Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Obituary: Rev. H. David Sox (24 April 1936 - 28 August 2016)

© Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is the eighth (and an update of the sixth) installment of my obituary of the former General Secretary of the British Society for the Turin Shroud turned anti-authenticist, the Rev. H. David Sox who died on 28 August 2016, aged 80. As mentioned in my previous post, Ian Wilson, who knew Sox personally, was not aware of his death until I advised him of it, said he will write an obituary of Sox in the British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter.

About Sox. Harold David Sox was born on 24 April 1936 in Hickory, North Carolina to the Rev. Samuel and Nellie Sox[4]. In 1961 Sox was

[Above (enlarge): David Sox (left) on his 80th birthday, 24 April 2016[2], presumably with "his partner of 45 years, Allan Offermann"[3].]

ordained a priest of the Episcopalian church[5]. In about 1972 Sox commenced a homosexual relationship with an Allan Offermann, which lasted for 45 years until Sox's death[6]. Sox's homosexuality is relevant to the Shroud's radiocarbon dating, as we shall see. In 1974 Sox moved to London where he taught at the American School for 19 years[7], which would have been from 1974 to 1993. However Sox may not have started teaching at the American School in 1974 because Prof. Harry Gove (1922-2009), who described he and Sox as "quite good friends"[8], in 1996 twice wrote that Sox "teaches [present tense] at the American School in London"[9].

Sox and the Shroud. Sox's first contact with the Shroud was in Turin in 1956 on his way to a nearby ecumenical youth camp[10]. Sox entered the chapel where the Shroud was then kept and realised after

[Above (enlarge): Interior of the Chapel of the Holy Shroud as it would have been in 1956 when Sox entered it [02May15].]

consulting his Italian-English dictionary, that the word "sindone" which featured prominently in the chapel's literature, meant that behind the grille above the altar must be "the Shroud of Jesus"[11]. Sox admitted that he was in "rebellion" against the traditional Christianity of his Lutheran clergymen father and grandfather, and in its place was a "fascination with exotic facets of Christian tradition"[12]. Sox's initial link with the Shroud remained dormant until 1976 when, in his own words, "I started reading everything I could get my hands on concerning this curious object"[13]. In 1977 Sox helped found the British Society for the Turin Shroud[14], and became the Society's first General Secretary[15]. In 1978 Sox wrote the first of his three books on the Shroud, "File on the Shroud," which Wilson claims, "obviously favoured authenticity"[16]. Although I have only dipped into the book, from what I have read in it I must disagree with Wilson on that. In fact, in his third book, "The Shroud Unmasked" (1988), Sox writes of his "first effort, The File on the Shroud," that "in hindsight [I] am only glad I took a step toward scepticism" in it[16a]. So Sox may originally have "favoured authenticity" as Wilson remembered it, but by his first 1978 book Sox had begun to favour "scepticism."

Walter McCrone. Walter McCrone (1916-2002), was an analytical chemist and a leading exponent of the polarised light microscope[17]. His early specialty was ident-

[Right: Dr. Walter C. McCrone, Jr., McCrone Research Institute, 11 October 2015.]

ifying explosives[18] by which he became wealthy consulting for the US government during World War II[19]. With that wealth McCrone set up his own McCrone Research Institute and his own in-house journal The Microscope[20].

In 1979 McCrone began examining under a light microscope 32 sticky tapes, loaned to him by STURP's Ray Rogers (1927–2005), which had been pressed onto the Shroud in 1978[21].

[Left (enlarge): STURP's taking one of its 32 sticky tape samples from the Shroud in 1978[22].]

As an example of McCrone's capacity for self-deception, when Rogers asked for the return of STURP's tapes, McMcrone had convinced himself that half the tapes were his and that in giving them back he had been "conned out of my set of tapes"[23] (see 05Jan16)! McCrone admitted he was unable to find any paint particles on the tapes[24], but he did find particles of iron oxide (Fe2O3) [25] and a few particles of mercuric sulfide (HgS), or vermilion, in only one larger agglomerate particle[26] , which he claimed accounted for all the blood[27]! STURP's Dr. Alan D. Adler (1931-2000) and John H. Heller (1921-1995) had also found abundant iron oxide[28] but only one particle of vermilion on the same tapes[29]. Without considering any other explanations (e.g. STURP's below), McCrone jumped to the conclusion that the iron oxide particles were red ochre[30] (one of many forms of Fe2O3) which he claimed that a 14th century artist had used to paint the Shroud image[31]! McCrone then needed evidence of an organic binder to glue the 'ochre' in place[32]. Unable to see any particles of a binder[33], McCrone had to resort to a chemical test for protein, amido black, which did return a positive result[34] (however see below).

In 1979-80 at STURP meetings attended by McCrone[34a], other STURP scientists pointed out that: 1) there was no more iron oxide in image than non-image areas[35] (except for blood areas which had slightly more iron as expected since blood contains iron[36]), and the tiny amount of iron oxide that McCrone had found would be invisible[37]; 2) McCrone had failed to consider other explanations for the iron oxide[38] (e.g. it was a consequence of the process of retting flax in streams[39] and/or flaked off blood particles[40]); 3) Amido black was too general a test for protein[41] - it returned a positive result on clean modern linen[42]; 4) the vermilion came from medieval artists pressing their freshly painted copies of the Shroud onto the Original to sanctify them[43]; and 5) McCrone's conclusions conflicted with those of other members of the STURP team[44]. But McCrone simply ignored those criticisms and made no attempt to work as a team with STURP to resolve their differences[45].

In 1980 at a meeting of STURP at Santa Barbara at which Gove and Sox were present[46], McCrone again took no notice of other STURP scientists' contrary evidence but simply reiterated his conclusion that the iron oxide was red ochre pigment and the amido black positive result was evidence of a gelatin binder[47]. McCrone never attended another STURP meeting, even though he was invited[48]. Later in 1980, McCrone presented his conclusions to a closed meeting of the British Society for the Turin Shroud[49], where he fatally conceded:

"I am not saying the Shroud is not authentic. I am saying that the image area has a lot of iron oxide and a lot of artists' pigment associated with it, but I do not know whether the amount of iron oxide present is sufficient to explain the entire image"[50].
However, after the gist of McCrone's address was unauthorisedly reported in the media by a journalist present[51], McCrone used that as a pretext to be no longer bound by STURP'S non-disclosure agreement which he had signed[52] and published his conclusions in a series of articles in his The Microscope[53].

Sox and McCrone. Sox had known McCrone personally since at least September 1976 when they had dinner in London with Ian Wilson and others[55]. McCrone was interested in radiocarbon dating the sample of the Shroud removed in 1973 for textile analysis by Belgian Professor Gilbert Raes (1914-2001)[56]. In July 1976 Sox had travelled to Turin

[Above (enlarge): The 1973 Raes' sample in relation to the 1988 radiocarbon dating sample[57] (see 15Jan12 for its context within the Shroud). As can be seen, the Raes sample is large enough for radiocarbon dating[59] but its lack of documented history (Raes was not present when the sample was taken in 1973[60]) render it unsuitable for carbon dating the Shroud [61] .]

and discovered that the Raes' sample was still with Prof. Raes in his home in Ghent, Belgium[62]. Then, after Sox had written to Prof. Raes, McCrone and Sox visited Raes in November 1976 and and inspected his sample[63], which they "were surprised to find ... kept in a rather casual manner in an old scrap-book of stamps" but in "excellent condition ... entirely suitable for carbon dating"[64]. Four months later in March 1977, McCrone presented a paper at the first United States Shroud conference in Albuquerque, New Mexico (at which Sox also presented a paper[65]) in which McCrone proposed that the Raes' sample be carbon dated[66]. However, unknown to Sox and McCrone, Raes was skeptical of McCrone's proposed `electron tracks on a photographic plate' method[67], which Gove later dismissed as "scientifically nonsensical on several counts"[68], and so Raes contacted a Belgian radiocarbon dating expert, Prof. Désiré Apers[69]. According to Sox, Prof. Apers' "physics analysis" of McCrone's "nuclear track emulsions" proposal "was devastating"[70]. Raes then contacted Turin because he expected Sox to insist on making the sample available to McCrone, and Turin, which had become disillusioned with McCrone[71], requested that Raes return the sample, which he did in October[72]. The returned Raes sample was then placed in the sacristy vault of Turin's Royal Chapel where presumably it still is[73].

Sox became emotionally attached to McCrone. In his first letter of 24 June 1977 to Gove (see also future below), Sox described McCrone as "... a marvellous person and I am very devoted to him"[74]. As a result Sox, the General Secretary of the BSTS underwent a "sudden conversion" to McCrone's red ochre and vermilion painting theory[75]. As Wilson put it:

"...Sox, earlier favorable to the Shroud's authenticity, underwent a mind-blowingly rapid conversion in order to become McCrone's mouthpiece with The Image on the Shroud, published in 1981"[76]
Having joined the anti-authenticity camp, Sox resigned from the BSTS (he was not pushed) in late 1980, on the eve of the publication of his The Image on the Shroud[77], "amid a brouhaha of publicity"[78]. The strongest thread running through Sox's File on the Shoud is his support for his friend Walter McCrone[79]. In that book, Sox gave full credit to McCrone[80]:
"I would like to thank Walter McCrone for making it possible for. me to do this book as I had intended, with all of his observations and insights. Without his contribution this book would not exist"[81].

To be continued in the ninth installment of this post.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. "David's 80th birthday Apr 24th, 2016," Harold Sox Obituary - Palm Springs, California, Legacy.com. [return]
3. "In Memory of Harold David Sox, April 24, 1936 - August 28, 2016," Trident Society, Rancho Mirage CA, 28 September 2017. [return]
4. Ibid. [return]
5. Ibid. [return]
6. Ibid. [return]
7. Ibid. [return]
8. Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK, p.8. [return]
9. Gove, 1996, pp.8, 20-21. [return]
10. Sox, H.D., 1978, "File on the Shroud," Coronet: London, p.12. [return]
11. Ibid. [return]
12. Ibid. [return]
13. Ibid. [return]
14. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.234. [return]
15. Wilson, 1998, p.234. [return]
16. Wilson, 1998, p.234. [return]
16a. Sox, H.D., 1988, "The Shroud Unmasked: Uncovering the Greatest Forgery of All Time," Lamp Press: Basingstoke UK, p.152; Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.87. [return]
17. Ruffin, C.B., 1999, "The Shroud of Turin: The Most Up-To-Date Analysis of All the Facts Regarding the Church's Controversial Relic," Our Sunday Visitor: Huntington IN, p.93; McCrone, W.C., 1999, "Judgment Day for the Shroud of Turin," Prometheus Books: Amherst NY, pp.36-37. [return]
18. Hopen, T.J., 2004, "Dr. Walter C. McCrone's contribution to the characterization and identification of explosives," J Forensic Science, March, 49(2), pp.275-276. [return]
19. Lecture by Prof. Joel Bernstein, "The Shroud of Turin: What science can tell us?," Scitech, Perth, Western Australia, 28 July 2011. [return]
20. Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, p.184; Wilson, 1998, pp.77-79. [return]
21. Scavone, D.C., 1989, "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA, pp.54-56; McCrone, 1999, pp.78, 122. [return]
22. Rogers, R.N., 2008, "A Chemist's Perspective on the Shroud of Turin," Lulu Press: Raleigh, NC, p.21. [return]
23. McCrone, 1999, pp.123-124. [return]
24. McCrone, 1999, p.83. [return]
25. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.47; Rogers, 2008, p.50. [return]
26. McCrone, 1999, pp.129-130; Antonacci, 2000, p.48. [return]
27. McCrone, 1999, pp.1, 130, 134, 137, 140. [return]
28. Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.88; Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, p.29. [return]
29. Heller, 1983, p.192. [return]
30. McCrone, 1999, pp.1, 117. [return]
31. Ruffin, 1999, p.89. [return]
32. Wilson, 1986, p.62. [return]
33. de Wesselow, 2012, p.136 [return]
34. Wilson, 1986, p.62. [return]
34a. Wilson, 1986, p.63. [return]
35. Heller, 1983, p.140. [return]
36. Heller, 1983, p.140; Whiting, B., 2006, "The Shroud Story," Harbour Publishing: Strathfield NSW, Australia, p.170. [return]
37. Sox, H.D., 1981, "The Image on the Shroud: Is the Turin Shroud a Forgery?," Unwin: London, p.38; Picknett, L. & Prince, C., 1994, "Turin Shroud: In Whose Image?: The Truth Behind the Centuries-Long Conspiracy of Silence," HarperCollins: New York NY, p.56; Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 23; Picknett, L. & Prince, C., 2006, "The Turin Shroud: How Da Vinci Fooled History," [1994], Touchstone: New York NY, Second edition, Reprinted, 2007, p.76; . [return]
38. Rogers, 2008, p.36. [return]
39. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, p.29; Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, p.153. [return]
40. Tribbe, 2006, p.153. [return]
41. Scavone, 1989, p.62. [return]
42. Scavone, 1989, p.62; Rogers, 2008, p.21. [return]
43. Heller, 1983, p.212; Ruffin, 1999, p.90; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.136. [return]
44. Wilson, 1998, p.79; Tribbe, 2006, p.138; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, pp.213-214. [return]
45. Reference(s) to be provided. [return]
46. Sox, H.D., 1981, "The Image on the Shroud: Is the Turin Shroud a Forgery?," Unwin: London, p.15. [return]
47. Reference(s) to be provided. [return]
48. Ruffin, 1999, p.100; Oxley, 2010, p.214. [return]
49. Wilson, 1998, p.79. [return]
50. Whiting, 2006, p.171. [return]
51 . Sox, H.D., 1988, "The Shroud Unmasked: Uncovering the Greatest Forgery of All Time," Lamp Press: Basingstoke UK, p.64; Wilson, 1998, p.79. [return]
52. Wilson, 1998, p.79. [return]
53. Wilson, 1998, p.79. [return]
55. McCrone, 1999, p.62. [return]
56. McCrone, 1999, p.55. [return]
57. Wilson, 1998, p.189. [return]
59. Meacham, W., 1986, "On Carbon Dating the Shroud," British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 14, September, pp.4-15, 5; Gove, 1996, p6. [return]
60. Meacham, 1986, p.5. [return]
61. Meacham, 1986, p.5; Gove, 1996, p6. [return]
62. Sox, H.D., 1978, "File on the Shroud," Coronet: London, pp.97-98. [return]
63. Sox, 1981, p.21. [return]
64. Sox, 1978, p.98. [return]
65. Sox, H.D., "Some Ecumenical Considerations Concerning the Turin Relic," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, pp.16-22. [return]
66. McCrone, W.C., "Authentication of the Turin Shroud," in Stevenson, 1977, pp.124-130, 124-125; Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.233. [return]
67. Gove, 1996, p.18. [return]
68. Gove, 1996, p.18. [return]
69. Sox, 1978, p.98. [return]
70. Morgan, R., 1989, "The Paris Symposium - Part I," Shroud News, No 55, October, pp.5-23, 23. [return]
71. Gove, 1996, p.20. [return]
72. Morgan, 1989, p.23. [return]
73. Sox, 1978, pp.98-99. [return]
74. Gove, 1996, p.15. [return]
75. Picknett & Prince, 1994, p.54; Picknett & Prince, 2006, p.74. [return]
76. Wilson, 1986, pp.xiii-xiv. [return]
77. Sox, 1981, p.vi. [return]
78. Wilson, 1986, p.63; Picknett & Prince, 1994, p.54; Picknett & Prince, 2006, p.74. [return]
79. Morgan, R., 1981, "New Book on the Shroud by H. David Sox," No. 6, March, Shroud News, No 6, pp.4-7, 5. [return]
80. Paci , S.M., 1990, "The Case Is Not Closed!," Shroud News, No 60, August, p.4-11, 8. [return]
81. Sox, 1981, p.vi. [return]

Posted: 15 August 2017. Updated: 24 August 2017.

Sunday, August 13, 2017

"Editorial and Contents," Shroud of Turin News, July 2017

Shroud of Turin News - July 2017
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

[Previous: June 2017, part #2] [Next: July 2017, part #2]

This is the "Editorial and Contents," part #1 of the July 2017 issue of my Shroud of Turin News. Following this editorial, I may comment on Shroud-related July 2017 news articles in separate posts, linked back to this post, with the articles' words in bold to distinguish them from mine. I have listed some linked articles about the Shroud in July as a service to readers, without necessarily commenting on them. If I do comment on an article in a separate Shroud of Turin News post, I will add after it "- see Month year, part #n".

Contents:
Editorial
"Shroud, new study: there is blood of a man tortured and killed," Vatican Insider, Andrea Tornielli, 11 July 2017
"New research: Shroud of Turin bears blood of a torture victim," Catholic News Agency, Turin, Italy, July 14, 2017.
"Experts in HUGE Turin Shroud discovery – is this proof at last Jesus WAS wrapped in cloth?," Daily Express, Joey Millar, Jul 17, 2017.
"Numismatics of Shroud of Turin resurrected," Numismatic News, Richard Giedroyc, July 17, 2017.
"Turin Shroud is stained with the blood of a torture victim, new research shows - supporting the belief that it DOES show the face of Jesus," Daily Mail, Jay Akbar, 18 July 2017.
"Shroud of Turin is stained with blood from torture victim supporting belief it's Jesus's face," Metro, Richard Hartley-Parkinson, 18 Jul 2017.


Editorial

Rex Morgan's Shroud News: My scanning and word-processing of the 118 issues of Rex Morgan's Shroud News, provided by Ian Wilson, and emailing them to Barrie Schwortz, for him to convert to PDFs and add to his online Shroud News archive, continued in July up to issue #81, February 1994 [Right (enlarge)], i.e 69% completed. Issues in that archive are now up to #76, April 1993.

Posts: In July I blogged 4 new posts (latest uppermost): "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Eleventh century," - 27th; "`Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud,' Shroud of Turin News, June 2017," - 19th; "c.15 June 1987: On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud," - 7th; "`Editorial and Contents,' Shroud of Turin News, June 2017," - 6th

Updates in the background. In July there were no significant updates in the background to past posts.

Comments: There were no significant comments in July.

My radiocarbon dating hacker theory: I blogged no posts about my hacker theory in July.

My book: I am making progress in writing a dot-point outline of my book on my smartphone (see 06Jul17). Chapters completed in dot-point outline up to July were: "0. Preface"; "1. Introduction"; "2. Linen cloth"; "3. Man on the Shroud"; "4. Wounds and bloodstains"; and "5. Bible and the Shroud".

News: Obituary: H. David Sox (April 24, 1936 - August 28, 2016). In July on a whim, I googled "Rev David Sox" to find out if the

[Left (enlarge): David Sox (left) on his 80th birthday, 24 April 2016, presumably with "his partner of 45 years, Allan Offermann".]

former General Secretary of the British Society for the Turin Shroud, turned anti-authenticist, had made any recent comment on the Shroud. I had done this every year or so but had usually drawn a blank. However this time I noticed a funeral home obituary for a "Harold David Sox." I knew he was "H. David Sox" but I didn't know (or had forgotten) what the "H" stood for. On reading the obituary, when I came to, "In 1974 he moved to London where he taught at the American School for 19 years" I knew it was the David Sox, without having to read further down that, "He is the author of numerous articles and 11 published books on varied subjects from the Shroud of Turin ..." I emailed the obituary to Ian Wilson and Barrie Schwortz, in case they hadn't heard that Sox had died. Barrie hasn't yet replied but Ian did and said he hadn't heard of Sox's death and would write an obituary of Sox in the BSTS Newsletter. I will also write an obituary of Sox in my next post after this. The online guest book at the funeral home has only 12 entries and only one of those (the BBC's Neil Cameron) is from Sox's Shroud connection. So this item and my obituary to follow may be the first that most Shroud pro- and anti-authenticists will have heard of Sox's death.

Pageviews: At midnight on 31 July 2017, Google Analytics [Below (enlarge)]gave this blog's "Pageviews all time history" as 777,560. This compares with 567,373 (up 210,187 or 37.0%) from the same time in July 2016. It also gave the most viewed posts for the month (highest uppermost) as: "John P. Jackson, `An Unconventional Hypothesis to Explain all Image Characteristics Found on the Shroud Image' (1991)," Jan 18, 2012 - 219; "c.15 June 1987: On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud," Jul 7, 2017-180; "Shroud of Turin News" - October 2015 Nov 10, 2015 - 114; "`Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud,' Shroud of Turin News, June 2017," - 103 and "Real human blood #23: The man on the Shroud: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!," Jun 3, 2017 - 94. As can be seen from the graph, pageviews peaked in the middle of the month and then settled down again.


Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]

Posted: 13 August 2017. Updated: 14 August 2017.

Thursday, July 27, 2017

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Eleventh century

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present
ELEVENTH CENTURY
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

This is the sixteenth and final (and an update to the sixth) installment of part #11, "Eleventh century," of my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 - present" series. See also 04May14 and 11May14. For more information about this series see part #1, "1st century and Index." Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

[Index #1] [Previous: 10th century #10] [Next: 12th century #12]


11th century (1001-1100).

[Above (enlarge): "Scenes from the Passion of Christ"[2]. Part of a larger carved ivory panel in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London[3]. Note that Jesus' arms are crossed awkwardly at the wrists, right over left, over His loins[4], exactly as they are on the Shroud[5]. And Jesus is lying on a double-length cloth[6] which has a repeating pattern of Xs similar to those in icons of the Image of Edessa (i.e. the Shroud "doubled in four" = tetradiplon) and hinting at the Shroud's herringbone weave[7]. Yet this is a late 11th/early 12th century Byzantine icon[8], an early example of the genre which the Byzantine Greeks called Threnos[9], or Lamentation, the main feature of which is Jesus wrapped in a large cloth compatible with today's Turin Shroud[10]. [See "c.1090" below]. This alone is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the Shroud already existed more than a century before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date of the Shroud!]

c. 1001a The Russian Orthodox cross uniquely has a footrest, or suppedaneum[11], angled with the left side higher than the right[12].

[Right (enlarge): Russian cross with angled footrest, late 12th century[13].

This matches the Shroud, in that the man on the Shroud's left leg (which when facing the Shroud appears to be his right leg because of mirror reversal[14]), appears to be shorter than the other[15].

This is due to his left foot having been superimposed over his right[16], and both feet fixed by a single nail[17]. The man's left leg was therefore bent more and remained fixed in that position after death by rigor mortis[18].

[Left (enlarge): The man on the Shroud's apparent right leg (left leg because of mirror reversal) appears to be shorter than his right[19].]

This presumably is the source of the 11th century Byzantine legend that Jesus actually had one leg shorter than the other and therefore was lame[20].

As this form of the cross is universal among the Russians[21] it must date from near the beginning of the national conversion to Christianity, when missionaries in 988 came from Constantinople[22] bringing a copy of the full-length Shroud, in `icon evangelism'[23].

c. 1001b Closely related to the Russian cross is the "Byzantine curve"

[Right (enlarge): "Byzantine Crucifix of Pisa," ca. 1230[24]. Note that Christ's right leg (corresponding to the Shroud's left leg) is shorter than the other leg and His body is curved (the "Byzantine curve") to compensate.]

in Byzantine Christian iconography[25]. After the year 1000, a striking change occurred in Byzantine depictions of Christ on the Cross[26]. Christ's two feet were nailed separately at the same level but his left leg is bent (based presumably on the Byzantines realising that the Shroud's image is laterally inverted) which meant that Jesus' body needed to curve to His right to compensate[27]. This "Byzantine curve" became the established form of Eastern depictions of Christ at the beginning of the eleventh century and made its way also into the West and became the recognized form in Italy in the early mediaeval period[28]. As with the strange design of the Russian cross, so this strange belief that Jesus had to have a curved body on the Shroud because one foot was shorter than the other and the Romans would have crucified Jesus' feet at the same level[29], has its most likely common origin in the Shroud[30]. But then again that means the Shroud was known in the Byzantine world (the centre of which was Constantinople), soon after the year 1000, nearly three centuries before 1260, the earliest possible radiocarbon date of the Shroud[31]!

1011 Pope Sergius IV (r. 1009-12) consecrates an altar in Rome dedicated to the sudarium[32]. This is thought to be a reference to the coming to Rome of its Veil of Veronica[33], which was purported to be

[Above (original): Poor quality distance photograph of Rome's Veronica icon[34], which the Vatican now refuses to allow to be seen or photographed up close because it has so deteriorated[35].]

an imprint of Jesus' face on the veil of a Jerusalem woman named Veronica who supposedly wiped Jesus' bloody and sweaty face with it as He was being led to the site of His crucifixion[36]. But there is no mention of that in the Gospel accounts (Mt 27:31-35; Mk 15:20-25; Lk 23:26-33; Jn 19:16-18)[37]. That there never was a woman called Veronica is evident in the name itself, which is a compound of two Latin words: vera icon = "true image"[38]. The Veronica's veil legends seem to have arisen in 7th and 8th centuries, when knowledge of the Edessa Cloth/Shroud image had become widespread[39]. In the early twentieth century, Joseph Wilpert (1857-1944), a German Catholic priest and archaeologist, examined the Vatican's Veronica icon in St Peter's Basilica and found on it brown stains but no clear image[40]. Similarly, Hungarian artist Isabel Piczek (1927–2016) in 1946, when still a teenager, was surprisingly shown the Veronica in St. Peter's, and as she described it:

"On it was a head-size patch of colour, about the same as the [Turin] shroud, slightly more brownish. By patch, I do not mean that it was patched, just a blob of a brownish rust colour. It looked almost even, except for some little swirly discolorations ... Even with the best imagination, you could not make any face or features out of them, not even the slightest hint of it"[41].
Earlier artists' copies of the Veronica icon indicate it was a copy of the face on the Cloth of Edessa/Shroud[42] specially made for Rome shortly before the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches went their separate ways[43]. Indeed, when Makarios of Magnesia, c. 410, retold the Veronica legend, he called her a "Princess of Edessa"[44]! This supports my proposal that, "the Veronica story" may be "a contemporary parallel to [or even earlier than] the Abgar V story of Jesus wiping his face on a towel [see "50"], to explain how Jesus' image came to be on the Image of Edessa (the Shroud tetradiplon = `four-doubled')" (see my 06Mar17). It has been claimed that Rome's Veronica icon disappeared when the troops of Holy Roman Emperor Charles V (r. 1519-1556) mutinied and sacked Rome and the Vatican in 1527[45]. But in 1616-17 six official faithful "tone for tone, blotch for blotch" copies of the Veronica in St Peter's were commissioned by Pope Paul V (r. 1605-1621) to be painted by an amateur artist who was also a canon of St Peter's, Pietro Strozzi[46]. And at least three of Strozzi's copies have survived: "The Holy Face of Vienna," "The Holy Face of San Silvestro," and "The Holy Face of Genoa" (see my 03Sep12)[47]. So this 1527 looted Veronica was evidently only one of the many copies of that icon[48].

c. 1050a The mid-eleventh-century Old French "Life of Saint Alexis"[49], the first masterpiece of French literature, contains the passage:

"Then he [Alexis of Rome (d.412)] went off to the city of Edessa Because of an image he had heard tell of, which the angels made at God's commandment"[50]

[Left: Miniature and text of the "Chanson de St Alexis" or "Vie de St Alexis," in the St. Albans Psalter (c. 1120-1145)[51].]

As philologist Linda Cooper has shown in a scholarly paper[52], the "image" referred to is the Image of Edessa, and from the various versions of St. Alexis's life it is clear that this was the Shroud[53]. See ["977"] for a 10th century "Life of St. Alexis" which used the word "sindon," the same word used in the Gospels for Jesus' burial shroud[54] (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53)!

c. 1050b Eleventh-century mosaic bust of Christ Pantocrator, i.e. "Ruler of all"[55], in the narthex of the catholicon church (c. 1010) within the Hosios Loukas monastery[56] near the town of Distomo, Greece[57].

[Right (enlarge): Christ Pantocrator, c. 1050, Hosios Loukas monastery, Greece[58].]

The late art historian, Professor Kurt Weitzmann (1904-93), who specialised in Byzantine and medieval art[59], noted that this icon had facial "subtleties" similar to the sixth-century Christ Pantocrator icon portrait in St. Catherine monastery, Sinai[60] [see "550"]. In particular Prof. Weitzmann noted:

"...the pupils of the eyes are not at the same level; the eyebrow over Christ's left eye is arched higher than over his right ... one side of the mustache droops at a slightly different angle from the other, while the beard is combed in the opposite direction ... Many of these subtleties remain attached to this particular type of Christ image and can be seen in later copies, e.g. the mosaic bust in the narthex of Hosios Lukas over the entrance to the catholicon ... Here too the difference in the raising of the eyebrows is most noticeable ..."[61].

Those facial "subtleties" that Prof. Weitzmann noted were "attached to this particular type of Christ image and can be seen in later copies" are Vignon markings (see 11Feb12) which are all found on the Shroud (see below)!

[Above (enlarge): Positive photograph of the Shroud face, with Vignon markings numbers 1-15 superimposed[61a].

1075 On 14 March 1075 the ark or chest (Arca Santa) in which the

[Above (enlarge)[62]: The Holy Chest (or Arca Santa) in which the Sudarium was transported from Jerusalem in 614[63], via Alexandria[64], to Cartagena and Seville in Spain in 616[65]; taken to the Monastery of San Vicente near Oviedo in 761[66], deposited in the Holy Chamber (Camara Santa), which is within today's Oviedo Cathedral, by King Alfonso II (r. 783, 791-842) in c.812[67], opened by Bishop Ponce (1025–1028) in 1030[68] and again opened by King Alfonso IV (1040–1109) in 1075[69].]

Sudarium of Oviedo was kept was officially opened in the presence of King Alfonso VI (r. 1077-1109), his sister Doña Urraca (c.1033–1101), Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar (c. 1040–1099) (aka El Cid) and a number of bishops[70]. This official act was recorded in a document which is now kept in the archives of the cathedral in Oviedo[71]. But as we saw

[Above (enlarge): "Comparison of the Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin"[72]. "The most striking thing about all the stains [on the Sudarium of Oviedo] is that they coincide exactly with the face of the image on the Turin Shroud."[73].]

in ["614"], the bloodstains on the face and back of the head of the Sudarium of Oviedo are so similar in appearance to those on the corresponding parts of the Shroud, that the two cloths must have been in contact with the same wounded body within the same short time period[74]. And since the Sudarium has been in Spain since the early seventh century, and certainly since 1075, this is further evidence that the "mediaeval ... AD 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud[75] was wrong[76]!

c. 1080 Eleventh-century Christ Pantocrator mosaic in the dome of the monastery church of Daphni near Athens, Greece[77]. It has 13

[Left (enlarge): Christ Pantocrator mosaic from Daphni, Greece[78].]

of the 15 Vignon markings[79]. Some of the markings (for example, the three-sided, or topless square) are stylized having been rendered more naturalistic by a very competent artist[80].

c. 1087 The Pantocrator in the apse of Sant'Angelo in Formis church, near Capua, Italy, had previously been cited by Wilson and others to have been tenth century, which I had followed. But according to Wikipedia, the "church was built in the eleventh century by Desiderius, the abbot of Monte Cassino," who became Pope Victor III (c. 1026–1087)[81]:

"The church was built in the eleventh century by Desiderius, the abbot of Monte Cassino ... the decoration was carried out by Byzantine (Greek) artists hired from Constantinople and the decoration of Sant'Angelo displays a mingling of the Byzantine (Eastern) and Latin (Western) traditions. The frescos were painted by Greek artists and by Italian pupils trained in their methods"[82].
This "Christ enthroned" fresco[83] has 14 out of the 15 Vignon

[Above (enlarge): Extract of Christ's face which is part of a larger 11th century fresco in the church of St. Angelo in Formis, Capua, Italy[84].]

markings that are on the Shroud[85], many of which are just incidental blemishes on the cloth[86]. These include:

"... a transverse line across the forehead, a raised right eyebrow, an upside-down triangle at the bridge of the nose, heavily delineated lower eyelids, a strongly accentuated left cheek, a strongly accentuated right cheek, and a hairless gap between the lower lip and beard ..."[87].

One of these, the upside-down triangle at the bridge of the nose (VM 3)[88] is particularly important because it has no logic as a natural

[Above: Upside-down triangle at the bridge of the nose on the Shroud, just below the base of the `topless square'[89].]

feature of the face, yet it recurs on several other pre-1260 depictions of Jesus' face, for example, the eleventh-century mosaic Pantocrator in the dome of the church at Daphni, near Athens (see above enlarged), where, being a mosaic, pieces of black material have been specially selected and arranged into the shape of a triangle[90].

c. 1090 Late eleventh/early twelfth century Byzantine ivory of the threnos (Greek for lamentation) scenes of Jesus (see above and right for context). This is an example of a dramatic change in depictions of Jesus' burial which began about the beginning of the eleventh century[91].

[Right (original): Full carved ivory panel in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London[92], showing scenes of: crucifixion (top), deposition (middle) and burial threnos (bottom).]

Before the eleventh century Jesus had been traditionally depicted as being buried wrapped in linen strips like an Egyptian mummy[93]. But from the early eleventh century, in threnos (lamentation) burial scenes[94], Jesus' began to be be depicted lying full-length[95] in front of the Cross as the central figure[96] and His body about to be enveloped in a double full-length white shroud[97]. In these depictions Jesus' right hand is crossed over the left at the wrists as it is on the Shroud[98]. This sudden new artistic development coincides with the discovery after the Image of Edessa arrived in Constantinople in 944 [see "944b"] that behind its face panel was the full-length Shroud "doubled in four" (tetradiplon)[99].

1092 A letter dated 1092 purporting to be from the Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos (r. 1081 to 1118) (aka Alexius I Comnenus) to Robert II of Flanders (c.1065- 1111)[100]. In the letter

[Left (enlarge): Portrait of Byzantine Emperor Alexius I Comnenus (1056-1118), from a Greek manuscript[101].]

the Emperor appealed for help to prevent Constantinople falling into the hands of the pagans[102]. The letter listed the relics "of the Lord" in Constantinople including, "the linen cloths [linteamina] found in the sepulchre after his Resurrection"[103]. Although historians regard the letter as a forgery[104], it may not be, since Robert had made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in 1086 and had spent some time with Alexius I in Constantinople, and there is no reason why the two had not remained in touch[105]. Besides, even if Alexius I did not write the letter, this need not invalidate it's description of the relics which were then in the imperial collection[106]. See below on the appeal by the same Emperor for Western help to prevent Anatolia from falling into the hands of Muslim forces.

