On October 6, 2009 a massage was running through the media that an Italian chemist, reproduces the image on
the 4.36 times 1.10 meters wide so-called Shroud of Turin. After
extensive research, Luigi Garlaschelli, Professor of chemistry at the
University of Pavia, has managed to produce an image quite similar to that
on the Turin shroud. Of which he also produced some pictures wich are to be
seen in the Internet.
Even before scientists, researchers
and non-fiction authors have tried to imitate the image on the shroud. It is
somewhat succeeded them, though not in precision, as on the shroud of Turin.
By the beginning of the 20th Century, Paul Vignon and anatomy Professor Yves
Delage attempts to explain the authenticity of the cloth after it first in
1898 by Secondo Pia was able to be photographed. In the 1940s, R. and G.
Romanese Judica-Cordaglia, professor of forensic medicine at the University
of Milan, have copies made. In the 1970s, S. Baima Bollone Rodante and 1989.
In 1981, Joe Nickel prepared a reproduction. In 1994, produced the two
authors Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince, for her book "The Jesus-fake," a
facial image using a "camera obscura", ie a simple imaging camera. They
wanted to prove that Leonardo da Vinci could come as the originator of the
Turin cloth in question.
The alleged burial cloth of Jesus is
to have a long history. For the first time it is in the 6th Century have
been mentioned, as could be affixed King Abgar of Edessa to the walls to
keep out the enemy. Then the cloth to Constantinople in the year 1204 and
should have been later taken from 1353, by Geoffrey de Charny, a Knight
Templar, after Lirey, France, where it was exhibited in the local church in 1357.
This is supported by a pilgrim medallion. A
possible additional documentation may have occurred 1389, when the Bishop of
Lirey, Pierre d'Arcis, complained in a letter to Pope Clement VII over an
allegedly "cunningly painted" Christ's burial cloth that pilgrims would be
misleading. This may be due to the pilgrims medallion, dated only to the Turin
cloth, which was exhibited publicly at this time in the church. Later, in
1578, the cloth verifiable has to be transferred to Turin, where it has
since been kept in the cathedral.
In 1978, a team of experts made
detailed studies on the cloth in Turin. They named their company Shroud
of Turin Research Project, (STURP). The Swiss criminologist Dr. Max Frei
said he has discovered a number of pollen traces, which should come from the
old Palestine. Some members of this group say they have found
traces of blood on the cloth - and the blood type AB. Many details of the
cloth, especially the image of the man is shown to have been documented. The
picture should have been somehow "breathed" that is attached only weakly.
Photographic and other images showed a three-dimensionality. Used with an
image analyser as it did for the Mars shots, had J. P Jackson and E. J.Jumper
3D images produced. In 1978, also Prof. Giovanni Tamburelli of CSELT
(Centro Studi e Laboratori Telecomunicazione, Turin) has produced 3D images
of the image on the Turin cloth.
Left: The face on the Turin cloth in the original.
In 1988 the Vatican ordered the cloth
again to examine by a team of experts. This removed the cloth, a 7 x 10 cm
piece of the lower left corner. This was divided into three parts, each for
an institute in Zurich, Oxford and Arizona to get more familiar with fabric
samples to a chemical "blind investigation". In August 1988 the head of the
investigation, Dr. Michael Tite, announced by the British Museum, the cloth
came to 95 percent from the period 1260 to 1390 AD - that is, from the
Middle Ages. Since then, the messages will not fall silent, especially by
proponents of the Shroud that this date could be wrong. The fabric sample
came from a "problematic" part of the cloth, where it has often been handled.
At least by the fabric samples may have been contaminated. Dr. Tite and his
team deny that, because such interference would not be affected by merely
touching the chemical analysis.
Since I have been for many years
occupied with the Turin shroud, I tried also in this object again and again
to find out the truth. To find the true origin. To determine the true facts.
About an object, as it looks, confused at least since 600 years the
professional world.
Firstly, it is not right that were
found bloodstains on the cloth. Walter McCrone in 1978 clearly demonstrated
the color pigments ocher and vermilion, which were also used in medieval
painting. Old blood stain on a cloth should be brown to black, those stains
on the Turin cloth, however, are yellow to red. That of the "blood spots" on
the cloth, the blood type AB could be detected is therefore incorrect. On
the other hand, on the Shroud side of wikipedia it is clearly explained why
there could be no blood type AB in antiquity. It was only later, by
intermingling of peoples and is more likely found in the Middle Ages.
