Friday, April 13, 2018

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Fourteenth century (2)

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present
FOURTEENTH CENTURY (2)
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

This is part #15, "Fourteenth century (2)" of my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 - present" series. Because of this post's length, I have decided to again split the fourteenth century, this time into parts (2) 1351-1375 and (3) 1376-1400. For more information about this series see part #1, "1st century and Index." Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

[Index #1] [Previous: 14th century (1) #14] [Next: 14th century (3) #16]


14th century (2) (1351-1375).

[Above (enlarge): Lead pilgrim's badge or medallion in the Cluny Museum, Paris[2] from the first undisputed exposition of the Shroud at Lirey, France from c.1355-56[3]. The coats of arms are of Geoffroy I de Charny (left) and his wife Jeanne de Vergy (right). See "c.1355-6" below.]

1351 Geoffroy I de Charny (c.1300–1356) returned to France from his captivity in England [see "1349d"] in July after his huge ransom of 12,000 ecus was paid by King John II (r.1350–1364)[4].

c.1351 Around 1351-1352 a painted copy of the Shroud with the frontal image only began to be exhibited in Besançon[5] [see "1349b" and "1375"].

1352 In January Geoffroy was created a founding member of the knights of the Order of the Star[6], members of which, like the Knights Templar, took a vow never to flee in battle[7].

c.1352 Birth of Geoffroy II de Charny (1352-98) to Geoffroy I de Charny and Jeanne de Vergy (c.1332–1428)[8].

1353 According to its Act of Foundation, construction of the Lirey church began on 20 February 1353 and was completed on 20 June 1353[9]. In June 1353, King John retrospectively granted Geoffroy I permission to build a collegiate church in Lirey[10]. See Introduction and "c.1343" where, according to my theory, Geoffroy by now had the Shroud[11].

1354a In January Geoffroy resubmitted his petition of five years previously to Pope Clement VI (r. 1342-1352) [see "1349c"] to the new Avignon Pope Innocent VI (r. 1352-1362), for approval that the by now built Lirey church be elevated to the status of a collegiate church[12]. Its clergy had increased to six canons, one of whom was the ruling Dean, together with three assistant clerics[13] - for a tiny a village of only ~50 houses [14][see "1343c"]!

1354b Henri de Poitiers (r. 1354–1370) was appointed Bishop of nearby Troyes[15].

1354c In August Pope Innocent VI recognised the Lirey church's canons and its collegiate status and granted indulgences to pilgrims visiting the church[16]. Yet despite extant lists of the various relics held by the Lirey church in 1354, none mention the Shroud[17]! There is an explanations for this: as we shall see the Shroud never was the property of the Lirey church but remained the private property of Geoffroy I de Charny and/or Jeanne de Vergy and their heirs[18].

1355 In June Geoffroy I was again [see "c.1347"] appointed bearer of the Oriflamme, the French sacred battle standard[19].

c.1355 First exposition of the Shroud in undisputed history at Lirey,

[Right (enlarge)[20]: Rebuilt Church of St. Mary, Lirey, France. It was on these grounds in c.1355 that the Shroud was first exhibited in undisputed history.]

France by Geoffroy I de Charny and his wife Jeanne de Vergy[21]. This date is based on a 1389 memorandum by the then Bishop of Troyes, Pierre d'Arcis (r. 1377-1395) [see "1389d"], to Pope Clement VII (r.1378-94), which stated that the Shroud had been exhibited in Lirey "thirty-four years or thereabouts" previously[22], that pilgrims were told it was "the true shroud of Christ" and that "from all parts people came together to view it"[23].

c.1355-6 Pilgrim's badge or medallion in the Cluny Museum, Paris [see above][24], from the first exposition of the Shroud at Lirey, France, in c.1355-56. It was found in 1855[25] by a French archaeologist, Arthur Forgeais (1822-78) in the mud of the Seine River, Paris[26], under the Pont au Change bridge[27]. Forgeais found hundreds of pilgrim's medallions to various holy places at that location (but only one of the Lirey Shroud exposition), which indicates it was a pilgrim `wishing well' site[28]. The badge depicts the actual Lirey exposition[29], with the arms and hands of two clerics (whose heads have broken off[30]) holding the Shroud[31] as well as the exposition platform and its support posts (the tops of which have also broken off) are on either side[32] (see below). The clerics are holding a full-

[Above (enlarge)[33]: The top `third' of the Lirey pilgrim's badge showing part of the arms and the hands of two clerics holding the Shroud, between the broken off support posts of the Lirey exposition platform.]

length representation of the Shroud[34] (below), the first known[35].

[Above (enlarge)[36]: The middle `third' of the Lirey pilgrim's badge depicting the full-length Shroud.]

The man on the Shroud is depicted front and back, head to head[37] and naked[38]. Despite the small, about 6.2cm. by 4.5cm. (or 2½ in. by 1¾ in.), size of the badge[39], the mold-maker even depicted the Shroud's herringbone weave[40] [see 16Jul15a]. Under the Shroud is a depiction of the reliquary (below) in which the Shroud was then kept[41]. That this is a depiction of the Shroud's reliquary and not a

[Above (enlarge)[42]: The bottom `third' of the Lirey pilgrim's badge showing the reliquary in which the Shroud was then kept. The coat of arms shields of Geoffroy I de Charny are on the right of the reliquary and that of Jeanne de Vergy is on its left[43]. The roundel in the centre represents the empty Tomb[44], and around it are instruments of the Passion: a flagrum, the scourging column, the lance, pincers, nails, and the cross upon which is hung the crown of thorns[45].]

depiction of the de Charny and de Vergy coats of arms themselves, solves the apparent problem of Jeanne's coat of arms seeming to be on the right and Geoffroy's on the left[46]. That the reliquary has Geoffroy I's coat of arms[47] indicates that he was still alive at the time of the exposition[48] and therefore the badge (and the exposition) must be dated before his death at the Battle of Poitiers in 1356[49] [see "1356c"]. It is most unlikely that the exposition took place, or continued, after Geoffroy I's September 1356 death in the Battle of Poitiers [see "1356c"] because not only would Jeanne have been grieving the death of her husband, but King John II had been captured [see "1356d"], the French army had been decimated and roving bands of English "companies" remained behind in France after the Battle of Poitiers [see "1356e"], which would have made it too dangerous for pilgrims to travel, let alone the danger to the Shroud [see "1359"].

