i.

Like everything Serbian, the medieval history is about struggle, disunity and eventual collapse. However, one of the greatest Christian civilizations is history was constructed on lines that might strike the reader as “libertarian nationalist.” Medieval Serbia was likely the most literate of all medieval civilizations in Europe, and featured a social system that contained checks and balances of power, and an extraordinary legal system that assured justice with few instances of abuse. As always, the medieval history of Serbia is one of the continued balancing between oligarchy and aristocracy on the one hand, as well as oligarchy and monarchy, on the other. This section does not in any manner purport to be an exhaustive history of the medieval era in Serbia, but rather an overview that emphasizes aspects of the Orthodox tradition salient for the purpose and thesis of this book. This brief section will commence at the later pre-Nemanjid period and end at the death of Tsar Dusan.

ii.

Zeta and Rasca, modern Montenegro and Kosovo respectively, were built in a vacuum between Bulgarian and Byzantine strife which produced an intercourse highly determinative of her later development. In pre-Nemanjid times, Serbia became important because she was a major contested area between Byzantium and Bulgaria. In Serbia, the main conduit for Greek letters was Ohrid, and it was under his suzerainty that Serbia became Christian, though with heavy Latin influence. The Latins controlled the coast, which meant that, for infant Serbia, Latins controlled much trade. Therefore, Serbia was born in a very bad neighborhood, and she needed to quickly learn how to fight to defend herself.

As Byzantium recognized Latin influence along the coastlands and in Dubrovnik (Latin name, Ragusa), Latin influence penetrated farther inland. The Byzantine navy, however, did put a check on this continued proselytizing of the Latins of the coastlines. The See of Bar was used by the pope to Latinize the area, using the power of Venice to accomplish this. Given that Zeta was connected to that See, it also meant that this region came under papal control. The main issue was linking trade in the coastlands with a dependence on the Sees involved. In other words, that for the Latins, the establishment of Sees along the coast has a strongly economic component, a component tightly matched with papal religious penetration into Serbia. However, when Byzantium retook these areas, the popes of the time, Callistus II, Innocent II and Alexander III in the mid 12th century removed the sees of Split and Bar and sent all their resources to Ragusa. This placed Latin influence squarely upon the Albanian landed classes as well as Ragusan traders. It was this move that identified Catholicism and papal control with both landed and merchant wealth.

Serbia came to be under the suzerainty of Byzantium after a major Serb victory over the Bulgar Khan, Presijan, around 680. Serbia did not have the strength to do battle with Byzantium afterward, once Bulgaria was temporarily out of the way. The sons and grandsons of Vastimir, the first major Serbian king we know of, likely the most important ruler in the pre-Nemanjid period, took part in the major dynastic struggles that tore Serbian society apart, making them weak and forcing them to capitulate to Byzantium after the Bulgar defeat. Prior to that, Caslav, grandson of Mutimir, took Serbia from the Bulgars. The Bulgars later wiped out the entire old Serbian royal line. Only at the death of Byzantine Emperor John Tzimisces was the second Bulgarian empire under Samuel able to consolidate itself.

The Latin rite was predominant within Rasca, as this region was under the metropolitanate of Dubrovnik. Only under Basil I of Raska did the Byzantine rite emerge in 871-2, though this is problematic since though the costal areas were Latin, the interior was Orthodox. In 1020 Basil made Rasca a suffragan bishopric of Ohrid. By 1000, the three major Serbian states of Rasca, Zeta and Zahumilje were well formed, but under Byzantine control. The battles against Alexis Commenus and the manipulation of the Magyar-Byzantine conflict of 1127-29 all ended in failure, and the Serbs remained under Greek control for a while longer.

Serbia was (and is) a highly vulnerable society, a situation shared with most of her Slavic neighbors, especially Russia. In 924, the infamous Simeon of Bulgaria sacked much of Serbian territory. St. Vastimir of Serbia was murdered by the Bulgarians; Rasca did not have a stable government as Zica did, and as a result, became a sort of “Piedmont” of Serbia, being the first major building block towards the completion of Serbian unity. Rasca was a feudal and national anarchy of zhupanates, or petty military chiefs.

Byzantium was challenged by a coalition of Magyars and Serbs during the reign of Basil II. Though the mighty Basil II could not be beaten, his successors could, and Stepan Voislav defeated Byzantium shortly after Basil’s death. Basil II of Byzantium destroyed the second Bulgarian Empire and brought Serbia under his rule. Bodin (1081-1131) liberated Serbia from Byzantium, and after his death, led to further dynastic struggles and led to the rule of Uros I (c.1115-1131), Stepan Nemanjia’s grandfather.

Zica was united with Rasca to provide the former with stable government under the Namanjids, and to begin the unification of all Serbian speaking lands. Stepan Nemanjia maintained his strong position due to the death of the powerful Byzantine Emperor Manuel. The fortunes of Byzantium were inversely proportional to the drive towards Serbian independence. Even under Basil II, Serbia maintained complete cultural autonomy, though her church was dominated from the largely Greek See at Ohrid. Byzantium was defeated against a coalition of Venetians and Serbs, a war that set the stage for a more meaningful Serbian independence. The first class web-book, The Illustrated History of the Serbs, sums up this era this way:

The ancient history of Serbia, until the rule of Nemanja, was marked by continual fighting either with Bulgaria or with Byzantium, and internal struggles for power among Serbian princes - members of the same family. The supreme rule in Byzantium was conducive to the Christianization of Serbs in the second half of the 9th century, mainly the work of Cyril and Methodius, From the third decade of the 12th century; Hungary became the third state to affect the history of Serbs. In the Hungarian-Byzantine struggles from 1165-1167, the name of Stefan Nemanja was mentioned for the first time. In the first years of his reign, Nemanja ruled over Toplice, Ibar, Rasina and Reka. After a conflict with his brother Tihomir, he became the grand zupan of Rasca, probably in 1166. Nemanja`s attempts to achieve independence resulted in a conflict with Tsar Manojlo I Komnin [Manuel Commenus] of Byzantium. The Tsar won; Nemanja was taken prisoner to Constantinople, but returned to Serbia remaining loyal, as vassal, to Tsar Manojlo [Manuel] I until his death in 1180.

This has been traditionally a very difficult period in history to write about, given the paucity of sources available. However, one might also summarize this era, that between Vastimir and Stepan Nemanjia was the continual struggle of Serbia to free herself from Byzantium to the south (which was done in 1204 thanks to the brutal Crusaders), from Hungary to the north and Bulgaria to the northeast. Furthermore, papal designs, often coming though Hungary, were more pronounced on the western coast of the Adriatic, that of current-day Montenegro, which was more or less Latinized at the time.

iii.

Stepan Nemanjia created a unified, strong government for Serbia and began to improve the economic situation in the country. Nemanjia, by absorbing Zica into his realm, checked Latin advances. The significance of this is that, had the Latins penetrated inland any further and began to control the economic life of the interior, Serbia might not have come into existence, and she might have merely become a permanent vassal state of Hungary such as Croatia, or a trading outpost of Venice.

The Nemanjid dynasty in Serbia had three aims: internal stability; the strengthening of Orthodoxy; and Serbian expansion for self-defense. All three of these things might be considered all aspects of one another, and there is much to be said for this view. Serbia’s strength, both in a spiritual and secular manner, came from her Orthodoxy; it became a national marker that set Serbia off from many of her neighbors to the north and west. The Latins were campaigning hard, using their banking and merchant allies in the west to subvert Serbian life and its Orthodoxy, thus, challenging the Latins had as much to with strengthening the Serbian state as any form of military campaign. St. Sava was later to erect monasteries at strategic posts along the western borderlands to act as a defensive infrastructure against popery and its Venetian allies.

Stepan Nemanjia (Simeon in his monastic life) needed to fight his elder brother Tihomir, in order to gain control of Rasca. A war had broken out between Venice and Byzantium (they were more or less permanent rivals, and represented two very different forms of state, as well as religion), and Stepan attempted to use this to his advantage, but again, this failed. The death of Manuel, however, made life much easier for Serbia, and Stepan Nemanja, now the strongest ruler of Serbia, absorbed the former Byzantium lands.

iv.

Stepan Nemanjia died in 1199. He had three sons, Vukan, Stepan and Rastko (Sava in monasticism). Vukan ruled Zeta and was given Roman Catholic lands, but eventually was muscled out by his brother Stepan while Sava had gone into monastic life. The destruction of Byzantium in 1204 was by far the most earth-shaking development in medieval times in the east. Now, not only had the papal powers shown their teeth and appetite for destruction, but the evils rained on Byzantium gave both Serbia and Bulgaria room to grow and develop independently, but the other side of the coin meant that popery was tremendously confident, and tripled its efforts on the western coastlands.

