Donation of Constantine - Revision history

Nick at 21:19, 12 January 2018

2018-01-12T21:19:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:19, 12 January 2018
Line 17:		Line 17:
	[[Image:Donationconstantine.jpg\|thumb\|right\|300px\|Workshop of [[Raphael]], ''[[The Donation of Constantine (painting)\|The Donation of Constantine]]''. ''[[Raphael Rooms\|Stanze di Raffaello]]'', [[Vatican City]]]]		[[Image:Donationconstantine.jpg\|thumb\|right\|300px\|Workshop of [[Raphael]], ''[[The Donation of Constantine (painting)\|The Donation of Constantine]]''. ''[[Raphael Rooms\|Stanze di Raffaello]]'', [[Vatican City]]]]

	During the [[Middle Ages]], the ''Donation'' was widely accepted as authentic, although the Emperor [[Otto III, Holy Roman Emperor\|Otto III]] did possibly raise suspicions of the document "in letters of gold" as a forgery, in making a gift to the See of Rome.<sup>[]</sup> It was not until the mid-15th century, with the revival of Classical scholarship and textual criticism, that [[Renaissance humanism\|humanists]], and eventually the papal bureaucracy, began to realize that the document could not possibly be genuine. [[Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa]] declared it to be a forgery<~~ref~~>{{Cite book \|title=The Discovery of Time \|first=Stephen \|last=Toulmin \|first2=June \|last2=Goodfield \|pages=104–106 \|publisher=University of Chicago Press \|location=Chicago \|edition=Phoenix \|year=1982 \|isbn=0-226-80842-4 \|authorlink=Stephen Toulmin \|authorlink2=June Goodfield}}</~~ref~~><~~ref~~>{{cite book\|authors=Nicholas of Cusa, Paul E. Sigmund (editor and translator)\|title=The Catholic Concordance\|series=Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought\|publisher=Cambridge University Press\|year=1991\|isbn=0-521-40207-7\|chapter=The properly ordered power of the Western emperor does not depend on the Pope\|pages=216–222}}</~~ref~~> and spoke of it as an [[apocryphal]] work.		During the [[Middle Ages]], the ''Donation'' was widely accepted as authentic, although the Emperor [[Otto III, Holy Roman Emperor\|Otto III]] did possibly raise suspicions of the document "in letters of gold" as a forgery, in making a gift to the See of Rome.<sup>[9]</sup> It was not until the mid-15th century, with the revival of Classical scholarship and textual criticism, that [[Renaissance humanism\|humanists]], and eventually the papal bureaucracy, began to realize that the document could not possibly be genuine. [[Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa]] declared it to be a forgery<sup>[10]</sup><sup>[11]</sup> and spoke of it as an [[apocryphal]] work.

	Later, the Catholic priest [[Lorenzo Valla]] argued in his [[philology\|philological]] study of the text that the language used in manuscript could not be dated to the 4th century.<~~ref name=Prosser~~>{{Cite journal\| issn = 08919666\| volume = 20\| issue = Journal Article\| pages = 35–\| last = Prosser\| first = Peter E.\| title = Church history's biggest hoax: Renaissance scholarship proved fatal for one of the medieval papacy's favorite claims\| journal = Christian History\| date = 2001\| url = http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=GPS&sw=w&u=wikipedia&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA80303684&asid=2e95f78ae926bf1bb8b214ce55f2aabb}}{{subscription\|via=[~~[General OneFile~~]~~]}}~~</~~ref~~> The language of the text suggests that the manuscript can most likely be dated to the 8th century. Valla believed the forgery to be so obvious that he leaned toward believing that the Church had knowledge that the document was inauthentic. Valla further argued that papal usurpation of temporal power had corrupted the church, caused the wars of Italy, and reinforced the "overbearing, barbarous, tyrannical priestly domination."<~~ref name=Prosser~~/>		Later, the Catholic priest [[Lorenzo Valla]] argued in his [[philology\|philological]] study of the text that the language used in manuscript could not be dated to the 4th century.<sup>[12]</sup> The language of the text suggests that the manuscript can most likely be dated to the 8th century. Valla believed the forgery to be so obvious that he leaned toward believing that the Church had knowledge that the document was inauthentic. Valla further argued that papal usurpation of temporal power had corrupted the church, caused the wars of Italy, and reinforced the "overbearing, barbarous, tyrannical priestly domination."<sup>[12]</sup>

	This was the first instance of modern, scientific [[diplomatics]]. Independently of both Cusa and Valla, [[Reginald Pecock]]e, Bishop of Chichester (1450–57), reached a similar conclusion. Among the indications that the Donation must be a fake are its language and the fact that, while certain imperial-era formulas are used in the text, some of the Latin in the document could not have been written in the 4th century; anachronistic terms such as "[[fief]]" were used. Also, the purported date of the document is inconsistent with the content of the document itself, as it refers both to the fourth consulate of Constantine (315) as well as the consulate of Gallicanus (317).		This was the first instance of modern, scientific [[diplomatics]]. Independently of both Cusa and Valla, [[Reginald Pecock]]e, Bishop of Chichester (1450–57), reached a similar conclusion. Among the indications that the Donation must be a fake are its language and the fact that, while certain imperial-era formulas are used in the text, some of the Latin in the document could not have been written in the 4th century; anachronistic terms such as "[[fief]]" were used. Also, the purported date of the document is inconsistent with the content of the document itself, as it refers both to the fourth consulate of Constantine (315) as well as the consulate of Gallicanus (317).