1356a In a letter dated 28 May 1356[50], Bishop Henri de Poitiers, writing from his diocese of Aix (presumably Aix-en-Othe)[51] formally ratified Geoffroy I's letters instituting the Lirey church, praised him and approved its "divine cult":

"Henri, by the grace of God and of the Apostolic See, confirmed bishop elect of Troyes, to all those who will see this letter, eternal salvation in the Lord. You will learn what we ourselves learned on seeing and hearing the letters of the noble knight Geoffroy de Charny, Lord of Savoysy and of Lirey, to which and for which our present letters are enclosed, after scrupulous examination of these letters and more especially of the said knight's sentiments of devotion, which he has hitherto manifested for the divine cult and which he manifests ever more daily. And ourselves wishing to develop as much as possible a cult of this nature, we praise, ratify and approve the said letters in all their parts a cult which is declared and reported to have been canonically and ritually prescribed, as we have been informed by legitimate documents. To all these, we give our assent, our authority and our decision, by faith of which we esteem it our duty to affix our seal to this present letter in perpetual memory. Given in our palace of Aix of our diocese in the year of Our Lord 1356, Saturday, the 28th of the month of May"[52].
1356b On 19 September 1356 the Battle of Poitiers was fought at

[Left (enlarge): Battle of Poitier at Nouaillé-Maupertuis in 1356, in the Chronicles of Froissart, c.1470[53]. The mounted French knights in armour (right) were no match for the longbows of the English foot-soldiers (left)[54].]

Nouaillé, near the city of Poitiers in Aquitaine, western France[55]. An English army led by Edward, the Black Prince (1330–1376)[56], defeated a much larger French army led by King John II (r.1350–1364)[57]. The loss included the capture of King John II[58], his son Philip II (1342–1404), and much of the French nobility[59]. The effect of the defeat on France was catastrophic, leaving the country in the hands of the 18 year-old Dauphin, and future King, Charles V (r.1364-1380)[60].

1356c Death of Geoffroy I de Charny on 19 September 1356 in the Battle of Poitiers[61]. He died, Oriflamme in hand[62], interposing his body between an English lance and King John II[63]. Geoffroy's body was buried in a nearby graveyard[64] but 14 years later, in 1370, his gallantry was publicly recognized when his remains were given a state funeral and reburied in the Abbey of the Celestins in Paris[65] [see "1370"].

1356d King John II was taken captive in the same Battle of Poitiers[66]. The Treaty of Brétigny in 1360 set John's ransom at 3 million crowns, so leaving his son Louis I, Duke of Anjou (1339–1384) in English-held Calais as hostage, John return to France to raise the funds[67]. However in 1363 Louis escaped and John for reasons of "good faith and honour" voluntarily returned to England[68] where he died in 1364 and his body was returned to France[69].

1356e Marauding bands of English soldiers, called "companies," after the Battle of Poitiers, began roaming the French countryside looting towns[70].

1357a Twelve bishops of the pontifical court at Avignon grant indulgences to all who visit the church of St Mary of Lirey and its relics[71].

1357b Also in June there was a peasants' revolt, known as the Jacquerie, which spread into Lirey's Champagne region, and although it was directed primarily against the nobility in manors and castles, there was also indiscriminate looting[72].

c. 1358 Due to the threats of the "companies" [see "1356e" and "1359"] and the peasants' revolt [see "1357b"], presumably the Shroud was taken in c. 1358 by Geoffroy I's widow Jeanne, with her two young children Geoffroy II (1352–1398) and Charlotte (c.1356-1398), to a safer region of France[73]. Such as her castle at Montfort-en-Auxois [Right (enlarge)[74].] (aka Montfort near Montbard)[75] which was ~93 km (~58 mi) south of Lirey. [see 16Feb15a].

1359 A "company" (see "1356d") under English knight Robert Knolles (c.1325–1407) attempts to capture Troyes but under the leadership of Bishop Henri de Poitiers, the attack failed[76]. Lirey is only ~12 miles (~19 km) from Troyes[77] and such a valuable and well-known religious artifact as the Shroud would have been a prime target for one of "the companies" so presumably it had already been taken to a safer region of France [see "c. 1358"].

c. 1359 Jeanne married the wealthy and influential Aymon IV of Geneva (c. 1324-1388)[78], an uncle of Robert of Geneva (1342-94) who became Pope Clement VII (r.1378-94)[79] [see "1378"]. Then she took her two children Geoffroy II and Charlotte, and the Shroud from Montfort to the safety of one of Aymon's estates in High Savoy (that part of France bordering both Switzerland and Italy), probably Anthon[80] [see 16Feb15b]. Aymon's domains were close to Annecy where Clement VII had been born and grew up[81]. Because of Clement VII's unexpected siding with Geoffroy II and Jeanne's 1389 exposition of the Shroud against Bishop d'Arcis' objections [see future "1389e"], presumably Jeanne had privately shown the Shroud to Robert of Geneva and explained its history: how her ancestor Othon de la Roche had brought the Shroud from Constantinople to Burgundy, via Athens [see "c1332"] [82]. So Pope Clement VII would have known the true facts about the Shroud's history, how it had come into the possession of the de Charny family and why this must remain a secret [see 15Aug17] [83].

