subject to the Vicar of _Rome_; but, for a considerable Tract of Time, there is no Instance of their ordaining either Bishops or Metropolitans out of that District. [Sidenote: _The Title of_ Archbishop _in itself a bare Name of Honour_.] As for the Title of Archbishop, it is in itself a bare Name of Honour; whence, in some Countries, especially in _Italy_, several are distinguished with that Title, who indeed take place of, but have no Power or Authority over, other Bishops. And thus far of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, as settled in the Fourth and following Centuries, of the different Degrees that compose it, and the Prerogatives peculiar to each Degree, the Knowlege whereof is absolutely necessary for the right understanding of the many Contests and Disputes in point of Jurisdiction, which I shall have Occasion to touch upon in the Sequel of this History; for it was not at once, but by Degrees, and not without great Opposition, that the Bishops of _Rome_, extending their Authority beyond the Limits of that Vicarage, which was at that time the Boundary of their Jurisdiction, acquired the unlimited Power they now enjoy, with the arrogant Title of _Universal Bishop_. [Sidenote: _The Donation of all_ Italy _made by_ Constantine _to the Pope, a Forgery_.] But to return to _Sylvester_, in whose Pontificate this great Change began; I need not employ many Words to shew the Forgery of the so much boasted Donation of all _Italy_, supposed to have been made by _Constantine_ to _Sylvester_, in the Spring of the Year 324. Four Days after he had been baptized by that Pontiff, since the Instrument of that Donation is now looked upon as supposititious, by all who have the least Tincture of Learning. The Arguments they allege against it are: 1. That more than Twelve Copies of that Instrument are still extant, all differing from one another. 2. That it evidently appears, from Two Constitutions of _Constantine_, still to be seen in the _Theodosian_ Code[640], that he was not at _Rome_, but at _Thessalonica_, in the Spring of the Year 324. 3. That neither _Eusebius_, who has given us a very minute and particular Account of the Actions of that Prince, nor any other contemporary Writer, has so much as hinted at so memorable a Fact. 4. That all the antient Writers, both _Greek_ and _Latin_, agree, that _Constantine_ was not baptized at _Rome_, but at _Nicomedia_, when he lay at the Point of Death[641]. Let those, who stand up in Defence of that Donation, give satisfactory Answers to these Reasons, and I shall conclude with them, that _Italy_ being, by such a Donation, disjoined from the Empire, the Emperors who succeeded _Constantine_, had no Claim or Title to that Country; that none of their Constitutions were binding there; and consequently that, by the Inhabitants of _Italy_, Recourse ought to be had, in all Cases, not to the Civil, but to the Canon Law: for such pernicious Doctrines have been broached, published, and