'Blood' Images
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Shroud of Turin’s ‘Blood’ Images: Blood, or Paint? A History of Science Inquiry Author: David Ford <[email protected]>, a graduate of the University of Maryland Baltimore County that majored in history and philosophy. Date: 10 December 2000 Keywords: Shroud of Turin, ‘blood’ images, McCrone, iron oxide and vermilion paint, Heller & Adler, blood tests “It is the essence of scientific investigation to seek to much ‘blood’ and a clear fluid as if from a lance conform thought to the nature of its object, as wound, and seemingly unbroken legs.10 Because of encountered in its interaction with us.” this close similarity, the image is universally believed -- John Polkinghorne1 to depict Jesus,11 yet much controversy remains about whether the Shroud is Jesus’ actual burial shroud or Introduction merely a forgery. A ‘strong-authenticity’ view holds that the body image was produced by supernatural According to the New Testament’s book of means involving Jesus’ body, while a ‘weak- John, Roman soldie rs “flogged” Jesus of Nazareth, authenticity’ view holds that the body image was “twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his produced by Jesus’ body via unusual natural head,” “struck him in the face,” and, along with two processes. In both the strong- and weak- authenticity others, “crucified him.”2 Because the next day was views, the ‘blood’ images arose via contact of the unsuitable for the display of crucified individuals, a cloth with a bloody Jesus. request that those crucified have their “legs broken” and their “bodies taken down” was made and A point of argument against the Shroud of granted.3 (With their legs broken, victims of Turin being Jesus’ actual burial cloth is that it can be crucifixion could no longer push up their bodies to traced with certainty only from about AD 1355. inhale, and death by suffocation quickly ensued.4) Before then, existence and provenance is much more Because the soldie rs found Jesus “already dead” they uncertain. According to some traditions, a disciple of “did not break his legs,” and one soldier “instead... Jesus brought from Jerusalem to Edessa a cloth pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden miraculously imprinted with the likeness of Jesus.12 flow of blood and water.”5 John states that the body Shroud historian Ian Wilson speculates that this cloth was “wrapped in strips of linen,” while Luke says “in was the Shroud of Turin, and that it was hidden in a linen cloth,” Mark writes “linen cloth,” and Matthew wall to be later rediscovered during the 500s.13 In states “a clean linen cloth,” though John later speaks fact, a circa 593 account states that a 544 siege of of both “strips of linen” and “the burial cloth that had Edessa was repulsed by “the divinely wrought been around Jesus’ head.”6 likeness which human hands have not made” and which was discovered in the throes of the city’s Incredible as it may seem, Jesus’ burial cloth distress.14 In 943, the ‘cloth of Edessa’ was moved has been alleged to have survived to the present and from Edessa to Constantinople. The year thereafter, be the object known as the Shroud of Turin (hereafter this cloth was described as bearing “blood and water Shroud). The Shroud is an approximately 4.3 by 1.1 from his [Jesus’] very side,” and in a circa 1130 meters (14 feet 3 inches by 3 feet 7 inches) strip of sermon borrowing from a 769 discussion, the cloth of linen cloth having burn marks from a 1532 fire, and Edessa was described as having “the glorious most signific antly, bearing the faint front and back features of [Jesus’] face, and the majestic form of his images of an apparently scourged and crucified male. whole body... supernaturally transferred,”15 indicating Close similarities exist between the image and the the presence of more than simply a face. An official biblical accounts of Jesus’ crucifixion: over 100 history of the cloth of Edessa characterized in 945 the marks are visible on the chest and back side as if imprint as “a moist secretion without pigment or the from a flogging,7 ‘blood’ marks at the back of the painter’s art,” and “due to sweat, not pigments,”16 head, to the sides of the face, and on the brow are descriptions that conceivably could have been of the suggestive of a crown of thorns,8 the face appears Shroud. The cloth of Edessa disappeared around the beaten and wounded,9 wounds appear in the visible time of the 1204 ransacking of Constantinople.17 wrist and the clearly-outlined foot as if from nails, a Assuming that the cloth of Edessa is identical with the dark ellipsis resides in the side in a region having Shroud of Turin, the cloth of Edessa reappeared in circa 1355, and has been known ever since as the Vignon (in the 1930s) and the American Shroud of Turin. Robert Wuenschel (by 1954) found at least 15 peculiarities shared by 1) the Shroud face and 2) An early charge of forgery appears in a 1389 many Byzantine portraits of Jesus from the 6th-12th letter by a bishop alleging that his predecessor had centuries,24 suggesting that the Shroud was in investigated the Shroud’s origin in about 1355, and existence well before the 1988 carbon-dating date of discovered it to be a painting: between AD 1260 and 1390.25 In 1969, a group of Eventually, after diligent inquiry and individuals examined and photographed the Shroud, examination, he [the preceding bishop] but did not perform any testing.26 A few years later, discovered the fraud and how the said cloth a 1973 Italian Commission largely composed of had been cunningly painted, the truth being scientists examined the Shroud, and those samples of attested by the artist who had painted it, to ‘blood’ removed were tested for the presence of wit, that it was a work of human skill and not blood, yet only negative results were obtained.27 On miraculously wrought or bestowed.18 19 February 1976, upon placing a transparency of the Shroud into a device called a VP-8 Image Analyzer, This letter, as well as the Shroud’s seeming lack of two American scientists viewed a 3-D rendition of the historical mention prior to the 1350s, was proclaimed body image, thereby discovering that the body image by scholars in 1900-1902 to constitute proof that the encodes 3-D information and posing a severe Shroud was a forgery.19 The scholars had had their challenge to attempts at reproducing the body interest in the Shroud recently awakened by an 1898 image.28 discovery. On the night of 28 May 1898, upon developing his photographic plates of the Shroud, the Beginning in October 1978, about forty Italian semi-professional photographer Seconda Pia American scientists intensely studied the Shroud found that the body image appeared much more before concluding that the body image was not some realistic and lifelike when viewed in negative. Pia type of painting.29 On the basis of their extensive inferred that the body image on the Shroud had the testing of fibers and particulate matter taken from the qualities of a negative, so that when one obtained a Shroud, biophysicist John Heller (d. 13 December negative of that negative, one saw a quite lifelike 1995) and chemist Alan Adler (d. 11 June 2000) positive.20 concluded that the body image consisted simply of prematurely-aged linen.30 The body image is, like a Besides scholars, scientists were intrigued by newspaper picture, a halftone, since the higher the the lifelike image. Working under the direction of the density of yellowed fibers, the darker is the body renowned agnostic zoologist Yves Delage, the image area.31 In contrast, microscopist Walter Catholic artist and biologist Paul Vignon and others McCrone claimed that the body image resulted from conducted experiments in an attempt to discover the the application of simply iron-oxide (Fe2O3) particles, mechanism responsible for the body image’s a claim he later altered to say that the body image formation. On 21 April 1902, Delage read his and resulted from the application of iron-oxide particles in Vignon’s paper to the French Academy of Sciences a proteinaceous medium (i.e., liquid iron-oxide paint). describing the Shroud’s properties and the research and experimentation done, and concluded that the Regarding the ‘blood,’ Heller and Adler Shroud was medically accurate, was not a painting, (hereafter H&A) concluded that it was actual blood was not a forgery, and did wrap Jesus’ body.21 In material on the basis of physics-based and chemistry- 1931 and 1932, the French surgeon Peirre Barbet based testing, most tests of which will be discussed, performed experiments on cadavers to learn more specifically the following: detection of higher-than- about crucifixion in relation to what is seen on the elsewhere levels of iron in ‘blood’ areas via X-ray Shroud.22 Barbet discovered that nails driven through fluorescence, indicative spectra obtained by the palms of the hands cannot support a body; in microspectrophotometry, generation with chemicals contrast, nails driven through the wrists would and ultraviolet light of characteristic porphyrin support a body, and furthermore, would damage fluorescence, positive tests for hemochromagen using nerves in the wrists, causing thumbs to retract into the hydrazine, positive tests for cyanmethemoglobin using palms.23 On the Shroud, a wound appears in the a neutralized cyanide solution, positive tests for the visible wrist, and no thumb is apparent. bile pigment bilirubin, positive tests for protein, and use of proteolytic enzymes on ‘blood’ material, leaving no residues.