There are several arguments for and against the authenticity of the Shroud.
One of the most important is radiocarbon dating, which indicated that the cloth dates back years 1260-1390that is, 12 centuries after the time when Jesus lived on Earth.
This dating has been contested by some researchers, who have invoked various hypotheses, such as biological contamination or carbon monoxide. However, these hypotheses were not accepted by the scientific community.
Another argument is that of the Jewish tradition from the 1st century, which stipulated that the dead should be wrapped in several cloths and not in one, as seems to be the case with the Shroud of Turin. It is also said that the cloth does not follow the weaving pattern used in Palestine at the time, but rather that of Turkey or France.
An argument in favor of the authenticity of the shroud is that of the image printed on the canvas, which would have been produced by oxidation or radiation and not by paint or other artistic methods.
The image would contain precise anatomical and medical details, such as wounds caused by thorns, whippings and nails.
Also, the image would have three-dimensional characteristics and would be compatible with other Christian relics, such as the veil of Veronica or the Sudarium (Latin for sweat cloth), also known as the Vernicle, a Christian relic consisting of a piece of cloth about which is said to bear an image of the Holy Face of Jesus when he was wiped from his sweat while carrying the cross to Golgotha.
Regarding the ethnicity of the person represented on the shroud, there are different opinions. Some say the image shows typical features of a 12th-13th century French medieval knight or Italian noble rather than first-century Near Eastern Jews, such as a prominent nose, beard, and long hair.
According to the New Testament, Jesus was not an attractive person to attract attention, his features were rather Semitic, close to the Arabs of today, and the wearing of long hair was forbidden among Jews.
There is a theory that claims that the Shroud of Turin was forged by Leonardo da Vinci, using a primitive photographic technique and a sculpture of his own face.
This theory is based on some similarities between the image on the shroud and Leonardo’s self-portraits, as well as the fact that he was interested in anatomy, chemistry and optics.
However, this theory is controversial and has no solid evidence. Some researchers have rejected the idea that Leonardo could have produced such a detailed and realistic image with the help of a camera obscura or a sculpture.
Moreover, the theory ignores the results of radiocarbon dating, which indicate a greater age of the Shroud than Leonardo’s time.
In conclusion, the theory of Leonardo da Vinci’s forgery of the Shroud of Turin is speculative and unconvincing. There is no direct evidence to support the hypothesis of authenticity, but the hypothesis of falsification also has many uncertainties.
Certainly, the Shroud of Turin gained popularity from the 14th century, the oldest recorded information dating back to 1354.
It is amazing how well it has been preserved.
It is unlikely to be the shroud of Christ with which he was wrapped after death and to have lasted 2000 years, but it is a medieval relic of major importance to historians, being the best preserved fabric from the past.
For the most important news of the day, transmitted in real time and presented equidistantly, LIKE our Facebook page!
Follow Mediafax on Instagram to see spectacular images and stories from around the world!
Answer on the websites of Aleph News, Mediafax, Ziarul Financiar and on our social media pages – ȘTIU and Aleph News. See the answer to I know, from 19.55, Aleph News.
The content of the www.mediafax.ro website is intended exclusively for your information and personal use. It is forbidden republication of the content of this site without the consent of MEDIAFAX. To obtain this agreement, please contact us at [email protected].
Leave a Reply