JANUARIUS
296
JANUARIUS
usually not less than two minutes or more than an
hour, the mass is gradually seen to detach itself from
the sides of the phial, to become liquid and of a more
or less ruby tint, and in some instances to froth and
bubble up, increasing in volume. The officiant then
announces, "II miracolo e fatto", aTe Deum is sung,
and the reliquary containing the liquefied blood is
brought to the altar rail that the faithful may venerate
it by kissing the containing vessel. Rarely has the
liquefaction failed to take place in the expositions of
May or September, but in that of 16 Dec. the mass
remains solid more frequently than not.
It is of course natural that those who are reluctant to admit the supernatural character of the phenom- enon should regard the liquefaction as simply due to the effects of heat. There are, they urge, certain substances (e. g. a mixture of spermaceti and ether) which have a very low boiling point. The heat pro- duced by the hands of the officiant, the pressing throng of spectators, the lights on the altar, and in particular the candle formerly held close to the reli- quary to enable the people to see that the mass is opaque, combine to raise the temperature of the air sufficiently to melt the substance in the phial — a sub- stance which is assumed to be l_>lood, but which no one has ever analysed. Further, ever since the early years of the eighteenth century, sceptical scientists, by using certain cnemical preparations, have recon- structed the miracle with more or less of success ; that is to say, they have been able to exhibit some red substance which, though at first apparently solid, melted after an interval without any direct applica- tion of heat. None the less, it may be said with absolute confidence that the theory of heat affords no adequate explanation of the phenomena observed.
For more than a century careful observations of the temperature of the air in the neighbourhood of the relic have been made on these occasions and the records have been kept. It is certain from the scien- tific memoirs of Professors Fergola, Punzo, and Spe- rindeo that there is no direct relation between the temperature, and the time and manner of the lique- faction. Often when the thermometer has stood at 77° Fahrenheit or even higher, liquefaction has been delayed for as much as twenty or even forty minutes, while on the other hand the contents of the phial have sometimes liquefied in considerably less time than this when the thermometer remained as low as 60° or 65°. Moreover, the heat theory by no means accounts for another more remarkable fact observed for quite two hundred years past. The mass in melting commonly increases in volume, but when it solidifies again it does not necessarily return to its original bulk. Sometimes the whole phial is seen to be occupied, at other times hardly more than half. This has led a Neapolitan scientist of modern times. Professor Al- bini, to suggest a new physical theory derived from observing the behaviour of a viscous fluid such as partly congealed honey. He conjectures that the unknown substance in the phial consists of some highly divided solid matter which is partly held in suspension by a disproportionately small quantity of liquid. When at rest, the liquicl sinks to the bottom of the phial, while the solid particles form a .sort of crust not easily displaced when the vessel is turned upside down. This cohesion is however overcome by repeated movements, such as those that the reliquary experiences when the moment of liquefaction is im- patiently waited for. Further, such a viscous fluid easily cakes upon the walls of the containing vessel, and admits large air bubbles which cause the decep- tive appearance of a change of volume.
Professor Albini claims to have reproduced all the phenomena with a compound made of powdered chocolate and the serum of milk. On the other hand, those who have studied closely the process of lique- faction of the contents of the |)hial declare that such
an explanation is absolutely impossible. Moreover,
there seem to be well-attested instances of lique-
faction taking place both in the case of this and other
similar relics of blood, when the reliquary has been
standing by itself without any movement whatsoever.
Accordingly, the suggestion has also been made (see Di Pace, " Ipotesi scientifica sulla Liquefazione ", etc., Naples, 1905) that the phenomenon is due to some form of psychic force. The concentration of thought and will of the expectant crowd and specially of the "aunts of St. Januarius" are held to be cajjable of producing a physical effect. Against this, however, must be set the fact that the liquefaction has some- times taken place quite unexpectedly and in the presence of very few spectators.
Probably the most serious difficulty against the miraculous character of the phenomenon is derived from the circumstance that the same liquefaction takes place in the case of other relics, nearly all pre- servetl in the neighbourhood of Naples, or of Neapoli- tan origin. These include relics which are affirmed to be the blood of St. John the Baptist, of St. Stephen the first martyr, of St. Pantaleone, of St. Patricia, of St. Nicholas of Tolentino, of St. Aloysius Gonzaga, and others. In the case of the alleged liquefaction of the so-called "Milk of Our Lady" (see Putignani, S.J., "De Redivivo Sanguine S. Januarii", Naples, 1723, I, 90) or of the fat of St. Thomas Aquinas (see Magnoni Valenti, "Discorso istorico" 1772, 47) we have probably a pure fiction, but the phials tradi- tionally associated with the names of St. John the Baptist, St. Stephen, and St. Pantaleone undoubtedly still exhibit on the respective feast days of these saints phenomena exactly analogous to those shown in the case of the more famous relic of St. Januarius. Fur- ther, it is asserted by eyewitnesses of scientific credit and high respectability that a block of basalt at Pozzuoli, reputed to bear traces of the blood of St. Januarius, grows vividly red for a short time in May and September at the hour when the miracle of the liquefaction takes place in Naples (see Cavene, "C^le- bre Miracle de S. Janvier", 1909, 277-300).
Three other points attested by recent investigators seem worthy of special note. (1) It now appears that the first certain record of the liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius dates from 1389 (see de Blasiis, " Chronicon Siculum incerti auctoris ", Naples, 1887, 85), and not from 1456, as formerly supposed.
(2) In 1902 Professor Sperindeo was allowed to pass a ray of light through the upper part of the phial dur- ing liquefaction and examine this beam spectroscop- ically. The experiment yielded the distinctive lines of the spectrum of blood. This, however, only proves that there are at any rate traces of blood in the contents of the phial (see Cavene, " Le C^lebre Mira- cle", 262-275).
(3) Most remarkable of all, the apparent variation in the volume of the relic led in 1902 and 1904 to a series of experiments in the course of which the whole reliquary was weighed in a very accurate balance. It was found that the weight was not constant any more than the volume, and that the W(-ight of the reliquary when the blood filled the whole cavity of the phial exceeded, by 26 grammes, the weight when the phial seemed but half full. This very large difference ren- ders it impossible to believe that such a substantial variation in weight can be merely due to an error of observation. We are forced to accept the fact that, contrary to all known laws, a change goes on in the contents of this hermetically sealeil vessel which makes them heavier and lighter in a ratio roughly, but not exactlv, proportional to their apparent bulk (Cavene, 333-39). The reality of the miracle of St. januarius has repeatedly been made the subject of controversy. It has had much to do with many conversions to Catholicism, notably with that of the elder Herder. Unfortvmately, however, allegations
