St. John Chrysostom: The Golden-Mouthed Preacher of Constantinople

St. John Chrysostom, a revered Doctor of the Church, was born in Antioch around 347 AD and passed away in Commana, Pontus, on September 14, 407. His epithet “Chrysostom,” meaning “golden-mouthed,” aptly describes his extraordinary eloquence, which established him as the most celebrated preacher in Christian history and a towering figure among the Greek Church Fathers. His innate talents, combined with the historical circumstances of his life, shaped him into a leading voice of his era.

Early Life and Education in Antioch

Antioch, Chrysostom’s birthplace, was a vibrant metropolis, second only to Constantinople in the Eastern Roman Empire during the 4th century. This era was marked by intense religious debates and diverse beliefs. Antioch was a melting pot of Paganism, Manichaeism, Gnosticism, Arianism, Apollinarianism, and Judaism, all vying for converts. Even the Catholic community was fractured by the schism between Bishop Meletius and Paulinus. Growing up amidst this religious turbulence profoundly influenced young Chrysostom.

His father, Secundus, was a high-ranking military officer in Syria. Tragically, Secundus died shortly after John’s birth, leaving his wife Anthusa, only twenty years old, to raise John and his older sister alone. Anthusa, a woman of remarkable intellect and strong character, dedicated herself to her children’s upbringing. She instilled piety in John and ensured he received the best education Antioch offered, despite the questionable morals and religious ambiguity prevalent in some educational institutions of the time. Chrysostom studied under Andragatius, a philosopher, and, more significantly, Libanius, the most renowned orator of the period and a staunch defender of Roman paganism. Under Libanius’s tutelage, Chrysostom mastered Greek rhetoric and classical culture, a foundation evident in his later works. His critiques of classical learning are often misinterpreted; they were aimed at pagan mythology, not classical wisdom itself, as he championed Christian philosophy against the proponents of “sophia ellenike” (Greek wisdom).

From Lector to Ascetic Life

A pivotal moment in Chrysostom’s life occurred around 367 AD when he encountered Bishop Meletius. Meletius’s earnestness, gentleness, and captivating demeanor deeply impressed Chrysostom, leading him to gradually shift away from classical studies and embrace a life of ascetic devotion. He immersed himself in Holy Scripture and diligently listened to Meletius’s sermons. Around 370 AD, he was baptized and ordained as a lector, a liturgical role involving reading scriptural passages during church services.

Driven by a desire for a more profound spiritual life, Chrysostom soon joined an ascetic community near Antioch. This community, guided spiritually by Carterius and Diodorus of Tarsus (later Bishop of Tarsus), emphasized prayer, manual labor, and Scriptural study. It is likely that Chrysostom’s earliest writings originated during this period, focusing on ascetic and monastic themes. After four years, seeking even greater solitude, Chrysostom became an anchorite, living in a cave near Antioch for two years. However, the extreme ascetic practices, including rigorous fasting and exposure to harsh weather, severely damaged his health. Wisely, he returned to Antioch to recuperate and resumed his duties as lector in the church.

Deacon and Priest in Antioch: Years of Flourishing Ministry

Historical accounts provide an imprecise chronology for Chrysostom’s time in Antioch. It is probable that Meletius ordained him as a deacon at the beginning of 381, just before Meletius departed for Constantinople and his role as president of the Second Ecumenical Council, where he later died. Flavian succeeded Meletius as Bishop of Antioch, and Chrysostom enjoyed a close and supportive relationship with him. As deacon, Chrysostom assisted in liturgical services, cared for the sick and impoverished, and likely instructed catechumens (those preparing for baptism). He also continued his literary pursuits. His acclaimed work, “On the Priesthood,” is believed to have been written around 386, or at the latest, early in his priesthood around 387. The book explores the weighty responsibilities and spiritual demands of pastoral leadership. Whether it was inspired by a specific event, such as a request for Chrysostom and his friend Basil to become bishops (around 372), is debated. Early biographers seem to interpret it differently.

