New Video on the Sudarium of Oveido

CORRECTED:  From Simon Brown and National Geographic. Pull up a chair and a cup of coffee. Part 1 and Part 2 each run about fourteen minutes.

Sudarium Part 1
Sudarium Part 2

Or click here

13 thoughts on “New Video on the Sudarium of Oveido”

  1. The Sudarium dates back to the sixth Century according to the C14 test. However, like in the Shroud, the blood keeps its red colour. Why?

    1. Wrong. Ask Barrie Schwortz about that. He saw the Sudarium with his own eyes ! He told me personally that the blood on that cloth was not looking like the blood on the Shroud. It was looking normal for an old blood (i.e. brownish). Also, I never read a serious paper or a serious book about the Sudarium that was pretending the blood on the cloth was reddish in color. That important discrepancy must be explain by those who believe the Sudarium had been in contact with the same bloody head as the Shroud! Presently, to my knowledge, this question has never been explore in deep and has never even been address properly.

    1. This is evident. The scientific knowledge concerning the Sudarium is far more limited than the Shroud. In a perfect world, the Vatican would allowed a same scientific team (a kind of CSI team of experts) to fully analyze both cloths side by side in order to see if both were really used on the same corpse. Light must be shed on this issue.

  2. Most likely, the sudarium is only a pre-burial cloth and was not subjected to a purifying and drying ritual whereas the long inner shroud as a burial cloth was.

  3. Well, I hate to pour cold water on this, and, don’t get me wrong, I do believe the Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Jesus, and, I would like to believe that the Sudarium of Ovedio is the face cloth, but, I’ve read most of Mark Guscin’s papers & watched this video and I don’t think there is an arguement here that will convince any sceptics.
    He makes his presentation and puts out a statement like it shows x and y but doesn’t provide any compelling data to back up his hypothesis.
    I want facts or details that I can shred with Occams Razor and then use to beat sceptics about the head with. I don’t think it’s here. No one else has reviewed his findings or done a seperate study on the stains that I’m aware of. Please do correct me if I’m wrong, but spooky music and half hearted searches don’t do it for me.

  4. And, A little point to clarify after I read back my post.

    I don’t wish to imply that Mark is in any way a crackpot. I just wish he presented a stronger arguement.
    If this is the head cloth then they each corroborate each other and are thus almost irrefutable.

  5. Gerard: There is a reasonably good article on comparisons between the Shroud & Oviedo cloth on a “Mystics of the Church” web-site by Jim Dunning; “THE SUDARIUM OF OVIEDO AND THE SHROUD OF TURIN”, by: Jim Dunning; Article was originally published in “Irelands Own” magazine.
    http://www.mysticsofthechurch.com/2010/03/sudarium-of-oviedo-and-shroud-of-turin.html

    Compsrisons include: pollens (Oviedo has Palestine, Africa & Spain), commentary on overlay comparisons (allegedly 72 points of correspondence), tentative 7th century carbon dating by Baima Bollone (with his reservations), comparisons with blood-stains and facial features. The article may suggest other search quests you might want to follow up, (e.g. Oviedo conference). Assertion that it could only result from a crucifixion. Of the C14 test, Bollone said: “‘The result is not easy to interpret due to the well known difficulties of dating textiles and to the conditions under which the sample was kept when it was taken in 1979 until it came to us in 1983.” Conference supporting statement: “‘Textiles left alone in normal atmospheric conditions are prone to becoming highly contaminated…. The Carbon dating should be nothing more than a stimulus to more precise investigation under better conditions.’ ”

    The Oviedo cloth has not been subjected to the same level of intense investigation as the TS.

    1. Quote : “The Oviedo cloth has not been subjected to the same level of intense investigation as the TS.”

      I disagree completely with that opinion simply because, on the contrary to the STURP team investigation, I’m not aware of even just one paper published by the Spanish team of sindonologist concerning the Sudarium that was published in a serious peer-reviewed journal !

Comments are closed.