The treatise of Lorenzo Valla on the Donation of ConstantineValla, Lorenzo
History
The treatise of Lorenzo Valla on the Donation of Constantine
Valla, Lorenzo
Church and state -- Holy Roman Empire; Constitutum Constantini; Popes -- Temporal power -- Early works to 1800
I will not speak here of the barbarisms in [the forger’s] language when
he says “chief over the priests” instead of chief of the priests; when he
puts in the same sentence “extiterit” and “existat” [confusing meanings,
moods and tenses]; when, having said “in the whole earth,” he adds again
“of the whole world,” as though he wished to include something else, or
the sky, which is part of the world, though a good part of the earth
even was not under Rome; when he distinguishes between providing for
“the faith” of Christians and providing for their “stability,” as though
they could not coexist;[469] when he confuses “ordain” and “decree,”
and when, as though Constantine had not already joined with the rest in
making the decree, he has him now ordain it, and as though he imposes a
punishment, decree [confirm] it, and confirm it together with the people.
[That, I pass by.] But what Christian could endure this [other thing],
and not, rather, critically and severely reprove a Pope who endures
it, and listens to it willingly and retails it; namely, that the Roman
See, though it received its primacy from Christ, as the Eighth Synod
declared according to the testimony of Gratian and many of the Greeks,
should be represented as having received it from Constantine, hardly yet
a Christian, as though from Christ? Would that very modest ruler have
chosen to make such a statement, and that most devout pontiff to listen
to it? Far be such a grave wrong from both of them!
How in the world—this is much more absurd, and impossible in the nature
of things—could one speak of Constantinople as one of the patriarchal
sees, when it was not yet a patriarchate, nor a see, nor a Christian
city, nor named Constantinople, nor founded, nor planned! For the
“privilege” was granted, so it says, the third day after Constantine
became a Christian; when as yet Byzantium, not Constantinople, occupied
that site. I am a liar if this fool does not confess as much himself. For
toward the end of the “privilege” he writes:
“Wherefore we have perceived it to be fitting that our empire
and our royal power should be transferred in the regions of the
East; and that in the province of Bizantia [_sic_], in the most
fitting place, a city should be built in our name; and that our
empire should there be established.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account