Art historian Jan de Jong comes up with surprising results in his book The Power and the Glorification. His research shows that popes in the 15th and 16th centuries systematically falsified history. With this they tried to boost their crumbling power a bit.
For centuries the papal power had been unassailable. The Pope, as the representative of God on earth, was above kings and emperors. In the late Middle Ages, this begins to change. Textual critics, including Erasmus, proved that ecclesiastical texts were not always correctly translated or interpreted. Some texts even turned out to be false, such as an eighth century Latin charter entitled Donatio Constantini , Donation from Constantine. This document stated that the first Christian emperor, Constantine the Great (c. 280-337), transferred the temporal supremacy of the Western Roman Empire to the Pope and that this bishop of Rome was above other bishops. This charter had been used by the popes for centuries to confirm their position above the secular rulers.
With the arrival of the Protestants, who did not recognize the Pope as head of the church, power eroded even further. To regain their power, popes in the 15th and 16th centuries used falsification of history on wall and ceiling paintings. Art historian Jan de Jong has systematically examined the paintings in papal palaces in Rome for the first time. The paintings were commissioned by various popes and depicted the history of these popes and their predecessors.
De Jong approached this painted history as a contemporary of the popes. What were visitors to the papal chambers served? What was the impact of these images? In addition, De Jong compared the depicted history with the actual history. This showed that manipulation was no stranger to the popes.
Effect of papal propaganda
Popes had themselves and their predecessors painted as the unmistakable head of the church. In the paintings they were treated with reverence by secular rulers, which was to make the papal power historically grounded. De Jong:“Popes had scenes painted in which former kings were clearly depicted humbly. They obediently bowed to the Pope and kissed his feet. The depiction of Emperor Constantine went even further:he walked like a groom through the city, with the Pope next to him on a horse.”
This scene did not actually take place and was intended to set a good example for later emperors. As the emperor used to behave, the present emperor was also supposed to behave. Popes had little choice but to resort to this kind of manipulation, as secular rulers with their armies were stronger than him.
The impressive paintings were made in waiting rooms of the papal palaces. Kings or their emissaries were deliberately put in the waiting room for a while, so that the history, and the attitude of the king towards the pope, could sink in well. Through this propaganda, the visitors knew how much respect they should treat the Pope with. It was difficult for them to determine that the scenes they saw were manipulated or even made up. They didn't have a history book or other reference book to check.
Painters knew about deception
And the painters? What did they think of the falsification of history? De Jong:“Only the best painters worked for the Pope and it was a great honor to be asked. The painters did not have a free hand and worked purely on commission. Historical advisers to the papal court told exactly which historical images or stories to show and how. The consultants also approved the designs before they were put on the walls.”
“You have to see the painters of that time more as advertisers. Their art was much more functional than today:it had to convey a message as effectively as possible. As a strategy, ignorance was used; on the fact that the visitors had no exact historical knowledge.”
The paintings with captions in Latin could only be admired by the papal visit, often from the highest classes. Whether they realized they were watching propaganda is difficult to determine. Few sources state what visitors thought of the paintings. An exception is Arnold van Buchel, a well-to-do young man from Utrecht. He lived in Rome in 1587 and wrote a detailed account of what he saw. Once home, he looked through the books to find out that the popes had tampered with history. Van Buchel felt tricked and wrote angrily that the "papal parasites" had falsified history.
Jan L. de Jong is Assistant Professor of Early Modern Art History at the University of Groningen. His expertise is Italian painting (1400-1600).
His book The Power and the Glorification was published this week. Papal Pretensions and the Art of Propaganda in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries