CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

2005 conclave

conclave

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 26, 2026
Entity authorityQ666536 ↗
Source-derived summary

A conclave was held on 18 and 19 April 2005 to elect a new pope to succeed John Paul II, who had died on 2 April 2005. Of the 117 eligible cardinal electors, all but two attended. On the fourth ballot, the conclave elected Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the dean of the College of Cardinals and prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. After accepting his election, he took the name Benedict XVI. Ratzinger was the first cardinal from the Roman Curia to become pope since Pius XII in 1939.

Papal election process

The papal election process began soon after the death of Pope John Paul II on 2 April 2005.

New voting procedures

Pope John Paul II laid out new procedures for the election of his successor in his 1996 apostolic constitution Universi Dominici gregis. It detailed the roles of the cardinals and the support personnel, the scheduling of the conclave, the text of the oaths, the penalties for violating secrecy, and many details, including the shape of the ballots ("the ballot paper must be rectangular in shape"). He denied the cardinal electors the right to choose a pope by acclamation or by assigning the election to a select group of cardinals (by compromise). He also established new voting procedures that the cardinals could follow if the balloting continued for several days, but those were not invoked in this conclave. He maintained the rule established by Paul VI that cardinals who reached the age of eighty before the day the pope died would not participate in the balloting.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “2005 conclave” is conclave. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through conclave, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2005, 1939, 1996—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, conclave is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “conclave” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 26, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q666536. Authority coordinates are 41.906, 12.456. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2005, 1939 and 1996.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “2005 conclave”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 2005 conclave primary sources, 2005 conclave archive and conclave research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “2005 conclave”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “2005 conclave” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.