	[[Pope Pius II]] wrote a tract in 1453, five years before becoming Pope, to show that, though the ''Donation'' was a forgery, the papacy owed its lands to [[Charlemagne]] and its powers of the [[Keys of Heaven\|keys]] to [[Primacy of Peter\|Peter]]; he did not publish it, however.<~~ref~~>Pope Pius II (1883). ''Opera inedita''. pp. 571–81. Cited in: Lea, Henry Charles (1895). "The 'Donation of Constantine'". ''The English Historical Review'' '''10'''(37). pp. 86–87. {{doi\|10.1093/ehr/X.XXXVII.86}}</~~ref~~>		[[Pope Pius II]] wrote a tract in 1453, five years before becoming Pope, to show that, though the ''Donation'' was a forgery, the papacy owed its lands to [[Charlemagne]] and its powers of the [[Keys of Heaven\|keys]] to [[Primacy of Peter\|Peter]]; he did not publish it, however.<sup>[13]</sup>

	Contemporary opponents of papal powers in Italy emphasized the primacy of civil law and civil jurisdiction, now firmly embodied once again in the Justinian ''[[Corpus Juris Civilis]]''. The Florentine chronicler [[Giovanni Cavalcanti (chronicler)\|Giovanni Cavalcanti]] reported that, in the very year of Valla's treatise, [[Filippo Maria Visconti]], Duke of Milan, made diplomatic overtures toward [[Cosimo de' Medici]] in Florence, proposing an alliance against the Pope. In reference to the ''Donation'', Visconti wrote: "It so happens that even if Constantine consigned to Sylvester so many and such rich gifts ~~&mdash~~; which is doubtful, because such a privilege can nowhere be found ~~&mdash~~; he could only have granted them for his lifetime: the Empire takes precedence over any lordship."		Contemporary opponents of papal powers in Italy emphasized the primacy of civil law and civil jurisdiction, now firmly embodied once again in the Justinian ''[[Corpus Juris Civilis]]''. The Florentine chronicler [[Giovanni Cavalcanti (chronicler)\|Giovanni Cavalcanti]] reported that, in the very year of Valla's treatise, [[Filippo Maria Visconti]], Duke of Milan, made diplomatic overtures toward [[Cosimo de' Medici]] in Florence, proposing an alliance against the Pope. In reference to the ''Donation'', Visconti wrote: "It so happens that even if Constantine consigned to Sylvester so many and such rich gifts -; which is doubtful, because such a privilege can nowhere be found -; he could only have granted them for his lifetime: the Empire takes precedence over any lordship."

	Later, scholars further demonstrated that other elements, such as Sylvester's curing of Constantine, are legends which originated at a later time. [[Wolfram Setz]], a recent editor of Valla's work, has affirmed that at the time of Valla's refutation, Constantine's alleged "donation" was no longer a matter of contemporary relevance in [[political theory]] and that it simply provided an opportunity for an exercise in legal rhetoric.<~~ref~~>[~~[Wolfram Setz\|Setz, Wolfram]~~] ~~(1976). ''Lorenzo Vallas Schrift gegen die Konstantinische Schenkung''. Weimar. (Translation of: Valla, Lorenzo (1440). ''De Falso Credita et Ementita Constantini Donatione Declamatio'').~~</~~ref~~>		Later, scholars further demonstrated that other elements, such as Sylvester's curing of Constantine, are legends which originated at a later time. [[Wolfram Setz]], a recent editor of Valla's work, has affirmed that at the time of Valla's refutation, Constantine's alleged "donation" was no longer a matter of contemporary relevance in [[political theory]] and that it simply provided an opportunity for an exercise in legal rhetoric.<sup>[14]</sup>

	The bulls of [[Nicholas V]] and his successors made no further mention of the ''Donation'', even when partitioning the New World. Valla's treatise was taken up vehemently by writers of the [[Protestant Reformation]], such as [[Ulrich von Hutten]] and [[Martin Luther]], causing the treatise to be placed on the [[Index Librorum Prohibitorum\|index of banned books]] in the mid-16th century. The ''Donation'' continued to be tacitly accepted as authentic until [[Caesar Baronius]] in his "[[Annales Ecclesiastici]]" (published 1588–1607) admitted that it was a forgery, after which it was almost universally accepted as such.<~~ref name="WikisourceCatholicEncyclopedia1913"~~/> Some continued to argue for its authenticity; nearly a century after "Annales Ecclesiastici", [[Christian Wolff (philosopher)\|Christian Wolff]] still alluded to the ''Donation'' as undisputed fact.<~~ref~~>~~Wolff, Christian. "Append. ad~~ [~~[Council of Chalcedon\|Concilium Chalcedonensem~~]~~]". ''Opere''. ii:261. Cited in: Lea, Henry Charles (1895). "The 'Donation of Constantine'". ''The English Historical Review'' '''10'''(37). pp. 86–87. {{doi\|10.1093/ehr/X.XXXVII.86}}~~</~~ref~~>		The bulls of [[Nicholas V]] and his successors made no further mention of the ''Donation'', even when partitioning the New World. Valla's treatise was taken up vehemently by writers of the [[Protestant Reformation]], such as [[Ulrich von Hutten]] and [[Martin Luther]], causing the treatise to be placed on the [[Index Librorum Prohibitorum\|index of banned books]] in the mid-16th century. The ''Donation'' continued to be tacitly accepted as authentic until [[Caesar Baronius]] in his "[[Annales Ecclesiastici]]" (published 1588–1607) admitted that it was a forgery, after which it was almost universally accepted as such.<sup>[3]</sup> Some continued to argue for its authenticity; nearly a century after "Annales Ecclesiastici", [[Christian Wolff (philosopher)\|Christian Wolff]] still alluded to the ''Donation'' as undisputed fact.<sup>[15]</sup>

	== Origin ==		== Origin ==
	It has been suggested that an early draft of the ''Donation of Constantine'' was made shortly after the middle of the 8th century, in order to assist [[Pope Stephen II]] in his negotiations with [[Pepin the Short]], who then held the position of [[Mayor of the Palace]] (i.e., the manager of the household of the Frankish king).<~~ref~~>{{cite book \|last=Duffy \|first=Eamon \|year=2006 \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qiTl-lhM36wC&pg=PA89 \|title=Saints and Sinners: A History of the Popes \|publisher=Yale University Press \|page=89 \|isbn=978-0-300-11597-0}}</~~ref~~><~~ref~~>{{cite book \|last=O'Malley \|first=S. W. J. \|year=2009 \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=H3Cs-1w5mucC&pg=PA59 \|title=A History of the Popes: From Peter to the Present \|publisher=Government Institutes \|page=59 \|isbn=978-1-580-51229-9}}</~~ref~~> In 754, Pope Stephen II crossed the Alps to anoint Pepin king, thereby enabling the [[Carolingian]] family to supplant the old [[Merovingian]] royal line. In return for Stephen's support, Pepin gave the Pope the lands in Italy which the [[Lombards]] had taken from the [[Byzantine Empire \| Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire]].<~~ref~~>{{cite book \|last=Schnürer \|first=Gustav \|year=1912 \|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14257a.htm \|title=States of the Church \|work=The Catholic Encyclopedia \|publisher=Robert Appleton Company \|location=New York}}</~~ref~~> These lands would become the [[Papal States]] and would be the basis of the Papacy's [[Temporal power (Papal)\|temporal power]] for the next eleven centuries.		It has been suggested that an early draft of the ''Donation of Constantine'' was made shortly after the middle of the 8th century, in order to assist [[Pope Stephen II]] in his negotiations with [[Pepin the Short]], who then held the position of [[Mayor of the Palace]] (i.e., the manager of the household of the Frankish king).<sup>[16]</sup><sup>[17]</sup> In 754, Pope Stephen II crossed the Alps to anoint Pepin king, thereby enabling the [[Carolingian]] family to supplant the old [[Merovingian]] royal line. In return for Stephen's support, Pepin gave the Pope the lands in Italy which the [[Lombards]] had taken from the [[Byzantine Empire \| Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire]].<sup>[18]</sup> These lands would become the [[Papal States]] and would be the basis of the Papacy's [[Temporal power (Papal)\|temporal power]] for the next eleven centuries.

	In one study, an attempt was made at dating the forgery to the 9th century, and placing its composition at [[Corbie Abbey]], in northern France.<~~ref name=Fried~~>~~Fried, Johannes (2007). ''"Donation of Constantine" and "Constitutum Constantini": The Misinterpretation of a Fiction and Its Original Meaning.'' Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. {{ISBN\|978-3-11-018539-3}}.~~</~~ref~~>		In one study, an attempt was made at dating the forgery to the 9th century, and placing its composition at [[Corbie Abbey]], in northern France.<sup>[19]</sup>

	Mediaevalist [[Johannes Fried]] draws a distinction between the ''Donation of Constantine'' and an earlier, equally forged version, the ''Constitutum Constantini'', which was included in the collection of forged documents, the [[Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals\|False Decretals]], compiled in the later half of the ninth century. Fried argues the ''Donation'' is a later expansion of the much shorter ''Constitutum''.<~~ref name=Fried~~/> Christopher B. Coleman understands the mention in the ''Constitutum'' of a donation of "the western regions" to refer to Lombardy, Venetia, and Istria.<~~ref~~>[https://books.google.com/books?id=c4ERAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA175&lpg=PA175&dq=Constitutum+Constantini&source=bl&ots=vVQdHFsSeD&sig=XsAcPddnV30diqJ8aY3arn4KFcc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj2vJzc6bLXAhUI44MKHZS9AMc4ChDoAQhQMAg#v=onepage&q=Constitutum%20Constantini&f=false Coleman, Christopher Bush. ''Constantine the Great and Christianity: Three Phases : the Historical, the Legendary, and the Spurious'', Columbia University Press, 1914, p. 177]</~~ref~~>		Mediaevalist [[Johannes Fried]] draws a distinction between the ''Donation of Constantine'' and an earlier, equally forged version, the ''Constitutum Constantini'', which was included in the collection of forged documents, the [[Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals\|False Decretals]], compiled in the later half of the ninth century. Fried argues the ''Donation'' is a later expansion of the much shorter ''Constitutum''.<sup>[19]</sup> Christopher B. Coleman understands the mention in the ''Constitutum'' of a donation of "the western regions" to refer to Lombardy, Venetia, and Istria.<sup>[20]</sup>

	==See also==		==See also==
Line 56:		Line 56:
	* 8. Dante Alighieri. ''Inferno''. Canto 19, lines 115–117.		* 8. Dante Alighieri. ''Inferno''. Canto 19, lines 115–117.
	* 9. ''[[Monumenta Germaniae Historica]]''. DD II 820. pp. 13–15.		* 9. ''[[Monumenta Germaniae Historica]]''. DD II 820. pp. 13–15.
	* 10.		* 10. Toulmin, Stephen; Goodfield, June (1982). The Discovery of Time (Phoenix ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 104–106. ISBN 0-226-80842-4.
	* 11.		* 11. Nicholas of Cusa, Paul E. Sigmund (editor and translator) (1991). "The properly ordered power of the Western emperor does not depend on the Pope". The Catholic Concordance. Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought. Cambridge University Press. pp. 216–222. ISBN 0-521-40207-7.
	* 12.		* 12. Prosser, Peter E. (2001). "Church history's biggest hoax: Renaissance scholarship proved fatal for one of the medieval papacy's favorite claims". Christian History. 20 (Journal Article): 35–. ISSN 0891-9666. – via General OneFile (subscription required)
	* 13.		* 13. Pope Pius II (1883). Opera inedita. pp. 571–81. Cited in: Lea, Henry Charles (1895). "The 'Donation of Constantine'". The English Historical Review 10(37). pp. 86–87. doi:10.1093/ehr/X.XXXVII.86
	* 14.		* 14. [[Wolfram Setz\|Setz, Wolfram]] (1976). ''Lorenzo Vallas Schrift gegen die Konstantinische Schenkung''. Weimar. (Translation of: Valla, Lorenzo (1440). ''De Falso Credita et Ementita Constantini Donatione Declamatio'').
	* 15.		* 15. Wolff, Christian. "Append. ad [[Council of Chalcedon\|Concilium Chalcedonensem]]". ''Opere''. ii:261. Cited in: Lea, Henry Charles (1895). "The 'Donation of Constantine'". ''The English Historical Review'' '''10'''(37). pp. 86–87.
	* 16.		* 16. Duffy, Eamon (2006). Saints and Sinners: A History of the Popes. Yale University Press. p. 89. ISBN 978-0-300-11597-0.
	* 17.		* 17. O'Malley, S. W. J. (2009). A History of the Popes: From Peter to the Present. Government Institutes. p. 59. ISBN 978-1-580-51229-9.
	* 18.		* 18. Schnürer, Gustav (1912). States of the Church. The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
	* 19.		* 19. Fried, Johannes (2007). "Donation of Constantine" and "Constitutum Constantini": The Misinterpretation of a Fiction and Its Original Meaning. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-018539-3.
	* 20.		* 20. [https://books.google.com/books?id=c4ERAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA175&lpg=PA175&dq=Constitutum+Constantini&source=bl&ots=vVQdHFsSeD&sig=XsAcPddnV30diqJ8aY3arn4KFcc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj2vJzc6bLXAhUI44MKHZS9AMc4ChDoAQhQMAg#v=onepage&q=Constitutum%20Constantini&f=false Coleman, Christopher Bush. ''Constantine the Great and Christianity: Three Phases : the Historical, the Legendary, and the Spurious'', Columbia University Press, 1914, p. 177]

	==Further reading==		==Further reading==

Nick: /* Notes */

2018-01-12T20:55:58Z

Notes

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:55, 12 January 2018
Line 52:		Line 52:
	* 4. "The Donation of Constantine". ''[[Decretum Gratiani]]''. Part 1, Division 96, Chapters 13–14. Quoted in: Coleman, Christopher B. (1922). [http://history.hanover.edu/texts/vallapart1.html ''Discourse on the Forgery of the Alleged Donation of Constantine'']. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Translation of: Valla, Lorenzo (1440). ''Declamatio de falso credita et ementita donatione Constantini''.) Hosted at the Hanover Historical Texts Project.		* 4. "The Donation of Constantine". ''[[Decretum Gratiani]]''. Part 1, Division 96, Chapters 13–14. Quoted in: Coleman, Christopher B. (1922). [http://history.hanover.edu/texts/vallapart1.html ''Discourse on the Forgery of the Alleged Donation of Constantine'']. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Translation of: Valla, Lorenzo (1440). ''Declamatio de falso credita et ementita donatione Constantini''.) Hosted at the Hanover Historical Texts Project.
	* 5. A slightly more ample summary is given in: Russell, Bertrand (2004). [https://books.google.com/books?id=Ey94E3sOMA0C&pg=PA366 ''A History of Western Philosophy'']. Routledge. p. 366. (ISBN 9780415325059).		* 5. A slightly more ample summary is given in: Russell, Bertrand (2004). [https://books.google.com/books?id=Ey94E3sOMA0C&pg=PA366 ''A History of Western Philosophy'']. Routledge. p. 366. (ISBN 9780415325059).
	* 6~~. [[s::Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Donation of Constantine\|"Donation of Constantine"]]. Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.~~		* 6. Migne, Jacques-Paul (1891). ''[[Patrologia Latina]]''. Volume 143 (cxliii). Col. 744–769.
	* 7. Migne, Jacques-Paul (1891). ''[[Patrologia Latina]]''. Volume 143 (cxliii). Col. 744–769.		* 7. Mansi, Giovanni Domenico. ''Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova Amplissima Collectio''. Volume 19 (xix). Col. 635–656.
	* 8. Mansi, Giovanni Domenico. ''Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova Amplissima Collectio''. Volume 19 (xix). Col. 635–656.		* 8. Dante Alighieri. ''Inferno''. Canto 19, lines 115–117.
	* 9. Dante Alighieri. ''Inferno''. Canto 19, lines 115–117.		* 9. ''[[Monumenta Germaniae Historica]]''. DD II 820. pp. 13–15.
	* 10. ''[[Monumenta Germaniae Historica]]''. DD II 820. pp. 13–15.		* 10.
			* 11.
			* 12.
			* 13.
			* 14.
			* 15.
			* 16.
			* 17.
			* 18.
			* 19.
			* 20.

	==Further reading==		==Further reading==

Nick: New page: A 13th-century fresco of [[Sylvester I and Constantine the Great, showing the purported Donation (Santi Quattro Coronati...

2018-01-12T12:05:35Z

New page: thumb|right|300px|A 13th-century fresco of [[Sylvester I and Constantine the Great, showing the purported Donation (Santi Quattro Coronati...

New page

[[Image:Sylvester I and Constantine.jpg|thumb|right|300px|A 13th-century fresco of [[Sylvester I]] and [[Constantine the Great]], showing the purported Donation ([[Santi Quattro Coronati]], Rome)]]
The '''''Donation of Constantine''''' (Donatio Constantini) is a [[Forgery|forged]] Roman imperial [[decree]] by which the 4th century emperor [[Constantine the Great]] supposedly transferred authority over Rome and the [[Western Roman Empire|western part]] of the [[Roman Empire]] to the Pope. Composed probably in the 8th century, it was used, especially in the 13th century, in support of claims of political authority by the papacy.[1] [[Lorenzo Valla]], an Italian [[Catholic]] priest and [[Renaissance humanist]], is credited with first exposing the forgery with solid [[Philology|philological]] arguments in 1439-1440,[2] although the document's authenticity had been repeatedly contested since 1001.[1]

In many of the existing manuscripts (handwritten copies of the document), including the oldest one, the document bears the title ''Constitutum domini Constantini imperatoris''.[3] The ''Donation of Constantine'' was included in the 9th century ''[[Pseudo-Isidorean Decretals]]'' collection.

== Content ==
The text, purportedly a decree of [[Roman Emperor]] [[Constantine I]] dated 30 March, in a year mistakenly said to be both that of his fourth consulate (315) and that of the consulate of Gallicanus (317), contains a detailed profession of Christian faith and a recounting of how the emperor, seeking a cure for his leprosy, was converted and baptized by [[Pope Sylvester I]]. In gratitude, he determined to bestow on the see of Peter "power, and dignity of glory, and vigour, and honour imperial", and "supremacy as well over the four principal sees, [[Alexandria]], [[Antioch]], [[Jerusalem]], and [[Constantinople]], as also over all the churches of God in the whole earth". For the upkeep of the church of Saint Peter and that of Saint Paul, he gave landed estates "in [[Judaea (Roman province)|Judea]], [[Greece]], [[Asia (Roman province)|Asia]], [[Thrace]], [[Africa (Roman province)|Africa]], [[Italy]] and the various islands". To Sylvester and his successors he also granted imperial insignia, the tiara, and "the city of Rome, and all the provinces, places and cities of Italy and the western regions".[4][5]

== Medieval use and reception ==
What may perhaps be the earliest known allusion to the ''Donation'' is in a letter of 778, in which [[Pope Hadrian I]] exhorts [[Charlemagne]], whose father, [[Pepin the Short|Pepin the Younger]], had made the [[Donation of Pepin]] granting the Popes sovereignty over the [[Papal States]], to follow Constantine's example and endow the Roman Catholic church.

The first pope to directly invoke the decree was [[Pope Leo IX]], in a letter sent in 1054 to [[Michael I Cerularius]], [[Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople|Patriarch of Constantinople]].[3] He cited a large portion of the document, believing it genuine,[6][7] furthering the debate that would ultimately lead to the [[East–West Schism]]. In the 11th and 12th centuries, the ''Donation'' was often cited in the [[Investiture Controversy|investiture conflicts]] between the papacy and the secular powers in the West.[3]

In his [[The Divine Comedy|Divine Comedy]], written in the early 14th century, the poet [[Dante Alighieri]] wrote: "Ahi, Costantin, di quanto mal fu matre, / non la tua conversion, ma quella dote / che da te prese il primo ricco patre!" ("Ah, Constantine, how much evil was born, / not from your conversion, but from that donation / that the first wealthy Pope received from you!").[8]

== Investigation ==
[[Image:Donationconstantine.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Workshop of [[Raphael]], ''[[The Donation of Constantine (painting)|The Donation of Constantine]]''. ''[[Raphael Rooms|Stanze di Raffaello]]'', [[Vatican City]]]]

During the [[Middle Ages]], the ''Donation'' was widely accepted as authentic, although the Emperor [[Otto III, Holy Roman Emperor|Otto III]] did possibly raise suspicions of the document "in letters of gold" as a forgery, in making a gift to the See of Rome.[] It was not until the mid-15th century, with the revival of Classical scholarship and textual criticism, that [[Renaissance humanism|humanists]], and eventually the papal bureaucracy, began to realize that the document could not possibly be genuine. [[Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa]] declared it to be a forgery<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Discovery of Time |first=Stephen |last=Toulmin |first2=June |last2=Goodfield |pages=104–106 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |location=Chicago |edition=Phoenix |year=1982 |isbn=0-226-80842-4 |authorlink=Stephen Toulmin |authorlink2=June Goodfield}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|authors=Nicholas of Cusa, Paul E. Sigmund (editor and translator)|title=The Catholic Concordance|series=Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=1991|isbn=0-521-40207-7|chapter=The properly ordered power of the Western emperor does not depend on the Pope|pages=216–222}}</ref> and spoke of it as an [[apocryphal]] work.

Later, the Catholic priest [[Lorenzo Valla]] argued in his [[philology|philological]] study of the text that the language used in manuscript could not be dated to the 4th century.<ref name=Prosser>{{Cite journal| issn = 08919666| volume = 20| issue = Journal Article| pages = 35–| last = Prosser| first = Peter E.| title = Church history's biggest hoax: Renaissance scholarship proved fatal for one of the medieval papacy's favorite claims| journal = Christian History| date = 2001| url = http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=GPS&sw=w&u=wikipedia&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA80303684&asid=2e95f78ae926bf1bb8b214ce55f2aabb}}{{subscription|via=[[General OneFile]]}}</ref> The language of the text suggests that the manuscript can most likely be dated to the 8th century. Valla believed the forgery to be so obvious that he leaned toward believing that the Church had knowledge that the document was inauthentic. Valla further argued that papal usurpation of temporal power had corrupted the church, caused the wars of Italy, and reinforced the "overbearing, barbarous, tyrannical priestly domination."<ref name=Prosser/>

This was the first instance of modern, scientific [[diplomatics]]. Independently of both Cusa and Valla, [[Reginald Pecock]]e, Bishop of Chichester (1450–57), reached a similar conclusion. Among the indications that the Donation must be a fake are its language and the fact that, while certain imperial-era formulas are used in the text, some of the Latin in the document could not have been written in the 4th century; anachronistic terms such as "[[fief]]" were used. Also, the purported date of the document is inconsistent with the content of the document itself, as it refers both to the fourth consulate of Constantine (315) as well as the consulate of Gallicanus (317).

[[Pope Pius II]] wrote a tract in 1453, five years before becoming Pope, to show that, though the ''Donation'' was a forgery, the papacy owed its lands to [[Charlemagne]] and its powers of the [[Keys of Heaven|keys]] to [[Primacy of Peter|Peter]]; he did not publish it, however.<ref>Pope Pius II (1883). ''Opera inedita''. pp. 571–81. Cited in: Lea, Henry Charles (1895). "The 'Donation of Constantine'". ''The English Historical Review'' '''10'''(37). pp. 86–87. {{doi|10.1093/ehr/X.XXXVII.86}}</ref>

Contemporary opponents of papal powers in Italy emphasized the primacy of civil law and civil jurisdiction, now firmly embodied once again in the Justinian ''[[Corpus Juris Civilis]]''. The Florentine chronicler [[Giovanni Cavalcanti (chronicler)|Giovanni Cavalcanti]] reported that, in the very year of Valla's treatise, [[Filippo Maria Visconti]], Duke of Milan, made diplomatic overtures toward [[Cosimo de' Medici]] in Florence, proposing an alliance against the Pope. In reference to the ''Donation'', Visconti wrote: "It so happens that even if Constantine consigned to Sylvester so many and such rich gifts — which is doubtful, because such a privilege can nowhere be found — he could only have granted them for his lifetime: the Empire takes precedence over any lordship."

Later, scholars further demonstrated that other elements, such as Sylvester's curing of Constantine, are legends which originated at a later time. [[Wolfram Setz]], a recent editor of Valla's work, has affirmed that at the time of Valla's refutation, Constantine's alleged "donation" was no longer a matter of contemporary relevance in [[political theory]] and that it simply provided an opportunity for an exercise in legal rhetoric.<ref>[[Wolfram Setz|Setz, Wolfram]] (1976). ''Lorenzo Vallas Schrift gegen die Konstantinische Schenkung''. Weimar. (Translation of: Valla, Lorenzo (1440). ''De Falso Credita et Ementita Constantini Donatione Declamatio'').</ref>

The bulls of [[Nicholas V]] and his successors made no further mention of the ''Donation'', even when partitioning the New World. Valla's treatise was taken up vehemently by writers of the [[Protestant Reformation]], such as [[Ulrich von Hutten]] and [[Martin Luther]], causing the treatise to be placed on the [[Index Librorum Prohibitorum|index of banned books]] in the mid-16th century. The ''Donation'' continued to be tacitly accepted as authentic until [[Caesar Baronius]] in his "[[Annales Ecclesiastici]]" (published 1588–1607) admitted that it was a forgery, after which it was almost universally accepted as such.<ref name="WikisourceCatholicEncyclopedia1913"/> Some continued to argue for its authenticity; nearly a century after "Annales Ecclesiastici", [[Christian Wolff (philosopher)|Christian Wolff]] still alluded to the ''Donation'' as undisputed fact.<ref>Wolff, Christian. "Append. ad [[Council of Chalcedon|Concilium Chalcedonensem]]". ''Opere''. ii:261. Cited in: Lea, Henry Charles (1895). "The 'Donation of Constantine'". ''The English Historical Review'' '''10'''(37). pp. 86–87. {{doi|10.1093/ehr/X.XXXVII.86}}</ref>

== Origin ==
It has been suggested that an early draft of the ''Donation of Constantine'' was made shortly after the middle of the 8th century, in order to assist [[Pope Stephen II]] in his negotiations with [[Pepin the Short]], who then held the position of [[Mayor of the Palace]] (i.e., the manager of the household of the Frankish king).<ref>{{cite book |last=Duffy |first=Eamon |year=2006 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qiTl-lhM36wC&pg=PA89 |title=Saints and Sinners: A History of the Popes |publisher=Yale University Press |page=89 |isbn=978-0-300-11597-0}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=O'Malley |first=S. W. J. |year=2009 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=H3Cs-1w5mucC&pg=PA59 |title=A History of the Popes: From Peter to the Present |publisher=Government Institutes |page=59 |isbn=978-1-580-51229-9}}</ref> In 754, Pope Stephen II crossed the Alps to anoint Pepin king, thereby enabling the [[Carolingian]] family to supplant the old [[Merovingian]] royal line. In return for Stephen's support, Pepin gave the Pope the lands in Italy which the [[Lombards]] had taken from the [[Byzantine Empire | Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Schnürer |first=Gustav |year=1912 |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14257a.htm |title=States of the Church |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia |publisher=Robert Appleton Company |location=New York}}</ref> These lands would become the [[Papal States]] and would be the basis of the Papacy's [[Temporal power (Papal)|temporal power]] for the next eleven centuries.

In one study, an attempt was made at dating the forgery to the 9th century, and placing its composition at [[Corbie Abbey]], in northern France.<ref name=Fried>Fried, Johannes (2007). ''"Donation of Constantine" and "Constitutum Constantini": The Misinterpretation of a Fiction and Its Original Meaning.'' Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. {{ISBN|978-3-11-018539-3}}.</ref>

Mediaevalist [[Johannes Fried]] draws a distinction between the ''Donation of Constantine'' and an earlier, equally forged version, the ''Constitutum Constantini'', which was included in the collection of forged documents, the [[Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals|False Decretals]], compiled in the later half of the ninth century. Fried argues the ''Donation'' is a later expansion of the much shorter ''Constitutum''.<ref name=Fried/> Christopher B. Coleman understands the mention in the ''Constitutum'' of a donation of "the western regions" to refer to Lombardy, Venetia, and Istria.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=c4ERAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA175&lpg=PA175&dq=Constitutum+Constantini&source=bl&ots=vVQdHFsSeD&sig=XsAcPddnV30diqJ8aY3arn4KFcc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj2vJzc6bLXAhUI44MKHZS9AMc4ChDoAQhQMAg#v=onepage&q=Constitutum%20Constantini&f=false Coleman, Christopher Bush. ''Constantine the Great and Christianity: Three Phases : the Historical, the Legendary, and the Spurious'', Columbia University Press, 1914, p. 177]</ref>

==See also==
*[[Donation of Sutri]]
*[[Donation of Pepin]]
*[[Privilegium maius]]
*[[Translatio imperii]]
*[[Vatican City]]
*[[List of late imperial Roman consuls]]

== Notes ==
* 1. Vauchez, Andre (2001). [https://books.google.com/books?id=qtgotOF0MKQC&pg=PA445 ''Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages'']. Routledge. p. 445. (ISBN 9781579582821)
* 2. Whelton, M. (1998). ''Two Paths: Papal Monarchy – Collegial Tradition''. Salisbury, MA: Regina Orthodox Press. p. 113.
* 3. Wikisource Catholic Encyclopedia 1913
* 4. "The Donation of Constantine". ''[[Decretum Gratiani]]''. Part 1, Division 96, Chapters 13–14. Quoted in: Coleman, Christopher B. (1922). [http://history.hanover.edu/texts/vallapart1.html ''Discourse on the Forgery of the Alleged Donation of Constantine'']. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Translation of: Valla, Lorenzo (1440). ''Declamatio de falso credita et ementita donatione Constantini''.) Hosted at the Hanover Historical Texts Project.
* 5. A slightly more ample summary is given in: Russell, Bertrand (2004). [https://books.google.com/books?id=Ey94E3sOMA0C&pg=PA366 ''A History of Western Philosophy'']. Routledge. p. 366. (ISBN 9780415325059).
* 6. [[s::Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Donation of Constantine|"Donation of Constantine"]]. Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.
* 7. Migne, Jacques-Paul (1891). ''[[Patrologia Latina]]''. Volume 143 (cxliii). Col. 744–769.
* 8. Mansi, Giovanni Domenico. ''Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova Amplissima Collectio''. Volume 19 (xix). Col. 635–656.
* 9. Dante Alighieri. ''Inferno''. Canto 19, lines 115–117.
* 10. ''[[Monumenta Germaniae Historica]]''. DD II 820. pp. 13–15.

==Further reading==
* Camporeale, Salvatore I. "Lorenzo Valla's Oratio on the Pseudo-Donation of Constantine: Dissent and Innovation in Early Renaissance Humanism." ''Journal of the History of Ideas'' (1996) 57#1 pp: 9-26. [http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_the_history_of_ideas/v057/57.1camporeale.html online]
* Delph, Ronald K. "Valla Grammaticus, Agostino Steuco, and the Donation of Constantine." ''Journal of the History of Ideas'' (1996) 57#1 pp: 55-77. [http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/jhi/summary/v057/57.1delph.html online]
* Fried, Johannes, ''ed. Donation of Constantine and Constitutum Constantini: The Misinterpretation of a Fiction and Its Original Meaning'' (Walter de Gruyter, 2007)
* Levine, Joseph M. "Reginald Pecock and Lorenzo Valla on the Donation of Constantine." ''Studies in the Renaissance'' (1973): 118-143. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/2857015 in JSTOR]
* [[Joseph McCabe|McCabe, Joseph]] (1939). ''A History Of The Popes''. Watts & Co.
* Valla, Lorenzo. ''On the donation of Constantine'' (Harvard University Press, 2007), translation by G. W. Bowersock of 1440 version
* Zinkeisen, F. "The Donation of Constantine as applied by the Roman Church." ''English Historical Review'' (1894) 9#36 pp: 625-632. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/547562 in JSTOR]

== External links ==
*Text of the [http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/donation.html ''Constitutum Donatio Constantini''] (Latin) at [[The Latin Library]]
*Text of the [http://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia/Lspost08/DonatioConstantini/don_intr.html ''Constitutum Donatio Constantini''] (Latin) at the [[Bibliotheca Augustana]]
*Text of the [http://webu2.upmf-grenoble.fr/Haiti/Cours/Ak/Constitutiones/donatioc.htm ''Constitutum Constantini''] (Latin) at The Roman Law Library
*Lorenzo Valla's [http://history.hanover.edu/texts/vallatc.html ''Discourse on the Forgery of the Alleged Donation of Constantine'']

[[Category:Medieval Christian controversies]]
[[Category:Constantine the Great and Christianity]]
[[Category:Documents of the Catholic Church]]
[[Category:Document forgeries]]
[[Category:History of the papacy]]
[[Category:Papal States]]
[[Category:Scientific skepticism]]
[[Category:Political forgery]]

{{Donate}}