From: leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas)
Subject: Re: Shroud exposed at early date (Tim O'Neill)
Organization: Integrated Measurement Systems, Inc.
	<LEET.92Sep1095317@dove.ims.com>
	<1992Sep5.084624.27783@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:52:37 GMT

>>>>> On Sat, 5 Sep 1992 08:46:24 GMT, Tim.ONeill@english.utas.edu.au (Tim O'Neill) said:

Tim> In article <LEET.92Sep1095317@dove.ims.com>, leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) writes:
> 
> All this is to blow away McCrone's contention that the red stuff is paint.
> They explain the presence of iron oxide as part of the retting process
> used to produce the cloth, and note that the water stains from dousing
> the fire caused the oxide to concentrate in the stain areas.

Tim> The idea that it is blood does not explain the fact that it is nice
Tim> and red after 600-2000 years.

IMHO the single greatest weakness of the pro-authenticity camp is their
failure to address how the iron in hemoglobin could resist oxidation for
2000 years.

Tim> It is also interesting that accounts of the shroud in the 15th and
Tim> 16th centuries, such as that by Don Antonio de Beatis in 1517, talk
Tim> about it's bright colours and the vividness of the image. No-one
Tim> could say the image is vivid today, so perhaps, Lee, you can tell
Tim> us how the image could be vivid for 1500 years and then fade
Tim> suddenly over the next 500.

I would like to get the reference for these accounts.  From memory, some
pro-authenticity author claimed that this was not "vividness" but
"glory", or somesuch mistranslation compatible not with a clear image
but with an image greatly impacting the emotions of the viewer.  That
sounds like grasping at straws, to me, but there it is.

Tim> No-one could say the image is vivid today, so perhaps, Lee, you can
Tim> tell us how the image could be vivid for 1500 years and then fade
Tim> suddenly over the next 500.

Sure, if you'll explain how all the paint could flake off over 500 years
while no-one complained.  Please also explain why there is no evidence
of chemical change in the scorch areas from the fire in the 1500's?
And, why did the "blood" not flake off along with the rest of the image?
Furthermore, Heller says the "image" is in the topmost microfibrils -
how did the paint (or whatever) get applied without touching the
fibers themselves?

> Heller does not discuss the textile issue, but Stevenson and Habermas
> do (_Verdict_on_the_Shroud, Servant Books, 1981).

Tim> Oh yes, THEM.  

I didn't say their work was all that great, just that they're the ones
who cover the issue from the pro-authenticity side.

>  They claim that
> Raes's results support their (vociferously pro-authenticity) position.

Tim> HOW?!

Without explanation, alas.

> I suppose we'll just have to find Raes's original work.  An email
> correspondent noted that there is a sample of 2nd century silk in
> herringbone weave, but that no twill of that weave survived.  (The
> correspondent - who did not give permission to reveal their name -
> said this confirms your position, Tim, but I find that the weave was
> known in 200 A.D. seems to support the idea that herringbone is not
> unique to the Middle Ages.)

Tim> I never claimed it was unique to the Middle Ages. It was used by a
Tim> vast number of cultures in a variety of periods, including the late
Tim> medieval period. The point is, that of all the many examples of
Tim> linen which have survived from the first century, *none* are of
Tim> herringbone twill weave. On the other hand, this weave was
Tim> universal for linen in the fourteenth century. The existence of
Tim> herringbone silk in the late second century is irrelevant.

I have been corrected on this point; Ian Wilson's book documents the
fragment of silk, which is from the late *third* century.  My point was
that the weave itself was not unknown near the first century, although
the weave on that particular fabric certainly is.
 
> Heller DOES note that cotton fibers were found wound in with the twill
> fibers, indicating that the cloth was woven on a loom which had also
> woven cotton cloth.  No cotton is grown in Europe, but it is grown in
> the Middle East (sez Heller).

Tim> Again Heller shows that he is no medievalist. Some cotton was grown
Tim> in Sicily but vast amounts of the stuff was imported into Europe
Tim> from the East from the twelfth century onwards. It is not
Tim> surprising at all for cotton fibres to be incorporated into the
Tim> weave of a 14th century linen in this way.

Point granted.
 
Tim> I know next to nothing of jewish burial practices in the 1st
Tim> century, so I cannot comment on that, though several sources say
Tim> that they wrapped their bodies in *strips* of linen. I do know that
Tim> a sheet-shroud of the kind we see in the Turin shroud was the
Tim> common form of shroud in the late medieval period.  None of the
Tim> pro-authenticity camp were ever able to produce an analogous
Tim> example of a 1st century shroud in this form.

How many 1st century shrouds and/or mummies do we have lying around?
If it's in the hundreds, I could see the validity of this objection.

Tim> Conclusion: taken with all the other evidence of its probable
Tim> medieval origins, I'd say were looking at a 14th century artefact.
Tim> How about you Lee?

I'd be happy to agree, if I could get all the loose ends cleared up
(which is what started all this in the first place, much to my current
chagrin).  So far all I can say is that the image is extremely
mysterious, since it cannot be fully explained, so as a cautious and
skeptical individual I can't fully accept the forgery story as it's
usually presented, despite strong evidence for a medieval date for the
cloth.  Since this isn't really going anywhere, and won't until I can
find Nickell's book, howsabout we drop it?
--
Lee Thomas,  leet@ims.com      | "But thou, O man of God, flee these things;
Integrated Measurement Systems |  and follow after righteousness, godliness,
9525 SW Gemini Dr.             |  faith, love, patience, meekness."
Beaverton, Or 97005            |  - 1 Timothy 6:11
(503) 626-7117, ext. 1558      | 





Newsgroups: talk.origins