# Panegyric of Macarius of Tkow

Source: https://coptic-lore-forge.lovable.app/wiki/panegyric-of-macarius-of-tkow — Coptic Orthodox Wiki (updated 2026-10-02)

The Panegyric of Macarius of Tkow is a hagiographical work attributed to Dioscorus of Alexandria, presenting Macarius as an exemplary bishop and defender of Egyptian opposition to Chalcedon.[^1][^2]

## Overview

The *Panegyric of Macarius of Tkow*, also called the *Panegyric on Macarius, Bishop of Tkow*, is the chief literary source for the saint’s life. Attributed to Dioscorus of Alexandria, it is identified as a work by Pseudo-Dioscorus.[^1] It combines praise of the bishop with narratives about Dioscorus and the events surrounding the Council of Chalcedon; it is a compilation of at least three historical or autobiographical texts.[^3]

## Composition and Transmission

The work cannot have been composed earlier than the second quarter of the sixth century. Internal evidence points to composition in Greek in or around Alexandria. It survives in Sahidic and Bohairic translations, and several unedited manuscripts of Arabic versions also survive.[^1]

The account of Macarius suggests that the author expanded episodes from the *Life of Dioscorus* and added other traditional stories. The supplied entries differ in their treatment of that underlying work: the Macarius entry attributes it to Pseudo-Theopistus of Alexandria, whereas the Theopistus entry presents it as a work by the historical companion of Dioscorus.[^1][^4]

## Narrative

The *Panegyric* takes the form of a discourse delivered by Dioscorus to monks visiting him in exile at Gangra in Paphlagonia. It supplies no account of Macarius’ early life or appointment as bishop. In its recollections, Macarius appears at the docks of Alexandria as a poor, self-effacing bishop accompanied by a single companion. He speaks only Coptic and requires an interpreter to converse with Dioscorus, who rebukes Theopistus for disparaging him.[^5]

During the voyage to Constantinople, Macarius heals a blind man and miraculously vindicates an Egyptian sailor falsely accused by his shipmates. His companion Pinoution recounts further virtues and miracles, including his victory over demons in a pagan temple. A vision attributed to Shenute identifies Macarius as a champion of orthodoxy who will take the aged abbot’s place in the coming struggle.[^6]

At Constantinople, Macarius’ poor clothing initially prevents his admission to the imperial presence. Once admitted, he cannot participate in the doctrinal debate because no interpreter is available. After learning of a plot against him, Dioscorus sends him back to Egypt; the narrative therefore places Macarius at a preliminary meeting rather than at the Council of Chalcedon itself.[^7]

The final episode recounts Macarius’ refusal to accept the council’s decrees and the Tome of Leo because he considers them inconsistent with Nicaea. An imperial courier fatally kicks him. His burial beside John the Baptist and Elisha fulfills an earlier vision, and healings accompany his funeral.[^7][^8]

## Literary and Historical Significance

The work is a hagiographical romance set within anti-Chalcedonian polemics. Its purpose is chiefly exemplary and exhortatory rather than historical in the modern sense; the principal claims about Macarius’ life lack corroboration outside the Egyptian orthodox tradition.[^2]

Macarius is portrayed as a model of evangelical poverty, trust in God, healing power, and willingness to suffer for the faith. His associations with Shenute and Paphnutius establish his standing within Coptic-speaking Christianity, while his relationship with Dioscorus connects him to the Greek-speaking patriarchate. Together, these relationships present Egyptian Christianity as united against what the author regarded as Chalcedonian error. Whether the work sought to create such unity or reinforced an existing situation remains uncertain.[^9]

## Edition

D. W. Johnson’s edition is cited as *A Panegyric on Macarius Bishop of Tkow Attributed to Dioscorus of Alexandria*, CSCO 415–416, published at Louvain in 1983.[^10]

## Sources
[^1]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 5, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 346)
[^2]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 5, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 348)
[^3]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 5, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 262)
[^4]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 7, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 521)
[^5]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 5, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 346)
[^6]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 5, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 347)
[^7]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 5, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 347)
[^8]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 5, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 348)
[^9]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 5, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 349)
[^10]: The Coptic Encyclopedia, Volume 7, Aziz S. Atiya (Editor in Chief) (p. 522)