attribute the alteration of the
composition to Gregory Tsamblak. His alleged authorship relates in particular
to the four liturgical stikhera, included in the Great Vesper391.
Tsamblak’s literary activity in Serbia dates roughly to between 1402 and
1405 or 1409 and the rule of Despot Stefan Lazarević. When in the empire,
Tsamblak stayed in the Dečani Monastery, where Bulgarian monks emigrating
from their homeland after the fall of Tarnovo (1393) found refuge in late
14th c.392. Tsamblak dedicated his literary texts in Serbia to Stephen Dečanski
(life and service), king, martyr and founder of the Dečani Monastery, and to
St. Paraskeva-Petka, strengthening her cult393 and disseminating it in eastern
Slavic lands in in the Polish and Lithuanian commonwealth. At that time
Tsamblak wrote an account of the translatio of the saint’s relics from Tarnovo
to Vidin (Slovo o prenosu moštiju svete Petke iz Trnova u Vidin i Srbiju), and
then to Belgrade, from ca. 1404/5. The oldest extant copy of the text comes
from the Rila Panegyric from the latter half of the 15th c.394. Jan Stradomski
believes that the author intended to “create a narrative supplementing the text
389
The East Slavic hymnographic literature dedicated to St. Petka is as rich as the Balkan one.
In the second half of the 19th century, the Russians edited another service in honour of
St. Paraskeva (October 14), combined with the feast of the martyrs: Nazarius, Gervasius,
Protasius, and Celestine. See M. Kuczyńska, Paraskiewa-Petka Tyrnowska…, p. 159, and
at <www.pravoslavie.ru/docs/oct14-b4ea36.pdf>.
390
Ђ. Трифуновић, “Служба преносу моштију свете Петке”, in: Зборник Владимира Мо
шина, Београд 1977, p. 203.
391
More on the topic: ibidem, p. 129.
392
Г. Цамблак, Књижевни рад у Србији, ред. Д. Петровић, Београд 1999, p. 13.
393
Ibidem, p. 20.
394
К. Иванова, Стара българска литература, т. 4. Житиеписни творби, София 1986,
p. 626.
120 Part I
of the Life [by Euthymius – note D.G.] and meant to be read out in a proper
place, which would not be an autonomous text”395.
Apart from Tsamblak’s works, texts dedicated to St. Petka in Serbia were
compilations. In the main, editions, alterations and additions were made to
already existing lives and services, adapting them to a new geopolitical context.
Examples include two manuscripts with a life by Euthymius396, no. 56 of 1509
(National Library of Russia in St. Petersburg), with information that St. Petka’s
relics were transferred to “the famous Serbian land”, and no. 89 from the
16th c. (State Library of Russia in Moscow), where excerpts dedicated to the
Bulgarian emperor were replaced by “our pious Despot Đurđe”397. Klimentyna
Ivanova wrote in detail on this topic398.
Contemporary versions of Paraskeva’s life were written by Nikolaj Veli
mirović (Ohrid Prologue, under October 14) and Justin Popović (Žitija svetih
za oktobar, under October 14399). The short life in Velimirović’s Prologue is
enriched by a poetic text praising Petka:
Чисто срце Господ жели,
Јеванђеље тако вели:
Чиста дева ти остаде,
Чисто срце Богу даде –
О предивна светитељко,
Наш узоре, света Петко!
Ум пречисти Господ тражи,
Без маштања и без лажи:
Ти му даде ум пречисти.
К’о анђелски – такав исти.
Чуј нам молбе, света Петко!
Душу чисту Господ иште
К›о небеско светилиште;
Такву душу ти одгаји,
Што на небу сад се сјаји,
395
The text of the translatio was to be read out after the account of the transfer of St. Petka’s
relics to Tarnovo in the life of Euthymius, and prior to the solemn laudation, see J. Stra-
domski, op. cit., p. 88.
396
397
Ibidem, p. 292.
398
К. Иванова, Житието на Петка Търновска…, p. 28–35.
399
Cytuję za: Преподобна мати Параскева…, op. cit., p. 11–16.
Помози нам света Петко!
Помози нам молитвама
У животним невољама:
У облачној земној тузи
Засветли нам слично дузи –
О предивна чедна дево,
Света мајко Параскево?400
Both hagiographical texts by Serbian clerics draw inspiration from the

Life of Euthymius and are typically historical in nature, without extensive
theological insights. Velimirović’s work gives a few basic facts about the saint’s
life, while Popović enriches and expands the story of Petka with details such
as her childhood, the description of miracles that took place at the relics in
the palace of Sultan Suleiman II (1494–1566).
In particular, akathists and canon, unknown to the earlier literary tradition,
are gaining the greatest popularity today. In 1960 nun Evpraksija from St.
Paraskeva-Petka Izvorska Monastery in Paraćin wrote an akathist in honour
of the saint in Church Slavonic. It was primarily intended to serve local needs
related to the daily life of the monastery and to add splendour to the ceremony
of transferring a fragment of the saint’s relic to the local church401. the text
was translated into contemporary Serbian by Životije Milojević and in this
version if it widely popular among the faithful, published separately as a mini
prayer book and in collections dedicated to St. Petka.
Analysing the development of the cult from its initial phase until the present
day, one can come to the conclusion that the gradual process of “Serbia
nization” is the most characteristic feature of the treatment of the sanctity of
Paraskeva within Serbian Orthodox scriptures. Over the years, the notion that
St. Petka is not only the “heavenly aide” of the state and nation, but, above
all, descendant of a Serbian nation, hence her nickname of Serbia, gained
ground in the Serbian spiritual tradition. In spite of Ilarion Ruvarac’s attempt
to correct this erroneous view, which is not borne out by historical facts, it
keeps recurring in Orthodox writings and homiletics. Leading authorities
of the Serbian Orthodox Church, Nikolaj Velimirović and Justin Popović, in
400
З. Перић, Света Петка – Преподобна Мати Параскева. Available online: <www.crkvaub.rs/
crkva/zitija_svetih/item/2223-sveta-petka-prepodobna-mati-paraskeva>, access: 13.01.2019.
401
Евпраксија, “Акатист”, in: Преподобна мати Параскева…, p. 56–64.
122 Part I
their texts dedicated to the saint, state that Petka was a native of Serbia (sic!):
“Она беше српског порекла” (Ohrid Prologue), “Ова славна, равноангелна
светитељлка беше српскога порекла (…)” (Žitija svetih za oktobar). Until
now this feature remains most often used in ideological terms. It makes the
image of St. Petka extremely meaningful and capacious. She can appear as
a mother, Serbian protector, “quick assistant,” patroness of the state and the
Orthodox Church. Even the most contemporary works on the subject of
saints, holiness, or women’s spirituality, which serve to popularize the cult,
do not try to correct the ideological “Serbianness” attributed to the saint:
“После Пресвете Богородице, најпоштованија светитељка y нашем наро
ду, особито међу женама, свакако је Преподобна Мајка Параскева, Света
Петка. По предању, ова славна подвижница беше српског порекла”402.
In another one:
Света Параскева-Петка рођена је, према предању, крајем десетог века у јужној
Србији, у месту Епивату (Пивату) на цариградском друму, а према другом
предању тај град је био на обали Мраморног мора, недалеко од Цариграда.
(…) Предање даље каже да је кнегиња Милица успела да од свог зета, турског
султана Бајазита, добије дозволу да се мошти свете Параскеве пренесу
у Србију, с обзиром на то да је она била Српкиња и српска светитељка403.
Of special attention with respect to the “Serbianization” process of the cult

there is a previously mentioned text published in Cetinje – Sveta Petka – slava
Srpska i zaštita vernih (2009). Already on the first pages the authors claim that it
is indisputable that the saint is a Serbian by birth: “После 950. рађа се потоња
Преподобна Петка, у српској породици [underline – D.G.], у селу Епивате-
Пристаништа (данас Епиватос), на трачкој обали Мраморног мора, не
много далеко од Цариграда”404. In the preface, Archbishop Amfilohije writes:
“Тако је и нама, православнима Балкана, прије више од 10 вјекова послао
Пеподобну мајку нашу Петку-Параскеву, небеску човечицу и земаљског
анђела, од нашег крштеног племена, из једне од бројних српских Славинија
402
Љ. Ранковић, Жена икона цркве и благо света, Шабац 2009, p. 177.
403
Ђ. Рандељ, Светачник. Славе и верски обичаји код Срба, Нови Сад 2006, p. 125–126.
404
Света Петка – слава српска и заштита верних, уредник протојереј Р. Никчевић,
Цетиње 2009, p. 12.
[underline– D.G.] (…)”405. As such, it is part of the Serbian history of the saint,
as illustrated by the graphic depiction of the pantheon of saints venerated by
the Serbian Church since c. 680 and St. Isidore of Gordoserbon (Serbian: sv.
Isidor Srbogradski)406 to St. Justin Ćelijski (1894–1979): among the saints there
is Petka with an icon and a legend: “Између 950 и 1000 (или 1022–1050):
Преподобна Петка-Параскева Српска или Београдска или Бугарска или
Трновска, најстарија позната пустиножитељка српског рода [underline
– D.G.], чудотворка Христова, чији култ обједињује православну земљу
од Цариграда до Москве и Минска (…).”407. In the chronological view of
Petka’s life and the development of her cult, including the texts dedicated to
her, in several places in the study, the authors claims that the first text of St.
Petka’s life was written in Serbian and only later was it translated into Greek,
as it would be the case with the life of Jovan Vladimir:
До 1147. прво житије Преподобне Петке Епиватске на српском и грчком

језику – (као што је и Свети Јован Владимир поред несачуваног српског, добио
и сачувано грчко и латинско житије Летопис попа Дукљанина). Поштовање
Свете Петке разраста се и снажи толико да она добија и своје житије, написано
“грубом” руком и срцем неког њеног “земљака”, међутим, на начин који није
очаравао учене Византинце, вероватно на србском језику са напоредним
грчким преводом408.
The facts known to literary historians about the burning of the first, popular
life are transformed in such a way that they correspond to the consistently
created image of the saint as inseparably and fundamentally connected with
the Serbian land and nation:
Када се у једном оваквом контексту прочита поново горе наведени одломак

о спаљеном и снова написаном житију “Свете Параскеве, поштоване у Кали
кратији”, може се наслутити да се исправљање првобитног сказања о овој
Светитељки, које је записао неки њен земљак, можда чак и црквено лице,
тицало, вероватно, и бројних србизама, у које је јамачно спадало и само
405
Ibidem, p. 3.
406
Gordoserbon (Gordosevron, Greek Γορδόσερβον; proto-Slavic Gordŭ Sĭrbŭ; Serbian: Го
рдосервон, Гордосербон, Србоград/Srbograd, Град Срба/Grad Srba) a Byzantine city
in Bithynia, inhabited by Serbs. Isidore, bishop of the city, is mentioned in sources from
680/681. Available online: <https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Гордосервон>, access: 23.11.2019.
407
Света Петка – слава српска…, p. 6.
408
Ibidem, p. 13.
124 Part I
Светитељкино име, али и назив њеног родног места на обали Мраморног

мора – Епивате (Epivatai, дакле множина), а можда и саме Каликратије.
(…) Могућност да је спаљивање тога пражитија Св. Петке наложено због
евентуалних јеретичких ставова пишчевих искључена је из простог разлога
што су Богомили одбацивали сваки култ Светаца и њихових моштију409.
Petka of Serbia was, according to the authors, replaced by the Greek

Paraskeva, rather than the other way around. Currently, the cults of early
Christian saintly women are disappearing and give way to Petka of Belgrade
or accompany her.
Among the hagiographies dedicated to St. Petka of Epivates and her
early Christian namesakes there is a prologue life originally published in the
collection Makedonska srednjovekovna književnost (Macedonian medieval
literature, Skopje 1985) with no reference to the source410. It is probably
a translation into modern Serbian of a life transcribed in 1780 in the Grgeteg
Monastery in Fruška Gora (Vojvodina) by monk Bartolomeus in Russian-
Slavonic411. Both texts claim that Epivates n. Kalikratia was on Serbian soil.
The status of the saint’s family was elevated: she came “from a good root”,
a poor, yet God-fearing and pious family. In addition, the Bulgarian Tsar Ivan
Asen II is called not only a Bulgarian, but also a Serbian king. The author
notes that after the Greek, Bulgarian and Serbian lands were taken captive
by Sultan Selim II, the relics of the hermit were deposited in Constantinople,
emphasizing that numerous miracles took place at the relics, thanks to which
even Muslims embraced Christianity. Seeing this, the sultan decided to hand
over the body to the Christians, who deposited it in the patriarchal church.
Later, the governor of Moldavia dispatched it to Jassy, where it was transferred
with great reverence on 14 October 1641412.
In the early stages of the cult’s development, the image of St. Petka basically
reproduced the pattern formed in Bulgaria. The cult has a state character and
pursues the goals of the dynastic policy of the Serbian rulers – it sanctions
409
Ibidem, p. 72.
410
Ibidem, p. 34–35.
411
Вартоломеј, монах, op. cit., access: 10.10.2019.
412
Bringing the relics of St. Petka to Jassy was also of political significance; the Moldavian
voivode supported the organisation of the Orthodox synod in 1642 convened by the Pa-
triarch of Constantinople Parthenius I.
the reign of the Lazarević dynasty, sanctifies the space of the capital and
the state (glory, tone 5: “Земљи српској помоћница”413). After a period of
great migrations, the cult would reflect the aspirations of Serbian ethnarchs
to maintain the autonomy and cohesion of the Orthodox Church inside the
borders of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. In developing Petka’s image anew,
hagiographers drew on the abundant imagery of texts dedicated to members
of the first dynasties to indicate a link between the medieval Serbian state
and the history of the Serbian people after the Turkish invasion. History is
interpreted from the perspective of the sacred, and therefore Petka too joins the
ranks of Serbian patron saints and protectors; she is a God-send (canon 2414,
ode 6: “Као дар освешстани отачаству дајеш се, Параскево (…)”). The
presence of holy relics in the country adds to Serbia’s stature among other
Christian countries:
Доласком светих твоих моштију

Српска земља обогати се,
и Христова црква примивши их
миро точећи украшава се (Litija stikhera, t. 1415).
Faced with the onslaught of the Ottoman state on the one hand and the
policy of converting Orthodox Christians to Catholicism on the other, Petka
is an apostle and defender of Orthodoxy against dissenters and heretics.
“Живописане свечасне и свештене образе усрдно си целивала, и, књиге
безбожника истребљујући и њихова богомрска и безбожна учења по
срамљујући, поштовање и поклоњење образу Христовоме оглашавала
јеси!” (canon 1, ode 6, and also: canon 1, ode 5).
The saint becomes the guarantor of preserving the purity of the faith of the
fathers and passing it on unchanged through the generations:
По закону Очевом закон отачки, свеблажена, истнито држећи, на демонска

си лица пљунула, а Господњи лик благочастиво целивала, који прими Онај
који се од Дјеве Откровице јави, кога преузносимо у веке!
413
“Из службе светој Петки Параскеви”, in: Г. Цамблак, op. cit., p. 125.
414
Вартоломеј, монах, op.cit.; The quoted texts of the canons in modern Serbian come
from: Света Петка – слава српска и заштита верних, уред. протојереј Р. Никчевић,
Цетиње 2009, p. 39–44.
415
Г. Цамблак, op. cit., p. 125.
126 Part I
Умом Божанственим и Духа Пресветога харфом свездруженом, славујем кра

снопојним, верних похвалом врховном, Православља стубом и утврђењем
мудрим, правилом Цркве и монахиња славом и свих Преподобниј украсом
јавила си се, појући Христа у веке!
Мирохранилицом Духа Светога, милостива, јавила си се мира својих миро
мирних и учења мудрих изливањем, ништећи трулежност злосмрадну пре
лести и благомирисавајући природом својом, Петка, Цркву пречасну, кличући
непрестано: Песмама те, Христе, преузносимо у векове! (canon 1, ode 8)
The image of Petka in the canons was based on the images attributed in the
Bible to Moses; like the patriarch, she was blessed with a direct contact with
God, which in the canon was poetically expressed by the biblical symbol of
the cloud that covers God’s chosen ones (Ex 13:21; 16:10; 33:9; Ezek 1:4) and
Christ himself during the Transfiguration (Mt 17:5):
Науком Божијега Зрака просветила си све, блажена Петка, одагнавши
јеретичку злобу сву, Христа као Животодавца песмословећи: Свет јеси,
Господе!
На гору Божанствених добродетељи устекла си, Параскево, и у облак бо
говиђења пронкавши, са Богом се сјединила, словесне таблице закона
благодатног промивши. (canon 1, ode 2)
From His hands she took the plaques, assuming the role of the leader.
Under her leadership, the Church and the nation will emerge unscathed from
every oppression.
The Serbian Church is portrayed as Zion, God’s dwelling place (Ps 76:3;
Ps 87:2), while Petka is likened to rivers flowing out of her interior, “pouring
out” numerous graces on the faithful: “Као река линувши са Сиона, Петко
славна, напојила си обилно струјама Божанственим зборове верних, који
клицаху: Господу запојмо песму нову!” (canon 1, ode 1, tone 6). According
to some Scripture commentators, Zion is shown as the motherland, the centre
of God’s people scattered throughout the world (Psalm 87:5)416. Analogous to
the biblical site, the SOC is to unite the Serbian Orthodox, especially around
places of worship of saints, including Petka:
416
See S. Zimmer, Zion als Tochter, Frau und Mutter, München 1959; Fr. S. Łach, “Próba
nowej interpretacji hymnów o Syjonie”, Studia Warmińskie, XII, 1975, p. 398.
Приступите, зборови посника! Приступите, чистоте љубитељи! Проступите,

празникољупци, сваки узрасте, песмама духовним усхвалимо пустинољубиву
грлицу, посника похвалу, девственица окићење, тиховатеља украс, печалних,
утешитељку, болних посетитељку и невољницима брзопослушну помоћницу,
богомудру Петку, која исцељења точи свима, јер обрете благодат чудеса
Божијом заповешћу! (ikos after ode 6).
The consequence of God’s choice of the Serbian Orthodox Church is invin

cibility and wealth, especially of the saints who protect it. God’s presence
ensures that nothing can shake it (see Is 33:20–21), and nations that dare
to fight against it will suffer defeat (see Is 29:7). In times of trial, the holy
hermit stands up for the fundamental idea of Orthodoxy – the purity of
faith. By preserving the purity of Christian doctrine, she defeats the Church’s
opponents: “Живописане свечасне и свештене образе усрдно си целивала,
и књиге безбожника истребљујући и њихова богомрска и безбожна учења
посрамљујући, поштовање и поклоњење образу Христовоме оглашавала
си!” (canon 1, ode 6). She drives off demonical forces by fasting and praying,
wielding “a sword of the spirit”417, symbolic of the power of the faith and the
preaching of the Divine Word (Heb 4:12; Ps 45:4).
Solar symbolism plays an important role in shaping the literary image of St.
Petka. The saint is described in many ways: as the second sun (sedalan, tone 4:
“Kао сунце си се друго у цркви јавила”; Ps 84:12; PnP 6:10, etc.), adorned
with luminous rays (canon 1, ode 9: “зрацима пресветлим окићена”), Divine
light (canon 2, ode 9: као божаствена светлост, Параскево, песмовито
си Цркви јавила се), light-bearer (stikhera for “Praise the Lord”, tone 8:
“светлоносна”), luminous (canon 1, ode 5: “светлозарном јавила си се,
мати Параскево”). The symbolism used in the hymnography evokes the future
times of salvation and the work of God manifested in light (Proverbs 6:23).
Radiating brightness in the spiritual dimension means seeing and knowing
the Most High (Wis 7:26). The saint, through sharing in the light, has access to
the most perfect form of communion with God and in her person His majesty
is revealed (Sir 42:16). The praesentia of Petka’s relics on Serbian soil made it
417
“Облиставши се, славна, живота исправљењем, избрушена као мач Христов јавила
си се, сасецајући лукавства демонска, укрепљивана Духом Божанственим” (can-
on 1, ode 4). Słownik obrazów i symboli biblijnych, ed. M. Lurker, transl. K. Romaniuk,
Poznań 1989, entry: miecz (sword).
128 Part I
a place of God’s permanent presence and action, a confirmation of the special

historical role and election of the country and its people.
*
After the successive defeats of Serbia in the confrontation with the Ottoman
Empire, the defensive and patronage functions of St. Petka began to give way
to others. Elements from the oldest Slavic Orthodox works, referring to the
image of St. Petka as a nun and hermit, return.
The latest, contemporary image of the saint is shaped using all the resources
of tradition and literature. It is a combination of the original, general image of
sanctity based on the ascetic model, together with patronage and protection
elements, as well as folk and Marian tradition. Petka is a model of Christian
virtues and anachoretic life, expressed, among other things, in the rejection of
worldly goods in favour of spiritual perfection (ikos 2): “Радуј се, савршени
обрасцу јеванђелског самоодрицања! Радуј се, јер си дуготрајним сирома
штвом стекла славу и вечно богатство! Радуј се, јер си заветом сиромаштва
показала висину духа!”. In the fourth kontaktion: “Буру садашњега живота
одбацила си, Преподобна, задобивши самовољно сиромаштво Христа
ради, великим врлинама си се обогатила, и многе у ревности начином
живота си подигла (…)”. In her deeds she resembles the fathers of the desert
(akathist, kontakion 6: “Радуј се, миомирни цвете пустиње! Радуј се, најбоље
васпитање пустиње!”) and the Old Testament prophets – St. Elijah and St.
John the Baptist (akathist, kontakion 6). Petka’s relics have the power to cure
and work miracles (akathist, ikos 9, kontakion 10). The power of her prayer
defeats demons and converts dissenters (akathist, ikos 3, ikos 10).
More recent texts also update her image as guardian and defender of the
state, nation and Orthodox Church (akathist418, ikos 11 and 12):
Певајући приљежно те молимо, Преподобна мати Параскево, моли се за
Цркву Христову, православној вери снагу и победу над јересима подај, и нама
спасење и мир испроси, да би те са љубављу овако прославили:
Радуј се, светли украсе Цркве Христове!
418
A translation of St. Petka’s akathist has also been published in Poland: Akathist to the Holy
Nun Paraskeva of Serbia, transcription of the Church Slavonic text into Cyrillic from the
“Grazhdanka” and translation into Polish by Fr. Mitrate E. (Stanisław) Strach, Białystok
2018.
Радуј се, заштитнице вере православне!

