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
But I, to give my frank opinion, deny that the Acts of Sylvester is an
apocryphal book; because, as I have said, a certain Eusebius is said to
have been its author; but I think it is false and not worth reading,
in other parts as well as in what it has to say about the serpent, the
bull,[517] and the leprosy, to refute which I have gone over so much
ground. For even if Naaman was leprous, should we forthwith say that
Constantine also was leprous? Many writers allude to it in Naaman’s
case; that Constantine the head of the whole earth had leprosy no one
mentioned; at least none of his fellow citizens, but perhaps some
foreigner or other, to be given no more credence than that other fellow
who wrote about wasps building their nest in Vespasian’s nostrils, and
about the frog taken from Nero at birth, whence they say the place was
called the Lateran, for the frog (rana) is concealed (latere) there in
its grave.[518] Such stuff neither the wasps themselves, nor frogs, if
they could speak, would have uttered! [I pass over the statement that
boys’ blood is a remedy for leprosy, which medical science does not
admit;[519]] unless they attribute this to the Capitoline gods, as though
they were wont to talk and had ordered this to be done!
But why should I wonder that the pontiffs are not informed on these
points, when they do not know about their own name! For they say that
Peter is called Cephas because he was the head of the apostles, as though
this noun were Greek, from κεφαλή, and not Hebrew, or rather Syriac;
a noun which the Greeks write κηφᾶς, and which with them means rock
(Petrus), and not head! For “petrus,” “petra,” (rock) is a Greek noun.
And “petra” is stupidly explained by them through a Latin derivation, as
from “pede trita” (trodden by foot)! And they distinguish “metropolitan”
from “archbishop,” and claim that the former is so called from the size
of the city, though in Greek it is not called μετρόπολις but μητρόπολις,
that is, the mother-state or city. And they explain “patriarch” as “pater
patrum” (father of fathers); and “papa” (pope) from the interjection
“pape” (indeed); and “orthodox” as from the words meaning “right glory”;
and they pronounce “Simonem” (Simon) with a short middle vowel, though it
should be read with a long one, as are “Platonem” (Plato) and “Catonem”
(Cato). And there are many similar instances which I pass, lest for the
fault of some of the supreme pontiffs I should seem to attack all. These
instances had to be given so that no one should wonder that many of the
Popes have been unable to detect that the Donation of Constantine was
spurious; though, in my opinion, this deception originated with one of
them.
* * * * *
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