The Sistine Chapel hosted its first conclave in 1492 and became the permanent conclave location in 1878.The Associated Press
Jacqueline Murray is a medieval historian at the University of Guelph.
Ever since Pope Francis’s death, the world has been mesmerized as cardinals from around the globe flock to Rome for the conclave to choose the next pope.
While the movies Conclave or Angels and Demons may seem to have penetrated the ancient secrecy of a conclave, no one knows exactly what happens during this most secret of secret ballots. What is certain is that many aspects have evolved over the last two millennia.
Originally, the pope (father) was simply the bishop of Rome, much like any other bishop. The election process in the early Middle Ages was quite transparent and collegial: Early popes were selected by consensus by the Roman deacons and nearby bishops, who then presented the pope-elect for the approval of the Roman people. But this right for the laity was abolished in 769.
By the sixth century, the papal electors became known as cardinals, meaning eminent or senior clergy. This group became more diverse in the eighth and ninth centuries, when popes began to appoint cardinals from outside of Rome. Medieval conclaves varied widely in size but were typically quite small – between 20 and 30 – compared to the 133 cardinals meeting now in Rome.
Another factor that accounted for the small numbers was the instability of the meeting place. Rome was the papal seat, but popes met with kings and ecclesiastical leaders across Europe, and conclaves tended to be held wherever the pope had died. The cardinals were scattered across Europe, and communication and travel was slow. It could take weeks for them to arrive – sometimes well after the election.
The Sistine Chapel – now inextricably linked with conclaves – was built in 1482, and hosted its first conclave in 1492, almost five decades before Michelangelo finished his famous frescoes. It became the permanent conclave location in 1878.
Complicating the medieval papal elections was the fact that the pope was head of the very powerful church and also a significant secular lord who ruled the Papal States (which have gradually shrunk; its last vestige is Vatican City.) Conclaves thus elected both a spiritual and political leader – making the process a turbulent high-stakes game.
The cardinals, too – men of great wealth and power accrued to them through church offices and lands – were motivated by political loyalties and self-interest. Consequently, there was competition between groups of cardinals working to further their own fortunes or at the behest of secular rulers. This divisiveness led to coercion, bribery and collusion that resulted in some conclaves being deadlocked for months – even years.
During the 1268-1271 conclave – which had met in three different locations – the people of the city of Viterbo intervened in 1269, refusing to send in food other than bread and water, but to no avail; they even removed the roof from the palace hosting the cardinals. Pope Gregory X, who was eventually elected, would issue a papal bull in 1274 establishing rules to govern conclaves.
These rules were first used in 1276 in Arezzo, to elect Gregory X’s successor. The cardinal-electors were locked up and forbidden to leave until the election was complete. They were not allowed private rooms and had only two servants each. Meals were provided through a guarded window to avoid outside contact. After three days, the cardinals received only one dish per day, and only bread and water after another five days. Perhaps more persuasively, their ecclesiastical stipends were suspended during the conclave. Across the centuries, subsequent popes modified these regulations as they evolved into today’s rules.
The politicking and deal-making associated with the cultural imagination of conclaves is firmly rooted in premodern evidence. Pope Pius II himself wrote an account of the conclave that elected him in 1458, describing how some of the 18 cardinal-electors tried to use bribery, begging, or threats to acquire votes. Some argued throughout the night while others gathered in the latrine to conspire. Insults were hurled, false promises were made, and fears were stoked. In the end, after official scrutineers tried to underreport the votes cast for Pius, there was a tie; when one cardinal tried to change his vote, others “tried to get him out of the room by force, one seizing his right arm and the other his left.” When he finally squeaked out his changed vote, Pius was proclaimed pope.
We may be assured that the conclave to select Francis’s successor will be a more temperate affair. The cardinals will enter with differing priorities, which will be accompanied by negotiations and diplomacy. In the end, however, there will be consensus, reinforcing the continuity of papal elections back to its medieval origins, with the proclamation “Habemus papam”: “We have a pope.”