1370 Geoffroy I was given a hero's reburial at the Abbey of the Celestins in Paris by John II's son, King Charles V (r.1364-1380)[84].

1375 Archbishop Guillaume (William) de Vergy (r. 1371–1391)[85], claimed to have found the original Besançon shroud lost in the 1349 fire [see "1349b"] [86] and `verified' it by a `miracle' of laying that `shroud' on a dead man who immediately revived[87]! Thus a de Vergy `verified' by this `miracle' that this was the original Shroud[88], which fits the theory that the de Vergys arranged the transfer of the Shroud from Besançon in Burgundy to Jeanne de Vergys in Paris[89] [see "c1343"]. This painted copy of the Shroud with the frontal image only[90] [see "c1351"] was kept at Besançon until it was destroyed in 1792 during the French Revolution[91]. Guillaume was a favourite of John II's older son, King Charles V[92] and came into conflict with John II's youngest son Duke Philip II of Burgundy (1342–1404), whom he excommunicated and took refuge at Avignon[93]. Where he was in 1391 made Cardinal of Besançon by Avignon Pope Clement VII (r.1378-94)[94].

c.1375 Only known other examples of herringbone twill linen weave in

[Left (enlarge): The larger fragment of only known other examples of a herringbone twill weave in linen (the grey part is a reconstruction), dated the second half of the fourteenth century[95], in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, ref. no. 8615-1863[96]. This 18 cm x 10.5 cm fragment, the larger of two (see ref. 7027-1860), is of coarser weave than the Shroud and was sold to the Victoria and Albert Museum in 1863 by a Franz Bock who attributed it to Italy[97]. They are the only known examples of herringbone twill linen (which the Shroud is - see 16Jul15b]), so how could a medieval forger have obtained a ~4.4 m x 1.1 m [see 16Jul15c] herringbone twill linen sheet?]

the Victoria and Albert Museum, London[98].

