This is my, "The Turin Shroud in a nutshell." I 
was having coffee with a Christian friend a few days ago (29 July 2024) and he asked me to text him a link to my blog, which I did. But then I realised that it must be difficult for newcomers to the Shroud to start with one of my current blog posts. So I resolved to post a single page introduction to the Shroud to which I will include a link at the top of each of my future posts with the text, "Newcomers start here." Each topic will have a link to one of my posts on that topic.
[Right (enlarge): Full-length negative image of the Shroud (Wikipedia)[STW]. The triangular shapes paralleling the man's image are burns and repairs from a 1532 fire. Could an unknown medieval forger really have created this?]
What is the Shroud of Turin? The Shroud of Turin (hereafter "the Shroud") is a sheet of fine linen, bearing the double image of a naked man, front and back, head to head[12Feb20]. The man has wounds and bloodstains consistent with the Gospels' accounts of the suffering, crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ[08Sep20]. Since 1578, except for brief periods in times of war, the Shroud has been kept in, or around, Turin Cathedral[05Jul20]. The Shroud first appeared in undisputed history in c. 1355, at an exposition in the tiny village of Lirey, France[13Apr18]. However, there is historical and artistic evidence that the Shroud was in Constantinople in 1201[11Nov17] and 944[13May17], Edessa in 544[07Dec16], and Jerusalem in 30[19Jun24]! In 1988 the Shroud was radiocarbon dated "1260-1390"[08Dec22], but that date cannot be correct because the Pray Codex (1192-95) alone (and it isn't alone), is clearly based on the Shroud[20Dec18a]. That radiocarbon date is an outlier, because the rest of the evidence is overwhelming that the Shroud is Jesus' burial sheet![08Jul15]! The "Central Dilemma of the Shroud" is that the Shroud either is a forgery, or it is Jesus' burial sheet: there is no realistic third alternative[04Apr22]. This has been admitted by leading Shroud sceptics, Herbert Thurston (1856-1939), Steven Schafersman (1948-) and Joe Nickell (1944-)[22Jan15]. Therefore, evidence against the Shroud being a forgery is evidence for it being Jesus’ burial sheet[20Jun24a]!
A linen cloth The Shroud is a large rectangular sheet of fine linen[31Oct12]. The Greek word translated "shroud" in the Gospels (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53) is sindon, a fine linen cloth[20Jun24b]. The Shroud's weave is three-to-one herringbone twill, which was expensive and rare[20Jun24c]. So it is consistent with the "linen shroud" bought by the "rich man" Joseph of Arimathea in which to bury Jesus (Mt 27:57-60; Mk 15:42-46)[04Mar20]. The Shroud's dimensions are ~442 cms 
= ~14 ft 6 in. long by ~113.35 cms = ~3 ft 8 in. wide[10Jul15]. These don't equate to any medieval unit of measurement, but they are close to 8 x 2 Assyrian standard cubits of between 21.4 and 21.6 inches, which was the common unit of measurement in Jesus' day[04Feb15]!
[Left (enlarge): Shroud photograph with an 8 x 2 grid overlay showing that the Shroud divides evenly into 16 squares, each 442/8 = 55.25 cm = ~21.7 in. long by 113.35/2 = 56.7 cm = ~22.3 in. wide. These units are too close to the Assyrian Standard Cubit of Jesus' day to be a coincidence[20Jun24d].]
The man on the Shroud is bearded and muscular[22Nov12] and about 1.81 m (5 ft 11 in.) tall[WI98, 25-26]. His is a real human body[05Feb17a]. As previously mentioned, the Shroudman's image is double: front and back and head-to-head. A 1620 painting by G.B. della Rovere (1560-1627) shows how this was done[13Jan16]. The man is entirely naked, both front and back[27Dec15]. This was an integral part of Roman crucifixion, to humiliate its victims[CXW]. But no medieval artist depicted Jesus realistically naked, nor entirely naked from the back[13Apr16]. A medieval forger of the Shroud who did that would likely have been burned at the stake for blasphemy[10Jul24]!
Faint The man's mage is so faint that it cannot be seen up 
close[08Mar16]. This is not apparent to those who have only seen photographs of the Shroud (like me), because photographs enhance the image[10Jul24].
