Stealing the Sacred: The Cult and Theft of Relics in the Middle Ages

Burgess, Jocelyn E.

Saints and Sanctity Module - Hilary Term 2014

Trinity College Dublin, MPhil in Medieval Studies

STEALING THE SACRED 2

Introduction

Acquisition of relics in itself is a tension of duality, especially within the medieval

period. Seen as both an ethically reprehensible and sinful action but a universally acceptable way

to obtain a saint’s relics for the beneficiary of a community, even the community from which

spawn the practice struggled with the understanding and justification of it. This becomes an issue

to analyze the acceptance and justification of the theft of these particular artifacts past the

economic explanations. Hagiographic tradition seems to reflect this emerging reluctance and

eventual succumbing to the network of relic mercantilism with the emergence and eventual

fabrications of the liturgical subdivision of Translationes and the Furta Sacra, which are at times

one and the same. This is apparent especially if the author of the particular hagiography

subscribed to the ideology that a relic was a living part of the saint meaning translation and

moving of the relic could not occur if the saint in question did not wish to be moved. However

the whole concept and practice of acquiring and translating saints has always been shrouded in

questionable practices. Even the medieval etymology of the term furta is derived from the Latin

word fūr or furtum (a noun of the 2nd Declension meaning “theft”) and implies a surreptitious

misappropriation often veiled in obscurity. There is a thin line between theft and translation that

even medieval writers of both the liturgical and secular works couldn’t absolve. Modern

scholarship even reflects this particular duality with often contradiction of hypothesis and

evidence or warring ideology within same studies. What can be inferred was that as long as the

general laity and clergy demanded relics, suppliers would meet the request no matter the process

and the medieval world would turn a blind eye as to by what method they procured them

especially when coinage was on the line.

STEALING THE SACRED 3

Stealing the Sacred: The Cult and Theft of Relics in the Middle Ages

Emerging at the beginning of the 9th century is a peculiar trend amongst the clerical and

monastic communities of Europe. With the political and social climate in crisis, a shift towards

the spiritual and supernatural is nothing but traditional. However emerging from the tombs of

Rome, Spain, and the Holy Land came a renovated revival, carefully monitored and exploited by

the major secular and ecclesiastic leaders, of the cult of the relic. Fragments of bones, hair, teeth,

nails and even whole corpses were being trafficked around Europe and the population demanded

more. Pieces of saints were being sold at alarming rates and consumed at even higher ones, to

which has left historians slightly baffled considering the moral duplicity in an ethically focused

society.

At the dawning of the 9th Century there was hagiographical tradition emerging to justify

and irradiate this particular practice that has recently come under scholastic focus. Illuminating

the many of the functions a relic and the attached cult played within the political, economic and

religious spheres by highlighting provincial and chronological variations between these

translations or translations of the saints has becoming a fast evolving area of study within both

historical and ecclesiastic studies. For the interest of time and comprehension, this paper will

heavily rely on the comprehensive studies of Patrick J. Geary and his works Furta Sacra: Theft

of Relics in Central Middle Ages and his collection of articles in Living with the Dead in Middle

Ages, as there is little time for in depth scholarship to the levels already acquired in these

resources- though they are not the only works consulted. Even with Geary’s comprehensive

study there is an inherent issue with using narrative sources such as translationes and other

hagiographic sources such as vitae, passiones, liber miraculorum and even more secular liturgy

such as chronicles and annals. Even though the translationes source is concerned with melding
STEALING THE SACRED 4

the hagiographic and historic events to lend credibility to the appearance of a relic within a

certain community; the dichotomy between the supernatural and historical seems, at times, too

large to surmount. When Geary draws a sharp contrast between the two, where there was no such

chasm existed when written, there creates handicaps in the scholarship and understanding

intrinsic to the medieval construct of the source and corners conclusions that may be drawn from

the source material. Historians can frustrate themselves by denying attention to the ritual

surrounding the relic, both physical and spiritual, by attempting to approach the subject from a

purely secular position and stripping the argument of vital inroads to understanding. Hence why

for this particular study there were endeavors to assimilate a variety of approaches from different

disciplines to the same subject in order to prevent such limitations.

The evolution of a relic’s role in medieval society is neither direct nor constant as not all

medieval communities used relics in the same or even remotely universal manner. However a

universality in miracles the relics provided can be inferred but only from a liturgical standpoint

which was highly formulaic. To truly understand a relic, a close examination of the cult

surrounding it must be undertaken. The start most of the historical and conceptual understanding

of relics should endeavor to start during the Carolingian reforms and emergence of the Frankish

church and state. It is true that relics existed as a layover concept from paganism adopted by the

Christian church and blended with the Christian ideology to form a new etymology and tradition

and emerged as early as the persecutions of the 2nd and 3rd Century persecutions, especially in

connection to the martyr.1 Classically speaking, death was relegated to an end of existence and

shift to the next realm when proper respect for the dead was accorded. Both Greek and Latin

traditions held true, which is why the particular mutilation of martyrs corpses was so exaggerated

1
Geary, Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages.
STEALING THE SACRED 5

as it prevented proper death rites.2 But interest in the relics or saints, particularly Roman martyr

emerged as early as 397 and soon became the driving force behind the propagation of relics.3

Religious fervor to the remains of a saint can be abridged to two fundamental precursors; the

pagan cult of heroes and the Christian belief in the resurrection of the body.4 With these two

ideologies it is not surprising that the cult of relics rose almost in tandem with the cult of

martyrs, especially if coupled with the knowledge that early Christians partook of the belief that

martyr’s would re-inhabit their bodies on the day of judgment and raise up those that were buried

near or safeguarded the remains.5 However with the stabilization of the Christian church and

decline of persecution martyr’s bodies became scare and bodies were often divided, moved,

bartered, and eventually stolen- dominating the early “records” of relic theft.6 One of the reasons

relic mongers, merchants and thieves worked was that the identity of a saint was almost

superfluous, as the proper manipulation of relics could achieve much of the desired effects sans

nomenclature. All that mattered was spiritual intercession and special protection for the

community, which may explain the logic behind many saints “choosing” to move during times of

crisis, deeming those seeking aid unworthy, or just straight “refusing” to help.7 This lead a

church or community to very few options to survive in a highly tension filled pilgrimage based

world, which will be delved into later in the study.

Primarily in order to understand the theft of relics, relic itself should be defined.

However, defining a relic is something both simple and challenging. Geary argues that a relic

outside of a specific milieu and culture divorces it from all communal and spiritual significance,

2
Ibid.
3
Ibid., 179.
4
Geary, Furta Sacra, 37.
5
Ibid., 32.
6
Geary, Furta Sacra.
7
Ibid.
STEALING THE SACRED 6

there by stripping it of all meaning into a passive object upon which the new community

introduced defines the relic.8 Meaning the intrinsic problem is that stripped of church, reliquaries

and documentation the relic itself is indistinguishable. This position is hard to support as in most

relics cases the reliquary and sacred trappings are just as important as the relic itself and can

inform (or in cases such as battle talismans and shaped reliquaries be more recognizable than the

relic itself). Case in point, in a 1997 paper- joint authors Caroline Walker Bynum and Paula

Gerson analyze the evolution of reliquaries from the standard sarcophagi to the “speaking” or

“shaped” reliquaries of the late 12th and 13th Centuries.9 Containers for these relics were often

more important than the relic inside, especially in consideration that the emergence of body part

shaped reliquaries can be attributed to the early 9th century but rise to prominence during the 11th

century lasting through the 14th Century; though the contents encased more often detached

literally with the outside form in no way diminished their power in both liturgical and political

spheres.

Spanning the same time period as that examined in Geary’s works it is hard to completely

eliminate the role of the reliquary, and even by proxy the role of the altar and surrounding

architecture. Delving further into Geary’s argument, it is inferred that unlike art, manuscripts and

the like which carry and intrinsic “code” that makes the importance recognizable without

necessary comprehension, relics relay almost entirely on culturally based perpetual elevation,

hence why hagiographic tradition evolved and authenticity emerges to validate relics across

cultures during translation.10 Here is where the argument on the importance of reliquaries, texts

and traditions as solidification of the function rather than form of the relic can be verified.

