Readers of my blog might be interested in the following piece that has come out in the Spectator USA:
How Onofrio Panvinio made the popes history:
The forgotten story of a Renaissance pioneer
The article can be accessed here:
I am delighted to announce that “The Invention of Papal History” has now been published both in the UK and the USA by Oxford University Press.
The Invention of Papal History
Onofrio Panvinio between Renaissance and Catholic Reform
Oxford-Warburg Studies. Oxford University Press, 2020
Hardback. Published: 16 December 2019
288 Pages | 11 black and white figures/tables. ISBN: 9780198807001. £70.00
- Presents the biography of a crucial sixteenth-century author, Onofrio Panvinio, who changed the historical narrative about the history of the Catholic Church
- Gives an account of the invention of a critical, source-based papal history, allowing us insights into sixteenth century writing processes, use of sources, and authorial intention
- Discusses the subsequent confessionalization and dogmatization of church history
- Reflects on the perpetually uneasy relationship between history and theology
For more information on The Invention of Papal History see:
Renaissance Studies 35 (2021) no. 1
The Uses of History in Religious Controversies from Erasmus to Baronio
Guest editor: Stefan Bauer
HAS BEEN PUBLISHED AS EARLY VIEW !
(articles are final, but page numbers are not final, please cite only by DOI reference)
The Uses of History in Religious Controversies from Erasmus to Baronio (Introduction)
https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12637 DOI: 10.1111/rest.12637
From the Reformation, church history presented a challenge to each confession in its own right. Protestants were compelled to invent particularly creative answers because, as Euan Cameron has noted, ‘the core message of the Reformation called for a shift in perceptions of the Christian past’. This is because Protestants, who aimed to revert to the pristine early state of the Church, were confronted with the key issue of explaining why error had entered the Church after apostolic times. The prevailing models for church history did not suit their view of the degeneration of the medieval Church, so that Protestant historians in the Reformation had to re-invent the discipline. Catholics, on the other hand, aimed to show that Church institutions and doctrine from apostolic times had always been the same. The special issue The Uses of History in Religious Controversies from Erasmus to Baronio explores this subject from a variety of innovative angles. It opens a new chapter in our understanding of the relationship between religious polemic and the uses of history in the Reformation era.
Pontianus Polman Re-imagined: How (Not) To Write a History of Religious Polemics
https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12638 DOI: 10.1111/rest.12638
This historiographical essay discusses several examples of how religious polemics have been studied with regard to their use of history. Only one book has ever treated the subject in a systematic way: Pontianus Polman’s L’élément historique dans la controverse religieuse du XVIe siècle (Gembloux, 1932). Applying a rigid scheme, Polman dealt first with Protestants and then with Catholics. For each side, he presented two sections: the first entitled ‘The accumulation of material’ (subdivided into ‘history of dogma’ and ‘church history’) and the second ‘The synthesis of material’. Polman’s general conclusion was that religious polemics stimulated historical research but that theological ideas were often considered to be of greater importance than evidence derived from historical documents and sources. After a consideration of contemporary reviewers such Hubert Jedin and Lucien Febvre, I discuss Irena Backus’ book Historical Method and Confessional Identity (2003) and argue that a new history of religious controversies should build on an ‘anatomy of polemics’, that is, on the study of scholarly conventions, their modification and rupture in Reformation polemics, with particular attention given to the criteria of religious knowledge as exemplified by debates about forgeries.
A Church Without History? Luther and Historical Argument in the Context of Humanist Polemics
https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12639 DOI: 10.1111/rest.12639
Marie Barral-Baron reassesses the role that historical argument played in Martin Luther’s works. It demonstrates the disjuncture between the use which Luther, the Reformer, made of history, and his reservations about the discipline. Luther (1483–1546) did not hesitate to grant historical arguments an important place in justifying the rupture that the Reformation had provoked. Historical arguments were used, but also misused, in his writings; and he encouraged those who claimed to be his followers to make use of the past whenever possible. His humanist adversaries, who had up until then marginalized the discipline of history, were forced to follow in his footsteps. However, in Luther’s eyes, historical arguments were part and parcel of his polemical armoury. He often deployed them, and he encouraged his contemporaries to do likewise, but he did not regard them as being of much intrinsic interest. Luther’s highly original attitude towards historical argument no doubt helps explain why dialogue between Catholics and Lutherans reached an impasse and why an entente between Erasmus and Luther proved to be impossible.
