My Hacker Theory in a nutshell (2) #37
This is the sixteenth and final installment of "My Hacker Theory in a nutshell (2)," part #37 of my Turin Shroud Encyclopedia. It will help me write chapter 16, "Were the laboratories duped by a hacker?," of my book in progress, "Shroud of Turin: Burial Sheet of Jesus!" See Part 1.
[Index #1] [Previous: My Hacker Theory (1) #36] [Next: My Hacker Theory (3) #38].
[Right (enlarge): The Pray Codex (1192-95 )[07Mar14]: The Entombment of Christ (upper) and Three Marys [sic Mk 16:1-6] at the tomb (lower). The images are claimed as one of the evidences against the radiocarbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin (Wikipedia's words. My emphasis)[16Dec24]! See "Pray Codex" below.]
For more information about this 5-part series, see Part 1. In particular, to keep these posts as brief as possible, references will be links to my previous posts on that topic. This is Part 2, "Evidence that the Shroud is older than the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date." The evidence will be under two main headings: "Historical evidence that the Shroud is older than 1260" and "Artistic evidence that the Shroud is older than 1260." I will post items of evidence as I rediscover them, but the order of appearance within those main headings will be from what I consider to be more significant to less significant, and that might change as I go along.
■ Part 2, Evidence that the Shroud is older than the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date
• The Director of the Oxford radiocarbon dating laboratory, Prof. Christopher Bronk Ramsey, who as "C.R. Bronk" was a signatory to the 1989 Nature paper, and was involved in the dating, has admitted:
"There is a lot of other evidence that suggests to many that the Shroud is older than the radiocarbon dates allow ..." (My emphasis)[18Feb14; 07Mar14].• Ian Wilson rightly pointed out that if the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud is correct, there should be no evidence for the Shroud before 1260:
"Looking back in time from 1204, we are in a period in which, if the radiocarbon dating is to be believed, there should be no evidence of our Shroud. The year 1260 was the earliest possible date for the Shroud's existence by radiocarbon dating's calculations"[21Jun17].■ Historical evidence that the Shroud is older than 1260
• Nicholas Mesarites After the 1204 sack of Constantinople, Nicholas Mesarites (c. 1163-aft. 1216), former keeper of the Byzantine Empire's relic collection in Constantinople's Pharos Chapel, recalled that in 1201, in that chapel, was:
"The burial sindon of Christ ... is of linen ... defying decay, because it wrapped the mysterious, naked, dead body after the Passion"[29Mar14; 27Dec15; 21Jun17; 04Oct18; 24May20].The Greek word translated "mysterious" is aperilepton which literally means "un-outlined"[29Mar14; 27Dec15; 11Jun16; 11Nov17]. And the Shroudman's image uniquely has no outline[29Mar14; 1Jun16]. So, the three descriptors: "sindon," "un-outlined" and "naked," uniquely identify this Byzantine relic as the Shroud[29Mar14], in Constantinple ~59 years before its earliest "1260" radiocarbon date and ~154 years before the Shroud first appeared in undisputed history at Lirey, France, in 1355[11Jun16]!
• Robert de Clari French knight Robert de Clari (1170-1216), who was in Constantinople with the Fourth Crusade, later described what he saw in Constantinople in 1203:
"And among the rest, there was another of the churches which they called My Lady Saint Mary of Blachernae, where was kept the sydoine in which Our Lord had been wrapped, which stood up straight every Friday so that the features of Our Lord could be plainly seen there. And no one, either Greek or French, ever knew what became of this sydoine after the city was taken." (italics original)[DR96, 112; 29Mar14].The word sydoines is Old French for the Greek word sindon, a linen sheet[29Mar14], used in the Gospels for Jesus' burial shroud (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53). The word figure is Old French for "bodily form"[29Mar14]. de Clari said it was the sindon "in which Our Lord had been wrapped" and on which "the features of Our Lord could be plainly seen." This can only be the Shroud, publicly exhibited in Constantinople in 1203, ~57 years before its earliest 1260 radiocarbon date!
• Pope Stephen III's sermon. Vatican Library codex 5696, folio 35 is an early twelfth century Latin update of an original Greek Easter Friday sermon by Pope Stephen III (r. 768-772), delivered in 769. Stephen's original 8th century sermon in Greek quoted Jesus' supposed letter in reply to Edessa's King Abgar V (r. 4 BC-7 AD & 13-50 AD)'s request for healing:
"Since you wish to look upon my physical face, I am sending you a likeness of my face on a cloth ..."[23Sep17]The twelfth-century Latin version contains an interpolation (in italics):
"Since you wish to look upon my physical face, I am sending you a likeness of not only of my face but of my whole body divinely transformed on a cloth ..."[23Sep17]Clearly the twelfth century Vatican copyist knew that the Edessa cloth then in Constantinople had an image not only of Jesus' face, but of His entire body, and he updated Pope Stephen's 769 sermon according to the new information he had[29Mar14; 11May14; 21Jun17; 23Sep17].
That the Edessa Cloth/Image of Edessa had arrived in Constantinople from Edessa in 944[944] (see "944b), after which the face-only Image of Edessa was discovered in Constantinople to include Jesus' "whole body," is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the Image of Edessa was the Shroud, "doubled-in-four" (tetradiplon)[18May14; 18Mar18], with the face of Jesus uppermost in landscape aspect[15Sep12; 20Jan17]! (see "Surrender of the Mandylion to the Byzantines" below). Which means that the Shroud was in Constantinople, ~316 years before its earliest 1260 radiocarbon date!
• Gregory Referendarius's sermon. On 16 August 944, the day after the Image of Edessa arrived in Constantinople (see "944b"), Gregory Referendarius, the Archdeacon of Constantinople's Hagia Sophia cathedral, preached a sermon in which he said that the Edessa Cloth bore not only "sweat from the face of the ruler of life, falling like drops of blood" but also "drops from his own side ... [of] blood and water"[13May17]. By "the sweat from the face of [Christ] ... falling like drops of blood" Gregory referred to Lk 22:44 where Jesus' "sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground," in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36; Mk 14:32)[13May17]. But the "drops from his own side ... [of] blood and water" refers to Jn 19:33-34, which was after Jesus' death on the cross[13May17]. Clearly, only if the Image of Edessa was not face-only could it show the blood and fluid stained spear wound in Jesus' side that is on the Shroud[13May17]. But Gregory could not have made that reference unless he had been aware of the wound in the side of the Image of Edessa and of bloodstains in the area of that wound[13May17]. And hence Gregory knew that the Edessa Cloth was full-length rather than merely a face-cloth[13May17]. And to know that, Gregory must have seen that under the Image of Edessa face was the full-length, bloodstained, body image of Jesus on the Shroud[13May17]! This is yet more evidence that the Shroud was in Constantiople in 944, more than three centuries before its earliest 1260 radiocarbon date!
• Tetradiplon Both the seventh century Acts of Thaddeus and Constantinople's 946 Monthly Lection describe the Image of Edessa as "tetradiplon"[04Oct18; 09Sep23; 15Sep24]. Tetradiplon is a Greek
[Above (enlarge: Tetradiplon and the Shroud of Turin illustrated: The full-length Shroud of Turin (1); is doubled three times (2) through (4) keeping the man's face uppermost); resulting in the man's face within a rectangle, in landscape aspect (4); and the Shroud having been "four-doubled" in side view (5). Exactly as depicted in early copies of the Image of Edessa, such as in the 11th century Sakli church, Turkey (6)]. The above is a major update! See 15Sep12].
compound word of two common Greek words, tetra ("four") and diplon ("doubled"), hence "four-doubled"[15Sep12; 04Oct18; 09Sep23]. Yet in all of known ancient Greek literature, tetradiplon occurs only twice, and both times in connection with the Image of Edessa (see above)[15Sep12; 04Oct18].
In 1966 Ian Wilson read in the Acts of Thaddeus, which is an update of the Abgar V story[08Jan19], where Jesus imprinted his face image on a towel[08Jan19]. The Greek word translated "towel" is tetradiplon ("doubled in four"), and the towel was "linen" (sindon)! So Wilson took a full-length photograph of the Shroud and folded it in half three times with the man's face uppermost, which left the man's face "disembodied, on a landscape-aspect cloth, exactly as it appears on the pre-1204 Edessa cloth copies ..." And looking at it from the side, as it was evidently possible to do with the Edessa Cloth, fastened to a board, it is indeed four doublings[20Jan17] (I did this myself as readers can do for themselves). This is experimental proof that the Image of Edessa was the Shroud `four-doubled'! If the Image of Edessa was a small cloth, why would anyone bother to four-double it, let alone record that they had done it?
