Jesus' Shroud? Recent Findings Renew Authenticity Debate

National Geographic News ^ | April 9, 2004 | Bijal P. Trivedi

[shroudie]

When the sample was cut for the 1988 carbon 14 testing of the Shroud, it was divided into six pieces. Three pieces were used for the tests, and three were placed in reserve in a vault. All were sealed and chain of evidence documentation was recorded by the British Museum, representatives of the three carbon dating laboratories, and Turin church authorities.

In December of 2003, one of the reserve samples was provided to Raymond Rogers, a UCLA Science Fellow. Rogers is a phyical chemist who once headed up the explosives research and development group at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

Roger has demonstrated that the 1988 tests were flawed and completely inaccurate.

[shroudie]

For more information and clear evidentiary photographs see: Carbon 14 Evidence and the article in National Geographic.

Rogers calls for new carbon 14 testing. I agree. But I don't believe it is needed to establish a reasoned conclusion that the cloth is indeed a first century burial cloth. See also: Lignon and Vanillin

Dan Porter

[kezekiel]

Pretty fascinating stuff. I admit I was one of those believers who wrote it off after the carbon-dating result, despite the lack of answers for how someone could have created such a fraud. With carbon-dating now more likely to place it within the time frame of Jesus, it's a whole new ballgame.

[Swordmaker]

Shroud of Turin PING for National Geographic!

As always, if you want to be included or deleted from the Shroud of Turin Ping list, Freepmail me.

Swordmaker

[beckett]

It's quite amusing. The Secrets of the Dead hourlong segment on the Shroud that aired this week on PBS showed the British scientist who ran the carbon-14 tests making a few remarks for the camera back in 1988. He was insufferably pompous and smug about the findings and said words to the effect, "Well you know, there is still a Flat Earth Society around which disputes the discoveries of Galileo. I suppose some will dispute our findings, but they will be no better than the Flat Earthers."

How exquisitely satisfying to see so arrogant a man taken down a notch. Science has too many like him in its ranks.

And really, the scientists in 1988 should have known the area the sample was taken from would be unreliable. It was the corner from which the Shroud was hung in public displays during the 16th and 17th centuries.

The most astounding thing I learned from the show was that the decision about where to take the sample from was made on the spot that day after a quarrel between two scientists in which one of them prevailed. They had not even carefully chosen the location after lengthy, months long, in depth study and debate!

[Rokurota]

How exquisitely satisfying to see so arrogant a man taken down a notch. Science has too many like him in its ranks.

Amen. I saw the same show. I thought, "Yet another dogmatist posing as a scientist."

[Graymatter]

Excellent site, shroudstory.com...

Another question. If it's the real deal, shouldn't there be traces of aloe and myrrh?

[WhiteyAppleseed]

What's the point of a "wall of separation between church and state" if that wall is non-existent for science and state? Freedom of conscience was/is controlled by the leaders in the church. Learning was controlled by the leaders in the church. The "scientists" of primitive cultures were able to forecast eclipses, had knowledge, were able to use that to demand sacrifices by the people, to demand human sacrifices. What has changed? Nothing.
The robes are still white, or black, or whatever color is worn on graduation day, and few think twice about questioning them.

[Caipirabob]

Sooner or later, Jesus will settle this for us once and for all...

[NewYorker]

Sooner or later, Jesus will settle this for us once and for all...

Amen!

[aruanan]

The most astounding thing I learned from the show was that the decision about where to take the sample from was made on the spot that day after a quarrel between two scientists in which one of them prevailed. They had not even carefully chosen the location after lengthy, months long, in depth study and debate!

Why should they bother to do that? They already knew that it wasn't what it purported to be.

[shroudie]

Excellent question about aloe and myrrh; one for which there is not yet a final answer.

Pierluigi Baima Bollone of the University of Turin reported in March of 2000 finding, by means of immunofluorescence, both aloe and myrrh in the areas of the right foot, the back and an off-image area. Unfortunately, his work was not submitted for peer review or published as a refereed paper. His findings lack confirmation. Furthermore, it is challenged by peer-reviewed findings. Following strict rules of scientific methods, Bollone’s findings cannot be considered evidentiary, at least not yet.

Aloe is a mixture of glycosides. It is a drug obtained by evaporating the juice of the leaves of several species of aloe

Myrrh is a complex mixture of resin acids, resenes, phenolic compounds, a polypentosan gum composed of arabinose units, and a bunch of terpenes. Myrrh, as a funerary spice, was often in the form of a yellow or yellowish-green oil that has a very piercing odor. However it may have been in powder form if its natural volatile oils were evaporated. Several of its components, like thymol, should have reacted with cellulose of the linen and there is not evidence of that

Both spices could have been mired with oil or used in powdered form. If they were ever in contact with the cloth, whether as an oil or a powder, some fractions should still be there. Scientists, using a Pyrolysis Mass Spectrometry system at the National Science Foundation's "Center of Excellence" at the University of Nebraska, no characteristic molecules of either aloes or myrrh were detected. Other visible light and UV spectra tests and wet chemistry tests did not find the spices.

How do we interpret the biblical narratives? Were the women returning to complete the burial on Easter morning? If the burial were not yet finished, is it possible that the expensive spices had not yet been used? If Luke 24:1 says: "But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices which they had prepared..." (RSV)

Shroudie

[Sacajaweau]

And the money will just keep rolling in for these "scientists". They'll write books, knock heads and in the end, nothing will EVER be settled...and what's the point. Even if it is timely to the "Jesus" period, it still does not mean it was his burial cloth.

[aruanan]

Amen. I saw the same show. I thought, "Yet another dogmatist posing as a scientist."

You've fallen for the very belief that such people have always tried to promote: The scientist as noble, clear-eyed, dispassionate revealer of truth.

The truth is that the intellectual tool of science is designed only to make sure that one's measurements be as accurate as one's technology permits, that one's measurements use the appropriate tool for the quantity to be measured, and that one's conclusions follow logically from one's premises.

If one works very diligently, then one may be able to separate what one hopes or believes is out there from what actually is out there. That is, one may be able to systematically eliminate one's misconceptions about what is out there in the world by the practice of science and, as a result, be able to exercise control over it and then use it for one's ends. This is the power of science.

The choice of both premises and ends, though, lies outside the field of science because science is limited to reasoning and experimentation based on measurable quantities. The biggest error of the past three centuries has been the assumption that since everything that can be measured exists, nothing exists if it cannot be measured. The belief is that since measurement is but the extension of our senses by technical means, there is nothing that exists apart from that which is open, at least in principle, to our senses; ie, "seeing is believing" or, ostrich-like, "If I can't see it, it doesn't exist." Accordingly, personality, thought, love, and free will are just smiley faces we put on biochemical processes that are irrevocably part of a chain of cause and effect that we only think we control.

The funny thing is that there are some people who feel comforted in believing this who at the same time ridicule people who believe Jesus rose from the dead because others witnessed it. They claim that their witness cannot be trusted because

1. something like that cannot happen,

2. it cannot happen since they've never observed it,* and

3. if it doesn't happen more than once and they haven't witnessed it themselves, then anyone else claiming to have done so must either be insane or a liar. And then they abuse the word "science" by claiming 1-3 to be scientific.

The answer to the above is, of course,

1. that the most they can say is that, given the usual nature of things, it doesn't happen, not that it cannot happen if given sufficient cause, and that if it did happen, that would be, in and of itself, evidence that the cause was outside the usual nature of things. Stating categorically that there can be no sufficient cause "because biology teaches us..." is just naked arrogance trying to use science as a fig leaf;

2. that plenty of things happen that one has never witnessed or had any idea that they could happen,

3. that there are plenty of things that happen only once--the history of one's life, for instance, beginning with one's conception--that are nonetheless real.

The retort to 3. (because they cannot argue with the first two) would be that 'history' or 'one's life' are not truly 'things,' but simply labels slapped arbitrarily somewhere along the chain of natural events that exist on their own without rhyme or reason and that sticking on these labels is just an attempt by weak people who lack the bravery to see things the way they really are to provide a feeling of meaning where is none--yeah, sort of like the people who use the label of "science" to claim to have the only true way of separating fact from fiction as well as the only means by which to define 'fact' and 'fiction' ?

* or observed by anyone they trust, meaning 'by anyone who believes what they believe', meaning 'if you've claimed to have witnessed this, you're no longer someone I can trust,' meaning, 'only that which I believe is true or can possibly be true,' meaning, 'I, and those like me, are the sole arbiters of truth,' meaning, 'if you don't fit in with the program, then you're an enemy,' meaning, 'if you don't accept the tenets of _____, then you're the enemy of truth and since we accept the tenets of _____ and we are human, then you are also the enemy of mankind." And how is this any different from any other form of tribalism?

[aruanan]

How do we interpret the biblical narratives? Were the women returning to complete the burial on Easter morning? If the burial were not yet finished, is it possible that the expensive spices had not yet been used? If Luke 24:1 says: "But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices which they had prepared..." (RSV)

This assumes there to have been a coordinated planning between all the followers of Jesus about what to do for the burial. Such is not evident. Remember that many of Jesus's followers were in hiding because they were afraid they'd be next. They didn't have telephones. There was no way to get in touch except to be physically present with another or to send him a message.

The most likely explanation, based on the available textual evidence, is that at least two groups of people were doing everything in their power to do the right thing as soon as they could. Joseph of Arimathea took the body from the crucifixion site and with Nicodemus wrapped it in strips of cloth and about 75 lbs of myrrh (the expensive spice) and aloes, "in accordance with Jewish burial customs". They put him in that particular tomb because it was close by and because the Sabbath was almost upon them. But there's no indication that they did an incomplete job that the women were coming to finish. That the woman were coming to the tomb with the things necessary for embalming the body simply means that either they didn't know at the time that he had already been buried "in accordance with Jewish burial customs", or that, like women everywhere, had figured that if the men had done it, they probably had screwed something up that the women needed to put right. Of course, they may just have wanted to see him one last time and treat his body with the respect and love it deserved.

[tbeatty]

I took classes from the the Physics prof at the University of Arizona. I don't believe his tests were flawed and it dated the Shroud as being living plant during the middle ages.

[shroudie]

I don't know when you took these classes. Many who participated in the tests have objected to the various explanations offered before end of 2003. Probably with good justification. I never bought into the many explanations being offered but I did believe something was wrong because of a preponderance of other evidence.

I agree with you. In fact, certainly, the tests were well done and indeed did measure to medieval plant material. And in fact, that is what Rogers and numerous others contend. What was measured, clearly, was a medieval patch to a damaged edge of the patch. Not easily discernable with visible light, the patch is clearly visible with UV lighting as shown in the picture below. It is the darker brown area and the reason it fluoresces is because it has a disparate chemical nature.

M. Sue Benford and Joseph Marino, in collaboration with number of textile experts, identified clear evidence of medieval mending on the Shroud. A patch was expertly sewn to or rewoven into the fabric to repair a damaged edge. It was from this patch—quite likely nothing more than a piece of medieval cloth—that the samples were taken. From documenting photographs of the sample areas, the textile experts identified enough newer thread to permit Ronald Hatfield, of the prestigious radiocarbon dating firm Beta Analytic, to estimate that the true date of the cloth is much older—perhaps even 1st century.

Independently, Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan and Raymond N. Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California Los Alamos National Laboratory have explored the chemical nature of the sample area. They have confirmed the finding of Benford and Marino. Ultraviolet photography and spectral analysis show that the area from which the samples were taken was chemically unlike the rest of the cloth. Chemical analysis reveals the presence of Madder root dye and an aluminum oxide mordant (a reagent that fixes dyes to textiles) not found elsewhere on Shroud. Medieval artisans often dyed threads in this manner when mending damaged tapestries. This was simply to make the repairs less noticeable. The presence of Madder root and mordant suggests that the Shroud was mended in this way.

Microchemical tests also reveal vanillin (C8H8O3 or 4-hydroxy-3-methoxybenzaldehyde) in an area of the cloth from which the carbon 14 sample were cut. But the rest of the cloth does not test positive for it. Vanillin is produced by the thermal decomposition of lignin, a complex polymer, a non-carbohydrate constituent of plant material including flax. Found in medieval materials but not in much older cloths, it diminishes and disappears with time. For instance, the wrappings of the Dead Sea scrolls do not test positive for vanillin.

As you studied the subject under a master, you certainly know that archeologists know well that carbon 14 testing is best suited for testing things that have been undisturbed and well protected from natural or manufactured contamination. Because of this problem and because unexplained anomalies in the measurements often occur, corroborating evidence of another kind is sought. For instance, an archeologist might try to compare the cloth with other linen examples from antiquity.

According to Methchild Flury-Lemberg, a leading authority on historic textiles and the former curator of Switzerland’s Abegg Foundation Textile Museum, it is similar to linen woven on Egyptian or Syrian tombs and used in Roman occupied Palestine. Flury-Lemberg reports that the Shroud resembles unique ancient textiles found in tombs of the Jewish palace-fortress Masada, reliably dated to between 40 BCE and 73 CE.

More significant is the fact that the yarn was bleached before the cloth was woven. This is not how linen was produced in Europe during the time in question. There and then, the entire linen was bleached after weaving. More ancient linen was manufactured as described by Pliny the Elder: individual hanks of yarn were bleached and dried before weaving. This produced batches of thread with slightly different off-white coloration. With lighting from behind, X-ray-transmission, ultraviolet light and contrast-enhanced photography we can see discrete bands of yarn with different visual characteristics (x-ray densities and corresponding color densities). Some areas show darker warp yarns and some show darker weft yarns. In places bands of darker or lighter color cross producing plaid effect. Archeologically speaking, the cloth of the Shroud was not produced when the carbon 14 testing determined that it was.

When Rogers and others say the tests were flawed they mean that a bad sample was provided to the team at the University of Arizona and the other labs. And this is not being disputed by those who conducted the tests.

Shroudie

[Oatka]

If it was a shroud, why are the images "hinged" at the head? Shouldn't the top of the head have left a mark also? That alone makes me suspicious.

Read "Turin Shroud" by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince for an off-the-wall but plausible explanation (as good as any of the others). Miracle it ain't, but it MIGHT be one of the world's most astounding artifacts.

[Swordmaker]

They had not even carefully chosen the location after lengthy, months long, in depth study and debate!

Actually, they HAD decided where to take the samples. There was a protocol that had been worked out in advance specifying that seven samples from seven different locations on the shroud would be taken. Agreement had been gotten for this protocol from the Bishop of Turin.

It literally WAS at the last moment that the senior scientist advising the Bishop ordered that the sample be taken from the one area that the scientists had all agreed SHOULD NOT be included because it had been repaired in antiquity. In other words, it was known that area was not a good candidate for the sample but they went ahead anyway in the hopes they were wrong about that area. That sounds like wishful thinking to me.

[Mike Bates]

A mystery shrouded in faith

[Swordmaker]

The most likely explanation, based on the available textual evidence, is that at least two groups of people were doing everything in their power to do the right thing as soon as they could.

No, Aruanan, this is illogical. The women had to have spoken with those who participated in the entombment because they knew where the body was buried. Preparing the purchased herbs and spices would have taken some time, time that was not available on the evening before the Sabbath started.

According to scripture, a LOT had to happen before Jesus' body could even be taken down from the cross. Pilate had to be persuaded, the shroud had to be purchased. Then they had to take the body down, get it into the tomb before sunset, and then ritually clean themselves because they had touched a dead body which left them "unclean" and not able to participate in Sabbath observances. They also had to get home as even walking home was considered "work" that was taboo on the Sabbath.

It is much more likely that a quick burial was done to beat the sunset which started the Sabbath. Just as the Bible tells us, the women were going to the tomb to complete the burial rituals.