speaking of the meeting of the Centro Internazionale di Sindonologia
This, just appearing on San Francesco, a news outlet of the Sacred Convent of Assisi: Shroud and Sudarium of Oviedo: "Traces of blood superimposed". What follows is a Google translation:
‘All information made by the study and research "on the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo" are in agreement with what, from the point of view of forensic medicine, one should expect that to happen on the canvas with these features if they covered the head of a corpse with all the injuries he suffered Jesus of Nazareth, just as it is told in the Gospels. " This was stated today the Spanish forensic doctor Alfonso Sánchez Hermosilla at the conference of the International Centre Sindonologia which was held today in Turin, dedicated to updates on the "major issues" concerning the Shroud.
It is not a public meeting, but reserved to the members of the Center and this year extended to groups and organizations around the world collaborate with the Turin Centre. Are in fact arrived from France, England, Spain, Peru, Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia more than 300 scholars and experts. "This time," said Gian Maria Zaccone, scientific director of the Museum of the Shroud, "the focus of debate and action, is not the subject of the authenticity of the Shroud.The purpose of the meeting is to review progress on some issues of Shroud research needing further study, such as the role of research palynological and significance of historical research and information on the Shroud. "
Among the experts took the floor also Sánchez Hermosilla, director of EDICES (Group of Investigation of the Spanish Center of Sindonologia), the forensic doctor who continued the studies undertaken in the sixties by Monsignor Giulio Ricci on the Sudarium of Oviedo. "The similarity in morphology and size of the spots of the same with the Shroud of Turin," made him think of Ricci "who had actually found the relic mentioned by St. John" in his Gospel, when he mentions the shroud in the tomb. "From the point of view of forensic anthropology and forensic medicine – continued Sanchez – all information highlighted scientific investigation, are compatible with the hypothesis that the Shroud of Turin and the shroud covered the corpse of the same person ‘ .
The Shroud of Oviedo is a relic preserved in the cathedral of "El Salvador" in Oviedo, Spain, in the House Santa used as a chapel of the palace during the reign of King Alfonso II, an annex to the palace and built with the intention to house the Shroud along with other relics from the king himself. "This painting is located in this region of northern Spain from the year 812 or 842 ‘and’ is packaged in linen; It has a size of about 84 + 54 cm ‘. The textile structure of the Shroud and the Shroud "have the same composition, concretely linen, the same thickness of the fibers are spun by hand and with a twist in the" Z ", although they were woven in different ways: serge spike for the Shroud and why orthogonal (taffeta) for the Shroud. "
In the Shroud it does not appear anything like the mysterious image in the Shroud and prodottasi after the body wrapped in a sheet of blood had stained and fluids. There are in fact only traces of blood and other body fluids "from a human corpse," as he had already said in 1985 Professor Pierluigi Baima Bollone, confirming also that the blood group was AB, as was subsequently confirmed by Dr. José Delfín Villalaín Blanco.
"The morphological study of the spots on the two paintings – said Sánchez – show a clear similarity between them, the cause is due to the fact that the corpse that originated was treated with much care either way." Of course, the Spanish scholar admits, "we must take into account that this morphological similarity between the bloodstains could not be relevant: different heads can give very similar stains, as well as a same head can give very different spots. Nevertheless – he insists – both teams will match very well, if you compare both relics, both for its location and for the surface dimension, to which must be added the correlation distance between injuries that originated stains. "
Hermosilla Sánchez pointed out that the Shroud of Oviedo "hid the face of the corpse," before it was wrapped in the Shroud of Turin. "From the point of view of forensic medicine, it appears a large number of agreements between the injuries that you see in the image Shroud, and those that can be observed in the study of the Shroud of Oviedo criminalistic. Moreover, all these injuries, agree with the findings that, in his day, he realized the STURP through the use of VP8. "
Among the evidence that the Spanish doctor considers most important, we note the bloodstains attributed to the thorns of the crown that "appear in both the relics with a great similarity in the distance separating each other." The area "occupied by the nostril in both paintings is very similar, in the Shroud of Oviedo occupies an area of 2,280 m², and the Shroud of 2,000 m². So even in the middle of the right region of the nose is an inflamed area with an area of 100 mm² and 90 mm² in the Shroud in the Shroud. "
In addition, one of the spots of the Shroud of Oviedo "seems consistent with some of the wounds caused by flagrum Taxilatum" – the scourge used to hit the man Shroud – "on the right side of the neck, and turns out to be compatible with some of the footprints of the Shroud turin attributed to the same reason. In the occipital region appear bloodstains vital, that spilled when the convict was still alive, are very similar in both paintings and seem to relate to the injuries of the scalp, also it appears to be consistent with those that would produce a crown of thorns ».
"At the height of the 7th cervical vertebra, or vertebra prominens, the Shroud of Oviedo – continues the scholar – a spot appears that takes the shape of a butterfly, and that it could rise as a result of precise stitching canvas Oviedo hair the corpse anointed blood still fresh. This way of sewing the cloth to the hair it produced the form which can be seen in the image Shroud and that some authors believed they identify with a kind of tail or even a braid, providing further proof of the influence that had the use Front Shroud compared to the Shroud. On either side of this spot will appear caused by other fluids cadaverous, and which are similar in the Shroud and the Shroud. "
Sanchez also said that on the Shroud of Oviedo located just a spot appears in the lower left corner of the back of the canvas, "which may have been produced as a result of the outlet of the wound caused by the spear, this spot has its equivalence in the Shroud Turin and could have passed unnoticed until then to its morphological similarity with the spots assigned to scourging. In addition to this spot, appearing indirect signs of the spear, as well as the abundant fibrin clot that appear in the so-called spot and stain spread like an accordion. "
The three-dimensional reconstructions of the face of the man on the Shroud are compatible with the spots in the Shroud. "After knowing the proportions craniometric present in both relics, and once made their comparison, it appears that they are in agreement, what allowed the sculptor D. Juan Manuel Lopez Miñarro to make a reconstruction of the face of the Man of the Shroud . This reconstruction is fully compatible with the face of the Man of the Shroud, not only for his anthropometric proportions, but also in traumatic injuries that have both. "
"In fact, there was also the compatibility of the face once carved, since it is colored in the anatomical regions that are stained with blood in the Shroud of Oviedo, above them was placed a painting very carefully in order to find out, and then check the result; footprints resulting appeared very similar to the canvas of Oviedo. "
Finally, encrusted in a clot of blood from the Shroud of Oviedo, "it turned out a grain of pollen that was morphologically identified by biologist dell’EDICES Marzia Boi as belonging to the botanical genus Helicrisum, and is compatible with other pollens found to be similar Other investigators on the Shroud of Turin. This finding, as well as showing a further analogy between the two relics, could support the hypothesis of Marzia Boi that the pollen could be arrived at tele proceeding ointments which was wrapped the corpse. " ( Vatican Insider )
Click on image to see larger version. This has been sourced from a July 2012 posting on Stephen Jones’ blog.
Click HERE or on the image
The English language pages of the Universidad Católica de Murcia (UCAM) are reporting that UCAM’s researchers have found scientific evidence that places the Shroud of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin in the same scenario::
The research group of the Catholic University of Murcia which is studying samples of the Shroud of Oviedo, has discovered a grain of pollen from one plant that, according to the Pollen Expert of EDICES, Marzia Boi, is compatible with the botanical species of Helicrysum Sp., also identified in the Holy Shroud (Shroud of Turin). Moreover, it has dropped the hypothesis of subsequent contamination, as the pollen is adhered to the blood; this means that the pollen arrived on the shroud at the same time as the blood, not randomly at some point along its history. This fact is very important because it makes it possible to prove the authenticity of the Shroud of Oviedo, and deny that it is a forgery.
La Opinion de Murcia in a story four days ago adds this interesting piece of information (Translation by Google):
This research has been possible thanks to the innovative scanning electron microscope last generation that tells the UCAM. In this sense, the president of the UCAM, José Luis Mendoza, notes that [the university] acquired "the microscope to offer this service" to investigate in depth the aforementioned relic. This is a new finding that is not part of the research line that is centered study, since what is sought in the sample being processed is human biological material.
The Valencia newspaper, Las Provincias, in its coverage of the discovery, offers up this (Translation by Google):
The plant known as ‘Helicrysum’ has been used for thousands of years for cosmetic purposes in the Middle East; also was used in Jewish burials during the first century of the Christian era, so it is no wonder their presence on blood remnants of a canvas used to shroud a corpse.
Will this story get legs beyond regional papers and a university website?
Click on picture for larger view and here for and even larger image on the university’s site.
Has anyone noticed that two weeks out
CNN is advertising this series several times per day.
1) Another Beliefnet article, Is This The Actual Face of Jesus? , delves into the upcoming CNN series about Jesus, particularly the first show on March 1, 2015, about the Shroud of Turin. The lead reads:
In the upcoming original CNN series, Finding Jesus: Faith, Fact, Forgery, The Shroud of Turin is a linen cloth that some Christians believe is the actual burial cloth of Christ, bearing His image. Others have their doubts.
It then begins with the rather bold sentence:
This March, the CNN series will delve into the archaeological findings surrounding The Shroud of Turin and travel as far as the Cathedral of San Salvador, in Spain, to answer this question once and for all.
“We believe based on our research the Shroud is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus,” says series expert and Director of the Turin Shroud Centre of Colorado Dr. John Jackson. A physicist and professor at heart, he was first introduced to The Shroud by his mother at the age of 13 and quickly became fascinated with the relic but asserts his position is not to convince others of his conclusion but lead them to draw one for themselves, "The Shroud has both religious and scientific dimensions. This ignites curiosity on both sides of the spectrum. So we try to put it back on the people who come to our lectures to think for themselves rather than regurgitating our data and reasoning. It’s much more effective that way." In 1978, Jackson led a team of scientists who spent five days intensely studying the Shroud for authenticity, before ultimately concluding it is genuine and not an artistic fake.
[ . . . ]
Jackson encourages fellow Christians to look at the series through the lens of both science and faith, "Maybe the Shroud has something to say about the primordial concern [of life and death] we have as human beings. Therefore, I think it’s incredibly important. Not that we base our faith on the Shroud, but that it can illuminate our faith in Christianity."
2) And The Blaze has an article, The Truth About Jesus? New TV Series Promises to Blend ‘Science and Archeology’ to Explore the Bible :
Set to premiere on March 1 at 9 p.m., “Finding Jesus” will include media personalities and experts who will discuss these matters in detail, including Pastor Erwin MacManus of MOSAIC Los Angeles, California, and Huffington Post religion editor Rev. Paul Raushenbush.
Reporter David Gibson will release a companion book later this month by the same name that will dive deeper into the contents of the documentary, claiming in a book description that the relics depicted “give us the most direct evidence about the life and world of Jesus.”
“The book and attendant CNN series provide a dramatic way to retell ‘the greatest story ever told’ while introducing a broad audience to the history, the latest controversies, and newest forensic science involved in sorting out facts from the fiction of would-be forgers and deceivers,” a book explanation reads. “The book and the show draw on experts from all over the world. Beyond the faithful, the book will also appeal to the skeptical and to curious readers of history and archaeology, while it takes viewers of the primetime TV series deeper into the story.”
We believe our hypothesis can readily be tested simply by . . .
our hypothesis depends on a completely natural mechanism.
It does not conflate the image formation mechanism with the Resurrection
When I spotted Electric Charge Separation as the Mechanism for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin: A Natural Mechanism by D.S. Spicer and E .T. Toton on shroud.com’s St. Louis Conference page, and I read the abstract again, I quickly looked for something else to read. It’s the non-scientist in me; this was going to be difficult paper, I realized.
I was wrong. It was very interesting and easy to understand.
I always jump to the end where I found this under Discussion and Conclusions on page 15:
As should be clear, our hypothesis depends on a completely natural mechanism. It does not conflate the image formation mechanism with the Resurrection, nor should it. The image is not the recording of the Resurrection but it is an image capture of the body of a crucified man consistent with the historical records of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. That no hitherto satisfying mechanism for image formation has been discovered is not proof that a supernatural explanation must be the only other choice, nor does the discovery of a credible mechanism of image formation impugn the belief in the reality of the Resurrection. If it were possible to take a photo of the Ascension-where is the miracle? Is it the Ascension or the photo of it? We believe that the Shroud Image is indeed the image of Jesus Christ’s lifeless body only and it strengthens the historical argument for His existence, death, and His Resurrection.
Got it! That’s clear. Now back to the beginning. This part of the introduction had me hooked. Read on!
In this paper we examine a novel image formation mechanism that comprises a uniform low frequency quasi-electrostatic field and polar molecules to produce the image of a crucified man on a linen cloth known as the Shroud of Turin. Given that to date the historical evidence tracks the origins of the cloth back to at least the 6th century AD, that forensic evidence strongly supports the conclusion that the man enclosed by the Shroud was in fact crucified, which totally undermines the assertion of forgery by revealing details in physics, chemistry and medical knowledge only available in the 20th century, and that there are additional physical tests, other than the one-off and often cited C14 test against the authenticity of the Shroud, that date the Shroud to the 1st century AD, we will assume that the crucified man was in fact Jesus of Nazareth and use the New Testament Gospels as a source of information for Jesus’ crucifixion.
Among the many STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) findings regarding the images of a crucified man found on the Shroud of Turin (ST) there are six that point to a clear and natural explanation for both the dorsal and ventral images of the cloth [21, 16, 1, 2, 3, 8, 20]. These are:
- Images on the cloth exist only of the dorsal and ventral surfaces of body and these images lie only on the fibers found at the extremities of the cloth
- No image or discoloration exists between the two surfaces of cloth, i.e., within the cloth
- There is no image of the top of the head or sides of the body enclosed by the cloth 
- The image density on the cloth appears to embody information on the vertical distance between the cloth and the portion of the ventral body imaged, as if the cloth were held flat and horizontal slightly above the body or, in the case of the dorsal image, between the cloth on either the floor or shelf on which the body lied and the back of the body. In essence, the closer the cloth was to the body the darker the image, and the farther away the fainter the image 
- A body image is visible in areas where there was no contact between the body and the cloth
- The coloration does not appear under the threads where they cross in the weave of the cloth
And there was this timely paragraph that pertains to recent discussions on this blog about why the image does not fluoresce – of course, assuming . . .
The STURP measurements showed that the Shroud fluoresced everywhere except in regions of the image. This suggests to us that the image formation mechanism somehow changed the allowed atomic transitions that permits the rest of the cloth outside of the image areas to fluoresce. This fact suggests that identifying what is allowing fluorescence can help to determine what chemically causes the image. A good start would be to see whether calcium fluoride or residual pectins (an Alan Adler suggestion) are present on the cloth.
 Brian Walsh private communication
In an opinion piece, Stu Salkeld, editor of the St. Albert Gazette, writes:
Some people would be astounded to know how far back the tourism industry stretches. Some claim it stretches back to the 14th century in Europe, when a preponderance of holy relics appeared rather suddenly. The number and diversity were impressive: the Shroud of Turin, said to be Jesus Christ’s image on his burial shroud, which was unheard of until the relic trade began in the 1300s, the Sudarium of the Lord, a facecloth that is said to have captured Christ’s profile after he died on the cross, the Spear of Destiny, which a Roman centurion wielded as he stabbed Christ on the cross (four of these currently exist in Europe) and probably the least known, the Holy Prepuce, or Holy Foreskin.
[. . . ]
The medieval relic trade was profitable. Pilgrims from across Christendom travelled what, at the time, were rather dangerous roads to visit cities such as Turin that held artifacts said to be associated with Christ, the saints or other holy figures and while they were on the road pilgrims spent a lot of shekels, much as modern tourists do today. However, the authenticity of many relics was almost immediately called into question, even by the church itself. For example, in a 1389 letter, Bishop Pierre D’Arcis denounced the Shroud of Turin as a fraud to Clement VII.
Some claim; is that transparent bias? Can you spot the history mistakes?
Why the picture of Saturn? Read the article.
Andrea Nicolotti’s book, From the Mandylion of Edessa to the Shroud of Turin: The Metamorphosis and Manipulation of a Legend (Art and Material Culture in Medieval and Renaissance Europe) has finally been published in English. It was available in Italian in 2011. Andrea, who has commented in this blog on occasion, considers this to be a “revised and augmented edition.”
The price for the Hardcover edition is $124.00 at Amazon. The list price is $142.00. (Please note that Amazon is reporting that the book has not been released even though the publication date is September 15th. Nonetheless, Amazon is accepting orders at this time).
A limited preview of the first chapter and the conclusion from the last chapter is available at Academia.org. The Table of Contents and Index are also provided.
The whet your appetite here are three paragraphs from the conclusion:
There is not a shred of evidence that the Mandylion of Edessa was a long shroud or that it showed the entire body of the crucified and wounded figure of Christ. Those who argue for the shared identity of the Shroud of Turin and the Mandylion of Edessa have based their arguments on evidence that cannot withstand close scrutiny. In order to argue for the authenticity of the Turinese relic, some have gone to great lengths. In so doing, they have approached the changing nature of the legends concerning this relic too simplistically. More-over, they have used evolving legends as if they were trustworthy historical sources, which is utterly unacceptable.
It is clear that the ultimate aim of the theory that identifies the Shroud with the Mandylion is to demonstrate that the Shroud of Turin has existed and can be documented since antiquity. But the first historical documents that mention the Shroud date to the fourteenth century, and the date obtained by radiocarbon dating places it between 1260 and 1390 CE. The history of the Shroud is the topic of my next book, but it is important to clarify that even if the Shroud was authentic and dated from the first century, it is a completely different object than the Edessean image.
We can therefore end this analysis by quoting the 1786 opinion of the Marquis Giovanni de Serpos, in regard to the reliability of that “sweet illusion” and the “birth of a devout imagination” in the legend of Abgar: “Everything so far narrated must be counted as mere fable.”
Order it today and Amazon will ship it the minute it becomes available. I look forward to reading this book and his next book on the history of the Shroud.