Stepan married a Venetian princess under pressure from the Latins, then a Byzantine one, and he eventually received a crown from pope Innocent III. The destruction of Byzantium provided the popes of Rome with such leverage that, for a time, no one could resist them. Receiving a crown from the pope was evidence of this. Serbia, however, was now under one ruler. Stepan the First Crowned (1196-1228) was crowned by the pope, but his brother Sava promised him church autocephalicity in exchange for his reconversion to Orthodoxy. Stepan did not believe Byzantium could offer him anything, given the destruction of the crusaders, so he was anxious to be confirmed to his region, as Vukasin was. Even Bulgaria was forced to accept papal control for a time. This situation proved that, in the context of the times, without the Orthodox empire, all would have become Latin.

The Slavs sought independence from Byzantium given her tremendously weakened state. The Byzantine empire had receded to its rump states of Nicea and Epirius. By using the papalists and their eternal lust for secular power, the Slavs were able to wrest independence from a rump Byzantine empire, and this empire was quite anxious not to alienate potential Slavic allies. However, only under Dusan was Catholic preaching in public banned.

Vukasin, as it turns out, was central to papal strategy in the region. He asked pope Innocent III to make the See of Bar, under his control, independent again of Ragusa. Though Venice protested, this was granted to him. A papal council of 1199 confirmed this move. It needs to be noted that Vukasin was a confirmed agent for papal interests. Hungary was soon to absorb this area and begin Latinizing the interior. However, Stepan Nemanja took back the region with Bulgarian help. It needs to be kept in mind that Stepan was in no manner Catholic, his approach to Rome was dictated by global political events. He quickly went to Nicea for autocephalicity regardless. Vukasin remained in the pay of the pope of Rome. Serbia was considered a major prize for the popes, and they used native Serbs, Venetians, Ragusans and Albanans to get it. They failed. They failed in large measure because of Sava’s pressure. The real impetus for autocephalicity was the real threat of Roman rule. The significance of the threat of Roman rule was that, in accepting Latinism, Serbia would also be accepting the rule of the Venetian oligarchy and those Serbs loyal to it.

Vukasin deliberately flaunted his father’s will, that is, that Stepan should be sole ruler of all Serbian lands. But because he was the instrument of the pope, he fought Stepan for control over Serbia from his base in Montenegro. Stepan then threw in his lot with the Bulgarians to throw Vukasin out, who had established himself as sole ruler of Serbia. The Orthodox coalition of Stepan and Bulgaria saved Serbia from complete Latinization. Even Stepan, however, was forced to accept a crown from Rome, given the fact that Byzantium was no more and Bulgaria was wavering in its loyalties. Sava, for political convenience, received a crown from Rome, but soon went to Nicea to plead his case for Serbian autocephalicity, needed to fight the Latins now that they had the upper hand.

Popery was allied with the banking houses of south and western Europe, and none had reached the level of power that the Venetians had. Therefore, the question was more than just Christian doctrine (which was most certainly important) but also economic independence as well. Maintaining the Orthodox faith against the Latins was a major reason that monks from Athos were chosen as the first bishops of an independent Serbian Church, and a strong Athonite presence maintained the purity of the faith in Serbia.

Afterwards, the minor reign of Radislav was significant because he turned to Ohrid again, the major Greek competitor to Serbia; this forced Sava back to Serbia again to stop this, and Radislav was eventually replaced by Vladislav. Radislav was extremely Byzantine in his self-image and he forced his Slavic nobles out of their lands. For Radislav, the Greek empire was the seat of culture, and the Serbs would, in his opinion, do better in remaining under Greek control. Vladislav was pro-Bulgarian and used the Bulgars the way Stepan had done. Significantly, however, Radislav was an enemy of the landed classes and was, therefore, a supporter of the Byzantine idea of a strong emperorship. Therfore, the Orthodox landlords wanted the reign of Vladislav. It is not to say that Vladislav was in some way a tool of the landed classes, but rather that the developing Serbian notion of kingship was becoming completely Byzantine, and this reached its apogee under Tsar Dusan as the fourteenth century dawned. Vladislav himself was a “Byzantino-Slav,” and ruled rather independently.

The next goal, in the meantime, was the elimination of Hungary and Bulgaria as military threats. The situation had changed since the crusaders sacked the royal city, and Byzantium, in the 1270s, was restored. Therefore, the Bulgar connection was no longer needed and she became a threat under the energetic Tsar John Asen. Soon, as the Mongols dominated Russia and were moving into the Balkans, the landlords, again upset with a man they thought they could use, Vladislav, replaced him and sent Uros I as his substitute. Uros, regardless of his connection with the nobility, ruled justly for 30 years, and created a stable and prosperous state; he brought German miners in to Serbia to work the mines in exchange for high pay and complete cultural autonomy. He maintained good relations with Dubrovnik, which were always fraught with peril, but was the price of prosperity. Keep in mind that Serbian rulers count their names from the “first crowned.” Therefore, if Serbian medieval history is not complicated enough, there were two Uros Is. The first prior to the first crowning of Stepan, and the later, after. Uros I was one of the greatest rulers of the medieval Serbian kingdom, and his long reign created a stable situation for internal consolidation, the coining of money and the development of mining. Along with this came Uros’ pacification of the arrogant Ragusan lords and thus the ensuring of the use of costal trade to Serbia’s benefit.

As Byzantine power was restored and Hungary became powerful; Uros lost a major battle against the Hungarians and, because of this, was replaced by his son Dragutin. Mining was growing tremendously, and Serbia became one of the most prosperous states of Europe. After a fall from his horse that crippled him, Dragutin was replaced by his brother Milutin, who continued the same policies, and his reign lasted another 30 years. Milutin has been dissatisfied with his father’s Byzantinist policies that insisted on a single ruler for Serbia. As such, he became an ally of the landed classes who did not trust a single ruler who might interfere with their privileges. Regardless of this, he continued the process of unification still further; though a strict Byzantinist, he set the stage for Dusan. While it is true that the two brothers fought for years after, they eventually reconciled. Dragutin died in 1313 in a monastery where he became a strict ascetic, a short time after the reconciliation.

Uros II Milutin (1282-1321) was responsible for major economic expansion; agriculture and mining became the engines of economic growth. Part of the Adriatic coast was conquered from Byzantium and this became a major part of Serbia’s world trading. National unity was achieved. The pope controlled the landlords of Albania and tried to use them to topple Uros II Milutin, but this failed. Serbia under Milutin became a first rate power with a tremendous economy based around mining, advanced agriculture and international trade. While Serbia did fight with Ragusa, battles that had religious as well as economic overtones, Serbia normally did operate with the Ragusan oligarchy, closely allied to Venice. Serbia could not afford anything else. Milutin did survive a coup attempt in 1319, where the pope gave a written order to the landlords of Albania to overthrow him. There is no doubt they failed. The landed classes in many respects had become Latinized, in that they believed the banking oligarchy in Catholic Venice would serve their interests far more than an Orthodox Tsar such as Milutin. Therefore, the populist nature of Serbian royalism in the middle ages was very much about checking the Venetians, the pope and the landlords within Albania and Serbia proper who sought alliances with the western banking powers, allies of the papacy and Venice, solely for their own profit.

v.

Uros III (also known as Stepan Dekanski (1321-1331)) was blinded by his father Milutin during a rebellion by the nobility that he took part in against his father, but was miraculously healed through an appearance of St. Nicholas. He took over the throne in 1321. The nobility had attempted to turn Milutin against his son, but eventually, after he was healed, relented and pardoned him. Wars broke out with Bulgaria over remaining fortresses left in the country from earlier wars. The Second Bulgarian empire under Samuel was crushed by the Serbs and the empire of Michael II was destroyed. Bulgaria was occupied for a year (1330-1). Then, turning south, Uros III defeated Andronicus, weakened during the civil war in Byzantium. Dusan overthrew Uros III for not pursuing the wars with greater energy, thus pressing the borders of Serbia further south. Uros was murdered for his restraint. Uros was canonized as a martyr against Dusan. However, Uros III’s is known most for his defeat of Bulgaria and the creation of a long alliance between the two states until the Turk conquest. All in all, the relations between Bulgaria and Serbia during the middle ages were positive, both states using each other to check the Latins and their oligarchs.

Uros III was canonized for his martyrs death; Dusan’s followers were more warlike than that of Uros. All of Dusan’s conquests, it should be noted, were permitted to maintain their customs, as was normal for medieval empires. This was also the Roman custom, both east and west, and was maintained in Russia as well. Though Dusan came to the throne though murder and deceit, he was a just ruler, far in advance of his time. The institutions under is rule, having developed from eariler times, will be treated in future chapters.

