Peter Stanford, on March 24, 2012, writes in The Telegraph:

imageEight years ago, [Thomas] de Wesselow was a successful art historian, based at King’s College, [Cambridge,] making a name for himself in scholarly circles by taking a fresh look at centuries-old disputes over the attribution of masterpieces of Renaissance painting. Today, he still lives in the university city – we are sitting in its Fitzwilliam Museum café – but de Wesselow has thrown up his conventional career and any hopes of a professorial chair to join the ranks of what he laughingly calls “shroudies”.

“In academia, the subject of the Shroud is seen as toxic,” he reports, “and no one wants to open the can of worms, but try as I might I just couldn’t resist it as an intellectual puzzle.”

[. . .]

. . . So, although he describes himself as agnostic, he now finds himself in the curious position of being more of a believer in the Shroud than the Pope. His historical detective work has convinced him, he insists, that it is exactly what it purports to be — the sheet that was wrapped round Jesus’s battered body when it was cut down from the cross on Calvary.

imageWe need to add that there is a new book by de Wesselow: The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection published by Penguin will be available in the UK on March 26 for about £13. A Kindle version is available in the UK for £12 and in the US for $14.99.