In 386, Bishop Flavian ordained Chrysostom to the priesthood, marking the beginning of his influential role in ecclesiastical history. For the next twelve years, preaching became his primary ministry, either alongside or in place of Bishop Flavian. He undoubtedly shouldered much of the responsibility for religious instruction and education within the community. A defining moment that showcased his oratorical power and authority was his series of sermons “On the Statues” during Lent of 387. The people of Antioch, angered by new taxes, had defaced statues of Emperor Theodosius. Amid the ensuing panic and fear of imperial reprisal, Chrysostom delivered twenty powerful sermons, offering solace, encouragement, and urging calm until Bishop Flavian secured the emperor’s pardon from Constantinople.

Chrysostom’s regular preaching involved systematic exposition of Holy Scripture, a practice unfortunately less common today. These scriptural expositions formed the basis of his renowned commentaries, a vast repository of dogmatic, moral, and historical insights into the late fourth and early fifth centuries. The period from 386 to 398 was Chrysostom’s most theologically productive era, solidifying his status as a Doctor of the Church. By 392, St. Jerome acknowledged Chrysostom’s prominent position among theological writers in his De Viris Illustribus, recognizing his widespread influence beyond Antioch, particularly in the Byzantine Empire and its capital.

Bishop of Constantinople: Reform and Conflict

Ordinarily, Chrysostom might have been expected to succeed Flavian as Bishop of Antioch. However, fate intervened. On September 27, 397, Nectarius, Bishop of Constantinople, died, creating a power vacuum and intense competition for the episcopal see. To the surprise of many contenders, Emperor Arcadius, influenced by his minister Eutropius, secretly summoned John Chrysostom from Antioch. Without the knowledge of the Antiochene populace, Chrysostom was swiftly transported to Constantinople and, on February 26, 398, ordained Bishop of Constantinople in a grand ceremony presided over by Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria. Theophilus, who had initially hoped to install his own candidate, Isidore, was compelled to consecrate Chrysostom.

This sudden elevation brought immense changes and challenges. Constantinople was a burgeoning metropolis, a blend of Western and Oriental cultures, rife with courtly intrigue and luxury. As bishop, Chrysostom headed a diverse clergy and effectively led the entire Byzantine episcopate. His first priority was reconciliation between Flavian of Antioch and Rome, healing a lingering schism. He then turned his attention to reforming the Constantinopolitan Church.

Reform was urgently needed. Chrysostom began with the episcopal household, drastically reducing expenses and ending lavish banquets, adopting a lifestyle reminiscent of his ascetic past. He addressed the issue of syneisactoe among the clergy—women housekeepers who had taken vows of virginity—forbidding this practice. He confronted clergy members guilty of avarice and luxury, even removing two deacons for murder and adultery. He disciplined monks who wandered aimlessly without monastic adherence, directing them back to their monasteries. Chrysostom also addressed the conduct of ecclesiastical widows, urging them to either remarry or live with decorum befitting their status.

Following clerical reforms, Chrysostom focused on his congregation. Echoing his Antioch ministry, he frequently preached against the excessive extravagance of the wealthy, particularly the ostentatious attire of older women who should have eschewed such vanity. These rebukes, aimed at societal excesses, resonated with the general populace but offended some within Constantinople’s elite, especially those in court circles like the widows Marsa, Castricia, and Eugraphia. Unaccustomed to such direct criticism, the upper classes felt targeted, their offense amplified by the accuracy of Chrysostom’s critiques. Conversely, the common people enthusiastically embraced their new bishop’s sermons, often applauding him in church. They deeply appreciated his dedication to the poor, evidenced by the hospital he established in his first year using saved household funds.

Despite these tensions, Chrysostom also cultivated close friendships within the nobility. Olympias, a widowed deaconess and relative of Emperor Theodosius, was a devoted friend. Brison, a court official, aided Chrysostom in training church choirs and remained a steadfast ally. Initially, Empress Eudoxia herself was favorably disposed towards Chrysostom, attending his sermons, participating in religious processions, and donating silver candlesticks to the churches.

Growing Estrangement and Political Turmoil

Regrettably, the amicable relationship with the imperial court deteriorated. Eutropius, the once-enslaved minister now wielding immense power, abused his position, unjustly confiscating wealth and persecuting rivals. Chrysostom repeatedly appealed to Eutropius, warning him of the consequences of his actions, but to no avail. Meanwhile, influential court ladies likely fueled Eudoxia’s resentment towards the austere bishop. The empress herself initiated the rift by unjustly seizing a widow’s vineyard. Chrysostom intervened on the widow’s behalf, further offending Eudoxia. This incident marked the beginning of a growing estrangement between the imperial court and the episcopal palace, escalating towards a major conflict, likely starting around 401 AD.

Before this discord became public, significant political events unfolded, drawing Chrysostom into the fray. These events included the downfall of Eutropius and the revolt of Gainas. In January 399, Eutropius fell from grace for unclear reasons. Fearing popular and political enemies, he sought sanctuary in the church. Despite Eutropius’s previous attempts to curtail ecclesiastical asylum, Chrysostom intervened, delivering his famous sermon “On Eutropius,” and saving the disgraced minister’s life temporarily. However, Eutropius’s subsequent attempt to flee led to his capture, exile, and eventual execution.

Immediately following this, a more perilous situation arose: the revolt of Gainas. Gainas, an imperial general, initially sent to quell Tribigild’s rebellion, openly joined forces with Tribigild in the summer of 399. Emperor Arcadius was forced to accept humiliating terms to restore peace. Gainas was appointed commander-in-chief and even demanded the surrender of Aurelian and Saturninus, high-ranking officials in Constantinople. Chrysostom reportedly undertook a mission to Gainas and, through his intervention, secured the release of Aurelian and Saturninus. Soon after, Gainas, an Arian Goth, demanded a Catholic church in Constantinople for his soldiers. Chrysostom’s resolute opposition forced Gainas to concede. Popular unrest in Constantinople led to the massacre of thousands of Goths in a single night. Gainas escaped but was later defeated and killed by the Huns. Within a few years, three consuls of the Byzantine Empire had met violent ends. Chrysostom’s authority was undeniably enhanced by his magnanimity and steadfastness during these turbulent times. This increased influence may have fueled the jealousy of the ruling court faction led by Empress Eudoxia, further aggravated by ambitious provincial bishops like Severian of Gabala, Antiochus of Ptolemais, and initially Acacius of Beroea, who gravitated to the capital’s allure. Severian, in particular, fancied himself Chrysostom’s rival in eloquence.

Synod of the Oak and Exile

Public conflict remained muted until Chrysostom’s months-long absence from Constantinople in 401, necessitated by ecclesiastical affairs in Asia Minor. Responding to appeals from several bishops, Chrysostom traveled to Ephesus, where he appointed a new archbishop and, with synodal consent, deposed six bishops for simony (the buying or selling of church offices). He also deposed Bishop Gerontius of Nicomedia before returning to Constantinople.

During his absence, tensions escalated in Constantinople. Bishop Severian, entrusted with some ecclesiastical duties, clashed openly with Serapion, the archdeacon and oeconomus of the cathedral and episcopal palace. The exact cause is unclear, but Chrysostom deemed the situation serious enough to request Severian to return to his own diocese. Only Eudoxia’s intervention, due to Serapion’s influence with her, allowed Severian to return from Chalcedon, where he had retreated. The subsequent reconciliation was superficial, particularly on Severian’s part, and the public scandal generated considerable animosity. The repercussions became evident when Bishop Porphyrius of Gaza sought imperial favor for his diocese in the spring of 402. Chrysostom admitted his inability to assist, confessing his own disfavor with the empress. However, the dissenting faction lacked a powerful leader until the unexpected arrival of Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria.

Towards the end of 402, Emperor Arcadius summoned Theophilus to Constantinople to face a synod presided over by Chrysostom. The charges stemmed from complaints by Egyptian monks, notably the “Tall Brothers,” whom Theophilus, once their ally, had turned against, persecuting them as Origenists. Theophilus, however, was not easily intimidated. He had cultivated influence in Constantinople and was aware of the court’s sentiments. He saw an opportunity to exploit the situation. He contacted St. Epiphanius of Cyprus, urging him to go to Constantinople and pressure Chrysostom to condemn Origenism. Epiphanius complied but, realizing Theophilus’s manipulative motives, left Constantinople and died on his return journey in 403.

Around this time, Chrysostom delivered a sermon criticizing the extravagant luxury of women, which was twisted and presented to Empress Eudoxia as a personal attack. The stage was set for conflict. Theophilus arrived in Constantinople in June 403, not alone but with twenty-nine suffragan bishops and, according to Palladius, ample money and gifts. He lodged in an imperial palace and convened with Chrysostom’s adversaries. He then withdrew with his supporters to a villa near Constantinople called epi dryn (“at the oak”). There, they compiled a preposterous list of accusations against Chrysostom. Chrysostom, who had assembled forty-two archbishops and bishops to judge Theophilus as per the emperor’s mandate, was now summoned to defend himself before this hostile assembly. He rightly refused to recognize the legitimacy of a synod packed with his enemies as judges. After three summons, Chrysostom was declared deposed with the emperor’s consent. To prevent bloodshed, he surrendered to imperial soldiers.

However, popular outrage and a sudden incident in the imperial palace terrified Empress Eudoxia. Interpreting these events as divine retribution for Chrysostom’s exile, she ordered his immediate recall. After initial hesitation, Chrysostom returned to Constantinople amidst jubilant public celebrations. Theophilus and his faction fled. Chrysostom’s return was a setback for Eudoxia, but her resentment soon resurfaced. Two months later, a silver statue of the empress was erected near the cathedral. The accompanying public festivities, lasting several days, disrupted church services. Chrysostom complained to the city prefect, who reported to Eudoxia that the bishop had protested against her statue. This enraged the empress. She recalled Theophilus and his bishops to depose Chrysostom again. Theophilus, wary of repeating the previous ordeal, declined to return but wrote to Constantinople, arguing that Chrysostom should be condemned for violating a canon of the Synod of Antioch (341 AD, an Arian synod) by resuming his see after deposition. Other bishops lacked the authority or courage to issue a formal judgment. They merely pressed Emperor Arcadius to issue a new exile decree. Two attempts on Chrysostom’s life failed. On Easter Eve, 404, imperial soldiers and Chrysostom’s opponents disrupted baptismal services, scattering the congregation in the baptistery. Finally, Arcadius signed the decree, and on June 24, 404, soldiers escorted Chrysostom into his second exile.

Final Exile and Death

Soon after Chrysostom’s second exile, a devastating fire consumed the cathedral, the senate house, and surrounding buildings in Constantinople. Chrysostom’s supporters were falsely accused of arson and faced persecution. Arsacius, an elderly man, was installed as Chrysostom’s successor, quickly followed by Atticus, a more cunning figure. Refusal to recognize the new bishops led to confiscation of property and further exiles. Chrysostom was banished to Cucusus, a remote and inhospitable location on the eastern frontier of Armenia, vulnerable to Isaurian raids. In 405, he was forced to seek refuge in the fortress of Arabissus to escape barbarian attacks. Despite these hardships, he maintained correspondence with his supporters and never relinquished hope of returning.

News of his unjust deposition reached the West, and the Pope and Italian bishops rallied to his cause. Emperor Honorius and Pope Innocent I attempted to convene a new synod, but their legates were imprisoned and sent back. The Pope severed communion with the Patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch (where a Chrysostom antagonist had succeeded Flavian), and Constantinople until they posthumously recognized Chrysostom by including his name in the diptychs (lists of honored bishops). Ultimately, all hope of return faded. Chrysostom’s continued existence appeared a threat to his enemies. In the summer of 407, an order was issued to transfer him to Pityus, a remote outpost on the Black Sea near the Caucasus. One of his guards inflicted deliberate suffering during the journey, forcing arduous marches in harsh weather. Chrysostom’s health, already weakened by illness, deteriorated rapidly. On September 14, the party reached Commana in Pontus. Despite his failing health, he was forced to continue. Soon, his weakness compelled them to return to Commana, where he died hours later. His final words were “Doxa to theo panton eneken” – “Glory to God for all things.” He was buried in Commana. On January 27, 438, his relics were solemnly translated to Constantinople and interred in the Church of the Apostles, where Empress Eudoxia had been buried in 404.

The Enduring Legacy: Writings and Theology of St. John Chrysostom

St. John Chrysostom’s lasting significance in ecclesiastical history rests not only on his turbulent episcopate in Constantinople but primarily on his profound contributions as a Doctor of the Church. His extensive writings surpass those of any other Greek Father. They can be categorized into three main groups: “opuscula” (shorter works), “homilies,” and “letters.”

Opuscula: Ascetic and Monastic Treatises

Chrysostom’s “opuscula” largely originate from his earlier literary period and explore monastic and ascetic themes. Key works include:

• “Comparison of the King with a Monk” – Contrasting worldly power with monastic renunciation.
• “Adhortatio ad Theodorum lapsum” – An exhortation to Theodore (possibly of Mopsuestia) who had lapsed from monastic life, urging repentance and return.
• “Against the Opponents of the Monastic Life” – A defense of monasticism against its detractors.
• “De Compunctione” (On Compunction) – A two-book treatise on contrition and repentance.
• “Adhortatio ad Stagirium” – A three-book work offering consolation and guidance to Stagirius, who suffered from illness and temptations.
• “Adversus Subintroductas” – Against the practice of clergy living with women (syneisactoe).
• “De Virginitate” (On Virginity) – An exaltation of virginity as a higher spiritual state.
• “De Sacerdotio” (On the Priesthood) – A profound dialogue on the dignity and responsibilities of the priestly office.

Homilies: Scriptural Commentaries and Sermons

Chrysostom’s homilies are diverse, encompassing scriptural commentaries, thematic sermon series, and numerous individual sermons.

(a) Scriptural Commentaries:

His major Old Testament commentaries include:

• Sixty-seven Homilies on Genesis (and eight earlier sermons on Genesis).
• Fifty-nine Homilies on the Psalms (covering Psalms 4-12, 41, 43-49, 108-117, 119-150).
• Commentary on the initial chapters of Isaiah.

Fragments attributed to Job, Proverbs, Jeremiah, and Daniel are considered spurious or of doubtful authenticity, as is the Synopsis of the Old and New Testaments.

His significant New Testament commentaries are:

• Ninety Homilies on St. Matthew (circa 390 AD).
• Eighty-eight Homilies on St. John (circa 389 AD).
• Fifty-five Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles (preserved through stenographic records).
• Homilies on all the Pauline Epistles.

His commentaries on the Psalms, Matthew, and Romans are particularly esteemed. The thirty-four homilies on Galatians are likely from a later editor.

(b) Homilies in Connected Groups:

Notable thematic homily series include:

• Five Homilies on Anna (exemplifying prayer and faith).
• Three Homilies on David (exploring his life and virtues).
• Six Homilies on Ozias (lessons from King Uzziah’s reign).
• Eight Homilies Against the Jews (polemical sermons reflecting the anti-Jewish sentiment of the time).
• Twelve Homilies “De Incomprehensibili Dei Natura” (On the Incomprehensible Nature of God).
• Seven Homilies on St. Paul (panegyrics praising the Apostle Paul).

(c) Single Homilies:

Numerous individual homilies address moral topics, feasts, and saints’ commemorations.

Letters: Exile Correspondence

Chrysostom’s letters, numbering around 238, were all written during his exile. The seventeen letters to the deaconess Olympias are particularly valued for their personal and insightful content, revealing his inner thoughts and spiritual fortitude amidst suffering.

Apocrypha

Among works of questionable authorship, the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is attributed to him, though he likely revised an existing liturgy rather than composing it entirely. The “Letter to Cæsarius,” a debated text regarding the Eucharist, is considered apocryphal. The Latin “Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum,” an Arian work from the 5th century, is also spuriously attributed to him.

Theological Significance

Oratorical Prowess

Chrysostom’s preaching success stemmed from his exceptional natural eloquence, abundant ideas, accessible presentation, and profound conviction. He prioritized moral themes, often deviating from rigid sermon structures to engage his audience dynamically. While his homiletic style differs from modern thematic preaching, the enthusiastic audience response during his sermons indicates his effective communication.

Exegetical Approach

As an exegete, Chrysostom is paramount, representing the Antiochian school’s grammatical-historical interpretation of Scripture. Trained by Diodorus of Tarsus, he emphasized literal meaning in contrast to Origen’s allegorical approach. However, Chrysostom avoided the extreme literalism of Theodore of Mopsuestia, acknowledging allegorical interpretations when contextually justified by the biblical text.

Dogmatic Theology

While not primarily a speculative theologian, Chrysostom’s writings are rich in theological insights. He was quickly recognized by both Greek and Latin Churches as a key witness to the faith. Even during the Council of Ephesus (431), both sides invoked his authority. His pronouncements were considered so authoritative that at the Seventh Ecumenical Council, a quote from Chrysostom in support of icons was deemed decisive.

The Latin Church also early recognized his theological weight. Pelagius, around 415, was the first to quote Chrysostom, followed by St. Augustine in 421, who cited Chrysostom in his anti-Pelagian arguments. During the Reformation, debates arose regarding Chrysostom’s alignment with Protestantism or Catholicism, a discussion that continues to some extent. While some passages on the Virgin Mary, private confession, and papal primacy are open to interpretation, they do not contradict Catholic doctrine. Conversely, Chrysostom explicitly affirms tradition and the Church’s authoritative teaching as rules of faith. He emphasizes the Church’s unity in doctrine, universality, and role as Christ’s singular Bride. In Christology, he clearly professes Christ’s divinity and humanity in one person, though without detailed exploration of the hypostatic union. His Eucharistic theology unequivocally affirms the Real Presence, with language describing the priestly consecration aligning with the doctrine of transubstantiation.

St. John Chrysostom’s enduring legacy lies in his powerful sermons, insightful scriptural commentaries, and theological wisdom, earning him the title “Golden-Mouthed” and a permanent place among the most influential figures in Christian history.

---

References

Baur, C. (1910). St. John Chrysostom. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08452b.htm

Further Reading

• Biographies:

  • Stephens, W.R.W. Saint John Chrysostom, his life and times: a sketch of the church and the empire in the fourth century. London: 1880.
  • Bush, W. The Life and Times of Chrysostom. London, 1885.
  • Hermant, La Vie de Saint Jean Chrysostome. Paris, 1683.
  • De Tillemont, L.S. Mémoires pour servir l’histoire ecclésiastique des six premiers siècles, XI.
  • Stilting, J. De S. Jo. Chrysostomo . . . Commentarius historicus in Acta SS., IV, Sept.
  • Thierry, G. S. Jean Chrysostome et l’impératrice Eudoxie. Paris, 1889.
  • Puech, A. Saint Jean Chrysostome. Paris, 1905.
  • Neander, A. Der hl. Joh. Chrysostomus und die Kirche, besonders des Orients, in dessen Zeitalter. Berlin, 1858.
  • Ludwig, M. Der hl. Joh. Chrys. in seinem Verhältniss zum byzantinischen Hof. Braunsberg, 1883.

• Chrysostom as Orator:

  • Albert, J.B. S. Jean Chrysostome considéré comme orateur populaire. Paris, 1858.
  • Ackermann, A. Die Beredsamkeit des hl. Joh. Chrys. Würzburg, 1889.
  • Willey, E.C. Chrysostom: The Orator. Cincinnati, 1908.

• Chrysostom’s Writings and Doctrine:

  • Usener, H. Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen, I. Bonn, 1889.
  • Rauschen, G. Jahrbücher der christl. Kirche unter dem Kaiser Theodosius dem Grossen. Freiburg im Br., 1897.
  • Batiffol, P. Revue biblique, VIII.
  • Schwartz, E. Jüdische und christl. Ostertafeln. Berlin, 1905.
  • Haidacher, S. Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie, XVIII-XXXII.
  • Haidacher, S. Des hl. Joh. Chrys. Büchlein über Hoffart u. Kindererziehung. Freiburg, 1907.
  • Mayerus, J.F. Chrysostomus Lutheranus. Grimma, 1686.
  • Hacki, J. D. Jo. Chrysostomus . . . a Lutheranismo . . . vindicatus. Oliva, 1683.
  • Förster, H. Chrysostomus in seinem Verhältniss zur antiochen. Schule. Gotha, 1869.
  • Chase, F.H. Chrysostom, A Study in the History of Biblical Interpretation. London, 1887.
  • Haidacher, S. Die Lehre des hl. Joh. Chrys. über die Schriftinspiration. Salzburg, 1897.
  • Chapman, J. St. Chrysostom on St. Peter in Dublin Review. 1903.
  • Naegle, A. Die Eucharistielehre des hl. Johannes Chrysostomus, des Doctor Eucharisti. Freiburg im Br., 1900.

---

(Note: No images were available in the provided original markdown. If images are to be included, please provide image URLs and context for placement and alt text generation.)