Holy headlessness. Beheading, death and various afterlives of sacred sculptures

Beheaded and mutilated medieval Virgin Mary and baby Jesus. Musée National du Moyen Âge, Paris

(An initial comment: Since I started planning this blog post on beheaded sacred images and their afterlives some weeks ago, recent events in Paris and other places in the world have brought the topic of violence, domestication and exercise of power under a religious label to a whole new and urgent level. I will not go into these events here at this point, but hope to return to them in the near future.)

I cannot think of a better topic for waking a resting blog, than resurrections and afterlives. Well, and some quite dramatic beheadings, of course - after all, I tend to end up reflecting on death every so often in this peculiar research topic of mine. As some of you might recall, It all started with a headless Jesus; my PhD journey took off when I encountered a headless Jesus in a Swedish cathedral, and couldn't make up my mind as to wether I regarded it primarily as a devotional, a historical or a cultural object. The broken state of this medieval sculpture is in no way unique in a Swedish context, but rather the normal condition. Worth noticing is that the present appearance of the medieval Catholic sculptures in Sweden is not a result of intentional mutilation or political violence, but of neglect in some church attic or shed after they came out of fashion (and, in some way, became dangerous) after the Reformation. With this, the Catholic sculptures were physically stowed away and out of sight, to be re-used as examples of a long history and proud national antiquities a century later in late 17th century. Seeing Catholic images presented like this creates an image of distance, of mysticism maybe, of historical pasts and beliefs, and of authenticity. The result, at least in Sweden, appears to be a sense of holiness and authenticity attached more strongly to these damaged images in a museum display or to a church ruin, than to sacred buildings and objects still in their original use.

Old and sacred matter the way I grew up seeing it in Sweden: broken, damaged and displayed museum objects with a narrative taking place in a time very long ago. (Gotlands Museum, Sweden)

When I recently took part in an international seminar at École du Louvre in Paris, on the musealisation of sacred buildings, I enthusiastically continued on this grim path, and learnt more about how the sacred images in France lost their heads.

Beheaded saints from the facade of Notre Dame de Paris, now in Musée National du Moyen-Âge.

Fact is, I was quite stunned by the ever-present and large number of beheaded saints and Marys that met me in various museums. In Musée National du Moyen-Âge were armies of saints ripped down from church facades, and individual sculptures with heads, hands and in some cases also their genitalia cut off. In other museums displaying religious art I met them too. Their headlessness is a result of the violent suppression of all forms of religion during the French revolution, primarily in the 1790's, when the churches were stripped of decoration and furniture, and the sacred art in many cases was mutilated or destroyed. The destruction here was violent, an act of dominance and an attempt to eradicate certain beliefs - and a jump start to musealisation of sacred objects and places. 

In the turmoil during the revolution, the sacred objects that were not destroyed were brought to Bibliothèque Nationale, which besides being a library at the time also functioned as a forerunner to Musée du Louvre. Objects made of precious metals were to be melted down for more useful purposes, and only objects of a certain "historical value" were to be spared. Thus, the heritagisation process in a nutshell: a quick shift from accentuating the sacred value to promoting (and, in fact, legitimizing the existence of an object with) the historical or heritage value.

Headless saint in a church museum in Angers

So, comparing the sacred headlessnesses in my own country with those in France, I find some major differences:

1) The heads in Sweden were almost always lost because of neglect after the Reformation, or because of popular beliefs that for example the wooden head of baby Jesus could ease the pain of a woman during childbirth if put in her bed (and sometimes didn't make it back to the church, or got lost, as loose details tend to do), but not in an act of religious or political violence. The heads in France, on the other hand, were intentionally and violently cut off to suppress and domesticate religion, and remove it from society in every shape but as historical and artistic artifacts.

2) In France these beheaded images are now on display in museums, telling stories about violent acts in the history of France, about religious beliefs and practices in the past, and about the artistic skills in various periods. I saw no beheaded saints in churches, used as devotional objects - but quite a few copies from the Viollet le Duc era in the 19th century. 