Continued in the next part #16 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. Latendresse, M., 2012, "A Souvenir from Lirey," Sindonology.org. [return]
3. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, pp.221-222. [return]
4. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.197; Currer-Briggs, N., 1995, "Shroud Mafia: The Creation of a Relic?," Book Guild: Sussex UK, pp.30-31; 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.277; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.10; Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, p.231; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, pp.44-45; Wilson, 2010, p.218. [return]
5. Hynek, R.W., 1951, "The True Likeness," [1946], Sheed & Ward: London, p.9; O'Connell, P. & Carty, C., 1974, "The Holy Shroud and Four Visions," TAN: Rockford IL, p.8; Guerrera, 2001, p.11. [return]
6. Wilson, 1979, p.198; Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.31; Wilson, 1998, p.277; Wilson, 2010, p.218. [return]
7. Wilson, 1979, p.198; Wilson, 2010, p.218. [return]
8. Crispino, D.C., 1982, "Recently Published," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 4, September, pp.32-35, 34; Currer-Briggs, N., 1988, "The Shroud and the Grail: A Modern Quest for the True Grail," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, p.35; Wilson, 1998, p.279. [return]
9. Bulst, W., 1957, "The Shroud of Turin," McKenna, S. & Galvin, J.J., transl., Bruce Publishing Co: Milwaukee WI, pp.6, 9; Rinaldi, P.M., 1978, "The Man in the Shroud," [1972], Futura: London, Revised, p.20; Crispino, D.C., 1981, "Why Did Geoffroy de Charny Change His Mind?," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 1, December, pp.28-34, 30-31. [return]
10. Currer-Briggs, 1988, pp.37, 49; Guerrera, 2001, p.10; Oxley, 2010, p.48. [return]
11. Morgan, R., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia, p.28; Maher, R.W., 1986, "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, p.97; Oxley, 2010, pp.46, 48. [return]
12. Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.31; Tribbe, 2006, p.41; Oxley, 2010, p.111; Wilson, 2010, pp.220, 277, 302. [return]
13. Wilson, 2010, p.220; Tribbe, 2006, p.41. [return]
14. Wilson, 2010, p.219. [return]
15. Wilson, 1998, p.278; Wilson, 2010, p.220. [return]
16. Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, p.20; Wilson, 1998, p.278; Wilson, 2010, p.220. [return]
17. Wilson, 1991, p.20; Oxley, 2010, p.49. [return]
18. Humber, T., 1978, "The Sacred Shroud," [1974], Pocket Books: New York NY, p.101; Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ, p.44; Drews, R., 1984, "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham MD, p.32; Currer-Briggs, 1988, pp.36-37; Piana, A., 2007, "The Shroud's "Missing Years," British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 66. December, pp.9-25, 28-31. [return]
19. Wilson, 1979, p.259; Oxley, 2010, p.52. [return]
20. "Lirey, France," Google Street View, August 2008. [return]
21. Oxley, 2010, pp.4, 49; Wilson, 2010, pp.221-222, 302. [return]
22. Humber, 1978, p.96; Wilson, 1979, pp.91, 267; Scavone, D.C., 1989, "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA, p.14; Scavone, D.C., "The History of the Turin Shroud to the 14th C.," in Berard, A., ed., 1991, "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, pp.171-204, 174; Wilson, 1991, p.19; Scavone, D.C., 1998, "A Hundred Years of Historical Studies on the Turin Shroud," Paper presented at the Third International Congress on the Shroud of Turin, 6 June 1998, Turin, Italy, in Minor, M., Adler, A.D. & Piczek, I., eds., 2002, "The Shroud of Turin: Unraveling the Mystery: Proceedings of the 1998 Dallas Symposium," Alexander Books: Alexander NC, pp.58-70, 66; Wilson, 1998, pp.111, 120, 122, 126; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.151-152; Guerrera, 2001, p.14; Wilson, 2010, p.222[return].
23. Wilson, 1979, p.268; Guerrera, 2001, p.14; Oxley, 2010, p.53; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.14. [return]
24. Adams, 1982, pp.30-31; Wilson, 1998, p.127; Oxley, 2010, p.49. [return]
25. Antonacci, 2000, p.150; Wilson, 1998, pp.126-127. [return]
26. Bonnet-Eymard, B., "Study of original documents of the archives of the Diocese of Troyes in France with particular reference to the Memorandum of Pierre d'Arcis," in Berard, A., ed., 1991, "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, pp.233-260, 245; Wilson, 1991, p.194; Wilson, 1998, pp.126-127; Tribbe, 2006, p.42. [return]
27. Wilson, 1979, p.194; Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.5. [return]
28. Foster, A., 2012, "The Pilgrim's Medallion / Amulet of Lirey," BSTS Newsletter, No. 75, June. [return]
29. Scott, J.B., 2003, "Architecture for the Shroud: Relic and Ritual in Turin," University of Chicago Press: Chicago & London, p.12. [return]
30. Adams, 1982, p.31; Bonnet-Eymard, 1991, p.246; Wilson, 1998, p.127; Guerrera, 2001, p.103. [return]
31. Wilson, 1998, p.127; Wilson, 2010, p.221. [return]
32. Scott, 2003, p.12. [return]
33. Latendresse, 2012. [return]
34. Adams, 1982, pp.30-31. [return]
35. Wilson, 1979, p.224D; Adams, 1982, pp.30-31; Wilson, 1986, p.5; Wilson, 1991, p.21; Wilson, 1998, p.127; Wilson, 2010, p.303. [return]
36. Latendresse, 2012. [return]
37. Wilson, 1979, p.224D; Adams, 1982, p.31; Maher, 1986, p.961; Wilson, 1986, p.5; Wilson, 1998, p.127; Guerrera, 2001, p.103; Tribbe, 2006, p.42; Wilson, 2010, pp.302-303. [return]
38. Wilson, 1998, p.127; Guerrera, 2001, p.103. [return]
39. Wilson, 1998, p.126; Scott, 2003, p.12; Wilson, 2010, p.221; Foster, A., 2012. [return]
40. Guerrera, 2001, p.103; Scott, 2003, p.12; Foster, A., 2012; Wilson, 2010, p.221. [return]
41. Bonnet-Eymard, 1991, p.246; Guerrera, 2001, p.103. [return]
42. Latendresse, 2012. [return]
43. Wilson, 1979, p.224D; Maher, 1986, p.96; Wilson, 1986, p.5; Wilson, 1998, p.127; Antonacci, 2000, p.150; Tribbe, 2006, p.42; Wilson, 2010, p.221. [return]
44. Wilson, 1979, p.224D; Wilson, 1986, p.5; Wilson, 1998, p.127; Antonacci, 2000, p.150; Guerrera, 2001, p.103; Scott, 2003, p.12; Wilson, 2010, p.221. [return]
45. Wilson, 1998, p.127; Guerrera, 2001, p.103; Scott, 2003, p.12. [return]
46. Oxley, 2010, p.52; Wilson, 2010, p.222. [return]
47. Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, p.128; Oxley, 2010, p.49. [return]
48. Bonnet-Eymard, 1991, p.246; Antonacci, 2000, p.151; Oxley, 2010, p.49. [return]
49. Oxley, 2010, p.49. [return]
50. Bulst, 1957, p.9; Wilson, 1979, pp.90, 193, 259; Currer-Briggs, N., 1984, "The Holy Grail and the Shroud of Christ: The Quest Renewed," ARA Publications: Maulden UK, p.65; Currer-Briggs, 1988, p.49; Scavone, 1989, pp.15-16; Wilson, 1991, p.20; Wilson, 1998, p.128; Antonacci, 2000, p.152; Guerrera, 2001, p.10; Tribbe, 2006, p.42; Wilson, 2010, p.303. [return]
51. Wilson, 1998, p.278; Wilson, 2010, pp.224, 229. [return]
52. Bonnet-Eymard, 1991, p.242; Wilson, 1991, p.20; Wilson, 1998, pp.128, 278; Guerrera, 2001, p.11; Wilson, 2010, p.224. [return]
53. "File:Battle-poitiers(1356).jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 23 April 2017. [return]
54. Wilson, 1979, p.199; Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, p.18; Oxley, 2010, p.471; Wilson, 2010, p.224. [return]
55. "Battle of Poitiers," Wikipedia, 29 April 2018. [return]
56. Adams, 1982, p.44; Currer-Briggs, 1988, p.49. [return]
57. Wilson, 1979, p.199; Antonacci, 2000, p.151; "Battle of Poitiers," Wikipedia, 29 April 2018. [return]
58. Wilson, 1998, p.278; "Battle of Poitiers," Wikipedia, 29 April 2018. [return]
59. "Battle of Poitiers," Wikipedia, 29 April 2018. [return]
60. Ibid. [return]
61. Adams, 1982, p.44; Guerrera, 2001, p.12; "Geoffroi de Charny: Death," Wikipedia, 17 April 2018. [return]
62. Currer-Briggs, 1988, p.49; Wilson, 1998, p.278; 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.64. [return]
63. Wilson, 1979, p.91; Currer-Briggs, 1988, p.49; Wilson, 1991, p.21; Wilson, 1998, p.278; Ruffin, 1999, p.64. [return]
64. Wilson, 1998, p.278. [return]
65. Wilson, 1979, p.91; Currer-Briggs, 1988, p.49; Wilson, 1991, p.21. [return]
66. "John II of France: Surrender and capture," Wikipedia, 6 April 2018. [return]
67. "John II of France: Treaty of Brétigny," Wikipedia, 6 April 2018. [return]
68. "John II of France: Louis' escape and returning to England," Wikipedia, 6 April 2018. [return]
69. "John II of France: Death," Wikipedia, 6 April 2018. [return]
70. Oxley, 2010, p.51. [return]
71. Wilson, 1998, p.279; Guerrera, 2001, p.12; Oxley, 2010, p.52. [return]
72. Oxley, 2010, p.50. [return]
73. Oxley, 2010, pp.51-52. [return]
74. "Château de Montfort," Tourisme en Bourgogne, 2014. [return]
75. Piana, 2007. [return]
76. Oxley, 2010, p.51. [return]
77. Wilson, 1986, p.11; Currer-Briggs, 1988, p.37; Wilson, 1998, p.129; Ruffin, 1999, p.65; Antonacci, 2000, p.151; Scott, 2003, p.13; Oxley, 2010, p.51. [return]
78. Wilson, 1979, p.203; Adams, 1982, p.33; Wilson, 1991, p.18; Wilson, 1998, p.279; Guerrera, 2001, pp.12-13; Oxley, 2010, p.68; Wilson, 2010, p.229. [return].
79. Wilson, 1979, pp.203, 205; Adams, 1982, p.33; Currer-Briggs, 1988, p.43; Wilson, 1991, p.18; Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.34; Guerrera, 2001, p.13; Oxley, 2010, p.83. [return]
80. Wilson, 1991, p.18; Wilson, 2010, pp.229-230. [return]
81. Wilson, 1991, p.18. [return]
82. Oxley, 2010, p.83. [return]
83. Currer-Briggs, 1988, p.43. [return]
84. Wilson, 1979, p.203; Wilson, 1991, p.21; Wilson, 1998, p.279; Whiting, B., 2006, "The Shroud Story," Harbour Publishing: Strathfield NSW, Australia, p.43. [return]
85. Bonnet-Eymard, 1991, p.245; Scavone, 1991, p.199. [return]
86. Scavone, 1991, pp.199-200. [return]
87. Ibid; Guerrera, 2001, p.12. [return]
88. Scavone, 1991, p.200. [return]
89. Ibid. [return]
90. Ibid; Guerrera, 2001, p.12. [return]
91. Guerrera, 2001, p.12. [return]
92. "House of Vergy: Notable members," Wikipedia, 18 November 2017. [return]
93. "Guillaume de Vergy," Wikipedia, 8 March 2018. [return]
94. "House of Vergy: Notable members," Wikipedia, 18 November 2017. [return]
95. Wilson, 1998, p.69. [return]
96. Ibid. [return]
97. Wilson, I., 1990, "Recent Publications," BSTS Newsletter, No. 26, September/October, pp.11-18, 14. [return]
98. Wilson, 1998, p.69. [return]

