Giulio Fanti writes:
. . . an additional confirmation that the TS was the model of Christ’s images during the Byzantine Empire, I have found a very interesting variant of the Face of Christ on Justinian II’s Solidus (685-695) AD showing long hair only on the left and SKEW NOSE.
As you know, there are dozens of different variants of the Face of Christ in Justinian II made in different mints during these years, but the face [at right or in larger format here as "Justinian II – Face of Christ with skew nose.jpg" is the first one that reports the skew nose.
As also there are clearly visible the longer left hair than the right ones, that are longer than in other similar coins, I deduce that this Face was one of the first minted after the sculptor looked at the TS.
In fact, in agreement with Alan (Whanger), the Face of Christ became more and more less typical of the TS with the time passing.
Someone will say that this is a minting error, but "casually" also the curvature is in agreement with that of the TS!
Every comment against my interpretation of this clue is welcome, also from Dan’s Blog. (Dan, you are free to use this information if you clearly show my copyright).
I’m impressed. Comments, as Giulio makes it clear, are welcome.
Photograph bears copyright notice: G. Fanti 2012. Used here with implied permission.
Even if I don’t doubt that this image of Christ have been in some way influenced by the image on the Shroud, I just want to remind people that the depiction that is on this coin is the one of the Pantocrator. In that context, the Shroud could only have been an indirect influenced for this particular image on a coin…
Very interesting find!
Yet, notice the lips and the swelling under the right eye, specifically. The artist clearly used the Shroud of Turin as his model.
Actually, the comparative study between this Justinian II Solidus Face of Christ and a 2010 Ray Downing 3D digital TS face illustration released for History Channel publcity is even more impressive in terms of swelling under both eyes, skew nose and small hair era just below lower lip.
See in Dan’s blog “More on the History Channel’s 2 Hour Shroud of Turin Special”
March 22, 2010 (1st 3D digital ,Sindon face non-mirrored picture to get vertically mirrored).
Mistyping: area (instead of era)
Remarkable – also note the eyes, semi-closed, double line at the throat, inverted V at hair, Is that a topless box I see? How long shall we wait for an enlightening comment from Charles Freeman or some other Byzantine Art historian??
Yannick, what is your source for this statement?
The coins of Justinian II’s first reign (685 – 695 AD) are indeed remarkably shroud-like, and it is difficult not to think it was indeed the model. However, when, after a period of exile, Justinian returned to the throne (705 – 711 AD), the same sort of coins (with the same designation – Christus Rex Regnantium) have a closely shaven Christ with tightly curly hair. Can anyone suggest why the changed their mind about Christ’s appearance?
The positive image of the Shroud does not show such a prominent curvature of the nose. It looks rather straight (http://www.dshroud.com/shroudScope/shroudScope.shtml?zl=5&image=3&lon=1451&lat=5434.734393275001). What does look obvious from the positive image is a swollen cheek. That can be see on some coins like the one at http://www.sindonology.org/byzantineCoins/ChristMonnai1.gif
more rubbish. As Mario says the positive image of the shroud does not show a curvature of any prominence whatsoever. Neither does the positive image show any real difference in length of hair on either side.
sorry, this is desperate, and is the kind of inane and furthermore flawed speculation that undermines Fanti’s credibility.
I would like to clarify that my post did not intend to describe this particular Byzantine coin, sent by Giulio Fanti, as not worthy of study. It is a very interesting find. The skewed nose on that coin is, I believe, a representation of one interpretation of what can be perceived, on the Shroud, as a broken nose. And as pointed out by another comment from another commentator, It might also relate to the actual emperor who ordered this particular coin to be minted. It might also point to the presence of the Manoppello veil in Constantinople as has been hinted by Max Patrick Hamon. The idea that the nose is curved on the Shroud is not exactly correct. It appears curved since one side of the face is more prominent than the other. Drawing a straight line from the top of the nose to its tip shows a very slight curve, but so small that we could not describe this as curved. Also, it is important to remember that each time the Shroud was laid down to be photographed, the face was slightly shifted left and right, creating slight deviations across the face. You can see these deviations on the Enrie’s photo vs the Durante’s photo.
