Postscript (correction: ‘prescript‘) added July 2019:
You have arrived at a 2014 posting. That was the year in which this investigator finally abandoned the notion of the body image being made by direct scorch off a heated metal template (despite many attractions, like negative image, 3D response etc. But hear later: orchestral DA DA! Yup, still there with the revised technology! DA DA! ).
In its place came two stage image production.
Stage 1: sprinkle white wheaten flour or suchlike vertically onto human subject from head to foot, front and rear (ideally with initial smear of oil to act as weak adhesive). Shake off excess flour, then cover the lightly coated subject with wet linen. Press down VERTICALLY and firmly (thus avoiding sides of subject). Then (and here’s the key step):
Stage 2: suspend the linen horizontally over glowing charcoal embers and roast gently until the desired degree of coloration, thus ‘developing’ the flour imprint, so as to simulate a sweat-generated body image that has become yellowed with centuries of ageing.
The novel two-stage “flour-imprinting’ technology was unveiled initially on my generalist “sciencebuzz” site. (Warning: one has to search assiduously to find it, and it still uses a metal template, albeit unheated, as distinct from human anatomy):
So it’s still thermal development of sorts, but with a key difference. One can take imprints off human anatomy (dead or alive!).
A final wash of the roasted flour imprint with soap and water yields a straw-coloured nebulous image, i.e. with fuzzy, poorly defined edges. It’s still a negative (tone-reversed) image that responds to 3D-rendering software, notably the splendid freely-downloadable ImageJ. (Ring any bells? Better still, orchestral accompaniment – see , correction HEAR earlier – DA DA!))
This 2014 “prescript” replaces the one used for my earlier 2012/2013 postings, deploying abandoned ‘direct scorch’ technology.
Thank you for your patience and forbearance. Here’s where the original posting started:
Original posting starts here:
Note the extra box on the right, and red links to the flow chart described previously. In other words, this is a refinement of an existing model proposed just two days ago.
Does my new ‘St.Lawrence connection’ push that of the Templars out the picture? Nope, I think not.
The gridiron on which St.Lawrence was roasted was small and simple, according to the artistic record. Compare that with the “trellis grid” on the reverse side of the Lirey badge. That looks like one constructed to accommodate many condemned to death ‘heretics’ at a time, as was the case with the purge and mass executions of the Templars in the early 14 th century in France.
The martyrdom of Lawrence provided the model for the appropriate punishment for personally offending the highest in the land – a Roman Emperor, no less (Valerian, ruled 253-259). The punishment meted out to the Templars, especially its leaders (de Molay and de Charney) was derivative and inspired by precisely the same alleged crime – namely offending a head of state – Philip the Fair of France.
Who says history never repeats itself?
Second PS: This comment fom Thibault Heimburger and my quick reply appeared last night Across the Way: