The Constitutum Silvestri is one of five fictitious stories known collectively as the Symmachian forgeries, that arose between 501 and 502 at the time of the political battle for the papacy between Pope Symmachus (498-514) and antipope Laurentius.
The other four, the first two with similar themes to the Constitutum Silvestri, are: The Constitutum Silvestri (Council of Sylvester), alternately known as one of the Synods of Rome (Mansi refers to it as the Third Council of Rome[2]), was a contrived meeting of Church bishops reported to have been convened by Pope Sylvester I (314-35) to deal with the issues of calculating the date for observing Easter each year and establishing canons for administering the trials of clerics up to and including the pope.
[3] Adding to the confusion, the opponents of Symmachus reappropriated the Constitutum Silvestri and amended it in the service of their own political agenda, and is referred to by scholars as the Council of 275 Bishops.
The most recent thorough scholarship on the Symmachian forgeries was done in German more than twenty-five years ago by Professor Eckhard Wirbelauer, who classifies the original pro-Symmachian version of the Constitutum Silvestri as SK1 (Silvester Konzil).
More conflicting references began appearing as scholars started documenting the forgeries, which depended on what manuscript version they were working from and what access they had to clarifying information in their era.
[18] Mansi and Hefele perpetuate the confusion in discussing Sylvester's reply to the letter from the Council of Nicaea (SA), the Symmachian version that corresponds to the Laurentian Gaudeo promtam (LA).
[20]Symmachus was accused of celebrating Easter on the wrong date ('Symmachus had celebrated that festival in 501 on March 25, following the old Roman calendar'), misappropriation of Church property, and improper relations with women;[21] it is debatable whether the charges were real or concocted by the Laurentian faction, but each of these three issues were covered independently in the forgeries covering Marcellino (SM), Sixtus (SX), and Sylvester (CS).
Given that the story of Constantine being cured of leprosy by baptism do not emerge until decades after his death in 337, it would be impossible for this to be an accurate description of an actual event which occurred in his lifetime; further evidence of its fraudulent creation in the early sixth century.
'Some supporter of Laurentius, having read the Silvestri constitutum, chose the same method in answering it; but in doing this he pointed out to the assembled bishops that Symmachus, by holding Easter on the twenty-fifth of March, was running counter to the great council of Nicaea.
'[33] The Council of 275 Bishops opens, like the Constitutum Silvestri, by stating that it was called by both Constantine and Sylvester, but no mention of leprosy and baptism was made.
[35] However, unlike the Symmachian canons, no mention was made of pope's being above judgment, as in SM and SX, or of the requirement for seventy-two witnesses to convict a bishop.
[36] Canon eight states that priests who engage in sex must perform twelve years of penance—possibly a reference to one of the three charges against Symmachus for having improper relations with women.
[37] Canon eighteen prohibits a pope from designating his successor—something Symmachus had done following his contested election with Laurentius, allegedly to prevent such a situation from arising again.
[42][43] One of the strongest attestations of the role Ennodius played, comes from Pope Gregory VII himself who writes in principal twenty-three of his Dictatus papae, which specifically mentions the fictions surrounding Symmachus: The Roman Pontiff, if he has been canonically ordained, is undoubtedly made holy by the merits of St. Peter, St. Ennodius Bishop of Pavia bearing witness, and many holy fathers agreeing with him.
[46] Professor Tessa Canella suggests that the Constitutum Silvestri supposedly took place in 315 based on the similarities to the Council of the Twelve Jews used in the Acts of Sylvester.
This would seem to be an unlikely assertion given the discrepancies in the day and month explicitly stated, in addition to the vastly different topics of discussion at each: Council of the Twelve Jews - 15 March in the year [315] Constantine and Licinius were in their fourth terms as consuls: Constantino itaque Augusto et Licinio quater consulibus idibus martiis facta est congregatio chrictianorum et ludaeorum in urbe Roma.
[48]Constitutum Silvestri (SK1) - 3 June in the year [324] Constantine and Prisco [Crispus] were in their third terms as consuls: Actum in Traianas thermas III Kal.
The Synod of Palmaris in October 502 returned a verdict that a pope could only be tried by God, which agreed with the sentiments passed in the Macellino, Sixtus, and Sylvester forgeries.
Townsend speculates then that the forgeries must therefore have been completed during the first three earlier series of trials in 501 and 502, compounded by the poor Latin, 'terrible, unreadable in places,' and likely written in the vernacular of the street.
[49] In favor of Canella's argument for 315, are the references to the same people officiating the two events, Constantine and Helena who are listed twice as having signed the canons of the council,[50] and a mention of a pagan who later became a fictional city prefect, Calpurnius.
[53] However, the inclusion of Helena and Calpurnius more likely indicated a creative use by the forgers to borrow these elements for the Constitutum Silvestri and not an attempt to place the events in the same year.
The fourth term of Constantine given in SK2 and the same people attending the Constitutum Silvestri and the Council of the Twelve Jews in the Acts are the only clues to 315 being a potential date, and here the similarities end.
Prosper is frequently referred to as the chief secretary for Pope Leo, which would have helped make his history popular and widely available, especially to the Symmachian forgers.
'[59] In a further example of the errors which proliferated around the Constitutum Silvestri, this entry in the Liber Pontificalis, which also retroactively sanctioned the Council of Nicaea through its usage of LK, then went on to produce yet another discrepancy: stating 277 bishops, rather than 275.
[60][61] Davis notes that the councils created in the Symmachian forgeries, their original forged pedigree forgotten, are depicted in murals at the Basilica of San Sebastiano in Rome.
While the Council of 275 Bishops version was used for the Liber Pontificalis, canon four of the Constitutum Silvestri also came to be included in service of subordinating these other cults to the Vatican 'by fabricating a papal role in the creation and organization of the tituli churches.
'[64] The repercussions of the Constitutum Silvestri extended far beyond their simple inclusion in the Liber Pontificalis, as three hundred years later the concept of papal immunity would be put to the test under Pope Leo III.
Sylvester's celebrity had grown enormously following the fourth century, for it was he who, by baptising Constantine and (supposedly) curing him of his leprosy, was seen as having delivered Christians from a condition of persecution to one of state sponsorship.