[Right (enlarge): Frontal image of the Shroud after the 2002 restoration[SU14], showing how faint the man's image is (and photographs enhance the image)!]. So a forger could not see up close what he was depicting[08Mar16]!
Colour The colour of the man's image is a uniform straw-yellow[23Mar16]. The colour is caused by dehydrative oxidation and conjugation[19May16] of the Shroud's cellulose fibres[27Jul24]. It is an areal density image where the shades of dark depend on the number of straw-yellow image fibres per unit area[23Mar16]. Photographs in 19th century black-and-white newspapers were areal density images, comprised of the number of black dots per square inch[10Jul24]. Even if he invented the areal density image ~5 centuries before it first appeared, why would a medieval forger have depicted the man on the Shroud by such a time-consuming method?
Hands As can be seen above, the man's hands are crossed awkwardly at his wrists and cover his genitals. They had been in a hanging-on-a-cross position above and behind his head[05Jun22] and were fixed in that position at death, by rigor mortis[09Sep23]. The rigor of his arms had been broken at his shoulders and forced down to fit inside the Shroud's boundaries[23Jan23]. Would a medieval forger have known this, considering that crucifixion had been banned in Europe by Roman Emperor Constantine I (r. 306–337) in 314[04Oct16]? Depictions of Jesus in eleventh and twelfth century art (long before the earliest, 1260, radiocarbon date of the Shroud and the Shroud's first appearance in undisputed history at Lirey, France, in c. 1355), with his "hands ... crossed consistently, the right over the left [as they appear looking at the Shroud] with an awkward crossing point at the wrists, all forcefully reminiscent of the Shroud"[WI79, 266-267], include: the Pray Codex
[Left (enlarge[27Dec15]): "Entombment" (upper), folio 28 in the Pray Codex. Jesus is depicted nude with his arms right over left, crossing awkwardly near his wrists, and his hands are covering his genitals, identical to the Shroud. Also Jesus' fingers are unnaturally long and his thumbs are not visible, as on the Shroud (see below)!].
Other pre-1355 depictions of Jesus, naked, with his arms crossing near his wrists, as on the Shoud, are at: 13Apr16, 14Jan18, 21Aug18,
[Right (enlarge)[09Sep20]: The Shroudman's hands, with his arms crossed awkwardly, right over left (apparently), and his hands covering his genitals. Note that the man's fingers are unnaturally long because we are seing his hand bones under his skin, as in an x-ray[20Apr17a]! Also, his thumbs are not visible[11Jan22] because the nail in each wrist (not his palm) damaged its median nerve. When French surgeon Dr Pierre Barbet (1884–1961) discovered this, he asked, "Could a forger have imagined this?" and the answer clearly is no[16Nov21]!]
29Nov18 and 20Dec18b. This is further proof beyond reasonable doubt that the Shroud existed long before the earliest, 1260, radiocarbon date of the Shroud and the Shroud's first appearance in undisputed history at Lirey, France, in c. 1355!
Feet The man's feet had been fixed to his cross by a single nail[02Dec18]. The patibulum, or crossbeam, bearing his nailed hands and body had presumably been hoisted up on the upright fixed stipes and attached to it[05Jun22]. His dangling feet were then nailed, left over right, by a single large Roman nail hammered through them to the stipes[BP53, 113-114, 124-128]. Barbet found the square cross-section 
mark of a Roman nail in the man's right foot [Left (enlarge[11Jan22]) Why would a medieval forger have depicted that, when it was only discovered in the mid-20th century[10Jul24]?
Wounds and bloodstains These match the Gospels' description of the sufferings, crucifixion, and death of Jesus (see above)[02Jan24]. Non-traditional features include: nails in the wrists not the palms[13Apr16], an Eastern cap of thorns rather than a Western wreath[13Apr16], and the nail wounds are incomplete: in his hands[23Jan23] and his feet[10Jul24]. A medieval forger would have conformed to prevailing tradition and clearly depicted each of the "Five Wounds of Christ," so that his forgery would be accepted by his contemporaries[13Apr16].
Anatomically accurate The man on the Shroud is anatomically and physiologically accurate[17Feb13]. Yet neither doctors nor artists of the fourteenth century knew enough about the human body to represent it so[22Dec16]. This is what convinced the agnostic anatomy professor at the Sorbonne, Yves Delage (1854-1920), that the man on the Shroud was Jesus[25Jun08]!]
The man's image Not painted [11Jul16]. It has been known since at least the 1930s that the Shroudman's image is not painted. By examining the Shroud with a magnifying glass during the 1931 exposition, English Roman Catholic prelate Arthur Barnes (1861-1936), could see individual threads in the image area with no colouring matter covering them[08Nov22]. Sceptics now admit that the man's image was not painted. Prof. Edward Hall (1924-2001), then Director of the Oxford radiocarbon dating laboratory, when in 1988 collecting his laboratory's Shroud sample, examined the Shroud with a magnifying glass and satisfied himself that the image was not painted[27Jul07]. Leading sceptic Joe Nickell (1944-) has admitted that, "...convincing evidence for any painting medium (that is, oil, egg tempera, etc.) on shroud image fibers is lacking"[11Jul16]. The Shroud of Turin Project (STURP) confirmed in 1978 that no paint, pigment, or dye constitutes the man's image[26Oct14]. Yet, as leading Shroud sceptic Walter McCrone (1916-2002) pointed out, a medieval forger would have simply painted the Shroud[03Mar23]. The sceptics' case is based on the c. 1389 claim of Bishop Pierre d'Arcis (r. 1377-95) that the Shroud was "cunningly painted" by a confessed artist in the time of one of his predecessors, Bishop Henri de Poitiers (r. 1354–1370)[03Jul18]. So, that the Shroud is not painted is alone (and it is not alone), a fatal blow to the entire forgery theory[27Jul24]! And if the Shroud is not a forgery, then it is the burial sheet of Jesus! See the "Central Dilemma of the Shroud" above.
Negative The Shroudman's image is a photographic negative[22Dec16]! In the evening of 28 May 1898 during the Shroud's 1898 Exposition, amateur, but experienced Turin photographer, Secondo Pia (1855-1941), was at home in his darkroom developing a 
[Above (enlarge): The negative of Secondo Pia's photograph of the Shroud taken on 28 May 1898, including the altar in Turin Cathedral where it was displayed. As can be seen, the Shroud image on Pia's negative is photographically positive, while everything else is negative, which proves that the Shroudman's image is a photographic negative (a negative of a negative is a positive[22Dec16]) [07May16]!]
photograph of the Shroud that he had taken that day, after several failed attempts that week[05Jun21]. Pia was astonished to see emerging on the large glass photographic plate in his developer tank, a life-like image of the man on the Shroud[22Dec16]! A medieval forger could not have conceived of the Shroudman's image being a photographic negative, because photographic negativity was not discovered until the early nineteenth century[22Dec16]. A medieval forger could not have depicted in negative the fine detail that is in the Shroudman's image (including the more than 100 scourge marks, each with a raised edge and serum halo, some of which are only visible under a microscope in ultraviolet light[15Jul13])[22Dec16]. A medieval forger creating a photographic negative Shroud image, centuries before the age of photography, would have had no means of checking his work[22Dec16]. Modern artists who have tried to depict the Shroud with its negative image have all failed, even though they had a copy of the Shroud's negative photograph before them[22Dec16]. Even if a medieval forger could have created the Shroudman's image as a photographic negative, he would not have wanted to, as neither he nor his contemporaries, would have been able to appreciate his work until the invention of photography ~500 years in the future[22Dec16].
Three dimensional The man on the Shroud's frontal image is three-
[Right (enlarge): "The Shroud [frontal] image's three-dimensional characteristics, as revealed by the VP-8 Image Analyzer in February 1976. Here the face and body appear in sculpted relief, framed by the two lines of scorches from the chapel fire of 1532"[05Feb17b].
dimensional[05Feb17c]! How could a medieval forger encode the Shroud man's image with three-dimensional information[27Jul24]? And in negative[27Jul24] (see above)! When true perspective, the correct representation of a three-dimensional object on a two dimensional surface, was discovered in 1415[27Jul24]. But the Shroudman's image is not an artistic representation of three-dimensionality: it actually is three-dimensional[27Jul24]! A medieval forger would have to encode three dimensional information into the Shroud image by adjusting the intensity levels of his work to everywhere correspond to actual cloth-body distance[27Jul24]! All attempts to replicate the Shroud's three-dimensional image fail the VP-8 Image Analyzer test[27Jul24]. Why would a medieval forger have encoded three-dimensional information into his Shroud image, if he could, when it was only discovered to be three-dimensional, more than six centuries later[27Jul24]?
Superficial The Shroudman's image is extremely superficial[11Nov16],
[Left (enlarge): STURP's 1978 transmitted light photograph of the front half of the Shroud, in which the light source is behind the suspended cloth so only the light transmitted through it is seen. The scorches and waterstains from the 1532 fire, and the bloodstains, have penetrated the thickness of the cloth and so can be clearly seen. But the body image has almost completely disappeared, demonstrating that the image of the man on the Shroud is superficial, only one fibre deep[11Nov16].]
residing only on the outermost crowns of the Shroud’s fibres[27Jul24]. It is "extremely thin, one-fifth of a thousandth of a millimeter, corresponding to the thickness of the primary cell wall of a single linen fiber"[27Jul24]. This means the man's image did not penetrate down through the cloth, as a liquid or powdered colouring matter would have[11Jul16]. Even though the thickness of the cloth is about one third of a millimetre, slightly thicker than shirt cloth[08Sep14]. How could a medieval forger depict the Shroud man's image, with medieval materials and technology, lying only on the very topmost fibers, leaving the underneath fibers unchanged[27Jul24]? With no cementation of the body image fibrils to one another and no penetration of the colour below the top surface fibrils on the crowns of the weave[27Jul24]?
Non-directional [29Oct16]. STURP's Don Lynn (1932-2000) and Jean 
[Right (enlarge)[29Oct16]: Lynn and Lorre's computer screen: the white cross in the centre of the screen represents the warp and weft of the weave[29Oct16].]
Lorre (1945-2005) (a man), discovered in 1978 that the man's image was non-directional[29Oct16]. They used a microdensitometer to scan black and white photos of the Shroud, and when that information was digitised, fed into a computer and then progressively removed at each level of shade intensity, the pixels disappeared (and therefore had appeared) randomly[29Oct16]. This showed there is no evidence of a directional pattern of the image, and therefore no evidence for brush marks as there would be if the Shroud was a painting (or any human application of colouring matter)[29Oct16]. Only if the Shroudman's image appeared all at once, like a photograph, could it be non-directional[05Sep16a]!No outline The Shroudman's image has no outline[11Jun16]. Which it would have if it was painted[11Jun16]. Sceptic Joe Nickell confirmed that "it would be foolhardy to proceed" with painting "two images of a man upon a fourteen-foot length of linen" without an outline, but "no evidence has been discovered" that there was one:
"However, there are other considerations arguing against the freehand-painting hypothesis, one of which is the fact that medieval tempera paintings were consistently preceded by a preliminary drawing (often fixed with ink). Indeed, without some method of accurately proportioning the anatomy of two images of a man upon a fourteen-foot length of linen, it would be foolhardy to proceed. But no evidence has been discovered on the shroud fibrils to indicate any preliminary drawing was made ..."[NJ87, 98-99].After the Sack of Constantinople in 1204, Nicholas Mesarites (c. 1163-aft.1216), the Keeper of the Byzantine Empire's relic collection, recalled that in 1201[11Nov17] the collection included "the sindon [which] wrapped the un-outlined (Gk. aperilepton), naked dead body [of Christ]"[11Jun16]. "sindon," "un-outlined," "naked." This can only have been the Shroud, 59 years before its earliest 1260 radiocarbon date and 154 years before the Shroud first appeared in c. 1355, in undisputed history, at Lirey, France[27Jul24]!
No style The man's image has no artistic stylel[05Sep16b]. Yet every artist has a distinctive style[05Sep16c]. The Shroudman's image does not fit the artistic sytle of the fourteenth[05Sep16d] or any, century[05Sep16e]. The man's image is impersonal[05Sep16f], automatic[05Sep16g], like a photograph[05Sep16h]. The Shroud is not therefore a work of human art[05Sep16i]! From at least the sixth century, the Shroud, as the Image of Edessa, "doubled in four" (tetradiplon), has been recognised as being acheiropoietos ("not made with hands")[07Dec16],
[Left (enlarge): Tetradiplon and the Shroud of Turin illustrated[15Sep12]
but made by God (Mk 14:58; 2 Cor 5:1; Col 2:11).
