o:30894 Prošlost koju su izgubili - manipulacija prošlošću i u političkom programu Karlovačke mitropolije The ­pasts they had lost­ Serbians sense of history and the shifting of time in the Karlovci archibishopric sr Sa­že­tak: ­Pi­ta­nje­ srp­ske­ pro­šlo­sti­u­ slu­ča­ju ­Kar­lo­vač­ke­ mi­tro­po­li­je­ neo­dvo­ji­vo ­je ­od­ ko­lek­tiv­nog­ sa­mo­po­tvr­đi­va­nja ­ovog ­na­ro­da ­u­okvi­ru­ Ha­br­zbur­ške­ mo­nar­hi­je ­u­18.­ve­ku.­Na­sta­nak­i­ob­li­ko­va­nje­srp­skih ­po­gleda na prošlost i kulturu deo su mehanizama masovne komunikacije ba­rok­og­do­ba ­i ­pro­ce­sa ­stva­ra­nja ­ko­lek­tiv­ne­ sa­mo­sve­sti ­u ­evrop­skim ­dr­ža­va­ma­ tog­ vre­me­na.­Me­đutim, ­Mi­tro­po­lo­i­ja­ se­ iz­dva­ja­svo­jim­ po­lo­ža­jem ­dr­ža­ve ­u­ sen­ci­ na ­ge­o­graf­skoj­ i­ kon­fe­si­o­nal­noj­ gra­ni­ci ­Austrij­skog­ car­stva.­Pre­ma­ to­me, ­ka­da ­se ­po­sma­tra­kon­cept­ srp­skog ­na­sle­đa ­u ­18.­ve­ku,­ tre­ba­ bi­ti ­spre­man­ na ­je­dan­ dru­ga­či­ji ­po­jam­ na­sle­đa,­isto­ri­je­ i ­pro­šlo­sti.­ Srp­sko ­po­i­ma­nje­ na­sle­đa ­i ­vla­sti­te­ pro­šlo­sti ­u­ve­li­koj ­me­ri ­je ­ob­li­ko­va­no ­shva­ta­njem­i sto­ri­je ­u ­ba­rok­noj­ kul­tu­ri­po­sle­ kon­ci­la ­u­Tren­tu.­Ka­ko­Džon­ Toš­ pra­vil­no­ pri­me­ću­je,­ kliza­va­ od­red­ni­ca ­isto­rij­ske ­sve­sti ­u ­to­ vre­me­ bi­la ­je ­još ­dvo­smisle­ni­ja, ­bu­du­ći­ da­ ba­rok­ni­ pogled­ na ­isto­ri­ju­ ni­kad ­ni­je­ ne­utra­lan­ i­ objek­ti­van, ­ne­go­ pri­stra­san. Abstract: The issue of Serbian heritage in the case of the Archbishopric of Kar­lovci is in separable from that of the collective self­identity of this 18th century ethnia in the Habsburg Empire. The creation and construction of the Serbian view of its past and culture was not unique, but belonged to the greater mechanisms of collective self­-awareness current in the European states at the time. The Baroque man was the first individual who fully explored the power and influence of the past on the present events; also the first to search for the borderline which separates the past from history, the individual or collective experience from the re­cord for posterity. Hence forth, the Baroque man realized the full poten­tial of the rewriting and editing of the past, of the fabrication of history and its integration in the greater narrative of validity and legitimation. And employed for the glory of faith, the Church, and the absolutism. But what is the past? And how do es it differ from history? What is me­mory in relation to the past? Even to day this presents a highly contested feld among historians and historiographers, far more complex than it was seen in the Baroque age. It could be said, that awareness of the past is common to all individuals, and that it shaes both the mechanisms and its subject matter with the concepts of history and memory. But the past is only at the beginning of the creation of history, since through history we validate and clothe it in the mantle of recognition, necessary for its acceptance – we institutionalize memory. Ključ­ne­re­či:­ isto­ri­ja,­se­ća­nje,­ma­ni­pu­la­ci­ja­vre­me­nom­i­pro­šlo­šću,­Kar­lo­vač­ka­mi­tro­po­li­ja,­Ar­se­ni­je­IV­Jo­va­no­vić,­Ste­ma­to­gra­fija Key­words: past, history, memory, shifting of time and manipulation of­ the ­past,­The­Ar­chbis­ho­pric­of­ Kar­lov­ci,­ Ar­se­ni­je­ IV­Jo­va­no­vić,­ Stemmatographia 91552100 185006860 2023-09-21T14:04:37.809Z 44 no 46 Jelena Todorović Fakultet likovnih umetnosti u Beogradu 0000-0002-8299-2458 application/pdf 477011 https://phaidrabg.bg.ac.rs/o:30894 no yes 1 70 92000001 111A02 Kultura : časopis za teoriju i sociologiju kulture i kulturnu politiku 134 144 2011