8
Ibid., 5.
9
Bynum and Gerson, “Body-Part Reliquaries and Body Parts in the Middle Ages.”
10
Geary, Furta Sacra, 6.
STEALING THE SACRED 7

Nevertheless problems with this line of thought still arise with the very medieval ideology of the

relic is in opposition to the passive and acted upon object Geary presents; as it was considered an

extension of a still living, active and participatory being in medieval society. There is soundness

in the claim that the symbolic value of a new or rediscovered relic was a reflection of the society

that valued it and could shed light on particular morals and works assigned to it as an extension

of the community mentality.11 However with the 21st Century study of relics we run aground

with society and academic scholarship being too divorced from the religious aspects that were

accepted unquestionably being viewed with a jaundiced hostility at best. Scholars are too eager

to minimize or disprove the viability of these relics and trivialize their importance.

A layman, or even lesser clergy prone to pilgrimage, may not know that the inside of a

body-shaped reliquary does not actually contain the body part depicted by its surrounding case

but fundamentally understands the spiritual attachment and function of the relic and what the

reliquary metaphorically represents.12 That is, a metaphorical language and use of the saint’s

relic would be so imbedded into the religious practices that the contents being one relic, or

several as is the case with most arm shaped reliquaries, would not deter from its holiness and

recognition but in some cases enhance the perception of the power of the relic.13 It may even be

argued that the religious contexts of the relics and corresponding shaped reliquary, especially in

consideration to their consumption and reception within their audience, are more significant than

their external features.14 Even more so than the actual form of the reliquary, the tableau in which

the relic sat or functioned was almost equally important to the ecclesiastic community. Relic

centric church design and renovation almost went exclusively in tandem to discovery, acquisition

11
Ibid.
12
Hahn, “The Voices of the Saints.”
13
Ibid.
14
Hahn, “The Voices of the Saints.”
STEALING THE SACRED 8

and translation of a saint. Even in the far reaches of the realm, which often eschewed religious

tendencies established on the continent in favor of a more fluid relationship with the pagan and

Christian population intent of conversion had minor churches with elaborate relic shrines and

documented translations of saints.15 However the validity of Geary’s original point is that are

those symbols, the reliquary and surrounding visual or literary enhancements, not intrinsically

part of a relic is viable and therefore adopted by relegating those symbols of a relic to its function

rather than its form for the sake of this study.

This brings us to the ultimate question of this study. If the relics was inherently

unrecognizable outside of its cultural context, how did a complex and lucrative trade of theft,

selling and embezzlement of relics even emerge? According to Geary the theft of a relic could

not result in a transference of the religious or cultural ideology of the original culture into the

new.16 What if it is taken a step further with the postulation that part of the function of the “theft”

of a relic and relocation is to stave off neglect and cultural insignificance of both saint and

community by introducing new symbolic functions and history important to the new culture and

wholly independent of the previous one? Here is the fundamental argument behind the

emergence of Translationes as a response for a need of a new hagiographic tradition.

Examining the social and cultural context the author attempts to place the relic in,

especially in regards to its symbolic and spiritual function after the theft is vital to the

understanding of the theft itself.17 Saints and relics inspired “generosity” of the faithful.

Pilgrimage offerings and tithes were a vital source of revenue for ecclesiastic and monastic

communities. Relics often traveled on “fund-raising” pilgrimages often for construction,

15
Carragáin, “The Architectural Setting of the Cult of Relics in Early Medieval Ireland.”
16
Geary, Furta Sacra, 7.
17
Ibid., 8–9.
STEALING THE SACRED 9

renovation or reconstruction funds for a community.18 Outside the parade of relics through the

laity there were three other options left. Primarily the redistribution or rediscovery of relics

already present in the church or community, which would often reveal themselves to pious

monks in visions and reveal their burial place.19 If that wasn’t successful a monk could visit a

neighboring town where there were relics in abundance and “procure” one or “save” one from a

neglected church, especially in search of martyrs. Sometimes if those tactics didn’t work the

search for remains of saints locally they then travel farther afield to Spain or Rome where relics

and martyrs were aplenty.20 However the search for replenishment of relics was bolstered by the

rise of the universal saints and influx of relics from the crusades and Rome. Crusades led to a

“flooding” of relics based around the growing cults of the virgin and the apostles. Their

emergences both diminished and exalted local saints, especially with “smaller” relics emerging

from a need of mobility and decline of “whole” tombs and bodies.21 It comes as no surprise that

in the later half of the 8th century efforts to regulate, control and validate saints relics emerged to

curtail the influx of cults and reform those carried over from pre-Christian practices and also

could infer a direct response to the expansion of the roles of relics, especially in concern to

communities lacking them.22 Carolingian reforms concerning relics raised to meet the expanding

roles especially in connection to secular roles, exclusively the re-invoked Item Placuit of the 5th

Council of Carthage. Under this individual reform was the implementation that all altars must

contain relics, swearing oaths on relics in both secular and ecclesiastic settings, and encouraged

pilgrimage to relics and tombs was highly encouraged.23 There is an accepted scholarship that

18
Ibid., 40.
19
Geary, Furta Sacra.
20
Ibid.
21
Ibid., 25.
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid., 18.
STEALING THE SACRED 10

Charlemagne was very hands on in the production and management of relics even calling out

extortionist approach of translations and approval by bishop or princes for all translations.24

Sermons and liturgy reveal that ecclesiastic competition was rampant and intense tensions

between dioceses, chiefly those that had “obtained” a relic.25 Geary goes so far as to argue that

saints saved the Western political society by fulfilling roles in the social and political system that

could not be met and that saints succeeded where the Carolingians couldn’t until the rediscovery

in the late medieval ages. That saints provided communities with a sense of identity, protection

and economic stability to the religious institutions, which does undermine the prevailing

ideology behind the theft of relics.26 This is where the emerging hagiography becomes vitally

important to the discussion concerning relics, the veneration and theft of relics. The primary

focus of a relic was protection and reflection of a community and the liturgy evolved to reflect

this burgeoning ideology.

Translationes often held a mirror to the consensus of the community, real or perceived

social conventions by the author, as a means to establish claims of spiritual protection and

blessing for a particular ecclesiastic (or later secular) communities through their values and

social needs.27 Translationes are not limited to one particular type of document but are present

over a wide variety of hagiographic traditions. Reconstructing patterns of theft based on

hagiography is notoriously problematic as Vitae are more literary that biographical, meant to

display the miraculous and universal sanctity over historical accuracy, where Translationes are a

hybrid form.28 Evolved from late classical forms often embedded in Vitae and Passiones,

24
Ibid., 41.
25
Geary, Furta Sacra.
26
Geary, Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages.
27
Geary, Furta Sacra, 10.
28
Ibid., 11.
STEALING THE SACRED 11

especially in attempt to bridge miracles pre-death and post-death, translationes were slim in

format.29 During the 9th through 11th Century there was a trend towards more elaborate and fuller

texts, even emerging as independent forms solely focused on the translation of a saint, which

may be attributed to the rising cult of relics that will be addressed later in the paper.

Translationes were more intimately concerned with the physical remains of saints that

their lives or virtues and the testimonia of their relic’s powers.30 Contrary to Geary’s earlier

assertion it seems that translationes were often closely connected with the memory of a

particular church dedication celebrating the translation with succeeded miracles and the liturgical

or secular procession of which the work was commissioned. Translations were often filled with

extreme pomp and circumstance, with very little frivolity, despite translationes depictions of the

“joyous” crowds that often met the saint on their travel to their new home.31 Because of the

importance of the dates attached to the arrival of a saint or relic and the liturgical celebration

attached, translations have been noted since the earliest historical calendars.32 However even

these must not be taken at face value, as many were written years, even centuries, after the

translation or explicitly to establish a connection to an (impossibly) remote monastery to the

saint in attempts to garner ecclesiastic patronage.33 Just as importantly when assessing these

sources is that the audience of such texts must not be forgotten as they were public pieces meant

for liturgical recitation of a feast of the saint or relic, which lends a particular problem when

trying to address the issue of theft within such works.34 Authors may try to mitigate the

dishonestly surrounding the acquisition by the theft becoming a gift rather than theft, especially

29
Ibid.
30
Ibid.
31
Geary, Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages, 109.
32
Geary, Furta Sacra, 12.
33
Ibid., 13.
34
Ibid.
STEALING THE SACRED 12

after the Carolingian reforms surrounding translation regulations in the late 9th Century.35 On the

contrary, later works may try to sensationalize a perfectly legal acquisition by insinuating theft to

disguise blatant attempts at fundraising and laity manipulation.36

Hallmarks of a “theft” translation often revolves around a clerical soul, sometimes with a

predisposition towards the saint in question, that travels to the saint’s relic or resting place on a

pilgrimage. The cleric, often a monk as they tended to be the authors of such liturgy, arrives

during a time of crisis or destruction for the church housing the relic. Sometimes a third person

(often a minority of persecution outside the culture such as a Greek, Turk, Moor, etc.) informs

the follower about the saint’s life and miracles, especially those after death through their relic. At

which time the saint is extolled through their virtues and miracles occur while the author is

present. Sometimes this informant is a clerical figure that lends credibility to the miracle, often a

bishop or archbishop of unnamed origin especially if translation is being worked as a gift rather

than a theft, who then gives permission to “save” the relic through translation. Otherwise the

figure is overwhelmed with how poorly a saint is being treated, or sometimes even at the appeal

of the saint through a vision, and the relic is saved and taken to a new church often with

difficulties along the path, where it is always met with “joyous” crowds.37 Obviously difficulties

immediately arise in that the author is clearly attempting to legitimize his account by

exaggerating the circumstances and assuming a propagandist approach to merging the arrival of a

new saint with the “historic memory” of the relic.38 But most translation texts follow this pattern,

the search, miracles upon discovery, difficulties moving it and the joyful reception.39 So prolific

35
Geary, Furta Sacra.
36
Ibid.
37
Ibid.
38
Ibid.
39
Ibid., 12.
STEALING THE SACRED 13

was this format that some texts appropriated theft trademarks in order to sensationalize and draw

in pilgrimage to an otherwise normal and local saint translation. These occurrences were rare but

widely investigates within the possibility of actuality that can’t be ignored. However, while

retaining a simple universal format, translation texts are able to illuminate not just the evolution

of the text but the very cults surrounding the relics through the variations on this simple format.

Even here, thieves begin to make an appearance. Originally marginal characters in

hagiography, they appear in a wide varieties of form. From noble merchants that stumbled across

the ware, to grave robbers taken over by sin and avarice, looking to make a profit.40 The prolific

use of the noble merchant motif seems to suggest, according to Geary, that there is the potential

relic theft and sale may have started with bishops and abbots before eventually moving to kings

and nobility with the emergence of personal relics and patronage of saints.41 There is

considerable evidence to support this theory, especially when addressing the relic trade between

Rome and the Frankish kingdom of the 9th Century. Believed to have organized periodic

caravans out of Italy or Spain and made the rounds of monastic settlements plying relics stolen

from different areas of Rome each time.42 Could explain the literary presence of “traveling”

monks, often in pairs which often brings an unnamed saints relic’s and either die or travel “back

to Rome” and are never heard from again.43 The majority of relic venders acted like modern day

art agents, buying them from impoverished clerical communities or direct theft from poorly

guarded churches and selling them at high profit.44 This tactic is also believed to have been

employed by enterprising merchants, as thieves are classically depicted to be in company with

40
Ibid., 44.
41
Ibid.
42
Geary, Furta Sacra.
43
Ibid.
44
Lindholm, “Authenticity, Anthropology, and the Sacred.”
STEALING THE SACRED 14

merchants which may be actual thieves or an alluded duality of said merchant’s wares – almost a

back door/ black market for relics. Like hermits and pilgrims, the relic merchants filled an

ecclesiastic role during an ill-documented crossing point between societies, fluid and clandestine

in nature, and they provided a service critical to the general relic needs of the age.45

This duality is exemplified in the more famous relic monger, Deusdona, a 9th Century

deacon at the head of a large and highly organized group of relic merchant who supplied Einhard

for one of the more famous translations of St. Peter and St. Marcellinus.46 Deusdona held all of

the hallmarks of a relic-monger, living next to an abandoned catacombs and wide spread access

to great men on “monastic business” and widely documented interactions with the upper clergy.47

Other notorious relic merchants are men such as Felix (Deusdona’s direct competition) who has

been recorded selling some of the exact saints as Deusdona. In the tales, both men appear they

openly admit to stealing the relic but the cleric still buys the body and even goes so far to aid the

“merchant” escape the pursuing monastic community from which the relic was stolen.48 High

clergy were not spared as Archbishop Otgarius of Mainz was also alluded to dabbling in the

buying and selling of relics. Even lesser clergy like Theotmar the Monk, exemplify the relic trade

between Roman and Frankish communities.49 The English shared (if not exceeded) the Frankish

obsession for relics, but sources are rare so inferences at the historical presences are speculative

at best. Especially when considering the tracts and vitas explaining their trade and movements

were often attempts to disprove another church’s claim to the relics while bolstering their own.

What can be seen is an English presence of relic thieves are often described as “men from across

45
Burns and J., “Relic Vendors, Barefoot Friars, and Spanish Muslims.”
46
Geary, Furta Sacra, 48.
47
Ibid., 50.
48
Ibid., 49.
49
Geary, Furta Sacra.
STEALING THE SACRED 15

the sea” and its ready acceptance of usage alludes to a high number of Englishmen on the

continent looking for relics.50

There is no denying there was an economic, commercial and religious spheres were

intertwined expressly in concern to sourcing relics for both individuals and communities. There

were obviously very few legal channels to which a merchant or monk could procure their wares.

It is not strenuous to conclude that many men involved in the relic trade were embezzlers at best,

grave robbers and thieves at worst. From a merchant or relic monger’s point of view relics were

ideal wares. They were small, easily transported, untraceable, minimal risks- even if genuine, a

luxury item with a high return and impossibly hard to verify unless the relic proved itself through

miracles which enabled double selling of saints if the monger was talented enough and played up

the lack of general communication. The issue of authentication centers on the differences

between medieval and modern cognizance. Duplicity and even replication of the same relics

could run into the double digits, medieval believers had an indisputable verification of relics

through the offices of the Holy See, which combed records of the history of the relic and of the

miracles associated with it in order to provide unquestionable validation and warring claims

could be settled by Papal intervention.51 In some cases vendors selling suspect relics could be

subjected to official ordeals, such as submersion of the relic in boiling water in order to test their

veracity.52 However even in the official papal records there were multiple records of multiple

saints, so the risk for many merchants was low and rewards were too tempting to turn most away.

From an ecclesiastic or secular consumer argument relics could soothe potential political

tensions, especially at a noble level. Discovery or acquisition of relics led to a rise in donation

50
Ibid., 51.
51
Lindholm, “Authenticity, Anthropology, and the Sacred.”
52
Ibid.
STEALING THE SACRED 16

and pilgrimage and the economic result from such events were always beneficial even if

increased tensions between communities. But mainly the prestige of both Rome and the recipient

of the relic widely increase with each acquisition. With a beneficial relationship on both sides of

the trade it is predictable that the religious community crafted a way to legitimize and excuse the

moral abhorrence to the act. Obviously the more the procurer was driven by devotion or holy

guidance, as opposed to greed and avarice, which allowed the sin to be easily forgiven.

Especially if the theft never existed. Even now there is a layer of contrdictionary evidence and

warring opinions within the scholastic community that suggests that the practice of theft, buying,

selling and the importance of relics will be up for scholastic interpretation in the foreseeable

future. With the questions this study set out to answer, at least 4 more have taken its place, but

what is that but the true spirit of research and history.