In 1346 Dusan, having married into the Bulgarian royal family and playing Hungary and Byzantium off one another, claimed the succession to the Byzantine throne; this was accepted by Venice, Ragusa and the bishops residing in Greece, Bulgaria and Albania. Dusan was not alone in his desire. Salonika, a major port city, actually considered switching to Dusan given the manifest unpopularity of John Cantacuzenus, then emperor of Byzantium. As Byzantium was torn apart by another civil war (with the Turks taking the side of Cantacuzenus), Albania, Macedonia and parts of Greece fell to Dusan. The archbishops of Pec and Ohrid raised the Serbian archbishopric, founded by Sava, to that of a patriarchate. Dusan did approach the west for aid, even promising a unia for the effort. The Latins distrusted Dusan as he was simply too powerful for Venice and its Vatican masters to manipulate; thus his overtures were rejected. Dusan banned the Latin rite in Serbia because the Vatican had made it clear that Dusan was their enemy, and Latin clergy residing on Serbian soild was considered an advance guard of Venice, Hungary or Ragusa. The Vatican desired only weak kings, so that their feudal magnates in Albania could give the country over to the pope. Turkish mercenaries brought in by Cantacuzenus defeated the alliance of Salonika (a major Greek port city) and Dusan. Serbia reached its zenith under Dusan’s rule. He was a general in the last Bulgarian battle, and this was the vehicle for his moves against Uros III Dekanski, leading to his coup in 1331.

vi.

Dusan died a mysterious death at the age of 48 in 1355.His successor was Uros IV, weak and young (he was often called Uros IV the Frail); and he could not hold the country together. Dusan had placed strict limits on the powers of the landed nobility (as will soon be discussed) and thus, after Dusan’s suspicious death, began to coin their own money and rule independently. They tried to tie the peasants to the land and institute serfdom to a country that had never known it. Stepan Uros V, his successor, was likely murdered by Vatican agents, as he had the potential to lead a unified Serbia and re-tame the landlords. The Vatican’s strategy was to use Dusan’s death to dismember Serbia, selling the remnants to Ragusa and Venice. Because of Uros V’s murder, he was canonized by the Serbian church as a “martyr to the Latins.”

Strongest of the local lords after St. Uros V were Lazar of Rudnik and Vukasin of Prilep. The latter took the kingly title in 1366. A league against the Turk was formed of Hungary, Bulgaria and Serbia. Vukasin was killed and the Turks put the alliance to rout in 1371. Lazar had retreated to northern Serbia with his capital at Krushevats. Lazar was of kingly stock, related to Dusan. Lazar was a bit more powerful than the western supported Vukasin, and quickly, after Uros V’s death, established himself as the chief of Serb nobles, or rather, the chief voivod, or military chieftain. Lazar still controlled many mines in the north of the country and he maintained, at a reduced scale, the highly literate and cultured life of medieval Serbia. Lazar created a new alliance which included Byzantium, which defeated the Turks in 1387; the next meeting was at the fateful Kosovo on June 28, 1389.

Stepan Lazarevic (1389-1427) was a minor when St. Lazar was killed. Hungarian pressure forced his mother to establish a vassal relation with Hungary after the Magyar attack on Serbia in 1389 (the Hungarians wished to take advantage of Lazar’s defeat, and were likely on orders from Rome). After Tamerlane gave Byzantium breathing room from the Ottomans, John VII of Byzantium gave Lazarevic title of Despot. He maintained good relations with Turkey in his war with Hungary, and this relationship helped him re-gather much of the former Serbian lands. At Srebrenica,. He exploited the mines, which, even in these extreme conditions, was responsible for a full 20% of European silver. Dubrovnik became wealthier because of this. Mine labor was completely free and well paid due to Stepan’s mining law and Serbia was becoming another Venice in its prosperity. He remained pious and was canonized.

George Brankovic (1427-1456) upon the death of Lazarevic, was forced to cede lands to Hungary and parts of the south to Turkey. He became a servant of the Turks due to his weak position, Serbian losses and poor morale continually rotted the basis for concerted military action. He created a new Serb capital at Smederevo, close to his mints. He still controlled much of old Serbia, though Murad II made war on him in 1438, and destroyed George’s capital. George organized a crusade against the Turk with the aid of Hungarian princes Ladislas and Janos Hunyadi. The Vatican was wavering between their long cherished goal of forcible converting Serbia via Hungary on the one hand, and defeating the threatening Turk, on the other. Turkey was defeated and much of Serbia restored; it was not to last, however, as later crusades saw Ladisas killed and Hunyadi barely escaping. In 1453 Byzantium fell, and the Serbian mining town of Novo Brdo fell in 1455, which was Serbia’s main mining center. The destruction of Serbia’s mineral wealth meant the end of Serbian economic independence. In 1459, Smederevo fell and Serbia was no more.

vii.

Why did Serbia develop the way it did? Why did the Serbs, a small people, squished among Bulgaria, Venice, Hungary and Byzantium for most of its medieval history, rise to become one of the dominant states in Europe under Milutin and Dusan?

Several issues arise here. First, the long reigns of Dragutin and Milutin, as well as that of Dusan, provided Serbia with the strong leadership and stability necessary for internal consolidation. Secondly, the fact that Serbia sits atop some of the world’s greatest silver mines (which, by the way, give Serbia its name) did not hurt. The Serbian mining industry, developed throughout the middle ages, and exploited by German miners was the major impetus for Serbian prosperity. Serbs also mined platinum, gold and tin, and was a major mineral exporter, which guaranteed a positive balance of trade throughout the era.

Thirdly, the establishment of an independent Orthodox church was very important, and the use of Athonite monks to guard the Deposit of Faith maintained the purity of Orthodoxy and marked Serbia out from its neighbors to the west and north. The Athonites, then and now, are the strictest and most traditional of all Orthodox institutions, and the dependence upon them in the founding days of the Serbian Orthodox Church provided Serbia with a highly literate, sophisticated and deeply ascetic spiritual vision. The affect of this on Serbian integrity cannot be underestimated.

Fourthly, the control over Dubrovnik was essential. Dubrovnik is intimately tied to the development of medieval Serbia for two major reasons: first, she provided a major outlet to the Adriatic and thus to global trade. Second, the wars fought with this pro-Venetian city-state kept the Latins in check, and, if they were kept in check, then so were their landed insturments in Albania and throughout Serbia.

Fifthly, the power of individuals. The fact is that Serbia was blessed with wise, far-seeing and highly literate rulers. Here again the same names crop up: Stepan Nemanjia, Dragutin, Milutin and Dusan, not to mention Lazar and his son. Had these men not been far-seeing and had they not been imbued with a strong sense of both religious and national mission, Serbia would have been carved up by local lords in an alliance with the Vatican, Hungary and Venice.

Sixthly, as much as I hate to say it, the murderous and Satanic sack of Constantinople in 1204 by the papalists permitted the Slavic nations some breathing space within which to develop their institutions and consolidate internally. The relations with Byzantium for both Serbia and Bulgaria were a curious mix: on the one hand, much of the religious and literary culture derived from the Greeks, the sense of theological mission also so derives, and lastly, the political vision of a strong monarch controlling landed interests also, in the Balkan context, is of Byzantine origin. On the other hand, Byzantium was an empire, and, though rather humane to its subject peoples, had no use for separatist tendencies. The sack of New Rome meant that Serbia could be an independent kingdom as well as develop its own specifically Serbian Orthodox institutions and structures.

Seventhly, the personality of St. Sava is so great, so towering, that few nations can boast of an equivalent. St. Sava was a first rate statesman, ascetic, administrator and creative thinker all in one. Even the most bitter of anti-Serb writers normally show admiration for St. Sava. Both Bulgaria and Serbia venerate him highly, and Sava is also highly regarded throughout Orthodoxy, of whatever ethnic background. Sava created the first independent Serbian Orthodox Church and specially selected its first bishops from Mount Athos. He quelled rivalries with his brothers. He preached unity, but a unity within a Christian context. He, after his death, became a symbol of unity that few peoples of that time could have united under. He was likely the chief reason the Serbs became one of Europe’s (and the globe’s) great peoples. I do not want to diminish the role of social forces, classes or ethnic groups, but the role of extraordinary individuals need also to be mentioned when one is answering questions like this. St. Savaism has become synonymous with Serbian resistance, independence and libertarian nationalism, and his role in the creation of medieval Serbia is towering.