Pole-as-Prophet:
The Creation of Identity and the Nature of Authority in Renaissance Europe.
Chris Sweet
Fall Term 2000
HI 480
Dr. Mayer
1
Andras Dudic, one of Reginald Pole’s early biographers concludes his account of
the life of Reginald Pole with the following entreaty, “and so if anyone considers in spirit
his whole life, and thinks it over diligently, how he bore so many calamities and labors
for the sake of the church, he I believe, easily will inscribe him in the number of martyrs
of Christ, to whom be honor and glory in all eternities.”1 Given the hagiographic nature
of the early Pole biographies, perhaps it is not surprising that Dudic would attempt to
group Pole with the martyrs and by association with the saints. This was not an
uncommon maneuver for prominent medieval and renaissance figures who had any
saintly aspirations. In the 15th and 16th centuries these popular biographies were often
collected and published in anthologies known as the lives of the saints. The exaggerated
elements of hagiographic biographies helped more than a few saints, including St. Francis
of Assisi, St. Augustine, and many other notables to achieve that status. Of greater
interest to the historian may be the fact that Pole had a direct hand in shaping the portrait
of himself in Dudic’s biography. According to Stephen Greenblatt’s theory of
‘Renaissance self-fashioning,’ prominent Renaissance figures such as Pole recreated their
personae through literary means.2 To desire sainthood is certainly a commendable goal
and may partially explain why Pole would put forth this particular persona but, the image
of martyr with its corresponding connotations of prophet is not by any means limited to
Pole’s biographies. Examining his life more closely through the available documents,
one discovers these images carefully interwoven throughout the fabric of Pole’s adult
1
Thomas F. Mayer, Two Early Lives of Cardinal Reginald Pole. (Medieval and Renaissance Texts.
Forthcoming.) (To be abbreviated hereafter TELCRP) Translations of Vita del cardinale Polo (Beccadelli)
and Vita Reginaldi Poli (Dudic).
2
Stephen Greenblatt, Renaissance self-fashioning, from More to Shakespeare. (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1980)
2
life, frequently appearing in both his private and public correspondence. Furthermore, he
maintained a public demeanor that was conducive with the prophet / martyr image. Pole
so thoroughly surrounded himself with these images that they are nearly inseparable from
the “real” Pole. The “real” Pole can be distinguished from the Pole created through a
lifetime of writing. The Pole that was created in writing was a character created for
specific purposes. In a forthcoming biography of Reginald Pole, Dr. Thomas Mayer
argues that this fabricated, “‘Pole’ arose through a process in which its author tried on in
writing a series of identities, often several at once, until the original Pole (so to say)
established a consistent image and maybe even a consistent personality.”3 One of the
recurring identities in this “trying on” process has to be Pole-as-prophet. Through Pole’s
public persona and his writings, both public and private, he created a carefully
constructed image of himself as a prophet. The development of this image enabled Pole
to claim authority from the highest source. To varying degrees Pole’s contemporaries
believed in Pole-as-prophet as indicated by their writings. The correspondence
surrounding Pole’s legation for the Reconciliation of England (1553-1557) and his
legation for peace (1553-1557) provides further evidence of the process by which Pole
created a prophet-like image of himself. This image found its culmination in the early
hagiographic biographies, which Pole heavily influenced. In this essay I attempt to
determine the status of prophets and prophecy in sixteenth century Italy and then place
Pole in this context. I will show that Pole developed the prophet image as a means of
increasing his personal authority. Through an examination of Pole’s correspondence and
3
Thomas F. Mayer, Reginald Pole, Prince and Prophet. (Cambridge UP, 2000), (To be abbreviated
RPP&P), 2.
3
other’s writings to and about Pole, I establish how this image was developed throughout
Pole’s lifetime.
Prophets and Prophecy
Surely the Lord God does nothing, without revealing his secret to his servants the
prophets. –Amos 3:7.
To understand Pole-as-prophet, there must first be a consensus as to what a
prophet is and what prophecy means. “Prophet” and “prophecy” today are buzzwords,
bearing numerous shades of meaning and a variety of connotations. Prophecy has been
adopted and summarily distorted by the so-called New Age movements. Many called
David Koresh a prophet, James Redfield’s book, The Celestine Prophecy was a bestseller
in 1997, every other month or so one of Nostradamus’ famous prophecies is said be
coming true. What did prophet mean to Reginald Pole in 16th century Europe?
Moreover, what was the status of prophets and the prevailing attitudes towards prophecy
among the general population in Pole’s day? To investigate this question it is necessary to
go back to the authoritative source on the matter of prophets- the Bible and specifically,
the Old Testament. The Harper Collins Encyclopedia of Catholicism defines a prophet
as, “one of a class of intermediaries who transmit communications from God to particular
individuals or to the people as a whole.”4 This will serve as a working definition of
prophet in the traditional sense. According to the Canon of the Roman Catholic Church,
there are four Major Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel) and twelve Minor
4
The Harper Collins Encyclopedia of Catholicism. s.v. “Prophet.”
4
Prophets.5 The Biblical prophets were primarily concerned about current social
conditions, about the spiritual and moral corruption they saw around them. They played
the role of intercessor between God and the people. According to Daniel, God’s law was
given to the people through his servants the prophets.6 In the New Testament, prophecy
finds its culmination in the figure of Jesus Christ. Jesus, the Son of God, is the supreme
spokesperson who communicates his father’s message to the people. In the First Epistle
of Paul to the Corinthians, Paul explains that prophecy is a gift of the Spirit given to
individuals for the good of the community.7
Throughout the days of the early church and the Middle Ages, prophecy retained
a position of honor and esteem. One historian, Jeffrey Burton Russell, interprets the
whole of Medieval Christianity in terms of two forces: prophecy and order. Russell
argues that the tension between these sometimes complimentary, sometimes conflicting
forces was the primary shaper of the medieval Catholic Church. Russell points to a
decline of ecclesiastical order coupled with an increase in the prophetic spirit as the cause
of the general weakening of the church.8 Elaborating on this point he writes, “to the
prophet, order was of subsidiary importance or even a positive evil.”9 During this time
the image of prophet was changing and evolving. The prophets of the Middle Ages had
to contend with the established institutions of the church whereas their early predecessors
had only to convince the people of their personal divine revelations. In the Middle Ages
The Modern Catholic Encyclopedia. s.v. “Prophecy/Prophet” 697-8. The twelve minor prophets are:
Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and
Malachi.
6
Dan. 9:9-10
7
1 Cor. 12:1-14.
8
Jeffrey Burton Russell, A History of Medieval Christianity: Prophecy and Order. (New York: Thomas Y.
Cromwell Co., 1968), 134-195.
9
Ibid. 100.
