Search results
Dec 30, 2022 · Among the real relics, there is first of all the Shroud of Oviedo, which is not a shroud but a cloth that was placed on the face of Jesus at the time of the descent from the cross, and which ...
- Solène Tadié
- Analysis
- Summary
- Controversy
- Example
- Investigation
- Publication
The Shroud of Turin is said by some to be the burial cloth of Jesus and by others a medieval forgery. Now, a new study using modern forensic techniques suggests the bloodstains on the shroud are completely unrealistic, supporting arguments that it is a fake. They found that if one examined all the bloodstains on the shroud together, \\"you realize t...
The Shroud of Turin is an ancient linen cloth about 15 feet long by 4 feet wide (4.4 by 1.1 meters) that bears the image of what appears to be a crucified man's body. On display at the Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, it is one of many shrouds claimed over the centuries to be the one true burial cloth of Jesus.
But in 1988, scientists carbon-dated the shroud's origins to between A.D. 1260 and 1390, supporting claims that it is merely a hoax, as Jesus' lifeis thought to have come to an end in A.D. 33. Still, whether or not the shroud is a fake is still a hotly debated question. [Religious Mysteries: 8 Alleged Relics of Jesus]
For instance, two short rivulets of the blood on the back of the left hand of the shroud are only consistent with a person standing with their arms held at a 45-degree angle. In contrast, the forearm bloodstains found on the shroud match a person standing with their arms held nearly vertically. A person couldn't be in these two positions at once.
The scientists did find that the bloodstains on the front of the chest did match those from a spear wound. However, the stains on the lower back which supposedly came from the spear wound while the body was positioned on its back were completely unrealistic, they said.
The scientists detailed their findings online July 10 in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. Originally published on Live Science.
The new research is in line with numerous previous studies that have concluded that the Shroud is not authentic. Earlier carbon dating work has determined that it dates to 1260 to 1390; Jesus is ...
People also ask
Is the Shroud of Turin a fake?
Is the Shroud of Turin a real relic?
Is the Shroud of Turin Jesus' burial cloth?
Did a body lay flat on a Turin Shroud?
- Becky Little
- The shroud first surfaced in medieval France. The earliest historical records of the Shroud of Turin place it in Lirey, France during the 1350s. A French knight named Geoffroi de Charny allegedly presented it to the dean of the church in Lirey as Jesus’ authentic burial shroud.
- The pope soon declared it was not an actual historic relic. After the church of Lirey put the shroud on display, the church began to draw a lot of pilgrims, and also a lot of money.
- De Charny’s granddaughter was excommunicated for selling it to Italian royals. In 1418, when the Hundred Years’ War threatened to spill over into Lirey, Geoffroi de Charny’s granddaughter Margaret de Charny and her husband offered to store the cloth in their castle.
- Before the shroud moved to Turin, it was almost lost in a fire. In 1502, the house of Savoy placed the shroud in the Sainte-Chapelle in Chambéry, which is now part of France.
Jul 16, 2018 · The Blood Stains on The Shroud of Turin Seem Totally Fake, Study Claims. A blood pattern analysis of the Shroud of Turin has revealed that there's just absolutely no way the stains could have been made by a body laying flat on the fabric. A pair of researchers have found that the blood-like splotches on the linen cloth are inconsistent with ...
Apr 13, 2020 · Real or fake: Debate continues to rage over the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin despite scientific tests that claim it dates to the Middle Ages. Getty Images
Feb 23, 2014 · The Shroud of Turin has been regarded as a relic, a forgery and even a work of art. A research team led by Alberto Carpinteri of the Politecnico di Torino in Italy hypothesized in a newly published study that an earthquake that hit Jerusalem in 33 C.E. may have been strong enough to cause neutron radiation.
