St Marks Square

[Taphoi]

The most interesting aspect of the story is that perished mummy fragments looked sufficiently as though they had been incinerated that they were used as the basis of a forged set of remains of Joan of Arc, despite the fact that they had never been anywhere near true flames. Recall that St Mark is said to have been burnt and that parts of the remains in the Basilica di San Marco were described as cenere (ashes) when seen in 1811. It is quite clear from the Joan of Arc story that this description could better fit bits of perished mummy than the remains of a burnt St Mark. The bones in San Marco are also said to be largely intact, whereas burning would normally cause fragmentation. This also means that mummification chemicals have probably not reached the bone marrow, so the DNA situation is not necessarily bad.

(Btw it is said that a cat was traditionally thrown on the pyre of a witch.)

Best wishes,

Andrew

[jasonxx]

Carbon Dating would be a very good start and pretty conclusive. If carbon dating put the remains pre Christ. Then we can totally discard St Mark. And if we discard St Mark, then theres only one answer who it can be. Alexanders Body disapears and St Marks appears. Yet Carbon dating proves its not ST Mark. You basically dont have to be a Rocket scientist to put 2 and 2 together. ok on this 2 and 2 could be 5. But the oportunitie is fascinating.

Andrew Chugg also qoutes the tell tale signs. Wounds broken bones and particulaly broben bones in and around the ribs where the arrow went in. With all the technology around today. with deeper invasive examinations the techniques available today would get us nearer and nearer.

I think the Star wars guy. George Lucas. Did a programe in connection with atomb found in Israel apparently they could be Jesus and his tribe. Mary etc. Now if Stone really wanted to do something worthwile maybe he should put his clout and a few spare million pounds into this progarame. Im sure with his backing suck a thing could be done.

Just a last question Marcus. IF i say If the carbon dating put the corpse pre Christ then logically who do u think its likely the corpse is.

Kenny

[Eschatos]

It was interesting the conference "Eroi, Eroismi, Eroizzazioni" in Padua...
I think Taphoi knows more than me, about.

I support Chugg's theories, at least because i'm from Venice...

You can imagine, how lucky i'd feel if the Soma was near my home...
XAIPE

[ruthaki]

Regarding DNA testing. I recall when I was at Vergina's Tombs the first time, I asked an archaeologist on the site if they could match the DNA that t remained inside the funery
urn of the "Macedonian Prince" to that of the bones found in the casket supposed to be "Philip" and see if there was a match. He thought that a very interesting question but said the bone fragments left in the urn were not enough for a DNA match (I guess they are too powdered.) I wonder though, if they matched the remains of "St Mark" with those of "Philip" if they could find any match??? (No doubt the Vatican would prohibit it though.)

[Tantalus]

I wonder though, if they matched the remains of "St Mark" with those of "Philip" if they could find any match???

Intriguing idea!

[Bobg]

I was under the impression that a portion of Philip's skull remained intact. Enough so that a debate over the damaged eye socket is either a wound or damage from the cremation fires.

[Theseus]

I wonder with all the interest and debate over the true identity of Saint Mark if the church will ever let tests be done? I mean stranger things have happened. Some of Egypts most precious mummies have undergone x-rays- ct scans, dna testing ect... to answer who they were so why not the remains of St. Mark?! I was raised catholic and I know how the church likes to "hide" their faults and this may be the one main reason holding them back from allowing the test to happen. I hope in our lifetime it is allowed so we can maybe know the true identity of that body.

Oh and Andrew how come you never mentioned you are not only an author but a great detective as well?!