In Sweden however, as I have stated previously, even the beheaded images can be used for devotion and seen as sacred - perhaps even more sacred and authentic than the better preserved or recently made ones? There is something fishy about the secularized Swedes and decaying heritage... (OK, sorry. I can't keep myself from referring to this favorite scene in the film "Peter's friends", where an American actress expresses her admiration for the old English mansion and adds that she has seen something just like it in the States, "but brand new!". Look here, at 1.09...)

So, is this displaying of beheaded and mutilated sacredness, also with various agendas, something unique to Christianity? Well, you just have to take a quick look in interior decoration magazines and the fancy Buddha-heads-in-bookshelves (not seldom side by side with a Lourdes madonna) to realize that there is more to it than that.

Musée Guimet, Paris

Not only interior decorations, but also museums are filled with Buddhistic and other religious Asian art, often in fragments or damaged condition. I ask myself if the level of exoticism and aestheticism in these objects is higher, and the religious content less obvious, to a Western audience?

 Damaged Buddha at Musée Guimet, Paris

Musealised Buddha in New South Wales Art Gallery, Sydney

Visiting the Jim Thompson House Museum in Bangkok where an American collector and silk factory director assembled a group of Thai houses into a Western interpretation of typical Thai style, I was fascinated by the rich collection of Buddhas - many of which headless. I asked the tour guide how Thai Buddhists regarded these statues, and was told that damaged Buddhas are connected to bad luck and are therefore not to be kept at home. Being holy, they however can not be disposed of in a careless way, but are brought (back, in a way) to the temple, where a special room serves as a final resting place for damaged and used Buddhas. 

Intentionally beheaded Buddha at Jim Thompson House Museum, Bangkok

Buddhas, and more Buddhas, in Jim Thompson's house

In Jim Thompson's House Museum, the headless and damaged Buddhas seem to go well in line with the eclectic westernized assembly of Thai art objects and architecture, forming a magnificent and all new creation built on heritage and aesthetics. The presence of the damaged and beheaded Buddhas in a home might be unthinkable for a Buddhist believer, but in this home formed by a foreigner's eye, the damaged state poses no religious problem and goes well side by side with ancient pottery and other objects with patina.

Coming this far in the guided tour my curiosity on beheaded sacredness was triggered, and I asked the guide why the Buddhas were missing their heads? The answer was, in this case, neither the Swedish Lutheran neglect or the French revolutionary rage and domestication. The explanation was more one of greed and materiality: in connection to conflicts treasure hunters were after precious metals and valuable objects, and they had heard that some Buddha sculptures were made of gold and painted over. To check the presumed material preciousness of the Buddhas, they cut the heads off, and if (as in the case here) the material was a less precious one, the beheaded figure was left behind to meet another destiny: as museum or collector's object.

Buddha head on display, NSW Art Gallery, Sydney. Not a Buddhist display, but okay in a museum.

Travel Buddhas in the museum shop at Musée Guimet. Pick your favorite color, please!

Looking at these three examples from three different historical, cultural and religious contexts, we find three different motives behind the missing heads of sacred sculptures - religiously motivated neglect, political violence, and plundering - and three different kinds of afterlife: museum objects, a final rest in the temple, or resurrection as sacred object in mutilated state. While mutilation or damages in some cultures make the images impossible for sacred use, it rather seems to reinforce the sacred and authentic qualities in countries like my own. Heritage can, obviously, act as a new religion, creating meaning and traditions in a time where traditional religious institutions are regarded with suspicion and by some even claimed to have played out their role. From holy headlessness to holy heritage, perhaps..?

At the core of all this heritage, death and afterlife dwells the complex question of Eternity - a time frame set for many collections in another time, but which for many reasons seems quite problematic today. And to be honest (quoting one of my secular house gods, Freddie Mercury): Who wants to live forever?

Sometimes, I can't blame the escaped gargoyle in the facade of Notre Dame de Paris: it hit the road, leaving nothing but its paws behind. A pawless afterlife, and an escape from material sacredness...

Come closer! Creating improved access

Coming closer: Dr. Cecilia Lindhé at Umeå university HUMlab using digital visualizing methods to approach medieval images of Virgin Mary in new ways. Learn more about the project here.

When setting up this blog a little more than a month ago, I mentioned that the whole blogging adventure was initiated by the PhD course in Digital History I am following this semester. Within this course, we are required to design and build a visualization project related to our dissertations, and this is why my thoughts now and then have moved beyond my regular 17th century source material to dwell upon the Why's, What's and How's of this task. (For this reason, and general technology nerdiness, of course.)

The coming two weeks I will be a guest blogger at K-Blogg, the blog of Swedish National Heritage Board (have to warn you, though: It's in Swedish). The National Heritage Board is working with and collaborating in many digitizing projects to improve access to cultural heritage, like Kringla (Swedish collective museum search), K-samsök or SOCH, and Europeana. Digitizing what is labeled as the national heritage has been a priority in Swedish cultural politics for almost two decades now, and the primary aim is to create an improved access to this shared physical and immaterial fund of (imagined) shared memory for a broad audience. 

These efforts, corresponding to similar projects internationally, have created a possible overview and countless entries to collections, databases and categories that were accessible only to specialists before. However, I believe that a true and equal access of this kind not only requires efforts concerning the range of databases and on-line availability, but also concerning the receiving part, i.e. the users. Many questions pop up in my head: 

- What prerequisites with the user are necessary for her/him to actually benefit from and make use of all these new and almost unlimited possibilities? Basic knowledge of Swedish and European history and geography? Basic knowledge of culture and religion(s)? Knowledge of colonialism, cultural influences, art history, etc..? Or no prerequisites at all?

Coming closer to the material medieval Marys, here placed in a circle as if talking to each other, in Swedish History Museum's exhibition on Virgin Mary in 2008. Physically closer, but also fragmented, and further from the original content and understanding. (Photo: Christer Åhlin/SHM)

- What do we actually mean by 'improved access'? Is it the possibility to look at and come closer to objects and environments that are normally locked away or closed to visitors? Is it going closer, and aided by digital tools on screen seeing details that were previously - when locked up behind glass in a museum counter - invisible to the eye?

- What values does the digital exhibition (potentially) add, and what values are (potentially) lost with the loss of the physical encounter? An example of an, in my opinion, interesting and innovative on-line exhibition is the Metropolitan Museum's (New York) blog 82nd & Fifth, where the knowledgeable experts in the staff each have picked an item and talk about it. Close-ups of the object are showed, but the strongest impression is, I think, hearing the voices and very personal stories told by people who know their subject well and has a vibrant passion for it. So - judging from this example, at least true passion can be mediated through the web.

- What are the relations between digital exhibitions/digitized objects, the Real McCoy (i.e., the real objects and environments), and authenticity? Is it at all possible to experience authenticity when encountering objects etc. on a screen and not in physical reality, or is the authenticity actually perceived as stronger in a close-up perspective - and will this question be totally irrelevant for coming generations..?

The unsurpassed way to coming very, very close: Touching.

These questions are debated in the museum world, for educational as well as for financial reasons, and a key issue - I presume - must be the future role of the costly storage, care and displaying of authentic objects and environments. Whatever the outcome of these discussions, the importance of education and knowledge with the presumed beneficiaries of the great digital and conservation efforts being made in the growing heritage field is crucial. If basic knowledge is not there, a visitor to the Bode Museum in Berlin will not see a Pietà, the emblematic scene of Virgin Mary mourning her dead son, also according to Christian belief the Son of God who has died to save mankind from eternal condemnation and who will resurrect and conquer Death after three days - s/he will see what is actually physically there, and only that: Two old heads on a wall. The improved access in this scenario can be debated, I think. 

Opinions on this?

(Update 24/10/2103:)

I remembered I wanted to link to this article in The Independent, Tuesday 22 Oct, touching on the subject of basic knowledge and education. The bottom line is that a film like Monty Python's 'Life of Brian' (a film where I have to admit I know most of the lines by heart) would have been impossible in Britain of today. Why? According to the article, because this film is based on references to the Bible and Christian history, and people today would not catch a fragment of the jokes being made since they are religious illiterates. If this is the case, I will safe guard my old Monty Python collection with extra care, since it appears to be on the endangered species list.

Close-up on a fragmented Pietà in Bode Museum, Berlin. The parts left out are filled in by our imagination - given that we have the required knowledge. If not, the two heads make very little sense.

Roman Workday

Yes. I wish this were the regular work look for a Museology researcher in Rome, but, alas: Sweating, no regular motorino driving, sadly no Gregory Peck, and good walking shoes is more like it.

Installed in - at least to a Scandinavian - hot and humid Rome, all children safely arrived as is my research material. Renting an apartment that turned out to be without wifi, we were reminded of how large a part of our lives that is dependent on internet: communication, school, work, banks, information, newspapers, timetables, ticket offices, data storage, and so on. Quite annoying, but we will work it out and try to remember what we used to talk about before smartphones and ipads entered our lives.

Installed also in what will be my work desk until May next year: a table in the beautiful and quiet library of Istituto Svedese di Studi Classici, the Swedish Institute for Classical Studies, in Northern Rome near the Villa Borghese park. Here, the foreign research institutes for art, archaeology, history, architecture, and other humanistic fields are flocking in what was once the outskirts of Rome, but now is regarded as rather central and elegant quarters. The history behind the accumulation of foreign institutes here is quite spectacular; Mussolini decided he wanted foreign states to establish research institutes in Italy, and he offered a piece of land in this Northern part of town to states who promised to build a beautiful and prestigious building and fill it with scientific activity, and also to offer a correspondent piece of land in their respective capitals. The Swedish Institute in Rome was founded in 1925, supported by the Crown Prince Gustav Adolf (later King Gustaf VI Adolf) who had an ardent interest in archaeology. In 1939 the present building in Via Omero, designed by famous Swedish architect Ivar Tengbom, was inaugurated and decorated with furniture and art signed by the most prominent Swedish designers and artists at the time.

Istituto Svedese in Via Omero, 14

Starting out with a classical profile in archaeology and classical studies, the Swedish Institute now has broadened its scope and houses also researchers in Art history, Architecture, Philology, as well as Heritage Studies and other more recently emerged disciplines. Working in this environment means a lot of benefits; first and foremost, a possibility to work in a beautiful and calm environment specially designed for this kind of work, and near the rich sources of historical layers, archives, libraries, buildings, art collections and other such things that make a nerd's eyes sparkle. But also, and not less important, a possibility to meet and talk with a vast range of other researchers from all over the world. In the few days I have been here, I have already met a couple of very good scholars working on journeys to Rome in Premodern time, i.e. with interests quite close to mine - where else would we meet, but here?

Work desk in 1930's design, carrying 2012 computer showing a 17th century diary. A Roman Mille Foglie ('thousand sheets') cake of historical layers.

And then, finally, the magic of authenticity, touching, following the footsteps of... We live very close to the Porta del Popolo, which was the regular entrance to Rome for travelers from the North in 17th century. Though surrounded by cars, motorinos, restaurants, trams and electric light, it is still there. From dusk til dawn and late night, I like to take a walk there just to imagine for a while what it was like to arrive there at different times of the day (as described in the 17th century diaries I study), after what was sometimes a hard journey, and after weeks and months of anticipation - finally there. 

And for me: Finally here.

Porta del Popolo, late 18th century engraving by Giuseppe Vasi

It all started with a headless Jesus

Virgin Mary holding baby Jesus. 15th century sculpture in Strängnäs cathedral (Sweden)

Every so often in the enigmatic world of Academia, when confronted with the arduous work of clever colleagues, a question springs to mind: How on earth did s/he come up with this topic? And what in it was so thrilling, so tickling, so calling out to be explored that it was considered worth spending at least four years of hard work on? Not that it doesn't seem interesting (it often does), it is just the level of specialization that might have a deterrent effect on the non-specialists in the field in question - i.e., sadly, almost everyone.   

For me, it all started with a headless Jesus. The time and place were the end of the 1990’s in the medieval brick cathedral of Strängnäs, Sweden, and I was presented to an image showing Virgin Mary holding baby Jesus. The sculpture was medieval, made of wood and displaying clear signs of neglect and being out of fashion during the past centuries - not a unique state for Catholic objects that for some reason were spared after the Reformation. Now, however, the image not only was given a prominent position in the cathedral, but even honored with a fresh rose and a living candle placed before it on a small altar. All in all, the signs were clear: This was a living relation, a devotion of and an interaction with the divine. ”—We have brought Mary back into the church!”, the Lutheran parish priest stated. It was when I approached and actually looked more closely on the Virgin that I discovered the headless state of baby Jesus. In an instant I discovered that I reacted in a number of habitual ways: as interested in the heritage field and historical matters in one way, as a former museum emplyee in another, and as a frequent visitor to Catholic churches in yet another way. 

The worn, historic image of Mary with a headless baby Jesus in her arms and candles and a flower placed before it sent out, at least to my mind, mixed signals: Was this a historical object to be regarded with nostalgia, was it part of a national or ecclesiastical heritage to be interpreted as sheer materiality, or was it the sacred image it was once made to be, and – despite the headlessness – still a relevant object for devotion? Or, I asked myself, could it actually be all these things at the same time – a state of hybridity, dependent on the beholder and its gaze, prerequisites and convictions? Standing there in the dusky church, a process started that eventually led to studies in Heritage politics, to a Master thesis in History of Ideas and science, and to the topic for the dissertation I am presently working on.

Skokloster Castle 17th century library, Sweden. (Photo: Bengt A Lundberg)

A clue to the ambiguous relationship to materiality, authenticity and sacredness that I became aware of when meeting the headless Jesus might be the years I worked in the rare book collection at Skokloster Castle. When being bought by the Swedish state in 1967 and transformed into a museum, Skokloster also formed a practice and a view on conservation that is still valid in heritage environments. Here it was actually possible to follow and understand the original building process from start to finish, through the books in the library, through letters ordering tools from Holland and other countries, through the same tools still preserved, and through the woodworks, ceiling constructions and lime mortar that were produced on the building site. Conservation was performed by using these original and authentic methods, and the golden rule was to add as little as possible - just to keep the old parts together. How this practice, with the carefully re-glued flakes of paints on the walls, sometimes clashes with the expectations of the visitors is quite vividly illuminated by the crass statement by an American tourist: "This place needs fixing.".

Being educated in this view, the supremacy of material authenticity, I had no problems with heritage objects looking really scruffy - as a matter of fact, the scruffiness just added to my belief in the authenticity. No, the problem with the headless Jesus was something else: it touched upon sacredness and the claims of being "alive" in its original function, as a devotional object. Could this work, even without a head?

In an article, presently under publication (November 2013, Gotländskt Arkiv), I explore the use of medieval religious materiality and practices on Gotland, Sweden, in premodern time and up to now. Without giving away too much of the article, it can be said that the general attitude towards sacred matter presently out of fashion has been severely unsentimental, down-to-earth and utilitarian, and that the appreciation of immaterial values in this category emerged with Romanticism, Piranesi's etchings of Roman ruins and the entrance of the Artist as a major character.

