Content area
Abstract
This study considers medieval culture through one of its central symbols: the pope. An examination of textual and visual propaganda produced during the Great Schism, the thirty-nine years (1378-1417) when two and then three men simultaneously claimed to be pope, this dissertation explores the context in which a symbolic lexicon of propaganda was created and the processes through which it was disseminated, applied, and interpreted. It explores the ways in which religious culture and its symbols were used to articulate paradigms of order and power, while simultaneously outlining those of disorder, unrest, and reform. This effort reveals that the common threads in this development were the use of prophecy as propaganda and the increasing elevation of history as a rhetorical tool. The study is centered on the Vaticinia de summis pontificibus (Prophecies of the Last Popes), an illustrated apocalyptic-prophetic work that chronicles the successors of Peter from Nicholas III (1277-1280) to a final Angelic Pope.
This study begins with the construction of the pope as a symbol (between 1100 and 1350), exploring the ways through which the pope—along with the saints and the Eucharist—became one of the principal representations of late medieval Christianity. Key to this development was the integration of the popes into the epic sweep of Christian salvific history. The study continues by examining the figures of the Angel Pope and its counterpart the Papal Antichrist and their relationship to Schism propaganda in general and the Vaticinia specifically. This study closes by looking at the symbol's fundamental redesign and use in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.
The field of papal history has long focused on the exercise of authority, namely the role of law, diplomacy, and fiscal innovation in the formation of a unified international culture. This study suggests a new paradigm. The papacy, I argue, as opposed to being a unifying institution, was the symbolic center of difference in the pre-modern world. Rather than dictating socio-cultural conditions, the institution is best understood as a direct result of the changes and rhythms in broader society.
