This is a post I made for a European travel forum (Fodor's) where this
limited underground tour is popular.
And I figured I'd throw it out there here for whatever wraith it will
bring:-).
Regards, Walter
I believe that this is the tomb of St. Peter and that his bones were
found there.
There is no rock solid evidence to support this though, if there were
you would be reading about it from some scholar with alot of letters
after their name instead of a poorly written post on Usenet:-).
***I Want You Only To Rely On The FACTS From The Pagan Writers And The
Excavation Reports.***
But the theory/belief/legend/whatever that Peter was killed and buried
at Rome's Vatican Hill is up too you to believe or disbelieve that
possibility.
No one should be 100% convinced nor can anyone say that it's also 100%
not true IMO that would show extreme bias. Instead go into this at 50/50
use logic and common sense without bias.
If you believe that there was a Divine Saint called Peter or just an
historical person named Peter remember one thing...he had to die and be
buried somewhere!
And there is factual archaeological evidence that ~90yrs after his
*presumed death and burial in Rome* the Christians marked (shrine
complex) and worshipped this particular grave.
The grave's walls were also twice repaired *in* that ~90yr timespan
(shored-up with bricks).
I am an Atheist so I have no religious or faith-based bias to this site,
I am just a Rome ancient history buff and this site is part of that
history.
I personally believe there was an historical Jesus who started a very
small cult following that was still part of Judaism.
This following grew after his death within the Jewish communities and
~20yrs later it caused a religious conflict in the Jewish community in
Rome and that's where we start.
EARLY CHRISTIANS IN ROME, NERO'S FIRE AND PERSECUTION (PART 1)
SUETONIUS 'CLAUDIUS' (~49/50AD)
"Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of
Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome".
Chrestus was a common name then but most scholars believe it should be
Christus (Christ) and it was just ***misinterpreted and the Jews are
likely fighting over the Messiah claim made by the Jewish followers of
Jesus.
So we have a Pagan writer with access to the Imperial Archives who wrote
'Lives of Ceasars' (De Vita Caesarum) that places Christians in Rome
roughly halfway between the death of Jesus and the 64AD Fire.
In 64AD we have the 'Great Fire of Rome' during Emperor Nero's reign.
He needs a scapegoat when rumors start that he had ordered the fire set
to clear away a large tract of land in order to vastly expand his palace
(which he does).
Nobody Pagan or Jewish cares about this very small minority cult, now
add to that the fact that the fire started in the small Jewish section
~SE of the Circus Maximus.
These early Christians are mostly/all Jews and would also have to live
in the Jewish areas within Rome.
SUETONIUS 'NERO'
Suetonius has an extreme bias when writing about Nero and other
Emperors.
Suetonius doesn't tie the Christians and the Fire together as he places
100% of the blame on Nero.
But he does record the Christian persecution by Nero.
"During his reign many abuses were severely punished and
putdown...[snip]
[45] Punishment was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to
a new and mischievous superstition."
TACITUS on the Fire and the Christians;
"But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the
propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the
conflagration was the result of an order.
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and
inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their
abominations, called Christians by the populace.
Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme
penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our
procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus
checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first
source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and
shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become
popular.
Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then,
upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much
of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind." [SNIP]
Ok so now we have 2 Pagan sources for a Christian persecution.
Tacitus who was a child in Rome at the time of the Fire and Suetonius
who was born 5yrs after the Fire.
Both have access to texts and/or archives of this recent period and
possibly actual 1st hand survivor accounts esp Tacitus but also
Suetonius who went to Rome to be educated as a young man within 25yrs of
the Fire, he was also very good friends with 'Pliny the Younger'.
Now to place the city's fire refuges at the Circus where St. Peter was
allegedly killed.
We have Nero's Imperial Gardens, a Circus (a chariot racetrack on the
fringe of the Gardens) and the Vatican Hill which at this time is a
desolate snake infested area used as a cemetary for the poor with simple
in-ground burials.
So Gardens [G], Circus (), Vatican Hill /\ [G]()/\ all alongside each
other.
