Home > Books, History > Blinding ignorance does mislead us

Blinding ignorance does mislead us

November 23, 2012

clip_image001In today’s Huffington Post book section, Ross King, the author of Leonardo and the Last Supper [Walker & Company, $28.00] writes an article, 10 Myths About Leonardo da Vinci:

Leonardo da Vinci bears the burden of great expectations. The undeniable breadth and depth of his genius means there was, it seems, no intellectual feat of which this original Renaissance Man was incapable. Almost five centuries after his death, his legacy thrives not merely in his paintings, two of which, The Last Supper and Mona Lisa, are arguably the world’s most famous and celebrated works of art. It also throbs in the chests of those whose damaged hearts have been repaired by the British surgeon inspired by Leonardo’s writings on the mitral valve. It takes to the air on the tiny wings of a bluebottle-sized robot designed by aerospace engineers captivated by Leonardo’s studies on flight. It even lingers, courtesy of the entrepreneur Alessandro Passi, in a range of pasta shapes, perfume bottles, and pepper grinders – all based on Leonardo’s drawings.

Leonardo was certainly wide-ranging and eerily modern in his interests. With his dreams of manned flight, submarines, and weapons of mass destruction such as giant crossbows and doomsday cannons, he almost seems more a prophet of our age than a product of his own. His known accomplishments – in anatomy, engineering, hydraulics, optics and painting – are undeniably astounding. But often he is given a little too much credit. He tends to get abstracted from his own time and fast-forwarded into ours, and in doing so he slips out of documented history and soars into the giddy realms of myth. So it is that he gets credited with tasks as varied as forging the Shroud of Turin by taking the world’s first photograph, or serving as the Grand Poobah of an arcane lodge charged with keeping ancient secrets about the bloodline of Christ.

Just how much do these and other claims stand up to scrutiny? "Blinding ignorance does mislead us," Leonardo himself said. "Oh, wretched mortals, open your eyes!" So let’s open our eyes and look at some of these claims about Leonardo in the light of documented fact, not hero worship or wishful thinking. (bolding mine)

And then he tells is as it is:

The history of the Shroud of Turin is complex and controversial enough without having Leonardo thrown into the mix, but he has been pushed forward as its creator. In 1993 Nicholas Allen proposed that the image on the linen shroud could have been produced in the Middle Ages via a photographic process that involved suspending a cadaver in the air for three or four days while its image slowly blossomed on the chemical-soaked cloth. Others were quick to give Leonardo the credit, even though he was born a century after the first documented reference to the Shroud. But who else could have pipped Daguerre – by some three and a half centuries – to the world’s first photo?

Like others before him, Leonardo did experiment with a camera obscura. But there is zero evidence that he had any knowledge of – let alone used – photo-sensitive chemicals. Even if he did invent something as earth-shattering as photography – and it’s a truly massive if – why should he have kept quiet about it? Why not take more pictures? The fact is that not a single shred of evidence links Leonardo to either photographic technology or the Shroud of Turin. As one critic has written: “The premise is more demanding of faith than is the authenticity of the Shroud.”

Yep! But blinding ignorance will persist.

Categories: Books, History
  1. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 9:51 am

    More than just punctual BLINDING ignorance, a 3-4 decades long negative double BINDING ignorance has been maintained (and internalized) within the Shroud world/community via miraculists’ and fraudulists’ two dominant stances in conferences, debates, for-and-against forums on radio, television, newspapers and blogs.

    How long will it take to both Shroud (arch)miraculists and (arch)fraudulists to really and resolutely put an end to this sadly schizophrenic/perverted/devilish/insane situation and subsequently cease to causes more delay in solving the enigma? How long will it take them before they get out of the dead-end and follow “The Middle Way” to finally reach the hidden scientific, archaeological and spiritual truth?

  2. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 9:53 am

    Typo: to cause more delay

  3. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 10:01 am

    The true fact is “The Middle Way” is intellectually more demanding…

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 23, 2012 at 10:04 am

      Correction: “The Middle Way” is intellectually AND spiritually more demanding

  4. daveb of wellington nz
    November 23, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    And then there are arch-myth-makers (e.g. Dan Brown) and arch-credulists and arch-sceptics and etc.

    I rather suspect dear Max of being an arch-mystereist – I think he may well prefer the mystery to any real solution. But then he suspects me (quite unjustly of course) of being an arch-miraculist.

    Ross King has I think written a very worthwhile piece on debunking Leonardo, incredible renaissance man though he was. .

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 23, 2012 at 7:44 pm

      I DID propose a REAL solution (see my archaeocryptologist’s gedanken experiment and Sindon image formation theory).

  5. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 7:13 pm

    Dear Dave, PLEASE don’t you mistake an archaeocryptologist for an arch-mysterist. The former can really help to solve the Shroud mystery NOT to indulge in as the word arch-mysterist can here imply.

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 23, 2012 at 8:59 pm

      Typo: not to indulge in it

  6. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 7:17 pm

    Dave, the true fact is as (arch-?)miraculist, you are also an (arch-?)mysterist.

  7. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 7:34 pm

    Is not Christianism a mystery religion?

  8. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 7:39 pm

    As far as the Turin Sindon image is concerned, I just can help thinking Christian Shroud (arch-)miraculists are after a pseudo-miracle. The true mystery is elsewhere.

  9. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 7:52 pm

    Precisely In Yeshua appearing as a gardener to Mary Magdalene…

  10. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 7:55 pm

    In her very mistake…

  11. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 8:01 pm

    The blinding ignorance here is to mistake a pseudo-miracle (the Sindon image formation process) for a genuine mystery (Yeshua looking like/appearing as a gardener on the third day of his death)

  12. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 8:25 pm

    Reminder: a male dominated Paulinistic Christianism promoted John Chrysostome’s exegesis focusing on Peter & John discovery of the empty tomb at the expense of Augustine of Hippo’s exegesis and Mary Magdalene’s testimony.

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 23, 2012 at 8:26 pm

      Typo: Peter & John’s

  13. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 8:42 pm

    How long will Shroud (arch-)miraculists dismiss Mary Magdalene’s testimony and Augustine of Hippo’s exegesis and keep promoting John & Peter’s empty tomb scene misreading by John Chrysostome?

  14. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 23, 2012 at 10:53 pm

    Reminder, for Dave Beltz:

    Turin Sindon image formation process: an Archaeocryptologist’s thought experiment

    Since most likely the Sindon image is that of Yeshua as crucifixion victim, it should be the natural end product of a mechanical chemical interaction between his corpse and burial cloth as the former was covered with sweat residues, Judean desert dust and in blood; the latter in-soaked with alkaline waters to purify his shed innocent blood and kill flesh flies’ larvae and blow-flies’ eggs. Reminder: Yeshua’s buriers thought him innocent of the crimes for which he was sentenced to death and his corpse had remained in the open for at least an hour-an hour and a half.

    His blood and body image formed on the burial cloth inner side along with a much fainter corresponding blood and facial hair image (beard, moustache and part of long hair) on its external side as his stiff rigid body was tightly wrapped up both length- and width-wise in linen while lying on his side and in extra height (on two stones/granulized myrrh in heaps?) and the inner long linen sheet gradually got somehow taut again through evaporation and shrinking up (this can be deduced from the Sindon image characteristics).

    This implies the body was subjected to a specific purifying/drying out ancient Judean ritual in the shape of fumigation/burning aromatic woods/spices (see 2 Chronicles 16:14 – 21:19 Targum) and at least one incense pan to hold burning charcoal was used. Most likely the body image only affected a superficial thin layer of impurities made of starch, lignin, pectin, saponin, hemicellulose deposits and/or flax wax.

    His body was laterally compressed with fresh medical plants and head flowers (Gr. aromaton) used as insect repellent and solid objects such as a cane of Arundo donax, a cord or rope, a linen headband (with writings both in Latin and Greek); three wooden pieces (sawn off the Yeshua’s trilingual titulus damnationis to make a small ‘jawbox’: two placed underneath on each side of the head and the shorter one on top under the chin and used in conjunction with a small face veil and a skull cap on top of it all to tightly shut the long burial sheet at head level). (This can be deduced from the Greek conjugated verbs used in the Gospels to describe Yeshua’s burial, the Turin Sindon’s absence of lateral body image; Israeli botanist, Avinoam Danin’s, Italian paleographer, Aldo Marastoni’s, French optic engineer, late André Marion’s findings and my personal and other researchers’ thorough examinations of additional possibly genuine contact Christic relics kept in Germany, Italy and France.

    Final reminder, for Christians: this little theoretical reconstruction of Yehua’s burial does not necessarily imply he has not risen from the dead.

    • Senior110
      November 24, 2012 at 3:25 am

      Thx for a very detailed and scientific explanation. When I read the first book on this subject some 30+ years ago there was certainly lot less description than what you described.Also it’s nice to hear from a person who had hands-on experience on the subject.

      I still confounded by the shallow irradiated image on the shroud, for the moment, I am not concerned whether or not there was a resurrection. Admittedly I don’t completely understand what you have described, but I don’t think that you, too, have provided an adequate explanaton of the image.

    • daveb of wellington nz
      November 24, 2012 at 5:26 pm

      Max, Thank you for the explanation of your theory of the image formation process. I’ve saved your posting in my TS folder for future reference. I note from Hugh’s comment below that he is hoping to test a few of the assertions you make, which can only be a good thing, as much further experimental work is something that in my view is sadly lacking, in all of the various theories of image formation. I’m not sure about your assertion about the jaw box coming from sawed up pieces of the titulus, as it certainly existed as a definite entire relic in the time of Helena. Although it could be that the present relic in San Gerusalemme Rome is a replacement replica. Minor point: If you intend using my family name in your postings, I’d appreciate the omission of the ‘t’ – it doesn’t appear in any of my genealogy research, it’s something I just happen to be sensitive about, probably unreasonably so.

      • Max Patrick Hamon
        November 25, 2012 at 8:41 am

        Ok Mr Belz.

      • Max Patrick Hamon
        November 25, 2012 at 9:15 am

        Dave, you wrote: “it certainly existed as a definite entire relic in the time of Helena.” How do you mean “CERTAINLY”. Remider: when it comes to the titulus damnationis (replica?) kept in Rome, the phrase “titulus damnationis” is still used NOT to describe the entire relic but ONLY part of it.

        As early as the 4th centry, the TD is described as a relic divided into three pieces (one in Rome, one in Jerusalem and one in Constantinople).

  15. Hugh Farey
    November 24, 2012 at 10:14 am

    I think I’m beginning to understand your ‘Middle Way,’ Max, which seems to require a linen that behaves a little like shrink-wrap plastic. However the details are still not clear, so could I ask for specific guidance… correct me where I go wrong…
    First the linen, soaked in appropriate preservatives, is laid on the rock, suitably prepared with raised stones or piles of myrhh. The body is laid on it.
    Second (and I may get the order wrong here), flowers and spices are piled alongside the body, various bits of wood and other material were placed on top, and then the body was tightly wrapped (Or was the body wrapped first and the other stuff placed around it afterwards?). A cloth ‘cap’ was added last, after the wrapping, to keep the shroud close around the head.
    I’m confused here. Were there two pieces of cloth – first the shroud (lengthways) and then a long thin bandage wrapped around the shroud transversely to keep it tight? Where do the artifacts fit in?
    Third, this arrangement was left, with one or more incense/charcoal burners. The heat evaporated the moisture on the cloth, drawing the dissolved solids outwards, so that any image formed was only on the outer surfaces of the threads.
    Fourth, as the cloth dried out, it also shrank, until it was as tight as it could be around the body, touching only the ‘hills’ of the contours of the body and not the ‘valleys.” Presumably, as it shrank, it stretched the ‘bandage’ wrapped widthways across the body to keep it well wrapped. If there was such a bandage.
    I hope that’s correct. If my interpretation of your explanation is accurate, I will undertake, with my students, to try to find a appropriate coating that will shrink linen in the way you describe, with whatever alkalies or plant preparations I can find.

