The Holy Grail: Truth or Legend?

In the famous third installment of the Indiana Jones saga, The Last Crusade, we see the hero immersed in a fight against time to prevent the fearsome Nazis from taking over one of the most important relics of Christianity: the Holy Grail or the chalice that used by Jesus at the Last Supper. And now be careful, because in the next paragraph we are going to make a small spoiler…

In one of the last scenes, Indiana has to choose, among many pieces, the authentic chalice. The true one gives eternal life, but the wrong one takes it away without mercy. The intrepid archaeologist chooses a wooden vase, with a miserable appearance, because, according to him, a carpenter’s chalice could not have been made of gold or silver.

The hero’s deduction doesn’t seem incongruous, does it? If, indeed, Jesus was a poor carpenter, the vessel he used would have to be made of a cheap material, and wood would be one of them. However, Isn’t it said in the Bible that Christ and his apostles celebrated the Passover meal in the house of Joseph of Arimathea? And Joseph of Arimathea was a rich character, so the chalice used would not be made of such a rough material.

There is also another aspect to take into account. Jewish tradition prohibits celebrating the Passover festival with porous containers, so wood and ceramics would be directly ruled out. We only have gold and semi-precious stones such as onyx or chalcedony left, and it is precisely the latter that are the most probable, given the remains found of containers from the time.

The true story of the Holy Grail

The Holy Grail or the chalice of Christ has always been a fascinating topic that has caused rivers of ink to flow. Did it really exist? And, if this answer is affirmative, is preserved? Where is? Is one of the many grails that claim to be the chalice of Christ the real one?

This article does not intend to question any aspect of the faith, but rather to inspect, in the light of historical and archaeological evidence, what is true and what is not true about the stories that circulate about the Holy Grail and its supposed preservation throughout the centuries. As historian Carlos Taranilla states, it is not about finding out if the holy chalice existed, nor if Christ’s last supper really took place. This is the terrain of faith.

What really concerns the historian is to unravel the truth about the numerous chalices that have been preserved and follow their trajectory. to check if they really are pieces from 1st century Judea, in addition to investigating how and when the legend of the Grail arose. Can you come with us?

On the trail of the Grail

Traditionally, the appearance of the legend of the Grail is attributed to the texts that Chrétien de Troyes (c. 1130-1183) wrote in the 12th century; especially, to his well-known chivalric novel Perceval or the tale of the Grail. It is the time of troubadours, minstrel poems and stories of knights, and Chrétien’s work is no exception.

In his stories about King Arthur’s knights (characters of deep faith and crowned with that aura of “soldiers of God” so characteristic of the Middle Ages) the search for the holy vessel that Christ used at the Easter dinner and that It was supposedly a miraculous object. But, in the light of the documents, the stories of Chrétien de Troyes are not the first to speak of the holy chalice. Carlos Taranilla mentions that the oldest quote dates back to the 8th century; specifically, from the year 717, when, apparently, a monk already speaks of the glass of the Holy Supper as “Holy Grail”.

In their magnificent study Los reyes del Grail, Margarita Torres and José Miguel Ortega del Río rescue much older documents. The first preserved text, according to this study, would date from as early as the year 400; This is the so-called Breviarius A, where, regarding the description of the Holy Sepulchre, it says that a chapel contains “the Cup that the Lord blessed and gave to his disciples to drink.” Torres and Ortega del Río follow the trail of the Grail and later take us to the year 570, when a pilgrim describes practically the same thing as the Breviarius A of the year 400, with the particularity that specifies that the Cup is made of “onys” (that is, , onyx).

Holy Grail… or royal blood?

Let us leave for a moment the historical clues of the Grail and pause for a moment on the etymology of the word. The term grail, also written as graal, has a dark origin. In fact, it could mean several things. The first theory is that it would come from an ancient root whose meaning would be “flat plate.” Attention, flat plate, so the idea of ​​a “cup” or “glass” would be much later.

The second hypothesis is perhaps the best known, in part due to the tremendous fame that Dan Brown’s novel The Da Vinci Code (2004) obtained. According to this theory, holy grail would be a deformation of sang real, that is, royal blood in old French. Thus, the denomination would refer to the blood of Christ or his line of descent. In this case, the Holy Grail would not be a cup or a plate, but a concept. The controversy is served.

