{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017880794701986755, 'fraction_numerical': 0.026490066225165563, 'mean_word_length': 4.8565891472868215, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
TO THE QUESTION OF THE CHURCH STATUS AND RELIGIOUS SITUATION IN THE BYZANTINE THEME IBERIA

The article considers the issue of the church status of the territory of the Byzantine theme Iberia (c. 1023–1073/1074). In 1045, Byzantium annexed the lands of Bagratid Kingdom of Armenia and included them in Iberia, which led to the significant increase of the Armenian Monophysite population in the theme. The seven dioceses of Iberia, which were located on the lands of the former Bagratid Armenia, are not in the lists of the Notitiae Episcopatuum of the Church of Constantinople and were included in the lists of the Antiochian Orthodox Church somewhere in the 11th century. Moreover, in three additional 11th century manuscripts of the Notitia Antiochena, the Antiochian patriarch owned three domains from the territory of Northern Tao, which was allegedly not part of Iberia. Nevertheless, data from the Georgian “Chronicle of Kartli” and “The Testament of Eustathius Boilas” suggest that at least from 1047 to 1053/1057, some of these fortresses in the Northern Tao were under Byzantine control and were included in the administrative structure of the theme. The return of these lands to the rule of the Georgian king Bagrat IV between 1053 and 1057, as well as the tense conflict between the Antiochian and Georgian churches about the authenticity of the Georgian autocephaly at the same time, did not allow the Church of Antioch to fully put in order the new created dioceses in such a short period of time.