Listed 19 sub titles with search on: Religious figures biography for destination: "KAPADOKIA Ancient country TURKEY".
Georgius. Of Cappadocia, a man of bad character, a heretic and a persecutor, and
an intruder into the see of the orthodox Athanasius, then in banishment, and yet,
strange to tell, a saint in the Roman Calendar, and the patron saint of England.
It is possible, indeed, that his moral delinquency has been aggravated by the
party spirit of the ecclesiastical historians, and other writers to whom his Arianism
made him odious; but it is hard to believe that their invectives are without considerable
foundation. He was born, according to Ammianus, at Epiphaneia, in Cilicia, but
our other authorities speak of him as a Cappadocian. His father was a fuller.
Gregory Nazianzen, whose passionate invective is our chief authority for his early
history, says that he was of a bad family poneros to genos); but it does not appear
whether it was discreditable for anything more than its humble occupation. George
appears to have been a parasite, a hanger-on of the wealthy, "one that would
sell himself," according to Gregory, "for a cake." He obtained
an appointment connected with the supply of bacon to the army; but being detected
in some unfaithfulness, was stripped of his charge and his emoluments, and was
glad to escape without bodily punishment. According to Gregory, he afterwards
wandered from one city or province to another, till he was fixed at Alexandria,
"where he ceased to wander, and began to do mischief" It is probable,
however, that he held office as a receiver of some branch of the revenue at Constantinople,
having by bribery obtained the favour of the eunuchs who had influence at the
court of Constantius II., the then reigning emperor. Athanasius, who notices this
appointment, calls him tameiophagos, "a peculator ;" but it is not clear
whether he refers to his former official delinquency or to some new offence.
Thus far it does not appear that George had even professed to be a
Christian: we have certainly no intimation that he sustained any ecclesiastical
character before his appointment to the see of Alexandria. Athanasius says it
was reported at the time of his appointment that he had not been a Christian at
all, but rather an idolator; and there is reason to believe that Athanasius is
right in charging him with professing Christianity for interest sake. Arianism
waspatronised by Constantius, and George consequently becamea zealous Arian; and
was. after his appointment to Alexandria, concerned in assembling the Arian councils
of Seleuceia (A. D. 359) and Constantinople (A. D. 360). According to Socrates
and Sozomen, Gregory, whom the Arian party had appointed to the see of Alexandria,
vacant by the expulion of Athanasius,had becomeunpopular, through the tumults
and disasters to which his appointment had led; and was at the same time regarded
as not zealous enough in the support of Arianism. He was therefore removed, and
George was appointed by the council of Antioch (A. D. 354, or, according to Mansi,
A. D. 356;) in his place. It is probable that George was appointed from his subserviency
to the court, and his readiness to promote to any fiscal exactions, and his general
unscrupulousness; and he was induced to accept the appointment by the hope of
gain, or, as Athanasis ext presses it, "he was hired" to become bishop.
Count Heraclian was sent by Constantius to gain the support of the heathen people
of Alexandria to apud George's election; and he succeeded in his object, by giving
them hopes of obtaining toleration for their own worship; and the emperor, in
a letter preserved by Athanasius, recommended the new prelate to the support and
favour of the Alexandrians generally. But a persecution of the Trinitarian party
had commenced even before the arrival of George, which took place during Lent,
A. D. 355. They were dispossessed of the churches and Sebastian, commander of
the troops in Egypt. publicly exposed some women, who had devoted themselves to
a life of religious celibacy, naked before the flame of a large fire, to make
them renounce orthodoxy. On George's arrival, the persecution continued as fiercely
as before, or even more so. Widows and orphans were plundered of their houses
and of their bread; several men were so cruelly beaten with fresh-gathered palm
branches, with the thorns yet adhering to them, that some were long before they
recovered, and some never recovered at all; and many virgins, and thirty bishops,
were banished to the greater Oasis, or elsewhere: several of the bishops died
in the place of exile, or on the way. Athanasius, however, escaped, and remained
in concealment till George's death. George and his partisans refused at first
to give up to their friends for burial the bodies of those who died, "sitting,"
says Theodoret," like daemons about the tombs." His perse cutions led
to a revolt. The Trinitarian party rose against him, and would have killed him.
He escaped, however, and fled to the emperor; and the Trinitarians re-occupied
the churches. A notary was sent, apparently from Constantinople; the orthodox
were again expelled; the guilty were punished, and George returned, rendered more
tyrannical by this vain attempt to resist him.
While his bitter persecution of the orthodox was embittering the anger
of that numerous party, his rapacity and subserviency to the court offended all.
