Stephen E. Jones

Shroud of Turin quotes: Unclassified quotes: July 2008

[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 July 2008. See copyright conditions at end.

2008: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec.


15/07/2008
"Ian Wilson proposes an intriguing theory to link the Mandylion with the Shroud. He suggests that from 
1204 to the early 1300s, the Shroud-Mandylion was in the possession of one of the most exotic and 
mysterious groups in the medieval church-the Knights Templars. [Wilson, I., "The Shroud of Turin," 
Doubleday: New York, 1979, pp.172-191] The Knights Templars were a religious order of knights founded 
about eighty years before the sack of Constantinople for the purpose of defending the crusader territories in 
the Holy Land. The Templars attracted powerful friends and noble members because they combined the two 
great passions of the Middle Ages-religious fervor and martial prowess. The members of the order took 
vows of poverty, chastity, and absolute obedience, and their courage in battle was legendary. They vowed 
never to retreat under attack, and they defended crusader territories in the Holy Land with resourcefulness 
and great bravery. By the time of the sack of Constantinople, the Templars had grown very powerful. They 
built impregnable fortresses in the Holy Land and in Europe, and princes and nobles in those unsettled 
times often entrusted their valuables to the Templars for safekeeping. Among these valuables were many 
relics. The Templars surely had the strength and the motive to safeguard a relic as fabulous as the 
Mandylion- Shroud. As one of the principal traders of relics from the Fourth Crusade, the Templars would 
have been in a position to acquire it, and their wealth would have protected them from the common 
temptation to sell relics for much needed cash. They would have been able to keep its location secret in their 
network of fortresses and castles." (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.20-21). 

15/07/2008
"Granite is a normal, geological source of radiation in the natural environment. Granite contains around 10 to 
20 parts per million of uranium. By contrast, more mafic rocks such as tonalite, gabbro or diorite have 1 to 5 
ppm uranium, and limestones and sedimentary rocks usually have equally low amounts. Many large granite 
plutons are the sources for palaeochannel-hosted or roll front uranium ore deposits, where the uranium 
washes into the sediments from the granite uplands and associated, often highly radioactive, pegmatites. 
Granite could be considered a potential natural radiological hazard as, for instance, villages located over 
granite may be susceptible to higher doses of radiation than other communities. Cellars and basements sunk 
into soils formed over or from particularly uraniferous granites can become a trap for radon gas, which is 
heavier than air. However, in the majority of cases, although granite is a significant source of natural 
radiation as compared to other rocks it is not thought an acute health threat or significant risk factor. 
Various resources from national geological survey organisations are accessible online to assist in assessing 
the risk factors in granite country and design rules relating, in particular, to preventing accumulation of 
radon gas in enclosed basements and dwellings." ("Granite: Natural Radiation," Wikipedia, 2 July 2008. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granite#Natural_Radiation)

15/07/2008
"Sample Location and the Radiocarbon Date There have been several researchers who have conducted 
experiments that appear to show an enhancement in radiocarbon measurement by exposing linen to heat 
under a variety of different conditions. While these experiments have been suggestive, they have not been 
widely accepted by the scientific community for a variety of reasons. Nonetheless, there does appear to be a 
reasonable theoretical rationale to conclude that such an enhancement in radiocarbon measurement is 
possible 15. If the underlying process of differential radiocarbon distribution suggested by the 1988 
radiocarbon measurements is related to thermal exposure or to some other exogenous physical or chemical 
process, then it is probable that some combination of kinetic and equilibrium isotopic fractionation may be 
involved in creating the differential radiocarbon distribution. If kinetic isotopic fractionation effects are 
present, then the lighter isotopic compounds will diffuse faster and further than compounds containing the 
heaver isotope. ... In this example, the lighter 12C isotopic carbon dioxide molecule can diffuse about 2.2% 
further in a given amount of time than the 14C carbon dioxide molecule, all other things being equal." 
(Walsh, B.J., "The 1988 Shroud of Turin Radiocarbon Tests Reconsidered," in Walsh, B.J., ed., 
"Proceedings of the 1999 Shroud of Turin International Research Conference, Richmond, Virginia," 
Magisterium Press: Glen Allen VA, 2000, pp.336-337. Emphasis original. 
http://members.aol.com/turin99/radiocarbon-b.htm) 

15/07/2008
"In the case of the Shroud of Turin, the linen fibrils exposed to higher temperatures would be expected to 
have a lower level of reaction-related isotopic fractionation than the areas of the cloth more insulated from 
the elevated temperatures of the 1532 fire. This would appear to imply the existence of a carbon isotopic 
gradient on the Shroud cloth in areas exposed to large differential temperatures. In addition, isotopic 
fractionation theory states that bonds involving heavier isotopes will be stronger and thus be more difficult 
to break for a given level of temperature than lighter isotopic bonds. Moreover, at equilibrium, the heavier 
isotopes will tend to occupy the site with the stronger bonds. As a result, because bonds involving lighter 
isotopes are weaker and more easily broken, lighter isotopes participate more readily in a given chemical 
reaction. The combined result of these effects is to diffuse light-isotope reaction products further from the 
source of a reaction. If these light isotope elements vacate a stronger bond location, then the heavier 
isotopes are more likely to be able to attach themselves to that site. This would leave a relatively enriched 
heavier isotope concentration wherever the lighter products had taken part in an exogenous chemical 
reaction. The fire to which the Shroud was exposed in 1532 appears to be a reasonable candidate for 
inducing both kinetic isotopic reactions and, also, potentially incomplete equilibrium reactions that may 
have resulted from the rapid temperature drop and water vapor environment associated with the quenching 
of the heated Shroud reliquary with water. This isotopic fractionation process could lead to areas of relative 
enrichment and depletion of various carbon isotopes if the reactions occurred in a confined environment. If 
the lighter isotopic reaction products were free to move away from the fibers, then the isotopic effects noted 
above could cause the Shroud to be left relatively enriched in heavier isotopic products as the result of the 
isotopic exchanges noted above. It would then radiocarbon date younger than its actual age at sites 
affected by this process." (Walsh, B.J., "The 1988 Shroud of Turin Radiocarbon Tests Reconsidered," in 
Walsh, B.J., ed., "Proceedings of the 1999 Shroud of Turin International Research Conference, Richmond, 
Virginia," Magisterium Press: Glen Allen VA, 2000, p.338. http://members.aol.com/turin99/radiocarbon-b.htm)

15/07/2008
"So far as Dr. Frei's surveys of the tapes are concerned, the evidence indicates that he made a kind of 
random analysis of the contents of each tape, circling items of interest which came to light at low power 
(probably 10x). Those experienced in microscopy know that the higher power the more time consuming 
it is to do survey work. Dr. Frei once told Dr. Walter McCrone that he (Frei) was finding approximately 1 
to 2 pollen per square centimeter on the tapes. Projecting this figure onto the Shroud it would imply 
that there are between 47,000 and 94,000 pollen grains on the cloth. I have used a. different approach. 
Beginning at the upper right hand corner of the tape I surveyed down, moved over one tenth of a 
millimeter and continued upward. Following that pattern I have nearly completed my survey of pollen 
on at least 3 of the 27 sticky tapes. But quick preliminary analysis of the remainder of the tapes have 
proven that on every single tape taken directly from the Shroud, there are apparently many times the 
figure given by Frei. For example, on the tape which Frei took from the blood flow from the heel I have 
made a quick count of at least seven pollen. And seven were found in a quick count of the tape from 
the blood flow across the back. But such quick counts do not really tell the story. My nearly complete 
photo-inventory of a tape from the dorsal `side-strip' shows a count of more than 80, and the one from 
the blood flow down the anatomical left arm holds more than 160, while the one from beside the face of 
the man of the Shroud exhibits more than 275 pollen, all of these concentrated in the approximate two 
square centimeters of the lead end of the tape! 12 These findings imply that there are incredible 
amounts of pollen on the Shroud. One need only find 21.1 pollen per square centimeter to project a 
million on the cloth. (Maloney, P.C., "The Current Status of Pollen Research and Prospects for the 
Future," ASSIST Newsletter, Vol. 2., No. 1, June 1990, pp.1-7, pp.4-5. Emphasis original)

15/07/2008
"Dr. Frei was not interested in the statistics of pollen grains on the Shroud. His goal was to identify 
individual plant types he found in the representing pollen on the Shroud cloth. Thus, Frei apparently used 
the `random walk' approach to his examination of his tapes. He told Dr. McCrone that he had been finding, 
on average, one to two pollen per square centimeter. At the 1988 exam of the 1978 tapes, Dr. McCrone told 
our group that he confirmed Frei's observation. McCrone's approach at that exam was also the use of the 
`random walk' - zig-zagging around the slide to locate and view each item of interest. There is another 
method one can use to determine the actual number of pollen grains that may be on the Shroud. When one 
examines the 1978 tapes using an `actual count' approach (and photographing each to create a photo-
inventory) as I did, one gains not only an idea of the extant grains on the tape, but one can also extrapolate 
to develop some idea of the statistical presence of pollen on the Shroud in general and, indeed, the 
distribution and statistical presence of pollen types on the Shroud. In my 1989 paper (Maloney, 1990) I 
noted that the count I did on tapes 10/9 Aa from the side-strip produced a result of 88 in two square 
centimeters of space-i.e. 44 per square centimeter; the count on 4 B/d from the left anatomical arm showed 
163 pollen grains in two centimeters-i.e. approximately 81 pollen per square centimeter, the count on 6 B/d 
taken from relatively close to the face stood at more than 275 grains in two centimeters space-i.e. 
approximately 137 grains per square centimeter." (Maloney, P.C., "A Contribution toward a History of 
Botanical Research on the Shroud of Turin," in Walsh, B., ed., Proceedings of the 1999 Shroud of Turin 
International Research Conference, Richmond, Virginia, 1999, pp.241-266, p.250. Emphasis original)

21/07/2008
"There are very few references to the sudarium after this until its appearance in Oviedo a thousand years 
later. These references are often confusing because as Latin had no word of its own for the Greek `sindon' of 
the synoptic gospels (i.e. the Shroud), the word `sudarium' was often used to mean this larger cloth that 
covered the whole body. In the Vulgate, the official Latin translation of the Bible, the sudarium that John 
speaks of is clearly that face cloth, whereas for the linen cloths or wrappings the neuter plural `linteamina' is 
used. This confusion of vocabulary is evident in a letter of Braulio, bishop of Zaragoza, in the seventh 
century. The exact dates of his life, career and death are not known, but he probably lived from c. 590 to 646, 
being bishop approximately the last twenty years of his life. He was a disciple of Isidore of Seville, and it 
was Braulio who encouraged Isidore to finish his Etymologies and who gave them their titles and divisions. 
More than forty of Braulio's letters have survived, providing useful information about the Visigoth kingdom 
in Spain. In one of these letters, dated 631 [San Braulio de Zaragoza, Letter no. 42, in Patrologia Latina, 
Vol. XXX, de. J-P. Migne, Paris, col. 689-690], he speaks of the existence of the linteamina and the sudarium, 
but says that their whereabouts is unknown. This detail fits in with other historical testimonies, as will be 
seen below. Braulio uses the same words as in the Latin text of John, linteamina and sudarium, both in the 
ablative case, but seems to confuse their use. ... Perhaps he understood John's words, `the cloth that had 
been over his head', as referring to the larger cloth that had also covered the body." (Guscin, M., "The 
Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, 1998, pp.11-12) 

21/07/2008
"For the history of how the cloth reached Oviedo, we depend on the chronicles of Pelayo, bishop of Oviedo 
[1101- 30 & 1142-43] and local historian. He lived in the twelfth century, and his historical works are The 
Book of the Testaments of Oviedo and the Chronicon Regum Legionensium, which describe events 
during the period from 986 to 1109. He tells us that the sudarium was taken from Jerusalem when the 
Christians fled the Persian invasion in the seventh century, was brought to Toledo in Spain through the 
north of Africa, and when the Muslims invaded Spain in the eighth century it was taken to the relatively safe 
north of the country." (Guscin, M., "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, 1998, pp.13-14)

21/07/2008
"Chosroes II was king of Persia from 590 to 628. On the death of his father, he had to fight the usurper 
Bahram VI. He did this with the support of the Byzantine emperor Mauritius, in return for certain lands. He 
later returned the favour, when Mauritius was dethroned by Phocas in 602, declaring war on the Byzantine 
Empire. He attacked and occupied Damascus, Antioch and Jerusalem in 614, and Alexandria in 616. Phocas 
was succeeded by Heraclius, who restored the strength of Byzantium, and Chosroes was defeated at 
Nineveh in 628. He was imprisoned by one of his sons and assassinated. This account would mean that the 
sudarium had been in Jerusalem, or at least Palestine, from the death of Jesus until this time, and was taken 
away shortly before Chosroes attacked the area. From Jerusalem, the sudarium was taken first to Alexandria 
by the presbyter, Philip. However, Chosroes and the Persians were going in the same direction, and they 
conquered Alexandria two years later. By this time, the sudarium was travelling again, escaping destruction 
at the Persians' hands." (Guscin, M., "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, 1998, p.14)

21/07/2008
"After crossing the north of Africa, the sudarium came to Spain, entering the Iberian Peninsula at Cartagena, 
in the company of people who were fleeing from the Persians. The bishop of Ecija, Saint Fulgentius [c.550-
630], welcomed the refugees and the relics, and surrendered the oaken chest or ark, in which the sudarium 
was kept, to Saint Leandro [c.534-600], who was bishop at Seville. He took it with him to Seville, where it 
spent some years. Saint Isidore [c.560-636] then became bishop of Seville. Isidore was the teacher of San 
Ildefonso, who was appointed bishop of Toledo in 657 AD. When he left Seville to take up his post there, he 
took the ark with him. It stayed in Toledo until the year 718. The Muslims had invaded Spain at the 
beginning of the eighth century and met with very little resistance in almost all the peninsula. This invasion 
was the reason for the ark's being taken further north. According to Pelayo, from Toledo the chest was taken 
directly to Oviedo. This detail in his account cannot be strictly true, because Oviedo was not founded until 
761 AD, and after destruction by the Arabs, again in 795 AD. The relics were first taken to a cave which is 
now called Monsacro, ten kilometres from Oviedo. The sudarium was in the cave until King Alfonso II (791-
842) built a special place for it, the `Camara Santa' in the cathedral. This was in 840, towards the end of his 
reign." (Guscin, M., "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, 1998, pp.14-15)

21/07/2008
"A slightly different year for the departure from Toledo is given in the Chronicum. Mundi written by Lucas 
de Tuy, who was Bishop of Tuy (a Spanish town that is on the border with the north of Portugal) from 1239-
1240. Lucas says that the relics left Toledo the same year that the Arabs invaded Spain (i.e. 711), and that 
they had been there for ninety-five years (i.e. since 616). 616 seems too early - this was the same year that 
Alexandria fell to Chosroes and the Persians, only two years after the fall of Jerusalem. The relics had yet to 
travel all across the north of Africa, enter Spain and spend some time in Seville before reaching Toledo. 
However, they do seem to have been in Spain in 631 when Braulio wrote about the two burial cloths." 
(Guscin, M., "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, 1998, pp.14-15)

21/07/2008
"Another relevant text is the History and Description of Spain by Abunbenque Mohamat Rasis [c.977]. In 
a description of the Arab invasion, he says that many Christians left the cities and fled to the mountains of 
Asturias (Oviedo is in Asturias), taking relics with them and hiding them underground. Abunbenque does 
not specifically mention the sudarium, but his description fits in exactly with what we know from other 
sources." (Guscin, M., "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, 1998, pp.15-16) 

21/07/2008
"There are other versions of the sudarium's stay in Spain before being taken to Asturias in the north. It is 
strange that Braulio, writing when the chest was supposedly in Toledo, does not know exactly where it is. 
Some have doubted that it was in Seville, but it does seem clear that Leandro was connected with the 
sudarium, and possibly even knew about the Shroud. In the Mozarabic Liturgy for Easter Saturday, a liturgy 
intimately associated with and possibly even partly rewritten by Leandro, we read the following ... Peter ran 
to the tomb with John and saw the recent imprints of the dead and risen one on the cloths ... Leandro had 
lived in Constantinople from 579 to 582, and visited the city again in 595 (he died in 600 or 601 AD). This was 
only fifty-four years after the Shroud/Mandylion's rediscovery in Edessa, so he could very well have heard 
about it and even seen it. ... It has even been suggested that the chest with the sudarium was in 
Constantinople and Leandro brought it back to Spain with him. Leandro could certainly not have seen the 
sudarium in Spain if Pelayo's account is to be believed, because he died 13 or 14 years before Chosroes 
invaded Jerusalem. Whichever version is true, the chest was in Spain at the beginning of the seventh 
century." (Guscin, M., "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, 1998, p.16)

21/07/2008
"The early manuscripts mentioned all agree in the following details concerning the history of the relic and its 
flight to Spain: a) that the relic was present in Jerusalem until the Persian invasion in the year 614, b) that it 
was briefly taken in a chest along with many other relics to a city in the north of Africa, most probably 
Alexandria, which was taken by the Persians in 616, c) that it was taken by sea to Cartagena on the 
southeastern coast of Spain, d) that it went directly to Seville during the time of St. Isidore, e) that after the 
death of St. Isidore in 636, Toledo became the most important city of Christianity, and the relic was taken 
there where it remained for 75 years, until the Muslim invasion in 711, f) that the Christians fled to the north 
with the relics at the time of this invasion, hiding the chest of relics for approximately fifty years in the 
mountains of Asturias, among them Monsacro, and g) that the chest has been in Oviedo since the city was 
founded in 761. All of these facts are also supported by logic and historical circumstances, as will be 
discussed." (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, pp.28-29)

21/07/2008
"Chosroes II, sometimes written as Khosrow II Parvis (the Victorious) was proclaimed king of Persia (Iran) in 
the turbulent times of 590 AD. ... In the year 614 the Persians, accompanied by Jewish warriors, advanced 
toward Jerusalem, which fell in the month of July. ... As many as 90,000 Christians were killed, the Church of 
the Holy Sepulcher was razed to the ground, and the relic of the True Gross was seized by the Persians and 
carried off to their capital of Ctesiphon. The Cross, which was always spoken of as the pieces of the wood 
of the True Cross by the original writers, was returned years later by the Emperor Heraclius in 627, an event 
that brought about the institution of the feast of the Holy Cross on September 14th. Nothing is mentioned of 
the capture or destruction of other relics, and one can assume that they were safeguarded." (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, pp.29-30)

21/07/2008
"The Sudarium, in its coffer along with many other relics, was safely removed from Jerusalem before its 
destruction, and it is believed that it was taken to Alexandria by the presbyter Philip, accompanied by many 
of the Christians who were fleeing from the invasion. Khosrow's armies went in the same direction, however, 
conquering Alexandria only two years later, in the year 616. By this time the chest of relics was traveling by 
sea from Alexandria to Spain, possibly stopping briefly in Carthage on the northern coast of what is today 
Tunisia." (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.30)

21/07/2008
"After its journey across the Mediterranean Sea, it is believed that the chest of relics entered Spain at 
Cartagena. At this time Cartagena was an extremely important metropolitan diocese of the Byzantine Empire, 
and maintained close relations with the other Christian-Byzantine communities, among them Jerusalem and 
Alexandria. The relics went directly to Seville, the religious capital of the peninsula, and were placed in the 
custody of St. Isidore. Politician, bibliophile, historian, theologian, doctor of the church, and the last of the 
Western Latin Fathers, Isidore was an impressive figure under whom Seville reached an apogee in this late 
Visigothic period. He had many eminent disciples, among them St. Braulio (585-651) and St. Ildephonsus, 
who became the bishops of Zaragoza and Toledo respectively. The fame of Isidore spread along the routes 
of Byzantium; he was a person held in extremely high esteem for his erudition. Isidore also spent a 
considerable amount of time in Toledo, having been there for at least three extensive periods of time 
between the years 631 and 633." (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, pp.30-31)

21/07/2008
"St. Ildephonsus, who had possibly been educated in Seville under Isidore, became bishop of Toledo in 657. 
It was previously thought that when he left for the capital of the Visigoth kingdom to assume his duties, the 
chest of relics possibly accompanied him, but now it is believed that the relics were taken to Toledo 
immediately after the death of St. Isidore. Toledo had been the site of numerous famous councils, one of the 
greatest being the Fourth Council of Toledo (633), headed by Isidore, which decreed union between church 
and state, toleration of Jews, and uniformity in the Spanish Mass. After the death of Braulio in 651, and 
under the direction of Ildephonsus, the city of Toledo was established as the most important Christian and 
intellectual center in Spain, and it is logical that Spain would seek to dignify this new metropolitan see with 
some relics that were considered to be the most important of Christianity. They remained in Toledo for 75 
years, until the invasion of the Muslims in 711 AD, an event that provoked the flight of massive numbers of 
Christians toward the north of Spain." (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.31)

21/07/2008
"It is thought that the chest was opened at least once during its permanence in Toledo, because in the 
subsequent inventory of Alfonso VI, the relics of St. Ildephonsus 12 are cited. Another reference appears to 
corroborate this belief because Canon VI of the Council of Braga in 675 makes a rather strange reference to a 
Chest of God that contained many relics, criticizing the fact that some bishops placed them on 
themselves, `as if they were the chest of the relics.' Due to the very real threat of the Muslim invasion of 
Spain at the beginning of the eighth century, the Visigoths fled in the direction of the Asturian kingdom, 
bringing their relics with them, but the actual route is not certain. Concerning the invasion of Spain, it is 
known that Musa ibn Nusayr, the Arab governor of Ifrikiya (the New Arab North Africa), sent an expedition 
of 1,700 men into Spain under the command of his former slave Tarik. King Roderic, who had just begun his 
reign in 710, was in a vulnerable position, possibly also due to controversy over the succession. It is 
believed that many deserted him in the course of the decisive battle in the Guadalquivir valley that ended his 
reign and the Visigothic kingdom. In the aftermath of the victory, Tarik immediately proceeded to Toledo, 
encountering no resistance en route. Musa then brought in a large army, either later in 711 or in 712, and 
took Seville. Musa and Tarik together continued the northern thrust of the conquest in 714; Musa advanced 
into Asturias, while Tarik conquered Leon and Astorga." (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, pp.31-32)

21/07/2008
"According to some versions, the chest was taken from Toledo to the coast, and placed in a boat that 
carried it to Subsalas. Another legend, which I will relate a bit later, relates that it was carried in a boat to 
Luarca (Lugar del Arca, or place of the chest). Still another version says that the chest crossed Castile, 
passed through Babias, stopped in Torrebario, entered through the Port of Ventana and through Quiros in 
Asturias. From Mt. Aramo they were probably taken to Monsacro (monte .sagrado or sacred mountain). The 
Libro Gotico, Cronica Alfonsina and the Silense confirm only its continual transport through caves 
and churches, and the chronicle of Alfonso (1465) relates that when they arrived in the mountains of 
Asturias, the relics were placed on top of a mountain that they call Monsacro, ten kilometers from the 
present city of Oviedo. Another version confuses these relics with those brought from Jerusalem by St. 
Toribio in the fifth century, and says that the saint arrived in Aviles with his divine cargo, and then placed 
the chest of the relics on the peak of a high mountain called Monsacro, inside a cave, which he barricaded 
with timbers and covered with earth." (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, pp.32-
33)

21/07/2008
"The legends in favor of a route to Oviedo by sea undoubtedly originated in the medieval era when 
Santiago was already an important pilgrimage destination, and it is possible that they may have been 
attempting to reinforce the importance of the relics of Oviedo, seeking a similarity with those of Santiago 
that were said to have arrived by sea. It may also be a case of confusing the initial arrival of the relics at 
Cartagena, after having followed a maritime route from Africa, with their subsequent flight to Oviedo. 
Nevertheless, it is known that they were hidden, either until the founding of the city of Oviedo in 761, or 
until King Alfonso II the Chaste (791-842) built the Camara Santa or Holy Chamber to house the relics. It is 
believed that this room was initially the chapel of his palace, incorporated into the Gothic cathedral that was 
subsequently built in the fourteenth century." (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.33)

21/07/2008
"A particularly important testimony has been found which corroborates the facts concerning the flight of 
the coffer from Toledo, previously referred to. It is the mention made by the Moorish historian Abunbenque 
Mohamat Rasis in his `History and Description of Spain,' finished in the year 977. He writes that `many [of 
the Christians], having left the cities, were fleeing to the mountains of Asturias and were bringing with 
them whatever relics they could, or were hiding them in subterranean places.' This reference supports the 
belief that the relics were hidden for a period of time in Monsacro, where it is thought that they were hidden 
underground in a site known as the `Well of St. Toribio.'" (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.33. Emphasis original)

21/07/2008
"Another interesting historical reference is contained in a letter of the Bishop Braulio of Zaragoza, in which 
he makes a reference to the preservation of the sepulchral linens of Christ. Braulio is a saint who was the 
disciple of St. Isidore. He was elected bishop in 631, and died in 651. His entire collection of letters only 
survives in one manuscript, number 20 of the Chapter Archives of Leon, a codex that was discovered in the 
18th century. In letter number XLII, there is a mention of linteamina (linens) and sudarium. The text 
says: `... but in those times, it is known that many things occurred that are not written, as for example the 
linens and the sudarium in which the body of the Lord was wrapped. We read that it was found, but we do 
not read that it was preserved. Nevertheless, I do not believe that the relics would have been disregarded, 
but preserved for future times. Braulio refers to the fact that one does not read in the Gospels that the burial 
linens were preserved, but says that he believes that they would have been safeguarded by the 
Apostles." (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, pp.33-34)

21/07/2008
"A little-known relic in Oviedo, Spain, called the Sudarium, the cloth said to have covered Jesus' face after 
He was crucified, may be the key to unveiling the mystery of the Shroud of Turin. The history and scientific 
findings respecting the Sudarium, often called the `Cloth of Oviedo,' provide an unfolding story that 
rivals the most pious fiction. As debates have intensified about the Shroud, the 14-foot swath of linen 
enshrined in the Cathedral of Turin, Italy, that is believed by many to be the burial cloth of Christ, it appears 
that the Sudarium may be evidence of the authenticity of the Shroud. Hidden from public view for more 
than a millennium, the Sudarium of Oviedo is thrusting into the modern world fresh testimony about the 
suffering and death of a man crucified many centuries ago. New investigations of the two burial cloths have 
compared blood types, patterns of stains, facial geometry, and pollen in an effort to find scientific data from 
the Cloth of Oviedo that might prove whether it covered the same man whose tortured image is preserved on 
the Shroud." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Debates about the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin focus on two stumbling blocks: Carbon-14 dating 
tests in 1988, which placed the origin of the Shroud in the 14th century; and lack of documentation to 
support theories about what happened to Christ's shroud after the resurrection. Those who doubt the 
authenticity of the Shroud reject all evidence other than the Carbon-14 results, which coincide with the date 
of the first recorded exhibition of the Shroud in 1357 in Lirey, France. Clearly, if the Shroud of Turin is a 
14thcentury artifact, it cannot be the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth. Some Shroud doubters go further; 
they attempt to speculate on the identity of the man so cruelly crucified to achieve the `fraudulent' image. 
While historians sift through lurid alternative theories about crucified Templars and a Masonic Grail, 
ongoing artistic studies and forensic pathology research on the Shroud of Turin still suggest it may truly be 
an artifact of first-century Palestine. Thus, the various methodologies of investigation have yielded 
conflicting conclusions, and the mystery remains. To many skeptics, the Shroud is at best a pious icon and 
at worst a medieval hoax." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"However, the Cloth of Oviedo, venerated in its own right for centuries in this city in Asturias, in north-
central Spain, without reference to the Shroud of Turin, stirs far less controversy over its provenance. The 
documented whereabouts of the Sudarium have been undisputed since at least 718 A.D., which explains 
its tremendous significance: If forensic evidence can prove that the Shroud and the Sudarium were in 
contact with the same body at the time of death, it would tend to invalidate the Carbon-14 results that date 
the Shroud only to the 14th century." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, 
April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"While the assumed chronology of the Shroud is veiled in the mists of medieval history, the Sudarium is a 
revered relic that could well have been preserved from the days of Christ's crucifixion. In Latin, Sudarium 
means `face cloth.' The Revised Standard Version of the Bible translates Sudarium as `napkin,' a clear 
indication that this smaller cloth was not identical to the longer burial shroud called the sindon in the New 
Testament's Greek. The smaller cloth was used to cover the face of the body immediately following death, a 
Jewish practice of respect and compassion for the family of the dead." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud 
of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"According to Liber Testamentorum (Book of Testaments), written by Bishop Pelayo of Oviedo in the 
twelfth century, a `holy ark' made out of oak by followers of the twelve apostles was said to contain the 
Sudarium, along with several relics of the Virgin Mary and the apostles and a piece of the cross on which 
Jesus was crucified. According to Pelayo, the ark remained in Jerusalem for the first 500 years following the 
resurrection. Philip `the Presbyter,' a leader of the Christian community in Palestine, fled Jerusalem with the 
oak chest when Chosroes II, king of Persia, sacked the holy city in 614 A.D., according to Pelayo's chronicle. 
John the Almoner, bishop of Alexandria, welcomed Philip and his precious cargo. When the Persian 
invasion continued into Egypt, the chest was said to have accompanied the faithful into Spain, where St. 
Fulgentius received it and sent it to Seville. In 657, according to Pelayo, the ark traveled north to Toledo 
where it was protected until 718. Citing slightly different dates from those in Pelayo's chronicle, Lucas, the 
bishop of Tuy, wrote in his 13th-century Chronicum Mundi (Chronicle of the World) that the ark was 
taken north from Toledo to Monte Sacro in Asturias in 711, to escape the advancing Moors. History and 
Description of Spain, a text completed in 977, corroborates this move, at least obliquely, with a description of 
Christians fleeing the Muslims to the mountains of Asturias and burying their relics underground." 
(Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"From atop Monte Sacro, Alfonso II, king of Asturias, turned back Spain's Moorish invaders and 
established his court at Oviedo. The 800-year Reconquista, or reconquering of Spain from the Moors, 
began with Alfonso's victory. He built a Camara Santa (holy chamber) in 840 A.D. to shelter the relics in 
the ark. Later kings built Oviedo's cathedral of San Salvador (Holy Savior) around this tiny chapel. A record 
from the year 1030 reports that some hapless clerics opened the reliquary in the Camara Santa without prayer 
or fasting and were struck blind. This account is dismissed by historians as legend. Rev. Rafael Somoano, 
the current dean of the cathedral, summarizes the contents of a document recording a second opening of the 
reliquary at Easter in 1075 by King Alfonso VI, his sister, Do-a Urraca, and Rodrigo D’az de Vivar, popularly 
known as El Cid, the Spanish hero: They prepared all 40 days of Lent with prayer, fasting and penance. The 
chest was opened with great fear because of the story from the time of Alfonso III, which told of unprepared 
priests blinded by the holy light emanating from the ark. The date was March 1075, and here in the Camara 
Santa, in the company of bishops, the king and El Cid examined the contents of the chest. There is a 
document in the cathedral archive that describes the ceremony. But for our day, we find what is most 
important: the official court record of what the king found inside. The document names each relic seen by 
the king and El Cid and Do-a Urraca in the presence of the bishops. The Sudarium is there! The king 
ordered the chest to be encased in this resplendent silver coffer, and the inscription on the outside lists all 
that was found. It invites all Christians to kneel and revere the Holy Blood." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other 
Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Other references to the sudarium are scattered throughout medieval European literature. Among the 
most intriguing are a mention of a mysterious ark in Spain in the documents of the Third Council of Braga, in 
Portugal, in 675, and the following reference to Oviedo in a ditty recited by pilgrims to Santiago de 
Compostela, the site of St. James the Apostle's shrine not far from Asturias ... `Who has been to St. James, 
And not to San Salvador. Visits the servant and Neglects the master.' ... Fascinating evidence of early 
veneration of the Sudarium also appears in this eleventh-century Spanish poem: "Tell us Mary, what did 
you see on the road? I saw the tomb of the living Christ, and His glory as He rose,...the Sudarium and the 
linen cloths [emphasis added]." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 
2001)

21/07/2008
"Since the relic was brought to the Camara Santa in the ninth century, it has remained undisturbed in 
Oviedo. Skeptics willing to concede its relative antiquity still question its authenticity as the sudarium of 
Christ described in John's gospel (John 20:6-7). Can it be proved that this cloth was used in the burial 
preparations for Jesus? This question and the related one of proving a correlation between the Sudarium 
and the Shroud of Turin are the object of ongoing scientific investigations by a team from the Spanish 
Center for Sindonology, an organization that studies the Shroud of Turin. The secret of the Sudarium's 
preservation, notes Father Somoano, is that its reliquary was rarely opened. Father Somoano himself knew 
nothing about the Sudarium when he was growing up, even though he was raised in a village near 
Oviedo. `I never saw the Camara Santa until after I became a priest, because it was always closed,' he recalls. 
He first learned about the Sudarium while studying in Rome and `was astounded.'" (Anderson, M.J., "The 
Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Formal testing of the Sudarium began 15 years ago. The first to study it was the late Msgr. Giulio Ricci, 
president of the Roman Center for Sindonology. Father Somoano reports that when Ricci viewed the 
Sudarium for the first time, he exclaimed, `It's authentic,' and decided it was a complement to the Shroud of 
Turin. Ricci concluded that the simplest explanation for certain symmetrical stains on the Sudarium was 
that they were made by someone holding the cloth against a bloodied face. He also suggested that a Swiss 
pollen expert, Max Frei, be given an opportunity to search for botanical evidence. Frei found two species of 
pollen typical of Palestine; significantly, these same pollens were found on the Shroud. However, he also 
found pollen from North Africa, which is consistent with the Sudarium's legendary travels. While this 
African pollen is not present in the Shroud, the Shroud contains pollen from species found in Turkey and 
France that were not found on the Cloth of Oviedo. Advocates of the authenticity of both the Sudarium 
and the Shroud contend that the two cloths exhibit pollen evidence consistent with their differing routes 
into Europe." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"In the late 1980s, Ricci urged a systematic study of the Cloth of Oviedo that would compare it with the 
Shroud. Early investigations included a photographic study of ultraviolet and infrared images of the cloth. 
This preliminary study confirmed that there is no underlying image of a face on the Sudarium-unlike the 
Shroud, which contains a bodily image that looks like a photographic negative. The Sudarium presents 
only a pattern of successive stains from perspiration, blood, and lymph. In the testing, video images were 
digitized so that the images on the two cloths could be highlighted and compared." (Anderson, M.J., "The 
Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"The First International Congress on the Sudarium of Oviedo, held in 1994, sponsored further testing. 
The findings indicated that the Sudarium had been placed against the face of a man who had been beaten 
on the front and back of the head. Although there is no facial image on the Sudarium, it does contain a 
distinct facial impression, the 1994 study showed. The cloth is impregnated with blood and lymph that 
match the AB blood type on the Shroud. (This was a crucial test, for had the blood types not matched, any 
subsequent testing would be pointless.) The pattern and measurements of the stains indicate a placement of 
the cloth over a face. Measurements of facial features were also made. These patterns were extensively 
mapped to enable researchers to compare the markings and measurements with those on the Shroud." 
(Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Alan Whanger, professor emeritus of medicine at Duke University, found similarities in the blood stains on 
the two cloths by using a polarized image overlay technique. He noted 70 congruent patterns on the face 
and more than 50 on the back of the head and neck. Furthermore, when the image on the Shroud was placed 
over the stains on the Sudarium, there was an exact correlation between the stains on the Sudarium and 
the image of the beard of the man on the Shroud." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis 
Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"According to the gospels, at the death of Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea went to Pontius Pilate for permission 
to remove His body from the cross. Following the custom of the time, the Sudarium would have been 
placed over Jesus' head at that time. The pattern of stains suggests that it was then wrapped back on itself, 
because the victim's head seemed to have been lying at an acute angle against his right arm. Author Mark 
Guscin explains in his book The Oviedo Cloth (Lutterworth Press, 2000) how the effects of a crucifixion 
are recorded on the Sudarium: `The main stains consist of one part blood and six parts pulmonary oedema 
fluid. This is very significant because it helps confirm that Jesus died from asphyxiation. It is the generally 
accepted opinion that people who were crucified died from asphyxiation.... When a person dies this way his 
lungs are filled with fluid from the oedema. If the body is moved or jostled, this fluid can come out through 
the nostrils.' It is precisely this kind of stain that forms the central group of stains on the Sudarium. The 
stains were superimposed on each other, i.e. after the first stain was formed, enough time passed for it to dry 
before the cloth was stained again, leaving the borders of each stain clearly visible." (Anderson, M.J., "The 
Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"The first set of stains on the Sudarium indicates that the victim's body was in a vertical position with the 
head at an angle. There are also stains from deep puncture wounds on the portion of the cloth covering the 
back of the head that are consistent with similar marks found on the Shroud, presumably made by Jesus' 
crown of thorns. A separate set of stains, superimposed on the first set, was made when the crucified man 
was laid down horizontally and lymph flowed out from his nostrils. Scientists are able to calculate the time 
that elapsed between each new set of stains based on the pattern of stains and the measurements of a model 
head used in the experiments. According to Guscin, `the third stain was made when the body was lifted from 
the ground about forty-five minutes later.... The marks (not fingerprints) of the fingers that held the cloth to 
the nose are also visible.'" (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Once the body was in the tomb, the Sudarium, stained and bloody, would have been set aside. The 
victim was then placed face-up on one-half of the long linen (presumably the Shroud of Turin) that Joseph 
of Arimathea had purchased (Mark 15:46). The linen was folded longitudinally over the body, which was 
only cursorily prepared for burial because the Sabbath was near, according to the gospels. The women 
planned to return after the Sabbath to prepare the body properly." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of 
Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"A comparison of the two cloths reveals an important difference between them. While the blood types 
match, the wound marks match, the facial features and measurements coincide, and pollen studies help 
confirm the cloths' histories, researchers point out that the Sudarium does not have the `scorched' fibers 
present on the Shroud. Those who believe that both cloths are genuine attribute this difference to a 
powerful event that later took place in the body and hence in the Shroud, but not in the Sudarium, which 
was `rolled up by itself' (John 20: 6-7). Christian believers maintain that this event was the resurrection." 
(Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Despite all the evidence, the question remains: What about the Carbon-14 data? The answer is partly to be 
found in the complex methodological and technical considerations with which reputable scientists on both 
sides of the issue are still grappling. The controversy over the carbon-dating evidence with respect to the 
Shroud centers on the validity of tests performed on three samples snipped from it in April 1988. When the 
results of testing by the three international laboratories selected to run the newly refined accelerated mass 
spectrometry method of carbon-dating were made public, all three labs concurred: The Shroud dates 
sometime between 1260 and 1390 A.D." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, 
April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Many in the academic and scientific communities were stunned. The great preponderance of other data 
suggests that the Shroud is a relic from first-century Palestine. Some even called into question the integrity 
of the samples: Had they been cut from an area charred during a fire in 1532, thus compromising the carbon-
testing? Similarly, carbon-testing on the Sudarium sets its origin in the seventh century, but those who 
contend it is older say the test results were distorted by the effects of a terrorist bombing inside the 
cathedral in 1934. Reams of paper have been devoted to trying to invalidate carbon-dating and its use on 
textiles. Shroud advocate Ian Wilson reported in his 1998 book, The Blood and the Shroud, that 
Egyptologists have produced Carbon-14 test results that date the wrappings of mummies as 1,000 years later 
than they are known to be. Some even question the quasi-religious belief of some scientists in the 
infallibility of carbon-dating. They cite famous and often hilarious examples suggesting that carbon-dating 
may be among the least accurate methodologies for assessing the age of the Shroud. For example, the head 
of the Swiss laboratory that participated in the Carbon-14 tests on the Shroud also ran a Carbon-14 test on 
his mother-in-law's 50-year-old tablecloth. The results of the test set the age of the textile at 350 years. He 
theorized that soaps used to wash the tablecloth were the compromising factor." (Anderson, M.J., "The 
Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Complicating the Carbon-14 question is the problem of the Shroud's chronology. The Carbon-14 date of the 
Shroud closely corresponds to its first documented appearance. There is, however, a possible earlier history 
for the Shroud that awaits further research before it can provide the chronological documentation that 
accompanies the Cloth of Oviedo. According to some theorists, including Wilson, the Shroud of Turin is 
actually the precious piece of cloth known in the Byzantine world as the Mandylion. Early Christian 
iconography brims with images of Jesus' face on the Mandylion that closely resemble the image of the man 
on the Shroud-an image that was not revealed until the age of photography. Where did these ancient artists 
find their model?" (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Tradition holds that Jesus' disciple Thaddeus took the Mandylion-perhaps the Shroud-with him to Edessa 
in Mesopotamia at the invitation of King Abgar V of Edessa (the Church historian Eusebius chronicles a 
supposed exchange between Jesus Himself and Abgar that is probably apocryphal). Later, Christians were 
persecuted in Edessa, and the `Cloth of Edessa,' as the Mandylion was called, was hidden in the city walls. 
By 550 A.D., the Mandylion had reportedly been recovered, and it was brought to Constantinople in 944. It 
was described as `the divinely wrought likeness which human hands have not made.' Travelogues, diaries, 
liturgies, hymns, and even coins attest to the existence of a mysterious image of Christ in the Near East. 
Shroud advocates believe this cloth was pirated during the infamous Fourth Crusade of the 13th century, 
when the Crusaders sacked Constantinople, and brought to France by the Knights Templar. Scant solid 
evidence has been found to support this theory, however." (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of Christ," 
Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"Naysayers scoff at such suppositions as fanciful. But Shroud devotees point to an equally vexing 
question: How is it that science and technology cannot provide a method to duplicate the Shroud, if it is in 
fact a hoax? What is the explanation for the most studied holy relic in history? Juan Ignacio Moreno, a 
magistrate in Burgos, Spain, and a leading advocate of the Sudarium's authenticity, offers this answer to 
the mystery of both the Shroud and the Cloth of Oviedo: `The Sudarium is a relic rediscovered for 
Christians fighting a new fight. It is a love letter to our time from God: a tantalizing puzzle saved for the 
minds of men that have made science and knowledge their god.'" (Anderson, M.J., "The Other Shroud of 
Christ," Crisis Magazine, April 1, 2001)

21/07/2008
"An important reference to the possible existence of the Shroud within a few centuries of the lifetime of 
Jesus comes from the famous theologian and Church Father St. Jerome, from a work written in Bethlehem in 
A.D. 392 called Lives of Illustrious Men. This is a series of very brief biographical sketches of the various 
early leaders of the Christian Church. One of the most important leaders was St. James, the Lord's `brother.' 
... A devout and pious man all his life, James ... scrupulously lived by the Law of Moses until the day of his 
death, led the Church in Jerusalem until his martyrdom at the hands of hostile Jews in A.D. 62. Jerome, in his 
Lives, cited the apocryphal Gospel According to the Hebrews (of which no copies have survived), in 
which it was stated that Jesus, after His Resurrection but before He appeared to James (Paul, in 1 
Corinthians 15, tells us that the Lord did in fact appear to James), gave His graveclothes "to the servant of 
the priest." In other words, Jesus gave His Shroud to James' servant. No mention, however, is made of an 
image on the graveclothes." (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.52-53. 
Emphasis original)

21/07/2008
"St. Nino (sometimes called St. Nina) was a Greek Christian girl, born in Cappadocia (in what is now Turkey) 
around A.D. 296. Her parents moved to Jerusalem when she was twelve. Later, as a captive, she was taken to 
what is now Georgia (in southeastern Europe), where she introduced the Christian faith. Shortly before she 
died in A.D. 338, she dictated her life story to her friend Salome of Ujarma. In the earliest version preserved, 
which dates to the fifth century, Nino mentions the Shroud. Reminiscing about her early life in Jerusalem, 
Nino recounted, `And they taught me that the things written by the prophet were fulfilled in the Lord, and 
that he was crucified and went up into heaven and is to come again. And the [grave] clothes the wife of 
Pilate asked for ... and believed in Christ, and deported to Pontus [in what is now Turkey] to her home. And 
after a time it fell to Luke the Evangelist, and he knows what he did with them. As to the napkin, Peter, they 
say, took it with him' [Wardrop, M. & J.O., "Life of St. Nino," Studia Biblica et Ecclesiastica, Vol. V., Pt. I., 
Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1900, p.72] It is significant that Nino distinguished between the graveclothes and 
the napkin, or cloth, that covered or went around Jesus' head. It is also noteworthy that she was ignorant of 
their location at the time she dictated her memoirs." (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.53)

21/07/2008
"St. Braulio, bishop of Saragossa, Spain, from 631 until his death twenty years later, mentioned in a letter 
that the physical `relics' of Jesus were still to be seen in Jerusalem, and were `left to us as a testimony of His 
passion.' Among these was the column to which Jesus was tied while he was being scourged. Braulio went 
on to state that `the linens and Shroud, in which Our Lord was wrapped, may well have been saved by the 
Apostles as relics. The fame of such relics alone would assure a good Christian that they were preserved 
carefully, though dispersed throughout the world.' [Lynch, C.H., ed., "Saint Braulio, Bishop of Saragossa 
(631-651)," Catholic University of America: Washington DC, 1938, pp.96-97] It is evident that Braulio had 
neither actually seen the Shroud nor was absolutely certain of its survival. They were not in Jerusalem in 
the 600s. Braulio simply stated that the burial clothes might have been saved." (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.53. Emphasis original)

24/07/2008
"A study to examine the artistic depictions of Christ through the centuries was first undertaken by Paul 
Vignon, and then others, in the earlier part of this century ... These researchers found that the standard and 
conventional likeness of Christ we know today was not always the way in which Jesus was depicted. The 
image so familiar to us now did not begin to appear until the sixth century. Prior to this, depictions of Christ 
varied greatly. Nowhere in the New Testament is there a description of Christ's physical appearance. 
Throughout the first five centuries A.D. Jesus was usually portrayed as young, clean-shaven, and with 
short hair. ... Beginning in the sixth century, this likeness abruptly changes. The likeness of Christ takes on 
the form of long hair parted in the middle and falling to the shoulders. He has a forked beard, with a thin 
mustache that droops to join the beard. His face is longer and more refined. His nose is longer and more 
pronounced, and his eyes are more deeply set. His whole countenance is also set in a rigidly front-facing 
attitude." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological 
Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.124)

24/07/2008
"A consistent pattern of anomalies or oddities in the depictions of Christ also emerged in the sixth century. 
These anomalies include a three-sided square between the eyebrows, a V shape at the bridge of the nose, a 
second V within the three-sided square, a raised right eyebrow, accentuated cheeks, enlarged left nostril, an 
accentuated line between the nose and upper lip, a heavy line under the lower lip, a hairless area between 
the lower lip and beard, heavily accentuated owlish eyes, and a transverse line across the throat. These 
features appear regularly in pictures of Christ and are apparent in the negative image visible on the Shroud 
of Turin. ... What is most intriguing is that many of these oddities appear with no apparent artistic purpose. 
In fact, many of them are irrelevant to, or detract from, the naturalness of the face. While each feature does 
not appear in every representation, the consistent pattern of their appearances indicates that artists through 
the centuries were studying and interpreting the various features found from a similar source. We know 
artists used the Mandylion as just such a primary source. The fact that all these features appear on the 
Shroud makes a good case for declaring the Shroud and the Mandylion to be one and the same. This is 
called the `iconographic theory,' which was first developed by Vignon to assert that the Shroud had a 
definite existence and influence on artists well before the 1300s, and that the similarity in imitations of Jesus' 
features could not be explained any other way. The artists would have been working with the negative 
image on the cloth. They would not have had the well-focused and highly resolved positive image revealed 
by the photographic negative. As a result, the features on the cloth would be vague and somewhat 
indefinite. The eyes of the Shroud image appear on the cloth to be open and staring; however the 
photographic negative reveals they are actually closed. It seems the early artists attempted to incorporate 
the Shroud image's facial features into their work by interpreting and composing them into the best 
representation they could. It was as if the artists were studiously attempting to follow a definitive and 
superior representation of Christ." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, 
and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.124,128)

24/07/2008
"According to Wilson, it is possible to analyze statistically the frequency with which these anomalous 
features occur in various works of art. Wilson took a half dozen samples from the sixth, eighth, tenth, 
eleventh, and twelfth centuries and found between eight and fourteen of these odd features on each of 
them, which yields an impressive average of 80 percent incidence." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the 
Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.128)

24/07/2008
"The similarities of features in artistic representations of Jesus are not limited to portraits. Dr. Alan D. 
Whanger of Duke University has also discovered them on Byzantine coins, particularly on Justinian II coins 
minted between A.D. 692 and 695 and a gold solidus of Constantine VII struck in A.D. 945. Whanger has 
also worked with some very early portraits of the sixth century. Using his `polarized image overlay 
technique,' whereby one image is superimposed over another to identify points of similarity Whanger has 
identified from thirty-three to more than one hundred points of congruence when these various images are 
matched to the Shroud face. [Whanger, A. & M., "Polarized image overlay technique: a new image 
comparison method and its applications," Applied Optics, 24.6, March 15, 1985, pp.766-72] ... Dr. 
Whanger has found so many points of congruence between the Byzantine icon and the Justinian II coin and 
the Shroud image, that he concludes the artists of the artifacts must have copied from the Shroud. 
[Whanger, M. & A., "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House Publishers: 
Franklin TN, 1998]" (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and 
Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.128)

24/07/2008
"When the Justinian II coin images are superimposed over the Shroud face, all three images have a 
transverse line in the exact same spot. This is artistically represented as a wrinkle line on the Justinian coin 
figures' garments, a totally unnecessary feature in and of itself. If Whanger is correct, the image on the 
Shroud must date far earlier than the 1350s, specifically, prior to A.D. 695, when the Justinian II coins were 
minted." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological 
Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, p.128)

24/07/2008
"All versions of the portrait show a bearded face, but the style of the beard and hair differs slightly, which 
can be explained by the blurred nature of the face on the Shroud, and, presumably, also on the Soudarion 
face which we have lost. There is yet another way in which these images can be related to the Shroud. 
Artists have copied certain characteristic details, technically known as Vignon markings, after the scientist 
who analysed fifteen of them, such as a transverse streak across the forehead of the Shroud image, a V-
shape at the bridge of the nose, two curling strands of hair in the middle of the forehead, a hairless area 
between the lower lip and the beard, and so forth. In some of the earliest copies - those painted before 1260 
as many as thirteen of the fifteen details are discernible, which strongly indicates that these earliest artists 
were working from the Shroud." (Currer-Briggs, N., "The Shroud and the Grail: A Modern Quest for the True 
Grail," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1987, p.58)

24/07/2008
"I mentioned a little while back that the face of the man on the Shroud had been analysed and a number of 
so-called Vignon characteristics had been detected. The Laon icon contains more of them than any other 
known icon. This, taken together with the artist's unequivocal statement that the portrait is that of the Lord 
`on the cloth', must mean that he was working from the `life'." (Currer-Briggs, N., "The Shroud and the Grail: 
A Modern Quest for the True Grail," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, 1987, pp.67-68)

24/07/2008
"The Sainte Face corresponds more closely to the face on the Shroud than any other icon: was it a copy of 
the Shroud, or was the Shroud copied from the Sainte Face? If, as all the experts agree, the Sainte Face dates 
from the beginning of the thirteenth century or the end of the twelfth, and it is a copy of the Shroud image, 
then the Shroud must be dated before 1200. On the other hand, if the Shroud is a copy of the Sainte Face, 
then it follows that it must have been fabricated after the beginning of the thirteenth century. Since the 
Sainte Face reached France in 1249, and was housed at Montreuil only sixty miles from Troyes, might not 
the Shroud have been painted soon afterwards?" (Currer-Briggs, N., "Shroud Mafia: The Creation of a 
Relic?," Book Guild: Sussex UK, 1995, p.56)

24/07/2008
"In 1900, Paul Vignon, sometime professor of biology at the Institut Catholique of Paris, drew the public's 
attention to fifteen characteristic marks on the face of the man on the Shroud. These included a transverse 
streak across the forehead, a three-sided `square' between the brows, a V-shape at the bridge of the nose, a 
raised right eyebrow, accentuated left cheek, enlarged left nostril, a hairless area between the lower lip and 
the beard and two strands of hair descending from the middle parting, and so on. In some of the earliest 
icons (those painted before 1260) many of these fifteen details are discernible, and the Sainte Face is one of 
those icons that has all but two of them." (Currer-Briggs, N., "Shroud Mafia: The Creation of a Relic?," Book 
Guild: Sussex UK, 1995, p.56)

24/07/2008
"To sum up: if the Sainte Face de Laon is, as it explicitly claims to be, a portrait of Christ as depicted on a 
cloth, then that cloth must pre-exist the painting of the icon, which all experts agree to date from the end of 
the twelfth or beginning of the thirteenth century. If the Shroud dates from 1260, as the C-14 dating asserts, 
it, too must be a faithful copy of an earlier cloth that has since disappeared. But Vignon claimed that the 
Sainte Face de Laon is a faithful copy of the image of the man on the Shroud of Turin. The view that the 
Sainte Face de Laon is a copy of the existing Shroud cannot be reconciled with the 1260-1390 dating. Of 
course, the C-14 dating could be wrong, and the existing cloth could be somewhat older than 1260, but if it 
is, it does not follow that it is twelve hundred years older, only that the dating process is not as accurate as 
its protagonists would have us believe. This is an important point that must be considered further. 
Regardless of the evidence of icon experts, the Sainte Face de Laon cannot date from after 1249, because it 
was in that year that Jacques Pantaleon sent it to France, so it must have been painted several years, if not 
decades, before. Thus if it was copied from the existing Shroud, then that, too, must predate 1249.." (Currer-
Briggs, N., "Shroud Mafia: The Creation of a Relic?," Book Guild: Sussex UK, 1995, pp.56-57) 

24/07/2008
"Several sindonologists, and especially Paul Vignon, had long ago called attention to some striking 
similarities between the face on the Shroud and the face of Jesus as depicted in the Byzantine world and in 
certain traditions in western Europe (especially in Italy) from the seventh century to the twelfth. Everyone 
can see that the Man of the Shroud, like the Christ in most Christian art, is bearded and has long hair, parted 
down the middle of the head and falling to the shoulders. Such similarities mean nothing, since even if the 
Shroud were a fourteenth-century forgery it would presumably portray Christ in that way. More interesting 
were the subtler similarities, ranging from the two wisps of hair at the top of the forehead, to the fork of the 
beard. Most important, however, were those characteristics of the Christ face in Byzantine and early 
medieval art that were paralleled by a fortuitous mark on the Shroud: a `wrinkle-line' in the cloth, for 
example, or an imperfection in the weave, or an apparent blemish. Here, clearly, one could not argue that the 
image on the Shroud was copied from earlier Christian art, and the alternative was that the face on the 
Shroud had been the source of certain medieval and Byzantine traditions of Christ-portraits. In a 1939 book 
Vignon itemized what he thought were the salient peculiarities, and others followed his lead. An American 
priest, Father Edward Wuenschel, and an English Benedictine, Fr. Maurus Green, extended the list. On 
Wilson's tabulation, no less than fifteen `peculiarities' can be explained only by derivation from the Shroud. 
[Vignon, Le Saint Suaire de Turin; Wuenschel, Self-Portrait of Christ; Maurus Green, `Enshrouded in 
Silence,' Ampleforth Journal, 74, 1969, pp.319-45; Wilson, Shroud, pp. 104-105]" (Drews, R., " In Search 
of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham MD, 1984, 
pp.33-34. Emphasis original) 

24/07/2008
"Sacred Scripture does not provide us with any physical description of Jesus. People of the first century 
were more concerned with His message than with what He looked like. Representations of Christ prior to the 
sixth century varied. Most often He was portrayed as a young beardless man with short hair. Around the 
sixth century, a common representation of the face of Christ with long hair, mustache and beard began to 
emerge and has been a standard depiction ever since. Perhaps the first person to notice this gradual change 
was Paul Vignon in the 1930s. He was later followed by Fr. Wuenschel. These researchers noticed a number 
of similarities between the face on the Shroud and early paintings and icons of Christ, particularly in the 
Byzantine tradition. They identified about twenty unusual details. Some of the most notable are the two 
strands of hair at the top of the forehead. Particularly noteworthy is the directionality of the wisps of hair, 
which is to the right, just like the bloodstain on the Shroud in the form of the Greek letter epsilon when 
viewed with the naked eye. The bloodstain only appears as the number `3' on a negative photo of the 
Shroud. Other parallels include a three-sided `square' between the brows (believed by some to be caused by 
a phylactery, a small leather box containing Scripture parchments worn around the forehead by Jewish men-
cf. Deut. 6:8); an enlarged left nostril; a `V' shape at the bridge of the nose; one eyebrow higher than the 
other; a transverse line across the throat (perhaps a crease from the way the Shroud was folded); and a 
forked beard. [Wilson, I., "The Shroud of Turin," Image Books: New York, 1979, pp.104-105] These facial 
characteristics found on the Shroud appear in most images of the face of Christ as early as the sixth century. 
Another interesting point is that artists who painted copies of the image usually depicted the face in a frame 
surrounded by an ornamental trellis. This may very well have been the way in which the face on the Shroud 
was displayed for veneration. Ian Wilson surmises that there must have been an official `portrait' which was 
used by artists as a model for their paintings." (Guerrera, V., "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for 
Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, 2000, pp.100-101)

24/07/2008
"Dr. Whanger and his wife used their polarized image overlay technique to compare the face on the Shroud 
with that on two Byzantine gold solidi coins minted between 692 and 695 A.D. under the reign of Justinian 
II. This was the first coin which bore the portrait of Jesus. The Shroud face and the coins were 
photographed with the same proportions on transparencies and then projected upon one another. The face 
on the coins measured between eight and nine millimeters in height from the crown of the head to the tip of 
the beard. On the first coin, the Whangers found approximately 145 points of congruence, including minute 
details such as bloodstains, small markings and even wrinkles on the Shroud that were replicated on the 
coin. The second coin had 105 points of congruence. [Whanger, A. & M., "A Quantitative Optical 
Technique for Analyzing and Authenticating the Images on the Shroud of Turin," History, Science, 
Theology and the Shroud," Symposium, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, pp.303-324, p.308] This is a 
significant discovery given that in a court of law, only 14 points of congruence are needed to establish the 
same fingerprints, and between 45 and 60 points of congruence are sufficient to determine the same face. 
[Whanger, 1991, p.307]" (Guerrera, V., "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, 
2000, pp.101-102)

24/07/2008
"In 1979, a colleague of Dr. Whanger who was doing research at the Monastery of St. Catherine at Mt. Sinai 
brought back photos of icons in the monastery. One of them was of Christ the Pantocrator (Almighty), 
dating back to the sixth century. When Whanger's friend asked a monk about the origin of the image, the 
monk replied that it had been copied from the Shroud of Turin. [Whanger, A. & M., "A Quantitative Optical 
Technique for Analyzing and Authenticating the Images on the Shroud of Turin," History, Science, 
Theology and the Shroud," Symposium, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, pp.303-324, p.306] Whanger's 
interest in this icon was piqued, and he decided to use his polarized image overlay technique to compare the 
face of the icon with that of the Shroud. He found over 200 points of congruence between the two, 
`including such features as a tear running down from the left eye, small irregular areas on the lips, and 
configurations of lines in the halo or nimbus... . This astonishing fidelity between the Pantocrator icon and 
the Shroud would indicate that the artist had direct access to the Shroud image when the icon was 
produced.' [Whanger, 1991, p.306] Given that early portraits of Christ depicted the face only, and the cloth 
known as the Mandylion was in all probability the Shroud framed in such a manner as to expose the face 
alone, artists may have been actually inspired by the Shroud for their paintings. It is only around the 
eleventh century that a full-length frontal and dorsal representation of Christ began to appear." (Guerrera, 
V., "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, 2000, p.102)

25/07/2008
"In the earliest years of Christianity the Church appears to have followed Jewish thinking and shunned the 
idea of physical portraits of Jesus-a view that recurred many times in succeeding centuries. ... Ironically, the 
earliest known example of a portrait of Jesus, albeit a poor one, occurs in a provincial Jewish setting, Dura-
Europos on the Euphrates, where interpretations of the second commandment were clearly less severe. It is 
a fresco of the mid-third century and depicts Jesus young, beardless, and with short hair, in a scene of the 
healing of the paralytic. The same type of youthful, beardless likeness occurred in the fourth century in 
locations as far apart as Rome's cemetery of Massimus and St. Felicity, and the mosaic floor of a Roman 
country house excavated at Hinton St. Mary, Dorset, England, this latter being the earliest portrait of Christ 
found in Britain. The same type was also found in the fifth century-in a Good Shepherd mosaic from 
Ravenna's Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, and in a well-known ivory diptych of the scenes from the miracles. 
There could be no doubt from these that in the centuries closest to Christ many of those in the civilized 
Roman world envisaged their Savior more as the Apollo of their forefathers than as a bearded Jew." (Wilson, 
I., "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, 1978, pp.80-81)

25/07/2008
"There were exceptions. A mid-third-century Christ as Shepherd Innn Rome's Hypogeum of the 
Aurelians certainly gave a vague impression of a bearded, long-haired man. A fourth-century Christ 
from the Catacomb of Commodilla, Rome, was similarly of the Semitic type-long, undulating hair, a long 
beard, large eyes and nose. These seemed to be attempts at representing what Jesus actually might 
have looked like, perhaps from some distant memory that he was a long-haired, long-nosed, bearded 
man. All these different concepts were possible because of sheer ignorance of any authority for the 
human likeness of Jesus. As St. Augustine wrote in the early fifth century, the portraits in his time were 
`innumerable in concept and design,' and for one very good reason: `We do not know of his external 
appearance, nor that of his mother.' [Augustine, De Trinitate, VIII, 4, 5, in Migne, J-P., Patrologia 
Latina, Vol. 42, 1801]" (Wilson, I., "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, 1978, p.81)

25/07/2008
"So how and when did knowledge of what we now recognize as the human likeness of Jesus occur? If one 
scours artbooks, one realizes that no one has really tackled the issue directly because no one has seriously 
considered that there might have been one specific source. It would be necessary to do the tracking from 
examples in art, scrupulously using the datings of modern art experts, and rejecting any work where later 
restoration might have altered the resemblance." (Wilson, I., "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: 
London, 1978, pp.81-82) 

25/07/2008
"Paul Vignon, an art historian as well as a biologist, was the first to note, in 1902, that many paintings, 
frescoes, mosaics, tapestries, and icons of Christ included markings similar to those found on the facial 
image of the Shroud. No pictures of Jesus are known to have been made during his lifetime. There also are 
no descriptions of Jesus' appearance in the New Testament. Saint Augustine wrote in the fifth century: `We 
know not his earthly appearance, nor that of his mother.' [Augustine, De Trinitate, VIII, 4, 5] Christians 
began to create images of Jesus as early as the third century A.D. and perhaps earlier, particularly in the 
catacombs of Rome. The early artists did not know what Jesus looked like, and consequently there was 
considerable variation in his appearance from artist to artist. Artists, therefore, rendered Jesus in many 
ways, particularly until the middle of the sixth century. They usually depicted Christ as an innocent-looking, 
young, beardless man with short hair. ... These early renderings were generally dissimilar to one another and 
often looked more like the pagan god Apollo than a bearded Jew." (Maher, R.W., "Science, History, and the 
Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, 1986, p.73)

25/07/2008
"A few years after A.D. 525, the year in which the Mandylion/Shroud was rediscovered, Jesus began to be 
pictured as a mature, Semitic-looking man with long hair, a full, forked beard, a long nose, and deep-set eyes 
with large pupils. The whole countenance is usually set in a rigid posture and faces front. It was also noted 
that the renditions began to resemble one another, although some artists, then as now, may have merely 
copied the works of others. These changes in the way Christ was depicted occurred particularly in 
Byzantine art, although the same tendencies can be found in art produced in western Europe. Paul Vignon 
noted these changes particularly because of his interest in the similarities between the image on the Shroud 
and many of the paintings, mosaics, and other artworks produced in the latter part of the sixth century and 
later. It is well known that artists visited Edessa to view the Mandylion, with some coming from as far as 
1,000 miles away." (Maher, R.W., "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, 
1986, p.76)

25/07/2008
"Vignon, with his scientific training, attempted to find specific similarities between the Shroud image and 
works of art, as clues to the possible existence of the Shroud prior to the fourteenth century. He found many 
similarities between the Shroud and works of art, of which a few did not make pictorial sense, i.e., they arose 
from such sources as creases in the cloth or imperfections in the weave. In total, Vignon listed twenty 
markings, of which fifteen are generally accepted as being quite obvious (the others being questionable). 
The fifteen Vignon markings are: 1. A transverse streak across the forehead. 2. A rectangle with one side 
missing on the forehead. 3. A v shape at the bridge of the nose. 4. A second v shape within the rectangle 
with one side missing (2 above). 5. A raised right eyebrow. 6. An accentuated left cheek. 7. An accentuated 
right cheek. 8. An enlarged left nostril. 9. An accentuated line between nose and upper lip. 10. A heavy line 
under lower lip. 11. A hairless area between lip and beard. 12. A forked beard. 13. A transverse line across 
the throat. 14. Heavily accentuated, owlish eyes. 15. Loose strands of hair falling from the apex of the 
forehead. These features were incorporated in many works of art beginning in the sixth century, but not 
before. All of these markings were not included in all works of art, but their persistent appearance makes it 
appear as though many artists were working from a common blueprint." (Maher, R.W., "Science, History, 
and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, 1986, pp.76-77)

25/07/2008
"The well-known eleventh-century mosaic of Christ Pantocrator in the dome of the monastery church in 
Daphni near Athens, Greece, includes thirteen of the fifteen Vignon markings. ... Two early (sixth-century) 
examples are the mosaic of Christ enthroned, in the Sant'Apollinare Nuovo Church in Ravenna, Italy (which 
includes eight Vignon markings ...), and a medallion portrait on a silver vase from Syria. There is an eighth-
century example in a painting in the catacomb of Saint Pontianus in Rome that has eight Vignon markings. In 
the South Gallery of the Hagia Sophia, Constantinople, there is a thirteenth-century mosaic of Christ 
enthroned with eleven Vignon markings. ... There is also another mosaic of Christ with Vignon markings in 
the South Gallery of the Hagia Sophia." (Maher, R.W., "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage 
Press: New York NY, 1986, pp.76-77)

25/07/2008
"One of the finest examples of a mosaic with fifteen Vignon markings can be found in the apse of the 
Norman-Byzantine church in Cefalu, Sicily. ... It dates back to the twelfth century A.D. There are many other 
examples of images of Christ with Vignon markings. Some artists have used one or perhaps several Vignon 
markings when depicting a saint or other holy person. An example of this can be seen in ... a twentieth-
century painting by Georges Rouault, who titled it Holy Face. The history of art has indicated that the 
Shroud has been in existence at least since the sixth century A.D. because otherwise there is no known 
explanation for the large amount of artwork traceable to the Shroud/Mandylion beginning in the mid-sixth 
century but not before. The Shroud, of course, was sealed in an Edessan wall from circa A.D. 60 until A.D. 
525." (Maher, R.W., "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, 1986, p.82)

25/07/2008
"In A.D. 544, the Persians laid siege to Edessa. The Mandylion was brought out to aid the Edessans in 
repulsing the enemy. Because the Edessans were successful, many of the surrounding towns wanted copies 
that had been in contact with the Mandylion and had thereby acquired miraculous powers, according to 
common belief. Edward Gibbon, in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, wrote: `Before the end of the 
sixth century, these images made without hands were propagated in the camps and cities of the Eastern 
Empire; they were the objects of worship and the instruments of miracles, and in the hour of danger or 
tumult their venerable presence could revive the hope, rekindle the courage, or repress the fury of the 
Roman legions.' [Gibbon, E., "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," Vol. 3, Heritage Press: New York, NY, 
1946, p.1672]" (Maher, R.W., "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, 
1986, p.82)

25/07/2008
"There are no known copies of the Mandylion from the Edessan period that have survived, but some copies 
made in the tenth century, after the transfer of the cloth to Constantinople (A.D. 944), and later are still 
extant. An early-tenth-century fresco (now destroyed) of the Mandylion was located in Spas Nereditsa, 
Russia. It included nine of the fifteen Vignon markings. ... The head was in a circular area, and surrounding 
the circular area was trelliswork similar to that used to embellish the headdress of Parthian kings (probably 
copied from the golden box). The Eastern Orthodox church continues to make copies of the Mandylion. ... 
The Russian branch of orthodoxy provided cloth copies of the Mandylion that were used as battle 
standards as late as World War I. Under the Marxist-Leninist government, this practice is not sanctioned. 
Many of these standards are labeled `Acheiropoietos.' There is a picture of World War I Russian troops 
with a Mandylion flag in the Imperial War Museum, in London. The face of Christ is in the middle, and 
around. it is depicted a frame of trelliswork. A Mandylion was also used as a battle standard by Ivan the 
Terrible, as can be seen in the Museum of Arms, in Moscow." (Maher, R.W., "Science, History, and the 
Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, 1986, pp.82,85)

25/07/2008
"The Mandylion tradition lives on in the Orthodox church, although the Mandylion itself passed from 
history in 1204, when Constantinople was sacked by the armies of the Fourth Crusade. Prior to the sack of 
Constantinople, the Byzantines removed the Shroud from its golden box or frame, and thereby the 
Mandylion became again the Shroud that we know today. When the unpinning occurred, in the late tenth or 
early eleventh century, the Doctrine of Addai and the Mandylion tradition were well established in Eastern 
Orthodoxy. The church authorities probably retained the golden box and did not choose to explain that what 
had been believed for centuries, i.e., that the cloth contained only a face image, needed to be updated. The 
Shroud was put back into its Mandylion box from time to time for display purposes, but after the sack of 
Constantinople in 1204, the golden box was not heard of again. Nevertheless, the Byzantines rigidly 
maintained the old Abgar story in both art and literature. Scenes of the Mandylion's history incorporated in 
icons produced in more modern times always end with the tenth century, when the cloth came to 
Constantinople." (Maher, R.W., "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, 
1986, p.85) 

25/07/2008
"A resemblance that is not fortuitous The resemblance between the image of the Man of the Shroud and 
most of the artistic representations of Christ, both in the East and in the West, is evident. This resemblance 
cannot be attributed to a mere coincidence; it must result from a dependence, direct or indirect, of one image 
from the other, and of all of them from one common source. A number of past authors have theorized upon 
the dependence of the image of the Shroud on the classical and most diffused manner of depicting Christ in 
art; such an image must have been made by a printing process, carried out in the Middle Ages by means of 
a wooden or cloth cliche. The traces of the wounds would be retouches by painting. Anyway, this thesis 
cannot be maintained today because all the researches and the experiments that have been carried out have 
excluded, with absolute certainty, any idea of the fabrication of the image by artistic means." (Petrosillo, O. 
& Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers 
Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, p.188. Emphasis original)

25/07/2008
"The opposite thesis, formulated for the first time by Paul Vignon at the beginning of this century, holds 
that the image of Christ, as presented in art, must derive from the Shroud; there is, therefore, a resemblance 
between the classical representation of the face of Christ with a beard and the image of the Shroud. One has 
to remember that the Holy Scripture does not include any physical description of Jesus of Nazareth, while 
the prohibition of the ancient law (Exodus 20:4, Deuteronomy 5:8) did not allow the first disciples to depict 
physiognomy in pictures or statues, although the legend attributes a few of such representations to St Luke 
or to Nicodemus." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," 
Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, p.188)

25/07/2008
"Later, the human figures of a young man, of the `good shepherd', the `thaumaturgist doctor', and the 
`master and judge' were introduced usually on the classical model. Similar to this type is the Christ Who 
heals the woman, suffering from a haemorrhage, painted in the catacombs of Saints Peter and Marcellinus, in 
Rome, which dates back to the end of the third century. By depicting a beardless Christ with youthful 
features it was intended to stress the divine nature of the Lord. Christ is the son of God, and this sonship 
did not happen as a temporal birth, as was affirmed in 325 by the Council of Nicaea against the Arian heresy. 
Eternity was then often expressed by means of an image of a young man or even that of a small boy. The 
representation of a youthful Christ that stresses his eternal divine nature, prescinds, therefore, from any 
intention to make a portrait with the semblance of the man Jesus of Nazareth." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 
"The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: 
Malta, 1996, p.189)

25/07/2008
"The first works that show a different representation of the face of Jesus are to be found on some 
sarcophagi of the time of Theodosius (c.370-410). Christ is characterized by a beard of medium length, 
moustache, a narrow, high and majestic face, long hair, that falls on the shoulders and that sometimes has a 
central parting. This type of figure is distinguished from that of the youthful beardless Christ, often with 
babyish features, that is to be found on almost all the other sarcophagi of earlier times and on most of the 
paintings in the catacombs before the fourth century; but it is a representation of Jesus that is still inspired 
by that of Jupiter. Examples of sarcophagi with the image of a majestic bearded Christ can be seen, amongst 
others, in the Lateran Museum, at St Sebastian-outside-the-Walls, in Rome (c.370), Arles (before 370) and St 
Ambrose, in Milan (380-390)." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to 
Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, pp.189-190)

25/07/2008
"Following the victory of Christianity decreed by Constantine with the edict of Milan (313) until the time of 
Theodosius (395), a cult of Christ developed it gradually replaced that which, in pagan times, used to be 
given to the emperor, whose representation was one of the most important objects of veneration. This 
function could not be performed by any other image than that of the deified emperor. When, in the new 
religion, the effigy of the emperor was substituted by that of Christ, even this had to be presented as a true 
and proper portrait. A century later, the wooden doors of Saint Sabina basilica in Rome, show a bearded 
Christ in scenes from the Passion; in all the other scenes of His earlier life, He is shown without a beard. 
This characteristic distinction can also be seen in the mosaics of Sant'Apollinare Nuovo at Ravenna." 
(Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., 
Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, p.190)

25/07/2008
"Prototype of the Icons Beginning from the sixth century, however, in concomitance with the rediscovery 
of the Mandylion at Edessa, a particular type of portrait of Christ starts to assert itself in the East. It is the 
majestic Christ, with beard and moustache; that would be represented in various forms as the Pantocrator 
even in post Byzantine times, and whose features are still substantially repeated to the present times. In the 
East this image would become the only one for all figurative art and even in the West it would always 
dominate. For the eastern Church the true portrait of Christ is based on the image of Edessa, the Mandylion, 
that can today be identified with the Shroud of Turin. The most recent studies have confirmed this ancient 
tradition. There still exist two panels that were inspired by the authentic Edessene image: one is in the 
Sancta Sanctorum in Rome and the other in the Church of St Bartholomew of the Armenians in Genoa. 
Moreover, there also was at St Peter's, in Rome, an effigy which was said to be that of Veronica. The name 
`Veronica', as it is known, is derived from the words vera icon which mean true image. Careful studies 
have proved that all these representations are copies of the image of the Shroud." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, 
E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: 
Malta, 1996, pp.190-191. Emphasis original)

25/07/2008
"On the other hand it is rather easy to link the classical effigies of Christ to that of the Shroud as possible 
representations of it. There are elements in common between the legend of the Mandylion and that of 
Veronica. These are: a) the representation of the face of Christ is on cloth instead of on a panel; b) the image 
was produced through direct contact with the face of Christ, soaked in water, sweat or perspiration of blood; 
c) different versions of both legends refer to an image on a linen sheet that included all the body of Christ. 
These legends seek to explain the mysterious character of the effigy on a piece of cloth that was evidently 
not painted but appears as the direct imprint of a human face. In their successive versions they want to 
account for the extraordinary character of the image whose story they narrate. Such rewordings of theories 
approach all the more the reality of the Shroud." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A 
Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, p.191)

25/07/2008
"Various artistic currents contribute to the formation of the definitive portrait of Christ. Originally, Christian 
art, as has already been stated, did not concern itself with providing a concrete image of Christ, but rather to 
render God's words of salvation in picture form. Moreover, the influence of the various representations of 
the pagan deities on the image of Christ was held to constitute a strong danger of a return to idolatry. There 
must have existed, therefore, another model that notably contributed to the affirmation of the most common 
image of Christ: the Shroud's face." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge 
to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, p.191)

25/07/2008
"At least five elements can be identified on the Shroud that help us to understand how the representation of 
the face of Christ is dependent upon it: 1) quite a large area between the cheeks and the hair of the Man of 
the Shroud has not been imprinted so that the sides of the hair appear too detached from the face; 2) the 
forked beard, slightly displaced to one side; 3) the moustache asymmetrically arranged, extending beyond 
the lips at a different angle on each side; 4) the imprint on the forehead that resembles a reversed 3, which is 
a trickle of blood from a hole made by the thorn; 5) one very swollen cheek as a result of the injuries 
received, to the extent that the face does not appear symmetrical. The works referring to the Shroud are 
basically inspired by these five elements." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A 
Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, pp.191-192)

25/07/2008
"Almost an identikit from the sixth century Starting from the sixth century, the representation of the face 
of Christ presents some asymmetric and irregular characteristics that can hardly be attributed to the 
imagination of the artists. In particular the following details can be noted: long hair, parted in two at each 
side of the face; a tuft of short hair, with a number of strands, on the forehead; pronounced eyebrows and a 
triangular mark at the bridge of the nose; large profound eyes that are wide open, with huge irises and large 
rings under the eyes; a long and straight nose; very pronounced cheek bones, sometimes with stains; 
concave cheeks; small mouth that is not hidden by the moustache that are often sloping; a beardless area 
below the lower lip; a beard that is not too long and parted in two and sometimes three." (Petrosillo, O. & 
Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises 
Group: Malta, 1996, p.192. Emphasis original)

25/07/2008
"Since the `writing of the icon' necessitates, according to the eastern concept, the exact reproduction of the 
subject without allowing the artist to exercise his imagination, those `successions' of works derived from 
one another can easily be identified, and hence, enabling one to go back to the `original model' from which 
they were taken. Naturally the modern idea of a `copy' does not correspond at all with the mentality of those 
times, therefore the `name' given to the prototype would pass by right to the copies and to the copies of the 
copies, even if they were more or less imperfect. Going back along these successions of icons, whatever 
their names, Pantocrator or Mandylion, Veronica or Acheiropoietos, one can, however, identify ever more 
pronounced those particular characters that are common to the `model' that inspired them: the Shroud of 
Turin." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., 
transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, p.192)

25/07/2008
"One of the most beautiful examples of the Pantocrator is the sixth century icon in the monastery of St 
Catherine on Mount Sinai. However, unfortunately, few are the icons that managed to survive the terrible 
storm unleashed by the fury of the iconoclasts. Another interesting Pantocrator, this time a fresco, dated 
back to the twelfth century and can be found in the church of St Nicholas of Casalrotto, at Mottola 
(Taranto). One notices the triangle between the nose and the eyebrows which can also be seen on the face 
of the Shroud. The inspiration from the Shroud is even more evident in the marks between the eyebrows and 
on the forehead of the face of Christ in the catacombs of St Pontianus, in Rome, which dates back to the 
sixth or seventh century. One can observe on the forehead a square mark open on the upper side which is 
surmounted by a semi-circular line. Identical markings can be seen on the face of the Man of the Shroud. 
Concave cheeks and asymmetrical and pronounced cheekbones can also be seen in the Pantocrator of St 
Saviour in Chora, in Istanbul. As for the detail in the middle of the forehead, which can sometimes be a tuft 
or a double tuft of hair, or some line or stain coloured red or white, and sometimes even a vertical wrinkle, it 
is always painted in the middle. Its content changes but never its essential form in the various images over 
the centuries. This betrays, even in its different interpretations, a unique source: the characteristic trickle of 
blood on the forehead of the Man of the Shroud. In the mosaics of Saint Apollinare Nuovo at Ravenna of 
the fifth or sixth century, this detail is depicted as a tuft of hair, either single or double. The same 
interpretation is to be found in the Pantocrator of the Triumphal Arch of Saint Apollinare in Classe, in the 
twelfth century Christ at Cefalu, near Palermo; in the twelfth century Pantocrator of Sant'Angelo in Formis at 
Capua near Caserta and in many others. All these images demonstrate the growing influence of the face of 
the Man of the Shroud in figurative art." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A 
Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, p.193)

25/07/2008
"A Shroud-head on coins The observation of the Shroud face has conditioned even the representation of 
Christ on Byzantine coins from the seventh century onwards, as demonstrated by the numismatist Mario 
Moroni. The first emperor to coin money with the face of Jesus was Justinian II (685-695). On the coinage of 
the tremissis and on the solidus there is a Christ Pantocrator that has features very similar to the face 
of the Man of the Shroud: long wavy hair that falls behind the shoulders, a long beard, moustache, and the 
typical small tuft on the forehead. After 843, following the cessation of the outburst of iconoclasm, the face 
of Christ as shown on the Shroud reappears on coins again and again. An expressive Christ Pantocrator, 
with large eyes and flowing hair and beard, is reproduced on the gold coins of Michael III (842-867). Moroni 
gives special prominence to the lack of the ears of the Pantocrator on all the coins of the "solidus", like on 
the Shroud; ears that, on the contrary, the icons always brought." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The 
Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 
1996, pp.193-194. Emphasis original)

25/07/2008
"As further confirmation of the relationship between the Shroud and the images of Christ impressed on 
these coins, Alan D. Whanger, a professor, at the Duke University Medical Centre of Durham, North 
Carolina, using superimposition technique and polarized light has demonstrated that the face of the Man of 
the Shroud matches in many points with the face, appositely enlarged, of Christ Pantocrator as represented 
on the coins. There are more than 145 points of congruence; this amply satisfies the American forensic 
criterion that requires at least 60 points of congruence to establish identity or similarity between two images. 
Similarly, when superimposed upon the face of the Man of the Shroud, the icon of Christ Pantocrator of 
Mount Sinai presented no less than 250 points of congruence. Yet another comparison between the face of 
the Shroud and the Christ Pantocrator of the coins was carried out by Robert M. Haralick of Virginia 
Polytechnic Institute by means of digital elaboration. It resulted that the outlines of the face of the Man of 
the Shroud can be superimposed on the outlines of the image of the face of Christ impressed on the 
Byzantine coins mentioned above." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge 
to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, 1996, p.194)

25/07/2008
"As has already been said, when the Mandylion arrived in Constantinople it was described by Gregory the 
Referendary as an image of the face impressed by drops of blood but in which even the blood that gushed 
out from the side can be seen. Evidently, at that time, the Shroud was folded in such a way as to show not 
only the face but also part of the torso. Thus the origin of the imago pietatis in Constantinople in the 
twelfth century can be explained. It consisted of a representation of the dead Christ rising upright out of the 
Sepulchre down to the waist, with His hands crossed in front. Only reference to the Shroud can furnish an 
explanation; the representation of a dead person in an erect position would not otherwise be justifiable. In 
these images Christ's head always leans to the right and if the folds of the Shroud are followed down to the 
level of the neck, we can observe an inclination of the head precisely to that side." (Petrosillo, O. & 
Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises 
Group: Malta, 1996, p.194-195)

25/07/2008
"Another figure which was being more widely reproduced was painted or embroidered on liturgical veils 
known as epitkphioi, which were used on Good Friday to represent the lament of the Virgin, the disciples, 
and the holy women. In these images, of which splendid examples can still be admired dating from the 
fourteenth century onwards, one sees Christ's complete body, stiff and often with the arms crossed in front, 
and lying on a sheet. The inspiration from the Shroud is very obvious: evidently by then the entire figure of 
the Shroud had become known, which was already reproduced in images that were called threnos. A 
magnificent example of these representations is the fresco in the church of Saint Pantaleimon at Nerezi in 
Macedonia which was painted in 1164, in which Jesus is figured lying on a large sheet with geometrical 
patterns similar to those that accompany the reproduction of the image of Edessa." (Petrosillo, O. & 
Marinelli, E., "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises 
Group: Malta, 1996, p.195)

25/07/2008
"It wasn't until 1931 and again in 1933 that the Shroud was publicly shown to all who traveled to Turin to 
see it. In 1931 it was photographed a second time, on this occasion by Giuseppe Enrie, a professional 
photographer. His pictures were much clearer than Pia's and led to another breakthrough in the study of the 
Shroud: Paul Vignon, the Shroud investigator, was able to show from these new photos that the Shroud may 
very well have been the `original' for all portraits of Jesus' face. If so, it would have been used by artists long 
before 1350. ... Vignon studied the numerous artists' portraits of Jesus in churches and museums. Many of 
them were made much earlier than 1350. Yet, strangely, they bore a strong resemblance to the face of the 
man on the Shroud. In fact, Vignon was able to point out about fifteen details found on many of the early 
portraits which could only be explained if the Shroud face was the model. Some of the Vignon markings. 1. 
Reverse `3' bloodstain becomes strands of hair. 2. `Box' without a lid in cloth weave. 3. Rounded `v' below 
box in cloth weave. 4. Cleavage in beard. 5. Half-moon shaped bruise. 6. One eyebrow is higher than the 
other. 7. Swollen cheek bone." (Scavone, D.C., "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven 
Press: San Diego CA, 1989, pp.23-24)

25/07/2008
"The most noticeable of these details are the following: 1. Almost all portraits of Jesus show two or three 
strands of hair in the middle of the forehead. These could be an artist's rendering of the reverse `figure 3' 
bloodstain on the Shroud man's forehead. What other reason would there be for artists consistently to paint 
in the strands of hair? 2. Many portraits of Jesus show one eyebrow higher than the other, as on the Shroud 
face. 3. Most intriguing of all is the fact that many portraits have a strange shape that looks like a box 
without a lid over a `v' at the bridge of the nose. This box is clearly visible in the weave of the cloth on the 
Shroud just above the nose. The resemblance of Christ-portraits to the face of the Shroud man is one of the 
most persuasive reasons for believing that the Shroud of Turin was used by early artists. The Shroud would 
thus be very old and may be our original source for what Jesus looked like." (Scavone, D.C., "The Shroud of 
Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA, 1989, pp.24-25)

26/07/2008
"Hints from Art History Our historical inquiry can begin with the image of the face of the man buried in 
the Shroud. The face-bearded, long-haired, with Semitic features-closely resembles the standard artistic 
rendition of the face of Christ. ... The Shroud face either reflects or has influenced the way most artists have 
portrayed Jesus for centuries. Why is this so? Skeptics argue that the similarity betrays forgery: the forger, 
presumably working in the fourteenth century, painted the face according to the standard artists' rendition 
of the face of Christ at the time. But if the Shroud is more than 700 years old, the same similarity would then 
argue for its authenticity. If it existed before the fourteenth century, the Shroud may have influenced or even 
determined the standard portrayal of Christ in art." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the 
Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, 1990, p.15. Emphasis original)

26/07/2008
"A French biologist and artist named Paul Vignon was probably the first person to note the similarities 
between the Shroud face and artistic renderings of the face of Jesus. Later researchers, most notably Edward 
Wuenschel, Maurus Green, and most recently, the British historian Ian Wilson, have done an exhaustive 
comparison of the Shroud face with ancient images, particularly Byzantine icons. [Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-
Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Esopus: New York, 1954; Wilson, I., "The Shroud of Turin," 
Doubleday: New York, 1979] They have developed evidence for what has become known as the 
`iconographic theory,' the theory that the Shroud was known to artists as early as the sixth century, and that 
it inspired the conventional likeness of Christ. These art detectives have been diligent. Vignon and 
Wuenschel thought they could find twenty `oddities' in Byzantine frescos, paintings, and mosaics which 
resembled peculiarities of the Shroud image." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the 
Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, 1990, p.15. Emphasis original)

26/07/2008
"Wilson decided that fifteen of these are substantial enough to offer evidence in support of the theory. 
[Wilson, I., "The Shroud of Turin," Doubleday: New York, 1979, pp. 104-105] A close study of the face of 
the Shroud image, for example, reveals a transverse streak across the forehead, a three-sided `square' 
between the brows, a `V' shape at the bridge of the nose, a raised right eyebrow, an enlarged left nostril, a 
transverse line across the throat, and two strands of hair at the top of the forehead. These appear in 
Byzantine icons. The most unusual of the markings, a combination rectangle and `V' at the bridge of the 
nose, was found in eighty percent of all the icons examined. Wilson found almost equally high percentages 
for all of the markings over a representative group of icons. This high frequency of similarities suggests a 
relationship between the Shroud face and Byzantine depictions of Jesus." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, 
G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, 1990, pp.15-16)

26/07/2008
"Why would a competent artist include these peculiarities in his art? The obvious answer is that, for some 
reason, he believed they belonged there. Wilson and others suggest that artists were copying one image, a 
holy likeness of Jesus that was revered as genuine, and hence definitive. This image, if it existed, seems to 
have begun to influence Christian art around the sixth century A.D. The appearance of Christ in portraits 
shifted dramatically around this time. Before the sixth century, there was little similarity among pictures of 
Christ; the earliest portraits show him as a beardless, short-haired youth. [Wilson, I., "The Shroud's History 
Before the 14th Century," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference on the 
Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, 1977, pp. 31-49.] The gospels give no information about his 
appearance, and Jews, the earliest Christians, probably shunned portraits of the Lord because Jewish law 
prohibited religious images." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," 
Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, 1990, p.16)

26/07/2008
"Around the sixth century, however, a conventional likeness of Jesus began to emerge. The majority of 
these representations display at least some of the telltale peculiarities which are also visible in the ethereal, 
mysterious, image of the face of the dead man on the Shroud of Turin. Christ is bearded, even fork-bearded 
like the man in the Shroud. Often his right eyebrow is raised, sometimes his left, as if the artist understood 
that an image produced by contact with his body would be reversed when viewed. Many of the Byzantine 
icons show a streak across the forehead and another across the throat, corresponding to fold marks on the 
Shroud face. Most of these icons have a peculiar box and "V" feature at the bridge of the nose. ... How can 
this be explained? Did the Shroud image influence Christian art from the sixth century onward?" (Stevenson, 
K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, 1990, p.16)

26/07/2008
"The particular issue that intrigued me was the face on the Shroud and it's reminiscence of two things: 1. 
The likeness of Christ in art which, displaying a strong resemblance to the Shroud, could be traced back 
long before the 14th century. 2. The tradition of Christ imprinting his face on cloth, as in stories such as that 
of Veronica's veil. ... As there is no record in the gospels of Christ's earthly appearance, nor is there an 
unbroken artistic tradition from the 1st century A.D. of what Christ looked like, it seemed to me that if the 
Shroud was genuine it must somewhere, somehow have been an influence on both of these. A viable 
method of research seemed to be to try to trace back likeness and cloth traditions to see what they led to, 
whether there was some known common source that could be identified which might not at first sight appear 
to be the Shroud." (Wilson, I., "The Shroud's History Before the 14th Century," 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.37)

26/07/2008
"The first aspect I tackled was the Christ likeness in art ... On these examples of Medieval and Renaissance 
likenesses, note the compatibility with the face on the Shroud. The type of Christ portrait I was particularly 
interested in was this bearded, rigidly front face example ... and although Jan van Eyck painted this in the 
15th century he is known to have derived the likeness not from the Shroud (at least directly), but from similar 
rigidly front facing examples in Byzantine art going back to the 11th century ... even as far back as the 6th 
century ... as in this Byzantine vase portrait from Syria. Compare the 6th century vase and the face on the 
Shroud and it looks very, very strongly as if whoever created this knew of the Shroud. Now an important 
discovery was that this type of likeness did not extend further back than the 6th century ... When one 
looked at earlier likenesses such as this 4th century example from a mosaic pavement in England, Christ was 
represented as Apollo-like and beardless, and yet we know it is Christ from the monogram. There were many 
similar examples of this type ... together with some vague bearded examples which had nothing of the 
definition of the 6th century and post-6th century likenesses. It all seemed as if no-one was sure what Jesus 
had looked like before the 6th century (except of course in the time of the apostles), and this is confirmed by 
a passage from St. Augustine in the 5th century who said quite bluntly `we know not his earthly 
appearance, nor that of his mother.' [St. Augustine, De Trinitate, VIII, 4, 5] (Wilson, I., "The Shroud's 
History Before the 14th Century," 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.36-37)

26/07/2008
"As mysterious as the shroud was, the face it displayed was remarkably similar to the traditional Christ-type 
seen on many ancient icons, the religious paintings of early Eastern Christianity. The first depictions of 
Jesus were highly idealized; he was shown as a clean-shaven, innocent youth. Around the sixth century, 
however, that image changed. He suddenly became a grown man with long hair, beard, and eyes that were 
abnormally large and ovate. If someone had copied the shroud face, the eyes would have appeared exactly 
that way. Art historians don't know exactly why Jesus was depicted in these two contrasting ways. 
Nowhere in Scripture is there any physical description of Jesus; several apocryphal works do contain some 
random and contradictory descriptions. Could the shroud, then, have caused the change in the way artists 
portrayed Jesus? Could it even have been the model upon which the virile icons were based?" (Wilcox, R.K., 
"Shroud," Macmillan: New York NY, 1977, pp.84-85)

26/07/2008
"It was an intriguing idea, one that was first expounded by Paul Vignon in 1902 and developed by him at 
book-length in 1939. Checking the icons in the museums and libraries of Paris, Vignon discovered dramatic 
evidence that the shroud face and the face on the icons had more than a casual link. Not only did the eyes, 
nose, and mustache seem the same; but strange marks that were not facial features also appeared on both 
the shroud and the icons. The most unusual of these is a mark between the eyes, just above the top of the 
nose. It resembled a V with a rectangular box resting on top of it; the box appears to have one of its sides, 
the side nearest the hairline, missing. This unusual, nonanatomical mark appeared in several different forms. 
On the earliest icons, such as the one in the St. Pontianus catacomb in Rome, which dates back to the sixth 
or seventh century, it appears as the rectangle with one side missing, but it does not have the V. On the 
icons made in the eleventh century, such as the Christ of Daphni in Greece, the mark is more stylized: the 
rectangular lines have become a teardrop or a pendant. Of the hundreds of Byzantine icons Vignon 
examined, 80 percent had the identifying mark between the eyes." (Wilcox, R.K., "Shroud," Macmillan: New 
York NY, 1977, p.85)

26/07/2008
"Among other points of similarity, Vignon listed the following: no ears; no neck; no shoulders; a `forked' 
beard; a `truncated' mustache; straight nose; enlarged nostrils; one raised eyebrow; a line across the throat 
(which is really a wrinkle on the shroud); bruised forehead; abnormally shaded or swollen cheeks. No icon 
had all these similarities, but all had at least a few. The earliest icons that Vignon found with shroudlike 
similarities were copies of the `Image of Edessa,' a portrait of Jesus on cloth which was discovered in 544 
bricked up in a wall in Edessa, the center of Syrian Christianity. After its discovery, the `true likeness' of 
Christ, as it came to be known, was the object of great veneration in Byzantium." (Wilcox, R.K., "Shroud," 
Macmillan: New York NY, 1977, p.85)

26/07/2008
"From the sixth to the thirteenth centuries, according to Rev. Maurus Green, O.S.B., certain features in the 
representations of Jesus seem to indicate that the artists drew their inspiration directly or indirectly from the 
features on the shroud. Green particularly points to (A) the bruise across the forehead; (B) three sides of a 
square between the eyebrows; (C) V-shape to the bridge of the nose; (D) one raised eyebrow; (E) enlarged 
nostrils; (F) divided moustache; (G) heavy line under lower lip; (H) gap between this line and the beard; and 
(I) the line across the throat. Compare these features on the shroud image (opposite) with the corresponding 
ones on the icons on the following ... Daphni, Greece; eleventh century ... St. Pontianus Catacomb, Rome; 
seventh century ... St. Bartholomew's Genoa; thirteenth century ... Holy Face of Laon, France, by a Slav 
artist; 1200 ..." (Wilcox, R.K., "Shroud," Macmillan: New York NY, 1977, p.86) 

26/07/2008
"Prior to the 1350s, artists, especially those working from the Image of Edessa/Mandylion or copies of 
it, knew instinctively that there was a supernatural factor in their subject and that at the same time there 
was a mysterious lack of naturalness (because it was a photographic negative), which of course they 
couldn't understand at all. Yet their strong reverence for their subject resulted in a slavish precision 
respecting detail, as they saw it. The result was a group of anomalies found in a dozen or so of the 
better portraits of Jesus that come to us from that period. Over the years, researchers Paul Vignon, 
Edward Wuenschel, and Ian Wilson have noted fifteen to twenty nonartistic oddities in the mosaics, 
paintings, and icons that are suspected of having been copied from the Image/Mandylion/Shroud. 
These oddities resulted from portraying the cloth weave, wrinkles in the cloth, blood rivulets, or 
imperfections in the image. In each of these cases, the artist, wishing to be totally faithful to the 
original, incorporated these oddities even though they are irrelevant to or detract from the naturalness 
of the face. The correlation of these repeated oddities on various early pictures of Jesus and their 
relationship to the Shroud Face has come to be known as Vignon's iconographic thesis. Typically, the 
pictures (like the Shroud) show an absence of ears, neck, and shoulders. Two blood rivulets on the 
forehead at the hairline are incorporated as curls. A cloth wrinkle across the middle of the forehead is 
included as if it were a scar. A bruised left eyebrow is shown with twice the vertical dimension as the 
right eyebrow. From nine to fourteen of these oddities in each of various pictures are too much for 
coincidence. All these artists must have copied from the same original, and all of them misunderstood 
the nature of these imperfections. They also made the eyes far too large, not realizing that the lids were 
closed by a coin-that their pattern was in fact a `death mask.' Because they must have copied from the 
same `source,' that original must have been the Shroud of Turin itself, even though custodians of it at 
various times were unaware of its true nature." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of 
the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, pp.249,251) 

26/07/2008
"1. A transverse streak across the forehead 2. The three-sided `square' on the forehead 3. A V-shape at the 
bridge of the nose 4. A second V-shape, inside the three-sided square 5. A raised right eyebrow 6. An 
accentuated left cheek 7. An accentuated right cheek 8. An enlarged left nostril 9. An accentuated line 
between the nose and the upper lip 10. A heavy line under the lower lip 11. A hairless area between the lip 
and the beard 12. The forked beard 13. A transverse line across the throat 14. Heavily accentuated, owlish 
eyes 15. Two loose strands of hair falling from the apex of the forehead ... Dr. Paul Vignon's Iconography 
Face analysis, with Wilson's modifications. Many of the icons, mosaics, and paintings of Jesus created 
under Byzantine influence and dated roughly to the sixth through the thirteenth centuries were found by 
sindonologists Paul Vignon and Edward Wuenschel to contain up to twenty similar oddities that were 
unattractive and unartistic. More recently, historian Ian Wilson has made a similar evaluation and has 
identified an aggregate of fifteen such peculiarities ..." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story 
of the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, p.250) 

26/07/2008
"Some of these distinctive features are definitely unartistic, as well as unnatural. For instance, between the 
brows is the troughlike marking of a three-sided square; attached just below it is a triangle, pointed 
downward. These features do appear on the Shroud face, though faintly; it is likely that these are blood 
traces that accidentally make that pattern. Also, many of the portraits show a space about three-quarters of 
an inch wide under the nose, between the two halves of the mustache-and in that bare space, the artists 
have put a dark, heavy, vertical line. It seems clear, with our present knowledge, that this was created by a 
rivulet of blood dripping onto the mustache from the septum of the nose. We notice that neither of these 
oddities are as noticeable on a photographic negative, but that was not an advantage the early artists had." 
(Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Paragon House 
Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, p.252)

26/07/2008
"General features of many portraits of Jesus painted in the early centuries are largely consistent with each 
other and with the Shroud Face as well. These include an oval-shaped face, a prominent nose, deep-set 
eyes, long hair parted in the middle, and a forked beard. Uncommon features frequently involve overly large 
eyes, which one can speculate may have resulted from duplicating the swelling the Shroud exhibits from 
bruises and other injuries, or from the coins on the eyelids." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated 
Story of the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, p.252)

26/07/2008
"The work of Vignon, Wuenschel, and Wilson in pursuance of the iconographic thesis of identity has 
obviously been a laborious one of measurement and comparison to find the commonalities in more than a 
score of early faces of Jesus, which now appear to have been copied from the Shroud. They have doubtless 
painstakingly considered and rejected twice that many. Consequently, it is fascinating to reflect upon the 
impact that Dr. Whanger's "polarized image overlay" technique can have on these comparison studies ... 
since the comparisons he has made have detected from 33 to 74 points of congruence when matched with 
the Shroud Face. He concludes that the Byzantine icon face and the face on the Justinian II coin are so 
nearly identical to the Face of the Shroud that they must have been based on a copying from the Shroud 
by artists. Whanger believes that this overlay comparison is so accurate that the procedure should be 
considered as reliable as fingerprint identification." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of 
the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, p.253. Emphasis 
original)

26/07/2008
"Considering the logistical problems early artists faced, we must be truly amazed at the fidelity and accuracy 
they achieved. For instance, take the icon face (a painting in a monastery on a mountaintop at the southern 
tip of the Sinai Peninsula), and the Justinian II coin (minted in Constantinople). During the four-hundred-
year period from about 550 to 944, the Image of Edessa was kept and frequently venerated in a church (and 
later a cathedral) in Edessa (which is situated between the headwaters of the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers, 
150 miles east of the nearest Mediterranean port. Constantinople is approximately 600 miles northwest of 
Edessa and Mount Sinai about 600 miles southwest). When an artist reached Edessa, we can suppose he 
spent many days (or even weeks) taking careful and precise measurements of the Image and making many 
sketches, doubtless using a variety of lighting arrangements to bring more image definition to the Shroud 
Face. He must have been exceptionally talented, for each resulting work of art now has scores of points of 
congruence when overlaid with the Face of the Shroud in a photographic negative, which he could 
neither see nor understand!" (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," 
[1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, pp.253. Emphasis original)

26/07/2008
"It is typical of some of the earliest copies of the Image of Edessa that the eyes are closed. Interestingly, in 
the Genoa Church of St. Bartholomew is an Edessa image copy with eyes open. When x-rayed at successive 
depths (a process called tomography), it was found that the original icon had had closed eyes, but it was 
overpainted to show open eyes." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of 
Turin," [1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, 2006, pp.253-254)

26/07/2008
"Thomas Heaphy, a prominent English painter, accompanied scientists in the mid-nineteenth century in 
reopening and exploring the Roman catacombs. Heaphy found a number of paintings of Jesus on the walls 
and ceilings of some of the rooms and passageways and made careful copies of them by candlelight, which 
he later published in the form of etchings that are preserved in the British Museum Library London. There 
they lay untouched for more than a century. His work was rediscovered by Rex Morgan, a Shroud of Turin 
researcher/author, and photographs of the Heaphy material were included in Morgan's The Holy Shroud 
and the Earliest Paintings of Christ, 1985. Morgan later made photographs of the originals during a 1993 
visit to the catacombs ... The full-face Heaphy copies of the Jesus face have been found by Alan and Mary 
Whanger to be overwhelmingly accurate (152 points of congruence) when compared with the Shroud Face. 
This Face, from the Domitilla Catacomb, has been dated to A.D. 40 to 60 and may well have been based on a 
Shroud face copy made in Edessa during its public period there, A.D. 33 to 57. In May 1996, Morgan again 
visited the Domitilla Catacomb (specifically the Orpheus Cubiculum chamber of same), together with his son, 
Christopher, a photographer, and Isabel Piczek, world-renowned artist and art expert. Of the several 
catacomb faces of Jesus, the one in this chamber is considered to be the best." (Tribbe, F.C., "Portrait of 
Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second 
edition, 2006, p.255)

26/07/2008
"The Iconography of the Holy Face From a minute study of hundreds of paintings, frescoes and mosaics, 
Vignon discovered that many of them reproduce certain peculiarities of the imprint of the face on the 
Shroud. The artists eliminated the marks of wounds and blood, and attempted to translate the stain image 
into a living face. They naturally made many mistakes in constructing a positive picture from the negative 
imprint, which was completely beyond their comprehension; but they faithfully copied certain details of the 
imprint, although these appear to be anomalies which no artist would ever introduce into a picture of the 
human countenance unless he had a compelling reason." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The 
Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.58. Emphasis original)

26/07/2008
"Among these oddities of the imprint are the following: the absence of ears, neck and shoulders; the two-
pointed beard and the two long strands of hair, each differently formed; a large capital T formed of the 
frontal arches and the nose, and more minute peculiarities of the cross-bar and the stem of the T; the 
distorted appearance of the nose, swollen at the bridge, with the lower part bent to the right; above the nose 
a square open at the top, and above this a curved transverse stain and a shadow due to a bruise; the 
abnormal shading of the swollen right cheek; on the left cheek a sheaf of demi-tints in the form of a fan; the 
pronounced slanting furrow at the right of the nose; the mustache truncated at both ends and at different 
angles; the groove between the two halves of the mustache; the formation of the mouth and the shape of 
the shadow on the bare upper part of the chin." (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud 
of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, p.58. Emphasis original)

26/07/2008
"There is no single art work in which all these peculiarities of the imprint of the face are to be seen together. 
Different details appear in different works, some more frequently than others. Many of these works were not 
derived directly from the Shroud, but indirectly through an earlier copy. Some of them are particularly 
notable for the minute exactness with which they reproduce some of the anomalies of the Shroud-an 
exactness which would have been impossible unless the artists had the imprint of the face before their eyes. 
One of these is the Holy Face of Laon in France-a glazed panel painted at Constantinople between 1201 and 
1204, the period when `the Shroud in which Our Lord was enveloped' was kept at Our Lady of Blachernes, 
and was shown to the public every Friday `so that all could clearly see the figure of Our Lord.' [de Clari, R., 
"The Conquest of Constantinople," McNeal, E.H., transl., Columbia University Press: New York NY, 1936] 
The Holy Face of Laon is at hand to complete the account of Robert de Clary. Though neither Greek nor 
Frank knew what became of the Shroud which vanished in the pillage of Constantinople in 1204, we know 
now that it appeared again at Lirey about 1354, and that it is now enshrined in the Royal Chapel in Turin." 
(Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, 
Third printing, 1961, pp.58-59)

26/07/2008
"Vignon traces the artistic lineage of the Shroud back to the fifth century, where he finds the Holy Face of 
Edessa as the first work in which distinctive peculiarities of the imprint of the face appeared. Venerated as an 
achiropoeton the image of Edessa was ceded by Baudouin II to St. Louis, who deposited it in the Sainte 
Chapelle at Paris in 1247. It was no longer to be found after the riotings of the French Revolution in 1790, but 
there remain many copies and adaptations in which details of the Shroud are reproduced." (Wuenschel, 
E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, 1954, Third 
printing, 1961, p.59)

26/07/2008
"Vignon's iconographic thesis has been severely criticized. This was to be expected. The thesis is entirely 
new and unfamiliar even to students of the history of Christian Art. It is rather complicated and not easily 
understood, and it demands careful study of minute details and constant comparison between the stain 
image on the Shroud and the many art works reproduced by Vignon. It is not likely that the opponents 
would take that much trouble if they were already convinced that the Shroud is a painting of the fourteenth 
century, and that the photographs of the Shroud are scientifically worthless. They have not even grasped 
Vignon's aim and method. They think he has tried to show that the features of the Holy Faces in art are 
the same as the positive image of the face revealed by the photograph of the Shroud! With such a 
grotesque misconception, it is easy for them to scoff at his efforts and to ridicule his conclusions. One critic 
who has tried to be more objective, discards Vignon's whole thesis because, he says, not all the peculiarities 
of the imprint of the face are to be found in any one art work. Neither has he understood the nature of the 
argument. Vignon's point is that each one of these details is distinctive of the imprint, so that the presence 
of even a few in any art work is sufficient to establish a relationship with the Shroud. He also maintains that 
the presence of all the distinctive details of the imprint of the face in many different art works taken together, 
which extend over more than seven centuries, proves that it was the canon of the Shroud that the artists 
obeyed in various degrees and usually with almost slavish fidelity. The attitude of the critics again suggests 
a paraphrase of Delage: `If, instead of the genuine imprint of the face of Christ, there were question of a 
portrait of Cicero, of Caesar Augustus, or of one of the Greek philosophers, no one would have made any 
objection.'" (Wuenschel, E.A., "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: 
Esopus NY, 1954, Third printing, 1961, pp.59-60. Emphasis original) 

26/07/2008
"When we look at the history of the likeness of Jesus as this has quite independently come down to us in 
art we find something very curious. The relatively few portraits of Jesus that date from before the sixth 
century are mostly very nondescript and unconvincing, often depicting him as a beardless, Apollo- like 
youth. A similar vagueness extends even to the few more credible ones that show him as Jewish-looking 
and with a beard. Consistent with this, St Augustine, writing in the fifth century, went on record as 
remarking, `We do not know of his [Jesus'] external appearance, nor that of his mother.' [St Augustine, De 
Trinitate VIII, 4, 5, in J.P.Migne, Patrologia Latina, Vol. 42, p.1801]" (Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The 
Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, p.109)

26/07/2008
"But in the sixth century, and therefore synchronous with the Edessa cloth's rediscovery, something quite 
remarkable happens to the portraits of Jesus. They suddenly take on a highly distinctive character, often 
rigidly front-facing, and exhibiting all those long-haired, long-nosed, fork-bearded characteristics that to this 
day we `recognize' as being Jesus' likeness. As if by invisible decree the Jesus portrait that we know today 
comes into being, and the logical explanation is that the Byzantines now had an authoritative reference for 
what Jesus looked like in the form of the cloth of Edessa." (Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: 
The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, p.109)

26/07/2008
"Nor is even this all. For when the Jesus portraits which are influenced by the Edessa cloth are examined 
closely, many of them exhibit certain oddities that recur time and again. As early as the 1930s these oddities 
particularly struck a French scholar, Paul Vignon, who assembled a list of some fifteen that he considered 
particularly significant. [Vignon, P., "Le Suaire de Turin devant la Science, l'Archeologie, l'Histoire, 
l'Iconographie, la Logique," Paris, Masson, 1939, p.128ff] These included a raised eyebrow, a 'topless 
square' between the eyebrows, a small `triangle' below this, heavily accentuated eyes, an enlarged nostril, 
exaggerated cheek markings and the hairless gap between lip and beard. And to Vignon the explanation 
seemed to lie unmistakably in the Shroud, since all the oddities could be traced to blemishes and quirks on 
its surface that the early artists had seemingly worked into their Jesus portraits. A classic example is an 
eighth-century Christ Pantocrator fresco in the Ponzianus catacomb in Rome, in which the artist has painted 
a very unnatural-looking topless square between Christ's eyebrows. When the equivalent area on the 
Shroud face is studied, there is this same topless square, telling us more strongly than any words that 
someone, somewhere, somehow knew of the Turin Shroud's existence back in the eighth century AD." 
(Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 
2000, p.110)

26/07/2008
"What Vignon was not able to explain satisfactorily was how the Shroud could have had such a profound 
influence on art so far back, when its existence as a historical object was not correspondingly frequently 
mentioned. But, if the Byzantine world knew our Shroud, not as a shroud but as the cloth of Edessa, then all 
such difficulties evaporate. For during the centuries before 1204 the Jesus-imprinted Edessa cloth received 
precisely the kind of historical documentation that is very largely absent for the cloth that we know as the 
Turin Shroud. So for what became known as the Turin Shroud after the 1350s to have been one and the 
same as the cloth known before 1204 as the cloth of Edessa would make a great deal of sense." (Wilson, I. & 
Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, p.110)

26/07/2008
"Though, in my opinion, this Vignon-inspired argument concerning the facial markings is highly compelling, 
nothing in Shroud studies is ever straightforward. A very valid objection that has been raised by some 
specialist scholars is that both in the great majority of documentary sources and in artists' copies the 
Byzantines clearly understood the cloth of Edessa to have been an imprint of Jesus' face only, not of his 
whole body. [Cameron, A., "The Sceptic and the Shroud," Inaugural Lecture, Department of Classics and 
History, King's College, London, 29 April 1980] They also understood it to have been made by Jesus while 
he was alive, not dead in the tomb. So how could it have been one and the same as our Turin Shroud?" 
(Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 
2000, p.110)

26/07/2008
"For me a crucial breakthrough in overcoming this objection surfaced in the 1960s, when I noticed how a 
sixth-century Greek version of the Abgar story, the Acts of the Holy Apostle Thaddaeus', describes the 
Edessa cloth as a tetradiplon. [Roberts, A. & Donaldson, J., eds., "Acts of the Holy Apostle Thaddaeus," 
in "The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to AD 325, Vol. VIII, 
Eerdmans: Grand Rapids MI, 1951, pp.558-559] In all the corpus of Greek literature tetradiplon is an 
extremely rare word, and totally exclusive to the Edessa cloth. Yet, because it is a combination of two 
common words, tetra meaning `four' and diplon meaning `two fold' or `doubled', its meaning is actually 
very clear: `doubled in four', suggesting four times two folds. This immediately raised the thought: `What 
happens if you try giving the Shroud four times two folds?'" (Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: 
The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, pp.110-111)

26/07/2008
"When I tried this, using a full-length photograph of the Shroud, I was dumb-founded by the result - as I 
continue to be today. There was the Shroud face, front-facing and disembodied-looking on a landscape 
aspect cloth, exactly as on the earliest artists' copies of the cloth of Edessa. Whenever the Shroud is 
presented in this manner - and it is a very logical way to present and make manageable a 437 cm length of 
cloth - its nature as a `shroud' is in fact subordinated to its rather more socially acceptable nature as a 
`portrait'. And historically such an arrangement finds ready support in the description of the Edessa cloth, 
on its arrival in Constantinople, as `fastened to a board and covered with the gold which is now to be seen'. 
["Story of the Image of Edessa," in Wilson, I., "The Shroud of Turin," Doubleday: New York, 1978, p.242] It 
therefore readily explains the many centuries of silence about an image-bearing `shroud' as such." (Wilson, 
I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, 
p.111)

26/07/2008
"Furthermore, when the man of the Shroud's eyes are viewed on the cloth itself, as the Edessans and 
Constantinopolitans might have viewed them, rather than on the photographic negative that we tend to be 
more familiar with today, they appear open and staring, just as if he was alive, thus readily corresponding to 
this aspect of the Abgar story. And when we further learn that in the tenth century, when the cloth of 
Edessa was transferred to Constantinople, the Byzantines rewrote the story of the cloth's origins to suggest 
that it may have been created by Jesus' `bloody sweat' in the garden of Gethsemane (Luke: 22 44), this also 
fits. It is just the sort of interpretation that anyone might come to when, ignorant of the Shroud's nature as a 
shroud, they noted on the forehead watery-looking bloodflows that we, from our perspective, now 
understand to have been from the crown of thorns." (Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The 
Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, p.111)

26/07/2008
"The facial imprint as it appears on the Shroud ... with ... a highlighting of some of the so-called Vignon 
markings that repeatedly occur in Byzantine portraits of Christ, as if copied from these anomalies to the 
Shroud face: (1) two strands of hair; (2) transverse streak; (3) `topless' square; (4) `V' shape; (5) raised 
eyebrow; (6) heavily accentuated eyes; (7 and 8) accentuated cheeks (9) enlarged nostril; (10) line between 
nose and lip; (11) line under lower lip; (12) hairless area; (13) forked beard; (14) line across throat; (15) left 
sidelock longer." (Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara 
Books: London, 2000, p.111)

27/07/2008
"As generally agreed by most observers, the visible body on the Shroud appears to be that of a thirty-to-
forty-five-year-old male, quite naked, with beard and mustache and hair falling to the shoulders. At the back 
of the head seems to be visible a long, loose rope of hair extending down the spine to the level of the 
shoulder blades. Although anthropological deductions are inevitably subjective, ethnologist Carleton S. 
Coon has associated the man with the very pure Semitic type found today among noble Arabs and 
Sephardic Jews, and certainly there are at least broad hints of Jewishness in the hair styling. The seemingly 
unbound rope of hair at the back of the head accords with what German biblical scholar H. Gressman has 
referred to as one of the commonest fashions for Jewish men in antiquity, to which French scriptural 
authority Daniel-Rops has supportively added the information that the Jews normally wore this "plaited and 
rolled up under their headgear" except on public holidays." (Wilson, I., "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild 
Publishing: London, 1986, pp.15-16)

27/07/2008
"In the 1930's a French scholar, Paul Vignon, was studying the new photographs by Giuseppe Enrie. Vignon 
had noticed that numerous early pictures of Christ in both the Byzantine and western traditions bore a 
strong resemblance to the face of the man on the Shroud beyond just the long hair and beard. He identified 
about fifteen peculiar details found on many of these early Christ-faces which could only be explained if the 
Shroud face was the model. ... The most noticeable of these are: 1. Almost all portraits of Jesus show two or 
three strands of hair in the middle of the forehead. The hairline is otherwise quite neat. These could be the 
artist's rendering of the reverse figure `3' bloodstain the Shroudman's forehead. What other reason would 
there be for the persistent strands? Or for the initial use of the strands in the first Christ-face, subsequently 
copied by all the others? 2. Many portraits of Jesus show one eyebrow higher than the other, exactly as on 
the Shroud face. 3. Most intriguing of all is the appearance of a strange shape that looks like a box without a 
lid above a rounded V at the bridge of the nose. On the Shroud of Turin it is clearly visible and seems to be 
an aberration in the weave of the cloth. 4. Most Christ-faces have a forked beard, as on the Shroud. 5. Many 
of them bring the face down to a garment neck-line exactly congruent to a crease we still see on the Turin 
Shroud. 6. Others, especially those that purport to depict the Edessa face, show the face alone, as if 
disembodied." (Scavone, D.C., "The History of the Turin Shroud to the 14th C.," in Berard, A., ed., "History, 
Science, Theology and the Shroud: Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man 
in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, 1991, pp.171-204, pp.185-186)

27/07/2008
"Much of what follows in this paper draws upon Vignon's work. [Vignon, P., "Le Saint Suaire de Turin 
devant la science, l'archeologie, l'histoire, l'iconographie, la logique," Masson: Paris, 1939] St. Catherine's 
Monastery, tucked away and virtually isolated in the Sinai Peninsula, was a place that evaded the 
iconoclasts. Here still resides perhaps the earliest surviving portrait-icon of Christ, in encaustic on wood. It 
dates from the 6th c. A comparison of this icon with the face on the Shroud of Turin will, for many, put an 
end to their doubts about the Shroud. The icon is nearly perfectly congruent to the Shroud-face. Notice 
especially the high right eyebrow, the very hollow right cheek, and the garment neckline. The artist seems 
even to have rendered even the creases and wrinkles still seen on the Shroud, meaning that it must have 
been inspired by, i.e., copied from, the Shroud. [Whanger, A. & M., "Polarized Image Overlay Technique: a 
New Image Comparison Method and its Applications," Applied Optics, 24, March 15, 1985, pp.766-772]" 
(Scavone, D.C., "The History of the Turin Shroud to the 14th C.," in Berard, A., ed., "History, Science, 
Theology and the Shroud: Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the 
Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, 1991, pp.171-204, p.186)

27/07/2008
"In the 7th c., the Byzantine Emperor at Constantinople, Justinian II, was the first to mint coins, both 
tremisses and solidi, bearing the face of Jesus on their obverse. The Jesus-faces on these coins are of 
two types: the so-called Syrian Christ ... and the recently coined (no pun) `Shroudlike' Jesus." (Scavone, 
D.C., "The History of the Turin Shroud to the 14th C.," in Berard, A., ed., "History, Science, Theology and 
the Shroud: Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud 
Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, 1991, pp.171-204, pp.187-188) 

27/07/2008
"A 6th c. vase from Homs, Syria is quite similar to the Shroud in many of the `Vignon' -- and other -- 
respects. Additionally, one is struck by the narrowness of the face; the distortions carved into the right side 
of the face, where the Shroud face has two sizable bruises, the swollen cheek and the half-moon bruise 
below; and the `light-bulb' shape of the head on its outer edge." (Scavone, D.C., "The History of the Turin 
Shroud to the 14th C.," in Berard, A., ed., "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud: Symposium 
Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: 
Amarillo TX, 1991, pp.171-204, p.189) 

27/07/2008
"A Christ-icon of the 8th c., from the Roman catacomb of Pontianus, bears a distinct box above the nose. ... 
We have to wonder why the artist put it there unless it was a marking that artists perceived on the Shroud 
face. Other icons have some, but not all, of the Vignon markings, depending on what the copyist/artist saw 
as he rendered his version of Christ. The point is that the very early origin of these distinctive traits 
which persist in the iconography of Christ must almost necessarily be the Turin Shroud -- as early as the 6th 
c. If so, it is not proof-positive that the Shroud is the burial cloth of Christ, but it powerfully refutes the 
carbon-dating of the Shroud to the 13th-14th c." (Scavone, D.C., "The History of the Turin Shroud to the 
14th C.," in Berard, A., ed., "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud: Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis 
Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, 1991, pp.171-
204, p.189. Emphasis original)

27/07/2008
"While waiting, I decided to reread the conclusion of The Shroud of Turin by the German Jesuit Werner 
Bulst, which had been published in Germany in 1954 and in the United States in 1956. `Is it possible to 
determine more closely the nationality of this man on the cloth? Since we have only a frontal image, and 
moreover, since the color of the skin, hair, and eyes is unknown, it would hardly seem possible to directly 
determine the racial strain with certitude. Still, the style of wearing the hair and beard allows some 
deductions. The man was certainly not of the Greco-Roman culture. Of the numerous portraits we have of 
Greek and Roman origin, there is not one of a man with hair parted in the middle and falling to the shoulders. 
Likewise, a beard like that on the cloth of Turin is seldom found. Is this in keeping with a Jew in the time of 
Christ? There was hardly a people in the whole Roman Empire who clung so stubbornly to their customs 
which, for the most part, were determined by their religious beliefs. It is well known that, in contrast to other 
peoples, the Jews highly regarded the beard as a manly adornment. However, we do not know exactly how 
men wore their hair in the time of Jesus. But, again in contrast with other peoples even neighboring on 
Israel, longish hair was thoroughly in keeping with Jewry. In his researches into the Jewish style of wearing 
the hair, H. Gressman found that they generally wore long hair caught together at the back of the neck. S. 
Kraus, the distinguished Jewish archaeologist, maintains that both in the talmudic and biblical period to 
which Gressman extended his study, men wore `long hair' but `not too long' - a flexible gauge."In any case 
we can say that the `portrait' on the cloth of Turin agrees perfectly with what we know from other sources of 
the Jewish style of wearing the hair. Still these scraps of information are too meager to allow any conclusive 
proof.' [Bulst, W., "The Shroud of Turin," Bruce Publishing Co: Milwaukee WI, 1957, pp.104-105]" (Wilcox, 
R.K., "Shroud," Macmillan: New York NY, 1977, pp.129-130)

27/07/2008
"Once Stewart arrived back from lunch, we walked down through some of the halls of the institution until we 
came to his office. I saw the packet of shroud information on his desk, but it turned out that he hadn't had a 
chance to look at it. He was attentive to my story, however, and when I finished, he made some comments. 
`The effect is of a narrow face, characteristic of the caucasoid people-a white man. Orientals tend to be 
round-faced. Negroes have broad noses and thick lips. That means he could be semitic, but I would have to 
see the profile to tell for sure. It looks like a large nose, and it might have been quite prominent. But there's 
no way to be certain without a profile.' ... The FBI, said Stewart, frequently asked him to identify the race of a 
person by bones that agents would bring in. `But we can't go beyond broad racial stocks with so little 
evidence. We can say, these are from a white man, a Negro, or a Mongoloid. But you really need to see a 
person in life to be positive. The shroud face is that of a white man. I think we can say that. But whether he 
was from Palestine or Greece, I don't know. I don't think you can be that specific. You'd be challenged. 
People would say, `How do you know? What's your proof?'" (Wilcox, R.K., "Shroud," Macmillan: New York 
NY, 1977, pp.131,136)

27/07/2008
"Stewart suggested that I put the question to Carlton S. Coon, one of the world's most distinguished 
ethnologists. A former Harvard professor and ethnology curator at the University of Pennsylvania, Coon 
had written books on the racial classifications of people all over the world. `He'd be the man who might be 
able to give you some answers.' `Here are the pictures that you asked me to return,' Coon wrote back in a 
week's time. `Whoever the individual represented may have been, he is of a physical type found in modern 
times among Sephardic Jews and noble Arabs. The soft parts of the nose have shrunken a bit, which is 
simply a sign of death. I have seen the same thing in the mummies of Egyptian pharaohs. `For what it is 
worth, that is my opinion.' Coon's opinion was worth a great deal, especially in view of the fact that he had 
traveled widely throughout the Middle East, Asia, South America, and Africa. He was also the author of 
fifteen books in the area of anthropology, including The Origin of Races, published in 1962; and The 
Living Races of Man, published in 1965. As if these weren't enough accreditation, he is credited with the 
discovery of at least one ancient-man fossil, Arterian man, and with leading the expeditions that discovered 
two others: Hotu man and Jebel Ighoud man No. 2." (Wilcox, R.K., "Shroud," Macmillan: New York NY, 
1977, pp.131,136)

27/07/2008
"Is it possible to determine more closely the nationality of this man on the Cloth? Since we have only a 
frontal image, and moreover, since the color of the skin, hair and eyes is unknown, it would hardly seem 
possible to directly determine the racial strain with certitude. Still the style of wearing the hair and beard 
allows of some deductions. The man was certainly not of the Greco-Roman culture. Of the numerous 
portraits we have of Greek and Roman origin, there is not one of a man with hair parted in the middle, and 
falling to the shoulders. Likewise a beard like that on the Cloth of Turin is seldom found. Is this in keeping 
with a Jew in the time of Christ? There was hardly a people in the whole Roman Empire who clung so 
stubbornly to their customs which for the most part were determined by their religious beliefs. It is well 
known that, in contrast to other peoples, the Jews highly regarded the beard as a manly adornment." (Bulst, 
W., "The Shroud of Turin," McKenna, S. & Galvin, J.J., transl., Bruce Publishing Co: Milwaukee WI, 1957, 
pp.104-105)

27/07/2008
"However, we do not know exactly how men wore the hair in the time of Jesus. But, again in contrast with 
other peoples even neighboring on Israel, longish hair was thoroughly in keeping with Jewry. In his 
researches into the Jewish style of wearing the hair, H. Gressmann found that they generally wore long hair 
caught together at the back of the neck. S. Kraus, the distinguished Jewish archaeologist, maintains that 
both in the Talmudic and Biblical period, to which Gressmann extended his study, men wore `long hair' but 
`not too long' - a rather flexible gauge: In any case we can say that the `portrait' on the Cloth of Turin agrees 
perfectly with what we know from other sources of the Jewish style of wearing the hair. Still these scraps of 
information are too meager to allow of any conclusive proof." (Bulst, W., "The Shroud of Turin," McKenna, 
S. & Galvin, J.J., transl., Bruce Publishing Co: Milwaukee WI, 1957, p.105)

28/07/2008
"A DNA test was conducted in 1995 on a sample of the pigment. ... `That was not an authorized test, 
but it was done from an actual sample of the shroud's blood,' Schwortz told Lauer. `They determined 
that it was very degraded, but they were able to determine that it was male and human. Whether or not 
newer types of DNA analysis could tell us more really would depend on the Turin authorities giving 
permission for this type of testing to be done.'" (Celizic, M., "Shroud of Turin debate rekindled 
Scientists re-examining whether ancient cloth could date back to Christ," MSNBC, March 21, 2008. 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23742885/) 

29/07/2008
"Following the successful cloning of the three gene segments from the samples of blood on the Shroud, I 
sent a fax to Cardinal Saldarini, telling him of our success. I received no acknowledgement. The first 
indication I had of trouble was when I heard that Cardinal Saldarini had issued a statement following 
`recently published press reports concerning the Holy Shroud'. The gist was that `... while the Church 
recognized every scientist's right to carry out research that he feels to be suitable in his field of science, in 
this case it is necessary to point out that: a) no new sample of material has been taken from the Holy Shroud 
since 21 April 1988, and, as far as the Custodian of the Holy Shroud knows, there is no residual material from 
that sample in the hands of third parties; b) if such material exists, the Custodian reminds everybody that the 
Holy See has not given permission to anybody to keep it and do what he wants with it.' The Custodian 
requests those concerned to give the piece back to the Holy See; c) as there is no degree of certainty about 
whether the material in question on which these aforesaid experiments have been carried out actually comes 
from the fabric of the Shroud, the Holy See and the Papal Custodian declare that they cannot recognize any 
serious value in the results of the alleged experiments. The statement, dated September 1995, clearly seemed 
to be directed toward my research, research I had always assumed to be bona fide, thanks to my samples 
having been given to me by a person I believed had full Church authority to pass them on. From my 
understanding of what Luigi Gonella had told me, the samples had been preserved on the authority of 
Cardinal Ballestrero, to be utilized in future `honest' research if they were required. How was I to know that I 
had been caught in a political situation in which the words of Cardinal Ballestrero would be disregarded 
once he relinquished his custodianship of the Shroud to Cardinal Saldarini, as happened in September 
1990?" (Garza-Valdes, L.A., "The DNA of God?," Hodder & Stoughton: London, 1998, pp.75-76)

29/07/2008
"In the spring of 1996, the University Health Science Center at San Antonio published its journal, The 
Mission, featuring a major article about my research on both my Maya artefacts and the Shroud of Turin, 
as well as the results of the DNA testing. On the front cover was the facial image of Christ as seen on the 
Shroud, with the Caption: `Secrets of the Shroud-Microbiologists discover how the Shroud of Turin hides 
its true age'. The article, written by Jim Barrett, outlined my hypothesis about the bioplastic coating and 
covered the work that had been done with Rosalie David's Mummy 1770. It also reported the findings of 
human blood by Dr Tryon's Center for Advanced DNA Technologies. It said, in part, After months 
examining microscopic samples, the team concluded in January that the Shroud of Turin is centuries older 
than its carbon date.' Dr Harry Gove was quoted as saying, `This is not a crazy idea.' Having heard nothing 
from Cardinal Saldarini in response to the various faxes and reports I had sent to keep him informed about 
my research, I sent him a copy of the magazine. It was probably the magazine that finally elicited a response 
from Cardinal Saldarini. His letter, dated July 31, 1996, and written in Italian, was translated for me by Dr 
Roberto Rolfini, and it upset me greatly. In it, the Cardinal asked `by whose authority' I had done my work. 
In reply, I sent Cardinal Saldarini a copy of the letter I had received from His Holiness John Paul II back in 
April 1994, with my comment: `By this authority.' Perhaps it was not the most diplomatic response, given the 
circumstances ... The Cardinal also accused me of not having respect for the millions who believe that the 
blood on the Shroud is from Jesus. (In other words, he was asking me to hide the truth.) He asked how it 
was possible for me to report that we had done studies on the blood from the Shroud. I am a Catholic ... I see 
no problem with any of the studies we did. I think that the Cardinal does not understand. And he said that, 
since the samples had not been given to me officially by the Church, the Church cannot recognize my 
research on the Shroud. Again, I say that I was dealing with the man I believed to be the official 
representative of the Church-and with samples contained in a parcel officially sealed by a signatory of the 
Church." (Garza-Valdes, L.A., "The DNA of God?," Hodder & Stoughton: London, 1998, pp.77-78)

29/07/2008
"The blood present on the Shroud has been studied in Europe by Dr. Pier Luigi Baima Bollone, professor of 
forensic medicine (Turin University), Jose Delfin Blanco, Spanish specialist in legal medicine and by 
hematologist Carlo Goldoni. They confirmed that the blood on the Shroud is human blood, indicating that 
`in light of its characteristics it would seem to appear as belonging to blood type AB.' Dr. Daniel Scavone of 
the University of Southern Indiana reports in an article of October 13, 1995 that in September 1994 Dr. Victor 
Tryon, Director of DNA Technologies of the University of Texas Health Science Center-San Antonio ... 
`isolated three genes from Shroud blood remnants. He has obtained a segment of the Betaglobin gene from 
Chromosome 11 and the Amelogenin gene from both the X and Ychromosomes. Together with the blood 
analysis, the DNA research also identifies the occipital blood from the Shroud as that of an adult human 
male." Dr. Tryon noted in a CBS special The Mysterious Man of the Shroud (Executive Producer Terry A. 
Landau, April '97) that the blood was human, male and contained degraded DNA consistent with the 
supposition of ancient blood." (Iannone, J.C., "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific 
Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, 1998, pp.67-68. Emphasis original)

29/07/2008
"In October 1994, Dr. Victor Tryon and his wife Nancy conducted DNA testing on sample threads from 
the Shroud given him by Dr. Garza-Valdes. Using a technique called PCR (polymerase chain reaction), 
which multiplies the number of cells in a substance, they were able to identify three gene segments in 
the blood. Tryon found that the two samples contained human blood and male DNA, which was very 
degraded. According to Dr. Adler: `It's not surprising to find DNA... . It's hard to establish, however, 
that the DNA came from the specific blood sample you're working with.... With really old blood, the 
DNA does break down. You would get smears, instead of sharp bands.' [Allen, J., "The Shroud of Turin 
and Genetic Research," The Tidings, March 21, 1997, p. 15] Dr. Garza-Valdes admits that 95% of the 
blood areas on the Shroud are covered by fungi and bacteria, and the small amount of blood left will 
continue to disappear with the passage of time. [Garza-Valdes, L.A., "The DNA of God?," Doubleday: 
New York, 1999, p.114] With numerous people handling the Shroud throughout the centuries it is 
virtually impossible to determine with absolute certitude if the DNA belongs to the same man whose 
image is on the cloth. When this test result was made public, it immediately provoked controversy, for 
it was an unauthorized test. Even though the scientific test may have been carried out in an unbiased 
fashion, the Church does not accept the validity of these findings because the Pontifical Custodian of 
the Shroud was not apprised of these `secret' samples, nor was permission granted to conduct such a 
test. Cardinal Saldarini emphatically stated that `no new removal [of material from the Shroud] 
happened after April 21, 1988, and there should not be any residual material in the hands of a third 
party.' [The Holy Shroud Guild Newsletter, November 25, 1995, Vol. 3, No. 52, p.1] The Cardinal 
demanded that any circulating samples of the Shroud be returned to his custody." (Guerrera, V., "The 
Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, 2000, p.148)

29/07/2008
"In the early 1990s Dr. Victor Tryon, director of the Center for Advanced DNA Technologies at the Texas 
University Health Science Center, obtained from Italian scientist Giovanni Riggi some small samples that 
Riggi had taken in 1988 from the area of the Shroud's crown of thorns on the day that he also had removed 
material from `Rae's corner' for radiocarbon-testing. Dr. Tryon and his wife Nancy, who was his chief 
technician, on examination of a 1.5 millimeter fragment on sticky tape, were able to confirm that it was blood 
from a male human being and were also able to `detect pieces of double-stranded DNA' and found `three 
quite unmistakable gene segments.' [Wilson, I., "The Blood and the Shroud," Free Press: New York, 1998, 
p.91] Then in 1995; scientists from the Genoa Institute of Legal Medicine were able to examine two threads 
that were 1.5 centimeters in length that had been taken from the foot region of the Shroud by Italian 
scientists when they worked with the STURP team in 1978. Professor Marcello Canale reported that they had 
been able to extract DNA from the threads. [Wilson, 1998, p.90] The fact that it does in fact contain 
bloodstains does not, however, reveal the owner of the blood nor the time or manner that it was deposited 
on the Shroud." (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.101-102)

[top]


Copyright © 2008-2009, 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: 29 June, 2008. Updated: 20 July, 2009.