Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Twentieth century (1)

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

This is part #25, "Twentieth century" (1) of my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 - present" series. For more information about this series see the Index #1. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated. This page was initially based on Ian Wilson's 1996, "Highlights of the Undisputed History: 1900."

[Index #1] [Previous: 19th century #24] [Next: 20th century (2) #26]

---

20th century (1) (1901-39).

[Above (enlarge)[2]: Sepia print of a negative photograph of the Shroud face taken by Giuseppe Enrie in 1931 [see 1931b below]:

"`Were those the lips that spoke the Sermon on the Mount and the Parable of the Rich Fool?'; `Is this the Face that is to be my judge on the Last Day?'"[3].

1901 November 15. Roman Catholic historian Canon Ulysse Chevalier (1841–1923) receives from the French Academie des Inscriptiones et Belles-Lettres, a gold medal of 1,000 francs for his fraudulent (see "1923" below)[4] monograph, Le Saint Suaire de Turin, est-il l'original ou une copie? ("The Shroud of Turin, is it the original or a copy?") [see 1899] attacking the authenticity of Shroud[5].

1902a April 21 (afternoon), Agnostic anatomy professor Yves Delage

[Right (enlarge)[6]]. From the anatomical details of the Shroud-man's image in Secondo Pia (1855–1941)'s negative photo-graphs, Delage realised that the Shroud could not have been produced by an artist and therefore was Jesus' burial shroud[7]!

(1854–1920), presents a paper on the Shroud to the Academy of Sciences, Paris, arguing for the Shroud's medical and general scientific convincingness, and stating his opinion that it genuinely wrapped the body of Christ[8].

1902b April 21 (evening) Secretary for the physics section of the Academy, Marcelin Berthelot (1827-1907), inventor of thermo-chemistry, and a militant atheist, orders Delage to rewrite his paper (for publication in the Comptes rendus de l' Acadmie des Sciences [Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences]) so that it treats only on the vaporography of zinc and makes no allusion to the Shroud or to Christ[11].

1902c April-May. Publication of French biologist and Roman Catholic colleague of Delage, Paul Vignon (1865-1943)'s [Left[10].] important pro-authenticist book, Le linceul du Christ: étude scientifique (Masson et Cie, Paris)[11], followed in the same year by its English translation, "The Shroud of Christ" (Archibald Constable, Westminster)[12].

1903 Publication of English anti-Shroud Jesuit, Fr. Herbert Thurston (1856–1939)'s influential but fraudulent article, "The Holy Shroud and the Verdict of History"[13].

1904a Church historian Adolf von Harnack (1851–1930) realised that in the Liber Pontificalis (Book of the Popes) the request from Lucio Britannio rege that Pope Eleutherus (r. 174-189) send missionaries to his realm, "Britannio" was not Britain as the English historian Bede (c. 673-735) assumed but Britium, short for Britio Edessenorum the

[Above (enlarge)[14]: The ruins of Edessa's citadel, within the modern city of Sanliurfa, Turkey.]

citadel of Edessa (above)[15]. [See "205]." So the King Lucius was not a non-existent 3rd century Christian King Lucius of Britain, but Edessa's King Abgar VIII (r. 177-212), whose full name was King Lucius Aelius Septimius Megas Abgarus VIII[16].

1904b 15 September. Birth to King Victor Emmanuel III (1904-46) and Queen Elena of Montenegro (1873-1952), their only son, Prince Umberto II (1904–83), who would become the last King of Italy, reigning for only 34 days (9 May-12 June 1946)[17].

1912 Fr Herbert Thurston (see above) wrote an article on the Shroud for the Catholic Encyclopedia, the unofficial guidebook of the Catholic faith[18]. In the article, which is still online[19], Thurston presented the false and indeed fraudulent arguments of Canon Chevalier (see above)[20], that the Shroud was a painting, `proved' by the 1389 Memorandum of Bishop Pierre d'Arcis [see "1389e"][21]. Thurston went further and provided his own `scientific' argument (which has been removed from the online article):

"It appears to me quite conceivable that the figure of our Lord may have been originally painted in two different yellows, a bright glazed yellow for the lights and a brownish yellow for the shadows. What chemist would be bold enough to affirm that under the action of time and intense heat (like the fire of 1354 [sic 1532]) the two yellows may not have behaved very differently, the bright yellow blackening, the brown yellow fading?"[42].

But Vignon had already refuted that colour inversion theory in 1902[23]. Neither Thurston nor Chevalier, had never seen the Shroud, and they refused to accept the evidence of those who had, that the Shroud image was not painted[24]. But despite the falsity, and indeed fraudulence, of Thurston's encyclopedia article, very few Catholics, and indeed very few Christians, believed in the Shroud after it appeared[25]. Thurston's article set a seal on the standing of the Shroud in the English speaking world[26]. It wasn't until 1968, fifty-six years later, that Thurston's article was replaced by a balanced, factual one, one written by pro-authenticist, Fr Adam Otterbein (1915-98)[27]. Otterbein concluded his article with:

"There are still many unanswered questions, but the accumulation of evidence from different fields of knowledge presents a formidable argument in favor of authenticity. The rapid progress of science and scholarship has made a new exposition of the shroud advisable"[28].

1914 28 June. Assassination by a Serbian nationalist of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria (1863–1914) and his wife Sophie, Duchess of Hohenberg (1868-1914)[29]. In response, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia and Russia entered into an alliance with Serbia[30]. Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy were in their already established Triple Alliance and by July France, Russia and Britain had entered an opposing Triple Entente[31]. By August the two coalitions were at war[32]. Italy decided to stay out of the war on the grounds that Triple Alliance was defensive[33]. However, Italy's real motive was Italian

[Right (enlarge)[34]. "Italian ethnic regions claimed in the 1930s"].

irredentism[35]: completing the unification of Italy by inclusion within it of areas of other countries where ethnic Italians and/or Italian-speaking individuals formed a majority or substantial minority[36].

1915 May 3. Following negotiations with Austria and the Triple Entente (see above) for territorial concessions at the end of the war to fulfil Italy's irrendentist claims, which Austria rejected but the Triple Entente partially accepted, Italy revokes its membership of the Triple Alliance and prepares to declare war against Germany and Austria-Hungary[37].

1918 6 May. In response to the threat of German aerial bombing, the Shroud is removed from Turin's Royal Chapel and taken to Turin's Royal Palace, where it is secretly placed inside a locked strongbox within a strengthened small room two floors below ground level[38]. After the war the Shroud is removed from the strongroom in Turin's Royal Palace and taken to be kept in Turin Cathedral[39].

1920 7 October. Death of Prof. Yves Delage (1854–1920)[40]. "His honesty remains for us a precious souvenir, an example for our days"[41].

"For while he [Yves Delage] did not believe in a divine Christ, he still admitted the historical existence of Jesus, and believed that the marks on the relic had been made by His dead body. In the face of the bitter attacks that followed his bold espousal of the relic's cause, he held to that belief unwaveringly. Such integrity and clarity of mind concerning the two most agitated questions of the day-religion and science-were not exactly common in fin de siecle [end of century] Paris. They are not common today"[42].

1922a 6 February. Achille Ratti (1857–1939), onetime mountaineering companion of Paul Vignon (see above)[43], becomes Pope Pius XI (r. 1922-39)[64]. Ratti was surely the most pro-Shroud Pope ever. In 1931 at the exhibition of the Shroud to mark the wedding of Prince Umberto and Princess Marie Jose of Belgium (1906-2001), he declared:

"We say, not as the Pope, but as a scientist, we have personally followed all examinations of the Shroud and we are persuaded that the Holy Shroud is authentic. All arguments against the authenticity of the Shroud do not hold. In fact, the Holy Shroud alone is sufficient evidence that this linen was not made by human hands"[45].

Ratti saw the Shroud at its 1898 exposition[46] and as Pope he authorised a special 1933 exposition to commemorate 1900 years [sic] since the death and resurrection of Jesus[47].

1922b 31 October. Following the March on Rome (28–30 October) of 30,000 Fascists, King Victor Emmanuel III appointed Benito Mussolini (1883–1945) Prime Minister[48]. Within five years, Mussolini would transform Italy into a totalitarian state with himself as its Dictator[49].

1923 Death of Canon Ulysse Chevalier (1841-1923) (see above)[50]:

"Though a Catholic priest and professor of history at the Catholic university of Lyon ... Chevalier maintained an independent critical attitude even on religious questions. In the controversy on the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin (sudario), he worked by tracing back the history of the cloth, which was undoubtedly used as a shroud, but he argued was not produced before the 14th century and was probably no older ... In 2006 French historian Emmanuel Poulle wrote in a peer-reviewed journal that Ulysse Chevalier showed in this case intellectual dishonesty ... Chevalier deliberately did not correctly mention the Papal bulls of antipope Clement VII issued in 1390. In fact Clement VII never opted for the forgery thesis"[51].

1924 Paul Vignon (see above) is appointed professor on the Faculty of Philosophy of the Institut Catholique de Paris, where until his death in 1943 he occupied the Chair of "Philosophy of Zoology and Introduction to the Philosophy of Biology"[52].

1930 8 January. Marriage in Rome of Prince Umberto II (1904–83) and Princess Marie Jose of Belgium (1906-2001)[53].

1931a 4-24 May. Twenty-one day public expostion of the Shroud to

[Left (enlarge): A poster advertising the exposition of the Shroud from 4-24 May, 1931[54].]

commemorate the royal wedding[55]. Two million view the Shroud[56]!

1931b 21-23 May. Turinese professional photographer Giuseppe Enrie (1886-1961)[57] photographs the Shroud (see above and below), with much improved photographic equip-ment[58], and confirms the 1898 findings of Secondo Pia [see "1898a"]

[Above (enlarge): Sepia print of Enrie's 1931 photograph of the Shroud on the steps of Turin Cathedral[59].]

that the Shroud image is a photographic negative[60] (see below). The

[Above (enlarge)[61]: Comparison of Pia's (left) and Enrie's (right) negative photographs of the Shroud face, showing that Enrie (1931) confirmed Pia's (1898) finding that the Shroud image is a photographic negative!]

~76 year-old Secondo Pia and the ~66 year-old Paul Vignon were Enrie's assistants[62]! Enrie's photographs proved that the Shroudman's image was not painted, because so much finer was their resolution that each thread of the cloth could be distinctly seen and that there was no paint or pigment covering them, nor clogging of the spaces between the threads[63]! Enrie's photographs were the basis of many Shroud studies, including those of Vignon, Barbet, STURP, Filas, Whanger and Danin (see future)[64].

1931c From study of Enrie's Shroud face photograph (see above), Paul Vignon (see above)[65], developed his "Iconographic Theory"[66] which proposed that the similarities betwen the Shroud face and Christian depictions of Jesus' face back to the 5th century, are because the artists had the Shroud as their model[67]!

1932a Dr Pierre Barbet (1884–1961), Chief Surgeon at St. Joseph's

[Right (enlarge)[68] Dr Pierre Barbet. Note: photos of "Pierre Barbet" which look like that below are of a writer who adopted "Pierre Barbet" as a pseudonym.]

Hospital, Paris[69], and a Roman Catholic[70], began research on the Enrie photographs[71], with a focus on the "Five Wounds of Christ"[72]: a nail wound in each hand, a spear wound in the side, and a nail wound in each foot[73]. Barbet had noted that on the Shroud the exit wound of the nail was in the man's left wrist, not the back of his palm[74] (see below). Although

[Above (enlarge): The nail exit wound and bloodstain on the back of the left hand of the man on the Shroud[75]. Only one nail wound is visible because the corresponding wound in the right wrist (indicated by blood flows down his right forearm) is covered by his left hand[76]. Note the thumbs are not visible (see below why); that these are xray images of the man's finger and hand bones [see 20Apr17a] and that the man's left thumb bones can be seen through the flesh of his left hand [see 20Apr17b]!]

Christian tradition, based on a simplistic interpretation of "hands" in Lk 24:39 & Jn 20:20,25,27, located the hand nail wounds in Jesus' palms[77], it was self-evident to Barbet that nails through the palms could not support the weight of a man hanging on a cross, but would tear through the palm's weak vertical structures[78]. Barbet confirmed this by experiments with freshly amputated arms of cadavers at St Joseph Hospital[79]. When such amputated arms were each suspended by a nail through the palms and weight added to simulate a man's body hanging on a cross, the nails tore through the palms[80]. Next

[Above (enlarge)[81]: "Destot's space ... The space in the wrist bounded by the hamate, capitate, triquetral and lunate bones. This place is referred to as a place where the nails of Jesus Christ crucifixion pierced his wrist"[82]. See also 07Dec13.]

Barbet experimented with driving a large nail through the wrists of amputated arms at the location indicated on the Shroud, which he knew was "Destot's space" (see above)[83]. Barbet expected the nail to crush one or more of the surrounding wrist bones[84], but instead, in repeated experiments, the nail entered Destot's space and pushed aside the wrist bones without crushing any of them[85]! Moreover, the nail was held fast by the four wrist bones surrounding Destot's space and the transverse carpal ligament[86]. Truly Jesus, the Man on the Shroud, is "the Lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev 13:8)! Barbet also found that when he drove the nail into the Space of Destot the thumb retracted into the palm, due to the nail damaging the median nerve[87]. Barbet then realised that is why on the Shroud the thumbs are not visible (see above)[88]. "Could a forger have imagined this?". Barbet asked[89], and the answer clearly is no! Finally, to dispose of the armchair criticism of the late Dr Frederick T. Zugibe (1928-2013) (Barbet did the experiments-Zugibe didn't), that:

"Barbet made another serious error, claiming that when he drove the nail through Destot's Space, anywhere from 1/2 to 2/3 of the trunk of the median nerve was severed. This is not anatomically possible, because the median nerve is not located in the area of Destot's Space but instead runs along the wrist on the thumb side and along the thenar furrow into the palm of the hand"[90].

Admittedly, Barbet was verbally imprecise when he wrote:

"Dissections showed me that the trunk of the median was always extensively injured by the nail. It was divided and crushed ... sometimes in its half, its third or two thirds" (my emphasis)[91].

And:

"Now, dissections have revealed to me that the trunk of the median nerve is always seriously injured by the nail; it is divided into sections, being broken sometimes halfway and sometimes two-thirds of the way across, according to the case" (my emphasis)[92].

But it is obvious (and should have been to Zugibe if he hadn't been blinded by his prejudice against Barbet) from an xray of the head of the large Roman nail in Figure IV of Barbet's "A Doctor at Calvary"

[Above (enlarge): (Left) Xray showing how the large, square, Roman nail forced outwards the bones surrounding Destot's space[93]. (Right) Extract of a drawing of the nerves in the hand. "A" and "B" are the muscular and digital branches of the median nerve and "C", "D" and "E" are the dorsal, superficial and digital brances of the ulnar nervee[94]. The red square shows the approximate location of the large, square Roman nail. As can be seen, the nail would have forced the bones surrounding Destot's Space outward, crushing and cutting the delicate branches of the median and ulnar nerves.]

(above left) that the hand bones being forced outwards by the nail would have crushed and cut the delicate median and ulnar nerves. So Zugibe's argument againt Barbet on this point is merely verbal, not real! If Barbet (or his English translator) had been more verbally precise, he would have written, "the median nerve is always seriously injured by the hand bones displaced by the nail" and it would be clear that in this Zugibe had no real point.

1932b 25 December. Pope Pius XI (r. 1922-39) (see above), declares 1933-34 is to be a Holy Year to commemorate the nineteenth centenary of the death of Christ[95]. However the most likely date of Jesus' death is 7 April 30[96].

