(visit the link for the full news article)
The relics, consisting of parts of bones from the arm and leg, as well as a tooth and a facial bone, were discovered last week in a sealed relic urn by the archaeological team of Professor Kazimir Popkonstantinov.
the recent archaeological discovery of remains that were almost immediately announced to have belonged to Saint John the Baptist.
In addition, the hurried announcement has caused tension in Bulgaria’s archaeological circles.
The archaeologists explain this, as well as other announcements of sensational finds from recent years, with the fact that it is much easier to find additional finances if you discover something unique and big. As the debates were going on, Dnevnik reported that Popkonstantinov’s team announced that a part of the saint’s heel was discovered in the remains.
On the day of their discovery, before having seen them, the Bulgarian minister without portfolio, former head of the National History Museum and Sozopol-native, Bozhidar Dimitrov, declared publicly that the remains are authentic and that they belonged to Saint John the Baptist
More extensive tests on the fragments will be conducted, but Popkonstantinov is convinced the relics belong to John the Baptist because of a Greek inscription on the reliquary. The inscription including the date of June 24 which is when Christians celebrate John the Baptist’s birth.
"Sveti Ivan" means "St. John" in Bulgarian and other Slavic languages. Popkonstantinov said it is possible an 11th century basilica also on the island was also dedicated to the saint.
Bulgaria’s economy is stable and the end of the crisis is near, Economy, Energy and Tourism Minister, Traicho Traikov, believes.
Regarding tourism, the Minister pointed out the priority is to make Bulgaria a year-round destination. By 2013, the Bulgarian tourism will receive BGN 63 M from the EU “Regional Development” program, according to Traikov.
How on earth are they going to be able to prove that these are the bones of John the Baptist ?
Originally posted by DISRAELI
But the only thing they're really proving on the argument is that the relics were probably claimed to be those of John the Baptist when the church was originally dedicated.
Which is not the same thing.
[edit on 4-8-2010 by DISRAELI]
Originally posted by lost in the midwest
I am afraid that there is no known way to prove that the remains belong to St. John. Even if there are church records that state the remains are Johns, these would not be 100 precent proof. Like most things dealing with history of that era, it has to be taken on faith.
[edit on 4-8-2010 by lost in the midwest]