Home > History, Press Coverage > Two Articles on the Shroud’s History

Two Articles on the Shroud’s History

March 7, 2015

They appear in the Italian language daily L’Indro (the links include translation into English):

image1)  Shroud: before the Middle Ages did not exist: The Mandylion is not the Shroud of Turin, which appeared only in 1355 in Lirey by Andrea Nicolotti

Google Translate says:  A much exploited in past to attribute an ancient history in a relic that is lacking is to take the hypothetical events attributed to a relic different and apply them to that, or to argue that two relics are actually the same thing. There are some stories that concern ancient images acheropite, ie ‘not made ​​by human hands’, fabrics on which it would miraculously imprinted the image of Christ. One of them is the Veronica, another is called Mandylion , ie ‘handkerchief’ or ‘towel’ of Edessa . The clip_image001legend on this handkerchief took its first steps in the V century as an appendix of another apocryphal legend and free of historical verisimilitude, already known in the previous century, which told of a correspondence exchanged between Jesus and King Abgar V of Edessa . In the text known as the ‘ Doctrine of Addai ‘it is said that King Abgar had sent his messenger to Jesus, who not only gave him a letter, but he also painted a portrait. Towards the middle of the sixth century, the legend was further modified and instead of the painted colors there was talk of a miraculous image : seeing the inability of the messenger in painting the portrait, Jesus would have washed his face and he wiped with a towel ; and on the fabric would miraculously imprinted the image of his face

image2) From the Mandylion Shroud: Reconstruction of the history of the Mandylion of Edessa in Lirey by Filippo Burgarella

Google Translate says:  To which attributes the discovery of the icon hidden for centuries in a niche of the walls of Edessa and prodigiously duplicated. A ‘icon, then, on two different media: the original on a towel folded four times (‘ rhakos tetradiplon ‘) and the copy on tile (‘ Keramion ‘). It was believed that the copy was formed by contact with the original on Keramion place to protect that niche. An Icon that in both formats ‘achiropita’, ie not painted by the hand of man, even to distinguish it from the pagan idols, facts instead of human hands (‘deadly works facta’) as reaffirm the imperial laws. Since then it was kept in the cathedral rebuilt by Emperor Justinian made. In 639 Edessa falls under Islamic rule, which saves the icon from the havoc of the Byzantine iconoclasts. From then on it is called Mandylion….

  1. Max patrick Hamon
    March 8, 2015 at 7:57 am

    Re the Icongraphical testimonies of the TS prior 1207 CE:

    Though an image is said to be worth a thousand words, K.’s statistical approach of the HP Ms Bifolium illustrations’ characteristics is unfortunately lacking since what is really TS-related, have not yet been correctly/convincingly ascertained in se while Skeptic’s intellectual chimera of incredulity can be killed ONLY via minute cryptological and steganological comparative study of TS-HP Ms Bifolium common striking and allegedly ‘unstriking’ details that build into a smoking gun evidence the Benedictine monk illustrator knew about the Constantinople aka Turin Shroud indeed. Most likely he (a Brother Joseph Almos?) was young Prince Bela’s confessor (and even a relative of his?) and as such had lived in Constantinople and seen ‘the sindon which G-d wore’ [theophoron sindonos] in his wake at some point between 1163 and 1173 CE.

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