He suggested to Constantius to require a rent for all the buildings which had
been erected at the public cost, and ministered to the emperor's cruelty, as well
as his rapacity, by accusing many Alexandrians of disobedience to his orders.
Mindful of his own interest, he sought to obtain a monopoly of nitre and of the
marshes where the papyrus and other reeds grew, of the salterns, and of biers
for the dead and the management of funerals in Alexandria. His luxury and arrogance
tended further to increase the hatred entertained towards him. A passage in Athanasius
(De Synod. c. 12) gives some reason to think that sentence of deposition was pronounced
against him at the Council of Seleuceia (A. D. 359); but if so, it was not carried
into effect.
The immediate cause of his downfal was his persecution of the heathens.
He had excited their fears by exclaimiinlg at the view of a splendid temple, "How
long shall this sepulchre stand?" But the crowning provocation was this:
there was a spot in the city occupied by the ruins of a forsaken temple of Mithras,
or the Sun, and still regarded by the heathens as sacred, though filled with the
refuse and off-scouring of the streets. This spot Constantius had given to the
church at Alexandria; and George determined to clear it out, and build a church
upon it. The workmen, in clearing it out, found in the adytum, or sacred recess
of the old temple, statues, sacred utensils, and the skulls of human victims,
either slain in sacrifice, or that the soothsayers might examine their entrails,
and foretell future events thereby. Some zealots brought these things out, and
exposed them to the mockery and jeers of the Christians. This irritated the heathens;
and as the news had just arrived of the death of Constantius (Nov. A. D. 361),
and the accession of Julian as sole emperor, and also of the execution of Artemius,
ex-governor of Egypt, they thought their time of ascendancy was come, and rose
in insurrection. George, whose persecutions seem to have been directed against
all who differed from him, was at the time presiding in a synod, where those who
held the sentiments of Aetius were compelled to subscribe a condemnation of their
own opinions. The rioters rushed into the church where the synod was assembled,
dragged him out, and would have killed him on the spot. He was, however, rescued
by the authorities, and apparently to satisfy his enemies, committed to prison.
But not many days after, at day-break, the mob forced the prison, dragged him
out, bound him (it is doubtful whether living or dead) on a camel, and, after
parading him through the city, tore him to pieces, and burnt his mangled remains.
His murder appears to have taken place about the end of the year 361. Though described
by Athanasius as a man of coarse manners and ignorant, at least in theology, he
left a valuable library, which the emperor Julian ordered to be sent to Antioch
for his own use. He had formerly, while in Cappadocia, borrowed some books of
George. The general hatred entertained towards him was evidenced by the absence
of any attempt to rescue him. The Arians subsequently charged the Athanasian party
with instigating his murderers; but Sozomen "rather thought" it was
the spontaneous act of the Gentiles. (Amm. Marc. xxii. 1; Gregor. Naz. Oratio
XXI.; Epiphan. Adv. Haeres. ii. Haeres. 48, or 68, iii. Haeres. 56 or 76; Athanas.
Historia Arianorum ad Monachos, c. 51, 75, De Synodis, c. 12, 37, Epistola ad
Episcopos Aegypti et Lybiae, c. 7, Apolog. de Fuga sua. c. 6, 7, Ad Imp. Constantium
Apolog. c. 30, Petitio ad Imper. Jovian, apud Athanas. Opera, vol. i. 782, ed.
Benedictin.; Socrat. H. E. ii. 14. 28, iii. 2, 3, 4; Sozom. H. E. iii. 7, iv.
10, v. 7; Theodoret, H. E. ii. 14; Philostorg. H. E. (apud. Phot.) vii. 2; Vita
Athanasii, apud Phot. Bibl. Cod. 258.)
It is difficult either to trace or to account for the introduction
of the odious George among the saints of the Romish and Greek churches; and it
is to be observed that the identification of the bishop of Alexandria with the
St. George of the calendar is stoutly objected to by some Roman Catlolic and some
Anglican writers -- for instance, Papebroche and Heylyn. In A. D. 494 (or perhaps
496) his rank as a canonised saint was recognized by Pope Gelasius I. at a coancil
at Rome, but his "gesta" were rejected as Apocryphal, and written by
heretics; a probable intimation that the facts of his history had not yet been
sufficiently perverted to be received. As time proceeded, various fabulous and
absurd "Acta" were produced, which Papebroche admits to be unworthy
of credit. The Greek "Acta" are considered by him as more trustworthy;
but he does not place even them in the first class; though a Latin version of
them is given in the Acta Sanctorum, with a long Commentarius Praevius, by Papebroche.
