Tuesday, January 11, 2022

Barbet, Pierre. Turin Shroud Encyclopedia

Turin Shroud Encyclopedia
Copyright © Stephen E. Jones

Barbet, Pierre #14

This is "Barbet, Pierre," part #14 of my Turin Shroud Encyclopedia. See also 07Dec13 & 16Nov21. For more information about this series, see part #1 and part #2. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

[Index #1] [Previous: Balossino, Nello #13] [Next: Ashe, Geoffrey #15]

French doctor Pierre Barbet (1884–1961) was a battlefield surgeon in

[Right (enlarge)[2]: Dr Pierre Barbet.]

World War I[3] and was later Chief Surgeon (Surgeon-General) at St. Joseph's Hospital, Paris[4], which position he held for over 35 years[5], performing up to 30 operations a week[6]. Barbet was a polymath, a linguist, a translator of poetry, a gifted violinist, a sportsman proficient in tennis, swimming and riding, and a teacher of anatomy[7]. He was the author of two books on the Shroud: "Les Cinq Plaies Du Christ" (1935)[8] and "La Passion de N. S. Jesus-Christ selon le Chirurgien" (1950)[9], which were translated into English as "The Five Wounds of Christ" (1952)[10] and "A Doctor at Calvary" (1953)[11], respectively.

Barbet's interest in the Shroud began when a friend showed him photographs of the Shroud taken by Giuseppe Enrie (1886- 1961) at the 1931 exposition[12]. Barbet went to Turin to see the Shroud at its 1933 exposition[13]. On the last day of the exposition, 15 October, Barbet was on the steps of Turin Cathedral when the Archbishop of Turin, Cardinal Maurilio Fossati (r. 1930-65), made the impromptu decision to bring the Shroud outside for the large crowd to take one last look at it[14]. Barbet thus saw the Shroud close up in daylight and recognised that the Shroudman's bloodstains really were blood:

"But, on Sunday, October 15th, which was the closing day, the relic was taken out of the heavy frame in which it was exposed under glass, and twenty-five prelates bore it with all due solemnity in its light frame, out to the terrace of the cathedral so that it should be venerated by the vast crowd who were filling the square, behind a double line of foot soldiers. I was in front of them, on the steps of the terrace, and Cardinal Fossati, the Archbishop of Turin; was so kind as to have the frame placed for a few minutes on the edge of the terrace, so that we might have the chance of looking at it. The sun had just gone down behind the houses on the other side of the square, and the bright but diffused light was ideal for studying it. I have thus seen the shroud by the light of day, without any glass screening it, from a distance of less than a yard, and I suddenly experienced one of the most powerful emotions of my life. For, without expecting it, I saw that all the images of the wounds were of a colour quite different from that of the rest of the body; and this colour was that of dried blood which had sunk into the stuff ... a surgeon could understand, with no possibility of doubt, that it was blood which had sunk into the linen, and this blood was the Blood of Christ! (emphasis Barbet's)[15].
Despite having no doubt that the blood on the Shroud really was blood, Barbet hoped that the authorities would allow a rigorously scientific proof that the stains are due to blood, involving physical and chemical examinations, including a search with a spectroscope for haemoglobin[16].

A devout Roman Catholic[17], Barbet decided to use Enrie's photographs from the 1931 and 1933 expositions, to investigate the Roman Catholic object of devotion, "The Five Wounds of Christ"[18]: two wounds in Jesus' hands,

[Left (enlarge)[19]: "Icon of the Crucifixion, showing the Five Holy Wounds (13th century, Saint Catherine's Monastery, Mount Sinai)"[20].]

the spear wound in His side and two wounds in Jesus' feet[21].

St Joseph's being a teaching hospital[22], Barbet had a ready source of cadavers[23], dead human bodies used by doctors and medical students to study human anatomy as part of their education[24].

Blood As we saw above, when Barbet saw the Shroud in daylight on the steps of Turin Cathedral at the end of the 1933 exposition, from his long experience as a surgeon, Barbet unhesitatingly identified the Shroud's bloodstains as dried blood[25]. Moreover, from study of Enrie's 1931 and 1933 photographs, Barbet discovered (~45 years before STURP), that the blood marks have serum halos:

"... the marks of blood ... seem to be surrounded by an aureole of a much paler colour, like a sort of halo ... this is produced by the serum which transudes from blood which has recently congealed on the skin"[26]!
Barbet found that the blood on the Shroud, with the exception of some liquid blood which flowed from the feet[27], is clotted blood which had flowed onto the surface of the skin and dried[28]. From this Barbet pointed out two problems for the forgery theory: 1) "a forger would have had the greatest difficulty in imitating blood-stained imprints if he used blood as his colouring matter"[29]; and 2) "All artists have painted flows of blood ... not one of them has thought of painting clots"[30].