1933 24 September to 15 October 15: At the request of Pope Pius XI the

[Left (enlarge)[97]: Poster advertising the 1933 Exposition.]

Shroud is exhibited as part of the celebrations for Holy Year[98]. The young Salesian priest Fr. Peter Rinaldi (1910-93), fluent in French and English, as well as Italian, acts as interpreter[99]. On the final day, 15 October, the Shroud is held out in daylight on the steps of the cathedral where Dr. Pierre Barbet views it from a distance of less than a yard (0.91 metre)[100]. He writes:

"I saw that all the images of the wounds were of a color quite different from that of the rest of the body, and this color was that of dried blood which had sunk into the stuff. There was, thus, more than the brown stains on the Shroud reproducing the outline of the corpse. The blood itself had colored the stuff by direct contact. It is difficult for one unversed in painting to define the exact color, but the foundation was red ('mauve carmine' said M. Vignon, who had a fine sense of color), diluted more or less according to the wounds"[101].

1934 June. Fr. Peter Rinaldi, having returned to the USA from the 1933 exposition, publishes "The Holy Shroud," in The Sign, the first ever USA magazine article on the Shroud[102]. This sparks such interest in the Shroud that it was the start of the involvement of many Shroudies in the USA[103].

1935 3 October. Italy, under Prime Minister Benito Mussolini (r. 1922–43) and King Victor Emmanuel III (r. 1900-46), invade Ethiopia in the Second Italo-Ethiopian War (1935-37)[104]. On 7 May King Victor Emmanuel III proclaims himself Emperor over the new Italian province of East Africa[105].

1937 March. An article, "The problem of the Holy Shroud," by Paul Vignon (see above), translated by Fr Edward Wuenschel (1899-1964), is published in Scientific American[106]. In it Vignon, with positive and negative photographs of the Shroud, points out that the image is a photographic negative, and therefore not a painting:

"The figures on the Shroud, in fact, are not paintings at all. As already stated, they are negative images, and the idea of a negative became known only through the invention of photography in the 19th Century. No artist of any earlier period, therefore (certainly none of the 14th Century and, above all, none before the 5th), could have conceived the idea of painting a negative"[107].

In the article Vignon also outlined his Iconographic Theory:

"It is quite certain that the figures on the Shroud are not paintings of the 14th Century. There are many representations of Christ, notably the image of Edessa, which could have been derived only from the Shroud. A careful study of these copies, which I completed recently, shows that the present Shroud of Turin was in Constantinople during the 12th Century, and that the face visible upon it served as a model for artists as early as the 5th. The artists did not copy slavishly, but tried to interpret the face, translating the mask-like features into a living portrait, which was still a recognizable copy of the original. This disposes of the only positive objection ever brought forward in the name of history"[108].

1938 Publication of Paul Vignon's "Le Saint Suaire de Turin devant la science, l' archologie, l' histoire, l' iconographie, la logique ("The Holy Shroud of Turin in the Light of Science, Archaeology, History, Iconography and Logic"[109]), which sets out Vignon's Iconographic Theory[110].

1939a 7 April. Italy invades Albania[111] and Victor Emmanuel III assumes the title, King of the Albanians[112].

1939b 3-4 May. First National Congress on Shroud Studies is held in Turin, with some twenty papers presented[113].

1939c 1 September. Germany, under Adolf Hitler (r. 1933-45), invades Poland, triggering World War II[114].

1939d 7 September. Due to fear of Allied bombing[115] and that Hitler might confiscate the Shroud[116], the Archbishop of Turin Cardinal Maurilio Fossati (r. 1930-65), had the Shroud secretly taken in an ordinary box to the Sanctuary of Montevergine, in southern Italy[117].

[Right (enlarge): The Benedictine monastery at Montevergine, Italy, where the Shroud was secretly kept during World War II, from 25 September 1939 to 29 October 1946[118].]

The King approved the plan because enroute the Shroud was hidden in the Royal Palace in Rome[119]. Only the Prior and three others are told that the box contained the Shroud[120]. It remained there, hidden under a side altar for seven years and a month[121]. During the war the Nazis had searched for the Shroud but were told by Cardinal Fossati that the Savoys had removed it[122]. See future 31 October 1946 on the return of the Shroud to Turin.]

To be continued in part #26, "Twentieth century" (2) 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]
2. Vignon, P., 1939, "Le Saint Suaire de Turin: Devant La Science, L'archéologie, L'histoire, L'iconographie, La Logique," Masson et Cie. Éditeurs: Paris, Second edition, plate I. [return]
3. Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, p.189. [return]
4. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, pp.185-186; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.151-152; Markwardt, J., 2001, "The Conspiracy Against the Shroud," BSTS Newsletter, No. 55, June 2002. [return]
5. Walsh, J.E., 1963, "The Shroud," Random House: New York NY, p.57; Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ, pp.54-55. [return]
6. Portrait of Professor Delage (1911-12), by Mathurin Méheut (1882–1958)," Station Biologique de Roscoff, France. [return]
7. Brent, P. & Rolfe, D., 1978, "The Silent Witness: The Mysteries of the Turin Shroud Revealed," Futura Publications: London, p.36; Drews, R., 1984, "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham MD, p.4; Antonacci, 2000, p.4; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.51. [return]
8. McNair, P., "The Shroud and History: Fantasy, Fake or Fact?," in Jennings, P., ed., 1978, "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, p.28; Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, pp.298-299. [return]
9. Wilson, 1998, p.299. [return]
10. Extract from de Gail, P., 1983, "Paul Vignon," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 6, March, pp.46-50, 46. [return]
11. McNair, P., "The Shroud and History: Fantasy, Fake or Fact?," in Jennings, P., ed., 1978, "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, p.28; Zeuli, T., 1984, "Jesus Christ is the Man of the Shroud," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 10, March, pp.29-33, 31; van Cauwenberghe, A., 1992, "The 1902 Concealment," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 41, December, pp.13-19, 15. [return]
12. Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, p.54; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, pp.100. [return]
13. McNair, 1978, p.28; Wilson, 1998, p.245; Markwardt, 2001. [return]
14. Extract from "Edessa citadel in Urfa, Turkey (Google Maps)," Virtual Globetrotting, 2016. [return]
15. Wilson, I., 1996, "Joseph of Arimathea, the Holy Grail and the Edessa Icon," British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 44 , November/December; Scavone, D.C., 2002, "Joseph of Arimathea, The Holy Grail & the Edessa Icon," BSTS Newsletter, No. 56, December. [return]
16. Scavone, D., 1997, "British King Lucius and the Shroud," Shroud News, No. 100, February, pp.30-39, 35; Scavone, D.C., 2010, "Edessan sources for the legend of the Holy Grail," Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the Acheiropoietos Images, ENEA Frascati, Italy, 4-6 May 2010, pp.1-6, p.3. [return]
17. "Umberto II of Italy," Wikipedia, 28 November 2021. [return]
18. Scavone, D.C., 1989, "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA, p.23 [return]
19. Thurston, H. (1912). "The Holy Shroud (of Turin)." In The Catholic Encyclopedia. Robert Appleton Co: New York, New Advent, 2020. [return]
20. Scavone, 1989, p.23 [return]
21. Nelson , H., 1993, "Rush To Judgement," Shroud News, No 76, April, p.6. [return]
42. O'Rahilly, A. & Gaughan, J.A., ed., 1985, "The Crucified," Kingdom Books: Dublin, p.51; Wilcox, R.K., 2010, "The Truth About the Shroud of Turin: Solving the Mystery," [1977], Regnery: Washington DC, p.122. [return]
23. Vignon, P., 1902, "The Shroud of Christ," University Books: New York NY, Reprinted, 1970, p.1113; Wilcox, 2010, pp.122-123. [return]
24. Wilcox, 2010, p.122. [return]
25. Scavone, 1989, p.23. [return]
26. Smith, P., 1988, "The Place of Shroud News in Sindonology," Shroud News, No 50, December, pp.22-24, 23. [return]
27. Wilcox, 2010, pp.122, 123. [return]
28. Wilcox, 2010, p.123. [return]
29. "World War I," Wikipedia, 23 November 2021. [return]
30. Ibid. [return]
31. Ibid. [return]
32. Ibid. [return]
33. Ibid. [return]
34. "Italian irredentism," Wikipedia, 21 April 2021. [return]
35. "1914 in Italy: August," Wikipedia, 21 April 2021. [return]
36. "Italian irredentism," Wikipedia, 21 April 2021. [return]
37. "1915 in Italy: April," Wikipedia, 31 March 2021. [return]
38. "1915 in Italy: April," Barberis, A., 1987, "The Secret Chamber: An Episode in Shroud History," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 22, March, pp.15-17, 16; Wilson, 1998, p.299. [return]
39. Rinaldi, P.M., 1983, "I Saw the Holy Shroud," Don Bosco Publications: New Rochelle NY, p.81. [return]
40. "Yves Delage," Wikipedia, 21 January 2021. [return]
41. van Cauwenberghe, 1992, p.18. [return]
42. Walsh, 1963, p.95. [return]
43. Walsh, 1963, pp.50-61; Crispino, D.C., 1982, "Commemorations," Shroud Spectrum International, No, 2, March, pp.33-35, 33-34; van Cauwenberghe, 1992, p.18. [return]
64. "Pope Pius XI," Wikipedia, 30 October 2021. [return]
45. Van Haelst, R., 1988, "First Belgian Touring Exhibition," Shroud News, No 46, April, pp.8-12, 10. [return]
46. Crispino, 1982, p.33; van Cauwenberghe, 1992, p.18. [return]
47. Crispino, 1982, pp.33-34; Van Haelst, 1988, p.10. [return]
48. "Benito Mussolini," Wikipedia, 26 November 2021. [return]
49. Ibid. [return]
50. "Ulysse Chevalier," Wikipedia, 2 July 2021. [return]
51. Ibid. [return]
52. de Gail, 1983, p.47. [return]
53. "Umberto II of Italy: Marriage and issue," Wikipedia, 28 November 2021 & "Marie-José of Belgium: Marriage and children," Wikipedia, 29 November 2021. [return]
54. "Poster exhibition litografia Turin Shroud Exposition 1931 100 Cm X 70cm Sindone Holy Shroud," www.todocoleccion.net. [return]
75. Wuenschel, E.A., 1954, "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, Third printing, 1961, p.29; Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ, p.56; Wilson, 1998, p.300; Moretto, G., 1999, "The Shroud: A Guide," Neame, A., transl., Paulist Press: Mahwah NJ, p.27; Guerrera, 2001, p.22. [return]
56. Adams, 1982, p.56; Wilson, 1998, p.300. [return]
57. Bulst, W., 1957, "The Shroud of Turin," McKenna, S. & Galvin, J.J., transl., Bruce Publishing Co: Milwaukee WI, pp.24-25; Drews, 1984, p.7; de Wesselow, 2012, p.21. [return]
58. Adams, 1982, p.56; Drews, 1984, p.7. [return]
59. Moretto, 1999, p.27. [return]
60. Adams, 1982, p.57; Wilson, 1998, p.300; Antonacci, 2000, p.47. [return]
61. Vignon, P., 1939, "Le Saint Suaire de Turin: Devant La Science, L'archéologie, L'histoire, L'iconographie, La Logique," Masson et Cie. Éditeurs: Paris, Second edition, plate I & "Holy Face of Jesus," Wikipedia, 28 August 2021. [return]
62. Adams, 1982, pp.56-57. [return]
63. Adams, 1982, p.57; Wilson, 1998, p.300; Antonacci, 2000, p.47. [return]
64. Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.43; Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 20; de Wesselow, 2012, p.20. [return]
65. 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, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, 1991, pp.171-204, 185-186. [return]
66. Borkan, 1995, p.30. [return]
67. Drews, 1984, p.7; Scavone, 1989, p.23; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, p.199. [return]
68. Extract from "M. Pierre Berthe [sic Barbet] Docteur t.s.s. La passion de N.-S. Jésus selon le chirurgien [Mr. Pierre Barbet Doctor t.s.s. The passion of N.-S. Jesus according to the surgeon]," Mondieuetmontout.com, N.D. [return]
69. McNair, 1978, p.35; Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.17. [return]
70. "Pierre Barbet (médecin)," Wikipedia (French), 30 October 2020. [return]
71. Wilson, 1986, p.17. [return]
72. Barbet, P., 1952, "The Five Wounds of Christ," Apraxine, M., transl., Clonmore & Reynolds: Dublin, p.7; Barbet, P., 1953, "A Doctor at Calvary," [1950], Earl of Wicklow, transl., Image Books: Garden City NY, Reprinted, 1963, p.89. [return]
73. "Five Holy Wounds," Wikipedia, 4 December 2021. [return]
74. Barbet, 1952, p.13; Barbet, 1953, p.109. [return]
75. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical," Sindonology.org. [return]
76. Borkan, 1995, p.49. n.68. [return]
77. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, p.92; Guerrera, 2001, p.39. [return]
78. Barbet, 1953, pp.110-111; Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.40; Morgan, R.H., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia, p.99; Borkan, 1995, p.24; Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, p.58; Antonacci, 2000, p.22; de Wesselow, 2012, p.119. [return]
79. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, pp.40-41; Morgan, 1980, p.100; Adams, 1982, pp.66-67; Wilson, 1998, p.35; Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, p.33. [return]
80. Barbet, 1953, pp.110-111; Wuenschel, E.A., 1954, "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, Third printing, 1961, p.44; McNair, 1978, p.35; Drews, 1984, p.25; Wilson, 1986, p.22; Borkan, 1995, p.24; 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.31; Tribbe, 2006, p.93; Oxley, 2010, pp.122-123. [return]
81. "File:Destot's space.svg," Wikimedia Commons, 28 October 2020. [return]
82. "Étienne Destot," Wikipedia, 11 September 2021. [return]
83. Barbet, 1952, p.26; Barbet, 1953, p.116; Adams, 1982, p.74. [return]
84. Barbet, 1952, p.27; Barbet, 1953, p.116. [return]
85. Barbet, 1952, p.27; Barbet, 1953, pp.116-117; Adams, 1982, p.74; Antonacci, 2000, p.24. [return]
86. Barbet, 1952, p.27; Barbet, 1953, p.118; Adams, 1982, p.74. [return]
87. Barbet, 1952, pp.29-30; Barbet, 1953, pp.118-119; Wuenschel, 1954, p.44; Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.44; Wilson, 1979, p.41; Morgan, 1980, p.101; Adams, 1982, p.75; Borkan, 1995, p.24; Antonacci, 2000, p.24. [return]
88. Barbet, 1952, p.30; Barbet, 1953, p.119; Wuenschel, 1954, p.44; Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.44; Wilson, 1979, p.41; Morgan, 1980, p.101; Borkan, 1995, p.24; Antonacci, 2000, p.24. [return]
89. Barbet, 1952, p.30; Barbet, 1953, p.119. [return]
90. Zugibe, F.T., 2005, "The Crucifixion of Jesus: A Forensic Inquiry," M. Evans & Co.: New York NY, p.74. [return]
91. Barbet, 1952, p.30. [return]
92. Barbet, 1953, pp.118-119. [return]
A Forensic Inquiry," M. Evans & Co.: New York NY, p.74. [return]
93. Barbet, 1953, Pigure IV. [return]
94. Marieb, E.N., 1992, "Human Anatomy and Physiology," [1985], Benjamin/Cummings: Redwood City CA, Second edition, p.442. [return]
95. Cortesi, A., 1932, "Holy Year Ordered for 1933-34 by Pope," New York Times, 25 December; Guerrera, 2001, p.21. [return]
96. Finegan, J., 1964, "Handbook of Biblical Chronology: Principles of Time Reckoning in the Ancient World and Problems of Chronology in the Bible," Princeton University Press: Princeton NJ, pp.296, 300-301; Wilson, 1998, p.263; Baima-Bollone, P., "Images of Extraneous Objects on the Shroud," in Scannerini, S. & Savarino, P., eds, 2000, "The Turin Shroud: Past, Present and Future," International scientific symposium, Turin, 2-5 March 2000," Effatà: Cantalupa, p.131; Doig, K.F., 2015, "New Testament Chronology: Part IV, The Crucifixion of Jesus" & "The 30 CE Crucifixion," 22 April. [return]
97. Moretto, 1999, p.31. [return]
98. Wilson, 1979, p.265; Wilson, 1998, p.300; Moretto, 1999, p.31; Oxley, 2010, p.199; Wilson, 2010, p.32. [return]
99. Adams, 1982, p.95; Wilson, 1998, p.300; Wilson, 2010, p.55. [return]
100. Barbet, 1953, p.29; Oxley, 2010, p.199. [return]
101. Wilson, 1998, p.300; Wilson, 2010, p.33. [return]
102. Wilson, I., 1984, "Some recent publications," BSTS Newsletter, No. 8, October, pp.7-11, 9; "Rev. Peter Rinaldi, 82, Shroud of Turin Expert," Obituaries, New York Times, 4 March 1993. [return]
103. Wilson, I., 1986, "Father Rinaldi's Golden Jubilee," BSTS Newsletter, No. 12, January, pp.3-4. [return]
104. "Second Italo-Ethiopian War," Wikipedia, 27 November 2021. [return]
105. "Victor Emmanuel III of Italy: Emperor of Ethiopia," Wikipedia, 22 December 2021. [return]
106. Vignon, P., 1937, "The problem of the Holy Shroud," Scientific American, Vol. 156, pp.162-164. [return]
107. Vignon, 1937, p.162. [return]
108. Vignon, 1937, p.162; Adams, 1982, p.20; Wilcox, 2010, p.102. [return]
109. Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, pp.161-162. [return]
110. Wilson, 1998, p.300. [return]
111. "Italian invasion of Albania," Wikipedia, 13 November 2021. [return]
112. "Victor Emmanuel III of Italy: King of the Albanians," Wikipedia, 22 December 2021. [return]
113. Marinelli, E., 1985, "Italian National Shroud Congress 1984", Shroud News, No. 27, February, pp.6-9, 6; Wilson, 1998, p.301. [return]
114. "World War II," Wikipedia, 21 December 2021. [return]
115. Morgan, 1980, p.47; Moretto, 1999, p.32. [return]
116. ; Moretto, 1999, p.32; Squires, N., 2010, "Hitler 'wanted to steal' Turin Shroud," The Telegraph, 6 April; Brkic, B., 2010, "Hitler had designs on the Shroud of Turin; Indiana Jones fans are not surprised," Daily Maverick, South Africa, 8 April. [return]
117. Morgan, 1980, p.47; Guerrera, 2001, p.20; Oxley, 2010, p.82. [return]
118. Moretto, 1999, p.32. [return]
119. Moretto, 1999, p.32. [return]
120. Morgan, 1980, p.47; Wilson, 1998, p.301. [return]
121. Morgan, 1980, p.47. [return]
122. Morgan, 1980, p.47. [return]

Posted 15 November 2021. Updated 5 March 2025.

The Letter of Publius Lentulus: A Shroud-like description of Jesus by an eye-witness contemporary?

Copyright © Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is my proposal that the Letter of Publius Lentulus contains a

[Right (enlarge)[2]: "Letter of Lentulus, printed in London, 1680"[3].]

Shroud-like description of Jesus by an eye-witness contemporary, and therefore is further first-century evidence for the authenticity of the Shroud!

In 1969, when I had been a Christian for only a few years, I was promoted to a position in the Mines Department of Western Australia. One of my new workmates was a Seventh Day Adventist who showed me in the back of his Bible the Letter of Publius Lentulus. From memory it was similar to Wikipedia's account (with the Shroud-like parts in bold):

"Lentulus, the Governor of the Jerusalemites to the Roman Senate and People, greetings. There has appeared in our times, and there still lives, a man of great power (virtue), called Jesus Christ. The people call him prophet of truth; his disciples, son of God. He raises the dead, and heals infirmities. He is a man of medium size (statura procerus, mediocris et spectabilis); he has a venerable aspect, and his beholders can both fear and love him. His hair is of the colour of the ripe hazel-nut, straight down to the ears, but below the ears wavy and curled, with a bluish and bright reflection, flowing over his shoulders. It is parted in two on the top of the head, after the pattern of the Nazarenes. His brow is smooth and very cheerful with a face without wrinkle or spot, embellished by a slightly reddish complexion. His nose and mouth are faultless. His beard is abundant, of the colour of his hair, not long, but divided at the chin. His aspect is simple and mature, his eyes are changeable and bright. He is terrible in his reprimands, sweet and amiable in his admonitions, cheerful without loss of gravity. He was never known to laugh, but often to weep. His stature is straight, his hands and arms beautiful to behold. His conversation is grave, infrequent, and modest. He is the most beautiful among the children of men"[4].

I remember the part about his hair being the colour of "hazel nut" (although I remembered it as "chestnut") and "He was never known to laugh, but often to weep." I was intrigued by its description of Jesus, but was sceptical of it since it was in a Seventh Day Adventist source. For some reason I thought about the Letter the other day, probably because I was thinking about the hair and beard of the Shroudman in my then current but now previous post.

Introduction Quoting Wikipedia (footnotes omitted):

"Origin It appears in several Florentine publications from around 1460 along with works of such humanists as Petrarch and Boccaccio. The letter was first printed in Germany in the `Life of Christ' by Ludolph the Carthusian (Cologne, 1474), and in the `Introduction to the works of St. Anselm' (Nuremberg, 1491). But it is neither the work of St. Anselm nor of Ludolph. According to the manuscript of Jena, a certain Giacomo Colonna found the letter in 1421 in an ancient Roman document sent to Rome from Constantinople. [Wikipedia's link to Giacomo Colonna redirects to a Giacomo Colonna who died in 1329, so that Giacomo Colonna couldn't have found Lentulus' Letter in 1421. See the comments below. So the Letter must have been found in 1421 by another Giacomo Colonna]. It must have been of Greek origin, and translated into Latin during the thirteenth or fourteenth century, though it received its present form at the hands of a humanist of the fifteenth or sixteenth century. Christopher Mylius, the 18th century librarian of Jena, stated the letter was written in golden letters on red paper and richly bound, but lost. In 1899, Ernst von Dobschütz [1870–1934] listed over 75 historical manuscripts from Germany, France, and Italy that include the Letter of Lentulus in variant forms. The 19th-century scholar Friedrich Münter believed he could trace the letter down to the time of Diocletian [ r. 284-305], but this is generally not accepted by present-day scholars"[5].

And:

"1680 English translation The first English translation of the text appears in 1680 and lists the author as `Publius Lentulus', a Prefect in Judea at the time of Tiberius Caesar [r. 14-37]. The letter is frequently regarded as apocryphal for several reasons: No Governor of Jerusalem or Procurator of Judea is known to have been called Lentulus, and a Roman governor would not have addressed the Senate in the way represented. However, the Deeds of the Divine Augustus lists a Publius Lentulus as being elected as a Roman Consul during the reign of Augustus (27 BC-AD 14). The Roman writer cited the expressions `prophet of truth', `sons of men' or `Jesus Christ'. The former two are Hebrew idioms, and the third is taken from the New Testament. The letter, therefore, gives a description of Jesus such as Christian piety conceived of him"[6].

For the Letter being authentic That is, it is what it purports to be, an eye-witness report by a Roman Governor of Jerusalem named Publius Lentulus, who was a contemporary of Jesus, to the Roman senate.

• The obscurity of Publius Lentulus Most (if not all) apocryphal writings which purport to be from a person, that person was well-known in the early church, e.g. "The Gospel of Philip," "The Gospel of Thomas," "The Gospel According to Maithias," "The Gospel of Judas," "The Apocryphon of John," "The Apocryphon of James" and "The Gospel of Bartholomew"[7]. What would be the point of forging a letter purporting to be from someone that few (if any) had heard of?

• There was a Publius Lentulus who could have been a governor of Jerusalem in Jesus' time As mentioned by Wikipedia above, the Deeds of the Divine Augustus lists a Publius Lentulus as being elected as a Roman Consul during the reign of reign of Augustus (27 BC - AD 14)." The relevant part of that document states:

"6. When Marcus Vinicius and Quintus Lucretius were consuls (19 B.C.E.), then again when Publius Lentulus and Gnaeus Lentulus were (18 B.C.E.) ..."[8].

For Publius Lentulus to write:

"There has appeared in our times, and there still lives, a man of great power (virtue), called Jesus Christ ... He raises the dead, and heals infirmities ..."

and to have seen Jesus in Jerusalem, he would have had to have written his letter in the final six months of Jesus' public ministry, between the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:1-14) in October AD 29 and the Feast of the Passover in April AD 30[9].

There were two Roman consuls elected each year and they served as consuls only for that year:

"A consul held the highest elected political office of the Roman Republic (509 to 27 BC) ... Each year, the Centuriate Assembly elected two consuls to serve jointly for a one-year term ... a consul's imperium extended over Rome and all its provinces. ... After the establishment of the Empire (27 BC), the consuls became mere symbolic representatives of Rome's republican heritage and held very little power and authority, with the Emperor acting as the supreme authority"[10].

So Publius Lentulus having been a Consul in AD 18, he would have been a pre-Empire Consul with vast authority over the entire Roman world for that year.

After they had served their one-year term, Consuls were appointed by the Senate to serve as governors of a province, with the title of Proconsul:

"After leaving office, the consuls were assigned by the Senate to a province to administer as governor. The provinces to which each consul was assigned were drawn by lot and determined before the end of his consulship. Transferring his consular imperium to proconsular Imperium, the consul would become a proconsul and governor of one (or several) of Rome's many provinces. As a proconsul, his imperium was limited to only a specified province and not the entire Republic. Any exercise of proconsular imperium in any other province was illegal. Also, a proconsul was not allowed to leave his province before his term was complete or before the arrival of his successor. Exceptions were given only on special permission of the Senate. Most terms as governor lasted between one and five years"[11].

Judea was not a Roman province until AD 41, but was a satellite of the province of Syria[12], as is evident in Lk 2:1-3 where "Quirinius [who] was governor of Syria" had ordered a previous census in Judea in which Joseph and Mary had to travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem, their ancestral birthplace. Quirinius, i.e. Publius Sulpicius Quirinius (r. AD 6 – 21), was later appointed in AD 6 as Legate of Syria, with authority over Judea, which position he held until his death in AD 21, even though he had returned to Rome in AD 12[13]. Moreover, Quirinius's successor, Lucius Aelius Lamia (bef. 43 BC–AD 33), although appointed as imperial Legate to Syria by Tiberius in AD 22, stayed in Rome and never traveled to Syria in person[14]! So although Pontius Pilate was subordinate to the Legate of Syria, for most of his Governorship of Judea, Syria's Legate was absent from the region, until AD 35 when Lucius Vitellius (bef. 7 BC–AD 51) took up that position, and deposed Pilate in AD 36[15]. So it is possible that Publius Lentulus had been appointed by "special permission of the Senate" as Governor of Jerusalem itself until AD 29, since Pilate lived in the provincial capital Caesarea Maritima, about 120 km (or 75 miles) from Jerusalem. There are only a few sources on Pilate's rule that have survived[16], and Pilate's political weakness is evident in the Jewish religious leaders' threat to him that if he realeased Jesus, he would not be Caesar's friend (Jn 19:12).

• Jesus' "hair ... is parted in two on the top of the head, after the pattern of the Nazarenes"A 15th century European forger would not likely know how "the [first-century] Nazarenes" wore their hair. But a first-century Roman governor of Jerusalem (along with other residents of Jerusalem and Judea) would! The Bible mentions "Nazarene" in two Greek words, both basically meaning an inhabitant of Nazareth[17]: 1) nazōraios (Mt 2:23; 26:71; Lk 18:37; Jn 18:5,7; 19:19; Acts 2:22; 3:6; 4:10; 6:14; 22:8; 24:5; 26:9); and 2) Nazarēnos (Mk 1:24; 10:47; 14:67; 16:6; Lk 4:34; 24:19). But none of these say anything about how Jesus or the Nazarenes wore their hair. So even if the unknown 15th century European forger did know how first-century "Nazarenes" wore their hair, what would be the point of including that in his forged letter to other 15th century Europeans who wouldn't know? But there would have been a point if Lentulus' Letter is not a forgery and Jesus did in fact part His hair in two from the top of His head, as the man on the Shroud did (see below)!

• The Letter was found in 1421 by a Giacomo Colonna[18]. He would have been a member of the powerful Colonna family[19], who trace their lineage back to the Julio-Claudian dynasty and the gens Julia[20]. The Julio-Claudian dynasty comprised the first five Roman emperors: Augustus (27BC –AD 14), Tiberius (r. 14–37), Caligula (r. 37–41), Claudius (41–54), and Nero (54–68)[21]. The gens Julia was one of the most ancient patrician families in ancient Rome[22]. The Letter of Publius Lentulus to the Roman senate in AD 29, could have been passed down unrecognised until 1421 in the archives of such an ancient Roman family!

• Historians near in time to the finding of the Letter in 1421 accepted it as authentic As Wikipedia states:

"In 1899, Ernst von Dobschütz [1870–1934] listed over 75 historical manuscripts from Germany, France, and Italy that include the Letter of Lentulus in variant forms"[above].

No details are given of how many of these more that 75 historical manuscripts accepted the Lentulus Letter as authentic, but it is a reasonable assumption that most (if not all) did. If the Letter was known to be a forgery, historians would likely have ignored it.

Against the Letter being authentic That is, it is a forgery.
• No known Governor of Jerusalem was named Publius Lentulus

"No Governor of Jerusalem or Procurator of Judea is known to have been called Lentulus" [above].

But this is an argument from silence. As Wikipedia also mentioned, "Although Pilate is the best-attested governor of Judaea, few sources on his rule have survived"[above]. The Gospels don't mention anyone who is not essential to their record of Jesus.

And empires don't run themselves, especially in an occupied country as Roman Judea was. There must have been an entire civil administration of Judea, and other Roman provinces, which is largely under history's radar. Pontius Pilate, although referred to as "Governor" (Gk hegemon Mt 27:2), was actually appointed by the Emperor Tiberius (r. 14-37) as Procurator of Judea[23]. "Procurator" was a title of officials in ancient Rome who were in charge of the financial affairs of a province[24]. In the larger provinces there was a dual administrative structure in which the Governor, appointed by the Senate, headed the civil and judicial administration of the province[25]. Since for most of Pilate's c. 26-36 AD term as Procurator/Governor of Judea there was no Syrian Legate to whom he would normally have been subordinate to (see above),it seems likely that in those years AD 12-35, when there was no Syrian Legate, there would have been governors of Jerusalem itself, appointed by the Senate, one of whom was Publius Lentulus, to oversee the civil administration of th ecity.

• A Roman governor would not have written to the Senate

"a Roman governor would not have addressed the Senate in the way represented" [above].

But Publius Lentulus being originally a Consul, had been appointed by the senate, and if he was later appointed by the senate, to be Governor of Jerusalem itself, then it would be to the senate that he wrote his account of Jesus!

• A Roman writer would not have used Hebrew idioms and terms in the New Testament.

"The Roman writer cited the expressions `prophet of truth', `sons of men' or `Jesus Christ'. The former two are Hebrew idioms, and the third is taken from the New Testament. The letter, therefore, gives a description of Jesus such as Christian piety conceived of him"[above].

In his Letter Lentulus is quoting: what Jesus was generally known as - "Jesus Christ"; what "The people call" Jesus - "prophet of truth"; and what His "disciples" call Him - "son of God". The words "sons of men" is not in Lentulus' Letter [above]. The term "prophet of truth" is not in the New Testament, but it could well be an early Jewish-Christian term used of Jesus. Pilate referred to Jesus as "Jesus who is called Christ" in questions to the Jewish religious leaders (Mt 27:17,22). And on the Day of Pentecost, 7 weeks after Jesus' death at Passover, the Apostle Peter called upon a large Jerusalem crowd to, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ ..." (Acts 2:38). So "Jesus Christ" was a name that Jesus was generally known by in Jerusalem. The term "son of God" is used approvingly of Jesus in the Gospels (Mt 4:3, 6; 8:29; 14:33; 16:16; Mk 1:1; 3:11; 5:7; Lk 1:35; 4:3,9; 4:41; 8:28; Jn 1:34, 49; 3:16-18; 3:36; 5:25; 10:36; 11:4, 27; 20:31), as well as negatively by the Jewish religious leaders against Jesus (Mt 26:63; Lk 22:70; Jn 19:7) and the unbelieving Jewish public (Mt 27:40, 43), and positively by the Roman centurion at Jesus' crucifixion (Mt 27:54; Mk 15:39). So Lentulus could have heard in Jerusalem the terms: "Jesus Christ," "prophet of truth" and "son of God," used of Jesus while He was alive. And the term, "prophet of truth," being not in the New Testament, it is unlikely a medieval forger would have used it of Jesus!

Problems of the forgery theory
• Who was the forger? Like Bishop d'Arcis' claimed c. 1355 `cunning painter'[26] the supposed forger of the Letter of Publius Lentulus is unknown. But like Bishop d'Arcis' claimed forger, how could he be unknown? Surely someone would know who he was, and even if it was after his death, would reveal it?

• Why would the forger stop at forging the Letter of Publius Lentulus? In the Middle Ages, forged eye-witness descripions of Jesus would be extremely valuable, so why is there only one? Why are there not forged descripions of Jesus by other claimed eyewitnesses? Medieval cathedrals did not care if the same claimed relic was held by other cathedrals, because they could claim theirs was the true one and charge pilgrims money to see it.

• Why would a forger choose an obscure name like Publius Lentulus? See above that this is an argument for the Letter to be authentic. Most, if not all, apocryphal writings which purported to be from a person, that person was prominent in the New Testament or early church.

• Why would a forger claim that that the Letter was "sent to Rome from Constantinople"? Why would a forger add an unnecessary complication that the Letter had been "sent to Rome from Constantinople" (see above)? Why not simply claim that ever since Publius Lentulus sent the Letter to the Roman senate when Jesus was still alive, it had been in Rome? Unless the Letter is not a forgery and it (or an early copy of it) had in fact been "sent to Rome from Constantinople"!

• Why would a forger create the Letter "written in golden letters on red paper"? (see above). That would make it a self-evident copy of Lentulus' Letter, not the original, because Lentulus would have written his Letter to the senate on then ordinary writing materials, either papyrus, parchment or vellum.

• Either Giacomo Colonna was the forger or he was duped by the forger See above that a Giacomo Colonna claimed he found the Letter in 1421 in an ancient Roman document sent to Rome from Constantinople. But it seems highly unlikely that Giacomo Colonna would have been the forger if he was a wealthy nobleman. But it also seems unlikely that he would have been duped by a forger planting the Letter in the Colonna archives. For starters, a forger would have planted an original-looking letter, not a self-evident copy. And it would not be easy to make a newly created forgery look like it was ~1400 years old.

Shroud-like description of Jesus
• "His hair is ... parted in two on the top of the head" [above]. As can be

[Above (enlarge)[27]: Enrie 1931 negative photograph of the Shroudman's face.]

seen in this Enrie negative photograph of the Shroudman (Jesus') face above, (which is the closest to how He would have looked in life), "His hair ...is parted in two on the top of the head""[28] exactly as described of Jesus in the Letter of Lentulus [above]!]

• "His beard is ... not long, but divided at the chin" [above]. And as also can be seen in the negative photograph of the Shroud face above, "His beard is ... not long, but divided at the chin"[29], again exactly as described of Jesus in the Letter of Lentulus [above]!

• "His hair is of the colour of the ripe hazel-nut" [above]. The colour of

[Left (enlarge)[30]: Ripe hazelnuts are a reddish-brown colour.]

ripe hazel nut is reddish brown (above). This, and Lentalus' further description of Jesus, that He had, "a slightly reddish complex-ion"[above], has a ring of authenticity, because nowhere before 1421, as far as I am aware, was Jesus described or depicted as having reddish hair or complexion. See "Was Jesus A Ginger?," for post-1421 Christian artworks, including by Michelangelo (1475-1564) and Leonardo da Vinci Leonardo da Vinci (1452– 1519), which depicted Jesus as having red hair. Evidently these artists considered the Letter of Lentulus to be authentic.

Israel's King David (r. c. 1010–970 BC), Jesus' ancestor through His mother Mary (Lk 3:23-31), was "ruddy" [Heb. admowniy "reddish (of the hair or the complexion)"][31] (1Sam 16:12; 17:42). There are red-haired Jews,

[Right (original)[32]: Stav Shaffir, a red-haired Israeli politician.]

and indeeed in medieval Europe, red-hair was associated with Jewish-ness ("ginger Jews")[33].

That Jesus was a red-head is both supported by the Shroud and negates the criticisms of Shroud sceptics Steven Schafersman and Joe Nickell, that the Shroudman's hair and beard not being white on the Shroud photo-negative, means they were not dark as "would be expected of a Palestinian Jew in his thirties":

"The alleged photographic negative quality of the Shroud image has been championed by Shroud enthusiasts as evidence for authenticity since 1898 when the feature was first discovered. According to these accounts, a photographic negative of the Shroud image reveals a photographic positive, and both the original image and its photographic negative have been repeatedly published in books devoted to the Shroud. However, a number of investigators have documented the fact that the Shroud image is NOT a true photographic negative but only an apparent one - a faux-photographic negative. As with a true negative, light features such as skin are dark on it and light on the positive and shadows are light on it and dark on the positive. Unlike a true photographic negative, however, dark features like the beard, mustache, hair, and blood are dark on it and light on the positive. So unless Jesus was blond or white-haired and his blood was white, the Shroud image cannot be a true photographic negative"[34].

"In 1898 the shroud was photographed for the first time, and the glass-plate negatives showed a more lifelike image of a man ... Thus began the modern era of shroud inquiry, with proponents asking how a mere medieval forger could have produced a perfect `photographic' negative before the development of photography. In fact, the analogy with photographic images is misleading: the `positive' image shows a figure with white hair and beard, the opposite of what would be expected of a Palestinian Jew in his thirties"[35].

Correcting Schafersman's and Nickell's errors: 1) "a faux-photographic negative." The Shroud image was not taken with a camera, so there are some differences between the Shroud's negative and that of a camera, so claiming that "the Shroud image [is not] a true photographic negative" is a straw man; 2) "... dark features like the ... blood are dark on it [the negative] and light on the positive." False! As can be seen below, the opposite is true: the blood (which is not part of the image) is dark on the positive and white on the negative! 3) "the `positive' image

[Above (enlarge): Comparison of positive (left)[36] and negative (right)[37] photographs of the Shroud face.]

shows a figure with white hair and beard ..." As can be seen above, this is false. If the Shroudman's hair and beard were (i.e. corresponded to) white on the positive, they would be black on the negative, but they are grey on the negative, i.e. the man's (Jesus') hair and beard were a colour between black and white, like reddish brown! 4) "the opposite of what would be expected of a Palestinian Jew in his thirties." This also is false, based on a stereotype that all Jews have dark hair. But as can be seen above, some Jews have red (or reddish brown) hair, as King David did!

So the Shroud image above is consistent with the Letter of Lentulus' description of Jesus, that:

"His hair is of the colour of the ripe hazel-nut, straight down to the ears ... parted in two on the top of the head ... His ... face ... [has] a slightly reddish complexion ... His beard is ... divided at the chin"[above]!

Conclusion We saw above that in favour of the Letter of Publius Lentulus being authentic, that is, an eyewitness description of Jesus in a report by a Roman governor of Jerusalem, Publius Lentulus, to the Roman senate, are: • The obscurity of Publius Lentulus. A forger would not likely chose as the author of the Letter, a person that few, if any, had heard of. • There was a Publius Lentulus who could have been a governor of Jerusalem in Jesus' time. • A 15th century European forger would not likely know how the first-century Nazarenes wore their hair, but a first-century Roman governor of Jerusalem would! • The Letter could have been found in 1421 by a Giacomo Colonna in the archives of his Colonna family, who trace their lineage back to ancient Rome. • Historians and artists near in time to the finding of the Letter in 1421 accepted it as authentic.

We also saw that arguments against the Letter of Publius Lentulus being authentic, are both fallacious and wrong. That no Governor of Jerusalem is known to have been called Lentulus is at best an argument from silence. And, as we saw above , a Gaetulicus Lentulus may have been a consul at Jerusalem in A.D. 26. If that is confirmed, then there would be no reason to deny that Publius Lentulus was a consul-governor of Jerusalem in Jesus' time! Besides, on general considerations, that empires don't run themselves, especially in an occupied country as Roman Judea was, so there must have been an entire civil administration of Judea, which is unknown to history. The argument that, a Roman governor would not have written to the Senate ignores the fact that if Publius Lentulus was a consul in Jerusalem, he would have been appointed by the senate, and so it would be to the senate that he would have written his account of Jesus! The argument that a Roman writer would not have used Hebrew idioms and New Testament terms ignores who Lentulus said used those terms, and when that is taken into account, they are seen to be correct.

If the Letter of Lentulus is not authentic, then it is a forgery. But, as we saw there are major problems with the Letter being a forgery, including: • Who was the forger? • Why would the forger stop at forging Lentulus' letter? • Why would a forger claim that that the Letter was sent to Rome from Constantinople, which would make it a copy because Lentulus would have sent his letter direct to the senate in Rome? • Why would a forger create the Letter written in golden letters on red paper, which would make it a self-evident copy of Lentulus' Letter, because he would have written to the senate on then ordinary writing materials?

Finally we saw that the Letter's desccription of Jesus is Shroud-like : • Jesus' hair is parted in two on the top of the head, as the Shroudman's hair is. • Jesus' beard is not long, but divided at the chin, again as the Shroudman's beard is. • Jesus' hair is the colour of ripe hazel nut, that is, reddish brown. As we saw above, the Shroudman's hair was in-between white and black, which is consistent with his hair having been reddish brown. And Jesus' ancestor, through His mother Mary, King David, was "ruddy," i.e. He had reddish hair and/or a reddish complexion!

We have seen above the evidence is strong that the Letter of Publius Lentulus is an eyewitness description of Jesus in life, consistent with the Shroud, and the arguments against that are weak. Therefore, the Letter of Publius Lentulus is further first-century evidence for the authenticity of the Shroud!

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of it (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. "File:Anon-Publius Lentulus.jpg," OrthodoxWiki, 17 December 2011. [return]
3. "Letter of Lentulus," OrthodoxWiki, 8 May 2021. [return]
4. "Letter of Lentulus," Wikipedia, 26 September 2021. [return]
5. Ibid. [return]
6. Ibid. [return]
7. Hennecke, E., Schneemelcher, W. ed., & Wilson, R. McL., ed., 1963, "New Testament Apocrypha: Gospels and Related Writings," Vol. 1, [1959], SCM Press: London, p.15. [return]
8. Bushnell, T., 1998, "The Deeds of the Divine Augustus," The Internet Classics Archive. [return]
9. Wieand, A.C., 1950, "A New Harmony of the Gospels : The Gospel Records of the Message and Mission of Jesus Christ," Wm. B. Erdman's Publishing Co.: Grand Rapids MI, Reprinted 1961, pp.8-119. [return]
10. "Roman consul," Wikipedia, 29 September 2021. [return]
11. "Proconsul," Wikipedia, 19 June 2021. [return]
12. "Judaea (Roman province): Under a prefect (6-41)," Wikipedia, 23 October 2021. [return]
13. "Quirinius: Life," Wikipedia, 3 September 2021. [return]
14. "Lucius Aelius Lamia (consul 3)," Wikipedia, 25 June 2021. [return]
15. "Lucius Vitellius (consul 34)," Wikipedia, 9 August 2021. [return]
16. "Pontius Pilate," Wikipedia, 9 October 2021. [return]
17. Zodhiates, S., 1992, "The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament," AMG Publishers: Chattanooga TN, Third printing, 1994, p.1003. [return]
18. Letter of Lentulus," Wikipedia, 26 September 2021. [return]
19. "Sciarra Colonna," Wikipedia, 4 March 2021. [return]
20. "Colonna family: Origins," Wikipedia, 17 September 2021. [return]
21. "Julio-Claudian dynasty," Wikipedia, 8 October 2021. [return]
22. "Julia gens," Wikipedia, 8 October 2021. [return]
23. Gehman, H.S. & Davis, J.D., 1924, "Pilate," and "Procurator," in "The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible," [1898], Collins: London, Revised, 1944, pp.482-483; Wheaton, D.H, "Pilate," and "Procurator," in Douglas, J.D., et al., eds., "New Bible Dictionary," [1962], Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester UK, Second edition, 1982, Reprinted, 1988, pp.939 & 973-974. [return]
24. "Procurator (ancient Rome)," Wikipedia, 21 March 2021. [return]
25. "Procurator (ancient Rome): Fiscal offices," Wikipedia, 21 March 2021. [return]
26. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.267. [return]
27. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, Shroud Scope: Enrie Negative Vertical. [return]
28. Walsh, J.E., 1963, "The Shroud," Random House: New York NY, pp.155-156; Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised, pp.102-103; Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ, pp.18-19; Bongert, Y., 1993, "Influence du Linceul dans l'Iconographie du Christ et le MS Pray," Shroud Spectrum International No. 42, December, p.34; 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.110 & Antonacci, M., 2000, "The Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.114. [return]
29. Wilcox, R.K., 1977, "Shroud," Macmillan: New York NY, pp.84-86; Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, pp.16-17; Maher, R.W., 1986, "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, pp.76-77; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, pp.100-101. [return]
30. Skhirtladze, K., 2021, "Swiss Company Camille Bloch Expects Its First Georgian Hazelnut Harvest by 2025," Georgia Today, 9 September. [return]
31. Strong, J., 1995, "New Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN. [return]
32. Extract from, "Stav Shaffir on Rabin's assassination: To me, as a child, Rabin was a real hero," Twitter, 5 November 2014. [return]
33. Connelly, I.K., 2019, "On National Redhead Day, Explore the History of Ginger Jews," Forward, 5 November. [return]
34. Schafersman, S.D., 1998, "Unraveling the Shroud of Turin," Approfondimento Sindone, Vol. 2. Footnote omitted. [return]
35. Nickell, J., 2007, "Relics of the Christ," The University Press of Kentucky: Lexington KY, p.140. [return]
36. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical," Sindonology.org. [return]
37. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Enrie Negative Vertical," Sindonology.org. [return]

Posted 23 October 2021. Updated 20 August 2025.