|
A
“miracle” diagnosis |
Luigi
Garlaschelli
Department of Organic Chemistry
Via Taramelli 10
27100 Pavia - Italy
Franco
Ramaccini
Viale Papiniano 44
20123 Milano - Italy
Sergio
Della Sala
now at: Psychology Departement
University of Aberdeen, AB9 2UB - U.K.
Introduction
A
sealed glass vial containing a dark unknown substance, allegedly the clotted
blood of San Gennaro (St Januarius), is shown several times a year to a packed
crowd in the Cathedral of Napoli (Naples). Whilst the container is being handled
during a solemn ceremony, the solid mass suddenly liquefies before everybody's
eyes. [1, 2]
This well-documented phenomenon is still regarded as unexplained [3]
by believers and sceptics alike. Noted parapsychologist Hans Bender defined
it the paranormal phenomenon with the best and historical documentation [4];
physicist Enrico Fermi seems to have expressed interest as well.
It is also one of the few recurrent non-medical, physical "miracles" that
might be studied scientifically.
St Januarius
Tradition
has it that St Januarius was bishop of Benevento (a town near Naples) later
to die a Christian martyr beheaded at the hands of the Emperor Diocletianus,
in 305 AD at Pozzuoli.
Ceremonies in his honour were instituted by archbishop Orsini of Naples
in 1337. [1] No mention of the liquefying blood was made however, until 1389,
when on August 17, the phenomenon was first reported. A chronicle of Naples
written in 1382 [5] describes the Januarian cult but still makes no mention
of either the miracle or the relic. It is very likely that "the blood of Januarius"
is one of the many relics to materialize during the Middle Ages.[6]
Today the rite is on one hand still encouraged (is performed by the archbishop
in the Naples cathedral); on the other hand it was never officially declared
a miracle by the Catholic Church, which leaves scientists free to express their
opinions. [7]
The relic and the Ceremony
The
relic is an ancient, round and flattened, sealed glass vial, of an estimated
volume of 60 ml, half-filled with the dark unknown substance. The vial, together
with an empty smaller one, is encased between the two rounded glass walls of
the portable silver reliquary.
During the ceremony the reliquary is repeatedly picked up, moved around
and upturned to check whether the liquefaction has taken place. If it
has, the dark mass is seen to flow freely into the vial (see Fig. 1). The liquefaction
sometimes takes place almost immediately, or can take hours, even days.
Fig.1
It
is claimed that other phenomena take place inside the reliquary. The liquid
mass is said to boil or froth, the colour to change from a dark to a reddish
brown, and the volume and even the weight to increase.8 Part of the mass
(the globo) is sometimes seen to remain solid and float in the liquid.
Toward a rational approach
When
blood is drawn from a living body and poured into a container, the soluble serum
protein fibrinogen forms a network of insoluble fibrin, which in turn binds
the erythrocytes resulting in a jelly-like clot. This clot can be mechanically
broken down, but once this has been done, clotting cannot reoccur. Thus, the
resolidification of a blood sample would be even more surprising than its first
liquefaction. The re-clotting process of the relic of Naples generally occurs
when the vials are safely within their locked vault.
A number of explanations, other than the intervention of a supernatural
power, have been put forward over the years. Scores of totally unproven influences
has been called into play: "magnetic" forces from Vesuvius (the nearby volcano),
psychokinesis from the crowd, poltergeist and spiritualistic type effects, to
name but a few.
Some other hypotheses were just provocations or pseudoscience.[1]
o The miracle is a magic trick, a hoax consciously performed by the Church (this would leave to explain how the trick is done, and how its secret could be kept for six centuries).
o The contents of the vial are a photo-sensitive substance changing its state from solid to liquid under the influence of light (no example of such material was ever proposed).
o The unknown substance is a periodical growth of microorganisms:(same as above, and not possible within a sealed container).
o The substance is a hygroscopic deliquescent solid, becoming liquid when it absorbs moisture from the air (this hypothesis would also account for the alleged weight variation, but would require an open vial. Furthermore, temperature raises needed to return the hydrated material to the anhydrous state would probably be completely outside the range of those the relic is ever exposed to).