TACITUS "To relieve the unhappy people, wandering in distress without a
place of shelter, he opened the field of Mars, as also the magnificent
buildings raised by Agrippa, and even his own *Imperial Gardens*.
He ordered a number of sheds to be thrown up with all possible despatch,
for the use of the populace.
Household utensils and all kinds of necessary implements were brought
from Ostia, and other cities in the neighbourhood.
The price of grain was reduced to three sesterces.
For acts like these, munificent and well timed, Nero might hope for are
turn of popular favour."
Nero actually did a good job for the people after the Fire and his
Gardens are just one location for the burnt-out refuges.
But this location has an added bonus, it has a Circus were the 'refuge
mob' can be entertained with death which they enjoy dearly.
In the Circus Maximus (which burnt down in the fire) more than chariot
races would take place, everything that the future Colosseum would have
was also done in the Circus (gladiators, animal fights, executions,
etc).
So killing Christians as criminals in Nero's Circus before the crowds
would be 'just another day at the races'.
And below is the rest of Tacitus' statement that I [Snipped] from above.
"Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished,
or were *Nailed to Crosses*, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to
serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.
Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was *Exhibiting A Show
In The Circus*, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a
charioteer or stood aloft on a car.
Hence, even for criminals (Christians) who deserved extreme and
exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was
not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty,
that they were being destroyed."
So we have proof by a Pagan source who was alive and lived in Rome at
that time although not likely an actual eyewitness to the fact that
Christians were killed in Nero's Circus.
But his writings will be read by others who lived thru this era and he
has absolutely no reason to lie about it.
Now we have as fact this event took place with a *belief* that one of
the Christians killed was St. Peter who was buried in a simple earth
grave just outside this Circus.
From the spina (center barrier of the racetrack (|) ) where his and
other crucifixions would have taken place a high school outfielder could
throw a baseball from there to Peter's grave if the Basilica wasn't in
the way.
Bribing the guards for a body wasn't unheard of or later retriving the
body from a mass burial pit is also possible.
If either was done burying the body ASAP would be a must to avoid
detection and very likely arrest and a place in the next day's
entertainment.
Also the Romans were good about allowing the Jews to bury their dead the
same day as their crucifixion in their homeland but I don't know if this
was the case here?
Anyway this is probably the worst location (malaria, snakes, barren
wasteland) outside of the City's Walls to *claim* that this is the grave
of your religious leader and Apostle of Jesus unless there was a very
good reason to make that claim?
----------------------------------------------
*** Christus to Chrestus;
Soldier at the scene could have changed it thinking the Jews he is
asking have mispronounced the common name Chrestus? Or as the report
moves up the chain of command orally it eventually gets written down to
present to the Emperor, then into an official decree and then into the
archives?
With a possibility of flipping back and forth between Greek and Latin
both orally and written?
--------------------------------------------
PETER IN ROME(?) PART 2
"Jesus was a marginal Jew leading a marginal movement in a marginal
province of a vast Roman empire.
The wonder is that any learned Jew or pagan would have known or
referred to him at all in the first or second centuries"
Now what written proof should we expect from this small minority
religion in Rome that has an even smaller break-away cult following with
regards to St. Peter?
Even the earliest written proof that there was a *single* Gospel written
(out of many) is ~125AD and that small parchment piece of St. John's
Gospel would fit in the palm of your hand.
Also consider the bibical claim that Peter had escaped Roman
imprisonment in Jerusaleum he is very possibly a fugitive from Roman
authority and keeping a very low profile in Rome.
To use the Hippie-era term "He went underground".
Of course I don't believe that an Angel aided in the escape but it's
possible that he was a wanted man who fled that city to avoid arrest and
the story was embellished by later NT writers?
St. Peter had to die somewhere and the early Christians claimed it was
in Rome vs anywhere else.
They also claim an *exact* location and timeframe (Nero's Circus during
Nero's persecution).
IMO if all the evidence and tradition was for a non-religious historic
figure we would very likely be claiming we found where this event had
taken place.
But there is often a stigma attached to believing in any bibical site
even if based only on non-bias information and evidence.
IME with a couple of 'Born Again' Christians they wouldn't even look at
any evidence based possibly on their bias against the Catholic Church.
In 'History/Archaeological' Newsgroups Atheists (like myself) or those
who don't believe in organized religion refused to look at any evidence
as their mind was already made-up that it could not have happened
<period>.
But to their credit actually putting Peter in Rome is a tough sell based
on the lack of evidence.
Here one must look at what some scant written evidence hints at,
Christian tradition and if it sounds plausable to you.
This is the best we can do and remember he had to be somewhere.
In St. Peter's First Epistle the end reads:
"The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you:
and so doth my son Mark" (5:13).
The real Babylon is in ruins and it's a fact that early Christians
referred to Rome as Babylon.
Mark is St. Mark who is Peter's scribe (Peter is likely illiterate) and
"son" is just a term of endearment (Mark is younger) or perhaps they are
posing as father and son to avoid suspicion?
There is some hinted evidence here mostly based on early Christian
writings but here I am only concerned with anything written before
~154AD.
Because by then the 'Red Wall' and the 'Trophy of Gaius' had been built
over the alleged St. Peter's grave and Christians have now marked this
grave with a large shrine and wall that is visible in sections today
which is the archaeological proof. (If they had marked the grave before
that with anything it would have been removed or destroyed when the
Shrine was constructed).
In these letters or writings there would be no reason to mention St.
Peter's martyrdom and burial place *if* it was common knowledge to all
parties concerned.
(Like; On the way to Houston I am stopping in Dallas to visit 'Dealey
Plaza'. I would not have to explain why to an American of my
generation.)
www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm
(Section 'Activity and death in Rome; burial-place') Use the website if
you're interested, as it has Links to the actual later passages. The
commentary though is Catholic so with a religious bias.
THE TOMB OF ST. PETER(?) PART 3
Use this website for the long detailed excavation report with diagrams.
www.saintpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/JW/TheBonesofStPeter-1.htm OR
http://tinyurl.com/tbosp
You can start at Section 3 or 4 if you like.
But 1st you have to know the places that they talk about (Red Wall,
Trophy of Giaus, Wall G, etc) and these websites have photos, videos,
diagrams and info.
So start here, the 1st and the 3rd website mainly deals with what this
post is about.
A couple of things are wrong IMO but they are just minor points. (1)
www.culturaltravelguide.com/saint-peters-basilica-vatican-necropolis OR
http://tinyurl.com/8kkcf77 (2)
www.culturaltravelguide.com/roman-mausoleums-saint-peters-basilica OR
http://tinyurl.com/8qsk8uy (3)
www.culturaltravelguide.com/real-tomb-saint-peter-under-saint-peters-basilica
OR
http://tinyurl.com/8copxlv
Also be sure to watch the 4min video on the grave in Part 3.
It's very good but I don't know about the timeline they use
'100AD-145AD'.
I could be wrong but I haven't come across any actual dates for the 1st
(and 2nd) 'low wall' that shored-up the grave so it might be pre-100AD.
Also 145AD would be the earliest, the time-span is 145AD-161AD which is
why I use ~154AD, it splits the difference plus it's 90yrs after 64AD.
The official excavation report is very long and detailed so I'd like to
just summarize the timeline and locations from the original grave to the
bones being placed in the 'Graffiti Wall' while only using the facts.
This hopefully even though I'm a terrible writer will make it easier for
anyone that is interested in this site.
The timeline will be from the ~64AD burial to an unknown date between
~250AD when roughly the 'Graffiti Wall' was added and Constantine build
the 1st St. Peter's Basilica (319-322AD).
Somewhere in that timeframe an elderly man's bones that were originally
in that earth grave (soil samples are an exact match) were placed into a
marble-lined repository (niche) in the Graffiti Wall.
The niche was then plastered over like the Wall and hidden with no
plaque or inscription marking this new grave/tomb location.
1st go here for a diagram of the 'Red Wall Complex [Scroll-down to> 8.
Plan of the second-century red wall complex]
www.saintpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/JW/TheBonesofStPeter-6.htm OR
http://tinyurl.com/dotrwc
Now I am only interested in the enclosed Courtyard (~26ft x 12ft).
Unlike the other areas in this complex its purpose is a Fact.
You have a 1stC grave with a large Shrine (Trophy of Gaius) build over
it, the floor is tiled and the area is enclosed by a high wall and
*possibly* a roof.
Christians meet in each others homes for services and this is attested
too by a Pagan letter to an Emperor pre-dating this Complex.
[A Theory of Mine?] This complex is *very likely* the 1st structure
build where Rome's Christians worshipped together making it the 1st
Church in Rome and possibly the 1st in the Christian World?
Now go to this model of the Shrine and Wall
www.culturaltravelguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/model-rotated-trophy.jpg
OR
http://tinyurl.com/gtrophy
Now in the later half of the 1stC none of those structures are there and
that 1stC groundlevel is maybe a foot or so beneath the Shrine.
We have proof that this was an area for simple in-ground poor-person's
graves with likely just some large bricktiles leaning against each other
to form an inverted V over the length of the grave marking it. This is
very common.
The Fact is nearby graves basically right next to our grave of interest
bricktiles were found from Emperor Vespasian's era (69-79AD) and also a
small oil lamp from the same era.
So it's possible now to date our grave of interest to the later half of
the 1stC based on the surrounding evidence and 64AD fits into that
timeframe.
Now from that time to the Red Wall and Shrine construction (~154AD) this
simple earthen grave had been shored-up twice at different times over
the decades with a low brick wall.
These fixes were needed due to the ground level rising because it's on a
hillside slope with soil erosion from the rain.
So the Fact is that someone or somepersons are maintaining this
gravesite. Not unusual but worth noting.
[CLAIM, not fact] In the 'Liber Pontificalis' (Book of Popes) it's
stated that Pope Anacletus built an Oratory over this grave ~90AD?
Now ~154AD the Christians have enjoyed a few decades of realitive peace
in Rome, Christianity is still illegal but they are basically being left
alone.
Like a "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy.
And it seems they are now confident enough to built this walled-in
courtyard with a shrine over this humble grave.
The shrine isn't square to the grave because this isn't a wide open
space any more, large above-ground Pagan tombs have encroached on this
area, so they must square-off with them to form this rectangular
couryard.
But in the base/floor of this Shrine there is a stone inset trapdoor
(for want of a better word) that outlines the offset grave exactly [\\]
by 11deg.
So the Fact is the Shrine is directly related to the grave below without
a doubt.
~250AD the Red Wall develops a long vertical crack right next to the
Shrine, to save the wall from collapse and shrine damage a short
buttress wall is built to support the Red Wall ___||___ .
This buttress wall is known to us as the 'Graffiti Wall' and it is about
to make history!
Now either when it was 1st built or in the timespan leading up to
Constantine (or by possibly Constantine himself but very unlikely) there
was a marble-lined repository/niche (3.5ft x 1ft x 10in) built into this
brick Wall.
This niche was then plastered over just like the bricks in both the Red
Wall and this Wall, it's now completely hidden from sight!
This shows the added 'Graffiti Wall' and its niche. That person in the
model throw's off the scale though, see how the shrine's columns support
a shelf, that shelf is 6ft high from the base of the shrine.
www.culturaltravelguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/model-grafitti-wall-north.jpg
OR
http://tinyurl.com/mgwnj
Now somewhere in this timeframe the grave is dug-up and not refilled.
A man's skeleton is removed with a few animal bones which were either in
the soil of the original grave or any number of reasons because of this
location (like erosion).
But that isn't important, what is important is that the skeleton they
removed is from 1 *single* person, a robust man, ~5'7" and ~60-70yrs
old.
Not all the bones in this skeleton are accounted for but all sections of
the body are represented to some degree *except* both ankle and foot
bones.
[THEORY that I have heard before]
This would this would be consistant with a person whose ankles were
nailed to an upright beam of a cross later after death the feet were
cut-off at the ankles.
Because the arms were most likely tied (history seems to favor that
method) to the removable crossbeam.
So they would just cut-off above the nailed ankle and remove the
crossbeam, untie and drag the body away.
Add another cut to the ankle's remains and it would free it from the
nail, grab the nail and wiggle it free.
Also crucifixion nails are valuable items and sold as good luck charms.
