Yesterday, Wednesday, The French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP) organised a press conference to give an update on the discoveries at Notre-Dame.
La Tribune de l’Art was not invited to the conference and found out about it via a tweet from this institution. It’s true that this is an issue we hardly talk about, so they probably didn’t think about it.... Unless, more likely, they feared we would ask indiscreet questions about the failure to continue excavating the rood screen in the choir (see article)? Or about the destruction caused by the need to speed up work (see article)?
-
- 1. One of the two lead sarcophagi found in the excavations of the transept crossing of
of Notre-Dame, one of which is believed to contain the remains of Joachim du Bellay
Photo: Didier Rykner (25 March 2022) - See the image in its page
Be that as it may, INRAP has come up with an innocuous subject that is causing quite a stir in the press: the possible discovery of Joachim du Bellay’s coffin (ill. 1)! A fragile hypothesis that has become for many an absolute certainty, triggering a passion that is not far removed from fetishism.
Because even if this were the case (and once again, it’s far from certain, as the scientists admit), what would be the real point? Proving that Joachim du Bellay is dead? There were a few clues to that effect.
Proving that he was a horseman (he wasn’t the only one at the time)? That he died of what we thought? That he was buried in the cathedral (not where he was found, but that’s a detail of course)? No, because it was these criteria that led us to believe that, unless we were mistaken, it could probably be possibly the body of Joachim du Bellay.
So let’s assume for a moment that this information is correct and that it is indeed him. What would that tell us? What is the origin of this rage to remove history’s famous figures from their final resting place [1]? The cemeteries are full of them. That this might be of interest to historians in order to deduce some lessons from the study of the body, why not [2], but this is about something quite different. We’re not far from false science, where hypotheses become certainties and facts no longer matter.
-
- . Two fragments of sculptures from the rood screen of Notre-Dame (early 13th century) found during excavations of the transept crossing
Photo: Didier Rykner - See the image in its page
On the other hand, it will not be possible to prove another hypothesis widely shared by archaeologists and historians, that of the presence of the rest of the rood screen (ill. 2), not yet discovered, in the unexcavated areas on the choir side. The 13th-century sculptures will remain buried, so as not to upset the President of the Republic, who has called for the cathedral to be "reconstructed" by 2024. A "reconstruction" - in reality, of course, a restoration - which will not in fact be completed on 8 December, but is expected to continue until 2030.
As we have written and said on several occasions, there is nothing to prevent the archaeological excavations from continuing for a few months, moving the altar temporarily towards the nave and closing off the area to visitors, who would nevertheless be able to follow the progress of the research behind transparent partitions.
To educate visitors by showing them an archaeological site in a religious building, to find extraordinary sculptures that would enrich France’s heritage? As the previous minister explained: "it’s not a subject"! Better to distract the French with the alleged remains of Joachim du Bellay.
The poet and the rood screen. It might have made a nice fable for La Fontaine.