Finally, STURP's 1978 raking light photograph of the Shroud revealed major foldlines at one-eighth intervals showing that the Shroud had been folded in eight for much of its history[15Sep12; 08Dec22], including foldlines of the man's face one-eighth matching the Image of Edessa, yet the Shroud has not been folded in eight since 1355[RTB]!
The above is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the Image of Edessa was the Shroud folded in eight, with the man's face one-eighth in landscape aspect, exactly as in early copies of the Image of Edessa. But the Image of Edessa was in Edessa since at least 544 (see "544"), which is 716 years before its earliest 1260 radiocarbon date[21Aug18; 04Oct18; 29Nov18a; 18Dec18; 14Oct20; 29Dec20; 15Sep24]!
And that's before we have considered the artistic evidence that the Shroud is older than 1260 (next)!
■ Artistic evidence that the Shroud is older than 1260
• Pray Codex See above. I have published too many posts on the Pray Codex in support of my Hacker Theory (starting with 07Mar14) to list them here. So I will summarise the evidence that Pray Codex alone (and it isn't alone), proves beyond reasonable doubt that the 1260-1390 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud cannot be correct. The Pray Codex was discovered in 1770 by Hungarian historian Gyorgy Pray (1723-1801)[19May12; 04Oct18; 24Nov20]. The codex contains a Funeral Oration which is the oldest surviving continuous text in the Hungarian language, so it is kept in the Hungarian National Széchényi Library in Budapest[11Jan10]. The codex itself is dated 1192-95 (which already is at least 65 years before the Shroud's earliest 1260 radiocarbon date[11Jan10; 27May12; 02Dec14]). And the documents bound in the codex are even older: for example there is a sheet of musical notation in the codex which is dated the middle of the twelfth century (i.e. 1150)[02Dec14]. The codex contains four pages of pen-and-ink drawings depicting the crucifixion, descent from the cross, entombment and enthronement of Christ[11Jan10; 29Mar14]. Two of them: "The Entombment and Visit to the Sepulchre" (see above and 11Jan10; 19May12; 11Jan10; 27May12) and "Christ Enthroned ..."[11Jan10; 27May12] (Berkovits, 1969, Plates III and IV[BI69]), share a total of at least fourteen unique correspondences with the Shroud[04Oct18; 20Jan24; 16Dec24]! Far too many to be the result of chance. These four drawings in the Pray Codex were most likely a gift to Hungary's King Bela III (r. 1172-96) from Byzantine Emperor Manuel I Komnenos (r. 1143-80). During Bela's reign cultural links between Constantinople and Hungary were strong[29Mar14; 21Jun17; 20Dec18]. And in his youth Bela had lived at the Imperial Court in Constantinople from 1163-72[07May16; 21Jun17; 04Oct18; 20Dec18; 24May20; 29Dec20]. Bela was betrothed to Manuel I's daughter Maria, but the betrothal was dissolved when Maria's brother, Alexios, was born in 1169[24May20; 29Dec20]. At the Emperor's request, Béla married Maria's half-sister, Agnes of Antioch (c. 1154-84) in c. 1168[24May20; 29Dec20]. So it is likely that the Pray Codex drawings were a wedding gift from Manuel I to Bela III for giving up his claim to the Byzantine throne and marrying Manuel's wife's half-sister instead of his promised daughter[24May20]. If so, the drawings in the Pray Codex already existed in 1168, which was ~92 years before the Shroud's earliest 1260 radiocarbon date! In 1172 Bela's older brother King Stephen III (r. 1162–72) died and Bela returned to Hungary and was crowned king[BTW].
• Madrid Skylitzes The Madrid Skylitzes is a twelfth century
[Above (enlarge): "The surrender of the Holy Mandylion" in the 12th Century "Madrid Skylitzes[13May17; 17Sep22; 07Jul23; 15Sep24]. ]
illuminated manuscript version of the Synopsis of Histories by late 11th century Byzantine historian John Skylitzes[JSW]. The manuscript is now housed in the Biblioteca Nacional de España in Madrid[MSW]. It includes 574 miniatures detailing depictions of everyday life in the Byzantine Empire[MSW]. One of those miniatures is "Surrender of the Mandylion to the Byzantines"[FSW]. It depicts the arrival of the Image of Edessa in Constantinople on 15 August 944 after it had been handed by Byzantine general John Kourkouas (bef. 900-aft. 946)[JKW] to Emperor Romanos I Lekapenos (r. 920-44)[RNW]. As can be seen above, under the face of Jesus on the Image of Edessa is a double body length partly folded cloth, which can only be the Shroud[RTB]. This is artistic proof beyond reasonable doubt of Ian Wilson's theory that the Image of Edessa was the Shroud "doubled in four" (tetradiplon) with the face of Jesus uppermost in landscape aspect[15Sep12; 20Jan17]. And as mentioned above, the Image of Edessa was in Edessa from at least 544, until it was taken to Constantinople in 944, after which it was revealed to be the full-length Shroud (see the 12th century update on Pope Stephen III's 8th century sermon above). That is 716 years and 316 years respectively before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date of the Shroud[21Aug18; 04Oct18; 29Nov18b]!
• Stained glass windows in Chartres Cathedral, France In Rex Morgan's Shroud News of June 1999, he wrote:
"Aside from the [1999 Rome] conference itself I met Roberto Falcinelli who has made the astonishing discovery that in one of the windows of Chartres Cathedral (1150 AD) is a head of Christ with Shroud features including the epsilon bloodflow on the forehead. This could hardly be a product of artistic imagination and so is a further piece of evidence which places the Shroud image well before the now discredited C14 date of 1350. I have Falcinelli's telephotographs and hope to bring more of this to you soon"[29Nov18c].
[Above (enlarge): Falcinelli's telephotograph (left) and his highlighting (right), of the depiction of the Shroud's reversed `3', or epsilon (ε), forehead bloodstain [see Shroud Scope] in the c. 1150 Chartres Cathedral stained glass window, "The Crucifixion" panel ... This is Shroud-like feature 10) in this overall "Window of the Passion and Resurrection" (see 29Nov18d) ogive stained glass window in the west wall of Chartres Cathedral[29Nov18e].]
The Shroud-like features are all in "The Window of the Passion and Resurrection," which is in the cathedral's west wall[29Nov18f]. And the west wall's stained glass windows are the Cathedral’s oldest, dating from "some time between 1145 and 1155"[29Nov18g]. This is more than a century before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date of the Shroud! Within "The Window of the Passion and Resurrection" are "The Flagellation” panel[29Nov18h], "The Crucifixion” panel[29Nov18i] and "The Anointing" panel[29Nov18j] .
Starting at 29Nov18k, read the eleven unique different features shared with the Shroud in these three, twelfth century, stained glass windows in Chartres Cathedral.
■ Conclusion This concludes Part 2, "Evidence that the Shroud is older than the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date": Historical and artistic. There is much more evidence that I could have posted which, in the words of Prof. Ramsey (above), prove that "the Shroud is older than the radiocarbon dates allow," but in keeping with my "in a nutshell" self-imposed limitation, the above will have to do. Having seen that the Shroud is more than seven centuries (716 years) older than the earliest "1260" radiocarbon date of the Shroud (see here and here), and so that date cannot be correct, we will next in part 3 see that "Other Shroudie explanations don't work" in showing why the first century Shroud has a 1325 ± 65 radiocarbon date.
To be continued in the next part 3 of this series.
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
BI69. Berkovits, I., 1969, "Illuminated Manuscripts in Hungary, XI-XVI Centuries," Horn, Z., transl., West, A., rev., Irish University Press: Shannon, Ireland.
BTW. "Béla III of Hungary," Wikipedia, 26 December 2024.
DR96. de Clari, R., 1996, "The Conquest of Constantinople," [1216], McNeal, E., transl., University of Toronto Press: Toronto, Canada.
FSW. "File:Surrender of the Mandylion to the Byzantines.jpg," Wikipedia, 26 September 2009.
JKW. "John Kourkouas," Wikipedia, 27 November 2024.
JSW. "John Skylitzes," Wikipedia, 17 January 2025.
MSW. "Madrid Skylitzes," Wikipedia, 17 January 2025.
RNW. "Romanos I Lekapenos," Wikipedia, 14 February 2025.
RTB. Reference(s) to be provided.
Posted 10 February 2025. Updated 27 February 2025.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment