Shroud of Turin History: Edessa to Turin: 2005 Facts

Shroud of Turin History: Edessa to Turin

On August 15, 944 AD, a cloth known as the Cloth of Edessa, was forcibly transferred from the city of Edessa to Constantinople, the Byzantine capital. It had been in Edessa since at least the middle of the 6th century (544 AD) when it was found concealed behind some stones above one of the city gates. On that the historical record is clear.

What happened to the cloth of Edessa? Is it the Shroud of Turin?

In that year, in August, when the cloth arrived in Constantinople, Gregory Referendarius, the archdeacon of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, described it as a full length image with bloodstains from a side wound. We know this from a recently discovered document in the Vatican Archives. The document is in ancient Greek (translated by Mark Guscin).

In Constantinople, the cloth was sometimes ceremoniously unfurled, raised up like a vertical banner, in a way that showed a full frontal picture of Jesus as though rising from a grave. In 1201, Nicholas Mesarites, the sacristan of the Pharos Chapel where the Image of Edessa was kept, described this ceremony in somewhat interesting terms:

Here He rises again and the sindon [Shroud] is the clear proof still smelling fragrant of perfumes, defying corruption because they wrapped the mysterious naked dead body from head to feet.

There is reason to believe that the Edessa Cloth, along with other priceless treasures, was taken from Constantinople in 1204 AD by French knights of the Fourth Crusades. About 1205, in a letter to Pope Innocent III, Theodore Ducas Anglelos wrote:

The Venetians partitioned the treasure of gold, silver and ivory, while the French did the same with the relics of saints and the most sacred of all, the linen in which our Lord Jesus Christ was wrapped after His death and before the resurrection.

We know that the sacred objects are preserved by their predators in Venice and France and in other places. In 1207, Nicholas d'Orrante, Abbott of Casole and the Papal Legate in Athens, wrote about relics taken from Constantinople by French knights. Referring specifically to burial cloths, he mentions seeing them "with our own eyes" in Athens.

But there are no known records between the time of the Crusades and 1357. That does not mean there are no records. There are just no known records that can directly link the Edessa Cloth and the Turin Cloth. Historians have two theories about this. One is that the cloth was in the hands of the Knight Templar and they kept that fact secret. The other theory, one that is gaining favor with some historians, is that the cloth was in Besancon during the years in question and that existing records and documents were destroyed during the excesses of the French Revolution.

Is there any other evidence that might tie these cloths together. The answer is yes.

We can be quite certain that in Edessa as well as in Constantinople, the cloth was kept folded in such a way that only the face was visible. By folding the cloth, doubled in fours (tetradiplon) that is exactly what results: a centered face of Jesus on a horizontal folded cloth, as seen in a 10th century painting -- a picture that is odd for its horizontal shape as a portrait.

John Jackson, who was one of several physicists who physically examined the Shroud in 1978, used special raking light photography to reveal ancient fold marks on the Shroud. He found persistent creases exactly where expected and in the correct folding direction for just such a tetradiplon folding.

Even more important is a drawing from an ancient codex, known commonly as the Hungarian Pray Manuscript or Pray Codex. Written between 1192 and 1195, the codex includes an illustration, one of five in the manuscript, showing Jesus being placed on his burial shroud, a shroud with the identical pattern of burn holes found on the Shroud. The artist drew the very unusual herringbone weave on the shroud and a number of other graphic characteristics consistent with the Shroud. Jesus is shown naked with his arms modestly folded at the wrists, the fingers are unusually long in appearance as they are on the Shroud, and there are no visible thumbs. (There are no thumbs visible in the images of the man of the Shroud either.) Forensic pathologists tell us that this makes sense since nails driven through the wrist would likely cause the thumbs to fold into the palms. In the drawing, there is also a clear mark on Jesus' forehead where the most prominent 3-shaped bloodstain is found on the forehead of the man of the Shroud.

There can be little question that this illustrator of the Pray Codex, far removed from France, working at a time before the sacking of Constantinople by French knights, before the time given for the Shroud by carbon 14 testing, and before or the d'Arcis Memorandum, knew about the Shroud, the Holy Mandylion, the Image of Edessa.

Shroud of Turin Facts Check More Facts

Much of the scientific material on this site is based on the work of Ray Rogers. Rogers, a chemist, is a science Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education. He has published many scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals and U.S. Government publications. In 1978, together with several other scientists, he was invited to personally examine the Shroud of Turin in Italy for several days. He collected numerous measurements and samples of fibers and particulate materials for further study. Rogers died March 8, 2005..