    And finally, please, could you try and get all your comments in a single post? It’s awfully difficult to keep track of new ones if the whole table is filled with “Max Patrick Hamon on Blinding ignorance does mislead us.” Sorry to be a bore…

  16. November 24, 2012 at 12:42 pm

    People will believe what they wish no matter the evidence. Perhaps that’s the nature of the opposite of wisdom.

  17. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 25, 2012 at 8:45 am

    Andy, can you tell me ONE FACTUAL evidence (that is demonstrated beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt) that goes against my naturalistic/ritualistic explanation?

  18. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 25, 2012 at 9:30 pm

    Hugh you wrote: “First the linen, soaked in appropriate preservatives, is laid on the rock, suitably prepared with raised stones or piles of myrrh. The body is laid on it.”

    My correction:
    First the long inner burial cloth soaked in (warm?) alkaline solution (ashes of the Red Heifer and/or malky – specific Jerusalem limestone – dust, mixed with water) is held taut – by two buriers – on two raised stones (most likely) respectively placed at head and foot of an unction slab. The disposition of the cloth at the time of the image formation implies, on one side of the slab, a third burier holding two canes previously inserted widthwise through the double-tubed S-like shaped fold purposefully made midway in the part of the cloth held taut (i.e. at the buttock level, see Thierry Castex’s figure 4 – 3D Dorsal View of the Front Side) in order for the stiff rigid corpse handling, wrapping and binding to be performed in extra height. Then the body carried by two or three other buriers, is laid on the part of the cloth kept taut (in extra height), by the other side of the slab. (To be continued)

  19. Hugh Farey
    November 26, 2012 at 7:21 pm

    Thank you. I’ve looked at Thierry Castex’s site, and although I’m quite impressed by his way of accounting for the extra inches that he finds around the buttock area, I can’t see the point of the S-folds around the block of wood. Why not simply lay the shroud over the top of it? Is that why you have substituted canes instead?
    I also wonder how stiff a body with rigor mortis is. Would it really lie flat across three stones (or two stones and some canes in the middle) and a sheet pulled rigidly tight? Maybe someone with more experience with corpses that I could tell us?

  20. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 27, 2012 at 9:08 am

    Hugh, a stiff rigid body does behave like a wooden board and the TS man’s corpse was all in (freshly) dry blood, which exlains the absence of any smearing on the cloth. The horizontal S-fold is an ease fold to help correctly wrap the body placed in extra height. Once the corpse is tightly wrap up, the pair of canes tranversally inserted through the S-fold at buttock level in the bottom half of the long inner burial cloth could help carry the body down to the tomb chamber and placed it first on one and then the other side on the tomb bench on two piles of granulized myrrh to be subjected to a myrrhic aloetic fumigation thus creating sort of a tight protective seal (much akin to shrink-wrap) over the stiff rigid corpse after the canes are removed.

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 27, 2012 at 11:18 am

      More typos: Once the corpse WAS tightly wrapPED up, the pair of canes tranversally inserted through the S-fold at buttock level in the bottom half of the long inner burial cloth could HAVE helpED carry the body down to the tomb chamber and PLACE it first on one and then the other side on the tomb bench on two piles of granulized myrrh

  21. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 27, 2012 at 9:13 am

    Typo: shrink-wrap plastic

  22. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 27, 2012 at 10:10 am

    Hugh you wrote: “Second (and I may get the order wrong here), flowers and spices are piled alongside the body, various bits of wood and other material were placed on top, and then the body was tightly wrapped (Or was the body wrapped first and the other stuff placed around it afterwards?). A cloth ‘cap’ was added last, after the wrapping, to keep the shroud close around the head.”

