This chapter sets out the history of the process of electing the pope, including the development of voting rules, procedures, sites of election, and a wider electoral culture. The basic format for the modern papal election evolved gradually over a period from 1059 to the 1400s, with the first “conclaves” taking place in the mid-thirteenth century. In contrast to papal elections, papal resignations have been rare, with most occurring during the first Christian millennium. The question of how a pope might relinquish office nevertheless still interested canonists until long after this date, and rules about how popes might resign were incorporated into the twentieth-century codes of canon law even before Benedict XVI dramatically invoked them in 2013.

The chapter addresses the history of the Synod of Bishops, created by pope Paul VI in September 1965 and reformed by Francis I between 2018 and 2023, with an analysis of the different phases: from the proposals emerging from the bishops during the Second Vatican Council (1962–65), to the Synods’ assemblies of Paul VI (r. 1963–78), John Paul II (r. 1978–2005), and Benedict XVI (r. 2005–13). After half a century of its life, the Synod of Bishops has changed, especially during pope Francis I’s pontificate, from an expression of episcopal collegiality (representing the bishops only), useful as a device of papal primacy, to an institution of ecclesial synodality, giving voice to all kinds of members in the Catholic Church, including women and lay people.

Did the popes, through the medium of decretals, make law or not? Against a long-established tradition expressed forcefully by Walther Ullmann, Harold Berman, and many others, this chapter argues that the legal authority of the medieval papacy, manifested most spectacularly in the issue of thousands of decretal letters, represented not legislation but jurisdiction; that it was generated by the demands of appellants and consultants from across the whole of the Latin Church, from Trondheim (Norway) to Esztergom (Hungary) and Palermo (Sicily); and that the impetus to compile collections of these papal decisions began not in Rome but in the regions, for use in episcopal courts and in the nascent universities where canon law was studied. A selection of rescripts (replies to judicial appeals) and consultations (answers to questions) offers a fascinating insight into these dynamic processes, which helped to shape the development of European law.

Three factors – Rome’s peripheral position, its rivalry with other sees, and the role of Roman aristocrats – shaped the ecclesiastical policy of the popes in late antiquity. Their claims to ecclesiastical authority across the empire were based on the reputation of the City of Rome. In addition, the Petrine tradition became crucial for the representation of late antique popes. From an Eastern perspective, however, they were no more than the patriarchs of the West. As they were not under the direct grip of the emperor, the popes possessed more agency than Eastern bishops, but this made it more difficult for them to influence imperial politics directly. Therefore, they composed treatises about the relationship between emperor and bishop, which answered concrete challenges, but were interpreted as fundamental texts later. In retrospect and in retrospect only, late antique papacy was the first step of a scale towards universal papacy.

The Cambridge History of the Papacy is organized to provide readers with a critical–historical survey of the structural development of the papacy as an institution and as an actor in Church history, and in world history. It is hard to imagine a sphere of human activity over the past two millennia that has not been influenced by, and influenced in turn by, papal action – be it in the domains of religious belief and practice; social, cultural, and political thought; art, science, medicine, ethics, diplomacy, and international relations. Four questions – each addressed throughout the three volumes of the present work – have framed that vision across vast chronological and geographical expanses: the pope’s centrality within the Catholic Church, the primacy of papal power as an instrument of governance, the papacy’s cultural influence in society and culture, and the implications of secularity for its place in the lives of believers and non-believers alike. Each question – and the search for answers – converges around the fundamental question of papal authority: its original claims; the ebbs and flows of its effective reach; and the numerous ways in which claims, and expressions of papal authority and supremacy, have been contested within the Catholic tradition, and from without.

Through patronage of art, architecture, and classical scholarship and through development of classically inspired rhetoric and ceremonies, the popes of the medieval and early modern periods promoted the recovery and reinterpretation of ancient Greek and Roman culture. Critics (including Roman civic leaders, Renaissance humanists, and Protestant reformers) pilloried the papal court as a symbol of corruption and cultural stagnation, but pontiffs and their advisers continued to adapt ancient and early Christian precedents to support their traditional claims to authority and to justify their new initiatives. This chapter argues that the papacy played a vital role in recovering and using the classical legacy throughout the (long) Middle Ages. It also argues that the venues and motivations for this appropriation remained more consistent than standard periodization of the medieval, Renaissance, and Counter Reformation papacy has suggested.

This chapter surveys the papacy’s struggles and historiography in the fourteenth and fifteen centuries, which were rich in far reaching events, questioning the “rhetoric” of crisis often attached to the period. Barred from Rome by widespread turmoil in Italy, seven consecutive popes – all of Gallic origin – resided at Avignon between 1309 and 1375. Criticized equally for “abandoning” Rome and for their perceived subservience to the French crown, the popes labored valiantly to end the Hundred Years War (albeit unsuccessfully) and to maintain an effective international ecclesiastical administration. The Schism (1378–1417) arose from the cardinals’ uncanonical attempt to depose the volatile Urban VI (r. 1378–89) and to elect Clement VII (r. 1378–94) in his place; eventually, three lines of popes (Roman, Avignonese, and Pisan) would bring deep divisions to Europe with their competing claims to legitimacy. The crisis only ended with the sui generis Council of Constance (1414–18) and the election of Martin V (r. 1417–31).

