1. The Exarchates of the Monasteries in the Pontus

The establishment of the archbishopric (1863) and the subsequent Diocese of Rhodopolis (1902) in the area of the kaza of Maçka (Matsouka), in the province of Trebizond, is an immediate result of the opposition of the Christian population in the area to their ecclesiastical subordination to the three patriarchal monasteries of the region, Soumela, Vazelon and Peristereota, which integrated in their exarchates the greatest part of the area. Behind this ecclesiastical subordination were significant financial and political issues of domination of the three monasteries over the Christian population of the region.

Since the Islamisation of the population in the Pontus, which took place during the 16th and 17th century, it is worth noting that two areas, Torul (Chaldia) and Maçka, were exempted from this process. In the first case, the absence of islamisation can be explained by the multifarious privileged status that characterises the involvement of the Christian population in mining activities. In the case of Maçka, it can be explained by the presence and multilevel influence exercised in the region by three great stauropegian monasteries. The ecclesiastical subordination of the area to the monasteries of Panagia Soumela, Prodromos Vazelon and Saint George Peristereotas (patriarchal monastery since 1691), through the regime of exarchate, should be placed during a quite early phase of the Ottoman period and it was already a known fact since the 17th century. The survival and attribution of a privileged status to these three highly distinguished monasteries is obviously included in the policy of the Ottoman administration for the smooth integration of the area in the Ottoman state in 1461, after the occupation of Trebizond. The ecclesiastical dominance of the three monasteries in the region, which took place through the establishment of exarchates, completed their social and financial role, since they were the greatest landowners in the region and had consolidated rights of financial demands over the population. Within the framework of the exarchates, the abbot of each monastery was typically and essentially the bishop of the corresponding group of villages. Regarding the issue of Islamization, Bryer notes: "Οne thinks twice about apostasy if one’s landlord is a mitred abbot".¹

2. The Reaction to the Regime of Subordination to the Monasteries

This regime was still a reality for the Greek Orthodox population of Maçka until the 19th century, when it started to be questioned. The improvement of the financial and educational level of the Maçka natives living in Trebizond but also in Constantinople, the possibly positive financial consequences for Maçka due to the re-opening of the commercial road between Trebizond and Tabrīz ² and the overall prevailing tendency of the Greek Orthodox communities in Asia Minor to ask for their ecclesiastical autonomy and distinction can be considered factors which contributed to the formulation of the demand for the ecclesiastical release of the region from the monasteries. It was a step towards the release from the general socio-economic dominance of the monasteries. Reactions had started to be manifest in Maçka, where the farmers continued to be under the control of the monasteries, something that Bryer characterises as ‘serfdom’, and at least one revolt of those subordinate to the Soumela Monastery³ is known to have taken place. Nevertheless, the important demand for the release of the villages from the monasteries was formulated in Constantinople by those characterised as ‘progressive patriots’ by the historian of the region and first metropolitan of the diocese, Gerbasios Sarasites. Those people lived in Constantinople and were mostly craftsmen.⁴ They obviously comprised the community of the Maçka natives in Constantinople and were able to formulate and promote a political demand in a better way than the farmers in Maçka due to the influence of the abovementioned factors. The need for a more effective congregation, which could not be dealt with by simple priests or the monks of the three monasteries, was used as the excuse for the appointment of an independent ecclesiastical authority.

3. The Archbishopric of Rhodopolis (1863-1867)

The demand was met in 1863, when under Patriarch Ioakeim II the exarchates were abolished and it was ordered that the villages which once comprised them should become a special ecclesiastical authority in the rank of an archbishopric.⁵ The name of the Rhodopolis archbishopric reflects the prevailing tendency of the time for the use of ancient names. In this case it concerns the resurrection from the past of a primatial title which had no historical or geographical relation with the region it was attributed to, since it concerned a bishopric of the medieval Lazike. A local priest, Gennadios Misailidis, from the village of Misailandon, was elected archbishop of Rhodopolis.⁶

Meanwhile, the reform of the provincial administration in 1864, under which the prelates became superior representatives of the Christian communities in the provincial administration,⁷ must have been a significant blow to the overall influence of the monasteries in the region, since the archbishop of Rhodopolis became the main representative of the Christians in the region in front of the Ottoman authorities of the kaza of Maçka and could promote policies opposite to the interests of the monasteries. The latter, of course, reacted to this ruin of their power and influence and were in conflict with the archbishop Gennadios, before finally, with the help of Trebizond’s ‘old-minded potentates’ (according to Sarasites), managing to abolish the archbishopric in 1867 and restore their exarchates.⁸

4. The Diocese of Rhodopolis

The political processes over the fate of the exarchates and the dominance of the monasteries continued until the final victory of the ‘audacious elements of the exarchates’ in 1902 and the reestablishment of the ecclesiastical province of Rhodopolis, this time as a diocese.⁹ The first metropolitan was Gerbasios Sarasitis, who until then was an assistant to the metropolitan of Chaldia and titulary bishop of Nazianzus, before becoming the metropolitan of Alexandroupolis. After remaining about one year in Deniacha, Gerbasios established the seat of the metropolitan in the village Livera or Doubera. The seat of the metropolitan was not the same as the administrative centre of the kaza, Cevizlik, which had no Christian population. Gerbasios remained the metropolitan of Rhodopolis until 1907 and had to deal with the reactions of the followers of the monasteries, who even resorted to armed attacks, although it appears that he was supported by the majority of the Christian population against them. The next metropolitans of Rhodopolis were Leontios Papadopoulos, former metropolitan of Philadelphia from Kromni (Kurum) (1906-1909) and Kyrillos Papadopoulos from Alaçam of Bafra (1909-1922).¹⁰ It is worth noting that all the archpriests of Rhodopolis were descended from the wider area of the Pontus.

Until 1920 the Greek Orthodox population of the province of Rhodopolis formed the majority of the Maçka kaza , amounting to 76% and comprising Greek-speaking natives. According to a memorandum submitted by the metropolitan Gerbasios to the kaza commander in 1905, the number of the Greek Orthodox in the province was 9704, allocated to 54 villages, most important being Livera, Larahani, the nine settlements of Santa, Deniaha, Ano and KatoHortokop and Misailandon, which used to be divided among the exarchates of the three monasteries. The number of the parish churches is estimated at around 98.¹¹ The number of the Greek Orthodox inhabitants of the province in 1912, as cited by Sophianos and apparently coming from information from the Club of Anatolian Greeks "Anatoli, is excessively high, amounting to 57,850,¹² while the respective number cited by Gerbasios must correspond to reality.