The Shroud of Turin: Christ's Evidence of the Resurrection

The Shroud of Truin: Scientists Conclude It’s Not a Forgery February 20, 1981


The American scientists who have been trying to fathom the mystery of the Shroud of Turin since they examined it in Italy two years ago are preparing to conclude and publish their findings, possibly in April, thus closing the most sophisticated scientific investigation ever performed on an ancient object.

The team set reporting dates several times previously and failed to meet them. Some members now are pressing hard to finish, in light of the significance of what they will be able to report—or, more accurately, what they will be unable to report. “Every member of the team came aboard bound and determined to prove this was a forgery,” said John Heller, a biophysicist at the New England Institute. He and nearly all of the 30 members of the team are coming away convinced it is not a fraud.

While they have not been able to determine that the ghostly, full-length image is that of the crucified Christ, much of the evidence released so far suggests the image on the cloth is a light scorch, the product of a burst of heat and light. Thus, the final report will probably be enough to convince many that the Shroud of Turin bears the genuine imprint of Christ’s resurrection.

Ken Stevenson, an IBM computer technician and the team’s official spokesman, is already delivering slide presentations in which he concludes that the shroud is the same one used on Christ’s body. Heller doesn’t go quite that far, but he says, “It sure does make you pious.”

Samuel Pellicori, a spectroscopist at the Santa Barbara (Calif.) Research Center and a member of the team, is one who suggests a different conclusion. In the current issue of Archeology magazine, he writes that the scorch may not be a scorch at all, but simply the effect of prolonged contact with the fluids from a decaying body.

He has not been able to account, however, for the results of an astonishing experiment conducted by the leaders of the team, which seem to discount Pellicori’s hypothesis. John Jumper and Eric Jackson, two air force scientists, observed in 1974 that the intensity of the image varies in proportion to the distance a particular portion of the body would have been from the cloth. On the face, for example, the imprint of the nose and chin is stronger than the cheeks. The two scientists concluded that whatever made the image did not have to be in direct contact with the cloth, contrary to Pellicori’s view.

To test their idea, Jackson and Jumper used a VP-8 image analyzer, a device used to make computer-enhanced photographs of Mars and Saturn. The analyzer converts image intensity to vertical relief, and when they used it on the shroud, the result was an accurate, three-dimensional image of a man. That suddenly seemed to put the shroud far beyond the range of some forger in the fourteenth century, to whom many shroud critics attribute it; it was then, in France, that the shroud first turned up. The results of the three-dimension test attracted the attention of many highly qualified scientists, who met in Albuquerque in 1977 and launched the Shroud of Turin Research Project. Umberto II, the former king of Italy who lives in exile in Portugal, is the relic’s official owner, and in October 1978, allowed the team five days to conduct tests. The scientists hauled in 72 crates of equipment and worked around the clock in shifts, finishing just in time. Since then, some of the findings have been published piecemeal by the individual researchers.

Besides the scorch-like body outline, the shroud bears “blood” stains, from punctures in the wrists and feet, from a wound in the side, from many smaller lash marks about the body, and from many small head wounds, conceivably the result of a crown, or more probably a cap, of thorns. From what is already known about the research, the final report will likely conclude that the blood is genuine.

The circumstantial evidence also suggests that the shroud is genuine, according to one of the team members. The kind of cloth—linen—with its herringbone weave, corresponds to first-century Palestine. Max Frei, a Swiss criminologist, even found microscopic pollen samples of a type peculiar to the Dead Sea region (others point out that pollen blows great distances and the shroud has been displayed in the open air several times in the past).

What most troubles many evangelicals, aside from a natural distaste for relics, is that the shroud seems to contradict the Bible’s testimony about Christ’s burial.

Gary Habermas, an associate professor of apologetics and philosophy of religion at William Tyndale College (formerly Detroit Bible College), is one evangelical who is convinced that there are no discrepancies, and he delivered a lecture on the subject at the December meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society. Here are some of the issues he dealt with:

• The gospel accounts mention a face cloth used to cover Jesus’ head, and therefore, the image should have been on it and not the shroud. According to Habermas, the face cloth was rolled, placed under the chin and tied at the top of the head, much like someone suffering a toothache, the purpose being to keep the jaw closed as rigor mortis set in. Habermas says the practice is mentioned in the Mishnah, the collection of early rabbinical practices, as well as the section of the Code of Jewish Law that deals with burial customs. (The man in the shroud seems to have just such a cloth around his head.)

Article continues below

• The body whose image is on the shroud was evidently not washed for burial, contrary to Jewish custom. Habermas, again citing the Code of Jewish Law, notes that in cases of those executed by the government, the blood was to be left on the body as a token of the culprit’s payment for illegal actions.

• Many assume that Jesus was wrapped like a mummy, although the Greek term used in Matthew 27:59 and in Luke 23:53 can mean either wrapped or folded, according to Habermas. Remains from an Essene (early Jewish sect) cemetery reveal bodies buried in shrouds, and burial according to the Code of Jewish Law in a single, plain linen sheet. Furthermore, when Christ called Lazarus forth from the tomb, Lazarus walked out, which he could not have done had he been wrapped like a mummy.

Habermas concludes in his lecture that the biblical evidence neither proves nor disproves the shroud’s authenticity.

Pellicori, the scientist who offers the variant view of how the bodily image was formed, addresses the central question in concluding his Archeology article:

“Was it the actual burial cloth of Christ? Our research has not been able to prove that weighty conclusion, nor will science ever be able to say. But at the same time, some of the most exhaustive research ever conducted on any relic, object of art, or archeological artifact in no way has eliminated that possibility.”

Heller, the biophysicist, says his belief in Christ still relies on a leap of faith, and many who will pore over the final report of the scientists, looking for absolute proof of the resurrection, will probably be forced to the same conclusion. But the Shroud of Turin may make that leap of faith seem less difficult than it once was.

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/1981/february-20/shroud-of-truin-scientists-conclude-its-not-forgery.html

The Shroud of Turin: God's Ultimate Mic Drop


Alright, listen up, you skeptical bunch,
I'm about to drop some knowledge, with a wink and a punch.
You think Jesus was just some made-up guy, eh?
Well, feast your eyes on this - the Shroud of Turin, I say!

Oh, I know, I know, you've got theories all lined up,
About how it was some medieval forger's grand trick-up.
But let me ask you this, my dear doubting friends—
If it's all a big hoax, where's that million-dollar end?

You see, the Shroud, it's got a story to tell,
A tale of divine intervention that'll make your jaws swell.
That faint image, it's no mere work of man,
It's God Himself, putting on a holy fan.

Just imagine it - Jesus laid out on that cloth,
His wounds and His glory, for all to gawk.
The bloodstains, the imprint, the unmistakable signs,
It's like the Big Guy's saying, "Hey, I'm the one who designs!"

And what about that carbon dating, hmm?
The "experts" say it's medieval, but I'm not buying their hymn.
They can poke and they prod, with their scientific might,
But the truth is, God's ways, they're beyond our finite sight.

So go ahead, keep trying to debunk and deny,
But I'll tell you right now, you're fighting a losing tie.
'Cause when it comes to the Shroud and the God who made it shine,
David Rolfe can keep his million, 'cause the victory's all divine!

God loves you, yes, even you, my dear skeptical friends,
And He's got a little test, that just never ends.
It's the Shroud of Turin, that age-old mystery,
Where the faithful see His son, but the doubters just can't see.

Consider the forger, from times dark and dim,
Who'd need to be smarter than all of them?
Knowing first-century crucifixion's precise whim,
With skills unmatched, on a medieval whim.

One hundred scientific fields, he'd need to master,
Outsmarting experts. A surgeon's keen eye,
and an artist's deft plaster,
Creating a relic that time couldn't shatter.

Predicting photography, centuries ahead,
Using cloth of the East, as ancient as the dead.
A coloring method, that heat could not spread,
With invisible details, to mess with your head.

Blood from a tortured man applied just so,
Before creating the image, like a pro.
The Sudarium of Oviedo, its secrets to show,
Matching the Shroud, blow by blow.

Limestone from Jerusalem, pollen from thorns,
Plants that only bloom between March and April morns.
So skeptics, how was this relic adorned?
With mysteries that have skeptics forlorn.

Oh, the skeptics, they try, with their science and wit,
But replicating this artifact, they just can't commit.
They poke and they prod, they analyze and they jest,
But the Shroud just laughs, as it puts them to the test.

Just ask Joe Marino, he's got the answer, don't you know?
That fixed corner, it's the key to the Shroud's 14th-century show.
But the skeptics, they just can't seem to get it through their heads,
When it comes to the divine, their theories end up as leads.

So keep on trying, my dear doubting friends,
Keep on chasing that prize, that just never ends.
'Cause when it comes to the Shroud and the God who made it shine,
The victory's already won, it's divine, divine, divine!

The Shroud and science (prof B. Barberis)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9pYnHNMpOM

The first studies involved forensic doctors who were asked to verify, based on a direct examination of the photograph, whether the double image of a human body that appears on the Shroud corresponds exactly to that of a real human body. The anatomical characteristics allowed for a kind of autopsy, obviously particular because it was done not on a real body but on the photograph of an image present on a cloth. These studies allowed for an incredibly precise description of at least some of the experiences suffered by the man who left his imprint on the Shroud.

It is of an adult man with shoulder-length hair, beard, and mustache, who shows clear traumatic injuries on the face, about thirty puncture wounds on the forehead and nape, deep wounds on the hands and feet that have characteristics allowing us to be certain of the cause of the torment of crucifixion. He was whipped all over the back from shoulders to heels, presenting about 120 bruises due to that torment. Finally, there is a deep wound on the right side of the chest with significant bleeding, which surely occurred after death due to blood coagulation.

Obviously, the parallel and convincing reading of what is seen on the Shroud and what is read in the evangelical description of the passion and death of Jesus of Nazareth immediately emerged. This reading naturally confirms the centuries-old tradition that has always interpreted the Shroud as the burial shroud that wrapped Jesus of Nazareth after his death. Already at the beginning of the last century, another area of research captured scholars' interest, particularly biologists, who tried to understand how this imprint could have formed. It is not natural for a corpse to leave its imprint on a cloth. Bloodstains are normal, but the body imprint is a completely different reality. The first is negative, the second is positive, and this unique characteristic of the cloth immediately gave rise to theoretical hypotheses about the various possibilities by which a body could leave an imprint on a cloth.

However, it is evident that in such a field, any theoretical hypothesis must necessarily be confirmed by experimental analysis, that is, from the fact of actually being able to create an image whose characteristics coincide with those of the image present on the Shroud. At that time, the only possibilities were to try to reproduce, starting from a corpse, under appropriate conditions, such as using blood and sweat on the corpse to make it look like a recently dead body and using solutions of aloe and myrrh on the cloth, substances known to have been used for corpses in antiquity, to obtain chemical reactions that could produce such an imprint. The most complex thing, however, was to avoid deformations, considering that a cloth is not a rigid surface and that a cloth that rests on a body, which somehow manages to transmit its imprint to the cloth, normally transmits it deformed, especially transversely, as logically imagined since our body is not a flat surface but a curved one.

From the 1970s, a new era of Shroud studies began, where the field of analysis was significantly expanded. It was no longer just forensic medicine and biology for studies on image formation, but research extended to other fields such as chemistry, physics, palynology, informatics, and so on. The highlight was in 1978 when a team of 44 scientists from around the world, particularly from the United States, had the Shroud at their disposal for 120 hours to perform a series of analyses and micro-samplings, allowing them to elaborate on the data obtained and try to answer many open questions in the following years.

These examinations, among other things, demonstrated that the red stains on the Shroud are indeed bloodstains, that it is human blood behaving like AB group blood. Moreover, it confirmed that while the bloodstains soak into the fabric and are visible on the back, the body imprint is extremely superficial, penetrating the fabric fibers to a depth of a micrometer, i.e., a thousandth of a millimeter. This result was definitively confirmed in 2002 when a team of scientists completed the restoration work on the Shroud, freeing it from the patches that closed the holes caused by the Chambéry fire of 1532, replacing the support cloth, the so-called Holland cloth. The method of preserving the Shroud changed radically from being rolled on a cylinder, used for the last three centuries and a half, to being preserved flat on a horizontal plane.

On that occasion, it was possible for the first time to clearly see, photograph, and scan the back of the Shroud, confirming that on the back, the bloodstains are clearly visible while the body image is entirely absent. This is an exceedingly difficult characteristic to reproduce. Regarding the image formation, which remains a central topic of study and research on this object, many attempts have been made to prove that the image could be the work of an artist from the past using some human technique. However, none of these experiments have ever managed to reproduce an imprint with exactly the same characteristics, not only visually but especially chemically and physically, as the Shroud's imprint has, first of all, its superficiality. Any technique causes the color used to create the imprints to soak into the fabric and penetrate deeply into it.

Another important research area involved biology. A Swiss botanist first suggested taking micro-samples of particles present on the cloth to verify the presence of pollen grains. His intent was to try to reconstruct the geographical journey of this object by seeing if specific pollens could be found to reconstruct it. The result was positive in the sense that, among others, pollens from the desert areas of Palestine and Anatolia were found, suggesting the Shroud's probable presence in those places at some point in its history, although this method does not allow for precise dating of the fabric and its travels.

Informatics also took an interest in the Shroud. The first scanning was done by two American scholars in 1977 with a special apparatus that could measure the brightness of the image pixel by pixel and relate it to the distance between the body and cloth at each point of the image, allowing a perfect three-dimensional reconstruction of the Shroud man's body. This is truly peculiar because if we repeat the same operation on a normal photograph of a painting, we do not obtain a three-dimensional image. This is likely due to the simple fact that the image was generated by a three-dimensional body. This scan was then perfected by later scholars, allowing a more detailed reconstruction of some imprint details.

There were also comparative studies between this three-dimensional image and the iconography of Christ's face, especially from the early period, say the first millennium, to verify if there were any points of overlap and to try to justify a stereotypical image that characterized art history from at least the 4th century onwards. Numerous points of correlation found make it likely that these artists were inspired by the Shroud image to paint Christ's face from at least the 3rd or 4th century onwards.

In relatively recent times, in 1988, another study that is historically significant for the Shroud was conducted: radiocarbon dating of a fabric sample taken from one corner of the cloth. This research, prepared for a couple of years, saw samples sent to three laboratories worldwide, with the average results from these laboratories dating to a surprisingly medieval period, between 1260 and 1390 AD. If this dating were confirmed, it would obviously resolve every historical problem, thus making it impossible for the Shroud to have anything to do with the historical figure of Jesus of Nazareth.

Unfortunately, the entire operation was marred by numerous imperfections, unscientific behaviors, and unscientific pretenses by the laboratories and their organizers. Moreover, there remains the strong doubt that the fabric's age was influenced by biological contamination (presence of microorganisms) or chemical contamination (the fabric's exposure to environments where it could have absorbed significant amounts of carbon), leading to a final result not corresponding to the cloth's real age. Numerous conferences have been held in the more than twenty years since then, highlighting characteristics that make the result highly unreliable. This operation needs to be repeated with a guarantee that the result is genuinely reliable.

It would be necessary to rescan the cloth, not only photographically or filmically but also chemically and physically, to have a complete map of the distribution of substances present on the cloth. This would allow for a precise understanding of the various areas of the cloth (image areas, blood areas, mixed areas, etc.) and identify the most logical places to take samples to obtain a dating result as insensitive to external contamination as possible.

Thus, there remains ample room for future scholars and researchers to understand more deeply and in more detail what this image on the cloth really is. It seems incredible that in 2013, an apparently simple, ancient object seen by millions of people throughout history can still arouse doubts, questions, and deep interest among today's scientists. And yet, the Shroud still has many open questions, ensuring that research will have room for further studies in the coming decades with increasingly sophisticated and advanced equipment to answer these questions. But as I said before and reiterate, the biggest question remains how this imprint could have formed. Until the proposed theories can yield a truly significant experimental result, we will still be far from understanding what really happened.

LA SINDONE DI TORINO - Dalla ricerca al culto 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4gaA3-Q_Vg

Text translation: THE SHROUD OF TURIN - From research to worship
I would say that from what we can observe, it does not seem that scientific research and the data that have been conveyed and expressed have changed the interest or caused a decrease in the number of Pilgrims. It does not seem that this can be observed. Certainly, however, we must say that the research that has taken place represents, we could say, a possibility to take greater awareness that it is important that scientific research goes on, goes on precisely in a free and disinterested way. The theme of authenticity can interfere in the relationship with the Shroud, whether I am convinced or not that, in any case, there is the imprint of a man, of a figure who suffered and died as the Gospels narrate of Jesus Christ, with all that follows from that, and all in all, even for the non-believer, it is still a testimony, as many young people have noted, of violence, oppression, and injustice. I believe that 1988, with the radiocarbon test, amplified an object, a point that perhaps over time was going a bit, let's say, practically, we must take into account that from 1978 until 1998, there were no more exhibitions.

Generally, the exhibitions take place in the Holy Year, with intervals that in the past were also very distant in time, so we are used to, let's say, an exhibition that is not something that happens every year or every few years, but after a number of years, precisely to allow different generations to make a pilgrimage and to ensure that the gaze of the Shroud, the vision of the Shroud, is not simply a touristic gesture, but is precisely a gesture, a religious gesture that has to do with walking, pilgrimaging to Turin, and what this church represents, precisely because in some way, the Shroud is kept here.

If by historical testimony we mean that it has to do with the earthly, material life of Christ, obviously the discussion is open. That it has to do with the figure of Christ in the Gospels is undoubted because it is a precise image, almost an illustration of the very succinct description that the Gospels give us of the Passion and death of Christ. The Shroud reveals to us, when we see it, harrowing details that the Evangelists do not transmit to us, but they do not transmit them to us because the tradition that they gather and put into writing is of people who unfortunately knew very well the terms of torture, the terms of death by crucifixion, etc. From a historical point of view, if it refers us to the Christ of the Gospels, it is clear that it also becomes an object of worship. The exhibition of 1978 brought 3 million Pilgrims to Turin, entirely unexpected, creating enormous problems for the city as well, which I was starting and I remember this huge queue that blocked the entire center of Turin, which is why it had to be diverted to the opposite side towards the Royal Gardens, so as not to be blocked by all these pilgrims, all these parties. Then there was this questionnaire, this sociological survey, and it emerged that the vast majority of Pilgrims arrived driven by a desire to confront the mystery.

It's banal, no, but certainly what strikes you most is the face, and that face, because, well, it's normal, isn't it? Because for us, the first thing that transmits the most to us about a person is the face, that face that has interested Saints, people up to very dangerous people. Paul Claudel, who wrote after looking at the photograph from 1931, is that face, is a presence. Well, and this sums up quite well the sense of transmission of that image. Whatever its origin, the impression of seeing the signs of great suffering that are imprinted on that body and also on that face, and at the same time, however, the peace that shines through from that face of Christ, laid out on that shroud, both elements seem to me to be two elements that truly help us and help us to read with greater depth the accounts of the Passion and the Resurrection, a man who is truly the man of sorrows who has given his life for me, and at the same time of a gift so loving, so gracious, so generous as to ensure that despite all the sufferings, it remains the face of a pacified man.


LA SINDONE DI TORINO - Stagione 2: Il Lino]LA SINDONE DI TORINO - Stagione 2: Il Lino  2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIHxO9970S8

Text translation: THE SHROUD OF TURIN - Season 2: The Linen]THE SHROUD OF TURIN - Season 2: The Linen
The Shroud is a linen fabric that is quite unique because it is herringbone twill with threads that have been spun with a Z-twist. No artifacts of this type have been found in the Palestinian area, also because the type of twist of the thread was not characteristic of that area. However, this does not mean that it could not have existed. The study of the structured recognition of fabrics in a historical and archaeological context is not very old. Talking about linen means talking about something known since the beginning; the first textile finds of linen date back to 7000 BC, so it is probably the first fiber used by humans. It is a fiber that is light, very durable, and has bactericidal properties, so it is frequently used to cover corpses or wounds because the combination of humidity equilibrium and this bactericidal characteristic helps preserve the body or the wound.

We do not have much information regarding Jewish funeral customs of the first century. We have archaeological finds that are somewhat different, ranging from burials in tombs as narrated in the Gospels to burials in the ground or sand, as happens in some Essene communities. The written historical documentation that has reached us is from the end of the first century, so it is not exactly from the period we are interested in. It is also true that there were no revolutions in those three centuries, but it is always better to be cautious in drawing conclusions. It is clear that the Evangelists did not care to chronicle what happened; they had other objectives. However, what we can gather from the Gospel account is that it is strange that the family was authorized to recover the body of a condemned man. In Roman custom, there was the tradition of leaving the crucified on the cross as part of the punishment, letting them be eaten by animals like dogs or birds.

Another indication of particularity and privilege is a precious cloth, but above all, it is a unique cloth of 4.5 meters. Keep in mind that in ancient times, such cloths were obviously made by hand on looms without special controls or structures. It is estimated that a weaver could weave about 3 or 4 meters of linen cloth a week, so it was not exactly a supermarket cloth within everyone's reach.

It is suggestive to think that the Shroud has always been associated with the great difficulties of the people. The plague of 1578 with St. Charles Borromeo vowed to go to venerate the Shroud in Chambéry on foot when Lombardy was freed from the plague. Indeed, when the city of Milan was declared free from the plague, St. Charles set out for Chambéry, giving the Duke of Savoy the excuse to finally bring the Shroud from Chambéry to Turin, saying it would make less distance for the saint from Milan.

On the other hand, during the pandemic, in some way parallelly in the Bergamasco region, someone thought of sowing the ancient linen to reconstruct the fabric. The ancient linen project of Gandino and Peia was born almost by chance. Gandino and Peia are places where the culture of linen has continued for several centuries. The Italian Linen and Hemp Mill in Bergamasco, a leading company in linen innovation worldwide, had started a program to research the characteristics of the linen variety presumed to be the one from the time of the Egyptians and Romans to obtain seeds as close as possible to those characteristics. The seeds were taken, macerated outdoors in the rain, and the thread was made using ancient technologies, meaning nothing modern or chemical was used.

Another company in the Gandino and Peia area, Torri Lana, was able to weave the thread. By a stroke of luck, they had an old loom in their centuries-old company, which they deemed faulty, but it turned out to be ideal for weaving a herringbone twill cloth with the characteristics of the Shroud. Another company in the Bergamo area, Lefreghini, a leader in fabric printing, offered to print a high-definition photo of the Shroud. Remember, the Shroud has no color; it is fundamentally a series of shades, so recreating that image is not simple. The Shroud, as I always say, is primarily an image and needs to be seen to convey its message. The message of any image can only be explained when it is shown.

These copies were initially destined for special situations worldwide. The first appeared in Washington at the Museum of the Bible, specifically dedicated to the Shroud. Another copy went to Oviedo, where the Sudarium of Oviedo is housed in the cathedral. Another copy is in Chambéry for obvious historical reasons. Today, in Cairo, we received a request from a priest working where various Christian faiths, including Catholics, Orthodox, and Copts, as well as moderate Muslims, gather for moments of shared religious life. The last copy was sent to Texas to a museum of funerary art, which launched a study on Native American funerary traditions

that surprisingly found some intriguing parallels with the funeral customs seen in the context of the Shroud. These initiatives underscore a growing interest in and fascination with the Shroud, not just as a religious relic but also as a historical and cultural artifact that bridges different times and traditions.

The reproduction of the Shroud using ancient techniques also provided a hands-on way to explore and understand the craftsmanship and labor that would have gone into creating such a cloth in antiquity. This project has brought together historians, archaeologists, textile experts, and religious scholars, fostering a multidisciplinary dialogue that enriches our understanding of the Shroud and its significance.

The Shroud continues to inspire and provoke inquiry. Scientists investigate its origins and the mysterious image it bears, while theologians and believers reflect on its spiritual significance. Whether viewed through the lens of faith, history, or science, the Shroud remains a powerful symbol that speaks to the human quest for meaning and connection.

In recent years, the Shroud has also found a place in digital and virtual spaces. High-definition images and 3D models allow people around the world to examine its details closely, making it more accessible than ever. These technological advancements have led to new insights and theories, further fueling the debate about its authenticity and the nature of the image.

Despite the ongoing debates and mysteries, the Shroud continues to draw millions of visitors and pilgrims, particularly when it is displayed publicly. Its impact on art, literature, and popular culture is profound, inspiring countless works and interpretations.

The story of the Shroud is one of enduring fascination. It is a testament to the interconnectedness of human history, religion, and culture. Whether one views it as a miraculous relic, an artifact of ancient craftsmanship, or a subject of scientific curiosity, the Shroud of Turin remains a compelling and enigmatic piece of our shared heritage.

As we continue to study and reflect on the Shroud, we are reminded of the ways in which objects from the past can resonate with contemporary concerns and questions. The Shroud challenges us to look deeper, to seek understanding beyond what is immediately visible, and to appreciate the complex tapestry of history that shapes our present and future.

In conclusion, the Shroud of Turin is more than just a piece of linen; it is a symbol of enduring mystery and faith that continues to captivate and inspire people across the globe. Whether through historical research, scientific investigation, or personal reflection, the Shroud invites us to explore the profound connections between past and present, faith and reason, life and death.


LA SINDONE DI TORINO - Stagione 2: La Sindone oggi 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYpsOzcqydY

Text translation: THE SHROUD OF TURIN - Season 2: The Shroud today
I see no represent the altar in front of the Body and Soul of all a series of other signs tell its story, of which triangles were due to the fall of material during the fire in Chambéry. However, a certain amount of attention has always been paid, which was also limited by the knowledge that all the syndromes were opened, it was spatulated. Today, we have a very great attention when it comes to conservation, because obviously there is a much greater sensitivity in the conservation of ancient archaeological findings.

We are in the Cathedral of Turin. Where we are currently. We are right in front of the Chapel of Life. Opposite. Where for a long time it was kept, deposited in that particular Chapel. Because not between the Royal Palace and the cathedral of really those of Christians who are a scale of the cathedral of the chapel.

In the testament of Umberto II, the Shroud was entrusted to the care of the Pontifical Custodian, who is appointed custodian by the Bishop of Turin pro tempore.

A technical task instituted by the Custody of the Shroud in such a way that its custody is not determined by this today, also through the means that science and technique allow precisely to preserve this particular document and meaning in a way that this deposit can be accessible to all, and this is done in various ways of the great stations. You know, classic at a high level of complications for 20.2%. Of the pilgrims come. Then not only the church is involved but also because from an economic point of view for a point for an event especially on a week it means at this point so many people who put something of their time of their energy of their availability all well, on a technical level station is not in the first or last, so that the shroud must be preserved because. That makes Turin participate in the Pilgrimage like all the others. I was a child accompanied, I remember, by my parents because especially all this mass of people who went over in silence and then saw it as a child. As a child, even with all the simplicity and term of a child, one thing was immediately clear in my personal experience, in my upbringing, and that. It all meant on the fact that Christ had risen and this still preserves it even now after so many years after theological studies after years of Ministry and therefore for me as a child to see it only was to be confirmed in this, in this faith, in this confidence that Christ is risen and that life has a meaning that a much deeper life that is given by the great similarity that between the story, told, images and the story of the Gospels and this is my personal position precisely.

This that all in all when I read those images it is as if I re-lived the Gospels, as if I re-listened in a new and unprecedented way even through what we could call the announcement of the death and resurrection of Christ. There is a meta-scientific truth. We should move a little away from contemporary culture. What is scientific truth? Probably that the truths are the deepest of our lives that are not scientific inquiry for evil. For example, death. For example, why we live and the meaning of life are the deepest that is done we are too much an imaginary thought at a point where the truth is what is under the life of the slant of science. Forgotten at the point that science works by putting 95% second. A perspective, an illness is always infinitely greater than the pawn of these fundamental questions, evil, love, death and the meaning of life. Why we live towards what we go will never be the purview of scientific research.


LA SINDONE DI TORINO - Stagione 2: Le copie della Sindone 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nB6FuNDXvFU&t=332s

Text translation:  THE SHROUD OF TURIN - Season 2: Copies of the Shroud
The replicas that have been made today in Gandino are almost perfect in conveying the image of the Shroud. But being an additional step from the 1898 photograph, how could the Shroud be interpreted and reproduced before? Access to the Shroud over the centuries has always been quite reserved. The people could see the Shroud, but they saw it displayed from a great distance. So let's imagine thousands and thousands, hundreds of thousands of people in large squares who observed this cloth from a considerable distance. The people probably really perceived very little. They realized, of course, that it was a long sheet, but let's say the silhouette of the frontal and dorsal body of the man was hardly visible. So we must imagine that only a few people, those who could attend a private exhibition, had the opportunity to see and realize what the image of the man of the Shroud is.

The reproduction of the Shroud has always existed. Certainly, among the most interesting types are the life-size replicas. These copies found their fortune starting from the 16th century until the end of the 19th century because, obviously, with photography, with the first photograph of the Shroud in 1898, it became rather useless to copy the image since photographic technique could do this work better. The copies are very interesting, especially for historical and artistic study. Historical because each copy has its own story. Most of them were directly commissioned by the Savoys, who used them as gifts for ambassadors and other European royals, so they were made directly on ducal commission. Other copies, however, were devotional, born within confraternities, especially after the Council of Trent, so with the Catholic Reformation. The confraternities, especially those linked to the theme of the Passion of Christ, made images that reflect all the difficulty for the artist who had to create them. The image of the Shroud is a really difficult image to reproduce. The main difficulty is certainly the fact that the Shroud presents an alternation of light and dark tones inverted compared to the normal painting technique. So if a painter has to paint my face, he will do it through the lights and shadows that he will see with his eyes observing me. What was, let's say, the trick that most of these painters found? Simply to paint what the human eye would have seen, that is, the photographic negative that we then discovered with Secondo Pia's photograph. And so the painters paint a silhouette of a man where they obviously try to reproduce with stronger tones the parts that we would normally see in the photographic negative. There are over 100 copies scattered around Piedmont, but not only in Piedmont, because these were objects that traveled and have been found, for example, also in the New World, probably brought by missionaries, particularly from Spain where there was a great devotion to the Shroud. The first copy we know dates back to the very early years of the 16th century and is kept in Belgium. It is slightly smaller than the original, about a third of the original, and has its own characteristic, which is that it does not have the signs of the fire of 1532, precisely because it predates the fire. We know copies even in Mexico, in the United States, and in other parts of the world. The first object that connects us with the Shroud today in Turin is this medallion of Pellegrin de Lay in France, where the Shroud appears in the mid-14th century. This medallion is part of that rich reality of pilgrimage testimonies that were minted and distributed and sold in the major pilgrimage sites of the Middle Ages. In other cases, instead, we have symbolic veneration. One is where the Shroud is shown by angels or saints. The Virgin is often present, often saints linked to local devotions are present, so linked to the devotions of the House of Savoy, linked to territorial devotions. Angels are often present too.

Each representation could tell a different story: who wanted it, for what reason those saints are depicted, for what reason the people at that moment in history felt the need to thank or somehow ask for something from the Lord. They tell a story, a story of the people, a story linked to everyday episodes. We honestly do not have news or images that can be directly linked to the Shroud before the mid-14th century, when it appears in Lirey. The man of the Shroud is certainly a crucified man. So if we want to look for models, we go to study the iconography of the crucifixion. The iconography of the crucifixion has a very broad development over the two millennia of Christian history. From the 6th century, there is also great anatomical attention, and therefore the study of how a body could be crucified and appear on the cross. Here we can begin to make comparisons with the image of the Shroud. Many features confirm an iconographic tradition, while others detach completely. What is, let's say, the most significant theme? The most significant theme is that of the wrists of the man of the Shroud. Because in the man of the Shroud, we see the nail wound in the wrists and not in the palms. While much of Christian iconography depicts Jesus crucified with nails in the palms. How could an artist in the Middle Ages suppose that instead the anatomical crucifixion had happened differently? This is a question we ask ourselves.

LA SINDONE DI TORINO - Stagione 2: Le analisi dell'Enea 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seDJ6elAWgE&t=19s

Text translation: THE SHROUD OF TURIN - Season 2: The analyzes of Aeneas
Here is the English translation:

The analysis on the Gandino cloth was entrusted to the ENEA working group that has been committed for many years to the theme of the preservation of the Shroud and the formation of the image.

There are two closely related themes that must be kept in mind: the linen from Gandino, which we analyzed through Raman spectroscopy, and we found that it contains a quantity of lignin that is significantly lower than the lignin found in modern linens. Since the Gandino linen was made from rather ancient seeds, this may indicate that older linen fabrics contained less lignin than current linen fabrics. So, in a way, lignin is considered a molecule that can contribute to the more or less accelerated aging of cellulose. However, this has nothing to do with the image itself, but rather with the cloth in general.

First, we must distinguish the body imprint from the blood decals, which still contain particles and traces of blood. It is blood because some components of these reddish stains have been measured, containing hemoglobin, bilirubin, and serum albumin. The imprint, on the other hand, is due to a dehydrating oxidation of the extremely superficial fibrils of the linen, extremely superficial - we're talking about one-fifth of a thousandth of a millimeter, an incredibly thin thickness that is difficult to imagine. Such a thin thickness is practically impossible to obtain with a drawing, a painting, or a scorching from a hot object.

The entire cloth is aged because we are talking about an extremely ancient cloth, but in correspondence with the image, it's as if it has aged even more, becoming even more yellow - a sort of accelerated aging of the cloth. If we section the thread, this oxidation does not penetrate inside, so the image is not visible on the back of the Shroud, while the blood decals are visible because they have evidently soaked through and penetrated the fabric.

It should be remembered that currently, there is no technique that can reproduce all the characteristics of the Shroud image, but one of the characteristics that struck us is that the image is present, albeit attenuated, even in areas not in contact with a hypothetical corpse that was covered by the linen. Obviously, the tip of the nose was in contact, but the lower lip was not. So how did the image transfer if there was no contact?

One way to color linen from a distance is to use ultraviolet light.

Laser light is transmitted over a distance; it is an energy that travels through the air until it reaches the fabric that you want to modify at the surface level. Not only that, but ultraviolet light is capable of modifying the characteristics of linen at extremely thin thicknesses. So, on the one hand, the need to have a distance effect, and on the other hand, the effect being extremely superficial, led us to think that ultraviolet light could be a good tool to verify if it was possible to generate a Shroud-like image. And so it was - we worked on it for years. In the end, we obtained a coloration on small surfaces of about 1-2 cm squared. This demonstrates that it is possible to work on an object like the Shroud in a strictly scientific manner. But the studies to be carried out are practically infinite.

Obviously, people want to have an answer: How old is the Shroud? They want to know how it is possible to produce an image similar to that of the Shroud. Is it possible that it was made in the Middle Ages? An answer is needed, and this requires point-by-point analyses, so we need to have the Shroud at our disposal.

The radiocarbon measurements were carried out in 1988 using a very complex apparatus called AMS, which was in some way at the dawn of its scientific life. The robust statistical analysis that was recently carried out, starting in 2010, of the 1988 results shows that when taken separately, the three measurements from the three laboratories are as if they belonged to different linens, so they are not very compatible with each other.

Every analysis that is done on any object, not necessarily the Shroud - every scientific discovery is valid until proven otherwise and was obtained to the best of our knowledge. With this definition, it is understood that every discovery is never definitive in any case. As a scientist, I cannot give a definitive answer on anything. I can say, "I obtained this result, and for me, it is valid. In the future, other colleagues will determine whether that result is valid or needs to be modified." Science evolves by correcting previous errors.
From this point of view, I would feel like censuring this deterministic attitude of the colleagues who made the radiocarbon measurement of the Shroud and wrote those things in that article. I would never have written it.

«La Sindone di Torino: il mistero dell’immagine» - VIDEO ep. 1/4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9DPq3kgJOI


What is the Shroud?
We are in Turin, inside the cathedral, in the last chapel of the left nave under the royal tribune. Inside what is called the case for preservation, enclosed in a large metal box, is the Shroud.  

Roberto Repole Gianmaria Zaccone are right in front of the Shroud. Gianmaria Zaccone is a historian and the director of the International Center for Shroud Studies.

What is the Shroud? The Shroud is a linen cloth that contains within it the double image placed head to head, so that you see the front and back of the body, a naked body that presents a whole series of wounds and lesions that unmistakably refer to the Gospel narrative of the Passion and death of Jesus Christ.

The Mystery of the Image  

Monsignor Roberto Repole is a theologian and the Archbishop of Turin.
A man who certainly suffered atrocious violence, whose image is really imprinted in a very mysterious way on this cloth, which has been particularly significant for centuries for Christians, but I would say also for non-Christians who have somehow heard of Jesus.

Gianmaria Zaccone, what is this shroud like?  
The shroud is very long. The body is laid on its back on one half of the shroud. Then the shroud is folded over from the head down to the feet, and this obviously allows an imprint or contact of the shroud with both the back and front of the body. And it is an image, we could say, that has something "miraculous" in the way it was formed and deposited on this cloth. From this point of view, it is certainly a unique image among all the images that have been made of Jesus or related to Jesus in history.

The Photograph  
Turin, 1898. A new exhibition of the Shroud is scheduled. King Umberto I decides to use a recent invention for the occasion - photography. Attorney and amateur photographer Secondo Pia is commissioned to photograph the Shroud of Turin for the very first time.

The result that had appeared on the plate, which according to Pia had obtained with difficulty, both in terms of authorizations and in terms of taking the photograph, appeared in the intermediate phase of the photographic negative as a face, which we conventionally call a positive image today.

It is no longer as simple to understand. We have to go back to the photographic process of that time. Photography was obviously in black and white, what we now call grayscale on a computer. It worked with the property that had been discovered of light "burning", that is, exposing a plate treated with particular photosensitive substances. Where the subject was lighter, the plate was darker because the light burned the substance more. Where the subject was darker, less light reached the plate and the preparation remained lighter. In this way, an image was obtained on the plate that was exactly the opposite of what is seen in reality.

We are still in Turin, inside the cathedral, trying to understand more about the Shroud. It was photographed for the first time in 1898 by the lawyer Secondo Pia. What is the singularity of this image?  

Monsignor Roberto Repole, Archbishop of Turin:
The peculiarity, the singularity of this image is precisely that of being an image that in negative shows a body, a tortured body.

The Singularity of the Image

This particular aspect was interesting for scientists.

Gianmaria Zaccone, director of the International Center for Shroud Studies:
This characteristic was interesting for scientists for two main reasons. One, because at the time there was a lot of interest in researching the properties of materials being influenced by various radiations, including light. And on the other hand, because the theory that until then had had the strongest support regarding the possibility that the Shroud was a medieval artifact fell, because who could have used such a process in the Middle Ages that could only be understood after the discovery of the photographic process?

Initially, there was controversy, with claims that Secondo Pia had falsified the photograph, so he had to have an expert examination done. But then his results were confirmed by the photographs taken in 1931 by Henri [another photographer].

And once the scientists, so to speak, became concerned with what could be deduced at various levels and through different scientific disciplines from the cloth, it is clear that they were also able to make discoveries that in some respects are sometimes even surprising.

«La Sindone di Torino: l’indagine scientifica» - VIDEO ep. 2/4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm1hReZLXa4


And the Shroud, when you get into it, it's hard to get out. I've been dealing with the Shroud since '77. It's a cloth that carries great importance, from which it becomes difficult to detach one's attention. Especially if you are a Christian, and I would say a Turinese. If you are a Christian, because in some way that image recalls from very close the image of Jesus and above all the heart of Jesus' story, precisely his Passion, his death, his Resurrection. If you are from Turin, because by ancient tradition this cloth is preserved here in the cathedral of Turin, and for a Turinese it is something that is part of, we could say, the treasure of the Church of Turin.

The Archbishop of Turin is the custodian of the Shroud, and on one hand there is a great responsibility, precisely because one knows that one must preserve an image that is truly dear to so many believers and has been dear to countless Christians over the centuries. And then in certain respects, one also feels the grace of being able to look at it in a way that, as a pilgrim, as has happened to me other times in the course of my life, has not been possible. Therefore, with a closeness, with an intensity that are certainly gratuitous and are a great gift that I perceive for my personal life. The fascination of the Shroud is precisely what Saint John Paul II had summarized in an exemplary way. He rightly said that the Shroud is a mirror of the Gospel and a provocation to intelligence. These are the two elements that clearly involve on multiple levels not only the believer but also the non-believer, the believer in other religions, because this reference, this figure, regardless of its origin, has a profound value. And then the study of its origin, with all the questions and mysteries that still remain unanswered, clearly makes it hard to detach oneself from it.

So in '31 there was a new interest, but they were still working on photographs. From '31 onwards, in fact, the Center that would become the International Center for Shroud Studies, which I now have the honor of directing, began. A more in-depth research began. I believe that scientists have shown a strong interest in the Shroud precisely because for two thousand years there has been in the world the story of Jesus Christ. If there had not been this story, if there had not been the testimony of the first disciples and of the living Church of Christ dead and risen, I think that science itself would not have had such great interest in dealing with a cloth like the Shroud. So this is one of the cases where it is shown that the very interest of science is not primarily, necessarily, immediately scientific. In fact, in '77, in anticipation of the exhibition of 1978, the arrival of Cardinal Ballestrero ensured that this request was made by this group of 30 scientists who had quickly gathered, in a typically American way, that is, with private funding, with laboratories and industries that provided the most up-to-date machines that existed at the time. Within the group there were various religions, various beliefs. The majority of them were convinced that it was a painting of southern origin, and therefore their main purpose was to clarify the nature of the image. They worked for 120 continuous hours, taking shifts. There was also an Italian study team that proceeded to take samples to try to understand the nature of the blood.

The STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) excluded in the most total way that it was an artifact made with known techniques. There are no traces of binders, no traces of paint, so there are no traces of manual interventions. They were able to define the nature of the image. That is, it is a dehydrating oxidation of the superficial fibrils of the linen that does not penetrate inside the thread itself. In fact, on the back, the imprint is not visible, except for the blood stains that had a different origin. What is still a big mystery and what we are unable to clarify is how this imprint was formed. So it is an image whose nature we know, in summary, but not its origin. Those are the latest strictly scientific results, if we exclude 1988 with the complex result of carbon-14 dating.

«La Sindone di Torino: la tesi medievale» - VIDEO ep. 3/4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUhYP7yvYDc


As is well known, in '88 a small sample was taken, which in turn was divided into sub-samples that were dated using the radiocarbon method. The results that emerged were that the Shroud, the cloth of the Shroud, was woven between 1260 and 1390. This is the result given by the radiocarbon test, on which, as you can imagine, fierce criticism has been raised from one side and the other.

It seems absolutely impossible to me that it is a medieval forgery, especially it seems impossible to me that it is a forgery. That is, that it is an artificially made representation that we would not have understood as such. Then, of course, it is a matter of determining, and only scientific research can do this, when this image was made on the Shroud cloth, in what way, in what precise era. But to say that it is a medieval forgery is something else. It seems to me that it remains rather an open question for scientists too, not a certain answer.

[Music]
Moreover, it was already known that the sample was taken very small from an extreme edge of the Shroud, quite contaminated, and a fairly visible halo, for example of water. So much so that a part was discarded, there could have been some contamination that the cleaning methods of the 80s were not able to completely eliminate, also because the methods at the time were not yet standardized as they are today. The fabric is easily contaminable, it's like a large filter, a large sponge. All that said, we cannot discard the carbon-14 test as irrelevant, but there are a number of problems. One above all is the fact of justifying an image like the one we have on the Shroud in the medieval period, when even today, knowing the nature of the image, we are still not able to reproduce it with all its chemical and physical characteristics. Moreover, if you'll allow me, as a historian, to imagine that in the 1300s someone tried to pass off an image, a forgery of such a complex shroud, so refined... Keep in mind that in previous history, other objects and relics believed to belong to Christ's funerary equipment had already appeared. A cloth with blood stains was enough, as for example in Oviedo, to justify devotion. This is something extremely complex that could not have been understood. So much so that the Church, in the person of the Bishop at the time, Pierre d'Arcis of Troyes, rejected it.

I do not believe that science in general exists, there are men who are scientists and there are men who are freer because in their research they are, in some way, simply marked by the search for truth, and there are men who may be less free even in their scientific research. It would be enough to look at what happens even today in the contemporary world, where sometimes, we could say, it is the big capitals that drive scientific research. At one time the center was called the Center for Sindonology. Then we called it the Center for Shroud Studies, because in reality sindonology is a station, that is, the sindonologist does not exist, because if he were someone who deals with the Shroud 360 degrees, he would need a number of highly improbable specializations. So there are historians who study the Shroud, there are chemists who study the Shroud, there are physicists who study the Shroud and who apply the knowledge of their domain that they use daily in their activity to also study the Shroud, just as they study other objects. For example, there is a big discussion and a big study on the scourges, and for example there is one of our young researchers who is doing extremely interesting archaeological research on archaeological finds more or less attributed to scourges, and so, in short, some quite interesting things are emerging. We do not know how they were made, and also on the burial, because if this is indeed an ancient burial from the first century and so on, we know very little about the funerary rites of the first century. So, in short, it is a whole set of things that prompts the study of the Shroud, which by its very nature is a multidisciplinary study.

When speaking of canon, generally in the Church, reference is made to the texts of Scripture, and one cannot speak of the Shroud as a canon, it cannot become one, precisely because, we could say by absurdity, even if the Shroud did not exist, faith in its fundamental contents and in its fundamental attitude would not be diminished in any way. Then, whether it is a historical testimony in the strict sense, and above all in the sense that historical has in modern and current terms, obviously depends on historical science, and on this it is the historians and then also the scientists who must say with precision what it is. The problem is quite complex in order to study the Shroud, it is necessary to have it available.

4th episode: The most recent illustrative panels of the Shroud, with Fabio Quadrini



4a puntata: I piu recenti pannelli illustrativi della Sindone , con Fabio Quadrini
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDQTIVe3Rb0

Otangelo: Greetings Fabio, greetings to all those who are watching us. Yes Fabio. Yes, good afternoon Otangelo to you. As usual, good afternoon to those who are following us live and those who are following the recording. We also greet them. Welcome. Yes, for me it's good morning here as it's 8:30 in the morning. Good morning to those who are watching from this part of the ocean. Ok, so we'll start right away, let's put the panel here on the screen. So we don't waste time and go straight to today's topic. Yes, first of all, we can perhaps give a recap for our listeners. So, we have already done three episodes on these panels, Otangelo, made by you. In the first and third episodes, we touched on different panels. So, we explained various panels. In the second episode, which by the way, listeners will find all three episodes on your channel, in the second episode, however, we were a bit more monothematic, let's say. We exclusively explored the scourging. Anyway, we have already done three episodes on these panels, and today we are at the fourth, so we continue to comment on these panels that you have made. You can describe a little bit the whole story of the Shroud and therefore of the man of the Shroud.

Fabio: Yes, we have arrived at the panel of the journey on the Via Dolorosa up to arriving at Golgotha, and now we begin with the panel of the localization of the crucifixion. Yes, if you want to introduce it as always, and then I'll come in with some comments.

Otangelo: Yes, on the panel on the right, we see the localization of the crucifixion of Golgotha in Jerusalem in the first century. The walls were different from today's, and the place of Golgotha was a little outside the city, and it seems to me that we can see more or less where this place was on the image. Perhaps you want to add something about the localization of Golgotha.

Yes, certainly. So currently, we have the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre, which localizes, let's say, historically and traditionally, the place where Jesus was crucified. As I heard some comments a while ago, a few days ago, in fact, about the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre, it's very interesting. The observation that I listened to is that we call it the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre, and it's a church, for those who don't know, let's say a basilica that contains both the place of the crucifixion, that is, Golgotha, and in the same church, there is also the place of the tomb. So it's a church that contains both the place of the crucifixion and the place of the tomb.

We Westerners call it the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre, while the Easterners call it the Anastasis, which is the place of the Resurrection. It was a very interesting observation, that is, we Westerners focus a lot on the aspect of the Passion, almost neglecting the Resurrection, while in the East they focus precisely on the Paschal Mystery of Jesus in the Resurrection. So they call it the Anastasis, while we call it the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre. Anyway, yes, it was clearly a place outside the walls of Jerusalem. And it was also a place of passage, we notice this also from the Gospels because in the Gospels it is said that those who passed by observed the events of the crucifixion of Jesus. And anyway, the Romans specifically located the places of crucifixion, I'm reminded also of the crucifixion of Spartacus along the entire Appian Way. There were all these crosses that, in a terrible way, obscured the vision of those who passed along the Appian Way, so the Romans specifically located the places of execution, specifically the places of crucifixion, in places of passage. Because those who died by crucifixion had to be subjected, as we said at the end of the previous episode, to extreme physical violence but also to extreme moral violence, so their shame had to be very visible, their placement attached to this wood, usually also completely naked, so it was really shameful for the one who remained hanging on this wood. If you want, I can give you, starting from this point, from this panel that you are showing, to recover and reconnect the discussion that we left last time and go a little deeper into the story of the man of the Shroud, the crucified man. If you want, I can give you some more.

Fabio: Yes, it seems to me that this is a fairly central theme, and as you have many details, it seems interesting to perhaps stop for a moment to analyze it a little and pass on this information, which certainly, like me, our viewers will also be able to learn something. Okay, then I'll make a connection. So, let's say that the last slide we commented on last time specifically concerned the deductio, which is, to say it with a technical term, of the Roman crucifixion. It was the place, the procession that led the condemned to death by crucifixion from the place of execution to the place where the sentence was pronounced. This procession was called deductio, and we talked about how the man of the Shroud, how on the flesh and specifically on the shoulders of the man of the Shroud, there is precisely the trace of the patibulum, which is the horizontal beam that made up the cross.

By the way, on the man of the Shroud, regarding this aspect of deductio and therefore this aspect of suffering endured by the man of the Shroud, I don't know if I said it last time, but I'll repeat it in a sort of connection, let's say. On the face of the man of the Shroud, in addition to all these signs of suffering and also of carrying the patibulum, there are also signs of beatings, and it wasn't strange that those condemned to death by crucifixion were also scourged along this deductio. The man of the Shroud probably also suffered some lashings along this procession. Anyway, he bears signs of beatings on his face, there is also a flow of blood and saliva from his mouth, his chin and lip are tormented, he has his beard completely torn out, and also the deviation of the nasal wing. The man of the Shroud has a deviation of this nasal wing which could have resulted perhaps even from a fall along this deductio, a fall made heavier by the fact that there was this weight, this beam of the patibulum of about thirty kilos on his shoulders, and this man of the Shroud  falling without being able to protect her face. So it's possible that he also broke his nasal septum. By the way, on the man of the Shroud, you can also verify the likely dislocation of a shoulder, this injury could also derive from the fall along this deductio, this path that led from the place of pronouncement of the sentence to the place of execution. An interesting note, then I'll move on to the topic of the Cross, an interesting note on the man of the Shroud is the fact that on the left knee of the man of the Shroud there is a trace of a fall, and the patibulum, as we observed already last time, hung on the left side. In fact, the lesions of the patibulum on the shoulders of the man of the Shroud are stronger on the right suprascapular and left scapular area, so the patibulum was placed diagonally, hanging to the left, and it's interesting how precisely on the left knee of the man of the Shroud there is a trace of a fall. Presumably, the diagonal position, hanging to the left of this patibulum, caused the man of the Shroud to fall towards the left. So the wound on the left knee of the man of the Shroud is consistent with this diagonal position of the patibulum.

It's also interesting how above the left ankle of the man of the Shroud there are the traces of the binding of the patibulum that blocked this beam above the shoulders of this man, of this cruciarius, that is, of this subject who was condemned, destined to die by crucifixion. It should also be noted how on the Shroud, on the Shroud cloth, traces of soil were found at the level of the heels, knees, and nose of the Shrouded figure. These traces strongly support the fact, you know, of how the man of the Shroud walked barefoot and fell. So these traces really support the fact that this man of the Shroud carried the patibulum, walked this path, this deductio to the place of execution, barefoot, and with very high probability, if not certainly, fell.

And it's interesting how these traces, also present on the Shroud, are also traces of aragonite, which is a type of calcium carbonate that has the same impurities as the aragonite from the caves of Jerusalem. So on the Shroud there is aragonite with the same impurities as the caves of Jerusalem. It's interesting how both the story, let's say, of the suffering of the man of the Shroud, and these traces, even scientific traces present on the Shroud cloth, lead us in a completely peaceful way, that is, decisively, precisely to the figure of Jesus. These are notes that must be taken into consideration, they are scientific notes.

Fabio: So let's move on at this point to delve a little into the crucifixion, the Roman crucifixion, and specifically, as you were showing, the place of execution in this case of Jesus, Golgotha or Calvary. So what can we say about this situation? The condemned man, so what happened to the man condemned to death by crucifixion, this cruciarius, therefore loaded with the patibulum on his shoulders, he carried this beam to the place of execution. And what was waiting for the cruciarius and the patibulum at the place of execution? There was the twin of the patibulum, that is, the stipes, or the vertical beam that made up the cross.

So, apart from all the artistic or cinematographic representations, which usually almost all envision that Jesus, specifically, and therefore also figuratively, those condemned to death by Roman crucifixion, carried the whole cross, composed of the vertical and horizontal beams, it is highly likely that almost all those condemned to death by Roman crucifixion, including Jesus, carried only the patibulum along the deductio, because usually Roman crucifixion involved the stipes, the vertical beam, already being planted at the place of execution. So presumably we can admit that Jesus, and therefore all those condemned to death by Roman crucifixion, carried this patibulum on their shoulders, and when they arrived near the place of execution, they saw the stipes, the vertical beam that made up the cross, already planted, waiting for them.

So what happened then? Upon arriving at the place of execution, the condemned man's upper limbs were tied or nailed to the patibulum. It was likely the same magistratus who categorically established all these steps, so the binding or nailing, the sentence, the magistrate usually regulated and arranged the entire context of the execution. And do you remember last episode when I told you that within the rite of Roman crucifixion there was a sort of perverse game, that is, everything that apparently was an act of piety was technically cruelty, and vice versa? Do you remember? We can see this very clearly precisely with regard to the use of ropes and nails. Apparently, if ropes were used on someone condemned to death by crucifixion, apparently it clearly appears as an act of piety compared to nails, but technically it was an act of cruelty, because it's true that ropes are less invasive compared to nails, but with ropes

Speaker 1: Which subject remains on the cross for so many days and this was precisely the purpose of the crucifixion, whereas with the nails that apparently were an act of cruelty is true. Yes, with the nails, in short, there was an increase in cruelty on the condemned, but because of the nails, that is, because of the fact that with the nails that subject suffered more, or because of the fact that with the nails that subject bled out more quickly, that condemned person died very quickly. Therefore, there was an exasperation of the pain, clearly, but there was an acceleration of the arrival of death, so apparently the nails were an act of cruelty but technically they were an act of mercy, let's say. And it is interesting to note that on Jesus the nails were applied, so we can technically note that on Jesus there was an act of mercy from Pontius Pilate if we really want to read it in this context here. So let's make a brief note on how this condemned person was placed, and I also mentioned it a little while ago, on the cross for crucifixion. Usually, the Romans carried out the execution completely nude; usually, whoever was executed by crucifixion, whoever was fixed to the cross, was fixed completely nude. This was the usual practice of the Romans. However, the Romans could sometimes decide to attenuate this complete and crude nudity, for example in circumstances or contexts or before populations who disdained exhibited nudity, or in circumstances where it was better to avoid it because it could provoke some revolt or something. So, let's contextualize it historically, the Jewish environment and the Paschal environment, within a Jewish environment, these were situations that could solicit and push the Romans not to go towards exposing the intimate parts. Let's play a game. I'll ask you the question: according to you, was Jesus completely nude or did he have a loincloth around the intimate areas? Let's see how you interpret it or how you've studied it, then I can give you an answer.

Speaker 2: In fact, I wondered about these details. I also discussed it with Gianmarino and he told me that he believes the Romans would probably have respected the will of the Jews and crucified him with a cloth.

Speaker 1: Here, I can give you how one should respond, let's say, at an academic level and then how one could respond based on logical reasoning. So, to the following question: was Jesus on the cross placed completely nude or with a cloth? The answer is: I don't know. We don't know. Because from the Gospels this notion does not emerge; the Gospels are very essential both in the description of the Resurrection situation and, clearly, also in the description of Jesus' entire life. The Gospels are very essential. But even regarding the crucifixion, they are very essential; from the Gospels this detail does not emerge, so let's say at an academic level we must answer that the Gospels are silent and it is good that we too remain silent, we are not able to know it. We can say that historically it was foreseeable, but at this point, here is where I want to get to: historically and analyzing it logically, we can say that even if the Gospels are silent, we can have an idea, but we cannot be categorical either in saying that Jesus had a loincloth, therefore a covering at the level of the pelvis, or that Jesus was completely nude. The logical-historical answer admits both possibilities. The crucifixion of Jesus occurred precisely within the Paschal context, so around the time of Passover. We can say it is very likely that the Romans, to avoid any possible revolt or chaos, calmly put a loincloth covering Jesus' intimate areas, as well as the thieves'. However, we can also consider the second situation - that Jesus may have been affixed completely nude. We cannot exclude this, in fact it has the same probabilistic equivalence as the presence of the loincloth. And how can we argue for taking into consideration the nudity?

According to Jewish burial tradition - let me explain it - for the Jews, whoever dies a violent death with blood loss, the body must not be washed. Hm, because with this violent death and this blood loss, this blood is blood of life. So this blood of life must remain attached to the corpse from which it came out. Therefore, for Jews, whoever dies a violent death with blood loss, since this blood is blood of life, the body must not be washed. And pay attention to this point Angelo - if the clothes that this subject who died a violent death with blood loss, if the clothes he is wearing are stained with this blood of life, these same clothes must not be touched, that is, they must not be removed from the body but must be buried just as they are together with the body. Because the clothes also bear, they have absorbed the blood of life, so they must remain intact on the corpse that will be buried.

Where am I going with this? If the man of the Shroud is Jesus, the man of the Shroud has a loincloth or is he nude? The man of the Shroud is completely nude. So following this Jewish ritual practice, if we hypothesize that the man of the Shroud is Jesus, and Jesus died a violent death, if Jesus had had a loincloth around the intimate areas, plausibly according to this Jewish practice it should have remained intact with the loincloth around the intimate areas. Instead the man of the Shroud is nude, so this is also why we can hypothesize that Jesus may have been affixed to the cross completely nude.

So there are reasons that support both the loincloth and the complete crude nudity of Jesus on the cross. Moreover, there are also artistic representations of artists who precisely portray and have sculpted statues of Jesus on the cross completely nude. So these are situations that art also recognizes, and history too.

So it is good in certain circumstances... Let's always give listeners a bit of a methodology for reading and studying the Shroud. When referring to the Gospels in certain circumstances, the first thing is to listen to and read what the Gospels say, and if the Gospels do not say anything, well, we should not say anything either. But if in this situation where the Gospels are not explicit, there are logical and also historical reasons that support certain interpretations, they should be presented and argued. However, in situations like these where we are in the realm of probability, both are probable, we cannot categorically assert one thesis nor categorically knock down another thesis. We must always be balanced, we must maintain a certain composure, a balance in these analytical situations.

Speaker 2: Here are some other notes I can give you regarding the crucifixion and what happened at this place of execution. The condemned man could be, as we said, tied and nailed down - how did it work? The condemned man was thrown to the ground onto the patibulum, so while lying on the ground on the patibulum, he was tied or nailed down. Then once affixed, either with ropes or nails, he was raised up so that the stipes interlocked with the patibulum - excuse me, the patibulum interlocked with the stipes.

It's interesting to note how the Romans borrowed their knowledge from the various sectors they had developed. Let me explain, in the context of Roman crucifixion, the Romans used everything they knew in the field of construction and everything they knew in the field of seamanship. So in carrying out a Roman crucifixion, the Romans used the knowledge they had in construction and seamanship.

So to raise, for example, the condemned man already nailed to the patibulum to affix him to the stipes, it is very likely that they used precisely the seamanship knowledge they used on ships, and construction knowledge for example where do we find it? First of all, clearly the support, the assembly of the beams, but for example the nails that were used to nail a condemned man to the cross were precisely called clavi trabales, which translates to "beam nails", let's say big nails like beams. But the interesting note is that it could also be translated as "nails for beams". So it could have two translations, in this clavi trabales it could mean nails for beams, so nails used for beams, or big nails like beams - translated it means "beam nails", clavi trabales. It refers, let's say, precisely to the aspect, the field of construction. So construction and seamanship were precisely applied in the context of carrying out the crucifixion.

Then once this condemned man was raised up, attached to the patibulum, he was affixed either with ropes or nails to the stipes. Oh, the man of the Shroud - this is a note that all in all I imagine listeners are familiar with, but we'll reiterate it - the man of the Shroud was not tied, he was nailed, nailed to the patibulum and nailed not in the palm but at the level of the wrists, in order to affix the body solidly and stably to the cross. Had he been affixed in the palm, the palm is clearly made up of a soft area, so the weight of the body would have pulled the condemned man down temporarily, let's say, once affixed to the cross. The weight of the body would have caused the condemned man to come right down, he would have lacerated his palm. So the Romans who crucified on a constant basis knew exactly where to drive the nail. They knew that if a condemned man had to remain on the cross with only the nails, without the aid of ropes on the wrist, the nail should not be planted in the palm but precisely in the wrist, and so it was for the man of the Shroud.

The interesting thing I can still tell you is that at the level of the wrist, so it is very likely that it also happened to the man of the Shroud, there passes a nerve called technically the median nerve. So what characteristics does this median nerve give the man of the Shroud? The median nerve has two characteristics: it is sensory, so it generates, provokes pain, and it is also motor. That is, the mobility of the fingers specifically depends on the median nerve, and it is very likely that the fact that the man of the Shroud has the thumb recalled in the palm of the hand is very likely due to the violation of the median nerve. It is very likely that the nail planted in the wrist of the man of the Shroud violated the median nerve precisely, and let's think about the fact that on the cross the condemned had to move, they managed to move, let's think about how these condemned men on the cross had to move by straining, those who were planted with nails by straining, precisely pivoting on the limbs pierced by the nails, and this median nerve that we said is sensory. So let's think about the effort but also the pain of these condemned men to crucifixion who had to move pivoting on the median nerve, which is sensory - it was truly an atrocious suffering. So I reiterate, moral violence and physical violence brought to the utmost exasperation, it was truly an atrocious torment.

Regarding the feet, I can tell you this: just like the wrists, the feet of the man of the Shroud also do not appear to be affixed with ropes but appear to be affixed with nails. Moreover, the feet of the man of the Shroud were nailed directly to the wood of the stipes without the presence of a suppedaneum, the footrest that we find in all crucifixes. The man of the Shroud was nailed directly to the vertical beam of the cross, the stipes, without the presence of the suppedaneum. Why is this note also interesting for another reflection?

Well, in the rite of Roman crucifixion, the suppedaneum or footrest entered the rite of Roman crucifixion from the second half of the 1st century AD onwards. So what can we deduce from this notion that the man of the Shroud, having been crucified without a suppedaneum, most likely his execution took place before the mid-1st century AD? Let me explain a bit - if the suppedaneum entered the rite of Roman crucifixion from the second half of the 1st century AD onwards, if the man of the Shroud is crucified without a suppedaneum, it is very very likely that his crucifixion precedes 50 AD. This is more or less the reasoning.

Let's remain, I repeat, in this realm of high plausibility, but these are notions that should be given great consideration. The last note I'll give you about the feet is that plausibly, from the analysis and scrutiny of the nails at the level of the feet of the man of the Shroud, the driving in of not one but two nails can be recognized with valid reliability: the first blocking the right foot to the stipes, and the second nail blocking the left over the right.

Here too the debate is heated, let's say, between those who maintain within Shroud studies that there were two nails and those who maintain there was one nail. It's still an open discussion, one cannot be categorical. For example, Monsignor Ricci recognizes one nail. As far as I'm concerned, I would not categorically exclude the presence of two nails because many traces at the level of the feet of the man of the Shroud can lead us to also recognize the presence of two nails: the first fixing the right foot to the stipes, and the second blocking the left over the right.

Well, I would have many other things to say about the crucifixion. I don't know if you have other slides regarding this situation, or you tell me.

Speaker 2: One particular thing, Fabio, is that if there were two nails, this means, as I'm showing on this photo here in the middle, that one nail went directly through the heel of the foot, and there is a prophecy in Genesis 3:15 that says "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel." So if there really were two nails and one went through the heel, it would be direct proof of the fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 if we interpret it as the first prophecy in the Old Testament about the Messiah.

Speaker 1: Yes, yes, it's beautiful, but we can find many so-called prophecies, let's say, readings of the Old Testament projecting to Jesus and specifically projecting to the crucifixion. One comes to mind that I am very attached to, in the sense that I quote it often and it is very beautiful. For example, in Isaiah, so we're talking precisely about the prophet par excellence, the prophet par excellence of the Passion, let's say. If our listeners... I also invite you to take Isaiah chapter 49, verse 16. I'll read what is written and not comment on it, I'll quote it directly to you. Isaiah 49:16 says this - it is God speaking, or rather let's say Adonai since we're on a Hebrew theme, it is Adonai, that is, God the Lord speaking and addressing Jerusalem. You know what He says? "Behold, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands."

Now, setting aside the nuances of "palm" etc., because in Hebrew "yad" means both hand and wrist and arm, just as "keir" in Greek means hand, wrist and arm, so let's not quibble over these things. This reference from Isaiah 49:1 is magnificent. "Behold," God speaks turned to Jerusalem, "Behold, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands." This is stupendous, and it is precisely a very strong reference to the crucifixion.

So yes, I associate myself with the observation you made - the Holy Scripture, specifically the Old Testament, very often contains such strong references to the crucifixion.

Speaker 2: It's really beautiful, even the observation you made. Absolutely.

Speaker 1: Okay, shall we move on to the next? Yes, look, as you wish. Now I've seen that you've changed the slide, you've focused on the crucifixion, if we want to move on, let's see where it takes us. This reminds me a bit of the death of the man of the Shroud already, I imagine. Yes, this is the next slide where we see that the Roman soldier thrusts his sword and pierces him to see if he was really dead. That is, there are those who say that Jesus was not dead, that he had survived the crucifixion, and it seems to me that the evidence we see on the Shroud proves the opposite, that is, it seems to me that the liquid from the wound on the side is a mixture of blood with fluid from the lungs.

Speaker 2: Yes, yes, maybe you can give more details about this, both from the Gospels and also from the Shroud study, it is clear that Jesus died. There is no shadow of a doubt that Jesus died, so it is useless to remain in balance, as it were. The balance lies in the certainty of the fact that Jesus died, and this is very clear from the Gospels, and if we want to apply the figure of Jesus to the man of the Shroud, it is very clear that the man of the Shroud is a deceased subject, and a subject who died wrapped in a cloth, and if we really want to say it all, the disappearance, let's say, of this man of the Shroud from the cloth, because literally this man of the Shroud, perhaps we'll see it later, literally disappeared - to use a term the listeners can understand, he was motionless, he was motionless when he was placed inside and he was motionless when he disappeared, he does not move, he did not even move when he disappeared, he was truly motionless and he was dead, he was really a corpse. You know, perhaps many times when the term "corpse" is also used referring to Jesus, someone wrinkles their nose a bit, "what an ugly word". But it's a normal word, and Jesus, let's get this into our heads, Jesus became a corpse, eh? It's not a joke or a game or a blasphemy or anything, it's the historical event of Jesus, Son of God, who became a corpse. This is a note that is not blasphemous, it is the historical and also, why not, theological event of Jesus Christ, Son of God, true God and true man, who became a corpse.

And let's get back to the man of the Shroud - the man of the Shroud is clearly dead. Let's try to analyze this aspect a bit, starting from the wound in the side, which, well, it seems to me that you've represented it there. Moreover, I also see the episode of the hemopericardium. Let's try to give an overview of this very interesting slide that you highlighted. Moreover, it seems to me that even when you were making it, you showed it to me in advance and we adjusted various proportions a bit, if I remember correctly. For example, I immediately remember the fact of that left knee of the soldier, which rightly, in my opinion, as it is depicted, was precisely at the height of the nail in the feet of the man of the Shroud - that was the height, right?

Uhm, the stipes for the Romans could be either sublimis, therefore high, or it could be humilis, that is, low - by low or high I mean the height of the nailed or tied feet in relation to the ground. The man of the Shroud, with much...let's say plausibility, was nailed to a humilis stipes. To understand, the height of the wound in the side of the man of the Shroud - in the sense of where the man of the Shroud was wounded, from the inclination of the wound, the penetration in the side, scholars deduce that the wound in the side of the man of the Shroud was tendentially about 1.80 meters from the ground. Therefore, it is very likely that the stipes to which the man of the Shroud was affixed, fixed with nails, was a humilis stipes, therefore tendentially low. So his feet were very close to the ground. Here, the feet of the man of the Shroud were very close to the ground. Yes, it's the height of the soldier's knee, it's possible that it was precisely at the same height, the same, let's say, spatial level as the feet affixed to the stipes.

So let's get back to the wound in the side. So the man of the Shroud appears pierced in the right side, and here we could make many citations from Ezekiel or Zechariah, but perhaps we'll save them for another time. The man of the Shroud appears pierced in the right side between the fifth and sixth ribs, by an instrument, and this is precisely the analysis of the penetration of this wound, by an instrument that has decidedly the characteristics of a thrusting and cutting weapon, and we can highly identify it precisely as a lance.

So now let's pay close attention - studies have shown that this piercing in the right side of the man of the Shroud was delivered some time after the death of the man of the Shroud. So the analysis of the wound in the side of the man of the Shroud, Angelo, what does it reveal? First of all, an immediate outflow of separated blood. What does "separated blood" mean? It means that the solid part of the blood, the corpuscular part, is separated, let's say decanted, from the liquid part, the serum of the blood. So if the blood is...what does it mean if the blood is separated? It means that it is not circulating, and if the blood is not circulating, the subject cannot be alive, he is dead.

So the analysis of the wound in the side of the man of the Shroud reveals an immediate outflow of separated blood, and furthermore, if the perforation margins are analyzed properly, if we perhaps had a focus right on this penetration wound, the margins of the wound in the side of the man of the Shroud are enlarged. What does this mean? It means that the subject was dead at the moment...let me give an example on ourselves: when we cut ourselves, even a minor cut, what happens? Our skin immediately contracts, the edges come together because they must favor the clotting process, so the wound must close up as soon as possible to prevent bleeding out. This is an automatic process of our body.

However, the margins of the penetration in the side of the man of the Shroud are enlarged. What does this mean? It means that if I pierce, it's a bit of a banal example but we understand, the skin is dead, the body's reactivity is dead, so by piercing a dead person, the edges remain enlarged, and this is what is found right on the penetration of the wound in the side of the man of the Shroud.

So separated blood flowed out, the margins of this wound are enlarged. Ergo, the man of the Shroud is certainly dead, and he certainly died, and this wound was inflicted some time after death, because the blood separated, so there was a decantation process. Let me give further notes - and this immediate outflow of separated blood was gushing under pressure and extremely abundant. So where do these other details lead us - immediate outflow of separated blood, outflow gushing under pressure, extremely abundant outflow? They have led forensic doctors to hypothesize the plausible cause of death of the man of the Shroud. These characteristics have led forensic doctors to say that the man of the Shroud most likely, with very high probability, died of a ruptured heart.

So technically, the process that leads to a ruptured heart, or rather the pathological process that stems from a ruptured heart, is called precisely postinfarction hemopericardium. And this is precisely the event that you depict in the lower left part of the panel, where we see precisely those phases around the heart. Let's try to describe it.

So what is a ruptured heart, or rather postinfarction hemopericardium? Well, already the analysis of the sequence of these words, let's say, helps us a bit to understand it. If one listens to "hemopericardium postinfarction", one says, "Good heavens, what is that?" Well, it's very simple - many times, to understand a difficult word, it's enough to break it down.

So hemopericardium postinfarction, what could that be? Let's break it down. Hemo - blood. Peri - around. Cardio - heart. So blood around the heart. Hemopericardium. Post - after. Infarction - after a heart attack. We've already explained what it means after a heart attack - it's the blood around the heart. There, we've explained hemopericardium.

Let's try to argue it in a slightly more professional way, let's say a slightly more medical way - what happens? First of all, then, originally there is a heart attack. So there is a heart attack of the cardiac muscle, let's say a heart attack. Well, after a heart attack of the cardiac muscle, there is, precisely, a rupture of the heart. So there is a heart attack, this heart attack is not treated, let's say, the infarction therefore it creates precisely a rupture of the heart, technically called fissuring. Uhm, rupture of the heart - what happens after a heart ruptures? The blood precisely flows out into the pericardium. What is the pericardium? The pericardium, that is, around the heart - the pericardium is a membrane that precisely surrounds the heart. Uhm, so the pericardium, which receives all this blood coming out of the ruptured heart, what does it do? It fills with blood, it dilates and stops the activity of the cardiac muscle.
The part of the blood that is corpuscular and red, separated from the clear liquid of the serum, therefore, immediate outflow of separated blood, this outflow that comes precisely from a swollen bag of blood, outflow of separated blood that will clearly be under pressure and extremely abundant. You see how these characteristics that precisely describe the prediction of hemopericardium, we find them in the story of the man of the Shroud. And here, if you allow me to quote it, the quote is his, that is, the Gospel according to John, chapter 19, verses 33-35, and I quote it. John 19:33-35, it's the same story that is analyzed technically, medically, scientifically, let's say as we want, on the man of the Shroud, precisely starting from the wound in the right side. John 19:33-35: "When they came to Jesus, the soldiers, seeing that he was already dead, did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out."

And so someone would say, "Oh no, this doesn't match the man of the Shroud." Oh no, instead it does match the man of the Shroud, because to see the red and corpuscular part of the blood separated from the clear liquid of the serum, let's say an immediate impact vision, especially the vision of a person who is not a doctor - what do they see? They see a red part that comes out and then a clear part that comes out; they call the red part blood generically, and the clear part water, but we know today with our knowledge that it is not water but the clear liquid of the serum separated from the corpuscular part of the blood. And so here too, the description of the Gospels about Jesus corresponds fully to the story of the death of the man of the Shroud. This is a very interesting reading, let's say that by now, the whole basin of studies of those who approach the Shroud tend to reconcile this type of death precisely with the man of the Shroud. Now, it is interesting, oh, and I'll close the discussion for a moment, how in Jesus this pathological process, let's say, of rupture of the heart can be identified even more, also by analyzing the Gethsemane. That is, it is interesting how in the Gethsemane, Jesus – this is clear from the Gospels – suffered profound suffering, he prostrated himself on the ground and sweated blood. Well, the medical examiners have no difficulty in saying how at that moment, the moment of the blood sweat, technically we are talking about hematidrosis, at that moment it is likely that in Jesus himself there could have been the triggering of a heart attack process, and specifically the medical examiners identify Jesus' heart attack process as a stress-induced heart attack process, a bit like saying, the heart attack, let's say, which in a poetic way describes this story. Yes, a stress-induced heart attack process can easily be triggered, many doctors specifically identify it technically as the takotsubo syndrome, a stress-induced heart attack process. And what led to it, as we said before, the triggering of an untreated heart attack process? Because Jesus, clearly, from Gethsemane to Golgotha, it doesn't seem that he was treated or kept under observation by a medical team; the team that observed Jesus was of a completely different nature than a medical team. In short, that inquest, soaked in blood, and therefore with a very high probability, Jesus died of post-infarction hemopericardium, which is the very likely prediction of death for the pathological condition of the man of the Shroud. And here I'll give you two other quotes that I think are very interesting. Actually, I'll give you one and then I'll give you a medical quote, let's say. When Jesus is about to die on the cross, he quotes a psalm – depending on the count, it's Psalm 21 or Psalm 22, you know, the one "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?  My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

So the first analysis is this: when the Jews pronounce the first line, the first line of a psalm, they do not intend only the first line, but by pronouncing or reading or proclaiming the first line of a psalm, they contemplate the whole psalm. Therefore, if Jesus proclaimed the first line of Psalm 21/22, he contemplated it, he considered the whole psalm. So a scholar of exegesis should read and analyze this whole Psalm 21/22 to understand what Jesus was alluding to on the cross. And if a careful scrutinizer were to go and read verse 15 of this Psalm 21/22, you know what it says? Psalm 21/22, proclaimed by Jesus is on the cross, verse 15 says like this, and I quote: "My heart is like wax, it melts within me..." Here is the story of the rupture of the heart, that is, of post-infarction hemopericardium. And where is the medical quote that allows me to be so fervent, let's say, in recognizing these passages? You know how the rupture of the heart is called in medical-legal jargon? That is, the pathological condition of post-infarction hemopericardium - do you know how doctors call it when they describe the rupture of the heart or post-infarction hemopericardium? They call it wax degeneration - the same terms as Psalm 21/22, verse 15, the Psalm considered and contemplated by Jesus on the cross. These are very interesting notes that also help us understand, and at least allow me to give our listeners another methodological note: the study of the Shroud must be multidisciplinary. How many times have we said it? The study of the Shroud must be multidisciplinary. Chemistry alone is not enough, nor physics alone, nor the Sacred Scriptures alone, nor theology alone, nor photography alone - they must all come together because together they manage to give us a complete picture of this relic, of this reality, which is clearly a relic since there is blood. So multidisciplinarity is a methodological aspect that our listeners must keep well in mind. If I do not listen to Shroud studies in a multidisciplinary way, or from our side, if I do not study the Shroud in a multidisciplinary way, my approach, whether as a listener or as a scholar, is in vain, it is not valid, because it fails to give a satisfactory picture of this reality, of this relic. I believe I have given you a fairly satisfactory overview, Otangelo. I don't know if you want to add something else too...

Speaker Two: Yes, yes, Fabio, it's fantastic, all the details you bring to light, and many things, okay, I didn't know, like this about the Psalm, it's very interesting to listen to these details. However, one thing, one detail that I think perhaps I could add, and then for today we should stop, is the fact that the wound is on the right side and not on the side of the heart. I don't know if you confirm this, but the Roman shield was always on the side of the heart, or rather, they always protected the heart. So they had the custom, with the sword, of trying to wound on the right side, which was unprotected, and perhaps... I don't know if my analysis is correct.

Speaker One: Yes, I understand what you're saying, and your analysis is correct. Let's try to explain it a little better, and then, as you say, we'll go to the conclusion and make an appointment with our listeners for next time. So, essentially, how did the warriors position themselves, let's say, in Roman times? On the right, they held the weapon; on the left, they had the shield, because on the left, rightly, as you point out, they covered the heart area. Oh, where does this position lead us, applying it to the story of the wound of the man of the Shroud? First of all, the man of the Shroud, being pierced on the right side, for the Romans, striking on the right was the typical mortal blow. That is, since on the left the adversaries were covered, where could they pierce them? On their right. So, the blow that was given to the man of the Shroud is clearly a mortal blow by the Roman soldiers. So, what was inflicted on the Shroud is a mortal blow by the Roman soldiers, let's say - the Romans, when they inflicted the mortal blow, gave it to the right of the adversary, because that part was uncovered by the shield. The other observation, I imagine, that you were referring to is: But if we're talking about the rupture of the heart, then the blow didn't pierce the heart, right? If that's what you meant, let's clarify this properly. The heart of the man of the Shroud was not ruptured because it was hit by the lance; the heart ruptured because, due to the heart attack - that is, the untreated heart attack caused a lack of oxygenation of the cardiac muscle, of the myocardium, it caused an absence of blood irrigation to the muscle. The unoxygenated and unirrigated muscle, but continuing to pulse, had cracked, it was dry, so it ruptured itself. Due to this unirrigated movement, it caused the outflow, having then hit the pericardium, which is this membrane around the heart. The perforation pierced the pericardium, which was already full of blood, and so the blood came out. This is the process: the blood that was separated, so the wound in the right side of the man of the Shroud, is a wound that specifically and technically matches a mortal blow that the Roman soldiers used to inflict. And this blow perforated the pericardium, which was full of this blood - blood that, over time, because the man of the Shroud remained on the cross for some time after his death, this separated blood came out in a jet and under pressure, the solid, red part separated from the liquid part of the serum. I don't know if I've clarified a little the point you raised...

Speaker Two: Yes, yes, it seems to me that we have clarified this topic enough too. Okay, Fabio, thank you once again for your very precise explanations that clarify this situation in a fairly clear way. It seems to me that our listeners will have learned quite a bit with all this that you've told us. For today, we'll stop this episode here, and I think there will be at least two or three more episodes if we continue to clarify in all these details the episodes that we have not clarified yet. And I'm glad, because there will still be a lot to learn from you, Fabio, because it's really very interesting, and the details are really very interesting to learn - details that many do not know. Okay, so yes, I would like to thank you once again, Fabio, for being here on my channel. We'll see you next time.  

Certainly, I greet you. I am the one who thanks you. We clearly thank all our listeners too, and we'll make an appointment for the next episode. And we will continue together with you, together with them, to try to scrutinize this story of the man of the Shroud, which is really very interesting and very engaging. So we'll make an appointment with everyone soon. Thank you again. Thanks to everyone who has listened to us until next time. Bye everyone.