The distortions of the history are singular. St. George still appears as a Cappadocian
and a layman, but he is made a soldier of Diocletian, under whom he is described
as suffering martyrdom. The length, variety, and intermission of his sufferings
are a probable distortion of the various inflictions of the enraged multitude
before and after his imprisonment. The magician Athanasius, successively an opponent
of Christianity, a convert, and a martyr, is his chief antagonist; and the city
of Alexandria appears as the empress Alexandra, the wife of Diocletian, and herself
a convert and a martyr. The story of the dragon appears only in later legends;
the monster, who is, we suspect, nothing else than a still more distorted representation
of the fugitive Athanasius, is described as lurking about a lake as large as a
sea (Mareotis ?), near the city of Silena (Alexandria ?), in Lybia. St. George
was known among the Greeks as tropaiophoros, or the Victorious; and he was one
of the saints who were said to assist the first Crusaders. He was reverenced in
England in the Anglo-Saxon period; during the Norman and earlier part of the Plantagenet
dynasty his reputation increased; and under Edward III., or perhaps earlier, he
came to be regarded as the patron saint of the nation. (Acta Sanctorum, 23d April;
Gibbon, Decline and Full, &c. ch. 21, 23; Heylyn, Hist. of St. George.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
St. Alexander, who died in chains after cruel torments in the persecution
of Decius, was first Bishop of Cappadocia,
and was afterwards associated as coadjutor with the Bishop of Jerusalem,
who was then 116 years old. This association came about as follows: Alexander
had been imprisoned for his faith in the time of Alexander Severus and on being
released came to Jerusalem,
where he was compelled by the aged bishop to remain, and assist him in the government
of that see. This arrangement, however, was entered into with the consent of all
the bishops of Palestine.
It was Alexander who permitted Origen, although only a layman, to
speak in the churches. For this concession he was taken to task, but he defended
himself by examples of other permissions of the same kind given even to Origen
himself elsewhere, although then quite young. Butler says that they had studied
together on the great Christian school of Alexandria. Alexander ordained him a
priest. Especial praise is given to Alexander for the library he built at Jerusalem.
Finally, in spite of his years, he, with several other bishops, was
carried off a prisoner to Caesarea, and as the historians say, “the glory
of his white hairs and great sanctity formed a double crown for him in captivity”.
He suffered many tortures, but survived them all. When the wild beasts were brought
to devour him, some licked his feet, and others their impress on the sand of the
arena. Worn out by his sufferings he died in prison. This was in the year 251.
His feast is kept by the Latins on 18 March, by the Greeks, 22 December.
T.J. Campbell, ed.
Transcribed by: Joseph P. Thomas
This text is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Alexander (Alexandros), at first bishop in Cappadocia, flourished A. D. 212. On
the death of Severus, A. D. 211, he visited Jerusalem, and was made coadjutor
of the aged Narcissus, bishop of that city, whom he afterwards succeeded. He founded
an ecclesiastical library at Jerusalem, of which Eusebius made great use in writing
his History. After suffering under Severus and Caracalla, he was at last thrown
into prison at Caesarea, and, after witnessing a good confession, died A. D. 250.
Eusebius has preserved fragments of a letter written by him to the Antinoites;
of another to the Antiochenes (Hist. Eccl. vi. 11); of a third to Origen (vi.
14); and of another, written in conjunction with Theoctistus of Caesarea, to Demetrius
of Alexandria. (vi. 19.)
Feastday: May 8
d. unknown, feastday: September 6
d. 303, feastday: May 23
d.c. 320, feastday: December 15
d. 529, feastday: January 11
d. 270, feastday: August 31
Chrysippus (Chrusippos), a native of Cappadocia, was a celebrated ecclesiastical writer, who lived during the middle of the fifth century of the Christian aera. Chrysippus had two brothers, Cosmas and Gabriel, all of whom received a learned education in Syria, and were afterwards intrusted to the care of the abbot Euthymius at Jerusalem. There Chrysippus took orders, and became Oeconomus in the "Monasterium Laurae", praefect of the church of the Holy Resurrection, and custos of the church of the Holy Cross, an office which he held during ten years. He wrote many works on ecclesiastical matters, and his style is at once elegant and concise; but his productions are lost except a treatise entitled "Homilia de Sancta Deipara", which is contained with a Latin translation in the second volume of "Auctuarius Duceanus", and some fragments of a small work entitled "Encomium Theodori Martyris", which are extant in Eustathius Constantinopolitanus "Liber de Statu Vitae Functorum". (Cave, Hist. Liter.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
