It's always the last place you look.

News reports tell us that scientists are no closer to knowing if the skull unearthed in 1801 by Joseph Rothmayer is indeed that of Wolfgang Mozart. This comes after performing comparisons between DNA material from two teeth in the skull and two thigh bones exhumed from the Mozart family grave in Salzburg. These two bones were believed to be from Mozart's maternal grandmother and his niece. The only thing the scientists seem to be able to say conclusively is that "there is no family link between these three people."

What I want to know is, is this the best they could get? Leopold Mozart is buried in that grave. (So, in an twist too ironic to be made up, is Constanze Weber Mozart.) His mother, Anna Maria Mozart, was buried in Paris, in one of the three cemeteries used by Saint-Eustache Church -- but that grave was unmarked. His sister, "Nannerl," is buried in Saint Peter's in Salzburg. If they're going to go digging people up, wouldn't exhuming Leopold or Nannerl make more sense? (Especially Leopold, seeing as they have already cracked that tomb.) And just what do they mean by "between these three people?" The two thigh bones do have a link to each other (i.e., "between"), but neither have any relation to the skull? I hate when a history of sloppy usage makes it hard to tell what anybody's talking about anymore.

I wonder what kind of a hootenanny they would have had for the upcoming sesquibicentennial (bisesquicentennial?) celebrations if tests had found a link. Would we really feel that much better, I wonder, if we could account for at least one Mozart body part? Would they be trying so hard if what the gravedigger had lifted was Mozart's coccyx? Now that's a bit of humor Wolfgang would appreciate.

Posted on January 09, 2006 to horticulture

Previously: Born in the fifties
Next Time: Feed Your Head
Main: cleaning out ferryboats