The following passage comes from Robert Graves' Lars Porsena, or the Future of Swearing and Improper Language (1927) pp. 6–7:

It has been stated with detail and persistence that in the late summer of 1918 an Australian mounted unit sensationally rediscovered the actual bones of St George – not George of Cappadocia but the other one who slew the Dragon: they were brought to light by the explosion of a shell in the vault of a ruined church. The officer in command sent a cable to the Dean and Chapter of Westminster inviting them to house the holy relics. After some delay, the Dean and Chapter formally regretted the serious over-crowding of their columns; for, of course, though they could not very well mention it, St George was a bloody German. So the saint was lost again by the disgusted Australians, this time beyond rescue. Or so one version of the story has it. The other version, more attractive if less authenticated, suggests that the Dean relented later and permitted the relics to be smuggled into the Abbey under the thin disguise of The Unknown Warrior, thereby avoiding offence to anti-Popish feeling.

Can anyone find any evidence that this bizarre story really was going the rounds in 1918, a symptom perhaps of war hysteria like the Angels of Mons, or did Graves make the whole thing up? He had a very lively sense of humour in his earlier days, as the whole of Lars Porsena shows. Also, why was St George a bloody German? --Antiquary (talk) 10:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The version Graves tells in Occupation Writer has the grave being discovered in Palestine, and the reason for his non-translation being that it would require ceremonies too Popish for the century, and tacit admission of the dragon myth. He doesn't mention the Unknown Warrior. See here. DuncanHill (talk) 10:54, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you're aware, but Australians have long a reputation for, um, making up stories; pulling your leg; telling porkies. I suspect those bloody Australians were just telling a Furphy. HiLo48 (talk) 11:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that. They were probably often wrongly understood by unattentive listeners, who would have been the ones writing down the anecdote. --Askedonty (talk) 11:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've found it, Palestine Exploration Quarterly October 1917, 'Notes and News', page 150 has the following:

Which I rather think would be the genesis of Graves's yarn. DuncanHill (talk) 11:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And more info here, here, and here. Search for Shellal + St George, or Shellal Mosaic and you'll find lots more. DuncanHill (talk) 11:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that has to be it, you've solved a mystery I've vaguely wondered about for decades. It's a shame that the body turns out not to have been St George's, but hardly unexpected. I'm still wondering what Graves' German reference means though. --Antiquary (talk) 12:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

George is one of the Fourteen Holy Helpers, popular amongst German RCs, and is sometimes claimed as Germany's patron saint. There's a gert statue of him in Berlin. DuncanHill (talk) 12:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And Robert von Ranke Graves would have known that. Thanks, and happy St George's Day! --Antiquary (talk) 12:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It might have been more interesting if they had found the bones of the dragon alongside. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What evidence can establish that a find is of the remains of the one and only true George of Lydda? Some dragon bones buried alongside the holy man?  --Lambiam 13:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]