    My correction: (See my previous post). As the half bottom of the long burial sheet is pulled rigidly tight and the body laid on it and the two stones, Fresh plants and flower heads are laid alongside the body with a few items such as a cord or rope, cane etc. (+ symbolic & affective tokens?) and a wooden piece is stuck around the bent head on both sides between cheeks and stiff rigid long side hair. Then the half top of the long burial sheet is tautly wrapped lengthwise over the body from head to toe. Two (alkaline water in-soaked?) long linen strips are used to bind the corpse widthwise from feet to shoulders and counteract dislocated arms rigor mortis. A small veil of fine transparent byssus is placed around the enshrouded face, a third shorter wooden piece is stuck under the enshrouded chin and between the two enshrouded lateral wooden piece ends and a skull cap is fastened on top of it all. (To be continued)

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 28, 2012 at 8:14 am

      + typos:

      As hte bottom half of the long burial sheet

      Then the top half of the long burial sheet

  23. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 27, 2012 at 12:59 pm

    Typos: a wooden piece is stuck on both sides of the bent forward head, between cheeks and long hair side stands hard like cardboard.

  24. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 27, 2012 at 1:01 pm

    + Typo (sorry): long hair side STRANDS hard like cardboard

  25. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 28, 2012 at 8:11 am

    Hugh you wrote: “I’m confused here. Were there two pieces of cloth – first the shroud (lengthways) and then a long thin bandage wrapped around the shroud transversely to keep it tight? Where do the artefacts fit in?”

    Oversight (sorry): most likely a shorter burial sheet (about 2m long by 1m wide) was wrapped around the moistened long inner burial sheet transversely (along with the two long thin strips/bandages) to close the stiff rigid body at the torso level.

    A few remarks: The Sindon image is affected by several distortions strongly suggestive of rigor mortis such as head slightly bent forward, back curved and legs bent with raised knees. The unusually long arms and seemingly long fingers on the right hand imply both dislocation and uneven stretching at the arm level. The latter distortions are a matter of “complex variable projective geometry” as the long inner burial cloth shrank up and got somehow taut again – during the Sindon image formation process – in conjunction with adducted-abducted arms counteracted rigor mortis. (To be continued)

  26. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 28, 2012 at 8:42 am

    Additional remarks:

    During the image formation process, the tightly pulled sovev (long inner burial sheet) didn’t quite return to its natural size and shape as it got sort of taut again lengthwise through
    shrinking.

    The uneven recording of the two arms imprint on the inner side of the burial cloth is due to the fact the deceased’s arms had been forced in rigor mortis from adduction to abduction thus creating sort of a counter-pressure to wrapping-up pressure. This resulted in specific image distortions not to be extended to the whole body imprint.

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 28, 2012 at 9:23 am

      Typing errors:
      “The uneven recording of the two arms imprint on the inner side of the burial cloth is due to the fact the deceased’s arms had been forced in rigor mortis from aBduction to aDduction thus creating sort of a counter-pressure to wrapping-up pressure. THROUGH DRYING OUT AND CLOTH TO BODY PRESSURE RELEASE, THE ARMS MECHANICALLY TENDED TO SLIGHTLY FLEX OUT AGAIN, this resulted in a specific image distortion not to be extended to the whole body imprint.

      • Max Patrick Hamon
        November 28, 2012 at 10:57 am

        + Mistyping: THE ARMS MECHANICALLY TENDED TO SLIGHTLY RAISE AGAIN

  27. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 28, 2012 at 8:45 am

    (To be continued)

  28. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 28, 2012 at 10:50 am

    Hugh you wrote:
    “Third, […] The heat evaporated the moisture on the cloth, drawing the dissolved solids outwards, so that any image formed was only on the outer surfaces of the threads.”

    Correct.

    You also wrote: “Fourth, as the cloth dried out, it also shrank, until it was as tight as it could be around the body, touching only the ‘hills’ of the contours of the body and not the ‘valleys.”

    Correct.

