[Home] [Updates] [Site map] [My Quotes; Shroud of Turin quotes: Unclassified, Classified] [My TheShroudofTurin blog]
The following are quotes added to my Shroud of Turin unclassified quotes in November 2008. See copyright conditions at end.
[Index: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Dec]
12/11/2008 "The portrait of the incarnate Christ is clear. He is fully God and fully man. Taking on a human nature did not involve mixing divine attributes with human, nor converting one nature to the other. In the words of the Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451), Jesus Christ was `truly God, and the same truly man,' one Lord `manifested in two natures, without confusion, without conversion, indivisibly, inseparably. The distinction of the natures being by no means abolished by the union, but rather the property of each preserved and combined into one person and one hypostasis, not one severed or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten, viz., God, Logos, and the Lord Jesus Christ.' [Schaff, P., ed., `The Creed of Chalcedon,' in `The Creeds of Christendom: With a History and Critical Notes,' Baker: Grand Rapids MI, 1931, 2:62-63]." (Feinberg, J.S., "The Incarnation of Jesus Christ," in Geivett, R.D. & Habermas, G.R., eds., "In Defense of Miracles: A Comprehensive Case for God's Action in History," Apollos: Leicester UK, 1997, p.231) 12/11/2008 "It is Luke who tells us how the Word was coded in the DNA of the Virgin Mary [Lk 1:30-37] ... We may also assume, therefore, that when the same Holy Spirit came upon the Virgin, He likewise assembled these nucleic acids and bonds which would be already available in the body of the Virgin. We speak with all reverence. These volumes would be assembled into the 23 chromosomes required to match the 23 in the Virgin's ovum, but would include a `Y' chromosome necessary for a male child. ... In the case of the Virgin, the `Most High' was the dynamic (Luke 1:35). This might be because it was `the Word' Himself who was being recorded in those nucleic acids, for He was `begotten of the Father' (John 1:14). The eventual result was that in Christ dwelt `all the fullness of the Godhead bodily' (Col. 2:9). In this way all the fullness of the Trinity would be involved in those 23 chromosomes prepared for fusion with the ovum of the Virgin - the Holy Spirit assembling the DNA code bases, the Father sending forth the Word and the Word Himself becoming recorded upon those bases ... Our knowledge that a foetus receives a complete set of 23 chromosomes from each of its parents gives insight into the oneness of Christ's nature. Those of Divine origin and those of the Virgin would pair and fuse (in the sense of producing gametes), resulting in the one personality, fully divine, fully human, without sin. This insight into the possible mechanics of the Incarnation is a reply to those who contend that the incarnation of the Lord is scientifically impossible. It is also a help in the difficulties which some in the early centuries and the middle ages had in their speculations on how two natures could become one. Modern genetics reveal that the alleles from both parents make one person at conception. The statement `That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit' [Mt 1:20], shows how God was the Father and the Virgin Mary the mother. Also, the fact that DNA is a code demonstrates how the speech, or `Word', of God, recorded upon the nucleic acids, would form the real genetic contribution from the Divine side. We see how that Christ was fully and truly man, and yet not two natures, but God-man, not God and man, thus illustrating physically what had been arrived at theologically by earlier divines." (Pearce, E.K.V., "Who Was Adam?," Paternoster: Exeter UK, 1969, pp.138-140) 13/11/2008 "Dr. Robert Bucklin ... has estimated the victim's height at 181 centimeters and his mass at seventy-seven kilograms ... There are `nail marks' in his wrists and feet, a `lance wound' on the left side of the chest, rivulets of `blood' about the head akin to what might be made by a `crown of thorns,' and the wounds of an apparent scourging on the man's back and legs. The image appears only on one side of the cloth, but the isolated `bloodstains' have soaked through. Anatomically and biblically the effect is correct in every detail." (Murphy, C., "Shreds of evidence: Science confronts the miraculous-the Shroud of Turin," Harper's, November 1981, Vol. 263, No. 1578, pp.42-65, p.44) 13/11/2008 "What is at issue is how the image got there. Are we dealing with a miracle? A chance natural occurrence? A clever medieval forgery? Every side has its partisans, and the Roman Catholic Church, legal custodian of the relic, has for more than six hundred years steadfastly refused to render its own official verdict, or, by and large, to help scientists render theirs. From Clement VII onward, successive popes, whatever their personal opinion, have publicly been cautious in their pronouncements. For a 1973 television broadcast, Pope Paul VI chose his words carefully. He observed that the shroud `appeared to me so true, so profound, so human, so divine' but deferred to `whatever may be the historical and scientific judgment that learned scholar will express.'" (Murphy, C., "Shreds of evidence: Science confronts the miraculous-the Shroud of Turin," Harper's, November 1981, Vol. 263, No. 1578, pp.42-65, p.44) 13/11/2008 "The issue would ordinarily be an academic one. Thousands of relics vie for attention within the churches of the Roman communion, from pieces of the True Cross to via of saintly blood to wizened bits of hallowed anatomy, including what is purported to be Christ's foreskin. But the Shroud of Turin which bears what may be a `snapshot' of man who is nowhere physically described in the New Testament, who is known to have existed, and whom more than a billion human beings believe to be the Son of God, is unique." (Murphy, C., "Shreds of evidence: Science confronts the miraculous-the Shroud of Turin," Harper's, November 1981, Vol. 263, No. 1578, pp.42-65, pp.44-45) 13/11/2008 "As unexpected as the generation of a 3D image by the VP-8 analysis of the Shroud ... was, another observation made at the time proved equally surprising. In a VP-8 relief made from a photograph of the Shroud face, researchers noted flat button-like objects over each eye. The characteristics of these images led the investigators to conclude that they were solid objects on top of the eyes of the man in the Shroud. In light of readings he made about Jewish burial customs, Jackson theorized that these objects were coins placed on the eyes to keep them closed in death. In 1979, the late Francis Filas reported identifying the letters UCAI and a design resembling a shepherd's crook, or lituus, in the coin area over the right anatomic eye. [Whanger and Whanger 1991:3, Whanger and Whanger 1985:767, Stevenson and Habermas 1990:66] These patterns match those of a lepton of Pontius Pilate, struck in Israel during the time of Jesus, with the exception that the Latin C is apparently a misspelling of what should have been the (identically pronounced) Greek K in KAICAROC (Caesar). Filas, however, managed to obtain a Pontius Pilate lepton with exactly this misspelling, and at least six others have been found, [Whanger in Meacham 1983 Comments, p.304] thus rendering academic any debate over the likelihood of a coin with such a misspelling being struck." (Borkan, M., "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Winter 1995, Vol. X, No. 2, pp.18-51, p.28) 13/11/2008 "Using their overlay technique, the Whangers compared a photograph of Filas' coin with a computer- enhanced photo of the area over the right eye on the Shroud. .... They found a very close match, noting at least 74 points of congruence. In order to demonstrate that it is not the case, as one critic of the Shroud has put it, that `the alleged coin-images are artifacts of observers' hopes and beyond the limits of photo enlargements and the coarseness of the Shroud weave,' [John R. Cole in Meacham 1983 Comments, p. 296] a number of confirmatory studies have been carried out. The Whangers twice repeated their polarized overlay comparison, first with a right-left reversal of the coin, and then with a top-bottom reversal. In the first case, they observed only ten points of congruence; in the latter, they observed six. They also performed a comparison with a lepton of the Procurator Coponius (C.E. 6-9) in place of the Pontius Pilate lepton (the two coins are nearly the same size and shape,) but were able to tabulate only 11 points of congruence. [Whanger and Whanger 1985:770] A series of computer-aided studies of the Shroud image carried out by Robert Haralick of the Spatial Data Analysis Laboratory at Virginia Polytechnic and State University also supports Filas' initial observations. Image analysis revealed not only the letters UCAI but also three additional letters in their proper positions. [Haralick 1983:34]" (Borkan, M., "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Winter 1995, Vol. X, No. 2, pp.18-51, p.28) 13/11/2008 "The Whangers further noted that the coin image over the right eye `is so similar to [Filas' lepton] that the two coins must have been struck from the same die.' The pattern on the back of Filas' coin identifies the year in which it was struck: the 16th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, or 29 C.E. This is also the only year in which another Pontius Pilate lepton, the Julia lepton, was struck; though the image over the left eye on the Shroud is less distinct than that over the right, the Whangers have reported 73 points of congruence between the image over the left eye and a Julia lepton. [Whanger and Whanger 1985:767, Whanger and Whanger 1991:4]" (Borkan, M., "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Winter 1995, Vol. X, No. 2, pp.18-51, pp.28-29) 13/11/2008 "Extensive debate has surrounded the discovery of coins on the eyes of the man in the Shroud. Critics have questioned both the reliability of the identification and the archaeological evidence for the practice of placing coins on the eyes of a corpse. The work of Haralick and the Whangers demonstrates that the images over the eyes on the Shroud are not anomalies in the cloth weave. In conjunction with the VP-8 analysis, this provides supportive evidence for the presence of coins on the eyes of the man in the Shroud. For several years after the initial identification of these images, the issue of archaeological justification for this discovery was hotly debated. It has become apparent in recent years that there is little archaeological support for a first-century Jewish practice of placing coins on the eyes of the deceased. [Hachlili and Killebrew 1983] However, there is neither a complete lack of support nor a strong theoretical argument against such an occasional practice." (Borkan, M., "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Winter 1995, Vol. X, No. 2, pp.18-51, p.29) 14/11/2008 "'Okay; Dr. Craig, you're an intelligent and educated individual,' I began. `Tell me: how can a modern and rational. person still believe in babies being born from virgins, people walking on water, and cadavers emerging alive from tombs?' Craig smiled. `It's funny you should ask specifically about the virgin birth,' he replied, `because that was a major stumbling block to my becoming a Christian. I thought it was totally absurd.' `Really?' I said. `What happened?' `When the Christian message was first shared with me as a teenager, I had already studied biology. I knew that for the virgin birth to be true, a Y chromosome had to be created out of nothing in Mary's ovum, because Mary didn't possess the genetic material to produce a male child. To me, this was utterly fantastic. It just didn't make sense.' `You're not alone,' I observed. `Other skeptics have problems with it too. How did you proceed?' Craig thought back for a moment. `Well, I sort of put that issue aside and became a Christian anyway, even though I didn't really believe in the virgin birth. But then, after becoming a Christian, it occurred to me that if I really do believe in a God who created the universe, then for him to create a Y chromosome would be child's play!'" (Strobel, L.P., "Objection #2: Since Miracles Contradict Science, They Cannot Be True," in "The Case for Faith: A Journalist Investigates the Toughest Objections to Christianity," Zondervan: Grand Rapids MI, 2000, pp.60-61) 14/11/2008 "The study of the testimony of the Gospels, when matched with Roman weapons and practices of crucifixion as well as with the findings of medical pathologists studying the Shroud, shows a strong correlation of these sources. The uniqueness of the markings on the Shroud, especially when taken in their totality, with the testimony of the Gospels provides the signature or the fingerprint of the Crucifixion that identifies the Man of the Shroud with Jesus. This is especially true of the capping of thorns to mock Jesus' `kingship,' a unique event never recorded with any other crucifixion victim; the lancing of the right side to assure that Jesus was dead instead of the usual crucifragium; the nails through the wrists; the scourge marks all over his back; the marks of the crossbeam (patibulum) on the shoulders, and the swollen face from the beating of the Sanhedrin guards. In all cases, the words match the wounds which match the weapons." (Iannone, J.C., "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, 1998, p.64) 14/11/2008 "Barrie Schwortz, a photographer from Santa Barbara's Brooks Institute of Photography, and one of the Jewish members of the S.T.U.R.P. Research team has said: `The image on the Shroud matches the account of the crucifixion in the New Testament down to the nth degree. Evidence is mounting that the Gospels are quite accurate. This may cause consternation among my family and other Jewish people, but in my own mind, the Shroud is the piece of cloth which wrapped Jesus after He was crucified. ["The Shroud: It's Even Changed the Lives of Scientists Studying It," Globe, 22 Sept. 1981, p.26] Sindonologist Robert Wilcox stated that there are just too many coincidences in the agreements between Jesus' Crucifixion and that of the Man of the Shroud to be explained away easily. He notes that these similarities do not fit any other known victim of crucifixion except Jesus. [Wilcox, R., "Fake or Not, Shroud Leaves Mark on Scientists," The Voice, 26 February 1982, p.12] Wilson quotes a statement of the Jesuit historian Herbert Thurston in 1903, a man originally convinced of the Shroud's fraudulence, who was later obliged to admit: `As to the identity of the body whose image is seen on the Shroud, no question is possible. The five wounds, the cruel flagellation, the punctures encircling the head, can still be clearly distinguished. If this is not the impression of the Christ, it was designed as the counterfeit of that impression. In no other person since the world began could these details be verified. [Thurston, S J., "The Holy Shroud and the Verdict of History," The Month, CI, 1903, p.19]" (Iannone, J.C., "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, 1998, p.65. Emphasis original) 14/11/2008 "Before concluding that the man of the Shroud is Jesus, we must consider the possibility that he is someone else-another Jew tortured. and crucified by Romans and buried according to Jewish customs. Science cannot resolve this question, but there is sufficient historical data to make a decision based on probability. We can do this because the crucifixion and burial of Jesus differed significantly from the ordinary ways the Romans crucified criminals and the Jews buried their dead. Jesus' case was irregular. He was scourged, crowned with thorns, nailed to his cross, stabbed in the side (instead of his legs being broken), buried well but incompletely, and his body left the cloth before it decomposed. Because we know a fair amount about Roman and Jewish customs in these matters, we can assess the probability that two men were crucified and buried this way. Such a probability, in reverse, would be the probability that the Shroud of Turin is the burial garment of Jesus Christ." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.124. Emphasis original) 14/11/2008 "Several Shroud researchers and scientists have already tried to computed such a probability. One is Francis Filas, professor of theology at Loyola University and a long-time investigator of the Shroud. Fr. Filas believes that there is very little chance that the man buried in the Shroud could be someone other than Jesus. Citing the correspondence between the Shroud anti the irregularities of Jesus' crucifixion, Fr. Filas computes tho total possibility that the man in the Shroud was not Jesus as 1 in 10^26, thereby virtually identifying the Shroud as Jesus' burial garment. [Filas, F., "Inquiry Into the Shroud of Turin," CBN University, April 4, 1980] A more conservative figure was devised by Vincent J. Donovan. Donovan was also impressed by the ways irregularities in Jesus' crucifixion correspond to the Shroud, especially the crown of thorns, the fact that Jesus' ankles were not broken, the spear wound, and the incomplete burial. Donovan concludes that there is a probability of 1 chance in 282 billion that the person buried in the Shroud was someone other than Jesus. [Donovan, V.J., "The Shroud and the Laws of Probability," The Catholic Digest, April, 1980, pp.49-52] French Jesuit and engineer Paul de Gail is another scholar who attempted to compute the probability that the Shroud wrapped someone other than Jesus. De Gail arrived at a much higher figure than Donovan's 1 in 282 billion, in spite of the fact that he performed his research in 1972, before some of the most surprising discoveries about the Shroud were made. [Donovan, Ibid., p. 51; cf. Wilcox, R.K., "Shroud," Macmillan: New York 1977, p.171] The most conservative probability arrived at thus far was computed in 1978 by Professors Tino Zeuli and Bruno Barbaris, two members of the science faculty at the University of Turin. Zeuli and Barbaris combined a skeptical approach with a mastery of statistics. They still concluded that the chances were 1 in 225 billion that someone other than Jesus was buried in the Shroud. [Donovan, Ibid] Statistical analyses such as these are not meaningless guesses. They are respectable scientific tools. Scientists employ them continually to weigh the merits of alternative theories to explain observed phenomena. These previous calculations about the Shroud-ranging from 1 in 225 billion to 1 in 10^26 virtually Identify the Shroud of Turin beyond any reasonable doubt as Jesus' burial garment." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.124. Emphasis original) 14/11/2008 "We will now make our own calculations. We will deliberately take a skeptical posture, and compute our probability as conservatively as possible. To keep our figure as low as possible, we will ignore the facts that the person in the Shroud is a crucified man. We will not include the probability that the person is a man and not a woman (1 in 2) and that the person who died was a victim of crucifixion. Donovan very conservatively estimates that one man in 500 died of crucifixion at the time, a figure which is almost certainly much higher. [Donovan, Ibid] Thus, even before we look at the specifics of Jesus' scourging, crucifixion, and burial, we would already have a probability of 1 in 1000." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.126) 14/11/2008 "Again, we will bypass this methodology in the interest of a skeptical approach. 1. Our first fact is Jesus' scourging and other mistreatment at the hands of his executioners. A beating was sometimes administered to those being crucified, but the beating was rarely so serious. The Shroud also depicts a very extensive beating, one which was so severe that it may have eventually caused the man's death. [Sava, A., "The Holy Shroud on Trial," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, 1977, pp.50-57] In spite of the rarity of this beating, which both Jesus and the man in the Shroud suffered, we will give only a 1 in 2 probability that a crucified man other than Jesus was beaten this way." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.126) 14/11/2008 "2. It is very unusual that a man to be crucified as a criminal would be crowned with thorns beforehand. Romans participated in formal emperor worship. How likely is it that they would routinely crown condemned criminals and slaves with thorns, and pretend to worship them? Crowning indicates majesty and a crown of thorns would, of course, mock that proclaimed majesty. Jesus was crowned with thorns for this very reason- to mock his claims to be the Son of God and the Messiah, thus the "ruler" of the Jews. The man buried in the Shroud was also pierced throughout the scalp. If the man in the Shroud is not Jesus, what are the chances that this man, probably a criminal or slave, would have been crowned with thorns? By any estimate, this is an improbable occurrence. [Ricci, G., "Historical, Medical, and Physical Study of the Holy Shroud," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, 1977, p.67] .A conservative guess would be 1 in 500. We will choose a figure of 1 in 400." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.126) 14/11/2008 "3. Many crucifixion victims were tied to their crosses with ropes. Both Jesus and the man buried in the Shroud were nailed. We will estimate the probability that another man was also nailed as 1 in 2." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.126) 14/11/2008 "4. The gospels and archaeological data indicate that the Romans commonly broke the legs of crucified persons in order to hasten their death. Since Jesus was already dead, his legs were not broken. Neither were the man in the Shroud's legs broken. Since leg-breaking was normal procedure, we will estimate the probability of its not occurring as 1 in 3." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.126) 14/11/2008 "5. To insure that Jesus was dead, a soldier stabbed him in the side, and blood and water flowed from the wound. The same thing happened to the man in the Shroud. Let us consider the probabilities that the same thing happened to some other man. The soldier could have done nothing, used a sword, or used a spear (1 in 3). To insure death, he could have struck the head, stomach, or side (1 in 3). Finally, blood and water flowed from the wound (1 in 3). We are being very skeptical by placing a probability of all of these occurring at 1 in 27." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, pp.126-127) 14/11/2008 "6. Since most crucified victims were criminals, slaves, and rebels, few were given individual burials in a fine linen shroud. Jesus was buried in linen with spices and placed in a new tomb. The man buried in the Shroud was also wrapped in fine linen and buried individually. We conservatively estimate the probability of a `criminal' being buried this way at 1 in 8." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.127) 14/11/2008 "7. The gospels relate that Jesus had to be buried hastily in order to be placed in the tomb before the Sabbath. Because the process could not be completed in time, the women returned to finish the job on Sunday morning. The man in the Shroud was also buried hastily and the process was incomplete at the time of burial. How many crucified victims receiving individual burials in fine linen shrouds were nevertheless buried hastily? We will conservatively estimate the probability of this happening as 1 in 8." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.127) 14/11/2008 "8. The New Testament asserts that Jesus' body did not undergo corruption (Acts 2:22-32) but that he was raised from the dead. ... Here we will simply note the parallel with the Shroud. There are no signs of decomposition on the Shroud. Additionally, the bloodstains are anatomically perfect and have not been smeared by the linen being separated from the body. This parallel is especially interesting because we have many ancient burial shrouds showing decomposition stains. Thus we have to estimate the probability that another crucified man's body was somehow removed from its burial shroud before it decomposed, and in such a way that the wounds were not smeared. We will conservatively estimate this probability as being 1 in 10." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.127) 14/11/2008 "The gospels say that these eight irregularities were present in Jesus' death and burial. The Shroud evidence says they were also present in the death and burial of the man of the Shroud. We have estimated the probability that they happened to someone other than Jesus, deliberately using skeptical and conservative estimates. Yet, multiplying these probabilities, we have 1 chance in 82,944,000 that the man buried in the Shroud is not Jesus. This ratio of nearly 83 million to 1 is almost meaningless to many of us. Yet consider this practical illustration. 82,944,000 dollar bills laid end-to-end would stretch from New York to San Francisco more than three times. Suppose one of these bills is marked, and a blindfolded person is given one chance to find it. The odds that he will succeed are 1 in 82,944,000. These are the odds that the man buried in the Shroud is someone other than Jesus Christ. There is a chance that the man of the Shroud is someone else, just as there is a chance that the blindfolded person would find the marked bill. But the odds are practically infinitesimal. There is no practical probability that someone other than Jesus Christ was buried in the Shroud of Turin." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, pp.127-128) 14/11/2008 "Some of the statistical estimates made about the frequency of irregularities in Jesus' death and burial may be open to challenge. We have relatively little data about some aspects of Roman crucifixion. This is why our calculations were deliberately conservative. Indeed, the odds of 82,944,000 to 1 are most likely too low rather than too high. We could have increased the odds a thousandfold by considering the facts that the Shroud image shows a man (not a woman) who was crucified (instead of dying by some other means). Our estimates concerning the chest wound, the frequency of good burials of crucifixion victims, hasty burials in linen, and the absence of decomposition are almost certainly too low. However, even apart from probability studies, a comparison reveals that it is highly likely that the man in the Shroud is Jesus of Nazareth." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.128) 14/11/2008 "There are also two other major points to consider. First, we were conservative in choosing to compare points in common between the Shroud and the gospel accounts of Jesus. Our figure would have been much higher if we included the fart that there are no contradictions between the gospel and the Shroud, an indication of an even closer correspondence. Since there are no contradictions in other aspects, then it is even more probable that the Shroud is the actual linen cloth in which Jesus was buried. Second, an earlier point should be recalled. The Shroud is not a recently discovered artifact that merely reminds us of Jesus. Rather, it has been kept through the centuries as his actual burial garment, even in times when this belief could not be scientifically tested. This further increases the chances that Jesus is the man buried in the Shroud because it produces an even closer correlation. In spite of skeptical procedures, we have a very probable correspondence between these two men." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, pp.128-129) 14/11/2008 "We tried to estimate probabilities conservatively. Nevertheless, the result still leaves a very high probability that the man buried in the Shroud is Jesus. As Ricci writes, the converging data " ... will cause us to conclude that the Man of the Shroud is that Jesus of whom the Gospels speak, excluding any other crucified person in history." [Ricci, G., "Historical, Medical, and Physical Study of the Holy Shroud," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, 1977, p.73] Thus we conclude that, according to high probability, the man buried in the Shroud is none other than Jesus. The Shroud of Turin is his actual burial garment. Such a conclusion is very strongly supported by the facts." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.129) 15/11/2008 "After studying the irregularities held in common between the Gospels and the Shroud, Francis Filas, late professor of theology at Loyola University in Chicago, concluded that there is 1 chance in 10^26 that the man in the Shroud was not Jesus. [Filas, F., "Inquiry into the Shroud of Turin," CBN University, 4 April 1980] Vincent Donovan's conclusion was much more conservative, but still estimated only 1 chance in 282 billion that the two men were not the same. [Donovan, V.J., "The Shroud and the Laws of Probability," The Catholic Digest, April 1980, pp.51-52] Engineer and Jesuit Paul de Gail arrived at an even higher figure than Donovan's in spite of the fact that his work was done in 1972, some six years before the major scientific investigation. [Ibid., p.51 ] The lowest figure was given by Professors Tino Zeuli and Bruno Barbaris of the University of Turin's science faculty. In 1978 they concluded that there is 1 chance in 225 billion that the two men were different. [Ibid.] Although statistical studies can be rather subjective in method they are regularly used in scientific study and are not simply arbitrary guesses. Both the smallest figure of 1 in 225 billion and the largest of 1 in 10^26 practically conclude that the Shroud is the burial garment of Jesus." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, p.89) 15/11/2008 "Why do so many researchers agree on identifying the two men? We will not reproduce here the basis for the probability we presented in Verdict, [Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, pp.121-129] but we will briefly note the major irregularities that both the Gospels and the Shroud reveal." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, p.89) 15/11/2008 "1. Both the Gospels and the Shroud plainly concern cases of crucifixion. While it is true that many persons were crucified in ancient times, the number is small in comparison to those who died by all other means combined. In other words, if the Shroud belonged to some person other than Jesus, it would probably have been that of a noncrucified individual, but that is not the case. The probability of identification is increased, though only slightly, by the fact that both victims were males. Occasionally, some females were crucified- hence, a small increase in probability." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, p.89) 15/11/2008 "2. It is also unlikely that a random burial shroud, especially one surfacing in western Europe, would bear the image of a person of Semitic origin. Yet T Dale Stewart of the Smithsonian Museum of Natural Sciences pointed out that the features of the man buried in the Shroud indicate that he was Caucasian and possibly Semitic. Former Harvard University ethnologist Carleton Coon concluded, `Whoever the individual represented may have been, he is of a physical type found in modern times among Sephardic Jews and noble Arabs.' [Wilcox, R.K., "Shroud," Macmillan: New York, 1977, pp.130-31, 136]" (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, pp.89- 90) 15/11/2008 "3. The scourging and beating of Jesus at the hands of His enemies was unusual treatment for those marked for crucifixion. We are told that Pilate hoped in vain to satisfy the mob by punishing Jesus in these other ways, but the people demanded His crucifixion, rejecting the suggestion that Jesus be set free (John 19:1-16). Therefore Jesus was both seriously beaten and crucified. This was not a common procedure. A man who was to be crucified was generally not beaten nearly to death. Yet this double punishment was inflicted on both Jesus and the man in the Shroud. In fact, some believe that the man in the Shroud eventually died from the scourging while he hung on a cross. [Sava, A., "The Holy Shroud on Trial," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, 1977, pp.50-57]" (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, p.90) 15/11/2008 "4. One of the most unusual similarities between the two men is in the head wounds. Since the Romans were, to some extent, emperor worshipers, it is plain that they crowned Jesus with thorns to mock His claims to be the Messianic ruler or King of the Jews. But would this treatment be given to the average criminal who was to be crucified? Probably not. Yet the man in the Shroud had injuries a crown of thorns would create all over his scalp." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, p.90) 15/11/2008 "5. Another similarity is that both men were nailed to crosses instead of being tied to them. This is not as irregular as some of the other points, for Yohanan, the first-century crucifixion victim whose bones were discovered in 1967, was also nailed to his cross. But tying was an option." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, p.90) 15/11/2008 "6. The Gospel of John agrees with the Yohanan archaeological find that normal Roman crucifixion procedure involved breaking the victim's legs to hasten death. But since He was already dead, this was not done to Jesus. The man buried in the Shroud did not have broken legs." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, pp.90-91) 15/11/2008 "7. Besides the crown of thorns, the piercing of Jesus' side by a Roman spear is the most intriguing parallel. Since legs were regularly broken to hasten death, lancing the victim's side would be a superfluous procedure. But while neither of the two men had broken legs, both were wounded in the chest by a spear. Furthermore, it was reported that blood and water flowed from Jesus' chest wound as are visible from the wound in the man on the Shroud. The soldiers could have done nothing when they detected that the victims were dead, or they could have struck different areas of their bodies. The fact Jesus and the man in the Shroud were similarly wounded raises the likelihood that the two men are one and the same. Moreover, the flow of blood and water would not have occurred apart from the chest wound. John's description of Jesus' death coincides with the Shroud image in that a post-death wound was inflicted, the chest area was affected, and blood and water oozed from the wound." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, p.91) 15/11/2008 "8. Jesus and the man in the Shroud were both given fine, individual burials in linen, not the common burials generally given to crucifixion victims." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, p.91) 15/11/2008 "9. Jesus was buried hastily because of the oncoming Sabbath. Therefore, the women returned with spices on Sunday morning in order to finish the burial process. There are also signs that the man in the Shroud was buried hastily .... What are the chances that two men would he crucified, receive individual burials in fine linen shrouds, and still have to be buried hastily?" (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, p.91) 15/11/2008 "10. Last, the New Testament testifies that Jesus' body did not experience corruption (Acts 2:22-32), but that He was resurrected instead. No decomposition stains are present on the Shroud. Since many of the burial garments in existence have even visible decomposition stains on them, the absence of stains on the Shroud is enigmatic, especially in light of the New Testament testimony concerning Jesus' resurrection ... " (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, pp.91-92) 15/11/2008 "These ten similar crucifixion anomalies between Jesus and the man buried in the Shroud are strong arguments for the identification of the two men. (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, 1990, p.92) 15/11/2008 "Eighth, before one rushes to embrace the man in the shroud as Jesus Christ, he should consider the statistical probability against the anonymous victim's having suffered, died, and been buried in exactly the same way as Jesus. The odds against this having happened, according to Paul de Gail, a French Jesuit priest and engineer, are 225 billion to one. Italian physicist Tino Zeuli, who quoted de Gail in the April 1974 issue of Sindon, went on to liken the possibility to a brick in the street suddenly sprouting wings and taking off." (Wilcox, R.K., "Shroud," Macmillan: New York NY, 1977, p.171) 15/11/2008 "Jesus was crucified at the hands of the Roman authorities, when `Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee' (Lk 3:1). He was brought before Pilate by the Sanhedrin, who brought charges against him, among them that he claimed to be the Messiah (Lk 23:1-5). Crucifixion was not a Jewish custom, and therefore Jesus was taken to Pilate in order to induce the governor to nail him to the cross as a rebel in the estimation of Rome. The Biblical account of the execution of Jesus agrees with the Roman method of execution, but there were, however, several concessions made because of Jewish custom: a) Jesus was given back his clothes after being scourged (Mk 15:20; Mt 27:31), b) He was given aid in carrying the cross (Mk 15:21), c) He was offered a drink of spiced wine which He refused (Mk 15:23; Mt 27:34), and d) Contrary to the Roman practice of leaving the body on the cross for days as a sign of disgrace and as a warning to others, that of Jesus was removed and buried before sunset of the same day, in accordance with Jewish law (Dt 21:23; Mk 15:42)." (Bennett, J., "Sacred Blood, Sacred Image: The Sudarium of Oviedo: New Evidence for the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin," Ignatius Press: San Francisco CA, 2001, p.125) 16/11/2008 "The Crowning with Thorns The fact of the crowning with thorns and the way in which it was done are expressed concisely but precisely by the Gospel of John: "And the soldiers plaited a crown of thorns, and put it on his head" (Jn. 19,2). Students of law may be surprised by this punishment, which was not contemplated by the penal procedure of Rome. No other crucified man in history, in fact, is known to have been crowned with thorns! The way in which it was done, on the hand, implicates the artists, who have universally represented a type of crowning borrowed from the customs of Orientals, who crowned their kings with precious mitres placed on their heads. ... But the way in which it was carried out is unexpectedly documented by the marks on the Shroud: the whole top of the skull, in fact, from the occiput to the bregma, is covered with trickles of blood, while the dark colour of all the same area makes one think of sweat mixed with blood, in which the mass of the hair was steeped, creating the conditions for the resulting imprint." (Ricci, G., "Historical, Medical and Physical Study of the Holy Shroud," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, 1977, pp.67-68. Emphasis original) 16/11/2008 "When we compile all the information about the wounds on the man in the Shroud with the knowledge that they were inflicted over a period of several hours, we can reconstruct what happened to him with some accuracy. Most likely, he was first beaten about the head, which caused swelling, bruises, and lacerations on his head and face. The scores of scourge marks all over his body attest to a whipping. Something made of sharp, thornlike objects placed over his head caused numerous piercing wounds on the front, top, and back of the head. Some of these wounds could have occurred from being struck on the head after the thornlike objects were placed over it. Other head wounds may have resulted from falling and being struck in the head by the crossbeam often carried by victims to the execution site, or from scraping his head against the cross when he pushed himself up and down to breathe. The shoulder abrasions could also have been imposed as he carried the crossbeam or later scraped his back during the up-and-down breathing motion. If some of these injuries were suffered while the man carried the crossbar, they may have occurred at the same time the victim apparently fell, as evidenced by the dirt in the nose and knee areas, as well as the scratches and cuts detected on his nose, cheek, knee, and leg. Such dirt and scratches suggest the man had been unable to break his fall with his hands. With a crucifixion crossbeam weighing an estimated one hundred pounds, it is reasonable to assume that victims fell frequently, especially since they were no doubt in a weakened condition already." " (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.32-33) 16/11/2008 "The man's foot and wrist wounds were next inflicted by large nails driven through his flesh between the metatarsal and wrist or forearm bones to anchor him on the cross. The crucifixion alone would have taken several hours. From the two parallel streams of blood flows, the expanded ribcage, the enlarged pectoral muscles drawn in toward the collarbone and arms, and the taut legs and buttocks, we can observe this victim was pushing and pulling himself up to breathe. In addition, he likely incurred two more especially painful experiences. The median nerve, which controls the thumb, is not only a motor nerve, but is also a great sensory nerve. It would be excruciating for this nerve to be lesioned by a nail, and the pain would only be aggravated further when the man pulled himself up to breathe. Also, the forehead, temple, and scalp contain a rich supply of nerves whose sensitivity is among the most painful in the body. The infliction of more than thirty different wounds about the head would have contributed even more pain and agony than a typical crucifixion. After he was dead, a spearlike weapon thrust into his right side pierced his heart, causing blood and watery fluid to escape. All of the data gleaned from extensive study of the pathology evident on the Turin Shroud tells us this piece of linen was wrapped around the corpse of a man who was crucified and died while still nailed to a cross. We also know that the man's corpse lay inside the burial linen for no more than two or three days. Had he been there longer, decomposition stains would be present on the cloth, but the Shroud contains no signs of bodily decomposition. It is also noteworthy that the bloodstains remain unbroken and unsmeared and appear to be exact mirror images of the man's wounds. This tells us that the blood marks could not have been transferred to the Shroud through direct contact between the body and the cloth alone; instead, some other process must have been at work." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.33) 16/11/2008 "Several modern writers have vastly overstated the case for the Shroud's identification with Jesus. According to Stevenson and Habermas' Verdict on the Shroud, the odds are 83 million to one that it could be anyone else. French Jesuit Fr. Paul de Gail, with even more questionable arithmetic, quoted 225 billion to one. Such wild calculations serve to diminish, not enhance, their subject matter's credibility." (Wilson, I., "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, 1986, p.137) 16/11/2008 "The simple fact remains. No such impression on a winding-sheet has ever been found in any tomb, and we may add that it is materially impossible that such a thing should be found. Whatever may be the exact nature of the chemical process by which the impressions were produced, what concerns us now is the organic action exercised between a naked body and a prepared cloth. All such action is restricted by one essential condition, namely, that the body should have remained in contact with the cloth for too short a time to allow of putrefaction. If corruption set in, any impression previously made would be ipso facto destroyed. What indeed is found in a violated sepulchre ? A mummy or a skeleton. In either case the tomb could not have furnished a winding-sheet like the Holy Shroud. On the other hand, it is not possible for any one to have arrived at a method of producing such impressions, and this because of their altogether exceptional character." (Vignon, P., "The Shroud of Christ," , University Books: New York NY, 1970, p.44) 17/11/2008 "But in his thoroughness he [Vignon] turned, at the last, to one final hypothesis that would still deny the cloth's connection with Christ. Suppose, someone had suggested, that another man sometime in the course of the early centuries-some poor criminal-had been crowned with thorns, scourged, crucified and lanced in the side. Why couldn't the Shroud of Turin be his winding sheet? A marvelous coincidence? Yes. But who was to say it couldn't happen? Vignon didn't even bother to calculate the enormous odds against it. His answer was more direct and convincing-and its implications devastating. There was one essential condition, he said, for the production and retention of the imprint on the cloth: `The body would have remained in contact with the cloth for too short a time to allow of putrefaction. If corruption set in, any impression previously made would be, ipso facto, destroyed.' There was no sign of corruption on the linen." (Walsh, J.E., "The Shroud," Random House: New York NY, 1963, pp.90-91. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "But the Shroud is not a plain cloth. It bears the complete frontal and dorsal imprints of a human corpse, with a rich variety of significant details. ... And the imprints tell their own story more accurately than any historical documents could. They are a visible portrayal of the tragic fate of the Man of the Shroud-a series of definite historical events which took place at a definite historical time. If we have elsewhere the record of the same events related of a definite person, we have a good historical basis for identifying the Man of the Shroud. And if the events taken altogether are unparalleled in history, the identification is certain and irrefutable. We have that historical record in the four Gospels. They relate with much detail the tragic end of Christ's earthly life, from the Agony in the Garden to the Resurrection. They tell of the various tortures which surely left their characteristic marks upon His Body. They describe the extraordinary manner of His death and burial, and the finding of the grave-clothes after He had vanished from the tomb. It is a drama unique in the history of the world. Nobody ever thought of ascribing it to anyone else. The Shroud of Turin presents a complete and precise tableau of the same unique drama, and compels us to conclude that it is the winding-sheet of Christ with the imprints of His tortured and wounded Body." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self- Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.39. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "This conclusion is not weakened in the least by the lack of historical documents whereby we might trace the Shroud from the `sepulchre' in the Royal Chapel at Turin to the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. That means only that we do not know the career of the Shroud through the ages, but we do know what it is and whence it came. For this, the Shroud and the Gospels together provide a proof which even the opponents dare not deny. They can only make futile efforts to explain away the genuineness of the imprints. Father Thurston, for example, writes of the Shroud of Turin: `As to the identity of the body whose image is seen on the Shroud, no question is possible. The five wounds, the cruel flagellation, the punctures encircling the head, can still be clearly distinguished in spite of the darkening of the whole fabric. If this is not the impression of the Body of Christ, it was designed as the counterfeit of that impression. In no other personage since the world began could these details be verified.' [Thurston, H., "The Holy Shroud and the Verdict of History," The Month, CI, 1903, p.19] We shall see that there is much more than the five wounds, the scourging and the crowning with thorns to show that Christ and the Man of the Shroud are one and the same." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.40) 17/11/2008 "The Buffeting Christ was repeatedly struck in the face on three occasions-at the night session of the Sanhedrin, when He was first sentenced to death; after the session in the morning, when the sentence of death was ratified; and at the mocking homage paid to Him when He was crowned with thorns. He was struck by the guard, by attendants of the court, apparently by some of the Sanhedrists, and by the Roman soldiers (Matt. 26:67-68; Mark 14:65; Luke 22:63-64; John 18:2223; 19:3). The terms used by the Evangelists signify heavy blows that wound or prostrate, blows with the palm of the hand, with the fist, with a rod or switch. The face of the Man of the Shroud was cruelly maltreated. The imprint shows that there were several excoriations, especially on the brow, the orbital arches and the right cheek, where there was also a large swollen bruise. There was an excoriation and a swelling also at the bridge of the nose. The right eyelid is sharply contracted." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.40. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "The Scourging It was Pilate who ordered Christ to be scourged, and the sentence was carried out by Roman soldiers (Matt. 27:26; Mark 15:15; John 19:1) . This made a great difference. The Mosaic Law limited a judicial scourging to forty lashes (Deut. 25:3). In practice only thirty-nine were administered, lest the legal limit be inadvertently exceeded (2 Cor. 11:24). With the Romans, however, the executioners were free to administer as many strokes as they pleased. Christ was surely not spared if Pilate could hope that the sight of Him might move the multitude to pity: `Behold the Man.' The Man of the Shroud received a merciless scourging that spared only the face and the extremities. The long thongs left stripes across the shoulders and the back. They encircled the legs and cut the flesh. The chest, the abdomen and the back were struck many times with the weighted ends of the thongs, which left deep bruises in the form of a dumbbell. From the form, the position and the grouping of the wounds we can reconstruct the scourge-long, thin thongs, apparently two, each weighted with two round pieces of bone or metal about an inch and a half apart. With many of the blows the end of the thong joining the two weights left its mark, causing bruises with that peculiar shape of a dumbbell. From archaeological data it is known that such a scourge was in use among the ancient Romans. The Shroud shows very little blood from the wounds of the scourging. At first sight a discrepancy, this turns out to be in perfect harmony with Matthew (27:31) and Mark (15:20), who relate that after the scourging Christ was again clad in His own garments. There followed the journey to Calvary, during which much of the blood must have been absorbed by the garments, the absorption no doubt being facilitated by the perspiration." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.40. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "The Crowning With Thorns `And plaiting a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed into his right hand ... and they took the reed and kept striking him on the head' (Matt. 27:29-30; Mark 15:17-19; John 19:2). The form of the crown is not described, but the soldiers must have woven it rather roughly with thorn branches. It was no artistic effort. They were merely regaling themselves with a play of cruel mockery, suggested by Christ's claim to be the King of the Jews. In the imprints there are the marks of punctures on the brow, with four clots of blood and a trickle in the form of a reversed 3. Other punctures at the front of the head are covered by the hair, in which several streams of blood clotted. At the back of the head the punctures were more numerous, and they extended almost to the base of the skull, as can be seen from the many trickles of blood that clotted in the hair. One cannot tell whether the top of the head was injured, since there is no imprint of this part. At certain points about the head the flow of blood was hindered by some obstacle, probably a circle of some kind that held the thorn branches in place." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self- Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.41-42. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "The Carrying of the Cross `And bearing the cross for himself, he went forth to the place called the Skull' (John 19:17). The contemporaries of the Evangelist understood without further explanation what it was that Christ carried. The data gleaned from historical sources indicate that it was not the complete cross as is invariably depicted in art, but rather the crossbeam only, to which the outstretched arms were bound. It is to be noted that all four Evangelists say that the executioners led Christ away to be crucified (Matt. 27:31; Mark 15:20; Luke 23:26; John 19:16). This is an allusion to the practice of leading the condemned by a rope tied around the waist. Christ Himself refers to this mode of carrying the cross in His words to Peter: `When thou art old thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another will gird thee, and lead thee where thou wouldst not. Now this he said to signify by what manner of death he should glorify God' (John 21:18-19). On an earlier occasion Christ had hinted that, like Himself, Peter would be crucified (John 13:36). The incident of Simon of Cyrene also indicates that Christ carried only the crossbeam. The terms used by Matthew (27:32) and Mark (15:21) mean that Simon, rather than merely assisting Christ, took the cross away from Him and carried it alone. The Evangelists use the same verb to quote Our Lord when He says: "Take my yoke upon you" (Matt. 11:29). Luke (23:26) is even more explicit: They laid the cross upon Simon that he might carry it walking behind Jesus." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.42. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "The Greek word for cross (staurós) does not necessarily mean a complete cross as we now understand it. In ancient usage it meant either the upright or the transverse beam. The same word, in fact, signified also the stake on which the condemned were sometimes impaled. In Latin the term most commonly used in reference to the carrying the cross was patibulum, which signifies precisely the crossbeam. The Shroud clearly portrays the carrying of the crossbeam. It is in conflict with popular belief and the tradition of art, but it agrees with the Gospels and the practice of the Romans. There is no trace of any injury at the top of either shoulder, such as would be caused by the carrying of a complete cross. We see there the stripes of the scourging, but the flesh was otherwise intact. On both shoulder-blades, however, there was an extensive excoriation-the sort of effect that would be caused by the friction of a rough burden like the transverse beam of a cross. There are also the traces of an abundant oozing, such as would continue after the friction had ceased. Moreover, it is clear that the burden was carried after the scourging, for on each shoulder-blade the wounds inflicted by the scourge were subsequently aggravated and altered in form, some of them almost obliterated, by the friction of the burden which caused such an extensive abrasion of the skin. In the case of the Man of the Shroud, as in that of Christ, everything points to the carrying of the crossbeam only." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.43) 17/11/2008 "The Crucifixion All four Evangelists say simply: `They crucified him' (Math. 27:35; Mark 15:25; Luke 24:33; John 19:18). There was no need of describing what Cicero calls `the ultimate punishment of slaves,' and St. Augustine `the most horrible and most ignominious form of execution.' It is certain that Christ was nailed to the cross. `See my hands and feet, that it is I myself.' (Luke 24:39), He said to the disciples when He appeared to them after the resurrection. It was the Roman practice. The Man of the Shroud was also nailed to a cross. The feet were crossed, the left over the right, and fixed with a single nail driven through the insteps. The imprints of the right foot (that of the left is incomplete) shows that blood flowed from the wound towards the toes. This was fresh blood which clotted on the sole and was afterwards impressed on the Shroud." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.43-44. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "There was another flow from the wound in each foot after extraction of the nail, while the body lay on the lower half of the Shroud with the feet turned upwards. In the case of the right foot, a portion of this second issue flowed beyond the heel in a fold of the Shroud. It did not spread on the cloth as fresh liquid blood normally would. As stated above, it was a dense viscous mass which issued together with an abundant quantity of serum-a condition which agrees with the fact that the Body of Christ was left on the cross for about two hours after death. The imprint of the back of the left hand, which lies over the right, shows that the hand was pierced, not through the palm, but at a certain point in the wrist. Dr. Barbet has demonstrated that this is in accord with the anatomy of the hand and the requirements of crucifixion. He performed many experiments with hands freshly amputated, and therefore retaining the condition of the living tissues. The tissues of the palms tore rather easily when they were pierced by a nail and traction was applied. In a real crucifixion the nails would surely have torn through the yielding flesh if they were driven through the palms. Even if the weight of the body were supported by a projection at the middle of the upright beam, the hands might still have been torn loose by the spasmodic contractions or the impulsive struggles of the crucified." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.44) 17/11/2008 "On the other hand, in Dr. Barbet's experiments the tissues did not tear at all when the nail was driven through the wrist at the point known as the space of Destot, which lies among small bones at the base of the hand. At this point a nail can be driven through easily without breaking any bone, and it will hold firmly against the greatest traction. It is here that the wound is localized in the imprint on the Shroud. A nail fixed in the space of Destot presses or lacerates the median nerve, which controls the muscular action of the fingers. In Dr. Barbet's experiments such injury to this nerve invariably caused the four fingers to curve slightly and stiffly, while the thumb was turned against the palm-exactly the position of the fingers and the thumbs in the imprint on the Shroud." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.44) 17/11/2008 "Blood flowed along the arms while they were extended on the cross. At several points on the left forearm the blood was deflected and flowed vertically down the side. At the back of the left hand there are two trickles of blood which also flowed vertically during the crucifixion. These streams are still in their original position in relation to the arm and the hand. Thus they enable us to calculate the angle at which the arms were extended on the cross-about 65 degrees from the vertical. In the imprints of the Shroud we have an exact portrayal of the technique of crucifixion, and of one crucifixion in particular which supplies for the reticence of the Evangelists." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.45) 17/11/2008 "The Wound in the Side The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other, who had been crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs; but one of the soldiers opened his side with a lance, and immediately there came out blood and water" (John 19:32-34). Roman Law demanded that the crucified be left to perish on the cross, and thereafter their bodies could not be removed without official authorization. In Palestine, because of the penal code of the Mosaic Law, it was often necessary to remove the crucified before they had succumbed to their torments. In such cases they were despatched by the breaking of the legs. In the case of Christ there were several extraordinary features which place it apart by itself. Crucifixion was a lingering torture which could last as much as two or three days. Though He was in the vigor of His manhood, Christ died after three hours. This was so exceptional that Pilate was surprised when it was reported to him by Joseph of Arimathea, and he sent for the centurion to verify the fact before granting permission to remove the body (Mark 15:44-45). To the soldiers it was evident that Christ was already dead, so they did not break His legs, and yet one of them plunged a spear into His side. This must have been about an hour after Christ had breathed His last. `And immediately there came out blood and water"-an event so extraordinary that St. John, an eye-witness, affirms it with singular emphasis. There are various theories as to what the `water' might have been. We are not now concerned with this problem, but only with the fact that some watery fluid issued from the side, distinct from the blood and in sufficient quantity to be seen by John standing near the cross." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.45-46. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "The position and the nature of the wound in the side as impressed on the Shroud were described above; also the fact that the blood appears to have had a thicker consistency than blood normally has, and that there issued along with it a distinct quantity of some kind of organic fluid. The body was erect when the side was pierced, for the blood and the separate liquid flowed downward from the wound. Besides that which adhered to the skin, an indefinite amount must have fallen to the earth. There was a second flow from the wound in the side when the body was laid on the Shroud. This accounts for the two meandering streams that extend across the loins in the dorsal image. These seem to have flowed directly upon the Shroud under the arched loins, as could easily have been the case in view of the fact that this was a new cloth of unbleached linen, woven in a compact twill pattern and somewhat stiff. Here there seem to have been clots of blood carried along by the more abundant serous fluid. Altogether, the wound in the side, with the issue of blood and `water,' is one of the most striking coincidences between the Shroud and the Gospels." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.46) 17/11/2008 "Rigor Mortis After death the Body of Christ remained suspended on the cross for hardly less than two hours. Under the circumstances, it must have grown rigid much more rapidly than is normally the case. It was probably rather thoroughly stiffened by the time it was taken down from the cross. The body enveloped in the Shroud was already rigid. This is suggested by the general appearance of the two figures, but there are more precise indications. The arms had been brought down from their extended position, but the hands remained as they had been on the cross, stiffened with the spontaneous curvature of the fingers and the inward bend of the thumbs illustrated by Dr. Barbet's experiments. The feet also were stiffened in the position they had on the cross, sloped forward and inward. It is an unnatural position which could not have been maintained if the feet had been normally flexible. The left foot had been crossed over the right. This caused a bend in the left knee, which grew rigid in that position and remained bent upward while the body was enveloped in the Shroud. One looks in vain for realistic details like these in art. They are present in these imprints because the Shroud registered with the utmost fidelity the condition of the body that rested within its folds." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.46-47. Emphasis original). 17/11/2008 "The Burial When the body was finally taken down from the cross, the Sabbath was imminent and there was no time for the customary burial rites. The disciples could carry out at most a hasty, provisional burial. The three Synoptics tell the whole story in one sentence: `And Joseph taking the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock' (Math. 27:60; Mark 15:46; Luke 23:53). St. Mark (16:1) and St. Luke (23:56) clearly exclude the anointing. Neither can we assume that the body was washed, for the ritual ablution of the dead had to be done with warm water, perfumed with aromatic spices. Warm water could hardly have been provided in those last hurried moments outside the walls of the city-no more than the ointments which were certainly lacking. So the body was provisionally wrapped in the linen sheet just as it was when taken down from the cross. The perfect harmony of the Shroud with the Synoptics is obvious. St. John (19:39-40; 20:5-7) adds three details to the account of the Synoptics. The first is that there were other cloths besides the winding-sheet. It is practically certain that one of these was a chin-band binding up the lower jaw, which is known to have been in use among the ancient Jews. This would explain the vacant space on the Shroud between the heads of the two figures. The imprint would be continuous had there not been some obstacle at the top of the head. What other cloths were present, and what purpose may they have served? The text gives no further clue and it is risky to speculate. Of one thing we can be certain-there were no swathing-bands. St. John says explicitly that the Body of Christ was wrapped in the linen cloths `according to the custom of the Jews in preparing the dead for burial.' It never was the custom of the Jews to bind the dead with swathing-bands after the manner of a mummy. The historical sources indicate something quite different-either clothing in ordinary garments or envelopment in a shroud. In this respect, there is perfect harmony between John and the Synoptics-and the Shroud of Turin." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.47-48. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "The second detail added by John is that there was a soudarion `which had been upon his head.' The soudarion could not have been a napkin covering the face, for it was not the custom of the Jews at that time to cover the face of the dead with a cloth distinct from the Shroud. Even if it had been, there would have been no reason whatever for doing so at the hasty, provisional burial of Christ just a few paces from the cross. The historical sources and philological data leave us no alternative but to conclude that the soudarion was either the chin-band or the winding-sheet folded over the head,-more probably the latter. There is still perfect harmony between John and the Synoptics-and the Shroud of Turin. The third additional detail is that the body was wrapped in the burial linen along with the mixture of myrrh and aloes. According to St. John's description and extra-biblical sources, the spices must have been a dry powder. On this point the exegetes are practically unanimous. Now there is reason to believe that there was a dry powder on the Shroud. While it enveloped the body, the Shroud was moistened at the middle of the frontal imprint, at the shoulder-blades by the serum from the excoriations, and by the serum from the wound in the right foot. In each one of these places, as the liquid spread upon the cloth by capillary attraction, it carried along with it a mass of small particles which accumulated at the edge of the stain left by the liquid." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.48) 17/11/2008 "The presence of aloes brings in the final element which led the scientists of the Sorbonne to formulate the vaporograph theory in an effort to explain the process by which the two stain images were produced in the form of a negative. Ammoniac vapors released from the sweat of the unwashed body reacted with the aloes on the Shroud and formed the brown stain, graduated according to the contours of the body. All other theories retain aloes as the basis of the explanation. Altogether, then, the Gospel account of the burial of Christ is of the highest significance in identifying the Man of the Shroud. St. John's text is proposed as an insuperable objection against the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin only at the cost of distorting the meaning of his terms and contradicting his statement that the Body of Christ was wrapped in the burial linen according to the custom of the Jews." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.48-49) 17/11/2008 "Under the Dominion of Death Christ remained in the tomb from about six o'clock on Friday evening till some time before dawn on Sunday morning. We can assume at most about thirty-six hours. During this time His Body was in a perfectly natural state, subject to the action of natural farces. Had it remained in the tomb long enough, it would have corrupted like any other human body. This condition came to an end and the body entered into an incorruptible state only at the moment of the resurrection. As was stated above, the imprints on the Shroud show the effects of the natural post-mortem process in the exudation of many small drops from the pores. This evidently took place hours after the body was enveloped in the Shroud. There are those who have been scandalized by the statement that the Body of Christ was corruptible while it reposed in the tomb. If they were consistent, they would say that it became incorruptible at the moment of death-an idea that is hardly tenable, scripturally or theologically. The corruptibility of that sacred body in the state of death pertains to the mystery of the Incarnation and the Redemption as much as the fact that the same body was passible and mortal during life. The Son of God assumed a human body that was in the same condition in which ours is in consequence of sin, in order that He might sacrifice Himself through the offering of His Body in propitiation for the sins of the world (Rom. 8:3; Hebr. 10:5-10). When His sacrifice was consummated, He left His Body temporarily under the dominion of death, `sown in corruption that it might rise in incorruption, sown in dishonor, that it might rise in glory, sown in weakness that it might rise in power, sown a natural body that it might rise a spiritual body' (1 Cor. 15:4244). This is the doctrine of St. Paul. Like the bodies of the just, who are assured of a glorious resurrection, the dead body of Christ was a natural, corruptible body which became immortal and incorruptible at the moment when He rose from the tomb: `Christ having risen from the dead, dies now no more, death shall no longer have dominion over him' (Rom. 6:9). Till that moment the Son of God chose to submit to the laws of death, that in the fullest sense of the word He Himself might become `the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also comes the resurrection of the dead' (1 Cor. 15:20-21)." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.49-50. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "Hence, one should not be disturbed by the corruptibility of the Body of Christ in the tomb. The divine plan of human redemption demanded it. Nor should one be disturbed by the fact that the imprints on the Shroud show the effects of the natural post-mortem process. It is only a preliminary stage that is indicated there, and it really proves that there actually was no corruption of the Body of Christ. There is no trace of the gases or liquids that would have resulted from the decomposition of the tissues. And the first effects of the post-mortem process ceased abruptly at a certain moment because then the body departed from the Shroud. So far from being a difficulty, the evidence of post-mortem action upon the Shroud is a striking proof of the genuineness of the imprints and of their complete harmony with the most profound aspects of the mystery of Christ." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.50) 17/11/2008 "The Time Element How long was the body enveloped in the Shroud? There are many factors to be considered and some of them are not very well understood, since we are dealing with an exceptional case that occurred nineteen centuries ago. Under the circumstances, how long did it take for the stain images to form? There were different forces involved and it seems practically impossible to reproduce them by experiment. How long did it take for the clotted blood to redissolve sufficiently to be impressed so completely on the cloth? How long did it take for the serous exudation from the pores to begin, and how long was it in progress? These questions cannot be answered very exactly. Nor can one say with any assurance what was the temperature and the degree of moisture in the tomb and what part these factors may have played. The temperature of the body itself may have contributed to the result, and of course there is no way of telling what the bodily temperature was. Finally, what toxic products may have been secreted in the body during the long and varied torture, and how may they have affected the tone of the tissues and the different processes involved in the production of the imprints? The most that one can say on the basis of experiments and observations, is that the whole complicated process required at least twenty-four hours, and that it could hardly have lasted more than forty-eight. In view of the subject we are dealing with, this is approximate enough to be reckoned among the details which serve to identify the Man of the Shroud." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.50-51. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "After-light of the Resurrection How did the body emerge from the Shroud at the right moment, when the two figures were perfectly formed with all their precise and varied details, and before corruption began? Vignon labored at this problem on the hypothesis that some human agent had removed the sheet. In the end he surrendered and called the attention of Science to a challenge of the Shroud: `Explain if you can how this sheet was separated from the body it had enveloped.' It was those extremely precise impressions of blood that created the difficulty. Remember, this blood had already clotted on the body. It had to be partially redissolved to be impressed on the Shroud, and it is there now entirely intact and with incredible exactness. Vignon succeeded in obtaining similar transfers of clotted blood, but never any as complete or precise as those on the Shroud. It was too difficult to time the process exactly, and he could never remove the cloth without disturbing the blood, although he worked under laboratory conditions with small quantities of blood, and with small pieces of cloth of a texture specially chosen for the purpose. Now here is a fourteen foot sheet which was originally longer, and this sheet retains complete and perfect transfers of clotted blood, varied in form, much of it extensive in area, and originally located on different parts of a human body. From his own experience Vignon was convinced that no human agent could have removed the frontal half of the sheet without destroying the extreme precision of the two trickles on the back of the left hand, the streams on the forearms, the large clot on the right side, and the clots and streams on the brow and the hair. But suppose that the frontal half of the sheet had been successfully removed-there was the body still lying on the lower half, where there are the many trickles at the back of the head, the blood on the soles of the feet, and the two intertwining streams across the loins beginning and ending with a large pool of blood and serum. Lift the body off the sheet? Turn it over and lift the sheet off the body? The thing was plainly impossible if that whole array of decalcomanias of blood was to be retained intact with the precision it has on the Shroud. So there was the challenge of the Shroud to Science: `... and if in the end you must confess that it is beyond your powers to explain how my mysterious guest departed, you will still have made a great discovery.' Christians, of course, know the answer. In fact, this and other `mysteries' of the Shroud seem natural enough to those who realize what this cloth is and whose blood it bears. For them, these "mysteries" are a confirmation of the authenticity of the Shroud for the very reason that they are inexplicable unless they be a distant afterlight of the resurrection of Christ." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.51-52. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "Does this seem fantastic to you? Study the problem with guides like Vignon and Barbet, and perhaps you too will be conquered as was Dr. Hovelacque, Professor of Anatomy in the Faculty of Medicine at Paris, who was far from being a Christian. After reading Barbet's Les Cinq Plaies, he meditated in silence and finally broke forth with the exclamation: `But then ... then Jesus Christ rose from the dead!'" (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.52. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "It Is I Through the Shroud, then, Christ presents the same proof of identity that He presented to the disciples when He appeared to them after the resurrection: "See my hands and feet, that it is I myself" (Luke 24:39). "He showed them his hands and his side" (John 20:20), and He met the demand of the doubting Thomas: "Bring here thy finger, and see my hands; and bring here thy hand, and put it into my side; and be not unbelieving, but believing" (John 20:27). Though the risen Saviour retained His major wounds, His flesh was otherwise restored to the integrity that befitted the state of glory in which He had risen. The disfigurements of the face, the punctures about the head, the lacerations and the bruises of the scourging, the excoriations from the carrying of the cross-all these were erased when a new life surged through His Body; but He left their imprints upon the Shroud, together with the marks of the nails and the spear. And with the imprints of the wounds He left a portrait of Himself as He was before His flesh was transfigured by the glory of the resurrection. This is the image that Christ chose to leave to the world, and in that awe- inspiring image He rises again before our eyes and renews the appeal of old: "See all these wounds that I bore for love of you, see this blood which I shed in atonement for your sins ... and know that it is I"" (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.52-53) 17/11/2008 "The Man of the Shroud executed by the Romans On looking closely at the Turin Shroud it is evident that the Man who was enshrouded in it had suffered injuries which resulted from a Roman crucifixion of the first century AD. The entire body is covered by wounds produced by a Roman flagrum. The scourge marks appear to exceed greatly the number of strokes that were normally give to a man condemned to a subsequent death; indeed 120 strokes can be counted. One can deduce that this scourging had originally been ordered to serve as a severe separate punishment; it shows, in any case, a particular fury on the part of the torturers. The absence of mutilations exclude an oriental type of crucifixion. The trickles of blood that cover the whole head and forehead of the Man of the Shroud, with the different morphology of veinous and arterial blood, are clear signs of a crowning with thorns, an unusual fact outside the normal procedure. As the Man was led to the place of execution, he was made to carry the beam of the cross and in doing so he fell to the ground. Very clear are the wounds on the left knee, the mark of a blow with a stick on the right cheek, the tumefaction and excoriation of the nose, and the swellings on the face. ... The wrists and the feet have been pierced with nails. In the case of the wrists, the nails have penetrated Destot's space, among the eight small bones of the carpus, causing an injury to the median nerve. As a result the thumbs have withdrawn inside the palms of the hand; they are indeed not visible on the Shroud. The feet have been nailed together, the left foot over the right, directly to the cross without a suppedaneum. The stabbing of the side made after the death of the condemned man rather than before in order to cause death, is unusual: this fact can be interpreted as a proof that death had already occurred. The burial sheet itself clearly shows that the corpse was immediately returned to the relatives; the absence of any sign of decomposition on it confirms the fact that the contact of the body with the cloth was only for a brief period of time. The presence of blood shows that the corpse was not washed, which can only be explained in the case of a burial in a Jewish cultural context before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. The number of coincidences between this crucifixion and that as used by the Romans is high; this is enough to rule out any other type of oriental crucifixion. Finally, one should point out also the very remarkable correspondence between the details that are observed on the Shroud and the description of Jesus's crucifixion as narrated in the four gospels; this becomes all the more surprising when one remembers that each crucifixion was `personalized' according to the victim to he executed and the crime committed."(Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, pp.227-228. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "Therefore-and also to round out this argument-let us look at a more recent and more precise example of a calculation relative to the problem under examination; we are indebted to Paul de Gail, S.J., French, who is an engineer in industrial technology, and for more than fifty years a most assiduous scholar of the Shroud. In his book, Le Visage de Jesus-Christ et son Linceul (France-Empire, Paris 1972), he takes up, among other things, this question we have been discussing, and offers a more complete and more accurate analysis, based on only seven independent elements. In words that we have heard before, he states: `It is Jesus Christ; considering all that I can now evaluate, the possibility that it is not is equal to (or less than) 1 chance in 225 billions.' Paul de Gail's study is very interesting, also for its clearness. I present it here most willingly. 1) The Man of the Shroud had a burial sheet. Many persons, after being executed on the cross, were abandonned [sic] to birds of prey and wild beasts, or thrown into a pit. Let us admit-a very wide hypothesis- that 1 in 3 crucified persons had a regular burial with a shroud. Probability of this event: 1/3. 2) The Man of the Shroud remained a short time in the sheet, otherwise the intensity of the marks produced by the body would have become illegible [through decomposition]. To how many of the crucified was a burial sheet given, only to have it removed after such a short time? Let us say, with abundant largesse, that there was 1 in 20. Probability of this event: 1/20. 3) The Man of the Shroud separated perfectly from the Shroud, with a technic which has left the imprints of blood clots on the fabric without leaving smears or streaks of blood, as would have happened if the clots had been moist, and without flaking or impairing these clots as would have happened if they had been dry. In how many cases could this operation have succeeded? The fact is so surprising that one can reply: This could happen once in a hundred times, or in a thousand. Let us limit ourselves to 1 in 50. Probability of this event: 1/50. 4) The Man of the Shroud was fixed to the cross with nails. It seems that this type of crucifixion was reserved to special cases, but let us admit anyway, with ample leeway, that crucifixions with nails occurred 2 times out of 3. Probability of this event: 2/3. 5) On the Man of the Shroud are seen the wounds of a crown of thorns. Some cases have been cited of Christian martyrs who, for derision, were crowned with thorns to make them resemble their Master more closely. Let us suppose, though it is certainly unrealistic, that this could have happened 1 time in 1000. Probability of this event: 1/1000. 6) The Man of the Shroud was pierced by a lance in the right side. It was the custom to break the legs of the crucified, to hasten their death. The lance thrust and the unbroken legs constitute an unexpected fact, without any doubt a rare exception. Given the lack of precise historical data on this point, let us confine ourselves to admitting-with wide liberality-that this could have happened 1 time in 5. Probability of this event: 1/5. 7) The face of the Man of the Shroud is of incomparable splendor, which thousands of artistic efforts have never attained. This man, crucified, found himself among criminals; but criminals do not have this expressive mask of majesty ... When we reflect on all his sufferings and tortures, then contemplate this countenance of nobility and serenity, we can be well assured that we would not find one such face in a million. And for good reason! Nevertheless, we will be content with the modest estimate of 1 in 10,000. Probability of this event: 1/10,000. What, then, is the probability that all these 7 characteristics, these 7 independent events to which we have limited ourselves, would be found simultaneously in any victim of crucifixion? Very simple: we need only to multiply all the single probabilities. For the coin and die, we had 1/2 x 1/6, which is 1/12. Here we multiply all the respective probabilities: 1/3 x 1/20 x 1/50 x 2/3 x 1/1000 x 1/5 x 1/10,000, and the product of these is 1 in 225 billions. And in his own distinctively provocative style, our Paul de Gail concludes: `We see that if, in all history there had been 225 billion persons crucified-which is manifestly absurd!-in this astronomical assembly we have one chance, one only, to find a victim identical to the one that the Gospels, in their historicity, describe as bearing these seven characteristics'. Pere de Gail assures us that in all these calculations on the probability, he took only a few elements into consideration, not more than seven; and for each one he wanted to reduce to the minimum the evaluation favorable to the result. With a more extended and more precise evaluation, it would not be difficult to ascertain the probability, not as 1 in 225 billions, but 1 in 50,000 billions, or more. `If the slightest trace of doubt is not pulverized and destroyed by these astronomical figures, it must be, perhaps, that for certain minds, too mathematical-or not mathematical enough?-numbers have nothing to say.' And he concludes: `One word suffices: The crucified man in the Shroud of Turin is Jesus Christ himself.'" (Zeuli, T., "Jesus Christ is the Man of the Shroud," Shroud Spectrum International, Vol. 3, No. 10, March 1984, pp.29-33, pp.32-33) 17/11/2008 "One of the things that shook my natural predisposition to scepticism about the Turin Shroud was precisely that it could not at all easily be harmonized with the New Testament accounts of the grave-clothes. I am not saying that it is incompatible with them but simply that no forger starting, as he inevitably would, from the Gospel narratives, and especially that of the fourth, would have created the shroud we have. Yet if it is genuine, it must make us look again at the biblical evidence. The Gospels are notoriously difficult to harmonize with themselves, let alone with what has been called this `fifth gospel'. Nevertheless it may, I believe, help us to reconstruct the situation in a manner which I, at any rate, would never have arrived at, unless I had been prepared to take account of this extra-canonical witness." (Robinson, J.A.T., "The Shroud and the New Testament," in Jennings, P., ed., "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, 1978, pp.69-81, p.69) 17/11/2008 "There will never be final proof that this is the actual cloth that wrapped the body of Jesus of Nazareth. Even if all the tests proved positive there would only be a very strong possibility that it was the burial cloth of this man. If the date of the linen were to come out correct, then there is a pretty powerful concurrence of evidence that would point to this conclusion. Clearly it carries the image of a man, almost certainly a Jew, of the right age, who suffered death by crucifixion. Though most of the marks of this barbarous punishment would not point distinctively to this one man, the evidence of severe injury to the scalp by a `crown of thorns' surely cannot reasonably be posited of any usual victim: it was a mock coronation as King of the Jews. There is also the fact that, unlike any other shroud, it did not disintegrate with the corpse it covered. For some reason it became separated from its body prior to decomposition and was regarded by a long series of people in most hazardous circumstances as valuable enough to preserve. If then everything else were to prove positive, there must be a strong presumption that it belonged to this man. We cannot say more, but neither, I think, can we say less." (Robinson, J.A.T., "The Shroud and the New Testament," in Jennings, P., ed., "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, 1978, pp.69-81, p.76) 17/11/2008 "If then it were this very cloth, what difference would it make? In the first place it would be bound to make us take the evidence that comports with it much more seriously. There is, as we have seen, the evidence from the Mishnah which agrees at points very well, and which for the first time would be confirmed as valid of Judaea prior to the war of 66-70 AD. Then there is the archaeological evidence from the skeleton found in Jerusalem in 1968 of a Jew named Jehohanan, crucified at this same period, which confirms (apparently) that the nails did not, as Christian tradition has depicted and a forger would have assumed, go through the palms, which medical tests have shown in any case could not support the weight of the body. But it is the bearing out of the New Testament evidence that is much the most significant. It does not of course prove the Gospels are, or set out to be, exact historical records. The well-known differences between them remain, though I am convinced that the light thrown by the Shroud can help us to understand how apparently discrepant accounts e.g., of the grave-cloths, are in fact compatible. The first thing that the genuineness of the Shroud would shake is the theory that the whole story of the empty tomb is an invention of the early church. ... The story is firmly entrenched in all the strands of the Gospel tradition, and I believe that Paul's statement of the common apostolic teaching, received after his conversion, that Christ `was buried ... and was raised to life on the third day' points to a connection between the Resurrection and the tomb (not merely the appearances) which takes us back to the very first years of the Christian movement. The survival of the shroud would simply add weight to the very strong presumption that the tomb of Jesus was found empty - though how it became empty neither the Gospels nor, I believe, the Shroud tell us. But somehow the body disappeared. The traditional challenge, that the authorities had only to produce the body to discredit the whole message that Jesus was risen, must, I think, be taken more seriously than I have tended to suppose. The argument certainly does not hold the other way round. ... But if a lifeless cadaver had been produced which could irrefutably have been identified with Jesus of Nazareth, then the proclamation that he was not dead but alive would have seemed as unconvincing to Jewish as to modern presuppositions. The Christian church would never have got off the ground. Positively this proves nothing about the mode or meaning of `resurrection'. But the Shroud unquestionably adds weight to the universal witness of the New Testament that there was a physical and not merely a spiritual aspect to this event." (Robinson, J.A.T., "The Shroud and the New Testament," in Jennings, P., ed., "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew- McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, 1978, pp.69-81, pp.76-78) 17/11/2008 "First, in regard to the death of Jesus, the Shroud bears out the reports in all the Gospels of multiple buffetings and Roman scourgings (far exceeding the Jewish thirty-nine strokes) and confirms how brutal these were. It supports a cap, and not merely as traditional art would have suggested, a circlet of thorns. The additional abrasions on the back of one shoulder could also bear out the tradition which John records [ 19.17], though not the Synoptists, that Jesus was compelled to carry his own cross at least part of the way. Again, the attachment of the body to the cross by nails, and not ropes, attested by John [20.25] and implicitly by Luke [24.39] is of course also confirmed by the Shroud. So are two important details strongly insisted upon by John on the evidence of eye-witness. The first is that the legs of Jesus were not broken, unlike those of the two crucified with him [John 19.32-3], a practice now confirmed by the mangled skeleton to which I have referred. The second is the lance-stab in the side with its effusion of blood and water which is clearly traceable on the Shroud [John 19.34]." (Robinson, J.A.T., "The Shroud and the New Testament," in Jennings, P., ed., "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, 1978, pp.69-81, p.78) 17/11/2008 "Finally, though this is inevitably a subjective judgement, the image of the Shroud reveals a visage, like that of Hamlet's father, altogether `most majestical'. It is surely a face that could credibly have commanded the loyalty and faith which the Gospels describe. The image might have been terribly disillusioning. But no one, I think, since its full photographic likeness became revealed, from the agnostic Delage onwards, could say that it was out of keeping with the man of supreme inner authority whom the Gospel records present." (Robinson, J.A.T., "The Shroud and the New Testament," in Jennings, P., ed., "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, 1978, pp.69-81, p.78) 17/11/2008 "Yet the face on the Shroud, we should never forget, is the face of a dead man. Its exclusive picture is a last testimony to the past. It is the imprint of the old body of flesh and blood, not of the risen Christ, nor even apparently, from its closed eyes, of some moment of awakening. Even if the cloth is authentic, it could still have been removed from the corpse by human agency after the image had been formed. Yet, on what looks at present to be the most promising hypothesis, it does appear to record some moment, some burst perhaps of low-energy non-ionizing radiation, lasting but a fraction of a second. Otherwise it would have penetrated further than the surface of the fibres, which is what the microscope tests disclose. What then was this moment or this energy? No one can say - or perhaps ever will. We may, however, rule out dematerialization in the crudely literal sense that the entire mass of matter composing the body was changed, according to the formula E = Mc^2, into an equivalent amount of energy. That would have destroyed the Shroud, Jerusalem, and everything else one can think of. Matthew's `violent earthquake' [28.2] would have been nothing! We are not here in the realm of transforming physical matter into physical energy according to the rules of repeatable experiment. ... In other words, if we are to use any term at all, it would be one more like `transmaterialization'. The New Testament accounts of the appearances differ considerably - though the degree of materialization and the difference of location seem to me neither here nor there and, like any other phenomena in this field, would depend greatly on the experiencing subject. In any case this is not the body which the Shroud shows us. What it could show us might be, so to speak, a side-effect of its generation, a brief but intense discharge of some sort of physical radiation sufficient to have left marks of thermal discoloration on the cloth. It would be the last trace, the final footprint, as it were, of the old body corresponding more to the skin sloughed off by the snake, except of course that it was nothing substantial but only an image." (Robinson, J.A.T., "The Shroud and the New Testament," in Jennings, P., ed., "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, 1978, pp.69-81, pp.78-80) 17/11/2008 "THE time has now come to ask ourselves the question-If the body imprinted on the Shroud is not that of Christ, whose could it have been ? We know indeed that, in the past, hundreds of thousands of slaves and rebels were crucified. It was the most painful and humiliating form of execution known to the days of antiquity-a death so terrible that contemporary references to it are few and brief. Those condemned to the cross were regarded as having lost their human rights, and death did not restore them. The bodies of the crucified received varying treatment: sometimes they were thrown to dogs, or left to be devoured by birds of prey: or they might be burnt or buried in some pit. In the Shroud, however, we see the imprints of a crucified body which had been wrapped in costly linen, covered with anti-putrifying aromatic mixtures. The body was evidently quite incorrupt, and could therefore have remained in the linen only a short time. It bears the marks of innumerable bruises and wounds, and of blood, shed both before and after death: also of blood serum, spreading around the dark blood stains. It is quite clear that no attempt was made to wash the body, or this blood would have been blurred or even obliterated. This applies particularly to the face and the nape of the neck, which is covered with rivulets of blood. Had the head and hair been either washed or combed-a process prescribed by almost every burial rite in the world-all this valuable evidence would have been destroyed. The inference seems a fairly clear one: that for some reason, such as the need for haste, the body was given only provisional burial, which did not include the ceremonial washing and anointing prescribed by the law of the time. Moreover, we can be sure from the lack of any sign of corruption that the body did not remain in the Shroud for long." (Hynek, R.W., "The True Likeness," Sheed & Ward: New York NY, 1951, pp.30-31. Emphasis original) 17/11/2008 "Let us now consider the imprints on the Shroud with an especial reference to marks of identification. In the first place, there are the clear and unmistakable marks of a crown of thorns round the forehead and temples. There is no record in history of a crown of thorns being given to anyone under sentence of death except Our Lord Himself. This is not all. Christ was crucified on Friday, the day of preparation for the Sabbath, and according to the law of Moses the body had to be in the grave before the first star appeared in the sky. He was, therefore, given provisional burial in the utmost haste. All this is in complete agreement with the findings on the Shroud. According to the Gospels, Our Lord's body lay for about thirty hours in the sepulchre, and He then rose from the dead. The imprints on the Shroud, as we have already seen, are so distinct and unsmudged that it is quite certain that the body which caused them was free of any trace of corruption. If the physico-chemical process which caused the imprints had continued, they would have become more and more indistinct, and finally merged into a dark confused mass." (Hynek, R.W., "The True Likeness," Sheed & Ward: New York NY, 1951, pp.93-94) 18/11/2008 "What evidence is there in the Shroud that could help us to identify the person it contained? Let us study the photographs carefully. To begin with, the stains show a perfectly proportioned man with a remarkably majestic face. His height should be easy to determine by measurement, but, perhaps because it depends on the directions in which the cloth was stressed, on how much to estimate the bend of the knees, on how high up one thinks the top of the head came, measurements. have given values varying between 5 feet 4 inches and 6 feet 2 inches - a surprisingly wide variation. We can see that the man was crucified. The Shroud clearly shows bloodstains from the nail-wounds in the upper wrist and the soles of the feet. This helps us to date and place the body. Crucifixion was probably first used by the Persians, and then spread to the Jews, Carthaginians and Romans. It was stopped altogether early in the fourth century by the Emperor Constantine, so the body was earlier than that. Since the Greeks and the Romans were clean-shaven, those nationalities may be eliminated. The shoulder-length hair and beard suggest a Jew, for as we know from depictions of Jewish prisoners-of-war between 37 B.C. and A.D. 70, they had unadorned hair and full beards. The body was probably that of a Jew, then, from some time in the first three centuries." (Hoare, R., "Testimony of the Shroud," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1978, p.37) 18/11/2008 "There are visible on the body other signs of injury which might help in identification. First, there was extensive bruising, as if the person had been buffeted around the face and body. Damage to the skin on the shoulder-blades suggests that he may have had to carry the heavy cross-beam of the cross for some way. Secondly, there are marks over almost the entire body as if weals had been cut into the skin with whips. The lashes, perhaps 125 of them, are all over the back of the body down to the heels, and they tend to be in twos and threes, indicating scourging with a Roman flagrum by a man on each side. This was a whip with three thongs, each thong of which had a small piece of bone or metal tied to the end to bite into the flesh of the victim. Thirdly, there are streaks of blood on the hair round the head, as well as on the forehead where a drip of blood trickled down and was deflected by the furrows into the shape of a figure `3'. 'These marks imply that he had to wear round his head something with sharp points digging into the skin. Lastly, there is a large bloodstain on the right side, not far below the armpit, indicating a serious wound. From it, as can be seen on the back image, trickles of blood and water spread round the body when it was still horizontal, not long before being placed in the cloth." (Hoare, R., "Testimony of the Shroud," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1978, pp.37,39-40) 18/11/2008 "Almost as significant are certain wounds which we would expect to be present but which are not. The legs, for instance, were not broken. It is almost impossible to imagine the degradation, agony and cruelty of a crucifixion. Nailed to the cross, the victim, if he allowed his body to sink so that his knees were bent and his weight was taken by his arms, found that his chest was fully expanded and he could not exhale. To breathe he therefore had to press up with his pierced feet, but this was at the price of an agonizing cramp in his muscles. This process, of going from one position to the other, could continue for a remarkably long time some survived for three days at least - and the prisoner was usually put out of his agony by having his legs smashed, so that he could no longer press up to breathe." (Hoare, R., "Testimony of the Shroud," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1978, p.40) 18/11/2008 "Once dead, a body would then have been thrown into a communal grave, so the existence of the Shroud is an important clue in itself. No ordinary Jew would have been given a proper burial-crucifixion meant he was unclean and accursed of God - and even if he had been so exceptionally loved that friends came secretly to bury him in the proper fashion, they would have washed his body and anointed it, and then wrapped it up in strips of cloth before putting it in a tomb. There would have been no shroud in this case, either. Lacking any further information, it would be exceedingly difficult to think of an explanation for its existence." (Hoare, R., "Testimony of the Shroud," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1978, p.40) 18/11/2008 "This, then, is the visual evidence, and since it is claimed that the body was that of Jesus, we must examine it against the written evidence we have of him to see how they match. At once the parallels become impressive. Christ was a Jew, of course, and he was crucified. We can consider the extensive bruising, and compare it with the Gospel accounts, Mark's, for instance: `Some began to spit on him, blindfolded him, and struck him with their fists, crying out, `Prophesy!' And the High Priest's men set upon him with blows' (14:15). Then the scourging: `So Pilate, in his desire to satisfy the mob, released Barabbas to them; and he had Jesus flogged and handed him over to be crucified' (15:25). It is a brief, harsh word, `flogged', but horrifying to think of what it means. He would have been stripped, and his wrists tied to a low post little more than two feet high, so that he was unprotected from the cruel lashes of the flagellae of the soldier on each side. They would have given no mercy, those men. Victims sometimes died, their skins flayed from their backs." (Hoare, R., "Testimony of the Shroud," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1978, pp.40-41) 18/11/2008 "Then there are the extraordinary bloodstains round the head, as if it had been spiked. `Then the soldiers took him inside the courtyard [the Governor's headquarters] and called together the whole company. They dressed him in purple, and having plaited a crown of thorns, placed it on his head. Then they began to salute him with, `Hail, King of the Jews!' They beat him about the head with a cane and spat upon him, and then knelt and paid mock homage to him' (Mark 15:16-29). A crown of thorns, followed by a beating about the head! Think what that implies. It certainly explains the bloodstains on the Shroud, and what are the chances of another man having been given a torture that could have left those same marks?" (Hoare, R., "Testimony of the Shroud," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1978, p.41) 18/11/2008 "Already the agreement between the facts as we know them and the evidence of the Shroud is astonishing. Then there is the wound in the side; how did that occur? And why were the legs not broken? Because it was the eve of the Passover, the Jews were anxious that the bodies should not remain on the cross for the coming Sabbath, since that Sabbath was a day of great solemnity; so they requested Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down. The soldiers accordingly came to the first of his fellow-victims and to the second, and broke their legs; but when they came to Jesus, they found that he was already dead, so they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers stabbed his side with a lance, and at once there was a flow of blood and water. This is vouched for by an eyewitness, whose evidence is to be trusted. He knows that he speaks the truth, so that you too may believe. [John 19:31-5]" (Hoare, R., "Testimony of the Shroud," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1978, p.41) 18/11/2008 "Even the use of the Shroud is explained, as there was no time for the proper burial rites because they obtained Jesus's body only shortly before the Sabbath; and the surprisingly fine texture of the material used for wrapping up the crucified man's body is explained by the reported wealth of Joseph of Arimathea. In all these points there is remarkable corroboration between the two sources of evidence, so that each seems to stand as guarantor of the other. Under Jewish law, a single witness had little value; at least two were required (Deuteronomy 17:6 and 19:15; Numbers 35:30). On these grounds, in view of the agreement of two widely different types of evidence, the written and the photographic, the historicity of Jesus and his Crucifixion may be taken as proven. Most appraisals of the Shroud have begun with an assumption of the complete accuracy of the Gospel accounts, and have tried to make the stains fit them. This has led to doubts of the Shroud's authenticity when certain stains, or the existence of the Shroud itself, have failed to match a particular description in a Gospel. However, the Shroud is material evidence that is available, and the marks on it can be seen, and prove themselves to have been formed on the day of the Crucifixion. It is therefore the Shroud which should stand as the measure of the accuracy of the Gospel stories, for there was plenty of opportunity for alteration and distortion in the decades before the traditions were first written down. The extent to which the Shroud confirms the accuracy of even small incidents reported in the Gospels means that more reliance can be placed on those details which the Shroud is unable to confirm. So far as the Shroud is concerned, the evidence of the stains points with certainty towards their having been made by the body of Jesus. What else can we therefore learn from them?" (Hoare, R., "Testimony of the Shroud," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1978, pp.41-42) 18/11/2008 "Good Friday and the Shroud Jesus was scourged by Roman soldiers prior to His Crucifixion (Matt. 27:26; Mark 15:15; John 19:1). The Shroud shows evidence of about 120 scourge marks, some visible only under ultraviolet light. The instrument used to cause these marks was likely the Roman flagrum, which was a whip constructed from two or three leather strips with two small balls made of lead or bone tied at each end. When a flagrum was used to whip a person, it would tear off pieces of flesh. The scourge marks on the man on the Shroud are `nearly always in clusters of twos or threes.' [Rinaldi, P.M., "It Is the Lord," Warner Books: New York NY, 1973, p.28] According to the Mosaic Law, 40 lashes were the maximum number of strokes allowed (cf. Deut. 25:3). Oftentimes the victim died from the scourging alone. To insure that they did not exceed the legal limit, the tormentors would give only 39 lashes (cf. 2 Cor. 11:24). Roman executioners, however, were free to administer as many lashes as they wished since they did not adhere to the Mosaic law. [Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1957, p.49] According to Dr. Pierre Barbet, who wrote his comprehensive work, A Doctor at Calvary, `there must have been two executioners. It is possible that they were not of the same height, for the obliqueness of the blows is not the same on each side.' [Barbet, P., "A Doctor at Calvary," Image Books: New York NY, 1963, pp. 10-11]" (Guerrera, V., "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, 2001, pp.37-38. Emphasis original) 18/11/2008 "Jesus was struck at the head and spat upon (Matt. 26:68, 27:30; Mark 14:65, 15:19; Luke 22:63-64; John 18:22, 19:3). The image on the Shroud shows a bruised face, a broken nose and a swollen right eye that is almost closed. Jesus was crowned with thorns (Matt. 27:29; Mark 15:17; John 19:2). The head of the man on the Shroud is covered with numerous puncture holes with blood trickling downward, which suggest a cap of thorns. This covered the entire head and was not just a circlet as is often depicted on a crucifix. According to Dr. Jackson, `these puncture-type wounds are consistent with thorns from a Jerusalem plant with vicious one to three-inch spikes.' [Scott, C., "The Shroud of Turin: Who Is This Man?" in "Holy Shroud Research Continues in Colorado," Sindone Press: Colorado Springs CO, 1994, p.16]" (Guerrera, V., "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, 2001, p.38. Emphasis original) 18/11/2008 "Jesus was made to carry His Cross (John 19:17). The Shroud image shows that the man must have carried a heavy object on his shoulders, for there are bruises and cuts on his shoulders and knees: `On the right shoulder ... there is a broad excoriated area, which is in the form of a rectangle of about 10 x 9 centimetres. ... On the left side, there is another area of excoriations of the same type... . It is round, with a diameter of about 5˝ inches.' [Barbet, P., "A Doctor at Calvary," Image Books: New York NY, 1963, pp.97-98] These wounds demonstrate that the man likely carried a cross-beam or patibulum, rather than a full-length `T' cross. When the condemned man reached the place of crucifixion, the patibulum would have been attached to the vertical beam or the stipes, which was permanently fixed into the ground." (Guerrera, V., "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, 2001, pp.38-39. Emphasis original) 18/11/2008 "Jesus was nailed to the Cross by His hands and feet (cf. Luke 24:39-40; John 20:20-27; Col. 2:14). The image of the man on the Shroud reveals that he had been pierced through the wrists and feet. The right wrist is hidden under the left hand (in negative photo), and a blood flow can be seen coming from the base of the left hand. In traditional depictions of the Crucified Jesus, He is shown nailed through the palms, but Scripture does not specify this. Dr. Barbet states that this would have been scientifically impossible because the weight of the body would have torn the hand right through the nail. In Hebrew there is no word for `wrist,' and the word yad was often used to refer to other parts of the hand. The hand wound image on the Shroud depicts the exit of the nail, not its entrance, and thus the nail could very well have passed through the upper part of the palm, pointing toward the arm, emerging as shown on the Shroud. Dr. Frederick Zugibe, a pathologist, states that the upper part of the palm could easily have been supported the weight of the body and that this is the most plausible explanation." (Guerrera, V., "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, 2001, p.39. Emphasis original) 18/11/2008 "His heart was pierced, and blood and water poured forth (John 19:34). This was the final mortal blow inflicted upon the crucified man to ensure he was dead. The executioner would most likely have used a lance or short javelin he was carrying. According to tradition, this blow was thrust on the right side of the chest. Most believe that the heart is on the left, but `the heart is mesial [central] and in front, resting on the diaphragm, between the two lungs... . Only its point is definitely to the left, but its base extends to the right beyond the breastbone.' [Barbet, P., "A Doctor at Calvary," Image Books: New York NY, 1963, p.131] ... `If the blow with the lance had been given from the left it would have pierced the ventricles, which in a corpse have no blood in them. There would have been no flow of blood but only water... .' [Ibid., p.139] The correlations between the scriptural account of the sufferings of Christ on the Cross with those depicted on the Shroud of Turin are too compelling to be considered merely coincidental." (Guerrera, V., "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, 2001, pp.39-40. Emphasis original) 18/11/2008 "Before seeing what sort of case the believers can present, we must nonetheless acknowledge that the sceptics' case would today be more difficult to make than it was when Chevalier and Thurston were writing. Those scholars rested their case primarily on a memorandum written in 1389 by Pierre d'Arcis, bishop of Troyes, to Pope Clement VII in Avignon. Bishop d'Arcis was distressed that `a certain cloth cunningly painted' was once again exhibited in his diocese and was popularly regarded as `the actual shroud in which our Savior Jesus Christ was enfolded in the tomb, and upon which the whole likeness of the Saviour has remained thus impressed together with the wounds that he bore.' ["Memorandum of Pierre D'arcis, Bishop Of Troyes, to the Avignon Pope Clement VII," 1389, Thurston, H., transl., "The Holy Shroud and the Verdict of History," The Month, CI, 1903, pp.17-29] The Shroud had first been displayed some thirty years earlier, and had immediately attracted attention not only in all of France, but also "so to speak, throughout the world." D'Arcis went on to recount how the then bishop of Troyes, Bishop Henri, was told by the theologians and other wise men that the claim for the Shroud could not be true, since the holy Gospel made no mention of any such imprint, while, if it had been true, it was quite unlikely that the holy Evangelists would have omitted to record it, or that the fact should have remained hidden until the present time. Eventually, after diligent inquiry and examination, he discovered the fraud and how the said cloth had been cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist who had painted it, to wit, that it was a work of human skill and not miraculously wrought or bestowed. It is this memorandum of Bishop d'Arcis that Chevalier called to the world's attention in 1900 and on which the sceptics' case formally rests." (Drews, R., " In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Allanheld: Totowa NJ, 1984, pp.23-24) 18/11/2008 "From the very beginning, Bishop d'Arcis's testimony raised certain questions. If someone in the 1350s had publicly confessed to having manufactured the Shroud's image, why did pilgrims flock to see the Shroud when it was again exhibited in 1389? And is it likely that such a monstrous hoax-the counterfeiting of Christ's burial shroud-could have been perpetrated in the 1350s, when Lirey and all Europe were recovering from the Black Death, and when religious fears and fervor ran high? Furthermore, one would not expect Geoffrey de Charny, who in the early 1350s owned the Shroud and who built the Lirey church, of complicity in a forgery. Geoffrey was not only one of the kingdom's most trusted and gallant knights, but also a seemingly devout author of religious poetry. Finally, it appears that neither Pope Clement VII nor Bishop d'Arcis's successor in the diocese of Troyes was persuaded that the Shroud was a fraud." (Drews, R., "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Allanheld: Totowa NJ, 1984, pp.23-24) 18/11/2008 "Arguments such as these are troublesome, but are not sufficient to undermine Bishop d'Arcis's statement that Bishop Henri had obtained a confession from the man who painted the Shroud's image. Recently, several other difficulties have emerged. First, the wounds that appear on the image seem more authentic than they did eighty years ago. The American scientists' conclusion "that the Shroud 'blood' areas are blood" [Schwalbe, L.A. & Rogers, R.N., "Physics and Chemistry of the Shroud of Turin: A Summary of the 1978 Investigation," Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 135, 1982, pp.3-49, p. 40] does not by itself mean very much, since at any time in the Shroud's early history someone might have added bloodstains to the original image. More important is the location of the wounds: the "bloodflow" on the arms of the Man of the Shroud originates at the wrists, and not at the palms of the hands. In fourteenth-century France, as elsewhere in medieval Europe, artists depicted the crucified Christ suspended from nails driven through the palms of the hands. The wrist-wounds of the Man of the Shroud intrigued Pierre Barbet, and in his A Doctor at Calvary Barbet argued that the Shroud's testimony was more credible than the artistic convention. Barbet buttressed his opinion with an account of experiments that he had done with cadavers: a body cannot be suspended from nails driven through the palms, for the weight of the body tears the palms immediately, whereas a body can be suspended indefinitely from nails driven through the wrists. [Barbet, P., "Doctor at Calvary," . Image Books: New York, Reprinted, 1963] Barbet's gruesome observations were strengthened in 1968, when for the first time archaeologists happened upon the skeleton of a victim of crucifixion. In that year Israeli archaeologists excavated a first-century cemetery at Giv'at ha-Mivtar, near Jerusalem. [Tzaferis, V., "Jewish Tombs at and near Giv'at ha-Mivtar, Jerusalem," Israel Exploration Journal, Vol. 20, 1970, pp.18-32] Among the skeletons was that of a man whose name, according to an accompanying inscription, was Jehohanan, and Jehohanan had clearly been crucified. [Haas, N., "Skeletal Remains from Giv'at ha-Mivtar," Israel Exploration Journal, Vol. 20, 1970, pp.38-59] A heavy, five-inch nail transfixed one or both of Jehohanari s heel-bones, and his legs had been broken. The radius bones of Jehohanari s arms were damaged at the wrist end, indicating to Dr. Nicu Haas, the specialist in physical anthropology who studied and published all of the Giv'at ha-Mivtar skeletal remains, that Jehohanan had been suspended on his cross from nails driven through the forearm just above the wrist. If the Shroud is a fourteenth-century forgery, it is surprising that the forger knew enough about the details of crucifixion (a method of execution that in Bishop Henri's time had been forbidden for a thousand years) to contradict the unanimous opinion of medieval Christians that nails had been driven through the middle of Jesus' palms." (Drews, R., "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham MD, 1984, pp.25-26) 18/11/2008 "The most serious difficulty with Bishop d'Arcis's characterization of the Shroud as a forgery is his remark that Bishop Henri found out who had painted the image, the affair being divulged `by the artist who had painted it.' Today it is quite certain that the image was not painted. Therefore, although it is possible that somebody `confessed' to Bishop Henri that he had painted the image, we can no longer put much stock in such a confession. One could, of course, argue that Bishop d'Arcis was perhaps careless in using the word `painted' (depinxit) and that perhaps he meant to use a broader verb, such as `created' or `produced.' Here, too, there are objections. If an ingenious Frenchman in the fourteenth century invented a process for producing something as sensational as the Shroud, which d'Arcis says was causing a stir throughout not only France but the whole world, it is hard to understand why the forger did not use the process again. The wealth that the little church in Lirey was accumulating ought to have inspired the forger, or someone privy to his trade secrets, to produce shrouds of apostles, saints, and martyrs. But there is no evidence that anyone, in France or anywhere else, was able to duplicate the Shroud being exhibited in Lirey. One must then resort to the argument that arts can be lost: rare techniques, known to only a few persons, may not survive those practitioners. Although this is theoretically true, and would have some validity if one were dealing with an art or technique from the ancient, Classical world (so much, after all, was lost in the Dark Age), it would be difficult to find any example of an art that became extinct just when its product was exciting all the world. In short, sceptics can no longer rest their case on Bishop d'Arcis's statement that in the 1350s Bishop Henri discovered who had painted the image on the Shroud. Bishop Henri found it incredible that the burial shroud of Jesus was in the little church in Lirey; today it is even more incredible that one of Bishop Henri's contemporaries painted the Shroud's image." (Drews, R., "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Allanheld: Totowa NJ, 1984, p.26) 18/11/2008 "The conventional argument that the image on the Shroud is the true image of Jesus assumes that we all agree, as perhaps we may, that the image came from a dead man's body. Most reasonable investigators have firmly ruled out the possibility that the image was painted, and they are also persuaded that it could not have been effected by means of a scorch from a hot statue. In addition, experts in anatomy and forensic medicine have concluded that the image on the Shroud could only have come from a human body, and in fact from the body of a man who had died (rigor mortis is evident) the violent death indicated by the visible wounds. These conclusions, as we have seen, were first reported by Delage in his 1902 address to the French Academy, and they have often been confirmed: in greatest detail by physician Pierre Barbet, and most recently by Robert Bucklin, deputy medical examiner of Los Angeles County in California." (Drews, R., "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Allanheld: Totowa NJ, 1984, p.27). 18/11/2008 "In addition to this reasonable assumption, the argument that the image came from Jesus' body assumes- and here we might disagree-that the image was not produced by human skill, but is either miraculous (if it is Jesus' image) or `natural' (if it is someone else's image). If this second assumption is conceded, the argument quickly and inexorably narrows to the desired conclusion. Of the millions who died in antiquity, a tiny minority died of crucifixion. Of the thousands of men who were crucified, only a few hundred would have been wrapped in a linen sheet, as the Gospels say that Jesus was. Of these few hundred buried in a shroud, only a fraction would have been scourged before crucifixion, as was Jesus and as was the Man of the Shroud. And of those who suffered those tortures, how many would have been wounded across the scalp, as though by a crown of thorns? How many bodies so abused were pierced in the side by a spear? And of all the bodies that meet these requirements, how many-here the odds rise to the maximum-would have been separated from their shrouds before decomposition began? In a recent book, Verdict on the Shroud, Gary Habermas thus fixes the statistical probability that a body other than Jesus' has left its imprint on the Shroud. [Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, pp.124-129] Others have made the attempt before, and Habermas notes their conclusions: reckonings of the chance that a body, if it leaves an imprint at all, will leave this imprint, range from 1 in 225,000,000,000, at the lower end of the scale, to 1 in 10^26 at the higher. Habermas's own estimate is a much more conservative 1 in 82,944,000." (Drews, R., "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Allanheld: Totowa NJ, 1984, pp.27-28) 18/11/2008 "Let us estimate the likelihood (obviously, we cannot indulge in statistics here) that someone, at some time, using a corpse that had been appropriately bloodied and disfigured, set out to produce an image that would correspond precisely to the Gospels' account of Jesus' passion. We have already seen that a forgery in the fourteenth century is unlikely: a European of that time would have placed nail-wounds in the hands of the corpse, and the technique that produced the Shroud would, in the fourteenth century, have been much too valuable to lapse into oblivion. These objections do not, however, apply to an earlier period in Western history: late antiquity, especially the third and fourth centuries. Criminals were still executed by crucifixion in the early fourth century, and undoubtedly for some decades thereafter the details of this type of execution were remembered. And an exotic technique for imprinting a human image on cloth, we shall see, was apparently known in antiquity but had been lost by the sixth century. One might thus propose that the Shroud's image was produced in the third or fourth century, or early in the fifth. Of the many Christian writers of late antiquity, not one mentions a cloth bearing an image of Jesus' crucified body. We may therefore be certain that if the Shroud's image was produced in late antiquity, it failed to attract much attention. The procedure that produced the image, however clever it may have been, might well have lapsed in the face of such indifference. If the Shroud's image was created, through some now-lost process of imprinting or thermography, as an imitation of Christ's crucified body, it is far more likely to have been created in late antiquity than in the late Middle Ages." (Drews, R., "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Allanheld: Totowa NJ, 1984, pp.28-29) 18/11/2008 "In the last analysis, however, we must concede that even an ancient forgery is unlikely. A fourth-century craftsman who intended to produce an image of Jesus would probably not have pictured Jesus' face as the face that is familiar to us in Christian art, and that we see in the Shroud. In late antiquity Jesus was occasionally represented as a bearded man with shoulder-length hair, parted in the middle, but he was more often pictured as a youthful, beardless, round-faced man, in the tradition of an Apollo or a young Hermes. This is hardly a decisive argument against the manufacture of the Shroud's image in late antiquity, but it nonetheless does carry some weight. In assigning the Shroud's image to late antiquity, a far greater difficulty than its form is its content: on the Shroud we see a crucified body, naked and bloody, and Christians in late antiquity never depicted Jesus naked or dead. In fact, early Christian art did not even portray Jesus on the cross. The earliest known representation of the crucifixion of Jesus is a panel on the wooden door of Santa Sabina in Rome, carved ca. 432, and the subject remained a great rarity until the eighth century. One of the early examples appears in the Rabbula Codex, an illuminated Syriac manuscript dating ca. 586, and there Jesus is portrayed, incongruously, fully clothed while hanging on the cross. In the third and fourth centuries Christians restricted themselves to depicting Jesus as a teacher, a miracle-worker, a shepherd, or as Christ in Triumph. The passion was not a subject that Christians had any desire to visualize. That some Christian in late antiquity should have decided to create, on a fourteen-foot sheet of linen, an imitation of the frontal and dorsal images of the naked body of the crucified Jesus is unimaginable." (Drews, R., "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham MD, 1984, p.29) 18/11/2008 "Could, then, the image have been created in late antiquity by a pagan, hostile to Christianity and not above desecrating Jesus' passion by making a grotesque facsimile of his burial shroud? This is a possibility (a graffito has survived that satirizes the crucifixion), although one remote enough that we need not long consider it. What purpose such an anti-Christian might have had is not easy to imagine. A reasonably perceptive pagan should have had the sense to foresee that the image would serve only to verify, for Christians, the entire tradition of Jesus' passion, burial, and resurrection. In short, it is quite improbable that anyone, whether in the Middle Ages or in antiquity, whether a Christian or an opponent of Christianity, created the Shroud's image in order to simulate the image of Jesus' crucified body. Nor is there any statistical probability at all that the Shroud bears a nonintentional, or `natural,' image of a body other than Jesus' body. We must therefore conclude that, if the Shroud is indeed ancient, as it seems to be, it is very likely that the image on the Shroud is that of Jesus' body. Should a carbon test indicate that the Shroud itself dates from around the time of Jesus, the probability will be overwhelming that what we have on the Shroud is the vera imago of Jesus." (Drews, R., "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Allanheld: Totowa NJ, 1984, pp.29-30) 19/11/2008 "If this type of body-on-cloth action is natural, why are there so many burial garments that have no images of the person buried in them? Surely more than one burial cloth with a contact image on it would have been discovered. But so far as we know, the Shroud is unique in this regard. And even if another burial garment with an image caused by natural contact with a dead body were found, the image would still have to display the characteristics of the Shroud's image, which has been shown to be highly unlikely." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, 1990, p.127). 19/11/2008 "Scientists found other interesting features connected with the Shroud. Joseph Kohlbeck, an optical crystallographer working for the Hercules Aerospace Divisions, which makes missiles, found particles of aragonite with small amounts of strontium and iron on the Shroud's fibers on the image of the foot. With the help of archaeologist Eugenia Nitowski, he obtained samples of limestone from inside ancient tombs in and near Jerusalem and subjected them also to microscopic analysis. He found the same substance. The aragonite on the Shroud and in the tombs was an uncommon variety, deposited from springs, typically found in limestone caves in Palestine, but not in Europe. The samples from the Shroud and the tombs provided `an usually close match,' suggesting to him and to Nitowski that the Shroud had once been in one of the `rolling-stone tombs' that were common in Palestine around the time of Christ and for several centuries before. Kohlbeck observed that those who believe that the Shroud is a forgery need to explain how the very rare aragonite found its way to the surface of the Shroud. [Kohlbeck, J.A. & Nitowski, E.L., "New Evidence May Explain image on Shroud," Biblical Archaeology Review, July/August, 1986, pp.23- 24]" (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, p.103). 19/11/2008 "Considering that the underside of Christ's burial shroud had been in hard contact with the limestone burial platform of the cave-tomb, the intriguing question was whether the mineral coating on these pollens had come from rock in the same area. This question was taken up in 1986 by optical crystallographer Dr Joseph Kohlbeck, resident scientist at Hercules Aerospace, Colorado. He gained the support of archaeologist Dr Eugenia Nitowski, an expert in ancient Jewish tombs of Israel, who obtained for him some limestone samples from a first- century tomb in Jerusalem. Dr Kohlbeck closely analysed and compared his samples from the underside of the Shroud with Dr Nitowski's samples. In both instances he identified the calcium component to be of the aragonite variety, and in both he also uncovered traces of strontium and iron. In scientific terms, these points meant a close match. [Kohlbeck, J.A. & Nitowski, E.L., "New evidence may explain image on the Shroud of Turin," Biblical Archaeological Review, July/August 1986, p.23] There was still more that Dr Kohlbeck could do to test his evidence. He took his mineral-coated pollen samples and the limestone tomb samples to Dr Ricardo Levi-Setti at the Enrico Fermi Institute in the University of Chicago. The two scientists studied the patterns of spectra produced by the comparative samples through a high-resolution scanning ion microprobe. Although they were unable to prove beyond doubt that the Shroud aragonite had come from the Jerusalem area, the samples were found to be an unusually close match. This led Dr Kohlbeck to assess the strong probability that the Shroud limestone is of Jerusalem provenance." (Whiting, B., "The Shroud Story," Harbour Publishing: Strathfield NSW, Australia, 2006, pp.129-130) 20/11/2008 "Aragonite as in Jerusalem ... The study of the area of the feet has been particularly interesting. In the greatly enlarged photographs, taken by Vernon Miller in 1978, one can see that the cloth looks dirty in the region corresponding to one of the heels. There, on the threads, is an exceptional amount of dust which helps one to think that the Man of the Shroud, very probably, had walked barefooted. [Archaeology, Vol. 34, No. 1, January-February 1981, p.41] Joseph Kohlbeck, an American crystallographer with the Hercules Aerospace Division, has identified a much greater concentration of calcium carbonate among the mineralogical particles present on the feet when compared with the other areas of the sheet. This calcium carbonate is, however, not the common calcite but a rarer form, the aragonite, with small amounts of strontium and iron. The comparison with samples of calcium carbonate taken from a tomb in Jerusalem has provided surprising similarities. Even in this case it is aragonite with small amounts of strontium and iron. Further chemical analyses, both on the aragonite found on the Shroud and that from Jerusalem, were carried out by means of a microprobe by Ricardo Levi-Setti of the University of Chicago. The two type samples have furnished extraordinarily similar results, which makes it highly probable that the aragonite on the Shroud came from Jerusalem. [Biblical Archaeology Review, Vol. 12, No. 4, July-August 1986, pp.23-24]" (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, pp.206-207. Emphasis original) 20/11/2008 "In 1985, Whanger detected what he believed to be a clear flower image near the head of the Shroud image, whose presence was first suggested by Oswald Scheuerman's observations in 1983. After finding other similar images, Whanger thought they might have great relevance, so he acquired a six-volume set of the definitive study on the botany of Israel. Whanger spent the next four years painstakingly comparing the faint images on Shroud photographs with life-size drawings in the botany books, and using his Polarized Image Overlay Technique to check his findings. By 1989, he had tentatively identified twenty-eight species of plants that grow in Israel. [Whanger, M. & Whanger, A., "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House: Franklin TN, 1998, p.78] Although Whanger showed his findings to other Shroud researchers, he did not publish them until they could be confirmed by Dr. Avinoam Danin, professor of Botany at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and a world-renowned authority on the flora of Israel. Danin not only confirmed almost all of Whanger's identifications, but he also discovered a large number of additional flower images that were not found by Whanger. [Ibid., p.80] Of the twenty-eight plants, twenty- seven grow within the close vicinity of Jerusalem, where four geographical areas containing different specific climates and flora can be found. (The twenty-eighth plant grows at the south end of the Dead Sea.) All twenty-eight would have been available in Jerusalem markets in a fresh state, and most would have been growing along the roadside or in nearby fields. While three of these plants grow in France and nine grow in Italy, `half are found only in the Middle East or other similar areas and never in Europe' (italics added). [Ibid., p.79] One of these plants grows only in Israel, Jordan, or the Sinai, with its northernmost boundary between Jerusalem and Jericho. Danin concluded that there is only one place in the world where all of these flowers can be collectively found-Jerusalem. [Interview of Dr. Danin, CBS Evening News, April 12, 1997; Danin, A., Lecture at the Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO, June 6, 1997; Whanger, A., "Flowers on the Shroud: Current Research," CSST News Vol. 1, No. 1, November 1997; Danin, A. et al., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.18] Furthermore, the blooming season for all these plants is March and April. [Ibid.]" (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.112) 20/11/2008 "There is also a strong correlation between the flower images and pollen grains found on the Shroud. For example, Danin and Whanger, along with Dr. Uri Baruch, an expert in the pollen of Israel, have also identified numerous images and pollen of three thorny plants. One of these plants left over ninety pollen grains and is found only in and around Israel. Of the twenty-eight plants identified by Whanger, Frei had previously identified the pollens of twenty-five of the same or similar plants. Dr. Frei's identifications have sometimes been criticized for identifying to species, instead of to family or genus. In fact, Danin and Baruch have not been able to make as many specific identifications in their examinations of Dr. Frei's pollens. However, Frei was able to separate the pollen grains from the sticky tape and independently mount and rotate them under SEM at 1200x magnification. While Dr. Whanger acknowledges that Frei's pollen identification list was naturally used as a guide to search for flower images on the Shroud, the pollen grains and flower images could constitute corroborating evidence for each other." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.112-113) 20/11/2008 "Interestingly, one of the floral species on the Shroud that grows in Jerusalem and blooms in the Spring, Capparis aegyptia, provides further corroborating information of the events depicted on the Shroud. Damn, Baruch, and Whanger state: `Capparis aegyptia is also significant as an indicator for the time of the day when its flowering stems were picked. Flowering buds of this species begin to open about midday, opening gradually until fully opened about half an hour before sunset. Flowers seen as images on the Shroud correspond to opening buds at about 3 to 4 o'clock in the afternoon. This was confirmed by a two day experiment with, first, Capparis aegyptia, and later with Capparis spinosa Veillard.' [Danin, A., et al., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.22]" (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.113) 20/11/2008 "Furthermore, after examining flowers at various stages after they've been picked, Whanger concluded that their images most closely matched those that had wilted for twenty-four to thirty-six hours. [Whanger, M. & A., "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House: Franklin TN, 1998, pp. 74-75, 80] This gives an indication of when the flower images might have been formed. This time frame is consistent with the formation of the body images, which occurred within two to three days after the body was placed within the Shroud, due to the lack of decomposition. These flower images, like the possible coin images, do not contain all of the unique features found on the body image and are very difficult to discern. They are most likely secondary images that also formed at the time the primary images formed. Further study should be undertaken to confirm the flower images, but so far, all evidence points toward corroboration." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.113) 20/11/2008 "Danin has identified flowers and thorns on the photos of Pia, Enrie, and Miller, as well as on the ultraviolet fluorescent photos. He has even been able to identify two floral images on the Shroud itself with binoculars. [Danin, A., et al., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.16] The implication of their identifications are enormous. In addition to confirming Frei's identifications, they could confirm the Jerusalem location, the period as the spring or Easter season, that different types of thorns were involved, that the flowers were picked around 3 to 4:00 in the afternoon, and that the images were encoded before two days had elapsed." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.113-114) 20/11/2008 "In the course of their study of the VP8 three-dimensional images, Drs. Jackson and Jumper thought they could discern small button-like objects, possibly coins, laid over the man of the Shroud's eyelids. The idea occurred to Chicago theology professor Francis Filas that if these were coins, high-magnification photography might reveal sufficient of the inscriptions for them to be identified and dated. To his astonishment, study of the right eye on a large print of the Enrie negative revealed what seemed to be four letters, UCAI, arranged in a coin-like curve, surrounding a shape resembling a shepherd's crook ... As it happens, among the known coins of Jesus' time is a tiny lepton, or mite, of Pontius Pilate, bearing an astrologer's staff .(limus), accompanied by the inscription TIBERIOU KAISAROS. Filas surmised that the Shroud UCAI might be the central letters (i.e., TiberioU HAIsaros) with a `C' substituted for the Greek `h,' a contention received with considerable skepticism until there came to light two actual examples of Pontius Pilate leptons with precisely this misspelling ... Filas subsequently submitted the coin and Shroud image for comparative analysis at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University's Spatial Data Analysis Laboratory. Here the director, Robert Haralick, has offered cautious support to Filas' hypothesis while stressing the fundamental problem that science has no way of determining whether what appears as a coin inscription is anything but a random quirk of the Shroud's weave." (Wilson, I., "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, 1986, pp.129,133) 20/11/2008 "John Jackson and Eric Jumper, the physicists who discovered the three-dimensional image, noted objects placed over the eyes of the man buried in the Shroud. They suggested that these objects might be coins. If so, they said that the ancient coin which was of the same size as the `buttonlike' images was the lepton of Pontius Pilate, minted between 14 and 37 A.D.[Jackson, J.P., et al., "The Three-Dimensional Image on Jesus' Burial Cloth," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of The 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, 1977, p.90] Francis Filas, professor at Loyola University in Chicago, says that the images are indeed coins, and that the coins are leptons. He says that computer enhancement and analysis of the images reveals that the objects have twenty-four coincidences of dimensions, location, selection, order, and angles `fitting only a coin issued by Pontius Pilate between 29 and 32 A.D.' [Filas, F.L., "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate," private monograph, 1980] This lepton is decorated with an astrologer's staff and four Greek letters. Some Shroud experts are taking a wait-and-see attitude on this point, but Filas' evidence strongly indicates a first-century origin for the Shroud. Studies of remains in first-century Jewish cemeteries confirm that the Jews placed coins over the eyes of the dead. [Hachilili, R., "Ancient Burial Customs Preserved in Jericho Hills," Biblical Archaeology Review, July/August 1979, pp.28-35]" (Stevenson, K.E., "Image of the Risen Christ: Remarkable New Evidence About the Shroud," Frontier Research Publications: Toronto ON, Canada, 1999, p.44) 20/11/2008 "Features even more striking were observed on the Shroud. As we have seen, medical examiner Robert Bucklin noted `rounded foreign objects can be noted on the imprint in the area of the right and left eyes.' [Bucklin, R., "Autopsy on the Man of the Shroud," Third International Scientific Symposium on the Shroud of Turin, Nice, France, 12 May 1997, p.3] Jackson and his colleagues also noticed `buttonlike objects' over each eye in their VP-8 relief. [Borkan, M., "Ecce Homo? Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University Magazine of Science, Technology, and Medicine, Winter 1995, Vol. X, No. 2, p.28] These objects are much more distinct in the 1898 and 1931 photographs than those taken in 1978. It was thought that some of the threads that ran through the eye area on the cloth had been pulled or rotated, perhaps during the 1973 examination. [Whanger, A.D., "A Reply to Doubts Concerning the Coins Over the Eyes," The Holy Shroud Guild Newsletter, Vol. 3, No. 56, December, 1997, p.7] Giulio Ricci, in his `Historical, Medical, and Physical Study of the Holy Shroud' examined five possible explanations for these objects: (1) `nonuniformity in the image forming process'; (2) the arrangement of the cloth on the man of the Shroud in such a way that it hung close to the eyelids; (3) `a local biological, chemical, or thermal reaction' that occurred some time during the shroud's existence; (4) the result of an artist's attempt to enhance the eyes of the image; or (5) swellings on both eyelids due to physical abuse. He ruled out the first and third possibilities because there were no other three-dimensional irregularities on the entire length of the cloth, which, he said, would make very unlikely the possibility that some image-forming process acted on both eyes of the image but nowhere else on the cloth. He rejected the second possibility, because if the cloth were draped close to the eyelids it would have sagged in the region of the nose and caused the nasal region between the eyes to appear distorted in the relief pictures - and this was not the case. Moreover, Ricci observed that the edges of the `objects' fell off too sharply `to be accounted for by a simple sag in the cloth over the eyes' or be explained by swollen eyelids. Furthermore, he discounted the idea that the objects were painted because `the color and character of the image in the eye regions are indistinguishable from other parts of the Shroud image,' which means that the hypothetical artist would have been forced to devise a process similar to that which created the image on the Shroud in the first place. Therefore Ricci insisted that there was but one conclusion possible, and that was `that the button-like features are ... solid objects resting upon the eyelids.' [Ricci, G., "Historical, Medical, and Physical Study of the Holy Shroud," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, 1977, pp.89-90] Jackson believed that the button-like objects were in fact coins placed by Jesus' family and friends to keep his eyes closed after death. Research by Francis L. Filas, a professor of theology at Loyola University in Chicago, tended to support this hypothesis. Using high- magnification photography, Filas found the letters UCAI on the right eye, arranged in a coin-like curve. He thought that these might be the central letters of the coin inscription TIBERIOU CAISEROS - Greek for Tiberius Caesar, who was Roman Emperor during the time of Christ's ministry. He also found over the eye a tiny design that looked like a shepherd's crook. He was able to locate authentic Roman coins, minted between A.D. 29 and A.D. 32 (which was the time of Jesus' ministry) that contained a shepherd's staff as well as the Greek inscription TIBERIOU CAISEROS." (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.105-106) 20/11/2008 "Filas died in 1985, but his research was confirmed by Alan and Mary Whanger. We will remember that Whanger was a professor of psychiatry at Duke University, and also an expert in photography, who along with his wife, Mary, between 1979 and 1981 developed the `polarized image overlay technique' in which two images were projected one on top of the other and aligned onto the same screen through polarizing filters at right angles to one another, thereby causing the two images to fade into one another when they were viewed through a third polarizing filter. ["Research by Dr. and Mrs. Whanger," Council for the Study of the Shroud of Turin, http://www.duke.edu/~adw2/shroud/whanger.htm] This made it possible to analyze the features of one image that corresponded to, or were congruent with, those of the other. Comparing a photograph of the Tiberius Caesar coin, known as a lepton, or `widow's mite,' with a computer-enhanced photograph of the area over the right eye of the Shroud image, they found `a very close match,' noting at least seventy-four `areas of congruence.' In other words, the Whangers found seventy-four features on the coin that closely corresponded to features on the Shroud image. They wanted to be sure that they were not simply seeing what they wished or expected to see, so they repeated the overlay comparison, first by reversing the coin from right to left, and then by reversing the top and bottom. When they reversed the sides, they found only ten points of congruence and when they turned the coin upside down they found only six. Then they compared the Shroud image with a lepton of the same size and shape but with a different inscription, and there they found only eleven points of congruence. [Borkan, M., "Ecce Homo? Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University Magazine of Science, Technology, and Medicine, Winter 1995, Vol. X, No. 2, p.28] The image of the object over the left eye on the Shroud is fainter than that over the right, but the Whangers found seventy-three points of congruence between that image and a Roman coin, contemporary to the time of Christ, known as a `Julia lepton.' [Borkan, pp.28-29] The Whangers sent their findings to be checked by Robert Haralick of the Spatial Data Analysis Laboratory of the Virginia Polytechnic and State University (Virginia Tech). Haralick gave `cautious support' to the Whangers and to Filas, but noted, `Science has no way of determining whether what appears as a coin inscription is anything but a random quirk of the Shroud's weave.' [Wilson, I., "The Mysterious Shroud," Doubleday: Garden City NY, 1986, p.133]. He offered, `The evidence is definitely supporting evidence because there is some degree of match between what one would expect to find if the Shroud did indeed contain a faint image of the Pilate coin and what we can in fact observe in the original and in the digitally processed images.' [Whanger, A.D., "A Reply to Doubts Concerning the Coins Over the Eyes," The Holy Shroud Guild Newsletter, Vol. 3, No. 56, December, 1997, p.7] Some have speculated that the apparent inscription might possibly have been produced by the texture of a negative film which, when observed through a microscope, `could appear as a group of silver lines forming alphabetic characters.' This argument has been answered, however, by researchers who insist that none of the `presumed alphabetic characters' on the negative can `be proportionally reproduced in an enlargement.' [Moroni, M., "Pontius Pilate's Coin on the Right Eye of the Man in the Holy Shroud in the Light of New Archaeological Findings," Berard, A., ed., "Symposium Proceedings: History, Science, Theology, and the Shroud, St. Louis, MO, USA, June 22-23, 1991," The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo: Amarillo TX, 1991, p.293] Although at various times and in various places coins have been placed on the eyelids of the dead, some have questioned whether this was actually the custom among the Jews at the time of Christ. Greeks and Romans characteristically placed coins on the eyes of the dead as payment to Charon, who was believed, in folk religion, to guide the souls of the dead across the River Styx. Such a custom would, of course, have been anathema to pious Jews. However, it seems to have been a Jewish custom to close the eyes of the deceased, and the placement of coins was a practical way of keeping the eyelids shut. Archaeologists working in Israel have, in fact, found coins in the eye orbits of three skulls from the approximate time of Jesus. [Ibid. p.278] Although this would certainly not prove that this was a common practice, it would seem to indicate that it was not unknown at the time and place." (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.106-108. Emphasis original) 21/11/2008 "One indication of an even more specific date for the crucifixion of this particular victim may be available in the Turin Shroud image. It comes from the uncorroborated evidence of coin images found over the eyes of the man in the Shroud. The presence of coins was first suggested by the three- dimensional images of the Shroud face made with the VP-8 Image Analyzer in 1976. [Jackson, J.P., et al., "The Three-Dimensional Image on Jesus' Burial Cloth," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of The 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, 1977, pp.74-94, pp.90-91] In these experiments, scientists were surprised to discover two small objects, both nearly circular and approximately the same size, over the eyes ... More evidence of the presence of a coin was found later when photographs were taken of an enlargement of the Shroud face made from a sepia print based on the original 1931 photographic plates of Giuseppe Enrie. These photographs suggested several features that were uniquely characteristic of a Pontius Pilate coin, or lepton, issued between A.D 29 and 32. These studies were conducted by the late Francis L. Filas, S.J., of Loyola University in Chicago, and several numismatists who assisted him. The first of the features noted by the Loyola team were the letters UCAI appearing at the 9:30 to 11:30 clock positions on the coin over the right eye. These letters seem to be part of the inscription TIOUKAICAPOC ... an abbreviation of TIBEPIOUKAICAPOC ('Tiberiou Kaisaros,' Greek for `Of Tiberius Caesar'). Both inscriptions have been identified on Pilate coins. Pontius Pilate coins that bear this first inscription have the same corresponding letters, UCAI or UKAI, appearing at the same 9:30 to 11:30 clock positions as those found on the coin over the right eye of the man in the Shroud. When a Pilate coin with this same inscription was enlarged on a screen to match the size of the enlarged right-eye area of the man in the Shroud, the size of the letters on the Pilate coin and the Shroud eye matched, with both measuring approximately 1˝ mm. [Filas, F.L., "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate," Cogan Productions: Youngstown AZ, Second edition, 1982] The matching of four consecutive letters strongly suggests that this is not an optical illusion or coincidence. According to Father Filas, for these letters to have appeared by accident, or as a result of a chance pattern in the weave of the cloth, is almost impossible; the odds of all four letters appearing in consecutive order are extremely remote. [Filas, Ibid.] An even more convincing point of authenticity to support the existence of a Pontius Pilate coin over the right eye of the Shroud image can be found in the letters UCAI. Prior to the identification of these letters on the Shroud, an interesting point concerning these Pilate coins had never been known to numismatists. The UCAI is actually misspelled and should read UKAI. The misspelling probably occurred because the pronunciations of `Caesar' in Latin and `Kaisaros' in Greek were identical, with both having the hard `K' sound (though the Greek C sounded like the Latin S). After finding this spelling over the right eye of the man in the Shroud, Pilate coins were checked for their spelling. It was discovered that at least four Pilate coins with this same misspelling exist today. [Otterbein, A.J., personal communication, September 23, 1986]" (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.102-104) 21/11/2008 "Furthermore, the letters UCAI on the Shroud face are located around the curve of an astrologer's staff, or lituus. This lituus is another very important point of identification, for it was used as a constant motif on coins minted by Pontius Pilate after A.D. 29. Following the rule of Pilate, this lituus was not used again by a ruler in Palestine, nor anywhere in the Roman world, as a central independent symbol. [Filas, F.L., "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate," Cogan Productions: Youngstown AZ, Second edition, 1982] Occasionally, it has been found as a small side decoration, but never more than that. On the Shroud image, the lituus is not as clear as the inscription, but the image on the coin is completely consistent with a lituus turned to the right, or clockwise, as was the lituus on the coin with the inscription TIOUKAICAPOC. When a photo of the Pilate coin was enlarged to match the size of the enlarged coin over the right eye of the man in the Shroud, the lituus measured 11 to 12 mm from its base to the top of its curve; this is the same measurement as the lituus on the coin found on the Shroud. [Filas, Ibid.] In addition, unlike the graceful curves of the lituus stem on most Pilate coins, the coin mentioned above with the abbreviated inscription has a cruder- appearing lituus that lacks graceful curves on its stem. Again, this design matches the lituus found on the coin over the right eye of the man in the Shroud. [Ibid.]" (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.104) 21/11/2008 "Critics of Filas's work have asserted that the presence of all these features could be just a coincidence, an accident, or a chance pattern in the weave of the cloth. Yet these critics have not stopped to consider the extreme remoteness of such possibilities. That the weave of the cloth or the grain of the film, or something else, could accidentally produce the appearance of a Greek letter is certainly possible, but then one must consider many other features as well: that all four letters are upright and not sideways, upside down, or backward; that the letters appear side by side and match the spelling found on other coins minted by Pontius Pilate, and all the other features that make the image consistent with the genuine article. Too much is left to chance when one realizes that, of the entire 14'3" length and 3'7" width of the Shroud, this would all coincidentally be found at the precise location over the right eye of the man in the Shroud. In fact, the odds of all of the above occurring as a result of some coincidental pattern of the weave or grain of the film or some other accidental cause, and not from an inscription, are astronomical. [Filas, F.L., "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate," Cogan Productions: Youngstown AZ, Second edition, 1982, pp. 11-12]" (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.104) 21/11/2008 "Further comparison of the enlarged area over the right eye of the man in the Shroud with the enlarged Pontius Pilate lepton reveals even more similarities. The sizes and outlines of both are quite similar.[Filas, F.L., "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate," Cogan Productions: Youngstown AZ, Second edition, 1982, pp. 11-12] Further, the right side of the rim of each has been clipped at the 1:30 to 3:30 o'clock position ... Father Filas summarized the many points of comparison: `To sum up, there exists a combination of size, position, angular rotation, relative mutual proportion, accuracy of duplication ... and parity [i.e., turned in the proper direction]. This combination concerns at least six motifs: a lituus or astrologer's staff, four letters, `UCAI,' and a clipped coin margin.' [Ibid., p.5] While these features are seen in varying degrees on numerous photographic negatives taken by different photographers, [Ibid., p.7] They are most clearly visible on an enlarge ment of the entire two thirds life-size photograph. The Enrie photographs were taken with film that emphasized contrast, whereas subsequent photographers used improved film that tended to downplay contrasts [Ibid.] . Also, subsequent photographers secured the Shroud to its frame with magnets, which produced tiny folds or draping effects rather than the stretched tautness of the Shroud cloth that was obtained by Enrie, who is thought to have used metal tacks.[Ibid., p.7] Unfortunately this means that STURP's many photos do little to prove or or disprove the existence of these coins. Further imaging of the Shroud should take Ernie's method into account so we may learn more about this theory. The photographic negative from which all of the above-discussed features were found has been processed in a Log E Interpretation System, which is very similar to a VP-8 Image Analyzer. Pictures of the enlarged areas over the eyes were also processed with this system. The letters UCAI, the lituus, and the clipped edge at the 1:30 to 3:30 clock position are all apparent .... Furthermore, for the first time the clarity of the boundary of a coin over the left eye also became visible. These nondistorted features appear on the Log E Interpretation image in the same manner as found on the photographic negative; this only points further toward a coin with the same inscription, motifs, and designs." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.104-105) 21/11/2008 "While Pontius Pilate coins could have been used as currency in any part of the Roman Empire, they were most likely circulated in the area where and at the time in which they were minted: first-century Palestine. Coins used in connection with burials in ancient Jerusalem and the surrounding area have enormous relevance, though the subject has only recently begun to receive attention and is deserving of much more. There are now many known instances wherein the use of coins in burials has clearly been found. Most significantly, all examples occurred primarily in Jerusalem and the surrounding area around the time of Christ. In 1970, it was first reported, but only in Hebrew, that excavation at the site of a fortress in the Judean. Desert, at En Boqeq, uncovered a buried man with silver coins from c. A.D. 133 placed over both his eye sockets [Hachlili, R., "Was the Coin-on-Eye Custom a Jewish Burial Practice in the Second Temple Period?" Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 46, Summer 1983, pp.147-153] Quite close by was a Bar Kokhba coin (A.D. 132-135). ... In light of these factors, archaeologist William Meacham thinks there is an excellent chance the excavated man was a Jew. Furthermore, he recognizes ` ... most importantly, the En Boqeq burial establishes that the coin-on-eye ritual was found in second-century Judea.... ' [Meacham, W., "On the Archaeological Evidence for a Coin-on-Eye Jewish Burial Custom in the First Century A.D.," Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 49, March 1986, pp.56-59, p.58] Such a discovery was remarkable because the buried body apparently had been completely undisturbed with the skull intact after almost two thousand years. Such discoveries are fortunate and rare, allowing us to observe the exact, original use of these ancient and tiny coins. One fortunate aspect of the man in the Shroud image is that we can see his original position inside the burial cloth; if there was a coin associated with his burial, it was clearly placed over his right eye. (As noted earlier, some believe there is also evidence of a coin over the man's left eye.) The main reason it is difficult to determine precisely how coins were used in connection with Jewish burials between the first century B.C. and the first century A.D. (Second Temple Period) is that the Jews engaged in the practice of secondary burial in ossuaries. The deceased would be laid out in a shroud or coffin for approximately a year, after which time the body would have decomposed, leaving only the skeleton. The bones would then be collected and secondarily buried or placed in an ossuary, a large, rectangular chest or container usually made of limestone and often decorated and inscribed. Reburials, or secondary burials in ossuaries, were rare in Jewish tombs after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70; however, during the Second Temple Period, Jews were the only group to utilize this practice. [Hachlili, R., "Ancient Burial Customs Preserved in Jericho Hills," Biblical Archaeology Review, Vol. 5, No. 4, July 1979, pp.28-35]." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.105) 21/11/2008 "In 1979, Rachel Hachlili described her findings from excavations in the hills overlooking Jericho of tombs hewn out of rock, which dated from the middle of the first century B.C. until the first century A.D.. These burials, located outside the then city limits of Jericho as required by Jewish law, consisted of primary and secondary burials. In one of the tombs, a skull contained two bronze coins of Agrippa I (A.D. 37-44). In another tomb, a bronze coin of Herod Archelaus (4 B.C. to A.D. 6) was found in a damaged skull of a skeleton that had been interred in a coffin, and a second, earlier coin of Yehohanan Hyrcanus II from 63-40 BC was uncovered in the debris by the door. Immediately following the description of all four coins, Hachlili states, `The coins originally must have been placed on the eyes of the deceased...... She added that this practice was followed often. [Hachlili, R., "Ancient Burial Customs Preserved in Jericho Hills," Biblical Archaeology Review, Vol. 5, No. 4, July 1979, pp.28-35] Hachlili was probably one of few people aware that coins were found over the eyes of the deceased at `En Boqeq, because she was the first to announce this finding in a 1983 English-language publication. The first two coins located at Jericho were found together in the same skull and obviously formed a pair. Archaeologist William Meacham thinks that, since the third coin found at the site was inside a damaged skull, the fourth coin discovered in the debris of the same tomb may have been that coin's mate: The date of the second coin coincides with the date of the tomb's first use, making it unlikely to have been an intrusion after the tomb's closure. [Meacham, W., "On the Archaeological Evidence for a Coin-on-Eye Jewish Burial Custom in the First Century A.D.," Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 49, March 1986, pp.56-59] These tiny coins would pass through the eye socket into the skull as a body's soft tissue decomposed." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.106) 21/11/2008 "An important indication that the events depicted on the Shroud of Turin occurred not just in Palestine, but specifically in Jerusalem, is supported by an examination of the limestone in the Ecole Biblique tomb in Jerusalem. The Ecole Biblique provided researchers with access to the same rock shelf as the Holy Sepulcher and the Garden Tomb, both of which are considered the most probable choices for the actual tomb of Christ. Tombs in the Palestine/Transjordan area were carved out of limestone, which remains wet and pliable and which rubs off easily with the slightest contact. [Nitowski, E.L., "The Field and Laboratory Report of the Environmental Study of the Shroud in Jerusalem," Carmelite Monastery: Salt Lake City UT, 1986] Calcium carbonate is the major component of limestone. The limestone in the Jerusalem tomb was determined to be in the form of travertine aragonite, rather than the more common travertine calcite. [Kohlbeck, J. & Nitowski, E., "New Evidence May Explain Image on Shroud of Turin;" Biblical Archaeology Review, Vol. 12, No. 4, July/August 1986] Aragonite is less common than calcite and is formed under a much narrower range of conditions. The Jerusalem sample also contained small amounts of strontium and iron. [Nitowski; Kohlbeck & Nitowski] A calcium sample taken from a Shroud fiber on the foot has been compared to the calcium sample from the Jerusalem tomb. The Shroud sample was found to be in the form of aragonite, not the more common calcite, and also exhibited small amounts of strontium and iron. [Kohlbeck & Nitowski] This match was confirmed by Dr. Ricardo Levi-Setti [Levi-Setti, R.G., et al., "Progress in High Resolution Scanning Ion Microscopy and Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry Imaging Microanalysis;" Scanning Electron Microscopy, Vol. 2, 1985, pp.535-552] of the Enrico Fermi Institute at the University of Chicago. Dr. Levi-Setti analyzed the calcium from both the Shroud fiber and the Jerusalem tomb with a high-resolution scanning ion microprobe. The resulting graphs show that these samples are an unusually close match, except for minute pieces of flax that could not be separated from the calcium sample taken from the Shroud fiber and that caused a slight organic variation. [Kohlbeck & Nitowski] Limestone samples taken from other tombs located at nine different test sites in Israel were also analyzed by Dr. Levi- Setti - but only the sample taken from the Jerusalem tomb matched the limestone on the Shroud." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.109) 22/11/2008 "In the 1970s, Dr. Max Frei was allowed to take dust samples from between the threads of the Shroud by means of adhesive tape. Dr. Frei, an internationally known criminologist, served as president of the United Nations' fact-finding committee to investigate the death of Dag Hammarskjold. He founded and directed the renowned scientific department of the Zurich Criminal Police for twenty-five years. The STURP scientists, when taking cloth samples with sticky tape, used a torque applicator (which limited the pounds-per-square- inch pressure on the Shroud) and took samples only from the surface. Frei was not constrained by a torque applicator, and by moving the sticky tape laterally over the cloth, he was able to lift material from between the cloth threads. [Maloney, P., "Modern Archaeology, History and Scientific Research on the Shroud of Turin," in Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: An Interdisciplinary Symposium, Elizabethtown College: Elizabethtown PA, February 15, 1986] From these samples, Dr. Frei, a botanist and expert in Mediterranean flora, could identify fifty-eight different pollen grains. Pollen grains, virtually indestructible, can last thousands, even millions, of years. Although extremely tiny, they have all different shapes and features representative of the plant species from which they derive. ... Dr. Frei spent the last nine years of his life identifying these various pollen grains and the parts of the world in which their plants are found. He also made seven different trips to the Middle East, in different floral seasons, to compare the pollen grains on the Shroud with those of ripe pollens from the Middle East. This was necessary because most of these Middle Eastern pollens were not yet registered with microphotographs in the botanical manuals nor in the herbariums. Each of his identifications was made under an optical microscope, at magnifications ranging from 60x to 1200x, and under a scanning electron microscope (SEM)." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.109- 111) 22/11/2008 "Dr. Frei discovered that pollen grains from sixteen different plant species that grow only in sand deserts or in soils with a high concentration of salt (such as those found around the Dead Sea) are present on the Shroud. These plants do not grow in France and Italy, where the Shroud has a documented history. [Frei, M., "Nine Years of Palinological Studies on the Shroud," Shroud Spectrum International, 3, June 1982, pp.3-7] He also determined that pollen grains of seven different plants that grow in rocky hills and stony terrain, such as in Palestine and neighboring countries but not in France or Italy, are also present on the Shroud. [Ibid] In addition, pollen grains from six other plants grown in Anatolia (a vast plateau in Turkey) and areas between Iran and the eastern Mediterranean, but not in France or Italy, also exist on the Shroud. [Ibid] This can only mean that the Shroud has a history outside of France and Italy. The non-European species of plants and pollen grains constitute the vast majority of samples taken from the Shroud. Perhaps the most interesting fact emerging from Dr. Frei's extensive study is that all of the non-European pollen species, except three, grow in Jerusalem. The city occupies an extraordinary geographical position situated on the ridge of the Judea mountains, between the Mediterranean area and the steppes and deserts around the Dead Sea, each of which has very different soils. Even of the three exceptions, one species grows exclusively in Constantinople, [Bulst, W., "The Pollen Grains on the Shroud of Turin," Shroud Spectrum International, 10, March 1984, pp.20-28] and the other two are found in Edessa, Turkey. [Ibid.]" (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.111) 22/11/2008 "Certainly pollens have adhered to the Shroud in later centuries when it was exposed to the local atmosphere. However, they comprise a small minority of the pollens identified on the cloth. With the vast majority of pollens identified on the Shroud coming from Jerusalem and the surrounding Middle East area, the only possible conclusion one can draw is that the Shroud of Turin has a strong historic link with this part of the world. The cloth's origin in Jerusalem is supported further by the fact that the clear majority (forty-five of fifty-eight) of pollens found on the Shroud grow in Jerusalem. [Bulst, W., "The Pollen Grains on the Shroud of Turin," Shroud Spectrum International, 10, March 1984, pp.20-28] The number of pollens on the Shroud from plants that grow in Jerusalem is almost three times greater than the number from plants that grow in France or Italy, where the Shroud has spent its last 630 years (but rarely exposed to the open air). The majority of the Jerusalem pollens are insect pollinated and could not have ended up on the Shroud as a result of winds. [Danin, A., et al., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.14-15, 24.] The only realistic explanation is that the Shroud cloth itself was manufactured in Jerusalem. Most plant pollens typically fall onto horizontal surfaces, such as water or fields, in the process of being transported to other plants through pollination. The flax used to make linen was soaked in natural bodies of water during the retting process, which was the first opportunity for pollen to attach itself to the Shroud material. An even greater opportunity is provided during the bleaching process, when the linen made from the surviving flax was laid out in a field of grass for long periods of time and regularly sprinkled with water. Because pollens contain such features as small hooks and sticky surfaces, they would easily adhere to the textile material. The quality of the linen, as well as its whiteness, depended on the duration of the bleaching process. Since the Shroud is of very high quality for an ancient linen, it can be assumed that it received a lengthy bleaching process. If the Shroud is the burial garment of Jesus, it would have been purchased new in Jerusalem by Joseph of Arimathea, according to the New Testament." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.111-112) 22/11/2008 "THE IDENTITY OF THE MAN IN THE SHROUD Based on the archaeological evidence described above, the man in the Shroud appears to be a Jew, who was crucified by the Romans and buried in Jerusalem, in accordance with first-century A.D. Jewish burial customs. The next obvious question that arises is whether this crucifixion victim is the historical Jesus Christ. While absolute proof may be impossible, since we have no living eyewitnesses, we can compare the Gospel accounts of the wounds inflicted on Jesus Christ and the events surrounding his death and burial with the details visible on the Shroud. (While studying this comparison, the reader should remember that most of the evidence on the Shroud is impossible to duplicate or forge.)"(Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.119. Emphasis original) 22/11/2008 "Then Pilate took Jesus and scourged him (John 19:1; see also Matthew 27:26 and Mark 15:15). Jesus was scourged by the Romans; as such, there would have been no limitation on the number of strokes he received. The man on the Shroud received a severe scourging by the Romans, and scourge marks cover the front and back of his body, from head to feet."(Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.119. Emphasis original) 22/11/2008 "And some began ... to strike him ... And the guards received him with blows (Mark 14:65). And they struck his head with a reed (Mark 15:19). Jesus was beaten on two occasions, once before the high priest, chief priests, and the council, and again at the praetorium by the Roman soldiers (Matthew 26:67 and 27:30; Mark 14:65 and 15:19; Luke 22:63; John 18:22 and 19:3). The man in the Shroud has been beaten about the face and head, which is clearly indicated by the swellings and lacerations evident on the image."(Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.119. Emphasis original) 22/11/2008 "Plaiting a crown of thorns they put it on his head (Matthew 27:29; see also Mark 15:17-20 and John 19:2). Jesus was mocked as King of the Jews, and part of this mocking consisted of placing a crown of thorns upon his head. Such a crowning has not been found among any of the recorded tortures of the condemned prior to crucifixion, except in the case of Jesus. The man in the Shroud has numerous puncture wounds all over his scalp, and evidence strongly suggests he wore a full crown, of the type used in the East in ancient times." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.119-120. Emphasis original) 22/11/2008 "So they took Jesus, and he went out, bearing his own cross (John 19:17). The man in the Shroud has abrasions on both shoulders as if a rough, heavy object had been placed across his shoulders. Based on the dirt found in the image areas of the man's nose and knees, as well as the cuts and abrasions on his face, knees, and legs, it appears that the man in the Shroud fell. This would have been expected for someone who was forced to carry a heavy crossbeam, especially if he had first received a beating and severe scourging. Jesus, too, apparently fell from this same strain (which would have been compounded by his sleepless, night-long agony of desertion and trials), for Simon of Cyrene was forced to carry the cross for him (Matthew 27:32; Mark 15:21; Luke 23:26)." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.120. Emphasis original) 22/11/2008 "`Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe' (John 20:25). These words reveal that Jesus was nailed to the cross during his crucifixion. Some crucifixion victims were tied to the cross, while others were nailed. Jesus was nailed to the cross (John 20:20, 25, 27; see also Luke 24:39, 40). It is obvious that the man in the Shroud also has nail marks in the areas of his hands and feet." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.120. Emphasis original) 22/11/2008 "So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him; but when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs (John 19:32, 33). In the case of Yehohanan and the thieves crucified with Jesus, crucifragium (the practice of breaking a victim's legs) was used to bring on death. This was not done to Jesus or to the man in the Shroud." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.120. Emphasis original) 22/11/2008 "But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear ... (John 19:34). The side wound on the man in the Shroud was determined to have come from a Roman lancea. John describes this very same instrument being used on Jesus." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.120. Emphasis original) 22/11/2008 "... and at once there came out blood and water (John 19:34). This flow of blood and water is recorded only once in history, and that is with the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Christian apologists from the time of Jesus to the fourth century, a period of frequent crucifixions until they became illegal c. A.D. 315, regarded the flow of blood and water as a miracle. The same flow of blood and watery fluid can be found coming from a postmortem side wound on the man in the Shroud." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.120. Emphasis original) 22/11/2008 "Jesus' body was given an individual burial in a new linen shroud; however, since the Sabbath and Passover were approaching, the burial was incomplete and his body was not washed (Matthew 27:59-62 and 28:1; Mark 15:42, 46-16:3; Luke 23:52-24:2; John 19:12; 41-20:1). The man in the Shroud was also given an individual burial, in a fine linen cloth, and his body was unwashed. Both Jesus and the man in the Shroud also appear to have been buried with sudaria, or chin bands, over their heads, and those who buried them apparently possessed detailed knowledge of Jewish burial customs. Moreover, while wrapped in a Shroud, Jesus was laid in a nearby tomb hewn from the rock in either the Holy Sepulcher or the Garden Tomb, both of which consist of the same rock shelf. Invisible traces of limestone that match samples from this rock shelf, discovered only by microscopic examination, have been found on the Shroud." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.120-12l) 22/11/2008 "The Gospels specifically state that, when the women returned to the tomb on the Sunday following Passover and the Sabbath, the body of Jesus was no longer there; it had somehow left both the tomb and the linen shroud in which it had been wrapped. The body of the man in the Shroud did not stay within the cloth longer than two or three days, for no decomposition stains appear on the Shroud. The Gospels relate that a miraculous event caused the dead body of Jesus to leave the cloth. The images of the man in the Shroud have never been duplicated despite centuries of effort from people throughout the world. The more science investigates the images, the more they seem to defy the laws of physics and science and require something miraculous to account for their unique characteristics." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.121) 23/11/2008 "Even more impressive is the coin-on-the-eye work of Professor Francis L. Filas of Loyola University, Chicago, which seems to give us a verified date for the Shroud image that is far more precise than carbon- dating can ever be. [Filas, F.L., "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate," 1982] Three-dimensional enlargements of the Face of the Shroud are like relief maps, and there are some objects on the eyelids that stand up like thick buttons. During their early 3-D work, Drs. Jackson and Jumper noted these definite protuberances and tentatively concluded that they might be coins placed on each eyelid to keep them closed, as was a common burial practice in the first half of the first century in Judea. [Marino, J., "First Century Jewish Burial Customs," Saint Louis Priory, St. Louis, MO, n.d.] Thereafter, tentative validation came by happenstance in August 1979 when Professor Filas was enlarging his slides of the Shroud image to fill a twelve foot, closed-circuit television screen. He was startled to see what appeared to be Greek letters on the right eye of the Shroud Face. With better enlargements and the technical assistance of coin expert Michael Marx, he discovered a 15mm (5/8 inch) disc inscribed with four recognizable Greek letters and an astrologer's staff, a lituus. After research on historic coins, the size of the coin, the size and shape and position of the inscriptions, and the sequence of the four letters, were all found to be exactly correct for a small bronze coin known as the Pontius Pilate coin, minted in Palestine from 29 to 32. (Pilate was procurator of Judea from A.D. 26 to 36). The astrologer's staff was used as an independent symbol on no other coin in the Roman world at any time (it occasionally appeared as a small side decoration). The odds in favor of the identification of the coin and its date are in the range of millions to one against any other interpretation. Although the coin is very rare, copies of it are available and have been compared with the Shroud by Filas. However, the coin of the Shroud has a misspelling: magnification shows the Greek letters `Y CAI' but should read, `TIBEPIOY KAICAPOC' (meaning, `Of Tiberius Caesar'). Some variations of the coin show only IOY instead of the full name of Tiberius (language specialists use different letters for transliteration of the Greek characters; IOY, end of first word, is rendered IOU by some). All coin experts know that coins of that period and coinage did sometimes contain spelling errors, and now, even more spectacularly, Filas has found three actual Pontius Pilate coins that do have that error, a C instead of K. In fact, numismatists admonish that Pontius Pilate coins, as a class, are of wretched technical quality, poorly pressed, off-center, and contain misspellings." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," , Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, pp.114-115. Emphasis original) 23/11/2008 "The very strong evidence presented by Filas in dating the Shroud was supported in spring 1982 by the independent research of Professor Alan Whanger of Duke University. Whanger developed a photographic technique (described earlier in this chapter) using polarized light and computer enhancement. Using one of Filas's actual Pontius Pilate coins to superimpose over a right-eye enlargement of the Shroud face, he states that he has found seventy-four points of congruence between the two. He finds the actual coin to be almost a perfect match for the markings on the Shroud face, so that the only reasonable conclusion he can come to is that they were coins struck from the same die. Whanger was able to extend the findings of Filas by identifying six Greek letters (IOY CAI) on the Shroud, whereas Filas had been able to discern only four. Whanger's technique identifies the coin on the left eye as another Pontius Pilate lepton, known as the Julia coin, struck only in the year 29, in honor of Caesar's mother, who died that year. Sheaves of grain and parts of eleven (out of a total of fourteen) letters that appear on the coin are identified by Whanger. This is not as certain an identification as the coin on the right eye, but no other coin of the period will fit at all." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," , Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, p.117) 23/11/2008 "Filas now owns two Pontius Pilate coins with the C for K misspelling and knows of a third one owned by a collector in Texas. These actual coins not only validate details of the Shroud image, but are different from what numismatists said was possible. The experts had never heard of a C for K misspelling on these coins. Also, numismatists said the second word, KAISAROS, would begin at the same place every time. Yet these three known coins are each different from the other. Additionally, the authoritative book History of Jewish Coinage by Frederic W Madden, first published in 1864, clearly shows some Pontius Pilate coins with the K at ten-thirty o'clock and others with the K at one o'clock. Considering the poor quality and errors regularly found in the Judean coins, as all agree, and especially in view of the specific, careful, detailed techniques used by Filas and Whanger, I feel that the clear preponderance of evidence supports their conclusions. The work of Dr. Whanger is particularly impressive in recording seventy-four points of congruence when he superimposed photographs of the coin of the Shroud right eye and the coin owned by Filas. Even the critics do not say the 3-D protuberances over the Shroud eyes are not coins; the disagreement is whether a particular coin is proven." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," , Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, p.118) 23/11/2008 "In any event, the Filas/Whanger coin identification work would seem to completely eliminate the possibility of forgery of the Shroud. Such a forger/artist would have had to execute, without pigment and in photographic negativity, tiny coin imprints on each eye containing letters one-thirty-second of an inch (one millimeter) high." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," , Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, pp.118,120) 23/11/2008 "The three scientific techniques, by Professor Francis L. Filas of Loyola University Chicago, by Log E/Interpretation Systems in Overland Park, Kansas, and by Dr. Alan D. Whanger of Duke University and wife Mary, identifying the Pontius Pilate coins of A.D. 29-31 on the eyes of the Man in the Shroud, have been further validated and extended by Dr. Robert M. Haralick of the Spatial Data Analysis Laboratory at Virginia Polytechnic Institute (four different techniques). Haralick's use of computer-enhanced digital image analysis now gives strong evidence for nine Greek letters in sequence on the perimeter of the coin appearing over the right eye, expanding the four-letter sequence found initially by Filas, who died February 15, 1985. This work would seem to historically pinpoint the death of Jesus to the seven-year period from A.D. 29, when these coins were first minted in Judea, to A.D. 36, when Pilate left office (since his coins then would no longer be legal tender)-if this was the burial shroud of Jesus! Subsequently, in 1985, Italian numismatist Mario Maroni announced confirmation of these findings." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," , Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, p.120. Emphasis original) 25/11/2008 "All of this raises the question of just what sort of plant is Gundelia tournefortii? At which point the surprise is that it is an extremely fearsome-looking thorn, with prickly leaves and a thistle-like head that bears the sharpest of spines. Its greatest known usefulness appears to be as a low-grade winter fodder for goats and sheep when there is nothing better available for them. So it is certainly not obvious as the kind of plant that might have been used as a funerary bouquet, even supposing there was evidence that the Jews of Jesus' time had such a custom. Likewise, while it is possible that the plant's spikiness might have caused it to be used for the `crown of thorns' laid on Jesus' head - a view certainly favoured by Dr Alan Whanger - Danin for one is ambivalent on this. And Dr Fred Zugibe, having carefully compared photos of Gundelia with the bloodstains around the back of the Shroud man's head, similarly expresses doubts. In fact the very distribution of Gundelia pollen grains as these occur on the Shroud is contra-indicative of any such scenario. The greatest concentration of specimens (fourteen) has been found on tape 4/3Aa, which Frei took from the very edge of the Shroud's front-of-the-body half, at the level of the crossed hands, with the next highest incidence ten specimens on tape 12Cd, from the spillage of blood from the ankle on the back-of-the- body half of the cloth. Conversely only a few Gundelia have been found in the region of the head. So what purpose might Gundelia have served being enclosed in the Shroud? And, besides the pollen grains, is there any visual evidence for its presence? The answer to the first question is ephemeral. If we look to the gospel of John description of Jesus' burial, this tells us that Jesus' body was `wrapped with the aromatics in linen, following the Jewish burial custom' (John 19:40). So one of the Christian gospels very positively tells us that some kind of plant or vegetable matter, seemingly for air-freshening purposes, was put next to his body. But while it might resolve matters wonderfully if we knew Gundelia to have some perfuming or fumigatory properties, its odour is said to be very nondescript, the closest resemblance being artichoke." (Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, pp.90-91). Emphasis original)
Copyright © 2008-2012, by Stephen E. Jones. All rights reserved. These my quotes may be used
for non-commercial purposes only and may not be used in a book, ebook, CD, DVD, or any other
medium except the Internet, without my written permission. If used on the Internet, a link back
to this page would be appreciated.
Created: 13 November, 2008. Updated: 9 January, 2012.