Радуј се, стено и избавитељко отаџбине наше од иноверних!
Радуј се, покрове твоје обитељи!
Радуј се, заштитнице рода хришћанскога!
Радуј се, брза помоћнице оних који са вером траже заштиту твоју!
Радуј се, Преподобна мати Параскево, утехо ожалошћених! (akathist, ikos 12).
As the “child” of the Serbian people and the greatest ornament of Belgrade,
the saint is constantly expected to stand guard over its prosperity and security:
“Буди и надаље престономе граду српском, утврди га у Православљу,
помози вернима, подигни недужне и тужне, у уснулим у Господу прецима
нашим, браћи и деци, измоли вечни покој и вечно спасење, света Петко,
Божија Светитељко”419.
Patriotic motifs are also preserved in the daily prayers of the faithful.
Even though her holy remains have not rested within the walls of Belgrade’s
fortress for several centuries, Petka still remains a defender of the capital and
its inhabitants and is a guarantor of fidelity to the Orthodox faith. Recognising
her as “our” saint: of Belgrade, of Serbia, offers a more intimate and close
prayerful contact: “Света Петко, Божја светитељко, моли Бога за нас.
Удостојила си се гледања лица Божјег, као чедо нашег народа, славна
Петко светитељко, па имамо слободу теби говорити, сродници нашој,
и тебе молити за спасење душа наших”420. Anyone can ask for healing at the
holy spring, the blind, lame, old, and young, because Petka: “Добре у добру
сложи, и свако им добро умножи”.
In other prayers, Petka is shown as the protector of the hearth, the family
and the entire household:
Теби, св. Петко, упућујемо топле молитве: умоли Сина Божијег Господа Исуса
Христа, за кога си живела и чијом си се невестом назвала, да нас и наш дом
благослови; да нас сачува од сваког зла, од беде, од разних болести; да нас
избави из свих невоља и недаћа, које би нас у животу снашле. Да благослови
дом наш и да све што је у њему напредује, да се умножава на добро и на
срећу нашу. Да благослови поља наша, воћњаке и винограде да уроде добрим
плодом; да благослови стоку – благо наше. Молимо Те, св. Параскево, да нам
419
Преподобна мати Параскева…, op. cit., p. 64.
420
Молитва Светој Петки Параскеви. Available online: <http://www.crkvaub.rs/crkva/
novosti/item/2705-molitva-svetoj-petki-paraskevi>, access: 27.11.2019.
130 Part I
будеш на помоћи увек: и у дому, и у пољу, и по дану и по ноћи, а ми ћемо

славити Твоју успомену сада и увек. Амин421.
Importantly, the cult in Serbian spirituality was also appreciated by poets,

who dedicated their works to her. Hristofor Žefarović’s Stemmatographia
(1741) shows among images of twenty-six saints two women; one is St. Petka,
the other is Angelina.
In recent years, the cult has taken on increasingly interesting features, and
the feast of Paraskeva has been restored to high prominence in the calendar (it
is marked in red). There are also theoretical and literary studies of hagiography
dedicated to St. Petka that adopt a feminist approach422. The author, Sofia
Crushovalieva, analyses from the feminist and gender perspective Euthymius’s
Life of the saint423. Already at the beginning of the discussion, she notes that
a critical analysis should be performed on the fact that the author of St. Petka’s
hagiography is a man, which by default situates the text in a masculine-centric
framework424. The fragment of the biography dedicated to the saint’s stay in
the desert and comparing her achievements to the spiritual perfection of
St. John the Baptist and the prophet Elijah is presented by the author as an
expression of misogyny:
Here again, one can see that if a woman manager to reach a peak in the spiritual
life she was necessarily compared to a man. But, apart from reading this as a clear
indication of misogyny I would like to suggest that the language of the Christian
church was to a great extent influenced by the heritage of the Greco-Roman world,
which was also giving virtues a masculine form425.
Further on, the same fragment is interpreted as liberation from the male-
dominated world and its constraints. Taking into account the general meaning
of the study, it should be stated that Petka is portrayed in it as a rebel against
421
Л. Мирковић, Хеортологија…, p. 30–31.
422
See S. Crushovalieva, Saint Petka: A Balkan Saint. A Case Study on Orthodox Women
Saints, Saarbrücken 2008. The first feminist analyses of the figure of St. Petka were done
by Eve Levin in the late 1980s, e.g. Sex and Society in the World of the Orthodox Slavs,
900–1700, Cornell University Press, 1989.
423
The text of the Life she analyses comes from Ivanova’s book: К. Иванова, Стара бълга
рска литература, т. 4. Житиеписни творби, София 1986.
424
S. Crushovalieva, op. cit., p. 43.
425
Ibidem, p. 46.
the existing social order; she opposes the reality created and described by
men, and her example is supposed to be a reversal of the patriarchal system426.
Importantly, in the analysis of the text of the saint’s Life, Crushovalieva
basically focuses on reconstructing the content of the course of the saint’s life,
while the very conclusions resulting from the feminist and gender approach
adopted at the outset are rather sparse and debatable. Nevertheless, it should
be emphasized that this is the first discussion of St. Petka’s life that adopts
a recent research perspective.
426
Ibidem, p. 45, 48.
Chapter VI
St. Zlata (Chrysa) of Meglen –

October 13, 18
The cult of Zlata of Meglen427 was established in 1799 on Holy Mount Athos.
Hagiographers believe that Zlata (also known as Chrysa) was born in the
village of Slatina (or Slatino) n. Meglen (today’s Greece, Aegean Macedonia,
Greek name since 1926 Χρυσή, Хрисѝ). Historical records about Zlata are
practically non-existent. Her image is shaped by liturgical literature, especially
hagiography, written initially by Greeks and later supplemented by Slavic
materials. It is very general, based on conventional models of holy martyrs,
partly enriched with the Marian and ascetic model.
The feast of the martyr occurs on October 13 or 18, because she ended her
life on either of these days in 1795. The main commemoration of the saint in
Serbia is October 13 (less frequently October 18). The Bulgarian Orthodox
Church commemorates the martyrdom of Zlata only on October 18. The
modern Macedonian Church commemorates the martyr twice: on October
13, and also on the first Sunday of October on the day of the celebration of the
Council of All Macedonian Saints (Собор на сите македонски светители).
427
Extracts from the chapter have been published in two articles, including one in English:
“St Zlata (Chryse) of Maglen – a model martyr of the southern Slavs/Света Злата (Хриса)
Мегленска – узорна светитељка Јужних Словенa”, in: Српска краљевства у Средњем
веку: зборник радова са међународног научног скупа Српска краљевства у средњем
веку, одржаног од 15. до 17. септембра 2017. године у Краљеву, у част обележавања 800
година од крунисања Стефана Немањића (Првовенчаног), уред. С. Мисић и други,
Краљево 2017, p. 271–288; “Радуј се, Цркве Православне птицо богогласна! Ptasia
symbolika w serbskiej hymnografii poświęconej St. Złacie Megleńskiej”, in: Słowiańszczyz
na z ptasiej perspektywy, ed. M. Baer, Poznań 2019.
134 Part I
The Russian Orthodox Church took over the cult of the saint in the second
half of the 19th century and commemorates her on both 13 and 18 October.
Zlata is also mentioned by name during the celebration on Athos on the
third Sunday after Pentecost428, the feast of “Saint martyrs who lay down their
lives for the sake of the Orthodox faith during the Turkish rule in the world”
(i.e. 1453–1912; Sveti mučenici postradali za veru pravoslavnu u toku turske
vladavine u svetu).
The cult of Zlata developed under complicated socio-political-religious
conditions. The 18th century was a period of great tension in the Balkans.
Serbia was politically dependent on the one hand on the High Porte, on
the other hand it is subject to the influence of the Habsburg monarchy and
Venice. At the same time, the Ottoman state was in crisis, internal feuds and
rifts deepened, while among the Slavic peoples a sense of ethnic and national
identity slowly emerged, providing the basis for the independence movements
of the 19th c.429.
The centuries of Turkish rule in the Balkans meant that Christianity in the
region took the form of a folk religion, quite distant from the classical theology
of the Church Fathers430. At that time (15th–19th c.) big monasteries, especially
Mount Athos, a point of reference for Orthodoxy there, were the cornerstone
of spirituality in the Balkans. Clerics from Mount Athos promoted a new kind
of sainthood, of so-called new martyrs (novomučenici)431. They were Christians
killed by the Turks in the name of the (Orthodox) faith: Muslims converted
to Orthodoxy and so-called Turn-Turks, who decided to wash away with
their own blood the sin of apostasy, as well as those who died in martyrdom
for political reasons (rebels, insurgents). The social status of the new martyrs
varies greatly and reflects the shift that occurred in the process of elevating
saints to the altars in the area ruled by the Ottoman Empire. The examples of
428
D. Gil, Serbska hymnografia…, p. 110. See also: Хризостом Столић Хиландарац, Пра
вославни светачник, tone 2, Београд 1989., p. 727–732.
429
A. Naumow, “W poszukiwaniu utraconej tożsamości – nowi męczennicy atoscy (1590–
1830)”, in: Religijna mozaika Bałkanów, ed. M. Walczak-Mikołajczakowa, Gniezno 2008, p.
43–54. Available online: <https://iris.unive.it/retrieve/handle/10278/29138/19627/Gnie
zno.pdf>, access: 28.02.2017, p. 2–4.
430
Ibidem, p. 2.
431
The term is now also used to refer to Christians who died a martyr’s death in the 19th and
20th c.
Chapter VI: St. Zlata 135
Athos and Serbia reveal that the graphical line drawn by the new cults of saints
runs top-down, from rulers, clerics, monks and hermits, to representatives of
the lower social strata432 – small feudal lords433, who supported the Church
with donations, as well as merchants, craftsmen, shepherds, and peasants.
At the end of the 18th c. and the beginning of the 19th c., martyrs who
died for the faith included Anastasius of Strumica (d. 1794), Agatangel Bitolski
(d. 1727), Teodor Sladić (d. 1788)434, etc. Three martyrs stand out from among
women-saints; their hagiographies are extraordinarily similar: Zlata of Meglen
(d. 1795), Kirana of Solun (d. 1751435) and Aquilina of Tessalonica (Angelina,
Saint Akylina οf Zagliveri, d. 1764436). The lives of these new martyrs show
the heroines against the background of everyday family and social life in
a religiously mixed society. As Sophia Laiou notes, the institution of marriage
[and the family – D.G.’s note] was a fundamental condition for stability and
social cohesion in both Christian and Islamic states. Any deviation from the
established system of ethical and religious values jeopardized the stability of
both a given family or marriage and the broader society to which it belonged437.
One of the greatest challenges faced by the Orthodox Church in the territories
under the Ottoman Empire was to control the family and marital life of the
faithful. The Islamic law offered many possibilities of entering into marriage438
(including so-called mut’a kebin – a marriage concluded for a specific time),
dissolution of marriage by divorce (two types: talak – launched by a man,
432
433
For example, Miloš Obilić, venerated in the 18th c.
434
435
Like Zlata, she was tortured to death as she refused to marry a Turk.
436
She defied her father, who embraced Islam and wanted to persuade his entire family to
convert. Information about the finding of her relics: А. Христова, “Тържествено опове
стяване откриването на мощите на св. новомъченица Акилина”, Църковен вестник,
бр. 12, 1 – 15 юни 2012 г., p. 3, available online: <http://digilib.nalis.bg/dspviewerb/srv/vie
wer/eng/53eecd16-865a-482c-9eb1-d7404db3d508?tk=U-7NFoZaSCyesddATbPVCAA
AAABfgGfG.cWZbtMbdsul79vJNOOO5zQ&citation_url=/xmlui/handle/nls/32611>,
access: 18.10.2020.
437
S. Laiou, “Christian Women in an Ottoman World: Interpersonal and Family Cases
Brought Before the Shari’a Courts During the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Cas-
es Involving the Greek Community)”, in: Women in the Ottoman Balkans. Gender, Culture
and History, ed. A. Buturović and İ.C. Schick, London 2007, p. 244.
438
Islamic law allowed civil mixed marriages (Muslim-Christian) or marriages between two
representatives of religions other than Islam before the kadi.
136 Part I
hul – launched by a woman) and offspring recognition, also eagerly used by

Christians439. The author shows, on the basis of court documents from the
17th and 18th c., that Christians from areas under the jurisdiction of the
Ottoman Empire went to the Turkish kadis more often than to local church/
civil courts in family or matrimonial matters, seeking more favourable solutions
for themselves, e.g. in matters of marriage, divorce or inheritance440. We can
therefore conclude that the Turks allowed Christians to reap the benefits of
the Ottoman legislative system to become covertly Islamised. Furthermore,
complete conversion to Islam offered specific privileges and concessions;
turn-Turks were allowed to retain property, paid lower taxes, were pardoned
by courts, even in the case of death sentences, and were ensured a range of
economic and social privileges441. Athos, as the bulwark of Orthodoxy, tried
to prevent conversions, promoting Christian values and the Christian ethic
through the new martyrs. Aleksander Naumow notes: “It seems that only
Athos (perhaps also Orthodox centres in the Holy Land) did not lose its all-
Orthodox dimension, a barrier against Islam and Western Christianity, but
also against the process of disintegration of the pan-Orthodox community”442.
Zlata’s first life was written in 1799 on Mount Athos, four years following
her martyr’s death. Authorship of a text in Greek, written on the basis of an
account of an eyewitness, igumen of the Stavronikita Monastery443 on Athos,
Fr. Timothei, is attributed to Nicodemus Hagiorite (Svetogorac)444. The life was
439
S. Laiou, op. cit., p. 245–246.
440
Ibidem, p. 245.
441
A. Naumow, W poszukiwaniu…, p. 2.
442
Ibidem, p. 4.
443
Stavronikita Monastery is a Greek monastery founded in the 10th c., consecrated in 1536
as the last of the existing ones on Mount Athos. The monastery stores e.g. the icon of St.
Nicholas (Streidas) and 171 manuscripts.
444
St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite (1749–1809) – known primarily as the co-author of an an-
thology of texts on asceticism and prayer entitled Philokalia of the Holy Neptic Fathers,
which he edited together with Bishop St. Macarios of Corinth in the 18th century. Other
works include: Evergetinon, On frequent reception of Holy Communion, Alphabetalphabetos
by Meletius Confessor, Book of Barsanuphius and of John of Gaza, Invisible Combat (ad-
aptation of Scupoli’s The Spiritual Combat), Spiritual Exercises (adaptation of Pinamonti’s
Exercise), Encheiridion symbouleutikon, collections of canons, tropar, acolutes, writings of
Gregory Palamas, Kīpos charitôn (Garden of Graces). Canonised in 1955 by Patriarch Ath-
enagoras I of Constantinople (1886–1972).
part of a set of martyrs’ lives Neon martyrologion445. Their content follows the
usual hagiographic patterns. The biography is stripped of national, patriotic
and independence themes, which made the figure of the saint as a martyr in
liturgical literature follow primarily biblical and hagiographic topoi, stylized
motifs and characteristics. Her portrayal is based on a scheme derived from
the Marian and partly ascetic model. Its basic assumption is to create a saintly
figure a reader can relate to; she will show how to defend Christian identity
while living in an environment dominated by Islam. It does not even have to
be repressive; it is enough that it creates many temptations. Christians were
attracted to the religion of Muhammad by many issues, especially wealth
and social prestige. The intention of the author of Zlata’s life was to remind
us of the core values of Christianity, which at the time were the core identity
based on the confessional element. Therefore the life of Zlata glorifies the
monastic virtues, i.e. the love of poverty, humility and piety, dobrotolubije (love
of goodness and beauty). The model of sanctity based on the imitatio Mariae
prizes in particular the virtue of virginity446, a signature sign of Christianity, and
a capacity for renunciation or even mortification, emblematizing a Christian’s
strong character and faith.
Thus, at this difficult time, St. Zlata’s voluntary martyrdom becomes a token
of religious affiliation, exaltation of the Eastern Church and strengthening of
the anti-Islamization policy. It expresses the desire to renew and strengthen
the Orthodox faith in the territories occupied by the Turks. It shows the Turks
as enemies to be resisted. The idea of martyrdom is based on the principle of
contradiction: a young Christian girl, of considerable physical and spiritual
beauty, becomes the object of desire of an infidel, a “devilish” Turk, who is
compared to the biblical Hagrites (sons of Agar)447, driven by carnal instincts.
445
In the National Library in Sofia, no. 475. See Б. Цонев, Опис на ръкописите и ста
ропечатните книги на Народната библиотека в София, tone 1, София 1910, бр. 415.
The text in Greek is available at: <http://anemi.lib.uoc.gr/metadata/3/a/4/metadata-02-00
00173.tkl>, access: 26.05.2017.
446
This is also reflected in the saint’s iconography, where she is depicted holding a lily (sym-
bol of purity).
447
Hagrites were the sons of Hagar, a slave girl who bore Abraham a son Ishmael. After the
birth of Isaac she was driven out into the desert. The descendants of Ishmael were called
Arabs, and later the name Hagrites was extended to all Muslim peoples. Here it refers to
the Turks.
138 Part I
The simple plot of Zlata’s life aims to present the most important differences
between “native” – Christianity and Christians, and “foreign” – Turks and
Islam. The various elements of this dichotomy, religions, customs, values and
human characters, are completely opposed to each other. While Christians
value poverty, Muslims value wealth; Christians opt for spiritual beauty, while
Muslims praise material beauty. Christians practice renunciation and Muslims
give in to debauchery. Christians embrace virginity, humility, self-abasement,
and readiness to die for their beliefs, while Muslims prize arrogance, violence,
cruelty, and violence. Zlata is the embodiment of all positive values, while the
Turk who wants to marry her epitomises negativity. The infidel is shown as
repulsive, cruel and godless, a vile oppressor, driven by carnal lusts and valuing
worldly goods (prelestnyj). The above character of the invader is contrasted
with Zlata’s “purity” and steadfastness. According to the hagiographer, the
two are worlds apart, irreconcilable and incompatible.
The original range of the cult of the new martyrs, including St. Zlata, remains
difficult to establish. Still, it can be assumed that the cult of Zlata gradually
spread (probably in the Greek language version) from Holy Mountain Athos
and radiated to the Greek and South Slavic lands of Serbia and Bulgaria,
from where it was transferred to Russia. In Serbia, the onset of the cult is
believed to have occurred in the late 18th c. and the first years of the 19th c.,
when new local cults of saints began to spread in the south of the country, at
the confluence of the borders with Macedonia and Bulgaria448. The universal
image of sainthood expressed in the Greek life of the saint and the lack of
historical data about this saint prompted a quick adaptation of Zlata to the new
socio-religious needs. Her origin on the borderland of three Slavic cultures
made it possible to see her as a Slav, and as time passed and individual Slavic
ethnoses made attempts at self-definition, a specific nationality began to be
attributed to her.
The first Slavic translation of the biography came out only in the late 19th
c. It was Peter Soloviev’s 1862 translation into Russian, published in the book
Христiанскiе мученики пострадaвшiе на Востокѣ со времени завоеванiя
Константинополя турками449. Soloviov’s version of the text was copied by
448
449
П. Соловьевъ, Христiанскiе мученики пострадавшiе на Востокѣ современи завое
ваня Константинополя турками, Санктпетербургъ 1862, p. 275–279.
Bishop Filaret Gumilevsky in 1865 in Святые южныхъ cлaвянъ450. Only in

the 1930s was a translation of the text in Bulgarian made by Christo Popov451.
There is another, later translation into Bulgarian, based on the Greek version,
with some abbreviations, published in 1984 in Solun as The life and passion of
great martyr Zlata of Meglen (Житие и страдание на св. великомъченица
Злата Мъгленска)452. A short version of the life in Bulgarian (Житие на
света великомъченица Злата Мъгленска) based on a Greek text was edited
by Bishop of Levkija Partenij and Archimandrite Athanasius (Bonchev); it was
published in Жития на светиите (The Lives of Saints) in 1991453.
An adaptation of a Greek life into the modern Macedonian language was
prepared in the mid-1990s by Dobrila Milovska454 and Jovan Takovski455. St. Zlata
moreover inspired contemporary Macedonian poets, e.g. Radovan Pavlovski
(Sveta Zlata Meglenska) and Mirče Nešovski (Osvetlena nebesna molitva)456.
In Serbia an interest in St. Zlata probably dates back to the interwar period.
Since the creation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes in 1918 (since
1929 the Kingdom of Yugoslavia), the problem of defining nationality/ethnicity
was a hotly debated topic not only among politicians, but also among clerics
and intellectuals457. Among the clergy, an ideology that gained momentum
was expressed in the texts by Archbishop Nikolaj Velimirović on the role and
status of Serbia on the historical map of Europe as the Teodul nation (bogonosni
narod), defining “Serbianness” through Orthodoxy (Svetosavlje, nacionalizam
450
Филарет, op. cit., p. 240–242.
451
Х. Поповъ, Жития на светите почитани отъ Православната църква, София 1930,
p. 143–145.
452
Житие и страдание на св. великомъченица Злата Мъгленска, Солун 1984, p. 95–98.
Available online: <www.pravoslavieto.com/life/10.18_sv_Zlata_Muglenska.htm>, access:
13.03.2018.
453
Жития на светиите, под ред. на Партений, епископ Левкийски и архимандрит
д-р Атанасий (Бончев), София 1991. Available online: <http://www.pravoslavieto.com/
life/10.18_sv_Zlata_Muglenska.htm>, access: 20.04.2018.
454
Д. Миловска, Житија на жени-светици, Скопје 2005, p. 75–78. Here the life of Zlata is
given under the date of October 26 (according to the new style). Available online: <http://
makedonija.rastko.net/cms/files /books/4a43643e33990>, access: 20.04.2018.
455
Д. Миловска, Ј. Таковски, Македонската житијна литература IX–XVIII век, Скопје
1996, p. 159–161.
456
М. Георгиевски, Македонски светци: живот и култ, Скопје 1997, p. 189.
457
M. Falina, “‘Clerical Fascism’ and Political Orthodoxy: Orthodox Christianity and Na-
tionalism in Interwar Serbia”, Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions 2007, tone 8,
no. 2, p. 251.
140 Part I
sv. Save). According to the archbishop, thinking about the extraordinary

historical role of Serbia as a chosen people was connected with the idea of
the election and mission of its individual “spiritual” leaders, starting with St.
Sava. Moreover, as Dorota Gil notes:
The concept of Serbia’s mission emphasizes the two most important components
of Serbian national identity: the willingness to make sacrifices in the name of faith,
in line with the Kosovo covenant, but also the recognition of the imperative to
fight for the freedom of the homeland, nation, preservation of traditions, etc., but
above all for spiritual freedom: “The cross and freedom are the defining elements
of Serbianism” – he stated458.
The new martyrs, apart from Prince Lazar, central in Serbian history, became
symbolic of the struggle for freedom and faith during Velimirović’s time459
(after the Second World War they would be joined by victims of Ustasha or
Serbs martyred in concentration camps), and St. Zlata was among them. It was
therefore necessary to accord her rightful place in the popular consciousness
of the Serbs. For this purpose, a collection of lives (as well as prayers and
sermons) for each day of the liturgical year, Ohrid Prologue, was to be used.
Velimirović, then Bishop of Ohrid and Bitol, compiled the book when in Ohrid
and published in 1928. The Prologue included a synaxar in honour of St. Zlata,
non-existent earlier in Serbian liturgical literature460. This text was used for
individual reading and to foster devotion to the saint in the consciousness of
the faithful. He also dedicated a poem to St. Zlata’s martyrdom:
Свету Злату, златно срце,

Турци мучили
Ради Христа, живог Бога,
муком морили.
Не заплака златна Злата,
нит се колеба,
Но срцем се сва предаде
Господу неба.
Залуд сузе родитељске,
458
459
He himself wrote the Service to saint Serbian martyrs (April 15).
460
Н. Велимировић, Охридски пролог, Ниш 1928, p. 814–815. An online version of the
prologue at: <www.svetosavlje.org/biblioteka/prolog/index.php?m=10&d=13&a=1&date
=10-2015>, access: 23.02.2018.
сузе сестринске,
Злата тражи сласт кроз муке,
сласти истинске,
Сласти које Христос спреми
мудрим девама,
Сласти које Женик даје
верним девама.
Разорише кавез тела
златне Златице.
Душа јој се ослободи
трошне тамнице,
И у рај се Злата диже
душе веселе
Усели се међ цареве –
свете ангеле.
Некад бедна сељанчица
света Златица
У рају се сада слави
као царица.
The text of Zlata’s life, with a poem patterned on a folk epic song, is one
example of Bishop Velimirović’s work in which the Serbian sacred and folk
traditions are intertwined461.
The outbreak of the Second World War and the subsequent communist
rule had a negative impact on the situation of the Serbian Orthodox Church.
A quarter of the Serbian clergy became victims of the war, including Bishop
Velimirović and Patriarch Gavrilo. Many churches and monasteries were
destroyed, including historic ones462. The post-war period, in the state ruled
by Tito, proved to be an equally dramatic struggle for the unity and survival
of the Serbian Church. The regime of communist Yugoslavia considered it
as a relic of the past, a token of backward Serbian nationalism, and it had
to be relegated to the margin of socio-political activity. From 1945 to 1958,
Church property was systematically seized and nationalised. Deprived of
461
More on this subject, see D. Gil, Serbska hymnografia…, p. 142–143; D. Najdanović, Tri
srpska velikana, Munich 1975; Đ. Trifunović, Srspki srednjovekovni spisi o knezu Lazaru
i kosovskom boju, Kruševac 1968, p. 334–336.
462
S.P. Ramet, “The Serbian Church”, in: The Balkan Babel. The Disintegration of Yugoslavia
From the Death of Tito to the Fall of Milošević, Boulder 2002, p. 100, 104–105.
142 Part I
its most prominent hierarchs, the Church also had to struggle with internal
separatism, which even during the Second World War led to the creation of the
Croatian Orthodox Church (1942). The Serbian Patriarchate lost control over its
dioceses in Czechoslovakia between 1945 and 1948. It then lost sovereignty over
congregations in Australia and America (1963) and over parishes within the
borders of Romania (1969, with the exception of the Diocese of Timişoara)463.
The efforts of the Macedonian Church, which declared autonomy in 1958
and completely separated from the Serbian Church in 1970, should also be
included in the dissenting tendencies within the Serbian Church. Probably the
events connected with the slow decentralisation of the power of the Orthodox
Church by the Patriarchate in Belgrade led to the official inclusion of the cult
of St. Zlata in the all-Church list of Serbian saints. Prompted by Metropolitan
Damaskin (Grdanički, 1892–1969) of Zagreb, on 4 June 1958 the Serbian
Archbishops’ Council established a “Commission for the elaboration of the
namebook464 of Serbian saints or an ikos, added to the service of Serbian
saints” (Komisija za izradu imenika srpskih svetitelja ili ikosa koji bi se dodao
službi srpskim svetiteljima)465. In the course of work and by decision of the
council from 1962, the name of Zlata of Meglen was added to the Namebook
of Serbian saints (Imenik Srba Svetitelja)466. That very year (1962), a holiday to
commemorate the council of all Serbian saints (30 August) was established.
The akathist written for the occasion, by protojerej Mirko Pavlović, includes
kondak and ikos 9 referring to women, among others to Zlata of Meglen467.
463
Ibidem, p. 108–109.
464
A list of saint Serbs: imenoslov.
465
Д.З. Плећевић, Српски светачник, Београд 2008, p. 15.
466
D. Gil, Serbska hymnografia…, p. 115; “Свети архијерејски сабор Српске православне
цркве донео је 1962. године одлуку »да се као признати светитељи у Српској
православној цркви и српском народу поштују и славе светитељи према Именику
Срба светитеља«, укупно педесет и четири светитеља”, С. Милеуснић, Свети Срби,
Нови Сад 2000, p. 5–6.
467
Kondak 9: “Сви анђели Божји задивљени су топлином љубави ваше према Христу,
роду и цркви, као и величином подвига и одрицања ваших, преподобне мајке
наше: Анастасијо, мајко светог Саве, Параскево, Јелено краљице, Јелено дечанска,
Јефросинијо љубостињска – царице; Ангелино деспотице, Јелисавето кнегињо, вели
комученице Злато мегленска и блажена Еуфимијо девичка. Вас је Господ Христос
признао и исповедио пред Оцем својим небеским, Који је прихватио оданост вашу
и примио жртве трудова ваших, те су ваша имена записана у књигу вечнога живота.
The next stage of strengthening the cult of St. Zlata in Serbia occurred in the
1970s. Justin Popović, archimandrite at that time, prepared a Serbian variant of
the Greek life of St. Zlata, which he included in his collection of lives of saints
(Žitija svetih)468. A service in honour of the saint was also created which was
not patterned on a Greek-language model. It was written in Church Slavonic
by the aforementioned Serbian hymnographer Mirko Pavlović. It is one of
eight hymnographic texts dedicated to saints who had not had them yet; in
1986 they were added to the Srbljak by Metropolitan Mihailo (1861)469. The
service enters a corpus of new services in honour of martyrs, which opens with
a text by Fr. Peja dedicated to St. George of Kratovo (Georgi Sofiyski Novi),
murdered in the 16th century, and closes with services to two martyrs from the
time of the anti-Turkish uprisings in the 19th c. – St. Pajsij and St. Avvakum.
The new Srbljak was supplemented on June 15 by the Service to Saint Serbian
martyrs by Bishop Nikolaj Velimirović. While it does not mention Zlata by
name, it does honour the memory of all Serbian martyrs from the rime of
Prince Lazar until today470.
The Serbian office was later adopted by the Russian Church and can be
found on October 13 and 18. The text was adopted by the Bulgarian Church
and it was part of the set of hymns Служби на българските светии (Service
to Bulgarian Saints), published on Athos in 2007471 (October 18). In Serbia
akathists were written in honour of Zlata; one (hereinafter Ak1) is a translation
of the Church Slavonic version (Bulgarian or Russian; the original author
cannot be ascertained on the basis of available texts) into Serbian by protojerej
Životije Milojević. The other (hereinafter Ak2) is a text by nun Olimpiada
(Slađana) Kadić from Cetinje Monastery472. The Serbian version of the akathist
is noteworthy due to its modernised form; there are rhymes and specific
И ви сада са свима светима певате Богу: Алилуја”. Акатист свим светим србима:
<www.spcticino.ch/arhiva_files/akatisti.htm>, access: 23.04.2018.
468
“Страдање свете великомученице Злате Мегленске”, in: Ј. Поповић, Житија светих за
октобар, wersja online: <https://svetosavlje.org/zitija-svetih-11/14/>, access: 23.04.2018.
469
470
Ibidem, p. 109–110.
471
Служби на българските светии, Атон 2007, p. 460–472.
472
Акатист на св. великомъченица Злата Мъгленска. Available online: <http://akafist.
narod.ru/Z/Zlata.htm>, dostęp 7.06.2016; (Ak1). Иск. Слађана Кадић, Акатист Светој
великомученици Злати Мегленској, Тиват 2007 (Ak2).
144 Part I
rhythms, as well as imagery that brings it close to folk epic poetry. In ikos 8
there is also a prayerful 10-line rhyme, with which the author refers to the
hymns of Nikolaj Velimirović, who incorporated folk poetry into the realm of
the sacred473. During the liturgical celebrations of the saint, a general tropar for
martyrs is read out, and the name of the saint is inserted into the right place474.
Interestingly, in the 1989 book Slobodan Mileusnić Sveti Srbi (The Saint
Serbs), published to commemorate the 600th anniversary of the Battle of
Kosovo there is no single text dedicated to St. Zlata (neither does it appear in
the second, revised edition of 2000).
Conventionality is an essential feature of the older hagio- and hymnography
in honour of Zlata. It reminds us of the evangelical and ethical values that
are fundamental for Christians, contrasted, as already mentioned, with the
values of Islam. The former include devotion to Christ, sacrifice, humility,
chastity of the flesh, sanctity of marriage, giving one’s life for the faith. They are
contrasted with false faith, pride, violence, profanation of marriage and family,
attachment to transient earthly values, especially wealth, luxury and carnal
promiscuity. The literary image of the saint, both the original, Athosian475,
and the attendant Slavic, is based on conventional (itinerant) biblical motifs
and all-Christian topoi. In contrast, the more recent Slavic hagiographies and
hymns, Serbian, Bulgarian and Macedonian, strive to enrich the basic image
of the saint’s martyrdom with additional elements.
Zlata comes under multiple names: a martyr virgin (devomučenica), martyr
(mučenica), new martyr (novomučenica), saint sufferer (sveta stradalnica),
great saint martyr (sveta velikomučenica), virgin (devica), saint (sveta), blessed
(blažena), a great martyr radiating with gold (zlatozarna Velikomučenica). In
literature, especially in the lives, Zlata appears mainly as the guardian and
defender of female chastity: “И тако света Злата, испитана и очишћена као
злато у топионици толиких страдања, предаде своју свету душу у руке
473
D. Gil, Serbska hagiografia…, p. 143.
474
Св. великомъченица Злата Мъгленска. Available online: <http://www.pravoslavieto.
com/life/ 10.18_sv_Zlata_Muglenska.htm>, access: 7.06.2016.
475
The maximally modest, “neutral” meaning of the life was most likely due to the difficult
political conditions at the time of the cult’s emergence and the monastic environment in
which the first life was written.
Бесмртном Женику свом, добивши од Њега двоструки венац; венац

девичанства и венац мучеништва”476.
When describing the saint, the authors often use the symbolism of gold
and the derived symbolism of light, planets and precious metals (sun, rays,
star, aurora, lightning, gold), which according to the biblical model refers
to the Virgin Mary and to God himself. The very name of Zlata, meaning
“golden”/”gilded”, symbolises permanence, resilience and eternity. Her actions
and sacrifices in the name of faith are compared to testing gold in a crucible
(Wis 3:6), which makes Zlata the ideal test of faith in the extreme conditions
of the Christian community:
И тако света Злата, испитана и очишћена као злато у топионици (Mdr 3,6)
толиких страдања, предаде своју свету душу у руке Бесмртном Женику свом,
добивши од Њега двоструки венац; венац девичанства и венац мучеништва.
И сада се у рајским насељима радује заједно са мудрим и победничким девама
и блаженствује у дивотном Царству Господа Христа, славећи Га кроза све
векове. Њеним молитвама нека се и ми удостојимо Небеског Царства477.
The most important point of reference for the semantic field thus con
structed is the Marian cult and the patronage functions attributed to the
Virgin Mary, stemming from her royal title of Mother of Christ (Theotokos)
and the protector and saviour of nations, the patroness of the homeland or
the city478. Mainly the hymnography dedicated to Zlata uses and extends
the symbolism of the name, making Zlata, like Mary, the intercessor of her
country: Якоже звѣздá свѣ́ тлая свѣ́́ тло свѣ́́ тиши отéчеству твоемý, Злáто
всеслáвная (GV, stikhera, tone 1), Златозáрнaя дѣви́ цa; Злáто тезоимени́ та,
златозáрную дýшу имѣ́ ла еси́ , хрáборствомъ же твои́ мъ вся́ позлати́ ла еси́
(GV, Litija stikhera, tone 6).
Serbian ritual literature currently tends towards the unification of texts
in honour of Zlata with national, state cults. Zlata’s martyrdom becomes an
476
Ј. Поповић, Житија светих…, op. cit.
477
Ibidem.
478
This extent of patronage is mainly associated with the feast of Pokrova, or Protection of
the Mother of God (October 1), celebrated by all Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Church-
es of the Byzantine tradition.
146 Part I
element of national mythology, creating an image of Serbian Orthodox culture

in a state of entrapment479; the saint martyr is the defender of this culture.
The liturgical literature also upholds fundamental Christian, family and
marital values, which stand in opposition to the doctrine, customs and ethics
of Muslims. The saint knew these values since childhood and cherished them
(at matins, sedalan, tone 1 – Воспитáна Бóжіими словесы́ , отъ ю́ ности своея́
возлюби́ ла еси́ Христá […]), she is meek and patient in the face of life’s hardships
and valiantly resists temptations of the world (bogorodichen after ode 9); she
does not renounce faith: “Света Злата беше смерна, кротка и побожна
девојка, мудра мудрошћу Христовом и златна не само по имену него и по
срцу богобојажљивом, чистом и чедном. При томе она беше и необично
лепа”480. Her rare physical beauty, later the reason of her martyrdom: “Та
њена лепота и би повод да се њен живот украси страдањима великому
ченице”481 is in line with the author’s intention and the image of Zlata he
depicts. In no way does it distort her character and is not the grounds for
pride or self-will. Nor does it prevent her from putting Christian ideals into
practice; she is straightforward and devoted to her faith. Persistence in the
religion of the fathers is symbolically underlined by comparing Zlata to a rock482
and a swallow. As a migratory bird that regularly returns to a fixed place, it
alludes to the constancy of Zlata’s beliefs and fidelity to the faith and values of
her fathers. The swallow appears only once (Ak1, ikos 5) – “Радуј се, дрвета
небеских ластавице бела! (…)” and refers to swallows and sparrows from
the Psalm, which make nests in the house of the Lord (Ps 84 (83)) and to
a passage from the prophet Jeremiah (Jer 8:7), in which reference is made to
the unfailing instinct of birds, their cyclical returns and constancy, in contrast
to the religious attitude of God’s people, who persist in deviation and do not
know the Law of the Lord.
Marrying a Turk and converting to Islam were attractive propositions483 and
could offer a Christian many benefits (e.g. their court sentences, including
479
This phenomenon is defined by A. Naumow in: Wiara i historia. Z dziejów literatury cer
kiewnosłowiańskiej na ziemiach polsko-litewskich, Kraków 1996, p. 70.
480
Translation according to Synaxaristes neomartyron, Солун 1984, p. 95–98. Available online:
<http://www.pravoslavieto.com/life/10.18_sv_Zlata_Muglenska.htm#2>, access: 8.11.2016.
481
Ј. Поповић, op. cit.
482
“An immovable rock in the Christian faith”.
483
A. Naumow, W poszukiwaniu…, p. 2.
the death penalty, were lifted), yet Zlata teaches steadfastness and persistence,
showing that one does not need to bother about earthly riches and honours.
One does not need to give in to the persuasion of an admirer, someone who
enjoys such luxuries or one’s own relatives. In literary texts can be likened
to the temptation of Christ in the desert (Mt 4:1–11; Mk 1:12 ff; Lk 4:1–13):
Чувши такве одлучне речи, Турци видеше да ову девојку не могу придобити
обичним средствима, већ се мора измислити нешто нарочито. И знајући да
су жене вичне у томе да девојку занесу, они предадоше Злату својим женама
да је на сваки начин приволе на оно што они желе. И шта све те жене не
чинише! и каква све лукавства не употребише! и каква све уживања не
обећаше! Читавих шест месеци они се трудише око Злате да је приволе да
прими муслиманску веру484.
In the Serbian variant of the akathist, the scene of Zlata’s temptation refers
to the folk tradition of kolo dancing and magical practices: making a magic
circle and performing witchcraft: “Заиграше турске жене своје коло око
Злате, заплетоше лукавштином, преплетоше турском вером, хоће Злату
зарад ћара да учине турком женом (…)” (ikos 4).
When persuasion, encouragement and sorcery do not have the desired
effect, Zlata is put to a worse test, having to face the dictates of her immediate
family who, fearing for their own safety, prefer to sacrifice their daughter, while
“a merciful God will forgive her sin committed under duress and violence”.
Zlata, however, entrusts her further destiny to Christ, the supreme Ruler, and
answers the biblical call “Follow me!” (Mk 1:16–20; 2:13–14). According to
the Gospel (Mt 10:35–37)485, she professes faith in the true God, renouncing
her family: “Кад ме ви саветујете да се одрекнем Христа, истинитог Бога,
нисте више родитељи моји ни сестре моје. Имам оца, – Господа Исуса
Христа, и мајку – Пресвету Богородицу, и браћу и сестре – светитеље
и светитељке”486.
In Ak1 the symbol of the dive epitomises the virtue of virginity and chastity
of a young villager who refuses to marry a Muslim (Ak1, ikos 6: “Радуј се,
дјево, од голубице чистија!”). As in the case of the eagle, it is supported by
484
485
See Mt 16:24 ff; Mk 8:34 ff; Lk 9:23 ff; Lk 12:51 ff; Lk 14:26 ff; Lk 17:33; Jn 12:25–26 as well
as Ps 27(26):10 and Mt 10:36.
486
Ј. Поповић, op. cit. This motif is also emphasised in the service, glory, tone 6.
148 Part I
the symbolism of colours associated with different shades of white as a token

of impeccability. Zlata, represented by the figure of the snow-white dove,
offers the most perfect model of virginity (witness), attesting in the highest
degree to the truth of the faith and the God she believes in: “Радуј се, Едема
голубице белоснежна!” (Ak1, ikos 8). Whiteness is the realm of the divine,
of spirit and perfection. It occupies a special position among the symbolically
used colours as their summation, the sign of the beginning (birth, wedding,
initiation, baptism, resurrection) and the end (death). The naming of St. Zlata as
a “snow-white dove” is to further emphasise her unblemished purity, virginity
and innocence. Whiteness has a symbolic meaning in relation to clothes; in
the Christian tradition they signify glorification (the white robes of Christ at
his transfiguration and resurrection and the shining white of Mary’s bed at
her falling asleep), they are also an attribute of the bride487. The hymnography
dedicated to St. Zlata links the symbolism of white robes with the bridal
nature of her relation with Christ and with the utmost dimension of the saint’s
martyrdom: “Радуј се, јер си мученичком крвљу хаљине убелела!” (Ak2,
ikos 6). The verb ubeliti means, apart from “whitening” and “whitewashing”,
also “turning (iron, gold) hot white” and again brings to mind the image of
gold purified in a crucible of suffering (Wis 3:6), which the martyr becomes
thanks to her sacrifice.
The saint’s steadfastness in the face of her tormentor’s insistence is also
illustrated in hagiography and hymnography by the biblical motif of the bride
(virgin, wise maiden) betrothed to her only Bridegroom488: “Ја у Христа
верујем, и Њему се клањам, и Њега јединога знам као Женика свога; Њега
се нећу одрећи никада, макар ме ви и на хиљаде мука метнули и на сигне
комаде исекли”489. In several places in the Serbian service, it is emphasised
that Zlata chooses her sacrifice voluntarily (stikhera for Litija, sedalen, tone
3), rejecting ungodly marriage, because it is more worthy to die for Christ
than to live in shame by accepting a foreign faith (troparion, tone 4): “Егда́
мучи́ тель безбо́ жный бра́къ тебѣ́ пону́ ди, ты́ же я́ вственнѣ отвѣща́ла еси́ : а́зъ
487
Leksykon symboli – Herder, [orig. ed. Marianne Oesterreicher-Mollwo], transl. Jerzy
Prokopiuk, ed. Lech Robakiewicz, Warszawa 2009, entry: biel [whiteness].
488
In her iconography, the saint is depicted wearing a traditional Macedonian wedding
dress.
489
во Христа́ вѣ́ рую и Его́ еди́ наго вѣ́ мъ Жениха́ своего́ ; никогда́же отрещи́ ся Его́
восхощу́ , а́ ще бы́ сте вы́ да́ же усѣкли́ и раздроби́ ли все́ тѣ́ ло мое́” (glory, tone
1, samoglasna). The martyr denounces the apostates (second other stikhera,
tone 8), opposes their faith while spitting on (stikhera for stichovne, tone 3)
and exposing the godlessness of the Muslims (svetilen – “she dispelled the
darkness of the godless torturers”). Christian values and the wisdom of God
represented by Zlata are contrasted with the falsehood of an alien faith, “the
faith of the Hagrites” (ode 3, troparion 1; ikos).
At the climax of the story, the Turks punish Zlata for her stubbornness,
subject her to elaborate torture490, and when nothing succeeds, since filled with
love, Zlata bears all the torture joyfully (“душа, оковима љубави везана за
Бога, ниушта не сматра страдања, радује се боловима, и цвета у мукама”),
they hang her and dismember her body. Zlata dies a martyr’s death on 18
October 1795, with the prayerful support of her spiritual father, proigumen
Timotej. Parts of her tortured body are surreptitiously taken over by the local
inhabitants from the Turks and buried with due reverence.
The antithesis between a Christian and a Muslim expressed in the liturgical
literature dedicated to Zlata contributes to the construction of the model of
an Orthodox society, forced to defend its own identity against infidels491.
Each successive author of Zlata’s life intensified the negative image of the
enemy, ascribing to him the worst traits, customs and anti-values that were
to stimulate the imagination, make an ever-stronger impression and fuel
anti-Islamic sentiments of the readers. More and more was written about the
cunning of the Turks and their cruelty, the visions of torments inflicted on
the saint were detailed, the scope of tortures was broadened and folk imagery
was often referred to.
Relevant hymnography (especially akathists) show her as a patron saint of
virgins (ikos 4: Pадуйся, всем девствующым верная другине; ikos 9: девства
сохранение на Бога возлагающи) and marital chastity (ikos 4: Радуйся,
490
Among other things, for three months in prison, she was beaten daily with clubs, hung on
hooks driven into her body, and had her head pierced from ear to ear with a hot rod. In
a short biography by Nikolaj Velimirović, we also read that Zlata was hung upside down
and asphyxiated with smoke.
491
Such a situation in the First Republic is described by A. Naumow in: Wiara i historia…,
p. 67.
150 Part I
супружества честнаго ограждение). This literary image is highlighted by

the extensive symbolism of a dove. Among the peoples of the Ancient East
she was associated with the goddesses of love, the Babylonian Ishtar, the
Eastern Semitic Ashtarte and the Greek Aphrodite492. These beliefs are partly
reflected in the Bible. The dove first appears in Genesis, in the story of the
Flood (Gen 8:8–12), where it heralds the peace (a culturally fixed image of
a dove with an olive branch in its beak) that God will bestow on his people
after the punishment of the Flood. In addition, the dove in the Old Testament
is a symbol of the physical and spiritual beauty of the Bride (Deut 2:14). The
Psalmist, on the other hand, praises her agility (Ps 55:7), which corresponds
with the descriptions of the dazzling beauty of the saint of Meglen. The Old
Testament meaning of the dove is extended by Paul’s symbolism related to the
dove, expressing Christ’s love for the Church in terms of a bridal relationship
(Eph 5:22–32). The dove is invariably associated with innocence, simplicity,
gentleness, and impeccability (Mt 10:16). It is an established symbol of the
Holy Spirit in Christianity and personifies His gifts: love, joy, peace, patience,
kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and moderation. It is primarily the
attribute of gentleness that is attributed to Zlata: “Радуј се, кротка голубице
мила!” (Ak2, ikos 1 and examples from the service quoted below).
The symbol of the dove with a martyr’s crown in its beak also evokes
funerary and martyrological associations: the soul of a dead martyr leaving the
body in the form of this bird (e.g. St. Eulalia, St. Scholastica)493. In their texts
in honour of Zlata, hymnographers refer to the dove in terms of the “dove of
the Lord”, which is not a direct reference to Scripture:
Кро́ ткая Влады́ ки голуби́ це, дѣ́ вства свѣ́ тлостію позлаще́нна, му́ ченическими
страда́ ньми укра́ шенная, не забу́ ди на́ съ, чту́ щихъ съ любо́ вію святу́ ю па́ мять
твою́ . (service, stikhera for stichovne, tone 3).
Стра́шно и пресла́вно сопротивле́ніе твое́, и́мже вся́ удиви́ла еси́, и безчеловѣ́ чныя
мучи́ тели побѣди́ ла еси́ , и я́ ко боже́ственная Влады́ ки голуби́ ца, златови́ дными
кри́лы исповѣ́данія твоего́ Христу́ возлетѣ́ла еси́, Зла́то богому́ драя (service, ikos
1, kontakion 5).
[…] Божја голубица, оста верна Христу Гопсоду […] (Ak2, kontakion 5).
492
Słownik obrazów…, entry: gołąb [dove].
493
J. Marecki, L. Rotter, Jak czytać wizerunki świętych? Leksykon atrybutów i symboli hagio
graficznych, Universitas, Kraków 2009, p. 546.
In the Serbian service, the saint like the Mother of God is contrasted with
Eve, who was deceived by the serpent and succumbed to his persuasions;
she is the new Eve, who liberates mankind from the bondage of the serpent/
sin/foreign faith/submission to Hagrite, i.e. the stranger/the infidel (ode 1,
troparion 2).
Zlata resurrects the medieval idea of the state being protected by saints
and their relics. The patronage of the saint extends to the state, the defence of
freedom and borders, and the protection of the Orthodox Church from what
is “foreign” sensu largo, as a carrier of values other than traditional Serbian
ones and, by extension, Orthodox values. This can be clearly seen in the text of
the service, which in ideological terms is essentially organised by the stikhera
in tone 8, in which it speaks ofs the Hagrite (Turkish, infidel) rule over the
entire Serbia, the constant attacks of the enemy, which the saint valiantly resists
with faith, defending “the entire Serbian land”, shown here as her homeland:
Егда влады́ чество ага́ рянское, навѣ́ ты вра́ жіими всю́ страну́ Се́рбскую обде
ржа́ ше, и служи́ ма бя́ ше пре́лесть безбо́ жная, тогда́ ты́ Боже́ственнымъ мано
ве́ніемъ, се́рдцемъ же усе́рднымъ и теплото́ ю вѣ́ ры, къ вышеесте́ственному
по́ двигу отлучи́ лася еси́ , оплева́вши ко́ зни вра́жія, и де́рзостно исповѣ́ давши Христа́
Го́ спода (other stikhera, tone 2).
Imitating Christ’s martyrdom in word and deeds, Zlata overcomes the

enemies (canon, ode 7; bogorodichen after sedalen, last glory; for Litija, stihhera
‘samoglasna’, tone 6) and ensures the security of the homeland by protecting its
borders with the Holy Cross (canon, ode 9). The hymnographer identifies Zlata
with the image of the Mother of God as the patroness of the homeland (Pokrov;
in bogorodichen at matins). Liturgical poetry offers the same motif, comparing
the saint to an eagle, which protects the whole country (not only Serbia, but also
Bulgaria and Macedonia) with its protective wings: “Pадуйся, крилома нас
хранящая орлице” (ikos 4) and the Church and its clergy: “Радуйся, славий
святыя Церкве богогласный”, (ikos 3), “Радуйся, монахом чистым аммо
благосердая” (ikos 10). She is the guardian of security and defender against
all assault: “Радуйся, в океанe бед нам остров неприступный, (…) Радуйся,
нам в мирe любодейнeм твердь пречистая” (ikos 10), “Радуйся, пещеро
от напастей сокровения” (ikos 11). The eagle inhabits regions inaccessible to
man and is therefore associated with the celestial sphere and transcendence;
it is traditionally perceived as a solar being. In the Bible it expresses divinity,
152 Part I
strength and perseverance (Isaiah 40:31) and acts as a symbolic conqueror

of evil494. The biblical image of an eagle circling over a nest, taking its chicks
and raising them up (Deuteronomy 32:11; Exodus 19:4), or a female caring
for her chicks, which she shelters and warms with her wings (Psalm 57(56);
Matthew 23:37) is a poetic metaphor of God’s care for his people and the
protection offered by his mercy (protectio misericordia). The above metaphors
also reflect the symbolic dimension of the descending movement, which
expresses God’s care for man, and the ascending movement, when man,
with God’s help, transcends his limitations and ascends to Him (especially
Deuteronomy 32:11)495. Equally significant are bird attributes, mainly wings
and the shadow of wings as elements of teriomorphic symbols of God496. They
point to God’s unique approach to humans. According to the words of the
psalmist, they represent God’s providence (Ps 17(16):8), offer protection from
disaster, shelter from the enemy (Ps 57(56):2; Ps 91(90):3–6), are a promise of
salvation (Ps 63(62):8). The shadow formed by the wings also indicates God’s
wisdom (Koh 7:12), care and power (Ps 57(56):2; 91(90):1). Taking refuge
in the shadow of God’s wings implies submission to his strength and power
(Ps 91:1). Hymns dedicated to St. Zlata reiterated the symbolism of an eagle
representing Divine care extended (e.g. with the aid of saints) over believers497
transposed into the figure of the saint as a protector against any attack, above
all by people of other faiths; she symbolically shields the Serbian people with
her wings (Ak1, ikos 4): “Радуј се, орлице која нас окриљујеш крилима!”.
“God’s wings” are gifts received from Him by humans. In the case of saints,
these are the virtues that transport them to heaven498. Zlata also possesses
“golden wings,” under which the poet understands the gifts of the Holy
Spirit: steadfast faith and divine wisdom (knowledge of God’s mysteries,
cs. богому́ дрие). They are the most effective weapon in the struggle against
a dangerous enemy (dissenters) or adversity and make martyrdom the most
494
Słownik obrazów…, entry: orzeł [eagle].
495
K. Bardski, Symbol – ikona tajemnicy. Available online: <http://pracownicy.uksw.edu.pl/
KrzysztofBardski/publikacje/2009-2/05-symbol-ikona-tajemnicy/>, access: 19.02.2018.
496
Ibidem.
497
See e.g. T. Pietras, Z orłem białym przez wieki. Z dziejów polskiej symboliki państwowej,
Aleksandrów Łódzki 2013, p. 5. Available online: <http:// warsztathistoryka.uni.lodz.pl/
heraldyka/orzel_2.pdf >, access: 11.03.2018.
498
K. Bardski, op. cit.
perfect form of displaying the professed faith. An example of this imagery

is the last glory of the matins from the martyr’s service quoted above; the
pivotal passage reads:
[…] похва́ льными добро́ тами воспои́ мъ богому́ друю Зла́ ту Ме́гленскую, я́ же
[…], зла́ ты же крилѣ́ иму́ щи, сія́ ющія заре́ю Ду́ ха, возлетѣ́ и въ небе́сныхъ
Боже́ственныхъ жили́ щахъ вои́ стинну всели́ ся. […] (glory at matins, tone 5).
Zlata’s wings play the role of a less typical symbol of Divine care and God’s
grace for the afflicted people, a cloak the saint dons (literally “uses as wings”)
and flies heavenwards (see e.g. Ex 22:25–26499; 24:13):
Блиста́ ющи свѣтови́ дными мо́ лніями, зако́ нно Христу́ уневѣ́ стившися, муче́
нія тече́ніе сконча́ ла еси́ , скве́рную вѣ́ ру ага́ рянскую презрѣ́ ла еси́ , укрѣпля́ ема
Боже́ственными уче́ніи упра́ вилася еси́ я́ ко избра́ нна, тща́ щися ко Влады́ цѣ и
Бо́ гу, Ему́ же и была́ еси́ же́ртва благово́ нная, и окрили́ вшися златови́ дными кри́ лы
исповѣ́ данія твоего́ , Христу́ возлетѣ́ ла еси́ , Зла́ то богому́ драя (service, ikos after
ode 6 of the canon).
The cloak may also be interpreted here as a sign of election to a unique
mission in life (e.g. 1 Kings 15:27; 1 Maccabees 6:15), as well as an image
of submission to God’s will, since taking off one’s clothes was an expression
of opposition in the Bible (e.g. Is 20:1–6). The combination of the image of
the cloak with the symbol of a fragrant sacrifice should bring to the mind
associations with the significant fragment of the Book of Ezekiel (Ez 20:18–41),
where God reveals to Israel the truth about the punishment of slavery and
oppression for their sins and betrayal, at the same time giving them the promise
of liberation from other people’s authority, as well as hope for future happiness
in the land chosen for them. In ideological terms, it is firstly a warning against
abandoning one’s own religion, against selling oneself to false gods (or to
foreign ones) under the threat of great misfortune. Secondly, it announces
to the people a wonderful reward for their faithfulness and perseverance.
At the time when the text of Pavlović’s service was written, undoubtedly
foreign faith and authority were identified with the atheistic ideology of the
499
“If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you shall not be like a mon-
eylender to him, and you shall not exact interest from him. If ever you take your neigh-
bour’s cloak in pledge, you shall return it to him before the sun goes down”.
154 Part I
communists500; now it is universally associated with any deviation from or

submission to the temptations of “the world”.
The symbolism of wings is also connected with that of the Apocalyptic
Woman who was given two wings in an emergency so that she could take flight
from the enemy in the desert (Rev 12:14)501, even though there is no direct
reference to this verse of Scripture in the works dedicated to Zlata (nowhere
are the two wings mentioned). This is another example of the caring and
protective role of God and especially of His Mother in the daily lives of the
faithful. The care of the Woman reminds us of the constant vigilance of God’s
Providence over His people and the help shown to them in the most difficult
moments of their earthly existence.
The martyrdom of Zlata shown through the prism of the symbolism of
birds also has an apostolic (missionary, teaching) function502: “Радуј се, Цркве
Православне птицо богогласна!” (Ak1, ikos 12) and “Радуј се, Злато грлице
златоуста!” (Ak2, ikos 3). The figure of a bird emphasises to some extent the
non-hierarchical order of this apostolate, since the official office of preacher/
teacher was inaccessible to women. This motif is intensified by the symbol of
the lyre ascribed to Zlata, the almost divine instrument played by the biblical
David, singing God’s praise503: “Радуј се, Златногласна лиро свете Вере!”
(Ak1, ikos 4).
The figure of the saint and her personal story are becoming a powerful
role model at a time of particular ethnic and national tensions over the legal
status of the Republic of Kosovo. The example of Zlata was invoked by national
circles before the first independent municipal elections in Kosovo in November
2013. The media campaign conducted by the authorities in Belgrade aimed
at persuading the Serbian community in Kosovo to actively participate in
500
See stikhera from the “others” series for GV (tone 2): “Егда влады́ чество ага́ рянское,
навѣ́ты вра́жіими всю́ страну́ Се́рбскую обдержа́ше, и служи́ма бя́ше пре́лесть безбо́жная,

тогда́ ты́ Боже́ственнымъ манове́ніемъ, се́рдцемъ же усе́рднымъ и теплото́ ю вѣ́ ры,
къ вышеесте́ственному по́ двигу отлучи́ лася еси́ , оплева́ вши ко́ зни вра́ жія, и де́рзостно
исповѣ́ давши Христа́ Го́ спода”.
501
“But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle so that she might fly from
the serpent into the wilderness, to the place where she is to be nourished for a time, and
times, and half a time”.
502
Analogous to St. Cyril the Philosopher who, like the apostle of the Slavs, was compared in
hymnography to a bird.
503
Leksykon symboli…, entry: lira [lyre]; see Ps 96 (95), Ps 98 (97), Ps 147 (146).
the elections. These persuasions were likened by some circles opposed to

the independence of the Republic to a passage from the life of Zlata, which
tells of her encounter with her parents and sisters, who try to persuade her
to renounce her faith and embrace Islam in order to save her life. The above
passage is paraphrased as follows:
Тада, Србима са Косова и Метохије, дођоше београдске власти са свеште

ницима. И рекоше им: “браћо наша, смилујте се себи и нама, »Србији својој«
и »цркви«, одреците се Косовског Завета привидно, да будете срећни и ви и
ми, а Христос је милостив, опростиће вам грех, учињен у нужди живота”504.
The image of the saint created in the liturgical texts depicts a simple peasant
woman. She is virtuous and pious yet if tough and fearless, firm in her views,
for which she is ready to suffer and sacrifice her life. To emphasise her virtues,
she is contrasted with the image of infidels, who are impious, cruel, aggressive,
and who act outside the law. For the faithful, the saint is supposed to be a model
of patience/strength and the courage to persevere in the faith (or to convert to
Orthodoxy) despite all adversities, incentives, temptations, and even against the
will of her loved ones. Zlata is to be an example of unconditional perseverance
in the faith, fidelity to the nation and the tradition of the fathers, which is
expressed in a fragment of the saint’s Serbian akathist styled as a folk song:
Шта се сија у земљи Србији?

Је ли сунце ил› су звезде сјајне?
Нит› је сунце нит› су звезде сјајне,
Него душа злаћане девојке,
Душом својом земњу обасјала,
Све Хришћане вером позлатила,
Христа Бога ради да поју:
Радуј се, Злато, Христова агинице,
Златозарна Великомученице! (ikos 8)
Symbolically depicted as an eagle or dove, she represents the highest values

and traditions of Christianity (Orthodoxy). Thanks to her intercession, the
state, its independence and borders, as well as the Orthodox Church are
504
Available online: <https://pravoslavljepzv.wordpress.com/2013/10/26/iskusenje-zlate/>, ac
cess: 14.11.2016.
156 Part I
assured of protection from the “stranger”, understood as a vehicle for values

other than traditional Serbian and, consequently, Orthodox ones. Apart
from her function as a patroness, as a dove or swallow, she becomes a model
of Christian (and feminine) virtues, human perfection in following Christ
through suffering, which bears better spiritual fruit than betrayal or selling
one’s soul to worldly comfort or pleasures.
Part
two
Chapter VII
St. Helen of Dečani –

May 21
The saint’s secular names are Ana Neda and Dominika Šišman (1277–ca.
1346). She was daughter of the first marriage of King Stephen Milutin of Serbia
(1282–1321) and sister of Stephen Dečanski. She was probably christened as
Nedelja (Sunday). As “Neda regina” she is mentioned in 1497 in records from
the Dečani Monastery and in Mauro Orbini’s chronicles Kingdom of the Slavs
(Pesaro, 1601)505, where her name is translated into Latin (Domenica). She
moreover appears in Slavo-Serbian Chronicles by Despot Đorđe Branković
(1645–1711). Serbian, Dubrovnik and Naples records mention her as Ana/
Anna, while Byzantine and Bulgarian sources do not mention her first name506.
Helen’s cult is tied with the Dečani Monastery, where her relics are to be
found. There is no precise information when Helen was canonised. It most
likely happened around 1692, when as legend has it, she miraculously saved
the monastery from a conversion into an Islamic mosque507. This can be
corroborated by visits to Dečani of Serbian metropolitans: Vikentije Stefanović
505
M. Orbini, Il regno degli Slavi, Pesaro, 1601.
506
See S. Ristić, Decanski spomenici, Beograd 1864, p. 20, V. Gjuzelev, “Imperatrix Bulgar-
iae Anna-Neda” (1277–c.1346), Zbornik radova Vizantološkog instituta 2013, no. 50 (2),
p. 618. See also: A. Бурмов, “Историја из Българија през времето на Шишмановци”,
Годишник на Софийският университет 1947, 43, p. 15–20; С. Георгиева, Жената
в българското Средновековие, Пловдив 2011; В. Игнатов, Българските царици –
владетелките на България VII–XIV век, София 2008.
507
See Л. Павловић, op. cit., p. 190; C. Милеуснић, Свети Срби, Београд 2000, p. 103.
Furthermore: official website of Vavedenje Monastery, <http://manastirvavedenje.org/pre
podobna-jelena-dechanska/>.
160 Part II
of Belgrade (1753) and Teodosije Popović of Valjevo (1757), who came to

venerate Helen as a saint508. Since the early 19th century, the tsarina and her
brother have been depicted together as saints in various images created for
the Church, which further strengthens the cult of Helen and adds significance
to the monastery itself509. Notes of travellers from the 19th century mention
believers who used to gather at the grave of St. Helen expecting her help, which
would prove the strength of the cult510.
Since the exact date of the queen’s death is not known and to this day
the Orthodox Church calendars do not specify a day for her veneration, the
celebration in her honour takes place on 21 May. Thus her feast is associated,
like that of other Serbian saintly rulers by the name of Helen (Jelena), with
the feast (and model of sanctity) of Emperor Constantine’s mother.
Although Ana was originally engaged to Count Charles de Valois (in
1308), she never married him511. She was married to Bulgarian Tsar Michael-
Asen III Shishman (1280/92–1330), who separated from her in 1324(26) to
marry Theodora Palaiologina, daughter of the Byzantine Emperor Michael
IX Palaiologos (1277–1320), widow of Bulgarian Tsar Theodore Svetoslav
(1300–1321). Ana, together with her sons Ivan Stephen, Michael Shishman
and Ludwig, was forced to leave Tarnovo. After the Battle of Velbazhd in 1330,
in which Michael III Shishman was killed, Stephen Dečanski placed Ana Neda
on the Bulgarian throne as regent until her eldest son Ivan Stephen came of
age, i.e. until 1331512.
After the coup of the Bulgarian boyars (1331) and the enthronement of
Ivan Alexander (?–1371), Ana Neda and Ivan Stephen again had to flee from
Tarnovo. They probably did not cross the Bulgarian border immediately, seeking
help from a relative, Belaur, despot of Vidin. According to documents found
in the Dubrovnik archives, in 1332 Ana Neda and her son stayed in Niš and
then moved on to Dubrovnik. They certainly stayed in the coastal town in 1337
and 1338, as evidenced by records of donations handed over to Ana and her
508
С. Милеуснић, оp. cit., Београд 2003, p. 103.
509
Б. Тодић, М. Чанак-Медић, op.cit., p. 61.
510
511
See Worldwide Guide to Women in Leadership. Women in Power 1300–1350. Online access:
<www.guide2womenleaders.com/womeninpower/Womeninpower1300.htm>, access: 12.
09.2016.
512
V. Gjuzelev, op. cit., p. 620.
Chapter VII: St. Helen 161
entourage513. In 1340, the former empress leaves Dubrovnik for Apulia and
the Kingdom of Naples. Three years later, for unclear reasons, Ana returns to
Dubrovnik, probably without any means of subsistence; the rent for the house
in which she lived was paid by the Minor Council of the Republic of Ragusa514.
In the following years she was aided by Queen Joanna I of Naples (1343–1381).
After 1346, historical sources are silent about the former Bulgarian tsarina,
hence this date is set as the time of her death, probably in Dubrovnik515.
To date, it has not been established how, when and if St. Helen’s relics were
ever deposited in the Dečani Monastery. Archaeographic research carried
out in the monastic compound, first by Danica Popović and then, more than
a decade later, by Branislav Todić and Milka Čanak-Medić, suggests that the
relics were probably never there516. Popović states that the smaller sarcophagus,
located next to the tomb belonging to Stephen Dečanski, was prepared not
for Helen, but for his second wife, Maria Palaiologina (?–1355)517. In turn,
Todić and Čanak-Medić believe that in the mid-19th century a casket (kivot)
was commissioned for St. Helen’s relics and paid for by Duke Alexander
Karađorđević himself518. However, the casket was not completed and the relics
were never deposited there. Nevertheless, the tradition and folk legend locating
the saint’s resting place at the side of her brother has been perpetuated through
the centuries until today. Legend has it that in Dečani, Serbia, Ana-Neda took
the monastic schema and assumed the religious name Helen, by which she
is known as a saint. This information is also provided (without reference to
sources) on the official SCP website:
Да би заратио са Србијом Шишман је своју жену на силу отерао у један

манастир у Бугарској. Након што је он доживео пораз у судару са српском
војском, Неда (њено световно име) је ослобођена и дошла је у Србију, где се
замонашила под именом Јелена. Подвизавала се у испосницама дечанским519.
513
See ibidem, p. 623–625.
514
Ibidem, p. 625.
515
Ibidem, p. 626.
516
Д. Поповић, Србски владарски гроб у средњем веку, Београд 1992, с. 105–106, Б. Тодић,
М. Чанак-Медић, Манастир Дечани, Београд 2005, p. 61.
517
Д. Поповић, Србски…, p. 105.
518
519
Преподобна Јелена Дечанска, <http://www.spc.rs/sr/prepodobna_jelena_dechanska>, ac
cess: 4.08.2021.
162 Part II
It follows that roughly as of 1324(26) until the Battle of Velbazhd, Ana

was detained (by force) in some unspecified monastery in Bulgaria, and soon
afterwards went to Serbia, where as a nun she stayed until her death in the
Dečani Monastery. This clearly conflicts with the findings of e.g. Vassil Gjuzelev
and other researchers. It is possible that the whole story originated in the milieu
of the monastery and successfully spread from there520. Depicting Helen of
Dečani as a ktitor of the Budisavci Monastery in Metochia, Ubožac (Rđavac)
Monastery near Močare village and of the Church of the Holy Mother of God
in the village of Kruševo is also based on folk tales.
Despite her numerous merits, Helen’s name does not appear among the
Bulgarian saints of the 12th and 14th centuries521. It is possible that the reason
was her separation from Michael III and the fact that she spent the last decade
of her life outside Bulgaria522.
In Serbia, literature venerating St. Helen of Dečani is very scant. To date,
no comprehensive biography of the saint has been written. Neither Nikolaj
Velimirović nor Justin Popović write about her. Slobodan Mileusnić is actually
the first to discuss Helen more extensively under the date of her feast day
(May 21) in his collection of lives. However, he omits the historical facts of
her life entirely. First of all, he recalls the legend of the miraculous rescue of
the Dečani Monastery from the Muslim hodja (Tatar-han) through her joint
intercession with St. Stephen Dečanski523. Following Leontije Pavlović, he
moreover mentions a visit of two Serbian archbishops at Helen’s tomb in the
mid-18th century.
Online versions of prologues often contain only a brief historical reference
to Helen’s origin and her relationship with the Nemanjić dynasty, e.g.
“Преподобна Јелена Дечанска (3. јун). Јелена је сестра Стефана Дечанског.
Упокојила се средином XIV века и сахрањена је у манастиру Дечани, где
јој се мошти и данас налазе. Њен портрет сачуван је у цркви у Горњем
Матејевцу код Ниша”524.
520
521
Ibidem, p. 617.
522
Ibidem, p. 617.
523
С. Милеуснић, op.cit., p. 75–76.
524
Преподобна Јелена Дечанска. Online access: <www.svetosavlje.org>, access: 4.08.2020.
Chapter VII: St. Helen 163
No texts related to the saint’s worship existed until the 21st c. It was only
in 2020 that a website dedicated to the Novi Srbljak published a text of an
unofficial service honouring St. Helen of Dečani, by hymnographer Zoran A.
Staničević (Zorast). Work in its creation started in 2017 and began with an
acrostic in the canon: Jelenu Dečansku pesmoslovim(o) and in Mother of God’s
one: [Tvorenje:] Zorastovo. The text is provided in two language versions: in
Church Slavonic and in modern Serbian. The text of the service is accompanied
by a synaxar of 6 odes of the canon, created by the author’s own admission on
the basis of data from Wikipedia and the website of the Belgrade monastery
of the Introduction of Our Lady to the Temple525.
The image of the saint created in the service uses symbols and motifs
established in the hymnographic tradition. The leading model is that of a nun.
The initial lines of the service (GV, for ‘Gospodi vozvach’, tone 5) evoke biblical
images of following Christ along a narrow path (Mt 7,13–14), Jacob’s ladder
(Rom 28,12) and wise maidens (Mt 25,1–13), characteristic of texts dedicated
to prepodobnyj. The ikos after the sixth ode of the canon depicts her in general
terms as an enemy of “the foes of Christianity”, a paragon for nuns, a defender
of laymen, and the patroness of the Dečani Monastery:
Благородношћу украшену, Ану царствену, која благоразумношћу задивљује,

и у монаштву подвигом просија, и по престављењу чудесима се јавља,
и непријатеље рода хришћанског устрашује, матер нашу Јелену преподобну
сада похваљујемо као наставницу оних који монахују и заштитницу оних
који у свету пребивају, кличући овако: Радуј се, воћко из врта Немањина;
радуј се, младице од корена благородна. Радуј се, госпођо царскоименита;
радуј се, врлинама украшена. Радуј се, јер слику смиреноумља показа; Радуј
се, јер анђелски образ прими. Радуј се, јер се од вере светсе удали; радуј се,
јер се од саживота с људима осами. Радуј се, јер Дечанску лавру чуваш; радуј
се, чудотворствима прослављена. Радуј се, јер миомирис Христов јављаш;
радуј се, јер славу светих улепшаваш.
The hymnographer, wishing to give the veneration of Helen its rightful

place in the pantheon of the Serbian chosen ones of God, alludes to the
medieval topoi of the holy twig of the Nemanjić dynasty and the “holy root”,
of which Ana is a noble offshoot that embellishes the Serbian nation: “Ходите,
525
Манастир Ваведенје. Online access: <https://manastirvavedenje.org/>, access: 4.08.2020.
164 Part II
благоверних зборови, похвалимо данас светог корена свету младицу,

воћку прекрасну усред врта Немањина процвалу (…)” (glory, tone 8);
“Немањићки благородни изданак, и народа србског боголепни украс,
песмама благохвалним, Јелену царствену и преподобну, славимо као
блажену” (canon, ode 3, irmos). The Dečani Monastery is famous not only
due to the miraculous relics of the founder, Stephen Dečanski, but also due
to the presence there of the relics of St. Helen: “Лавра Дечанска се не слави
само чудотворним моштима оснивача свога, но и тебе, мати преподобна,
часно прославља, хвалећ(и) и преузносећ(и) Христа у све векове” (canon,
ode 8, irmos).
The reference to the earlier writing tradition is also evident in the selection
of terms known from texts dedicated to Serbian saint, especially St. Helen of
Anjou and Tsarina Milica. They refer to the typical Serbian characteristics of
female saints, i.e. the valiant overcoming of gender weaknesses in the fulfilment
of their earthly mission: “женску немоћ мужаствено пренебрегав(ши)”
(stikhera for ‘Gospodi vozvach’, tone 5).
The contemporary image of Helen refers primarily to her function as a co-
participant/co-creator of the dynastic and monastic tradition initiated by Ana,
Simeon and Sava. Insufficiently commemorated in centuries past, the cult is
now gaining momentum as a model for modern monasticism: “Блаженом те
зовемо, преподобна мати Јелено, оних који се у монаштву подвизавају
наставнице, и оних који з свету пребивају молитвенице” (for the matins,
velicanje osobito prepodobnoj). As a nun, the saint ennobles the Serbian Church
thanks to the podvig, placing it in the centre of Serbian spiritual li e: “Свечасни
(с)помен преподобне матере наше Јелене засијав(ши), Србска поколења
у свете храмове сабира да узнесу Богу хвале и молења (…)” (glory for
‘stikhovne’, vol. 6). The miraculous power of the saint’s relics heals both soul
and body: (…) по престављењу за оне који ти прибегавају усрдно Господа
молиш, лечећ(и) им душевне и телесне бол(ест)и (stikhera for ‘Gospodi
vozvach’, vol. 5, also glory for ‘stikhovne’, vol. 6).
Chapter VIII
St. Jelisaveta-Jevgenija (Helen

of Bulgaria, Stracimirović-Nemanjić,
Mother Of Uroš V) – December 2
Until 1868, Serbian historians and cultural researchers assumed, apart from
other less probable variants, that Helen known as Helen of Bulgaria (ca. 1310–
1374) was the daughter of the Byzantine Tsar John Kantakuzen (1292–1383)526.
Only Ilarion Ruvarac indicated her rightful origin, observing that the tsarina
was the sister of Bulgarian tsar Ivan Alexander (?–1371)527. She married tsar
Dušan in 1332. Various records attest that Helen was a founder of places
of worship (monasteries in Serbia, Chilandar, St. Archangel Monastery in
Jerusalem) supporting and advising her husband in this regard, and on her
own initiative endowing Orthodox churches528. There is also a well-known
story about Helen’s speech at the meeting of Dušan and Jan Kantakuzen
at the court in Pauni (near Priština) in June 1342, which is the first public
speech of a Serbian ruler on political issues and Serbia’s bilateral relations
with neighbouring countries529. Together with her husband and son, she was
officially granted the status of a citizen of the Republic of Venice in 1350.
Helen’s connections with Mount Athos are of special importance. The
tsarina had the honour of staying with her family on Holy Mount (1347–1348),
protecting herself there from the plague ravaging Europe; and legend has
526
M. Пурковић, Јелена, жена цара Душана, Диселдорф 1975.
527
И. Руварац, “Краљице и царице српске”, Матица. Лист за књижевност и забаву,
III, 1868, p. 433–435 (Зборник Илариона Руварца, I, пр. Н. Радојчић, Београд 1934,
p. 23–27).
528
M. Пурковић, Јелена…, p. 10–13.
529
Ibidem, p. 13–17.
166 Part II
it that this was at the will of the Mother of God herself530. During this visit
she visited the Chilandar Monastery and the cell of St. Sava in Kareja. As
attested by historical records, it had a special meaning for Helen. From two
letters of Dušan, we learn that the tsarina was called by the august title “the
second founder (ktitor)” of the cell531. The fact is significant for a number of
reasons. Firstly, never before has it been granted to a woman (even if they
were committed to supporting the churches and monasteries on Mount
Athos). Secondly, historical records indicate that in 1316 monks from Mount
Athos forbade King Milutin to call himself the ktitor of St. Sava’s cell in the
hermitage in Kareja532. In addition, interpretation of historical sources by
Tatiana Beljakova, especially the deed of igumen of Chilandar and protos of
Athos hieromonk Dorotej (1359–1360)533 and of the council of brethren of
1359/1360, shows that the tsarina played the key role:
Елена (в монашестве Елизавета) обратилась с просьбой к игумену и мона

стырской братии Кельи святого Саввы о том, чтобы стать покровителем
кельи: именовать в честь своего имени (то же в грамоте Душана – «во име
царства ни»), направлять и укреплять ее. Однако, хотя братия Хиландарского
монастыря ей это разрешила, поскольку она проявила активное желание
помочь келии, но ей при этом были поставлены два условия, которые обяза
тельно должны были быть соблюдены: чтобы молчальница не отделялась
от монастыря и чтобы ее старца поставляли в соответствии с правилами
Карейского типика святого Саввы Сербского534.
Dorotej calls Helen the “Holy Tsarina” even though she had not been
officially canonised. This testifies to the great respect that the clergyman had
for the Serbian ruler. Tatiana Beljakova supposes that the monk was also her
spiritual mentor. For obvious reasons, Helen could not remain, even as a nun,
on Athos. Therefore, she decided to introduce the formula of monastic life
530
Ibidem, p. 17.
531
Т. А. Белякова, “Сербская царица Елена и Карейская келья св. Саввы: к интерпре
тации источников”, Славянский альманах, 1–2, 2015, p. 14.
532
Ibidem, p. 15.
533
For more details about Dorotej’s activity, see M. Живојиновић, “Јеромонах Доротеј –
игуман манастира Хиландара (1355–1360) и прот Свете Горе (1356–1366)”, in: ΝΟ
ΜΟΦΥΛΑΞ Зборник радова у част Срђана Шаркића, Београд 2020, p. 387–394.
534
Ibidem p. 16.
Chapter VIII: St. Jelisaveta-Jevgenija 167
adopted in the hermitage of St. Sava to her court in Ser535. After Dušan’s death,
probably in 1356, she entered a religious order and assumed the monastic name
Jelisaveta536. This did not prevent her, according to later historical sources,
from ruling independently in Ser until 1365 as a nun-empress, formally
recognising until 1360 the supremacy of her son, Uroš V537. Historians admit
that Helen sided with Byzantium and wanted to use its cultural, political and
organizational models in her territories. Georgije Ostrogroski claims that her
ambitions surpassed her actual capacity and compared to the rule of despot
Jovan Uglješa Mrnjavčević (?–1371), who took over power after her in Ser
in 1365, the tsarina’s political importance and accomplishments are rather
modest538. Ever since Uglješa took power, there are no records about Helen
and the whereabouts of the tsarina-mother until her death on 7 November
1376 are unknown. She may have died at Uroš V’s court, where she would
stay quite often539. Shortly before her death she took the grand scheme and
the monastic name of Jevgenija.
Historians acknowledge that the tsarina was politically active, even after she
joined the order. For example, we know that she participated as an advisor in
a meeting with Patriarch Callistus in 1364. The meeting aimed at reconciling
the Serbian Church and the Patriarchate in Constantinople after the anathema
cast on the Serbian Tsar, State and Church in 1350, and at creating a united
front against the growing power of the Ottoman Turks540. The success of the
talks was precluded by the patriarch’s sudden death in June that year541.
Early religious veneration of Helen is recorded in historical sources from
Mount Athos. They clearly indicate that the initiators of her cult were the
monks there, who called her a “saint” still during her lifetime. These include
the previously mentioned hieromonk Dorotej and monk Khariton542 from
535
Ibidem, p. 17.
536
Г. Острогорски, Серска област после Душанове смрти, Београд 1965, p. 5.
537
M. Пурковић, Јелена…, p. 20. Also: Г. Острогорски, op.cit., p. 4–5.
538
Г. Острогорски, op.cit., p. 6.
539
M. Пурковић, Јелена…, p. 25. Г. Острогорски, op.cit., p. 7.
540
Ibidem, p. 21.
541
Ibidem, p. 21.
542
The monk Khariton became the first metropolitan of the Wallachian land in 1372–1376.
He was an elder of the Kutlumisiu Monastery, see J. Charkiewicz, E. Kocój, Rumuńscy
święci, Hajnówka 2011, p. 13.
168 Part II
Athos. In his last will and testament of 1378, the latter calls the former tsarina
a “blessed”543. The cult probably developed further in the first half of the 17th
c. under the impact of the glorification of her son Uroš V, canonised 211
years after his death (1582)544. Along with her son, she is remembered by the
Serbian Church on December 2. In 1643, patriarch Pajsije I of Janjevo donated
a fragment of Helen’s relics to tsar Michael I of Russia, This would confirm her
fairly early inclusion into church calendars. Today, her remembrance is local,
limited to the Matejče Monastery near Kumanovo and the Holy Trinity Church
in Skopje, two of the most important foundations of Helen and Uroš. She is the
patron saint of women who cannot have children or cannot carry a pregnancy
and of those who cannot breastfeed their children545. The saint’s relics (right
hand) is preserved in the Savina Monastery (as of 1759) in Boka Kotorska.
St. Jelisaveta-Jevgenija has no separate hymnographic or hagiographic
texts dedicated to her. She is mentioned546 in The Life of St. Tsar Uroš V (Žitije
svetog cara Uroša) and in Service to St. Tsar Uroš V (Služba svetom caru Urošu
V; first sedalen, tone 5), by patriarch Pajsije of Janjevo547. The original 1642
manuscript containing also Service to St. Tsar Uroš V and a brief life of tsar
Uroš (Sinaksarsko Žitije svetog cara Uroša) has been extant and is preserved in
the Patriarchal Library, no. 33. The text of the Service can be moreover found
543
Actes de Kutlumus, ed. P. Lemerte, (Archives de l’Athos), Paris 1945, Kutl. no. 36, 28.
544
According to tradition, the body of the last Tsar of Serbia lay in the monastery in Nero
dimlju (today Kosovo). On 11 May 1705, the monk Hristofor transferred it to the monas-
tery of Jazak in Srema, and some relics were placed in the monastery of Studenica. Then
Uroš’s body wandered from Jazak to monasteries in Vrdnik and Krušedol to return to Jazak.
On 14 April 1942, as a result of Ustasha’s actions, the relics had to be taken from their
resting place and moved to the Cathedral of St. Archangels in Belgrade. On 22 September
2001, the Synod decided to return them to Jazak. See A. Стојановић, “Радослав Грујић
о преносу моштију српских светитеља априла 1942. године из НДХ у окупирану
Србију”, Токови историје. Часопис Института за новију историју Србије 2012/1,
p. 69–86. Despite the relocation of the relics of Uroš V to Fruška Gora, religious guides
often indicate that the saint’s body is still in Belgrade.
545
Pravoslavni kalendar. Online access: <http://www.pravoslavnikalendar.iz.rs/>, access: 23.
04.2016.
546
Пајсије, Сабрани списи, Београд 1993, p. 94.
547
Pajsije of Janjevo was a Serbian patriarch in 1614–1647. He is the author of the life and ser-
vice of St. Tsar Uroš V. The texts can be found in the collection: Старе српске биографије
XV и XVII века, прев. Л. Мирковић, Београд 1936, p. 129–151, and Пајсије, Сабрани
списи, Београд 1993, p. 59–76.
in a copy from early 1740s in Serbo-Slavonic (a copy from Jazak Monastery,

now at the SCP Museum, no. 333)548.
In more recent collections of lives of the saints, St. Jelisaveta-Jevgenija
appears in Remembrance of St. Uroš V, Tsar of Serbia (Spomen svetog Uroša, cara
Srpskog) by Justin Popović from The Lives of the Saints (Žitija svetih, Valjevo
1998)549. Following Serbian records, in late 17th and early 18th c., the life of
Uroš, with mentions of his mother and wife, was written by Dimitry Tuptalo
(St. Dimitry of Rostov) and included into his Lives of the Saints550.
Under the life of the son, Popović writes a remembrance of his mother:
Spomen svete i pravedne Jelisavete – Evgenije, Srpske carice Jelene (Memorial of
Saint and Righteous Elizabeth – Evgenija, Serbian Empress Jelena), adding in the
introduction that he elaborates on her God-fearing life in Uroš’s hagiography.
The account is indeed brief and quasi-historical. In a few sentences, the hagio
grapher presents the tsarina’s earthly life, merits before God and stages of
veneration, emphasising her adherence to Orthodoxy, piety, protective nature,
and early recognition of her sainthood.
Unlike his predecessors, Justin Popović places Uroš’s mother at the centre
of events. He builds the image of the mother and the queen on the key facts
of her life: her status as a legitimate tsarina, her long wait for a child and the
risk of divorce by her impatient husband551. Furthermore, he mentions her
support for the young son during his rule following the premature death of
his father, Tsar Dušan. The biblical references include typical paragons of
women depicting the tragedy of infertile women: Sara, Elisabeth and Anna,
the Blessed Virgin Mary’s mother. The hagiographic image of Helen thus
548
Пајсије, op. cit., p. 143–144.
549
J. Поповић, Житија светих, Ваљево 1998; online: <https://svetosavlje.org/zitija-sve-
tih-13/3/>, access: 06.09.2020.
550
A version translated from Orthodox Slavonic into modern Russian is included in the se-
ries: Жития святых на русском языке, изложенные по руководству Четьих-Миней
святого Димитрия Ростовского, 12 кн., Москва 2010; online: Житие святого Сте
фана, царя Сербского, <https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/books/download/8887-%D0%96%
D0%B 8%D 1%82%D0%B8%D1%8F-%D1%81%D0%B2%D1%8F%D1%82%D1%8B
%D1%85.pdf>, access: 11.10.2020.
551
As of around 1336, due to the lack of offspring, plans for the dissolution of the marriage
began. Elisabeth, daughter of the German king Frederick III the Beautiful was a candidate
for the second wife, yet at the end of 1336 or in early 1337 Jelena gave birth to her only
son. В. Ћоровић, Историја српског народа, Београд 1997.
170 Part II
consists of: 1) a figure of an unfortunate wife who, harassed by her husband,

humbly endures her fate, full of trust in God’s mercy and His help; 2) a happy
mother, rewarded by the Lord with her desired offspring; 3) a devout educator
of her son in the spirit of piety and mercy; 4) an enlightened, wise ruler, in love
with Serbian religious books (the hagiographer emphasises her instruction to
translate the Gospels into her mother tongue), 5) an active companion in the
life of the tsar and the tsar’s son, with whom she participates in government.
As in the case of Ana and Stephen Nemanjić, the hagiographer uses the
symbol of the parental couple, and since young Uroš was crowned King of
Serbia while his father was still alive, he also shows all three of them as a family
who jointly exercises governance, looking after the interests of the state and
the Church:
Благочестиви родитељи Душан и Јелена са својим сином Урошем не само да

помагаху многе цркве и манастире, нето и сами подигоше нове. Они подигоше
своју задужбину прекрасни манастир Светих Арханђела на Бистрици више
Призрена (од 1348–1352. године), у коме први игуман би Јаков, потоњи
митрополит у Серезу. Заједно са царским побожним великашем, деспотом
Јованом Оливером, подигнут би и живописан и други манастир Св. Арханђела
у Леснову (1347–1349. г.), и затим заједнички од стране свих њих манастир би
завештан светој лаври Хиландару на Светој Гори. Ова благочестива породица,
а особито “христољубива супруга” Јелена и побожни јој син Урош, подигоше
и манастир Пресвете Богородице, звани Матејич, у Скопској Црној Гори код
Куманова, и цркву Свете Тројице у граду Скопљу552.
Popović’s concern for the Orthodox religion is particularly noteworthy,

as the story of his son’s search for a wife at the French court, included in the
text, clearly attests:
Пре тога пак, родитељи Уроша пошто поодрасте најпре оженише, а то би

на овај начин. Када моћни цар Стефан Душан заузе Босну и дође у град
Дубровник, он тамо са својом супругом царицом би свечано дочекан и при
мљен. Идуће године он посла отуда свога протовестијара Николу Бућу на
двор Француског краља да запроси кћер тога краља за жену своме сину
Урошу. Француз му, међутим, одговори да би то врло радо учинио само када
би и цар Стефан и његов син били “римског обреда“, то јест када би прешли
552
J. Поповић, Житија светих, Ваљево 1998; online: <https://svetosavlje.org/zitija-sve-
tih-13/3/>, access: 06.09.2020.
у римокатолицизам. Када се Душанов посланик врати натраг и исприча своме

господару шта му је Француски краљ рекао, тада се цар Стефан насмеја и
наруга одговору латинског краља, па се онда окрете и запроси православну
невесту сину своме, Анк у, кћер Влашког кнеза и војводе Александра Басараба,
коју овај одмах и даде за Уроша553.
Recording autonomous yet weak Uroš’s rule554, the hagiographer makes

the mother both the son’s aide and the real co-ruler of the eastern part of
the empire. At the same time he uses her person to praise the strong central
power in the state, to criticise internal dissent and the disloyalty of the elites
striving to seize power:
Да би помогла своме нејаком сину Урошу, његова мајка Јелена узе да управља
источним делом царевине, то јест Серском облашћу у источној Македонији,
али тако да она потпуно признаваше врховну царску власт свога сина. Она
мудро и побожно управљаше овим крајевима Српског царства и доста
помагаше своме сину Урошу555.
The tsarina’s religious life serves to affirm the spirituality of rulers. It is

meant to prove that by abiding by religion, the ruler (government) becomes
an even better, more effective manager (steward) of his country, and the
homeland can only benefit from this:
Пре свега другога и више од свега она му [i.e. Uroš – D.G.] помагаше у
побожности и животу по Богу и ради Бога. Њена побожност и христољубивост
види се и из тога што она, чим по смрти Душановој остаде удовица, одмах
одлучи да се замонаши, што ускоро заиста и учини, поставши тако монахиња
Јелисавета (већ у месецу мају идуће 1356. године). Као монахиња-царица она
чешће посећиваше сина свога Уроша и помагаше му у његовим пословима. Но
особито му помагаше у његовим честим и богатим милостињама и даровима
црквама и манастирима. […]
И сам он, и заједно са својом благочестивом мајком монахињом Јелисаветом,
помагао је свету лавру Немањићску, Хиландар на Светој Гори, и то давањем
честих и великих дарова и богатих прилога. Царица-монахиња Јелисавета
подарила је са Урошем на дар манастиру Хиландару седиште Петрићево (1360.
године), а затим су дали и велики дар лаври Светог Атанасија на Атону (1361.
године). Урошевим прилозима и даровима урађене су у Хиландару прекрасне
553
Ibidem.
554
In Serbia he is nicknamed “Weak” (Serbian Nejaki).
555
J. Поповић, op. cit.
172 Part II
велике иконе на великом иконостасу Хиландарске саборне цркве, док је

његова мајка Јелисавета била ктиторка несрећно запустеле Карејске ћелије
Светога Саве у средишту Свете Горе. Света Јелисавета је богато обдарила
и светогорски манастир Кутлумуш. Затим је она постала «други ктитор»
манастира Светог Николе под Кожљем на реци Пчињи, који је она после
уступила Серском митрополиту Јакову556.
Popović’s hagiography is not an example of outstanding quality. The author

assembles it as if from separate fragments of Serbian history. The figure of
Tsar Dušan Nemanjić is not properly rounded in terms of composition. On
the one hand, the author attempts to shed positive light on Tsar Dušan, even
referring to the reports of “old historians” who attest to his piety and devotion
to the Orthodox faith:
Ни отац Урошев Душан није био непобожан човек. Јер стари историчари
сведоче и за њега да је био благочестив, “врло одан православној вери“.
“Подизао је цркве и манастире, дарујући им велике милостиње, и дајући
велике дарове достојанственицима и свештеницима, који су у тим црквама
и манастирима певали песмопоје Богу. У ове манастире спадају и они на
Светој Гори, у Македонији и по другим местима. Он даде за вечна времена
монасима Српског манастира Светог Арханђела Михаила у Јерусалиму стални
новчани прилог, који су му Дубровчани плаћали за Стон и Пељешац. Управо
стога он беше назван Душан, што значи душеван човек”.
On the other hand, he stresses that the crisis between the Churches was
due to Dušan’s self-appointment as tsar and his arbitrary establishment of
a patriarchate557, which the hagiographer sees as “crossing the boundary
set up by the forefathers”, i.e. first representatives of the Nemanjić dynasty.
At the time the text was written, it was vital to recall the importance of the
Church and religion in the state, to show the positive effects of the alliance of
556
557
Dušan established an empire in Serbia, proclaimed himself tsar, and elevated the Serbian
archbishop to the position of patriarch, thus sparking a conflict with the patriarch of Con-
stantinople, Callistus. This led to the breaking of all ties between the Byzantine Church
and the Serbian Church and the excommunication of the newly established patriarchate.
It is worth noting that Dušan did not take monastic vows and is the only one of the Ne-
manjić dynasty who is not included in the monastic cult. After Dušan’s death, Jelena, after
extensive efforts, managed to settle the dispute between the Serbian Orthodox Church
and the Patriarchate in Constantinople (1375).
“throne and tiara”. It can also be assumed that the example of a woman made it
easier to convey theocratic thought in a programmatically atheistic state. The
crowning touch of Jelena’s monarchical image is the hagiographer’s credit for
reconciling the autocephalous Serbian Church with the universal Orthodox
Church, represented by the Patriarchate in Constantinople:
Истинска побожност светог цара Уроша и његове мајке блажене царице-

монахиње Јелисавете види се и из следећег. Српски цар Стефан Душан беше у
нечему “преступио границе отаца својих”, како за њега кажу стари летописи,
јер не учини као његови прародитељи Немањићи, него се самовољно понесе
и погорди у уздизању себе за цара и проглашењу Српског архиепископа за
патријарха. Због овога настадоше не мале невоље и несугласице између Српске
и Цариградске Цркве, тако да васељенски патријарх Калист изрече на крају
одлучење над царом Душаном и Српским патријархом. Тада се, како кажу
стари летописци, “покаја цар и заиска разрешење за ово зло”, али се затим,
додају летописци, Душан убрзо “разреши од овога живота и предаде се гробу,
оставивши ово зло непогребено”. Бригу око измирења Српске и Цариградске
Цркве узе на себе царева супруга, блажена царица Јелена-Јелисавета и њен
нејаки син Урош. Са много поштовања и љубави мудра и побожна царица-
монахиња прими на свој двор у град Сер свјатјејшег патријарха Цариградског
Калиста, који лично дође к њој ради хришћанског мира и јединства. Свети
патријарх Калист беше готов на помирење и праштање и зато већ ступи у
опшптење са Српском Црквом, а то исто жељаше и мајка Урошева и сам
Урош558.
558
Chapter IX
St. Jelisaveta (Jelena Štiljanović) –

October 4
In fact, it is not known who Jelena was by origin. Historical data are limited to
some minor information contained in a cycle of hagiographical works dedicated
to her husband, Stephen Štiljanović (?–1543). Her cult is a companion cult to
that of her husband and is essentially limited to the Šišatovac Monastery559. No
separate day of remembrance has been established for the saint; the Serbian
Church honours the couple on October 4, the day of Stephen’s dormition. It
can be considered that the moment of sanctioning of her holiness was the
act of transferring her relics to a reliquary shared with Stephen in 1780 by
Vikentije Popović, then igumen of the Šišatovac Monastery.
Liturgical literature is exceedingly scarce; no separate hymn or euchography
were written in honour of St. Jelisaveta in the Middle Ages or in the subsequent
centuries. It was only in 2015 that this lack was remedied to a small extent by
adding to the Novi Srbljak under the date of October 4 a tropar and a kondak
dedicated to Jelisaveta, which were written in the Church Slavonic language.
However, these are not texts that have the official character or the Patriarch’s
permission.
Religious authors mention the queen in laudatory and instructive nar
ratives in honour of Stephen. In the manuscript minea for October from the
Šišatovac Monastery (No. 56, now in the Patriarchal Library in Belgrade), there
559
The monastery dates back to the early 16th c. and was built on the site of a small church
dedicated to St. Nicholas. Archimandrite of Šišatovač Vikentije Popović initiated the con-
struction of a new church, which still exists today, in the years 1758–1778. In 1543 the
relics of St. Stephen Štiljanović were transferred to the monastery.
176 Part II
are two texts dedicated to Stephen: Laudatory Narrative of Despot Stephen

Štiljanović (Pohvalno slovo despotu Stefanu Štiljanoviću charts 36–42a) and
Instructive Narrative of Despot Stephen Štiljanović (Povesno slovo o despot
Stefanu Štiljanoviću charts 43a to 50b), compiled by a monk from the Šišatovac
Monastery long after Stephen’s death, in 1631560. The texts of the Narratives
(in the Russo-Slavic language) were fully incorporated into the Srbljak from
Rimnik (1761) and from Moscow (1765)561, as well as, in an abridged and
slightly revised version as a synaksar in the Service of St. Stephen Štiljanović
Služba sv. Stefanu Štiljanoviću, (1631) – into the Srbljak from Belgrade (1861)562.
In 1875, Ilarion Ruvarac published in Latopis Matice Srpske excerpts of the
Instructive Narrative from the aforementioned manuscript563. The Laudatory
Narrative, “with no rhetorical embellishments and moral didacticism”, is
published by Mita Kostić in 1926564. Both texts with commentaries were
published in their entirety by Tomislav Jovanović565.
The principal difference between the two Narratives dedicated to Stephen
consists in the precision of description of the revelation of his sainthood, which
in the Instructive Narrative is extended with more details and, importantly,
has information on Jelena566. The author of the text introduces her in brief
and in a standard manner, in keeping with the image of a widow-queen: she
is a “blessed” wife who took care of a dignified burial of her beloved husband,
honouring his relics. She then entered a monastery567 close to Stephen’s burying
place and assumed the name of Jelisaveta568.
560
Т. Јовановић, “Похвално и повесно слово о деспоту Стефану Штиљановићу”, Књи
жевна историја, Х, 38, Београд 1978, p. 336.
561
Ibidem, p. 339.
562
563
И. Руварац, “Повесно слово кнезу Лазару, деспоту Стефану Бранковићу и кнезу
Стефану Штиљановићу”, Летопис Матице Српске 117, 1875, p. 190 and 118–121.
564
М. Костић, “Стефан Штиљановић. Историјско-хагиографска студија”, Глас Српске
Краљевске Академије, СХ, Београд 1923, p. 72–73.
565
Т. Јовановић, op. cit., p. 335–377.
566
See Л. Павловић, op. cit., p. 156–157.
567
R. Grujić suspects that this may have been the Karlovice Monastery, see ibidem, p. 157.
568
Ibidem, p. 157.
Chapter IX: St. Jelisaveta 177
The above texts include also Kratko povesno slovo o despotu Stefanu Štilja
noviću (A short narrative of St. Stephen Štiljanović) by Pajsije Janjevac569 of
1631570, whose original Chruch Slavonic manuscript has been lost. The work
was written on the occasion of the patriarch’s visit to the Šišatovac Monastery
on 3 October 1631, as evidenced by the note preserved in all later copies of
the Narrative571. However, this variant of the life essentially adds nothing new
to Jelisaveta’s hagiography:
А госпођа његова Јелена, по неком времену, због турског присуства, оде

у Чешку земљу у град Праг и тамо поживе извесне г одине (…). А супруга
његова бивша, Јелена, када дочу о њему, похита са љубављу према светом. И по
смрти његовој, не губећи времена, дође у манастир Шишатовац, где многе сузе
са радошћу и умилним речима изливаше, примивши ту и монашки лик572.
We know there were copies of A short narrative of St. Stephen Štiljanović

by Pajsije in a the Novorussian-Slavic version – one was in the Srbljak from
the Šišatovac Monastery, the other was attached to the Narrative of Ephrem
the Syrian (No. 183)573, kept in the same monastery. The other two copies
were kept in the Orthodox church in Siklós (Serbian Šikloš)574 and in the
Franciscan monastery library in Buda575. All the four manuscripts have van
ished without a trace.
Four copies of Pajsije’s Narrative have survived until today. One can be
found in the Patriarchal Library in Belgrade, no. 175. Another one is a separate
copy added by Vikentije Popović to a printed Evangeliary of 1735 (now SOC
Museum, no. 508). A third one, on a wooden board of 1767, was until World
War II in the Šišatovac Monastery, and then was included into the collection
of the SOC Museum in Belgrade, no. 3933576. The most recent copy of the
569
Pajsije Janjevac (1542–1647/49) – Metropolitan of Novo Brdo as of 1612, patriarch of Peć
1614/15–1647.
570
Пајсије, op. cit., p. 105–106 (a modern Serbian version).
571
Ibidem, p. 27.
572
Ibidem, p. 106.
573
C. Петковић, Опис рукописа манастира Шишатовца, Београд 1951, p. 58–59.
574
В. Пандуровић, “Из прошлости барањских Срба”, Straža, 5, Osijek 3, I 1923, p. 2.
575
G. Csevapovich, Synoptico-memorialis Catalogus Observantisminorum Provinciae S. Ioan
is a Capistrano, olim Bosnae Argentiae a dimidio seculi XIII. usque recentem aetatem, ex
archivo et chronicis eiusdem recusus, Budae 1823, p. 335.
576
Пајсије, op. cit., p. 144.
178 Part II
Narrative (SANU Archive no. 9086) comes from Lukijan Mušicki’s collection
and was made probably between 1799 and 1805577.
The saint is included by the famous Russian hagiographer Filaret Gumile
vsky into his anthology578, ahead of the Serbian authors of books dedicated to
the saints, Nikolaj Velimirović and Justin Popović. He mentions St. Jelisaveta
together with her husband under the date of October 4. Filaret shows her
as a caring wife, concerned about the dignified burial of Stephen and the
survival of his memory: “Супруга его Елена, съ честию похоронивъ тѣло
его, удалилась к родным въ Германию”; “(…) Супруга Елена, услыхавъ о
нетлѣенномъ тѣлѣ праведнaго мужа, хотя и была удерживаема родными,
поспѣшила прибыть въ Шишатовецъ и облобызала мощи праведника”.
Filaret also mentions that Jelena became a nun after her husband’s death and
devoted the rest of her life to asceticism: “Принявъ монашество, она стала
жить уединенно невдали отъ монaстыря, в молитвѣ и постѣ. Спустя три
года она скончалась и похоронена была въ обители”. Filaret enriched the
image of the character by expanding the classical image of the Serbian ruler,
who according to tradition enters a monastery after the death of her husband,
with the features of an ascetic hermit promoted in Russia at the time579.
Nikolay Velimirović’s Prologue580 justifies a hypothesis that the bishop took
carer to separate the cult of Jelena from that of her husband, since he placed
her feast on October 4. It is brief and refers to the husband’s life for more
detailed information, but this fact alone should be noted: “Спомен Свете
Преподобне Јелисавете, Српске кнегиње Јелене Штиљановић Супруга
Св. Стефана Штиљановића, о којој се опширније говори у Житију мужа
њеног (под данашњим датумом)”581. Justin Popović reiterates the pattern in
his set of saints’ lives. He mentions the saint’s name separately and moves on
to the life of Stephen, where his wife appears several times. Continuing the
577
L. Mušicki is suspected of having himself re-written the text, see T. Јовановић, “Кратко
повесно слово о светом Стефану Штиљановићу”, in: Манастир Шишатовац. Збор
ник радова, уред. Д. Даников, Београд 1989, p. 75.
578
Филарет, op. cit., p. 224–225.
579
See M. Kuczyńska, “Paraskiewa-Petka Tyrnowska w rosyjskim wariancie służby – ‘mo-
narchiczny’ obraz świętości”, Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne 2013, no. 5, p. 166–167.
580
Н. Велимировић, Охридски пролог, Ниш 1928. Online access: <http://www.svetosavlje.
org/biblioteka/prolog/index.php?m=10&d=4&a=1&date=10-2015>, access: 12.09.2016.
581
Available online: <https://svetosavlje.org/zitija-svetih-11/5/>, access: 12.09.2016.
Chapter IX: St. Jelisaveta 179
custom of his predecessors, Popović does not give Jelena’s sainthood much more
prominence than they had had, offering only a few minor facts of her life. But
the cult of Stephen, clearly embedded here in the anti-Islamic current582, allows
the hagiographer to show Jelena as a victim of Turkish raids, who after her
husband’s funeral is forced to flee from the Turks abroad (“to German lands”):
“блажени Стефан се мирно пресели ка Господу (негде после 1540. године)
и би чесно погребен од своје супруге Јелене и православног народа, на
брду Бунтиру изван града. Супруга пак његова Јелена, распустивши слуге
своје, сама се повуче испред Турака негде у немачке земље”583. Her body
was buried in the Šišatovac Monastery.
The texts about Jelisaveta show her as an obedient and devoted spouse,
a companion always offering advice, and after her husband’s death as a widow
faithful to her husband’s memory and an ideal nun. Most recent texts, which
have not yet received official Church approval, create an image of the saint as
a model of virtues. They emphasise the biblical virtue of caritas, manifested in
helping the poorest and showing kindness to all. A contemporary hymnographer
compares Jelena to Abraham’s obedient wife Sarah (kontakion, vol. 3)584. He
goes on to present her as the daughter who continues the work of Abraham
and Nemanjić, thus attempting to permanently inscribe the saint in Serbian
sacred history in the image of the most eminent wives – rulers and nuns from
the Nemanjić family.
582
Popović also incorporates anti-Ustasha motifs into the text, which in popular hagiograph-
ical studies is given a more general form of Stephen’s fight against the Latinists: “Деспот
српски. Родом из Паштровића. Управљао српским народом у претешким приликама
борећи се храбро против Турака и Латина. Праведник Божји и родољуб, овај дивни
кнез може се успоредити са св. Александром Невским или са св. Краљем Јованом
Владимиром”. Св. Стефан и Преподобна Јелена Штиљановић, <https://bskm.rs/2014
/10/sv-stefan-prepodobna-jelena-stiljanovic/>, access 6.09.2020.
583
Available online: <https://svetosavlje.org/zitija-svetih-11/5/>, access: 12.09.2016.
584
The text available online: <http://novisrbljak.narod.ru/PDF_files/Novi_Srbljak/10-04_
Stefan_ i_Jelena_Shtiljanovici.pdf>, access: 11.06.2016; translation: “Like Sarah to Abra-
ham, you obeyed Stephen your husband. You kept pure love and marriage vows even after
his death. You have truly become a daughter of Abraham and Nemanjić and have reached
the heavenly palaces. Do not stop praying there for those who worship you with love,
Blessed Mother Jelisaveta”. Transl. mine – D.G.
Conclusion
From the very beginning, the Serbian national imaginary and the identity of the
nation were impacted by the dynastic ideology patterned after the Byzantine
model. Byzantine theology and political ideas, especially the principle of
diarchy, as well as models of spiritual culture, inspired subsequent rulers in the
creation of the ecclesiastical and political structures of the Serbian state. It was
evident mainly in the cults of the members of individual dynasties ruling in
Serbia, the Nemanjićs, the Hrebeljanovićs and the Brankovićs. It is extremely
interesting due to the fact that there is no corresponding phenomenon in
other Slavic cultures, especially since it has continued from the Middle Ages,
through the Ottoman captivity, the national revival, to contemporary times, i.e.
the Yugoslav Federation and the period after its dissolution, when Serbia and
the Serbs have reinterpreted their identity and symbolic imagery in political,
economic and social contexts. Serbian and foreign (including Polish) research
on the subject has never focused on female figures, nor has it described the
extent and manner of their involvement in the formation of a set of national
myths that serve to construct communal images of the Serbian nation, state
and Church. The present work fills this research gap by placing the most
important women’s cults at the centre and attempting to offset the disproportion
in analyses devoted to men’s and women’s cults. The cults presented in the
monograph were studied in the light of various sources, with special emphasis
on liturgical literature in many genres: hagiography, hymnography, sermons,
and in selected cases euchography. The study proves that the problem of
182 Conclusion
women’s sanctity cannot be treated marginally, since it is a major part of

Serbian cultural, literary and spiritual legacy.
The analyses presented in the work shed new light on women saints.
Frequently “silent” in history, they “spoke up” in Orthodox cults. Women –
wives, mothers, rulers, nuns, anchorites – are presented in the analysed works
as actively participating in the life of the state and the Church, influencing
their shape both in the Middle Ages and in the following centuries. Their
cults are an integral component of the established cultural model based on
the dynastic idea, the permanence of the state-Church organisation and the
national character of Orthodoxy. In this specific paradigm of Serbian spiritual
culture, female saints, queens, duchesses, hermits or peasant women-martyrs,
play no less important an ideological role as the figures of male saints. They are
not only their companions and advisors, but also, when circumstances require
it, just as efficient in organising state and social life. The figures of Serbian
saints, regardless of the time when the texts dedicated to them were written,
draw on fixed symbols, comparisons and epithets. They are centred around the
biblical and the Marian axes. On the one hand, the most important aspect is
membership in the “dynasty of monks”585, expressed in literature as direct or
symbolic membership in the “holy tree”, “holy root”, or “the elect nation”. This in
turn is linked to a special historical role, mission, enlightenment, and teaching
of the faith, rooted in the religious and political realm. As a result, comparisons
are made with biblical prophets and sages and motifs connected with the
history of Israel and its leaders appear. This is accompanied by extensive solar
symbolism. On the other hand, there is a “feminine” dimension, primarily
alluding to the figure of the Mother of God as mother, guide and protector,
as well as to other female figures whose stories are invoked per analogiam,
in order to build Serbian sacred history. There are regular references to the
Bride from the Song of Songs or the prudent maidens awaiting the arrival of
the Bridegroom-Saviour. The symbols are extended with animal or natural
imagery, birds, like the turtledove and the eagle, a fortress, and a rock. Recurrent
elements create a canonical set of meanings, build an ideological layer based
on the principle of election, a nation in which God actively acts. They also
585
The term used by I. Lis in her book Śmierć…, p. 115.
Conclusion 183
define the paradigm of “Serbianness”, rooted in Christian and national values

and the tradition of “mothers and fathers”.
In the monograph, the cults of saints are also presented from a functional
aspect, from the point of view of contributing to the construction of state,
spiritual and cultural identity. The functions performed by saints are subject
to constant changes depending on the socio-political situation. The examples
presented in this work prove that this is a dynamic and essentially unfinished
process. The saints are first and foremost the defenders of the state and the
nation against the enemy understood literally (e.g. the Turks) or metaphorically
(the temptations of consumerism, the destructive influence of the West). The
authors present them in roles that are providential for the country, the Church
and society. They are the carriers and guardians of national values, the idea
of the continuity of the state and political unity, respect for central authority.
The literary testimonies to their lives are inscribed with whole political (idea
of the tree [vine] of the Nemanjić family, diarchy and symphony), religious
(idea of election, Teodul nation; the Serbian nation as a servant of God) and
social agendas.
They are the guardians of the purity of the Christian (Orthodox) faith,
which is opposed to Catholicism or Islam as invasive and disintegrating the
community. The rulers (later nuns), such as Jelisaveta-Jevgenija (Dušan’s wife),
cherish communication and good relations with the universal Church for
the sake of the unity of the Orthodox ecumene. They are the patrons of their
native Orthodox Church, in accordance with the tradition and framework
developed by the “fathers of the pyramid” – for example, the cult of Angelina
and the rest of the Brankovićs guided the ideas of consolidation and attempts
to rebuild the structures of the Serbian Church around the patriarchate in Peć.
In times of crisis and instability, the saints are patrons of spiritual and
political revival. In the social sphere, they guard the purity of customs, look
after mothers, maidens (guarding chastity, virginity) and the home. They watch
over marriages. They help in diseases of body and mind. Depending on the
imperative of the moment, outdated functions and qualities are eliminated
and new, important and necessary from the point of view of state, spiritual
or socio-cultural ideals are added. Of the figures discussed in the work, the
greatest transformations (expansion) of the model of sanctity are evident in
the case of St. Paraskeva-Petka and the martyr Zlata of Meglen. They acquired
184 Conclusion
a fully national dimension and an attendant deeply political aspect, patterned

after Serbian women of royal ruling dynasties.
The saints are portrayed as real stateswomen, of great minds, hearts and piety.
All the women depicted in the texts display extraordinary deeds at virtually
every moment of their lives, going even beyond the limitations imposed by
the monastic rules. As wives (rulers, duchesses, empresses), mothers and
nuns, they invariably oversee the affairs of the state, the Church, the family,
understood not only as a blood relation but above all as a community and
a nation. They are symbols of knowledge, teachers of resourcefulness, efficiency
of management and organisation. Not only do they support their husbands
with good advice in years of peace, like Ana Nemanjić, but they are able to
cope with the most difficult times and situations, like Milica or Angelina. They
exercise independent rule (Helen of Anjou) or efficiently take it over when
the husband is missing. They save their sons, like Jelena, Dušan’s wife, when
they cannot cope with the demands of politics and economy on their own.
They were able to make brave decisions, putting their own interests above the
security and stability of the state, as exemplified by the story of Milica, her
negotiations with the sultan in defence of her son, Stefan Lazarević, or the
delivery of her daughter Oliva to the sultan’s harem.
The saints promote native culture, including liturgical culture, by com
missioning transcriptions and translations of liturgical books (Gospels,
synaxarions, typikons, apostles) into Serbian586. They enriched their private
collections, but also supplied court and monastery libraries with books.
Especially active in this respect were Angelina, Helen of Anjou, Jelena (Dušan’s
wife), Milica. Some books belonging to Angelina have survived to this day.
Her personal and the larger family library were very extensive. She is said to
have always carried books with her during her life’s wanderings587.
The figures of women saints perfectly combine the sacred and the secular.
Secular matters do not obscure God’s matters for them, and on the other
hand their piety and active liturgical life do not shut them off from everyday
problems. They are active as founders of monasteries and churches, open
orphanages and schools for girls. They continuously take care of the poor,
586
See С. Томин, Књигољубиве жене српског средњег века, Нови Сад 2007, especially cha
pter Књигољубиве жене средњег века. Пролог познавању, p. 47–74.
587
Ibidem, p. 51.
Conclusion 185
the sick and the needy. They do not close themselves behind monastic walls,
they remain in constant contact with the “outside” world, fulfilling the dužnost
služenja (duty of service) prescribed for them.
Women’s cults appear almost simultaneously with men’s and generally
coexist, as this monograph demonstrates. Of course, not in all cases was it
possible to create at the same time a corpus of texts for the liturgical setting
of the cult. Sometimes general texts (e.g. services) were used to venerate the
memory of a given saint. Still, the source material collected in this study, Serbian
hagiography and hymnography, and to a lesser extent euchography, produced
in most of the cults discussed here over the centuries (from the Middle Ages
to the present day), shows constant efforts to update and supplement the
sphere of patronage.
Many new texts dedicated to women have been written in recent years
as an adjunct to the earlier corpus, or completely from scratch in the case of
saints who never had works to commemorate their feast days. This process has
not ended; hymnography and hagiography dedicated to them are constantly
being created and published in Serbia. Hymns are developing particularly
exuberantly, as exemplified by the constant replenishment of the Srbljak’s
contents and the recent work of Serbian nuns. Contemporary hymnographers
enter into dialogue with the scriptural tradition of past centuries by writing
works in the Church Slavonic language. Preliminary analyses of these texts
made in this dissertation show a strong tendency to preserve the continuity
of the writing tradition in the field of imagery, the use of symbols (the sacred
tree, the dove, prudent maidens, etc.) and fixed motifs in the creation of figures
of holy women. The contemporary literature of ritual character, which is
developing nowadays, awaits a detailed (qualitative, textological, comparative,
linguistic) study, which paves the way for further in-depth considerations on
the topics presented here.
I have not included studies of two Russian saints in the present work, St.
Xenia of St. Petersburg and Matron of Moscow, increasingly popular in Serbia
and increasingly “Serbian”. I collected initial indications for further analyses
of Serbian records connected with St. Xenia in an article “Kult św. Kseni
186 Conclusion
Petersburskiej w Rosji i Serbii”588. This is a contribution to future research

on the phenomenon of iurodstvo in the spirituality of the Southern Slavs,
especially since the last canonisation of a saint in the Serbian Orthodox Church
concerned precisely the native “fool for Christ”, Blessed Stefanida Skadarska
(memorial day: May 4).
To sum up, the importance of female saints, their image and functions,
relate to the whole spiritual and political life of Serbia and remain valid to
date. Their images and functions in the national imaginary evolve according
to time and place, religious-political and social realities, are updated according
to the needs of the faithful, and are constantly expanded.
588
D. Gapska, “Kult St. Kseni Petersburskiej w Rosji i Serbii”, Kultury Wschodniosłowiańskie
– Oblicza i Dialog, vol. III, 2013, p. 11–16.
Bibliography
PRIMARY SOURCES:
Akatyst do świętej mniszki Paraskiewy Serbskiej, transcription of the Church
Slavonic text into Cyrillic from the “Grazhdanka” and translation into
Polish by Fr. Mitrate E. (Stanisław) Strach, Białystok 2018.
Данило II, “Житије краљице Јелене”, in: Животи краљева и архиепископа
српских. Службе, прир. Г. Мак Данијел, Д. Петровић, прев. Л. Мирковић,
Београд 1988.
Данило II, Животи краљева и архиепископа српских. Службе, прир. Г. Мак
Данијел, Д. Петровић, прев. Л. Мирковић, Београд 1988.
Dar Słowa. Ze starej literatury serbskiej, ed. A. Naumow, transl. T. Wątor-
Naumow, A. Naumow, W. Kotwiczowa, Łódź 1984.
Димитриј Ростовский, “Житие св. Симеона”, in: idem, Жития святых,
<https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Dmitrij_Rostovskij/zhitija-svjatykh/>, access:
14.03.2019.
Доментијан, Житије Светога Саве, пред., прев. дела и коментари Љ.
Јухас-Георгиевска, издање на српскословенском Т. Јовановић, Београд
2001.
Доментијан, Живот светога Саве и Живот светога Симеона, прир.
Р. Маринковић, Београд 1988.
Филарет Черниговский (Гумилевский), Святые южныхъ cлaвянъ. Опи
сание жизниихъ, издание 4-е, Санкт Петербургъ 1894.
Иванова К., “Житието на Петка Търновска от Патриарх Евтимий”,
Староблгарска литература 1980, 8.
188 Bibliography
Јагић Б., “Живот Стефана Лазаревића”, Гласник Српског Ученог Друштва,

књ. XLII, 1875.
Јосиф Троношац, Троношки родослов, прев. Д. Протић, Шабац 2008.
Кадић С., Акатист Светој великомученици Злати Мегленској, Тиват 2007.
Књига Правила. Зборник канона Православне цркве, Шибеник 2003.
Константин Филозоф, Повест о Словима. Житије деспота Стефана
Лазаревића, прир. Г. Јовановић, Београд 1989.
Левушкина Р. С., Станчевић З. А., “Сербское гимнографическое творчество
конца ХХ – начала ХХI веков”, Fontes Slaviae Orthodoxae 2017, 1, s. 31–41.
Милеуснић С., Свети Срби, editions: Крагујевац 1989, Београд 2000,
Милојевић М.С., Правила св. Петке Параскеве Српске, “Гласник СУД”
1871, XXXI.
Миловска Д., Житија на жени-светици, Скопје 2005.
Мирковић Л., “Живот Стефана Лазаревића”, in: Старе српске биографије
XV и XVII века ‒ Цамблак, Константин, Пајсије, Београд 1936.
Novaković S., “Život sv. Petke. Od patriarha bugarskoga Jeftimija”, Starine IX,
Zagreb 1877.
Пајсије, Сабрани списи, Београд 1993.
Поповић Ј., Житија светих за октобар, Београд 1977.
“Повесно слово о кнезу Лазару”, прев. М. Башић, in: Стара српска књи
жевност, књ. III, ред. Д. Павловић, Нови Сад-Београд 1970.
Siedem niebios i ziemia. Antologia dawnej prozy bułgarskiej, selection, transl.,
introduction T. Dąbek-Wirgowa, Warszawa 1983.
Служби на българските светии, Атон 2007.
Srbljak manuscripts:
1. Rimnik Srbljak from 1761 (old print from the collection of the Matica
Srpska Library, reference number R 18, Sr II).
2. Venice Srbljak from 1765 (the so-called of Moscow from 1765) (old print
from the collection of the Matica Srpska Library number R 18, Sr IV).
3. Belgrade Srbljak from 1861 (old print from the collection of the Matica
Srpska Library, number R19, Sr IV).
Србљак, прир. еп. рашко-призренски Павле, Београд 1986.
Србљак 1, 2, Добрунска Ријека 2015.
Bibliography 189
Старе српске биографије (XV и XVII века), прев. Л. Мирковић, предг.

П. Поповић, Београд 1936.
Стефан Првовенчани, Сабрани списи, прир. Ј. Јухас-Георгиевска, Београд
1988.
Св. Параскева (Св. Петка-Петковача), написао по житијама свјатих
Велимир П. Исаковић, Библиотека Српска Слава, Београд 1934.
Света Петка – слава српска и заштита верних, уредник протојереј
Р. Никчевић, Цетиње 2009.
Преподобна мати Параскева. Житије, акатисти, чудеса, духовне песме
светитељки, прир. C. Лазаревић, Рума 2014.
Свети Сава, Сабрани списи, прир. Д. Богданивић, Београд 1986.
Теодосије, Житија, прир. Д. Богдановић, Београд 1988.
Велимировић Н., Охридски пролог, Ниш 1928
Жития на светите, ч. 2, Издание на Българската Православна Църква,
Ямбол 1998.
Жития святых на русском языке, изложенные по руководству Четьих-
Миней святого Димитрия Ростовского, 12 кн., Москва 2010; online:
Житие святого Стефана, царя Сербского, <https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/
books/download/8887-%D0%96%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%8F-
%D1%81%D0%B2%D1%8F%D1%82%D1%8B%D1%85.pdf>, access:
11.10.2020.
Животи краљева и архиепископа српских од Данила Другог, прев.
Л. Мирковић, предг. Н. Радојчић, Београд 1935.
SECONDARY SOURCES:
Adamiak E., Kobiety w Biblii. Nowy Testament, Warszawa 2010.
Adamiak E., Kobiety w Biblii. Stary Testament, Kraków 2006.
Apokryfy i legendy starotestamentowe Słowian południowych, red. G. Minczew,
M. Skowronek, Kraków 2006.
Blagojević M., Religija i crkva u transformacijama društva. Sociološko-
istorijska analiza religijske situacije u srpsko-crnogorskom i ruskom (post)
komunističkom društvu, Beograd 2005.
Brzozowska Z., “Twórczość literacka kobiet w średniowiecznej Serbii (XIII–
XV w.)”, Vade nobiscum 2011, VII, Łódź.
190 Bibliography
Brzozowska Z., “Księżna Milica – między sakralizacją władzy monarszej,

oficjalnym kultem cerkiewnym i narodowym mitem”, Poznańskie Studia
Slawistyczne, 2013/5, p. 59–73.
Brzozowska Z., “Łacinniczka na tronie XIII-wiecznej Serbii. Wizerunek
królowej Jeleny z Andegawenów w pismach arcybiskupa Danila II”,
Balcanica Posnaniensia. Acta et studia, XIX, Poznań 2012, pp. 71–83.
Crushovalieva S., Saint Petka: A Balkan Saint. A Case Study on Orthodox
Women Saints, Saarbrucken 2008.
Csevapovich G., Synoptico-memorialis Catalogus Observantisminorum
Provinciae S. Ioanis a Capistrano, olim Bosnae Argentiae a dimidio seculi XIII.
usque recentem aetatem, ex archivo et chronicis eiusdem recusus, Budae 1823.
Evdokimov P., Kobieta i zbawienie świata, transl. E. Wolicka, Poznań 1991.
Evdokimov P., Prawosławie, transl. J. Klinger, Warszawa 2003.
Evdokimov P., Szalona miłość Boga, transl. M. Kowalska, Białystok 2001.
Falina M., “Clerical Fascizm and Political Orthodoxy: Orthodox Christianity
and Nationalizm in Interwar Serbia”, Totalitarian Movements and Political
Religions 2007, vol. 8, no. 2.
Farlati D., Illyricum sacrum, VII, Venetiis 1813.
Ferro M.Ch., “Il ‘typos mariano’. Sulla topica del testo agiografi co al femminile
nella Rus’”, Russica Romana 2006, XIII, Pisa–Roma.
Ferro M.Ch., “Sante madri. Una tipologia particolare di santé della Rus’”, Studi
Slavistici 2007, IV, Firenze.
Ferro M.Ch., Santità e agiografia al femminile. Forme letterarie, tipologie
e modelli nel mondo slavo orientale (X–XVII sec.), Firenze 2010.
Fiedotow G., Święci Rusi, przeł. ks. H. Paprocki, Białystok–Bydgoszcz 2002.
Filonov Gove A., The Slavonic Akathistos Hymn: Poetic Elements of the Byzantine
Text and Its Old Church Slavonic Translation, Monachium 1988.
Flis A., Chrześcijaństwo i Europa. Studia z dziejów cywilizacji Zachodu, Kraków
2001.
Folklor. Sacrum. Religia, ed. Ј. Bartmiński, M. Jasińska-Wojtkowska, Lublin
1995.
Gavrilović Z., “Women in Serbian politics, diplomacy and art at the beginning
of Ottoman rule”, in: Byzantine Style, Religion and Civilization: In Honour
of Sir Steven Runciman, red. Elizabeth Jeffreys, Cambridge University Press,
Bibliography 191
2006, p. 74–78, <https://books.google.pl/books?id=q0hMf5vu7kgC&prin

tsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=milica&f=false>, access: 16.09.2020.
Gil D., “Państwo – /naród/ – Kościół i specyfika serbskiej religijno-narodowej
koncepcji diarchii”, in: Język, Literatura i kultura Słowian dawniej i dziś –
III, ed. B. Zieliński, Poznań 2001.
Gil D., Prawosławie. Historia. Naród. Miejsce kultury duchowej w serbskiej
tradycji i współczesności, Kraków 2005.
Gil D., “Sakralno-polityczny i ludowy aspekt serbskiej poezji liturgicznej”, in:
Literatura a liturgia, ed. J. Okoń, Łódź 1998.
Gil D., Serbska hymnografia narodowa, Kraków 1995.
Gil D., “Średniowieczna hagiografia serbska jako dokument stanu świadomości
narodowej (zarys problematyki)”, Pamiętnik Słowiański 2000, L, Kraków.
Gjuzelev V., “Imperatrix Bulgariae Anna-Neda (1277–c.1346)”, Zbornik radova
Vizantološkog instituta 2013, no. 50 (2).
Hafner S., “Danilo II. und sein Schüler: Die Königsbiographien”, in: Serbisches
Mittelalter – Altserbische Herrscherbiographien II; Slavische Geschichts
schreiber, vol. 9, Graz 1976.
Jagić V., “The Slavic Response to Byzantine Poetry”, in: XII Congres des Etudes
Byzantines, Rapports VIII, Belgrade 1961.
Kalužniacki E., Werke des Patriarchen von Bulgarien Euthymius (1375–1393),
Wien 1901.
Kaszlej A., “Odnaleziona kopia dzieła Danila II Životi kraljeva i arhiepiskopa
srpskih”, in: Zbornik Matice Srpske za slavistiku 1989, no. 36, Novi Sad,
p. 109–112.
Klaniczay G., Holy rulers and blessed princesses: Dynastic cults in Medieval
Central Europe, Cambridge 2000.
Koch M., …kiedy dojrzejemy jako kultura… Twórczość pisarek serbskich na
początku XX wieku (kanon – genre – gender), Wrocław 2007;
Kocój E., Pamięć starych wieków. Symbolika czasu w rumuńskim kalendarzu
prawosławnym, Kraków 2013.
Kuczyńska M., “Obraz św. Paraskewy-Petki Tyrnowskiej w hymnografii
słowiańskiej. (Na materiale polskich odpisów służb ku jej czci)”, in: Stosunki
kulturowo-literackie polsko-wschodniosłowiańskie, ed. K. Prus, Rzeszów
1994.
192 Bibliography
Kuczyńska M., “Paraskiewa-Petka Tyrnowska w rosyjskim wariancie służby –

“monarchiczny” obraz świętości”, Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne 2013, 5.
Kuczyńska M., Południowosłowiańska poezja liturgiczna w zbiorach bibliotek
polskich, Szczecin 2003.
Kuczyńska M., “Teologia maryjna Joanicjusza Galatowskiego. Zarys problemu”,
in: Krakowsko-wileńskie studia slawistyczne. Seria poświęcona starożytnościom
słowiańskim, t. 4, ed. M. Kuczyńska, W. Stępniak-Minczewa, J. Stradomski,
Kraków 2009.
Laiou S., “Christian Women in an Ottoman World: Interpersonal and Family
Cases Brought Before the Shari’a Courts During the Seventeenth and
Eighteenth Centuries (Cases Involving the Greek Community)”, in: Women
in the Ottoman Balkans. Gender, Culture and History, A. Buturović, İ.C.
Schick (eds.), London 2007.
Leksykon symboli. Herder, przeł. J. Prokopiuk, L. Robakiewicz, Warszawa 2009.
Lis I., Śmierć w literaturze staroserbskiej (XII–XIV wiek), Poznań 2003.
Lis I., Święci w kulturze duchowej Słowian prawosławnych w średniowieczu
(do XV w.), Kraków 2004.
Lis-Wielgosz I., O trwałości znaczeń. Siedemnastowieczna literatura serbska
w służbie tradycji, Poznań 2013.
Lis-Wielgosz I., “Tworzona przez mężczyzn – odtwarzana przez kobiety.
Kultura i literatura staroserbska”, in: Męskie światy w życiu kobiet. Literatura
– historia – język, ed. B. Walęciuk-Dejneka, Kraków 2018, s. 199–214.
Lomagistro B., Jefimija monaca: storia di donna nella Serbia medievale, Parnaso,
2020.
Łach S. (ks.), “Próba nowej interpretacji hymnów o Syjonie”, Studia Warmińskie
1975, XII.
Łosski W., Teologia mistyczna Kościoła Wschodniego, transl. M. Sczaniecka,
Warszawa 1989.
Mandić S., Molenije rabe božije Anastasije, Beograd 1975.
Marecki J., Rotter L., Jak czytać wizerunki świętych? Leksykon atrybutów i sym
boli hagiograficznych, Kraków 2009.
Marjanović-Dušanić S., “Patterns of martyrial sanctity in the royal ideology
of medieval Serbia continuity and change”, Balcanica 2006, no. 37.
Mazurkiewicz R., Deesis. Idea wstawiennictwa Bogarodzicy i św. Jana Chrzciciela
w kulturze średniowiecznej, Kraków 2002.
Bibliography 193
McClanan A.L., The Empress Theodora and the Tradition of Women’s Patronage
in the Early Byzantine Empire. The Cultural Patronage of Medieval Women,
Athens–London 1996.
McDaniel G.L., “On Hungarian-Serbian Relations in the Thirteenth Century:
John Angelos and Queen Jelena”, in: Ungarn-Jahrbuch 1982/1983, vol. 12.
Meyendorff J., Teologia bizantyjska, Warszawa 1984.
Minewa E., The Byzantine Hagiographic and Hymnographic Texts on St Parasceve
of Epibatae: The Byzantine vita of St Parasceve of Epibatae or the vita by
“Vasilikos the Deacon”, Sofia 2017.
Misztal H., Doskonali w miłości. Świeccy święci i błogosławieni, Lublin 1992.
Najdanović D., Tri srpska velikana, München 1975.
Nardi E., Né sole né luna. L’immagine femminile nella Bisanzio dei secoli XI–XII,
Città di Castello 2002.
Naumow A., Biblia w strukturze artystycznej utworów cerkiewno-słowiańskich,
Kraków 1983.
Naumow A., “Święci Cerkwi Bułgarskiej”, Tygodnik Podlaski 1987, no. 9 (30),
Warszawa.
Naumow A., “W poszukiwaniu utraconej tożsamości – nowi męczennicy
atoscy (1590–1830)”, in: Religijna mozaika Bałkanów, ed. M. Walczak-
Mikołajczakowa, Gniezno 2008.
Naumow A., Wiara i historia. Z dziejów literatury cerkiewnosłowiańskiej na
ziemiach polsko-litewskich, Kraków 1996.
Naumow A., “Współczesna hymnografka między tradycją a wyzwaniami
świata”, in: Nel mondo degli Slavi. Incontri e dialoghi tra culture, Studi in
onore di Giovanna Brogi Bercoff, ed. M. Salvo, G. Moracci, G. Siedina, vol.
II, Firenze 2008.
O’Shea S., Morze Wiary – islam i chrześcijaństwo w świecie śródziemnomorskim
doby średniowiecza, transl. R. Kot, Poznań 2009.
Olteanu P., “Damaskinský” prúd v slovansko-rumunskej literatúre: referáty
a prednášky prednesené na VII-om kongrese slavistov, Varšava 21–27.
VIII.1973, Bucureşti 1973.
Orbini M., Kraljevstvo Slavena, prev. S. Husić, prired., uvod F. Šanjek, Zagreb
1999.
194 Bibliography
Parker Ch.G., “Współczesna religia ludowa. Złożony obiekt badań dla socjo
logów”, in: Socjologia codzienności, ed. P. Sztompka, M. Bogunia-Borowska,
Kraków 2008.
Petry-Mroczkowska J., Niepokorne święte, Kraków 2007.
Prodić S., “Osnivačka povelja manastira Hilandara kao zaistraživanje vladarske
ideologie Nemanjića”, Kultura polisa 2011, no. 16, Novi Sad.
Putniković M., “Sveštenstvo u službi otadžbine”, Naša Crkva 1914, no. 1., year
2, 6, Požarevac.
Radisavljević Ćiparizović D., “Religioznost hodočasnika u Srbiji: Studija slučaja
tri svetilišta”, Filozofija i drustvo 2012, XXIII (1).
Ramet S.P., “The Serbian Church”, in: The Balkan Babel. The Disintegration of
Yugoslavia From the Death of Tito to the Fall of Milošević, Boulder 2002.
Rapp C., “Figures of Female Sanctity: Byzantine Edyfing Manuscripts and it’s
audience”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 1996, 50.
Rękopisy cerkiewnosłowiańskie w Polsce: katalog, ed. A. Naumow and Andrzej
Kaszlej; with co-operation of E. Naumow i J. Stradomskiego, Kraków 2004.
Robertson E.A., “The corporeality of female sanctity in The Life of St. Margaret”,
in: Images of Sainthood in Medieval Europe, R. Blumenfeld-Kosinski, T. Szell
(eds.), Ithaca-London 1991.
Rudi T.R., “La santità femminile nell’antica Rus’”, in: A. Mainardi, Forme
della santità russa. Atti dell’ VIII convegno sui santi russi (21–23 settembre
2000), Bose 2002.
Salamon M., “Bela III”, “Aleksy”, in: Encyklopedia kultury bizantyńskiej, ed.
O. Jurewicz, Warszawa 2002.
Słownik obrazów i symboli biblijnych, ed. M. Lurker, transl. K. Romaniuk,
Poznań 1989.
Stantchev K., “Il posto della poesia liturgica nello spazio letterario della Rus’
medievale (Storia e stato attuale della questione)”, Russica Romana 2002, IX.
Stefanović B., “Stihira Serbima svetiteljima – problem teksta, melodije i mesta
njenoga u službama svetim u Srbljaku”, Pravoslavna misao, sv. 2, Beograd
1964.
Stradomski J., “Święta Paraskiewa (Petka) w literaturze, kulturze i duchowości
Słowian południowych i wschodnich”, in: Święci w kulturze i duchowości
dawnej i współczesnej Europy, ed. W. Stępniak-Minczewa, Z.J. Kijas, Kraków
1999.
Bibliography 195
Sulikowska-Gąska A., “Kult świętej Paraskiewy na Rusi”, Ikonotheka 2008, t. 21.

Szefliński B., Trzy oblicza Sawy Nemanjicia: postać historyczna – autokreacja
– postać literacka, Łódź 2016.
Święci Cerkwi prawosławnej, vol. 1–12, collected, transl. and ed. J. Charkiewicz,
Białystok 1995–1996.
Święci i świętość u korzeni tworzenia się kultury narodów słowiańskich, vol.
1–2, ed. W. Stępniak-Minczewa, Z.J. Kijas, Kraków 2000.
Święci w kulturze i duchowości dawnej i współczesnej Europy, ed. W. Stępniak-
Minczewa, Z.J. Kijas, Kraków 1999.
Timotojević M., Serbia sacra u baroknom versko-političkom programu Karlo
vačke mitropolije, SANU, Beograd 1998.
Tomanić M., Srpska crkva u ratu i ratovi u njoj, Beograd 2001.
Tomin S., “Poslednji Brankovići – izgnanstvo kao sudbina”, in: Od banity do
nomady, ed. J. Czaplińska, S. Giergiel, Opole 2010.
Tomin S., “Žena kao demonsko iskušenje. Primer ‘Žitija svetog Maksima
Brankovića’”, in: Wielkie tematy kultury w literaturach słowiańskich, part
9, Ciało, ed. A. Matusiak, I. Gwóźdź-Szewczenko, M. Koch, E. Komisaruk,
J. Rysicz, A. Ursulenko, Wrocław 2011 (Slavica Wratislaviensia, vol. 153).
Ward B., Nierządnice pustyni, transl. P. Długosz, Poznań 2009.
Wellesz E., A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography, Oxford 1961.
Wodziński C., Św. Idiota: projekt antropologii apofatycznej, Gdańsk 2000.
Vukovich A., “Motherhood as Authority in the ‘Life of Queen Helen’ by Arch
bishop Daniel II”, in: Authorities in the Middle Ages. Influence, Legitimacy,
and Power in Medieval Society. Fundamentals of Medieval and Early Modern
Culture, S. Kangas, M. Korpiola, T. Ainonen (eds.), vol. 12, De Gruyter 2013.
Ziemscy aniołowie, niebiańscy ludzie, choice and intro. G. Minczew, Białystok
2002.
Zimmer S., Zion als Tochter, Frau und Mutter, München 1959.
SECONDARY SOURCES IN CYRILLIC:

Амфилохије (Радовић), Синаити и њихов значај у животу Србије XIV
и XV века, Споменица о шестој стогодишњици манастира Раванице,
196 Bibliography
Андреев Й., Лазаров И., Павлов П., Кой кой е в средновековна България,
София 1999.
Антологија епских народних песама, прир. С. Самарџија, Београд 2001.
Батаковић Д.Т., Нова историја српског народа, Београд 2000.
Билярски И., Покровители на Царство. Св. цар Петър и св. Параскева-
Петка, София 2004.
Благојевић Г., Срби у Калифорнији: обредно-религијска пракса и етници
тет верника српских православних парохија у Калифорнији, Београд
2005.
Богдановић Д., Ликови светитеља, Београд 1991.
Богдановић Д., Византијски књижевни канон у српским службама средњег
века, у: О Србљаку. Студије, Београд 1970.
Бошков М., О симболици дара деспотице Ангелине великом кнезу Василију
Ивановичу, у: Мили Стојнић у част, Београд 1999.
Бранковић Ђ., Хроника Словена Илирика, Горње Мезије и Доње Мезије,
прев., пиред. С. Бугарски, предг. Ј. Ређеп, Нови Сад 1994.
Бурмов A., “Историја из Българија през времето на Шишмановци”, Годи
шник на Софийският университет 1947, 43.
Цамблак Г., Књижевни рад у Србији, ред. Д. Петровић, Београд 1999.
Цонев Б., Опис на ръкописите и старопечатните книги на Народната
библиотека в София, т. 1, бр. 415, София 1910.
Ћирковић С., Историја Српског Народа, књ. I, Београд 1981.
Ћирковић С., Историја Српског Народа, књ. II, Београд 1982.
Ћоровић B., Историја Срба, Ниш 2001.
Ћоровић В., Историја српског народа, Београд 1997.
Чурчић Л., “Параклис Стефана Дечанском Јована Георгијевића из 1762
године”, у: idem, Српске књиге и српски писци 18. века, Нови Сад 1988.
Дамјанова С., Ново читање традиције. Изазови историје српске књи
жевности, Нови Сад 2002.
Дамјановић Д., Анастасија: Мајка свих православних Срба, Београд 2011.
Дамјановић Д., Чуда српске светитељке – Анастасија, Београд 2018.
Дамјановић Д., Пророчанство Немањине жене – света Анастасија,
Даничић Ђ., “Језик старе српске књижевности”, у: Ђ. Трифуновић, Српска
књижевност у књижевној критици, т.1, Београд 1965.
Bibliography 197
Димевски С., Историја на македонскама православна црква, Скопје 1989.

Дончева-Панайотова Н., Григорий Цамблак и българските литературни
традиции в Източна Европа XV–XVІІ в., Велико Търново, 2004.
Георгиева С., Жената в българското Средновековие, Пловдив 2011.
Георгиевски М., Македонски светци. Живот и култ, Скопје 1997.
Гордон Мак Данијел, “Данило Други”, у: Данило II, Животи краљева
и архиепископа српских. Службе, Београд 1988.
Грујић Д.М., “Велика схима кнегиње Милице, удовице Лазареве”, Гласник
Скопског научног друштва 1932, бр. 11.
Грујић P., “Павле, архиепископ пећки”, у: Народна енциклопедија СХС,
књ. III, Загреб 1928.
Хризостом Столић Хиландарац, Православни светачник, т. 2, Београд
1989.
Игнатов В., Българските царици – владетелките на България VII–XIV
век, София 2008.
Илић В., Религија и култура, Ниш 1995.
Иванов С.А., Блаженные похабы. Культурная история юродства, Москва
2005.
Иванова К., Стара българска литература, т. 4. Житиеписни творби,
София 1986.
Јаковљевић M.J., “Света мајка Ангелина (жена српског деспота Стефана
Бранковића)”, Гласник Српске православне цркве 1961, бр. 10.
Јелена. Краљица. Монахиња. Светитељка, ред. С. Мишић, К. Митровић,
Манастир Градац 2015.
Јиречек К., Историја Срба, II, Београд 1952.
Јовановић М., Језик и друштвена историја, Београд 2002.
Јовановић T., “Кратко повесно слово о светом Стефану Штиљановићу”,
y: Манастир Шишатовац. Зборник радова, уред. Д. Даников, Београд
1989.
Јовановић Т., “Похвално и повесно слово о деспоту Стефану Штиља
новићу”, Књижевна историја 1978, Х, 38, Београд.
Караџић В., Српске народне песме, Беч 1845.
Кнегиња Милица монахиња Јевгенија и њено доба, ред. С. Мишић,
Д. Јечменица, Трстеник 2014.
198 Bibliography
Коматина И., Црква и држава у српским земљама од XI до XIII века,

Костић М., “Стефан Штиљановић. Историјско-хагиографска студија”,
Глас Српске Књижевне Академије 1923, СХ, Београд.
Кожухаров С., “Неизвестно произведение на старобългарската поезия”,
Старобългарска литература 1971, кн. I, София.
Кучинска М., “Сакрализация болгарской земли по текстам балканской
агиографии”, Palaeobulgarica 2015, t. XXXIX (201), no. 3.
Ласкарис М., Српске краљице. Византијске принцезе у средњовековној
Србији, Београд 1990.
Левин И., “Христианские источники культа св. Параскевы”, в: Двоеверие
и народная религия в истории России, пер. А.Л. Топоркова, Москва
2004.
Лихачёв Д.С., “Древнеславянские литературы как система”, в: Славянские
литературы, VI Междунар. съезд славистов (Прага, авг. 1968), Докл.
сов. делегации, Москва 1968.
Лихачёв Д.С., Поэтика древнерусской литературы, Москва 1979.
Лукић Н., Историја Железника 1528–1945, Чукарица 2011.
Магловски Ј., “О београдском култу свете Петке и манастиру Фенеку”,
Зборник Народног музеја. Историја уметности 2007, XVIII-2, Београд.
Марјановић Ч., Историја српске цркве, Београд 2001.
Марјановић-Душанић С., Владарска идеологија Немањића, Београд 1989.
Марковић В., Православно монаштво и манастири у средњовековној
Србији, Београд 2002.
Мијатовић Ч., “Ко је краљица Јелена?”, Летопис Матице српске 1902,
217, Нови Сад.
Милошевић-Ђорђевић Н., Косовска епика, Београд 1990.
Миловска Д., Таковски Ј., Македонската житијна литература IX–XVIII
век, Скопје 1996.
Минева Е., Пет химнографски творби за Св. Петка Търновска, Софиа
2005.
Мирковић Л., Хеортологија или историјски развитак и богослужење
празника православне источне цркве, Београд 1961.
Мироненко-Маренкова И.К., Концепт святости в культурной традиции
России и Франции XIX столетия, Москва 2005.
Bibliography 199
Митић М., “Свето писмо у Житију краљице Јелене од архиепископа

Данила II”, у: Српска књижевност и Свето писмо, 26. научни састанак
слависта у Вукове дане, Београд, Манасија, 9–14. 9. [1996.], ред. Ј. Ређеп
и др., Београд 1997.
Народна митологија на Македонците. Етнографски и фолклорни мате
ријали, ред. Т. Вражиновски, Скопје–Прилеп 1998.
Наумов А., “Служба као жанр”, у: Научни састанак слависта у Вукове
дане, Реферати и саопштења, Београд 1986, бр. 16, с. 5–18.
Наумов A., “Службата на преподобната Филотея Темнишка като отра
жение на православната духовност през XIII век”, в: In Honorem
TРІАNТАΦϒΛΛО. Юбилеен сборник в чест на 60-годишнината на
проф. д.фил.н. Христо Трендафилов, ред. В. Панайотов, Шумен 2013.
Недељковић Н., Српске славе: чувари огњишта, Београд 2013.
Никчевић В., Пренос моштију Преподобне Петке Срске, у: Света Петка
– слава и заштита верних, уред. протојереј-ставрофор Р. Нкичевић,
Цетиње 2009.
Николај (eп.), Вера светих; Катехизис Источне православне цркве,
четврто издање, Шабац 1988.
Новаковић С., “Апокрифно житије свете Петке”, Споменик СКА 1895,
ХХIХ, Београд.
Новаковић С., Косово, српске народне песме о боју на Косову, Београд 1906.
Новаковић С., Срби и Турцу XIV и XV века, Београд 1960.
О монастире Любостинiи, “Христианское чтение” 1865, ч. 2.
O Србљаку. Студије, ред. Ђ. Трифуновић, Београд 1970.
Пандуровић В., Из прошлости барањских Срба, Straža, 5, Osijek 3, I 1923.
Павловић Л., Култови лица код Срба и Македонаца. (Историјско-
етнографска расправа), Смедерево 1965.
Перић Ђ., “Мајка св. Саве, госпођа Анастасија, према историји и предању”,
Теолошки погледи: двомесечни верско научни часопис 1986, год. 18,
бр. 3/4.
Петковић C., Опис рукописа манастира Шишатовца, Београд 1951.
Плећевић Д.З., Српски светачник, Београд 2008.
Поповъ Х., Жития на светите почитани отъ Православната църква,
София 1930.
200 Bibliography
Поповић Д., Под окриљем светости. Култ светих владара и реликвија

у средњовековној Србији, Беoград 2006.
Поповић М., Српска краљица Јелена између римокатоличанства
и православља, Београд 2010.
Поповић M., Видовдан и часни крст, Belgrad 1976.
Поповић М.И., Историјска улога Српске цркве у чувању народности
и стварању државе, Београд 1933.
Поповић Р.В., Српска црква у историји, Београд 2002.
Пурковић M., Јелена, жена цара Душана, Диселдорф 1975.
Пурковић М., Попис цркава у старој српској држави, Скопље 1938.
Пурковић М., Принцезе из куће Немањића, Виндзор 1956.
Пурковић М., Принцезе из куће Немањића. Историјска студија, Београд
1996.
Пушкарева Н.Л., Женщины Древней Руси, Москва 1989.
Пузовић П., “Госпођа Ана, незнаног порекла”, Српско наслеђе: историјске
свеске 1998, бр. 5, стр. 35–41.
Пузовић П., “Преподобна Анастасија-Ана”, у: idem, Прилози за историју
Српске православне цркве, Ниш 1997.
Раденковић Љ., “Кривотворење фолклора и митологије: Неки словенски
примери”, Зборник Матице српске за књижевност и језик 2005, 53 (1–3).
Радојичић Ђ. Сп., “Хагиолошки прилози о последњим Бранковићима”,
Гласник Историјског Друштва у Новом Саду 1939, књ. XII, св. 3–4,
Novi Sad.
Радојичић Ђ. Сп., Књижевна збивања и стварања код Срба у средњем
веку и у турско доба, Нови Сад 1967.
Радојичић Ђ. Сп., “О првој српској црквеној песми – о Савиној служби
Симеону Немањи”, Зборник радова САНУ 1952, бр. XVII.
Радојичић Ђ., “Архиђакон Јован, писац стихова 18. Века”, у: Књижевна
збивања и стварања код Срба у средњем веку и у турско доба, Нови
Сад 1967.
Радовић П., “Историја српског женског монаштва”, Гласник СПЦ 1963,
бр. 1, Београд.
Рајић Ј., Историја Срба, Беч 1874.
Рандељ Ђ., Светачник. Славе и верски обичаји код Срба, Нови Сад 2006.
Ранковић Љ., Жена икона цркве и благо света, Шабац 2009.
Bibliography 201
Ристић С., Дечански споменици, Београд 1864.

