About

This is an example of a WordPress page, you could edit this to put information about yourself or your site so readers know where you are coming from. You can create as many pages like this one or sub-pages as you like and manage all of your content inside of WordPress.

6 Responses to About

  1. Kevin p stone says:

    Hi,

    I just want to thank you for your wonderful blog. I have been reading your blog for more than couple of months and now I have learned a lot. It’s a tough job to keep a blog going and I truly appreciate it. I really like to submit my post on your blog (as guest post) with my website link. Please let me know your interest in accepting guest posts for free of cost and I’m ready to discuss my contents with you, I promise you with quality and 100% plagiarism free content.
    I am looking forward to get your reply.

    Thank You,
    Kevin P Stone

  2. H.E says:

    Hi Collin, not sure if you answered this before… but why don’t we see many more instances of images on shrouds, cloths, etc…?

  3. Colin Berry says:

    It took me a while to track down where on my site your comment appeared, having only an email notification to go on initially. OK, so it’s under the “About” tab – I wasn’t aware it invited comments, thus the discovery that there’s an unanswered one from back in 2014!

    There’s no simple, self-evident answer to your question, which rephrased might be “Why is the Turin Shroud a ‘one-off’?”. But there’s a hint of an answer to be found if you go into the history of the Lirey chapel pre-1355 (first display of the Shroud). It was set up to begin with by a gift of land from Geoffroy de Charny’s comrade-in-arms, heir to the King of France, who, on becoming KIng himself, showered honours on his loyal but cash-strapped lieutenant, prompted in no small part by their sharing high-minded knightly ideals and a strong sense of religious piety.

    To cut a long story short, I believe the Shroud was initially created as a sure-fire attraction for ailment-afflicted and indulgence-seeking pilgrims, initially billed as a ‘realistic icon’ to represent Joseph of Arimathea’s linen. But when Geoffrey was killed at the Battle of Poitiers, his widow saw the potential in immediately upgrading an icon to “genuine relic”. The local bishop of Troyes. Henri de Poitiers, having initially approved the “icon” description, was quickly on the case. Banning the display for some 30 years allowed knowledge of its real provenance to gradually fade from public view, even assuming that the technology was ever known outside of the tight circle of 5 or 6 clerics appointed as ‘stewards’ (and in all probability covert part time icon-manufacturers) to Geoffroy’s VERY private chapel, well off the beaten track until acquiring its star attraction.

    Later stewards of the celebrated “Shroud” ( widow Jeanne de Vergy’s descendants and later still, under post-sale House of Savoy ownership) had a strong incentive to keep the innovative image-making technology under wraps, again assuming they were ever privy to the details.

  4. Matt says:

    Good day Colin, I’ve been reading your blog and you’ve revealed things to me I never knew about the shroud given all the hype thats out there. Just wanted your opinion on something. What do you make of the “second face” on the reverse side claim. I’ve heard even some pro-shroud people deny it. Do you have a post about it? Thanks.

  5. Colin Berry says:

    Hello Matt

    Any chance you could copy-and-paste your comment to the end of a posting,e.g. current, in addition to “About” (which does not get to be seen except by the few who click on that tab)?

    I’ll be back later with a tentative response to your question, hopefully visible as a ‘Recent Comment”. In the meantime, have you seen the entry that Mario Latendresse added to the Home Page of his site on September 20, 2016 (scroll down a bit) together with two useful images?

    http://www.sindonology.org/

    I would take issue with his claim that there’s NO image visible on the opposite side of the linen. The hair especially is faintly visible in Fig.2:

    • Matt says:

      Something you could reply to in my copied comment on your post:

      But, is the second face something that’s inexplicable by a scorch or bas relief? Or inexplicable by science?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s