How many chalices were there in the Holy Supper?

The idea we have of the holy chalice as the vessel of the Passover meal is relatively modern. In many ancient sources, the grail appears as a concept, more of a path to perfection than an object. If we look at the Bible, for example, we do not find any reference to a cup or glass at the Last Supper. It’s more; If we stick to the context (thirteen people celebrating the Jewish Passover) it makes no sense to assume that there was only one container, since it was not usual for diners to share utensils.

This means, as researcher Jesús Callejo (b. 1959) states, that the “chalices” should be thirteen, not one (since we also have the “cursed chalice”, that of Judas Iscariot). So why talk about a single chalice? Evidently, Christianity collected what was the most important for its doctrine: the chalice of the Lord. However, in the light of logic, more than one chalice of the Holy Supper could be preserved, since each of the apostles had a glass.

On the other hand, there is another Grail tradition that must be taken into account: the one collected by the French poet Robert de Boron, a contemporary of Chrétien de Troyes, in his work Joseph d’Arimathie (12th century). It tells how Jesus, after being resurrected, appeared to Nicodemus and gave him the chalice, with the order to take it to Britain and guard it.

Some later legends add the story that Nicodemus himself collected the sacred blood of Christ with the cup once he died, although this would be incongruous. with the episode of the delivery of the chalice once resurrected and, furthermore, it is scientifically impossible for the blood of a corpse to flow, since barely an hour later it is already clotted.

The strongest candidates to be the “Holy Grail”

So we have several things. One, that the first references to the Holy Grail are not from the 12th century (the texts of Chrétien de Troyes and Robert de Boron), but much earlier (the quote from the 8th century monk who already mentions the holy chalice and the corresponding Jerusalem documents to the 5th and 6th centuries). In all of them the chalice is already mentioned as a cup or glass, although in other sources this concept is confusing.

Second, if the Grail were a container, it would have to have been made of semiprecious stone; neither ceramic nor wood, for two reasons: 1) because Joseph of Arimathea was a wealthy character, and 2) because Jews cannot celebrate Passover with porous containers. In this sense, the document from the year 570 where the chalice is described as being made of onyx would be more than consistent.

And finally, the idea that the grail is a vessel comes to life at a very advanced time, so, at first, it could refer to a spiritual concept rather than an object. In reality, and again following Carlos Taranilla, the idea of ​​a magical vessel that heals or grants life is much older than Christianity itself. We find it in many mythologies; Without going any further, in Celtic mythology, where the cauldron (round object to contain liquid) was clothed with a magical and sacred meaning.

Having said all this, let’s see who are the strongest candidates to be the “Holy Grail”, if it really existed. It just so happens that the two most reliable candidates are in Spain, in the Collegiate Church of San Isidoro in León and in the Cathedral of Valencia, respectively. Let’s analyze them one by one.

1. The Lion’s Chalice

In the aforementioned work The Grail Kings, very interesting data is provided that supports the “authenticity” of the grail preserved in the Collegiate Church or, at least, that confirms that it is one of the oldest relics in this regard.

In the Cairo library, certain scrolls dating from the 11th century are preserved that speak of a terrible famine that devastated Egypt. The then emir of the taifa of Denia, in the Iberian Peninsula, sent help to the sultan of Egypt. In gratitude, he sent as a gift the holy chalice, which had been transferred in the 5th century from Jerusalem to Egypt. In turn, the emir gave it as a present to Ferdinand I, king of León.

Indeed; The chalice preserved in the Collegiate Church of San Isidoro in León is made with onyx, one of the most valued semi-precious stones (and which also matches the description of the 6th century pilgrim). On the outside it is decorated with the jewels that Urraca de Zamora, daughter of Fernando I, donated to the chalice, which is why the Leonese glass is also known as “Doña Urraca’s chalice”.

But there is still more; In 2010 the piece was disassembled for reproduction and it was found that a chip was missing. This fact corroborates another of the texts found in the University of Cairo, according to which, a splinter of the holy vessel had been sent to Saladin to cure his sick daughter through a miracle.

So, we have that the grail of Leo 1) is made of onyx, a common material in the cups of wealthy people in Judea in the 1st century and which also coincides with one of the oldest descriptions of the grail; and 2) its trace can be traced back to the 5th century, when there is the first testimony that it was kept in the Holy Sepulcher of Jerusalem.

Of course, this does not confirm its authenticity as a relic, but it does confirm its proximity to what should have been the sacred chalice. Some historians have criticized the theory held by Margarita Torres and have accused her study of falling into numerous chronological and translation errors of the Arabic texts, so the supposed documentary evidence is called into question.

2. The chalice of Valencia

As for the glass preserved in the Cathedral of Santa María in Valencia, we will say that it has significant scientific and archaeological testimony. According to the archaeologist Antonio Beltrán, who studied the chalice in 1960, the carving, made of chalcedony (again, a semi-precious stone) was made in the 1st century AD. For her part, the doctor in art history Ana Mafé affirms that it is of a typology of “Hebrew blessing cup” and that is contemporary to the time of Jesus.

How did the holy chalice reach the Peninsula? Apparently, it was transferred from Rome to Hispania by San Lorenzo; After passing through numerous places, it was kept in the monastery of San Juan de la Peña. Later, he is sent to Zaragoza and, even later, in the 15th century (and when the Aragonese court settles in Valencia), he arrives at what will be his definitive home, the Cathedral of Santa María.

3. The “other” calyxes

Although the chalice of León and that of Valencia are the ones that have the most compelling evidence for their authenticity, there are “other” grails in the world that have their own history and that claim their candidacy. Let’s look at the most important ones:

3.1 The chalice of Nanteos

Guarded in a private mansion, it seems that this glass comes from Glastonbury Abbey, which is, according to the Arthurian saga, where Joseph of Arimathea left the holy chalice for safekeeping. The analyzes that have been carried out on the cup reveal that its origin cannot be extended beyond the 14th century, which eliminates its candidacy for the Holy Grail.

3.2. The Chalice of Ardagh

Of course, due to its relationship with the Arthurian grail cycle, the British lands have always claimed their legitimation with respect to the Holy Grail. Legends claiming that Nicodemus (or Joseph of Arimathea) brought the sacred vessel to Britain from Jerusalem have spurred the myth.

In Ardagh, County Limerick, a chalice was found in 1868, made of silver, gilded bronze and glass. Despite its exquisite workmanship, everything indicates that its origin is from the first centuries of Christianity, specifically, Irish Christianity, so it cannot be the cup of the Last Supper either.

3.3. The chalice of Genoa

Italy also claims its rights as the repository of the Grail tradition. In the Treasure Museum of the Cathedral of San Lorenzo in Genoa there is the Santo Catino, made of a beautiful green crystal that, at first, was mistaken for emerald. This crystal is of medieval Byzantine (or perhaps Islamic) manufacture, so we must place its origin in the 9th and 10th centuries. Another discarded grail.

The true history of the Holy Grail and its supposed magical qualities have given rise to many legends. If we stick to the historical evidence, we must begin by saying that there is no evidence that the biblical Last Supper took place and that, if it did, there was probably more than one chalice on the table. On the other hand, if the relic exists, it should be made of semi-precious stone, in no case of porous material such as ceramic or wood.

In light of the documents, the most reliable candidate to be the holy chalice is the one discussed in the Collegiate Church of San Isidoro de León, for several reasons: 1) the documentation already mentions it in the year 400; 2) we can follow its trace through historical texts and 3) it is made with onyx, a material that agrees perfectly with archaeological records and documentation.

Did the Holy Grail really exist? Is it a cup, really? Or is it a spiritual concept? The field that faith covers is broad and, in this sense, each person can give their opinion as they like. Historically speaking, we cannot say that there is any evidence of the existence of a “holy grail”, not even of Jesus’ Last Supper. Yes, we can affirm that, if they had existed, the chalice of León and that of Valencia are the ones that have the most points of being authentic. This is probably a question that can never be fully resolved. The search continues.