Jesus Christ

*Shape of the cross, support, and dimension.* — M. Robault (page 66) cites a passage from Saint Justin and another from Saint Augustine to prove that the shape of the cross, which has prevailed in Catholic art, is truly the one that was in use at the time of Our Lord's death. Innocent confirms this opinion by saying: *Fuerunt autem in cruce dominica ligna quatuor: stipes erutus, et lignum transversale troncus suppositus et titulus superpositus.*

The cross of Jesus Christ was therefore not a simple *tau* T, nor the Greek cross +, nor the Saint Andrew's cross X, but the cross *in missa*, where the crossbar is located at approximately two-thirds of the height †.

The author of the memoir we have just cited relies on Plautus, Saint Justin, Saint Jerome, and Gregory of Tours to establish that the crucified one had a footrest, and this opinion is confirmed by the paintings of the 8th century in the underground of Saint Clement. The same author, after various very judicious considerations, whether on what a healthy man can carry during a journey of eight to nine hundred meters, or on the state in which Our Lord was, concluded that the cross must have had one hundred and seventy-eight million cubic millimeters and weighed about ninety kilograms.

According to an ancient tradition reported by Gretzer, the Cross consisted of an upright whose height was fifteen feet (four meters eighty centimeters), and a crossbar of seven or eight feet (two meters thirty centimeters to two meters sixty centimeters). By inspecting the cross of the good thief, which is still at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme in Rome, one sees that this large piece corresponds to the length of a crossbar of two meters twenty-five centimeters or five cubits. The piece is one hundred and fifty-five millimeters in length, but the thickness could not be determined; it is probable that this piece of wood was square, and that if it is no longer so today, it is because, to multiply this relic, it was sawn. This piece of the good thief's cross has precisely a notch in the middle with a hole for the peg, which confirms that this instrument was a cross *in missa*, that is to say, that the perpendicular stem exceeded the shape of the tau.

M. Robault, after examining the species of the wood of the true Cross, had established that it is a resinous species. After examining the cross of the good thief, Dismas, there can be no doubt; as this piece is more substantial, the verification was easier. It is evident that this wood is a species of fir; even before any examination, it should have seemed probable that the cross of Our Lord and that of the two thieves, having been prepared on the same day and for the same purpose, must have been of the same species.

According to a tradition recalled by the tablet found in the cloister of Saint John Lateran, Jesus Christ was of a very tall stature (one meter eighty-four centimeters). Simon of Cyrene must have been shorter, and Saint Luke is strictly accurate when he places him behind Jesus Christ, *post Jesum*; the slope of the sacred wood placing it at the height of his shoulder. The Roman liturgy therefore follows tradition and the most rigorous reason in admitting that the weight was shared between Jesus Christ and Simon.

*Research on the relics.* — We quote in full § V from M. Robault M. Robault Author of the memoir on the Instruments of the Passion, the primary source for technical data. :

"I have attempted to ascertain all that is known of existing relics, or of which the memory has been preserved. I have calculated their volume in cubic millimeters. Now, all that I have been able to collect is far from equaling one-tenth of the volume of the true Cross. The nine-tenths, which are no longer found, must have sufficed to form myriads of unknown or destroyed relics."

Anseau, through his correspondence with Galon, Bishop of Paris, of whom I shall speak again regarding the relics of Notre-Dame de Paris, gives some idea of what had become of the relics of the Passion in the 7th century. He recounts that after the death of Heraclius in 636, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was partially burned by the infidels, and that, to save the cross, the Christians decided to divide it into nineteen parts, from which they made crosses that they gave, namely:

In Constantinople, 3; on the island of Cyprus, 2; on the island of Crete, 1; in Antioch, 3; in Edessa, 1; in Alexandria, 1; in Ascalon, 1; in Damascus, 1; in Jerusalem, 4; in Georgia, 2.

It is quite difficult to know what the dimensions of these relics were. Anseau mentions only the measurement of one of the four that had been deposited in Jerusalem and which were kept in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. It was one and a half palms long by one inch wide and as thick; he does not speak of the crossbar, which I shall assume, as in the true Cross, to be equal to half the length of the upright. According to this, the volume of this Cross would be approximately five hundred thousand cubic millimeters; and by considering it as an average, one would find for the nineteen crosses, or rather for the piece from Jerusalem that was divided, nine and a half million millimeters, which could represent a piece two or three times smaller than the relic of the cross of the good thief at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme.

Such was the beginning of the great dispersion of the relics of the true Cross; it increased rapidly in the following centuries. Villani reports a very curious document from the beginning of the 9th century, indicating the cities where the greatest number of relics were to be found. It is a te Charlemagne Emperor of the Franks and uncle of Saint Folquin. stament of Charlemagne, who, upon dying, left a third of his rich treasury to all the poor of Christendom, and two-thirds to the archbishops and bishops of his empire. In these treasures there were undoubtedly a great quantity of relics. Here are some dates that concern the history of the relics of the true Cross.

