Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Searching For Stories (And Vacation) In Cartagena, Colombia
The Gatekeepers Of Asia: Face To Face With The Border Guards Of The Far East
Cockpit Chronicles - Paragliding In Rio: Best Layover Ever! (Video)
An Interview With Paul Theroux, Author Of 'The Last Train To Zona Verde: My Ultimate African Safari'
Shroud Of Turin One Of 40 Fakes, Historian Says
The Shroud of Turin has been causing controversy for centuries now. The linen cloth, measuring 14 feet by 4 feet, has what appear to be bloodstains on it. Also, the image of a wounded man can be seen, an image that becomes clearer when looked at as a photographic negative.Now historian Antonio Lombatti of the Università Popolare in Parma, Italy, says the Shroud of Turin is a fake, and not only that, it's not a very original one. About forty pieces of cloth purported to be the burial shroud of Jesus circulated in Europe during the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Religious relics were popular then and now.
Lombatti say the shroud was given to a French knight in Turkey in 1346. This is the first concrete record of the Shroud and agrees with radiocarbon analysis of the linen. In 1988, the University of Oxford, University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology independently tested parts of the Shroud and each said it dates to sometime between 1260-1390.
The photographic negative image was well within the ability of medieval technology as far back as the eleventh century A.D., according to one researcher who made his own shrouds using medieval techniques.
Also, John 19:40 and 20:6-7 clearly state that Jesus was wrapped in several strips of linen, not just one, and that his head was wrapped in a separate cloth.
None of this, of course, will dissuade the thousands of believers who flock to the Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin, where the Shroud is kept and (rarely) exhibited.
[Photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
kgum Jun 14th 2012 5:46AM
A biased article not referencing sources and unnecessarily critical of those questioning past tests.
The photographic negative image was well within the ability of medieval technology - an amazing comment without reference. It has taken modern science to even get close to the negative image that is manifest when taking a photographic negative of the shroud (no reference supplied, sorry).
radiocarbon analysis of the linen. In 1988 is questioned because of repair work that has occurred to the shroud throughout the ages. The cloth sample taken is suspected of being such a segment and therefore the carbon dating is held in doubt. No mention of such controversy is given.
Lombatti say the shroud was given to a French knight in Turkey in 1346 - perhaps. While certainly there were many Christian relics circulating there were records of a similar shroud (by witness descriptions) circulating in modern day Turkey before the middle ages. Again claims are made here that have no backing and no other possibilities given.
Sean McLachlan Jun 14th 2012 5:53AM
The reference to medieval photographic techniques was provided in the link in that paragraph.
There is no evidence that the sample was taken from a later repair, as the later repairs are quite visible.
http://www.shroud.com/nature.htm