Today, authenticity and sacredness seem to merge in a highly subjective narrative, not primarily based on historical or theological facts, but on what might very well be the most influential currency of our time: Emotions. In this perspective it is hardly surprising that many visitors to the medieval church ruins of Visby, Gotland, express that they experience a particularly strong authenticity during the annual Medieval Festival ('Medeltidsveckan') when the former Franciscan church of S.t Catherine is filled to the brim with reenacting visitors watching jesters performing a fire show. The former sacred building has transformed into a live scene for medieval reenactment, and the result is experienced authenticity and - for some - even a sense of sacredness.

Returning to Mary and her headless baby Jesus, one question seems inevitable: Sacredness - is it objective, or is it all in the eye of the beholder?

Jester from performance group 'Trix' performing a fire show in S.t Catherine's church ruin, Visby. (Photo: Helen Simonsson)

Byproducts of death: Thoughts on the fate of bones

Head of Saint Catherine of Siena (1347-1380) 

In my department, Culture and Media Studies, a group of likeminded colleagues has started to discuss and write on various topics connected to the research field called Death Studies. It all started somewhere early this year with an e-mail popping down in my mailbox, where a Professor just wanted to check if anyone was interested in meeting and talk about death. This is one of the many great things with this job: I suspect such an approach doesn't appear in every office, but it did in mine.

Already up to my knees in the death field (since museums and heritage are tightly related to death, and also to rebirth), and after having received a blessing from one of my supervisors, I happily joined what is now commonly referred to as "the Death Group" (one simply has to like that, right?). It soon was obvious that the concept of "death" triggered a vast range of topics and aspects in our interdisciplinary circle; from the semi-death in cryonics, via zombies and dumpster diving, to Medieval Pietà - and much more in between. In June a special issue of Kulturella Perspektiv ("Cultural Perspectives") was published in Swedish, where my contribution bore the title (translated) "Death in the Souvenir shop: Mortal Remains as Cult and Curiosities" and touched upon the many layers of charging and re-charging in Christian relics.

In brief, I wanted to describe how the many similarities between the concepts 'heritage' and 'sacredness', similarities that are one of my starting points for my PhD project, partially derive from the collecting and veneration of relics. These relic collections eventually developed into art cabinets or proto-museums, and then into Western European museums as we are used to see them.
Relics could and still can be found in the shape of actual human remains, or as second and third degree relics, meaning something that has touched the remains or something that has touched something that was once touched by the saint - a contagious sacredness that is physically transmitted. Relics also strongly emphasizes the material aspect and the sensual relationship to sacred objects, an aspect that has been highlighted by Caroline Walker Bynum in Christian Materiality (2011) and Charles Freeman in Holy Dust, Holy Bones (2011).

Saint Bridget of Sweden (1303-1373): Here, there, and everywhere

From a museological point of view, what I find particularly fascinating is the constant re-charging and creation of new and very different narratives connected to relics. Saint Bridget of Sweden, for example, was not only a well documented spiritual person in 14th century Europe, she was also of royal ancestry and did not hesitate to intervene in high politics. When she died in Rome her body was 'ossificated', which meant the soft parts of the body were removed, and her bones (except for some of them that remained in her house in Rome) were carried in a shrine to Vadstena, Sweden, where she had founded her first convent. Like many bone relics from the Middle Ages and even from the times of the first Christians, Saint Bridget's bones can now be found in a number of countries, settings, contexts and narratives; a small flake of her bones was given to Uppsala Cathedral by Bridgettin sisters in the 1980's, an act that caused an animated debate since the cathedral is Lutheran and the veneration of saints and relics is not commonly accepted there. However, a special silver shrine was made and the relic was given an honorable place in a choir.