McCrone has reaffirmed his view in 1999 and will have long attacked by the
shroud proponents. Even earlier, however, in 1973, investigations of
international recognized serologists by reviewing the alleged blood trail
images have provide no evidence of blood.
The weave of the cloth in a
herringbone pattern is not particularly special. It "does not allow us the
time period in which it was manufactured to determine," said in 1976 the
textile expert Gilbert Raes, who had taken the cloth in 1973 a piece of
cloth. Herringbone patterns are also known from the Middle Ages.
Even the
supposedly pollen traces taken from the cloth do not indicate an origin from
the ancient Jerusalem. It should be pollen from different regions. From
Jerusalem, from Iran, from Urfa (Edessa), but also from the Sahara, North
Africa and France. In 1982, Steven Schafersman pointed to a conference of
forensic experts to inconsistencies in the samples made by Dr. Frei. This
could only be attributed to distortions of the samples, so the proof of the
cloth from the small Asian region has not been clearly provided.
Left: The face on the Turin cloth and a 3D relief of it.
The emergence of a painting, that is a
product manufactured by brush and color image is largely negated by all the
experts. There are no such traces on the cloth, which is why it is so
puzzling, as it came into being. The picture looks like "breathed". It
appears to be an impression. Therefore, even supernatural effects like a
flash of light or just simply used a photograph as an explanation. While the
former is highly speculative and falls more in the paranormal field, the
second method was repeatedly applied to reconstruction purposes.
The art historian Nicholas Allen has
made in 1989 such an attempt by a so-called "camera obscura". 1994 also made
similar, the two authors Picknett and Prince. Both were in fine cloths to
produce after several hours of exposure, images that have a remote
resemblance to the cloth in Turin. This can also conclude that a clever
photographer could come in the middle ages for the origin of the image on
the Turin cloth in question. In conversation, of course, immediately
Leonardo da Vinci. He dares you to have the necessary skills, especially as
he was also a distinguished artist and technician, and even pathologist. He
knew all of machinery and also with human bodies. The problem is that
Leonardo lived from 1452 to 1519 - 62 years later from 1390, the most
obvious dating from 1988. Actually that does not speak against Leonardo.
Since 1988 only the cloth and not the picture was dated . However, doubts
arise because there are a pilgrim medallion of 1357, which allegedly has been
made for the exhibition of the shroud in Lirey, and at that time Leonardo
has clearly not lived yet. Also, the letter of Pierre d'Arcis to the Pope in
1389 will not prevent Leonardo.
Amulets that this could be very
important to prove the image of it. It is clearly a kind of see how that
shroud of Turin - stretched out, with two halves of the body front and rear.
In addition, the back will see a spiral structure that could correspond to
the "blood stains" on the back of the man on the Turin cloth. Leonardo da
Vince then comes as the originator of the Turin cloth not in question. He
would also have to make according to the size of the cloth, a huge camera of
about 4 to 5 meters. An hour-to day-long exposure time would also be
necessary to have a statue - or as some people think even Leonardo's face -
immortalized in the cloth. Since this would have to take place in sunlight,
the lighting conditions were also constantly been different. Such a work
would not have stayed little secret.
Some, like the psychiatrist and
sindonologist Alan Whanger, they have discovered on the eyes of the man on
the cloth Roman coins. It is for example UCAI the lettering and a "Lituus" a
crook, be seen in one eye. This is a part of the Greek name of Tiberius
Caesar (Emperor Tiberius), TIBERIOU CAICAROS. This should indicate
the period 29 AD. At that time, such coins have been circulated. In simple
high magnification of the spot on the cloth, you can not see anything of the
sort. A. Whanger has discovered with polarized light and thus identified
altered forms of the fabric. A proof of the authenticity of the Turin cloth
is it not.
Other researchers, André Marion and
Anne-Laure Courage, said in 1997 characters near the head of the man who
discovered on the cloth. It must be concerned about the letter HΣOY, the
genitive of Jesus with a missing first letter, or ΝΝΑΖΑΡΕΝΝΟΣ (nnazarennos,
"Nazarene" is misspelled). Also this is not evident at high magnification
easily with the linen. It is also here to distortions in certain
photographic changes.
The replicas of the cloth have shown
that the image on the Turin shroud must be accomplished in some way of
artistically. Jacques di Costanzo, of Marseille University Hospital, has
proposed in 2005 a sculpture or even a human cadaver as the basis of the
Turin cloth. It could also be a so-called "flat-relief" or "bas-relief", an
other in the art since at least 2300 years widespread art of temples and
buildings that come into question. In fact, the 3D images of the photographs
of the Turin cloth, show the characteristics of a bas-relief. Even with
simple graphical computer programs it can achieve such results. Also in 1978
the images of the STURP group made with the help of NASA image analyser show
this property.
In fact, an entire body may come as a
basis for the image on the cloth of the question, because then the picture
would be completely distorted. A cloth that rests on the body largely
complete, would result in the decrease and subsequent stretching a distorted
picture. The researchers have identified some relevant experiments. The
image of the entire figure on the Turin cloth, is pictured but equally
unique and symmetric. It is a strictly vertically oriented, static
phenomenon. The face itself is a unique symmetric. It can not come from an
imprint of a human body. An easy-laid over the head scarf would not show
such details as the Turin cloth. It would create gaps that would not make
visible the body beneath the cloth.
If you follow the Bible, Joseph of
Arimathea took the body of Jesus from the cross and then immediately wrapped
in a shroud. He "bought a linen cloth, and taking him (Jesus) down,
wound him
in linen cloth, and laid him in a tomb which had been hewn out of a rock ..." Mk 15, 46 Similarly,
in Matt. 27, 59-60: "... Joseph took the body, and wrapped it in clean linen
cloth...and
laid it in his own new tomb ..." In Luke we read: "... wrapped it in
a linen cloth, and
laid him in a tomb ..." 23, 53. And in John: "... So they took the body of
Jesus, and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as the custom of
the Jews is to bury". And then it says in John (19, 40-41) that was "in the place
where he was crucified," and there was "a new tomb," where Jesus was buried.
According to this the body of Jesus would
must have
filled with cold sweat and cold blood and have been correspondingly moist
when Joseph enveloped him in the linen cloth. If would this cloth the Turin shroud,
it should look completely different and it would hardly recognize anything
on it. John speaks of linen bandages that were apparently wrapped around the
cloth, so that this body would be totally fitted. John also speaks only as
of a "napkin, that was upon his head..." (20, 7). Thereafter, the linen
cloth, as it was apparently then burial custom, was laid over the entire
body. This may, however, the head of Jesus does not have pictured on the
cloth.
Some think that the "Veil of
Manoppello" was this napkin, the sudarium which was upon the face of Jesus.
It is managed since 1638 in the Capuchin church of Manoppello. The face is
said to have a similarity with those on the shroud of Turin, but it shows a
slightly more cheerful and safe painted picture that is why many serious
theologians and scientists believe it is more likely an image and
not a reprint.
The same applies to the Santo
Sudario of Oviedo which is preserved in the Cathedral of San Salvador in
Oviedo, in Spain and is considered the napkin of Jesus. However, it shows no
face, but apparently stained with blood stains. According to a radiocarbon
dating, it comes from the year 614 AD.
In summary,
the Turin shroud clearly can not be the burial cloth of Jesus. It actually
says anything about it. This raises the only question, then who made this
picture on the cloth and how. And since there is only the solution with the
basis of a flat-relief, or bas-reliefs. It is highly unlikely, even
impossible, that an artist in the Middle Ages - or sooner - could paint a
negative picture, which only centuries later, by a photographic record by
reversing the light / dark values (ie on the photographic negative) it is
visible as an abstract image as it appears in a painting. This effect occurs only in a
reprint of a slightly raised image. And because the form is displayed at the
Turin cloth completely without distortion that can only come from a bas-relief
impression. The relief was coated with color and fabric artist then
carefully and neatly pressed. The people who see the picture then, must
indeed get the impression of an imprint. A simple painting would have
been immediately recognized as a fraud.
Left: A negative of a bas-relief image
corresponds to the image on the Turin cloth in the original (top). A photograph of
it is in the negative a picture as in the bas-relief
Obviously, the colors were still quite
fresh, as was seen Bishop d'Arcis 1389 this cloth as a "cunning painting '.
Like his predecessor, Bishop Henri de Poitiers, recognized thirty years ago
in the towel and had a painting allegedly even begin an investigation and
discovered the forger, whose name has not been documented anywhere. That
must have been about the year 1359, when the pilgrims amulet was in
circulation. Then, too, others such as the son of Geoffrey de Charny, Geoffroy
II and his daughter Margaret de Charny have seen the cloth simply as a "portrait". Following a complaint by Bishop d'Arcis
the Pope Clement VII said in
1392, that the cloth is not a relic and should be regarded only as a
portrait. Even today, the cloth is honored only by the Vatican as an icon,
which documented the sufferings of Jesus.
Over the year of production still remain
open questions because there should be an indication that there might have the cloth
with the image as early as 1192 and 1195, which would argue against the dating from
1260 to 1390. Still, there is a difference of at least 65 years. In an old manuscript,
the "Codex Pray" provides a description of the anointing of Jesus, according to this
lies in a shroud, showing the amazing details to the Turin cloth. There are exactly
two groups of four holes in L-shape as seen on the shroud of Turin. These can be
caused by hot wax. Also, the posture should correspond to that on the Turin cloth.
When Bishop Henri de Poitiers in 1359, at which a forger has been exposed, then that
would not match the dating of the codex, but it did with the dating from 1988.
Indeed, the image shown on the Codex below are
not the Shroud, but the grave with open lid. The "holes" are irregularly arranged and they
can also be seen on the figures. The Codex Pray is therefore no proof of a previous existence
of the Turin cloth.
Older images of the face of Jesus,
which should correspond to that on the Turin cloth can also be interpreted
to mean that the one in Turin, is created according to the development of
iconography, according to these models.
All in all, there is a plausible
explanation of the origin of the image on the Turin cloth, only those who
has a bas-relief is based. The bas-relief technic exist in the art since at
least 2300 years and it was often quite sophisticated. Probably the
manufacturer had to make the relief for herself. Probably one exists somewhere,
that he simply used it for its own purposes. On coffins and on church walls,
there have been such reliefs. Counterfeiters are well known, but quite
clever, but they give little trouble to produce. Thus, countless pieces of
wood and nails from the cross of Jesus were put into circulation, and
probably even more grave cloths and napkins.
Luigi Garlaschelli says: "In practice, a linen sheet is laid flat over a volunteer,
then rubbed with a pigment. The image is then completed free-hand; the face, however,
must be obtained from a bas-relief to avoid the unescapable wrap-around distortion.
We have also shown that pigments containing traces of acidic compounds can be artificially
aged after the rubbing step (by heating the cloth in an oven) in such a way that, when the
pigment is washed away, an image is obtained having the expected characteristics as the Shroud of Turin."
As early as 1982, the anthropologist, Vittorio Pesce Delfino with a bas-relief in bronze,
followed by heating to 230 degrees Celsius, has produced a very accurate face as on the Turin
cloth. He has in this way demonstrated that only a bas-relief comes as the basis for the face
on the Turin cloth in question. However, this was not heated, but painted. Even the rest of the
picture appears with a bas-relief, or to have been made easily by hand, because the anatomical
proportions of the body do not match - as some have already noticed (History Channel, 2005).
The image on the Shroud of Turin is an artistic work, produced by a flat relief technic and plotting
of color pigments.
There is more to be clarified. For example,
how the forger was knowing that the nails were driven through the wrists and not through
the palms of the crucified. This is a modern knowledge, and was occupied until much later
by bones found. But there are simple explanations to. But it can be said with certainty that
the Shroud of Turin is crealy NOT the burial cloth of Jesus.
Sources:
Bulst, Werner:
Betrug am Turiner Grabtuch, 1990.
Hain, Walter: Sein
Reich war nicht von dieser Welt, 1997.
Joe, Nickell: Inquest
on the Shroud of Turin, 1983.
Kersten, Holger;
Gruber, Elmar R.: Das Jesus-Komplott, 1992.
McCrone, Walter:
Shroud Image Is the Work of an Artist, The Sceptical Inquirer, Spring
1982.
Müller, M. Marvin:
The Shroud of Turin: A critical Appraisal, The Sceptical Inquirer,
Spring 1982.
Picknett, Lynn;
Prince, Clive: Die Jesus-Fälschung, 1994.
Schiatti, Lamberto:
Die Sindon, Publikation des Centro Internazionale di Sindonologia, Turin, 1978.
Siliato, Maria: Und
das Grabtuch ist doch echt, 1998.