1095 Start of the First Crusade (1095–1099) which sought to regain the Holy Land taken in the Muslim conquests of the Levant (632–661)[107]. The crusade was called for by Pope Urban II (r. 1088-1099), in response to an appeal by Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos (r. 1081 to 1118) who requested western help to repel the invading Seljuk Turks from Anatolia[108]. See above on the 1092 appeal by the same Emperor for Western help to prevent Constantinople from falling into the hands of Muslim forces. The crusade climaxed in the recapture of Jerusalem in 1099[109]. In. 1098 Edessa was captured by Christian forces under Baldwin of Boulogne (1058-1118) who became the first ruler of the County of Edessa and then the first King of Jerusalem (r. 1098–1100)[110].

[Right (enlarge): "Baldwin of Boulogne entering Edessa in February 1098," by J. Robert-Fleury (1840)[111].]

Edessa became an important part of the Crusader presence in the Middle East[112] until its recapture by Muslim forces in 1144[113]. [See future "1144"]. An important consequence for Shroud history of the Christian capture of Edessa in the First Crusade is that Byzantine texts about Edessa became better known in the West[114]. Among these were the Abgar story[115] [See future "1140"].

c. 1100 Late eleventh century portable mosaic, "Christ the Merciful"[116], in the former Ehemals Staatliche Museum[117], now Bodemuseum, Berlin.

[Left (enlarge): "Christ the Merciful" mosaic icon (1100-1150) in the Bodemuseum, Berlin[118].]

By my count this icon has 12 (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15) of the 15 Vignon markings including a wisp of hair where the reversed `3' bloodflow is on the Shroud, a topless square, wide open staring eyes, a forked beard and a line across the throat, but they are more stylized[119].

Remember:

"... if the radiocarbon dating is to be believed, there should be no evidence of our Shroud [before 1260]. The year 1260 was the earliest possible date for the Shroud's existence by radiocarbon dating's calculations. Yet artistic likenesses of Jesus originating well before 1260 can be seen to have an often striking affinity with the face on the Shroud ..."[120].
To be continued in the next part #12 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page.[return]
2. "Scenes from the Passion of Christ; The Crucifixion, the Deposition from the Cross, The Entombment and the Lamentation," Victoria and Albert Museum, London. [return]
3. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.160; Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, p.151; Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, pp.147, 270. [return]
4. Wilson, 1979, p.160. [return]
5. Wilson, 1991, p.151; Wilson, 1998, p.270; Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, p.183. [return]
6. Wilson, 1991, p.151. [return]
7. Scavone, D.C., 1999, "Greek Epitaphoi and Other Evidence for the Shroud in Constantinople up to 1204," in Walsh, B., ed., 2000, "Proceedings of the 1999 Shroud of Turin International Research Conference, Richmond, Virginia," Magisterium Press: Glen Allen VA, pp.204-205. [return]
119. Wilson, 1998, p.147. [return]
9. Wilson, 1991, p.151; Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.195. [return]
10. Wilson, 2010, p.182. [return]
11. Bulst, W., 1957, "The Shroud of Turin," McKenna, S. & Galvin, J.J., transl., Bruce Publishing Co: Milwaukee WI, p.47. [return]
12. Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, p.65. [return]
13. The Adoration of the Cross," Second half of the 12th century, "Christian Art: Icons, Murals, Mosaics," The Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow, Russia, 2 April 2014. [return]
14. Barnes, 1934, p.64. [return]
15. Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p.196. [return]
16. Ibid. [return]
17. Barnes, 1934, p.64. [return]
18. Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p.196. [return]
19. Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical". [return]
20. Ruffin, C.B., 1999, "The Shroud of Turin: The Most Up-To-Date Analysis of All the Facts Regarding the Church's Controversial Relic," Our Sunday Visitor: Huntington IN, p.111. [return]
21. Barnes, 1934, p.65. [return]
22. Barnes, 1934, pp.65-66. [return]
23. Wilson, 2010, pp.136-137, 151-152. [return]
24. "Byzantine Master of the Crucifix of Pisa," Wikipedia, 14 April 2017. [return]
25. Barnes, 1934, p.66. [return]
26. Barnes, 1934, pp.66-67. [return]
27. Barnes, 1934, p.67. [return]
28. Barnes, 1934, pp.67-68. [return]
30. Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p.195. [return]
29. Barnes, 1934, p.68. [return]
31. Wilson, 1998, p.141. [return]
32. Wilson, 1998, p.269; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.7; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, p.37. [return]
33. Bulst, 1957, p.40; Wilson, 1979, p.109. [return]
34. "St. Peter's Basilica: St Veronica Statue," February 6, 2010. [return]
35. Bulst, 1957, p.41; Wilson, 1991, pp.183-187; Oxley, 2010, p.37; Wilson, 1998, p.63. [return]
36. Wilson, 1979, pp.97, 106; Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, pp.25-26; Scavone, D.C., "The History of the Turin Shroud to the 14th C.," in Berard, A., ed., 1991, "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud," Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud Committee ofork NY, pp.265-266; Wilson, 1991, p.25; Guerrera, 2001, p.7; Oxley, 2010, p.36. [return]
37. Bulst, 1957, p.12; Guerrera, 2001, p.7. [return]
38. Stevenson & Habermas, 1981, pp.25-26; Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, 1983, p.71; Cruz, J.C., 1984, "Relics: The Shroud of Turin, the True Cross, the Blood of Januarius. ..: History, Mysticism, and the Catholic Church," Our Sunday Visitor: Huntington IN, p.53; Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p.191; Ruffin, 1999, p.59; Guerrera, 2001, p.7. [return]
39. Meacham, W., 1983, "The Authentication of the Turin Shroud: An Issue in Archaeological Epistemology," Current Anthropology, Vol. 24, No. 3, June, pp.283-311, 287; .287; Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 50. [return]
40. Bulst, 1957, p.41; Antonacci, 2000, p.265; Oxley, 2010, p.37. [return]
41. Wilson, 1991, p.185. [return]
42. Bulst, 1957, p.40. [return]
43. Borkan, 1995, p.35; Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p..191; Wilson, 1998, pp.269-270. [return]
44. Scavone, 1991, p.195. [return]
45. Wilson, 1979, p.107; Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.129; Antonacci, 2000, p.265; Oxley, 2010, p.37. [return]
46. Wilson, 1991, pp.106-113; Oxley, 2010, p.37. [return]
47. Wilson, 1991, pp.111-114. [return]
48. Wilson, 1991, p.47; Antonacci, 2000, p.265; Bennett, 2001, p.87. [return]
49. Bauer, B.L.M. & Slocum, J., 2013, "Old French Online: Lesson 3," Linguistics Research Center in The College of Liberal Arts, University of Texas at Austin, 11 December. [return]
50. Wilson, I., 1987, "Recent Publications," British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter 16, May, p.14. [return]
51. "St. Albans Psalter," Wikipedia, 1 July 2017. [return]
52. Cooper, L., 1986, "The Old French Life of Saint Alexis and the Shroud of Turin," Modern Philology, Vol. 84, No. 1, August, pp.1-17. [return]
53. Wilson, 1987, p.14. [return]
54. Wilson, 1998, p.269. [return]
55. Ruffin, 1999, p.110; Zodhiates, S., 1992, "The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament," AMG Publishers: Chattanooga TN, Third printing, 1994, pp.1093-1094. [return]
56. "Hosios Loucas (Stiris)," Pausanias Project, January 5, 2015. [return]
57. "Hosios Loukas," Wikipedia, 15 June 2017. [return]
58. Ibid. [return]
59. "Kurt Weitzmann," Wikipedia, 1 May 2017. [return]
60. Wilson, 1986, p.107. [return]
61. Weitzmann, K., 1976, "The Monastery of St. Catherine at Mount Sinai: The Icons," Princeton University Press: Princeton NJ, p.15, in Wilson, 1986, p.107. [return]
61a. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002: Face Only Horizontal (cropped and rotated right 90°), Sindonology.org. [return]
62. "Arca Santa," Wikipedia, 29 November 2016. [return]
63. Bennett, J., 2001, "Sacred Blood, Sacred Image: The Sudarium of Oviedo: New Evidence for the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin," Ignatius Press: San Francisco CA, p.194. [return]
64. Bennett, 2001, p.194. [return]
65. Bennett, 2001, p.194. [return]
66. Bennett, 2001, p.195. [return]
67. Bennett, 2001, p.195. [return]
68. Bennett, 2001, pp.195-196. [return]
69. Bennett, 2001, p.196. [return]
70. Guscin, M., 1998, "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, p.17. [return]
71. Guscin, 1998, p.17. [return]
72. Bennett, 2001, p.122. [return]
73. Guscin, 1998, p.27. [return]
74. Adler, A.D., 1996, "Updating Recent Studies on the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.81-86, 83. [return]
75. Damon, P.E., et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16 February, pp.611-615, 611. [return]
76. Adler, A.D., 2000, "The Shroud Fabric and the Body Image: Chemical and Physical Characteristics," in Adler & Crispino, 2002, pp.113-127, 124. [return]
77. Maher, R.W., 1986, "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, p.77. [return]
78. "Daphni Monastery," Wikipedia, 7 May 2017. [return]
79. Maher, 1986, p.77. [return]
80. Wilcox, R.K., 1977, "Shroud," Macmillan: New York NY, p.84; Wilson, 1979, p.104. [return]
81. "Pope Victor III," Wikipedia, 25 June 2017. [return]
82. "Sant'Angelo in Formis," Wikipedia, 3 January 2017. [return]
83. Wilson, 1991, p.47. [return]
84. Wilson, 1986, p.110A. [return]
85. Wilson, 1979, p.102. [return]
86. Wilson, 1991, p.47. [return]
87. Wilson, 1991, p.165. [return]
88. Wilson, I., 1978, "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, p.82e. [return]
89. "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Face Only Vertical". [return]
90. Wilson, 1991, p.165. [return]
91. Morgan, R.H., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia, p.37; Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ, p.26. [return]
92. "Scenes from the Passion of Christ," Victoria and Albert Museum, London. [return]
93. Wilson, 1979, pp.158-159; Wilson, 1986, p.114; Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, p.79. [return]
94. Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, p.119. [return]
95. Morgan, 1980, p.37. [return]
96. Iannone, 1998, p.119. [return]
97. Adams, 1982, p.27; Iannone, 1998, p.119. [return]
98. Adams, 1982, p.27. [return]
99. Morgan, 1980, pp.37-38. [return]
100. Wilson, 1979, pp.166-167. [return]
101. "Alexios I Komnenos," Wikipedia, 7 August 2017. [return]
102. Ricci, G., 1981, "The Holy Shroud," Center for the Study of the Passion of Christ and the Holy Shroud: Milwaukee WI, p.xxxv; Scavone, D., "The Shroud of Turin in Constantinople: The Documentary Evidence," in Sutton, R.F., Jr., 1989, "Daidalikon: Studies in Memory of Raymond V Schoder," Bolchazy Carducci Publishers: Wauconda IL, pp.311-329, 318. [return]
103. Currer-Briggs, N., 1989, "Letters," BSTS Newsletter, No. 22, May, pp.11-12; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.177. [return]
104. Wilson, 1979, p.314n31. [return]
105. Crispino, D.C., 1989, "Questions in a Quandary," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 31, June, pp.15-19, 17. [return]
106. Wilson, 1979, p.314n31. [return]
107. "First Crusade," Wikipedia, 5 August 2017. [return]
108. Ibid. [return]
109. "Siege of Jerusalem (1099)," Wikipedia, 30 June 2017. [return]
110. "Baldwin I of Jerusalem," Wikipedia, 14 July 2017. [return]
111. "File:Baldwin of Boulogne entering Edessa in Feb 1098.JPG," Wikipedia, 23 March 2017. [return]
112. Oxley, 2010, p.33. [return]
113. "Siege of Edessa," Wikipedia, 12 June 2017. [return]
114. Scavone, D.C., 2002, "Joseph of Arimathea, the Holy Grail and the Edessa Icon," Collegamento pro Sindone, October, pp.1-25, p.6. [return]
115. Scavone, D.C., 1989, "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA, p.88. [return]
116. Wilson, 1979, p.160H. [return]
117. Ibid. [return]
118. Mosaic icon, "Christ the Merciful (1100-1150), in Museum of Byzantine Art, Bode Museum, Berlin, Germany: Wikipedia (translated by Google). [return]
119. Wilson, 1979, p.104. [return]
120. Wilson, 1998, p.141. [return]

Posted: 27 July 2017. Updated: 13 August 2017.

Wednesday, July 19, 2017

"Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud," Shroud of Turin News, June 2017

Shroud of Turin News - June 2017
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

[Previous: June 2017, part #1] [Next: July 2017, part #1]

This is part #2 of the June 2017 issue of my Shroud of Turin News. Footnotes have been omitted. Typos have been corrected. The article's words are bold to distinguish them from mine. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

Carlino, E, De Caro, L, Giannini, C, & Fanti, G., 2017, "Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud," PLoS ONE, 12(6), June 30.

Abstract. We performed reproducible atomic resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy and Wide Angle X-ray Scanning Microscopy experiments studying for the first time the nanoscale properties of a pristine fiber taken from the Turin Shroud. We found evidence of biologic nanoparticles of creatinine bounded with small nanoparticles of iron oxide. The kind, size and distribution of the iron oxide nanoparticles cannot be dye for painting but are ferrihydrate cores of ferritin. The consistent bound of ferritin iron to creatinine occurs in human organism in case of a severe polytrauma. Our results point out that at the nanoscale a scenario of violence is recorded in the funeral fabric and suggest an explanation for some contradictory results so far published.

[Above (original): Extract of Fig 1: Low-magnification, light microscopy image of a fibre from the Shroud, the arrows indicate some of the blood particles on the surface of the fibre.]

This discovery of particles of "creatinine ... an important indicator of renal health[2]," in the Shroud man's blood, has been reported in many news articles, including: "Shroud, new study: there is blood of a man tortured and killed," Vatican Insider, Andrea Tornielli, 11 July 2017; "New research: Shroud of Turin bears blood of a torture victim," Catholic News Agency, Turin, Italy, July 14, 2017; "Experts in HUGE Turin Shroud discovery – is this proof at last Jesus WAS wrapped in cloth?," Daily Express, Joey Millar, July 17, 2017; "Turin Shroud is stained with the blood of a torture victim, new research shows - supporting the belief that it DOES show the face of Jesus," Daily Mail, Jay Akbar, 18 July 2017; "The Shroud of Turin is stained with the blood of a torture victim, a new study claims," The Sun, July 18, 2017. I will comment on some of them in July's Shroud of Turin News. Not only is creatinine in the man on the Shroud's blood: 1) an indicator that he was a real man, not a painting; 2) his blood is real blood, not paint or pigment; 3) he had been subject to trauma, as a crucifixion victim, including Jesus, would have been; and 4) a medieval forger would have known nothing about creatinine, which was only discovered in 1832[2].

But if the image of the man on the Shroud is not "a product of human artifice" then leading Shroud sceptics Steven Schafersman (and Joe Nickell who quoted Schafersman approvingly) have admitted that "the image is that of Jesus" and there is no "possible third hypothesis":

"As the (red ochre) dust settles briefly over Sindondom, it becomes clear there are only two choices: Either the shroud is authentic (naturally or supernaturally produced by the body of Jesus) or it is a product of human artifice. Asks Steven Schafersman: `Is there a possible third hypothesis? No, and here's why. Both Wilson[3] and Stevenson and Habermas[4] go to great lengths to demonstrate that the man imaged on the shroud must be Jesus Christ and not someone else. After all, the man on this shroud was flogged, crucified, wore a crown of thorns, did not have his legs broken, was nailed to the cross, had his side pierced, and so on. Stevenson and Habermas even calculate the odds as 1 in 83 million that the man on the shroud is not Jesus Christ (and they consider this a very conservative estimate)[5]. I agree with them on all of this. If the shroud is authentic, the image is that of Jesus'[6]."

Introduction. The Turin Shroud (TS) is a handmade 3–1 twill linen cloth, 4.4 m long and 1.1 m wide, showing the double image of a dead body of a scourged, thorn-crowned man who was stabbed in the side and crucified. It is believed by many that it was the burial cloth in which Jesus of Nazareth was wrapped about 2000 years ago. Conversely, others think that it is a fake. However, the TS image has not been explained nor reproduced so far by science, although some hypotheses have been proposed. There are some indications that the TS was in Palestine in the first century A.D. and then taken to Edessa, now Sanliurfa (TR). The similarity of many details of the TS face with the Christ on Byzantine coins in use from the VII century A.D. is a clue that the TS were already known during the Byzantine Empire" is After the sack of Constantinople in 1204 the "Shroud of Christ" appeared in Europe in 1353 at Lirey (F) and in 1532 at Chambéry (F) where it was fire damaged. It was taken to Turin in 1578 where it is still now.

In the article, "The similarity of many details of the TS face with the Christ on Byzantine coins in use from the VII century A.D." (above) is referenced by footnote "[3]." That footnote refers to the book, Fanti G & Malfi P., "The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!," Pan Stanford, Singapore, 2015. That book has an entire chapter, "3. Numismatic Investigation" (pages 81-140), with photographs of a great many Byzantine coins each with a Shroud-like face of Christ. One of these (see below) is a gold solidus coin minted in 692 during the reign of Byzantium Emperor Justinian II (685-695, 705-711).

[Above (enlarge): "Gold solidus of ... the first period of Emperor Justinian II, minted in 692, depicting a Shroud-like face of Christ ... we find ourselves in front of a Shroud-like face of Christ. Shroud resemblances of this face" include "the swelling on the cheeks caused by the suffered blows, the asymmetrical tear on the right side beard, and the asymmetrical hair shape."[7].]

In 1988 the linen fabric of the TS was radiocarbon dated to the Middle Ages. This result is considered wrong by some authors claiming the presence of systematic errors. Another work indicated an age for the TS "between 1300-and 3000-years old." A mechanical analysis coupled with opto-chemical measurements has recently dated the TS to 90 AD ±200 years.

There may well have been "systematic errors" in the 1988 Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin, but that does not explain how the radiocarbon date of the authentic first century Shroud could be shifted 12-13 centuries into the future to not just any date, but to 1269-1390, the mid-point of which, 1325 ± `just happens' to be a mere ~30 years before the Shroud first appeared in undisputed history at Lirey, France, in c. 1355. But my theory that the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Turin Shroud was the result of a computer hacking does explain it.

The "work [which] indicated an age for the TS "between 1300-and 3000-years old" with the footnote "[9]" was the 2005 paper by STURP chemist Ray Rogers (1927–2005), in the peer-reviewed journal Thermochimica Acta, in which Rogers reported that the vanillin content of the Shroud's linen was too low (i.e. undetectable) for it to have been harvested between 1260-1390:

"In 1988, radiocarbon laboratories at Arizona, Cambridge, and Zurich determined the age of a sample from the Shroud of Turin. They reported that the date of the cloth’s production lay between A.D. 1260 and 1390 with 95% confidence. This came as a surprise in view of the technology used to produce the cloth, its chemical composition, and the lack of vanillin in its lignin ... Preliminary estimates of the kinetics constants for the loss of vanillin from lignin indicate a much older age for the cloth than the radiocarbon analyses ... The lignin at growth nodes on the shroud’s flax fibers ... did not give the usual chemical spot test ... for vanillin ... The Holland cloth and other medieval linens gave a clear test. This suggested that the rate of loss of vanillin from lignin could offer a method for estimating the age of the shroud ... If the shroud had been produced between A.D. 1260 and 1390, as indicated by the radiocarbon analyses, lignin should be easy to detect. A linen produced in A.D. 1260 would have retained about 37% of its vanillin in 1978. The Raes threads, the Holland cloth, and all other medieval linens gave the test for vanillin wherever lignin could be observed on growth nodes. The disappearance of all traces of vanillin from the lignin in the shroud indicates a much older age than the radiocarbon laboratories reported ... Because the shroud and other very old linens do not give the vanillin test, the [Shroud] cloth must be quite old. It is thus very unlikely that the [Shroud] linen was produced during medieval times ... The fact that vanillin can not be detected in the lignin on shroud fibers, Dead Sea scrolls linen, and other very old linens indicates that the shroud is quite old. A determination of the kinetics of vanillin loss suggests that the shroud is between 1300- and 3000-years old[8]."
This was the subject of a 2005 BBC news article:
"The Shroud of Turin is much older than suggested by radiocarbon dating carried out in the 1980s, according to a new study in a peer-reviewed journal. A research paper published in Thermochimica Acta suggests the shroud is between 1,300 and 3,000 years old. The author dismisses 1988 carbon-14 dating tests which concluded that the linen sheet was a medieval fake ... Raymond Rogers ... is a retired chemist from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, US ... In the study, he analysed and compared the sample used in the 1988 tests with other samples from the famous cloth ... microchemical tests - which use tiny quantities of materials - provided a way to date the shroud. These tests revealed the presence of a chemical called vanillin in the radiocarbon sample and in the Holland cloth, but not the rest of the shroud. Vanillin is produced by the thermal decomposition of lignin, a chemical compound found in plant material such as flax. Levels of vanillin in material such as linen fall over time ... The fact that vanillin cannot be detected in the lignin on shroud fibres, Dead Sea scrolls linen and other very old linens indicates that the shroud is quite old," Mr Rogers writes. `A determination of the kinetics of vanillin loss suggests the shroud is between 1,300 and 3,000 years old.'[9]."
The, "A mechanical analysis coupled with opto-chemical measurements has recently dated the TS to 90 AD ±200 years" (above) presumably is an update of three different methods (or a new fourth) to date the Shroud, carried out under the leadership of engineering professor Giulio Fanti [Right (enlarge)[10].] at the University of Padua, Italy. I had blogged about Prof. Fanti's three new methods of dating the Shroud in my posts of 27Mar13, 02Apr13, 21Apr13 and 02Jan14. They were mainly in response to the news articles, Tornielli, A., 2013, "New experiments on Shroud show it's not medieval," Vatican Insider, 26 March and Squires, N., 2013, "Turin Shroud 'is not a medieval forgery'," Daily Telegraph, 30 March. These three tests and their results were:
"Final results show that the Shroud fibres examined produced the following dates, all of which are 95% certain and centuries away from the medieval dating obtained with Carbon-14 testing in 1988: the dates given to the Shroud after FT-IR testing, is 300 BC ±400, 200 BC ±500 after Raman testing and 400 AD ±400 after multi-parametric mechanical testing. The average of all three dates of the Shroud is 33 BC ±250 years"[11].
This is summarised in the following table:
TestMax/MinRange
FT-IR300 BC ±400700 BC-AD 100
Raman200 BC ± 500700 BC-AD 300
Mechanical400 AD ± 400AD 0 - AD 800

So all three tests yield a date range in which Jesus' death (either AD 30 or AD 33) falls!

The TS shows a pale yellow background fabric, the body image — devoid of pigments — produced by a chemical reaction (dehydration and oxidation), blood stains and other localized signs of minor interest like burns, water stains etc. In 1969 Cardinal Pellegrino appointed a commission to investigate if the red stains clearly visible on the TS were blood. In 1973, a discordant conclusion was obtained: "The negative response of the investigation does not allow an absolute judgment of exclusion of blood nature of the material". Subsequent analyses of some TS threads evidenced only the presence of red pigments compatible with red ochre and vermilion, whereas other researchers found the evidence of blood. A recent study found both blood and pigments proposing a retouch for the faded bloodstains. In summary, there is a strong controversial about the TS authenticity due to contradictory results of scientific analyses.

This is confusing mentioning nearly 50 year-old Shroud blood research that had long been superseded (perhaps insisted upon by the peer-reviewers). The 1969-73 Turin commissions did not find evidence of blood on the Shroud because they failed to dissolve the blood particles into a solution, which was necessary to carry out the required wet chemical tests[12]. As for "some TS threads evidenced only the presence of red pigments compatible with red ochre and vermilion," this was the claim of the late microscopist Walter McCrone (1916-2002). But see 05Jan16 for a comprehensive refutation of McCrone's position. See also 03Jun17 where the late blood chemist Dr. Alan D. Adler (1931-2000)'s presentation of his 12 tests for blood on the Shroud at the October 1981 public final meeting of STURP in New London, Connecticut, after which he concluded:

"That means that the red stuff on the Shroud is emphatically, and without any reservation, nothing else but B-L-O-O-D!"[13].]
Also it is hard to believe that any custodian of the Shroud over the centuries would allow the most holy, precious blood of Christ (1Pet 1:19) on the Shroud to be "retouch[ed]", i.e. overpainted! It is far more likely that any odd flecks of paint on the Shroud (including its blood areas) are due to: 1) artists pressing their painted copies of the Shroud onto the original to `sanctify' them[14], or 2) tiny airborne paint particles from artworks in the same room that the Shroud has been in over the centuries:
"The STURP team also noted from their work on site in Turin one other easy way for the Shroud to have acquired quite a sprinkling of paint particles, without these having anything to do with it being by the hand of an artist. In virtually every one of the seven rooms of Turin's Royal Palace that the team were allocated for their testing work the ceiling was a magnificent Renaissance creation, richly decorated with frescos from which tiny paint fragments would fall like confetti as the team members worked below. Accordingly, there need be no argument concerning the presence of paint pigments on the Shroud's surface. It is the distinction between those that are definitely strays and those that may have been deliberately applied that forms the basis of the continuing dispute."[15]
Up to now, to our knowledge, microscopic analyses on the TS were limited, at the best of times, to sub-micrometer spatial resolution. Here we present an atomic resolution study on a fiber of the TS performed by Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) and Wide Angle X-ray Scanning (WAXS) Microscopy. The fiber, of about two millimeters, comes from an area of the feet (dorsal image) containing some red crusts, of about one micrometer, visible by optical microscope. TEM experiments were performed in areas of the fiber away from red crusts. TEM analyses show that the fiber is fully covered by creatinine nanoparticles, 20–100 nm in size, embedding small (2–6 nm) nanoparticles, made of defected ferrihydrite, typical of biologic ferritin cores. WAXS shows the presence of diffraction peaks of defected cellulose. Here we show how atomic resolution investigations unexpectedly discover a scenario of violence hidden at the nanoscale in the TS fiber and also suggest an explanation for the controversial results so far obtained. Indeed, a high level of creatinine and ferritin is related to patients suffering of strong polytrauma like torture. Hence, the presence of these biological nanoparticles found during our TEM experiments point a violent death for the man wrapped in the Turin shroud.

That it was a "man wrapped in the Turin shroud" is alone sufficient to refute the anti-authenticist claim that the Shroud is "a product of human artifice" (see above), and therefore the only alternative (as admitted by sceptics Nickell and Schafersman) is that "the shroud is authentic," that is, "the image is that of Jesus"! Let alone that his blood contained nanoparticles of creatinine and ferritin indicating he died "a violent death" under "torture" as Jesus did. And since creatinine was only discovered in 1832, and that it is a nanoparticle, refutes all medieval forgery theories, whether painting (Bishop d'Arcis, McCrone), statue/bas relief (Nickell), medieval photograph (Nicholas Allen), Leonardo (Picknett & Prince) and a fourteenth century accident (Hugh Farey). That is all except one medieval forgery theory (see below)!

[...]

Conclusions. On the basis of the experimental evidences of our atomic resolution TEM studies, the man wrapped in the TS suffered a strong polytrauma. We studied a fiber of the TS by atomic resolution TEM experiments and WAXS. This is the first time that the TS is studied at this resolution and this range of view produced a series of experimental results, which thanks to recent studies on ancient dye painting, ferritin, creatinine and human pathology can be connected and understood in relationship with a macroscopic scenario in which the TS was committed. In fact, the fiber was soaked with a blood serum typical of a human organism that suffered a strong trauma, as HRTEM [High-Resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy] evidenced that the TS is covered by well-dispersed 30nm-100nm creatinine nanoparticles bounded with internal 2nm-6nm ferrihydrate structures. The bond between the iron cores of ferritin and creatinine on large scale occurs in a body after a strong polytrauma. This result cannot be impressed on the TS by using ancient dye pigments, as they have bigger sizes and tend to aggregate, and it is highly unlikely that the eventual ancient artist would have painted a fake by using the hematic serum of someone after a heavy polytrauma. Nevertheless, the presence of red pigments, detected in some studies seems to indicate a human intervention on the TS. This, in turn, has generated some difficulties for the modern investigations and stimulated the scientific debate about the actual origin of the TS. The analyses discussed in literature so far, have been realized without the necessary spatial resolution to distinguish what is coming from the nanoscale and cannot filter eventual artifacts. This has been the target of our work and the obtained results are not compatible with a painting but evidenced the presence of nanoparticles of pathologic blood serum related to the presence of creatinine bound with ferrihydrate, which are typical of an organism that suffered a strong polytrauma, like torture. Indeed, unexpectedly, at the nanoscale it is encoded a scenario of great suffering recorded on the nanoparticles attached to the linen fibers. Furthermore, here the experiments point how the nanoscale enable to study unspoiled properties of the Turin Shroud suggesting an effective experimental strategy for further studies.

That the particles of creatine and ferritin are nanoparticles (i.e. of the order of billionths of a metre) is the final nail in the coffin of all forms of the medieval painting and powder forgery theories. A medieval forger would not know about, could not see, let alone apply, nanoparticles.

However, as indicated above, there is still one last desperate refuge that anti-authenticists could flee to, and that is the theory that a forger took a real, live man, and in a mockery of Jesus, beat him, scourged him with a Roman flagrum [see 08Oct6], crowned him with thorns, crucified him, speared him in the side with a Roman lancea [see 03Jun17], and laid his dead body on a fine linen sheet with a rare and expensive 3:1 herringbone twill weave [see 16Juy15], which measured 8 by 2 Assyrian standard cubits [see 10Jul15], and then dusted it with pollen which matched the Shroud's journey from Jerusalem to Constantinople [see 16May15]! The principal proponent of that theory (albeit without those inconvenient facts!) is a Dr Michael Straiton and we will see its problems in the next installment.

As mentioned above, since the discovery of nanoparticles of creatinine and ferritin in the man on the Shroud's blood is the refutation of all forms of the painting and powder forgery theory, the only refuge for anti-authenticists is that a real, live man was tortured and crucified in mockery of Jesus. This is the view of British physician Dr Michael Straiton, that the man on the Shroud is a 13th century crusader who was crucified by Muslims in mockery of Jesus' crucifixion[16]. A variant of this theory is that of conspiracy theorists Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas who claim that the man on the Shroud is Knights Templar leader Jacques de Molay (c. 1243-1314)[17]. Space does not permit an examination of Knight and Lomas' theory (but see Ian Wilson's refutation of it[18]), so I will only here cover Straiton's theory. However, most of my refutation of Straiton's theory applies to all theories that the man on the Shroud was a live crucifixion victim other than Jesus.

Specifically Dr. Straiton claims that in the 1291 Siege of Acre the Shroud imprint was created on an unknown crusader's burial cloth, who was crucified by Muslim Turks in mockery of Jesus[19]. But in addition to the problems above of:
1. The man on the Shroud was scourged with a Roman flagrum; and
2. speared in the side with a Roman lancea; so where would 13th century Muslims have obtained those?
3. Similarly, where would 13th century Muslims have obtained a rare and expensive 3:1 herringbone twill weave fine linen sheet that the Shroud is?
4. Let alone one that was 8 by 2 Assyrian cubits?
5. And already, or by them, dusted with pollen which matched plants on the Shroud's journey from Jerusalem to Constantinople?

Straiton's theory needs to explain, but doesn't:
6. How exactly was the crusader's image formed on the Shroud[20].
7. Why did the crusader's body leave such a detailed imprint on the Shroud, when no other known dead body has[21]?
8. Why is the crusader's image on the Shroud a photographic negative[22]?
9. How did 13th century Muslims have a detailed knowledge of not only Roman crucifixion (see above)[23] but also of the Gospel accounts of Jesus' crucifixion[24]?
10. Why was a crusader crucified by Muslims given a dignified Jewish burial[25]?
11. Why there is evidence of the Shroud having existed many centuries before 1291[26]?

So Shroud sceptics are unlikely to flee to Dr. Straiton's theory, because as well as its above problems (most of which would be common to all live crucifixion victim other than Jesus theories), it would require them to admit they had been wrong for over a century about Bishop d'Arcis' claimed c.1355 confessed painter-forger[27]!

To be continued in the part #1 of my July 2017 Shroud of Turin News.

Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. "Creatinine," Wikipedia, 10 July 2017. [return]
3. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, pp.51-53. [return]
4. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, pp.121-129. [return]
5. Stevenson. & Habermas, 1981, p.128. [return]
6. Schafersman, S.D., 1982, "Science, the public, and the Shroud of Turin," The Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 6, No. 3, Spring, pp.37-56, p.42; in Nickell, J., 1987, "Inquest on the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Prometheus Books: Buffalo NY, Revised, Reprinted, 2000, p.141. [return]
7. Fanti, G. & Malfi, P., 2015, "The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!," Pan Stanford: Singapore, pp.86. [return]
8. Rogers, R.N., 2005, "Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the Shroud of Turin," Thermochimica Acta, 425, pp.189–194. [return]
9. "Turin shroud 'older than thought," BBC, 31 January, 2005. [return]
10. Roberto Brumat, 2013, "Shroud, new dating compatible with the age of Christ," (Google Translate). [return]
11. Tornielli, A., 2013, "New experiments on Shroud show it's not medieval," Vatican Insider, 26 March. [return]
12. Ruffin, C.B., "The Shroud of Turin: The Most Up-To-Date Analysis of All the Facts Regarding the Church's Controversial Relic," Our Sunday Visitor: Huntington IN, 1999, pp.74-75. [return]
13. Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, p.216. [return]
14. Adler, A.D., Selzer, R. & DeBlaze, F., 1998, "Further Spectroscopic Investigations of Samples of the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, 2002, pp.93-102, 98; Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, pp.73-74; Marino, J.G., 2011, "Wrapped up in the Shroud: Chronicle of a Passion," Cradle Press: St. Louis MO, p.273. [return]
15. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.98; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.115. [return]
16. Wilson, 1998, pp.10, 207; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.126; de Wesselow, 2012, p.150. [return]
17. Wilson, 1998, p.10; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.126; de Wesselow, 2012, pp.149-150. [return]
18. Wilson, I., 1996, "The Hiram Key," BSTS Newsletter No. 43, June/July. [return]
19. Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, p.25; Wilson, 1998, p.208. [return]
20.Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.126; . de Wesselow, 2012, p.151. [return]
21. Wilson, 1998, p.209. [return]
22. Wilson, 1998, p.10. [return]
23. de Wesselow, 2012, p.150. [return]
24. Wilson, 1998, p.208. [return]
25. Wilson, 1998, p.209; de Wesselow, 2012, p.150. [return]
26.Wilson, 1998, p.209; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.126. [return]
27. Wilson, 1991, p.25. [return]

Posted: 19 July 2017. Updated: 14 August 2017.