St. Georges of Cappadocia and St. Michael the Archangel: A Comparison of Two Christian Saints and Their Cults

Halil Özel

Article Details

St. Georges of Cappadocia and St. Michael the Archangel: A Comparison of Two Christian Saints and Their Cults

Authors:

Halil Özel

Publisher:

Eskişehir Osmangazi University

Main Topics:

Dinler Tarihi

Journal:

Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.12 Issue 2, pp.1009-1044

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

9/2025

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001357961

pISSN:

2147-8171

Keywords:

Abstract:

 The cult of saints, which occupies an important place in Christianity, includes angelic and human saints. From the Christianity of antiquity to the present day, many saints have been surrounded by cults with their myths, miracle narratives, roles, attributes and functions. In this article, two great saints and their cults, who have managed to maintain their popularity from the first centuries of Christianity to the Middle Ages and up to the present day, are examined in a comparative perspective. These saints are Georges of Cappadocia and Michael the Archangel, who belong to two different categories of being and therefore have different natures. Although these two saints, who were chosen to be analyzed with a comparative method, differ in terms of their creation and belong to two different classes of beings, one celestial and the other human, they share many commonalities. The article first focuses on this major difference between two saints and from this point of view focuses on the aspects that distinguish one from the other, and then draws attention to the commonalities that bring the two saints closer together in some points. Whereas St. Georges attained sainthood by tasting martyrdom after a life of suffering and virtue, this is not the case for Michael. He did not receive his sainthood after death like Georges. Michael owes his sainthood to the fact that he is an angel, and unlike Georges, he is a living saint. Furthermore, the issue of relics, an integral part of the cult of human saints, is different for Michael. As a disembodied angel, he does not have relics consisting of body parts like human saints. Nevertheless, as a saint, he does have his relics, and these are mostly permanent changes he makes in nature or his intervention in the elements of nature. The first point is that the cult around both saints was born in Anatolia, in preference to the dominant tradition that presents George as a Cappadocian. The next steps compare the most popular aspects of the cults of the two saints from antiquity to the present day and the roles and functions attributed to both saints. Both of them are dragon hunters, warriors, healers, and patron saints of agriculture and animal husbandry. Finally, there are some details in the legends that present both saints together, working together, or in some way in contact with each other. All these commonalities are strong signs that suggest that these connections between the two saints were not coincidental but shaped by a conscious choice, that is, that a state of influence occurred. To make all these comparisons, the method of comparison, which is one of the most commonly used methods in the History of Religions, was used, and the method of description was used when the legends and cults of the saints were examined separately. In studies on saint cults, the comparative method is frequently used, and thus saints are classified under various categories. However, studies in which two saints belonging to different classes and having different natures are subjected to a thematic comparison and analysis are rare. The article has exactly this kind of purpose and analyzes two holy figures, one human and the other angelic, but both saints, by comparing them from many perspectives.

 The cult of saints, which occupies an important place in Christianity, includes angelic and human saints. From the Christianity of antiquity to the present day, many saints have been surrounded by cults with their myths, miracle narratives, roles, attributes and functions. In this article, two great saints and their cults, who have managed to maintain their popularity from the first centuries of Christianity to the Middle Ages and up to the present day, are examined in a comparative perspective. These saints are Georges of Cappadocia and Michael the Archangel, who belong to two different categories of being and therefore have different natures. Although these two saints, who were chosen to be analyzed with a comparative method, differ in terms of their creation and belong to two different classes of beings, one celestial and the other human, they share many commonalities. The article first focuses on this major difference between two saints and from this point of view focuses on the aspects that distinguish one from the other, and then draws attention to the commonalities that bring the two saints closer together in some points. Whereas St. Georges attained sainthood by tasting martyrdom after a life of suffering and virtue, this is not the case for Michael. He did not receive his sainthood after death like Georges. Michael owes his sainthood to the fact that he is an angel, and unlike Georges, he is a living saint. Furthermore, the issue of relics, an integral part of the cult of human saints, is different for Michael. As a disembodied angel, he does not have relics consisting of body parts like human saints. Nevertheless, as a saint, he does have his relics, and these are mostly permanent changes he makes in nature or his intervention in the elements of nature. The first point is that the cult around both saints was born in Anatolia, in preference to the dominant tradition that presents George as a Cappadocian. The next steps compare the most popular aspects of the cults of the two saints from antiquity to the present day and the roles and functions attributed to both saints. Both of them are dragon hunters, warriors, healers, and patron saints of agriculture and animal husbandry. Finally, there are some details in the legends that present both saints together, working together, or in some way in contact with each other. All these commonalities are strong signs that suggest that these connections between the two saints were not coincidental but shaped by a conscious choice, that is, that a state of influence occurred. To make all these comparisons, the method of comparison, which is one of the most commonly used methods in the History of Religions, was used, and the method of description was used when the legends and cults of the saints were examined separately. In studies on saint cults, the comparative method is frequently used, and thus saints are classified under various categories. However, studies in which two saints belonging to different classes and having different natures are subjected to a thematic comparison and analysis are rare. The article has exactly this kind of purpose and analyzes two holy figures, one human and the other angelic, but both saints, by comparing them from many perspectives.

 The cult of saints, which occupies an important place in Christianity, includes angelic and human saints. From the Christianity of antiquity to the present day, many saints have been surrounded by cults with their myths, miracle narratives, roles, attributes and functions. In this article, two great saints and their cults, who have managed to maintain their popularity from the first centuries of Christianity to the Middle Ages and up to the present day, are examined in a comparative perspective. These saints are Georges of Cappadocia and Michael the Archangel, who belong to two different categories of being and therefore have different natures. Although these two saints, who were chosen to be analyzed with a comparative method, differ in terms of their creation and belong to two different classes of beings, one celestial and the other human, they share many commonalities. The article first focuses on this major difference between two saints and from this point of view focuses on the aspects that distinguish one from the other, and then draws attention to the commonalities that bring the two saints closer together in some points. Whereas St. Georges attained sainthood by tasting martyrdom after a life of suffering and virtue, this is not the case for Michael. He did not receive his sainthood after death like Georges. Michael owes his sainthood to the fact that he is an angel, and unlike Georges, he is a living saint. Furthermore, the issue of relics, an integral part of the cult of human saints, is different for Michael. As a disembodied angel, he does not have relics consisting of body parts like human saints. Nevertheless, as a saint, he does have his relics, and these are mostly permanent changes he makes in nature or his intervention in the elements of nature. The first point is that the cult around both saints was born in Anatolia, in preference to the dominant tradition that presents George as a Cappadocian. The next steps compare the most popular aspects of the cults of the two saints from antiquity to the present day and the roles and functions attributed to both saints. Both of them are dragon hunters, warriors, healers, and patron saints of agriculture and animal husbandry. Finally, there are some details in the legends that present both saints together, working together, or in some way in contact with each other. All these commonalities are strong signs that suggest that these connections between the two saints were not coincidental but shaped by a conscious choice, that is, that a state of influence occurred. To make all these comparisons, the method of comparison, which is one of the most commonly used methods in the History of Religions, was used, and the method of description was used when the legends and cults of the saints were examined separately. In studies on saint cults, the comparative method is frequently used, and thus saints are classified under various categories. However, studies in which two saints belonging to different classes and having different natures are subjected to a thematic comparison and analysis are rare. The article has exactly this kind of purpose and analyzes two holy figures, one human and the other angelic, but both saints, by comparing them from many perspectives.