“Papal Rome” is an idea constructed through Rome’s physical topography and the built environment that enabled popes to govern Rome and its environs, and to project power outward. Rome cannot be called a papal city until the eighth century, but throughout the Middle Ages, the papacy’s control was regularly challenged and marginalized. The idea of Rome, its ideological, political, and religious significance, central to papal authority, was intertwined with Rome’s shifting and refashioned topography. Papal authority relied on a history invented in the early Middle Ages, and re-invented in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. To create “papal Rome,” popes rebuilt portions of Rome, and reshaped and reimagined Roman topography, the physical reality of Rome, and that idea, in turn, reshaped Europe and the Mediterranean. The Roman aristocracy and communal movement would draw from and attempt to redirect that symbolic topography as they challenged papal authority for control of the city.

Two recent trends in scholarship necessitate a reevaluation of the persistent myth of a unitary, teleologically secular Enlightenment. The first is the recognition that a unitary Enlightenment with a preordained set of goals is a later ideological construction. A second trend problematizes the relationship between religion and Enlightenment by pluralizing the Enlightenment, thus making more space for the “religious” motivations and inspirations of so many of the men and women typically denominated as “enlightened.” This chapter explores the ambivalent relationship between the popes and a “Catholic Enlightenment” that was engaged in theology, secular scholarship, and political and societal reform. On one hand, the papacy is often cast as the primary enemy of enlightened Catholicism. And yet Italy, and indeed Rome itself, boasted very significant enlightened Catholic intellectuals, rulers, and networks throughout the eighteenth century, including, arguably, certain popes. This chapter seeks to make sense of this seemingly paradoxical situation.

This chapter examines papal–imperial relations during the thirteenth century. It focuses on series of oaths sworn by prospective emperors to popes from Innocent III (r. 1198–1216) to Nicholas IV (r. 1288–92), part of broader negotiations over imperial rights on the Italian peninsula and obligations toward the Papal States. Historians often associate this era with the apex and subsequent decline of the so-called medieval “papal monarchy,” as characterized above all by its dramatic conflicts with the rulers of the Holy Roman Empire. The history of those solemn pledges allows us instead to discern a remarkable continuity in papal attitudes toward imperial monarchs, envisioned as partners in the reform of the Church, the defense of the faith, the eradication of heresy, and crusades to recover the Holy Land. By the late thirteenth century, however, for reasons endogenous to their respective spheres of influence, both parties began to lose interest in the realization of those increasingly anachronistic oaths.

This chapter examines the foundations and evolution of papal legation in the Middle Ages. It frames the development of this ecclesiastical office in the context of burgeoning papal authority and its reception in Christian lands. And it posits the growth of legation as a natural and effective response to the Roman Curia’s administrative, bureaucratic, and legal needs.

The origins of a papal state reach back to the patrimonies accumulated in late antiquity. In the eighth century, the papacy allied with the Franks who defeated the Lombards and forced them to donate lands to the papacy, most of which had formerly belonged to Byzantium. A series of documents down to the eleventh century (Pactum Ludovicianum, Constitutio Romana, Ottonianum, Henricianum) spelled out the territories assured to the popes and mutual papal and imperial rights in those lands. Political strife in Italy and then the Roman commune severely attenuated papal control of its territories. Innocent III began a process of “recuperation” based on the old documents and he inaugurated institutional reforms and innovations. Across the thirteenth century, judicial and financial reforms enhanced papal rule of a First Papal State while battles with the German Empire and then the Angevin kingdom in the south represented constant challenges.

I propose to situate my contribution in a long chronological sequence that goes from the pontificate of Pius IX to the “Vatican II moment” (including the pontificate of Paul VI). The chapter is structured around three axes. The first takes into account the doctrinal and dogmatic developments that sanction papal primacy without detaching them from the socio-political context. The second evaluates the refusals and acceptance of the model thus developed by questioning the concept of “romanity,” the practices that result from it and the institutional and doctrinal impasses, sensitive under the pontificate of Pius XII. The third axis analyzes the development of the idea of collegiality before the Council and evaluates the conciliar debates before understanding how the pontificate of Paul VI assumes and renews the pontifical heritage of the previous century in the context of the crisis of the 1960s and 1970s.

This chapter enlightens the papal martial power through three different questions. It first focuses on the military geography of the Pontifical States (Central Italy, Comtat Venaissin, Avignon). Strongholds were key in the affirmation of pontifical political authority. Their locations and features testify to the great care taken in their construction and management. The chapter then investigates the structure of the troops involved in both offensive and defensive enterprises. Cardinals acting as legates or vicars as well as papal officers were expected to exert strong control over companies led by potentially troublesome condottieri and local warlords. At sea, the popes relied mostly on private and foreign contractors. Finally, this chapter describes the socio-cultural composition of armies, intended as micro-societies defined by rules they adopted or developed themselves. Since they served the papacy just like lay principalities, they kept up with commonly shared knightly aspirations and military practices found across Europe.