LE SYMPOSIUM INTERNATIONAL LE LIVRE. LA ROUMANIE. L ...

474 cOnSTAnTIn PAncHEnKO
Dorotheus Daw did not record any details of the solution of the conflict.
Some information can be found in the chronicle of the patriarch Dositheus
notaras. he wrote that Serbs complained to other orthodox churches on
the oppression of the Jerusalem patriarch and invited the patriarchs of
Alexandria and Antioch to come to Jerusalem as mediators in the conflict.
It looks very much like the situation described by Dorotheus Daw. So,
the trial took place about January of 1579. the mediators confirmed the
independence of Serbian monks from the Jerusalem patriarch. Dositheus
commented: “If the decision of judges was motivated by a bribe or by their
foolishness – in any case it was shameful”. 11
So, Germanus was defeated in the dispute with Sabaite monks. however,
perhaps as a compromise, the participants of the conflict supported the
project of the succession of the patriarchal power from Germanus to
Sophronius. this time it was uwakim, who was defeated. he lost his allies
and had to renounce his demands.
As a result, 3 of May 1579 a Jerusalem kadi (a judge of the Sharia
Court) received a petition of palestinian Christians who asked to confirm
the abdication of Germanus and the transfer of the patriarchal power to his
nephew Sophronius. 12
the list of signatures on the petition was very impressive. Silvestrus,
patriarch of Alexandria, who came to Jerusalem for this occasion. eugenius,
bishop of Mount Sinai. nectarius, metropolitan of Gaza. Athanasius,
abbot of the Serbian community, who was mentioned in the colophon
of Dorotheus Daw. priest Jacub, head of the Georgian colony. the list
included also eight names of Christian Arab ayans (notables), leaders of
the local orthodox community. Arab priests promised not to try to depose
Sophronius in future; it was agreed that such an attempt should be punished
by a significant penalty. Sophronius, as a mutual concession and according
to an ancient tradition, guaranteed to give annually 20 silver coins to every
orthodox Christian of Jerusalem as a subsidy for tax payment.
It is obvious that only one name was absent in the list of ecclesiastical
leaders, who asked to appoint Sophronius the patriarch. It was the name
of metropolitan uwakim of Bethlehem. And this fact explains perfectly,
what was the reason of the conflict between uwakim and the Jerusalem
patriarch. We can see as well that there was no cordial reconciliation
11 KAptereV n.F., op. cit., p. 208-209.
12 this document is kept in the archive of the Sharia Court of Jerusalem (Sijill of
Jerusalem. Vol. 58. p. 385). I am very grateful to Dr. Amnon Cohen (Jerusalem) who
provided me with the photocopy of this source. See also: KAptereV n.F., op. cit., p.
201.