Arms Barbet first had considered the two different angles of bloodflows

[Above (enlarge): "The angle of the arms at crucifixion, deducible from the Shroud by determining the path of the blood flows in following the course of gravity. The main angle appears to have been 65 degrees, but there is evidence that at some stages the forearms were at 55 degrees, indicating that the man of the Shroud sought to raise himself, probably continually, during crucifixion"[31]. This was based on the investigations of surgeon Dr Pierre Barbet[32], and supported by medical examiner Dr Robert Bucklin (1916-2001)[33] and forensic pathologist Prof. James Cameron (1930–2003)[34]. The two slightly different angles of 55° and 65° of the blood trickles on the Shroudman's hand and forearms are consistent with blood dripping from nail wounds vertically under gravity, as the crucifixion victim alternatively raised himself on the nail in his feet to inhale and then slumping down against the nails in his hands to exhale[35].]

from the nail wound on the man's left wrist and forearms (see below). He found that the bloodflow from the nail wound varied from 65° to 55° from the vertical [36]. This is consistent with a crucifixion victim continually raising himself agnonisingly on the nail(s) in his feet to inhale and slumping down against the nails in his hands to exhale[37]. This explains why breaking the legs of a crucifixion victim (Jn 19:31-33) brought about his rapid death by asphyxiation[38].

Hand wounds Barbet noted that Christian artists, with few exceptions, had traditionally depicted the nails in Jesus' hands in the centre of His

[Above (original)[39]: Extract from "Dying Christ" (1627) by Anton van Dyck (1599–1641) in the Palazzo Reale, Genoa. This the first depiction of Jesus crucified by nails through the wrists but Van Dyck had lived in the Italian sea port of Genoa[40] and he could have seen the Shroud in Turin at the 1613, 1620 or 1624 public expositions[41].]

palms[42]. They based this on Bible verses, such as the Messianic prophecy, "they have pierced my hands and feet" (Ps 22:16)[43], as well as Jesus' post-resuurection appearances where Jesus showed the disciples the nail wounds in His hands and feet, and the spear wound in His side, to prove to them it really was Him, risen from the dead: "See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself ... he showed them his hands and his feet" (Lk 24:39-40) and "he showed them his hands and his side ... `Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails...' ... `Put your finger here, and see my hands ... " (Jn 20:20,25,27)[44]. But as Barbet pointed out, those verses say "hands" not "palms" and the wrist is part of the hand[45].

Palms It was evident to Barbet, the surgeon and anatomist (as it had been to biologist Paul Vignon (1865-1943) and anatomist Yves Delage (1854–1920)[46]), that a nail through the palm could not support the weight of a man hanging on a cross, but would tear through the palm's weak vertical structures[47]. Nevertheless, Barbet decided to test that experimentally by driving a large, square section nail (to simulate a Roman nail [Right (enlarge[48]) through the palm of a man's freshly amputated forearm and then attaching weights to it to simulate the pull of a crucified man's body[49]. In ten minutes the palm's flesh and skin had torn past the stationary nail and the forearm had separated completely from it[50]. Barbet noted out that a medieval forger would have conformed to tradition and depicted the nail wound in the palm (only the nail wound in the left hand is visible as the right hand wound is covered by the left hand[51]) because he would want his forgery to be accepted[52].

Wrists Next Barbet experimented with driving a large nail through the

[Above (enlarge)[53]: The nail exit wound in the back of the Shroudman's left wrist (apparent right because of mirror-reversal[54]), with the crossed left hand covering the nail wound in his right wrist. Note that his thumbs are not visible, consistent with Barbet's finding that a large Roman nail hammered in through Destot's space (see below) damaged the hands' median nerves, causing the thumbs to flex tightly against the palms (see below). Also note the different angles of the bloodflows on the nail wound and man's forearms (see above).]

wrists of amputated arms at the location indicated on the Shroud,

[Left (enlarge)[55]: "Destot's space... The space in the wrist bounded by the hamate, capitate, triquetral and lunate bones. This place is referred to as a place where the nails of Jesus Christ crucifixion pierced his wrist"[56].]

which he knew was "Destot's space"[57]. Barbet expected the nail to crush one or more of the surrounding wrist bones[58], but instead, in repeated experiments, the nail entered Destot's space and pushed aside the wrist bones without crushing any of them[59]! Moreover, the nail was held fast by the four wrist bones surrounding Destot's space and the transverse carpal ligament[60]. Truly Jesus, the Man on the Shroud, is "the Lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev 13:8)!

Thumbs Barbet's experiments driving a large, square section 1/3rd inch = 8.5mm wide[61] equivalent of a Roman nail into the wrists of

[Right (enlarge)[62]: Top view (flipped vertically) xray of the effect of a large square section Roman nail equivalent (the white rectangular shape) driven into a wrist at the location (Destot space) evident on the Shroud. Note the displaced Capitate (largest) carpal bone riding over the Scaphoid and Trapezoid carpal bones. The underlying median nerve would have been pinched between these displaced carpal bones and damaged directly (see below) by the large, square section Roman nail as it moved through Destot's space to exit slightly backward towards the wrist.]

freshly amputated arms (see above) revealed to him with something else unexpected: as the nail penetrated each wrist, with the palm upwards facing Barbet, each thumb bent into the palm[63]:

"But these experiments had yet another surprise in store for me. I have stressed the point that I was operating on hands which still had life in them immediately after the amputation of the arm. Now, I observed on the first occasion, and regularly from then onwards, that at the moment when the nail went through the soft anterior parts, the palm being upwards, the thumb would bend sharply and would be exactly facing the palm by the contraction of the thenar muscles, while the four fingers bent very slightly; this was probably caused by the reflex mechanical stimulation of the long flexor tendons. Now, dissections have revealed to me that the trunk of the median nerve is always seriously injured by the nail; it is divided into sections, being broken sometimes halfway and sometimes two-thirds of the way across, according to the case. And the motor nerves of the oponens muscles and of the short flexor muscle of the thumb branches at this level off the median nerve. The contraction of these thenar muscles, which were still living like their motor nerve, could be easily explained by the mechanical stimulation of the median nerve"[64].
As mentioned in Barbet's quote above, he discovered that the nail (see below), and/or the carpal bones displaced by the nail, had seriously

[Above[65]: Cross-section of the wrist, palm facing upwards, with simulated Roman nail having passed through "the soft anterior parts", grazing the median nerve, and about to enter Destot's space between the hamate and capitate carpal bones.]

injured the median nerve of the hand[66], causing the thenar muscles at the base of the thumb to contract, pulling the thumb into the

[Left (enlarge)[67]: Photo by Shroud sceptics Matteo Borrini and Luigi Garlaschelli, helpfully showing that when two hands are crossed as on the Shroud, both thumbs would normally be visible.]

palm[68] and stimulating the flexor tendons, causing the four visible fingers to bend slightly inwards[69] (see above)

Barbet then realised that this explained why on the Shroud only the four fingers of each hand are visible, not the thumbs[70]:

"Christ must then have agonised and died and have become fixed in the cadaverous rigidity, with the thumbs bent inwards into His palms. And that is why, on the shroud, the two hands when seen from behind only [i.e. from the backs of the hands] show four fingers, and why the two thumbs are hidden in the palms" (emphasis Barbet's)[71].
The Hungarian Pray Codex is dated 1192-95[72]. That is at least 65 years before the earliest, 1260, radiocarbon date of the Shroud[73]. Yet its depiction of the entombment of Christ (below) shows Jesus with four fingers and no thumbs, just as they are uniquely on the Shroud[74], when on Jesus' left hand His thumb would be visible. This

[Above (enlarge)[108]: "The Entombment of Christ (above) and Three Marys [sic see Mk 16:1] at the tomb (below). The images are claimed as one of the evidences against the radiocarbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin"[76].]

is only one of the "eight telling correspondences" (by my count twelve) between the Shroud and one of the drawings (above) in the 1192-95 Pray Codex (1192-95)[77]!

Sceptics had seized on the fact that as the Shroud image showed no thumbs, it couldn't have been an impression of Jesus' body[78]. But Barbet showed that no thumbs is what happens when a Roman nail is driven through the wrist location indicated on the Shroud. And Barbet asked, "Could a forger have imagined this?"[79], and "Would he have dared to portray it?" (emphasis Barbet's) given that "many ancient copyists of the shroud have added the thumbs"[80]. And how could a medieval faker have known this, since Barbet discovered this reaction in 1932[81]. As Wilson pointed out:

"... for a `cunning painter' back in the 1350s to have single-mindedly thought out the wrist-nailing feature, and to have known of the `snapping of the thumbs into the palms effect' that this would cause, also to have painted on bloodflows consistent with the principles of gravity (the discovery of which lay three centuries into the future), simply beggars belief"[82].
Feet wounds Continuing with his study of the "Five wounds of Christ" (see above), Barbet next considered the wounds in the Shroudman's feet (see below).

[Above (enlarge)[83]: The dorsal (back) feet bloodstains on the Shroud (flipped vertically for comparison with those of the frontal feet below). The larger stain is a complete imprint from the nail wound in the man's right foot[84]. The square hole made by the Roman nail can be seen slightly below centre above (enlarged)[85]. The smaller stain is an incomplete imprint of the heel and middle of the man's left foot[86], which had been nailed to the cross by a single nail through it and the right foot[87]. This meant that the left foot had to be bent at the knee (which is evident in the image of the legs-see 21Dec13)[88] and being fixed by rigor mortis in that final death position, the toes of the left foot didn't make contact with the dorsal underside of the Shroud[89]. The trickle of blood apparently from the man's right heel was interpreted by Barbet as blood from the withdrawn nail which flowed off the heel when the man was laid horizontally on the Shroud[90]. Part of this trickle appears on the frontal feet bloodstains below.