5
5
prophets were labeled monks, mystics, and heretics. Russell observes that the rich
mystical tradition of the Middle Ages replaced the position in society formerly held by
the prophets. Mystics, like prophets, claimed direct divine inspiration. Well known
medieval mystics include St. Bernard of Clairvaux (1091-1153), Meister Eckhart (12601327), Margery Kempe (born c. 1275), Thomas a Kempis (1379-1471), and Hildegard of
Bingen. Two important observations as to the changing nature of prophet are suggested
by this list. First, the prophet no longer had to be male. Both Margery Kempe and
Hildegard were eventually recognized as having a special, legitimate connection with
God. Second, the clergy did not have a monopoly on prophecy. Just as the Old
Testament prophets arose from the people so it was possible (though relatively
uncommon) for medieval mystics to come from the laity. An example of a lay mystic is
Margery Kempe, who in addition to being a woman was also a member of the laity.
Prophecy during the Renaissance, which extends through Reginald Pole’s lifetime
(1550-1558), did not change substantially in nature, retaining much the same character as
in the Middle Ages. One major change that did occur was a widespread proliferation of
prophets and prophecy. This proliferation cannot be overemphasized and is essential to
understanding Pole-as-prophet. Humanist scholars and theologians propelled this surge
of interest in prophecy by delving into sources of Neoplatonism, mystical revelations,
astrology, numerology, Joachimist prophecy and the Cabbala. Nowhere was this
proliferation more evident than in Rome, the seat of the papacy. In an essay entitled,
“High
and Low Prophetic Culture in Rome at the Beginning of the Sixteenth Century”,
Ottavia Niccoli explores the range of prophetic influence in Rome. She concludes, “at
the beginning of the sixteenth-century Rome found itself at the centre of a flood of
6
prophetic interpretations of contemporary history, originating from the heights of the
most refined humanist culture but descending to those who spoke in the squares
surrounded by charlatans and tooth drawers.”10 Prophecy in sixteenth-century Italy had
become a class-transcendent phenomenon. It was also immensely popular. The creation
of new prophecies accompanied the dredging up of the old. The circulation of printed
anthologies of collected prophecies, of which the best known was the Mirabilis Liber,
exemplifies the increase of sixteenth century interest.11 Prophecies concerning the
papacy were especially popular. Older prophecies of this nature that were popularized in
the sixteenth century include the fourteenth century Vaticinia de summis pontificibus, a
sequence of fifteen prophecies with pictures, the Vaticinium Romanum, supposedly a
twelfth century text “discovered” by the Franciscan Pietro Galatino, and possibly most
important, the pseudo-Amadeite Apocalypsis Nova, which predicts the coming of an
‘Angelic Pope’.12 Prophets, true and false, would have been commonplace to all classes
of people in sixteenth century Italy.
Prophecy and the Nature of Authority
Why did Pole choose to create the image of prophet around himself? At the most
basic level there is a simple answer to this question: authority. In Thomas Mayer’s new
biography of Reginald Pole he claims, “Pole’s career is very easily encapsulated as a
contest for authority.”13 Pole’s choice to represent himself as a prophet was one solution
Ottavia Niccoli, “High and Low Prophetic Culture in Rome at the Beginning of the Sixteenth Century,”
in Prophetic Rome in the High Renaissance Period: essays/edited by Marjorie Reeves. (This work will
hereafter be abbreviated PRHRP.) (New York: Oxford UP, 1992), 213.
11
Marjorie Reeves, Chap. II introduction, “The Proliferation and Circulation of New Prophecies,” in
PRHRP, 23.
12
Marjorie Reeves, “The Medieval Heritage,” in PRHRP, 3-26.
13
RPP&P, 4.
10
7
to this ‘contest for authority.’ As I have established, prophets received their messages for
the people directly from God. In terms of authority, direct revelation from God has to be
pretty high on the list for most sixteenth-century Europeans. Considering the increased
secularization and the decline of papal authority during and prior to Pole’s lifetime this
choice appears more intelligent on Pole’s part. In his capacity as papal legate, Pole was
able to claim full papal authority. Legates were representatives of the Vicar of Christ.
For Pole, his own prophetic authority complemented papal authority. Given the
increased secularization, important individuals may not have been inclined to respect
papal authority as they would have two centuries earlier. It is entirely possible that these
same individuals were still God-fearing Christians and as such would be inclined to
acknowledge prophetic authority.
The position of the church on prophets and prophecy in the sixteenth century is
important for understanding prophecy and prophetic authority. According to Mayer, “the
church’s dependence on prophecy and revelation ran right to the very top.”14 Sill,
prophecy was a touchy subject in the sixteenth century church. For prophets,
“ecclesiastical machinery was an encumbrance and its offices an offence to God, if
meanwhile the actual human situation and urgent moral issues were ignored.”15 The
church could not excommunicate all contemporary prophets because the church was to a
large extent founded on prophecy. On the other hand, people who claimed direct
revelation from God were a threat to the church as an institution. The church’s
standpoint on prophecy was spelled out in the Fifth Lateran Council (1512-1517). The
council’s final decree on preaching and prophecy, the Supernae majestatis praesidio,
14
15
RPP&P, 20.
R.B.Y. Scott, The Relevance of The Prophets. (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1947), 15.
8
addressed the issue of clerics who claimed revelation from God. According to this
decree, clerics were forbidden “to predict in their sermons any fixed time of future evils,
of Antichrist’s coming, or the day of Last Judgement.”16 Predictions were also not to be
based on interpretations of scripture or “foolish divinations.” To prevent the spread of
false prophecies, the decree set up a method of examination for clergy before they were
allowed to prophesy. The Supernae majestatis praesidio did not ban all prophets. In
fact, “far from inhibiting all prophecy, the decree openly acknowledged its legitimacy
and utility.”17 It is within these contexts that we must examine Reginald Pole’s creation
of a prophetic identity.
Pole and Vittoria Colonna
One of the many people who firmly believed in Pole as a prophet was the famous
Renaissance poet, Vittoria Colonna (1492-1547). Colonna came from one of the oldest
and wealthiest of Roman aristocratic families. The Colonnas had a tradition of close ties
with the papacy; Pope Martin V (1417-1431) was a Colonna.18 Vittoria Colonna, a
widow at age thirty-three, had an intense personal spirituality which brought her into
contact with many of the most passionate spirituals of the day. She believed strongly in
the necessity of reforming the Catholic Church and aligned herself with like-minded
individuals. In addition to Pole, she associated with other persons often classified as
spirituali including Gasparo Contarini, Giovanni Morone, Marcantonio Flaminio,
Bernardino Ochino, and Alvise Priuli. According to Elisabeth Gleason, who wrote a
Nelson H. Minnich, “Prophecy and the Fifth Lateran Council (1512-1517),” in PRHRP, 63.
ibid. 87.
18
Trollope, Thomas Adolphus. “Vittoria Colonna,” in These Splendid Women, ed. Hamblen Sears. (New
York, J.H. Sears & Company, Inc. 1926), 96-98.
16
17
9
recent biography of Gasparo Contarini, spirituali “referred to the juxtaposition of carnal
and spiritual man, but could also be used in an ideological and political sense as well.”19
The spirituali, which included Pole, hoped for a reconciliation with the Protestants and
were known as ardent reformers.
Pole’s friendship with Colonna began to intensify in early 1540.20 Vittoria
Colonna adopted Pole as her personal spiritual adviser. Pole in turn adopted Colonna as a
replacement for his mother, the Lady Margaret Pole, who was executed by the order of
Henry VIII on May 27 1541.21 These relationships are evident in the correspondence
between Pole and Colonna and also in Colonna’s correspondence to others concerning
Pole. Colonna’s letters are something of a dilemma to historians since they are filled
with complex poetical devices and generally obscure prose. Furthermore, in the case of
the Pole-Colonna correspondence, many letters whose existence we know of by referral
are missing. Taking this into account, there is still plenty of evidence to conclude
confidently that Colonna thought of Pole as a prophet and worthy spiritual guide. As
always, this was an identity that Pole created and nurtured through correspondence. In a
letter to Pole from July 1546, Vittoria begins, “I always tell you everything, as God’s
most direct minister to me. I feel consolation from Christ through you.”22 Recalling that
one of the primary characteristics of a prophet is that of intercessor between God and the
people, Vittoria’s conception of Pole as a prophet is clear. She unequivocally states that
God provides her with spiritual direction through Pole. In addition to the role of
19
Elisabeth Gleason, Gasparo Contarini: Venice, Rome, and Reform. (Los Angeles, CA: University of
California Press, 1993), 191 n.23.
20
RPP&P, 105.
21
Thomas F. Mayer, ed., The Correspondence of Reginald Pole (St. Andrew’s Reformation Studies.
Guildford: Ashgate, forthcoming; 4 vols.) (To be abbreviated CRP), no. 330.
22
CRP, no. 480.
10
intercessor, Pole the prophet also serves Colonna as a confessor to whom she “always
tells everything.” We must infer that as confessor Pole granted Colonna some form of
absolution since she writes of feeling consolation “from Christ through you.” It would
appear that Christ as well as God worked through Pole the prophet.
It was not only in her letters to Pole that this complex relationship was expressed.
Writing to Cardinal Marcello Cervini, (who later became Pope Marcellus II) Vittoria
elaborates on her relationship with Pole: “The more I have had an opportunity of watching
the actions of the Rev. Monsignor of England [Pole], the more I have perceived what a
true and very sincere servant of God he is; so that when he is so good as to answer any of
my questions I feel sure that I shall not err in following his advice.”23 In this letter
Colonna changes Pole’s title from “direct minister” to “servant of God,” but the message
remains the same. Pole’s advice –like that of the prophets –is infallible. By following the
advice offered in his letters Vittoria believes she is following the will of God.
Documents besides Pole’s and Colonna’s correspondence indicate that others
were well aware of this relationship between Pole and Colonna. Cardinal Pietro
Carnesecchi, knew both Colonna and Pole well. In one of his letters, he writes that
Vittoria followed “the advice given her by the Cardinal [Pole] in whom she trusted as in
an oracle.”24 The conception of the prophet as oracle is a traditional association; predating
even the Old Testament and hearkening back to classical Greek and Roman societies.
Calling Pole Vittoria’s oracle is perhaps an even stronger statement of other’s perceptions
of Pole’s prophetic identity.
23
Tiraboschi, Storia della Letteratura italiana. 1822 ff, vol. viii, 43. Cited in G.K. Brown, Italy and the
Reformation to 1550. (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1933), 238.
24
Salvatorelli, Revista Storica Ital., 1924, vol. 41, 54-7. Cited in G.K. Brown, Italy and the Reformation
to 1550. (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1933), 237.
11
Colonna spent many of her last years in Viterbo where Pole was serving as legate.
As her health declined she took comfort in Pole’s letters and visits. Her long attachment
to Pole indicates that her confidence in Pole-as-prophet was much more than a whim.
Dudic’s biography of Pole recounts Colonna’s constancy in her final gesture to her friend
and spiritual guide. Dudic writes, Colonna, “a woman of the greatest character and
highest piety, valued him most highly. Dying, she left him nine thousand gold coins,
which money, however Pole did not wish to touch.”25 Pole the prophet obviously did not
wish to mix himself up in such temporal matters as money (“Give unto Caesar that which
is Caesar’s.”)
Pole as the Angelic Pope in the papal conclave of 1549-1550.
In the papal conclave of 1549-1550, Cardinal Reginald Pole missed being elected
by the margin of one vote. Had he been elected the fate of the Roman Catholic Church
may have been greatly altered. Pole had a reputation as an advocate for papal reform.
His position is indicated by the Consilium de emendanda ecclesia, a document of legal
opinion concerning the reform of the church commissioned by Pope Paul III. The
Consilium was written by some the leading Catholic reform thinkers of the day including
Pole, Gasparo Contarini, Gianpietro Carafa and Jacopo Sadoleto, among others. Since
the specific author of the Consilium is unidentified, it is difficult to assign particular
viewpoints to particular signers. Still Pole was on the commission and had influence as
to the final content of this document. Largely due to resistance from the conservative
majority of the Cardinals and Martin Luther’s scathing marginalia which he added to the
25
TELCRP, Vita Reginaldi Poli (Dudic).
12
German translation of the document, Paul III never implemented the reform measures
suggested in the Consilium. Only in retrospect can one wonder what would have
happened had Pole been elected. Would he have been successful in reforming the
Church? Given the historical significance of the conclave and personal significance to
Pole, it is important that we investigate 1) how Pole lost a “sure thing” election and 2) the
relevance of contemporary prophecy and Pole’s prophetic identity.
In the first scrutinium (an initial voting in which the cardinals could vote for as
many candidates as they wanted) of the conclave of 1549-50, Pole emerged as the
favorite. By December 4 he had twenty-four of the twenty-eight votes necessary to be
elected. The bankers put Pole’s odds at 90 to 95%, pontifical vestments were made and
Pole may have even written an acceptance speech.26 The next day, Pole garnered only
twenty-six votes. This was the closest Pole would ever get to being elected. His backers
eventually coalesced around Cardinal Giovanni Maria Ciocchi del Monte who after one
of the longest conclaves in history (72 days) was elected Pope Julius III on February 8,
1550.
Why Pole lost the election is a matter of scholarly debate.27 The debate turns on
the matter of the scrutinium voting on December 5, 1549. Before the voting began,
Cardinal Gianpietro Carafa leapt to his feet and accused Pole of heresy, waving a list of
Pole’s infractions.28 Pole’s contemporaries, including his biographers Beccadelli and
Dudic, attribute Pole’s failure to be elected to Carafa’s condemnation. This interpretation
of events was for a long time also the accepted historical standpoint (see footnote 14).
Thomas F. Mayer, “The War of the Two Saints: The Conclave of Julius III and Reginald Pole,” in
Cardinal Pole in European Context. Ed. Thomas F. Mayer (Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate Publishing Co.,
2000), IV 1-21.
26
13
Dr. Thomas Mayer has recently argued for another interpretation, pointing out the
relatively small role Carafa’s denunciation played in the overall election.29 Mayer
contends that the cardinals connected to the Inquisition, and therefore to Carafa, “formed
only one group among many” and could not have been wholly responsible for Pole not
being elected. Mayer looks instead to the possible suspects for the missing vote that Pole
had needed to be elected. I wish to argue for a third, as of yet unexplored explanation as
to why Pole failed to be elected. I believe Pole’s perception of himself a prophet and his
knowledge of contemporary prophecy, especially prophecy concerning the Angelic Pope,
influenced the final outcome of the conclave of 1549-50.
Ludovico Beccadelli, Pole’s first biographer gives the following account of Pole’s
behavior during the conclave:
It is a clear and well known thing to all those who were in that conclave, which lasted more than
two months, that with all this in Cardinal Pole's favor, neither by him nor by his supporters was a
word ever said to anyone in order to solicit their help in making him pope, nor was any sign of a
change of spirit ever seen in the said cardinal. He was always the same with his usual
cheerfulness, which it was his custom to show. 30
Pole’s refusal to campaign or further himself in anyway during the conclave is well
documented. His non-involvement was to some a sign of his detachment from secular
matters, causing one cardinal to argue that Pole was “too holy to be elected.”31 Others
interpreted his attitude as complete indifference to the pontificate. According to
Beccadelli, Pole counseled, "I beg you not to look at any preference for a person, but
consider the need of holy church, and do that which God inspires in you. To this alone
one must pay attention."32 Pole’s detachment can be interpreted in yet another more
27
ibid. See esp. IV 1-2 and footnote #3 for a discussion of this debate.
ibid. IV, 9.
29
ibid. For Dr. Mayer’s argument see entire article (IV, 1-21.)
30
TELCRP Vita del cardinale Polo (Beccadelli)
31
“The War of the Two Saints: The Conclave of Julius III and Reginald Pole,” IV, 4.
32
TELCRP, Vita del cardinale Polo. (Beccadelli)
28
14
interesting manner. Perhaps Pole wasn’t attempting to portray himself as “too holy” to
be elected pope, but just holy enough to be the prophesized Angelic Pope.
The prophecy of the Pastor Angelicus or Angelic Pope appears in multiple
sources. Arguably the most popular and widely disseminated of these is found in the
Apocalypsis Nova, a prophetic work attributed to the fifteenth century Franciscan
Minorite, Amadeus. In the oldest version of the Apocalypsis Nova, the prophetic
sequence of popes extends only to the reign of Leo X (1513-1521). Still this
inconsistency in no way disqualifies Pole from attempting to appear as the Angelic Pope
since as Morisi-Guerra points out, “readers of the Apocalypsis Nova over a number of
years annotated their manuscripts with various interpretations, inserting spaces of
decades between one pope and another in order to lengthen the time span and maintain
the validity of the prophecies.”33 Predictions derived from the Apocalypsis Nova were
circulated even as late as the nineteenth century.34
Another important source that must be mentioned is the Vaticinium Romanum.
The Vaticinium is one of many prophetic works of questionable origin brought to light in
the sixteenth century by the Franciscan Pietro Galatino. This work is of particular
relevance to the conclave of 1549-50 because it deals with all the Popes from Alexander
III (1159-1181) to Clement VII (1523-1534), the latter to be followed by the Pastor
Angelicus.35 Paul III was the only pope between the end of those popes described in the
Vaticinium and the conclave of 1549-50. Paul III was certainly not the prophesized
Anna Morisi-Guerra, “The Apocalypsis Nova: A Plan for Reform,” in PRHRP, 35.
ibid. 27.
35
Marjorie Reeves, Chap. II introduction, “The Proliferation and Circulation of New Prophecies,” in
PRHRP, 25.
33
34
15
Angelic Pope, so expectations ran high for the next election. Enter Cardinal Reginald
Pole.
It should not be thought that marketing himself as the Angelic Pope was an
original idea conceived and enacted only by Pole. To the contrary, in the first two
decades of the sixteenth century, many claimed to be the Angelic Pope, including the
Spanish Cardinal Bernardino Carvajal, the Bosnian theologian Juraj Dragišić, Cardinal
Adriano Castellesi, even Pope Leo X identified himself with the Angelic Pope.36 The
Florentine prophet / heretic Savonarola, in one of his sermons (24 March 1496) describes
the coming of an Angelic Pope.37 What this establishes is a precedent for Pole’s
seemingly eccentric actions (or inaction) during the conclave of 1549-50. His refusal to
campaign or engage in any form of electioneering that so confounded his contemporaries,
viewed in light of my argument that Pole was attempting to portray himself as the
Angelic Pope, provides Pole with a plausible motive for his eccentric actions.
Many characteristics are attributed to the Angelic Pope. He will be young and
poor. He will be concerned only with spiritual matters. He will unite the western and
eastern churches. In all the prophecies the Angelic Pope will be a great reformer who
will purge the church of evil. According to Morisi-Guerra, the Apocalypsis Nova’s
prophecy of the Angelic Pope as a reformer was, “a valid myth at a time when Popes
were failing to respond adequately to the disarray of the Christian world, a disarray and
confusion which found expression in anxiety for reform and in pressure for theological
and cultural rethinking.”38 Already one can begin to see why Pole would style himself
after the Angelic Pope. His reputation as an ardent reformer discussed above obviously
36
37
Roberto Rusconi, “An Angelic Pope Before the Sack of Rome,” in PRHRP, 157.
Josephine Jungić, “The Borgherini Chapel: Iconography,” in PRHRP, 332 .
16
suits him for this role. According to one prophecy, under the first Angelic Pope, “The
Roman See will renounce all temporal wealth and a General Council will ordain that
clergy shall live on bare necessities.”39 This description could almost have come directly
from the Consilium. The very first point made in the Consilium states; “it should not be
lawful, even for the Vicar of Christ, to obtain any wealth through the use of the power of
the keys given him by Christ.”40 Pole was also in favor of reform of the clergy. It was
rumored that if elected pope he would send the bishops back to their dioceses and prevent
cardinals from holding bishoprics, both issues raised in the Consilium.41
The Angelic Pope was also supposed to be young and poor. At the time of the
conclave Pole was in the younger and (relatively) poorer half of the College of Cardinals.