Editorial Comment

There is little question among those familiar with the topic that the biggest mistake ever made in carbon 14 dating was the Shroud of Turin.

Sadly, this mistake will be understood by some as meaning that carbon 14 dating is prone to error, subject to unexplainable anomalies or plagued by problems of contamination; none of which is true.

Let's be perfectly clear: carbon 14 dating is an excellent and very accurate scientific method for determining the age of many things as old as 50,000 years.

The failure to obtain a reliable date for the Shroud of Turin is not about flaws in carbon 14 dating methods or contamination. It is not about the problems, so often discussed in the media, of mysterious biological polymers growing on the cloth's fibers or new carbon introduced into the Shroud's cloth by a scorching fire in 1532.

It is not about the sloppy work by three very prestigious carbon 14 dating laboratories. And it is not, as some suggest, about conspiracies dreamed up to prove religious or anti-religious arguments (the Shroud is a religious object for some).

It is about a stupid mistake.

Let me illustrate: Recently I sent a soil sample to a testing laboratory to find out why my lawn was doing so poorly. The lab reported back that the soil was perfect for grass. It had the right nutrients and the pH was right on target, neither too acidic or alkaline.

I didn't think so. What had gone wrong?

It turns out that a few weeks earlier I had repaired a spot in my lawn where my dog had peed and killed the grass. I dug out a small section of soil and filled the hole with loam I had purchased from a garden supply store. Without realizing it, I had taken a sample for testing from that repaired area.

The sample was not representative of my lawn. It was chemically unlike the rest of my lawn. The lab had perfectly analyzed an invalid sample.

Similarly, as we now know, from National Geographic News, PBS and several scientific papers, that the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was done with an invalid sample.

M. Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino, with the help of several textile experts, undertook a detailed examination of the documentation photographs of the carbon 14 samples and identified clear indications of a medieval patch.

Independently, Ray Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education has examined actual threads and fibers adjacent to where the samples were snipped. In a paper he published with Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan, Rogers reported finding indisputable chemical evidence of a repair patch. He found dyestuff and spliced threads. Others, using scanning electronic microscopes and advanced spectral analysis tools have confirmed his findings.

This mistake of using an invalid sample should not be allowed to tarnish the reputation of carbon 14 dating. Unfortunately, we live in a world of easy and careless polemics. There are some, as well, who because of religious convictions cannot accept the conclusions of carbon 14 dating. Scientists cannot properly challenge matters of faith on the basis of science alone. But it would be unfortunate if those who hold certain beliefs use an erroneous understanding about carbon 14 dating to challenge carbon 14 dating when it is not carbon 14 dating that is at fault.

The mistake must now be openly admitted in the interest of scientific integrity. It was a careless mistake, a stupid mistake, a foolish mistake.

Carbon 14 dating is an invaluable tool for archeology and science. The mistake made in dating the Shroud of Turin does not diminish this fact.

In 1898 Secondo Pia discovered the negative properties of the picture of Jesus on the Shroud

Presented by:

Shroud of Turin Story
History, Science and Many Topics

Science

Shroud of Turin face as it appears when photographed. This is the negative.

Face on the Shroud as it appears when photographed. This is the negative.

Gum encrusted cotton fiber found only in the carbon 14 sample area and not elsewhere on the Shroud of Turin.

Spliced thread in the carbon 14 sample area of the Shroud of Turin

Close up view of spliced thread in the carbon 14 sample area

Microscopic view of fibers from the carbon 14 area when dissolved in water.

Photomicrograph, gum is swelling and slowly detaching from the fibers and alizarin mordant lakes can be seen. Yellow dye is in solution.

Phase Constrast Microscopy of a single image fiber from the Shroud of Turin

Phase Constrast Microscopy of a single image fiber from the Shroud of Turin

Phase-contrast microscopy of a single image fiber. Image is a reddish-brown caramel-like complex carbon bond, a chemical change within a super thin coating of crude starch on the fabric's outermost fibers. It is not paint or any kind of applied pigment. It is likely caused by bodily amine vapors reacting with saccharides in the starch.

Threads consisting of twisted bundles of fibers. Shows color in starch coating

This is how the face appears on the Shroud of Turin.

Second face image found on the backside of the cloth in 2004

Second face image found on the backside of the cloth in 2004

Second face image recently discovered with image analysis technology. This a a computer enhanced view. It matches the face on the front of the Shroud. The images are doubly-superficial meaning that nothing soaked through.

Picture of the Shroud of Turin