Tuesday, December 29, 2020

Shroud of Turin News, November 2020

© Stephen E. Jones[1]

[Previous: October 2020] [Next: December 2020]

This is the November 2020 issue of my Shroud of Turin News. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated. The articles' words are bold to distingish them from mine.

This is my first post on my `new' Windows 10 computer bought about 2 years ago! Everything was at my fingertips with my old Windows 7 computer, so I was reluctant to change (even though I had been using Windows 10 on my laptop for other things), and despite the dire warnings (which I now believe were by paid Microsoft `influencers'), my Windows 7/64 system was still receiving regular updates from Microsoft! Over a year ago I made sure that if my old computer `died' I could access this my blog from my new computer. In July I paid a computer `geek' to load my backed up data onto my Windows 10 computer and install my Thunderbird emails on it. Yesterday, 28 December 2020, with perfect timimg, the morning after I had finished my month-long latest post, Jesus the man on the Shroud [whose face in this framed photo - right (enlarge)[2] - `looks' down on me at my computer desk], to whom I had been praying for help in this transition, allowed my Windows 7 computer's CPU fan to fail. Even though this is fixable, I took it as a sign from the Lord to start using my Windows 10 computer, and I found my `old man's' fears (Ecc 12:5) were groundless!


News:
"Jesus Christ breakthrough as Shroud of Turin debate put to bed," Daily Express, Joel Day, 6 November 2020. The Shroud of Turin is perhaps one of the more famous so-called Medieval mysteries that has caught the attention of popular culture academia. For centuries, historians, scientists and religious figures have battled it out over whether the Shroud is really an imprint of Jesus Christ. It first appeared in 1354, and just over 30 years later, was branded a fake by the local bishop of Troyes. Since when are the claims of a "local bishop" on a matter decisive? He was Pierre d'Arcis (r. 1377-1395)[3], in whose diocese of Troyes, France, was the village of Lirey[4], where the Shroud was

[Above (enlarge)[5]: A lead pilgrim's badge, found in 1855 in the mud under a bridge over the Seine River, Paris and dated 1357, depicts the Shroud at the first Shroud exposition in Lirey c.1355[6]. Now in the Cluny Museum, Paris, the badge depicts the Shroud being exhibited with the coats of arms of Geoffroy I de Charny (c. 1300–56) (left) and his wife Jeanne de Vergy (c.1332–1428) (right) [7].]

again being exhibited, this time by Geoffroy II de Charny (1352–98) and his mother Jeanne de Vergy[8]. D'Arcis complained in a 1389 Memorandum[9] to Pope Clement VII (r. 1523-34)[10] that the Shroud had been "cunningly painted"[11] and that about "thirty-four years" earlier (i.e. c. 1355)[12] one of his predecessors, Bishop Henri de Poitiers (r. 1354–1370), had investigated and found "the artist who had painted it"[13]. But this is false: • d'Arcis, who had been a lawyer[14] didn't give the name of the forger[15], who would have been well-known (and may even have been still alive) if he had existed[16]. • The Shroudman's image is not painted[17] [see 11Jul16]. • There is no evidence that Bishop Henri de Poitiers had a problem with the Shroud[18] and much evidence that he didn't[19]. • Pope Clement VII allowed the exhibition to continue and ordered d'Arcis to be "perpetually silent" on the matter[20]! • There is abundant evidence that the Shroud existed long before 1355 (see for example below and in my previous post, "1770" and "1395").

This didn't stop many believing the linen was in fact the burial shroud in which Christ was wrapped following his crucifixion. A more conclusive answer appeared to put the debate to an end in 1988. It was here that scientists, through carbon dating, established the Shroud to have been created in the Middle Ages, between 1260 and 1390. The results were inevitably fiercely contested, with many arguing the results were skewed because of material dating discrepancies. Which

[Above (enlarge). This comparison of the 10th-13th century Christ Pantocrator mosaic in Istanbul/Constantinople's Hagia Sophia Cathedral (left) with its counterpart Shroud image, gives the lie to the article's claim that "the Shroud [was] ... created in the Middle Ages, between 1260 and 1390"!]

contradicts his claim that "scientists, through carbon dating, established the Shroud to have been created in the Middle Ages, between 1260 and 1390"! I will summarise the evidence against the 1260-1390 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud, based in my 2018 "Open letter to Professor Christopher Ramsey"

• The leaders of the radiocarbon dating laboratories were not

[Left (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 a triumphant exlamation mark[21], that the Shroud had been radiocarbon dated to "1260-1390!"[22].]

Christians (not even Donahue - see 06Nov20) and so were inevitably biased against the Shroud being Jesus' burial sheet (Jesus said "Whoever is not with me is against me" - Mt 12:30 & Lk 11:23). See above exclamation mark in "1260-1390!"[23]. Timothy Linick of Arizona Laboratory (whom I alleged was a hacker whose program generated the bogus medieval radiocarbon dates of the Shroud - see 22Feb16, etc), was so biased against the Shroud that he wouldn't accept it was Jesus' even if radiocarbon dating showed it was "2000 years" old:

"Timothy Linick, a University of Arizona research scientist, said: `If we show the material to be medieval that would definitely mean that it is not authentic. If we date it back 2000 years, of course, that still leaves room for argument. It would be the right age - but is it the real thing?'"[24].
• Oxford laboratory's Prof. Christopher Ramsey himself in 2008 admitted:
"There is a lot of other evidence that suggests to many that the Shroud is older than the radiocarbon dates allow and so further research is certainly needed. It is important that ... experts assess and reinterpret some of the other evidence. Only by doing this will people be able to arrive at a coherent history of the Shroud which takes into account and explains all of the available scientific and historical information"[25].
But in the intervening ~12 years Ramsey has done little to resolve the conundrum and specifically he ignored, without even an acknowledgement, my open letter to him which I both emailed and snail-mailed to his online Oxford addresses. So on the principle, "don't believe what people say - believe what they do," I don't believe Prof. Ramsey is sincere in his admission that, "It is important [to] assess and reinterpret some of the other evidence ... to arrive at a coherent history of the Shroud which takes into account and explains all of the available scientific and historical information," and that by omission he is perpetuating a scientific fraud!

• One of that "lot of other evidence that ... the Shroud is older than the

[Above (enlarge)[26]: The Entombment of Jesus in Jn 19:38-42 (upper), one of the four pen and ink drawings in the Pray Codex[27], and the Resurrection of Jesus in Mk 16:1-6, where an angel is telling the three women at the empty tomb, "Jesus ... has risen; he is not here. See the place where they laid him"(lower) [28]].

radiocarbon dates allow" (as Prof. Ramsey must know) is the Pray Codex[[29] which is dated 1192-95[30], and the drawings in the codex are even older, about 1150[31]. There are at least "eight [and by my count ten - see 04Oct18a] telling correspondences between the Shroud and the drawings on ... [this] single page of the Pray Codex"[32].

Another drawing in the Pray Codex (below) has a further four telling

[Above (enlarge): The Enthronemnent of Jesus (e.g. Mk 16:19; Acts 2:33 & Heb 1:3,12) in the Pray Codex[33].]

correspondences with the Shroud, making a total of fourteen [see 04Oct18b]!

The only reasonable explanation is that the artist who painted the ink drawings in the Pray Codex did so with the Shroud before him[34]. Hungary was ruled at that time by King Bela III (r. 1172-96), an ally of the Byzantine Empire, who had spent eight years as a young man in the imperial court at Constantinople[35], as the heir to the throne of the Emperor Manuel I Komnenos (r. 1143-80)[36]. Given the close links at the time between Hungary and the Byzantine Empire, the Pray Codex artist undoubtedly saw the Shroud, and painted his copy of it, in Constantinople[37]! A likely year was 1169 when Emperor Manuel's wife, Maria of Antioch (1145–1182), gave birth to a son Alexios II Komnenos (r. 1180-83), and so Emperor Manuel I dissolved his daughter's betrothal to Béla and in her place the Bela married Empress Maria's half-sister Agnes of Antioch[38]

These fourteen telling correspondences between the Pray Codex and the Shroud prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Shroud already existed at least 65 years before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud[39]! And, as we saw above, the most likely place the Pray Codex artist saw and depicted the Shroud was Constantinople. And, as we also saw above, the most likely time the artist depicted the Shroud was about 1169. That is over 90 years before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date of the Shroud! But the Image of Edessa/Shroud arrived in Constantinople in 944[[see "944b"]. That's 316 years before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date of the Shroud! And before that the Image of Edessa/Shroud was continuously in Edessa since 544 [see "544"]. That's 716 years before the Shroud's earliest 1260 radiocarbon date!

• Yet another of that "lot of other evidence that ... the Shroud is older

[Above (enlarge)[40]: 11th-12th century depiction of the transfer of the Image of Edessa, behind the face image of which is the full-length Shroud [see "944a"], from Edessa (left) to Constantinople (right) via Byzantine general John Kourkouas (fl. 915–946) to Byzantine Emperor Romanos I Lekapenos (r. 919–944) in 944 [see "944b"] [41].]

radiocarbon dates allow" is the above 11th-12th century miniature in the Synopsis of Histories by John Skylitzes (c.1040–1101), depicting the transfer of the Image of Edessa/Shroud from Edessa to Constantinople in 944[42]. Skylitzes' work covers the reigns of Byzantine emperors from the death of Nicephorus I in 811 to the deposition of Michael VI in 1057[43]. The Madrid manuscript was produced in Sicily in the 12th century but its 574 miniatures may be copies of earlier Byzantine images[44]. The above miniature proves beyond reasonable doubt that by the 12th century it was known that behind the face of the Image of Edessa/Mandylion was the full-length Shroud[45]! And that the arrival of the Image of Edessa/Mandylion from Edessa on 15 August 944 (a fact of history in Wikipedia:

"[944] August 15 – The `Holy Mandylion' (a cloth with the face of Jesus) is conveyed to Constantinople [from Edessa], where it arrives on the feast of the Dormition of the Theotokos. A triumphal entry is staged for the relic in the capital"[46])
was the arrival in Constantinople of the Shroud[47]! And then see above that means the Image of Edessa/Shroud in Constantinople in 944 was more than three centuries before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date of the Shroud[48] and before that it was continuously in Edessa since 544, which is more than seven centuries before the Shroud's earliest 1260 radiocarbon date!

The Catholic Church has avoided taking an official position on the authenticity of the Shroud, with the Pope merely stating that he "venerates" it; while the Church itself has never gone beyond describing the linen as anything more than an "icon" of Christian devotion. As I have previously posted:

• [06Oct13], I regard the Roman Catholic's Church's official position on the Shroud, that it is merely "an `icon' of Christian devotion," as weak and dishonest:

Dishonest, because the Roman Catholic Church has spent, and continues to spend, the equivalent of many millions of US dollars preserving and protecting the Shroud, and holding expositions at which tens of millions of pilgrims have filed past it on the understanding that it really is Jesus' burial shroud. And individual Popes have expressed their personal conviction that it really is Jesus' burial shroud. So clearly the Roman Catholic Church (to its credit), really believes that the Shroud of Turin is the very burial sheet of Jesus and the image on it is of Jesus' body."

Weak, because as John Evangelist Walsh [1927-2015] (himself a Catholic) pointed out 50 years ago, either the Shroud of Turin is a deliberate fraud, or it is Jesus' burial shroud:

"Only this much is certain: The Shroud of Turin is either the most awesome and instructive relic of Jesus Christ in existence-showing us in its dark simplicity how He appeared to men-or it is one of the most ingenious, most unbelievably clever, products of the human mind and hand on record. It is one or the other; there is no middle ground"[49]

• [14Feb14] I repeat my criticism that "the Catholic Church doesn't have an official position on the cloth" is duplicitous (i.e. two-faced), in that the Church, to its credit, clearly believes the Shroud is authentic, and has spent the equivalent of millions of dollars in safekeeping the Shroud and exhibiting it. I am not anti-Catholic in this - I am pro-truth!

• [150417] As I have stated before, it is duplicitous (i.e. two-faced), of the Vatican to refuse to confirm or deny that the Shroud is authentic. By its actions of spending the equivalent of tens (if not hundreds) of millions of dollars preserving the Shroud and exhibiting it to millions of people as though it is authentic, the Vatican clearly does believe that the Shroud is authentic, so it should say so. Shroud anti-authenticists cite the Vatican's refusal to state that the Shroud is authentic as evidence that it is not!

• [160507] See my previous criticism ... of the Vatican's policy of neither confirming nor denying that the Shroud is authentic, as "duplicitous," i.e. "two-faced." Because by its actions of spending the equivalent of many millions of dollars preserving the Shroud and exhibiting it to millions of people as though it is authentic, the Vatican clearly does believe that the Shroud is authentic, so ordinary honesty requires that it should say so. Shroud anti-authenticists cite the Vatican's refusal to state that the Shroud is authentic as evidence that it is not. And as devout Roman Catholic Donald M. Smith pointed out in his 1983 book, "The Letter," which was in the form of a letter to Pope John Paul II, if the Shroud is not authentic then it can only be the image of someone else tortured and crucified to make it look like Jesus (see 25Oct15). And for the Vatican to exhibit that, would show it has the same "the end justifies the means' ... principles of ... Nietzsche, Machiavelli and Adolf Hitler":

"[If the Shroud is not authentic] ... there is another conclusion which also must follow: Sometime between 100 A.D. and 1357 A.D., an evil, cruel and sinful act occurred. A human being was actually made to go through the exact same torture and agonizing death as suffered by Jesus and as reported in the Gospels, for the sole purpose of producing a valuable relic ... If the goal of producing a likeness of the only begotten Son of God by such evil means, could in any way be condoned, then the whole principle is based on the theories that `the end justifies the means,' and that `power makes right.' These are the same set of principles of men with character the likes of Nietzsche, Machiavelli and Adolf Hitler ... It is not right to venerate an object if that object was created by evil means" (my emphasis)[50].

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. "Shroud of Turin Face Detail," AllPosters.com, 2020. [return]
3. "Roman Catholic Diocese of Troyes: 1300 to 1500," Wikipedia, 28 December 2020. [return]
4. Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ, p.32. [return]
5. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2012, "A Souvenir from Lirey," Sindonology.org. [return]
6. 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.126-127. [return]
7. Latendresse, 2012. [return]
8. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.151. [return]
9. Antonacci, 2000, p.151. [return]
10. Antonacci, 2000, p.151. [return]
11. Antonacci, 2000, p.151. [return]
12. Antonacci, 2000, pp.151-152. [return]
13. Adams, 1982, p.32; Antonacci, 2000, p.151. [return]
14. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, p.231. [return]
15. Antonacci, 2000, p.152. [return]
16. Antonacci, 2000, p.152. [return]
17. Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, pp.55-56; Maher, R.W., 1986, "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, pp.98-99. [return]
18. Antonacci, 2000, p.152. [return]
19. Antonacci, 2000, p.152; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.13. [return]
20. Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, pp.81-83; Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, p.71. [return]
21. Garza-Valdes, L.A., 1998, "The DNA of God?," Hodder & Stoughton: London, p.8-9. [return]. [return]
22. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, plate 3b. [return]
23. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.108; Garza-Valdes, 1998, p.9; Guscin, M., 1998, "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, p.67; Guerrera, 2001, p.133. [return]
24. Sox, H.D., 1988, "The Shroud Unmasked: Uncovering the Greatest Forgery of All Time," Lamp Press: Basingstoke UK, p.147. [return]
25. Ramsey, C.B., 2008, "The Shroud of Turin," Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, March. Last modified 17 July 2009. [return]
26. "File:Hungarianpraymanuscript1192-1195.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 2 March 2019. [return]
27. Berkovits, 1969, p.19; Guerrera, 2001, p.104. [return]
28. Guerrera, 2001, p.104. [return]
29. "Pray Codex," Wikipedia, 23 January 2020. [return]
30. Berkovits, I., 1969, "Illuminated Manuscripts in Hungary, XI-XVI Centuries," Horn, Z., transl., West, A., rev., Irish University Press: Shannon, Ireland, p.19; Guerrera, 2001, p.104; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.178. [return]
31. Berkovits, 1969, pl. IV (cropped). [return]
32. de Wesselow, 2012, p.180. [return]
33. Berkovits, 1969, p.20. [return]
34. de Wesselow, 2012, p.180. [return]
35. de Wesselow, 2012, p.178; "Béla III of Hungary: Childhood (c. 1148–1163)," Wikipedia, 4 December 2020. [return]
36. Berkovits, 1969, p.20; "Béla III of Hungary: Despotes Alexios (1163–1169)," Wikipedia, 4 December 2020. [return]
37. de Wesselow, 2012, p.180. [return]
38. "Béla III of Hungary: Kaisar Alexios (1169–1172)," Wikipedia, 4 December 2020. [return]
39. Maloney, P.C., 1998, "Researching the Shroud of Turin: 1898 to the Present: A Brief Survey of Findings and Views," in Minor, M., Adler, A.D. & Piczek, I., eds., 2002, "The Shroud of Turin: Unraveling the Mystery: Proceedings of the 1998 Dallas Symposium," Alexander Books: Alexander NC, pp.16-47, 33. [return]
40. "File:Surrender of the Mandylion to the Byzantines.jpg," in "Chronography of John Skylitzes, cod. Vitr. 26-2, folio 131a, Madrid National Library, Wikimedia Commons, 20 December 2012. [return]
41. Scavone, D.C., 1991, "The History of the Turin Shroud to the 14th C.," in Berard, A., ed., 1991, "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud," Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, pp.171-204, 193. [return]
42. "John Skylitzes," Wikipedia, 2 January 2021. [return]
43. "Madrid Skylitzes," Wikipedia, 16 November 2020. [return]
44. "Madrid Skylitzes," Wikipedia, 16 November 2020. [return]
45. Scavone, 1991, p.194; Scavone, D.C., "Underscoring the Highly Significant Historical Research of the Shroud," in Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, pp.xxvi-xxvii. [return]
46. "944: Byzantine Empire," Wikipedia, 26 November 2020. [return]
47. Piana, A., 2007, "The Shroud's `Missing Years'," British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 66. December, pp.9-25,28-31; Fanti, G. & Malfi, P., 2015, "The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!," Pan Stanford: Singapore, p.55. [return]
48. de Wesselow, 2012, p.183. [return]
49. Walsh, J.E., "The Shroud," Random House: New York NY, 1963, pp.x-xii. [return]
50. Smith, D.M., 1983, "The Letter," DMS Publishing Co: Rancho Palos Verdes CA, pp.24-25. [return]

Posted: 29 December 2020. Updated: 3 March 2021.

Tuesday, November 24, 2020

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Eighteenth century

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

This is part #23, "Eighteenth century" 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: 1700."

[Index #1] [Previous: 17th century #22] [Next: 19th century #24]


18th century (1701-1800).

1701a 27 April. Birth of future King Charles Emmanuel III (r. 1730–73) to King Victor Amadeus II (r. 1675–1730) and Duchess Anne Marie d'Orléans (1669-1728)[2].

1701b July. The War of the Spanish Succession (1701–14), is triggered by the death in November 1700 of the childless Charles II of Spain (r. 1665-1700)[3] and France's King Louis XIV (1643-1715), whose mother Anne of Austria (1601-66) was a daughter of King Philip III of Spain (1598–1621)[4] and his wife Maria Theresa of Spain (1638-83) was the eldest daughter of King Philip IV (r. 1621-65)[5], claimed the title of King of Spain[6].

1701c November. Victor Amadeus II forms an alliance with France against the Austrian Holy Roman Empire[7], which is sealed by giving his daughter Maria Luisa Gabriella of Savoy (1688-1714) in marriage to King Philip V of Spain (1700-24)[8].

1703a An engraving of this year shows an exposition of the Shroud in front of the Bertola altar in the new Chapel of the Holy Shroud[9].

[Right (enlarge)[10]. Engraving dated 1703 by Bartolomeo Giuseppe Tasnière (c. 1675-1752) based on a drawing by Giulio Cesare Grampin[11]]

1703b October. Victor Amadeus II switches sides in the War of the Spanish Succession from France to the Habsburg Holy Roman Empire[12] and declares war on France[13].

1704-5 In 1704 French troops under Marshall Louis de La Feuillade (1673-1725) capture Savoy territories and by the end of 1705 Victor Amadeus controlled only his capital Turin[14].

1706a 12 April. The Shroud is exhibited in Turin[15], not on the usual 4 May, in anticipation of an impending French attack.

1706b 12 May. Marshall de La Feuillade and 48,000 French troops arrived at Turin but the blockade of the city will not be completed until 19 June[16].

1706c 23 May. The Grand Alliance – Austria, England, and the Dutch Republic – under the command of John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlborough (1650-1722a), won a decisive victory over the French in the Battle of Ramillies in the Netherlands[17].

1706d 2 June. The Siege of Turin begins under de la Feuillade but makes little progress against Turin's hardened defences[18].

1706e 16 June. The Shroud is in Cherasco[19], about 50 km (31 mi)

[Above (enlarge): Route (marked by red `diamonds') by which the Shroud was taken from Turin in June 1706 via Cherasco (16th June), Mondovì (24th), Ceva (25th), Ormea (26th), Caravonica (not shown), to Albenga. From Albenga the Shroud was then sailed via Savona to Genoa arriving on 16th July[02May15].]

southeast of Turin, enroute to the seaport of Genoa[20], about 169 km (105 mi) south east of Turin. The Shroud had been taken from Turin by Duchess Anne Marie, accompanied by her two youngest children, the 2 year-old Victor Amadeus (1699-1715) and the 1 month-old Charles Emmanuel (1701-73)[21], as well as Victor Amadeus II's mother, Marie Jeanne Baptiste of Savoy-Nemours (1644-1724)[22].

1706f 8 July. Louis Joseph, Duke of Vendôme (1654-1712), one of France's best generals and any available forces, were sent to reinforce France's northern frontier after the defeat at Ramillies[23].

1706g 17 June. Victor Amadeus escapes from the city with 7,000 cavalry. He spends the next two months attacking French supply lines, while de La Feuillade continues siege operations with little success[24].

1706h Mid July. Prince Eugene of Savoy (1663-1736) [Left (enlarge)[25]], Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Army, whose attempts to move west towards Turin had been previously thwarted by Vendôme's skillful manoeuvres, crosses the River Po from where he can at last move west towards Piedmont and relieve Turin[26].

1706i 16 July. The Shroud arrives safely in Genoa by a circuitous route (see map above)[27].

1706j 15 August, Prince Eugene begins his advance on Turin[28].

1706k 29 August. Prince Eugene reaches Carmagnola only 29 km (18 mi) south of Turin, where he is joined by Victor Amadeus[29].

1706l 7 September. Prince Eugene orders a general assault which

[Above (enlarge): "The Allied relief force breaks the French lines, lifting the siege of Turin"[30].]

finally forces the French to retreat with heavy loss of life, casualties, captures and loss of equipment. Victor Amadeus re-enters his capital the same day[31].

1706m October. The Shroud is returned to Turin[32].

1708 Victor Amadeus gains the bordering Duchy of Montferrat[33].

1713 April. Under the Treaty of Utrecht, Victor Amadeus II receives the kingdom of Sicily and parts of the Duchy of Milan[34].

1715 22 March. Death from smallpox at age 15 of Victor Amadeus, Prince of Piedmont (1699-1715), the eldest son of King Victor Amadeus II and Duchess Anne Marie and heir apparent[35]. His younger brother Charles Emmanuel III (1701-1773) inherited the title Prince of Piedmont as the new heir apparent[36].

1718 2 August. Beginning of the War of the Quadruple Alliance (1718-20) in which Spain sought to recover territorial losses it had agreed to in the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht[37].

1720a 17 February. The Treaty of The Hague was signed on 17 February 1720 between Spain and the Quadruple Alliance of Britain, France, the Dutch Republic and Austria[38]. Its terms included that Victor Amadeus II [Right (enlarge)[39]] exchange his title of King of Sicily for the more geograph-ically practical King of Sardinia[40].

1720b Exposition of the Shroud to celebrate the union of Sardinia with the Savoy states[41].

1722a 15 March. Charles Emmanuel III marries Anne Christine of Sulzbach (1704-23)[42].

1722b On 4 May there is a showing of the Shroud in Turin and on 3 June another showing[43].

1723 7 March. Anne Christine gave birth to a son, Prince Victor Amadeus Theodore (1723–25), the Duke of Aosta[44]. But she died a few days later on 12 March at the age of nineteen in Turin[45].

1724a 15 March. Death of Victor Amadeus II's mother, Marie Jeanne Baptiste of Savoy-Nemours[46].

1724b 23 July. Marriage of Charles Emmanuel III to Princess Polyxena of Hesse-Rotenburg (1706–35)[47].

1725 11 August. Death of Prince Victor Amadeus Theodore (1723–25) at the age of 2[48].

1726 26 June. Birth of Victor Amadeus III (1726–96) who was to become Duke of Savoy and King of Sardinia in 1773[49].

1727 Discovery by Johann Heinrich Schulze (1687-1744) "that the darkening in sunlight of various substances mixed with silver nitrate is due to the light, not ... heat" [50]. Contrast Nicholas Allen's claim that photography was invented ~4 centuries previously in the 13th-early 14th century [07Aug16, 16Jun19 & 15Nov20]!

1728 26 August. Death of King Victor Amadeus II's wife Duchess Anne Marie d'Orléans[51].

1730a 12 August. Marriage of King Victor Amadeus II to his mistress Anna Canalis di Cumiana (1680–1769)[52].

1730b 3 September. Abdication of King Victor Amadeus II[53]. Beginning of the long reign of his eldest son, King Charles Emmanuel III of Sardinia (r. 1730– 73) [Left (enlarge)[54]][55].

1731 Having suffered a stroke and under the influence of his wife Anna, Victor Amadeus II informs his son King Charles Emmanuel III that he was going to resume his tenure on the throne[56]. Therefore King Charles Emmanuel III has his father confined to Moncalieri Castle and Anna was separated from her husband until April 1732 when she was allowed to rejoin him in Rivoli Castle[57].

1732 31 October. Death of Victor Amadeus II[58].

1735 13 January. Death of King Charles Emmanuel III's second wife Polyxena of Hesse-Rotenburg[59].

1736 21 September. The Shroud is exhibited in Turin to celebrate the engagement of King Charles Emmanuel III to Princess Elisabeth Teresa of Lorraine (1711-41) [60].

1737a 1 April. Marriage of King Charles Emmanuel III to Princess Elisabeth Teresa of Lorraine[61].

1737b 4 May. Public showing of the Shroud to mark the royal

[Above (enlarge): Engraving by Filippo Juvarra (1678–1736) of the 1737 exposition of the Shroud from a pavilion in Turin's Piazza Castello to mark the marriage of King Charles Emmanuel III and Elisabeth Therese of Lorraine[62].]

marriage, commemorated by print showing vast crowd in front of the Royal Palace, as the Shroud is displayed from a balcony[63].

1750a A handwritten anonymous document (MS 826) is placed in the Besançon City Library, and claims that Othon de la Roche (c.1170-1234) sent the Shroud from Athens [see 11Nov17] to his father, Pons in Burgundy, who gave it to the Bishop Amadeus de Tramelay 1197–1220 of Besançon, and names three medieval writers (no longer extant) who stated this[64].

1750b 31 May. Prince Victor Amadeus III marries Maria Antonia Ferdinanda (1729-85), a daughter of King Philip V of Spain (r. 1700-24)[65]. They had three surviving sons, each of whom would become Duke of Savoy and King of Sardinia: Charles Emmanuel IV (1751-1819), Victor Emmanuel I (1759–1824) and Charles Felix (1765-1831)[66].

1750c 29 June. Showing of the Shroud to celebrate the marriage of Prince Victor Amadeus III and Infanta Maria Antonia[z].

1751 24 May. Birth of Charles Emmanuel IV (1751-1819), who would be King of Sardinia from 1796 to 1802[68].

1758 3 May. Death of Pope Benedict XIV (r. 1740-58), "... one of the best scholars to sit on the papal throne"[69], who had written of the Shroud:

"The Holy Shroud, that outstanding relic, is preserved at Turin. Popes Paul II (1464-71); Sixtus IV (1471-84); Julius II (1503-13) and Clement VII (1523-34) all bear witness that this is the same in which our Lord was wrapped"[70].

1759 24 July. Birth of Victor Emmanuel I (1759–1824), who would be King of Sardinia from 1802-21[71].

1765 Birth of Charles Felix (1765-1831), who would be King of Sardinia from 1821-31[72].

1769 16 June. Private showing of the Shroud for Emperor Joseph II (r. 1765-90) of Hapsburg-Lorraine and then the Shroud is displayed from the balcony of the Royal Chapel for large crowd gathered in the cathedral below[73].

1770 Discovery of the Pray Codex (1192-95)[74] by Hungarian Jesuit

[Above (enlarge)[75]: "The Entombment of Christ (above) and Three Marys [sic] at the tomb (below). The images are claimed as one of the evidences against the radiocarbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin"[76]. There are at least "eight telling correspondences between the Shroud and the drawings on a [this] single page of the Pray Codex"[77]. And by my count there are twelve - see 27May12. See also 26Oct14, 02Dec14, 23Jul15, 15Oct15, 27Dec15, 07May16, 07Aug16, 14Jul18, 15July18, 21Aug18, 20Dec18, 24May20 & 14Oct20]

archivist Gyorgy Pray (1723-1801)[78]. Even Wikipedia has had to admit, "This illustration shows remarkable similarities with the Shroud of Turin":

"One of the five illustrations within the Codex shows the burial of Jesus. This illustration shows remarkable similarities with the Shroud of Turin: that Jesus is shown entirely naked with the arms on the pelvis, just like in the body image of the Shroud of Turin; that the thumbs on this image appear to be retracted, with only four fingers visible on each hand, thus matching detail on the Turin Shroud; that the supposed fabric shows a herringbone pattern, identical to the weaving pattern of the Shroud of Turin; and that the four tiny circles on the lower image, which appear to form a letter L, `perfectly reproduce four apparent "poker holes" on the Turin Shroud', which likewise appear to form a letter L. The Codex Pray illustration may serve as evidence for the existence of the Shroud of Turin prior to 1260–1390 AD, the fabrication date established [sic] in the radiocarbon-14 dating of the Shroud of Turin in 1988"[79].
1773 20 February. Death of King Charles Emmanuel III[80] and beginning of the reign of his eldest son, King Victor Amadeus III (r. 1773-96)[81].

1775a 30 September. Marriage of Prince Charles Emmanuel IV to Princess Marie Clotilde of France (1759–1802), a sister of King Louis XVI (r. 1774-92) but their marriage would be childless[82].

1775b 15 October. Exposition of the Shroud in Turin to mark the royal marriage[83].

1789a 21 April. Marriage of Prince Victor Emmanuel I to Archduchess Maria Teresa of Austria-Este (1773-1832)[84].

1789b 5 May. Beginning of the French Revolution (1789-99)[85].

1792a Revolutionaries break into the French royal relic collection in the Sainte Chapelle, Paris and a fragment of the Shroud is destroyed[86].

1792b The Kingdom of Sardinia and other Savoy states under Victor Amadeus III join the First Coalition against the French First Republic[87].

1793 21 January. King Louis XVI, Queen Clotilde's brother, is executed by guillotine[88], followed on 16 October by his wife, Queen Marie Antoinette (1755-1793)[89].

1794 24 May. French Revolutionaries destroy the painted copy of the Shroud at Besançon[90] [Above (enlarge): A 1634 depiction of the Besançon copy of the Shroud[91].]

1795 December. The Holy Face of Laon (Sainte Face de Laon) is taken

[Above (enlarge): "Icon of the Holy Face (Mandylion), bought in 1249 in Bari (Italy) by Jacques Pantaléon, archdeacon of the cathedral of Laon who later became Pope Urban IV. Exhibited in the cathedral of Laon"[92].]

out of hiding and placed in Laon cathedral[93]. The icon had been in Laon's Montreuil Abbey before the latter's destruction by French revolutionaries in December 1793[94]. Before that the icon had been given in 1249 by Jacques Pantaleon (c. 1195-1264), archdeacon of Laon Cathedral, but living in Rome as chaplain to Pope Innocent IV (r. 1243-54), and future Pope Urban IV (r. 1261-64)[95], to the Cistercian Abbey in Montreuil-en-Thiérache[96], via his sister Sybille who was Abbess of the Abbey's convent[97]. However, in 1636 a Spanish invasion compelled the Cistercian sisters to leave their abbey and in 1650 they and their precious treasure relocated to nearby Montreuil-sous-Laon[98] which became Montreuil Abbey. The Laon icon is a glazed panel[99], nearly square, 44 cm (17.3 in) high and 40 cm (15.7 in) wide[100]. It bears the inscription in Serbian, OBRAZ GSPDN NAUBRUSJE, "the image of the Lord on the cloth"[101]. Moreover it has at least thirteen (and by my count fourteen - see 23Apr12) of the fifteen Vignon markings[102] [see 25Jul07, 11Feb12, 18Mar12, 22Sep12, etc], more than any other known icon[103]. The Laon Face evidently came from Bari in southeastern Italy, where there was an Orthodox monastery with Serbian monks[104]. After the sack of Constantinople in 1204 by the Fourth Crusade, the Serbian Orthodox Church had been liberated from the Byzantine Empire and sought a closer relationship with the Roman Catholic Church[104a]. Jacques Pantaleon carried out diplomatic missions on behalf of Pope Innocent so it would have been normal for him to visit the Orthodox Serbian monks of Bari which is not far from Rome[105]. It was on one of these missions that Pantaleon presumably received a gift of the Holy Face from the monks of Bari[106]. The icon's disembodied head[107], circular `halo'[108], fringe [109], trellis pattern[110] and sepia/brown monochrome colour[111], reveal that the Laon Face is a depiction of the Mandylion[112], that is the Image of Edessa[113]. Which was the Shroud "four-doubled" (Greek tetradiplon)[114] - see 15Sep12]! That the Laon icon contains more Vignon markings than any other known icon, together with the artist's statement that the portrait is that of "the Lord on the cloth" must mean that he was working directly from the Image of Edessa/Shroud[115]! In the upper left and upper right corners of the icon (see above) are the Greek letters "I C" (Iota and final sigma) and "X C" (Chi and final sigma)[116], which are the first and last letters of the words 'Iesous Xristos - "Jesus Christ" in Greek[117]. The icon was therefore likely painted in Greek-speaking Constantinople after the transfer of the Image of Edessa/Shroud from Edessa to Constantinople in 944[see "944b"][118]. Between 1094 and 1149 Serbia was a vassal state within the Byzantine Empire[119], so it is likely the icon was painted by a Serbian in Constantinople between those dates. So the Holy Face of Laon alone (and it is not alone! - see for example the Pray Codex above) is proof beyond reasonable doubt that it is a depiction of the face of the Shroud[120] even at 1249 predating by 11 years the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date of the Shroud[121]. But to be a worthy gift from the Serbian Orthodox Church to the Roman Catholic Church, the Laon icon must have been painted many years, if not decades, before 1249[122]. Indeed, as we saw above, the Greek and Serbian letters on the icon indicate, it was most likely painted directly from the Shroud in Constantinople between 1094 and 1249, which is between 111 and 166 years before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date!

1796a April. The First Coalition is beaten by the 26 year-old general Napoleon Bonaparte (1769–1821) in northern Italy[123] and Victor Amadeus III is forced to sign the disadvantageous Treaty of Paris, which gives the French army free passage through Piedmont[124].

1796b 16 October. Victor Amadeus III dies[125] and is succeeded as King of Sardinia and Duke of Savoy by his eldest son, Charles Emmanuel IV (r. 1796-1802)[126].

1798a 2 October. Birth in Paris of the untitled Charles Albert of Savoy (1798–1849), a great-great-great-great-great-grandson of Duke Charles Emmanuel I (r. 1580-1630), and who due to a lack of surviving male heirs in the royal line,would become King of Sardinia and Duke of Savoy in 1831[127].

1798b 6 December. Napoleon's general Barthélemy Joubert (1769-99) occupies Turin and forces Charles Emmanuel IV to abdicate all his territories on the Italian mainland and to withdraw to the island of Sardinia, without the Shroud[128]. On 9 December Charles Emmanuel IV with the rest of the royal family privately venerate the Shroud and then depart for Sardinia[129]. From then on the Shroud would be effectively under the control of the Roman Catholic Church[130].

1799 9 November 1799. End of the French Revolution[131].

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. "Charles Emmanuel III of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 17 November 2020. [return]
3. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, p.271. [return]
4. "Anne of Austria," Wikipedia, 17 November 2020. [return]
5. "Louis XIV: War of the Spanish Succession," Wikipedia, 22 November 2020. [return]
6. Wilson, 2010, p.271. [return]
7. "War of the Spanish Succession: Savoy," Wikipedia, 23 November 2020. [return]
8. "Victor Amadeus II of Sardinia: War of the Spanish Succession," Wikipedia, 27 November 2020. [return]
9. Wilson, I., 1997, "A Calendar of the Shroud for the Years 1694-1898," BSTS Newsletter, No. 45, June/July; Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.296. [return]
10. Scott, J.B., 2003, "Architecture for the Shroud: Relic and Ritual in Turin," University of Chicago Press: Chicago & London, p.111. [return]
11. Scott, 2003, pp.111, 369 n.53. [return]
12. "War of the Spanish Succession: Savoy," Wikipedia, 23 November 2020. [return]
13. "War of the Spanish Succession: Italy," Wikipedia, 23 November 2020. [return]
14. "Siege of Turin: Background," Wikipedia, 19 September 2020. [return]
15. Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.296. [return]
16. "Siege of Turin: Background," Wikipedia, 19 September 2020. [return]
17. "Battle of Ramillies," Wikipedia, 22 November 2020. [return]
18. "Siege of Turin," Wikipedia, 19 September 2020. [return]
19. Oddone, A., n.d., "THE_HOLY_SHROUD_files/OSTENSION_ENGLISH 5.doc," Accademia Vis Vitalis, Turin (no longer online). [return]
20. Morgan, R., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia, p.47; Wilson, 2010, p.306; Cassanelli, A., 2002, "The Holy Shroud," Williams, B., transl., Gracewing: Leominster UK, p.14; Wilson, 2010, p.271. [return]
21. "Anne Marie d'Orléans: Duchess and Queen," Wikipedia, 27 November 2020 & "Victor Amadeus II of Sardinia: War of the Spanish Succession," Wikipedia, 27 November 2020. [return]
22. "Marie Jeanne Baptiste of Savoy-Nemours: Retirement and later life," Wikipedia, 27 May 2020 & "Victor Amadeus II of Sardinia: War of the Spanish Succession," Wikipedia, 27 November 2020. [return]
23. "War of the Spanish Succession: Military campaigns 1701–1708," Wikipedia, 23 November 2020. [return]
24. "Siege of Turin: Siege," Wikipedia, 19 September 2020. [return]
25. "File:Prinz Eugene of Savoy.PNG," Wikimedia Commons, 30 November 2020. [return]
26. "Prince Eugene of Savoy: Turin and Toulon," Wikipedia, 29 November 2020. [return]
27. Oddone, n.d. [return]
28. "Siege of Turin: Siege," Wikipedia, 19 September 2020. [return]
29. Ibid. [return]
30. "File:BattleofTurin.JPG," Wikimedia Commons, 27 July 2020. [return]
31. "Siege of Turin: Battle," Wikipedia, 19 September 2020. [return]
32. Oddone, n.d. [return]
33. "Duchy of Montferrat," Wikipedia, 5 July 2020. [return]
34. Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, p.81; "Peace of Utrecht," Wikipedia, 9 November 2020. [return]
35. "Victor Amadeus, Prince of Piedmont," Wikipedia, 19 November 2019. [return]
36. "Charles Emmanuel III of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 19 November 2019. [return]
37. "War of the Quadruple Alliance," Wikipedia, 26 November 2020. [return]
38. "Treaty of The Hague (1720)," Wikipedia, 10 July 2020. [return]
39. "File:Vittorio Amedeo II in Maestà - Google Art Project.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 27 September 2020. [return]
40. Oxley, 2010, p.81; Wilson, 2010, p.271; Treaty of The Hague (1720)," Wikipedia, 10 July 2020. [return]
41. Oddone, n.d. [return]
42. "Anne Christine of Sulzbach, Princess of Piedmont," Wikipedia, 24 October 2020. [return]
43. Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.296. [return]
44. "Prince Vittorio Amedeo Teodoro, Duke of Aosta," Wikipedia, 24 October 2020. [return]
45. "Anne Christine of Sulzbach, Princess of Piedmont," Wikipedia, 24 October 2020. [return]
46. "Marie Jeanne Baptiste of Savoy-Nemours," Wikipedia, 27 May 2020. [return]
47. "Polyxena of Hesse-Rotenburg," Wikipedia, 7 August 2020. [return]
48. Prince Vittorio Amedeo Teodoro, Duke of Aosta," Wikipedia, 24 October 2020. [return]
49. "Victor Amadeus III of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 13 December 2020. [return]
50. "Johann Heinrich Schulze," Wikipedia, 11 September 2020. [return]
51. "Anne Marie d'Orléans," Wikipedia, 27 November 2020. [return]
52. "Anna Canalis di Cumiana," Wikipedia, 27 August 2020. [return]
53. "Victor Amadeus II of Sardinia: Abdication and later years," Wikipedia, 27 November 2020. [return]
54. "File:Clementi - Charles Emmanuel III in armour.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 13 March 2020. [return]
55. Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.296; "Charles Emmanuel III of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 26 November 2020. [return]
56. "Victor Amadeus II of Sardinia: Abdication and later years," Wikipedia, 27 November 2020. [return]
57. Ibid. [return]
58. "Victor Amadeus II of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 27 November 2020. [return]
59. "Polyxena of Hesse-Rotenburg," Wikipedia, 7 August 2020. [return]
60. Oddone, n.d.; Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.296; "Elisabeth Therese of Lorraine: Queen," Wikipedia, 10 December 2020. [return]
61. Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.296; "Elisabeth Therese of Lorraine: Queen," Wikipedia, 10 December 2020. [return]
62. "Palazzo Reale, già Palazzo Ducale o Palazzo Novo Grande," Museo Torino, 2010. [return]
63. Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.296; Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, p.11; Wilson, 2010, p.306. [return]
64. Scavone, D.C., 1989, "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA, p.98; 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.62. [return]
65. "Maria Antonia Ferdinanda of Spain: Duchess of Savoy," Wikipedia, 8 December 2020. [return]
66. "Maria Antonia Ferdinanda of Spain: Issue," Wikipedia, 8 December 2020. [return]
67. Oddone, n.d.; Morgan, 1980, p.48; Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.296; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.21; Wilson, 2010, p.306. [return]
68. "Charles Emmanuel IV of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 6 July 2020. [return]
69. "Pope Benedict XIV," Wikipedia, 10 December 2020. [return]
70. Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.297; Guerrera, 2001, p.26; Oxley, 2010, p.84. [return]
71. "Victor Emmanuel I of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 6 November 2020. [return]
72. "Charles Felix of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 8 October 2020. [return]
73. Oddone, n.d.; Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.297. [return]
74. Berkovits, I., 1969, "Illuminated Manuscripts in Hungary, XI-XVI Centuries," Horn, Z., transl., West, A., rev., Irish University Press: Shannon, Ireland, p.19; Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, pp.114-115; Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, pp.150-151; Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, p.154; Scavone, D.C., 1998, "A Hundred Years of Historical Studies on the Turin Shroud," Third International Congress on the Shroud of Turin, 6 June 1998, Turin, Italy, in Minor, M., Adler, A.D. & Piczek, I., eds., 2002, "The Shroud of Turin: Unraveling the Mystery: Proceedings of the 1998 Dallas Symposium," Alexander Books: Alexander NC, pp.58-70, 63-64; Wilson, 1998, pp.146-147; Guerrera, 2001, p.104; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.288G. [return]
75. "File:Hungarianpraymanuscript1192-1195.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 2 March 2019. [return]
76. "Pray Codex," Wikipedia, 23 January 2020. [return]
77. de Wesselow, 2012, p.180. [return]
78. Fanti, G. & Malfi, P., 2015, "The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!," Pan Stanford: Singapore, p.59; "Pray Codex," Wikipedia, 23 January 2020 (footnotes omitted). [return]
79. "Pray Codex," Wikipedia, 23 January 2020. [return]
80. Wilson, 1998, p.297; "Charles Emmanuel III of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 26 November 2020. [return]
81. "Victor Amadeus III of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 13 December 2020. [return]
82. "Clotilde of France: Marriage," Wikipedia, 29 October 2020. [return]
83. Oddone, n.d.; Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.297; Wilson, 2010, p.271. [return]
84. "Maria Theresa of Austria-Este, Queen of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 16 June 2020. [return]
85. "French Revolution," Wikipedia, 25 December 2020. [return]
86. Wilson, 1997; Wilson, 1998, p.297; Wilson, 2010, p.271. [return]
87. "Kingdom of Sardinia: Napoleonic Wars and the Congress of Vienna," Wikipedia, 15 December 2020. [return]
88. "Louis XVI: Imprisonment, execution and burial, 1792–1793," Wikipedia, 3 December 2020. [return]
89. "Marie Antoinette: Trial and execution (14–16 October 1793)," Wikipedia, 18 December 2020. [return]
90. Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, p.57; Beecher, P.A., 1928, "The Holy Shroud: Reply to the Rev. Herbert Thurston, S.J.," M.H. Gill & Son: Dublin, p.60; Hynek, R.W., 1951, "The True Likeness," [1946], Sheed & Ward: London, p.9; Rinaldi, P.M., 1978, "The Man in the Shroud," [1972], Futura: London, Revised, p.54; Crispino, D.C, 1985, "Doubts along the Doubs," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 14, March, pp.10-24, 12-13; Scavone, 1989, pp.99, 101; Ruffin, 1999, p.62. [return]
91. "The Holy Shroud of Besançon," 1634, Jean de Loisy, The Art Institute of Chicago, 2013. [return]
92. "File:Icône Sainte Face Laon 150808.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 30 November 2020. Translated by Google. [return]
93. de Riedmatten, P., 2008, "The Holy Face of Laon," BSTS Newsletter, No. 68, December. [return]
94. de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
95. Green, M., 1969, "Enshrouded in Silence: In search of the First Millennium of the Holy Shroud," Ampleforth Journal, Vol. 74, No. 3, Autumn, pp.319-345; Currer-Briggs, N., 1984, "The Holy Grail and the Shroud of Christ: The Quest Renewed," ARA Publications: Maulden UK, p.21; Currer-Briggs, N., 1988a, "The Shroud and the Grail: A Modern Quest for the True Grail," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, p.157; Wilson, 1991, p.78H; Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, p.21; de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
96. de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
97. Green, 1969; Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.157; Wilson, 1991, p.78H; de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
98. de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
99. Wuenschel, E.A., 1954, "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, Third printing, 1961, p.59; Tribbe, 2006, p.21; . [return]
100. Wilson, 1991, p.78H; de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
101. Wilson, I., 1983, "Some Recent Society Meetings," BSTS Newsletter, No. 6, September/December, p.13; Currer-Briggs, 1984, p.21; Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.58; Currer-Briggs, N., 1988b, "Dating the Shroud - A Personal View," BSTS Newsletter, No. 20, October, pp.16-17; Tribbe, 2006, p.21. [return]
102. Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.58. [return]
103. Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.67. [return]
104. de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
104a. de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
105. de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
106. de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
107. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, pp.114-115; Wilson, 1986, pp.110F, 136; Wilson, 1998, pp.150-151. [return]
108. Wilson, 1979, p.121; Currer-Briggs, 1984, p.23. [return]
109. Wilson, 1979, p.114; Currer-Briggs, 1984, p.21; Currer-Briggs, 1988a, pp.60, 157; Wilson, 1991, p.136. [return]
110. Wilson, 1979, pp.114, 121; Currer-Briggs, 1984, pp.22-23; Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.60; Wilson, 1991, p.136; Tribbe, 2006, p.21; de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
111. Wilson, 1979, pp.114-115; Wilson, 1998, p.150. [return]
112. Green, 1969; de Riedmatten, 2008; Oxley, 2010, p.108. [return]
113. "Image of Edessa," Wikipedia, 14 December 2020. [return]
114. Wilson, I., 1977, "The Shroud's History Before the 14th Century," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., 1977, "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, pp.31-49, 44; Wilson, 1979, pp.120-121, 307; Drews, R., 1984, "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham MD, p.36; Wilson, 1986, pp.112-113, 145; Scavone, 1989, pp.81-82; Scavone, D.C., 1991, "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, 184; Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 35; Iannone, 1998, pp.104-105, 115; Wilson, 1998, pp.152-153, 266-267; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.132-133; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, pp.110-111; Guerrera, 2001, pp.2-3; Oxley, 2010, pp.23-247; Wilson, 2010, pp.140-141, 174; de Wesselow, 2012, pp.186-187, 288I. [return]
115. Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.68. [return]
116. "Greek alphabet," Wikipedia, 11 December 2020. [return]
117. Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.67; Tribbe, 2006, p.21; Jesus: Etymology," Wikipedia, 22 December 2020. [return]
118. Tribbe, 2006, p.21; de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
119. "Serbia in the Middle Ages: Byzantine suzerainty," Wikipedia, 22 December 2020. [return]
120. Wuenschel, 1954, p.59; de Riedmatten, 2008. [return]
121. Wilson, 1991, p.3; Wilson, I., 1996, "Jesus: The Evidence," [1984], Weidenfeld & Nicolson: London, Revised, p.134; Currer-Briggs, N., 1995, "Shroud Mafia: The Creation of a Relic?," Book Guild: Sussex UK, pp.56-57; Wilson, 1998, pp.125, 141; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.113; Wilson, 2010, p.108; de Wesselow, 2012, p.176. [return]
122. Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.57. [return]
123. Napoleon: First Italian campaign," Wikipedia, 17 December 2020. [return]
124. "Charles Emmanuel IV of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 6 July 2020. [return]
125. "Victor Amadeus III of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 13 December 2020. [return]
126. "Charles Emmanuel IV of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 6 July 2020. [return]
127. "Charles Albert of Sardinia: Accession to the throne," Wikipedia, 16 December 2020. [return]
128. Scott, 2003, p.267; "Charles Emmanuel IV of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 6 July 2020. [return]
129. Wilson, 1998, p.297; Scott, 2003, p.267; "Charles Emmanuel IV of Sardinia," Wikipedia, 6 July 2020. [return]
130. Scott, 2003, p.268. [return]
131. "French Revolution: The Directory; 1795–1799," Wikipedia, 25 December 2020. [return]

Posted: 24 November 2020. Updated: 30 December 2020.

Sunday, November 15, 2020

My reply to Prof. Nicholas Allen (assumed)

© Stephen E. Jones[1]

On 15 November I received an anonymous comment under my 16 June 2019 post, "Allen, N: Turin Shroud Encyclo-pedia," which from its tone (I have had comments from Prof. Allen before) and its subject matter, I assume can only be from Prof. Nicholas Allen [Right[2]] himself! According to my long-standing stated policy:

"Comments are moderated. Those I consider off-topic, offensive or sub-standard will not appear. I reserve the right to respond to any comment as a separate blog post."
I am replying to Prof. Allen's comment here as a separate post. His words are bold to distinguish them from mine. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated. See also 13Jul07, 07Aug16 and 16Jun19.

Anonymous said... I regard it as significant that Prof. Allen does not give his name but hides behind a cloak (albeit see-through!) of anonymity.

Nicholas Allen never lived in Zimbabwe....when he lived there it was called Rhodesia.. I have now added "(then Rhodesia)" to that part of my 2019 post which I presume Allen is referring to:

"Allen's first exposure to the Shroud was in 1969, as a 13 year-old, when he saw a photograph of the Shroud face on the wall of the Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia) home of his parish priest, Fr. Philip Foster."

Allen has conducted tests with synthetic and natural quartz...he also ensured that his synthetic quartz lenses had the same qualities as natural quartz. Thanks to Prof. Allen for conceding my main point, which is that if he did not use only medieval materials and technology, then he cannot truthfully claim that he has produced a "medieval photograph" explanation of the Shroud image! As I pointed out in my 2019 post, quoting Mark Antonacci, "For Allen to show that `a very large [180 mm = 7 inch diameter[3]], accurately ground high-quality biconvex [quartz] lens of long focal length" ... could have been used by his `medieval photographer,' Allen would need to replicate it using only medieval materials and technology":

"For Allen's purposes, he needs a very large, transparent, rock-crystal-quality quartz, which is very rare, just to begin his process. The largest and most abundant of these are found in the Western hemisphere, which certainly did not export them in medieval times. Once our medieval forger had obtained this unlikely stone he would have to form a perfectly circular lens, with smooth, equal curves around each side of the complete circle. The convex curves of each side would have to match perfectly. If our medieval forger is off a fraction of a degree anywhere, it will throw off the highly resolved and focused image. In addition, he cannot have imperfections of any kind on the perfectly curved surfaces anywhere on the entire lens. There is absolutely no history of such skill or such a product in medieval times. Our medieval forger would most likely have had to have done this perfect job with only his hands and a piece of cloth with some sand on it ... Allen does not inform us where he acquired his lens, but it is extremely doubtful that he chiseled and hand-ground it from natural stone. Since optical-quality quartz lenses do not appear historically until the nineteenth century, Allen has the burden of demonstrating how a seven-inch, optical-quality, biconvex quartz-crystal lens without any imperfections could be made"[4].
Allen himself has made this point that his "primitive photography" theory requires that only "technology readily available to medieval cultures" be employed:
"... the inferences of the author's recent investigation into shroud-like image formation techniques employing technology readily available to medieval cultures as far back as the eleventh century strongly suggests that the negative image as found on the Shroud of Turin was the product of a form of primitive photography employing either silver nitrate or silver sulphate as a light sensitive agent"[5].
Antonacci made a telling observation:
"Ironically, among his very valid criticisms of Picknett and Prince's [who plagiarised Prof. Allen's medieval photography theory - see 07Aug16] book and experiments, Allen does not criticize their use of lenses and apertures from cameras and slide projectors. Perhaps that is because he himself is using a type of lens that was not available until the nineteenth or twentieth century"[6].
The point being that it is not possible to make a shroud image with glass lens which cuts out the uv spectrum necessary for the chemical reaction with silver nitrate or silver sulphate. The "uv spectrum," i.e. ultraviolet light, was only discovered in 1801 by the German physicist Johann Wilhelm Ritter (1776-1810)[7], so "no one in medieval times knew about ultraviolet light at all, much less what materials would or would not transmit it":
"A lens made of regular glass will not transmit ultraviolet light, the portion of the EM [electromagnetic] spectrum that makes the image on Allen's treated cloth. Of course, no one in medieval times knew about ultraviolet light at all, much less what materials would or would not transmit it"[8].
I find it incredible that people who have never bothered to read his many scientific articles and books ... It is "incredible" in the sense of not credible! As is obvious from my references in my many posts about Allen's `medieval photography' theory (see 13Jul07, 07Aug16, 05Sep16, 14Mar17, 05Nov17, 21Aug18 and the very post Allen commented under 16Jun19a), I have indeed "bothered to read" Allen's "many scientific articles and books" on his `medieval photography' theory of the formation of the Shroud image. Except I have not yet bought and read Allen's 2017 book, "Turin Shroud: Testament to a Lost Technology" because its price on Advanced Book Exchange to Australia is A$223.03! However, I have just discovered it sells for A$65.64 from The Book Depository, so I will probably buy it eventually.

... still get his contributions so wrong ... If Allen really believed that I am wrong about his `medieval photography' theory, he would have jumped at the chance to point out on my blog, where I am wrong! And, as far as I am aware, no leading Shroud anti-authenticist agrees with Allen's `medieval photography' theory. Joe Nickell, for example, called Allen's theory "astonishingly absurd":

"... the astonishingly absurd notion of an art historian named Nicholas Allen that the image was "the world's first photograph." (The technique was supposedly invented to make a fake shroud and then conveniently lost for subsequent centuries!)"[9].
... and even feel that they have the right to make quite libellous comments on this blog. I presume Allen is referring to my alleging that he is guilty of scientific dishonesty in:

• Not having tested his theory that a corpse[10] was hung out in full sunlight for eight days ("four days" each side[11]) by hanging a dead pig out in the sun for even few days and seeing what happened to its image in his `medieval camera'[16Jun19b]; and

• Titling his book, "The Turin Shroud and the Crystal Lens" [Left [12]] when hidden deep within it, not mentioned in the index, Allen admitted indirectly that he had used a piece of synthetic quartz to make his 180 mm lens, not a natural quartz crystal [16Jun19c]:

"Through the kindness of my institution I was made a loan with which I purchased a blank piece of high grade quartz. After many months of waiting, a blank sent from Switzerland, finally arrived in South Africa, where through the sterling efforts of both Derek Griffith and Dan van Staaden, it was ground and polished into a bi-convex lens"[13].
Plagiarizing an expert's life work and employing it for blogs as though you had done all the necessary research is the height of arrogance. Allen needs to check the dictionary definition of "plagiarism." According to the online Oxford dictionary it is:
"The practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own"[14].
And I definitely wouldn't want to pass off Allen's `medieval photography' ideas as if they were my own! Indeed I meticulously cited footnotes to Allen's works to show that they are his ideas. Nor do I claim that I had done the primary research that Allen has, which I give him credit for. But what I don't give Allen credit for is his not being honest and admitting that his "life's work" in seeking to discredit the Shroud as a `medieval photograph" has failed. Because: 1) Allen did not use only medieval materials and technology in making his 180 cm = 7 inch optical quality quartz lens; 2) Allen did not test (or if he did he conncealed the result) of what would happen to a human corpse (using an animal substitute) if hung out in full sunlight for eight days; and 3) Allen does not admit that his photographic `replication' of the Shroud image fails because it is obviously directional in recording the sun's

[Above (enlarge)[16Jun19d]: Comparison of Allen's photographic `replication' of the Shroud image (left) and the Shroud image itself (right). As can be seen, Allen's image of a white plaster bodycast strongly shows the directional movement of the sun overhead, but the Shroud image does not show any directionality whatsoever. The white patches on the Shroudman's side, wrist, arms and feet are dark blood which is white in a photographic negative, and the other white patches are dark burns from the 1532 fire.]

repeated passage over it[15], but Allen had previously correctly stated that the Shroud's image is "non-directional":

"Directionless: The process that formed the image operated in a non-directional fashion. It was not generated according to any directional pattern as it would have been if applied by hand. A painting, for example, shows strong directionality, that is, the direction by which the medium was applied is evident from the brush strokes"[16].
As Ian Wilson pointed out, the value of Allen's contribution to sindonology is that he demonstrated that the Shroud image really is a photograph, and not a painting as claimed by most anti-authenticists, led by Walter McCrone (1916-2002):
"Now it can also be said unreservedly of Professor Allen that more than anyone else before him he has demonstrated that the Shroud's image really is photographic in character. This is in fact something that those in favour of the Shroud's authenticity have been saying for years and is certainly bad news for Walter McCrone and others"[17].
But not a `medieval photograph' using only medieval materials and technology (because they exist only in Nicholas Allen's imagination), but rather, as Wilson put it, a "`snapshot' of the Resurrection" of Jesus!:
"Even from the limited available information, a hypothetical glimpse of the power operating at the moment of creation of the Shroud's image may be ventured. In the darkness of the Jerusalem tomb the dead body of Jesus lay, unwashed, covered in blood, on a stone slab. Suddenly, there is a burst of mysterious power from it. In that instant ... its image ... becomes indelibly fused onto the cloth, preserving for posterity a literal `snapshot' of the Resurrection"[18]!

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. "CurriculumVitae: Nicholas P L Allen, North-West University," Academia.edu. Accessed 15 November 2020. [return]
3. Allen, N.P.L., 1995, "Verification of the Nature and Causes of the Photonegative Images on the Shroud of Lirey-Chambery-Turin," De Arte 51, Pretoria, UNISA, pp.21-35; Ware, M., 1997, "On Proto-photography and the Shroud of Turin," History of Photography, Vol. 21, No. 4, Winter, pp.261-269, 264; Allen, N.P.L., 1998, "The Turin Shroud and the Crystal Lens: Testament to a Lost Technology," Empowerment Technologies: Port Elizabeth, South Africa, pp.92, 100; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.92; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.140-. [return]
4. Antonacci, 2000, pp.91-92. [return]
5. Allen, 1995. [return]
6. Antonacci, 2000, p.91. [return]
7. "Ultraviolet: Discovery," Wikipedia, 16 November 2020. [return]
8. Antonacci, 2000, p.91. [return]
9. Nickell, J., 2004, "PBS `Secrets of the Dead' Buries the Truth About Turin Shroud," Skeptical Inquirer, April 9. [return]
10. Allen, 1998, p.93; Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.260. [return]
11. Allen, 1995; Allen, 1998, pp.93, 100; Schwortz, B.M., 2000, "Is The Shroud of Turin a Medieval Photograph?: A Critical Examination of the Theory," Shroud.com. [return]
12. My scan of the font cover of my copy of Allen's 1998 book. [return]
13. Allen, 1998, p.100. [return]
14. "Plagiarism," Oxford Dictionary on Lexico.com, 2020. [return]
15. Schwortz, 2000. [return]
16. Allen, 1995. [return]
17. Wilson, 1998, p.216. [return]
18. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.251; Wilson, 1998, p..234. [return]

Posted: 15 November 2020. Updated: 17 December 2020.