X-rays The frontal image of the man on the Shroud includes under-the-skin x-ray images of his skull, cheekbones, teeth, finger bones, hand bones, thigh bone and the dorsal image his spine[20Apr17a]. Sceptics had claimed that the Shroud was a 
[Right (enlarge): Extract of a 2002 Shroud positive photograph by professional photo-grapher, Gian Carlo Durante, showing xray images of the Shroud man's under-the-skin hand bones[10Dec15].]
medieval forgery because the man's "hands and fingers [were] unnaturally long and spidery"[20Apr17b]. But the claimed bug was a feature! After considering naturalistic alternatives, Prof. Giles F. Carter (1930-2010), a specialist in x-ray fluorescence analysis, concluded that the "the Shroud of Turin is in reality the Shroud of Jesus Christ" and the energy released by His resurrection "was partly in the form of x-rays, which then reacted with the linen"[20Apr17b]!
The man's blood Real human blood The blood of the man on the Shroud is real human blood[03Jun17a]. Real blood At STURP's final public meeting in October 1981, blood chemist Alan Adler (1931-2000) presented a table of 12 tests for blood, which STURP's Shroud samples had passed[03Jun17b]. Human blood In 1983 Pierluigi Baima-Bollone (1937-), Professor of Forensic Medicine at the University of Turin, by means of fluorescent antigen-antibody reactions, confirmed that the Shroud blood is human blood[03Jun17c]. Then in 1984 Baima-Bollone and Agostino Gaglio reported that they had confirmed the identification of the blood group AB in Shroud bloodstains[03Jun17d] Clotted blood The Shroud's bloodstains are clotted blood[03Jun17e], each with a raised border and a blood serum retraction halo[03Jun17f]. Many of the latter are only visible under
[Above (enlarge): Clotted blood in white and uv light[13Jul21]. As can be seen, the above blood clot's serum retraction halo is barely visible in white light, but clearly visible in ultraviolet light. A medieval forger would not know that, yet he would have to have depicted in negative (see above) the serum retraction halos of more than 100 tiny scourge wounds evident on the Shround[27Dec21], for starters!].
ultraviolet light[13Jul21], which was discovered in 1801[17Feb13]!
Distinction between arterial and venous bloodflows is evident in some bloodstains on the man's
[Left (enlarge): The distinction on the Shroudman's forehead between venous blood in the reversed `3' or epsilon bloodstain, which is from the frontal vein "V", and arterial blood which is from the frontal branch of the superficial temple artery "Al" on the forehead[03Jun17g].]
forehead[03Jun17h]. Venous blood appears darker and thicker because it flows more slowly than arterial blood: the large reversed `3' or epsilon-shaped blood clot on the man's forehead is an example of a large venous blood flow[03Jun17i].The distinction between arterial and venous blood was not discovered until 1593 by Andrea Cesalpino (c. 1524-1603)[03Jun17j], more than 230 years after the Shroud first appeared in undisputed history at Lirey, France in c.1355!
Blood clots intact The bloodstains on the Shroud are comprised of intact, unbroken, unsmeared, clots[04Sep17a]. If a bandage is removed 
[Right (enlarge [04Sep17b]): The `reversed 3' bloodstain on the forehead of the man on the Shroud. As can be seen, the upper majority of this clot is intact, while part of its lower minority has flaked off over a foldline.]
from a former bloody wound, part of the dried clotted blood will stick to the bandage and part of it will remain stuck to the skin of the wound[04Sep17c]. This means the Shroud separated from the man's body in a special way, without it being unwrapped, or by any other human agency[04Sep17b]. As would have happened in Jesus' resurrection (see "Resurrection" below).
No image under the blood There is no image under the bloodstains on the Shroud, therefore the blood was on the cloth before the image[05Nov17a]. There are no yellowed image fibres under blood stained fibres on the Shroud[05Nov17b]. When bloodstained image fibres were treated with enzymes which digest blood, after the blood had been dissolved by the enzymes, the underlying fibers were white like non-image fibres[05Nov17c]. This meant that blood on the Shroud's linen had protected it from the image-forming process[05Nov17d]. That there was no underlying image on fibrils from bloodstained image areas means that the blood was on the cloth before the image[05Nov17e]. This is the correct order if the Shroud is Jesus' burial sheet but is effectively impossible for a forger[05Nov17f]. A forger would have had to paint the wound areas with real human blood [see above] with no image on the cloth to guide him[05Nov17g]. All attempts to replicate the Shroud, add the `blood' after they had depicted the image on the cloth[05Nov17h].