    You finally wrote: “Presumably, as it shrank, it stretched the ‘bandage’ wrapped widthways across the body to keep it well wrapped if there was such a bandage. […].”
    My correction: it stretched the shorter burial sheet and the linen strips/thin bandages wrapped widthways across the body in order to keep the latter “shrink wrapped”.

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 28, 2012 at 11:43 am

      An important precision: first the in-soaked compressed long inner burial cloth was touching both most if not all body ‘valleys’ and ‘hills’, front and back, then only the body ‘hills’, front and back, as it dried out and got sort of taut again.

      • Max Patrick Hamon
        November 28, 2012 at 11:44 am

        Typo: then only the body ‘hill tops’, front and back,

  29. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 29, 2012 at 9:03 pm

    Hugh, here are my comments (Turin Sindon image formation process: an Archaeocryptologist’s thought experiment) summed up in a single post:

    The real body of a crucifixion victim forms the Sindon image. Since most likely it is Yeshua’s, it should be the natural end product of a mechanical chemical interaction between his corpse and burial cloth as the former most likely was heavy sweat residue and Judean desert dust covered and in freshly dried blood; the latter in-soaked with alkaline waters to purify his shed innocent blood and kill flesh-flies’ larvae and blow-flies’ eggs.

    Reminder: Yeshua’s buriers thought him innocent of the crimes for which he was sentenced to death and his corpse had remained in the open for at least an hour-an hour and a half. Adhesion of water insoluble (e.g. iron oxyde and/or other “opaques” present in the desert of Judea dust) onto the body skin and/or receiving flax surface could have resulted from the Sharaf (the biblical RuHa Qâdim or East Wind), an Israel wind more commonly known as Khamsin or the Dark Breath of the desert of Judea. See also 3/1twill weave linen fabric return force and the effect of alkali pre-treatment on mechanical and morphological properties of flax.

    First the long inner burial cloth soaked in (warm?) alkaline solution (ashes of the Red Heifer and/or malky stone or/and Jerusalem malky stone –– specific Jerusalem limestone –– dust, mixed with water) is held taut – by two buriers – on two raised stones (most likely) respectively placed at head and foot of an unction slab. The disposition of the cloth at the time of the image formation implies, on one side of the slab, a third burier holding two canes previously inserted widthwise through the ease horizontal S-fold made in the middle of the half bottom of the long inner burial cloth held taut (i.e. at the buttock level, see Thierry Castex’s figure 4 – 3D Dorsal View of the Front Side) in order for the stiff rigid corpse handling, wrapping and binding to be correctly performed in extra height. Then the body –– carried by two or three other buriers –– is carefully laid out on the half bottom of the cloth kept taut (in extra height), by the other side of the slab.

    Reminder: a stiff rigid body does behave like a wooden board (board-like stiffness) and the TS man’s corpse was all in (freshly) dried blood, which explains the absence of any smearing on the cloth.

    As the bottom half of the long burial sheet is pulled rigidly tight and the body laid on it and the two stones, fresh antiseptic insect repellent aromatic flora (Gr. aromaton) and solid objects such as a cane of Arundo donax, a cord or rope etc are laid alongside the body with a few items such as a cord or rope, cane etc. (+ symbolic & affective tokens laid on top?). Two wooden pieces (sawn off the Yeshua’s trilingual titulus damnationis to make a small ‘jawbox’: a wooden piece is stuck on both sides of the bent forward head, between cheeks and dried blood, sweat and dust pasted long hair side strands hard like cardboard. Then the top half of the long burial sheet is tautly wrapped lengthwise over the body from head to toe. A shorter burial sheet (about 2m long and 1m wide) is transversely tightly wrapped around the moistened long inner burial sheet to close the stiff rigid body at the torso level and counteract dislocated arms rigor mortis. Two (alkaline water in-soaked?) long linen strips/thin bandages are then used to bind the corpse widthwise from shoulders to feet in order to keep the Sindon close around the torso and legs. A small veil of fine transparent byssus is placed over the enshrouded face; a third shorter wooden piece sawn off the titulus damnationis is stuck under the enshrouded chin and between the two enshrouded lateral wooden piece ends and a skull cap is fastened on top of it all to keep the deceased’s mouth close and the Sindon close around the head. (This can be deduced from the Greek conjugated verbs used in the Gospels to describe Yeshua’s burial, the Turin Sindon’s absence of lateral body image; Israeli botanist, Avinoam Danin’s, Italian paleographer, Aldo Marastoni’s, French optic engineer, late André Marion’s findings and my personal and other researchers’ thorough examinations of additional possibly genuine contact Christic relics kept in Germany, Italy and France).

    Reminder: Read in the light of the Turin Sindon, the Gospels implies the lengthy linen cloth (Heb. sadin, sovev), was first tautly wrapped (Gr. enetulixen, Matthew 27,59) lengthwise around the stiff rigid body in dried blood and the latter thus wrapped to be then compressed (Gr. eneilesen, Mark 15,46) and fastened (Gr. edesan, John 19,40) width wise with spices (Gr. aromaton).

    This implies the corpse was subjected to a purifying and drying-out ancient Judean ritual in the shape of small-scale myrrhic aloetic fumigation (burning an aromatic plant/resin and wood on activated charcoal; see 2 Chronicles 16:14 – 21:19 Targum) and at least an incense pan to hold burning charcoal was used. This is totally consistent with the evidence that supports a low-temperature image-colour-formation process.

    The Sindon image is affected by several distortions strongly suggestive of rigor mortis such as back curved, head slightly bent forward, legs bent with raised knees and elongated arms and fingers on the right hand. The unusually long arms and seemingly long fingers on the right hand imply both dislocation and uneven stretching at the arm level. The uneven recording of the two arms on the inner side of the burial cloth is due to the fact the deceased’s arms had been forced in rigor mortis from abduction to adduction thus creating sort of a counter-pressure to wrapping-up pressure. Through drying out and cloth to body pressure release, the arms mechanically tended to slightly raise again, this resulted in a specific image distortion not to be extended to the whole body imprint. The particular distortions here are a matter of “complex variable projective geometry” as the long inner burial cloth shrank up and got somehow taut again – during the Sindon image formation process – in conjunction with abducted-adducted arms counteracted rigor mortis.

    Most likely (this can be deduced from the Sindon image characteristics):

