Over at History Today’s blog space

Cover Blurb:  Origins of the Turin Shroud: Solving history’s greatest mystery

imageIf by now you are thoroughly bored by the continuing coverage of Charles Freeman’s article, then ignore this. I promise many other topics as well.

The conversation is far from over. So if you are still with me we should take a look at History Today’s blog space. Here we find Charles attempting to defend his ‘it’s a painting’ assertion:

I am not sure why there should be something special physically about the Shroud and why it cannot be a ‘mere painting’. After all ,as my article shows, there is a mass of evidence that suggests it was just this . . .

And Terry Conspiracy putting the kibosh on:

The real issue, is whether the Shroud is a Medieval work of art, or not.

Well published scientific research has confirmed for most of us long ago, that whatever the Shroud is, and regardless of when exactly it was created, the Shroud of Turin is "not" a painting.

There are several highly respected teams of scientists and artists that have both invested and risked large portions of their careers by attempting to explain and/or replicate the process that created the image, and to date, none have even come close to being successful.

That is why it is still such a great mystery to ponder and speculate over.

What you fail to mention (I suspect deliberately) Charles, is that with the exception of the remaining stains of "human blood" that are still on the cloth, the actual image of Christ is virtually invisible to the eye up close, and it only takes on a vague human form at a distance.

All of the amazingly accurate "head to toe" evidence of scourging, the crown of thorns, and all the other chillingly accurate anatomical details of facial features, Crucifixion, and torture, only become visible when viewed in photographic "negative" images of the Shroud.

As much as I appreciate the insight you have given me through your discussion of the changes in the depiction of this icon’s blood in art images over time, I really would like you to explain how you could possibly devote so much time to exploring these fine forensic details in the Shroud’s image, without informing your readers about the unique and precarious precondition of having to wait 500 years for photography to be invented, before anyone, including the artist, could actually see those details.

Did I say kibosh? Not so fast. Charles has a reply:

No, Terry. These details were clear for all to see in the fifteenth ,sixteenth and seventeenth centuries when there were frequent expositions. Perhaps as the images faded, perhaps for other reasons, expositions became fewer and fewer and as the images could no longer be seen by large crowds, restricted to the cathedral and probably relatively few visitors. So in 1898 it had been thirty years since the previous exposition and twenty- six since the one before that (1842) . . . . So it must have been a real shock when the Shroud came out of storage and by this time it had the total faded images recorded by Secondo Pia.

Deliberately?  Or out of a lack of comprehension?  I suspect that Charles doesn’t understand what a photographic negative is (see Dear Charles Freeman, re the Famous Arnolfini Portrait by Van Eyck and his comments therein).

4 thoughts on “Over at History Today’s blog space”

  1. I will try to make a long story short. I believe the Shroud of Turin to be the burial cloth of of Jesus Christ. I had a little help. From who ?? My Guardian Angel. A few words about my Guardian Angel. My first recall of my Guardian Angel – I was about 9 to 10 years old and the family, me included were on vacation at a small lake in Indiana. I was playing in the lake in an inner tube at the small beach area that people swam at. I seen more members of the family had arrived at the beach and I decided to get out of the inner tube and go to be with them. I did not realise that I had drifted further out into the lake and the water was several feet over my head and I did not know how to swim. I threw my arms and hands over my head to slip down out of the inner tube to walk up to the beach from the water. The water was maybe 10-15 feet deep and I no longer had the inner tube and could not swim and was literally in over my head. I tried to grab on to anything above me but there was nothing there so all I was doing was flailing mfield nex to y arms and my hands were out of the water sometimes. I knew I was in trouble – I then heard a voice inside my head that told that “You are going to die – Say your prayers”. I was confused as I knew a few prayers but didn’t know which one to say say first. Next thing in realise is that inside my mind I am saying the Lords Prayer also known as the Our Father. I then saw pinkish or reddish colored clouds and then I had an image of the field nes to out house that was up in Michigan. and then the voice told me that this was all I was going to remember. The next thing I know is that I am laying on a towel on my stomach on the beach and my brother 10 years older than me was pushing on my back. The towel was wet under my face and there was a lot of mucus (snot) on my nose and lips. My brother had performed CPR on me and I was alive. I also now realise that I had an NDE but was told not to remember most of it.

    Another strong interaction with My Guardian Angel happened in early 1964, I was in the USMC and my 4 years of active duty was almost over. A couple of older more senior guys that I knew told me that when I re-enlisted I would be promoted to Sgt. E-5 (I was then a Crpl e-4). Originally I was going to leave the Marines and go back to Michigan as I was stationed at the MCRD here in San Diego. So I started thinking about re-enlisting but I heard that voice say “do not re-enlist” . I didn’t think much about it and just continued living my daily life. I thought about I was reminded by one of the guys about being promoted on my reenlistment and heard the voice say the same again, I ignored it and continued on with my daily life. A few days later I was told by one of the Sgts at The headquarters building that I needed to “get on the stick’ and tell them That I was ready to re-enlist. I thought about that and then as I was seriously thinking of of taking the required action, that voice was very stern and loud inside my head “DO NOT RE-ENLIST”. So I did not reenlist. On Feb. 17th I left active duty in the Marine Corps. Well history tells us what happened for the next following several years. The war in Viet Nam. With in a year I was married and never back on active duty, was released from the inactive reserves after 2 years and was a full blown civilian. Alive.
    During the last few years I have been following the Shroud of Turin and had signed up to this site. One day I was looking at a couple of the images of the Shroud that showed how it looked in it’s natural state and then what the 3-D imaging showed and then I heard some words in my head head telling me that this was the “real picture of the living Jesus Christ”. I accepted that it was my Guardian Angel consciously communicating with me again. While reading one of the articles I read about the ?Prince of Peace”, I looked it up and sure enough, my insides tell me the same thing – that this is a painting of the Living Jesus
    Christ. I am a believer. You don’t know me but all I can say is to take my Guardian Angels words for it as I do. Peace and love to all of you.

  2. Yes I believe you Mr. McMahon. Only very few people have experienced Guardian Angels.

    When you read Dan’s blog you can see that all the theories of painting, schorch, sweat are collapsing from the comments of experts. Skeptics always have points to disagree.

  3. I have read that Barrie Schwortz (dismitting “Freeman’s claims”) invoked the numismatic proof about the early coins (and an interesting “numismatic dating” was well illustrated by prof. Eng. G. Fanti in her own book …) …
    So …
    Now I ask:
    What is your opinion about the numismatic proof / “numismatic dating”?
    Isn’t it a strong stone against the strange new theory published in the magazine “History Today” ?
    In other words:
    What is the weight (on the “Authenticity Balance”) for the numismatic dating?
    I wait for your answers about an intelligent numismatic dating.
    Have you considered the frontal facial proportions ?
    For example : Eng. Giulio Fanti worked with nos/eyes ratios…

    1. Having made mistakes, I was a bit ‘wrong in my summary of the case.
      So …
      I apologize for my previous mistakes in English.
      — —
      In the book (2014) by Giulio Fanti the Byzantine coins of Justinian II of 692-695 were reevaluated to better understand the influence of the Shroud image.
      Prof. Eng. G. Fanti in his own book used nose/eyes ratio…
      … and then Barrie Schwortz rejected “Freeman’s claims” and indicated the numismatic proof about the early coins (= byzantine coins, IMO).
      See also in this blog :
      “More: Two Coins, Two Lines, Two Questions” (February 23, 2011)
      — —
      Now I hope you understand better what I mentioned in my previous intervention …

      Do you know Craniofacial anthropometry (= the craniofacial anthropometrical parameters and indices) and Applied Statistics?

Comments are closed.