8,921
edits
Changes
m
This Thus it must have been of Greek origin, and translated into Latin during the thirteenth or fourteenth century, though it received its present form in the 15th or 16th century.
Yet even Even so after that, the letter was given greater prestige by being incorporated into the prologue of [[w:Ludolph of Saxony|Ludolph]] of Saxony's ''Meditationes in vitam Christi'' (Nuremberg 1483). In a similar way it was printed in the collection of writings of the 11th century [[w:Anselm of Canterbury|Anselm of Canterbury]] (Nuremberg, 1491). However neither Ludolph nor Anselm had any knowledge of the letter.<ref name="CORA"/>
no edit summary
: {{la icon}} "Explicit epistola Iacobi de Columpna, anno domini 1421, reperta in annalibus Romae, in libro antiquissimo in Capitolio, doct. domino Patriarchae Constantinopolitano."
Just about the time that the letter was being dispersed widely in Italy, the humanist [[w:Lorenzo Valla|Lorenzo Valla]] denounced it as a fraud in his famous treatise correctly exposing the Donation of Constantine as fraudulent (ca. 1440 AD). That said, one cannot infer the one from the other (i.e. fraudulency).<ref>Laurentius Valla. ''De falso credita et ementita Constantini donatione declamatio.'' Ed. W. Schwahn. Leipzig, 1928. p.62.</ref>
Later, in the 16th century, it was printed as authentic by the Protestant theologian [[w:Matthias Flacius|Matthias Flacius]], in his ''Centuries of Magdeburg.'' It continued to appear as late as the end of the 19th century, and became included among the texts of the [[Apocrypha|Apocryphal New Testament]].
===Summary===
According to both tradition and in historical accounts, there was an early [[icon]] of [[Christ]] that men of the East believed was created in a miraculous manner during Christ's lifetime and which they guarded and reverenced. Furthermore, the three descriptions of an early icon as given by St [[John of Damascus]] in the 8th century, in the 11th century text edited by [[w:Dionysius of Fourna|Dionysius of Fourna]], and in the 14th century text of [[w:Nikephoros Kallistos Xanthopoulos|Nicephorus Callistus]], agree in many details and must all derive from a common source. If the ''Letter of Lentulus'' that was discovered in the 15th century is apocryphal as some scholars allege, nevertheless it also belongs to and carries forward this same iconographic tradition that was described held by the examples of prime Byzantine historiansas authentic.<ref group="note">In a discussion of the ''Letter of Lentulus'' on a Greek weblog (''[http://www.truthison.com/viewtopic.php?t=12013&p=68991 Publius Lentulus και το υποτιθέμενο γράμμα στον Καίσαρα]''), one contributor has conjectured that both [[Mount Athos]] and [[Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain]] (in his ''Unseen Warfare'') regard the letter as authentic.</ref>
==See also==
