Late addition (July 2019)
Please forgive this postscript, correction, “prescript”, correction, intrusion, added many years later – based on some 350 and more postings here and elsewhere.
That’s including some 7 years of my hands-on investigation into image-forming techniques, chosen to be credible with simple, indeed crude, medieval (14th century) technology etc etc.
(Oh, and yes, I accept the radiocarbon dating, despite it being restricted to a single non-random corner sample, making all the oh-so-dismissive, oh-so-derogatory statistics-based sniping totally irrelevant – a ranging shot being just that me dears- a single ranging shot, albeit subdivided into three for Arizona, Oxford and Zurich).
Sindonology (i.e. the “science” , read pseudoscience – of the so-called “Shroud ” of Turin) can be simply summed up. It’s a re-branding exercise, one designed to pretend that the prized Turin possession is not just J of A’s “fine linen”, described in the biblical account as used to transport a crucified body from cross to tomb.
Oh no, it goes further, much further, way way beyond the biblical account. How? By making out that it was the SAME linen as that described in the Gospel of John, deployed as final “burial clothes”. Thus the description “Shroud” for the Turin Linen, usually with the addition “burial shroud”. Why the elision of two different linens, deployed for entirely different purposes (transport first, then final interment)?
Go figure! Key words to consider are: authentic relic v manufactured medieval icon; mystique, peaceful death-repose, unlimited opportunity for proposing new and ever more improbable image-formation mechanisms etc. How much easier it is to attach the label “Holy” to Shroud if seen as final burial clothes, in final at-peace repose – prior to Resurrection- as distinct from a means of temporary swaying side-to-side transport in an improvised makeshift stretcher !
As I say, a rebranding exercise (transport to final burial shroud) and a very smart and subtle one at that . Not for nothing did that angry local Bishop of Troyes suddenly refer to a “sleight of hand” after allegedly accepting it when first displayed. Seems the script was altered, or as some might say, tampered with! It might also explain why there were two Lirey badges, not just one. Entire books could be written on which of the two came first… I think I know which, with its allusion (?) to the Veil of Veronica… yes, there are alternative views (the face above “SUAIRE” a visual link to the face-only display of the Linen as the “Image of Edessa” or as that on the then current “Shroud” per se.
Face shown (left) on mid- 14th century Machy Mould (recently discovered variant of the Lirey Pilgrim Badge) above the word “SUAIRE” (allegedly meaning “shroud”). Inset image on the right: one version among many of the fabled “Veil of Veronica” image. I say the two are related, and deliberately so, but this is not the time or place to go into detail.
No, NOT a resurrectional selfie, but instead a full size version of, wait for it, the legendary VEIL OF VERONICA , product of inital body contact – no air gaps- between body and fabric, but with one important difference. The Turin image was intended to look more realistic, less artistic.
How? By displaying a negative tone-reversed image implying IMPRINT (unless, that is, you’re a modern day sindonologist, in which case ‘resurrectional proto-photographic selfie” becomes the preferred, nay, vigorously proferred explanation assisted by unrestrained imagination, creation of endless pseudoscience etc etc, with resort to laser beams, corona discharges, nuclear physics, elementary particles, earthquakes etc etc – the list is seemingly endless!
Welcome to modern day sindonology.
Personally, I prefer no-nonsense feet-on-the-ground hypothesis-testing science, aided by lashings of, wait for it, plain down-to-earth common sense.
Start of original posting:
WordPress has a splendid stats feature. Here’s a summary of my most-viewed postings (50 visits or more). Older ones will tend to have more visits (naturally), more recent ones fewer, so some of the more recent ones may be higher in say 3 months time and vice versa.
This list does not include postings to my two other sites, notably http://www.colinb-sciencebuzz.blogspot.com and www. strawshredder.wordpress.com. both of which have a substantial number of postings on Shroud-related issues, the first especially.
The entries below are all ‘hot links’ needless to say. Enjoy – or grind your teeth in fury as the case may be…
Afterthought: but for Shroudie news aggregation sites, one in particular, there would be far more hits and perhaps responses, here on my own site to my own original content. It’s the copying-and-pasting of most of one’s work – sometimes within minutes of posting – that I object to most. Visitors to those other sites then feel, probably correctly, that they have been supplied with the gist, and then feel no incentive to visit one’s site. This pirating of others’ content (let’s not mince our words – it IS pirating) then impacts unfavourably, disastrously even, on one’s ranking in search engines under general search labels like “shroud of turin” since the inter-site linking and CLICKS that one needs to register with the Google and other algorithms simply does not occur. I see Google has just announced that sites that facilitate the pirating of films, books, music etc will now find themselves de-ranked. I sincerely hope the same will apply in due course to ALL sites whose standard MO is the pirating of large chunks of others’ content – often graphics an’ all – with what can only be described as indecent haste.
Colin Berry aka sciencebod 18 August 2012