John Long
Critics have rightly charged that it was impossible for something as extraordinary as the Shroud to have escaped 13 centuries of notice, only to show up in the possession of a member of the lesser French nobility in 1355. The Shroud seemed to have come out of nowhere in a century notorious for faked relics. But in 1969, British writer and historical researcher Ian Wilson noticed strong similarities between the Shroud and medieval descriptions of the most famous icon of the early Middle Ages – “The Holy Image Not Made By Hands of Edessa.”
The Edessa Icon’s recorded history began in the 6th century Christian city of Edessa, in modern eastern Turkey. Believed to be a cloth on which the living Jesus imprinted his face, the Icon was purportedly sent to an Edessan king. It was so long, that it had to be “doubled in four” to be mounted on a backing board. If the Shroud of Turin was folded to disembody the face, it would look very similar to the earliest surviving paintings of the Edessa Icon.
Medieval writers said the Icon was not a work of art, but the faint and “sweaty” imprint of Jesus. Blood was also said to be present on it. Both features can be observed on the Shroud today. In Wilson’s The Shroud of Turin (1978), he noted that after the Edessan image was taken by the Byzantines to Constantinople in 944, they began to quietly admit having a Shroud as one of their relics. It was possibly one of the treasures stolen in the Fourth Crusade (1204) which later show up in France. Thus, the Edessa Icon seems closely associated with the Shroud of Turin.
Predictably, most historians gave Wilson’s theory little notice, believing the Edessan image was just a painted face on a small cloth. But evidence continues to surface. Special raking light photos of the Shroud show old crease lines strongly suggestive of a past “doubling in four.” There are also references from early medieval writers who believed the Edessa Icon had a full body image.
Finally, a sermon by Gregory, archdeacon of Hagia Sophia (the great cathedral in Constantinople) and expert on the Edessa Icon’s history, was recently identified in the Vatican Library. On the night of August 16, 944, the Edessan image, recently “liberated” from Edessa, was brought to the emperor’s palace in Constantinople. This was one of the Icon’s very few recorded public displays. Gregory’s sermon on that occasion strongly implies the image was at least partly removed from its covering (a kind of picture frame) and unfolded far enough to reveal not only a face, but also a bloody side wound. In his sermon, Gregory says the blood and sweat of the face is embellished by drops from Jesus’ side. He also mentions “blood and water there” as if pointing to the side wound for his audience. If the Edessa Icon had a side wound, it consisted of more than a face image and sounds remarkably like the Shroud of Turin. Such a connection would push the Shroud’s history back to the 6th century AD, additional reason to doubt its 1988 carbon-14 dating.
BSP 13:1 (Winter 2000) p. 21
Closeup of Negative.
Throughout the image are blood stains, corresponding to death by crucifixion. Scorch and burn holes, as well as several water stains from a 1532 fire, also appear.
Historical studies trace the Shroud to AD 1356, when it was exhibited in Liery, France, by Geoffrey De Charney. In 1452 the cloth was sold to the Duke of Savoy, and in 1578 moved to Turin, Italy where it remains to this day.
The Shroud’s history prior to the Middle Ages is cloudy. A possible scenario suggests that after Christ’s death (or the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem) it was moved to Edessa, Turkey (modern Urfa). Known as the Mandylion (Greek “small towel”) or Edessa Icon, it was folded to exhibit only the face within an open-faced box.
The Byzantine Imperial Army invaded Edessa (944), with the intent of retrieving the cloth, and then delivered it to Constantinople. The Fourth Crusade (1204) sacked Constantinople, and the Shroud virtually disappeared until the 14th century. Possibly in the possession of the Knights Templar, an international crusading order of warrior monks, it reappeared with De Charney in 1353.
Scientific investigation of the Shroud centers on whether the image was created naturally or artistically. Over 500,000 hours of scientific examination by 63 scholarly disciplines have been applied to the Shroud. Most extensive was the 1978 STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) analysis by 40 scientists around-the-clock for five days. They concluded the image could not be a painting!
BSP 13:1 (Winter 2000) p. 22
There were no significant signs of paint, pigment, dye or stain on the cloth. Neither did the image show the directionality normally found with brush strokes. There was no outline of the image as would be necessary for creating a painting and no evidence of fibril cementing that occurs with the application of any liquid substance. The image appears to be purely superficial, penetrating only the top two microfibrils.
The blood tested human AB with components of hemoglobin, serum and bilirubin. Bilirubin only occurs with jaundice or severe trauma, as would be expected from scourging. Blood stains over the forehead and hair were consistent with wounds from a crown of thorns. Over 100 whip marks on the back alone match scourging inflicted by a Roman whip (flagrum). Blood flow down both arms and at the feet indicate piercing as from nails. Blood flow down the forearms matches gravitational flow patterns made in crucifixion. The absence of thumb images on both hands indicate the wrist was pierced, not the hands. A nail through the wrist would pierce the median nerve, causing the thumb to snap into the palm of the hand.
Secondo Pia’s 1898 photographs of the Shroud revealed its hidden “true positive,” making the Shroud’s image a photographic negative. A space-age invention, called a VP-8 Image Analyzer, was used on the Shroud in 1978. It revealed the Shroud’s real 3-D qualities, indicating the cloth wrapped an actual three-dimensional human form, impossible to create in a painting.
Recent studies by Israeli botanists Avinoam Danin and Uri Baruch, along with Americans Alan and Mary Whanger, revealed strong evidence of the Shroud’s origin in the Jerusalem area. The cloth contains numerous pollen grains and even plant images. Removed with sticky tape and studied by standard light miscrocopy, at least 30 pollen grain types were positively identified.
Plant images, although more difficult to identify, included Zygophyllum dumosum, Gundelia tournefortii, Cistus creticus and Capparis aegyptia. Taken together, they are unique to only one region on earth-the Judean mountains and desert of Israel.
The concurrent March-April blooming times of eight plants identified on the Shroud corresponds to the Biblical account of Christ’s death. One of these flowers (Capparis aegyptia) begins to open at mid-day and is at full bloom shortly before sunset. The three or four o’clock opening of their buds matches the time of Christ’s death.
In 1988, the Shroud of Turin was carbon-14 dated by three separate laboratories. All three dated it to between AD 1260 and 1390. Yet, concerns about the test’s accuracy have risen. Living fungi and bacteria have been discovered on the cloth, creating a “bio-plastic coating” that could skew the carbon-14 dating. Harry E. Grove, who directed the carbon-14 testing, stated that the microbe is a “development that should be taken seriously. .. it merits further detailed investigation.” The Shroud piece used for radiometric testing, known as “Rae’s Corner,” came from a location susceptible to contamination due to the Shroud’s handling throughout the centuries. It is also possible that the 1532 fire created a significant increase in carbon-14 influx, thereby adding to the radiometric count.
Although science has still not determined the mechanism by which the Shroud’s image was created, some type of neutron flux by radiation has been proposed. This process would also produce additional carbon-14, skewing its date. Changes in the 1988 carbon-14 testing protocol included:
• Testing from one place on the Shroud.
• Utilizing only three laboratories as opposed to the original seven.
• The Shroud’s “Rae’s Corner” piece was known to be contaminated from fire and human handling as opposed to a cleaner site.
Taken together, all this evidence raises serious doubts about the 1988 test’s validity.
If the Shroud is accurately dated to the 14th century, a medieval forger’s knowledge, competency and mastery of so many fields stretches credibility. This artist needed extensive knowledge in anatomy and physiology to accurately depict the details of crucifixion, as well as knowledge of photographic negatives and 3-D imagery. Insight into blood chemistry and microscopic additions of site-specific indigenous varieties of pollen would also have been required.
Whether the Shroud is a first-century Palestinian burial cloth or a medieval European forgery is still being studied. Whether it is the actual burial cloth of Christ is beyond the scope of science. Yet, the Shroud’s image and blood stains can help all to visualize Christ’s tremendous suffering. That it is empty reminds us of His resurrection. A masterful reproduction or the actual burial cloth, it can speak to all who have put their faith in Him.
He is not here; He has risen, just as He said. Come and see the place where He lay! (Mt 28:6).
The Shroud Photographs
Photos courtesy of the Holy Shroud Guild, formed in 1951, and possibly the oldest Shroud organization in the United States. Its members played an important role in facilitating the Shroud of Turin Research Project.
See their website at http://shroud.org.