Posted: 13 April 2018. Updated: 12 July 2018.

Thursday, April 5, 2018

Water stains #28: Other marks and images: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!

WATER STAINS #28
Copyright © Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is part #28, "Other marks and images: water stains," of my series, "The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!" For more information about this series, see the "Main index #1" and "Other marks and images #26." Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated. Again see also, "The Shroud of Turin: 2.6. The other marks (1): Burns and water stains."

[Main index #1] [Previous: Burns #27] [Next: "Poker holes" #29]


  1. Other marks and images #26
    1. Water stains #28

Introduction As well as burns from the 1532 Sainte Chapelle, Chambéry fire (see previous part #27) there are water stains on the Shroud from extinguishing that fire[2]. But the most prominent,

[Right (enlarge): Water stains on the Shroud. According to photo- grapher Aldo Guerreschi and writer Michele Salcito, only the small water stains marked in red are from the 1532 fire. The rest of the large stains marked in blue are from a previous unrecorded, presumably ancient, water staining when the Shroud was kept in a Middle-Eastern type pottery jar[3]! (see below).]

large water stains [right] are, according to Guerreschi and Salcito, from a previous, unrecorded, presumably ancient, water staining when the Shroud was tightly rolled up inside a Middle-Eastern pottery jar[4]! (see future below).

Note: Even though I had saved Guerreschi and Salcito's two papers in 2015, and I had read about and accepted their ancient pottery jar experiment in Ian Wilson's "The Shroud" (2010), I hadn't mentally connected their findings with the burns marks in part #27. So after this post I will go back and update part #27 to take account of Guerreschi and Salcito's findings.

Water stains from the 1532 fire In 1931 Fr. Antonio Tonelli (1877-1938), based on the pattern of the burns from the 1532 fire, proposed that at the time of the fire the Shroud had been folded in 48 layers[5], "four times across the breadth and twelve times across the length"[6]. Even though he accepted Tonelli's reconstruction, Dr R.W. (Rudolf Maria) Hynek (1883-1952) considered it a "strange fact" that the water stains were from "water thrown over" the Shroud to extinguish the 1532 fire, yet the burns marks on the Shroud "remained dry, untouched by the water which soaked the rest of the Shroud"[7]. And in 1985, British Society for the Turin Shroud member, Dr. Michael Clift (1928-2016), later to become the Society's General Secretary, asked a `the Emperor has no clothes' question:

"... why are the water stains not directly over the fire damage? They are indeed so separated from it that one can fairly ask how was the fire extinguished?"[8].
By superimposing the 1931 Enrie photographs of the burned areas [Left (enlarge)[9].] over Barrie Schwortz' transparency photographs taken during STURP's 1978 Turin investigation,[Right (enlarge)[10].] Guerreschi and Salcito were able to `see through' the patches sewn over the burned areas by Chambéry's Poor Clare nuns in 1534, and determine with precision the exact contours of the 1532 burn holes and so discover the real burn damage to the Shroud [Left (enlarge)[11].] caused by the 1532 Chambéry fire[12].

Then by superimposing the first four burn holes in order of decreasing charring [Below (enlarge)[13]. Note the water stains in blue, realistic- ally around the burned areas.], Guerreschi and Salcito were able to determine the correct folding sequence of the first four layers of the Shroud at the time of the 1532 fire[14]. Then by repeating this process, Guerreschi and Salcito found that the Shroud had been folded in 32 [Left (enlarge)[15].] (not 48) layers of four layers of four thicknesses on one side and eight layers of four thicknesses on the other side, at the time of the 1532 fire[16]. That would make the Shroud pack length about 75 cm and its width about 29 cm[17]. These dimens- ions are more in proportion with the Chambéry chapel niche [Below (enlarge)[18].](165 cm L x 50 cm H x 60 cm D)[19], which held the Shroud's casket donated by Margaret of Austria (1480–1530)[20].

Ancient water stains Having accurately reconstructed the damage to the Shroud caused by the 1532 fire and from that the 32-layers in which the Shroud had then been folded, Guerreschi and Salcito saw clearly that the large water stains (in blue above) did not have any connection with those burns and that folding system[21]. They therefore realised that these large stains could not have been from the same incident[22]. The large water stains were similar and equidistant [Left (enlarge)[23].], with very irregular edges[24] [Below (enlarge)[25].] After numerous experiments Guerreschi and Salcito found that the folding pattern which fitted the large water stains was if the Shroud had been folded accordion-style in 52 layers [Above (enlarge): the first 13 of 52 layers[26].] resting against each other [Left (enlarge)[27].] in a near vertical slanting position[28]. Guerreschi and Salcito found with a sheet of linen having the same dimensions (436 cm by 111 cm) as the Shroud and the same herring bone weave, that the first section tended to collapse (see below)[29]. This explains that section's irregular water stain (see above top)[30]. [Below (enlarge): Collapse of the first section of a Shroud-like cloth folded accordion- style in 52 layers[31].]

Guerreschi and Salcito then considered what kind of receptacle could have been used to store the Shroud in a slightly curved slanted near vertical position, as indicated by the large water stains[32]. They reasoned that it could have been an ancient earthenware jar like those which were common in antiquity[33]. They then found on the website of the Israel Antiquities Authority an earthen- ware jar [Left (enlarge)[34].] found at Qumran (which was destroyed by the Romans in c. AD 68[35] and thus overlapped the time of Christ[36]) with the characteristics and dimensions to explain the large water stains on the Shroud[37]. Guerreschi obtained an exact replica of one of these ancient jars and fitted into it a cloth of exactly the same dimensions as the Shroud, folding it in the accordion-style arrangement that the large water stains indicated[38]. It was a perfect fit, and held the arrangement perfectly[39]! Guerreschi then repeated the experiment, this time with a puddle of water in the bottom of the jar and when he removed the cloth and opened it out, there was an identical pattern of water stains[40]! Ian Wilson personally verified a further repeat of Guerreschi's experiment:

"This is no anecdote. Guerreschi repeated it in April 2004, with me acting as his assistant, for a British-made television documentary produced by Pioneer Productions [Secrets of the Dead IV: The Shroud of Christ] As the production team can confirm, the filming occurred at the very end of the day, with no possible opportunity for a second 'take'. Again, an identical pattern was produced"[41]!
Problem for the forgery theory (see previous three: #24, #25 and #27). That the Shroud has water stains which perfectly fit it having been stored in a first-century earthenware jar is yet another problem for the medieval forgery theory. That is because a medieval forger would have been most unlikely (to put it mildly) to forge water stains on the Shroud to match its linen having been kept in a first-century earthenware jar, when it was not until the 21st century that it was worked out that was what they indicated. The only other alternative is that the forger went to the time, trouble and expense of finding a first-century linen cloth (which just happened to have those water stains) on which to imprint his forgery. But apart from then the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud's linen would be wrong, it again would be most unlikely for a medieval forger to do that. After it was announced on 13 October 1988 that the Shroud's radiocarbon date was "1260-1390!"[42] journalists linked the Shroud to products of "mediaeval tricksters" such as "a feather from the Archangel Gabriel" and "the last breath of St Joseph"[43]. To which Ian Wilson responded:
"... is it not rather incredible that this unknown individual should have gone to so much trouble and effort to deceive in an age in which, as twentieth-century journalists have reminded us, a large proportion of the populace would have been very easily duped by a feather of the Archangel Gabriel or a phial of the last breath of St Joseph?"[44].
Similarly when Oxford radiocarbon dating laboratory's Professor Edward Hall (1924-2001) claimed in the same newspaper article that: "Someone just got a bit of linen, faked it up and flogged [sold] it[45], as I pointed out in "Weave" #4 of this series:
"... in a sense Hall was right! If the Shroud were a medieval forgery, then the forger, to maximise his profit, would have `just got a bit of linen.' That is, he would have used the least expensive `bit of linen' he could find that would still deceive his prospective buyers ... But the Shroud is not just any `bit of linen.' ... the Shroud would have been expensive and rare in the first century. And it would have been even more expensive and rare in the 14th century ... So the medieval forger would have been most unlikely to have obtained a fine linen herringbone twill sheet the size of the Shroud in the first place. And if the forger did have the opportunity to obtain the 8 x 2 cubit (see `Dimensions #3") ancient Syrian or Palestinian fine linen sheet that the Shroud is ... he would not have bought it for the very high price it would have been, as that would have severely reduced the profit margin on his planned forgery of the Shroud image upon it."
So neither of the two medieval forgery alternatives can plausibly explain why the Shroud has water stains which perfectly fit it having been stored in a first-century earthenware jar!