    – The ease horizontal S-fold made in the middle of the half bottom of the long inner burial cloth allowed two canes to be transversally inserted through the double tube at the buttock level in order to help correctly wrap the body resting in extra height on the two raised stones in the antechamber. Once the corpse was tightly wrapped up, the pair of canes could have helped carry the body down from the antechamber to the burial chamber and have it rest first on one and then the other side on two piles of granulized myrrh on the tomb bench in order to be subjected to a myrrhic aloetic fumigation. Once the linen dried out, the canes were removed and the body placed in supine position inside the sole funerary vaulted niche (Heb. kokha) on a bed of granulized myrrh (blended myrrh and aloes?) to keep it from putrefying and the burial cave entrance sealed by a large stone disc. In anticipation of honorary visits, his linen wrappings were to be anointed with the perfumed spicy oils the women had prepared immediately after the Sabbath and brought at the first hour of the first day of the Judean week (Sunday) to prevent the stench of his decomposing corpse (However the anointing was not done as they found the tomb empty of Yeshua’s body on that very day).
    – The body image only affected a superficial thin layer of impurities (a mere 0.0002-0.0006 of a millimetre thick, as thin as the wall of a soap bubble) made of starch, lignin, pectin, saponin, hemicellulose deposits and/or flax wax i.e. a layer of adhering carbohydrate (acquired adventitiously, e.g. in linen weaving and manufacture) that is not cellulose, but something chemically more reactive, more prone to dehydration as the heat evaporated the moisture on the cloth, drawing the dissolved solids outwards.
    – Prior to being laid in supine position on the tomb bench, the stiff rigid corpse –– tightly wrapped up both length- and width-wise in linen –– resting in extra height on two granulized myrrh piles, was left to dry out first on its left and then right side when the image formation process occurred. His blood and body image were recorded on the burial cloth inner side along with a much fainter corresponding blood and facial hair image (beard, moustache and part of long hair) on its external side.
    – Both bloodstains and body frontal and dorsal imprints come from direct contact and gradual loss of direct contact transfer from the body to the cloth implying, as a mechanical chemical model, the tightly wrapped-up corpse was basically anaerobic (with no air gap), front and back and while drying out and shrinking close to the skin, water mechanically entrapped in the void spaces among the flax fibres of the in-soaked 3/1twill weave linen cloth, evaporated while compressed involving conducted heat through almost atom-to-atom contact as the lengthy inner burial sheet mechanically got somehow taut again.
    – The “opaques’ present in the Judean desert dust or/and Jerusalem malky stone dust allowed collimation as the concentration-evaporation could have catalyzed the dehydrative oxidation of the cellulose; dissolved the adhered powder and coloured the long inner burial sheet, front and back, according to the body front and back ‘valley hollows’ and ‘hill tops’.
    – The oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of a layer of adhering carbohydrate/“collimated/auto regulated vaporographic mordanting process” of the thin impurity layer results from first maximal cloth/body direct contact with a corpse (still in hyperthermia at 41-42°C as a crucifixion victim’s body is most likely to overheat?) tightly wrapped up in dry outer linen and a pre-soaked interior lengthy linen shroud, which, once subjected to a myrrhic-aloetic fumigation and under pressure release of the lengthy inner burial wrapping, has then gradually lost intimate contact through evaporation and shrinking, thus creating sort of a tight protective seal (much akin to shrink-wrap) over the stiff rigid corpse (as the long inner burial sheet gradually unstuck from body skin and got somehow taut again hence the high (undisturbed) quality of the bloodstains (who are mainly mirror images of freshly dried blood clots that were remoistened to stain the cloth). The in-soaked compressed lengthy inner burial cloth was first touching most if not all body ‘valleys’ and ‘hills’ of the contours of the body, both front and back, then only the body ‘hill tops’, front and back, as it dried out and shrank and the shorter outer burial sheet and the linen strips/thin bandages, wrapped widthways across the body, stretched. To the sole exception of lateral macro and micro air pockets (and next to no fontal and dorsal ones), the absence of body skin-to-cloth front-and-back air gap prevented the ‘opaques’ (present in the Judean desert and the malky stone dusts) being deflected by air molecules somehow created a molecular beam.
    – In this burial reconstruction, the Maillard reaction has nothing to do with the TS man’s image formation process. The appearance of the decomposition amines (that would otherwise have slowly appeared at the surface of the skin under normal circumstances during the time in the tomb) was temporarily delayed/suspended through a specific ancient Judean purifying and drying-out ritual that was performed about two hours after the Turin Sindon man’s death and resulted in something like ‘shrink-wrapping’.

    Reminder, for Christians: this little theoretical reconstruction of Yehua’s burial does not necessarily imply he has not risen from the dead.

    Final overall reminder: Please, do keep in mind that this theoretical archaeological reconstruction of the TS man’s burial is a work in progress and shall be refined (as any effort in such an archaeological reconstruction should be) through experimental reconstruction.

  30. Max Patrick Hamon
    November 29, 2012 at 9:27 pm

    Sorry for the typos…

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 29, 2012 at 9:55 pm

      typos: (that are mainly mirror images of freshly dried blood clots that were remoistened and stained the cloth)

    • Max Patrick Hamon
      November 29, 2012 at 9:58 pm

      More typos: As the bottom half of the long burial sheet is pulled rigidly tight and the body laid on it and the two stones, fresh antiseptic insect repellent aromatic flora (Gr. aromaton) and solid objects such as a cane of Arundo donax, a cord or rope etc (+ symbolic & affective tokens laid on top?) are laid alongside the body.

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: