Monday, January 23, 2023

The Shroudman and Jesus died on a cross #40: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is Jesus' burial sheet!

Copyright © Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is the seventh installment of part #40, "The Shroudman and Jesus died on a cross," of my series, "The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is Jesus'burial sheet!." For more information about this series, see the "Main index #1" and "Other marks and images #26." I will use in-line referencing to save time in renumbering out-of-order footnotes. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

[Main index #1] [Previous: The Shroud man and Jesus were crucified #39] [Next: The Shroud man and Jesus were wrapped in a linen shroud #41]

  1. The Bible and the Shroud #33
    1. The Shroudman and Jesus died on a cross #40

The Shroudman and Jesus died on a cross. Both the man on the Shroud and Jesus died on a cross[SH81, 45].

[Right (enlarge): Major bloodstains on the Shroud[LM10a]. As we shall see in more detail, the man has been nailed through his wrists and feet, and the bloodstains on his forearms show he was hanging from the nails in his wrist with both arms above and to the sides of his head, as on a cross. The large bloodstain in his right side (apparently left because of mirror-reversal[BR70; WI79, 30]), which pooled across the small of his back, was, as we shall see, from a Roman lance thrust upward into his heart, which if he hadn't been already dead (otherwise that blood would have spurted over his body), would have killed him.]

Jesus died on a cross. The Gospels record that Jesus died on a cross[SH81, 45]:

Mt 27:50. "And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit."
Mk 15:37. "And Jesus uttered a loud cry and breathed his last."
Lk 23:46. "Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!” And having said this he breathed his last."
Jn 19:30. "When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, `It is finished,' and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit."
• Jesus was nailed to a cross (Col 2:14)[AM00, 120], through his hands (Lk 24:39-40; Jn 20:25,27)[AM00, 22] and feet (Lk 24:39-40).

• Jesus legs were not broken because he had died on the cross (Jn 19:31-33)[WI79, 52; SH81, 45; WM86, 44; SH90, 87; BM95, 26; IJ98, 62; GV01, 86].

• Instead, Jesus was speared in his side to make sure he was dead (Jn 19:33-34)[SH81, 45; SH90, 87; BM95, 26; RC99, 44; AM00, 120].

The Shroudman died on a cross.
• The Shroudman was nailed to a cross[AM00, 33; WE54, 43], through

[Left (enlarge[LM10b]): The left arm of the Shroudman, flipped horizontally and rotated 90 degrees, showing how the blood from a nail through his wrist in a crucifixion position dripped off his arm vertically under gravity.]

his hands and feet[AM00, 120; GV01, 86]. He was nailed through each

[Above (enlarge[WI78, 50L]): The bloodstains on the man's left wrist and forearms show that he was nailed by his outstretched wrists to a cross. The bloodflows down each foream dripped off at 65 and 55 degrees to the vertical, as the man alternately raised himself to exhale and slumped down to inhale[WI79, 40; CJ84, 51; AM00, 31].]

wrist with his hands stretched out[BP53, 107; BM95, 25; RC99, 30; OM10, 122]. The man on the Shroud was nailed to a cross by a single

[Above: Upper: Feet dorsal (original[LM10c]). Lower: Feet frontal (original[LM10d]):

"When viewing the back of the man's legs and feet, we see that the left foot and leg images are less defined than the right ones. In addition, the left heel is elevated above the right. These facts indicate that the left knee was flexed to some degree. While this is most apparent on the dorsal view, the left leg visible on the frontal image also appears slightly raised. In light of these findings, most pathologists contend that the right foot was placed directly against a flat surface, while the left leg was bent at the knee and the left foot rotated to rest on top of the right foot. With a body in this position, a single nail driven between the metatarsal bones could affix both feet in a stationary position"[AM00, 22].]

nail through his left foot over his right[BA34, 64; BP53, 114; BR78, 46; MR80, 103; AM00, 22]. French surgeon Pierre Barbet (1884–1961) actually discovered the mark of the large, square in cross-section, Roman nail in the man's right foot[BP52, 35; BP53, 125; GV01, 84]!

[Left (enlarge[LM10e]):

"Half-way along there is a rectangular stain, rather nearer to the inner than to the outer edge of the impression, and this is where the flows seem to have their centre ... This four-sided image is certainly the mark of the nail ..."[BP53, 125].
To quote Barbet in a different context, "Could a forger have imagined this?"[BP53, 119]. And the answer again is, "of course not"!

To be continued in the eighth installment of this post.

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]

AM00. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY.
BA34. Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London.
BM95. Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, 18-51.
BP52. Barbet, P., 1952, "The Five Wounds of Christ," Apraxine, M., transl., Clonmore & Reynolds: Dublin.
BP53. Barbet, P., 1953, "A Doctor at Calvary," [1950], Earl of Wicklow, transl., Image Books: Garden City NY, Reprinted, 1963.
BR70. Bucklin, R., 1970, "The Legal and Medical Aspects of the Trial and Death of Christ," Medicine, Science and the Law, January.
BR78. Brent, P. & Rolfe, D., 1978, "The Silent Witness: The Mysteries of the Turin Shroud Revealed," Futura Publications: London.
CJ84. Cruz, J.C., 1984, "Relics: The Shroud of Turin, the True Cross, the Blood of Januarius. ..: History, Mysticism, and the Catholic Church," Our Sunday Visitor: Huntington IN
GV01. Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL.
IJ98. Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY.
LM10a. Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002: Horizontal: Major bloodstains overlay.,"
LM10b. Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical,"
LM10c. Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical,"
LM10d. Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical,"
LM10e. Latendresse, M., 2010, Shroud Scope: Enrie Negative Vertical,
MR80. Morgan, R.H., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia.
OM10. Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK.
RC99. 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.
SH81. 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.
SH90. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN.
WE54. Wuenschel, E.A., 1954, "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, Third printing, 1961.
WI78. Wilson, I., 1978, "The Turin Shroud," Victor Gollancz: London.
WI79. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition.
WM86. Wilson, I. & Miller, V., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London.

Posted 23 January 2023. Updated 1 February 2023.

Wednesday, January 11, 2023

Ulysse Chevalier, Turin Shroud Encyclopedia

Turin Shroud Encyclopedia
Copyright © Stephen E. Jones

Ulysse Chevalier #20

This is "Ulysse Chevalier," part #20 of my Turin Shroud Encyclopedia. As mentioned in my previous Pierre d'Arcis #18, this series will help me write chapter "18. Sceptics and the Shroud" of my book, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" See 06Jul17, 03Jun18, 04Apr22, 13Jul22 & 8 Nov 22.

[Index #1] [Previous: Pierre d'Arcis #18] [Next: Herbert Thurston #21]

Ulysse Chevalier (1841-1923) was a French bibliographer and historian[MP78, 28; UCW].

[Right (enlarge)[CWC]: Portrait of Chevalier in 1909.]

Chevalier's principal work was the Répertoire des sources historiques du moyen âge, which arranged and annotated almost the entire source material for the history of the Middle Ages[WJ63, 50; UCW].

Though a Catholic priest and Professor of Ecclesiastical History at the Catholic Institute of Lyon[VC92, 19], the Abbé (afterwards Canon) Chevalier maintained an independent critical attitude even on religious questions[UCW]. 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 (Le Saint Suaire de Lirey-Chambéry, Turin et les défenseurs de son authenticité)[PE06]. In 2006 French historian Emmanuel Poulle [1928–2011] wrote in a peer-reviewed journal[PE06] that Ulysse Chevalier showed in this case intellectual dishonesty[UCW]. According to Poulle, Chevalier deliberately did not correctly mention the Papal bulls of antipope Clement VII [1378-94] issued in 1390[UCW]. In fact Clement VII never opted for the forgery thesis[UCW].

Chevalier, was a leader of a progressive faction of the Roman Catholic Church which sought to do away with what was seen as "superstition"[OM10, 57]. His position was close to that of the Bollandists, learned Belgian Jesuits, who concerned themselves with the lives of saints and the authenticity of relics[PM96, 185]. Both Chevalier and the Bollandists wanted to free the Church from outdated customs and beliefs, in favour of a more modern foundation of the Faith[PM96, 185].

So when news of the discovery in 1898 of Turin photographer Secondo

[Left (enlarge): Secondo Pia's 1898 negative photograph of the Shroud face[HFW], which because it is a photographic positive, proved that the Turin Shroud image is a photographic negative[MP78, 26-27; AM00, 34-35; OG85, 46-47].]

Pia (1855–1941), that the Shroudman's image is a photographic negative, Chevalier set about discrediting the Shroud[DT12, 19].

Chevalier had already discovered documents which seemingly discredited the Shroud[KG94, 10]. So in 1900 he published his Etude Critique sur l'origine de Saint Suaire de Lirey-Chambéry-Turin [KG94, 10; WI79, 319] ("Critical Study on the Origins of the Holy Shroud of Lirey-Chambery-Turin") and it had the impact of a death-blow[WJ63, 50]. Almost immediately, the article was reprinted as a monograph, with fifty documents in a sixty-four page appendix[KG94, 10; WJ63, 50; AF82, 54].

Included in the documents was the so-called D'Arcis Memorandum [see 1389d & 08Nov22], which is merely hearsay evidence[AF82, 54]. It purported to be the draft of a letter from Bishop Pierre d'Arcis (r. 1377-95) which claimed that the Shroud was only a painting, based on the supposed verbal statements of one of his predecessors, Henri de Poitiers (r. 1354-70)[AF82, 54]. Also included was the 1 January 1390 papal bull from Clement VII to Geoffroy II de Charny (1352-98), that the Shroud could continue to be exhibited but only as a "figure or representation" of Christ's burial cloth[WJ63, 56; DT12, 19]. Chevalier claimed on the basic of these documents that the Shroud it could not be a genuine relic and that it must have been "cunningly painted", as Bishop Henry de Poitiers had supposedly discovered[DT12, 19].

It was enough to close the discussion, and the president of the Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-lettres, at a solemn sitting held on 15 November 1901, while awarding a gold medal of 1,000 francs to M. Chevalier, severely censured any future attempt to impose upon the credulity of the faithful with what could henceforth be described only as a fraudulent misrepresentation[AF82, 54-55; DT12, 19]!

However, Shroud scholar Luigi Fossati (1920-2007), in a detailed analysis of the documents in Chevalier's appendix, found that most were irrelevant to the question of the Shroud's authenticity and some were actually favourable to it[FL92, 3]! Fossati concluded:

"All things considered, the documents contrary to authenticity, those that support a manual origin of the imprints, are reduced to one only: the so-called Memorandum of Pierre d'Arcis"[FL92, 4]!
So Chevalier dishonestly `padded' his Appendix with fifty documents, when only one, the so-called d'Arcis Memorandum, was against the authenticity of the Shroud! Moreover, as referred to above, Chevalier was dishonest in only including Pope Clement's 6 January 1390 bull to Geoffroy II de Charny, when Clement sent three bulls on the same day, one of which was to Bishop d'Arcis, "reimposing perpetual silence, this time under pain of excommunication":
"Clement conducted no investigation ... On January 6, 1390, he put his signature to three documents that ended the acrimony, although not in the way that d'Arcis had wanted. To Geoffrey he sent a letter reinforcing his previous decision to let the expositions continue, provided that it was always stated that the cloth was a `figure or representation.' To Bishop d'Arcis he sent a letter reimposing perpetual silence, this time under pain of excommunication. To certain other ecclesiastics in the surrounding area he sent letters requiring them to oversee his decision in the matter"[WJ63, 56; OM10, 83].

However, Chevalier's worst act of dishonesty, indeed literary fraud, was in creating the d'Arcis Memorandum out of two rough drafts:

"There are two handwritten copies of the memorandum attributed to d'Arcis, `Folio 137' and `Folio 138' Folio 138 is a first draft with some parts crossed out, underlinings, and some very violent expressions expressions canceled; it is unsigned and undated and the addressee is not even shown. Chevalier made an orderly and careful transcription of this and published it in his very influential book. But Chevalier affixed the heading from Folio 137, `The Truth about the Cloth of Lirey, which was and now is being exhibited and about which I intend to write to our Lord the Pope in the following manner and as briefly as possible,' onto Folio 138. Thus, the document seen in Chevalier's book does not even exist, for it is actually a combination of two documents! Folio 137, the second draft, is neater than the first, and with its proper heading removed and affixed to the earlier messy draft, Chevalier gives the impression that Folio 137 was sent to Clement VII" (my emphasis)[AM00, 151-152; OM10, 57].
[Right (enlarge)[LSD]: Folio 137, the second of the two drafts, the first being folio 138[OM10, 56], of the so-called d'Arcis Memorandum]

At the foot of Folio 137, not part of the Latin document itself, a scribe had written in French "Fin 1389", i.e. "end of 1389"[BB91, 236; KG94, 11]. Chevalier forged the "Fin 1389" at the head of the d'Arcis Memorandum in his Appendix[BB91, 236, KG94, 11], without informing his readers that the date, though probably correct, is not on the document itself[BB91, 236, 238].

The central claim of the d'Arcis Memorandum is:

"Some time since in this diocese of Troyes the Dean of a certain collegiate church, to wit, that of Lirey ... procured for his church a certain cloth cunningly painted, upon which ... was depicted the twofold image of one man, that is to say, the back and front ... declaring ... that this was the actual shroud in which our Saviour Jesus Christ was enfolded in the tomb, and upon which the whole likeness of the Saviour had remained thus impressed together with the wounds which He bore ... The Lord Henry of Poitiers ... then Bishop of Troyes, becoming aware of this, and ... set himself earnestly to work to fathom the truth of this matter ... Eventually, after diligent inquiry and examination, he discovered the fraud and how the said cloth had been cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist who had painted it, to wit, that it was a work of human skill and not miraculously wrought or bestowed"[WI79, 266-267].
The first component of the d'Arcis Memorandum, as previously mentioned, that "The Lord Henry of Poitiers ... then Bishop of Troyes, becoming aware of this..." is hearsay[AM00, 152-153; DT12, 182]. The first layer of hearsay is the claimed confession of the unnamed artist that he painted the image[AM00, 153]. The second layer is the source from which d'Arcis received this information[AM00, 153]. D'Arcis does not reveal either, so he may be relating mere gossip or rumor, or he may be making it up[AM00, 153]. Already in 1902 Paul Vignon (1865-1943) pointed this out:
"We know nothing of the enquiry made by the bishop, Henri de Poitiers, in 1355, but simply what his third successor [d'Arcis] was pleased to tell us about this enquiry. Many of Chevalier's readers have been misled by this ... "[BB91, 236].
D'Arcis was a former lawyer[CD92, 26; WI86, 11; WI98, 121; WI10, 231] so if there was any evidence to support his central claim above, he would have cited it[AM00, 152].

The second component of the d'Arcis Memorandum's central claim, as we saw in my previous post, is that, "Henry of Poitiers ... then Bishop of Troyes... after diligent inquiry and examination, he discovered the fraud," is false!: • Henri de Poitiers wasn't in Troyes in 1355[08Nov22a]; • On 28 May 1356 when de Poitiers was still in his previous diocese at Aix-en-Othe he wrote instituting the collegiate church of Lirey: "... we praise, ratify and approve ..." its "divine cult" which can only be veneration of the Shroud[08Nov22b]; • There is no evidence that de Poitiers made any "diligent inquiry and examination" and "discovered the fraud"[08Nov22c]; • In 1357 twelve bishops at the Papal Court in Avignon granted indulgences to all who visited the church of St Mary at Lirey and its relics[08Nov22d]; • de Poitiers didn't have a problem with Shroud, e.g. Geoffroy II de Charny married Henri de Poitiers' niece, Marguerite de Poitiers (c. 1362-1418)[08Nov22e].

The third component of the d'Arcis Memorandum, "... and how the said cloth had been cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist who had painted it", as we saw, is not only false but d'Arcis must have been lying, because the Shroudman's image is not painted, and there can't have been another shroud that de Poitiers investigated in c.1355[08Nov22f].

So, since the d'Arcis Memorandum was the only document in Chevalier's fifty-document Appendix that was against the authenticity of the Shroud (see above) and that is doubly a fraud (by both d'Arcis and Chevalier), Chevalier's entire literary argument against the Shroud fails!

Yet, it is the false d'Arcis Memorandum, forged by Chevalier, which, as we will see, is the basis of sceptic's argments against the Shroud down to this day[DR84, 24; DT12, 19]!

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]

AF82. Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ.
AM00. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY.
BB91. Bonnet-Eymard, B., "Study of original documents of the archives of the Diocese of Troyes in France with particular reference to the Memorandum of Pierre d'Arcis," in Berard, A., ed., 1991, "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud," Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, 233-260, 236-237.
CD92. Crispino, D.C., 1992, "A New Look at Two Incompatible Views," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 41, December, 22-28.
CWC. File:Cyr Ulysse Chevalier.png, Wikimedia Commons, 20 November 2022.
DR84. Drews, R., 1984, "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham MD.
DT12. de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London.
FL92. Fossati, L., 1992, "A Critical Study of the Lirey Documents," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 41, December, 2-11.
KG94. Kersten, H. & Gruber, E.R., 1994, "The Jesus Conspiracy: The Turin Shroud and the Truth About the Resurrection," Element Books: Shaftesbury UK, Reprinted, 1995.
HFW. "Holy Face of Jesus," Wikipedia, 29 October 2022.
LSD. "La Sindone di Torino: Il memoriale del vescovo Pierre d'Arcis del 1389," n.d.
MP78. McNair, P., 1978, "The Shroud and History: Fantasy, Fake or Fact?," in Jennings, P., ed., "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK.
OG85. O'Rahilly, A. & Gaughan, J.A., ed., 1985, "The Crucified," Kingdom Books: Dublin.
OM10. Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK.
PE06. Poulle, E., 2006, "Le linceul de Turin victime d'Ulysse Chevalier," Revue d'histoire de l'Eglise de France, Vol. 92, No. 229, 343-358.
PM96. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta.
UCW. Ulysse Chevalier, Wikipedia, 24 January 2022.
VC92. van Cauwenberghe, A., 1992, "The 1902 Concealment," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 41, December, 13-19.
WI79. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition.
WI86. Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London.
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.
WI10. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London.
WJ63. Walsh, J.E., 1963, "The Shroud," Random House: New York NY.

Posted 11 January 2023. Updated 1 February 2023.

Thursday, December 8, 2022

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Twentieth century (5)

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present
© Stephen E. Jones

This is part #29, "Twentieth century" (5) of my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 - present" series. For more information about this series see the Index #1. I will use in-line referencing to save time in renumbering out-of-order footnotes, but in the final installment I will convert these to numbered footnotes. 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: 20th century (5) #28] [Next: 20th century (6) #30]

20th century (5) (1980-1988).

1980a 13 April. On his first visit as Pope to Turin John Paul II (r. 1978-2005) has a private showing of the Shroud and kisses the cloth's hem[WI98, 305; WI10, 279]. In his homily the Pope says:

"The Paschal mystery has found here some splendid witnesses ... It could not be otherwise in this city which guards an unusual and mysterious relic as the Holy Shroud, a singular witness - if we accept the arguments of many scientists - of Easter: of the Passion, death and Resurrection. It is a silent witness, but at the same time surprisingly eloquent!"[GV01, 29; WI10, 279]
1980b 29 April. London University Professor of Ancient History, Averil Cameron (1940-), delivers her Inaugural Lecture, "The Sceptic and the Shroud," at King's College, London[WI86, 118, 146; WI10, 3]. In it she claimed, "It is beyond belief that so staggering a discovery (of the 14-foot Shroud folded behind the Edessa face) would have been passed over by all our literary sources"[SD89, 101; WI86, 119]. But Cameron chose to look only at texts, rather than texts and images in parallel[WI10, 3].

1980c June. A 24-page article with photographs: "Science Seeks to Solve The Mystery of the Shroud," is published in National Geographic[WK80, 730-53]. It covers STURP's 1978

[Right (enlarge): "Anatomy of the Shroud"[WK80, 736-7], showing that the wounds and bloodstains on the Shroud match those in the Gospels' accounts of Jesus' sufferings and death. But no forger would or could forge even the over 100 scourge marks which perfectly match a Roman flagrum.]

examination of the Shroud as well as its history back to Edessa!

1980d July. Fr. Francis L. Filas (1915-85), a professor of theology at Chicago's Loyola University, publishes a monograph, "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate"[FF80; FF81; AF82, 89-90]. In it Filas announces his discovery over the right eye, in an enlargement of an Enrie 1931 negative photograph of the Shroudman's face, the letters "UCAI" in the correct position around a Roman astrologer's staff called a lituus[FF80, 3-4]. Filas found in Madden's "History of Jewish Coinage, and of Money in the Old and New Testament" (1864) a Pontius Pilate lepton coin minted in AD29 [Left (enlarge)MF67, 149] with the inscription "TIBEPIO-UKAICAPOC" ("Of Tiberius Caesar"), and assumed the "C" was a rare mispelling of "K"[FF80, 3-5; ZF05, 236] [see 18Apr20a]. However, while Filas did discover part of the lituus and inscription of a lepton coin minted by Pontius Pilate (r. c. AD 26–36), the Roman governor of Judea who sentenced Jesus to death by crucifixion (Mt 27:2,24-26; Mk 15:1,15; Lk 3:1; 23:1, 24-25; Jn 18:28; 19:15-16) (thus proving beyond reasonable doubt that the man on the Shroud is Jesus!); Filas identified the wrong Pontius Pilate lepton coin[see 18Apr20b]!

1980e 11 September. Walter McCrone (1916-2002) lectures to the British Society for the Turin Shroud in London, again claiming the Shroud to be the work of a mediaeval artist who painted in iron oxide, using a very dilute tempera binding medium[WI98, 305]. However, McCrone concluded by admitting:

"I am not saying the Shroud is not authentic. I am saying that the image area has a lot of iron oxide and a lot of artist's pigment associated with it but I do not know whether the amount of iron oxide present is sufficient to explain the entire image"[MW80, 6]
In the question-and-answer session which followed, a British journalist Peter Jennings (1948-2013), kept asking McCrone if he thought the Shroud was a fake, and after McCrone evaded answering the question several times, finally he said:.
"I think it was a fake but I cannot prove it as a scientist"[MW80, 9]
Jennings, without authorization[WI98, 305], publishes the news, repeated world-wide, that McCrone said the Shroud was a "fake"[MR80, 1,3]!

1980f 17-19 October. A group of key STURP scientists meets in Espanola, New Mexico, to review a rough draft of the group's summary paper, scheduled for release before the expiration of STURP's formal agreement with its team members, in October 1981[WI98, 305].

1981a 9 March. Death from pancreatic cancer of West Indian patient Les at Jospice International Hospice at Thornton, near Liverpool[WI98, 305; DT12, 288D]. An imprint with some resemblance to the Shroud [Right (enlarge)[JM81].] is left on the nylon cover of the mattress of the bed in which Les died[WI98, 305]. The imprints of his hand, buttocks, arm, shoulders and jaw[WI98, 209] were presumably caused by the man's abnormal urine reacting with the nylon material of the mattress cover[DT12, 288D]. Medical examiner Dr Frederick Zugibe (1928–2013) found "many dissimilarities" between the Jospice mattress cover image and that of the Shroud[ZF81]. Unlike the Shroud, the Jospice imprints are simple outlines and blocks of shadows[WI98, 209]. And there is nothing special about its photographic negative[WI98, 209] . See 18Jul20.

1981b 27 March, at Geneva ex-king Umberto II (r. 1946) signed a formal decree that 'after my death the entire property of the Holy Shroud shall be donated to the Holy See'[WI10, 276]. [see 1983b].

1981c 1 April. Max Frei (1913-83) reports that had found 56 varieties of pollen on the Shroud (by 1982 it was 58 - see 1982c), including 14 found only in the eastern Mediterranean, and two-thirds of these varieties come exclusively from plants growing in semi-desert areas from Palestine to Turkey[TF06, 111]. Frei states that it is his opinion that the cloth of the Shroud is indeed about 2,000 years old and came from Palestine[TF06, 111]! Frei's conclusions were supported by palynologists Prof. Aharon Horowitz and Prof. A. Orville Dahl (1910-2003)[RC99, 77].

1981d 6 May. Prof. Pierluigi Baima-Bollone (1937-) informed the Medical Academy of Turin that forensic haematological analyses conducted on the threads that he himself had removed in 1978 [see "1978t"] showed the presence of human blood preserved unaltered[BZ98, 20; PM96, 210; WI98, 305; BB00, 212].

1981e 13 May. STURP team members John Jackson and Larry Schwalbe, along with Fr Adam Otterbein (1916-98) and Fr. Peter Rinaldi (1910-93), are in St. Peter's Square, Rome, awaiting an audience with Pope John Paul II to report to him on the 1978 testing when the Pope is shot by Turkish gunman Mehmet Ali Agca, and the audience never takes place[WI98, 305].

1981f 15 May. John Jackson and Larry Schwalbe of STURP, together with Frs. Adam Otterbein and Peter Rinaldi, visit ex-king Umberto II of Savoy in Cascais, Portugal, to report on the 1978 testing[WI98, 305].

1981g August. STURP chemist Alan D. Adler (1931-2000) reported to a meeting of the Canadian Society of Medico-Forensic Sciences that he had obtained analogous results from strips applied to the Shroud surface in 1978, thus confirming Baima Bollone's positive identification[BZ98, 20; WI98, 305].

1981h 10-11 October. The STURP team meets at Connecticut College in New London, Connecticut, for an invitation-only symposium closed to the public[WI98, 305]. During his presentation, Adler was asked to comment on McCrone's claim that there was no blood on the Shroud and he referred to a chart of the blood tests that he and John Heller (1921-95) had performed and remarked:

"That means that the red stuff on the Shroud is emphatically, and without any reservation, nothing else but B-L-O-O-D!"[HJ83, 216; GV01, 69]
STURP concluded:
"No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultraviolet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 Image Analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. ... We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist"[SC81; IJ98, 178; OM10, 218-219]
The meeting marked the official expiration of the group's original written agreement with its team members and brings to a close the most productive period of its history[WI98, 305].

1981i November. Another 24-page article, "Shreds of evidence: Science confronts the miraculous-the Shroud of Turin," by Cullen Murphy is published in Harper's Magazine[MC81]. STURP chemist Ray Rogers (1927–2005), before he examined the Shroud in 1978, had said, "Give me twenty minutes, and I'll have this thing shot full of holes"[MC81, 44; AF82, 94]

1981j December. STURP informs the Turin authorities that the Arizona, Brookhaven, Oxford and Rochester laboratories have all agreed to participate in a radiocarbon-dating of the Shroud[WI98, 305].

1981k December. Alan Whanger (1930-2017) invented his Polarized Image Overlay technique - a procedure for comparing various images[IJ98, 41; OM10, 177]. For my critique of Whanger's "Points of Congruence" claims, see 02Jan18.

1981l December. Dr Sebastiano Rodante (1924-2016)'s paper, "The

[Left (enlarge): Distinction between venous blood in the reversed `3' or epsilon bloodstain, which is correctly over the frontal vein "V", and arterial blood which is over the frontal branch of the superficial temple artery "Al" on the forehead of the Shroudman[RS81, 17]. See 03Jun17].]

Coronation of Thorns in the Light of the Shroud" is published[RS81]. Dr. Rodante identified the origins of many of the head wounds on the Shroud based on the size or coagulation pattern of blood flows on the skin[IJ98, 67; AM00, 26; TF06, 99]. For example, he discovered that the epsilon-shaped forehead clot on the Shroud lies exactly over the frontal vein, while the arterial wound numbered A1 above precisely corresponds with the frontal branch of the superficial temple artery[BM95, 26; AM00, 26]. But the distincion between arterial and venous blood flows was only discovered in 1593 by Andrea Cesalpino (1524-1603)[BM95, 26; IJ98, 67; TF06, 99]. A medieval forger would not know this distinction to depict it on the Shroud[IJ98, 67]. Yet more evidence that the 1260-1390" radiocarbon date of the Shroud" is wrong![IJ98, 67].

1982a STURP sets up a commission to study the possibility of using the radiocarbon technique to date the Shroud[GV01, 116]. The commission is headed by Robert Dinegar (1921-2005), a chemist at Los Alamos[GV01, 116]. He and Harry Gove (1922-2009) contacted six laboratories capable of working with small samples[GV01, 116]. Four of the labs, Rochester, Arizona, Oxford and Zurich made use of the accelerator method[GV01, 116]. The other two labs at Brookhaven and Harwell made use of the gas counter method[GV01, 116].

1982b A secret radiocarbon dating of the Shroud is conducted at the University of California nuclear accelerator facility[CT96, 75; GH96, 285; GV01, 136; MW88, 25; PM96, 149; SH90, 58]. Adler gave a single thread from the Raes sample (see "1973d") to Heller, who delivered it to the California Institute of Technology (CalTech) for radiocarbon dating by Professor of Mineralogy George R. Rossman (1944-)[CT96, 33; BM02, 11]. Adler had informed Rossman that one end of the thread contained a "starch contaminate," so Rossman cut the thread in half and, using a Fourier-transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometer (FTMS), dated each end of the thread separately[BM02, 11]. Rossman found that the non-contaminated end of the thread dated to AD 200 while the starched end dated to AD 1200[CT96, 33; BM02, 12; MW88, 25]! Adler stated that Rossman is the "world's expert in it [FTMS] and there's no arguing with him ... if he says these are the dates he got"[BM02, 12]. Although this was an unauthorised, radiocarbon date of a single sample[GV01, 136; MW88, 25], because the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud was the result of a computer hacking, this is the only actual radiocarbon date of the Shroud! Its AD 200 date is consistent with the Shroud having been Jesus' burial sheet[SH90, 58], since it is impossible to remove all carbon contamination from linen[MW86, 10].

1982c June. Frei publishes his "Nine Years of Palinological Studies on the Shroud"[FM828]. See 1981c. Frei reported he had identifed pollens from 58 varieties of plants[WI86, 38]. In particular, Frei found on the Shroud pollens of:

"Desert plants, most notably halophytes, specially adapted to grow in the exceptionally salty soil around the Dead Sea, also feature prominently in the list, along with no fewer than seven plants characteristic of Near Eastern rocky hills and other high places. It is obvious that the Shroud has been in a region typical of, if not identical with, the terrain in which the historical Jesus moved. But by far the greatest significance of the table is the preponderance of plants typical of, and in some cases effectively exclusive to, the environs of Jerusalem. The ... only reasonable inference being that it was somewhere in the Jerusalem region that the Shroud received its most prolonged exposure to the open air .. As Frei argued, the Shroud therefore must have once been in the very region it has to have been if it wrapped the body of Jesus: the land we today call Israel"[WI86, 43]
Frei concluded:
"The pollen-spectrum as described leaves no room for the hypothesis of a medieval fake painted in France. On the contrary, the pollen-deposits are a most valuable confirmation of the theory that the Shroud traveled from Palestine through Anatolia to Constantinople, France and Italy"[FM828, 7]!

1982d July. The British Museum Trustees agree that their Keeper of Scientific Services, Michael Tite, should act as supervisor of any project to demonstrate satisfactory carbon dating of textiles, prior to any dating of the Shroud[WI98, 305]. AERE Harwell and the Zurich AMS facility are added to the list of laboratories willing to participate in any radiocarbon dating of the Shroud[WI98, 305].

1982e. September. Giles F. Carter (1930-2010), a Professor of

[Right (enlarge): Extract of a positive photograph of the Shroud showing the finger (phalanges) and the hand (meta-carpals) bones beneath the skin[LM10a]. See 20Apr17a]

Chemistry at Eastern Michigan University, who for 15 years had specialised in x-ray fluorescence analysis[SH90, 131; AM00, 213], proposed[CG82, 446] that parts of the Shroud man's image were the result of:

"... x-rays emanating from the bones of the man in the Shroud ... absorbed by elements (e.g., sodium, silicon, phosphorus, potassium, calcium) at the surface of the body, which would then fluoresce and emit secondary x-rays of relatively long wavelength"[CG82, 433; BM95, 42; OM10, 241].
Carter noted that the fingers in the Shroud image "are extremely long for a man of 1.73-1.78 m (5'8" - 5'10") height" and "the probability is very small that a man of this height would have such long fingers"[CG82, 430]. After considering other explanations of the Shroud man's too-long fingers, Carter proposed that, "the finger images may be due at least in part to x-rays emanating from the bones in the body":
"...the finger images may be due at least in part to x-rays emanating from the bones in the body. Finger bones continue throughout much of the hand, and they could cause the fingers to look too long. In normal bodies, the ratio of the distance from the middle fingertip to the base of the finger divided by the distance from the middle fingertip to the wrist (wound area) is about 0.5. This compares with a ratio of about 0.6 for the image on the Shroud, meaning that the fingers are unusually long and the rest of the hand is grotesquely small. The probability for this to have occurred must be small"[CG82, 430; BM95, 42; AM00, 213; WS00, 37].
Secondly, Carter noted that some of the Shroudman's teeth are visible under his lips:
"A second curious part of the Shroud image is the mouth area. Close inspection, particularly of slides from a distance, shows the presence of what appear to be eight or more objects, two rows of four or six ... Perhaps these could be teeth images ... because the lips probably covered the teeth of the body of the Shroud, any images of teeth may indicate that x-rays have been involved in the formation of the Shroud image ..."[CG82, 433; BM95, 42; WS00, 37-38; OM10, 241].

[Above (enlarge)[LM10c]: Extract from Shroud Scope of a close-up positive photograph of the Shroud man's mouth area. As can be seen, under the skin of the man's upper and lower lips are at least 4 pairs of upper and lower teeth, in a curving dental arcade, with a bite line between them. See 20Apr17b]

Thirdly, Carter also noted that some skull bones and parts of the

[Left (enlarge)[LM10d]: Enrie 1931 negative photograph of the man in the Shroud's head showing parts of his skull are visible under the skin, including his forehead, eye socket (supraorbital ridge or brow ridge), cheekbones and teeth. See 20Apr17c]

backbone (spine [20Apr17d]) can be seen under the man's skin:

"A third observation indicating possible image formation by x-rays is the high, pronounced cheekbones. The face is somewhat skull-like, especially in the appearance of the high cheekbones. Part of the backbone may be visible on the dorsal image ..."[CG82, 433; BM95, 42; WS00, 37-38; OM10, 242].
That the Shroudman's dead body emitted x-rays is consistent with him being Jesus and emitting corona discharges (see below) at his resurrection. And corona discharges emit x-rays!:
"X-rays from a corona discharge were detected for the first time by Bosamykin et al (1980), who reported on the generation of microsecond x-ray pulses in this type of discharge"[TS11].
In fact Carter theorised that the x-rays were emitted by a corona discharge[CG82, 430], but he evidently was unaware of this 1980 report which was in a Russian journal.

1982f October. Adler views Whanger's coin overlay photographs and

[Right (enlarge)[WA98]: Image of Pontius Pilate lepton coin imprinted on linen by German physics teacher Oswald Scheuermann (1933-2019)[GV01, 149; WA08b, 140; WW98, 28; OM10, 258] by corona discharge using a Van de Graaf generator[DA10, 38].]

observes that the image had emerged from the raised points of the coin, not the smooth surface, which is indicative of corona discharge[GV01, 99; WA08a, 136]. In a corona discharge, ionizing electrical energy first spreads over the surface of an object in the electrical field, including flesh, hair, cloth, leather and metal, and the ions are discharged as sparks into the air[GV01, 99-100].

1983a 14 January. Death of Max Frei, leaving unfinished the book he was writing on his pollen findings[WI98, 305]. Frei had made seven trips to the Middle East to gather plant specimens to help him in his work of identifying pollens from the Shroud[GV01, 91]. Frei's estate, with all his Shroud materials, passes to his widow Gertrud[WI98, 305]. She in turn, in mid-1988, gives Frei's entire collection of Shroud sticky tapes enclosing his pollen grains, along with his unpublished manuscript, to the US- based pro-Shroud group ASSIST (Association of Scientists and Scholars International for the Shroud of Turin)[WI98, 101; WS00, 82], led by archaeologist Paul Maloney (1936-2018)[WW98, 128]. Maloney, due to ill-health, passed them to the Whangers who were members of ASSIST[WI10, 64; WW98, 128].

1983b 18 March. Death of ex-king Umberto II (1904-83) in Cascais, Portugal[BM95, 18; WI86, 125; WI98, 305]. In his will he bequeathed the Shroud to the Pope and his successors, with the proviso that the cloth stays in Turin[BM95, 18; WI86, 125; WI98, 306; WB06].

1983c. Scheuermann writes to Whanger that he thinks he can see flower-like patterns around the face of the Shroudman but Whanger couldn't see them[WW98, 71]. Scheuermann, who had been

[Left (enlarge)[DA10, Fig. 5]: Chrysanthemum coronarium image on the Shroud (right); Corona discharge image of a chrysanthemum flower by Scheuermann (top lef); drawing of a chrysanthemum flower (bottom left)]

experimenting with corona discharge images of coins on linen (see above) then sent Whanger a photograph of corona discharge image of a chysanthemum flower similar to the one he could see near the Shroudman's head[WA08b, 141] (later identified as Chrysanthemum coronarium - see 1985b). A medieval forger would not know about, let alone use, a Van de Graaf generator to create high-voltage corona discharges on linen, as it was only invented in 1929[VDW]. But a corona discharge could have been a by-product of Jesus' resurrection as His body changed state from "flesh and blood" to "his glorious [resurrection] body" [see 10Oct08, 06Oct13, 05Feb17, ]:

"... the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body." (Php 3:20-21).

"...`How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?' ... ... The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory." (1Cor 15:35,41-42).

"... flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. ... the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed." (1Cor 15:50-52).
STURP chemist Ray Rogers (1927–2005) concluded that, "the image [on the Shroud] was formed by a burst of radiant energy... at the moment of Jesus' resurrection":
"I am forced to conclude that the image [on the Shroud] was formed by a burst of radiant energy — light, if you will. I think there is no question about that. What better way, if you were a deity, of regenerating faith in a skeptical age, than to leave evidence 2,000 years ago that could be defined only by the technology available in that skeptical age. The one possible alternative is that the images were created by a burst of radiant light, such as Christ might have produced at the moment of resurrection"[RR78].
Jesus' pre-resurrection body emitted "radiant energy" namely light, at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-13; Mk 9:2-13; Lk 9:28-36), where His "face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light" (Mt 17:2); "his clothes became radiant, intensely white, as no one on earth could bleach them" (Mk 9:3); "the appearance of his face was altered, and his clothing became dazzling white" (Lk 9:29). And the Transfiguration was "a preview of the glorified body of Christ following his Resurrection"[TJW]! This is consistent with other evidence that the Shroudman's dead body emitted x-rays, which are generated by corona discharges (see above)!

1984a. June. John Jackson, an Air Force physicist who was one of the organizers of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP), reconstructed the pattern of the folds in the Shroud[SH81, 24]. Using Shroud photographs and a life-size mock-up of the cloth, he found that doubling the cloth in four did indeed expose the face area[SH81, 24; GV01, 3]. Furthermore, Jackson found an eight-fold pattern of folds, visible in STURP's raking light photographs of the Shroud[SH81, 24, JJ84; WI98, 154-156; GV01, 3], which is exactly consistent with Wilson's doubling in four (see 15Sep12)[SH81, 24; WI98, 156; AM00, 133].

[Right (enlarge): Diagram of raking light photograph of the Shroud, taken in 1978 by STURP, showing major foldlines consistent with the Shroud having been folded at one-eighth intervals[WI86, 123].

1984b 16 October. Tom d'Muhala (1940-) and John Jackson, as President and Vice-President of STURP, together with their Italian scientific counterparts Prof. Giovanni Riggi (1935-2008) and Prof. Luigi Gonella (1930–2007), met with the Archbishop of Turin Cardinal Ballestrero (r. 1977-89)[WI86, 127]. They presented him with STURP's 177-page proposal entitled "Phase II"[GV01, 116-117] of the next round of scientific testing of the Shroud, including radiocarbon dating[WI86, 127; WI98, 306]. STURP proposed that six samples be taken from different parts of the Shroud which would then be distributed by STURP, who would act as the "submitter" to the six laboratories[GV01, 117]. But Gove, who had a concealed anti-Christian animosity toward STURP[AM00, 193], ensured that STURP's proposal would come to nothing (see "1985d").

1985a January. Publication of Fr. Andre Dubarle (1910-2002)'s survey, Histoire

[Left (enlarge)[FHP]: "The Entombment of Christ (upper) and Three Marys [sic] at the tomb (lower). The images are claimed as one of the evidences against the radiocarbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin"[PCW].]

Ancienne du Linceul de Turin ("Ancient History of the Shroud of Turin"), in France[SD06, xxvi]. Dubarle covers the early history of the Shroud up to 1204[SD06, xxvi]. One of his contributions was to point up the importance of the 1192 Budapest Pray manuscript[SD06, xxvi]. It depicts a nude Jesus, hands in the same attitude as on the Turin Shroud, lying upon a cloth whose design resembles the herringbone twill of the Shroud[SD06, xxvi; WI98, 147; DT12, 179]. The cloth bears four marks in the same pattern as the burn-holes (`poker holes') of unknown date still seen on the Shroud[SD06, xxvi; WI91, 160-161; WI98, 147; DT12, 192]. This argues that it was modeled on the Shroud in or before 1192[SD06, xxvi].

1985b Whanger notices a flower image, just above the head and to one side[IJ98, 27-28; WW98, 71; AM00, 112]. He later identifies it as Chrysanthemum

[Right (enlarge): Image of a Chrysanthemum coronarium flower (circled in red) on the Shroud[LM10b]. This is one of the clearer flower image on the Shroud[DW99, 16]. See 17Dec19]

coronarium (since renamed Glebionis coronaria), which is is native to the Mediterranean region[GCW], including Israel. Whanger subsequently identified the images of 28 different plants on the Shroud, using Zohary's Flora Palestina[IJ98, 28; WW98, 78; AM00, 112; GV01, 149]. Of the 28 plants, 27 grow within the close vicinity of Jerusalem and the 28th grows around the Dead Sea[IJ98, 28;WW98, 78; AM00, 112]. The blooming season for all these plants is March - April[AM00, 112; WA08b, 142] and Jesus was crucified in April[FJ64, 296, 300; DK15]! All 28 would have been available in Jerusalem markets in a fresh state, and most would have been growing along the roadside or in nearby fields[IJ98, 28; WW98, 78; AM00, 112]. In 1997 Prof. Avinoam Danin (1939–2015), author of Flora of Israel Online, confirmed almost all of Whanger's identifications, and also discovered additional flower images that were not found by Whanger[WW98, 78; AM00, 112; DA10, 12]. There is also a strong positive correlation between the flower images on the Shroud found by Whanger and the pollen grains found on the Shroud by Max Frei[IJ98, 28-29; AM00, 112]. Of the 28 plants images on the Shroud identified by Whanger, Frei had previously identified the pollens of 25 of the same or similar plants on the Shroud[AM00, 112; GV01, 149-150]!

1985c May. Another proposal for a C-14 test was submitted to the Cardinal by William Meacham, an American archaeologist living in Hong Kong, that the following five samples be taken from the Shroud: 1) a single thread from the middle of the cloth between the dorsal and ventral images, 2) a small piece cut just in from the edge next to the site of Raes' piece I, 3) a piece of the charred cloth, 4) a piece cut from the side strip next to the site of Raes' II, 5) a piece of the backing, cloth sewn on in 1534[GV01, 117]. That would produce two or three radiocarbon ages that would agree with one another, thereby giving a reliable date for the calendar age of the linen Shroud[GV01, 117].

1985d 1 June. At the 12th International Radiocarbon Conference in Trondheim, Norway, Tite and Richard Burleigh (c. 1932-2017) of the British Museum, London, release the results of an inter-comparison experiment conducted between six radiocarbon dating laboratories, four using AMS and two using small gas proportional counters[GH96, 9; WI98, 181, 306]. This showed how unreliable radiocarbon dating of cloth really is[GV01, 137]. The British Museum had arranged for each of the laboratories to receive two samples for testing: flax from Egypt dated 3000 BC and Peruvian cotton from AD 1200[PM96, 24; GV01, 137]. The laboratories were told their provenance, but not their ages[PM96, 24]. The results from the labs were revealing: Zurich lab was off 1,000 years because the samples were improperly cleaned of contamination[PM96, 24; WI98, 306]; and the other labs dated the Peruvian sample later than it actually was, between AD 1400 and 1668[PM96, 24; GV01, 137]. Despite these errors, the experiment is seen as opening the way for a radiocarbon dating of the Shroud[WI98, 306]. Gove proposed to the representatives of the other five laboratories that they separate from STURP (see "1984b") and continue on their own and the laboratories agreed[PM96, 27; GV01, 117-118]. They proposed instead the following Trondheim Protocol: 1) The British Museum would be the co-ordinating body and the "guarantor" of the investigations. 2) The "good services" of STURP would be requested to organize the cutting operation. 3) The British Museum would supply two additional samples of known dates with a difference of at least ± 150 years. The three samples, including that of the Shroud, would be unravelled and the threads cut up to render them as indistinguishable as possible. 4) The British Museum would obtain a written declaration from the laboratories not to divulge the results to anybody, except those authorized and designated by the Museum. 5) The six laboratories could use any method of their choice to prepare the specimens for dating, but detailed descriptions should be carefully recorded of the procedure and the manner in which their average values and their uncertainties were assessed. 6) The results would be sent to the Holy See and the Archbishop of Turin before publication[GV01, 118]. STURP's representative at the Conference, Dinegar, insisted that the radiocarbon dating was only one of the tests which was part of the STURP project and that it should not have priority over the others[GV01, 118]. But Gove threatened that the laboratories would not participate if STURP were allowed to do anything other than cut the samples[GV01, 118]. It is suggested that the Pontifical Academy of Sciences be contacted[GH96, 9; WI98, 306].

1985e October. Through Vittorio Canuto, a NASA astrophysicist and a scientific aide to Prof. Carlos Chagas (1910-2000), President of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Gove meets with Chagas in New York to discuss the holding of a workshop of all parties interested to radiocarbon date the Shroud[GH96, 9; WI98, 306].

1986a January. Paul Maloney (1936-2018) of the U.S. Shroud group ASSIST receives from Max Frei's widow two copies of Frei's unpublished manuscript, together with five of the sticky-tape samples he took in 1978[WI98, 306].

1986b February. Gove meets with the Archbishop of Turin's scientific adviser, Prof. Luigi Gonella [1930–2007] in New York, who insists that the proposed radiocarbon-dating workshop be held in Turin[WI98, 306].

1986c 16 February. Shroud Conference at Elizabethtown College, Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania, at which some of Max Frei's pollen samples are examined by the attendees, who include Walter McCrone, who almost immediately confirms observing pollen[WI98, 306].

1986d April. Chagas sends out invitations for the workshop meeting to take place in Turin on 9-11 June, but reveals it to the British journalist Peter Jennings, who publishes the story, precipitating heated feelings[WI98, 306].

1986e May. A. Orville Dahl, professor emeritus of palynology at the University of Pennsylvania examined Dr. Frei's unpublished manuscript held by ASSIST's Paul Maloney and noted the rather high number of floral pollen types on the Shroud[MP90, 5], That is, these are insect pollinated plants[MP90, 5]. He proposed the hypothesis that human activity must be involved and that perhaps flowers had been laid down on the Shroud in a liturgical context[MP90, 5].

1986f 16 May. The Pontifical Academy of Sciences sends a cable, postponing meeting to discuss the carbon dating of the Shroud[WI98, 306].

1986g 27 May. Gove, with Prof. Edward Hall (1924-2001) of Oxford and British Museum Director Sir David Wilson as co-signatories, cables Vatican Secretary of State, Agostino Casaroli (1914-1998) and Ballestrero, angrily protesting the postponement and warning that several institutions may withdraw[WI98, 306-307].

1986h May-June. Gino Zaninotto (c. 1936-2016), an Italian scholar, reported his rediscovery in the Vatican Archive of a Greek manuscript, Codex Vatican Graecus 511 (tenth century), of a sermon given by Gregory, archdeacon and referendarius of Hagia Sophia Church in Constantinople[SD91, 192; CD93, 26; SD98, 62; FM15, 56; GV01, 5]. It was delivered on August 16, 944[SD91, 192] the day after the arrival of the Image of Edessa in Constantinople[see "944b"][SD98, 62; GV01, 4]. As an eyewitness of the events, Gregory names those who participated in the celebration[SD91, 192]. He mentions crowning the Mandylion with the emperor's crown and placing it on the imperial throne, acknowledgment of the overlordship of Christ[SD91, 192; GV01, 5]. He notices, curiously, that the image was formed by "the perspiration of death on his face"[SD91, 192]. Then comes the most surprising part: he speaks of the side wound and the blood seen there[SD91, 192; SD98, 62; FM15, 57; GV01, 5]. How to explain a face-icon of Christ with a wound in its side -- unless folded back behind the face the upper body was visible[SD91, 192]. It is a strong hint that folded tetradiplon[see 15Sep12]- Mandylion and Shroud were one and the same object[SD91, 192]! Wilson's circumstantial evidence that the Edessa cloth held a full-body image was now very possibly eyewitness-proved[SD98, 62]!

1986i June. Two years before the Shroud was radiocarbon-dated, pro-Shroud archaeologist Meacham cautioned:

"Several C14 dating proposals are now under consideration by the Archbishop of Turin. In contrast to these positive developments, however, there appears to be an unhealthy consensus approaching the level of dogma among both scientific and lay commentators, that C14 dating will `settle the issue once and for all time.' This attitude sharply contradicts the general perspective of field archaeologists and geologists, who view possible contamination as a very serious problem in interpreting the results of radiocarbon measurement"[MW86, 15; BM95, 37].
And he concluded:
"Listening to the tapes of the recent symposium at Elizabethtown, I was struck again by nearly all the speakers' repeated references to the eventual C14 date as `scientific proof of the Shroud's age' or `proof of the disauthenticity of the Shroud if it is not First Century', etc. These statements are seriously in error. We must bear in mind that C14 will not prove or disprove the Shroud's authenticity or its true age, because radiocarbon dating rests upon a number of assumptions which cannot be subjected to laboratory proof-the most important assumption in this instance being that the carbon now present in the sample is indeed the carbon present at the time the sample died (i.e., the harvest of the flax used in making the linen)"[MW86, 24].

1986j July-August. Optical crystallographer Joseph Kohlbeck (1927-2022) and archaeologist Eugenia Nitowski (1949-2007) report that limestone dust on the feet of the man on the Shroud (from a Ray Roger's STURP sticky tape sample[WI98, 104; DT12, 114] is the same comparatively rare travertine aragonite found in Jerusalem cave tombs[WI98, 105; RC99, 77; WS00, 93], in one of which Jesus was buried (Mt 27:60; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53; Jn 19:41-42)[IJ98, 74]. Moreover, their chemical signature revealed by Prof. Riccardo Levi-Setti (1927-2018), using the University of Chicago's

[Above: Prof. Ricardo Levi-Setti's scanning ion microprobe comparisons of Jerusalem limestone (black) and limestone on Shroud (red)[KN86]. As can be seen above, from their spectral patterns, the Shroud foot and Jerusalem tomb limestone samples were a very close match[WI98, 106]

ion microprobe, were almost identical[; WS00, 93; DT12, 114]! [See above and 22Mar13 & 27 Dec 18].

1986k 29 September - 1 October. Representatives of the radiocarbon dating laboratories, among 26 participants meet in Turin, under Chagas' chairmanship, in a `workshop', to discuss the best protocol for radiocarbon dating the Shroud[BM95, 38; GH96, 9; WI98, 307; GV01, 119; DT12, 164]. A protocol is drawn up for seven laboratories (five AMS, two small gas counter) to take part, the AMS facility at Gif-sur-Yvette, having been added to the list[GH96, 9; WI98, 307; OM10, 223]. They ignored Gonella's "great concern" that seven laboratories to carbon-date one object was "political", not scientificGH96, 151) and he represented the actual custodian of the Shroud, the Archbishop of Turin, who would have the final say! The test would be blind: each laboratory would receive three samples: one from the Shroud and two control samples supplied by the British Museum, with the laboratories not knowing which sample was from the Shroud[GV01, 119; OM10, 223; DT12, 165]. Swiss textile expert Mechthild Flury-Lemberg (1929-) would cut the samples from the Shroud[WI98, 307; OM10, 223]. This Turin Protocol is then submitted to both the Pope and the Archbishop of Turin[WI98, 307].

1986l 6 October. News of the meeting is released to the world's press[WI98, 307].

1987a 27 April. The Turin newspaper La Stampa publicly quotes Gonella as saying that only two or three laboratories would be involved in the dating[WI98, 307].

1987b 1 July. Representatives of the seven laboratories write a letter to Cardinal Ballestrero advising: 'As participants in the workshop who devoted considerable effort to achieve our goal we would be irresponsible if we were not to advise you that this fundamental modification in the proposed procedures may lead to failure'[WI98, 307].

1987c 10 October. Cardinal Ballestrero writes to the seven radiocarbon laboratories informing them that on the advice of his scientific advisor Gonella, it is only three of their number, the Oxford, Arizona and Zurich laboratories, who have been chosen to perform the testing[WI98, 307]. Ballestrero's letter states that ' experience in the field of archaeological radiocarbon dating' was a criterion and that certain other details of the 1986 protocol have been scrapped, including any further involvement of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in the exercise[WI98, 307]. Also eliminated is the participation of Flury-Lemberg[WI98, 307]. Tite is named as the appointed supervisor for certification of the samples[WI98, 307]. According to my hacker theory [see 23Jul15] after Ballestrero's reduction of the seven laboratories using two methods of radiocarbon dating (AMS and small gas proportional counters) to three laboratories, Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, using the one AMS method, the hacker (allegedly Arizona laboratory physicist Timothy W. Linick (1946-89) would have realised that it was feasible for him to write a program to be installed on the AMS computers at the three laboratories (which were effectively clones[WI91, 178]), to replace the Shroud's carbon 14 dates coming from their AMS systems, with computer-generated dates which would ensure that the Shroud appeared to date from a plausible time, 1325, before the Shroud's debut in undisputed history at Lirey, France, about 1355[WI10, 222]. See 22Feb16 and 22Oct17.

1987d November. The directors of the three chosen laboratories warn Cardinal Ballestrero: 'As you are aware, there are many critics in the world who will scrutinize these measurements in great detail[WI98, 307]. The abandonment of the original protocol and the decision to proceed with only three laboratories will certainly enhance the skepticism of these critics'[WI98, 307]. The chosen three declare themselves 'hesitant to proceed', and request the matter be given 'further consideration'[WI98, 307].

1987e 18 December. The Spanish Center of Sindonology (CES) officially opens[BJ01, 18]. While they were taking the first steps to initiate a scientific multidisciplinary study on the Sudarium of Oviedo, the news was made public that, according to the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud, it had been fabricated in the Middle Ages, between the years 1260 and 1390[BJ01, 18]. For the investigative team, the following question immediately arose: if the Shroud and the Sudarium have bloodstains from the same person, how is it possible that the Shroud is from the cited era if the Sudarium has been in Oviedo since the eighth century and in Spain since the seventh century?[BJ01, 18].

1988a January 13. La Stampa discloses that Gove and Prof. Garman Harbottle (1923-2016) of Brookhaven laboratory have written an open letter to the Pope, also to Nature and the director of the British Museum, deploring the rejection of the seven-laboratory protocol[WI98, 307]. They claim that the Pope has been 'badly advised' and 'that he is making a mistake if he approves a limited or reduced version of the research whose outcome will be, to say the least, questionable'[WI98, 307-308].

1988b 15 January. In a press release Gove and Harbottle conclude, 'The Archbishop's plan, disregarding the protocol, does not seem capable of producing a result that will meet the test of credibility and scientific rigor' and that 'it is probably better to do nothing than to proceed with a scaled-down experiment'[WI98, 184, 308].

1988c 22 January. Gonella and leading representatives of the Oxford, Arizona and Zurich laboratories meet in the Board Room of the British Museum, London, to discuss the best procedures to be adopted. News of this meeting is released the same evening[WI98, 308].

1988d February. Tite tries unsuccessfully to find control samples of weave identical to the Shroud[WI98, 308].

1988e 25 March. Gove writes to the Pope outlining all that has transpired and appealing to him to persuade Cardinal Ballestrero to revert to the original protocol but is letter is ignored[WI98, 308].

1988f 21 April. At 5 a.m. the Shroud is secretly taken out of its casket. At 6.30 a.m. Tite and the representatives of the three laboratories assemble at the cathedral. In the cathedral sacristy the Shroud is unrolled and shown to assembled representatives of the three chosen radiocarbon dating laboratories. Professor Testore of Turin Polytechnic, Gonella's choice as textile expert in place of Mme. Flury-Lemberg, reportedly asks 'What's that brown patch?' of the wound in the side. Professor Riggi and Professor Gonella reportedly spend two hours arguing about the exact location on the Shroud from which the sample should be taken. During the event, it is Riggi who seems in charge of the operation[WI98, 309]. At 9.45 a.m., with a video-camera recording his every move (he will later sell copies to international media and others), he cuts a sliver from one edge and divides this into two, then divides one of these halves into three. In a separate room (the Sala Capitolare), and now unrecorded by any camera, the Cardinal and Tite place these three latter samples in sealed canisters, for the respective laboratories to take away with them[WI98, 309]. At 1 p.m. the sample taking for carbon-dating purposes is formally completed, and the laboratory representatives depart[WI98, 309]. During the afternoon, and in the presence of some twenty witnesses, Riggi takes blood samples from the lower part of the crown-of-thorns bloodstains on the Shroud's dorsal image. According to Riggi's own subsequent account, he received the cardinal's permission to take for himself both these 'blood' samples and the portion of the Shroud he cut away but which was superfluous to the needs of the carbon-dating laboratories. These samples he will deposit in a bank vault[WI98, 309]. At 8.30 p.m. the Shroud is returned to its casket[WI98, 309].

1988g 22 April. (Friday) The news of the taking of the samples is released to the world's press.

1988h 24 April. (Sunday) Safely arrived back in Tucson, Damon and Donahue of the Arizona laboratory informally open the samples, immediately recognizing the characteristic weave of the Shroud on opening sample A1. A photograph taken on this occasion shows this sample to have been in two parts[WI98, 309].

1988i 25 April. (Monday) Formal opening of the Arizona samples, with Damon and Donahue now joined by Toolin and Jull[WI98, 309].

1988j 6 May. 9.50 am. In the presence of Harry Gove, who has been invited to be present, the Shroud sample is run through the Arizona system. With the calibration applied, the date arrived at is 1350 AD[WI98, 310].

1988k 8 June. The Arizona laboratory completes its work on the Shroud[WI98, 310].

1988l 4 July. The Oxford laboratory, having delayed because of technical adjustments to their radiocarbon dating unit, begins its pre-treatment of its Shroud sample and controls[WI98, 310].

1988m 15 July. At the Hotel Thalwiler Hof, Thalwil, Switzerland, Max Frei's entire collection of twenty-eight sticky-tape Shroud samples is formally handed over to the American Shroud group ASSIST[WI98, 310].

1988n 22 July. (Friday) Michael Tite of the British Museum receives the Zurich laboratory's radiocarbon dating findings[WI98, 310].

1988o 23 July. Shroud Meeting at the Academy of Natural Science, Philadelphia, in which Max Frei's sticky tape samples, just brought over from Europe, are formally and collectively studied by Walter McCrone, Alan Adler and others, under the auspices of the U.S. Shroud group ASSIST, reveals that, in addition to pollens and fabric particles, the tapes bear a surprising proportion of plant parts and floral debris, suggesting that actual flowers were laid on the Shroud at some time during its history[WI98, 310].

1988p 8 August. The Oxford laboratory completes its Shroud work[WI98, 310].

1988q 26 August. The London Evening Standard carries banner headlines declaring the Shroud to be a fake made in 1350. The source, Cambridge librarian Stephen Luckett (1945-2020), has no known previous connection with the Shroud, or with the carbon dating work [See 15Aug17 for my explanation], but in this article declares scientific laboratories 'leaky institutions'[WI98, 310; WI10, 89]. The story is picked up around the world[WI98, 310]. Gove realises that the leaker was "someone who was present at Arizona during the first measurement":

"I must say I wondered about Luckett's date of 1350 because it was the date Donahue announced to me when I was present at the first radiocarbon measurement on the shroud in 6 May 1988. Of course, it also corresponds very closely to the shroud's known historic date. However, I still assumed Luckett had said he got the number from Oxford. When I read that he claimed he got it from one of the other two labs I worried that it might have come from someone who was present at Arizona during the first measurement"[GH96, 279].
Further, Gove must have realised that the "someone" was the alleged hacker, Arizona laboratory physicist Timothy W. Linick (1946-89) [see 24Jun14], because the below group photograph of those present at Arizona's first dating on 6 May 1988, in Gove's 1996 book, shows Linick standing in front of everyone, indicating that he was in charge of Arizona's computerised AMS process, but Gove barely mentions Linick in his book:
"My signature was followed by T W Linick and P J Sercel, also from the Arizona facility"[GH96, 262].

[Above (enlarge): "Those present at the Arizona AMS carbon dating facility at 9:50 am on 6 May 1988 when the age of the shroud [sic] was determined"[GH96, 176H]. The alleged hacker, Timothy W. Linick, is the one in a black shirt standing significantly most prominently in the foreground[JS89]. The 1989 Nature article in footnote 9 acknowledged that Linick wrote the 1986 paper which described in detail the AMS radiocarbon system at Arizona[LT86]. So it is significant that Linick is standing in front of his Arizona laboratory leaders and colleagues in this historic group photograph of the very first "1350 AD" dating of the Shroud[GH96, 264], because this is evidence that Linick was in charge of the actual AMS computerised dating process at Arizona laboratory and those present were acknowledging that. See also my 22Nov16 where Gove must have realised by September 1988 that Linick was the leaker of Arizona's first "1350 AD" date to David Sox (1936-2016), the further evidence of which is that Gove had `airbrushed' Linick out of his book but he couldn't take him out of this photograph! See 25Mar18]

1988r 18 September. Without quoting its source, The Sunday Times publishes a front-page story headlined: 'Official: The Turin Shroud is a Fake'. Hall and Tite firmly deny any responsibility for this story[WI98, 310].

1988s 13 October (Thursday). At a press conference held in Turin, Cardinal Ballestrero, Archbishop of Turin, makes an official announcement that the results of the three laboratories performing the Carbon dating of the Shroud have determined an approximate 1325 date for the cloth. At a similar press conference held at the British

[Above (enlarge): From left to right, Prof. E. Hall (Oxford), Dr M. Tite (British Museum) and Dr R. Hedges (Oxford) on 13 October 1988 in the British Museum, London, announcing with an exlamation mark, that the Shroud had been radiocarbon dated to "1260-1390!"[WI98, plate 3b].]

Museum, London, it is announced that the Shroud dates between 1260 and 1390 AD (1325 ± 65). Newspaper headlines immediately brand the Shroud a fake and declare that the Catholic Church has accepted the results[WI98, 310-311].

1988t 17 November.(Thursday) Michael Tite gives lecture to the British Society for the Turin Shroud on his radiocarbon-dating work[WI98, 311].

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]

AF82. Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ.
AM00. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY.
BA34. Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London.
BA91. Berard, A., ed., 1991, "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud," Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX.
BB91. Bonnet-Eymard, B., 1991, "Study of original documents of the archives of the Diocese of Troyes in France with particular reference to the Memorandum of Pierre d'Arcis," in BA91, 233-260, 245.
BE98. Brucker, E., 1998, "Thy Holy Face: My 39 Years of Lecturing on the Shroud of Turin," Brucker: Tucson AZ.
BB00. Baima Bollone, P., 2000, "The Forensic Characteristics of the Blood Marks," in Scannerini, S. & Savarino, P., eds, 2000, "The Turin Shroud: Past, Present and Future," International scientific symposium, Turin, 2-5 March 2000," Effatà: Cantalupa, 209-218.
BJ01. Bennett, J., 2001, "Sacred Blood, Sacred Image: The Sudarium of Oviedo: New Evidence for the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin," Ignatius Press: San Francisco CA.
BM02. Benford, M.S. & Marino, J.G., 2002, "Textile Evidence Supports Skewed Radiocarbon Date of Shroud of Turin," 1-14.
BM95. Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, 18-51.
BZ98. Baima-Bollone, P. & Zaca, S., 1998, "The Shroud Under the Microscope: Forensic Examination," Neame, A., transl., St Pauls: London.
CD93. Crispino, D.C., 1993, "Two Scholars on the Edessan Trail," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 42, December, 25-27.
CG82. Carter, G.F., 1982, "Formation of the Image on the Shroud of Turin by x-Rays: A New Hypothesis," in Lambert, J.B., ed., 1984, "Archaeological Chemistry III: ACS Advances in Chemistry, No. 205," American Chemical Society, Washington D.C., 425-446.
CT96. Case, T.W., 1996, "The Shroud of Turin and the C-14 Dating Fiasco," White Horse Press: Cincinnati OH.
DA10. Danin, A., 2010, "Botany of the Shroud: The Story of Floral Images on the Shroud of Turin," Danin Publishing: Jerusalem, Israel.
DK15. Doig, K.F., 2015, "New Testament Chronology: Part IV, The Crucifixion of Jesus" & "The 30 CE Crucifixion," 22 April.
DW99. Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., 1999, "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO.
DT12. de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London.
FF80. Filas, F.L., 1980, "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate," Cogan Productions: Youngtown AZ.
FF81. Filas, F.L., 1981, "`Missing Link' Coin of Pontius Pilate Proves Authenticity, Place of Origin, and Approximate Dating of the Shroud of Turin," News Release, Loyola University of Chicago, 1 September, 1-4.
FJ64. 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.
FM15. Fanti, G. & Malfi, P., 2015, "The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!," Pan Stanford: Singapore.
FM82. Frei, M., 1982, "Nine Years of Palinological Studies on the Shroud," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 3, June, 2-7.
FHP. "File:Hungarianpraymanuscript1192-1195.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 28 June 2021.
GH96. Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK.
GCW. Glebionis coronaria, Wikipedia, 5 December 2022.
GV01. Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL.
HJ83. Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA.
IJ98. Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY.
JJ84. Jackson, J.P., 1984, "Foldmarks as a Historical Record of the Turin Shroud," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 11, June.
JM81. "The Jospice Mattress Cover Image,", 8 March 1981.
JS89. Jull, A.J.T. & Suess, H.E., 1989, "Timothy W. Linick," Radiocarbon, Vol. 31, No. 2.
KN86. Kohlbeck, J.A. & Nitowski, E.L., 1986, "New evidence may explain image on Shroud of Turin," Biblical Archeological Review, Vol. 12, No. 4, 23-24.
LM10a. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical,"
LM10b. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, Shroud Scope: Enrie Negative Vertical,
LM10c. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Face Only Vertical,"
LM10d. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Enrie Negative Vertical,"
MC81. Murphy, C., 1981, "Shreds of evidence: Science confronts the miraculous-the Shroud of Turin," Harper's, Vol. 263, November, 42-65.
MF67. Madden, F.W., Fairholt, F. W. & Reidenbach, R., ed., 1967, "History of Jewish Coinage, and of Money in the Old and New Testament," [1864], Pegasus Publishing Co: San Diego CA, Revised.
MM12. Minor, M., Adler, A.D. & Piczek, I., eds., 2002, "The Shroud of Turin: Unraveling the Mystery: Proceedings of the 1998 Dallas Symposium," Alexander Books: Alexander NC.
LT86. Linick, T.W., et al., 1986, "Operation of the NSF-Arizona accelerator facility for radioisotope analysis and results from selected collaborative research projects," Radiocarbon, Vol. 28, No. 2a, 522-533.
MP90. Maloney, P.C., 1990, "The Current Status of Pollen Research and Prospects for the Future," ASSIST Newsletter, Vol. 2., No. 1, June, 1-7, 5.
MR80. Morgan, R., 1980, "Australian Press Reports `Fake'," Shroud News, No. 1, 24 September, 1-3.
MW80. McCrone, W., 1980, "Walter McCrone's London Lecture," Shroud News, No. 2, 27 October, 3-10.
MW86. Meacham, W., 1986, "On Carbon Dating the Shroud," British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 14, September, 4-15.
MW88. Meacham, W., 1988, "From Agence France Presse - Comments by William Meacham," Shroud News, No 50.
OM10. Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK.
PCW. "Pray Codex," Wikipedia, 19 September 2021.
PM96. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta.
RR78. Rogers, R.N., 1978. Los Alamos Monitor, March 24, in Nickell, J., 1987, "Inquest on the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Prometheus Books: Buffalo NY, Revised, Reprinted, 2000, 87-88, 172n9.
RS81. Rodante, S., 1981, "The Coronation of Thorns in the Light of the Shroud," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 1, December, 4-24.
RTB. Reference(s) to be provided.
RC99. 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.
SC81. "A Summary of STURP's Conclusions," October 1981,
SD06. Scavone, D.C., 2006, "Underscoring the Highly Significant Historical Research of the Shroud," in TF06
SD89. Scavone, D.C., 1989, "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA.
SD91. Scavone, D.C., "The History of the Turin Shroud to the 14th C.," in BA91, 171-204.
SD98. Scavone, D.C., 1998, "A Hundred Years of Historical Studies on the Turin Shroud," Paper presented at the Third International Congress on the Shroud of Turin, 6 June 1998, Turin, Italy, in MM12, 58-70.
SH81. 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.
SH90. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN.
TS11. Shao, T., et al., 2011, "Runaway electrons and x-rays from a corona discharge in atmospheric pressure air," New Journal of Physics, Vol. 13, 25 November.
TF06. Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition.
TJW. "Transfiguration of Jesus: Transfiguration and Resurrection," Wikipedia, 18 December 2022.
VDW. Van de Graaff generator: Initial development, Wikipedia, 24 November 2022.
WA08a. Whanger, A.D. & M.W., "Revisiting the Eye Images: What are They?," in Fanti, G., ed., 2009, "The Shroud of Turin: Perspectives on a Multifaceted Enigma," Proceedings of the 2008 Columbus Ohio International Conference, August 14-17, 2008, Progetto Libreria: Padua, Italy, 134-139.
WA08b. Whanger, A.D. & Whanger, M.W., 2008, "Aspects of the Shroud in Botany and Related Art," in Fanti, 2009, 140-144.
WA98. Whanger, A. & M., 1998, "Image produced on linen by corona discharge from lepton by Scheuermann," Council for Study of the Shroud of Turin, 29 September 1998 (no longer online).
WI10. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London.
WW98. Whanger, M.W. & Whanger, A.D., 1998, "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House Publishers: Franklin TN.
WB06. Whiting, B., 2006, "The Shroud Story," Harbour Publishing: Strathfield NSW, Australia.
WI86. Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London.
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.
WI91. Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London.
WS00. Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London.
WK80. Weaver, K.F., 1980, "Science Seeks to Solve ... The Mystery of the Shroud," National Geographic, Vol. 157, June, 730-753.
ZF05. Zugibe, F.T., 2005, "The Crucifixion of Jesus: A Forensic Inquiry," M. Evans & Co.: New York NY.
ZF81. Zugibe, F.T., 1981, "The Jospice Mattress Cover Image," 8 March,

Posted 8 December 2022. Updated 15 January 2023.