Last June we received an article accepted in the scientific journal Archaeometry that left us totally perplexed: it lacks scientific rigor and repeats arguments from the past that have already been superseded by anatomical and forensic studies. This is what usually happens when one writes about subjects that are not within one's field of study. Prof. Alfonso Sánchez Hermosilla, director of EDICES (Research Team of the Spanish Center of Sindonology), a forensic doctor of widely recognized prestige, responds to this article in depth and with evident scientific rigor. Below, we leave in pdf to download the original article and the response of Prof. Sanchez Hermosilla and transcribe this response.
CONSIDERATIONS ON THE ARTICLE “UNVEILING DECEPTION: AN APPROACH TO THE SHROUD OF TURIN'S ANATOMICAL ANOMALIES AND ARTISTIC LIBERTIES” By Elio Quiroga Rodríguez
Alfonso Sánchez Hermosilla
E-mail: hubertus06@yahoo.es
Forensic Pathologist
The mencioned article referes various theories about the Shroud of Turin, all of them very old, and none of them have been scientifically proven, quite the opposite, the current state of scientific knowledge indicates that these hypotheses are false. These theories, in summary, are as follows:
1. Carbon-14 dating of the Shroud of Turin demonstrates that it is a medieval object. Specifically, the cloth was made between the years 1260 and 1390, during the Middle Ages.
2. The Shroud of Turin is a forgery.
3. It is a painting.
4. Anatomically, it is not possible for a human being in a horizontal position to cover their genital region with their hands.
The current state of scientific knowledge on each of these assertions will be described below.
1. Carbon 14 dating of the Turin Shroud shows that it is a medieval object. Specifically, the cloth was made between 1260 and 1390, during the Middle Ages.
The results of this method, as published at the time (Nature 1989), should in any case be considered as “raw data” which, as in any analytical determination, should be interpreted exclusively by experts in the field, and always placed in context.
As all experts know, no analytical method is 100% reliable, all without exception have a large margin of error, having developed the calculation of the “uncertainty” in analytical methods to determine said margin of error, and Carbon 14 is no exception. The specialized bibliography shows many examples of considerable errors of this methodology in all types of biological material, especially in textile material.
For these purpose, it is worth considering the research of Montero (2022), chemist at EDICES, and expert in Biodeterioration, in which, analyzing the cloth of the “Soudarion” of Oviedo (Spain), he observed that many of the linen fibers of the surface had a dark coloration, almost black, and when he gently pulled on one of them with tweezers, he discovered that it was much more fragile than the fibers that did not show this chromatic change. So he isolated some of these fibers, and observed them under the microscope, to discover that they did not show the same aspect as the rest of the fibers, their surface was irregular instead of smooth, and their color, decidedly dark, which is why he called them “Black Fibers”. The most feasible hypothesis about the origin of these fibers, was the possible biodeterioration of these fibers as a consequence of the action of various microorganisms responsible for incorporating the organic matter of the natural textile material back into the biological carbon cycle. To the cycle of life, definitively.
The same microorganisms responsible for biodeterioration, would not only feed on the linen fibers themselves, but also on all added biological material, including blood and other human body fluids. As a consequence of their metabolism, they destroyed the original cloth, and, in addition, deposited on it their own metabolic residues, the equivalent of the feces of higher beings, thus contributing, once again, modern Carbon-14 that was continuously deposited, and for centuries, on the fibers of the cloth.
On the other hand, experimentally, Montero (2022), reproduced the standard cleaning method applied to the textile material before submitting it to the Carbon-14 test. This method is very aggressive, using alternatively acids and alkalis at high temperatures to remove all types of biological contamination added to the textile material under study, with the consequence that the weight of the material, after undergoing this cleaning, is reduced to slightly less than half the original weight.
Montero repeated this same cleaning method with black fibers, and observed that this cleaning method did not have the same effect on these fibers, nor did it completely remove the amorphous carbon, probably a consequence of biodeterioration, added in a secular way.
This added circumstance is relevant in the final count of the total Carbon-14 counted, since after cleaning the original Carbon-14 is reduced by more than half, and the modern Carbon-14 added to the fibers is not completely removed.
This is probably not the only cause of the Carbon-14 problems with the textile material, including the Shroud of Turin, but it is one of the most relevant, and of course, its effect adds to the rest of the causes, some known, others hypothesized, and others, for the moment, unknown.
On the other hand, in Oviedo, Spain, there is another archaeological object known as Sudario of Oviedo, or also “Soudarion” of Oviedo, which was traditionally known as “Sudarium Domini”. The scientific investigation of this object has shown that it meets all the necessary requirements to have been used as a burial cloth during the first century following the uses and customs of the Hebrew ethnic group. This object has documented its presence in Spain since the VII century, and from the Medical Forensic, Anthropological, Anatomical and Mathematical point of view, it can be affirmed that “Soudarion” of Oviedo and Shroud of Turin covered the corpse of the same person.
These findings seem incompatible with the hypothesis that the Shroud of Turin was woven in such a late period, almost seven centuries after the documented presence of the “Soudarion” of Oviedo in Spain (between 1260 and 1390 A.D.). It is unlikely that the same corpse, seven centuries later has left blood stains and other body fluids coincident in both cloth, as well as an unexplained image on the Shroud.
2 - The Shroud of Turin is a forgery.
To date, no researcher has scientifically proven that the Shroud of Turin, nor the “Soudarion” of Oviedo are forged objects, in the sense of having been made with the intention of deceiving the public by passing them off as funerary objects when in fact they are not. It is beyond any doubt that they are, in both cases, objects that had, as has already been exposed, a funerary use according to the uses and customs of the Hebrew ethnic group in the first century A.D., and that both were used to cover the corpse of the same individual of male sex, and that shows findings compatible with the hypothesis that this individual suffered the same type of physical abuse that describes the historical personage of Jesus of Nazareth.
To date, innumerable attempts have been made with very diverse methods that, theoretically, would allow to demonstrate that the Shroud of Turin is a forgery, most of them are simple theories that not even its discoverers have put into practice, others yes, but always with negative results. The final consequence is that these theories have never been demonstrated and, in addition, they are not plausible. The attempts to demonstrate some of these theories have achieved the opposite effect, that is to say, they have demonstrated that this was not the mechanism by which the Shroud of Turin was produced.
3 – It is a painting
In the scientific bibliography, there is no publication that proves in any way, and unequivocally, that the Shroud of Turin is a painting. The current state of scientific knowledge, in fact, recognizes that the mechanism by which what is known as “sindonic image” was formed, to date, is totally unknown, ruling out that it was produced by contact with any surface. At the present time, no technology is available to make a copy of the sindonic image replicating each and every one of its characteristics.
On the other hand, the analytical studies do not find enough dye material to justify the stains of what appears to be blood and other cadaveric fluids, nor on the sindonic image. The only thing that is found, are traces of pigments that, in reality, are micro-contaminants, and their most probable origin is the transfer of these pigments from other materials, among them, the various copies of the Shroud of Turin that have been made in the past, and that some of them, have been put in direct contact with the original to “Sanctify the copies by contact with the Shroud”.
And this with respect to the sindonic image, since what appear to be blood stains are indeed human blood, as evidenced by all the research carried out to date, including genetic studies.
4- Anatomically, it is not possible for a human being in a horizontal position to cover his genital region with his hands.
First of all, it should be borne in mind that the mechanism of formation of the sindonic image is unknown, so it is not possible to be certain that the Shroud of Turin faithfully reproduces the anatomical proportions of the human body it shows. Therefore, any statement to this effect is just an unconfirmed hypothesis until we know in depth what really happened. And so far, from the point of view of science, there are no answers to this.
On the other hand, this hypothesis that the anatomical proportions of all human beings are the same, is not correct either. The eurythmy of these proportions is certainly the general rule, but it is not absolutely true for all individuals, nor was it true in the past, as anthropological studies of current and ancient human populations have shown. So, it's not entirely true that “The distance between the fingers of an adult's arms should be approximately equal to their height”. At least not in the entire population, especially when these anatomical proportions respond to aesthetic idealizations specific to certain geographical regions or historical periods, and not to objectively measured anthropometric data.