Resurrection! The Shroudman and Jesus were resurrected[08Nov23a]!
[Left (enlarge)[08Nov23b]: A painting by English artist Thomas Frank Heaphy (1813-73) in the 1850s, of a fresco in the ceiling of the earliest section of the Catacomb of Domitilla, Rome, dated to the time of Nero (r. 54–68). A Shroud-like Jesus is uniquely depicted in profile, naked with a white cloth over his shoulder. Presumably Jesus sitting up at His resurrection with the Shroud still partly covering Him! If so, this is the earliest, mid-first century, depiction of the Shroud[08Nov23c]!
Jesus was resurrected[08Nov23d] • Jesus predicted his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21; 17:9, 22-23; 20:18-19). • Jesus died on a cross (see 23Jan23a). • Jesus' body was not in his tomb because he had "risen" (Mt 28:6; Mk 16:6; Lk 24:6). • Jesus had "risen from the dead" (Mt 28:7; 2Tim 2:8). • Jesus was "raised from the dead" (1Cor 15:3-4, 12, 20). • God raised Jesus from the dead (Acts 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30,34,37). • Jesus was resurrected (Acts 2:31; 4:33; 1Pet 3:21). • Jesus was resurrected from the dead (Acts 4:2; Rom 1:4; 1Pet 1:3). • Jesus' body did not experience corruption because he was resurrected (Acts 2:27, 31; 13:34-37; Ps 16:10). • At his resurrection, Jesus' body did, as his followers' bodies will, change state from "perishable" to "imperishable," from "mortal" to immortal (1Cor 15:51-53), from "lowly" to "glorious" (Php 3:21). • Jesus appeared to his disciples after his resurrection: Mary Magdalene (Mk 16:9-11; Jn 20:11-18). The two other women who had been to the tomb (Mt 28:1,8-19). The apostle Peter (Lk 24:34; 1Cor 15:5). Two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Mk 16:12-13; Lk 24:13-32). The apostles, except for Thomas (Lk 24:36-49; Jn 20:19-25). The apostles including Thomas (Jn 20:26-29; 1Cor 15:5). Seven disciples on the shore of the Sea of Galilee (Jn 21:1-23). The apostles on a mountain in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20). To over 500 disciples (1Cor 15:6). His brother James (1Cor 15:7). Jesus' disciples at his ascension (Mk 16:19-20; Lk 24:50-53; Acts 1:6-12). • Jesus' resurrection body was "mechanically transparent"[18Jan12]: after his resurrection, on two separate occasions, Jesus suddenly appeared to his disciples inside a locked room (Jn 20:19, 26).
The Shroudman was resurrected[08Nov23d]• The Shroudman died on a cross[23Jan23b). • There is no evidence of bodily decomposition on the Shroud[14Mar17]. • The bloodstains are intact, unbroken and unsmeared, indicating the body separated from the cloth without being unwrapped[see above]. • The Shroudman's fingers, handbones, and teeth are visible under his skin due to x-rays generated by his resurrection[see above]. • A dead body would not leave such an image on the Shroud[08Nov23e].
This is the end of my, "The Turin Shroud in a nutshell." For further reading see my, "The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is Jesus' burial sheet!"; "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present"; and "The 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Turin Shroud was the result of a computer hacking."
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]
Bibliography
BP53. Barbet, P., 1953, "A Doctor at Calvary," [1950], Earl of Wicklow, transl., Image Books: Garden City NY, Reprinted, 1963.
CXW. "Crucifixion: Ancient Rome," Wikipedia, 30 July 2024.
DY02. Delage, Y., 1902, "Letter to M. Charles Richet," in Review scientifique, 31 May, in O'Rahilly, A. & Gaughan, J.A., ed., 1985, "The Crucified," Kingdom Books: Dublin.
NJ87. Nickell, J., 1987, "Inquest on the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Prometheus Books: Buffalo NY, Revised, Reprinted, 2000.
STW. "Shroud of Turin," Wikipedia, 31 July 2024.
SU14. "Image of Full 2002 Restored Shroud," High Resolution Imagery, Shroud University, 2014.
WI79. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition.
WI98. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY.
Posted 3 August 2024. Updated 14 September 2024.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment