It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Joan of Arc 'relics' confirmed to be fake

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Joan of Arc 'relics' confirmed to be fake

Extensive study confirms French scientist's finding from 2007
By Jennifer Viegas
Discovery Channel
updated 8:29 p.m. ET, Wed., Jan. 20, 2010

The so-called "relics of Joan of Arc," overseen by the Archbishop of Tours in Chinon, France, do not contain the charred remains of the Catholic saint.

Rather, the artifacts consist of a mummified cat leg bone and human rib, both dating to the 6th-3rd century B.C., according to a new study.

The "relics," which have fooled onlookers for decades, did resemble burnt bones, in keeping with historical accounts of the death of Joan of Arc (ca. 1412-1431), who was convicted of heresy and executed by burning.


More:www.msnbc.msn.com...

A mummified cat....who knew?




posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 




Joan of Arc 'relics' confirmed to be fake


If so, I would not be surprised. Records indicate that Jehanne d'arc (Joan of Arc) was burned at the stake and then her remains were burned twice again to prevent relics from being obtained by her followers.

But none of this subtracts from this young woman who almost single-handedly saved France from English occupation.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl
Joan of Arc 'relics' confirmed to be fake


The Catholic Church has a well documented history of maintaining ‘relics’ that were so dubious that they defied belief – even in their day. The multiple right hands of saints, the 50,000 lbs of splinters of the true cross and the skull of John the Baptist as a baby , etc. are well known.

Unfortunately, a lot of these relics were even accepted by secular society as the ‘real deal’ historically speaking. This is just another example. Still, it’s good that this was finally exposed for the fraud it is. I’d like to see more examination of these ‘holy’ relics to winnow out the blatant frauds, as in this case, so as to maybe concentrate on the possible real ones.


[edit on 20-1-2010 by passenger]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by passenger
 


So it goes
www.forallthesaints.info...

As the story goes, a priest assigned to a poor parish in a poverty stricken mountain community of northern Italy was approached by the town council. The council wanted to improve the lives of the population by bringing in tourist dollars. However, the town had nothing to attract outsiders to the community for a visit. They thought that, perhaps, the good father could obtain the relics of a major saint to place in the church that would bring visitors who would spend their money in local restaurants and hotels.

The priest agreed to give it a try and set off for Rome. After days of visiting church after church he was approached by a rather swarthy looking character who ask the father if he was searching for relics.

The priest responded, "Yes, my son, I am looking for the relics of an important saint to take back to my village but have found nothing. Tonight I must return home empty handed."

"Father, this is your lucky day!" responded the man. "It just so happens that I have recently acquired the head of Saint John the Baptist and for a moderate sum, to cover my expenses, the head is yours."

"But my good man, isn't the head of John the Baptist held at the church of San Silvestro here in Rome?" inquired the priest.

"Ah, yes, Father, but the head in San Silvestro is the head of St. John as an adult. I happen to have the head of St. John as a child."



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 
Hiya PG

Yeah, these relics could all do with a visit to the lab. Rat bones, cat bones, robbed from graves bones etc. The roaring trade in gullibility is likely thousands of years old. Narwhal horns being sold as unicorn horns by sailors. Dinosaur teeth as dragon teeth in China.

John the Baptist jokes? Made me smile



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   


The multiple right hands of saints


Can this be used to claim that there were no left-handed Saints?



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maegnas
Can this be used to claim that there were no left-handed Saints?


That’s funny but it does illustrate the ridiculousness of the events reported by the OP and how it came to be.

The right hand has been traditionally associated with holiness, purity, etc. Check out all the references to the right hand of God in the Bible. (see dextrogyrate) The left hand was associated with duplicity, evilness, etc. (see sinistrogyrate)

(As an anecdotal note, I can remember some wizened nuns - even as late as the 70’s – beating children for using their left hands to write. That’s how powerful that belief was.)

The point is, that the Catholic Church associated the right hand with good and the left with evil. Thus, proffering a right hand of a saint was cash-money-in-the-bank-babeee!!! A left hand wasn’t worth so much. That’s why you have 75 right hands of St. Spivens (or whomever) floating around. A right hand was holy and therefore valuable. A left hand – eh.

Another curious aspect seems to be that, during certain periods, particular body parts were in vogue. At some times it was skulls, at others hands, or whatever. The demand followed the current fashion. Of course, some commodities such as blood or locks of hair seemed to always be in demand. I suspect though, that people became too cynical, “Ohhh, another skull of John the Baptist – yeah right!” Thus, the clever entrepreneurs out there figured a toe bone or eyelash might seem more ‘real’ because it was different.

Odds are that they are all just junk carrion obtained from condemned prisoners, battlefield casualties and dead cats, which were easily obtainable at the time. Unfortunately, the chances of these ‘relics’ being confirmed as real are infinitesimally small because in most cases we have no verifiable basis to compare samples to. The really sad part is that some will still cling to these ludicrous beliefs in holy artifacts no matter how much evidence gets in the way.


[edit on 25-1-2010 by passenger]



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by redoubt
If so, I would not be surprised. Records indicate that Jehanne d'arc (Joan of Arc) was burned at the stake and then her remains were burned twice again to prevent relics from being obtained by her followers.


and held against the Church, somehow?
:shk:
a very probable supporting idea for the non-genuineness of the so-called relics, imo.

i think it is also documented that the ashes, or whatever was left, were then thrown into the Seine.




posted on Feb, 22 2010 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 


I suspect many of us have a fascination with people of note and seek to have some sort of contact with them. I fall into that group. I have a number of photographs, autographs and mementos of meeting various people I have admired. These people were all relatively famous and I have known of them only from a distance. By distance I mean through the various forms of modern media.

Hundreds of years ago this would not have been possible with the "media" available. The Bible, books in general as well as word of mouth were the forms of media available. I suspect that saints acquired rock star status at various times. I don't think it is much of a stretch to say their exploits and accomplishments were exaggerated to say the least. With all of this going for them it's no wonder that people throughout history have wanted to have some contact with them in life or more often than not, in death. Although I woudn't go out of my way to see a "relic" (I am a former Catholic), I likely wouldn't pass up seeing what was passing for one if the opportunity presented itself.

The availability of information (media) has changed and so has the technology to debunk that information. Not every Joe DiMaggio autograph is authentic and not surprisingly not every "Bone d'arc" is either. What is fascinating is that the cat bone and the rib reportedly predate Joan of Arc by 1700 years. Somebody went a bit out of their way to get those. Perhaps they were passing as relics of someone else earlier on. Just a guess there.

Interesting post Pauligirl!



posted on Feb, 25 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   


The multiple right hands of saints, the 50,000 lbs of splinters of the true cross and the skull of John the Baptist as a baby , etc. are well known.


What really? God that's funny!

I'd heard what someone above posted, that her body was burned twice, but then again, there may have been some that believed that as she was such a martyr that parts may survive that as a sign from God..

Just the sort of legend that arises again and again in this sort of thing.
But alas no, just a bit of cat.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join