Max Patrick Hamon replies to Charles Freeman

REVISED: Maximage has asked me to publish a short PDF paper, Dormant archaeopareidolias of a most secret liturgical ritual, that helps make his point. I am glad to do this as I am for other active participants of this blog. This, as with papers by others, does not mean that I agree (or that I understand).

By way of an email to me, Max writes:

By way of a series of tongue-in-cheek and cynical comments, Mr Freeman asserted that “Clearly [I] have skills no one possesses” and asked me the reason “[w]hy [I] don’t […]assume [all relic historians] are ignoramuses [as far as the Image of Edessa is concerned] and spell out the Shroud history for [them] […]”.

Mr Freeman gives the impression that the sole archaecryptologist who takes early Cryptochristian’s, Nestorians’ and Knights Templar’s secret rituals seriously is ‘esoteric’ and so-called ‘conventional’ historians and Art historians can do without archaeocryptology.

29 thoughts on “Max Patrick Hamon replies to Charles Freeman”

  1. Max, that’s quite spooky, I saw all sorts of images. Fig 1 was very plain indeed, but I had to work a bit harder to see the others. However, stepping back about 5 metres from the PC monitor, brought them more into focus. Query: They show up on the negatives OK, but can you demonstrate they also appear on the positives, as they would have been seen in the first millenium? They’re evidently some kind of optical illusion involving the image, eye and brain, verging on the “I think I see” category of perceptions. But observers would in fact report as observations what they believed they saw.

    1. OK Dave. The pareidolic embedded face images are even more obvious on the positives (especially Enrie’s Sindon Face). Here we only have a 3D detail of the overall frontal image. I first detected the three pareidolic Christ face images in 1998.

      Actually the best way to see them is in extreme raking light, in 3D (positives and negatives) and HD.

      1. Then you can even rather clearly notice even accidental characteristics copied by the Comotilla catacombs fresco’s painter.

    2. Dave you wrote: “Max, that’s quite spooky”. The TS visions and semblances might even have been rather dreadful for some early Christians as well as Knights templars…

  2. On October 9, 2012 at 7:46 am | #12
    I wrote Forthose interested in my view on the Image of edessa, I have sent Dan a “two page flash illustrated paper” on Turin Sindon archaeoperception entitled: DORMANT ARCHAEOPAREIDOLIAS OF A MOST SECRET EDESSEAN LITURGICAL RITUAL?.For the sake of both debate balance and fairness, I do hope Dan will publish it here…

    and asked Dan” to publish its SLIGHTLY REVISED AND CORRECTED VERSION I sent you.”

    Most obviously you have published the draft not the revised version I sent you. Dan, could you please chanhe this version for the “good one”. Thank you.

  3. The fact is I wrote up the first draft in haste (less than 20 minutes and English is far from being one of my most practiced languages.

  4. Actually the Turin Sindon Image is THE KEY OBJECT to pareidolically decipher all the late-antique apocalyptical, pseudo hagiographical, medieval graalic and templars’ visions and semblances/simulacra.

  5. Max Patrick Hamon :Then you can even rather clearly notice even accidental characteristics copied by the Comotilla catacombs fresco’s painter.

    Max, I admit, I see these ‘characteristics’ and quite clearly actually, and also possibly another face mixed in, one looking of an even younger child. It is quite eerie as Dave as described. But I question whether they can be seen on the natural Shroud itself? I’ve studied the Enrie photo you mentioned closely and can’t see it. But I await your revision.


  6. Ron, you are right, I do need a better photographic illustration to make my point even clearer. The fact is I am working hard on professional files and had to snatch a spare moment to write up in haste this 2 page illustrated flash paper on Turin Sindon archeaoperception. I’ll try to save up much more time to it next time. The face simulacra/semblances/visions can be better “seen” under some lighting conditions (remember they were “seen” in Late-Antiquity and the Middle Ages).

  7. Reminder: these pareidolic faces were seen by mystics in a state of modified consciousness.

  8. Mistyping: Reminder: these pareidolic faces were seen by mystics in a state of modified consciousness as far as the Image of Edessa-Turin Sindon Image is concerned.’

  9. To Freeman & Aslanovski: An archaeocryptologist may well like after all ‘to cogitate a bit more deeply’ than a Byzantine or Roman Art historian or historian.

  10. I just sent Dan via e-mail a first short sequel to my two page illustrated flash paper on young Christ archaeopareidolic faces having the TS Image as the most likely original template..

  11. So are you implying that the image (or the apparent image) on the Shroud is simply a random artefact produced by an as yet unknown natural process?

    Because this would put you in opposition both to the skeptics who believe the Shroud is a medieval fraud, and the camp who believe that the Shroud is the real burial cloth of Christ.

    Personally, I don’t think that any consideration of the image here being a case of apophenia can ever really settle anything or guide us to further study. Ultimately the Shroud will likely stand or fall depending on what may or may not be discovered in various laboratories around the world over the course of the next few decades.

  12. Andrew,

    Please don’t you get me wrong.. This is just an itsy-bitsy fragment of my several findings (still unpublished) on the Turin Sindon Image.

    As a professional archaeocryptologist, the fact is I have been studying the TS for nearly a
    quarter of a century in my spare times and made several findings. They do convince me beyond the shadow of a rational doubt that the TS is a genuine burial sheet and the image it bears shall be investigated BOTH as a REAL impression (that left on a burial sheet by the corpse of a crucifixion victim who in all likelihood is Yeshua ben Yossef) AND as an oversized Rorschach yielding APPARENT images/pareidolias (to be studied in the light of John’s Revelation, early Cryptochristianism, Christian Apocryphal literature, late Antique and Medieval (pseudo)hagiographic literature, mystique secrecy of of Nestorians’ liturgical rituals, Holy Grail scenes in Medieval Arthurian literature, Benedictine Monks’ frescoes and miniatures and Knight Templars’ mysterious Head in figura baffometi/in semblance of baphomet (= Bocca della Verità in Rome).

  13. In my opinion, this is not really “a random artefact produced by an as yet unknown natural process”. This is what I would call a providential image resulting from a specific Second Temple Judean burial ritual.

  14. To Ron & Dave, I sent Dan via email, a 2d sequel (to my very short illustrated paper) clearly showing on 1931 Enrie TS positive overall photograph, eye-like shaped accidental characteristics accurately referable to the eyes of the young Christ teaching in the Domitilla Catacombs arcosolium fresco. Hope Dan will publish it.

Comments are closed.