[Above (enlarge)[91]: The frontal right foot bloodstains on the Shroud. The left foot bloodstain is missing entirely because the frontal image `half' of the Shroud is shorter than that of the dorsal image (a mistake that would occur in a real, hurried burial but not one that a forger would make)[92]].

Barbet located the nail hole in the right foot (see above) between the

[Above (enlarge)[93]: Barbet's diagram, showing with a small cross the entrance point of the single nail through both feet.]

second and third toes (metatarsals), immediately in front of Lisfranc's joint, which separates the tarsus from the metatarsals[94]. Barbet experimented on a freshly amputated foot by hammering a simulated Roman nail (see above) through the less dense anterior tarsus (between the three bones immediately above the Lisfranc joint above), but he had to strike the nail twenty times to get through that one foot[95]. Barbet then experimented, presumably on a different amputated foot, driving a nail betwen the second and third metatarsals in front of Lisfranc's line, at the place indicated by the nail hole on the Shroudman's image (see above)[96]. He found the nail penetrated easily through soft parts of the foot, pushing aside the second and third metatarsals, and not causing any serious loss of blood[97].

Heart wound This was the last of "The Five Wounds of Christ" that

[Above (enlarge)[98]: The wound on the right side of the man on the Shroud (on our left because the Shroud is, like a plaster cast, a mirror image[99]). The wound is on the left-hand side of the Shroud image but because of mirror reversal it was in the right side of the man of the Shroud[100]. The wound is marked by an effusion of blood and clear fluid[101]. The origin of the flow of blood and fluid is an elliptical wound (circled in red) at its top edge[102] about 4.4 cm long by 1.1 cm wide (1.75 x 0.44 inches)[103]. The size and shape of the wound in cross-section[104] conforms perfectly to a Roman lancea (Greek λογχη - logche)[105], which is the word translated "spear" in Jn 19:34. The wound is in the intercostal space between the right fifth and sixth ribs[106]. From below this is directly in line with the right auricle (atrium) of the heart which fills with blood after death[107]. From the angle of flow[108] the body must have been erect and leaning forward when the side was pierced, for the blood and the fluid flowed downwards and frontwards from the wound[109].]

Barbet studied on the Shroud[110]. Barbet identified the wound caused by the blade of a Roman lance (see above), and measured it as just under 2 inches long (~4.4 cms) and a height of about two-thirds of an inch (~1.75 cms)[111]. He then made a metal plate the same dimensions as the wound, placed it over one of his students of similar height to the Shroudman, and x-rayed him[112]. From the radiograph Barbet found

[Above (enlarge)[113]: The path of the lance (red arrow): between the right fifth and sixth rib, through the fluid-filled pleural cavity, the right lung and pericardium (the last three not shown) into the blood-filled right auricle or atrium of the heart.]

that the lance entered the right side above the sixth rib, perforated the fifth intercostal space and penetrated deeply beyond it through the pleura of the lung, the pericardium and entered the right auricle (atrium) of the heart[114]. And as Barbet pointed out, in a corpse (as Jesus was - Jn 19:31-34) the right auricle (atrium) of the heart is filled with blood[115], because with its last beat the heart empties from the left ventricle but blood continues to drain into the right atrium from the venae cavae[116].

Water Next Barbet investigated the source of the water in the "blood and water" that the Apostle John saw at once come out of Jesus' side when the soldier pierced his side with a spear (Jn 19:34)[117]. Barbet in repeated experiments with different cadavers inserted a large syringe between the fifth and sixth rib, through the right lung, and the pericardium into their heart's right atrium[118]. However, while each syringe filled with blood when the right atrium was pierced, as it passed through the lung, no blood or fluid entered the syringe[119]. Barbet then in different cadavers thrust a large amputation knife into the right auricle which again caused blood to flow down the knife, but no watery fluid[120]. Finally in other cadavers Barbet inserted the syringe slowly through the pericardium, a double-walled sac containing the heart and which encloses the pericardial cavity containing pericardial fluid[121], and the syringe drew up a "considerable quantity of serum"[122]. When he thrust the knife through the pericardium into the right atrium, Barbet saw "a considerable amount of blood emanating from the wound" but only "on the edges of a lesser flow of pericardial fluid"[123]. So Barbet (half-rightly - see below) concluded that, "The water was then pericardial fluid"[124]. Barbet had at the outset of his experiments dismissed the water having been "pleural fluid" because "if there was any, would have been necessarily accumulated at the base of the pleural cavity, which was behind and below the level of the wound"[125]. But this depends on how much pleural fluid there was. Later Barbet agreed that "the terrible scourging in which the chest was injured ... could certainly cause pericarditis"[126]. But Barbet never considered the effect the scourging (with 2 x 3 = 6 lead balls see 15Jul13 & 27Dec21]) impacting on the Shroudman's chest and back with every lash of the three-thonged flagrum would have had on the fluid in his pleural cavity and in his lungs themselves. Medical examiner Dr Robert Bucklin (1916-2001) along with most medical experts who have studied the matter believe that the watery fluid came from the pleural cavity in the chest and the pericardial sac surrounding the heart[127].