The following circumstance should be taken in a supine position, completely horizontal, in an anatomical position, if the hands are crossed in front, they do not cover the genital area, they remain above it. But if the body is partially bent forward, the hands can cover the genital area without any problem. According to Villalaín's research (2010), the corpse of the Man in the Shroud showed early and intense cadaveric rigidity and, with the exception of the arms, whose position had probably been modified during the covering of the corpse, the rest of the body was slightly bent forward and with the hips and knees partially flexed, reproducing the position in which death occurred, which is the same position that appears in the sindonic image, as V. L. Caja and M. Boi (2018). For this reason, the arms do not fall to the sides, and all this without the need to restrain them in any way. The position is fixed by cadaveric rigidity.
As an additional point, it's worth considering the possibility that the hands aren't attached to the body, as it might seem when looking at the sindonic image which, after all, is a spatial projection of a three-dimensional object onto a two-dimensional plane. If the hands are raised, as they appear to be, in relation to the body, the projection changes the interpretation of distances and dimensions. This is noticeable in the inclination of the right hand, which appears more elongated than natural, presumably due to the projection of its position in space onto the screen.
Regarding the statement that “The distance between the fingers of an adult with their arms outstretched should be approximately equal to their height”, this is not necessarily true for the entire population. Furthermore, it is not possible to measure the length of the arms in the Sindon image, as none of the shoulders are visible. The reason is simple, the textile material in these areas, as in many others, has disappeared, presumably as a result of at least one fire. For this reason, it is not possible to make any statements in this regard. The measurements made in the article are not based on reliable measurements, nor are they based on objective numerical data, they are only based on estimates that are subject to subjectivity. And, once again, it should be borne in mind that the sindonic image is a projection onto a plane of a figure in space, so the distances measured between two points on this sindonic image are not real in that they are modified and altered, for reasons of basic geometry, in relation to the original dimensions of the elements generating this projection.
There is also no absolute proof of joint or skeletal injuries, dislocations or bone fractures. Since the shoulders are not visible in the sindonic image, it is not possible to affirm or deny the presence of a unilateral or bilateral shoulder dislocation.
From a scientific point of view, it is also not possible to determine the intention of the people who performed the funeral rites on the corpse, so it is not possible to know with complete certainty whether the corpse's hands were left in the genital area in a gesture of premeditated modesty, or it was simply accidental and produced by the reduction in the rigidity of the shoulders during the damping maneuvers.
CONCLUSIONS
From a scientific point of view, it cannot be considered proven that the age of the cloth of the Shroud of Turin can be dated to the period 1260-1390 AD due to various issues of lack of validity and reliability in the test that gave such results, on the one hand, and on the other, due to the interpretation of the results of statistical significance, which prove to be debatable at best. For this reason, its alleged connection to a crucifixion in the 1st century AD cannot be ruled out.
Scientifically, the existence of anatomical inconsistencies in the Sindonic image has not been proven. It is a projection onto a two-dimensional plane of a three-dimensional object, a corpse, and this projection process causes distortions.
From a scientific point of view, it has not been proven that the Shroud of Turin is a painting, nor that it is a forgery.
The “modest pose” of the Sindonic image, in which the hands cover the genital area, in no way proves that this is a medieval painting by an anonymous artist, simply because this position is a characteristic of medieval Catholic iconography. It doesn't seem sensible to consider this as a scientific argument. On the contrary, as Rodriguez Almenar (2017) shows, everything seems to indicate that it was the Shroud of Turin and its Sindonic image that not only inspired medieval iconography, but still influences it today. On the other hand, from the point of view of Forensic Medicine, scientific publications highlight the naturalness of the process by which the corpse of the Man of the Shroud was left in the position reflected in the Sindonic image.
REFERENCIAS
Actas del I Congreso Internacional de la Síndone de Turín de Turín (2012). Valencia.
Actas de II Congreso Internacional sobre el Sudario de Oviedo: Oviedo Relicario de la Cristiandad. (2007). Ayuntamiento de Oviedo, Oviedo.
Actas del Congreso “Síndone y Sudario, dos telas y ¿un cuerpo? (2023). Repositorio institucional de la Universidad de Murcia. https://digitum.um.es/digitum/handle/10201/141764
Baima Bollone P., (2009). El Misterio de la Síndone de Turín. Algaida Editores, Sevilla, p. 91.
Barbet P., (1965). La Passion du Crist selon le chirurgien. Apostolat des Editions, Paris. (Séptima Edición), p.123.
Bennett, J. (2002). Sacred Blood, Sacred Image: The Sudarium of Oviedo: New Evidence for the Authtenticity of the Shroud of Turin. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press), pp. 68-69, 78, 89 and plate 10ª.
Caja V.L., Boi M. (2018). The Evidence of Crucifixion on the Shroud of Turin Through the Anatomical Traits of the Lower Limbs and Feet. Pages: 1377-1390 First Published: 03 May 2018, Archaeometry
Damon, P. E.; D. J. Donahue, B. H. Gore, A. L. Hatheway, A. J. T. Jull, T. W. Linick, P. J. Sercel, L. J. Toolin, C. R. Bronk, E. T. Hall, R. E. M. Hedges, R. Housley, I. A. Law, C. Perry, G. Bonani, S. Trumbore, W. Woelfli, J. C. Ambers, S. G. E. Bowman, M. N. Leese, M. S. Tite (1989-02). «Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin». Nature 337 (6208): 611-615. doi:10.1038/337611a0. https://www.nature.com/articles/337611a0
Díez Fernández F. (1994). Ritos Funerarios Judíos en la Palestina del Siglo I, Sudario del Señor, Actas del I Congreso Internacional sobre el Sudario de Oviedo, Oviedo, pp. 26 y 71.
Guía para la expresión de la incertidumbre en los ensayos cuantitativos, G-ENAC-09 Rev. 1 Julio 2005.
Maroto Sánchez A., Incertidumbre en métodos analíticos de rutina. Tesis Doctoral, Universidad Rovira y Virgili, Facultad de Química. Tarragona, 2002. https://www.tesisenred.net/handle/10803/8987#page=1
Montero Ortego F., (2007). Descripción química y microscópica del lienzo, Oviedo Relicario de la Cristiandad, II Congreso Internacional sobre el Sudario de Oviedo, Oviedo, pp. 103-124.
Montero Ortego F., (2022). El Sudario de Oviedo. Memoria de las Investigaciones. Centro Español de Sindonología. Valencia.
Peinado Rocamora P. (2023). Análisis de correlación matemática entre manchas de Síndone y Sudario. Actas del Congreso “Síndone y Sudario, dos telas y ¿un cuerpo? Repositorio institucional de la Universidad de Murcia. https://digitum.um.es/digitum/handle/10201/141764
Rodriguez Almenar J.M. La Sábana Santa y sus implicaciones histórico-artísticas. Universitat de Valencia. España. 2017. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/tesis?codigo=170976
Sánchez Hermosilla, A., (2015). Commonalities between the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo. SHS Web of Conferences 15, 00007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20151500007
Sánchez Hermosilla A., Miñarro López J.M., Gómez Gómez A., (2017). Estudio médico forense de la lesión del costado derecho del hombre de la Síndone, Cuidar, curar, morir: la enfermedad leída en los huesos, Care, heal, die: the disease read in the bones, Actas del XIV Congreso Internacional de Paleopatología, Universidad de Alicante, p. 245-264.
Sánchez Hermosilla A., Miñarro López J.M., Mangado Alonso M.L., Gómez Gómez A. (2017). Culto y trasiego de reliquias de Oriente en Occidente: El Sudario de la Catedral de Oviedo y el Estudio Médico Forense de la lesión del costado derecho. Scriptorium Victoriense. Volumen LXIV, Nº 3-4, Julio-Diciembre. Facultad de Teología del Norte de España. Sede de Vitoria-Gasteiz.
Villalaín Blanco, J.D., (2010). Estudio de la rigidez cadavérica que presenta la Síndone de Turín. Cuadernos de Medicina Forense, 16 (1-2): 109-123.
Villanueva Cañadas E., (2004). Indicios en Medicina Legal: manchas, pelos y otros indicios, Medicina Legal y Toxicología. Editorial Masson, 6ª Edición, Barcelona, pp. 1255-1270.
Comentários