A
few actual simulation were also tried:
In 1890, Albini used mixtures of powdered chocolate and sugar in water, or casein
and salt in milk serum.[9] These murky suspensions of solids in dense
liquid separate to form a thick crust at the surface, which acts like a plug,
solid enough to stop the heavier, liquid part below from flowing freely within
the container, making it appear solid. When shaken, the two components mix,
thus simulating a change of state. Albeit interesting, this attempt was
rather crude and failed to impress observers observers familiar with the
relic.
A
sounder suggestion was that the unknown substance is simply a mixture
with a low-melting point. Solid when stored in a somewhat cooler place, it would
melt when taken to the warmer altar, near burning candles, amidst a fervent
crowd. This hypothesis was first recorded as early as 1826 [10] and was
quickly supported by numerous recipes, mostly based upon waxes, fats or gelatines
(plus suitable dyes). [11] A practical, not anachronistic one, was
recently suggested by Nickell and Fisher.[12] However, mixtures such as
these, have a constant melting point, whereas the blood-liquefaction ceremony
can be performed at different room temperatures (May, September, December).
This and the problem of inducing the change in temperature to produce the "miracle"
(candles, for instance, are no longer brought near the relic) remain the basic
limitations of this hypothesis.
The thixotropic hypothesis
Thixotropy
might prove a good hypothesis to explain this "miracle". [13,14,15]
Thixotropy denotes the property of certain gels to became more fluid, even from
solid to liquid, when stirred, vibrated, or otherwise mechanically disturbed,
and to resolidify when left to stand. Common examples of such substances are
catsup, mayonnaise and some types of paints and toothpastes.
Thus, the very act of handling the reliquary, repeatedly turning it
upside down to check its state, might provide the necessary mechanical stress
to induce the liquefaction. A successful performance of the rite, therefore,
does not need conscious cheating, while not excluding its occurrence, as gentle
or sharp movements can certainly control the timing of the liquefaction.
Indeed, over the centuries, unexpected liquefactions have often been observed
whilst handling the relic case for repairs.[1]
In support of the thixotropic hypothesis, we made up samples whose properties
resembled those of the relic. We used substances that would have also been available
in the fourteenth century. After some testing with bentonite clays (producing
a thixotropic but unpleasantly mud-like gel), [16] we settled for a reddish-brown
FeO(OH) colloidal solution [17] (see box).
This
gel is the right shade of brown without the addition of any dye; it becomes
perfectly liquid when shaken (See Fig. 2) and, just like the relic, can even
produce the globo and bubbles on its shiny surface (The real boiling even of
a volatile liquid in a closed vessel under such conditions is quite untenable).
Fig 2
All the compounds for this concoction could have been readily available to a
Neapolitan artist or alchemist of the 1300. CaCO3 (from chalk, i.e.
limestone, or crushed eggshells) also formed the basis of many white pictorial
pigments. K2CO3, available from wood ashes was also well-known,
and can be used instead of CaCO3.
The only source of FeCl3 at that time was a mineral called
molysite, which occurs naturally only near active volcanoes. Notably, Naples
is near Mount Vesuvius. Moreover, after the blood of Januarius miraculously
liquefied in 1389, a number of similar miracles occurred in and around Naples,
even if most of them seem to have failed after some time. These coincidences
might simply have been imitations or else have come as the results of the presence
of molysite in that particular area.
The only questionable step might be the dialysis, given that the earliest
record (brine passing through a bladder) dates back to the early 1600s. [18]
It might be recalled however, that in the Middle Ages dyes were stored in gut
bags or bladders (maybe sometimes even under water, to retard oxidation). This
practice went on until the introduction of metal tubes, around 1840. These materials
(as well as parchment) were used as typical dialysis membranes prior to the
age of polymers. Furthermore, a common practice was to precipitate lakes by
adding alum or basic compounds to dyes, and filtering them through a felt tube
(Hippocrates' sleeve). These practices are just a step away from ours; a medieval
artist experimenting with pigments might well have stumbled across it.