If the Shroud would have been known of the emperor at that time (during his first reign), it’s evident that he would never have allowed a different representation like the one he allowed during the second reign ! It’s pure rational thinking but this kind of thinking is very often put aside when it comes to speculate wildly on supposed direct links between the Shroud and some Byzantine artworks. The solidus of Justinian II doesn’t show anything more than the Pantocrator image of Christ that look very Shroud-like simply because the Pantocrator images (which dates from at least 500 A.D. onwards) were most probably influenced in some way (direct or not) by the image on the Shroud.
One last important comment to those who are tempted to defend at all cost the present hypothesis that makes a direct link between the nose from this very ancient Byzantine coin and the nose on the Shroud : Be certain that this speculative assumption would NEVER stand for more than 2 seconds in a court room, simply because the characteristic of the nose of this ancient coin could well be due to a bunch of different things that have nothing to do with the image on the Shroud. Anyone is free to believe in this direct connection hypothesis, but at least, you should admit that this will never represent a winning case in a court room, just like Jackson’s supposed finding versus the co-called series of ancient folds on the cloth, because these kinds of hypotheses mainly rest on pretty wild assumptions that could be attacked by “cons-assumptions” and in a court room, that is never good. No doubt that a good advocate can crush such wild assumptions very easily. One thing’s for sure: personally, that’s the way I judge if an hypothesis have good chances to be valid or not and I call this “the court room test”. Along with the honest use of the Occam’s razor principle, I think this is a very good test to separate what is good and what is bad.
It should be here reminded by both Matthias and Mario:
1/- The true medical forensic fact IS the TS man’s nose shows slight deviation of the tip of the nose.
2- The true archaeological fact IS, in Late Antiquity and Byzantine time, sculptors and engravers did have the ability to turn 2D image into 3D model.
Matthias’ negative speculation is here contradicted by numismatic, forensic and archeological facts.
Max
re: no.1 – perhaps a very slight deviation is observable on modern day photos, but to the naked eye in antiquity? I just can’t see it
Like Colin Berry does with the Lirey badge, we can read far too much into the less than precise artistic realisations that come from minting.
Fanti says someone will explain this as a minting error – and I do!
Matthias,
I do understand your viewpoint . Yet the true fact is BOTH yours and Fanti’s have their own shortccomings.
The basic questions here I’ll ask you are:
1/ – Did you take a very close look at the ORIGINAL Turin Sindon face image to be 100% sure you’re totally right and Fanti is totally wrong?
2/- Have you a (7th c. CE Byzantine) sculptor or engraver’s eye?
3/- Can you credibly discriminate between what would be really readable (I can see what does really exist and cannot see what doesn’t really exist) and what would be mere pareidolia (I think I see what doesn’t really exist and I think I don’t see what does really exist)?
4/- Could you be more specific when you content this is a minting error and back-up your contention by a few coin examples proving beyond the shadow of a rational doubt this is precisely the case here?
5/- What do you exactly know about the way, the SIndon Image may have been closely examined in Byzantine time (under natural transmitted sunlight, oil lamp/natural raking sunlight)?
Mistyping: oil lamp lighting
BTW Ideally, the best way to ewamine a 3D encoded planar image is from HD photographs taken under raking light and from different angles, and subsequently enhanced in 3D and digital squeeze. The direct examination of the original shall be done under alternative light.
Addendum: Alternative light + transmitted light
…whenever possible.
Matthia you wrote:
“the positive image [doesn’t] show any real difference in length of hair on either side.”
Really?
‘Really’ is right lol. Matthia should take a close look and notice on the SoT face image the hair on one side seems to get cut-off by what seems to be a crease in the linen. On the opposite side the hair continues much lower, but periodically obscured, possibly due to the linen being tucked, Anyways one must also notice the fact the the short hair side is opposite the extended point of the beard, exactly as shown on the Shroud and seen on the coin.
R
Well to my eyes there is no difference. You guys can imagine what you like, just like Vignon did with his very creative interpretations – the Vignon markings
Because you cannot see it, it’s imaginary? Creative interpretations? How about YOU have no ability, or lack a keen enough eye to see the details. Seriously anyone with absolutely no backing who can dismiss others abilities and in your case also the Vignon markings as rubbish, does not deserve any serious response.
R
Reminder:Ancient Observers would in fact report as observations and copy BOTH what they did really see and what they believed they saw.
Max, you are absolutely correct here. If one is to expand the coin image above, and then open a photo of the negative (as viewed normally) photo of the SoT face, and expand it to match in size, then compare “very closely”; It is quite obvious whomever minted this coin had viewed the Shroud directly. The congruences are amazingly accurate! The nose bend may have been slightly exaggerated (less likely) or simply be an issue of damage to the coin (most likely), otherwise there are numerous similarities that one does not find anywhere else, i.e; as in the pantocrator images for instance. Whomever minted this coin was absolutely phenomenal in his detail and obviously had a very keen eye. I am no expert by any means, but have been told I have a keen eye for detail. Anyways, anyone who disagrees, I ask you please take a ‘very’ close look, follow all the lines and you will see.
It would be awesome if someone had thought of taking off-angle ‘raking-light-close-up’ photos of the face of the Shroud, as this would almost certainly be the way an 8th century artisan would have viewed the Shroud, i.e; by candle light or angled light from a window….this could explain the ability of the artisan to distinguish fine details!…I’m hoping Barrie Shwortz picks up on my comment and can enlighten us on any such photos being in existence.
R
gosh, that’s a very creative interpretation. Like Angel I don’t see it. Even if there are very subtle differences, such subtle differences do not correspond to the SIGNIFICANT difference in hair length on the coin.
Sorry, this kind of rubbish is a distraction from the real issues
I don’t see any difference in the length of Jesus’ hair on either side of the coin image, nor is there any difference in length on the Shroud image.
There is; however, a difference in length on the Edessa Cloth.
On the coin image featured above, we the right side of the head (left on the photo). that the hair continues down from the inverted “v” to the lighted area that looks as though it is a script version of the letter “Y,” at the neck. Then two broad lines continue outward from the neck.
One of the broad lines is an elongated upside down “Y” and the other broad line is straight.
Both broad lines continue to the shoulder and are obviously the artist’s rendition of Jesus’ hair.
On the left side of the head (right looking at the image), the hair is wavy to the neck, and then there is a double broad line that falls to the shoulder. All the broad lines on both sides of the head project outward from the shoulder, clearly indicating the broad lines are hair. Therefore, on both sides of the head the hair is symmetrcal and falls to the shoulder.
The artist failed to include the Trinity (3) blood spot above the left eyebrow, evidenced on the negative of the Shroud image, just to the right of the nose. The artist, as well, failed to include the blood intermingled with Jesus’ hair. The blood “3” was obvious on the Shroud and certainly would have been included on the coin, if the Shroud image was used as the model. I don’t believe it was.
The nose on the Edessa cloth (King Abgar) does not look as straight as the nose on the Shroud image, and the hair on the Edessa cloth is shorter on the left side of the head.
One thing amazes me though. If Jesus rubbed his face on the Edessa cloth and gave it to King Abgar for healing, then why would the Edessa cloth have the blood “3” at the forehead and also the blood spots intermingled through Jesus’ hair? This blood should not have been on the Edessa cloth, as Jesus was alive when he sent the cloth to King Abgar for healing.
With that in mind, the “Edessa Cloth,” (King Abgar) had to be pressed to Jesus’ face, either after his death or on the road to the cross; otherwise there would be no visible blood on the Edessa cloth image. And there does appear to be the blood “3” above the left eyebrow on the Edessa cloth and a few blood spots in the hair.
There must be another cloth, still not found, that would have been used for King Abgar’s healing and this must be the cloth used as a model for the coin. When Jesus pressed his face to the cloth, the nose would have been distorted on the cloth as pushed to the side or not straight, and there is no blood on this image, as well.
Just my opinion!
Angel, your interpretation of the coin lines may be incorrect, both sides do not run down passed the shoulders. On the short side I believe you may be mistaking clothing lines as hair lines.
I am baffled by which Edessa cloth you are talking about? I don’t remember seeing any depiction showing the blood ‘3’ marking or any other blood markings whatsoever, and only a few that may show differences in hair length. Truth being I haven’t seen any artist depiction at all with the ‘blood 3’ marking as seen on the Shroud, even the pantocrators have this blood mark missing!…So why would it be expected to be shown on the coin?….The reasoning for no blood images, and this has been covered many times by others, is that Jesus would always have been shown as alive. I’ll also venture to say, you are taking the Abgar story as factual writings, when it is just a story written by someone who obviously was trying to interpret how the image they saw on the Shroud could have possibly have been created on the cloth. Several ancient interpretations have mentioned the image seemed as though created from the secretion of bodily fluid or sweat, so put two and two together and it is not hard to understand the writers intentions. But seriously which Edessa image has ever shown blood? Can you please link us to this image?…thanks.
R
Ron, I saw two images of the Edessa cloth on google images yesterday. I enlarged one of the images and it looked as though there was a is a blood 3 above the left eyebrow. Maybe this is not the case, but from the image, it looks to be so.
I just copied the information on the picture and it was from the shroudofturinblogspot.
Website for this image
theshroudofturin.blogspot.com
Full-size image – Same size
Size: 600 × 380
Type: 87KB JPG
This image may be subject to copyright.
***I just looked at the image, enlarging it. I did not go to the website.
On this google image the nose does not look exactly as the long nose on the TS image.
Best,
Correction in Paragraph 3.
On the coin image featured above, we see on the right side of the head (left on the photo), that the hair continues down from the inverted “v,” to the lighted area that looks as though it is a script version of the letter “Y,” at the neck.
Reminder, dear Matthias & Angel:
The initial issue was the SKEWED NOSE.
I sent Dan via email the perfect overlap of the two most famous ‘non made by hand’ Christ face images on cloth (aka the Turin Sindon and the Manoppello Veil).
The skewed nose in the overlap is plain as the… nose on each of you’s face (if you really have eyes to see)…
Forensically speaking, the nose did have been distorted on the TS burial cloth as pushed to the side via cloth-to-head pressure, for in all likelihood the long inner burial cloth had been tighly wrapped up from head to toe.
The slight deviation of the tip of the nose here is forensically characterictic of pressure..
The skewed nose may also simply be impact damage delivered to the coin at some point!
R
Wow Ron ! I think you NEVER said something so clever in all your time here. I agree 100% with you. Read my previous comments #13 and 14 above and you’ll see that I think exactly as you do… The fact is this: the somewhat strange form of the nose on the coin can be due to a wide bunch of factors that has nothing to do with the Shroud !!!! Starting to make direct links between a little feature like that and the Shroud of Turin, this is called “walking in a very dangerous territory”, scientifically speaking, because your presumption only rest on a pretty wild speculation that you will NEVER BE ABLE TO PROVE ANYWAY.
(my tongue-in-cheek comment): Or that particular coin ‘may’ have impacted both the Manoppelo Veil face and the Turin Shroud face exactly in the same area to leave this mark What a coincidence this would be! And the three strands of hair on the Manoppello Veil faces ‘may’ also have impacted the coin! A magic coin! Even more intriguing…
Max, I’m going to be honest here in that I don’t see the same curvature of the nose seen on this coin as compared to the veil or the Shroud, not at all. The coin curvature is extreme, comparitively. The overlay shown in your post with the Shroud and veil is not clear at all really. If you would look closely at the coin above, there are signs of impact, or ‘possible’ impact. For instance a slight ridge on the right side of the curve and look close at the very tip of the nose, …possible damage in the form of impact flaking? These were not flat coins, they were pseudo-3 dimensional and would have raised areas, the noise dominating most likely. So not completely out of the question that this exaggerated bend in the nose could be due to damage.
I also don’t see three strands of hair on the coin. One would really have to try hard to believe so.
R
Ron, it’s hopeless…stick to the magic coin.
Ron, I found the article for the Edessa image. [Above (click to enlarge): The Image of Edessa (11th century), Sakli church, Goreme, Turkey: Wilson, I
http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2012/08/my-critique-of-charles-freemans-turin_23.html
***Maybe the markings above the left eye are not the blood “3,” yet it certainly looks to be. Also note there are spots in the hair that appear to be blood, as well.
Don’t know if this is a true Edessa image, but is the one I looked at on Google.
Best,
Angel, well done, You’ve very keen eyes. I can see it too.Yet a better photo here is most needed to make 100% sure it is not a pareidolia and the vey fine forehead red epsilon is really there.
It does seem the nose is slightly skewed too. A much better photo is most needed indeed.
Max,
Yes, I took out my magnifying glass, and I could see it more clearly. The clothes line runs horizontally and is a squiggly line that extends across the front to the left shoulder. Where the horizontal line meets the left shoulder there is an arched broad line and adjacent to the broad line is a smaller arched line. This, to my mind, would be the clothing and this would be the case if there was no veil over the head of Jesus.
Yet, if Jesus was wearing a veil over his hair, then this may account for what Ron sees as clothing, and this may be correct, as well. I am viewing the picture without the veil, and in this case the hair projects out from the clothing, or more simply put, the hair lays on the clothing.
Just an opinion though.
Angel I’ve seen several renderings of the Sakli Image, some in much better detail then this one. The markings you are interpreting as a possible blood article is actually damage (flaking). The frescos are deteriorating at an alarming rate, in most probability this image we see is probably much worse off now or gone for all we know.This is actually the image I studied and interpreted the 7 dark circlets has ‘possibly’ being the intention of the artist to convey there were several layers below the face layer, and to Max, yes the nose is skewed, but only very “slightly” with absolutely no comparison to the curvature we see on the coin, not even close.
Ron, no problem!
Your account, with respect to the deterioration,
is thoroughly convincing. Yet, it is ironic the flaking occurred exactly where the Epsilon or Trinity blood “3” is located on the TS.
To my eye, the nose on the Sakli image appears to be broken. The base of the nose is flattened out.
Do you know if the nail mark on the left foot of Jesus’ (TS) is centered and if the nail mark on the right foot is to the left of center, more toward the instep? Is there any picture that could be enlarged that would show the nail marks clearly?
…or is it my English?
Quite tell-taling. On British Byzantine Art hitosrian, Devour Aslanovki, Ithe Sakli Mandylion is photographically INVERTED. He didn’t even noticed it.
Typo: thank you Colin Berry and DA for correcting my typos
Too tired to blog on…
In terms of additional spy clue as far as the Justinian coin obverse Christ face is concerned, you rotate the numismtic “three-four strands of hair” 90° clockwise then you’ll get the mirrored form of the Greek letter epsilon-shaped like TS man’s forehead clot as a BONUS!
Yes, Max. I can see it too, without rotating 90°; however, the Epsilon is mislocated.
In all likelihood and obedience to a specific iconological canon, the TS man’s forehead clot DISlocation in centre hairline of the forehead and stylisation as a double stranded quiff of dropping hair, was deemed more suitable both within the general economy of the Justinian II’s Solidus obverse Christ face and… the engraver’s eye.
Yes, this looks to be no more than a few strands of hair that have fallen down onto the forehead. Actually, an impressive observation on your part.
Max, below (link) is the most believable of the Justinian coins; the flowers depicted on the coin image are an exact variety as those on the TS.
Click on the first picture with 4 flowers and the excerpt is displayed on the same page. Scroll down to the black and white coin image “Flowers on Justinian II coin (692–695 AD).”
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~brach/Jerusalem_Flowers/
This Whanger coin image has been around for a while, so you’ve probably already seen it.