Senate Member
Posts: 6,112 
April 7th, 2007, 05:53 AM
Joan of Arc relics 'from an Egyptian mummy'
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
06/04/2007
The 19 year old Joan of Arc was burnt at the stake by the English in 1431 after England invaded France durig the Hundred Years War. The excution took place at Rouen, the English seat of government in France. England's main allies in the war were the Burgundians.
The blue areas show the areas of France ruled by the English in 1430. The red areas are those controlled by England's allies, the Burgundians.
For generations, Catholics from across France have worshipped the holy remains of their favourite saint, Joan of Arc and political leaders have looked up to her for inspiration.
Ashes reputed to be those of the national heroine have been on display in a museum in France for decades.
But today scientists announce that pilgrims and politicians could, in fact, have been paying homage to a fake - the remains of an Egyptian mummy.
Joan of Arc is revered in her homeland for repelling an English invasion before being burnt, aged 19, at the stake in 1431 in Rouen, Normandy as a witch by the English.
Ashes from the foot of her pyre were supposedly discovered in 1867 in a jar in the attic of a Paris pharmacy, bearing the inscription “Remains found under the stake of Joan of Arc, virgin of Orleans” and taken to a museum in Chinon by French bishops, where they are still kept in a museum.
But the relics of St Joan are not the remains of the 15th-century heroine after all, according to experts who have analysed the sacred scraps.
They date back to between the third and sixth century BC. Dr Philippe Charlier of the Raymond Poincaré Hospital in Garches, near Paris, who obtained permission to study the relics, tells Nature today that he was “astonished” by what his analysis revealed.
“I’d never have thought that it could be from a mummy.” The Church is ready to accept the results, he adds.
The relics of the Maid of Orleans comprise a charred-looking human rib, chunks of what seem to be carbonised wood, a six inch fragment of linen and a cat femur - consistent with the medieval practice of throwing black cats onto the pyre of supposed witches.
Romantic painting of Joan of Arc at the Siege of Orléans.
He will tell an international meeting of pathologists later this week in Loches, France, how his team used a battery of methods to investigate the remains, including various forms of spectroscopy to reveal the chemical make-up, electron microscopy, pollen analysis.
The team also enlisted leading 'noses’ from the French perfume industry to sniff the remains: Sylvaine Delacourte from Guerlain, and Jean-Michel Duriez from Jean Patou.
The 15 strong team describe in their study, “L’étude scientifique du Bocal de Chinon, reliques présumées de Jeanne d’Arc” how Delacourte and Duriez sampled the aroma of the relics and nine other samples of bone and hair and both described hints of 'burnt plaster’ and 'vanilla’ in the samples from the Joan of Arc relics.
The plaster smell was consistent with her being burnt on a plaster stake, not a wooden one, to make the macabre spectacle last as long as possible. But vanilla is inconsistent with cremation.
“Vanillin is produced during decomposition of a body,” says Dr Charlier.
“You would find it in a mummy, but not in someone who was burnt.”
With this crucial clue to the origins of the remains, the evidence that these were in fact from a mummy began to build up.
Microscopic and chemical analysis of the black crust on the rib and on the cat femur showed that they were not burnt and had no trace of muscle, skin, fat or hair.
“I see burnt remains all the time in my job,” Charlier tells Nature. “It was obviously not burnt tissue.”
The black material was consistent with an embalming mix of wood resins, bitumen and chemicals such as malachite.
It was also consistent with gypsum, which gives the mix its plaster smell.
The linen cloth had a coating characteristic of mummy wrappings. And large amounts of pine pollen were also present: pine trees did not grow in Normandy at the time that Joan of Arc was killed.
However, pine resin was used widely in Egypt during embalming.
Carbon-14 analysis dated the remains to between the third and sixth centuries BC, long before she met her end. And the spectrometry data from the rib, femur and black chunks matched those from Egyptian mummies from the period, and not those of burnt bones.
Remains of mummies were often used in Europe during the Middle Ages in pharmaceutical remedies, consistent with how the jar purporting to contain her remains was found in an apothecary.
The 1867 discovery date also fits the period when Joan of Arc, who had been forgotten for centuries, was rediscovered by historians and created as a national myth.
Someone might have forged the relics at this time in an attempt to reinforce her importance.
DNA tests carried out in Denmark were negative, however.
“It is a fascinating project,” comments Anastasia Tsaliki of the University of Durham in North East England, adding that it is a tour de force of what scientists call palaeopathology, where forensic science is used to inform history.
Part of the legend of Joan of Arc springs from the observation, documented in records, that some of her organs resisted the fire. Surviving manuscripts describe in vivid detail how she was burnt three times over to ensure that nothing but ash remained, which was thrown in the River Seine. In this way the English wanted to prevent her remains being worshipped and relics from being collected.
The observation of remaining organs was interpreted as a miracle. But science has another explanation.
“In fact, it is very difficult to totally cremate a body; organs such as the heart and intestines, which have a high water content, are very resistant to fire,” says Dr Charlier.
“We see it all the time in forensics.
“It is also helpful for us - in terms of determining whether the relics are fakes or not - that the cult that has grown up around Joan of Arc is relatively recent. No one took much notice of her for the preceding 400 years. So there aren’t dozens of boxes of relics kicking around, all claiming to be hers.”
Dr Charlier came to prominence when he ascertained that Agnes Sorel, the favourite of King Charles VII, died from mercury poisoning.
He took an interest in Joan of Arc because her presumed remains were stored in the same Chinon museum as those of Sorel.
HUNDRED YEARS' WAR - THE COMBATANTS
ALLIES - ENGLAND, BURGUNDY, BRITTANY, PORTUGAL, NAVARRE, FLANDERS, HAINAULT, AQUITAINE, LUXEMBOURG, HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE
AXIS POWERS - FRANCE, SCOTLAND, CASTILE, GENOA, MAJORCA, BOHEMIA, CROWN OF ARAGON
telegraph.co.uk
Joan of Arc relics 'from an Egyptian mummy'
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
06/04/2007
The 19 year old Joan of Arc was burnt at the stake by the English in 1431 after England invaded France durig the Hundred Years War. The excution took place at Rouen, the English seat of government in France. England's main allies in the war were the Burgundians.
The blue areas show the areas of France ruled by the English in 1430. The red areas are those controlled by England's allies, the Burgundians.
For generations, Catholics from across France have worshipped the holy remains of their favourite saint, Joan of Arc and political leaders have looked up to her for inspiration.
Ashes reputed to be those of the national heroine have been on display in a museum in France for decades.
But today scientists announce that pilgrims and politicians could, in fact, have been paying homage to a fake - the remains of an Egyptian mummy.
Joan of Arc is revered in her homeland for repelling an English invasion before being burnt, aged 19, at the stake in 1431 in Rouen, Normandy as a witch by the English.
Ashes from the foot of her pyre were supposedly discovered in 1867 in a jar in the attic of a Paris pharmacy, bearing the inscription “Remains found under the stake of Joan of Arc, virgin of Orleans” and taken to a museum in Chinon by French bishops, where they are still kept in a museum.
But the relics of St Joan are not the remains of the 15th-century heroine after all, according to experts who have analysed the sacred scraps.
They date back to between the third and sixth century BC. Dr Philippe Charlier of the Raymond Poincaré Hospital in Garches, near Paris, who obtained permission to study the relics, tells Nature today that he was “astonished” by what his analysis revealed.
“I’d never have thought that it could be from a mummy.” The Church is ready to accept the results, he adds.
The relics of the Maid of Orleans comprise a charred-looking human rib, chunks of what seem to be carbonised wood, a six inch fragment of linen and a cat femur - consistent with the medieval practice of throwing black cats onto the pyre of supposed witches.
Romantic painting of Joan of Arc at the Siege of Orléans.
He will tell an international meeting of pathologists later this week in Loches, France, how his team used a battery of methods to investigate the remains, including various forms of spectroscopy to reveal the chemical make-up, electron microscopy, pollen analysis.
The team also enlisted leading 'noses’ from the French perfume industry to sniff the remains: Sylvaine Delacourte from Guerlain, and Jean-Michel Duriez from Jean Patou.
The 15 strong team describe in their study, “L’étude scientifique du Bocal de Chinon, reliques présumées de Jeanne d’Arc” how Delacourte and Duriez sampled the aroma of the relics and nine other samples of bone and hair and both described hints of 'burnt plaster’ and 'vanilla’ in the samples from the Joan of Arc relics.
The plaster smell was consistent with her being burnt on a plaster stake, not a wooden one, to make the macabre spectacle last as long as possible. But vanilla is inconsistent with cremation.
“Vanillin is produced during decomposition of a body,” says Dr Charlier.
“You would find it in a mummy, but not in someone who was burnt.”
With this crucial clue to the origins of the remains, the evidence that these were in fact from a mummy began to build up.
Microscopic and chemical analysis of the black crust on the rib and on the cat femur showed that they were not burnt and had no trace of muscle, skin, fat or hair.
“I see burnt remains all the time in my job,” Charlier tells Nature. “It was obviously not burnt tissue.”
The black material was consistent with an embalming mix of wood resins, bitumen and chemicals such as malachite.
It was also consistent with gypsum, which gives the mix its plaster smell.
The linen cloth had a coating characteristic of mummy wrappings. And large amounts of pine pollen were also present: pine trees did not grow in Normandy at the time that Joan of Arc was killed.
However, pine resin was used widely in Egypt during embalming.
Carbon-14 analysis dated the remains to between the third and sixth centuries BC, long before she met her end. And the spectrometry data from the rib, femur and black chunks matched those from Egyptian mummies from the period, and not those of burnt bones.
Remains of mummies were often used in Europe during the Middle Ages in pharmaceutical remedies, consistent with how the jar purporting to contain her remains was found in an apothecary.
The 1867 discovery date also fits the period when Joan of Arc, who had been forgotten for centuries, was rediscovered by historians and created as a national myth.
Someone might have forged the relics at this time in an attempt to reinforce her importance.
DNA tests carried out in Denmark were negative, however.
“It is a fascinating project,” comments Anastasia Tsaliki of the University of Durham in North East England, adding that it is a tour de force of what scientists call palaeopathology, where forensic science is used to inform history.
Part of the legend of Joan of Arc springs from the observation, documented in records, that some of her organs resisted the fire. Surviving manuscripts describe in vivid detail how she was burnt three times over to ensure that nothing but ash remained, which was thrown in the River Seine. In this way the English wanted to prevent her remains being worshipped and relics from being collected.
The observation of remaining organs was interpreted as a miracle. But science has another explanation.
“In fact, it is very difficult to totally cremate a body; organs such as the heart and intestines, which have a high water content, are very resistant to fire,” says Dr Charlier.
“We see it all the time in forensics.
“It is also helpful for us - in terms of determining whether the relics are fakes or not - that the cult that has grown up around Joan of Arc is relatively recent. No one took much notice of her for the preceding 400 years. So there aren’t dozens of boxes of relics kicking around, all claiming to be hers.”
Dr Charlier came to prominence when he ascertained that Agnes Sorel, the favourite of King Charles VII, died from mercury poisoning.
He took an interest in Joan of Arc because her presumed remains were stored in the same Chinon museum as those of Sorel.
HUNDRED YEARS' WAR - THE COMBATANTS
ALLIES - ENGLAND, BURGUNDY, BRITTANY, PORTUGAL, NAVARRE, FLANDERS, HAINAULT, AQUITAINE, LUXEMBOURG, HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE
AXIS POWERS - FRANCE, SCOTLAND, CASTILE, GENOA, MAJORCA, BOHEMIA, CROWN OF ARAGON
telegraph.co.uk
