A reader in Chicago writes regarding Giulio Fanti on the Carbon Dating of Certain Relics and A Reaction to Giulio Fanti’s Suggestion:
And they divided up his raimant/tunic/robe/garment/garments/clothes by casting lots/dice/or some variation of rock-paper-scissors. Had Geiger counters been present they would have been clicking.
The Markan priority is glaring. Yet despite and perhaps because of John we must wonder if the division of garments really happened and it was not merely a case of historizing prophecy (Psalm 22:18). If it happened there were probably multiple garments and some form of sortition such as drawing a short straw or rolling dice.
There is no reason to think the Argenteuil is one of those garments. The same must be said for the Trier and the Mtskheta. But they each could be and all could be real. However, the Argenteuil has been carbon 14 dated and in the absence of compelling reason to doubt the tests, it should be considered fake. Because I’m Greek I’m 25% convinced the Mtskheta is the real seamless garment.
Here is what else I think. The Turin Shroud may be real and there is compelling reason to fully reject the carbon dating because of chemical differences and evidence of mending. That is 100% solid stuff. The Oviedo may be real despite carbon dating because the work was sloppy and the results suspicious. I’m sort of 50/50 on the Oviedo. As for the the Argenteuil and the Titulus, I’m about 2%. Trying to validate belief in these relics with extreme pseudoscience and new age folderol is pure fantasy, the slathering of nuttiness onto biblical literalism. Next SSG will be studying pyramid crystals, herbs and magic potions. Next they will be using modified Geiger counters to measure holiness. This is [***].
I removed the last word.
I agree almost completely with this great comment. The only thing I disagree a bit is his evaluation of the probability for the Tunic of Argenteuil. Even if I agree that the possibility is very low that it is authentic, I would put the probability a bit higher (let’s say 10 to 20%) just because of one thing : human blood have been found on the cloth. I know that doesn’t prove anything. But if you put yourself in the shoes of a forger from the 7th or 8th century, why do you really want to put real human blood on this cloth ? There were no DNA and blood analysis during those days. Why a forger would want to be so authentic in his work ? It would have been much more easy for him to use blood from an animal to make this relic. Nobody wouldn’t have make the difference ! In any case, that’s the way I would have done it myself if I would have been this forger. The fact that there’s real human blood on it is not a proof of anything but it can be considered as a point in favor of the “smell of truth” criteria I talked about yesterday. But, on the other hand, the fact that John report that it was a Roman soldier who get it during Christ resurrection make it very difficult to understand how a disciple of Christ would have been able to put his hand on this cloth and why the Roman soldier wouldn’t have washed the cloth ! So, in the end, when I put all those things on a balance, I consider that the probability for this Tunic to be authentic is low (as I say, around 10 to 20%). Comparative studies between the blood on this Tunic and the blood on the Shroud and on the Sudarium would really help to know the truth. When I look at the progress in genetic and forensic science, I think it is something that WILL have to be done in the future…
The forger may not have cared about being authentic, maybe he got a paper cut and bled himself on the thing. Comparitive blood studies will answer absolutely nothing, as it is well studied, all blood reverts to AB after so many years. Case in point, the Shroud and Sudarium. I give the chances at less then 1% for any of these items being authentic, including the Greek one….just my conjecture.
R.
Oups, I wanted to say “during Christ crucifixion” and I said “resurrection”… But you get the point anyway. :-)
“Behold a (Greek) indeed, in whom there is no guile! ”
The geiger counter is terrific. And, I like this guy’s straight-talking honesty. :)
If I may revive this old topic.
I have a very interesting book written by Andre Marion, and Gerard Lucotte, titled Le Linceul de Turin et la tunique d’Argenteuil (Shroud of Turin and the Tunic of Argenteuil).
What they write in it?
1.The blood on the Tunic of Argenteuil has been confirmed to be AB, and as Kelly Kearse pointed, it is not true that the old blood always reverses to AB.
2.They found cristals of urea attached to erythrocytes in the blood. It suggests that the owner of the Tunic suffered from hematidrosis -sweating blood, just like Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane (Luke 22:44).
3. The blood marks on back of theTunic, were compared to those from the back side of the Shroud, first in 1934, and later in 1997, using Marion’s computer models. They correspond to each other.
4. As for C14 dating, the Tunic was buried beneath the ground in the parish gardem dyring the French revolution. It was probably contaminated then, so radiocarbon dating is not reliable.
I understand the cathedral at Tier also has the Holy Robe, but that its version has not been studied scientifically. It would be interesting to compare the two.
It has been studied by Metchild Flury-Lemberg in 1973-1974. According to her, the main relic consist of remmants of ancient 1st -4th century cotton (or wool, there are conflicting versions) Roman cloth, attached to much later layer of cloths from 1512, 1890 and 1891, for strenghtening of the structure. It is probably the outer Tunic, and that of Argenteuil is the underside tunic, worn directly on the body. So the two are not in conflict, actually, and both can be authentic.
BTW.: In Poland, there is a very interesting album by Catholic journalist Grzegorz Górny, titled “Świadkowie Tajemnicy” (Witnesses of Mystery, Inquest of the Relics of Christ) http://en.rosikonpress.com/dzial_51/towar_karta_150/Swiadkowie_Tajemnicy.html Although uncritical at times, but very interesting, and recommended by Barrie Schwortz: http://www.shroud.com/books.htm