It is also very possible that as the day's entertainment in Nero's
Circus neared the end the crucified victims were wearing clothes that
were covered in tar/pitch and set alight.
This was very common in these blood sports venues and a Pagan writer
Tactius mentions Nero doing this with Christians in his Gardens next
door (cited earlier).
Also they have found both ankles of a 1C Roman Jewish crucifixion (near
Jerusaleum) where each ankle was seperately nailed to each side of the
upright post.
So again, somewhere in this timeframe the skeletal remains taken from
this grave end-up hidden in the Graffiti Wall's niche and remain there
until the 20C.
We know this because in the 1960's soil samples taken from those bones
*exactly* matched the soil from that grave and even soil samples from
the surrounding graves were a mismatch.
So the Fact is, this elderly man was once buried in that earth grave in
the 1C-AD.
Now in ~250AD when this Graffiti Wall was built Christians are again
being persecuted even to the point of not being allowed burials or
visiting Christian graves.
Perhaps fearing the bones would be taken and destroyed forever by the
Pagans they were secretly hidden in the wall's niche?
Or perhaps it was done decades later for the same reasons?
Or Constantine had them placed them there when he built the Basilica?
This seems to be the accepted theory but there are no facts or claims to
back it up.
Personally I don't think Constantine knew about the bone's location
because if he had I believe he would have put them in a beautiful
elaborate coffin and placed it in a more honorable location (like
beneath or on the new Basilica's altar).
Remember Constantine is either a new Christian convert or his accepting
of Christianity had a purely political motive?
Plus he didn't get baptised which is the 1st step to becoming a
Christian until he was on his deathbed.
So it's possible that the Pope didn't trust him completely or perhaps he
feared that the Pagans might one day regain complete power again.
Or the secret hidden location was never passed-on to a following Pope
perhaps there were only an original few that knew the secret location
and in the following 70yrs only a single Pope, a sudden death and the
secret goes to his grave?
It's very unlikely we will ever know the reason the bones were removed
and hidden but the Fact is those bones from that 1C grave match the age
and sex of St. Peter and the timeframe is in the ballpark.
So either the early Christians are right and this is the grave of St.
Peter or decades later they just happened to pick a gravesite to worship
where by coincidence a 60-70yr old male just happens to be buried?
[CONCLUSION; Read this section on the Bones & Theory. But skip the
examination results from the other bones found randomly in the larger
*Courtyard* excavation of 3 adults & 1 40ish male]
www.saintpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/JW/TheBonesofStPeter-8.htm OR
http://tinyurl.com/tbept
Now to avoid confusion when reading the excavation report remember there
are two seperate piles of bones that were discovered here.
The bones in the Graffiti Wall which were discovered by accident when a
small piece of the Graffiti Wall's plaster had fallen off and the hidden
niche was exposed during the excavations.
But they were secretly taken out of the niche and stored away by the
Vatican's overseer of the excavations and unknown to the archaeologists
for years.
The 2nd pile of bone was when the archaeologists got into the original
grave which was an open cavity beneath the
Shrine.
The grave was empty except where the underground Red Wall's brick
foundations cut across the grave, when they built this section ~154AD
they arched over the grave by making an inverted V which made a niche.
In this niche archaeologists found a pile of BONES in the GRAVE that
were placed there in ancient times!!!
Needless to say they were overjoyed at the discovery except later when
the bones are examined they discover the bone remains (none are
complete, just bits and pieces) are of 2 50ish males and an elderly
woman.
And not of a man fitting St. Peter's older age.
Now the Graffiti Wall's bones are stored in the Vatican unknown to the
archaeologists.
The Vatican overseer who secretly removed them figured they were from
some early Christian like a Pope who had himself entombed near the grave
generations after St. Peter's death.
Now about the multiple person's bones found in the grave's niche? Who
knows?
Perhaps they ended up mingled in the grave site's area thru erosion as
the report suggests.
Guessing! Maybe any bones found when building the Red Wall & Shrine
complex were placed there figuring they were earlier Christians.
But I've always wondered maybe they were a decoy?
Any Pagans breaking into the grave to destroy St. Peter's remains would
find a pile of bones and think he had found them and leave the cemetary
happy.
Remember just small bits and pieces of those person's skeletons remained
even the archaeologists didn't realize they had found multiple persons
until the scientists examined the bones.
Bottomline Hard Facts;
Pagan writer Tactius states that Christians were killed in the Circus of
Nero by Nero.
St. Peter if alive would have been in his 60's when this happened.
St. Peter's Basilica southern side is built over part of this Circus.
The Basilica's main altar is built over a 1stC grave of a man in his
60's.
Early Christians worshipped this grave site as St. Peter's proven by the
building of the Red Wall and Shrine Complex
~154AD roughly 90yrs after St. Peter's believed death in the Circus.
What cannot be factually proven is;
Was St. Peter in Rome ~64AD?
Was he killed in the Circus of Nero?
Was he buried in that 1stC grave beneath St. Peter's Basilica?
So we have the facts for the 'When', 'Why' and the 'How' but you must
decide if the 'Who' is Fact, Fiction, Possible or Impossible. Regards,
Walter
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Also I would like to add this theory into the mix although it doesn't
add anything to my 64-154AD main timeline of interest.
[The PETROS GRAFFITO Fragment Theory]
"PETROS ENI literally "Peter is within" in a tomb or grave context
"Peter is buried in here."
Ok this is not a fact it's a theory based on this partial graffito but
if you take all of the other evidence into account it seems very likely.
1st the location; The graffito is on the *large* 'Red Wall' ~2ft from
the floor, so a person would have to be on their knees to write it.
It just so happens to be in the exact section where the 'Graffiti Wall'
was abutted to the 'Red Wall' and to be more exact it is *exactly* where
the marble-lined hidden niche with the bones abutts the Red Wall.
That section is 12in x 10in [X] and in that less than 1 sq/ft area there
is vertical crack in the Wall's plaster which likely narrows down the
writeable surface area even more.
So either that graffito was there before the Graffiti Wall was built
(unlikely).
Or just before the Graffiti Wall's niche tomb was plastered over and
hidden a person on his knees reached in and hastily scratched that
"Peter is within" graffito into the Red Wall's plaster?
That someone religious ID'ed this hidden tomb of their Saint seems alot
more likely to me?
2nd; What survives in this plaster fragment are the definite 1st 3
letters in Greek for PETROS (Peter) with the 4th letter which is a Greek
P for our Latin R in petRos as a *possible* match because only part of
the vertical line survives and not the top section. ENI (within, here)
in the 2nd line.
Best to let the 'Theory' website below explain this line.
Bottomline; What are the odds of finding this kind of partial evidence
*there* inside a secret hidden unmarked tomb niche that ancient
Christians placed what they firmly believed were St. Peter's bones?
Even though the graffito is partial and somewhat cryptic the evidence
seems to support her theory IMO?
[GRAFFITO PHOTO]
www.culturaltravelguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/petros-eni-saint-peter-tomb-349x420.jpg
OR
http://tinyurl.com/8qtn79v
[PETROS GRAFFITO THEORY]
Professor Margherita Guarducci is the Italian archaeologist and author
who worked for years on decipering the St. Peter's Basilica Necropolis
graffiti and this is her theory.
Scroll down to "10 The Peter Theory" and then scroll down a few
paragraphs to the paragraph starting with "During the evening..." which
is her Graffito Theory.
http://saintpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/JW/TheBonesofStPeter-8.htm OR
http://tinyurl.com/8bqzd4l
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
BACK-UP LINKS
"The Bones of Saint Peter" by John Curran
www.ucd.ie/cai/classics-ireland/1996/Curran96.html OR
http://tinyurl.com/4wrrl2
On the excavation;
(Part 1)
http://lonelypilgrim.com/2012/05/14/the-tomb-of-st-peter/ OR
http://tinyurl.com/9ny5ntb
(Part 2)
http://lonelypilgrim.com/2012/05/15/the-grave-of-st-peter/ OR
http://tinyurl.com/9tkfnkh
(Part 3)
http://lonelypilgrim.com/2012/05/17/the-bones-of-st-peter/ OR
http://tinyurl.com/9dh76c5