Continued in the next part #29 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. Heller, J.H. & Adler, A.D., 1981, "A Chemical Investigation of the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.34-57, 35; Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 18; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.48; Adler, A.D., 2000c, "Chemical and Physical Aspects of the Sindonic Images," in Adler & Crispino, 2002, pp.10-27, 13. [return]
3. Guerreschi, A. & Salcito, M., 2002, "Photographic and computer studies concerning the burn and water stains visible on the Shroud and their historical consequences," IV Symposium Scientifique International du CIELT, April 25-26, 2002, Paris, France, pp.1-14. [return]
4. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, pp.1-14; Guerreschi, A. & Salcito, M., 2005, "Further studies on the scorches and the watermarks," The 3rd International Dallas Conference on the Shroud of Turin, September 8 through 11, 2005, The Adolphus Hotel, Dallas, Texas, pp.1-10. [return]
5. Hynek, R.W., 1951, "The True Likeness," [1946], Sheed & Ward: London, p.3; Humber, T., 1978, "The Sacred Shroud," [1974], Pocket Books: New York NY, p.105; Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.24; Morgan, R., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia, p.45; Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.2; 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.65; Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, p.22; Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002; Guerreschi & Salcito, 2005, p.1; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, p.4. [return]
6. Hynek, 1951, p.3. [return]
7. Hynek, 1951, pp.3-4. [return]
8. Clift, M., 1985, "Contributions from B.S.T.S. members," BSTS Newsletter, No. 10, April, pp.11-13, 12. [return]
9. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.2. [return]
10. Ibid. [return]
11. Ibid. [return]
12. Ibid. [return]
13. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.3. [return]
14. Ibid. [return]
15. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.4. [return]
16. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, pp.4-5. [return]
17. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.5. [return]
18. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2005, p.2. [return]
19. Ibid. [return]
20. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.5. [return]
21. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.7. [return]
22. Ibid. [return]
23. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.8. [return]
24. Ibid. [return]
25. Ibid. [return]
26. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.10. [return]
27. Ibid. [return]
28. Ibid. [return]
29. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.12. [return]
30. Ibid. [return]
31. Ibid. [return]
32. Ibid. [return]
33. Ibid. [return]
34. Ibid. [return]
35. "Qumran," Wikipedia, 21 February 2018. [return]
36. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, p.83. [return]
37. Guerreschi & Salcito, 2002, p.12. [return]
38. Wilson, 2010, p.83. [return]
39. Ibid. [return]
40. Ibid. [return]
41. Ibid. [return]
42. Wilson, 1998, pp.6-7. [return]
43. Sheridan, M. & Reeves, P., 1988, "Turin Shroud shown to be a fake," The Independent, 14 October in Wilson, 1998, p.7. [return]
44. Wilson, 1998, pp.59-60. [return]
45. Wilson, 1998, p.7. [return]

Posted: 5 April 2018. Updated: 21 August 2018.

Monday, April 2, 2018

"Editorial and Contents," Shroud of Turin News, March 2018

Shroud of Turin News - March 2018
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

[Previous: February 2018, part #1] [Next: April 2018, part #1]

This is the "Editorial and Contents," part #1, of the March 2018 issue of my Shroud of Turin News. I have listed below linked news article(s) about the Shroud in March as a service to readers, without necessarily endorsing any of them.

Contents:
Editorial
"Traveling Shroud of Turin education exhibit to visit St. Philip Church," The Rhode Island Catholic, Laura Kilgus, 1 March 2018
"The Turin Shroud: Divine Likeness or Bogus Relic?," Historical Blindness, Nathaniel Lloyd, 5 March 2018
"Blood on the Shroud: An Interview with the Blood Investigator of the Shroud of Turin Research Project," Ancient Origins, 6 March 2018, Dr Peter J Shield
"Shroud of Turin's 3D encoded info -- how'd it get there?," WorldNet Daily, Myra Adams, 22 March 2018
"This 3D `carbon copy' of Jesus was created using the Shroud of Turin," Aleteia, Lucandrea Massaro, 28 March 2018
"Shroud of Turin inspires professor to create a 3D image of Jesus," Daily Express, Laura Mowat, 29 March 2018


Editorial
Rex Morgan's Shroud News: My scanning and word-processing of the 118 issues of Rex Morgan's Shroud News, provided by Ian Wilson, and emailing them to Barrie Schwortz, for him to convert to PDFs and add to his online Shroud News archive, continued in March up to issue #98, October 1996. [Right (enlarge)], i.e ~83% completed. Issues in that archive are up to #93, February 1996.

News: As mentioned in my "25 March 1988: On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud," I was emailed on 26 March by ["STOP PRESS"[2].] a leading Shroud pro-authenticist who told me that he has been "repeatedly mulling over" my "Linick/computer hacking hypothesis," and as October this year will be the thirtieth anniversary of the announcement on 13 October 1988 [see 23Jul15] that the Shroud's radiocarbon date was "1260-1390", he is likely to be talking on this topic in both the UK and USA. In those talks he is thinking of suggesting my Linick/computer hacking as one of two scenarios he most favours for having skewed the Shroud's radiocarbon date! I thanked him for taking my hacking theory seriously. That led me to start preparing a media release outlining my hacking theory which I will post here when it is completed. I may then email a copy of it to news outlets in anticipation of an upsurge in media interest in the Shroud's radiocarbon dating as 13 October draws near. Arising out of this, I also on 31 March emailed the "well-known Shroud author" for clarification of the April 1989 phone call he received from a male with a German accent who said had committed "espionage" in falsifying the results of the 1988 dating. I will post any response I receive from him.

Posts: In March I blogged 4 new posts (latest uppermost): "25 March 1988: On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud" - 25th; "11th-10th centuries: Shroud's 1260-1390 radiocarbon date is against the preponderance of the evidence (4): Steps in the development of my radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud hacker theory #12" - 18th; "Obituary (3): Dr. Alan Duane Whanger (17 July 1930 - 21 October 2017)" - 3rd; and "Editorial and Contents," Shroud of Turin News, February 2018" - 2nd.

Updates in the background of past posts in March: I continued adding footnotes to my "Chronology of the Shroud ... First century."

Comments: On 10 March I received an Anonymous comment under my 17 April 2010 post "`Ian Wilson's Turin Shroud theories are the worst kind of junk history'." The comment started with (my numbering in square brackets):

[1]"You raise some fine points, but frustratingly neglect the role of bias in judging the usefulness and reliability of historians and their contributions. [2]You seem fine to frequently, incessantly point out Walters' Metaphysical Naturalism, [3]yet conveniently fail to examine your pro-Wilson, pro-Shroud, pro-Christianity bias, [4]Wilson's bias (and how it's made evident by his other texts), and even his former Oxford teacher's bias in his endorsement of him ..."
My response included:
[1]"That was irrelevant to the purpose of my post, which was to respond to Walter's article critical of Wilson." [2]"I only pointed out Walters' Metaphysical Naturalism ONCE (or twice if my `see below' sentence is counted)." [3]"I don't `fail to examine' my `pro-Wilson, pro-Shroud, pro-Christianity bias,' I am well aware of each of them. But again that was not the purpose of my post (see above)." [4]"EVERYONE is biased, and it gets us nowhere debating it. Wilson and I present EVIDENCE for our positions and leave it at that. We also take the time to read the other side. I (and I am sure Wilson) own and have read every anti-Shroud book available. See my online "My Shroud of Turin books and articles" in which my anti- or non-authenticist books and articles are marked `(A)'. But Walter's bias in his criticism of Wilson was EXTREME and UN-SCHOLARLY in that he admitted he had not read ANY of Wilson's books! The Telegraph.co.uk website presumably thought so too because it took Walters' article off-line..."

Then on 12 March, I received a comment from a Dillon under my 22 March 2008 post, "Shroud News - January 2008," that started, "[1]You said that the Man in the Shroud has a ponytail. [2]Bear in mind that Jesus was a 1st century Galilean. Is there any evidence that Galilean men had ponytails?" My response included:

[1]"That was in 2008. I no longer maintain that the vertical feature below the man's hair in the back image is a ponytail. For example, I did not include it under "The man on the Shroud #8" in my "The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!" series. See Shroud Scope https://goo.gl/qf4FDY As can be seen, it is NOT a ponytail (it does not even come from the centre of the man's hair as a ponytail would) but is a feature of the weave. I have added to my post above in square brackets: `I no longer maintain that this is a ponytail.'" [2]"According to Stevenson and Habermas they did:
"As a matter of fact, the traditional style for an orthodox Jewish man of two thousand years ago is much the same for him today: a ponytail of hair and sidelocks-precisely what we see on the Shroud." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, p.151)
But since it is now clear that what was once thought to be a ponytail is NOT part of the image of the man on the Shroud, I don't care to argue it, one way or the other. ..."
My radiocarbon dating hacker theory: As can be seen above, I blogged about my radiocarbon dating of the Shroud hacker theory in the STOP PRESS" above my ""25 March 1988: On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud" post, about "a leading Shroud pro-authenticist who" is going to start publicly supporting my "Linick/computer hacking hypothesis"! Also, at the end of that post, I pointed out that, after Dr Michael Tite's letter to Nature of 7 April 1988, the alleged hacker, Arizona laboratory physicist Timothy W. Linick (1946-89)'s programing task would have been made easier by Tite's confirmation that: 1) there would indeed be only "three ... radiocarbon laboratories ... Arizona, ... Oxford and ... Zurich"; 2) each laboratory would test "a sample from the shroud, together with two known-age control samples"; and 3) the test would not be "blind" ..." In that post I also promoted a point that I had made in a footnote [24] of my, "The 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Turin Shroud was the result of a computer hacking #11" that:
"... it is significant that Linick is standing in front of his Arizona laboratory leaders and colleagues in this historic group photograph (taken by Gove who is not in it) of the very first `1350 AD' dating of the Shroud[46], because this is evidence that Linick was in charge of the actual AMS computerised dating process at Arizona laboratory and those present were acknowledging that."

My book: In March I continued to give this a higher priority and completed the "Fourth century" and "Fifth century" in "Chapter 6, "History and the Shroud," in the dot-point

[Right (enlarge): The planned cover of my book.]

outline of my book, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" (see 06Jul17).

Pageviews: At midnight on 31 March 2018, Google Analytics [Below (enlarge)] gave this blog's "Pageviews all time history" as 871,539. This compares with 718,747 (up 152,792 or 21.3%) from the same time in March 2017. It also gave the most viewed posts for the month (highest uppermost) as: "The Shroud of Turin: 3.3. The man on the Shroud and Jesus were scourged," July 15, 2013 - 343; "Re: Shroud blood ... types as AB ... aged blood always types as AB, so the significance of this ... is unclear," Mar 18, 2011 - 266; "The Shroud of Turin: 3.5. The man on the Shroud and Jesus were crowned with thorns," Sep 8, 2013 - 166; "`according to John chapter 20, Jesus was wrapped in linen cloths (plural) ... If Scripture is correct ... lets throw out the shroud'," Jul 11, 2012 - 123; "Three-dimensional #20: The man on the Shroud: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!," Feb 5, 2017 - 106." This is the first month that I can remember where none of the most viewed posts were current ones!


Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. "STOP PRESS – AG Opinion in Huawei v ZTE published today," The CLIP Board, 20 November 2014. [return]

Posted: 2 April 2018. Updated: 6 May 2018.