Debate concerning the validity of the ‘miraculous’ Turin Shroud has persisted through the ages – now, fresh research has brought to light evidence from its initial unveiling. Share Article Share Article Facebook X LinkedIn Reddit Bluesky Email Copy Link Link copied Bookmark Comments
For more than six centuries, contention has swirled around the genuineness of the Turin Shroud – a 14ft length of linen that seems to display an impression of a man’s almost-nude form.
Those who believe assert that the likeness was somehow seared onto the material after it enveloped the body of Jesus Christ, subsequent to his crucifixion. They maintain it furnishes proof that not only did Jesus exist, but that he was resurrected following his demise.
Article continues below ADVERTISEMENT
At the dawn of photography, it became apparent that the faint depiction was notably improved when observed as a photographic inverse, reinforcing convictions that the image had been “burned into” the fabric via some supernatural means.
However, doubters have consistently questioned these assertions, and it has now come to light that the shroud was condemned as a forgery practically from its first appearance in Europe.
The oldest accounts regarding the shroud imply that it had fallen into the hands of a French aristocrat named Geoffroy de Charny during a crusade expedition in the 1340s.
Article continues below ADVERTISEMENT
Read more: Turin Shroud mystery ‘solved’ by expert and he knows Christ’s blood type
Read more: Shroud of Turin mystery deepens as scientist claims it was ‘never laid on Jesus’
Geoffroy carried the cloth back with him to his residence in the small town of Lirey, and its presence in his possession was known in the 1350s.
Article continues below ADVERTISEMENT
Yet now, a study, featured in the Journal of Medieval History, has disclosed that queries were being raised concerning the supposed “holy relic” from the very start.
A letter penned in 1355 by respected Norman theologian Nicole Oresme rebuffed the shroud as a “clear” and “obvious” sham. Prior to the emergence of this new evidence, a 1389 letter by Pierre d’Arcis, the Bishop of Troyes, had been considered the initial sceptical evaluation of the object.
Dr. Nicolas Sarzeaud, a history researcher at the Université Catholique of Louvain, in Belgium, and a fellow of the Villa Médicis, the French Academy, in Rome, Italy, is the primary author of the new study, which was released this week.
“This currently-contentious relic has been embroiled in a dispute between proponents and critics of its veneration for centuries,” he writes. “What has been discovered is a considerable refutation of the Shroud.”
Oresme, who later became the Bishop of Lisieux, was an influential figure at the time. He was renowned for explaining rationally and disproving various pronouncements of “miracles” and other supernatural happenings.
The latest science news from the natural world, health, tech and beyond Subscribe Invalid email
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our Privacy Policy
Get More of Our News on Google
Set Daily Express as a ‘Preferred Source’ to get quicker access to the news you value.
In his 1355 letter, Oresme states: “I do not need to believe anyone who claims ‘Someone performed such a miracle for me,’ because numerous clergymen thus deceive others, to solicit donations for their churches.
“This is clearly the situation for a church in Champagne, where it was asserted that there was the shroud of the Lord Jesus Christ, and for the almost countless number of those who have fabricated such items, and others.”
Dr. Sarzeaud says: “What has been discovered is a considerable refutation of the Shroud.” He says that the cleric had pinpointed the claims concerning the Shroud’s origins as a particularly glaring instance of deceit perpetrated to extract funds from pilgrims.
“Oresme’s assessment of the Shroud, moreover, actually caused him to be more generally distrustful of the word of clergy altogether,” he added.
The Shroud was on display in Lirey until approximately 1355 when the Bishop of Troyes commanded its removal. It was then concealed for over 30 years until Pope Clement VII granted permission for it to be exhibited again – with strict conditions regarding the assertions made about its beginnings.
Professor Andrea Nicolotti, one of the most highly regarded experts on the controversial relic, remarked that Dr. Sarzeaud’s discoveries, are “additional historical proof that even in the Middle Ages, they were aware that the Shroud was not genuine”.
He added: ”The other technological and scientific evidence, which suggests the same conclusion, remains unaltered.”