The news went almost unnoticed last November 20: we found relics of Galilee (see photo-cons - AP). The announcement, very serious, was made by Paolo Galluzzi, director of the Museum of History of Science in Florence. The story seems trivial, yet it is comparable to most stories rediscovered relics even though in the case of Galileo, it is not a "saint" in the religious sense of the term (perhaps by cons grant him the status of "hero" or "martyr" of science if we wanted to draw a parallel).
A collector (anonymous) has in effect bought recently at an auction of items classified as "unidentified" in a beaker of the eighteenth century before realizing it was human bones . Investigation, whose details were not reported by the media, leading it to believe it would be two fingers and a tooth removed from his body Galilee in 1737, 95 years after his death upon transfer of his remains in the Basilica of Santa Croce in Florence. On this occasion another finger and a vertebra were also collected and preserved thereafter in museums of Florence and Padua. From 1737 to 1905, the two fingers and teeth were preserved by a family before we lose track of these relics. The recent acquisition of anonymous collector is a rediscovery of the relics disappeared for over a hundred years ... The pattern of transmission of these relics is as follows: sampling at a late transfer of the remains - stored in a private setting - disappearance of the relics - recurrence after authentication of an object initially unidentified. To close this scheme, adding that the relics will be exhibited in spring 2010 at the Museum of History of Science in Florence. Finally, the authenticity of these relics is affirmed through the scholarly authority, the museum director who reported to cut short any debate: "In light of considerable historical documentation, the authenticity of these items no doubt" .
Those who know the religious history will recognize this pattern in the conventional steps of the invention (within the meaning of "discovery") or the preservation of relics. The difference with what is known is probably the extreme contemporaneity of the event: it is not a rediscovery after a past moment of crisis (as a revolution or a war) that the historian reconstructs from its sources, but a fortuitous rediscovery in a context of both antique and scientist who place our eyes.
What has changed is perhaps the reaction to this rediscovery. If exposure is considered, the reactions of users have been few. The invention of the relics of Galileo is therefore conducted in a certain indifference. Those who respond are far from enthusiastic. Quite the contrary, skepticism prevails. It seemed interesting to note the different types of arguments for the rejection of these relics, but questioned their historical continuity. These arguments have been virtually set in the sixteenth century by Calvin in his famous treatise on relics (1543) in which he summarizes the arguments and radical humanists of his predecessors. His arguments are, in summary, three types: theological (the worship of relics is idolatry), pragmatic (the relics are usually wrong) and moral (the relic is a piece of corpse). In the case of Galileo, the theological argument can not be used because there is no a priori not worship. However, we note that the debate sometimes slips the role of Galileo in the history of science, the "holy" / "Heroes" / "martyr" became an example and not an idol. The other two types of arguments are cons prominently in the reviews. I give you some examples of reactions, classified by type of argument.
True or false?
As Calvin wrote, "is a notorious fact that most of the relics that shows everywhere are false and have been put forward by scoffers who have shamelessly abused the poor world." This declaration marked the critical relics until today and Readers of information are also inhabited:
"How to be certain that these relics come from Galilee? Even his DNA can not be compared with anything. This is nonsense and in any case, very ugly "(a reader of the New Gazette - Belgium)
" How do I know ????? The police had his fingerprints or they have retrieved the records of the dentist ??????" (A reader of Figaro - France)
sign of the times, where the impossible Calvin advanced authentication or the multiplicity of historical relics, the argument here police (DNA fingerprinting or dental) that predominates ...
Relics and corpse
"It was the Office of the Christians to leave the bodies of the saints in their tomb in obedience to the sentence that all men are universal and return powder powder" , says Calvin, returning the relic in the tomb as the ashes of a deceased. Two and a half centuries later, the revolution in its dechristianisers episode, she also saw some of his players to return the relic to his morbid state. In April 1794, a former constitutional priest denounces the district of Toulouse practices of the municipality of Pibrac: "You know, probably a corpse named St. Germaine, exists in the church of this village and that the body is regarded as holy." Later he calls it even "rotting body" (quoted in Stephen Baciocchi and Dominique Julia, "Relics and the French Revolution," in Modern Relics , p. 551-552). In some cities during the Revolution, the relics are buried elsewhere, like those of St. Remi in Reims. The religious sentiment of Calvin, through the Revolution, the development of gaze on the relic desecration continues today as the trade relics and equipment is prohibited on eBay, Regulation stating that "the sale of organs, tissues, cells, blood and any other product on the human body is strictly prohibited on the site. At a time when the relic is again part of the human body, users do not deprive themselves to argue their disgust at the forthcoming exhibition of the relics of Galilee
"Personally, I find it hard to understand how can get there. Who would want pieces of corpses? Regardless of who was the body to the limit, I find it so morbid and without any interest. As much, I can understand the grave robbers that retrieves valuables, as there, is beyond me ... "(a participant in www.forum-religion.org )
" The way we dug and displays the body is really disgusting. Are these people would like to be dug up and their parents that expose them? "(A participant in newsvine.com )
" My God, it is morbid, primitive and inexcusable ... Gather all its pieces and stop it ... Give him the respect that we all want for ourselves in death. Bury him ... The whole ... In one place ... And leave him alone "(another speaker on newsvine.com )
"Some of the ideas of Galileo are eternal truths. All body parts should be buried deteriorated. If one of these institutions are bending to the curiosity of the public bad taste was a bit of class and decency She would call these body parts in the tomb of Galilee "(another speaker on newsvine.com )
From the religious argument of Calvin and anticlerical polemic revolutionaries, the question of the relationship between relics and corpses therefore moved to the area of sensitivity. The relic is humanized here, it is in the eyes those who are responding really a piece of corpse - the argument here involving no other ulterior motive - and that they are unbearable. Thus the comparison between relics and ashes, so to say well it was already present in Calvin, does not seem necessarily fall under the same logic.
0 comments:
Post a Comment