Students of History, Masters of Tradition: Josse Clichtove, Noël Beda and the Limits of Historical Criticism
https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12640 DOI: 10.1111/rest.12640
Kennerley investigates the relationship between tradition and historical criticism in France during the earliest years of the Reformation. Its key sources are two polemics between Josse Clichtove (1472–1543) and Noël Beda (c. 1470–1537) over the cult of Mary Magdalene and the Exultet hymn. A student of Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples, Clichtove enunciated modern‐sounding criticisms of received traditions. His opponent Beda is instead famous for his scholastic defences of inherited doctrine against humanists like Clichtove and Erasmus. Drawing on an in‐depth reading of Clichtove and Beda’s tracts, this essay will contextualize the clashes between these two scholars and analyse their respective methods and conclusions. While demonstrating the sophistication of Clichtove’s historical thought and Beda’s own surprising skill as a historian, this essay will contend that the central issue of these polemics was not history, but whether tradition was a legitimate subject for historical criticism. It will conclude by considering the implications of these polemics for the study of sacred history in the Reformation, as shown in the change of Clichtove’s method after his conflict with Beda.
David V. N. Bagchi
The Historical Argument in Early Reformation Controversy Revisited: The Council of Constance in the Writings of Eck and Cochlaeus
https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12641 DOI: 10.1111/rest.12641
Pontianus Polman, in his classic study L’élément historique dans la controverse religieuse du XVIe siècle, was critical of the historical abilities of the earliest Catholic opponents of the Reformation, regarding the efforts of the likes of Johann Eck and Johann Cochlaeus as mediocre and superficial. His verdict, that the use of history in religious controversy achieved maturity only much later in the sixteenth century, has proved influential. But a review of Reformation‐era treatments of the Council of Constance (1414–18) shows that Polman underestimated the work of the early Catholic controversialists in this regard. Writing against Luther after the Leipzig Disputation of 1519, Eck emphasized the importance of using primary sources when discussing the decrees of church councils. Cochlaeus, in a series of writings on Constance and the execution of Jan Hus, showed a similar concern for the importance of consulting original documents, of citing them correctly and of quoting them accurately. While one looks in vain to the early controversialists for a recognizably modern, critical approach to history‐writing, we do see a nascent interest in the importance of primary sources, of accurate citation, and a relative openness to new interpretations – the building blocks of history as a critical discipline.
Searching for the True Religion: The Church History of the Magdeburg Centuries Between Critical Methods and Confessional Polemics
https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12642 DOI: 10.1111/rest.12642
The Magdeburg Centuries (1559–74) constituted the first attempt at a comprehensive Lutheran church history. Written as a collaborative project and starting its account in the Apostolic age, the Centuries aimed also to describe the theological changes of their own century, although the printed version extended only to the thirteenth century. In its development, the project was closely connected to the so‐called Chancery of God, a propaganda office of strict Lutheran theologians in Magdeburg which worked against the emperor, the Catholic Church and confessional opponents in Wittenberg. Written during a time of political threats, the work was driven by apocalyptic thinking and a certain scepticism about authorities. The search for historical testimonies of religious truth, the critical methods of a humanist education, the deconstruction of myths, and the writing for specific confessional goals intermingled and formed the compilation of excerpts from historical sources. The authors of the Magdeburg Centuries used these different techniques according to their needs.
Thomas S. Freeman
1077 and All That: Gregory VII in Reformation Historical Writing
https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12643 DOI: 10.1111/rest.12643
From the late Middle Ages onwards, the reputation of Pope Gregory VII (r. 1073–85) was hotly debated. Lionized during the Catholic Reformation, the controversial pope was also the target of strident polemic from conciliarists, German humanists and then, most intensely, from Protestants. This essay focusses on the development of polemic against Gregory by Lutherans and English Protestants. Important contemporary sources against Gregory were unearthed by humanist and conciliarist scholars such as Johannes Aventinus and Ortwin Gratius and then published by Protestants such as Philipp Melanchthon and Kaspar Hedio. English writers with strong connections to the Lutherans such as Thomas Swinnerton and Robert Barnes presented the polemical history of Gregory’s pontificate to English audiences. It was further extended by Matthias Flacius, John Bale and John Foxe. Yet while all Protestant accounts of Gregory agreed that he epitomized papal depravity, there were significant variations in emphasizing which qualities of his were truly Antichristian. For some writers it was his imposition of clerical celibacy, for others his excommunication and deposition of an emperor and for others it was his activities as a sorcerer. This essay concludes by discussing these variations and evaluating the reasons for their popularity. While Gianmarco Giuliani’s essay in this collection describes how Gregory VII became a keystone in Catholic interpretations of the Church and the papacy, this essay attempts to show how he became a keystone of Protestant interpretations of ecclesiastical and papal history.
Reformatio or restauratio? The Rehabilitation of Pope Gregory VII in Catholic Historiography after Trent
https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12644 DOI: 10.1111/rest.12644
This essay highlights the role played by Pope Gregory VII (r. 1073–85) in the confessional historiography of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. A pivotal figure in ecclesiastical history, this medieval pope was the subject of lively historical debate. The Lutheran Magdeburg Centuries assessed Gregory as the best example of the increasing dominion of the Antichrist’s spirit in the Latin Church, and this view was generally shared by all Protestant scholars. The eleventh volume of the Annales ecclesiastici (Ecclesiastical Annals, 1605) by Caesar Baronio was the major attempt to rehabilitate Gregory’s status, in particular broadening the richness of contemporary sources. Baronio succeeded in creating a new critical account of Gregory. Contrary to the Protestant apocalyptic view, Gregory was not the symbol of the end of the first Christian millennium; instead, he safeguarded the apostolic purity of the Church. Baronio became a spokesman for the Doctrina Hildebrandina, a doctrine sanctioned by the decrees of the Council of Trent (1545–63) and reinforced by subsequent Catholic theologians. What emerges is, above all, a certain uniformity of historical method in all confessional parties. In addition, the pontificate of Gregory VII represented a crucial turning point in the Catholic interpretation of history as well as in the Protestant one.
* ALL ARTICLES PUBLISHED AS EARLY VIEW *
Articles are final, but page numbers are not final, please cite only by DOI reference, not by page numbers
‘History for Hire in Sixteenth-Century Italy: Onofrio Panvinio’s Histories of Roman Families’, Erudition and the Republic of Letters 4 (2019) 397–438.
Onofrio Panvinio was hired by sixteenth-century Roman families to write their histories and, where necessary, be prepared to bend the facts to suit their interests. This occasionally entailed a bit of forgery, usually involving tampering with specific words in documents. In most respects, however, Panvinio employed the same techniques—archival research and material evidence such as tombs and inscriptions—which distinguished his papal and ecclesiastical histories. This suggests that genealogy, despite being commissioned by aristocratic families to glorify their ancestries, can be seen as a more serious field of historical investigation than is often assumed. Yet the contours of this genre of history for hire in sixteenth-century Italian historiography are nowhere near exact. Panvinio struck a balance between fulfilling the expectations of the noble families who commissioned him and following his own scholarly instincts as an historian, but he nevertheless did not seek their publication. By contrast, Alfonso Ceccarelli, who also composed family histories, veered considerably in the direction of flattering his patrons, even forging entire papal and imperial privileges. Indeed, he was condemned to death for the forgery of wills concerning the property rights of nobles.
For access (through your institution) please visit https://brill.com/view/journals/erl/4/4/article-p397_397.xml
In case of lack of access please contact me.
CFP: RSA 2020, Philadelphia 2-4 April 2020
The Reception of Ancient and Medieval Forgeries in the Early Modern Period
Organizer: Stefan Bauer, Centre for Renaissance and Early Modern Studies, University of York (UK)
The sharp tools of Renaissance philology exposed numerous forgeries. Ecclesiastical history was a prime medium for the discussion of forgery, as was shown by Lorenzo Valla’s famous demolition of the Donation of Constantine. The Reformation lent further urgency to questions surrounding the authenticity of ancient and medieval documents. Polemicists on both sides of the confessional divide – Catholic and Protestant – often accepted or rejected the results of the humanists on the basis of religious and political expediency.
This session will also move beyond church history to discuss recent trends in the study of forgery across several disciplines, including the history of science, literature and art.
Presenters are encouraged to address questions such as: What were the similarities and differences in the reception of legends, myths, falsely attributed texts and forged documents? How did exposures of forgery shape the epistemology of history?
To submit a paper proposal, please provide the following:
· your name and institutional affiliation (if applicable)
· paper title (15-word maximum)
· abstract (150-word maximum)
· curriculum vitae (brief version)
· PhD completion date (past or future)
· any a/v requirements
Send your materials by email attachment to Stefan Bauer at firstname.lastname@example.org by 9 August 2019.
We are saddened to learn of the passing of Irena Backus, on June 14, 2019. Irena was a leading scholar of the Genevan Reformation, and she will be sorely missed. The theology faculty of the University of Geneva has provided a brief obituary: We have just learned with great sadness the death of Professor Irena […]
I will be speaking at the international conference “The Book of Pontiffs in the Renaissance / Der Liber Pontificalis – ein Schlüsseldokument europäischer Geschichte”, Vatican City, 21-24 November 2018.
My paper is entitled: “The Book of Pontiffs in the Renaissance: Platina, Panvinio and their Critics”
For a complete programme see
and for a PDF flyer
I will be speaking at the symposium:
Interdisciplinarity in early modern studies: the state of the question
University of Hull, 15 June 2018
2:00 pm – 5:00 pm
‘Modern Europe meets Reform’ is a workshop that aims to investigate the development of historical writing about the medieval church across the period from the Reformation to the twentieth century. We hope this will bring together medievalists and modernists and create new areas for debate. Confirmed speakers include: Stefan Bauer (York), Joshua Bennett (Oxford), Julian Fuehrer (Zurich), Daniel-Odon Hurel (CNRS Paris), Stephen Taylor (Durham) and Nicholas Vincent (UEA).
I (Stefan Bauer) will speak about “Onofrio Panvinio’s view of Gregory VII in his history of papal elections (1558-1563)”.
Modern Europe meets Reform’ is part of a larger international project entitled ‘Rethinking Reform 900-1150: Conceptualising Change in Medieval Religious Institutions’, funded by the Leverhulme Trust. It brings together scholars from across Europe to focus on how changes in medieval churches were understood and explained in their own day and on how they have been reinterpreted in post-Reformation and especially post-Napoleonic historical writing.
The project is co-ordinated by the University of Leeds (UK), with partners from UEA, Paris VIII, Mainz, KU Leuven, Durham and Ghent. Over the years 2016-19 the project will run four workshops and a final conference to allow discussion of various aspects of the main theme. Workshops in January and September 2017, held respectively at York and KU Leuven, gave groups of scholars the chance to reflect on the choice of vocabulary used to define change between the early middle ages and the twelfth century and also the ways in which medieval institutions and individuals created narratives of change.
The fourth workshop will be held at the University of Mainz in September 2018 and a final conference will be held at Ghent University April 2019. Please contact Dr Ceri Pitches (email@example.com) for further details.
Download the conference programme here: MEmR (Leeds) Programme
Thursday 12 April 2018
1.30pm – 2.15pm Registration in the Grant Room, Michael Sadler Building (with tea/coffee and cake)
2.15pm – 2.30pm Welcome and Introduction: Julia Barrow, University of Leeds
2.30pm – 3.00pm Paper 1: Stefan Bauer, University of York: Onofrio Panvinio’s view of Gregory VII in his history of papal elections (1558- 1563)
3.00pm – 3.30pm Paper 2: Gianmarco Giuliani, SNS Pisa/EPHE Paris: Reformatio or Restauratio? Cardinal Baronius and the rehabilitation of Gregory VII’s status in the XI volume of the Annales Ecclesiastici
3.30pm – 4.00pm Discussion of Papers 1 & 2
Treasures of the Brotherton
4.00pm – 5.30pm Special exhibition of books from Brotherton Special Collections – with panel members available for interpretation & discussion
Friday 13 April 2018
9.30am – 10.00am Arrival & tea/coffee (Grant Room, Michael Sadler Building)
10.00am – 10.30am Paper 3: Joshua Bennett, Christ Church, University of Oxford: Henry Hart Milman and the liberal Anglican discovery of medieval church reform
10.30am – 11.00am Paper 4: Stephen Taylor, Durham University: Post-Reformation views of religious reform in England c.900-1150: Thomas Fuller and Jeremy Collier
11.00am – 11.30am Discussion of Papers 3 & 4
11.30am – 12.00 Tea/coffee & biscuits (Grant Room, Michael Sadler Building)
12.00pm – 12.30pm Paper 5: Nicholas Vincent, University of East Anglia: Reform or restoration? Hallam and Stubbs on Church and State
12.30pm – 12.45pm Discussion of Paper 5
12.45pm – 2.00pm Lunch (Grant Room, Michael Sadler Building)
The exhibition in Treasures of the Brotherton will be open during lunch for those wishing to visit
2.00pm – 2.30pm Paper 6: Kathleen Cushing, University of Keele: Law and Reform: Burchard of Worms and His Readers
2.30pm – 2.45pm Discussion of Paper 6
2.45pm – 3.15pm Summing up: Sarah Hamilton, University of Exeter
3.15pm – 4.00pm Roundtable discussion and questions