Monday, September 8, 2014

Dimensions of the Shroud: Turin Shroud Encyclopedia

Turin Shroud Encyclopedia
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

Dimensions of the Shroud

This is entry #7, of my "Turin Shroud Encyclopedia," about the dimensions (i.e. measurements) of the Shroud cloth. See the Main Index "A-Z" for information about this series. As mentioned in my comment under my post, "Shroud of Turin: Turin Shroud Encyclopedia":

"I intend to grow my Encyclopedia organically, i.e. I will next add entries about key words in my latest post, e.g. "shroud," "Turin," "Lirey," "de Charny, Geoffroi," and " de Vergy, Jeanne" etc."
So this post is an expansion on that entry #3's, "The Shroud of Turin ...is a 437 x 111 cms (~14.3 x 3.6 ft) rectangular linen sheet."

[Main index] [Previous #6] [Next #8]

Dimensions determined. Prior to 1998, the most commonly cited dimensions of the Shroud were 14 feet 3 inches long by 3 feet 7 inches wide[2] (434.3 x 109.2 cms)[3]. In that year ancient textiles specialist Dr. Mechthild Flury-Lemberg determined that the true dimensions of

[Above: From left to right: Swiss textiles expert Mechthild Flury Lemberg, Sister Maria Clara Antonini of the Poor Clare nuns[4] and Don Giuseppe Ghiberti, Turin diocesan official in charge of the 1998 exhibition[5], finish preparing the Turin Shroud April 16 for display to the public on Sunday April 19, 1998[6].]

the Shroud are 437 centimetres long by 111 centimetres wide (about 14 feet 4 inches by 3 feet 8 inches)[7]:

"Dr. Flury-Lemberg and New Textile Findings The first speaker was Dr. Mechthild Flury-Lemberg, a former curator of the Abegg Foundation textile museum, Switzerland, whose theme was 'The Shroud fabric, its technical and archaeological characteristics'. It was Dr. Flury-Lemberg who, immediately prior to the 1998 exposition, had the task of preparing the Shroud for its display and housing in the new three ton Italgas container constructed for it, working side by side with Sister Maria Clara Antonini of the Poor Clares. Because the plate for the new container had been made slightly too small, Dr. Flury-Lemberg gained permission to remove the blue surround that had been sewed on in the 19th century. The intention behind this surround had been to save the Shroud from the repeated handling at the edges to which they had been subjected throughout the long centuries when it was the custom to hold it up before the populace. However, the surround had ever since prevented examination of the same edges, thereby hindering totally accurate calculation of its dimensions. Now the dimensions have been authoritatively determined by Dr. Flury-Lemberg as 437 cm long by 111 cm wide." [8]

after she, to prepare the Shroud for the 1998 exposition[9], removed the Shroud's blue satin protective hem[10] which had been sewn onto the cloth by Princess Clotilde of Savoy in 1868[11].

The thickness of the cloth is about one third of a millimetre[12] (0.345 mm [13]), slightly thicker than shirt cloth[14], and its weight is approx- imately 2.45 kgs (about 5½ lbs)[15].

[Right (click to enlarge): Shroud showing missing pieces at each end of the sidestrip[16].]

Missing pieces. There are two pieces missing at each end of the 8 cms (3½ inch) sidestrip[17] (see right). The first is 14 x 8 cms (5½ by 3½ inches) at the front left feet end and the second is 36 x 8 cm (14 by 3½ inches) at the back left feet end[18]. However, as can be seen (right) the missing pieces do not change the length or width of the Shroud.

Cubits. In August 1989, an expert in early Syriac, Ian Dickinson, from Canterbury, England[19], reflected on the Shroud's then commonly accepted measurements of 14 feet 3 inches by 3 feet 7 inches[20]. They seemed odd to him by modern standards but he wondered what they would be if the Shroud was measured in 1st century AD Jerusalem, by the cubit[21].

There were various cubits in use in Jesus' time, including one for use in the Jerusalem Temple[22]. There was also a cubit of the market place, known as the Assyrian cubit, which was the one most widely one used, being the international standard of that time for merchants of the Near East[23]. This common cubit of commerce was carried along with the Assyrian language, Aramaic, which was the common language of trade and diplomacy from the Euphrates River to the Mediterranean Sea, and had become the language of the Jew (Jn 5:2; 19:13,17,20; 20:16), which Jesus spoke[24]

[Above: Page 67 of "Inductive Metrology: Or, The Recovery of Ancient Measures from the Monuments," by William Matthew Flinders Petrie (1877), showing the Assyrian cubit was 21.6 inches (~54.9 cms)[25] (see below).]

Petrie & Oppert. During the 19th century the archaeological pioneer, Sir Flinders Petrie (1853–1942) and Assyriologist Julius Oppert (1825–1905), took many measurements of ancient buildings in Babylon (which Assyria had annexed in the 9th century BC)[26]. Petrie and Oppert found the length of the Assyrian cubit to be almost 21.5 inches, since refined by other archaeologists to be 21.6 ±0.2 inches[27] (54.9 ±0.5 cms). In fact according to page 67 of Petrie's book above, he himself accepted 21.60 inches as the mean length of the Assyrian cubit. And this is what the Shroud conforms to, taking the lower limit of 21.4 inches[28] (54.4 cms):

 21.4 inches x 8=171.2 inches
 Shroud recorded length=171.0 inches
 21.4 inches x 2=42.8 inches
 Shroud recorded width=43.0 inches

Now 171.2 inches is 434.8 cms, and 43.0 inches is 109.2 cms, which are very close to the Shroud's 437 cms by 111 cms. Indeed, those latest, most accurate dimensions of the Shroud are even closer to the Assyrian cubit's middle value of 21.6 inches or 54.9 cms. Dividing 437 and 111 cms by 54.9 cms equals 8 (7.96) cubits and 2 (2.02) cubits, respectively!

Guralnick. Archaeologist Eleanor Guralnick claimed that from measuring slabs and figures from ancient Assyrian capitals Khorsabad and Nineveh in Iraq, from the reigns of Sargon II (r. 721–705 BC), Sennacherib (r. 705 – 681 BC), and Ashurbanipal (r. 668–627 BC), she derived new standard lengths of three different cubits from the Late Assyrian period[29]. They were, the Standard Cubit (51.5 cms), a Big Cubit (56.6 cms), and a "Cubit of the King" (55 cms)[30]. Despite Guralnick's standard cubits having been derived from a smaller sample set than Oppert/Petries', what Guralnick called the "Cubit of the King" (55 cms) appears to be Oppert/Petrie's "Assyrian Cubit" (54.9 cms), as highlighted in the table below.

[Above: Comparison of Oppert/Petrie's and Guralnick's three Assyrian cubits in relation to the dimensions of the Shroud of Turin. As can be seen, Guralnick's "Cubit of the King" (55 cms) is very close to Oppert/Petrie's "Assyrian Cubit" (54.9 cms), and the 437 cms long by 111 cms wide dimensions of the Shroud equal 8 by 2 of those cubits of Guralnick and Oppert/Petrie.]

Medieval forger? The Bible mentions cubits (Gn 6:16; Ex 25:10,17,23; 26:13,16; 30:2; 36:21; 37:1, 6,10,25; Dt 3:11; Jdg 3:16; 1Ki 6:16; 7:24,31,35; 2Chr 4:3; Eze 40:5,12,42; 42:4; 43:13,14,17; Mt 6:27; Lk 12:25) but does not say how long they were. So it is highly unlikely that a medieval forger would even know about the Assyrian standard cubit[31], and even if he did, it is even more unlikely that he would bother obtaining a first century fine linen shroud of those dimensions, especially given that fine linen then ranked with gold in value[32]. And that is assuming that he could obtain one, let alone one with the Shroud's three-to-one herringbone twill linen, of which the Shroud is the only one remaining in existence[33].

Doubled in four And finally, as Ian Wilson has pointed out:

"Such conformity to an exact 8 by 2 Jewish cubits ... correlates perfectly with the `doubled in four' arrangement by which we hypothesized the shroud to have been once folded and mounted as the `holy face' of Edessa[see below], for the exposed facial area of this latter would have been an exact 1 by 2 Jewish cubits[34].

[Above: Tetradiplon and the Shroud of Turin illustrated: The full-length Shroud of Turin (1), is doubled four times (2 through 5), resulting in Jesus' face within a rectangle, in landscape aspect (5), exactly as depicted in the earliest copies of the Image of Edessa, the 11th century Sakli church, Turkey (6) and the 10th century icon of King Abgar V of Edessa holding the Image of Edessa, St. Catherine's monastery, Sinai (7).]

Proof the Shroud is authentic. So even the dimensions of the Shroud of Turin are among the many proofs beyond reasonable doubt that it is authentic. That is, the very burial sheet of Jesus, bearing the image of His beaten (Mt 26:67-68; 27:30; Lk 22:64; Jn 18:22; 19:3), scourged (Mt 27:26; Mk 15:15; Lk 23:16; Jn 19:1), crowned with thorns (Mt 27:29; Mk 15:17; Jn 19:2,5), crucified (Mt 27:35,38,44; Mk 15:24-27,32; Lk 23:33; Jn 19:16-18), died (Mt 27:50; Mk 15:37,39; Lk 23:46; Jn 19:30), legs not broken (Jn 19:32-33), speared in the side (Jn 19:34), wrapped in a linen shroud (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53; Jn 19:40), buried in a rock tomb (Mt 27:59-60; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53; Jn 19:38-42) and resurrected (Mt 28:1-6; Mk 16:1-6; Lk 24:1-6; Jn 20:1-9) body!


Notes
1. This post is copyright. No one may copy from it or any of my posts on this my The Shroud of Turin blog without them first asking and receiving my written permission. Except that I grant permission, without having to ask me, for anyone to copy the title and one paragraph only (including one graphic) of any of my posts, provided that they include a reference to the title of, and a hyperlink to, that post from which it came. [return]
2. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.21. [return]
3. "4.34m x 1.09m." Currer-Briggs, N., 1995, "Shroud Mafia: The Creation of a Relic?," Book Guild: Sussex UK, p.11. [return]
4. Wilson, I., 2000a, "`The Turin Shroud – past, present and future', Turin, 2-5 March, 2000 – probably the best-ever Shroud Symposium," British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 51, June. [return]
5. Wilson, I., 2000b, "Recent Publications," British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 51, June. [return]
6. Brkic, B., 2010, "Hitler had designs on the Shroud of Turin; Indiana Jones fans are not surprised," Daily Maverick, 8 April. [return]
7. By my calculation assuming 1 inch = 2.54 cms. [return]
8. Wilson, 2000a. [return]
9. Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, p.18. [return]
10. Whiting, B., 2006, "The Shroud Story," Harbour Publishing: Strathfield NSW, Australia, p.177. [return]
11. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.64. [return]
12. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.161. [return]
13. "345 ± 22 µm." Schwalbe, L.A. & Rogers, R.N., 1982, "Physics and Chemistry of the Shroud of Turin: Summary of the 1978 Investigation," Reprinted from Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 135, No. 1, 1982, pp.3-49, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co: Amsterdam, 1982, p.43. [return]
14. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.68. [return]
15. Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, p.1. [return]
16. Shroud Scope, "Durante 2002, Horizontal" (rotated vertical). [return]
17. Iannone, 1998, pp.1-2. [return]
18. Wilson, 1998, p.67. [return]
19. Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, p.181. [return]
20. Dickinson, I., 1990, "The Shroud and the Cubit Measure," BSTS Newsletter, Issue 24, January, pp.8-11, p.8. [return]
21. Ibid. [return]
22. Dickinson, 1990, p.9. [return]
23. Ibid. [return]
24. Dickinson, 1990, pp.9-10. [return]
25. Petrie, W.M.F., 1877, "Inductive Metrology: Or, The Recovery of Ancient Measures from the Monuments," Cambridge University Press: Cambridge UK, Reprinted, 2013. Google books. [return]
26. Dickinson, 1990, p.10. [return]
27. Ibid. [return]
28. Ibid. [return]
29. Guralnick, E., 1996, "Sargonid Sculpture and the Late Assyrian Cubit," Iraq, Vol. 58, pp.89-103, p.89. [return]
30. Ibid. [return]
31. Wilson, 1991, p.181. [return]
32. Dickinson, 1990, p.11. [return]
33. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, pp.74-75. [return]
34. Wilson, 1991, p.181. [return]

Updated: 9 September, 2014.

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

Index "D": Turin Shroud Encyclopedia

Turin Shroud Encyclopedia
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

Index "D"

This is the index page, "D", entry #6, of my "Turin Shroud Encyclopedia." It will be closely followed by "dimensions" (i.e. measurements of the Shroud cloth). See part #1, the Main Index "A-Z" for information about this series.

[Main index] [Previous #5] [Next #7]

[Above: Eleventh century (c. 1080-1100) Christ Pantocrator ("ruler of all") mosaic in the dome of the church of Daphni, Greece. [2]. It has 13 of the 15 Vignon markings[3], which are also found on the Shroud, and it is therefore (together with all the other Byzantine artworks which feature most of these same Vignon markings), proof beyond reasonable doubt that the Shroud existed in the 11th century, and indeed all the way back to at least the 6th century[4]! As previously explained, for each letter of the alphabet sub-index page, I will include a brief note about a topic in that sub-index (i.e. "Daphni, Pantocrator") but this will not take the place of an eventual full page on that topic.]

Click on an entry's hyperlink below to go to that entry. If an entry is not hyperlinked, it is a planned future entry in this encyclopedia.


[Damon, Paul] [Danin, Avinoam] [Daphni, Pantocrator] [d'Arcis, Bishop Pierre] [de Charnay, Geoffroi] [de Charny, Geoffroi II] [de Charny, Geoffroi] [de Charny, Marguerite] [de Clari, Robert] [de Poitiers, Bishop Henri] [de Vergy, Jeanne] [de Wesselow, Thomas] [decomposition] [Delage, Yves] [dimensions of the Shroud] [directionality] [Doctrine of Addai]


Notes
1. This post is copyright. No one may copy from it or any of my posts on this my The Shroud of Turin blog without them first asking and receiving my written permission. Except that I grant permission, without having to ask me, for anyone to copy the title and one paragraph only (including one graphic) of any of my posts, provided that they include a reference to the title of, and a hyperlink to, that post from which it came. [return]
2. "Christ Pantocrator," Wikimedia, 7 November 2013. [return]
3. Maher, R.W., 1986, "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, p.77. [return]
4. Ruffin, C.B., 1999, "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, pp.110-111. [return]

Updated: 8 September, 2014.

My theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker #9

Copyright ©, Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is part #9 of my theory that the three laboratories (Arizona, Zurich and Oxford) which in 1988 radiocarbon dated the Shroud of Turin as "mediaeval... AD 1260-1390"[2] were duped by a computer hacker, Arizona physicist Timothy W. Linick[3]. Previous posts in this series were part #1, part #2, part #3, part #4, part #5, part #6, part #7 and part #8. Newcomers should read those previous posts as this part of my theory will be brief and will rely on evidence provided in some of those previous posts. In my next and final post in this series, part #10, I will summarise my theory, bringing together my evidence and arguments in the previous nine posts in this series.

[Above: "Sergei [or Sergey] Markov in February 2012"[4]. The Soviet official who the German hackers (including Koch) sold their hacked secrets to was a "Sergei Markov":

"For both Dob and Carl it became apparent after an hour or so of being questioned that Pengo and Hagbard had gone to the authorities. Eventually, both of them confessed to espionage. But they weren't to be accorded the same leniency that Markus Hess got. Dob and Peter Carl had previous arrests on their records, and both were considered flight risks-Carl for his plans to go to Spain and Dob for his avoidance of military duty. Both were taken into custody. Carl's ex-wife came forward to say she would take out a loan for 1,000 marks for bail, but prosecutor Kohlhaas felt uneasy about setting Carl free and urged the judge to deny bail. Kohlhaas saw his case strengthen when, during the search of Carl's apartment, a Casio pocket calculator was found. It contained the telephone number for one Sergei Markov"[5].

The Sergey Markov in the photo above has been described as "Putin's man"[6]. In 2009 this Sergey Markov reportedly admitted to being behind a hacking cyber-attack on Estonia [7]. While I can as yet find no evidence that this Sergey (or Sergei) Markov was a former KGB agent (he need not have been), I assume that he is the "Sergei Markov" who was the Soviet Union's point of contact with the German "KGB hackers" which included Karl Koch[8].

8. THE KGB'S MOTIVE TO DISCREDIT THE SHROUD AND KILL KOCH AND LINICK

• The Soviet Union was on the verge of collapse in the 1980s. By the mid-1980's the former Soviet Union (USSR) was on the verge of collapse:

"In October 1977, the third Soviet Constitution was unanimously adopted. The prevailing mood of the Soviet leadership at the time of Brezhnev's death in 1982 was one of aversion to change. The long period of Brezhnev's rule had come to be dubbed one of `standstill', with an aging and ossified top political leadership ... Two developments dominated the decade that followed: the increasingly apparent crumbling of the Soviet Union's economic and political structures, and the patchwork attempts at reforms to reverse that process ... In 1988, the Soviet Union abandoned its nine-year war in Afghanistan and began to withdraw its forces ... In the late 1980s, the constituent republics of the Soviet Union started legal moves towards potentially declaring sovereignty over their territories ..."[9].
See also "1988 Soviet Union centre – starting to lose control"[10]. And in fact the USSR did collapse in late 1989, epitomised by the fall of the Berlin Wall on 9 November 1989[11].

[Above: Germans on and around the Berlin Wall at the Brandenburg Gate, 10 November 1989[12].]

• A first century radiocarbon date of the Shroud would have been a threat to the atheist USSR. The Soviet Union was an atheist State[13]. Yet, despite its attempts to eradicate religion since the 1917 revolution, the USSR continued to have a large Christian population[14]. In the 1980s, four Christian denominations alone, had a total of about 61 million adherents:

"According to both Soviet and Western sources,in the late 1980s the Russian Orthodox Church had over 50 million believers ... The Georgian Orthodox Church ... [had] an estimated 2.5 million followers ... The Armenian Apostolic Church is an independent Oriental Orthodox church. In the 1980s it had about 4 million adherents ..." [15]

And that does not count the 5.5 million Roman Catholics mainly in the satellite republics:

"The majority of the 5.5 million Roman Catholics in the Soviet Union lived in the Lithuanian, Belarusian, and Latvian republics, with a sprinkling in the Moldavian, Ukrainian, and Russian republics"[16].

Nor does that count the Roman Catholics in Poland, which assuming they were 80% of the population:

"There are 44 Catholic Dioceses in Poland ... Ever since Poland officially adopted Latin Christianity in 966, the Catholic Church has played an important religious, cultural and political role in the country ... As of 2005 a majority of Poles, approximately 88%, identified themselves as Roman Catholic, and 58% said they are active practicing Catholics, according to a survey by the Centre for Public Opinion Research. ... The CIA Factbook gives a number of 87.2% belonging to the Roman Catholic Church in 2012"[17].

and given a 37.5 million population in Poland in 1987 (see graph), that means there

[Right (click to enlarge): Graph showing the population in Poland was about 37.5 million in 1987[18].]

were about 30 million Roman Catholics in Poland in the late 1980s.

That totals about 96.5 million Christians in the Soviet Union in the 1980s. And if Protestants and other Christian denominations are included, that means there would have been over 100 million Christians in the crumbling, officially atheist, Soviet Union in the mid- to late 1980s!

So a first-century radiocarbon date of the Shroud of Turin would have been perceived as a huge threat by the embattled Soviet leadership.

• If Timothy W. Linick had offered the Soviets a 14th century carbon-date of the Shroud they would have accepted it. So if Arizona radiocarbon dating laboratory physicist, Timothy W. Linick (see part #6) had approached the Soviet Union (through for example the Soviet consulate in San Francisco):

"Since most of what they [the Soviet Union] were interested in, especially technology for advanced computing, was on a list of highly restricted technologies maintained by a consortium of Western nations known as COCOM, the Soviets had long since resorted to extralegal means of procuring hardware and software. The FBI liked to maintain that Northern California's Silicon Valley, where much of American computer innovation resided, was crawling with KGB agents. The FBI claimed that one of the primary missions of the Soviet consulate in San Francisco was to funnel U.S. technology into the Soviet Union"[19].
with an offer to guarantee that the Shroud would be radiocarbon-dated to about 25-30 years before the Shroud first appeared in undisputed history at Lirey, France, in the 1350s (see part #1), the Soviets would certainly have accepted that offer.

• Linick was found dead of suspected suicide on 4 June 1989 Linick was found dead of suspected suicide in Tucson, Arizona on

[Right: Photograph of Linick and report that "He died at the age of forty-two on 4 June 1989, in very unclear circumstances, shortly after the campaign of the Italian press reporting our [Bonnet-Eymard's] accusations" (my emphasis).]

4 June 1989. (see part #7).

• Koch had been murdered between 23 and 30 May 1989, i.e. between 12 and 6 days before Linick's `suicide.' The German police would have needed to identify the charred body as that of Koch (see part #8) before they publicly released the information that Koch's burned body had been found. So Linick's `suicide' would have been very soon after the KGB learned that Koch's burned body had been found.

• Koch and Linick could have been killed by the KGB to prevent the Soviets' hacking of the Shroud's dating being revealed. Koch's murder was disguised as suicide, presumably by the KGB, since no one else is known to have had a motive to kill Koch. But that the KGB had killed Koch seemed inexplicable because Koch had long since finished confessing his hacking for the KGB, as had his fellow hackers for the KGB, but none of them were killed (part #8).

But it is explicable if the KGB executed Koch (and then Linick) for fear they would betray the KGB's own secret, as hacking the Shroud of Turin's radiocarbon dating would have been. With the publication of the Nature paper of 16 February 1989, which claimed that the Shroud was "mediaeval ... 1260-1390":

"Very small samples from the Shroud of Turin have been dated by accelerator mass spectrometry in laboratories at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich. As Controls, three samples whose ages had been determined independently were also dated. The results provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval ... AD 1260-1390 ..."[20]
Koch may have realised what his hacking into the Oxford and Zurich university computers and running a program on them had done, and as he had since "embrace[d] ... conventional religion" (my emphasis):
"It looked as if Hagbard [Koch] was beginning to straighten out his life. Before the news of the KGB activity broke, a friend had helped him get a job as a messenger in the Hannover office of the conservative Christian Democratic Union ... Even after his spying came to light, along with his dependence on drugs, the CDU office kept him on, convinced that he deserved another chance. Some of Hagbard's friends viewed the CDU job as further proof that this erstwhile social democrat's political perspective had gone completely awry. Others saw the job as Hagbard's first small step toward folding himself back into society. His life, at least to outsiders, seemed more stable. After years of rootlessness, he was finally planning to move into an apartment of his own. And a recent embrace of conventional religion had probably added to his calm bearing"[21].

he may have started to talk about it. But to others, including his fellow hacker Pengo (Hans Hübner), it sounded like "conspiracies and ... religious hallucinations" (my emphasis):

"After that first trip, Pengo testified, he waited for Sergei's feedback. To his great disappointment, none came, and by the beginning of 1987 Pengo's role in the enterprise had fizzled. Carl continued to drop by 'for coffee' and ask him for source code, but Pengo couldn't deliver them. 'The whole thing was more hot air than anything else,' he declared. After a while, Carl stopped calling. By that summer, Pengo said, he and Dob were no longer speaking, and he had never had much contact with Hess. Hagbard, he said, was completely `outgespaced,' talking of nothing but conspiracies and having religious hallucinations"[22].

But if, according to my theory, the KGB had arranged for Koch to install Linick's program on Zurich and Oxford radiocarbon dating laboratories' AMS computers (see part #8), they would have realised what Koch was saying, and silenced him permanently. But then because Linick (who may have had to communicate with Koch on how to run his program) would probably learn of Koch's `suicide' and out of fear and/or remorse, might confess his hacking to the US authorities, the KGB would have to permanently silence Linick as well, by a second contrived `suicide'.

To be concluded in part #10.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. No one may copy from this post or any of my posts on this my The Shroud of Turin blog without them first asking and receiving my written permission. Except that I grant permission, without having to ask me, for anyone to copy the title and one paragraph only (including one associated graphic) of any of my posts, provided that if they repost it on the Internet a link to my post from which it came is included. See my post of May 8, 2014. [return]
2. Damon, P.E., et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16th February, pp.611-615, p.611. [return]
3. Jull, A.J.T. & Suess, H.E. , 1989, "Timothy W. Linick," Radiocarbon, Vol 31, No 2. [return]
4. "Sergey Alexandrovich Markov," Wikipedia, 22 June 2014. [return]
5. Hafner, K. & Markoff, J., 1991, "Cyberpunk: Outlaws and Hackers on the Computer Frontier," Corgi: London, reprinted, 1993, pp.292-293. [return]
6. "Putin’s Man Warns Finland About NATO Membership and Russophobia," Finbay, 9 June 2014. [return]
7. Coalson, R., 2009, "Russia admits to Cyber Attack on Estonia," La Russophobe, March 9. [return]
8. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.293. [return]
9. "Soviet Union," Wikipedia, 29 August 2014. [return]
10. "Dissolution of the Soviet Union," Wikipedia, 22 August 2014. [return]
11. "Berlin Wall," Wikipedia, 16 August 2014. [return]
12. Ibid. [return]
13. "State atheism: Soviet Union," Wikipedia, 19 August 2014. [return]
14. Ibid. [return]
15. "Religion in the Soviet Union," Wikipedia, 16 August 2014. [return]
16. Ibid. [return]
17. "Roman Catholicism in Poland," Wikipedia, 23 August 2014. [return]
18. "Demographics of Poland," Wikipedia, 12 August 2014. [return]
19. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.226. [return]
20. Damon, 1989, p. 611. [return]
21. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.301-302. [return]
22. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.316. [return]


Updated: 3 September, 2014.

Friday, August 29, 2014

Crispino, Dorothy (1916-2014): Turin Shroud Encyclopedia

Turin Shroud Encyclopedia
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

Crispino, Dorothy (1916-2014)

This is entry #5, "Crispino, Dorothy (1916-2014), of my "Turin Shroud Encyclopedia." See part #1, the Main Index "A-Z" for information about this series.

[Main index] [Index "C"] [Previous #4] [Next #6]


Dorothy Crispino (nee Zimmer)[2] was born in Chicago[3] on 17 January 1916[4]. She was the founder and Editor of Shroud Spectrum International, the only

[Right: Dorothy Crispino in 2010: Photo by Barrie Schwortz[5].]

peer-reviewed journal specialising in scholarly studies of the Shroud of Turin[6].

Dorothy counted herself among the "all of us" to whom the Shroud is "this visible, tangible record of Christ's passage on earth" and therefore "is indeed the most precious and priceless object that exists":

"The canons [of Lirey]— like the Charnys, like the Savoys, like the hundreds of thousands of pilgrims, eloquent or mute, scholarly, saintly, royalty, peasantry or bourgeoisie, religious fanatics, atheists or those with simple faith, ordinary people of every nation — on seeing the Shroud, like St. John and St. Peter, they believed. For all of them, for all of us, this visible, tangible record of Christ's passage on earth is indeed the most precious and priceless object that exists"[7].

Dorothy contributed numerous scholarly articles to Spectrum, as she usually referred to it. Spectrum's first issue was December 1981 and its last, #42, was December 1993[8].

Dorothy also wrote a 108-page work titled "Spicilegium" (L. "a gleaning") which was sent to Shroud Spectrum subscribers in April, 1996[9]. It was largely comprised of a "Dossier of Geoffrey I de Charny," who was "her knight in shining armor"[10].

Spectrum is, with Dorothy's permission, progressively being scanned (with the exception of "Spicilegium"), word-processed and put online through the joint efforts of Barrie Schwortz, Ian Wilson and myself[11].

At the age of 86, Dorothy undertook the major task of editing the "thirteen articles from ten various sources"[12] on the Shroud by eminent blood chemist and Shroud scientist, Dr. Alan D. Adler (1931-2000). She then had them published in a book, Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy[13]. The book is subtitled "A Shroud Spectrum International Special Issue," and so it will be the final issue of Spectrum to be put online.

Dorothy and her husband Luigi lived in Cavour, Italy, about an hour and a half drive from Turin[14]. She had a son, Anthony Bercel[15], from a previous marriage.

Dorothy Crispino died, aged 98, in Cavour Italy on 16 August 2014[16].

Notes
1. This post is copyright. No one may copy from it or any of my posts on this my The Shroud of Turin blog without them first asking and receiving my written permission. Except that I grant permission, without having to ask me, for anyone to copy the title and one paragraph only (including one graphic) of any of my posts, provided that they include a reference to the title of, and a hyperlink to, that post from which it came. [return]
2. "Karl R. Zimmer Jr. Obituary," 2014, The Indianapolis Star, May 25. [return]
3. "The Shroud in Cavour," nd., Cavour.info. Translated from Italian by Google. [return]
4. "In Memoriam [Dorothy Crispino]," Late Breaking Website News!, 26 August 2014. [return]
5. Ibid. [return]
6. Schwortz, B., 2010, "Turin 2010 - A Personal Report," STERA, Inc. [return]
7. Crispino, D., 1998, "To Know the Truth: A Sixteenth Century Document with Excursus by Dorothy Crispino," Shroud Spectrum International, Issue #28/29, September/December 1988, pp.25-40, p.25. [return]
8. Schwortz, B., 2012a, "View by issue number," Shroud Spectrum International, Shroud.com. [return]
9. Schwortz, B., 2012b, personal email, 27 December. [return]
10. Schwortz, 2012b. [return]
11. Schwortz, B., 2012c, "Introduction," Shroud Spectrum International, Shroud.com. [return]
12. Crispino, D., "Foreword," Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.vii. [return]
13. Crispino, 2002, pp.v-ix. [return]
14. Schwortz, 2010. [return]
15. Schwortz, 2012c. [return]
16. Schwortz, B., 2014. [return]

Updated: 4 September, 2014.

Thursday, August 28, 2014

Index "C": Turin Shroud Encyclopedia

Turin Shroud Encyclopedia
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

Index "C"

This is the index page, "C", entry #4, of my "Turin Shroud Encyclopedia." See entry #1, the Main Index "A-Z" for information about this series. This sub-index page will be closely followed by entry #5, Crispino, Dorothy, who died on 16 August 2014.

[Right: Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (905–959)[2] depicted being crowned by Christ[3]. As the boy co-Emperor of the Byzantine Empire, Constantine VII received the Shroud (as the Image of Edessa/Mandylion, folded in eight (tetradiplon) with only the face one-eighth panel visible[4]-see below) in Constantinople on August 8, 944[5].]

I am going to try to post an encyclopedia entry about every item of significant Shroud of Turin news, soon after it appears. The entries

[Left: Constantine VII depicted in 10th century icon at Saint Catherine's Monastery, Sinai, as the Edessa king Abgar V (BC 4–AD 50)[6] receiving the Image of Edessa, with Jesus' face in landscape aspect (again as it is when the Shroud is folded eight times with the Man in the Shroud's face uppermost) from Jesus' disciple Thaddeus.]

may therefore temporarily sacrifice completeness for speed of posting, but I will try to improve each entry over time. I will try to make these sub-index pages interesting, by including something brief about a topic in it (e.g. "Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus") but it will not take the place of an eventual full page entry on that topic.

[Main index] [Previous #3] [Next #5]

Click on an entry's hyperlink below to go to that entry. If an entry is not hyperlinked, it is a planned future entry in this encyclopedia.


[Calvin, John] [carbon-dating] [catacombs] [Cathedral, Turin] [Catholic church] [Cefalù mosaic] [cellulose] [Chambéry] [Cheshire, Leonard] [Chevalier, Ulysse] [chin band] [Christ] [Christianity] [church] [Cistus creticus] [Clement VII, Pope] [cloth collapse theory] [Clotilde, Princess] [coins over eyes] [Commodus, Emperor] [computer hacker] [congresses] [Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus] [Constantinople] [contact theory] [copies] [cotton] [Crispino, Dorothy] [cross] [crown of thorns] [crucifixion] [crurifragium] [Crusades] [cubit] [Currer-Briggs, Noel]


Notes
1. This post is copyright. No one may copy from it or any of my posts on this my The Shroud of Turin blog without them first asking and receiving my written permission. Except that I grant permission, without having to ask me, for anyone to copy the title and one paragraph only (including one graphic) of any of my posts, provided that they include a reference to the title of, and a hyperlink to, that post from which it came. [return]
2. "Constantine VII," Wikipedia, 14 May 2014. [return]
3. "Byzantine literature," Wikipedia, 25 January 2014. [return]
4. Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, pp.3-4. [return]
5. Ruffin, C.B., 1999, "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, p.57. [return]
6. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, pp.154-155. [return]

Updated: 5 September, 2014.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Dorothy Crispino (1916-2014)

Dorothy Crispino, aged 98, has departed to be with Christ, which far better (Philippians 1:23). My condolences to her family and friends.

[Above: "Special Update from The Shroud of Turin Website" advising of Dorothy Crispino's death on 16 August 2014.]

I had a brief email correspondence with Dorothy in 2007-08 regarding me buying back issues of Shroud Spectrum International. There were problems back then of transferring money from Australia to Italy where she lived, so Dorothy suggested that I pay for the issues by sending her an Australian art catalog, which I did and which she much appreciated:

"The collection of Aboriginal art was a revelation; such beauty of colors and design! Why do you keep these treasures Down Under? Perhaps they are exhibited sometimes in England, but I’m sure in Italy they are unknown."

But by far my greatest involvement with Dorothy, albeit indirectly, which is still ongoing, is my scanning and word-processing issues of her Shroud Spectrum International, from #1 (1981) to #42 (1993), and a Special 2002 issue (currently I am up to #34). That requires me reading every word of every issue twice. And since Dorothy often wrote articles herself, I had long become an admirer of her high intelligence, her extensive vocabulary, and above all her love and devotion to the Man on the Shroud, the Lord Jesus Christ.

As stated on Shroud Spectrum International's Shroud.com main page, Dorothy gave her informed consent to the project of Barrie Schwortz, Ian Wilson and myself putting its issues online:

"Anthony also brought me up to date on Dorothy's condition. Sadly, her vision has completely failed so she is no longer able to live on her own or answer e-mails and she now resides in an assisted living home. However, as Anthony put it, "aside from that, she is doing well for a 96 year old," so he was still able to discuss my request with her in detail. I am very proud to include here an excerpt from the kind response we received from Dorothy and Anthony a few days later:
"My mother will be happy to have you scan the issues of Shroud Spectrum International as long as your scanned version makes it clear that the material is being reproduced with her consent as holder of the copyright. Personally, I owe my thanks to you for placing her research on the internet; this ensures that it will never be lost and be of benefit to scholars today and into the future."
so I am very pleased I was able to be part of bringing her that happiness in her declining years.

Rest in peace Dorothy, I look forward to meeting you in Heaven where we can talk about Shroud Spectrum International and the Shroud endlessly!

As Dorothy's emails usually ended,

"In fraternitate Sindonis, Dorothy."

Friday, August 22, 2014

Lynne Milne's "A Grain of Truth: How Pollen Brought a Murderer to Justice" (2005)

I am up to "pollen" in my references for the "Shroud of Turin" entry in my Turin Shroud Encyclopedia, when I came again across what I had almost forgotten, this

[Right: "A Grain of Truth: How Pollen Brought a Murderer to Justice" (2005) by Lynne Milne.]

amazing pro-Shroud authenticity, pro-Max Frei's pollen findings, pro-Whangers and Danin's flower images on the Shroud, and anti-the 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud, four pages in a 2005 book, "A Grain of Truth" by respected Australian forensic palynologist, Dr. Lynne Milne. My comments are in bold.


One of the most famous and fascinating cases that involved analysing pollen from woven fabric to determine where something came from is the investigation into the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin.

[Above: Dr. Lynne Milne, Australia's only forensic palynologist: Australian Broadcasting Corporation.]

The Shroud of Turin is a 4.3 x 1.1-metre piece of linen cloth on which a faint image of a man's face and body can be seen. There are various lines of evidence, including blood samples, that suggest that the image is of a man who was crucified. Many believe this is the shroud that was wrapped around the body of Christ after his crucifixion; others believe it's a medieval forgery. Scientists first examined the Shroud at the end of the nineteenth century, and research and debate on its authenticity continue today. Historically, it is alleged that the Shroud was taken from the Holy Land to Constantinople in Turkey and then, in the 1350s it was taken from Turkey to France. The first documented history of the Shroud is from 1357 AD, when it arrived in France. But pollen from the Shroud indicates an earlier history in the Middle East. This summary already shows that Dr. Milne has, unusually, `done her homework' on the Shroud's history.

Pollen was first collected from the Shroud in 1973 by Dr Max Frei,17 [Palenik, S., 1982, "Microscopic trace evidence-the overlooked clue: Part II, Max Frei-Sherlock Holmes with a microscope", Microscope Vol. 30, pp.163-168] then head of the Scientific Service of the Criminal Commission of Investigation [1973] that photographs of the Shroud taken some years before were authentic, he asked for permission to collect dust samples from the Shroud. Shroud sceptics have tried to discredit Max Frei, but while he was not a trained palynologist, he did have a PhD in Botany, and the title of the above paper cited by Milne, "Max Frei-Sherlock Holmes with a microscope," shows that Frei was respected in the forensic science community as a pioneer in the use of pollen to solve crimes.

Frei pressed 5-centimetre sections of transparent sticky tape onto the Shroud, lifted them off and mounted them onto glass microscope slides Police of Zurich, Switzerland. Some of his previous police work was based on pollen and, while testifying at the Turin

[Left: Max Frei taking sticky tape samples of dust and pollen from the Shroud in 1978, with STURP's Ray Rogers looking on: "The 1978 Scientific Examination": Shroud.com.]

for microscopic examination. He found hundreds of pollen grains on the tapes and compared them with reference pollen collected from plants in Israel, Turkey, Cyprus, France and Italy. Only a few pollen grains were from typical European plants found in Italy and France. Most of the pollen was from plants that grow in different parts of Israel, in nearby Turkey, and the western Mediterranean. Thirty-three per cent of the pollen grains were from Gundelia tournefortii, a prickly tumbleweed (thorn) restricted to the

[Above: Middle-East Gundelia tournefortii thorn showing its abundant flowers (and pollen inferred): Flora in Israel.]

Middle East. Among other pollen types, Frei also reported pollen from Rock Rose [Cistus creticus] and a bean caper plant, Zygophyllum dumosum, that would later help other investigations of the Shroud. From the natural distribution of plants represented in the pollen assemblage Frei concluded that the Shroud originated in the Middle East in an area near the Dead Sea and Palestine, and that it had travelled through Turkey to France and Italy. He collected further tapes from the Shroud in 1978 but didn't finish examining them before his death in 1983. It is refreshing to read that forensic palynologist Milne sees no reason to doubt Frei's identification of pollen on the Shroud as having come from the Middle East. This contrasts with the circular argument of extreme Shroud anti-authenticists Steven Schafersman (and Walter McCrone), that: 1) the Shroud is not authentic; 2) Frei's claimed Middle Eastern distribution of Shroud pollen would be strong evidence that the Shroud is authentic; 3) therefore Frei's Shroud pollen distribution must be fraudulent and Frei must be a fraud:

"In a similar fashion, I will show that Max Frei's pollen data can be most reasonably explained by human fraud because the only other possible explanations are that the Shroud of Turin is authentic, that a miracle occurred, or both. Since we are pretty certain as scientists that the Shroud is not authentic and that miracles don't occur, human deception is the only explanation remaining. Proof is not necessary in this method, the scientific method, at all." (Schafersman, S., in McCrone, W.C., 1999, "Judgment Day for the Shroud of Turin," p.302).

In 1988 radiocarbon dating, commonly expressed as carbon-14 or 14C, of linen strands from the Shroud produced a date of 1325 AD, strangely coincident with the first documented history of the Shroud. Sceptics declared the Shroud a thirteenth-fourteenth century forgery; and because Max Frei wasn't a recognised palynologist, his research and findings were not taken seriously. It is significant that Milne also realised that the midpoint of the 1260-1390 radiocarbon dates of the Shroud is 1325 ±65, which is "strangely coincident with the first documented history of the Shroud" (see "My theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker #2") that this `too good to be true' date is evidence of fraud, i.e. computer hacking. It is also significant that Milne does not include herself among the Shroud "Sceptics".

In the year that Max Frei died, a German physicist, Oswald Scheuermann, noticed flower-like images in enhanced photographs of

[Above: One of Scheuermann's corona discharge images of a Chrysanthemum coronarium flower (left), a Chrysanthemum coronarium flower image visible on the Shroud (centre) and a drawing of a Chrysanthemum coronarium flower in Flora Palaestina (right): Whanger, A.D., Council for Study of the Shroud of Turin, Still Image Gallery.]

the Shroud. He conducted experiments and concluded that these images were made by corona discharge-the discharge of radiation from a surface charged with static electricity. That is, where the plant material touched the cloth it lost electrons to the cloth and left faint halo-like images of the outline of the plant material on the cloth. Scheuermann reported his findings to Professor Alan Whanger of Duke University in North Carolina and his wife Mary Whanger. Milne shows an unusual depth of knowledge of Shroud science. As in the previous post, the Whangers are less well known than (say) Ian Wilson. It does not necessarily follow that whatever caused the body image to be imprinted on the cloth was the same as Scheuermann's static electricity discharge but it must also have been able to imprint the images of flowers (and coins).

The Whangers saw these faint images of plant material for themselves on the Shroud in 1985. Over the following decade they enhanced black

[Above (click to enlarge): Chrysanthemum coronarium flower image near the head of the man on the Shroud: ShroudScope: Enrie Negative Vertical. This is the clearest flower image on the Shroud and was the first to be seen by Dr. Alan Whanger. The species C. coronarium is native to the Mediterranean and East Asia. See also below.]

and white photographs of the Shroud taken in 1931 and detected hundreds of images of flowers, buds, leaves, fruit and stems around the head and on the chest area of the image of the figure of a man on the Shroud. Tentatively, they identified 28 of the plant images as being from plants that grew in Israel. Milne does not say that she agrees with Whanger's findings but neither does she say that she doesn't. And it it is very unusual, if not unique, that someone who is not a Shroud pro-authenticist (although see below) states the pro-authenticist case so objectively and fairly. Personally I assume that Milne is a closet Shroud pro-authenticist (again see below).

In 1995 the Whangers enlisted the help of a well-respected Israeli botanist, Dr Avinoam Danin, to confirm their identifications of plants in the Shroud images. Danin was impressed. He verified their work and

[Above: Drawings of the location of other flower images around the Man on the Shroud's face: Prof. Avinoam Danin: "`Holes' in the 3D-Image of the Body on the Shroud."]

identified other plants represented by the images. Of particular interest was the image of a flower of the thorn Gundelia tournefortii near the right shoulder of the figure on the Shroud, the same place from which Frei had taken a tape that contained numerous G. tournefortii pollen grains. This is very important that Frei (like STURP members which he wasn't) was apparently oblivious to the plant images on the Shroud, had reported that he found a concentration of G. tournefortii pollen at the very same place on the Shroud that this G. tournefortii image is. This `two-step authentication' is confirmation that both Frei's pollen identification and Danin's plant images identification are correct. And needless to say a medieval forger, and his target audience, would not have known about pollen grains (which can only be seen with a microscope), let alone obscure Middle Eastern plants.

[Above: "An image of Gundelia tournefortii on the right shoulder of the man of the Shroud (marked by a red ellipse); on the right, enlargement of the G. tournefortii inflorescence displaying a long thorn, from below the inflorescence, and large spots at the tips of the short thorns tips." (Danin, A., 2011, "Plant Stories: My studies on the Botany of the Shroud of Turin," February 20th.]

The Whangers had acquired Max Frei's pollen tapes and Danin took them back to Israel in the hope that Dr Uri Baruch, an expert on Israeli palynology, would examine them. Baruch had publicly taken a stand against Frei's findings, but on examining the tapes he changed his opinion. Like Frei, Baruch found that almost one-third of the pollen grains on the tapes were from the thorn Gundelia tournefortii. This is also important because the claim that Frei could only have identified his pollen down to the genus level, not the species level, fails in the case of G. tournefortii because Gundelia is "a monotypic genus," i.e. a genus with only one species, G. tournefortii":

"The two plant species identified as part of the Shroud, beyond any reasonable doubt, are Gundelia tournefortii and Zygophyllum dumosum. Their presence on the Shroud, with the former confirmed by its pollen grains and both identified by presumed imaging, indicate that the Shroud originated in the spring season (March-April) in the Jerusalem area. The high indicative value of Gundelia tournefortii's pollen grains derives from the fact that it is a monotypic genus (Feinbrun-Dothan, 1978). For the Near East, its pollen morphology is unique for the family and for the entire flora. Zygophyllum dumosum is an endemic plant with unusual leaf morphology. Leaves of the present year are produced at the beginning of winter as paired leaflets on a terete petiole while those of previous years can be seen to lack this leaflet pair. The cooccurrence of these two species on the Shroud suggests that they were placed with the body prior to the process that caused the formation of images on the cloth." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., 1999, "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," p.23. Bold emphasis mine-see below).

During another visit to the Whangers, Danin identified leaves and flowers of bean caper plants, Zygophyllum dumosum, in the image of a bouquet on the chest area of the figure of a man on the Shroud. At that

[Above: On the chest area, "Zygophyllum dumosum leaflets (L), petioles (P) and flower (F) images shown with a black overlay. On the right an illustration of the plant from Flora Palaestina": Danin, A., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin].

time Danin didn't know that Frei had reported pollen of Z. dumosum on the Shroud tapes. Similarly, an image of a bouquet of Rock Roses was found near the left cheek of the figure. Frei had found Rock Rose pollen on the tapes too. Presumably Milne means that Frei found both Bean Caper (Z. dumosum) and Rock Rose (Cistus creticus) pollen in the same places, that Danin found images of those two different species. If so, these would be two more, separate, `two-step authentication' confirmations that Frei's pollen, and Danin's plant image, identifications are correct.

Although pollen and images from many other plants that grow in the Middle East have been recognised on the Shroud, the independent identification of both pollen and images of Gundelia tournefortii and Zygophyllum dumosum are the most significant. The thorn G. tournefortii is insect pollinated and flowers from February to May.

[Above: Distribution map of the only place on earth where Gundelia tournefortii, Zygophyllum dumosum and Cistus creticus are all found growing together (Danin, A., 2010, "Botany of the Shroud: The Story of Floral Images on the Shroud of Turin," p.52), the area around Jerusalem (green circle superimposed by me).].

Such great numbers of pollen from this species could only have arrived on the Shroud from a flower being placed on it. Zygophyllum dumosum is restricted to Israel, western Jordan and Sinai, and its northernmost distribution occurs between Jerusalem and Jericho.18 [Danin, A. & Baruch, U., "Floristic indicators for the origin of the Shroud of Turin," in Minor, M., et. al., eds., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: Unraveling the mystery," Proceedings of the 1998 Dallas Symposium, pp.202-214.] The natural distributions of G. tournefortii and Z. dumosum overlap in two small areas, both in the Holy Land. From studying distribution grids of all the plants identified by pollen or images, Danin reported that the area the Shroud may have originated from is 10-20 kilometres east and west of Jerusalem. What Milne is clearly implying is what others have stated:

"So for Gundelia pollen to be so strongly represented has to mean either that a whole swarm of insects flew from Gundelia plants to land on the Shroud - highly unlikely - or that at some time some person or persons unknown deliberately laid flowering Gundelia tournefortii plants on it. ... it is quite definite that whoever did this has to have done so somewhere within the Middle Eastern geographical area where the plant is known to grow, an area specifically including Jerusalem. They also have to have done so at a time of the year when Gundelia is known to bloom, and therefore produce pollen, a time that botanists ... can narrow to between March and May. So is it mere coincidence that this was the very period of the year within which Jesus' Passover-linked crucifixion occurred?" (Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," p.91).

That is, the abundance of G. tournefortii pollen and plant images (together with those of Z. dumosum and C. creticus) must mean these flowers were placed on the body of the Man, and then covered with the Shroud, in or around Jerusalem between March and May, the same time and place that Jesus was crucified (see below)!

The Whangers, Danin, Baruch and others have plenty of ammunition for the sceptics. The documented history of the Shroud shows that since 1352 AD it hasn't left Europe. If the similar carbon-14 date for the age of the Shroud is correct, how did so many pollen grains and images of plants from the Middle East come to be on the Shroud? The carbon-14 dating has since been discounted. The linen threads that were dated are chemically different from most of the' Shroud linen. Was this younger thread used for mending the Shroud when it first arrived in France, or before it was taken from Constantinople? Milne has `come out of the closet' and is clearly a Shroud pro-authenticist (whether she realises it or not), differentiating herself from Shroud sceptics, pointing out that the Shroud must have had an undocumented history outside of Europe before 1352, in the Middle East, the carbon-14 date for the age of the Shroud cannot be correct and indeed has been "discounted"!

However, she is wrong that, "The linen threads [sic] that were dated are chemically different from most of the' Shroud linen." That is Benford and Marino's claim but as I pointed out in Benford and Marino admit that to shift the carbon-date of 1st century linen shroud to the 14th century would require that the Shroud sample was 60% 16th century, when it clearly isn't. The same 60% contamination requirement refutes all contamination theories. The only theory which satisfactorily explains how the 1st century Shroud has a 14th century carbon date, 1352 ± 65 years, is my computer hacker theory.My theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker #1,"

Are the images of plant material on the Shroud artefacts or 'faces in the clouds' as one sceptic put it? They could be, but it's unlikely. After examining the pollen and image evidence, even the aforementioned sceptic agreed the images may be authentic. Some images can be seen on the Shroud without the aid of photographic enhancement, and the same images can be seen in photographs of the Shroud taken in 1898 and 1978-eighty years apart and with different cameras, films and developing methods. In this instance the "sceptic" is the pro-authenticist Ian Wilson:

"For such reasons Barrie Schwortz and I, along with many others who favour the Shroud's authenticity, dismissed Alan Whanger's insights as having too much of a `faces in clouds' character to be considered in the same scientific league as the pollen evidence. Yet, in fairness to him, in the case of the flower images in particular there are some very good reasons to be wary of too readily dismissing his insights. ... at the March 2000 viewing of the Shroud I was very close to Danin as we were ushered into the Cathedral sacristy. ... Then, as we were able to get within touching distance of the Shroud, the spontaneity of his reaction was quite infectious. As his eyes focused on the shoulder area, in almost childlike delight he recognized, as only one of his so specialized botanical expertise could, the Gundelia inflorescence's presence on this. ... Quite obvious was that for Danin, the world's leading expert on the flora of Israel, here, on this piece of cloth displayed in a northern Italian Cathedral side-room, was utterly unqualified recognition of a plant that he positively knew to come from the environs of his own Jerusalem. And in my observing this recognition, I could only bow to his very special `eye' for such things - as he subsequently explained to me, a `gift' from his childhood. The natural daylight lighting Turin Cathedral's sacristy was clear and even, and as, during the two hours allotted to us, my eyes continued to rove the Shroud's surface, quite apparent was that flower images are not just an aberration of black-and-white photographs. Faint flower-like shapes are quite definitely there on the cloth itself, and while no doubt many can deservedly be dismissed as merely of the `faces in clouds' variety, the `hard' evidence of the pollens, combined with my first-hand observation of Danin's very special eye at work, now persuades me to believe that some at least are `real'. (Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, pp.84,91-92. Emphasis original).

who indeed, as can be seen above, after examining the plant images on the Shroud, agreed that at least some of them are authentic. Not only can some of the plant images be seen on the Shroud directly by the naked eye, as pointed out by Danin, the same images can be seen in photographs of the Shroud taken over 80 years apart, by different photographers, cameras, films and developing methods:

"Confirmation that the plant images are not a result of artifacts of photographic enhancement of Enrie's (1931) negatives is provided by the identical images discovered on photos taken by other photographers. A few of the most significant images were discovered and confirmed (by Danin) in several additional sources (Table 5). There are differences of 80 and 45 years between the three photographic intervals, all by different investigators, by different cameras, with different optical qualities, with different film emulsions and spectral characteristics, as well as film development under different darkroom conditions. Yet, many significant images were consistently observed in the photos of different generations. These similarities establish that the images are not artifacts of photography, but are part of the nature of the Shroud." (Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.21).

The two independent botanical methods, palynology and the analysis of the halo-like images left by coronal discharge, show that plants were placed on the Shroud. Pollen analysis narrowed down the area from which the Shroud originated and determined the time of year when the pollen arrived on it. None of this proves that the Shroud was used to cover the body of Christ. I'm not an adherent of traditional religion, but the abundant presence of pollen from the thorn Gundelia tournefortii and its image near the shoulder of the figure oil the Shroud does provoke thought. This species is not an ornamental and is unlikely to have been used in a floral tribute. That Milne is "not an adherent of traditional religion" makes her fairness and objectivity in considering the pollen and plant image evidence on the Shroud that much more impressive. She cannot be dismissed as being biased in favour of the Shroud by her prior Christian beliefs, as leading Shroud anti-authenticist Joe Nickell and his ilk routinely (and ad hominem fallaciously) do. Milne is correct that the pollen and plant image evidence, although it does narrow down the area from which the Shroud originated (in and around Jerusalem), and the time of year when the pollen arrived on the Shroud (from February to May - and Jesus was crucified just outside the then wall of Jerusalem in April AD 30) does not itself in isolation, "prove... that the Shroud was used to cover the body of Christ."

But then the other evidence that the Man on the Shroud "was flogged, crucified, wore a crown of thorns, did not have his legs broken, was nailed to the cross, had his side pierced, and so on" had already narrowed it down so that, as leading Shroud anti-authenticists Steven Schafersman and Joe Nickell agreed, "Either the shroud is authentic ... produced by the body of Jesus) or it is a product of human artifice," and there is no "possible third hypothesis":

"As the (red ochre) dust settles briefly over Sindondom, it becomes clear there are only two choices: Either the shroud is authentic (naturally or supernaturally produced by the body of Jesus) or it is a product of human artifice. Asks Steven Schafersman: [Schafersman, S.D., 1982, "Science, the public, and the Shroud of Turin," "The Skeptical Inquirer," Vol. 6, No. 3, Spring, pp.37-56, p.42] Is there a possible third hypothesis? No, and here's why. Both Wilson [Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin," pp.51-53.] and Stevenson and Habermas [Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud," pp.121-129] go to great lengths to demonstrate that the man imaged on the shroud must be Jesus Christ and not someone else. After all, the man on this shroud was flogged, crucified, wore a crown of thorns, did not have his legs broken, was nailed to the cross, had his side pierced, and so on. Stevenson and Habermas [Ibid., p.128] even calculate the odds as 1 in 83 million that the man on the shroud is not Jesus Christ (and they consider this a very conservative estimate). I agree with them on all of this. If the shroud is authentic, the image is that of Jesus." (Nickell, J., 1987, "Inquest on the Shroud of Turin," p.141. Emphasis original).

And Schafersman "and so on" could have included that the Man on the Shroud's body did not decompose (which is why we have his burial shroud at all), his body and the Shroud separated without breaking the blood clots attached to both, his image (including that of flowers and coins over his eyes) was imprinted on the cloth, in photographic negative and three-dimensional, anatomically accurate detail, his teeth and some bones are visible under his skin, some of the pollen (including G. tournefortii) and AB blood type matches that of the Sudarium of Oviedo which has been in Spain since the 7th century, etc, etc, narrows it down still further so that beyond any reasonable doubt the image of the Man on the Shroud can only be of Jesus, since the only other possibility that is a product of 14th century or earlier "human artifice" is excluded by Frei's pollen and Danin plant image evidence alone, not to mention historical, archaeological and artistic evidence that the Shroud existed well before the 14th century and indeed all the way back to the 1st century.

After all, Milne herself has provided pollen and plant evidence, which combined with far less other evidence than that on and of the Shroud, has secured convictions in courts of law, on the basis of proof beyond reasonable doubt, which is the theme of her book:

"In 1996 Samantha Hall, a young mother of two, was brutally murdered and her body dumped in parkland near Noosa in the heart of Queensland's Sunshine Coast. Despite suspicions, evidence was thin until the police called in a forensic palynologist - a pollen specialist. Forensic palynology is the use of pollen and spores to help solve crimes. It is another investigative tool, like fingerprint analysis and DNA profiling which is increasingly used by police to solve crimes. Interwoven with the unfolding story of how Samantha's killer was brought to justice, A Grain of Truth opens the door on a new forensic tool that is being used to solve crimes and other mysteries." (Milne, 2005, inside front cover).


(Milne, L., 2005, "A Grain of Truth: How Pollen Brought a Murderer to Justice," New Holland: Frenchs Forest, NSW, Australia, pp.92-95).