Work dossier · summary and historical context
This homily, traditionally attributed to John Chrysostom (c. 349–407), praises John the Evangelist on his feast day. It employs encomiastic rhetoric, comparing the saint to a rose and depicting him as a spiritual warrior against a dragon. The text draws on Gospel imagery, especially John reclining on Christ’s breast, to emphasize his theological insight. Its date and place of delivery are uncertain, likely Antioch or Constantinople. The Greek text survives in multiple manuscripts, but the edition by khazarzar lacks a critical apparatus. Authenticity has been questioned due to stylistic anomalies, but no consensus on spuriousness exists. The homily contributed to Byzantine hagiographic tradition and was read liturgically on 26 September or 8 May.
This homily matters as a witness to late antique Christian rhetoric and the veneration of John the Evangelist. It illustrates how Chrysostom (or a contemporary) adapted encomiastic conventions for hagiographic purposes, blending biblical imagery with praise. Its disputed authenticity highlights challenges in attributing patristic works. The text also contributes to understanding Byzantine liturgical practices and the development of John’s iconography, such as the motif of reclining on Christ’s breast.
The homily is set in the late fourth or early fifth century, a period when John Chrysostom was active as a priest in Antioch (386–397) and later as bishop of Constantinople (398–404). The work reflects the flourishing of Christian encomiastic oratory in Greek, often delivered on saints’ feast days. The community was likely a congregation in one of these cities, accustomed to elaborate rhetorical praise. The text survives in multiple Byzantine manuscripts, indicating its use in liturgical settings, particularly for the feast of John the Evangelist. Its transmission is part of the broader corpus of Chrysostom’s homilies, though its authenticity is debated. The edition by khazarzar, based on a collation of witnesses, does not specify manuscript sources or variant readings, limiting certainty about the original text. The homily’s relation to other Chrysostom works and to John’s hagiography is typical, but its stylistic anomalies suggest possible later interpolation or misattribution.
Apparatus · what the pipeline recorded
| Coptic | Rendering | Count | First |
|---|---|---|---|
| no glossary terms recorded | |||