In 1389, the Cathedral of Naples was in construction and artists from
all over Italy were present. At that time the king was Robert of Anjou, a pious
person, who would certainly have been pleased by a "holy blood relic".
In those days the need for relics was widespread as were the attempts
to counterfeit them. The shroud of Turin has been carbon-dated back to those
same years.
Thixotropy was first tentatively reported in 1863 and named in 1927.
As far as we now know, the earliest mention of thixotropy in connection with
Januarius is a personal communication from E. Newton Harvey to Henry Green and
Ruth N. Weltmann, contributors to a 1946 book, who reported it in a footnote.[19]
This interesting quotation, wholly overlooked by all skeptic or believer literature
dealing with the miracle, [20,11] was reappraised about a year after our
communication by fellow skeptical chemists.
Tests and analyses
Strangely,
the possibility of investigating a recurrent unexplained phenomenon, has instigated
very little scientific experimentation.
Since the Catholic Church has always forbidden the opening of the sealed
containers, a spectroscopic analysis was first performed in 1902 [21]. The instrument
was a prism spectroscope, the light source was a candle with grains of salt
on the wick providing the sodium D lines. The light was shone through a thin
layer of the fluid "blood" and four layers of glass (the two walls of the ampoule
plus the two of the relic case). It was reported that the characteristic absorption
bands of hemoglobin were detected.
The same analysis was replicated in 1989 [20] using the same type
of prism spectroscope. This time the light source and the D lines were provided
by electric lamps, and the spectra were recorded photographically. Again, the
detection of hemoglobin was reported. This test is always referred to as the
"scientific proof" of the presence of blood in the vial. However, the following
facts should be considered:
a) The results were not submitted to a refereed Journal, but printed privately
by the Neapolitan Curia. The booklet is on sale at the Cathedral bookstall.
b) It is not clear why an old-fashioned prism spectroscope was used instead
of a more reliable modern electronic spectrophotometer.
c) No colourless compounds and/or suspension of opaque solids will show
up in a visible spectrum.
d) The Authors themselves acknowledge that other red dyes could be mistaken
for hemoglobin.
e) Measurements were made on similar old glass to rule out deformations
or anomalous absorption bands. The correct method would have been to make measurements
at two different liquid thicknesses and determine the spectrum of the reliquary
contents by difference (old glass is known to sometimes contain impurities in
the region of interest).
f) During the test, hematin and hemochromogen bands were said to appear
(after 3 and 9 min) and overlap the hemoglobin bands, as if recording a "miracle
in progress". It is worth pointing out that, in any case, at the time of testing
the mass had already been liquefied for hours.
g) If visual measurements (having a limit at ca 400 nm) are adopted ,
the diagnostic maximum of the Soret band of blood at 410 nm cannot be detected;
recent investigations [22] have demonstrated that under these conditions
our FeO(OH) gel has spectra that are very similar to those of old blood, since
in the latter the characteristic bands of oxyhemoglobin at 545 and 575 nm are
lacking owing to the decomposition of oxyhemoglobin into methemoglobin and other
derivatives. (See Fig. 3)
Fig 3
h)
The spectra show no wavelength calibration, and appear to be of extremely poor
quality, exhibiting some unusual abnormalities, such as very sharp colour contrast
and distorted spectral distribution. As a matter of fact, no clear absorption
band can even be identified in the printed reproduction.
In summary, we surmise that the 'scientific' claim that the reliquary
contains blood is based on very flimsy grounds.
Volume
variations of the "blood" are simply anecdotal claims: no records (e.g. of the
relic hold level against a scale) are available for this claim. They could be
due to the viscous mass sticking to the walls, or to unsymmetries in the
vial shape.
Colour variation are undocumented as well. In any case, a dark mass does show
different colour hues when seen by transparency (i.e. as a liquid film on the
glass) or when by reflection (i.e. as still a solid); this is also visible in
our own FeO(OH) gel.
Erratic
weight variations were recorded in 1900 and 1904 (with an increase of up to
28 g on an estimated amount of "blood" of 30 ml, [23] but 3% of the total
weight of the relic case.[12] Again, these data were published only in
a religious magazine (no experimental conditions or balance model reported).
Moreover, even a booklet published by Church Authorities and available at the
Duomo bookstall, [24] reads " Tests performed during the last five years
by using electric balances failed to confirm any weight variation".
Conclusion
Further
tests to investigate the real nature of the holy "blood" without opening the
ampoule come readily to mind: for example, molecular absorptions and fluorescence
spectroscopy, and Raman scattering measurements, made with modern electronic
instruments by qualified spectroscopists. Controlled temperature increments
and shock tests also represent non-destructive analytical methods by which our
or alternative hypotheses might be verified or disproved.
Whether these simple tests will be allowed to go ahead wholly depends
upon the Catholic Church. At present however, given that the phenomenon has
been replicated, it would be rather too naive to consider it irreproducible
or unexplainable.
Acknowledgements.
We thank Prof. Steno Ferluga for encouragement at the early stage of this project
and Ms Gillian Jarvis for her help with the English version of the paper.
HOW TO SYNTHESIZE A THIXOTROPIC MIXTURE
FeCl3.6H2O - Ferric chloride is a common chemical. The hexahydrate form is a
yellow solid. The container should be tightly closed since this salt is hygroscopic.
CaCO3 - Calcium carbonate is also a very common chemical. Finely crushed marble
or egg shells are a suitable source. Also used, at least in the middle age,
as white painting pigment.
NaCl - Sodium chloride. Common salt, sea salt, rock salt. Other soluble salts
can be used (calcium chloride, sodium sulphate etc.) but they do not change
the final result.
Dialysis tubing. - It is a cellophane tubing, sold in various diameters, that
can be cut at the desired length. A supplier is Spectrapore. A dialysis membrane
will allow the purification of a mixture of colloidal particles and dissolved
salts, since only the smaller salt ions will pass through the pores of the membranes.
The commercial items have various cut-off numbers, indicating the highest molecular
weight they will let through. In our case, almost any type should work.
Before the polymer age, dialysis was performed with parchment. A thin parchment
can be tightened to the end of a bottomless tube to make a simple dialyzer.
Or a sort of long and narrow sack can be made, but it must not leak. Another
possibility is to use animal bladders gut. This can be obtained from a butcher,
the thinner the better; guts were and are used tomake sausages, salami, etc.
Lamb guts (end of blind intestine) can also be found in drugstores, still sold
as a prophylactic. Wash carefully before use to get rid of lubricating agents.
GENERAL PROCEDURE
Dissolve 25 g FeCl3.6H2O in 100 ml of water. A clear reddish-orange solution
will be obtained. Slowly add 10 g of powdered CaCO3. Since the ferric chloride
solution is acidic, foaming and CO2 evolution will occur. Add slowly by stirring.
The relative amounts of ferric chloride and base may vary, but the complete
precipitation of the formed ferric hydroxide must be avoided. Other base to
try might be potassium carbonate (from wood ashes) - also in common use in the
14th century. Solid NaHCO3 (baking soda) or Na2CO3 (Solvay soda) in water solution
work as well, A dark brown solution will be produced due to the formation of
colloidal FeO(OH).
To dialyze, cut about one foot of the plastic tubing , wet it well and tie a
knot at one end. Fill it half its volume with the mixture to purify, and then
suspend it in a jar of distilled water. Match the level of water and that of
the contents of the tubing.The level of liquid inside the dialysis tubing will
soon become higher because of osmosys (water entering the tubing, while salts
are going out). The distilled water will be changed three to four times at 24
hrs intervals, at least until it is no longer yellow. Watch that the contents
not to overflow.
The final solution can be used as such or can be concentrated to ca 100 mL.
This can be easily accomplished by pouring the solution in a large dish and
slowly evaporating it at the air, or by a gentle stream of hot air from a hair
dryer.
Pour some of this solution into a small round, flattened bottle, add a tiny
amount of NaCl and shake very well. Leave untouched for the time required and
see if it has jelled. If not, add some more salt.
If a solution is very concentrated, or if much salt is added, then the thixotropic
gel will set quickly and will be "hard" to liqufy by shaking; if the solution
is more diluted and little salt is added, the soll will take longer to set (even
two days), but it will be very shock-sensitive and will become very fluid. If
too much salt is added, the sol will undergo flocculation (i.e. will precipitate).
Some trials and fine adjustments are necessary.
NOTES
The final mixture is non-toxic. The glassware used for the preparation should
be rinsed immediately after use with water, detergent and brush. Old spots can
be removed with some hydrochloric acid. Gels are tricky: thixotropic sols will
equilibrate after one or more months, and their final properties may differ
from the initial ones (generally they will gel incompletely and become only
very viscous). In this case a very tiny amount of salt can again be added ;
this should restore their original behavior. A number of samples of different
concentrations might also be prepared and checked for stability several months
later. Stabilizing agents might also be tried: e.g. small amounts of arabic
gum or fish glue. Any help from colloid experts will be very welcome! Please
contact the author.
References
1. G. B. Alfano and A. Amitrano, Il miracolo di S. Gennaro: documentazione storica e scientifica. Napoli: Scarpati, 1924.
2. M. L. Straniero, Indagine su San Gennaro. Milano: Bompiani, 1991
3. Encyclopaedia Britannica 15th Edn, vol 6, p 495. 1985.
4. H. Bender, Verbogene Wirklichkeit, Olten: Walter-Verlag AG, 1973.
5. A. Altamura ed., Cronaca di Partenope (1382). Napoli, 1974.
6. J. Bentley, Restless Bones: The story of Relics. London: Constable, 1985.
7. M. Giordano, p 10 in Atti del convegno nel VI centenario della prima notizia della liquefazione del sangue (1389-1989) Napoli, 16 dic. 1989, Torre del Greco (Napoli), 1990.
8. P. R. Smith, Chem. Br., 1993, 29, 116)
9. G. Albini, Rendiconto della Reale Accademia delle scienze fisiche e matematiche (Napoli), 1890, Feb., 24.
10. E. Salverte, Des sciences occultes ou essai sur la magie, les prodiges et les miracles. Paris: Baillière, 1826.
11. H. Broch, Le Paranormal, p 109. Paris: Seuil, 1989.
12. J. Nickell and J. Fisher, Mysterious Realms, p 159. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1993
13. L. Garlaschelli, F. Ramaccini and S. Della Sala, Nature, 1991, 353, 507.
14. R. Meadows, Chem Matters, 1993, 11, 12.
15. L. Garlaschelli, F. Ramaccini and S. Della Sala, Skeptical Inquirer, 1993, 17, 209.
16. S. Della Sala and F. Ramaccini, CICAP, 1990, 2(1), 9.
17. E. Schalek and A. Szegvary, Kolloid - Zeitschr., 1923, 32, 318
18. J. R. Partington, A history of chemistry, vol 2. London: MacMillan, 1961
19.
H. Green and R. Weltmann in Colloid Chemistry, (J. Alexander ed), vol
6, p 328. New York: Reinhold Publishing Co.,1946. For a slightly later
reference, see:
A. E. Alexander and P. Johnson, Colloid Science, p 586. Oxford: Clarendon,
1949. (See also P. D. Lark, Chem. Br., 1992, 28, 781)
20. F. D'Onofrio, P. L. Baima Bollone and M. Cannas, p 55, in Ref. 7.
21. G. Sperindeo, Il Miracolo di S. Gennaro, p 67 Napoli: D'Auria, 1901.
22. M. Epstein and L. Garlaschelli, J. Sc. Exploration, 1992, 6, 233.
23. P. Silva, La Civiltà Cattolica, 1905, 3, 535.
24. E. Moscarella, Proculus (Pozzuoli, Napoli), 1989, 4, 401.