According to calculations by Dr. Thomas Mayer the Imperial-Farnese alignment which
backed Pole averaged 40.5 years old, while their opponents were almost a decade older.
The division was so distinct that, “many observers thought the old and the rich opposed
Pole to a man.”42 Whether Pole knew of and exploited this characteristic is impossible to
say, but it is enough to realize that again in this example Pole fit the mold of the Angelic
Pope.
One final comparison between Pole in the conclave of 1549-50 and the
Apocalypsis Nova bears mention. In the Apocalypsis Nova the archangel Gabriel reveals
divine knowledge to Amadeus in a series of eight raptus. In the third raptus, Gabriel
says to Amadeus, “in this matter you are to God like a horse to your brother, carrying
Anna Morisi-Guerra, “The Apocalypsis Nova: A Plan for Reform,” in PRHRP, 36.
Marjorie Reeves, “The Medieval Heritage,” in PRHRP, 10.
40
Elisabeth Gleason, ed. and trans., “Proposal Concerning Reform of the Church,” in Reform Thought in
Sixteenth-Century Italy. (Ann Arbor, Michigan: Edwards Brothers, Inc., 1981), 88.
41
“The War of the Two Saints: The Conclave of Julius III and Cardinal Pole,” IV, 2.
42
ibid. IV, 6.
38
39
17
flour to the mill. And I [Amadeus] said: ‘May I be a good ass –to carry something so
good to our faithful. You called me a horse out of courtesy rather than what I deserve but
you meant an ass, a rough beast.’” 43 This account of Amadeus’ humility is interesting
when compared with Pole’s writing during the conclave, “Pole stoutly refused to
campaign, spending his time instead putting into writing a refined version of his martyr
self, a Christ-like persona, coupled slightly later with an image of himself as the ass
which bore Christ into Jerusalem.”44 Could this be evidence that Pole was familiar with
the Apocalypsis Nova, to the point where he used the same analogy as Amadeus? Both
compare themselves to the ass that bore great things to the people. While it is possible
that the analogies are purely coincidental, the similarities given the circumstances seem
to suggest otherwise. In the end Pole was unsuccessful in the election. Angelic Pope or
not he still had to be elected by the College of Cardinals. His identification with the
Angelic Pope prophecies was either overlooked, or perhaps it was realized and as a result
it frightened voters concerned about their financial well being away from the reformminded Pole.
To better understand Julius III’s later preferential treatment of Pole, a word about
the end of the conclave is merited. As I mentioned, following Pole’s near election
support eventually coalesced around cardinal del Monte, who was elected Pope Julius III
on February 8, 1550. According to the biographies of Beccadelli and Dudic, during
Julius’ adoration the night before the formal election took place, the cardinals lined up to
prostrate themselves before the Pope and kiss his feet as was customary. When it came
to be Pole’s turn, “the pontiff, tears having arisen, raised him up and embraced him as a
Quotation from MS. Vat. Lat. 3825. R3, fo. 17. Cited in, Morisi-Guerra “The Apocalypsis Nova: A Plan
for Reform,” in PRHRP, 31.
43
18
friend, seeing that he [Pole] refusing the papacy, had delivered it from his hands to
him.”45 This in part explains Julius’ later special treatment of Pole. One final anecdote
from the conclave: after Julius had been Pope for awhile he had many problems with the
French over Mirandola. Again according to the biographies, Julius supposedly said to
cardinal Ranuzzio of Sant ̀Angelo, “I do not know, what has been my offense against
God, that he should execute such sharp pains on me, unless perhaps it is that I refused my
vote in the conclave to the most holy man Pole.”46
Marcellus Cervini- A Successful Angelic Pope.
After a short four-day papal conclave following the death of Julius III (March 23,
1555), Marcellus Cervini was elected Pope Marcellus I. Cervini was one of the few
popes of modern times to retain his baptismal name. When asked what he would take as
his papal name he is credited with saying, “I was Marcellus, I will be Marcellus: the
pontifical office will change neither my name nor my ways.”47 This portrait of constancy
reflects Cervini’s behavior during the short conclave. He was determined to be elected
only if he were chosen for the qualities he always represented. Girolamo Seripando, one
of Cervini’s early biographers, wrote of the conclave, “If he did not [seek the papacy]
then undoubtedly he was not a man, but an Angel sent to earth.”48[Italics mine]. This
biography like so many others from the time is intended as hagiography. Still the
reference to Cervini as an angel is intentional. During this conclave Cervini acted in
44
RPP&P, 6.
TELCRP, Dudic, see also Beccadelli’s account of the same.
46
TELCRP, Dudic.
47
Pogianus, Epistolae et orationes, 1:125. Cited in, William V. Hudon, Marcello Cervini and
ecclesiastical government in Tridentine Italy. (DeKalb, Illinois: Northern Illinois UP, 1992), 153.
48
Baronius, Annales ecclesiastici, xxxiii. 551. Cited in William Hudon, “Marcellus II, Girolamo
Seripando, and The Image of the Angelic Pope,” in PRHRP, 375.
45
19
much the same manner as Pole had in the previous conclave. William Hudon suggests
that his actions were patterned after the characteristics of the Angelic Pope. Following
the election, Marcellus put into action a series of papal and curial reforms that was “much
in line with what was to be expected from the Angelic Pope.”49 A comparison seems
appropriate here. Like Pole, Cervini maintained that he did not seek the pontificate and
did nothing to further his election. Like Pole, Cervini was known primarily as an ardent
reformer. Like Pole, Cervini had a certain amount of detachment from secular matters.
But, unlike Pole, Cervini was almost unanimously elected pope, the only dissenting vote
being his own (Pole as well never voted for himself). It would appear that the Angelic
Pope routine was successful for some and not others. The determining factor for the
success of the ploy may have been as simple as the composition of the College of
Cardinals.
Pole’s prophetic identity in the papal legation for the Reconciliation of England and
legation for Peace.
Following the death of Edward VI in 1553 and the subsequent crowning of Mary
Tudor, Pole was appointed as papal legate by Julius III for the Reconciliation of England.
His task as for this legation was to bring England back under papal authority. A second
legation for peace between the Holy Roman Emperor (Charles V), France (Henry II),
England (Mary and Phillip) and the papacy was assigned to Pole later that same year.
For this legation Pole’s task was to serve as mediator between these major European
rulers to achieve peace in Europe. To increase his authority as papal legate, Pole
49
ibid. 381.
20
maintained and exploited his prophetic identity throughout his written legatine
correspondence as well as in his public demeanor. By this maneuver his effectiveness as
legate was greatly improved. First, as the Pope’s legate he had ecclesiastical powers
nearly on par with those of the Pope. Secondly, for those who may not have been swayed
by institutional authority, Pole was a double-edged sword since as a prophet he could also
claim authority directly from God. Even if the issue of authority is never directly
addressed, it underlies the whole of the legatine correspondence.