 Hıristiyanlıkta mühim bir yer işgal eden azizler kültü, melek ve insan azizleri ihtiva etmektedir. Antik çağdan günümüze kadar pek çok azizin etrafında kendi menkıbe, mucize anlatısı, rol, vasıf ve işlevleriyle temayüz eden kültler teşekkül etmiştir. Bu makalede, sayıları oldukça kalabalık olan azizlerin içinde, Hıristiyanlığın ilk asırlarından orta çağa ve günümüze kadar popülerliğini korumayı başarabilmiş iki büyük aziz ile kültleri incelenmektedir. Bu azizler, iki ayrı varlık kategorisine ait, dolayısıyla birbirinden farklı tabiatları haiz Kapadokyalı Georges ile Başmelek Mikâildir. Mukayeseli bir metotla incelenmek üzere seçilen bu iki azizin, yaratılışları itibariyle her ne kadar farklılaşsalar ve biri semavî diğeri beşerî varlık sınıflarına ait olsalar da birçok yönden müştereklikler taşıdıkları görülür. Makale, öncelikle iki azizin bu en büyük farkına odaklanarak buradan hareketle birini diğerinden ayıran yönlere eğilmekte, ardından da bu farklılığın beraberinde getirdiği hususların bazı noktalarda iki azizi birbirine yaklaştırdığı ortaklıklara dikkat çekmektedir. Aziz Georges, çileli ve faziletli bir hayatın ardından şehitliği tatmasıyla azizlik mertebesine erişirken Mikâil için durum bundan biraz daha farklıdır. O, azizliğini Georges gibi ölümünden sonra almış değildir. Mikâil, aziz unvanını bir melek oluşuna borçludur ve Georgesın aksine yaşayan bir azizdir. Bundan başka beşer azizlerin kültlerinin ayrılmaz parçasını oluşturan relikmukaddes emanet hususu da Mikâil için farklıdır. Bedensiz bir melek olduğundan onun insan azizler gibi vücut parçalarından ibaret relikleri bulunmamaktadır. Fakat yine de bir aziz olarak onun da kendine mahsus relikleri vardır ve bunlar ekseriyetle tabiat üzerinde gerçekleştirdiği kalıcı değişiklikler ya da tabiatın unsurlarına müdahalesi gibi faaliyetlerden ibarettir. Bunu takiben Georges ile Mikâilin menkıbeleri ve buradan doğan kültleri ele alınmaktadır. Buradaki ilk müşterek husus, her iki azizin de -Georgesı Kapadokyalı olarak takdim eden baskın geleneğin tercihiyle- etraflarında teşekkül eden kültün bugün Anadolu olarak adlandırılan coğrafyada, doğmasıdır. Bundan sonraki adımlarda iki azizin kültlerinin antik çağdan günümüze dek en popüler yönleri ve her iki azize atfedilen rollerle işlevler karşılaştırılmaktadır. Her ikisi de ejderha avcısı, savaşçı, şifacı ve ziraat ile hayvanclılığın himayecisi azizlerdir. Bütün bunlara ilaveten, menkıbelerde her iki azizi bir arada, birlikte faaliyet gösterirken ya da bir şekilde birbirleriyle irtibat halinde sunan bazı detaylar da yer almaktadır. Tüm bu müştereklikler, iki aziz arasındaki mezkûr bağlantıların tesadüfî değil de şuurlu bir tercihle şekillendiği, yani bir etkilenme durumunun vaki olduğunu düşündüren güçlü işaretlerdir. Bütün bu karşılaştırmaların yapılabilmesi için, Dinler Tarihinde en çok kullanılan metotlardan mukayese yöntemine başvurulmuş, azizlerin menkıbe ve kültleri ayrı ayrı ele alınırken de tasvir yöntemine müracaat edilmiştir. Aziz kültlerine dair araştırmalarda karşılaştırma yöntemi sıklıkla kullanılmakta ve bu sayede azizler çeşitli kategoriler altında sınıflandırılmaktadır. Fakat farklı sınıflara ait ve ayrı tabiatları haiz iki azizin tematik bir mukayese ve analize tabi tutulduğu çalışmalar nadirdir. Makale, tam da bu türden bir amaç taşımakta ve biri insan diğeri melek fakat ikisi de aziz olan iki mukaddes figürü birçok açıdan mukayeseye tabi tutarak analiz etmektedir.

Article Details

St. Georges of Cappadocia and St. Michael the Archangel: A Comparison of Two Christian Saints and Their Cults

Authors:

Halil Özel

Publisher:

Eskişehir Osmangazi University

Main Topics:

Dinler Tarihi

Journal:

Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.12 Issue 2, pp.1009-1044

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

9/2025

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001357961

pISSN:

2147-8171

History of Religions

Cult of Saints

St. Georges of Cappadocia

St. Michael the Archangel

Dragon-slaying Saints

Warrior Saints

Healing SaintsDinler Tarihi

Azizler Kültü

Kapadokyalı Aziz Georges

Başmelek Aziz Mikâil

Ejderha Avcısı Azizler

Savaşçı Azizler

Şifacı Azizler

Issues

Article Details

Authors: Halil Özel

Publisher: Eskişehir Osmangazi University

Main Topics: Dinler Tarihi

Journal: Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.12 Issue 2, pp.1009-1044

Document Type: Article

Publication Date: 9/2025

Document Language: Turkish

Document ID (Org No.): 2001357961

pISSN: 2147-8171

Issues

Authors:

Halil Özel

Publisher:

Eskişehir Osmangazi University

Main Topics:

Dinler Tarihi

Journal:

Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.12 Issue 2, pp.1009-1044

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

9/2025

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001357961

pISSN:

2147-8171