Images of Change

Front matter

IMAGES OF CHANGE

VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF PAPAL POWER IN ROME FOLLOWING THE COUNCIL OF TRENT

Images of Change

Contents

Acknowledgments xi List of figures xii Introduction 1 PART I Sources, Methods and Historical Context 7 1 Written Sources 9 2 Artistic Sources 11 3 Historical Context EX PART II Analysis 45

4 St. Peter's Basilica: The Ground Zero for Catholic Image-making 48

5 Julius III, Paul IV and Pius IV: A Laboratory for a New Media Strategy? Papal Art Commissions and Propaganda During and Immediately After Trent 31

Introduction

In today's world, we are well aware of the power of images, especially when it comes to personal branding or self-marketing. We mostly encounter image-building online, in the form of a politician's carefully curated Instagram account, for instance. By using images and hashtags to convey their message, politicians create an image—a personal brand that can be used as a platform for entire political campaigns on social media. "Instagram is the place to showcase the personality behind your politics," the platform advertises on its website. What the website does not tell you is that personal branding, image-building and media strategy are concepts, which are centuries old. After all, the media revolution, the invention of the printing-press in sixteenth-century Europe, predates the so-called social media revolution.

The Catholic Church, and in particular the papacy, provides perhaps one of the best examples in history of the mechanics of image-building and why it sometimes fails to work. Over the centuries, the papacy has re-branded itself and reinvented its own image multiple times and not always successfully. By investigating the image-building processes at work inside the papacy during a decisive moment of re-alignment, Images of Change gives insight into the “media machinery” of the Holy See that is still alive and well today. It also strives to explain why Reform is so difficult for the Catholic Church and why it often goes against the self-interest of the papacy. And, by looking at media strategies employed by different popes, this book also helps us to understand the papacy as a complex elective dynasty united by shared beliefs, values and common goals that may or may not align with diverging personal interests and individual political stances.

The departure point for this book, which presents the first comprehensive study of the popes of the second half of the sixteenth century, 1s the Council of Trent (1545-1563). The Council of Trent presents the Church's attempt to reform itself, by rectifying wrongful beliefs, consolidating Church teachings, reforming Church morals and discipline and, most importantly, reunifying the Church in the face of a looming schism. The decrees, the Council members agreed upon, were as much a message to their own brothers and sisters of faith, as an answer to the supposed Protestant “heresy.”

2 Introduction

The term “counter-reformation” is misleading. German historians long ago proved it outdated and insufficient to describe the complex reform processes taking place within the Church before, during and after the Council of Trent.! Therefore, in this volume, the terms “Church Reform,” “Catholic Reform" and “Tridentine Reform" will be used instead to describe what is, in essence, a conservative Catholic renewal movement. In essence, the Church tries to reform itself by going back to its roots.

To understand the need for Church Reform, we must first look at the historical background: during the Renaissance, the papacy promoted media revolution perhaps more than any other political power in early modern Europe. During the fifteenth century, Nicolas V (1447-1455) established the theoretical basis for a papal media strategy and declared permanent propaganda primary curia policy? Long before the sixteenth century, popes recognized that the fate of the Church depended on the image of the Church throughout Europe and, as colonialism emerged, the world. Yet from 1520 onward, when Protestant Reformation starts to challenge the Catholic Church, propaganda becomes crucial. And with it, the city of Rome. As the power center of the Church, Rome becomes its propaganda capital and primary battleground against what is perceived as Protestant heresy. The impression the city leaves on its visitors therefore 1s of vital importance. The visible city with its monuments and the public appearances of the pope and his cardinals are a key factor in the fight for souls and power. But so are the propaganda leaflets the Protestants rely on so heavily. In their writings, Protestants increasingly challenge the political and religious authority of the Church, openly criticizing its imagery. In Rome, they see a new Babylon, a capital fit for the Antichrist, full of pomp and show.

In the decades before the Council of Trent, papal self-representation emphasizes the role of the individual pope and the papacy as an institution as champions for religion, who could count on heavenly support at all times—most poignantly in the fresco-series of Raphael's stanzas in the Vatican? Elsewhere, popes opt for displays of absolute power—a visual strategy dangerously similar to that of worldly princes. This opens the floodgates for Protestant criticism. Rome's enemies see a perfidious mix of spiritual mandate and worldly hunger for power in the public appearance of the papacy and in its imagery. For Protestants, the self-portrayals of the papacy constitute a core characteristic of the Antichrist. They focus specifically on the pagan, immoral and megalomaniac basis traits of roman autorepresentation. The demolition of old St. Peter in favor of a newer church project serves as the main argument for such criticism. In particular, because it was the oversized and ill-received tomb of Pope Julius II that made the tear down necessary in the first place.^ The pomp of the Renaissance popes appeared to shake the Church to its foundations—literally, in the case of the St. Peter's Basilica. To attenuate such criticism, the papacy needed a new visual identity. Paul III was the first sixteenth-century pope to recognize this: a first example of a fully valid alternative concept for visual propaganda

Introduction 3 emerges in the late stages of the Farnese reign with Vasari’s frescoes in the Sala dei Cento Giorni of the Cancelleria. Here, a “tirelessly proven"? pontifex appears, sacrificing himself for the good of the faithful, who always rely on him to make decisions, to avoid the Apocalypse. In a theological sense, legitimizing power with usefulness was fashionable in the 1540s. This was in part due to the inconclusive controversy with Protestantism about human merit in connection with grace. It was, however, also presented as a counterpoint to grievances brought forward against Roman administrative and ruling institutions, especially by German princes from the mid-century onward.° In short, Paul III saw image cultivation as a means to strengthen the power foundation of the Church and Rome as a system. He also saw visual representation as a perfect tool to convey self-reform.

The cautious indicators of change debuting under Paul III are the departing point for the present book with the aim of analyzing papal propaganda for the pontificates from the Council of Trent until the end of the sixteenth century. This temporal frame was defined on the basis of earlier findings, most notoriously those of Hubert Jedin.’ In his research, Jedin recognized that, although the impetus for a conservative renewal movement first emerged outside Rome, Catholic Reform was only implemented—to what extent will be discussed in the present analysis—after first being embraced by the papacy and Rome.’ Therefore, the second half of the sixteenth century is the decisive moment for Catholic Reform: Paul III laid the foundation for the Tridentine Reform process when he recognized the importance of the problem and summoned the Council of Trent, effectively demanding a Catholic Reform of the papacy. Subsequent popes, from the fanatic Paul IV to the three “Reform popes” Pius V, Gregory XIII and Sixtus V, experimented with implementing and shaping Church Reform—some more successfully than others. These diverging efforts to embrace, implement, shape and appropriate Tridentine Reform are communicated in the visual propaganda of the papacy, as will be shown throughout the analysis.

The analysis laid out in this book is based on the research of extensive literature? taken from the field of art-history. The approach pursued in this volume, however, goes beyond the traditional approach and combines traditional historical source criticism with methods taken from related research fields such as public relations and communication studies as well as marketing and economy. The reasoning behind this approach and its implications for the analysis are detailed in the theoretical part of this book, followed by background information on the historical context of the Council of Trent and, in particular, on the 1563 image decree and its significance for papal propaganda. The analytical part deals with important questions raised in this book: what methods and strategies does the papacy use to create a new image for itself during the Post-Tridentine time of change, power consolidation and realignment? What is the thematic focus of this new kind of propaganda? Where does it appear? How does this new media strategy oscillate between reform and tradition, modern progress and Renaissance nostalgia?

4 Introduction

As we seek answers, additional questions emerge. For instance, how does the new image strategy deal with history? Does the papacy distance itself from the more recent past in the face of Protestant criticism? What is made of the awkward heritage of the second Borgia pontificate? Are there admissions of guilt in images that serve as symbols of change and of top-down Church Reform at the same time? What thought processes accompany these cautious and sometimes even contradictory efforts around a new image?

The analysis is presented as a successive approach to the individual pontificates, followed by a comparative study of the papal strategies used during the sixteenth century. To this end, the analysis is structured into three main parts: the first part focuses on the regency of Julius III, Paul IV and Pius IV. For these pontificates, the principal objective is drafting an inventory and reconstructing planned and realized architectural and artistic projects. This analysis is based on extensive art-historical literature and archival research.!° The research centers on the pope and his nepotes, whose own image building and propaganda form a vital part of papal propaganda. Any art projects commissioned by the pope or his nephews are carefully planned and based on shared concepts. These concepts are detailed in memoranda and implemented in the artworks. Analyzing the key messages, therefore, requires both archival study and iconological analysis to allow for an interpretation of motives and their accentuation. This results in a holistic overall assessment of papal objectives versus the executed paintings.

After the intermediary pontificate of Pius IV, the second part of the analysis concentrates on what is traditionally seen as the pinnacle of Catholic Reform under Pius V and Gregory XIII—although progress begins to slow down in 1572. Here, archival study in the Vatican Archives!! was necessary in order to study initial concepts envisioned by the Ghislieri pope that were later retracted of diffused. Of particular interest is the open confrontation with ancient pagan Rome”: how far was this eradication of ancient paintings intended to go? Which counter-arguments proved useful against this campaign against antiquity? For the following pontificate of Gregory XIII, the main goal 1s to explore compromises made between strict Reform and opposing interests, particularly when it comes to the artistic projects led by the nepotes. Again, this is achieved by inventorying and reconstructing planned and realized projects: what is the qualitative and quantitative relationship between the still dominant utility buildings used to showcase papal charity and projects intended to consolidate and advance the position of the papal family?!

Because the Jesuits were crucial to Catholic Reform after Trent, their role is also discussed in the second part of the analysis, specifically during the pontificate of their great benefactor, Gregory XIII. The Jesuits’ main activities, preaching, teaching and missionary work, served to communicate the Church's teachings and Church Reform. In the Roman context, however, they also served to reinforce and celebrate the faith through highly cultivated and visible means, particularly art and architecture. The building of

Introduction 5 the Gesù and Sant'Ignazio are characteristic of a distinctly Jesuit form of pictorial representation that is in line with Catholic Reform. While these buildings are later than the scope of this book, they are a logical continuation of the definitions of Jesuit imagery and the use of theatrical devices that began in the second half of the sixteenth century. Early examples of this emergence of a distinctly Jesuit and Reform-centered imagery are discussed in this book, for instance, the pictorial decoration of Santo Stefano Rotondo.

The third and final analytic section centers around the exceptional pontificate of Sixtus V followed by the short-term regencies of Urban VII, Gregory XIV and Innocent IX. For Sixtus V, whose urban planning ideas and utopias have sparked heightened scientific interest for over 30 years, the objective of this book is to summarize and round off findings made so far.'* This is accomplished by registering and interpreting central artworks such as the serial fresco-wall-paintings in memorial sites and other prominent places incorporating papal rule: what kind of honorary titles and achievements are being claimed as laurels by the papacy in such illustrations?? How does Sixtus V deal with contemporary history? How does he use contemporary events in his pictorial propaganda to convey historical continuity?!

The short-duration pontificates of Urban VII, Gregory XIV and Innocent IX—largely unresearched under the previously established parameters—complete the core investigation period, with Clement VIII forming the epilogue and the definite waning of Reform. Intermediary findings are included at the end of each part of the analysis. Comparative findings, spanning all investigated pontificates, and generated as a result of the vast period of time covered in this book, are detailed in the final comparative results chapter.

Part I 1 Written Sources

Due to the interdisciplinary nature of the topic discussed in this book, a mixed-methods approach consisting of qualitative analysis of primary and secondary sources was required. Relevant sources could also be categorized according to formal criteria: they generally were either written or artistic. The following explanations outline the different methods applied to the different source categories appearing in this book.

All written sources analyzed over the course of this book are either of primary or secondary nature. Consulting primary sources included elaborate and time-consuming archive work primarily conducted on site in the Vatican and Rome. Secondary sources were incorporated into the analysis wherever relevant.

The primary written source analyzed in this book is the image decree issued by the Council of Trent in December 1563," as this document regulated papal pictorial propaganda undertaken after 1563. The other main sources analyzed throughout this thesis originated during the papacies of Julius III, Paul IV, Pius IV, Pius V, Gregory XIII, Sixtus V, Gregory XIV and Clement VIII.!8 Since the Council of Trent served as a starting point for the larger research project which serves as the foundation for this book, the exact timeframe of the analyzed sources spans the years between 1545 and 1605. Primary documents relevant for this volume are documents mentioning art commissioned by the pope—avvisi, inventory lists, protocols of papal proceedings, bills, letters and inscriptions.

One of the objectives of this book consists in the elaboration of an inventory of relevant artistic projects (although without claim to completeness). As patronized art has never been compared for the abovementioned papacies prior to this book, generating an inventory for these types of artworks could only be achieved through ground-breaking archival study. The archives consulted for this purpose were on site, at the center of papal influence, in the Vatican and in Rome, which in the sixteenth century formed part of the papal states and continues to be the capital of Christendom to this day. The sources were mostly written in the language of the Church, Latin or sixteenth-century Italian, sometimes also in a mixture of both and/ or different local Italian vernaculars.

Archives consulted:!?

* Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (BAV), Città del Vaticano * Archivio Segreto Vaticano (ASV), Città del Vaticano * Archivio di Stato (AS), Roma

Additional written sources are texts (treatises, manuscripts and folios) produced either during the period of investigation or shortly thereafter focusing on artistic patronage conducted by the popes. The most important examples of this are Giorgio Vasari's Le vite dei più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architetti? and (later) Giovanni Baglione's Le vite de’ Pittori.?! Other sources relevant to either all Tridentine and Post-Tridentine pontificates—such as Laurentius Valla's De falso credita et ementita Constantini donatione declamatio,? which was first printed and circulated during the period of investigation—or individual papacies are referenced throughout the analysis. The individual primary written sources cited in this book were subjected to analysis as designated by the historical method. Source criticism was conducted in the tradition of Leopold von Ranke et al.? on both an external level and an internal level. However, throughout this book, the particulars, curiosities and results found over the course of this source criticism were organically woven into the text as appropriate to the reporting of the results. In other words, source criticism was not treated as a separate section with detailed accounts of every methodological step of the analysis but as an implied method manifesting itself and rendered explicit only occasionally.

Secondary written sources are all written sources used in this book that were not produced during the targeted time (1545-1605), but at a later stage. Into this source category fall all scientific monographs and papers published on the topic at hand or a related topic, as well as scientific studies (i.e., data) published prior to this book. Given the author's linguistic capabilities and inclinations, publications considered as secondary literature were written in either English, German, Italian, French or Spanish. For a more detailed overview of the secondary literature used for this thesis, see the individual analysis chapters and the bibliography.

Artistic sources are the second formal category included in this book apart from written sources. They differ from written sources in that they are not texts, but objects such as paintings, frescoes, statues or even entire buildings. Yet, like their written counterparts, they were crafted during the time of interest, roughly between 1545 and 1605.?^ Since these artifacts were produced in the sixteenth century, they are—just like written primary sources— part of what Johann Gustav Droysen described as “Uberreste,” meaning historical relics that unintentionally help researchers gain insight into the past.” However, patronized art, propaganda imagery and historical paintings present a special methodological challenge in that they are not only relics but also part of what Ernst Bernheim called “Tradition.” This dual character of patronized art will be further explored in the following section.

2.1 Ars Sacra, Ars Profane: The Dual Character of Patronized Art

For the purpose of this book, the artistic sources analyzed are primarily religious artworks and buildings (ars sacra). Profane art is largely excluded, unless used in a religious context, for instance, a papal tomb monument within a chapel featuring reliefs showcasing profane historical scenes. Urban architecture (canalization, water supply, city gates and road infrastructure), —frequently used by the popes to improve living conditions in Rome while simultaneously displaying their role as benefactors—has also been left aside due to the sheer number of projects realized between 1545 and 1605.

Since propaganda art and historical paintings present a distinct outlook on a historical event or persona, they come with an intentional message that may go as far as reinterpreting historical facts. This dual character of patronized art as a relic that is also part of a certain tradition means that propaganda paintings are both witnesses to the past and commentary on it. From a methodological standpoint, this means that they are a hybrid form between a primary and a secondary source. This requires a delicate methodological approach that not only takes this dual character into account but also looks beyond the artwork itself into the mechanisms surrounding its creation. The milieu of the artwork—from the artist, the employer, the intended place and timing of issue to the target audience— contributes to the artwork's propagandistically charged message.

In addition, artists working in a religious setting had to fulfill the strict requirements of their employers. From a methodological point of view, the logical conclusion for these circumstances is, that in addition to the classical iconography and iconology used by historians whenever confronted with imagery, approaches from the social sciences (habitat and network of employer and employee) and communication sciences (employer-employee relationship and image-building) as well as an analysis foregrounding economic/market-economy concepts (art market, brand-building and the propaganda strategies of advertisement) must be implemented also. This results in the establishment of an interdisciplinary method tailored to deal with the technicalities of artworks commissioned by the popes during and after the Council of Trent. This in turn requires gaining an overview of the many preexisting interdisciplinary approaches in the field to use as a foundation where appropriate alongside the more classically historical methods employed by historians when dealing with images. The following section explores further methodological particularities regarding patronage and commissioned art and concludes with a detailed description of the method applied by the author in this thesis.

2.2 Methodological Particularities Regarding Patronage and Commissioned Art

To this day, there is no methodological uniformity within the historical sciences regarding image analysis, or the analysis of propaganda imagery— even Erwin Panofsky’s widely recognized method still leaves important questions unanswered.

Panofsky took issue with the way most historians understood iconology: as a mere description of an image and its composition. According to Panofsky, as a term, iconography designated the classification and description of images. Iconology, however, was equal to applied iconography with the purpose of interpretation. In simpler terms: a method.?

Panofsky was correctly convinced that interpreting an image could not be achieved through description alone.*® He therefore composed a three-step method for the analysis of images:

1 Description, which Panofsky referred to as “vorikonographische Beschreibung," is the first step of interpreting an image and belongs to the area of Gestaltungs-geschichte in that through describing a picture one describes its form.

2 The second step, dubbed “ikonographische Analyse," consists in combining what is seen and described with further knowledge—either preexisting or acquired through extensive reading. Here interdisciplinarity comes into play: general knowledge of other fields besides history allows for a broader understanding of the subject and better recognition of the typology to which an image may belong (7ype-ngeschichte).

3 The analysis culminates in step 3, "7konologische Interpretation": the interpretation of the image’s message and the capture of what Panofsky referred to as—with a good dose of pathos perhaps—Wesenssinn.”

Although the three steps appear self-contained, Panofsky pointed out that when applied, the researcher's approach might be more fluid and a strict separation of the above-described steps might not be practicable. To Panofsky this did not matter as long as "scheinbar getrennte Bewegungen [sich] in praxi zu einem vóllig einheitlichen [...] Gesamtgeschehnis verweben [...]” (apparently separate movements interweave in practice to from a completely [...] unified overall event).??

As revolutionary as Panofsky's approach is—to this day it remains a fundamental reference when analyzing images—it does present some difficulties that provide ground for criticism. Francis Haskell! and Peter Burke? have written extensively on the subject. An ever-growing number of historians have since presented methods of their own to fill the gap or further refined proposals made by others. This multitude of approaches not only creates more authority and legitimacy for the use of images as primary sources among historians but also positions the field at several disciplinary crossroads.

Philosophical hermeneutics, for instance, as a theory or method, also deals with interpretations of texts and images and has gained wide acceptance among historians and theologians. Philosophers such as Hans-Georg Gadamer have recognized that interpreting historical images comes with added methodological challenges because “das Kunstwerk selbst ist es, was sich unter je veránderten Bedingungen anders darbietet. Der Betrachter von heute sieht nicht nur anders, er sieht auch anderes.”*? When looking back at images from the early modern period, historians are influenced by their own prejudices and prejudgments about the past. They cannot see the image as It was intended because they do not form part of the original audience for whom it was intended. Therefore, at its best, any interpretation of historical images is a highly probable approximation to the original meaning of any painting. Additionally, when analyzing images, historians have to interpret the individual parts of an 1mage to understand the message of the entire painting. At the same time, understanding the message of the entire painting might again change the understanding of its individual parts. Gadamer calls this the hermeneutic circle. The term describes the complex and interactive process that is image interpretation and highlights the importance of establishing the cultural and historical context of artworks.

Umberto Eco, one ofthe most well-known semioticians, has further developed the interpretative theory. According to Eco, image interpretation occurs in an interactive process between the connotations (signs) included in the image and the framework of understanding of the spectator (or historian). This means that both the image and its spectator actively contribute to establishing meaning. Eco emphasizes that to interpret artworks, spectators must perform an /nterpretationsleistung (interpretation performance). Image interpretation, then, requires effort. And, as both Eco and Gadamer point out, since artworks carry a certain sense of ambiguity, this effort does not lead to a fixed interpretation. Rather, artworks display “eigentiimliche Unfixiertheit" (a peculiar unfixedness). However, this ambiguity is not "[ein] Mangel an Eindeutigkeit,” (a lack of clarity) but rather “[die] Móglichkeit, gegensátzliche und kohárente Interpretationen zu tragen und zuerzeugen" (the possibility of carrying and generating opposing and coherent interpretations).?? This ambiguity allowing for different, sometimes even contradictory interpretations is a characteristic of sixteenth-century commissioned artworks: they usually convey more than one message. Typically, sixteenth-century paintings include various motives carrying additional messages, inviting multiple interpretations. This is where communication theory offers useful insights, as it investigates the structures behind human communication in all its forms, be it verbal, nonverbal, written or visual. In 1948, Claude E. Shannon and Warren Weaver published what they called “a Mathematical Theory of Communication”?#—a model so widely popular that it is often referred to as the mother of all models, even outside of communication sciences (see Figure 2.1). The model describes communication as follows:

e The sender selects the desired message.

e The sender encodes the message using a transmitter.

e The message travels to the receiver using a channel (e.g., sound or radio waves). Note: this channel can suffer interference summarized as “noise” in the graphic. Noise can be due to context (e.g., background noise on a phone line) or due to content (e.g., along with the message irrelevant information is also passed along).

Sender Encoder Decoder => Channel > (Information Source) (Transmitter) (Reception)

FEEDBACK

Receiver (Destination)

The Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication

Figure 2.1 Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication.

* Thereceiver decodes the message to decipher its meaning.

e The message reaches its receiver. Note: if the message suffered interference in the form of noise during transmission via a selected communication channel, this might alter the received message. Therefore, the receiver might not understand exactly what the sender meant.

* The receiver gives the original sender feedback in the form of a response and if necessary communication begins anew, running through the model once again from the beginning.

Since art also conveys a message, the Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication? can also be translated into the visual context: instead of "sender," one might speak of “artist” and instead of “receiver” of “spectator.” Additionally, in the case of commissioned art, the employer could be seen as the “sender,” the artist as the “encoder” and the artwork as the chosen channel of transmission. The transmission process, however, remains the same.

For historians dealing with images, communication theory offers important insights: first, messages always come encoded and must therefore be decoded to be received. To fully understand the entire message hidden in an image, historians must first decode all the sub-parts of the message, meaning all the details of an image, and then put them together to grasp the sense of the entire message. Second, even 1f a message is decoded and received, it may not be transmitted in its original intended state, but in an altered or even misconstrued form due to noise during transmission. This means that when analyzing images, historians should be aware of the fact that more than one interpretation of the pictorial message is possible and that every interpretation is only a form of approximation to the original message. It is possible that the original message could only be understood by the originally intended receiver. Since we are not that receiver, every interpretation remains an approximation—at best a claim strongly supported by written sources, at worst an educated guess.

Third, in order to decipher the message of an image, the receiver (1.e., the intended audience) plays a vital role. Therefore, the audience cannot be neglected when analyzing historical images. Since the message is tailored to the intended receiver, the receiver has to have the necessary tools to decode the message. Ergo, when looking at the painting, the spectator has to be familiar with the subject and grasp the different references and allusions present in the painting; otherwise, the message of the painting cannot be deciphered. In the context of this book, this means that if a painting was created to be showcased in a ceremonial room usually frequented not by the general public but by members of the elite, one can deduct that the motives represented in the painting had to be commonly known within that elite in order to function as propaganda. This provides us with insights into which motives or visual arguments worked in what context. And, by extension, if an image is removed from a room and replaced with a different motive, it is an indication that a motive no longer worked for the current elite. Therefore, to best reconstruct papal selfimage, the motives that work for the pope in question are just as relevant as the ones that do not.

Shannon and Weaver's ideas about sender-receiver interaction bring us to an additional model governing the patron-client relationship: that of social interaction in general, also known as network theory. At the heart of sociological efforts surrounding social interaction lies the concept of "social capital" (Pierre Bourdieu, 1930—2002).? Bourdieu’s “habitus” concept is strongly tied to this notion of different types of capital, since it mediates this relation between the individual and the collective that is the basis of any social network. Whereas economic and cultural capital are based on an individual's resources in a financial and educational sense, Bourdieu defines social capital as “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition—or, in other words, membership in a group—which provides each of its members with the backing of the collectively-owned capital, a ‘credential’ which entitles them to credit—in the various senses of the word.’ An individual with powerful social connections might benefit from those in one way or another (wealth, power, prestige), provided the individual in question is recognized as a peer by his acquaintances. Virtual social networks such as Facebook are based on this principle.