Just a few miles away, in 17th century Skokloster Castle with a collection of around 50,000 objects preserved through families and centuries, another flake of Saint Bridget is kept. Here, though, no silver shrine has been made and no veneration takes place, because this part of the Saint's bones is cathegorized as a museum object. It is properly listed in the museum inventory, and dated "19th century" probably due to the papal certificate from that time stating the authenticity of the bone fragment. What is Bridget doing there, in a Baroque collection containing numerous other things but not of a specifically pious character? The answer lies in one of the previous owners, the noble Brahe family, who (wrongly, as it later turned out) proudly announced themselves to be related to this famous saint and thus also of royal blood. This assumed relationship resulted in the collecting of Bridget memorabilia of various sorts and qualities, where the relic is just one of many items.

In my short article I ended up in the souvenir shop, where third degree relics are sold amongst the postcards and amulets with no specific demands on belief or intention with the buyer. I asked how we should understand this multi-layered existence that is a relic: as layer upon layer of death, or as a rebirth upon rebirth as new and different existences? This topic is fascinating, even without having touched upon the excitements of other aspects such as secular relics (pieces of hair etc from famous persons, Jimi Hendrix' guitar - or what's left of it - and so on), and I was glad to hear this morning when meeting my fellow Death Group members that our exploration of death and its connotations will go on and probably result in a publication, and perhaps also in a workshop or conference.

This, dear readers, is one of the many geeky sides of Academia: How contemplating Death can make you feel so vibrantly alive.

Authenticity and the irresistible desire to touch

I couldn't resist. I just had to touch the column beside the place where the 9th century Viking Halfdan once carved his name while visiting the by then already 300 year old church of Hagia Sophia. It was mind-boggling.

Finally home again after a long journey from the ISCH (International Society for Cultural History) conference in Istanbul. Going to a conference has many potential values, such as trying your research ideas/results/questions on a competent and hopefully benevolent group of colleagues, getting feedback, learning from others, giving feedback, and - of course - the ever important networking. This time, I left the busy and yet-to-be-explored city filled to the brim with impressions, discussions, new knowledge, new ideas - and some really nice new acquaintances. I get more and more convinced that one of the main raison d'êtres for academia is sharing: by listening, by commenting, by teaching, by the constructive disagreements. I believe the digital development makes sharing so very much easier (and more fun!) - given that people want to share, of course.

Back to the conference, and to the ever present theme of authenticity. In a city like Istanbul where the cultural layers are many and diverse, the question of what is real and what is fake, or what is original and what is a later addition, is an inevitable framework. And for me, being born and raised in a Western European context, the materiality aspect of reality is initially hard to avoid when understanding and interpreting heritage and history. One side of this, the connection between authenticity and materiality (as bearing witness of an authentic past?), is the irresistible desire to touch. I believe there are numerous parallels to the physical relation to sacred objects here.

I have seen them at countless heritage places and in numerous settings: the visitors who, sometimes with a partly ashamed, partly guilty appearance can't hold themself back, but have to touch the walls, the objects, the ground which presumably bear witness of certain events in history or just of a very distant time. They do this despite knowing that touching is generally not permitted in heritage environments due to preservation, and despite, perhaps, a rational doubt why they do this. During my visit to Hagia Sophia and the Cistern in Istanbul, I saw in both places a certain column associated with stories about wishings coming true and other magical events for those who touched it in a certain way. In both cases there were people lining up to perform this ritual of magic touch, and in both cases the people doing this were laughing and making funny faces to a companion with a camera; this was obviously something inviting, thrilling, sensual, but also something a bit shameful that needed ridicule to pass.

 
Visitor touching the ornamented pillar in Justinian's 6th century cisterns in Istanbul


Not only touching, but performing a full circle with the thumb in the hole in the Sweating Pillar or Wishing Column in musealised church-turned-mosque Hagia Sophia is a popular ritual for fulfilling wishes, or just for fun - or because it's a must-do according to guide books?

As for myself, despite considering myself both respectful towards heritage authorities and - in some sense, at least - a sensible person, I am an incurable toucher. There is something to it - but what, exactly? For now, my best answer leans towards the problematic concept of 'Authenticity'. Input, please..?