STEALING THE SACRED 17

Works Cited

Burns, Robert I., and S. J. “Relic Vendors, Barefoot Friars, and Spanish Muslims: Reflections on
Medieval Economic and Religious History. A Review Article.” Comparative Studies in
Society and History 24, no. 1 (January 1, 1982): 153–63.
Bynum, Caroline Walker, and Paula Gerson. “Body-Part Reliquaries and Body Parts in the
Middle Ages.” Gesta 36, no. 1 (January 1, 1997): 3–7. doi:10.2307/767274.
Carragáin, Tomás Ó. “The Architectural Setting of the Cult of Relics in Early Medieval Ireland.”
The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 133, no. ArticleType: research-
article / Full publication date: 2003 / Copyright © 2003 Royal Society of Antiquaries of
Ireland (January 1, 2003): 130–76.
Geary, Patrick J. Furta Sacra: Thefts of Relics in the Central Middle Ages, 1990.
———. Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages, 1994.
Hahn, Cynthia. “The Voices of the Saints: Speaking Reliquaries.” Gesta 36, no. 1 (January 1,
1997): 20–31. doi:10.2307/767276.
Lindholm, Charles. “Authenticity, Anthropology, and the Sacred.” Anthropological Quarterly 75,
no. 2 (April 1, 2002): 331–38.
STEALING THE SACRED 18

Bibliography

Burns, Robert I., and S. J. “Relic Vendors, Barefoot Friars, and Spanish Muslims: Reflections on
Medieval Economic and Religious History. A Review Article.” Comparative Studies in
Society and History 24, no. 1 (January 1, 1982): 153–63.
Bynum, Caroline Walker, and Paula Gerson. “Body-Part Reliquaries and Body Parts in the
Middle Ages.” Gesta 36, no. 1 (January 1, 1997): 3–7. doi:10.2307/767274.
Carragáin, Tomás Ó. “The Architectural Setting of the Cult of Relics in Early Medieval Ireland.”
The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 133, no. ArticleType: research-
article / Full publication date: 2003 / Copyright © 2003 Royal Society of Antiquaries of
Ireland (January 1, 2003): 130–76.
Clark, Anne L. “Guardians of the Sacred: The Nuns of Soissons and the Slipper of the Virgin
Mary.” Church History 76, no. 4 (December 1, 2007): 724–49.
Connors, Michael. “Review.” Church History 48, no. 4 (December 1, 1979): 449.
doi:10.2307/3164538.
FOSKOLOU, VASSILIKI A. “Mary Magdalene between East and West: Cult and Image, Relics
and Politics in the Late Thirteenth-Century Eastern Mediterranean.” Dumbarton Oaks
Papers 65/66, no. ArticleType: research-article / Full publication date: 2011–2012 /
Copyright © 2011 Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University (January 1, 2011):
271–96.
Geary, Patrick J. Furta Sacra: Thefts of Relics in the Central Middle Ages, 1990.
———. Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages, 1994.
Hahn, Cynthia. “The Voices of the Saints: Speaking Reliquaries.” Gesta 36, no. 1 (January 1,
1997): 20–31. doi:10.2307/767276.
Kieckhefer, Richard. “Review.” The Journal of Religion 76, no. 3 (July 1, 1996): 474–75.
Lawrence, C. H. “Review.” The English Historical Review 95, no. 375 (April 1, 1980): 402.
Lindholm, Charles. “Authenticity, Anthropology, and the Sacred.” Anthropological Quarterly
75, no. 2 (April 1, 2002): 331–38.
Lucas, A. T. “The Social Role of Relics and Reliquaries in Ancient Ireland.” The Journal of the
Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 116, no. ArticleType: research-article / Full
publication date: 1986 / Copyright © 1986 Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland
(January 1, 1986): 5–37.
McCulloh, John M. “Review.” The American Historical Review 84, no. 1 (February 1, 1979):
134–35. doi:10.2307/1855699.
Trainor, Kevin. “Review.” Numen 40, no. 2 (May 1, 1993): 202–3. doi:10.2307/3270212.
Witty, Francis J. “Review.” The Journal of Library History (1974-1987) 15, no. 1 (January 1,
1980): 97–98.