Saturday, March 3, 2018

Obituary (3): Dr. Alan Duane Whanger (17 July 1930 - 21 October 2017)

© Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is the fifteenth and final (which is a continuation of the fourteenth) installment of part #3 of my obituary of Dr. Alan D. Whanger. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated. Previous parts in this series were part #1 and part #2.

[Coins over the eyes] [Corona disharge]

Coins over the eyes [top]

[Above (enlarge): A lepton (Greek) aka prutah (Hebrew) coin struck under the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate (r. AD 26-36), who sentenced Jesus to death by crucifixion (Mt 27:24-31; Mk 15:15-20; Lk 23:25-26; Jn 19:12-16) in AD 30[2]. This lepton has the "UCAI" ("TIBEPIOUCAICAPOC" - "Of Tiberius Caesar") variant of the usual "UKAI" ("TIBEPIOUKAI- CAPOC") which was given to Fr. Francis L. Filas (1915-85) in 1979 by numismatist William Yarbrough[3]. Tiberius Caesar was Roman Emperor from AD 14-37, and therefore over the time of Jesus' ministry and death (Lk 3:1). But this lepton's lituus (astrologer's staff) is in the shape of a reversed question mark, which pro-authenticist numismatist Mario Moroni correctly pointed out cannot be the version of lepton imprinted on the Shroud (see 10May13a). And also that the "C" in "UCAI" was part of the lituus - see 10May13b. So both Filas and Whanger were correct about the coin over the Shroud man's right eye being a Pontius Pilate lepton (and therefore further proving beyond reasonable doubt that the man was Jesus!), but they misinterpreted which Pontius Pilate lepton it was - see my "The Shroud of Turin: 2.6. The other marks (5): Coins over eyes" and below.]

In January 1982 the Whangers had arranged a press conference through the Duke University News Service[4]. where Alan was a professor of psychiatry[5]. Its purpose was to disseminate the Whangers' Points of Congruence findings [albeit flawed - see part #2] on the St Catherine's Monastery Pantocrator icon [see part #1a] and a Justinian II gold solidus coin [see part #1b] [6]. After the press conference the Whangers were asked about Fr. Francis L. Filas' claim that there were identifiable coins over the eyes of the Man on the Shroud[7]. Their response included: "We don't know ... But now we have a method for minute and detailed comparison and we'll go look"[8].

The Whangers then summarised (with my additions) the evidence that there are indeed images of Pontius Pilate lepton coins over the Shroud man's eyes:

■ In 1977 the leaders of what became The Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP), John P. Jackson, Eric Jumper and R.W. (Bill) Mottern (1924-2015), using a VP-8 Image Analyzer which converts shades of grey into height [see 05Feb17] discovered that the Shroud man's image was three-dimensional[9]. Moreover on the VP-8 Image Analyzer's `relief map' of the Shroud, they discovered there were two

[Above (enlarge): Extract of a close-up of the original 1977 VP-8 Image Analyzer three-dimensional output of the Shroud face, showing the "button-like objects" over each eye[10]. As can be seen, the "button" over the man's right (left facing) eye is in the correct place, but that over the left (right facing) eye, has been displaced to the edge of the eye-socket[11]. This is yet another problem of the forgery theory, which I will cover in my, "The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!" series, namely "3. Other marks and images ... G. Coins over the eyes #32." That is, a medieval forger: 1) would be unlikely to even know the dimensions of a Pontius Pilate lepton; 2) would be unlikely, if not unable, to depict leptons as three-dimensional objects; and even if he did, 3) would have depicted them both over the centre of the eyes, not show one displaced to the edge of the eye socket. But a a displaced lepton could well have happened in a real transport of Jesus' body from the cross to the tomb and the laying of His body in the tomb. Since rigor mortis would by then have ensured Jesus' eyes were closed, those burying Jesus would not have bothered to re-position a displaced coin over one of His eyes, especially considering the extreme shortness of time they had left (see 30Sep15).]

"button-like objects, one over each eye" which "might be coins ... used to keep the eyes of the dead closed"[12]. Jackson, et al. noted that this "agrees with ancient Jewish burial custom where objects (potsherd fragments or coins) were ... sometimes placed over the eyes" of the dead[13]. They also saw with their then limited "computer enhancements ... a possible structure on the surface of the objects"[14].

■ Historian Ian Wilson mentioned several Judean Bronze lepton coins from the time of Pontius Pilate which would correspond to the size of

[Above (enlarge): Perfect fit of Pontius Pilate lepton coins superimposed over the Shroud man's eyes[15]!]

these "buttons"[16], which were about fifteen millimeters or five-eighths of an inch in diameter[17]. Wilson also pointed out that a lepton was acceptable as a Temple offering (Mk 12:41-44; Lk 21:1-4), and therefore would likely be used by orthodox Jews Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus who buried Jesus (Mt 27:57; Mk 15:43; Lk 23:50; Jn 19:38)[18]. So even if no inscription nor designs unique to Pontius Pilate leptons were found on these "buttons" over the Shroud man's eyes (but there were - see below), from their size and shape, the best explanation is that they were Pontius Pilate leptons!

■ In August 1979 Fr. Francis Filas Filas was looking at a high-quality enlargement of a 1931 Enrie negative photograph of the Shroud face, when he

[Right (enlarge): Fr. Francis L. Filas (1915-85)[19].]

noticed for the first time some sort of a design over the right eye[20]. Filas was a Jesuit priest and Professor of Theology at Loyola University in Chicago[21] and a founding member and Vice President of the Holy Shroud Guild[22]. Filas was aware of Jackson, et al's 1977 discovery of three-dimensional images of "buttons" over the eyes of the man on the Shroud (see above) and that Wilson had confirmed that they were the same size and shape as Pontius Pilate leptons (see above)[23], since Filas had been present and had even delivered a paper at that same 1977 Shroud conference in Albuquerque, New Mexico[24].

■ Filas showed the photograph to Michael Marx, a Chicago numismatist specialising in ancient Greek coins, who had previously volunteered his professional expertise[25]. Marx under his magnifier identified four curving capital letters, "UCAI" and a design that looked like a shepherd's crook (a lituus or astrologer's staff - see above)[26]. A prominent lituus in the shape of a question mark was unique to coins minted in Judea in the reign of Pontius Pilate[27] and only between AD 29-32[28]! So even if no inscription had been found on these images of coins over the eyes of the man on the Shroud (but there were - again see above), that they were uniquely the size and shape of Pontius Pilate leptons (see above) and that they have a prominent lituus unique to Pontius Pilate, is already proof beyond reasonable doubt, that they are Pontius Pilate leptons, and therefore the man on the Shroud is Jesus!

■ Marx suggested that Filas obtain Frederic W. Madden's History of Jewish Coinage and of Money in the Old and New Testament (1864)[29], in-addition to consulting the catalog of all Pontius Pilate coins in the British Museum[30]. But here is where Marx and Filas, and eventually Whanger, went wrong. I don't know about the then catalog of Pontius Pilate coins in the British Museum, but I have Madden's book in front of me, and it only shows Pontius Pilate leptons (page 149 and supplements s.10-11) with litui in the shape of a reversed question mark (see above). But as Italian numismatist Mario Moroni correctly pointed out (and reader scan verify this for themselves - as I

[Above (enlarge): Numismatist Mario Moroni's correct interpretation (right) of the lituus as a question mark shape in an Enrie negative sepia negative photograph[31] of the Shroud (left)[32].]

did [see 10May13c]) - that since the image of the lituus in the lepton over the right eye of the man on the Shroud in an Enrie negative photograph, is the shape of a question mark (not a reversed question mark), then the lituus on the actual lepton coin that is imprinted on the Shroud must have also had the shape of a question mark. And as Moroni pointed out, there was a Pontius Pilate lepton with a lituus

[Left (enlarge): A Pontius Pilate dilepton coin with its lituus in the shape of a question mark[33], as it is on the Shroud. See other photos of Pontius Pilate dilepton lituus coins at 10May13d.]

in the shape of a question mark: a dilepton lituus, which was struck in AD 29[34]!

■ On reading Madden, Filas tentatively identified the coin over the Shroud man's left eye as a Julia lepton[35], which was issued only in [Above (enlarge): Julia (ΙΟΥΛΙΑ) lepton with three barley sheaves on one side (reverse) and a simpulum (Roman sacrificial vessel) and Greek letters "Tiberius Caesar" on the other (obverse): Edgar L. Owen, Ltd. The "LΙϚ" ("LIS") on the obverse indicates the coin was issued in the 16th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, which was AD 29[36]. ]

AD 29 upon the death in that year of Livia Drusilla (58 BC–AD 29), also known as Julia Augusta, who was Tiberius' mother and the wife of the former Roman Emperor Augustus (63 BC–AD 14)[37]. The basis of Filas' identification was "three very short curving lines that seemed to spread away from each other from a common source," which are the stalks of three sheaves of barley on the Julia lepton (see above)[38]. Filas' identification of this coin over the left eye as a Julia lepton was later confirmed by numismatist Arden R. Brame Jr[39] and computer enhancement by Prof. Nello Balossino[40]

■ In May, 1981 Filas requested that Log/E Interpretations Systems digitize photographs of both eye areas of the Shroud[41]. Their Standard Earthview equipment was similar to a VP-8 Image Analyzer[42]. Its enhancement for the right eye area showed clearly the letters "UCAI" (according to Filas), the curving staff (lituus) and the coin outline[43]. While this coin boundary and within it a lituus as well as an inscription, over the right eye of the Shroud man, is sufficient to add to the already proof beyond reasonable doubt that it is the image of a Pontius Pilate lepton coin, and therefore the Man on the Shroud is Jesus, but again, Filas (and Whanger) had misinterpreted what type of Pontius Pilate lepton coin it was (see above) and so the letters "UCAI" are an illusion and hence a distraction.

■ In August 1981, Filas had Gamma Laboratories of Chicago enlarge a photograph of his Pilate lepton to twenty-five times life-size, and to his great surprise he noticed for the first time the letter "C" where "K" should have been[44]. But instead of drawing the conclusion that he had all along misinterpreted the letter "C" (as Moroni pointed out, albeit in 1991[45]), especially since Mel Wacks, Editor of The Augur, the journal of the Biblical Numismatic Society, had been pointing out since 1980 that Filas' letters "C" and "A" were in the wrong position relative to the lituus on the Pontius Pilate lepton[46]), Filas (and Whanger) assumed that Filas `just happened' to have "in his possession a coin with the never-before-seen misspelling"[47]!

■ Then in November, 1981, at the coin sales department of Marshall Field's in Chicago, Filas found another Pontius Pilate lepton with "the aberrant C misspelling"[48]. Later, Filas located two more Pontius Pilate leptons "with the C misspelling"[49]. Whanger called these finds "astonishing"[50] but Wacks, a Jewish expert on Biblical coins, having studied highly magnified photographs of Filas' first coin, pointed out that "the actual inscription is quite normal for the coin and bears no similarity to Filas's findings"[51], which presumably also applies to these later so-called "aberrant C misspelling[s]"! Tellingly, numismatist William Yarbrough, who gave Filas the Pontius Pilate lepton which had the claimed "UCAI" variant (see above), agreed with Wacks on this and in an article in World Coin News of March 1982, Yarbrough stated that "a number of good numismatists disagree with Filas's opinion"[52].

■ It was soon after this that the Whangers held their January 1982 Duke News Service press conference (see above) where they were asked about Filas' claims of coins over the eyes of the man on the Shroud[53]. Alan contacted Filas, who sent the Whangers photographs of his coins: his original lituus lepton and a Julia lepton, as well as the Log/E Interpretations Systems computer enhancements[54]. According to Mary Whanger:

"Polarized image overlays revealed seventy-four points of congruence (PC) between the image on the right eye of the Shroud and Filas's lituus lepton, and seventy-three PC between the left eye image and the Joulia lepton! Remember, in a court of law it takes only fourteen PC to establish same source of fingerprints. These coins are much smaller than a fingerprint. For the right eye, there is a clipped edge on one side of the Filas coin that matches a clipped edge on the Shroud image. The letters, which are about one and one-half millimeters high, match remarkably: about half of the letter U, which actually is the Greek letter upsilon and shows the tail looking like a Y; all of the letter C; two-thirds of the letter A; the lower half of the letter I; as well as parts of other letters. On the coin there is a circular die defect at the base of the letter A; the same die defect can be clearly seen on the Shroud"[55]
This sounds impressive until it is remembered that (as we saw in part #2): 1) The Whangers' PC claims are entirely subjective and are merely what Alan and Mary Whanger agreed was so[Flaw #1]. 2) Their court of law analogy is fallacious since fingerprint points of congruence are so objective they can be, and are, computerised[Flaw #2]. 3) Their assumption is that more is better, but is "seventy-four" and "seventy-three" points of congruence really any better than Jackson, et al.'s and Filas' observations? Especially considering that the more claimed PCs, the smaller each is, and the more is the likelihood that some (if not most) are illusory[Flaw #3]. 4. Then there is the lack of realism [Flaw #4] in that the Whangers found "seventy-four points of congruence" using the wrong coin [see above]! If the Whangers truly believed that there really were 74 and 73 points of congruence between Pontius Pilate lituus and Julia leptons and the images of "buttons" over the right and left eyes, respectively, of the man on the Shroud, then they would have published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal comparative photographs of the coins and the Shroud eyes for each of them. But as far as I am aware they never did for any of their claimed PCs.

■ In 1983 Filas arranged with Robert M. Haralick, then Director of the Spatial Data Analysis Laboratory of Virginia Polytechnic Institute, to

[Right: "Robert M. Haralick is Distinguished Professor in Computer Science at Graduate Center of the City University of New York"[56].]

do a full-scale, three-dimensional computer image analysis of Filas' Enrie 1931 photographs of the Shroud[57]. Filas also gave Haralick a Pontius Pilate lepton[58] and a 1978 STURP colour photograph of the Shroud taken by Vernon D. Miller (1932-2009)[59]. Haralick spent about 6 months doing a variety of digital enhancements to the photographs[60], publishing his findings in 1983 in a 66-page monograph, "Analysis of Digital images of the Shroud of Turin"[61]. Haralick's report included:

"A number of digital enhancements were performed on imagery digitized from the 1931 Enrie photographs of the Shroud and a 1978 S.T.U.R.P. photograph taken by Vernon Miller. The enhancements provide supporting evidence that the right eye area of the Shroud image contains remnants of patterns similar to those of a known Pontius Pilate coin dating from 29 A.D. "[p.2]

" ... Thus, in the enlargement of the right eye image we find supporting evidence for a bright oval area: a shepherd's staff pattern as the main feature in the bright area; and bright segment patterns just to the side and top of the staff pattern, which in varying degrees match to the letters OUCAIC." [p.34]

"... This evidence cannot be said to be conclusive evidence that an image of the Pontius Pilate coin appears in the right eye of the Enrie Shroud Image ... however, the evidence is definitely supporting evidence because there is some degree of match between what one would expect to find if the Shroud did indeed contain a faint image of the Pilate coin and what we can in fact observe in the original and in the digitally produced images." [p.34][62]
■ It has been objected that placing a coin in the mouth of the dead was a pagan custom, to pay the mythical ferryman Charon to carry the soul of the recently died across the river Styx to Hades[63], and Jews would not have done that[64]. But coins have been found in first century Jewish skulls[65], which can only have originally been placed over the eyes, since coins placed in the mouth don't stay in the skull but coins placed over the eyes do[66]. The leptons of Pontius Pilate were actually Jewish coins (the prutah)[67] and (as we saw previously) were acceptable as temple offerings (Mk 12:42, Lk 21:2), so there is no reason why they could not have been used by first century Jews for the practical purpose of closing the eyes of their dead[68].

Corona discharge [top]

[Above (enlarge: Pontius Pilate lituus lepton (left) and its image imprinted on linen (right) by Oswald Scheuermann (1933-) using corona discharge[69].]

In 1982 Alan Whanger showed an overlay of the Filas coin and the computer enhancement of the right eye area to STURP member the late Dr. Alan Adler (1931-2000), then a Professor of Chemistry at Western Connecticut State University[70]. Prof. Adler realised that he was seeing a clue to the Shroud man's image formation[71], in that the image over the Shroud's right eye was only of the high points and rough spots of the coin, which is a characteristic of corona discharge[72]. In corona discharge, ionizing electrical energy first spreads over the surface of any object in the electrical field, whether it be flesh, hair, cloth, metal, etc[73]. The electrical energy is then discharged as ionized streamers from irregular or elevated areas of the object rather than from smooth surfaces[74]. Through Fr Adam J. Otterbein (1915-98), Alan then contacted Oswald Scheuermann (1933-), a high school physics teacher in Germany who had experimented with corona discharges on photographic film[75], using a Van de Graaf generator which produced high-voltage, high-frequency electricity[76]. Whanger sent a lituus lepton to Scheuermann and he promptly returned a piece of linen bearing a corona discharge image of the lepton (see above), which was remarkably similar to the image over the right eye of the Shroud[77]. In 1983, Scheuermann first noted the presence of flower images on the Shroud[78] and as a test he produced corona discharge

[Above (enlarge): "Corona discharge photographs made by O. Scheuermann on photographic paper. Left. Stems and a fruit of Berberis sp. Right. A leaf of Rosa sp"[79].]

images from diverse plant material, including leaves, stems, thorns, as well as flowers and fruits (see above)[80]. Although Scheuermann reported this in a 1983 letter to Alan Whanger[81], it was not until two years later, in 1985, that Whanger noticed out of the corner of his eye the image of a large chrysanthemum-like flower near the head of the man on the Shroud[82]. See a future "Flower and Plant Images" part of this obituary of Dr. Alan Whanger. See also my 2013 "... 2.6. The other marks (4): Plant images." Finally, in all of Scheuermann's samples the corona discharge images penetrate the cloth, something the Shroud images do not do[83]. Also some of Scheuermann's cloth fibres were scorched, unlike Shroud image fibres which are not scorched[84]. Moreover, for corona discharge to be the explanation of the Shroud's total body image would require an estimated amount of energy of 50 watt-seconds/square centimeter for a power source of at least 1,100 kilowatts for 1/10 second[85]. Since dead bodies don't generate that amount of energy[86] (to put it mildly!), Scheuermann proposed that the Shroud man was Jesus and the image on the Shroud was caused by His resurrection:

"Either there was a chain of coordinated processes of cause and effect due to laws that are still unknown or an inexplicable phenomenon of a supernatural kind left traces of a natural kind ... Consequently, it is high time now to completely record the primary aspect and add the phenomenon `resurrection' to the fact `corpse.' ... `Resurrection,' even if inexplicable, must not be excluded as a point of reference or an action principle ... It has to be admitted that we know hardly anything as to how that resurrection is to have taken place; but that does not exclude that it could have left palpable traces ... not only an empty tomb and all the attendant circumstances, but also a very informative image"[87].
To be continued in the next part #4 of my obituary of Dr. Alan D. Whanger.

1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. Doig, K.F., 2015, "New Testament Chronology: Part IV, The Crucifixion of Jesus" & "The 30 CE Crucifixion," 22 April. [return]
3. Filas, F.L., 1981, "`Missing Link' Coin of Pontius Pilate Proves Authenticity, Place of Origin, and Approximate Dating of the Shroud Of Turin," News Release, Loyola University of Chicago, September 1, p.5. [return]
4. Whanger, M. & Whanger, A.D., 1998, "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House Publishers: Franklin TN, p.22. [return]
5. "In Memory of Alan Duane Whanger," Cremation Society of the Carolinas, October 21, 2017 & "About CSST," Council for Study of the Shroud of Turin, 2015. [return]
6. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.22. [return]
7. Ibid. [return]
8. Ibid. [return]
9. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.23. [return]
10. Jackson, J.P., Jumper, E.J., Mottern, R.W. & Stevenson, K.E., ed., 1977, "The Three Dimensional Image On Jesus' Burial Cloth," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, pp.74-94, 88. [return]
11. Moroni, M., 1997, "Those Contentious 'Coins over the Eyes'...," Letters to the Editor, BSTS Newsletter, No. 46, November/December; Moretto, G., 1999, "The Shroud: A Guide," Neame, A., transl., Paulist Press: Mahwah NJ, p.51. [return]
12. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.23; Jackson, et al., 1977, pp.89-91 & Jumper, E., Stevenson, K. & Jackson, J., 1978, "Images of Coins on a Burial Cloth?," The Numismatist, July, Vol. 91, No. 7, pp.1349-1357, 1354-1355; Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, p.114. [return]
13. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.90; Jumper,et al., 1978, p.1355. [return]
14. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.90. [return]
15. Jumper,et al., 1978, p.1355. [return]
16. Jackson, Jumper, Mottern & Stevenson, 1977, p.90. [return]
17. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.23. [return]
18. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.90. [return]
19. Wilson, I., 1985b, "Obituary - Fr. Francis L. Filas, S.J.," BSTS Newsletter, No. 10, April, pp.4-5, 4. [return]
20. Filas, F.L., 1980, "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate," Cogan Productions: Youngtown AZ, p.3; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.23. [return]
21. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, p.124; Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ, p.89; Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, p.36; Baima-Bollone, P., "Images of Extraneous Objects on the Shroud," in Scannerini, S. & Savarino, P., eds, "The Turin Shroud: Past, Present and Future," International scientific symposium, Turin, 2-5 March 2000," Effatà: Cantalupa, 2000, p.130. [return]
22. Whanger, A.D. & Whanger, M.W., 2008, "Revisiting the Eye Images: What are They?," in Fanti, G., ed., 2009, "The Shroud of Turin: Perspectives on a Multifaceted Enigma," Proceedings of the 2008 Columbus Ohio International Conference, August 14-17, 2008, Progetto Libreria: Padua, Italy, pp.134-139, 134. [return]
23. Filas, 1980, p.3. [return]
24. Filas, F.J., 1977, "Ideal Attitudes Concerning Research on the Shroud of Turin," in Stevenson, 1977, pp.13-15. [return].
25. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.23-24; Filas, 1980, p.3; Iannone, 1998, p.36; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.135. [return]
26. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.24; Filas, 1980, p.4; Iannone, 1998, p.36; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.135. [return]
27. Filas, 1980, p.4; Moroni, M., "Pontius Pilate's Coin on the Right Eye of the Man in the Holy Shroud, in the Light of the New Archaeological Findings," in Berard, A., ed., 1991, "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud," Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, p.277; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.104; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.135. [return]
28. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.223; Tribbe, 2006, p.114; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, p.176. [return]
29. Madden, F.W., Fairholt, F. W. & Reidenbach, R., ed., 1967, "History of Jewish Coinage, and of Money in the Old and New Testament," [1864], Pegasus Publishing Co: San Diego CA, Revised. [return]
30. Filas, 1980, p.3. [return]
31. Vignon, P., 1939, "Le Saint Suaire de Turin: Devant La Science, L'archéologie, L'histoire, L'iconographie, La Logique," Masson et Cie. Éditeurs: Paris, Second edition, plate 1. [return]
32. Moroni, 1991, p.286 (modified). [return]
33. "Jesus of Nazareth. By Donato Calabrese," (translated by Google), 16 April 2011. [return]
34. Moroni, 1991, p.292. [return]
35. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.24. [return]
36. Madden, F.W. et al., 1967, s.10; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.28; Whanger, A. & Whanger, M., 1999, "The Real Date of the Shroud: The Visual Evidence," in Walsh, B., ed., 2000, "Proceedings of the 1999 Shroud of Turin International Research Conference, Richmond, Virginia," Magisterium Press: Glen Allen VA, pp.69-77, 75; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.98. [return]
37. Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 28; Iannone, 1998, pp.38, 44; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.24; Tribbe, 2006, p.117; Oxley, 2010, p.177; "Livia," Wikipedia, 25 February 2018. [return]
38. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.24. [return]
39. Wilson, I., 1985a, "Some Recent Publications," BSTS Newsletter, No. 9 , January, pp.18-20, 19. [return]
40. Iannone, 1998, p.38; Oxley, 2010, p.177. [return]
41. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.25; Tribbe, 2006, p.117. [return]
42. Antonacci, 2000, p.105. [return]
43. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.25; Antonacci, 2000, p.105. [return]
44. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.25. [return]
45. Moroni, 1991, p.284. [return]
46. Morgan, R.H., 1982, "More About the Filas Coin Theory," Shroud News, September, pp.3-7, 3; Tribbe, 2006, p.117. [return]
47. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.25. [return]
48. Ibid. [return]
49. Ibid. [return]
50. Ibid. [return]
51. Morgan, 1982, p.3. [return]
52. Morgan, 1982, p.7. [return]
53. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.25. [return]
54. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.26. [return]
55. Ibid. [return]
57. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.30. [return]
58 Oxley, 2010, p.176. [return]
59. Iannone, 1998, p.39. [return]
60. Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.136. [return]
61. Ibid. [return]
62. Iannone, 1998, pp.39-40 [return]
63. Meacham, W., 1983, "The Authentication of the Turin Shroud: An Issue in Archaeological Epistemology," Current Anthropology, Vol. 24, No. 3, June, pp.283-311, 290; Meacham, W., 1987, "On the Archaeological Evidence for a Coin-on-Eye Jewish Burial Custom in the First Century A.D.," Shroud News, No. 39, February, pp.7-12, 11; Borkan, 1995, p.49 n.129; de Figueiredo, L., 1997, "From Louis de Figueiredo of São Paulo, Brazil," Letters to the Editor, BSTS Newsletter, No. 46, November/December;Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.30; "Charon (mythology)," Wikipedia, 10 March 2018. [return]
64. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.30; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.100. [return]
65. Meacham, 1983, p.290; Meacham, 1987, p.11; Borkan, 1995, p.49 n.129; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.30; Antonacci, 2000, p.106. [return]
66. Meacham, 1983, p.290; Borkan, 1995, p.49 n.129; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.30-31; Antonacci, 2000, pp.106-107. [return]
67. Guerrera, 2001, p.100. [return]
68. Meacham, 1987, p.11; Borkan, 1995, p.49 n.129. [return]
69. "Image produced on linen by corona discharge from lepton by Scheuermann," Council for Study of the Shroud of Turin, 3 December 2017 [return]
70. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.28. [return]
71. Ibid. [return]
72. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.28; Guerrera, 2001, p.149; Whanger, A.D., 1998, "Radiation in the Formation of the Shroud Image - The Evidence," in Minor, M., Adler, A.D. & Piczek, I., eds., 2002, "The Shroud of Turin: Unraveling the Mystery: Proceedings of the 1998 Dallas Symposium," Alexander Books: Alexander NC, pp.184-189, 187. [return]
73. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, p.41; Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., 1999, "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, p.10; Guerrera, 2001, p.149. [return]
74. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, p.41; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.28; Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.10; Guerrera, 2001, p.149. [return]
75. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.28; Guerrera, 2001, p.149; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.136. [return]
76. Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.10. [return]
77. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.28. [return]
78. Iannone, 1998, p.25; Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.9; Guerrera, 2001, p.149; Milne, L., 2005, "A Grain of Truth: How Pollen Brought a Murderer to Justice," New Holland: Frenchs Forest, NSW, Australia, p.93; Oxley, 2010, p.258. [return]
79. Danin, A., 2010, "Botany of the Shroud: The Story of Floral Images on the Shroud of Turin," Danin Publishing: Jerusalem, Israel, p.39. [return]
80. Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.10. [return]
81. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.70. [return]
82. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.70; Iannone, 1998, pp.25, 28; Maloney, P.C., 1999, "A Contribution toward a History of Botanical Research on the Shroud of Turin," in Walsh, 2000, pp.241-266, 251; Milne, 2005, p.93; Oxley, 2010, p.258. [return]
83. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, p.41; Zugibe, F.T., 2005, "The Crucifixion of Jesus: A Forensic Inquiry," M. Evans & Co.: New York NY, p.272. [return]
84. Zugibe, 2005, p.272. [return]
85. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, p.41. [return]
86. Fanti, G. & Malfi, P., 2015, "The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!," Pan Stanford: Singapore, pp.28-29. [return]
87. Scheuermann, O., 1986, in Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, p.41. [return]

Posted: 3 March 2018. Updated: 17 March 2018.

Friday, March 2, 2018

"Editorial and Contents," Shroud of Turin News, February 2018

Shroud of Turin News - February 2018
© Stephen E. Jones

[Previous: January 2018, part #1] [Next: March 2018, part #1]

This is the "Editorial and Contents," part #1, of the February 2018 issue of my Shroud of Turin News. I have listed linked news article(s) about the Shroud in February as a service to readers, without necessarily endorsing them.

"Is This the Face of Jesus? Shreveport researchers examine ancient Shroud of Turin," KTBS, Nate Fluharty February 5, 2018.
"Local lecturer brings world class Shroud of Turin exhibit to Greater Cleveland," Middleburg Heights community blog, February 20, 2018.
"Physicist unveils secrets behind shroud," The Redstone Rocket, Amy Guckeen Tolson, February 28, 2018.

Rex Morgan's Shroud News: My scanning and word-processing of the 118 issues of Rex Morgan's Shroud News, provided by Ian Wilson, and emailing them to Barrie Schwortz, for him to convert to PDFs and add to his online Shroud News archive, continued in February up to issue #96, August 1996. [Right (enlarge)], i.e ~81% completed. Issues in that archive are up to #93, February 1996.

News: The cataract operation (see below) on my left eye was a success, so much so that I was seeing more clearly with my `new' left eye as they

[Above: "Cataract Surgery Procedure: Safety, Recovery, and Effects," Fort Worth Eye Associates.]

wheeled me out of the operating theatre into the recovery room! Now my `good' right eye is less clear than my previously `bad' left eye! Eventually I will need the lens in my right eye replaced also.

Posts: In February I blogged only 3 new posts (latest uppermost): "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Fourteenth century (1)" - 10th; "22 January 1988: On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud" - 4th and "`Editorial and Contents,' Shroud of Turin News, January 2018" - 2nd.

Updates in the background of past posts in February included: I resumed adding footnotes to my "Chronology of the Shroud: First century" and I also updated my "Chronology of the Shroud: Thirteenth Century" with:

"c.1248 Henri I de Vergy (c.1205-1263) married Isabelle (Elizabeth) de la Roche de Ray (c.1235-1278). Isabelle de la Roche was a direct descendant (granddaughter) of Othon IV de la Roche (above. Henri I de Vergy was a direct ancestor (great-great-grandfather) of Jeanne de Vergy (c.1332-1428) (above). Therefore Jeanne de Vergy, whose husband Geoffrey I de Charny (c.1300-1356) was the first undisputed owner of the Shroud [see future "c1351"] was a direct descendant of Othon de la Roche, who brought the Shroud from Constantinople, via Athens, to France!" (footnotes omitted)

Comments: In February, I deleted as substandard another comment which implied I should not continue posting on a topic. But see my previous response to commenters who tell me what I should, or should not, post: "if you don't like what I write, then don't read my blog"! I also deleted as substandard two comments in a foreign language. If commenters cannot be bothered to translate their comments into English, then I cannot be bothered using Google translate to try to find out what they are saying.

My radiocarbon dating hacker theory: I did not blog about my radiocarbon dating of the Shroud hacker theory in February but again my "22 January 1988: On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud" is part of a series which will provide further evidence to support my hacker theory.

My book: In February I gave this a higher priority and so completed the "Second century" and "Third century" and started on the "Fourth century" in "Chapter 6, "History and the Shroud," in the dot-point outline of my book, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" (see 06Jul17).

Pageviews: At midnight on 28 February 2018, Google Analytics [Below (enlarge)] gave this blog's "Pageviews all time history" as 855,514. This compares with 701,730 (up 153,784 or 22.0%) from the same time in February 2017. It also gave the most viewed posts for the month (highest uppermost) as: "The Shroud of Turin: 3.6. The man on the Shroud and Jesus were crucified.," Dec 2, 2013 - 141; "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Fourteenth century (1)," Feb 10, 2018 - 111; "22 January 1988: On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud," Feb 4, 2018 - 109; "Re: Shroud blood ... types as AB ... aged blood always types as AB, so the significance of this ... is unclear," Mar 18, 2011 - 97; and "Other marks and images #26: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!", Jan 19, 2018 - 97.

1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]

Posted: 2 March 2018. 2 March 2018.

Saturday, February 10, 2018

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Fourteenth century (1)

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present
© Stephen E. Jones

This is part #14, "Fourteenth century (1)" of my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 - present" series. I have decided to split this too-long post into two parts: (1) 1301-1350 and (2) 1351-1400. For more information about this series see part #1, "1st century and Index." Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

[Index #1] [Previous: 13th century #13] [Next: 14th century (2) #15]

14th century (1) (1301-1350).

[Above: Map of Lirey, France[2], showing the Church of St. Mary (centre above the `arms' of the Y intersection[3]), which was in 1516 built in stone over the the ruins of Geoffrey I de Charny's wooden church)[3a], in the grounds of which the Shroud of Turin was first exhibited in undisputed history in c.1355[3b]. According to my theory (see below) Geoffroy I de Charny (c.1300–1356)'s request to King Philip VI of France (r.1328–1350) in early 1343 for funding to build and operate a church with five canons in this tiny village of Lirey indicated that Geoffroy already had, or had been promised by Philip, the Shroud to exhibit it there.]

c.1300 Birth of Geoffroy I de Charny (c.1300–1356) to Jean I de Charny de Mont-Saint-Jean (1263-1323) and Jeanne de Villurbain (1260-1310) in Burgundy, east-central France[4]. He was evidently the grand-nephew and namesake of the Templar Geoffroy de Charny (c.1240–1314)[5] who was burnt at the stake in 1314 [see "1314" below]. Geoffroy I was the first undisputed owner of the Shroud [see future "c.1355" below].

1307 Arrest at dawn on Friday, 13 October 1307 (a possible origin of the Friday the 13th superstition)[6] of the entire Knights Templar order in France, as ordered by King Philip IV of France (1268–1314)[7] [see "1119"] with the support of the first Avignon Pope, Clement V (c.1264–1314)[8]. The Templars were very wealthy[9] and Philip was deeply in debt to the order from financing his wars[10]. Following his arrest of the French Templars, Philip confiscated all their wealth[11]. Charges against the Templars included: idolatry - worshiping a head with a reddish beard[12], heresy[13], sorcery[14] and sodomy[15]. `Confessions' of guilt to these charges were extracted under torture[16].

1314 Among those arrested were Jacques de Molay (c.1243–1314), the Templars' Grand Master[17], and Geoffroy de Charny (c.1240–1314) the master of Normandy[18] (and grand-uncle of Geoffroy I de Charny - see above). They also were imprisoned and tortured[19] to extract their `confessions' to the false charges brought against them[20]. But at their trial they publicly retracted their, and their order's, `confessions'[21], so Philip IV ordered they be burned at the

[Right (enlarge. Depiction in the Chronicle of St Denis of the burning at the stake on 19 March 1314 of Templar leaders Jacques de Molay and Geoffroy de Charny, on an island in the Seine River, Paris[22].]

stake[23], on 19 March 1314, on the Ile des Javiaux ("Isle of the Jews") in the Seine River, Paris[24]. From the stake de Molay cursed Philip and Clement and summoned them to meet him before the throne of God within the year to answer for their crimes, and both died during that very same year![25]. It was Ian Wilson's Templar ownership theory that Geoffroy I de Charny received the Shroud from Geoffroy de Charny the Templar[26]. But see "1119" and "1291" that Wilson no longer holds that theory.

c.1321 Creation of the epitaphios of King Stefan Uroš II Milutin (c. 1253–1321) of Serbia[27]. Epitaphioi were large embroidered cloths employing Shroud symbolism that first appeared in the Good Friday liturgy of Eastern Orthodox churches from the tenth century, after the Shroud was brought to Constantinople from Edessa in 944[28] [see "944b"]. The body of Jesus is depicted frontally with hands crossed at the wrists as on the Shroud[29]. A fine example is the fourteenth century epitaphioi of Serbian King Uros Milutin[30]

[Left (enlarge): Example of the early fourteenth century Eastern Orthodox liturgical cloth known as an epitaphios, specifically symbolizing Jesus's burial Shroud, preserved in the Museum of the Serbian Orthodox Church, Belgrade[31].]

Ian Wilson wrote of this epitaphios:

"... its inscription firmly dates it to the reign of Milutin II Uros, ruler of Serbia from 1282 to 1321, predating the 1350s when, according to Bishop d'Arcis (r. 1377–1395), the Shroud was `cunningly painted' [see future "1355" and "1389" below] seven hundred miles and several daunting mountains away in France. ... we see on it an image so strikingly reminiscent of the Shroud's front-of-body image that, whether directly or indirectly, it can hardly be other than that image's progeny .... We see the same long-haired, long-nosed, bearded face. We see the same crossed hands. ... the lance-wound correctly on the mirror- reverse side to that in which it appears on the Shroud ... And in the case of these same hands, although the thumbs are depicted, the way that the long fingers of the lower hand parallel those on the Shroud is particularly striking"[32].

1325 Mid-point of 1260-1390, i.e. 1325 ±65 [33], the claimed radiocarbon date of the Shroud[34] [see future "1989b"]. Some leading Shroud anti-authenticists claim that 1325 was the date of the Shroud[35].

c.1332 Birth of Jeanne de Vergy (c.1332–1428), the future second wife of Geoffroy I de Charny (above) [see future "c.1351"]. Jeanne was a direct descendant of Othon IV de la Roche (c.1170-1234)[36] [see "c.1248"], who brought the Shroud from Constantinople["1204"] to Athens["1205a], from where he sent the Shroud to France["c.1206"]. So it was through Jeanne de Vergy at their marriage in 1345 [see "1345a" below] that Geoffroy I de Charny became the owner of the Shroud.

c.1335 Marriage of Geoffroy I de Charny to Jeanne de Toucy (c.1301–c.1342)[37]. She was the daughter of Guy II de Toucy (–1308), Lord of Bazarne, Pierre-Perthuis and Vault-de-Lugny and of Guillemette de Beaumont-sur-Oise (-1308)[38]. The de Charnys and the de Toucy families were close to each other in Burgundy, no more than fifteen miles (~24 kms) apart[39]. Geoffroy had no lands of his own by family inheritance[40], but through this his first marriage he became Lord of Pierre-Perthuis[41]. They had no children[42] and Jeanne was dead by 1342[43].

1337 Start of the Hundred Years' War[44], "a series of conflicts waged

[Above (enlarge)[45]: Territory controlled in the Hundred Years' War between England and France: 1337, 1360, c.1429 and 1453]

from 1337 to 1453 by the House of Plantagenet, rulers of the Kingdom of England, against the House of Valois, rulers of the Kingdom of France, over the succession to the French throne"[46].

1340a On 24 June 1340 in the Battle of Sluys, off today's Dutch city of Sluis[47], the English fleet under King Edward III (1312–1377) [my ancestor!] almost completely destroyed the French fleet[48]. Of the 213 French ships in the battle, the English captured 190, and the French dead totaled 16,000-18,000 including both French admirals[49].

1340b. Following Edward's heavy defeat of the French in the Battle of Sluys, on 23 July 1340 he besieged Tournai, which was in Flanders (today's Belgium), but loyal to King Philip VI of France (r.1328–1350)[50]. Geoffroy was sent by Philip VI to join the French garrison defending the town[51]. The defence was a victory for the French, when on 22 September 1340 with the French army drawing closer and Edward running out of money, a truce was brokered by Joan of Valois (c. 1294–1342), a sister of Philip VI and the mother-in-law of Edward III[52].

1341 In September 1341 [see "Battle of Champtoceaux" and "War of the Breton Succession"], Geoffroy fought in the defence of Angers, about 300 km (190 mi) southwest of Paris and the original seat of the Plantagenet dynasty[53] - Edward III's), alongside the Duke of Normandy, the son of Philip VI and future King John II (r.1350–1364)[54].

c. 1342 Death of Jeanne de Toucy, Geoffroy's childless first wife (see above)[55].

1342 On 30 September 1342 Geoffroy was taken prisoner in the Battle of Morlaix, Brittany[56]. He was taken to England by Sir Richard Talbot (c. 1305-1356), and kept in Talbot's principal residence of Goodrich Castle, Hertfordshire[57]. Geoffroy was then acquired as a prisoner by an English lord who had been the architect of the English victory in the battle at Morlaix, Sir William de Bohun (c. 1312–1360), Earl of Northampton[58]. Bohun allowed Geoffroy to return to France to raise his ransom[59] which was evidently soon paid because later that same year he was fighting the English at Vannes in Brittany[60].

c. 1343 According to my theory (see below), fears of an English invasion of Burgundy (which later happened-see above map "c.1429") led to the Shroud being secretly moved by the prominent[61] and pro-French de Vergys[62] from Besançon's St. Etienne's [Stephen's] Cathedral (which being in Franche-Comté was then part of the Holy Roman Empire[63]) to King Philip VI in Paris[64]. The plan, according to my theory was that Geoffroy would marry the legal owner of the Shroud, the then ~11 year-old Jeanne de Vergy (see above), when she reached marriageable age.

Note that it is only my theory in respect of the timing of Geoffrey I receiving the Shroud from King Phillip VI and marrying Jeanne de Vergy. Specifically my theory takes account of Geoffroy I's seemingly extravagant request in early 1343 [see "1343c" below], in the midst of a war, for ongoing rent revenues to build and operate a church with five chaplains in the tiny village of Lirey, and Philip's swift granting of that request, indicating that Geoffroy already had, or had been promised by Philip, the Shroud to display it there. The theory that the Shroud reached Geoffroy I via Othon de la Roche, Besançon Cathedral and King Phillip VI (or Jeanne de Vergy direct) is probably held by the majority of Shroud pro-authenticists after the demise of all other theories of how Geoffrey I obtained the Shroud, including Wilson's Templar theory (see above). Those who hold that Geoffroy I obtained the Shroud from King Phillip VI (or Jeanne de Vergy direct), who received it from Besançon Cathedral, which received it from Othon de la Roche, include: Beecher[65], Barnes[66], O'Connell & Carty[67] and Scavone[68]

1343a In February 1343 the Truce of Malestroit (1343–1345) commenced[69].

1343b Geoffroy was promoted to the rank of chevalier (knight) by King Philip VI[70].

1343c Early in 1343, Geoffroy appealed to King Philip VI for rent revenues of 140 livres annually, so he could build and operate a chapel at Lirey with five chaplains (or canons)71], for a village of only ~50 houses[72]. Evidently in early 1343 Geoffroy was already planning to exhibit the Shroud at that yet to be built Lirey church[73]! In which case Geoffroy I de Charny would already have the Shroud, or had received a promise from Philip VI that he would have it in the near future. Geoffroy's great-aunt Alix de Joinville (1256–1336) (who was also Bishop Pierre d'Arcis' [see above] great-aunt[74] - see future "1355" and "1389") evidently donated the lands and title of Lirey[75].

1343d In June 1343, Philip donated to chevalier Geoffroy 140 livres of rent revenue for ongoing financing of the Lirey church and its clergy[76].

1345a Assumed marriage during the truce of the ~45 year-old Geoffroy I and the ~13-14 year-old Jeanne de Vergy. The date of their marriage is unknown[77]. In medieval Europe the minimum marriageable age was between 12 and 14[78]. The ~32 year difference in their ages itself shows that this was no ordinary marriage.

1345b In May, during the truce in the war with England[79], Geoffroy set sail from Marseilles under the command of Humbert II, Dauphin of Vienne (1312–1355) [80], in a Crusade to recapture the Muslim-held citadel of the former Christian port of Smyrna ([Rev 1:1; 2:8)[81].

1345c End of the Truce of Malestroit in June 1345 (see above).

1346 Geoffroy missed the Battle of Crécy on 26 August 1346[82] in far northern France in which English forces under Edward III, aided by his sixteen-year-old son, Edward, Prince of Wales, aka the Black Prince (1330–1376)[83] decisively defeated a larger French army under Philip VI[84]. Geoffroy had been sent under the Duke of Normandy, the future King John II (r.1350–1364), to the southwest to blunt the campaign by the English in Gascony[85].

c.1347 Geoffrey I was first named by King Phillip VI the Porte-oriflamme, bearer of the Oriflamme, France's sacred royal battle-standard[86] [Right (enlarge): A reconstruction of the Oriflamme[87].]. Recipients of the honour of bearing the Oriflamme, swore that they would die rather than lower it in battle[88]. The appointment was not for life, nor was it hereditary[89] and in fact Geoffroy I received the oriflamme four times: in 1347, 1351, 1355, and 1356[90].

1348a In January Geoffroy I was made a Councillor of King Philip VI[91].

1348b Geoffroy was sent to the northern city of Saint Omer, ~46 km (~28 miles) southeast of the English-held French port of Calais, as governor, with all the military powers of the king[92].

1348c The Black Death began to devastate France, eventually killing one-third of the population[93], including in 1349 Philip VI's wife, Queen Joan of Burgundy (1293–1349)[94]. Joan was the daughter of Robert II, Duke of Burgundy (r. 1272-1306) and was "intelligent, strong-willed ... an able regent of France during the king's long military campaigns, was said to be the brains behind the throne and the real ruler of France"[95]. So it may well be that Queen Joan of Burgundy played a decisive, but unrecognised role in bringing the Shroud from Besançon in Burgundy to Philip VI in Paris and then to the Burgundians, Geoffroy I and Jeanne de Vergy!

1349a A document dated 3 January 1349 in the Lirey church archives, confirmed a donation by Philip VI of land yielding 140 livres annually that will pay the salaries and expenses of the canons[96] who will take charge of the Lirey church in which the Shroud will be exhibited[97].

1349b In March 1349 St. Etienne's Cathedral, Besançon, was struck by lightning[98]. The cathedral was badly damaged[99] and its records destroyed[100] by the resulting fire. It was discovered that the reliquary containing the Shroud was missing[101]. See future "1375" below for the claimed finding of this lost Shroud.

1349c In April Geoffroy I wrote to Pope Clement VI (r. 1342-1352) advising of his intention to build a church at Lirey, to be staffed by five canons and a prebendary (Dean)[102] and requesting that the church be raised to the level of a collegiate[103]. Again (see above), this is evidence that Geoffroy already had the Shroud, and that both King Philip VI and the French Pope Clement VI knew it, since this number of clergy is far in excess of what tiny Lirey needed, as Wilson implies:

"At just fifty hearths, the village of Lirey at this time was of much the same tiny proportions as today ... [yet] The surprising aspect is its large clerical staff"[104].
The Pope granted Geoffroy's request except for the church's collegiate status, because Geoffroy was subsequently captured by the English at Calais at the end of that year and taken a prisoner to London (see below)[105].

1349d On 31 December Geoffroy I was captured in a failed relief of the English held French port, Calais[106]. England's King Edward III who was in Calais, sent Geoffroy to England as a prisoner for a second time (see above)[107]. In the ~18 months of his captivity (see future "1351")[108], Geoffroy wrote a book on chivalry, Le Livre de Chevalerie[109]. It contains veiled hints that Geoffroy was married: "Deeds undertaken for Love of a Lady"[110], even secretly: "... the most secret love is the most lasting and the truest ..."[111].

1350a First radiocarbon date of the Shroud as "1350 AD" at Arizona radiocarbon dating laboratory on 6 May 1988:

"The first sample run was OX1 [an oxalic acid standard]. Then followed one of the controls. Each run consisted of a 10 second measurement of the carbon-13 current and a 50 second measurement of the carbon-14 counts. This is repeated nine more times and an average carbon-14/carbon-13 ratio calculated. All this was under computer control and the calculations produced by the computer were displayed on a cathode ray screen. ... everyone was waiting for the next sample-the Shroud of Turin! At 9:50 am 6 May 1988, Arizona time, the first of the ten measurements appeared on the screen. .... At the end of that one minute we knew the age of the Turin Shroud! The next nine numbers confirmed the first. It had taken me eleven years to arrange for a measurement that took only ten minutes to accomplish! Based on these 10 one minute runs, with the calibration correction applied, the year the flax had been harvested that formed its linen threads was 1350 AD-the shroud was only 640 years old! ... I remember Donahue saying that he did not care what results the other two laboratories got, this was the shroud's age"[112].
Note: 1) The AMS radiocarbon dating process was fully computerised: "All this was under computer control and the calculations produced by the computer were displayed. Therefore the dating of the Shroud was vulnerable to computer hacking without the other laboratory staff being aware of it. See my "The 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Turin Shroud was the result of a computer hacking" series. 2) The owner of the Shroud in 1350, Geoffroy I de Charny, was then a prisoner of war in England! 3) After only one dating run, at only one laboratory, all present gullibility and unscientifically accepted "this was the shroud's age" without even considering that in 1350 France was in the middle of a war and one-third of its population was being killed by the Black Death, yet Geoffroy I de Charny, the author of a book on knightly ethics, was allegedly involved in a forgery of Jesus' burial shroud!

1350b Death of King Philip VI on 22 August 1350[113]. He was succeeded by his son King John II (r.1350–1364)[114].

To be continued in the next part #15 of this series.

1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. Extract from Google Maps (Earth) Classic View, search on Lirey, France, 11 January 2014. [return]
3. Verified by Google StreetView and by comparison with Jang, A.W., 2013, "Introducing... Lirey, France!," Shroud Center of Southern California. [return]
3a. [return]
3b. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, pp.221-222. [return]
4. Currer-Briggs, N., 1995, "Shroud Mafia: The Creation of a Relic?," Book Guild: Sussex UK, p.221; Jones, S.E., 2015, "de Charny Family Tree," (members only). [return]
5. Jones, 2015, "de Charny Family Tree," See Brent, P. & Rolfe, D., 1978, "The Silent Witness: The Mysteries of the Turin Shroud Revealed," Futura Publications: London, p.17; Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.317; Morgan, R., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia, p.41; Maher, R.W., 1986, "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, p.97; Antonacci, 2000, p.148; Scavone, D.C., "The History of the Turin Shroud to the 14th C.," in Berard, A., ed., 1991, "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud," Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, pp.171-204, 197; Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 35; Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.115; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.149. [return]
6. Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, p.96. [return]
7. Morgan, 1980, p.40; Maher, 1986, p.96; Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.274; Antonacci, 2000, p.148; Wilson, 2010, p.302; Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, p.33; "Knights Templar: Arrests, charges and dissolution," Wikipedia, 12 February 2018; Oxley, 2010, p.96. [return]
8. Wilson, 1979, p.208; Scavone, 1991, p.197; Maher, 1986, pp.95-96; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.9. [return]
9. Maher, 1986, pp.94,96; Antonacci, 2000, p.148; Tribbe, 2006, p.33. [return]
10. "Knights Templar," Wikipedia, 12 February 2018. [return]
11. Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, pp.117-118; Wilcox, R.K., 2010, "The Truth About the Shroud of Turin: Solving the Mystery," [1977], Regnery: Washington DC, p.111; Fanti, G. & Malfi, P., 2015, "The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!," Pan Stanford: Singapore, p.58. [return]
12. Scavone, 1991, p.197; Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.201; Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, p.117; Wilson, 2010, p.302. [return]
13. Maher, 1986, p.95; Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.201; Oxley, 2010, p.96. [return]
14. Oxley, 2010, p.96. [return]
15. Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.201; Oxley, 2010, p.96; Wilson, 2010, p.302. [return]
16. Wilson, 1979, p.190; Maher, 1986, pp.95-96; Antonacci, 2000, p.148; Tribbe, 2006, p.33; Oxley, 2010, p.96. [return]
17. Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.17; Borkan, 1995, p.35; Antonacci, 2000, p.148; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.117. [return]
18. Brent & Rolfe, 1978, p.17; Borkan, 1995, p.35; Scavone, 1991, p.197; Wilson, 1998, p.274; Antonacci, 2000, p.148; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.117. [return]
19. Wilson, 1979, p.317; Antonacci, 2000, p.148. [return]
20. Wilson, 1979, p.317; Antonacci, 2000, p.148. [return]
21. Wilson, 1979, p.317; Maher, 1986, p.97; Oxley, 2010, p.97. [return]
22. "Jacques de Molay," Wikipedia, 5 February 2018. [return]
23. Scavone, 1991, p.197; Wilson, 1998, p.136; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.117. [return]
24. Wilson, 1979, pp.190-191; Guerrera, 2001, p.9; Wilson, 2010, p.302. [return]
25. Oxley, 2010, p.97. [return]
26. Scavone, 1991, p.197. [return]
27. Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, p.150; Wilson, 1998, p.274. [return]
28. Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, p.154. [return]
29. Iannone, 1998, p.154. [return]
30. Iannone, 1998, p.154. [return]
31. Wilson, 2010, p.274C. [return]
32. Wilson, 1998, p.137. [return]
33. Wilson, 1998, p.7; McCrone, W.C., 1999, "Judgment Day for the Shroud of Turin," Prometheus Books: Amherst NY, pp.1, 141, 178, 246; Tribbe, 2006, p.169; Oxley, 2010, p.87; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.170. [return]
34. Damon, P.E., et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16 February, pp.611-615, 611. [return]
35. Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK, pp.293, 300; McCrone, 1999, pp.xxiii, xx. [return]
36. Currer-Briggs, N., 1988a, "The Shroud and the Grail: A Modern Quest for the True Grail," St. Martin's Press: New York NY, p.38-39; Scavone, D.C., 1989, "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA, p.100; Scavone, 1991, p.199; Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.214; Guerrera, 2001, p.12; Kaeuper, R.W., 2005, "Introduction" to de Charny, G., "A Knight's Own Book of Chivalry," [c. 1350], Kennedy, E., transl., The Middle Ages Series, University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia PA, p.4; Tribbe, 2006, pp.33, 44, 194-195, 230; Piana, A., 2007, "The Shroud's "Missing Years," British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 66, December, pp.9-25,28-31; Oxley, 2010, pp.105-106; Wilson, 2010, pp.210-211, 213. [return]
37. Jones, 2015, "de Charny Family Tree," See Wilson, 1979, p.89; Currer-Briggs, N., 1988b, "The Shroud in Greece," British Society for the Turin Shroud Monograph no. 1, pp.1-16, 8, 10; Wilson, 2010, p.214. [return]
38. Jones, 2015, "de Charny Family Tree," [return]
39. Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.213; Wilson, 2010, p.214. [return]
40. Wilson, 1979, p.89 [return]
41. Wilson, 1979, p.89; Kaeuper, 2005, p.4. [return]
42. Kaeuper, 2005, p.4. [return]
43. Kaeuper, 2005, p.4. [return]
44. Wilson, 1998, pp.130, 275; Tribbe, 2006, p.38; Oxley, 2010, p.46; Wilson, 2010, p.214. [return]
45. "The Hundred Years' War vs. The Eastern Front of World War II - A Good Comparison?," Historum, 6 July 2015. [return]
46. "Hundred Years' War," Wikipedia, 15 February 2018. [return]
47. "Sluis," Wikipedia, 12 November 2017. [return]
48. "Battle of Sluys," Wikipedia, 22 October 2017. [return]
49. Oxley, 2010, p.47. [return]
50. "Siege of Tournai (1340)," Wikipedia, 20 August 2017. [return]
51. Wilson, 1998, pp.130, 275; Kaeuper, 2005, p.4; Oxley, 2010, p.46; Wilson, 2010, p.214. [return]
52. "Siege of Tournai (1340)," Wikipedia, 20 August 2017. [return]
53. "Angers," Wikipedia, 6 February 2018. [return]
54. Wilson, 1998, p.275; Oxley, 2010, p.46; Wilson, 2010, p.214. [return]
55. Kaeuper, 2005, p.4. [return]
56. Wilson, 1998, p.275; Kaeuper, 2005, p.5. [return]
57. Kaeuper, 2005, p.5. [return]
58. Kaeuper, 2005, p.5; "William de Bohun, 1st Earl of Northampton: Campaigns in Flanders, Brittany, Scotland, Victor at Sluys and Crecy," Wikipedia, 30 November 2017. [return]
59. Wilson, 1998, p.275; Kaeuper, 2005, p.5. [return]
60. Wilson, 1998, p.275; Kaeuper, 2005, p.5. [return]
61. Scavone, 1989, p.100. [return]
62. Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.50; Scavone, D.C., 1998, "A Hundred Years of Historical Studies on the Turin Shroud," Paper presented at the Third International Congress on the Shroud of Turin, 6 June 1998, Turin, Italy, in Minor, M., Adler, A.D. & Piczek, I., eds., 2002, "The Shroud of Turin: Unraveling the Mystery: Proceedings of the 1998 Dallas Symposium," Alexander Books: Alexander NC, pp.58-70, 67. [return]
63. Scavone, D.C., "The Turin Shroud from 1200 to 1400," in Cherf, W.J., ed., 1993, "Alpha to Omega: Studies in Honor of George John Szemler," Ares Publishers: Chicago IL, pp.187-225, 207. [return]
64. Scavone, 1998, p.67. [return]
65. Beecher, P.A., 1928, "The Holy Shroud: Reply to the Rev. Herbert Thurston, S.J.," M.H. Gill & Son: Dublin, pp.54-67. [return]
66. Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, pp.54-55. [return]
67. O'Connell, P. & Carty, C., 1974, "The Holy Shroud a41ur Visions," TAN: Rockford IL, pp.8-9. [return]
68. Scavone, 1989, pp.96-101; Scavone, 1991, pp.198-200; Scavone, 1993, pp.187-213; Scavone, 1998, p.66-67. [return]
69. "Hundred Years' War (1337–1360): Truce of Malestroit (1343–1345)," Wikipedia, 7 January 2018. [return]
70. Wilson, 1998, p.275; Kaeuper, 2005, p.5. [return]
71. Crispino, D.C., 1981, "Why Did Geoffroy de Charny Change His Mind?," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 1, December, pp.28-34, 30; Tribbe, 2006, p.41. [return]
72. Crispino, 1981, pp.29-30. [return]
73. Tribbe, 2006, p.41. [return]
74. Crispino, D.C., 1990, "Kindred Questions," Shroud Spectrum International, #34, December, pp.43-44. [return]
75. Crispino, 1981, p.30. [return]
76. Crispino, 1981, p.30; Wilson, 1998, p.274. [return]
77. Wilson, 1998, p.132. [return]
78. "Marriageable age: Middle Ages," Wikipedia, 21 February 2018. [return]
79. Wilson, I., 1992, "Reviews," BSTS Newsletter, No. 32, September, pp.15-18, 16. [return]
80. Wilson, 1998, p.275; Kaeuper, 2005, p.6. [return]
81. Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.48; Oxley, 2010, p.47. [return]
82. Kaeuper, 2005, p.6. [return]
83. Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, pp.18; Wilson, 2010, p.224. [return]
84. "Battle of Crécy," Wikipedia, 28 January 2018; Oxley, 2010, p.44. [return]
85. Kaeuper, 2005, p.6. [return]
86. Wilson, 1998, p.276; "Oriflamme: Porte oriflamme," Wikipedia, 2 January 2018. [return]
87. "File:Oriflamme.svg," Wikimedia Commons, 5 February 2015. [return]
88. Wilson, 1998, p.276; Wilson, 2010, pp.223-224. [return]
89. Crispino, D.C., 1989, "Geoffroy de Charny's Second Funeral: Part II," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 32/33, September/December, pp.38-42, 42. [return]
90. Tribbe, 2006, p.231. [return]
91. Wilson, 1998, p.276. [return]
92. Crispino, D.C., 1989, "Geoffroy de Charny's Second Funeral," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 30, March, pp.9-13, 11; Wilson, 1998, p.275; Wilson, 2010, p.217. [return]
93. McNair, P., "The Shroud and History: Fantasy, Fake or Fact?," in Jennings, P., ed., 1978, "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud ," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK, p.33; "Black Death: Death toll," Wikipedia, 19 February 2018. [return]
94. "Joan the Lame: Queenship," Wikipedia, 11 February 2018. [return]
95. "Philip VI of France: Marriages and children," Wikipedia, 29 January 2018. [return]
96. Crispino, 1981, p.30; Crispino, D.C., 1987, "Geoffroy de Charny in Paris," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 24, September, pp.13-18, 18. [return]
97. Wilson, 1998, p.276. [return]
98. Beecher, 1928, p.60; Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.50; Scavone, 1993, p.205; Tribbe, 2006, p.194. [return]
99. Scavone, 1989, p.98. [return]
100. Scavone, 1991, p.199; Scavone, 1993, p.193. [return]
101. Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.50; Scavone, 1991, p.199. [return]
102. Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.30; Wilson, 1998, p.276; Tribbe, 2006, p.41. [return]
103. Crispino, 1981, p.30; Tribbe, 2006, p.41. [return]
104. Wilson, 2010, pp.219-220. [return]
105. Crispino, 1981, p.30; Currer-Briggs, 1995, p.30; Wilson, 1998, p.276; Tribbe, 2006, p.41. [return]
106. Wilson, 1979, p.196; Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.48; Wilson, 1998, p.277; Tribbe, 2006, p.231; Oxley, 2010, p.44. [return]
107. Wilson, 1998, p.277; Guerrera, 2001, p.10; Oxley, 2010, p.44. [return]
108. Wilson, 1979, p.196; Currer-Briggs, 1988a, p.48. [return]
109. Oxley, 2010, p.45. [return]
110. Kaeuper, 2005, pp.52-53 [return]
111. Kaeuper, 2005, p.65. [return]
112. Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK, p.264. [return]
113. Wilson, 1998, p.277. [return]
114. Wilson, 1998, p.277. [return]

Posted: 10 February 2018. Updated: 3 March 2018.

Sunday, February 4, 2018

22 January 1988: On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud

© Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is part #8, "22 January 1988," of my series, "On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud." For more information about this series, see part #1. As explained in part #1, the first significant days 30 years ago in the 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud have already passed, but I will catch up and thereafter publish each day's post as near to its 30th anniversary as possible. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

[Index #1] [Previous: 18Nov87 #7] [Next: 24Mar88 #9]

22 January 1988 A meeting at the British Museum in London was held between Luigi Gonella (1930–2007), the Archbishop of Turin's

[Above (enlarge): Extract of a photograph of the cutting and distribution of the Shroud samples on 21 April 1988[2], showing some of those present at the 22 January meeting: Front from left Cardinal A. Ballestrero (r. 1977-1989) (not at meeting), M. Tite and L. Gonella. Back from left: R. Hedges, D. Donahue, E. Hall and P. Damon.]

scientific adviser, representatives of the three chosen AMS laboratories: Arizona's Paul Damon (1921-2005) and Douglas Donahue; Oxford's Edward Hall (1924–2001) and Robert Hedges; Zurich's Willy Wolfli (or Woelfli); and the British Museum's Michael Tite; to work out the final details of how and when they would take the Shroud samples[3].

But before that came the reaction to the letter of 18 November 1987 from the three chosen laboratories to the Archbishop of Turin, Cardinal Ballestrero[see 18Nov87], stating that they:

"... are hesitant to proceed under the arrangement in which only three laboratories [instead of seven] would participate in the measurements. We urge that the decision to change the protocol of the Turin workshop and to limit participation to only three laboratories be given further consideration ..."[4].
On 25 November 1987 Prof. Harry Gove (1922-2009), the unofficial leader of the radiocarbon dating laboratories[5], but whose laboratory, Rochester, was not chosen to date the Shroud, was told by Dr Vittorio Canuto, a NASA astrophysicist and a scientific aide of Prof. Carlos Chagas Filho (1910-2000), the then President of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, that Gonella had said that if the three chosen laboratories declined to date the Shroud, then Turin would ask other AMS laboratories to do it[6]. Specifically the Italian AMS laboratories at Pisa and Udine:
"There was no [immediate] response to the newest protest made by the labs. The rumour mill had it that Dinegar asked Gonella what would happen if the three labs refused to accept the offer and insisted on the workshop protocol. Gonella said he did not believe they would refuse. The prize was too great. Pressed further Gonella admitted he had 'a contingency solution' which supposedly was to go to the carbon dating facilities at Pisa and Udine"[7]
On 3 December Gove learned from Fr Peter Rinaldi (1910-93) [below[8].] that Cardinal Ballestrero had received the letter from the three laboratories[9]. Then on 7 December Gove was told by Canuto, via Rinaldi, that Gonella had convinced Ballestrero to stick with his original decision [see 10Oct87] that only three AMS laboratories, Arizona, Zurich and Oxford, would radiocarbon date the Shroud[10].

On 18 December Ballestrero (i.e. Gonella) replied to the three chosen laboratories urging them to agree to date the Shroud since there was no possibility of returning to the original Turin Workshop protocol [see 27Apr87][11]. Arizona's Donahue told Gove on 28 December that Oxford's Hall and Zurich's Wolfli had agreed to date the Shroud, and Arizona would probably agree to do it as well[12]. Wilson observed that all it took was for Gonella to "merely hint... that ... he might bring in Italy's Pisa and Udine laboratories" and the three chosen laboratories "duly capitulated":

"Had the three chosen laboratories held their nerve and insisted that the original Protocol be maintained, history might have been very different. But as Gonella rightly anticipated `the prize was too great', particularly for the Oxford laboratory's Professor Hall, who was in a fight-to-the-death struggle with the Harwell laboratory (still using the old Libby method), for the controlling share of the UK's radiocarbon-dating work. When Gonella merely hinted that if the three chosen laboratories declined to co-operate he might bring in Italy's Pisa and Udine laboratories, they duly capitulated"[13]!
Gove was understandably (but unrealistically) disappointed at the three laboratories' (especially Arizona and Zurich's) capitulation:
"So despite all the high-minded statements he, Damon, Woelfli and even Hall had made to me in writing that they would stick by the protocol, it all went down the drain as soon as their bluff was called by Gonella. That was all it was — pure and simple bluff. I was not surprised that Hall took this position but I was deeply disappointed that Damon, Donahue and Woelfli, whom I regarded as personal friends as well as colleagues, did so as well. Would I have done the same if I were in their shoes? I thought not, but one could never know unless one really were put in that position"[14].
It wasn't bluff. If the three chosen laboratories had refused to date the Shroud, then Turin would have been free to find some other radiocarbon dating laboratories who would. And as for Gove's, "I thought not", he later admitted to Donahue,"I can't disguise from you the fact that I envy the hell out of you"[15] because Donahue was going to date the Shroud and Gove (due to his anti-Christian hostility towards STURP and Turin - see 27Apr87, 15Jun87 & 10Oct87) was not!

On 15 January 1988 Gove and Brookhaven's Garman Harbottle (1923-2016) [below[16].] held a press conference at Columbia University in New York City[17] "to protest the archbishop's abrogation of the Turin Workshop Protocol"[18] and to "make it clear to the general public that some responsible scientists thought the project would suffer if only three labs were involved"[19]. Their aim was to put pressure on Cardinal Ballestrero before "the three labs actually agreed to date the shroud" [sic] at the 22 January meeting, so that "he would compromise"[20]. To that end they were prepared to lie to "Senator Al D'Amato and/or Daniel Patrick Moynihan" who were "the two senators from New York State" by claiming falsely that, "inexplicably we have been excluded from the dating endeavour":

"We ... are the two New York laboratories who had made the first proposal to date the shroud. We were the developers of both the AMS and the small-counter technique and inexplicably we have been excluded from the dating endeavour. Could the senators by inquiry through our Ambassador to the Holy See find out why two such distinguished laboratories were summarily excluded?"[21].
When in Gove's own book, he had already quoted Cardinal Ballestrero's explanation why he chose only the three AMS laboratories, Arizona, Oxford and Zurich to date the Shroud:
"The choice of the three laboratories among the seven which offered their services was made, after long deliberation and careful consultation, on a criterion of internationality and consideration for the specific experience in the field of archaeological radiocarbon dating, taking also into account the required sample size. On this criterion [sic] the following laboratories are selected: Radiocarbon Laboratory, University of Arizona Research Laboratory for Archaeology, Oxford University Radiocarbon Laboratory, ETH, Zurich"[22].
See 10Oct87 that, "On the criterion of ... sample size ... the non-AMS laboratories Harwell and Brookhaven would need two to three times the amount of Shroud sample than the AMS laboratories ... This alone eliminated the non-AMS laboratories" Brookhaven and Harwell. Then of the AMS laboratories, by the criterion of "specific experience in the field of archaeological radiocarbon dating ... Gove's Rochester and Gif-sur-Yvette ... had less than Arizona, Oxford and Zurich." And "the criterion of `internationality' meant only one laboratory each from the USA, England and Europe ... leaving ... Arizona ... Oxford ... and ... Zurich." That Rochester's Gove and Brookhaven's Harbottle did not agree with Turin's explanation does not mean that they can truthfully claim it is not an explanation!

At the press conference on 15 January, only about "a dozen people or so showed up"[23]. Gove consoled himself with, "Although the turnout was not large, the actual coverage by the world's press was quite substantial"[24]. But he admitted that The New York Times did not send a reporter across town to attend the conference, and its article by science writer, Walter Sullivan[25], based on a phone call with Gove the day before, "was not up to his usual standards"[26]. Gove claimed that the Chicago Tribune on 17 January[27] "carried a very good article on the shroud" [sic][28]. But Gove made the mistake of personally attacking Gonella as, "a man nobody (in the scientific community) ever heard of":

"We felt that the cardinal was being given extraordinarily bad advice by his science advisor. That's Luigi Gonella. He's a professor of metrology, whatever that is, at Turin Polytechnic. He's a man nobody (in the scientific community) ever heard of"[29].
This meant that Gonella had to be contacted in Turin to give his side of the story, which Gove mentions but does not quote[30]. But in the Chicago Tribune article, Gonella made the telling point that Gove and Harbottle's "press conference... [was] just an effort to intimidate" them but "It's not going to work ... It won't change anything":
"Gonella, contacted at his office in Turin, refused to give a reason for the reduction in labs or discuss Friday's impending meeting, which he called a private matter. He added that he would not budge on the decision just because Gove and Harbottle were upset about it. `I do not have to account for my credentials to Gove and Harbottle,' he said. `As a professor at Turin Polytechnic, I only have to account to my faculty. This business of holding press conferences is just an effort to intimidate people who don't agree with you. It's not going to work. They can hold all the press conferences they want. It won't change anything.' Gonella accused Gove and Harbottle of bad faith, saying neither of them answered Ballestrero's most recent letter discussing the move to three labs and he said the protocol adopted at the Turin meeting was only a suggestion, never an agreement. `It was agreed that there would be no advance publicity on this,' he said. `We are keeping our end of the bargain whether they do or not'"[31].
On 19 January Gove talked to Zurich's Wolfli, who said that at the 22 January meeting in London, the three laboratories "would ask for very restrictive conditions ... and if Gonella would not accept them then he would withdraw"[32]. Wolfli told Gove that, "Gonella had asked why the shroud [sic] was any different from any other important carbon dating Woelfli did every day?" But evidently Wolfli had no good answer, because Gove does not give one for his readers benefit, but lamely wrote, "I assume Woelfli was patient in his explanation"[33]. But Wolfli could hardly give, nor Gove print, the true reason why Gove insisted on seven laboratories to date the Shroud, which is that, "... despite Gove's Rochester laboratory being where radiocarbon dating was invented, Gove admitted in the Turin Workshop that Rochester had the least experience of radiocarbon dating" and "Therefore, unless seven laboratories dated the Shroud, Gove would have no part in it" [see 18Nov87]!

On 22 January Gove received a phone call from Roger Highfield, a science writer for the London Daily Telegraph, informing him that the meeting (see above) had been held and:

"The decision was to use only the three labs, the shroud [sic] sampling would be videotaped, they would try to respect the agreement of the Turin workshop as far as possible and the results should be available by the end of the year"[34].
On 25 January 1988 Gove phoned Donahue, who told him:
"... it [the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud] was going ahead and nothing was going to stop it. The meeting had been attended by people from the three laboratories, Tite and Gonella. There had been a fair amount of enthusiasm on the part of most of the people there. I asked what mood Luigi [Gonella] had been in and he said that he had been quite agreeable ... Every request or demand they had made (and he admitted they had not really made any demands) about how the operation should be carried out had seemed reasonable to Gonella. His response to all of them was that he would consult the cardinal"[35].
Donahue then read to Gove a press release that he, Tite and Gonella had composed:
"Representatives of the three radiocarbon dating laboratories, Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, accepted by the Vatican to undertake the radiocarbon dating of the shroud met on 22 January at the British Museum together with Professor Luigi Gonella, the scientific advisor to the Cardinal of Turin and Dr Michael Tite of the British Museum who had been invited to help in the certification of the operation. After discussion, they accepted the decision of the Vatican to use no more than three samples in the interest of conservation of the shroud [sic]. Procedures for taking the samples from the shroud and for the treatment of the results were discussed and proposals on this will be submitted to the Archbishop of Turin for his agreement. It is proposed that, as far as possible, the spirit of the original protocol of the 1986 meeting be retained. Each laboratory will be provided with control samples of known age. The samples will be taken from the main body of the shroud away from patches or charred areas under the supervision of a qualified expert. Certification of the samples will be undertaken by the Archbishop of Turin, Anastasio Cardinal Ballestrero, Pontifical Custodian of the Shroud of Turin and by Michael Tite of the British Museum. Representatives of the three laboratories will be present in Turin to receive the samples. The overall procedure will be fully recorded by video film and photography. The laboratories will submit their results for statistical analysis to the British Museum and to the Institute for Metrology 'G Colonnetti'. The timetable for the operation has not been established but it is hoped that the radiocarbon dates on the Shroud of Turin will be released by the end of 1988. If these proposals are approved by the cardinal, then a letter will be submitted to Nature giving further details of the procedure. The participants of this meeting wish to take this opportunity to record their appreciation to Professor Carlos Chagas, President of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, who chaired the original meeting in Turin in October 1986 as well as the other participants who played a crucial role in moving the project forward"[36].

So Gove, "who had spent nearly ten years bringing the project into being and was now not even to have a look-in"[37] had comprehensively failed and his only `reward' was to be thanked anonymously as just one of "the other participants who played a crucial role in moving the project forward"! But that was Gove's own fault, due to, "... by [his] own account in his book ... confrontational and divide-and-conquer approach, riding roughshod over both STURP and Turin's Gonella, to achieve a result that was acceptable only to the seven laboratories [see 10Oct87]."

Note that so great was Gove the agnostic's[38] antagonism towards Christianity and the Shroud that he cannot bring himself to use correct English and capitalise "Shroud" as the proper noun it is. The same press release is quoted in full in Garza-Valdes' "The DNA of God?" (1998)[39], which is online, and as can be seen it has "Shroud" capitalised. So Gove evidently went out of his way to uncapitalise "Shroud"!

To be continued in the next part #9 of this series.

1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, p.82A. [return]
3. Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK, p.228; Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, pp.184, 308. [return]
4. Gove, 1996, pp.222-223; Wilson, 1998, p.184. [return]
5. Sox, H.D., 1988, "The Shroud Unmasked: Uncovering the Greatest Forgery of All Time," The Lamp Press: Basingstoke UK, p.95; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.192-193. [return]
6. Gove, 1996, pp.224-225. [return]
8. "7th Fr. Peter M. Rinaldi Awards Dinner," Event Management Services, 2017. [return]
7. Sox, 1988, p.117. [return]
8. "7th Fr. Peter M. Rinaldi Awards Dinner," Event Management Services, 2017. [return]
9. Gove, 1996, p.226. [return]
10. Ibid. [return]
11. Gove, 1996, p.227. [return]
12. Ibid. [return]
13. Wilson, 1998, p.184. [return]
14. Gove, 1996, p.227. [return]
15. Gove, 1996, p.241. [return]
16. "Garman Harbottle: Senior Chemist Emeritus," Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton NY, 2011. [return]
17. Gove, 1996, pp.228, 232; Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.45. [return]
18. Gove, 1996, p.324. [return]
19. Gove, 1996, p.228; Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p.45. [return]
20. Gove, 1996, p.228. [return]
21. Gove, 1996, pp.228-229. [return]
22. Gove, 1996, p.214. [return]
23. Gove, 1996, p.232. [return]
24. Ibid. [return]
25. Sullivan, W., 1988, "Three Laboratories Are Chosen to Determine Age of Shroud of Turin," The New York Times, January 16. [return]
26. Gove, 1996, pp.231-232. [return]
27. Clark, K.R., 1988, "Shroud of Turin Controversy Resumes," Chicago Tribune, January 17. [return]
28. Gove, 1996, pp.232-233. [return]
29. Gove, 1996, p.233. [return]
30. Ibid. [return]
31. Clark, 1988. [return]
32. Gove, 1996, pp.234-235. [return]
33. Gove, 1996, p.235. [return]
34. Gove, 1996, pp.235-236. [return]
35. Gove, 1996, p.239. [return]
36. Gove, 1996, pp.239-240. [return]
37. Wilson, 1998, p.184. [return]
38. Gove, 1996, p.101; Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, p.9. [return]
39. Garza-Valdes, L.A., 1998, "The DNA of God?," Hodder & Stoughton: London, pp.177-178. [return]

Posted: 4 February 2018. Updated: 13 February 2018.