However, as the late Dr José Delfín Villalaín Blanco (-2019), Professor of Legal Medicine of the University of Valencia, and Vice-President of Centro Español de Sindonología (CES) (The Spanish Center of Sindonology), showed using a glass head (below), the stains on the

[Above (enlarge)[128]: The specially modeled glass head used by Dr. Villalaín to recreate the stains on the Sudarium of Oviedo[129].]

Sudarium of Oviedo, which as "the face cloth [soudarion] that had been on Jesus' head" (Jn 20:7), had also covered the face of the man on the Shroud[130] - see 08Aug07 & 24Jun16, were 6 parts lung (pulmonary oedema) fluid and 1 part blood[131]. Although the right lung of Jesus was punctured by the Roman lance, the left lung wasn't. And the pleural cavity is not connected to the mouth or nose. So it seems that most of the "water" that John saw issuing from Jesus' right side was lung fluid from His punctured right lung.

Beyond his investigations of the five wounds of Christ on the Shroud (see above), Barbet in his "A Doctor at Calvary," Barbet studied the Shroud to investigate: "The Descent from the Cross" (pp.148-153) and "The Burial" (pp.154-175), but time and space prevents discussion of those in this already long post.

Conclusion Barbet, as a former battlefield surgeon in World War I, and as Chief Surgeon of St Jospeph's Hospital, Paris, when he saw the Shroud in 1933 from a distance of 1 metre in daylight on the steps of Turin Cathedral, was able to authoritatively identify the bloodstains on the Shroud as real blood[above]. Later, from his study of Enrie's 1931 and 1933 photographs of the Shroud, Barbet discovered, 4 decades before STURP did, that the blood stains on the Shroud are clotted blood with serum halos[above]! Barbet showed that from the two different angles of 55° and 65° from the vertical of bloodflows from the nail wound in the man's left wrist and forearms, corresponded with a crucifixion victim having to continually raise himself agonisingly on the nail in his feet to inhale and slump down against the nails in his hands to exhale, which explained why breaking the legs of a crucifixion victim brought about his rapid death by asphyxiation[above]; Despite Christian artistic tradition, which depicted the nail wounds in Jesus' palms, Barbet as Chief Surgeon of St Joseph's Hospital, Paris, a teaching hospital, which legally allowed experiments to be carried out on cadavers, proved experimentally that the Shroud was correct in the nails being in the wrists of crucifixion victims[above]. As he drove a nail into the wrists of cadavers, Barbet discovered that the thumbs flexed into the palm, which he realised explained why the Shroudman has no thumbs visible[above]. Barbet discoverd a nail hole in the man on the Shroud's right foot between the second and third toes, immediately in front of Lisfranc's joint, which Barbet experimentally proved was where a single nail fixed both feet of the Shroudman to his cross[above]. Barbet correctly identifed the spear wound in the Shroudman's right side as having been caused by a Roman lance which entered between his fifth and sixth rib, went through his pleural cavity, lung, pericardium and into his right atrium which after his death would be filled with blood [above]. However, in his identification as pericardium fluid the "water" which the Apostle John saw, with blood, come out of the spear wound in Jesus' side[above], the lung fluid stains on the Sudarium of Oviedo (which also had covered the Shroudman's face) indicate that the "water" was mostly lung fluid[above].

Epilogue Barbet's in-depth investigations into the sufferings of the man on the Shroud (Jesus), eventually took its toll on him, and he reached a pont where he no longer could think about them because he was starting to "share" in them (Barbet's emphasis):

"Besides, when a surgeon has meditated on the sufferings of the Passion, when he has worked out its timing and its physiological circumstances, when he has methodically set himself to reconstruct all the stages of that martyrdom of a night and a day, he can, more than the most eloquent preacher, more than the most saintly ascetics ... as it were share in the sufferings of Christ. I can assure you of a dreadful thing, I have reached a point when I no longer dare to think of them. No doubt this is cowardice, but I hold that one must either have heroic virtue or else fail to understand; that one must either be a saint or else irresponsible, in order to do the Way of the Cross. I no longer can"[132].
The Apostle Paul's aim was:
"that I may know him [Jesus]and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death," (Php 3:10)
From what I have read of his writings, in sharing in Jesus' sufferings, Dr Pierre Barbet did become like Jesus!

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. Extract from "M. Pierre Berthe [sic Barbet] Docteur t.s.s. La passion de N.-S. Jésus selon le chirurgien [Mr. Pierre Barbet Doctor t.s.s. The passion of N.-S. Jesus according to the surgeon]," Mondieuetmontout.com, N.D. [return]
3. 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.17; Adler, A.D., 2000c, "Chemical and Physical Aspects of the Sindonic Images," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.10-27, 12; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.30. [return]
4. McNair, P., "The Shroud and History: Fantasy, Fake or Fact?," in Jennings, P., ed., 1978, "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, p.35; Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.40; Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ, p.66; Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.17; Ruffin, 1999, p.17; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.54; Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, p.93; Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, p.32. [return]
5. Wilson, 2010, p.32. [return]
6. Wilson, 2010, p.32. [return]
7. Brent, P. & Rolfe, D., 1978, "The Silent Witness: The Mysteries of the Turin Shroud Revealed," Futura Publications: London, p.43. [return]
8. Barbet, P., 1952, "The Five Wounds of Christ," Apraxine, M., transl., Clonmore & Reynolds: Dublin, p.4; Barbet, P., 1987, "Proof of the Authenticity of the Shroud in the Bloodstains: Part I.," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 22, March, pp.2-10, 3; 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.300. [return]
9. Barbet, P., 1953, "A Doctor at Calvary," [1950], Earl of Wicklow, transl., Image Books: Garden City NY, Reprinted, 1963, p.iv; Barbet, 1987, p.3. [return]
10. Barbet, 1952, p.4. [return]
11. Barbet, 1953, p.iv. [return]
12. Barbet, 1953, p.xi; Morgan, R.H., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia, p.99; Wilson, 2010, p.32. [return]
13. Barbet, 1952, p.57; Barbet, 1953, p.16. [return]
14. Barbet, 1952, pp.57-58; Barbet, 1953, pp.16-17; Wilson, 1998, p.300; Wilson, 2010, p.32. [return]
15. Barbet, 1952, pp.57-58; Barbet, 1953, pp.16-17; Wilson, 1998, p.300; Wilson, 2010, pp.32-33. [return]
16. Barbet, 1953, p.18; Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.45; Antonacci, 2000, p.28. [return]
17. Brent & Rolfe, 1978, pp.43-44. [return]
18. Barbet, 1952, p.7; Barbet, 1953, p.x. [return]
19. "File:Crucifixion Icon Sinai 13th century.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 27 June 2021. [return]
20. "Five Holy Wounds," Wikipedia, 4 December 2021. [return]
21. "Five Holy Wounds," Wikipedia, 4 December 2021. [return]
22. Wilson, 1979, p.40; Adams, 1982, p.66. [return]
23. Wilson, 1979, pp.40-41; Adams, 1982, pp.66, 74; Wilson, 1998, p.34. [return]
24. "Cadaver," Wikipedia, 12 November 2021. [return]
25. Barbet, 1952, p.58; Barbet, 1953, p.17. [return]
26. Barbet, 1953, p.16. [return]
27. Barbet, 1953, pp.23-24. [return]
28. Barbet, 1953, pp.22-23. [return]
29. Barbet, 1953, p.27. [return]
30. Barbet, 1953, p.31. [return]
31. Wilson, I., 1978, "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, pp.50L; Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.22. [return]
32. Barbet, 1953, pp.82-83ff; Brent & Rolfe, 1978, pp.44-45. [return]
33. Bucklin, R., 1982, "The Shroud of Turin: Viewpoint of a Forensic Pathologist," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 5, December, pp.3-10; Bucklin, R, 1998, "The Shroud of Turin: A Pathologist's Viewpoint," 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.271-279, 273. [return]
34. Cameron, J. M., "The Pathologist and the Shroud," in Jennings, 1978, pp.58. [return]
35. Barbet, 1952, pp.14-15; Barbet, 1953, pp.107-108; Scavone, D.C., 1989, "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA, p.25; Tribbe, 2006, p.94. [return]
36. Barbet, 1952, p.16; Barbet, 1953, pp.108-109. [return]
37. Barbet, 1952, p.16; Barbet, 1953, pp.108-109. [return]
38. Barbet, 1953, pp.84-85; Wuenschel, E.A., 1954, "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, Third printing, 1961, p.45. [return]
39. "Dying Christ," by Anton Van Dyck (1627), Palazzo Reale Museum, Genoa, Italy. Accessed 15 January 2022. [return]
40. McNair, 1978, p.35. [return]
41. Wilson, 1998, pp.293-294. [return]
42. Barbet, 1952, p.12; Barbet, 1953, p.103; Wilson, 1979, p.40; Wilson, 1986, p.22; Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 24; Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, pp.57-58; Wilson, 1998, p.36; Guerrera, 2001, p.39. [return]
43. Barbet, 1952, p.12; Barbet, 1953, p.103. [return]
44. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, pp.45, 53; Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, pp.86-87, 92; Iannone, 1998, p.57; Antonacci, 2000, p.22; Guerrera, 2001, p.39. [return]
45. Barbet, 1952, p.12; Barbet, 1953, pp.106, 119; Adams, 1982, p.74; Guerrera, 2001, p.39. [return]
46. Wilson, 1979, p.40. [return]
47. Barbet, 1953, pp.110-111; Wuenschel, 1954, p.44; Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.40; Wilson, 1979, p.40; Morgan, 1980, p.99; Borkan, 1995, p.24; Iannone, 1998, p.58; Antonacci, 2000, p.22; de Wesselow, 2012, p.119. [return]
48. MacDonald, J.B., 2018, "One Roman Nail," Living Theology, 30 March. [return]
49. Barbet, 1952, pp.20-21; Barbet, 1953, p.109; Adams, 1982, p.74; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, p.122. [return]
50. Barbet, 1952, pp.20-21; Barbet, 1953, p.106; Wilson, 1986, p.22; Iannone, 1998, p.58; Wilson, 1998, p.34; Tribbe, 2006, p.93; Oxley, 2010, pp.122-123. [return]
51. Barbet, 1952, p.13; Barbet, 1953, pp.114-115. [return]
52. Barbet, 1953, pp.114-115. [return]
53. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical," Sindonology.org. [return]
54. Borkan, 1995, p42. [return]
55. "File:Destot's space.svg," Wikimedia Commons, 28 October 2020. [return]
56. "Étienne Destot," Wikipedia, 11 September 2021. [return]
57. Barbet, 1952, p.26; Barbet, 1953, pp.115-116; Adams, 1982, p.74; Wilson, 1998, p.35. [return]
58. Barbet, 1952, p.27; Barbet, 1953, p.116. [return]
59. Barbet, 1952, p.27; Barbet, 1953, pp.116-117; Morgan, 1980, p.100; Adams, 1982, p.74; Borkan, 1995, p.24; Antonacci, 2000, p.24. [return]
60. Barbet, 1952, p.27; Barbet, 1953, p.118; Adams, 1982, p.74; Borkan, 1995, p.24; Wilson, 1986, p.22. [return]
61. Barbet, 1952, p.18; Barbet, 1953, p.110. [return]
62. Barbet, 1953, pl. IV. [return]
63. Barbet, 1952, pp.29-30; Barbet, 1953, pp.118-119; Antonacci, 2000, p.24. [return]
64. Barbet, 1953, pp.118-119. [return]
65. "Relevant Wrist Anatomy," joint-pain-expert.net (no longer online). [return]
66. Barbet, 1952, pp.29-30; Barbet, 1953, pp.118-119; Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.44; Borkan, 1995, p.24; Antonacci, 2000, p.24. [return]
67. Borrini, M. & Garlaschelli, L., 2018, "A BPA Approach to the Shroud of Turin," Journal of Forensic Sciences, 10 July, pp.1-7, 5, Fig. 6(b). [return]
68. Barbet, 1952, pp.29-30; Barbet, 1953, p.118; Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.44; Antonacci, 2000, p.24. [return]
69. Barbet, 1952, p.30; Barbet, 1953, p.118; Adams, 1982, p.74. [return]
70. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, pp.165, 229; Borkan, 1995, p.24; Bucklin, 1998, p.273; Wilson, 1998, p.35; Tribbe, 2006, p.93. [return]
71. Barbet, 1953, p.119. [return]
72. Wilson, 1998, p.146; de Wesselow, 2012, p.178; "Pray Codex," Wikipedia, 19 September 2021. [return]
73. Damon, P.E., et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16 February, pp.611-615, 611. [return]
74. Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p.163; Wilson, 1998, p.146; Ruffin, 1999, pp.60-61; Guerrera, 2001, p.105; Oxley, 2010, p.37; de Wesselow, 2012, p.179; Wilson, 2010, p.183. [return]
75. "File:Hungarianpraymanuscript1192-1195.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 28 June 2021. [return]
76. "Pray Codex," Wikipedia, 19 September 2021. [return]
77. de Wesselow, 2012, p.180. [return]
78. Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.44. [return]
79. Barbet, 1952, p.30; Barbet, 1953, p.119; Wilson, 1998, p.35. [return]
80. Barbet, 1952, p.30; Barbet, 1953, p.119. [return]
81. Adams, 1982, p.75; Antonacci, 2000, pp.24-25. [return]
82. Wilson, 1998, p.36. [return]
83. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical," Sindonology.org. [return]
84. Barbet, 1952, p.32; Barbet, 1953, p.121. [return]
85. Barbet, 1952, p.35; Barbet, 1953, p.125. [return]
86. Barbet, 1952, p.32; Barbet, 1953, p.121. [return]
87. Barbet, 1952, p.37; Barbet, 1953, p.128; Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.46; Wilson, 1979, p.42; Morgan, 1980, p.103; Antonacci, 2000, p.22; Wilson, 2010, p.48; de Wesselow, 2012, p.145. [return]
88. Barnes, 1934, p.64; Antonacci, 2000, p.22. [return]
89. Barnes, 1934, p.65. [return]
90. Barbet, 1952, p.36; Barbet, 1953, p.126. [return]
91. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical," Sindonology.org. [return]
92. Wilson, 1998, p.36. [return]
93. Barbet, 1953, pl. VII. [return]
94. Barbet, 1952, p.36; Barbet, 1953, p.126; Wilson, 1979, p.42. [return]
95. Barbet, 1952, pp.35-36; Barbet, 1953, p.126. [return]
96. Barbet, 1952, p.36; Barbet, 1953, p.126. [return]
97. Barbet, 1952, p.36; Barbet, 1953, p.126. [return]
98. Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical. [return]
99. Antonacci, 2000, p.33. [return]
100. Wilson, 1979, p.43. [return]
101. Robinson, J.A.T., 1978, "The Shroud and the New Testament," in Jennings, P., ed., 1978, "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, p.78. [return]
102. Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, p.63. [return]
103. Wilson, 1979, p.48. [return]
104. Wilson, 1986, p.34. [return]
105. Ibid. [return]
106. Wilson, 1986, p.26. [return]
107. Wilson, 1979, p.44. [return]
108. Wilson, 1998, p.37. [return]
109. Wuenschel, 1954, p.46. [return]
110. Barbet, 1952, p.39ff; Barbet, 1953, p.129ff. [return]
111. Barbet, 1952, p.40; Barbet, 1953, p.134. [return]
112. Barbet, 1952, p.41; Barbet, 1953, p.136. [return]
113. Based on Flores, M., 2022, "Heart in rib cage," Quizlet Inc. [return]
114. Barbet, 1952, pp.42-43; Barbet, 1953, pp.137-138. [return]
115. Barbet, 1952, p.43; Barbet, 1953, p.138. [return]
116. Wilson, 1979, p.44; Oxley, 2010, p.167. [return]
117. Barbet, 1952, p.44ff; Barbet, 1953, p.139ff;. [return]
118. Barbet, 1952, p.44; Barbet, 1953, p.139. [return]
119. Barbet, 1952, p.45; Barbet, 1953, p.139. [return]
120. Barbet, 1952, p.45; Barbet, 1953, p.139. [return]
121. "Pericardium," Wikipedia, 19 January 2022. [return]
122. Barbet, 1952, p.45; Barbet, 1953, p.139. [return]
123. Barbet, 1953, p.141. [return]
124. Barbet, 1952, p.46; Barbet, 1953, p.140. [return]
125. Barbet, 1952, p.42; Barbet, 1953, p.137. [return]
126. Barbet, 1953, p.141. [return]
127. Wilson, 1979, pp.44-45; Adams, 1982, pp.79-80; Bucklin, R., 1982, "The Shroud of Turin: Viewpoint of a Forensic Pathologist," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 5, December, pp.3-10, 8; Borkan, 1995, p.26; Bucklin, R, 1998, "The Shroud of Turin: A Pathologist's Viewpoint," 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.271-279, 274-275; Ruffin, 1999, p.35; Antonacci, 2000, p.31; Tribbe, 2006, pp.101-102; Oxley, 2010, p.167. [return]
128. "Mark Guscin - Sudarium of Oviedo," YouTube, 17 July 2015. [return]
129. Guscin, M., 1997, "The Sudarium of Oviedo: Its History and Relationship to the Shroud of Turin," Shroud.com. [return]
130. Borkan, 1995, p.37; Guscin, M., 1998, "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, pp.27-28, 32, 64, 87, 110; Moreno, G.H., Blanco, J-D.V, Almenar, J-M.R. & Guscin, M., 1998, "Comparative Study of the Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin," III Congresso Internazionale di Studi Sulla Sindone Turin, 5th to 7th June 1998," Centro Español de Sindonologìa; 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, pp.84,186; Guerrera, 2001, p.114-22; Tribbe, 2006, p.166; Oxley, 2010, p.190. [return]
131. Guscin, 1998, pp.22-23; Bennett, 2001, pp.66, 153; Guerrera, 2001, p.44; Oxley, 2010, pp.188-189. [return]
132. Barbet, 1953, p.87. [return]

Posted: 11 January 2022. Updated: 13 July 2022.