Руварац И., “Повесно слово о кнезу Лазару”, Летопис Матице Српске
1875, 117.
Руварац И., “Повесно слово кнезу Лазару, деспоту Стефану Бранковићу
и кнезу Стефану Штиљановићу”, Летопис Матице Српске 1875, 117.
Руварац И., “Краљице и царице српске”, Матица. Лист за књижевност
и забаву, III, 1868, c. 433–435 (Зборник Илариона Руварца, I, пр. Н.
Радојчић, Београд 1934, c. 23–27).
Сабрана дела Вука Караџића, Београд 1988.
Самарџић P., Веселиновић P., Поповић T., Историја српског народа у 6
књига. Срби под туђинском влашћу 1537–1699, књ. 3, т. 1, Београд 2000.
Слијепчевић Ђ., Историја Српске Православне Цркве, књ. I, Београд 2002.
Соловьевъ П., Христiанскiе мученики пострадавшiе на Востокѣ со
времени завоеванiя Константинополя турками, Санктпетербургъ
1862.
Спасский Ф.И., Русское литургическое творчество, Париж 1951.
Спремић M., Бранковићи и Света Гора. Друга казивања о Светој Гори,
Списи о Косову, прир. М. Грковић, Београд 1993.
Српски јерарси од деветог до двадесетог века, Београд-Подгорица-Кра
гујевац 1996.
Станчев K., “Исследования в области средневековой литературы пра
вославного славянства”, Krakowsko-Wileńskie Studia Slawistyczne 2012,
t. 7, red. A. Naumow, S. Temčinas, Kraków.
Станкова P., Култ и химнография. Служби за местни южнославянски
и балкански светци в ръкописи от XIII–XV в., София 2012.
Стојановић A., “Радослав Грујић о преносу моштију српских светитеља
априла 1942. године из НДХ у окупирану Србију”, Токови историје.
Часопис Института за новију историју Србије 2012/1, p. 69–86.
Стојковић А., Српски народ на размеђу Истока и Запада. Пролози исто
риографији, историологији и историозофији, Београд 1999.
Суботић Г., “Краљица Јелена Анжујска – ктитор црквених споменика
у Приморју”, Историјски гласник 1958, 1–2.
Суботин-Голубовић T., Српско рукописно наслеђе од 1557. године до средине
XVII века, Београд 1999.
202 Bibliography
Суботин-Голубовић Т., “Утицај преноса моштију св. Петке у Деспотовину

на развој њеног култа у српској средини”, у: България и Сърбия б
контекста на византийската цивилизация, София 2005.
Сувајџић Б., Народна књижевност. Епске песме у старијим записама,
Београд–Крагујевац 1998.
Шекуларац Б., Врањинске повеље, XIII–XV вијек, Титоград 1984.
Търновска книжовна школа. Антология, съцт. ред. В. Велинова, София
2000.
Таисия (Карцова) мон., Русские святые: 1000 лeт русской святости,
Санкт-Петербург, 2000.
Тимотијевић M., “Од светитеља до историјскицх хероја. Култ светих
деспота Бранковића у ХХ веку”, Култ светих на Балкану 2002, бр. 7.
Тимотијевић M., “Римничко издање Србљака и барокна примењена
амблематика”, Зборник Матице Српске за Књижевност и Језик 2002,
50 (1–2).
Тoмин С., Деспотица и монахиња Ангелина Бранковић – света мајка
Ангелина, Нови Сад 2009.
Томин С., Мужаствене жене српског средњег века, Нови Сад 2011.
Томин C., “Допринос жена српској култури средњег века”, у: Књиженство
теорија и историја женске књижевности на српском језику до 1915.
године, уред. проф. др Б. Дојчиновић, проф. др А. Вранеш, проф. др
З. Бечановић-Николић, Београд 2015, с. 1–26.
Томин С., Књигољубиве жене српског средњег века, Нови Сад 2007.
Трофимов A., Святые жены Руси, Москва, 1994.
Трифонова Р., “Сръбски препис на най-ранната служба за св. Петка
Търновска”, Търновска Книжовна Школа 1999, т. 7, Велико Търновo.
Трифуновић Ђ., “Служба преносу моштију свете Петке”, у: Зборник
Владимира Мошина, Београд 1977.
Трифуновић Ђ., Српски средњовековни списи о кнезу Лазару и косовском
боју, Крушевац 1968.
Васић М., Архиепископ Данило II, “Прилози за КЈИФ” 1926, VI.
Велимировић Н., “Блажена Стојна”, у: Изабрана дела: Владика Николај
у служби Богу и роду. Живот светог Саве. Чланци, беседе и посланице.
Свети Срби. Блажена Стојна, Београд 1996.
Велимировић Н., Српски народ као Теодул, Београд 2003.
Bibliography 203
Вуковић С. (еп.), Српски јерарси од деветог до двадесетог века. Аѕбучни

и хронолошки преглед, Београд-Нови Сад 1996–2012.
M. Вушковић, “Монахиња Анастасија и манастир Свете Богородице
у Куршумлији”, w: Стафан Немања и Топлица (тематски зборник),
уред. Д. Бојовић, Ниш 2011.
Злоковић М., Градачка црква, задужбина краљице Јелене, “Гласник
Скопског научног друштва” 1936, XV–XVI.
Жанровска структура акатисника у српској средњовековној књижевности,
“Зборник Матице Cрпске за Књижевност и Jезик” 2003, књ. LI, св. 3,
Нови Сад.
INTERNET SOURCES:
Aкатист на св. великомъченица Злата Мъгленска, <http://akafist.narod.
ru/Z/Zlata.htm>, access 7.06.2016.
Антологија српске књижевности, elektroniczna wersja opracowana przez
Wydział Filologiczny Uniwersytetu w Belgradzie, 2009, <www.antologija
srpskeknjizevnosti.rs/ASK_SR_AzbucnikDela.aspx>, access: 13.02.2020.
Вартоломеј, монах, Служба и житије Свете Петке, 1780, sygn. РР
III 42, <http://digital.bms.rs/ebiblioteka/pageFlip/reader/index.php?
type=publications
&id=2146&m=2#page/44/mode/2up>, access: 10.10.2019.
Bardski K., Symbol – ikona tajemnicy, <http://pracownicy.uksw.edu.pl/
KrzysztofBardski/publikacje/2009-2/05-symbol-ikona-tajemnicy/>, access:
19.02.2018.
Царица Милица као пример охрабрења и наши страшљивци – Беседа
владике жичког Николаја у Љубостињи, “Политика” 1940, бр. 11489,
<https://svetosavlje.org/kosovo-i-vidovdan/15/>, access: 1.03.2019.
Ћоровић B., Историја Срба, Београд 1997, <www.rastko.rs/rastko-bl/
istorija/corovic/istorija/3_4_l.html >, access: 5.02.2016.
Danas je Sveta Petka, veliki praznik i crveno slovo: Žene ne bi trebalo da rade
ove stvari prema narodnom verovanju, <https://www.telegraf.rs/vesti/
srbija/2906869-danas-je-sveta-petka-veliki-praznik-icrveno-slovo-jednu-
stvar-ni-slucajno-nemojte-da-radite-a-to-nije-sve-foto>, access: 7.01.2019.
204 Bibliography
Ђорђевић-Јовановић J., “Цар Лазар и царица Милица у грчкој књи

жевности”, Прилози за књижевност и језик, историју и фолклор 2010,
књ. 76, Београд, <www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0350-6673/2010/0350-
66731076095D.pdf>, access: 15.05.2012.
Đukić S., O Srbima, istoriji i Kosmetu, <https://www.bastabalkana.com/2017/10/
dragan-damjanovic-publicista-strpimo-se-i-otrpimo-sve-je-u-vremenu/>,
access: 25.03.2020.
Ж. Фајфрић, Света лоза кнеза Лазара, Београд 2000, <www.rastko.rs/
kosovo/istorija/zfajfric-lazarevici.html>, access: 15.04.2012.
Giljen N., Šaranović O., Jovićević-Jov S., Princeza Olivera, zaboravljena srpska
kneginja, Beograd 2009, <www.princezaoliverafond.org.rs/flash/download/
biografija.pdf>, access: 04.07.2012.
Хрестоматия по истории средних веков в трех томах, ред. С.Д. Сказкин,
том II, X–XV века, Москва 1963. Fragments online: <www.illuminats.
ru/component/content/article/31---xi-xv-/1275-the-songs-on-the-battle-
of-kosovo-qmurat-on-the-kosovo-fieldq-qking-lazar-and-queen-milica-
serbia>, access: 13.04.2012.
Христова A., “Тържествено оповестяване откриването на мощите на св.
новомъченица Акилина”, Църковен вестник, бр. 12, 1 – 15 юни 2012 г.,
<http://digilib.nalis.bg/dspviewerb/srv/viewer/eng/53eecd16-865a-482c-
9eb1-d7404db3d508?tk=U-7NFoZaSCyesddATbPVCAAAAABfgGfG.
cWZbtMbdsul79vJNOOO5zQ&citation_url=/xmlui/handle/nls/32611>,
access: 18.10.2020.
Иларион Руварац, в: Историјска библиотека. Енциклопедија на српском
језику, <www.istorijskabiblioteka.com/art:ilarion-ruvarac>, access: 18.
12.2018.
Ивановић Д., Црква Свете Петке у Великом Орашју, “Саборност” 2008,
<https://casopis.sabornost.org/files/sabornost_II_2008_12.pdf>, access:
28.12.2018.
Izvor svete Petke, <http://www.izvorsvetepetke.com/>, access: 6.02.2019.
Jovan (Purić), Ukrepi decu moju u blagovernosti, <http://pravoslavlje.spc.rs/
broj/909/tekst/ukrepi-decu-moju-u-blagovernosti/>, access: 20.05.2012.
Knjiženstvo. Teorija i istorija ženske književnosti na srpskom jeziku do 1915.
godine: <http://knjizenstvo.etf.bg.ac.rs/sr/autorke/jelena-mrnjavcevic-
jefimija>, access: 9.10.2020.
Bibliography 205
Манастирска слава <http://www.manastirfenek.com/manastirska-slava>;

<http://www.manastirfenek.com/images/stories/monografija.pdf>, access:
10.05.2019.
Милосављевић М., “Највољенија српска царица”, Православље. Новине
српске патријаршије, Информативно-издавачка установа Српске
Православне Цркве 2007, бр. 959, Београд, <www.pravoslavlje.org.rs/
broj/959/tekst/najvoljenija-srpska-carica/>, access: 5.04.2012.
Молитва Светој Петки Параскеви, <http://www.crkvaub.rs/crkva/novosti/
item/2705-molitva-svetoj-petki-paraskevi>, access: 27.11.2019.
Монашки живот, <http://www.svetapetkaizvor.com/manastir/>, access:
10.05.2019.
Монографија о Светој Петки, <http://www.rts.rs/page/stories/ci/story/8/
kultura/245851/monografija-o-svetoj-petki.html>, access: 10.05.2019.
Web page of Vavedenje Monastery: <http://manastirvavedenje.org/prepodobna-
jelena-dechanska/>.
О манастиру. Историја и оснивање, <http://manastirgradac.rs/o-manastiru/
istorija-iosnivanje/>, access: 5.03.2013.
Перић З., Света Петка – Преподобна Мати Параскева, <www.crkvaub.rs/
crkva/zitija_svetih/item/2223-sveta-petka-prepodobna-mati-paraskeva>,
access: 13.01.2019.
Children hymns: <www.crkvaub.rs/crkva/veronauka/item/2793-sveta-petka-
kroz-likovne-radove-osnovaca>, access: 22.03.2018.
Pietras T., Z orłem białym przez wieki. Z dziejów polskiej symboliki państwowej,
Aleksandrów Łódzki 2013 <http://warsztathistoryka.uni.lodz.pl/heraldyka/
orzel_2.pdf >, access: 11.03.2018.
Popov R., Paraskeva and her ‘sisters’: Saintly personification of women’s rest
days and other themes, in: Cult of the Saints in the Balkans, M. Detelić,
G. Jones (eds.), <http://www.mirjanadetelic.com/docs/CULT%20OF%20
SAINTS%20IN%20THE%20BALKANS.pdf>, access: 4.01.2019.
Поповић J., Житија светих, Ваљево 1998, <www.svetosavlje.org/biblioteka/
avajustin/zitijasvetih/Lat_ZitijaSvetih10.htm>, access: 21.04.2016.
Поповић Ј., Житије Преподобног и Богоносног оца нашег Саве, првог
Архиепископа српског, <http://spc.rs/sr/arhimadrit_justin_popovitsh_
zhitije_prepodobnog_bogonosnog_oca_nasheg_save_prvog_arhiepis
kopa>, access: 1.02.2020.
206 Bibliography
Pravoslavni calendar, <http://www.pravoslavnikalendar.iz.rs/>, access: 23.

04.2016
Преподобна Анастасија Српска, <http://www.spc.rs/sr/prepodobna_ana
stasija_srpska>, access: 25.03.2019.
Преподобна Ангелина – мајка небеске доброте и милости, <http://www.
spc.rs/sr/prepodobna_angelina_majka_nebeske_dobrote_milosti_2>,
access: 12.08.2020.
Преподобна Јелена Дечанска, <www.svetosavlje.org>, access: 4.08.2020.
Prolog za 14. Oktobar, <https://svetosavlje.org/dan-prologa/14-oktobar-po-
julijanskomkalendaru/2019-10-27/>, access: 11.03.2019.
Раб Божји Ђорђе Сандић, Света Петка Параскева – писане речи из мог
срца, <www.crkvaub.rs/crkva/najbolji_vaspitac/item/2710-sveta-petka-
paraskeva-pisane-reci-iz-mog-srca>, access: 28.04.2018.
Руварац И., “Критика. I – О раду Милоша С. Милојевића у Гласнику”,
Летопис Матице Српске 1873, 115, Нови Сад, <https://archive.org/
details/ZbornikIlarionaRuvarca/page/n95 >, access: 28.12.2018.
Stošić L., Stojanović S., Čudotvorni izvoru Železniku: Vernici hrle po spas,
report from September 21, 2016, <http://mondo.rs/a940979/Info/Drustvo/
Izvor-Svete-Petke-u-Zelezniku.html>, access: 30.01.2019.
“Страдање свете великомученице Злате Мегленске”, у: Ј. Поповић, Житија
светих за октобар, <https://svetosavlje.org/zitija-svetih-11/14/>, access:
23.04.2018.
Света Петка – српска слава и заштита верних, <http://www.spc.rs/sr/
sveta_petka_srpska_slava_zastita_vernih>, access: 10.05.2019.
Св. великомъченица Злата Мъгленска, <http://www.pravoslavieto.com/ life
/10.18_sv_Zlata_Muglenska.htm>, access: 7.06.2016.
Synaxaristes neomartyron, Солун 1984, <http://www.pravoslavieto.com/
life/10.18_sv_Zlata_Muglenska.htm#2>, access: 8.11.2016.
Тафт Р., Почитание святых в византийской литургической традиции,
перев. С.В. Голованов, 2007, <http://www.kiev-orthodox.org/site/wor
ship/1660/>, access: 11.07.2016.
Tihi glas, <https://svetosavlje.org/tihi-glas/47/?pismo=lat>, access: 17.03.2019.
Велимировић Н., Охридски пролог, Ниш 1928, <http://www.svetosavlje.org/
biblioteka/prolog/index.php?m=10&d=4&a=1&date=10-2015>, access:
12.09.2016.
Bibliography 207
Vučićević J., Zaboravljena srpska princeza koja je iz turskog harema mnogo

učinila za Srbiju, <https://rslat.sputniknews.com/kultura/20181229
1118300231-princeza-Olivera-Lazarevic-despina/>, access: 5.07.2012.
Worldwide Guide to Women in Leadership. Women in Power 1300–1350, <www.
guide2womenleaders.com/womeninpower/Womeninpower1300.htm>,
access: 12.09.2016.
Жития на светиите, под ред. на Партений, епископ Левкийски и архи
мандрит д-р Атанасий (Бончев), София 1991, <http://www.pravoslavieto.
com/life/10.18_sv_Zlata_Muglenska.htm>, access: 20.04.2018.
Житие и страдание на св. великомъченица Злата Мъгленска, Солун
1984, <www.pravoslavieto.com/life/10.18_sv_Zlata_Muglenska.htm>,
access: 13.03.2018.
D o m i n i k a G a p s k a
A
s female cults in Serbian culture have continued to play
an important role in shaping religious and personal
attitudes, in creating spirituality and national identity,
WOMAN CHURCH STATE

the presentation of nine saints in the book, with a discussion

of their lives and legends, primarily on the basis of a corpus
of hagiological texts (vitae, offices, akathistas), provides
an extremely interesting panorama of the spiritual life of Serbia
CULTS OF THE FEMALE SAINTS

over the centuries in close connection with the history of the
country and the nation. These cults, as Dominika Gapska
describes them, may serve as signs which help to recognise
and understand the uniqueness of Serbian culture through
the perspective of faith and attachment to tradition, which
are its cornerstones.
From the review by Aleksander Naumow
WOMAN
Dominika Gapska, Ph.D. – Serbian philologist and medievalist.
Graduate of the Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań. Her scientific
Dominik a Ga psk a
interests focus on the history of medieval Serbian literature,
Slavic writing traditions, spiritual culture, and rituals of the
CHURCH
Orthodox Church. In her research she pays special attention
to the issues related to the sanctity and spirituality of women
and the hymnographic, hagiographic, euchographic texts
devoted to them.
ISBN 978-83-66812-73-4
9 788366 812734
STATE CULTS OF THE FEMALE SAINTS
View publication stats

Woman Church State E-Book

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Woman Church State E-Book

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Woman Church State E-Book

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

WOMAN –CHURCH - STATE. CULTS OF THE FEMALE SAINTS IN THE

Book · December 2021

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

WOMAN CHURCH STATE

IN THE WRITINGS OF SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH

CULTS OF THE FEMALE SAINTS

From the review by Aleksander Naumow

Translated by Marcin Turski

Book review by prof. Aleksander Naumow

Cover design: Hubert Grajczak

Wydawnictwo «scriptum» Tomasz Sekunda

to particular saints, the biblical models of women’s personalities, constitutive

The dynastic and monkish characteristics of cults of Serbian saints, some

A vivid example of such a model is the sanctity of Princess Milica (nun

position. It is developing in two directions – social tasks/functions (e.g. care

St. Anastasija (Ana Nemanjić) –

commemorated as a ruler of exceptional merit for the Nemanjić family, and

СТИХИРА СВЕТИМ СРПСКИМ ПРОСВЕТИТЕЉИМА, tone 5:

са Евстатијем премудрим, предивни међу страдалницима

markers of the type of sanctity attributed to holy mothers, as well as their

и обнажи све безумљем својим. И отидох у туђу страну далеко, хранећи се са

It is no coincidence that later Teodosije of Chilandar, in his Life of St. Sava,

[…] yђe к родитељима, украде отпуштење и замоли по обичају молитву

the understanding of this word in the Church Slavonic language, because it

Господу, желећи да ужива блага у дому Господњем”. Стефан Првовенчани, Сабрани

The frequent mentions in the lives of both Nemanjić family members of

[…] жупан Немања самодржавно царевао свом српском и поморском

И потом добро снабдевши чистоту на старост своју, и савећавши бого­мисаони

осећајући натприродну, безмерну љубав према њему, неситом душом

У овом чину, дакле, наглашена је њена побожност, али и жеља да посту­пи

Ana’s life in a monastery is invariably depicted in the same way, highlighting

literature is reproduced, albeit with slightly more modest means. Ana is

Посоветовавшись с единомышленною с ним супругою благочестивою Анною

In an edition of St. Sava’s hagiography92 by Filaret Gumilevsky (1805–1866,

Затем тот же епископ [Kalinik – note D.G.] в обители Студеницкой облек

Orthodox church songs dedicated to Anastasija, written by lay people,

СВЕТА АНАСТАСИЈА СРПСКА

se rodio sveti Sava, Venčani prsten, Vlastelinka97. In addition to the previously

Но добро је кад ми, синко, дође

The literary image of St. Ana-Anastasija penned by hagiographers and

St. Helen of Anjou (Jelisaveta) –

pantokrator, svedržitelj) of all that exists, an embodiment of absolute authority

Jелена била jе од племена фрушкога (францускога), кћи славних родитеља,

(…) и после смрти мужа њезина примивши од вазљубљенога сина свога

(“Трпи анђелски живот, свагда умом пустиње гонећи”150, attends liturgies

In Danilo’s view, God on earth is represented in Serbia by the Church.

А ови блажени оци доброразумним речима поучаваху ову (…): “Богољубиво

Danilo places the queen in a position of a “spiritual child” of the Church,

sins to their supernatural mission. He uses the ruler’s extensive network of

from external enemies), guardian (strengthening and relieving from material

(…) подвизава се добрим подвигом, украшавајући се сваким добрим делима,

Despite the foregrounding of the virtues of kindness, goodness and mercy,

generous “new Helens”175. Popović justifies the fact by the assumptions of

The realization of the ideal of theocracy is presented as a duty of the heirs

О мати моја и госпођо, како ћу ја недостојни заборавити жељу срца твога

The scene of St. Helen’s death is particularly important because of the

себи за садружницу сродницу цареву, кћер неког велможе. И она од рода

кнеза Лазаря”. Въ хиландарскихъ гра­матахъ: “азъ благовернаа монахы Евгенiа

И потом добро снабдевши чистоту на старост своју, и савећавши богомисаони

У овом чину, дакле, наглашена је њена побожност, али и жеља да поступи

кнеза Лазаря”. Въ хиландарскихъ граматахъ: “азъ благовернаа монахы Евгенiа

списатељски рад. Темељно и на научан начин Руварац је доказао да је овај

– српска слава и заштита верних. Available online: <http://www.spc.rs/sr/sveta_petka_

Умом Божанственим и Духа Пресветога харфом свездруженом, славујем кра

The consequence of God’s choice of the Serbian Orthodox Church is invin

Тада, Србима са Косова и Метохије, дођоше београдске власти са свеште