Pole and Muzzarelli
One of the believers who figures into the legation was Girolamo Muzzarelli.
During the time of the legations (1553-1557), Muzzarelli served as Master of the Sacred
Palace– a title which meant he was the official papal theologian. Pole and Muzzarelli were
close friends and some of the longest correspondence from the legations is between the
two. In a letter from August 9 1553, Pole complains to Muzzarelli that, “My troubles,
equivalent to stigmata, have steadily gotten worse.”50 This complaint is a perfect
illustration of the way in which Pole created a prophetic persona around himself through
writing. In this simple statement, Pole equates his troubles to the stigmata- the wounds of
Christ. Traditionally, only devout, intensely spiritual Christians such as St. Francis of
Assisi, St. Theresa of Avila, and St. Catherine of Siena, received the stigmata as a visible
sign of their participation in Christ’s passion. Pole again tries to associate himself with the
saints and martyrs- to remind his readers that his sufferings are on par with theirs. In the
same letter Pole bemoans the fact that he has sacrificed so much for the church and yet is
suspected of heresy. Referring to his refusal to support Henry VIII’s divorce and his
21
defection from the Roman Catholic Church Pole writes, “Did God not give me a chance to
prove my obedience, just one step short of martyrdom?” Ordinary people are killed or
executed, it is only the saints and prophets who become martyrs. Here Pole is obviously
writing himself into the latter category. He makes the assumption that had he been killed,
he would have been a martyr of the faith.
In his reply to Pole’s letter, Muzzarelli consoles Pole, telling him that his ‘exile’
from England and all his sufferings testify to the constancy of his faith. He elaborates, “I
am convinced that you have been illuminated through all your troubles.”51 The idea that
Pole was ‘illuminated’ through his sufferings is directly related to Pole’s prophetic persona.
Prophets receive their revelations through illumination. Muzzarelli conceives of Pole and
Pole’s writing in this prophetic context. In the same letter he declares that Pole’s
‘ornamented mode of writing’ makes him cry- the prophet’s words moving the believer to
tears. If this were not enough to encourage Pole, Muzzarelli later compares him to the
prophet Jeremiah. Concerning Pole’s legations, Muzzarelli, following the prophetic
context he has established, writes that God gave them to Pole as, ‘a sign of your sanctity.’
Sanctity, roughly meaning Godliness or sacredness could be applied to any good Christian,
but given Muzzarelli’s opinion of Pole, sanctity in this case probably means ‘saintly’ or
‘Godly.’ Believers such as Muzzarelli helped to perpetuate and disseminate Pole’s
prophetic persona.
Pole, Mary, and Philip II
50
51
CRP no. 636.
CRP no. 670.
22
In his capacity as legate for the Reconciliation of England, Pole had frequent
correspondence with Mary Tudor and later with her husband Philip II of Spain. Pole’s
mission as legate was to reconcile the Church in England, which had defected under
Henry VIII, with the Roman Catholic Church. According to a letter from Pope Julius III,
Pole was unanimously selected as legate for this highly important assignment because of
“your love for your fellow citizens; your knowledge of their language and customs; your
high standing with them because of your family; your extraordinary prudence and
eloquence . . .”52 Although very high praise coming from a Pope, Julius is careful not to
identify Pole explicitly as a prophet. To do so would have acknowledged that Pole had
powers beyond the control of the papacy. Nevertheless, Julius was very generous in
granting Pole’s faculties in the papal bulls. Dr. Thomas Mayer points out that, “Julius
gave him exceptionally wide powers making him virtually equivalent to the pope.”53
Julius’ special treatment of Pole can be explained in part by the events surrounding the
papal conclave of 1550 (discussed above) wherein Pole was nominated, but Julius was
eventually elected.
For this all-important legation, Pole had to utilize the full array of diplomatic
maneuvers at his disposal, including relying on the authority granted him as a prophet.
Unfortunately for Pole, the powers granted him by the Pope and his own prophetic
authority was not enough to even gain him admittance to England. Due largely to
opposition from the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, Pole was kept from entering
England and thus from being able to influence Mary at this crucial point in her reign.
52
CRP no. 619.
The New Dictionary of National Biography, eds. H.C.G. Matthew and Brian Harrison, (Oxford UP,
forthcoming). s.v. “Pole, Reginald.”
53
23
In the meantime, Charles was able to negotiate a marriage between Mary and his son,
Philip II of Spain. Pole was against the marriage from the outset. He thought that Mary’s
principle concern should be healing the schism and returning England to papal obedience.
Furthermore, he thought that if Mary were to wed she should choose an Englishman not a
foreigner. Julius eventually made Pole write congratulatory letters to Mary and Philip and
Charles. This animosity towards Philip is obvious in a strongly worded letter that a
frustrated Pole wrote to Philip from Dilighem (a Premonstratensian monastery just outside
of Brussels) where he was awaiting permission to enter England. He begins by chastising
Philip for making him wait a year to return to England. He argues that the time is right for
his return since all impediments to his return have been removed. Then Pole moves to
stronger arguments insisting that Philip and Mary are offending Christ by refusing to admit
his legate. Finally, he pulls out all the stops and utters a prophecy against Philip and Mary
in true Old Testament fashion: “If you try to use any other, [legate, advisor?] I denounce
and predict with Christ the destruction of the house.”54 Pole follows up this prophecy with
a warning to Philip that if he wants to ‘avert divine anger, admit me.’ In this one
exemplary letter, Pole cycles through his whole diplomatic arsenal. He argues first from a
rational, rhetorical standpoint for his re-entry into England. Next, he reminds Philip that he
is the representative of the pope. To top it all off, Pole relies on his prophetic authority to
clinch his argument. As I have established, knowledge of prophets and prophecy was
common to all classes. Although contemporary prophesies were listened to with some
degree of skepticism, they couldn’t be completely disregarded either. There was always
the possibility that one could be dealing with a true prophet. By October, Pole received the
long-awaited permission to come to England.
54
CRP no. 939.
24
The degree to which Mary Tudor believed in Pole-as-prophet is harder to discern.
After all, the two had known each other since childhood. King Henry VIII and Queen
Catherine of Aragon chose Pole’s mother, the widowed Lady Margaret Pole, as the most
suitable governess for young Mary because she was both a close relation of the King’s and
“a
widow of great prudence and dignity.”55 This intimate relationship between Pole and
Mary did not dissuade Mary from believing in Pole’s prophetic persona. This is evident in
the correspondence describing Pole’s entry and first days in England. Finally having
gained admittance, Pole was received in grand style. According to the legation
correspondence, fully 800 well wishers showed up at Rochester and another 1,000 at
Gravesend.56 Mary and Philip formally greeted Pole at Westminster. Once again in
prophetic fashion, Pole said to Mary, “Benedictus fructus ventris tui,”57 intoning the words
of Elisabeth to Mary mother of Jesus. Mary Tudor later sent word to Pole that she had not
wanted to say anything about the pregnancy in public but, she had “felt her child stir when
Pole greeted her.”58 Pole’s powers are shown here to extended beyond the ability to
prophesy. In this instance he has the same physical effect on Mary Queen of England as
Saint Elisabeth had on the Virgin Mary. Mary, like so many others recognized and
accepted Pole’s prophetic persona.
Five days later on Wednesday 28 November 1554, Pole addressed parliament and
explained his legation. Stephen Gardiner, the Lord Chancellor (the highest office under the
crown, a sort of Prime Minister before that office was established in the 18th century)
repeated what Pole had said so everyone could hear. He began this speech by quoting from
TELCRP, “Vita del Cardinale Reginaldo Polo.” (Beccadelli).
CRP no. 998.
57
Luke 1:42-44. (Blessed is the fruit of your womb.)
58
CRP no. 998.
55
56
25
Deuteronomy, “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among
you, from your brethren, him–you shall heed–.”59 In this instance one of the most
important members of Mary and Philip’s counsel declares to the entire governing body
(parliament) Pole’s role as prophet to England. This passage from Deuteronomy is
especially well suited to Pole because it states that the prophet whom God will raise up will
come “from among you, from your brethren.” Given Pole’s English heritage, a better
scriptural passage could probably not be found for this occasion. Gardiner is asserting
Pole’s right, as an Englishman, a papal legate, and as a prophet to be the one to heal the
schism and reconcile England with the papacy. Two days later on St. Andrew’s Day Pole
formally absolved and reconciled England to the papacy. The legation was successful, due
in part to the authority of Pole’s prophetic persona.
Following the reconciliation, Pole had to deal with the secondary problem of
church property. When Henry VIII defected from the Roman Catholic Church and was
appointed head of the Anglican Church by parliament, one of his first acts was to dissolve
the monasteries. Henry took the land previously held by the monasteries and sold it to
noble and gentry families. At the time of the reconciliation these lands were still held by
these families who were extremely reluctant to just hand them over to the church.
According to canon law it was illegal for individuals to hold church property. After Mary’s
ascension to the throne, the problem of church property was probably the single biggest
obstacle to the Reconciliation. Pole was very adamant on the point of its return to the
church. In addition to this problem, Philip and Mary were still receiving income from first
fruits and tenths, which rightly belonged to the church. In a letter from Pole to Philip and
59
Deut. 18:15.
26
Mary, he likens this withholding to crucifying Christ.60 He also sets forth arguments for
the return of church property. This letter is exemplary of Pole’s utilization of authority. In
a single page, Pole is able to argue authority from civil law (Pole-as-Englishman), canon
law (Pole-as-Papal legate) and prophetic right (Pole-as-prophet). Beginning his arguments
from a civil law standpoint he argues that law could deprive no one of property without a
hearing. Therefore, parliament could remedy the situation by declaring the expropriations
illegal and demanding their return to the church. Next, (as one begins to expect) Pole does
the prophet bit. He makes references to divine vengeance and claims a right to intervene,
“because of the danger to souls.”61 Prophesizing divine vengeance and declaring prophetic
right are classic characteristics of prophets. According to R.B.Y. Scott in his book, The
Relevance of the Prophets, “Their [prophet’s] frequent references to the future, and
especially to the immediate future, result from their sense of the spiritual importance and
moral urgency of the present.”62 This description aptly describes Pole’s prophetic persona.
It appears he truly did believe that souls were in peril because they possessed church lands.
His prophecies always dealt with the immediate future. Pole concludes his letter
concerning church property with an extended biblical analogy. He states that all of
England had acted in concord concerning the reconciliation and that he “had acted like the
prophet who restored the widow’s son through the prayers of all. But Pole had only begun
to revive him, and it was up to Mary to make the child stand and walk.”63 Once again, Pole
becomes the quintessential prophet to whom all of England prayed. In response to “the
prayers of all” Pole as prophet \ legate healed the schism. Now it was time for Mary to do
60
CRP no. 1010.
CRP no. 1009.
62
R.B.Y. Scott, The Relevance of The Prophets. (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1947), 12.
63
CRP no. 1010. Also need biblical reference of widow’s child.
61
27
her part, setting an example by renouncing first fruits and tithes as well as any church
property held by the crown. Although Pole was successful on the point of returning first
fruits and tenths, against his will he had to concede the church property to the current
holders at the order of Julius III, who wrote saying that saving souls was more important to
the church than the matter of property.
Reginald Pole’s Early Biographers: Pole-as-Saint
The final synthesis between Pole the man and Pole’s created image of himself as
prophet occurred in the writing of three early Pole biographies. By the time of his death,
Pole’s created persona was for all intents and purposes inseparable from the person.
Almost immediately following Pole’s death (17 November 1558) work on the biographies
got underway, “in an attempt to launch a pre-emptive strike on his detractors.”64 Between
1558 and 1562 three biographies of Pole were written by Nicholas Harpsfield, Ludovico
Beccadelli, and Andras Dudic. According to Thomas Mayer both Beccadelli’s and Dudic’s
biographies were “plainly intended as hagiography”.65 Pole knew all three of his
biographers and had much influence on the content of his biographies. Given this
information it is not surprising that the prophet \ martyr image of Pole can be found on
nearly every page. Through the biographies an image of a saintly Pole was created for
posterity. Pole was never canonized, but the biographies still provide a fairly detailed and
accurate (although exaggerated) account of his life. To truly get a sense of Pole’s image in
the biographies it is best to read each in its entirety. Since references to Pole-as-prophet are
so prevalent in these documents, I will limit myself to a few brief examples. Both
64
RPP&P, 356.
28
Beccadelli and Dudic claim that the information in their respective biographies was
something that they had either seen or heard Pole say in person or was taken from the
words of others that are “completely trustworthy.”66 Beccadelli in his biography, Vita del
cardinale Polo, offers his readers the following image of Pole; “His [Pole’s] purity was
mixed with prudence, which made him foresee many things.”67 In this instant, Beccadelli’s
portrayal of Pole-as-prophet is pretty blatant. The saintly characteristic of purity results in
Pole’s ability to “foresee many things.” Dudic echoes this sentiment in his introduction;
“God poured out on this man from the most abundant fount of his goodness so many riches
of divine gifts.”68
Recalling that according to 1 Corinthians one of the divine gifts of the spirit is
prophecy, Dudic’s description is more of the same; Pole is a prophet, Pole is a martyr,
therefore Pole must be a saint. Another important event recounted by both Beccadelli and
Dudic is Pole’s meeting with Henry VII. Pole was ordered by Henry to procure a favorable
argument for his divorce from Catherine of Aragon. With Henry’s bribe of the
archbishopric of York in mind, Pole planned to go against his conscience and support the
divorce. Dudic’s interpretation of the meeting is as follows: “when he began to speak what
he had thought out (oh miraculous event, impossible unless accomplished by divine will)
his tongue suddenly so stuck, that for a long time he could utter no word.”69 Whoever was
responsible for the specifics of this description –Pole or Dudic –knew prophetic
characteristics very well. Discussing the prophetic experience, John Sawyer writes,
“Another recurring theme in the descriptions of the prophet’s experience is the inner
65
RPP&P, 357.
TELCRP, Dudic.
67
TELCRP, Beccadelli.
68
TELCRP, Dudic.
66
29
compulsion that forces them to prophesy even when they try not to.”70 Pole’s compulsion
here is similar to that of the prophets. He cannot tell Henry what his conscience is against.
He is compelled to act like “a good and pious man” and tell Henry his true opinions on the
divorce. Pole waits until writing De Unitate to proclaim actual prophecies against Henry.
Both Dudic’s and Becadelli’s account of this event are heavily dependant on Pole’s own
account which he recorded in his preface to De Unitate (the preface was written and
revised after De Unitate). The biographies in general are reliant on Pole’s writings for
most of their content. Therefore, Pole can be seen as the primary shaper of his own
biographies. In this way, he was able to continue his life-long process of creating a
prophetic persona through writing even after his death.
Pole-as-Prophet: Identity and Authority.
By the end of his life, Pole had created a prophetic persona that was for all intents
and purposes indistinguishable from his ‘real self.’ Whether Pole really believed he was
a prophet who had direct revelations from God or if he only used the persona to further
his own ends, we cannot know. In any case, from a historical standpoint, Pole’s personal
beliefs are irrelevant. The available evidence shows that Pole actively promoted a
prophetic image of himself and that others believed in it. Pole utilized the authority
implicit in this persona to influence others. Dr. Mayer notes, “Whatever his failings as a
diplomat, Pole exercised remarkable power over certain people.”71 For nearly twenty
years, Pole was one of the most important diplomatic figures of his day and as such he
69
TELCRP, Dudic
John F. A. Sawyer, Prophecy and the Biblical Prophets. (New York, Oxford UP inc., 1987), 5.
71
RPP&P, 103.
70
30
was in a position to influence the most powerful figures in sixteenth-century Europe.
Pole’s prophetic persona directly or indirectly affected Pope Julius III, Holy Roman
Emperor Charles V, Henry II of France, Henry VIII, Mary Tudor, and Phillip II, just to
name a few. Besides these prominent figures, Pole-as-prophet had much greater impact
on a few close friends. These intimates certainly include Muzzarelli, Vittoria Colonna,
and the members of Pole’s tightly knit household. My research is significant in that it
demonstrates the widespread power and influence of prophets. Pole recognized and
effectively utilized this power.
Pole-as-prophet also tells us something about the nature of authority in this time
period. The centrality of the papacy in daily life had been declining since the late Middle
Ages. This increased secularization weakened the authority of the church. Reginald
Pole, as a diplomat and a writer found a solution to this problem of authority. He
intentionally created a prophetic persona through writing and his public demeanor that
served to increase his authority. The possibility that a given prophet truly had divine
revelations was always in the back of everyone’s minds. When a prophet spoke, popes,
emperors, princes, diplomats, shopkeepers, beggars, -everyone- listened. Prophets had
the backing of the people. In many ways, the authority of the church was powerless to
act against prophets who were undermining the institutional church. Prophets offered a
more direct route to salvation. If the church attempted to deny the authenticity of a
prophet’s revelations, they were denying the prophetic roots of the Catholic church. This
situation gave prophets a dangerous amount of power. Sometimes the church chose to
intercede as in the case of the Florentine prophet/preacher Savonarola, who had a broad
popular backing and yet was viewed as a threat by the church. Pole was made legate and
31
then archbishop, Savonarola was burned at the stake. It would seem that the game of
prophetic authority was a dangerous one and moreover, one that required shrewd players.
It would be interesting to see if further research would uncover individuals besides Pole
who intentionally and successfully created a prophetic persona to gain authority.
The portrait of Pole I have presented raises some interesting questions about
identity and the nature of authority in sixteenth-century Renaissance Europe. It also
significantly reinterprets some major events in the life of Reginald Pole.
32
Bibliography
Brown, G.K. Italy and the Reformation to 1550. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1933.
Gleason, Elisabeth G. Gasparo Contarini: Venice, Rome, and Reform. Los Angeles, CA:
University of California Press, 1993.
Gleason, Elisabeth G. ed. and trans. Reform Thought in Sixteenth-Century Italy. Ann
Arbor, Michigan: Edwards Brothers, Inc., 1981.
Greenblatt, Stephen. Renaissance self-fashioning, from More to Shakespeare.
Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1980.
The Harper Collins Encyclopedia of Catholicism. s.v. “Prophet.”
Hudon, William V. Marcello Cervini and ecclesiastical government in Tridentine Italy.
DeKalb, Illinois: Northern Illinois UP, 1992.
Mayer, Thomas F. Cardinal Pole in European Context. Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate
Publishing Co., 2000.
Mayer, Thomas F., ed., The Correspondence of Reginald Pole. St. Andrew’s
Reformation Studies. (Guildford: Ashgate, forthcoming; 4 vols.)
Mayer, Thomas F. Reginald Pole, Prince and Prophet. Cambridge UP, 2000.
Mayer, Thomas F. Two Early Lives of Cardinal Reginald Pole. Medieval and
Renaissance Texts. Forthcoming. Translations of Vita del cardinale Polo
(Beccadelli) and Vita Reginaldi Poli (Dudic).
The New Dictionary of National Biography, eds. H.C.G. Matthew and Brian Harrison,
(Oxford UP, forthcoming). s.v. “Pole, Reginald.”
Reeves, Marjorie ed. Prophetic Rome in the High Renaissance Period: essays/edited
by Marjorie Reeves. New York: Oxford UP, 1992.
33
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. A History of Medieval Christianity: Prophecy and Order. New
York: Thomas Y. Cromwell Co., 1968.
Sawyer, John F. A. Prophecy and the Biblical Prophets. New York, Oxford UP inc.,
1987.
Scott, R.B.Y. The Relevance of The Prophets. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1947.
Tolnay, Charles de. Michelangelo: Sculptor, Painter, Architect. Trans. By Gaynor
Woodhouse. New Jersey, Princeton UP, 1975.
Trollope, Thomas Adolphus. “Vittoria Colonna,” in These Splendid Women, ed.
Hamblen Sears. New York, J.H. Sears & Company, Inc. 1926.