In 1187, at the Battle of Tiberias, the victorious Muslims took the cross of Saint-Jean-d'Acre, carried by the bishop. (Morand, *Histoire de la sainte chapelle*, p. 9. Paris, 1790). In 1191, Philip Augustus and Richard, having taken the cross, had this cross returned to them after the capture of Saint-Jean-d'Acre and thirty days of siege. In 1204, at the sack of Constantinople by the Latins, abominations were committed, and reliquaries were stolen; but pious souls collected the relics that the apostates disdained, and from there spread them throughout the world. The Doge of Venice, Dandolo, had a portion of the true Cross, which was said to have been carried by Constantine into war. Emperor Baldwin took the crown of thorns. In 1217, Raoul, Patriarch of Jerusalem, departed from Acre, carrying with him a portion of the true Cross. In 1239, Baldwin II, pressed by the Bulgarians, came to France to solicit the piety of Saint Louis, and offered him the crown of thorns as the price for his services.

The centuries successively reduced our precious treasure, dissipated by the wind of revolutions and the breath of impiety. Very little remains, and this indigence making each of these relics more precious, I have taken the liberty of making an appeal to the Catholic world, and the information I have received has allowed me to describe those that still exist, and to form a table that will be found hereafter.

It results from this table that the total volume of the relics that have reached us is approximately five million millimeters, including relics perhaps destroyed, such as those of Amiens, Donauwörth, Schira, Grammont, Jaucourt, etc.; but recorded according to descriptions that seemed accurate to me. If one considers the smallness of the particles that may be found in churches and convents, and in the possession of private individuals, we will be far beyond the truth. By tripling the known volume for the unknown, one thus arrives at fifteen million cubic millimeters, which does not make up one-tenth of the one hundred and eighty million millimeters that we find for the volume of the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Table of known volumes of the true Cross expressed in cubes of one millimeter.

| Aachen | 150 | Laon | » » | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Amiens | 4,500 | Libourne | 3,000 | | Angers | 2,640 | Lille | 15,112 | | England | 30,516 | Limburg | 133,768 | | Arles | 8,000 | Longpont | 1,136 | | Arras | 10,314 | Lorris | » » | | Athes (Moul-) | 878,360 | Lyon | 1,696 | | Autun | 50 | Mâcon | 2,000 | | Avignon | 220 | Maastricht | 10,000 | | Baugé | 104,000 | Marseille | 150 | | Bernay | 375 | Milan | 1,920 | | Besançon | 1,000 | Montepulciano | 500 | | Bologna | 15,000 | Naples | 10,000 | | Bonifacio | 47,960 | Nevers | 876 | | Bordeaux | 3,420 | Nuremberg | » » | | Bourbon-l'Archambault | 20,275 | Padua | 64 | | Bourges | 22,275 | Paris | 237,731 | | Brussels | 516,090 | Pisa | 8,175 | | Chalinargues | » » | Poitiers | 870 | | Châlons | 200 | Pontigny | 12,000 | | Chamirey | 605 | Ragusa | 169,324 | | Châtillon | » » | Riel-les-Eaux | 671 | | Cheffes (Anjou) | 100 | Rome | 537,587 | | Chelles | » » | Royaumont | » » | | Compiègne | 1,696 | Saint-Bié | 99 | | Conques | 108 | Saint-Florent | 460 | | Cortona | 3,000 | Saint-Quentin | 5,000 | | Courtrai | 200 | Holy Sepulchre | 200 | | Dijon | 33,091 | Sens | 69,545 | | Donauwörth | 12,000 | Siena | 1,680 | | Faphine | » » | Tournai | 2,000 | | Fiume | 5,250 | Trier | 18,000 | | Florence | 37,640 | Troyes | 201 | | Ghent | 436,450 | Turin | 6,500 | | Genoa | 26,438 | Venice | 445,582 | | Grammont | 5,000 | Venloo | » » | | Jaucourt | 3,500 | Valcourt | 2,000 | | Jerusalem | 5,045 | Vambach | » » | | Langres | 200 | TOTAL | 3,941,957 |

In view of these facts and the preceding observations, one wonders how C alvin Calvin Reformer cited as an opponent of Mary's royal title. could say that fifty men could not carry the wood of the true Cross, which the credulity of the Catholic adores throughout the universe; and Luther, that with the relics of the true Cross, admitted by the same superstition, one could build the framework of an immense building. When, in fact, there does not remain in the world the tenth part of a single cross, what to think of the millions of dissidents who are led to believe these singular exaggerations, what to think of the high criticism of our famous thinkers who share these prejudices and reproach us for the lightness of our belief? These are the humiliations one prepares for oneself when one claims to find Jesus Christ at fault. As for us, after this study, we present the history of the Cross of Jesus Christ as an irrefutable testimony of his passion.

*The Holy Nails.* — The first question that arises is that of the number of nails. M. Robault de Fleury cites more than twenty authors and various monuments to prove that Jesus Christ was attached to the cross with four nails, and this through secular testimonies as well as those of the holy Fathers and archaeologists of the catacombs. (See p. 166.) The physicians who have been consulted say that the crucifixion of both feet with a single nail would hardly be practicable. The nails must have been very large for Our Lord to invite Saint Thomas to place his finger in them. Now, the preserved nails of the Passion meet these conditions.

In removing Our Lord, the nails must have been pulled out before the deposition, for the heads of the nails could not have passed through the flesh. The nails were certainly thrown to the ground as the deposition progressed, as were the crown and the title. Now, everything that came from Our Lord was so precious that those who took Him down must have collected these easily portable relics, to which they later added the holy linens and the innumerable cloths that must have served for the burial of the divine victim. On this point, one can rely on the attentive and loving zeal of the august Mother of God and the holy women. It is these objects that Saint Helena collected, either from the pi ous faithful sainte Hélène Mother of Emperor Constantine, who came to pray at the saint's tomb. who had received them from their fathers, or in the sepulcher.

Calvin counts fourteen or fifteen holy nails, which he claims Catholics recognize as genuine; but he names several of which no one had heard before him; such are: the one in the church of Saint Helena in Rome (this church is the same as that of the Holy Cross); those of Siena, Venice, the Carmelites of Paris, the Sainte-Chapelle, Draguignan, and the village of Ténaille (this village is imaginary).

The true nail that is in Rome, in the church of the Holy Cross, has been filed down and no longer has a point today. This filing was enclosed in other nails made in the same manner as the true one, and, by this means, it was in a way multiplied. Another means of multiplying it was found: by having similar nails touch it, which were then distributed. Saint Charles Borromeo, a very enlightened prelate, and of the most scrupulous exactitude regarding relics, had several nails made like the one kept in Milan, and distributed them after they had touched it. He gave one to King Philip II as a precious relic. There are traces of such devotion in centuries very distant from our own. Saint Gregory the Great and other ancient Popes gave a little filing from the chains of Saint Peter as a relic; they also put some into other chains made in the same manner. One reads in Father Honoré de Sainte-Marie a fact that further confirms what we have just said. It concerns an authentic miracle performed by means of a taffeta heart made in the likeness of the heart of Saint Teresa. The cited author was not a man to believe everything indiscriminately; he occupies a distinguished place among the most judicious critics.

Let us return to the true nails that Saint Helena had found with the Savior's cross. This pious princess, being in danger of perishing on the Adriatic Sea, agitated by a violent storm, threw one of the nai ls into it, w sainte Hélène Mother of Emperor Constantine, who came to pray at the saint's tomb. hich calmed the waves immediately, Gregor. Turon., l. 1, glor. mart. c. 6. We read in Saint Ambrose, *de obst. Theod.*, n. 47, and in other authors, that Constantine the Great placed one in the rich diadem he wore on the most solemn days, and another on a magnificent bridle for his horse, regarding it as a sure rampart in the perils of war. There were, according to Saint Gregory of Tours, *loc. cit.*, two nails on the emperor's horse's bridle. The metropolitan church of Paris possesses two pieces of these nails, one coming from the treasury of the abbey of Saint-Denis, and the other from the abbey of Saint-Germain-des-Prés. At the moment when the first was returned to him, the Bishop of Quebec, Archbishop of Paris, noticed a small piece of wood that was adhering to it. By examining this wood with a magnifying glass, it was recognized that it was of the same nature as that of the large piece of the true Cross, of which we have just spoken and which is now at the church of Notre-Dame.

M. Robault, in his conclusion, assures us that history has not lost sight of these relics. The Iron Crown of Monza, which contained part of the true nail, and the nail of Trier completed by that of Toul, seem to him of incontestable authenticity. (See p. 151.)

*The Title of the Cross.* — Along with the true Cross, the Title of the Cross is one of the most incontestable relics of the Passion of Jesus Christ. This title has been preserved for us, at least in a notable part; and it is a great happiness for Christians to be able to still read this inscription, which is like the seal of our sacred history, says M. Robault de Fleury.

We read in Niquet (chap. 24, p. 152), cited by the memoir from which we draw so happily, that the general opinion is that Saint Helena had sent this title, with the other relics of the Passion, to Rome, with a sufficient quantity of earth taken from Calvary to cover the location where the Holy Cross of Jerusalem in Rome is today, an d th Rome Birthplace of Maximian. at it is from there that this church took its name.

A century later, Placidius Valentinian III, son of Constantius Caesar, nephew of the emperors Arcadius and Honorius, through their sister Galla Placidia, daughter of the great Theodosius, adorned with mosaics the place where Saint Helena had placed it. Fortunately, it had been placed under the top of the arch of this church, where it remained during the invasion of the barbarians without attracting their gaze; and even after this storm, and during several centuries of turmoil, it was lost from view. But in 1492, the Cardinal of the Holy Cross, while having this building repaired, had the workers discover the rich treasure: it was a universal joy, and people came to see it for three days. There are two things in this distinguished relic, the casing and the relic itself. The casing is a square of terracotta brick measuring three hundred and twenty millimeters by two hundred and ten millimeters, larger than the title and therefore able to well hide the niche where the lead box containing it was enclosed for a thousand years. On this brick one reads these words engraved with a chisel: *Titulus crucis*; the antique letters of fifty millimeters in height are from a beautiful era.

It must be noted that one possesses in Rome only a fragment of the title which represents the center of the inscription in three types of characters, all going from right to left: the lower line allows one to read distinctly in Latin: NAZARINVS RE. The second line in Greek: ΝΑΖΑΡΕΝΟΥΣ; finally, the upper line only allows one to perceive the lower extremity of the letters of the line above it, which indicate Hebrew letters that can no longer be read. We must now answer the difficulties that have been raised and which demand serious explanations.

Father Durand, who lived shortly after Saint Louis, says that he saw in Paris a tablet bearing the entire inscription: *Jesus nazarenus Rex Judæorum*. (Rationale, div. aff., l. VI, p. 354.) The monk Antoninus, traveling to Jerusalem before the invasion of the barbarians, also says he held in his hands, in the church of the Holy Sepulcher, the Title of the Cross.

M. Robault de Fleury responds with an explanation that seems to me to smooth out these difficulties. It is that Saint Helena treated the title as she had done with the Cross; she divided it into several pieces, of which the center was offered to Rome, and the two extremities had another destination. One of the extremities remained in Jerusalem, the other came to Paris. And one can add that, to assist in the reading of this title, a piece of wood in harmony with the remaining piece of the true title must have been added, and thus it could have been said that the entire title had been read. As for the piece in Rome, it remained in its incomplete state, such as it was in its first state of division, and the reading of the entire title is found only on a separate plaque, in terracotta, and these letters are necessarily antique, and do not belong to the Middle Ages.

This portion of the title of the true inscription that one sees in Rome carries with it a stamp of its antiquity; and everything that accompanies it tells us that it is a portion of the title that was placed on the cross of Jesus Christ. And let us say with M. Robault de Fleury: "Therefore we possess, in its primitive integrity, the relic given to Rome by Saint Helena. The detailed objections to which we are going to respond with the same author increase, instead of diminish, the measure of authenticity and veracity, for they show the invincible difficulties that a forger would have had to overcome."

It has been said: "At that time one did not yet put 'for' in Greek, nor the ending 'ous' for 'us';" now, *Gretzer and Montfaucon have shown several examples of it.* (See Mem., p. 193). It was objected that one no longer found *Boustrophedon* writing in the Greek and Roman language, that is to say, characters going from right to left, and yet in Pausanias and in several inscriptions of Italy, one finds examples of it. Who would dare to say that a forger would have had the thought of conforming to these exceptions? He would have been careful not to give himself this appearance of implausibility. One sees by this that the writer of the title was led naturally to follow this exceptional mode for the last two lengths, because having begun by writing Hebrew, he put the last two lines in harmony with the first, because this system was not unknown. I call that catching sincerity in the act.

There are, from the point of view of grammar, various anomalies in this writing, which lead us equally to conclude that this title is the work of a Roman soldier, who wanted for example to make the Latin *la* pronounced, or in Greek, in *Nazarenous*. From whatever side one views this title, therefore, it is a certain title and an irrefutable witness to the Passion of Jesus Christ.

*The Crown of Thorns.* — This distinguished relic, perhaps the most remarkable of those possessed by Christians due to its relative integrity, comes to us without question from Sain t Louis and saint Louis King of France whose chaplain was Thomas Hélye. is kept in the treasury of the cathedral of Paris; here we shall only slightly abbreviate M. Robault de Fleury. (P. 293.)

Like the other relics of the Passion, it remained hidden during the first three centuries under the pagan emperors, from whose eyes everything holy to Christians was concealed. In 409, Saint Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, admitted its existence as a notorious fact; Saint Gregory of Tours appears to be the first to have spoken of it explicitly; the *Patriarch of Jerusalem*, around the year 800, sent Charlemagne a nail, some thorns, and a considerable piece of the Cross. Charles the Bald gave these relics to the Abbey of Saint-Denis. A 12th-century inscription placed on his tomb recalls this donation.

At the time of the First Crusade, to encourage the Latins to seize Constantinople, Alexios Komnenos wrote in 1100 to Robert, Count of Flanders, that many distinguished relics were kept in Constantinople; here are the relics to which he alluded:

* The column to which Our Lord was bound; the whip with which He was scourged; the purple robe with which He was clothed; the Crown of Thorns; the reed given to Him as a scepter; the garments of which He was stripped; a considerable part of His cross; the nails used for His crucifixion; the linens found in His tomb.

In 1228, the Emperor of Constantinople, Baldwin II, had borrowed from the Venetians a sum of 13,075 hyperpyra, corresponding to 156,900 livres of our currency. Unable to pay, he turned to the King of France, who paid the debt and became the possessor of the relics that the Emperor had consigned as a pledge into the hands of his lenders (1239).

Some years later, Saint Louis, having received from Emperor Baldwin a considerable portion of the True Cross along with other rel ics, had th saint Louis King of France whose chaplain was Thomas Hélye. e building we see today constructed on the site of the old Palace chapel. This edifice, begun around 1244 and finished in 1248, cost the pious monarch about 40,000 livres of his time, commonly valued at 800,000 livres of our currency.

It was at the same time that, by a singular coincidence, the Pisans consecrated a reliquary of the same kind to another portion of the holy Crown of Thorns. And the *Santa Maria della Spina* of Pisa is, like the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris, a marvel of architecture; it is there that two parts of the crown were kept, sufficient to make us well acquainted with this horrible instrument of torture of Our Lord, and by another coincidence, which well marks the instability of human things, neither one nor the other marble or stone shrine has kept its relic until the present; but these two relics are intact, and the restored shrines could still receive them. (Robault, p. 204.)

The shrine of Notre-Dame de Paris recalls the memorable history of the relic with which Saint Louis had enriched the eldest daughter of the Church. One reads on the first face: "The holy crown of Je Paris Place of birth, ministry, and death of the saint. sus Christ, conquered by Baldwin at the capture of Constantinople in 1204, pledged to the Venetians in 1228, was received with great piety by Saint Louis at Villeneuve, near Sens, on August 10, 1239." On the second face: "Transferred from the Sainte-Chapelle to the Abbey of Saint-Denis, in France, by order of Louis XVI in 1791, brought back to Paris in 1793, stripped at the Hôtel des Monnaies and taken to the National Library in 1794, it was finally restored to the church of Notre-Dame, by order of the government, on October 26, 1804." On the third face: "Recognized on October 5, 1805, by P. Dienaz and Ch.-N. Warin-Flot, Vicar General of Coutances, charged in 1791 with taking a portion for Port-Royal, it was solemnly transported to the church of Notre-Dame by J.-B., Cardinal de Belloy, Archbishop of Paris, on August 10, 1806." It is enclosed in a crystal ring bound by gilded bronze and red silk threads.

The crown itself is composed of small rushes gathered into bundles. The inner diameter of the ring is two hundred and ten millimeters; the section is fifteen millimeters in diameter; the rushes are bound by fifteen or sixteen ties of similar rushes. A gold thread runs through the middle of the ties to consolidate these pious remains. The diameter of the rushes, which are very fine, varies from one millimeter to one and a half millimeters; some are bent and show that the plant is hollow; their surface, examined under a magnifying glass, is furrowed with small ribs.

Here now is a very judicious reflection by M. Robault de Fleury. Independently of the authenticity that history ensures for the relic of Notre-Dame, the kind of implausibility that surrounds it at first glance, and which ceases soon after an attentive examination, proves that it was truly the crown of Our Lord. If one had wanted to compose a crown according to the very natural idea one would have of it, and which paintings have followed without reflection, one would not have simulated a ring of rushes instead of thorns, and one would not have made it, moreover, too large for the head.

To fully understand the value of this seal of authenticity, the reader must know that, according to the scientifically special observations of M. Robault, it is established that the holy crown of Paris is not a crown of thorns, but a circle of rush, *Juncus balticus*, native to hot countries, and this circle, too wide moreover to be adapted alone to the head of Our Lord, served in the Passion only as a support to add and superimpose a crown full of thorns that covered the whole head and attached to this circle. The thorns were a species of *rhamnus*.

According to this happy discovery, one understands the exact use of the crown of Notre-Dame; why it is of a different nature from the other branches of thorns that are kept in various churches and which were the crown properly so-called, and the true instrument of the torture; one is no longer astonished to see a crown apparently intact in Paris, and furthermore, various small branches and isolated thorns detached in one hundred and three cities of Christendom; but the most notable part is found in Pisa, in Trier, and in Bruges. Those of Trier, which came from Saint Helena, have a great character of authenticity and resemble perfectly those of Pisa.

I add that I was very struck while reading verse 14 of chapter IX of Judges, which says: *Dixerunt omnia ligna ad rhamnum: Veni, et impera super nos*. Is it possible not to see there the role that this shrub was to play in the great scene of Calvary? The *rhamnus* becomes the sign and the illustration of the royalty of Jesus Christ; and this royalty, the *rhamnus* wrote with divine blood.

*The holy robes of Trier and Argenteuil.* — Let us now come to the garments of the Savior. The account of the Passion mentions his robe being drawn by lot, and this was the fulfillment of a prophecy. Now, we still possess this robe as a piece of evidence; we possess with it several other garments that had the honor of covering the holy humanity of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ must have had, according to the custom of the Jews, a tunic, a kind of seamless shirt, a robe over it, similar to the cassock of ecclesiastics, and finally a cloak, an outer garment that was easily removed and not kept inside dwellings. It is considered certain that Jesus Christ, in his Passion, had kept only one of his habitual garments, and on two occasions he was clothed in robes of mockery, the white robe before Herod, and the scarlet robe before Pilate and the Jewish people.

The cities of Trier and Argenteuil each possessed a tunic said to have belonged to Our Lord, and each formerly belie ved it Trèves Birthplace of the saint. possessed the seamless robe; which caused a regrettable confusion in people's minds. But recent studies have shown that both may be genuine. It is certain that the long robe, preserved and honored at Trier, is different from that of Argenteuil. It is the former that arrived first in Europe, because it was Saint Helena herself who sent it to Evagrius, Bishop of Trier.

One should not be surprised that the city of Trier cannot show written documents attesting to its authenticity until the 13th century. Who does not know the misfortunes of this city during the invasion of the Barbarians, particularly in the 5th century? A hundred times the possession of this city was disputed between the Gauls, the Franks, the Suebi, etc., and it was always a victim of both the vanquished and the victors. How can one look for written monuments under such rubble? But traditions have grown, and all of them, says M. Robault, agree on the authenticity of the relics.

However, the church of Trier has a written monument: it is an ivory diptych, a Roman work of the decadence, which represents the introduction of the relics of Trier into that city and their reception by Saint Helena. In 1196, Archbishop John, while having work done on the cathedral, found the casket that contained the holy robe. From that moment until 1512, it remained under the high altar without being exposed; and after many vicissitudes, from 1512 to 1810, it returned to Trier, from where it had been removed for a century. The chest containing the holy robe was placed in the relic chamber and opened.

The great antiquity of the garment is evident. The holy robe is browner on the inside than on the outside, whitish in some places, grayish in the rest. It was thought that no kind of seam was to be found on it; but the back had been covered with gauze, because the fabric was coming apart in many places, and the threads were hanging. The threads are so fine that they are barely distinguishable to the naked eye. The material seems to be nettle filaments. Length, one meter fifty-five centimeters; sleeve, seventy-three centimeters; width, at the bottom, one meter sixteen centimeters. When this relic was exhibited in 1810, more than two hundred thousand pilgrims flocked to it.

The titles of authenticity of the robe of Argenteuil are perfectly established and distributed from century to century, so that it has not been lost sight of since Gregory of Tours, who gives its history from the beg inning. He Argenteuil Place of preservation of the seamless Holy Tunic. says that this tunic, purchased by the faithful, was carried to a city in Galatia, a province of Asia Minor, one hundred and fifty miles from Constantinople. The relic was kept there in a basilica dedicated to the holy archangels, and in a secret vault, in a wooden chest; from there it was transported to Jaffa to be safe from the attacks of the King of Persia, marching on Armenia and Asia Minor, in 590, where he destroyed all the churches. In the year 594, this robe was solemnly transported to Jerusalem by three patriarchs, Gregory of Antioch, Thomas of Jerusalem, and John of Constantinople, and a crowd of people. (Gretzer, l. IV, c. 97.) Twenty years later, Chosroes took it and carried it off to Persia. Heraclius took it back in 627, and transported it to Constantinople, then to Jerusalem, to finally bring it back to Constantinople where it was safer. The Empress Irene, sending rich gifts to Charlemagne, included the seamless tunic of Our Lord. Charlemagne had a sister named Gisela, who had been living for some time in a monastery at Argenteuil, near Paris, and dependent on Saint-Denis. Theodrada, daughter of Charlemagne, consecrated herself to God in the same monastery, and the emperor requested that she be abbess there. As he loved this princess very much, he made, in her favor, the solemn translation of the precious relic to this abbey on August 13, 800.

The parish priest of Argenteuil had the unfortunate idea of dividing the holy tunic into several parts to better protect it from profanation, so that it is now difficult to restore it to its original form. But the old descriptions are there to tell us what it was, that is to say, the same shape as that of Trier, only a little shorter. According to M. Davin, the fabric is of camel hair, quite loose, and resembles canvas whose threads would be very twisted. The threads are distributed at two millimeters for three threads. It is made by needle, woven from top to bottom in its entire extent, on the simplest of looms, such as a tablet receiving the warp and weft on both sides. The arms were only half covered, and the garment could reach down to the bottom of the knee.

It seems demonstrated, says M. Robault, that Trier possesses the long outer robe, woven in fine linen, adorned with designs, etc., and Argenteuil, the shorter, seamless tunic, coarsely woven from a single camel hair thread. Both were worn by Our Lord; but it is the latter that he had on Calvary. Moscow believes it possesses a robe of Jesus Christ. It could be that it is a part of the cloak, according to what M. Prilejoff communicated to M. Robault on this subject. Nothing prevents there being relics of the garments of Jesus Christ in several other places; for, by adding the pieces found at Saint-Frazède, at Saint-Roch, in Rome, the known wardrobe of Jesus Christ is not very considerable, and certainly not everything has reached us. In Venice, there is a piece of the white robe of mockery worn before Herod. Pieces of the purple robe, with which Our Lord was clothed in Pilate's palace, are shown at Saint-François de Philipo-Anagni, in Italy, at Saint-Jean de Latran, and at Sainte-Marie-Majeure.

*The holy shrouds.* — What has not been said in insult against the piety of the faithful and the dignity of the Church regarding the ease with which it is reproached for allowing a large number of shrouds, robes, and veils to be exposed to the veneration of Christians as instruments of the Passion? Here, as on so many other points of religious belief, more in-depth studies will teach the reckless critics that it is dangerous to condemn the Church. When, then, will our century be willing to resign itself to pronouncing condemnations only when it has thoroughly known the evidence of the trial?

What does history tell us about the manner of embalming among the Jews in the time of Our Lord? One could have already known from Saint John (chap. XX) that, in the embalming of the dead, several wrappings were used; there is mention of *linteamina* in the plural, and of a *sudarium*, another object set aside in the sepulcher after the resurrection. We must therefore rid ourselves of an idea drawn from modern customs, which represent only a single shroud for a single dead person. In chapter XI, 44, Saint John shows us Lazarus coming out of the tomb; but he had his feet and hands bound with linens and strips of cloth. M. Robault thinks with Langellé and many other scholars, and this is incontestable, that the manner of burying the dead among the Egyptians was also practiced by the Hebrews and was preserved until the time of Our Lord. There were three ways of embalming among the Egyptians. According to Diodorus, one cost a talent, five thousand five hundred francs; another two minae, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-three francs; and the third, very little. Undoubtedly, the mummies that have reached us had been the object of a very careful embalming. One can see the detail in the same historian. (Book I, ch. 91.) Herodotus says the same things. Do we want to know what quantity of cloth goes into these sumptuous burials? The Arab Abdallatif will tell you. There are, he says, some that contain more than a thousand cubits of hemp cloth. One can understand by this that a considerable expense was still incurred, even in second-class burials. In 1867, all of Paris was witness, at the exhibition, to the unwrapping of mummies which yielded a prodigious quantity of linens. Before going further, let us insist again, to establish that, on this point, the customs of the two peoples were similar. It can be said that, in everything that was not forbidden by the law, the Hebrews had borrowed much from the people among whom they had lived for several centuries, whose science Moses had known, whose language was still known in the time of Abraham, since he spoke to the king without an interpreter. Here is what Genesis says, and it is an important fact (Genesis, ch. 50, v. 2): Joseph commanded his servants and the physicians to embalm the body of his father, and it took forty days to complete this embalming. It was obviously the Egyptian method, described by the historians of whom we have just spoken. The similarity of customs is therefore well established. The Chevalier de Rossi showed M. Robault, in the cemetery of Saint Callixtus, a body embalmed and wrapped entirely in the Egyptian fashion, and it is known that the burials of the catacombs are from the first centuries of the Christian era.

Can one believe now that a rich man, like Joseph of Arimathea, and the holy women did not lavish what they had most precious in their homes, in jewels, in aromatics, in linens, to make use of them for the venerated Master?

Despite the care that the blessed Joseph and the holy women took to stanch the blood, as the burial took place immediately after death, it is very likely to say that the blood could have passed through several folds of the shrouds and given rise to the existence of several shrouds bearing imprints, which have been venerated in different cities of Christendom, and it can be affirmed that not all the shrouds have reached us. If, therefore, there is one thing that should cause astonishment, it is not that there have been holy shrouds in Besançon, Turin, Cahors, Cadouin, Carcassonne, and Rome; but that there are not more of them left, and this proves the sincerity and good faith of Christians, to whom it is naturally repugnant to employ deceit in such a grave matter. Only doubt of the holiness of things prevents the abuse of them; but there must be a considerable human interest. Here, where would it be? Excommunication threatens those who traffic in them.

*The *santa scala*, the reed, the sponge, the lance.* — The staircase of Pilate's palace was transported to Rome by Saint Helena in 326 and deposited at Saint John Lateran. In 850, Saint Leo IV established the devotion of climbing it on one's knees. As one could only climb these stairs on one's knees, the steps were so worn that they had to be covered with walnut wood linings; these linings are hollowed out in front, so as to let the relic be seen, which consists of twenty-eight steps in white marble, whose veins, slightly gray, are in the direction of the length of the steps. There are no moldings on the front; the first eight are 3.30 m in length; and the others, 2.50 m.

The dome of Florence possesses a small fragment of the reed of the derisive royalty of Jesus Christ; another more considerable one, one hundred and ten millimeters, is at the convent of Andechs, in Bavaria, and another of one hundred and eighty millimeters at the convent of Vatopedi, on Mount Athos. By gathering all these fragments, we hardly exceed three hundred millimeters: the reed must have exceeded this length by much. Here again, as for most of the holy relics, there has been loss, instead of false multiplication.

At the capture of Jerusalem by the Persians in 614, the holy sponge was taken to Constantinople on September 14 of the same year. Saint Gregory of Tours, a few years earlier, speaks of it as a relic that was publicly venerated in Jerusalem with the lance and the reed, the crown of thorns, and the column, without marking the place where they were kept. The Venerable Bede saw it in Jerusalem in the chalice of Our Lord, a silver chalice believed to have been used at the Last Supper. A fragment of the holy sponge came to France with the relics offered to Saint Louis; Saint-Jacques de Compiègne had a small portion of it. One also sees fragments of it in Rome in the churches of Saint Sylvester, Saint John Lateran, Saint Mary Major, Saint Mary in Trastevere, Saint Mark, and Saint Mary in Compitelli. All gathered together would form, in all appearance, only a sponge of quite mediocre size.

In the time of the Venerable Bede, the holy lance was enclosed in a wooden cross under the portico of the Martyr, a church buil sainte lance The lance that pierced the side of Christ. t by Constantine. Bishop François-Adolphe also saw it. According to Gregory of Tours, it was transported from Jerusalem to Constantinople in the time of Heraclius. In 1092, the crusaders found it in Antioch; in 1243, Baldwin ceded the point to Saint Louis. A part of the lance was sent by Bayezid in 1492 to Innocent VIII, who placed it in Saint Peter's in Rome, where it is in great veneration. Bayezid had it said that the point was in France. Benedict XIV had the point of the holy lance brought from Paris, in order to bring it closer to the lance itself, deposited in the basilica of Saint Peter, and he verified that the adaptation was satisfactory.

*The stone where the cross was placed: — the stone of the anointing.* — Mgr Mislin denounced a deception of the Greeks. The cavity, which is at the summit of Calvary, is not the one where the cross was planted. In the upheaval that occurred during the fire of 1808, they removed the stone in which the true cross had been driven, to transport it to Constantinople, and put another stone in its place, and the true one was lost in a shipwreck. But, if the jealous zeal of Christians removes the stones, one cannot remove the places.

Descending from Calvary, one immediately finds the stone of the anointing on which Joseph of Arimathea embalmed the body of Jesus. Eight feet long, two wide, it is today covered with a slab of red marble that is only a few inches thick. It is surrounded by large candelabra and ten silver lamps.

*The column of the flagellation; — the holy blood.* — The column, to which Jesus Christ was bound during his flagellation, was anciently kept in Jerusalem on Mount Zion with other holy relics. This is what we learn from Saint Gregory of Nazianzus, *or.* 1, *in Julian.*, from Saint Paulinus, *ep.* 34; from Saint Gregory of Tours, *l.* 1st, *de glor. mart.*, c. 7; from the Venerable Bede, *de locis sanctis*, c. 3; from Saint Prudentius; from Saint Jerome, etc. This column is presently seen in Rome, through an iron grating, in a small chapel of the church of Saint Praxedes. According to an inscription placed above the chapel, it was brought there in 1223 by Cardinal Jean Colonna, legate of the Holy See in the East, under Pope Honorius III. It is of gray marble, and a foot and a half long. It has, at its base, a foot in diameter and only eight inches at the top. The base of the column is preserved in the rich treasury of Saint Mark, in Venice. One still sees there an iron ring to which criminals were attached. Some think that it is only the upper part of the column of which Saint Jerome speaks: but no mark of fracture is perceived on it. The Jews whipped criminals, first on the back, then (at least often) on the stomach, then on both sides. It seems that the same thing was observed among the Romans.

The *blood* of Jesus Christ, which is kept in some places, and the most famous of which is that of Mantua, comes from what has sometimes flowed miraculously from crucifixes that Jews or pagans have pierced in hatred of the Savior. These touching miracles are recounted and established in a peremptory manner in very authentic histories. See Saint Thomas, *l.* III, p. 54, a. 2, ad 5; and *quod*, l. V, a. 5.

*The holy blindfold.* — Mr. Baras, parish priest of Saint-Céré (Lot), has brought to our attention the existence of a precious relic of Our Lord Jesus Christ, long forgotten, which is possessed by a small country church in the diocese of Cahors. This relic is linked to the life of Saint Namphase, whose tomb is in the church of Caniac. Saint Namphase was the restorer of the Abbey of Marcillac, to which the precious relic of which we speak wa Charlemagne Emperor of the Franks and uncle of Saint Folquin. s given by Charlemagne. It is the holy blindfold with which the eyes of Our Lord were covered in the house of Caiaphas, during the scene described by the Gospel: "They began to veil his face, to strike him, and to ask him who it was that struck him." The small church of Saint-Julien de Lunegarde has had the good Lunegarde Village in Quercy possessing the Holy Band. fortune to possess this distinguished relic for several centuries.

This blindfold is a piece of linen cloth long enough to go around the head and about ten centimeters wide; it shows numerous bloodstains.

The historian Dominicy, in his work *De Sudario capitis Christi*, printed in Cahors in 1640, says: *Asservatur in ecclesia S. Juliani de Lunegarde (cujus praesentatio ad abbatem Marciliacensem pertinet), tenue velum ex lino ægyptio ; idemque illud esse dicunt quo Christi faciem militas obduxere, dum per ludibrium colaphis cæderetur. Est et in eadem Ecclesia, frustum arundinis, et in signum regni affectati, pro sceptro traditæ, p. 47... Hanc porro camobio Marciliacensi, cum velo quo Christus eadem in cena obductus fuit, a Carolo Magno illius monasterii restauratore olim vetus affirmat traditio, eamque postmodum ecclesiæ de Lunegarde, ab illius camobii abbatibus traditam, et locus ille (qui ab hoc monasterio ad hoc pendet), vasta superioris Cadurcinii solitudine et sylva horrenda obsitus, tantorum pignorum gratia, a populis devotionis ergo adeuntibus in posterum frequentaretur... Sacros quamplures reliquias in multis Galliarum ecclesiis (Carolum Magnum) depaeuisse nemo potest inficiari, illosque maximè ab oriente quæzitas, p. 50.*

These precise texts from the historian of Quercy acquire, in our eyes, a new authority from a document that was communicated to me by Father Ayrales, retired in Saint-Chigues, parish of Saigros, canton of Saint-Céré. It is a notarized act on parchment in which is reported: 1st, the presentation made by the Abbot of Marcillac of a certain Jeanny de Podio of Cardailhac to replace a certain Valette, who resigned from the parish of Saint-Julien de Lunegarde; 2nd, the appointment of this same de Podio (probably Dupuy) to the said parish, for the brother and vicar general of Mgr Antoine d'Alamand, Bishop of Cahors. This act is from the year 1468. — This act assumes that the right of presentation, exercised by the Abbot of Marcillac, existed before that time. Can we not reasonably conclude that the holy blindfold had already been deposited at Lunegarde at a time prior to the year 1468?

I believe that Dominicy makes a mistake in speaking of a *fragment of the reed*. I am convinced, as the inscription attached to the relic states, that it is from the True Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which was deposited in the church of Saint-Julien de Lunegarde at the same time as the holy blindfold.

The authentic title of these relics no longer exists. Mr. Pons, parish priest of Lunegarde before 1789, and who died, I believe, in 1834, said to several people who reported it to me, "that he had had this title in his possession, but that he had lost it at the time of his emigration." This has been attested to us by the late Mrs. Pons de Reilhac, mother of Mr. Antoine Pons, notary; by the late Mrs. Claretty, mother of Mrs. Pégourie of Grand-Domaine, and by Mr. Laveyflières, parish priest of Saint-Martin-de-Désarnat, former parish priest of Lunegarde, previously vicar to Mr. Pons.

It is certain that from time immemorial there have been pilgrims going, out of devotion, to Lunegarde. 1st, The fountain, where pilgrims still go to draw water, is proof of this. Its name *Font-Roumine* means fountain of the pilgrims, *Font des Roumious*. In the Middle Ages, in the local language, the name *Roumious* was given to those who undertook any pilgrimage, because as the pilgrimage to Rome was the most famous, those who went there were called *Roumious*. There exists, in Rocamadour, a path called *lou Comi des Roumious*. 2nd, The old people I knew in Lunegarde affirmed to me that, at all times, the pilgrimage had been frequented, especially before the great Revolution. People even came from the Auvergne, as attested by a peddler from that country who told me "to have heard his grandfather, who died at ninety, say when he himself was a small child, that people went from Auvergne on a pilgrimage to Lunegarde." This merchant was named Andrieu and was over sixty years old. This testimony is prior to 1850. I attest, concludes Father Baras, to the truth of the above testimonies.

Cl. *La Bible sans la Bible*, 2 gr. v. in-8°, 2nd ed., Bar-le-Duc, 1871-72.