Arcadia Discussion Zone

Was The Shroud In Languedoc During The Missing Years?

From an article by Jack Markwardt

INTRODUCTION:
In 1204, a sydoine, bearing a full-length figure of Christ and a possible Apostolic pedigree, disappeared from Constantinople. Matching that cloth with the Shroud which appeared in Lirey, France a century and a half later requires an accounting of its hidden movements and an explanation for its acquisition by Geoffrey de Charny. This paper focuses upon the "Missing Years" in the history of the Shroud of Turin, presents a hypothetical reconstruction of several of the more mysterious chapters in the cloth's biography, and suggests that the sindonic path between Constantinople and Lirey runs directly through Languedoc.

http://www.shroud.com/markward.htm

According to a tradition among the descendants of La Roche, a French family
established in the Franche-Comté, their ancestor Otho de la Roche obtained the Shroud as a prize when he joined the Fourth Crusade and he sent it to Ray sur Saône castle. He became Duke of Athens thanks to his actions during the sack of Constantinople in 1204. The Shroud was quietly inherited by the following family generations until it came to Jeanne de Vergy, Geoffroy de Charny's wife.

http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n67part6.pdf

http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n66part3.pdf

This is an interesting article written a while ago about the Shroud and early Byzantine frescoes.....IMHO that is

E. Lennox Manton is a retired dental surgeon who now lives in Stirling, Scotland. He has had a lifelong interest in Cappadocia and the numerous medieval and earlier churches in that region. He has taken and collected a remarkable archive of coloured slides of the church sites and their frescoes thus making a very valuable and unique contribution to the history of that area, of Christianity, and of art. He has given many papers and lectures on these matters and is regarded as an expert on early Byzantine art. Most of the existing books on this subject appear to ignore the areas of Asia Minor he has meticulously covered and recorded in his expeditions.


http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/connections/MANTON94.pdf

Very interesting indeed, as are the previous articles - thanks for taking the time to share them!

Hi Tina,

Perhaps the references to an 'Elisabeth des Chappes' and 'Nicolas de Saint-Omar' are worth noting. A hundred years earlier, an 'Elisabeth des Chappes' was the wife of Hugh de Payen (the lady is usually ignored in favor of the fantasy Sinclair 'wife' however)...and of course Godfrey de Saint-Omar was, along with Hugh de Payen, a founding member of the Templar Order...and then there is the Cistercian and Burgandy connection...and how far is Lirey from Troyes? About 10 miles I think...

Regards,

Spartacus

Thanks Tingra great articles and resources

I get so confused between the
Shroud of Turin

Mandylion

and
Veronica
There is no reference to the story of Veronica and her veil in the canonical Gospels. The closest is the miracle of the woman who was healed by touching the hem of Jesus’ garment (Luke 8:43-48); her name is later identified as Veronica by the apocryphal "Acts of Pilate". The story was later elaborated in the 11th century by adding that Christ gave her a portrait of himself on a cloth, with which she later cured Tiberius. The linking of this with the bearing of the cross in the Passion, and the miraculous appearance of the image was made by Roger d'Argenteuil's Bible in French in the 13th century,
The Vatican's Veronica


very limited viewing



an important copy of the Veronica, identified by the signature of P. Strozzi in the right hand corner of the inner frame. He was the secretary of Pope Paul V, and a man referred to by Vatican notary Jacopo Grimaldi as making a series of six meticulous copies of the veil in 1617.S[11]

The outside of the frame is relatively modern, while the inner frame is roughly made and corresponds to the cut-out pattern of earlier copies. The face within is very unclear, more a series of blotches in which only the bare elements of a nose, eyes and mouth can be identified. This argues for the authenticity of the copy as there is clearly no attempt at artistic enhancement. Furthermore, the fact of its being copied from the Vatican copy after the Sack of Rome in 1527 suggests that the original image may have survived that event.

It is kept in the Schatzkammer of Sacred and Secular Treasurers of the Habsburg dynasty in the Hofburg Palace, Vienna.
here is the recently found


In 1999, Father Heinnrich Pfeiffer announced at a press conference in Rome that he had found the Veil in a church of the Capuchin monastery, in the small village of Manoppello, Italy, where it had been since 1660
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_Veronica

Agreed

yep, thats how i see it also

a short re cap....

In 544 AD, in the city of Edessa, a folded burial cloth bearing an image, believed to be of Jesus, was found above a gate in the city's walls. We know from various history sources that the cloth was a burial shroud with a faint full-body image of Jesus and bloodstains positioned on the image. The image was variously described as a reflection, produced by sweat and divinely wrought. There is even some indication that the image was thought to be negative.

On August 15, 944 AD, the Image of Edessa was forcibly transferred from Edessa to the Byzantine capital city of Constantinople. It clearly was a burial cloth with a full image and bloodstains.

The following records are particularly useful in developing an accurate picture of the cloth:

a sermon by Gregory, archdeacon and referendarius of Hagia Sophia Cathedral given August 16, 944
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/guscin3.pdf

a Greek ceremonial text written in 960
http://perpetuacatholic.info/index.php?p=1_17

a text by Nicholas Mesarites, the overseer of the imperial relic treasury in Constantinople in 1201

a letter by the crusader knight Robert de Clari in 1203
http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/sources/clari.htm

Other documents have since been found in the Vatican library and the University of Leiden, Netherlands, confirming this impression. (The Codex Vossianus Latinus Q69 and Vatican Library Codex 5696, p. 35.):

Illustrations in an 1192 a codex, known as the Hungarian Pray Manuscript, show Jesus being prepared for burial and the scene of the empty tomb. The drawing depicts several features consistent with the Shroud of Turin: the unique herringbone twill, a specific pattern of burn holes that antedate the much later fire in 1532 which nearly destroyed the Shroud, Jesus depicted naked with his hands crossed before him, hands with no visible thumbs.

http://www.historian.net/shroud.htm
http://www.shroudstory.com/faq-pray-manuscript.htm

In 1204, French and Venetian knights of the Fourth Crusade besieged the city and on April 13 entered and looted the city. The Edessa Image certainly seems to have been among the treasures taken by the looters.
http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/sources/clari.htm

About a year after Constantinople was plundered, Theodore Ducas Anglelos, in a letter to Pope Innocent III wrote: "The Venetians partitioned the treasure of gold, silver and ivory, while the French did the same with the relics of saints and the most sacred of all, the linen in which our Lord Jesus Christ was wrapped after His death and before the resurrection."
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n66part3.pdf

Many sacred objects were preserved in Venice, in France and elsewhere. In 1207, Nicholas d'Orrante, the abbot of Casole and the Papal legate in Athens, wrote about relics taken from Constantinople by French knights. Referring specifically to burial cloths, he mentions seeing them "with our own eyes" in Athens.

After that time, the trail runs cold on the Image of Edessa. In 1356, Geoffrey de Charny, a French knight , displayed a burial shroud that he claims is the burial shroud of Christ. That shroud is now the Shroud of Turin. It they are one in the same, if the Shroud of Turin is the Image of Edessa -- and there is good reason to think so -- then no records have been found to empirically link it to 1204.

But there is some evidence that the cloth may have been in Besancon, France prior to 1356.
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n67part6.pdf

The Turin Shroud is about fourteen feet long and three and a half feet wide. As a burial shroud it is long enough on which to lay the body of a man on his back with his feet at one end and his head near the middle. The cloth is long enough to bring it across the front of body and back down to his feet. Its width is enough to cover him completely if his arms are not extended.

The earliest reference may be the Hymn of the Pearl, often attributed by scholars to Bardesane of Edessa, a Gnostic poet, perhaps as early as A.D. 216. This poems describes Jesus’ burial garment with two images, front and back. In the late 6th century, Evagrius Scholasticus’ Ecclesiastical History mentions that Edessa was protected by a “divinely wrought portrait” (acheiropoieton) sent by Jesus to Abgar, the king of Edessa.
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/dreisbc2.pdf

A 6th century apocryphal text, the Acts of Thaddeus describes the “divinely wrought portrait” as an large image-bearing cloth. It describes the cloth as a tetradiplon, meaning folded into fours doubled (a fold of eight layers). A fourteen-foot long cloth, thus folded, would be just about the right size for a portrait. Moreover, the Acts goes on to use the word sindon. This is important for it is the word sindon is used in the synoptic Gospels for burial shroud.
http://greatshroudofturinfaq.com/Histor ... iplon.html

In A.D. 730, John of Damascus, a priest and monk who served as an advisor to the Muslim Caliph of Damascus, wrote his famous Apologetic Treatises against those Decrying the Holy Images. He describes the same cloth as a himation. An himation was a long rectangular cloth worn as sleeveless garment in ancient Greece and well into the middle Byzantine era. Similar to a toga, but shorter, it was often used as a garment in iconography of Christ or other biblical persons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himation

One of the illationes used in a late 7th century rite, The Mozarabic Rite speaks of an imaged cloth: “Peter ran with John to the tomb and saw the recent imprints of the dead and risen man on the linens.” Pope Stephen II, who reigned from 752 to 757, wrote that Christ had “spread out his entire body on a linen cloth that was white as snow.

On this cloth, marvelous as it is to see . . . the glorious image of the Lord's face, and the length of his entire and most noble body, has been divinely transferred.”

On August 16, 944, the very day after the image-bearing cloth arrived in Constantinople from Edessa, Gregory Referendarius, the archdeacon of Constantinople’s great cathedral, Hagia Sophia, gave a sermon in which he described the cloth as having the likeness of a man with a side wound, a clear reference to a full body image.

There are many references to it after that that clearly support the case that a large, shroud-size cloth with an image believed to be that of Jesus, was brought from Edessa and was kept in Constantinople for about 250 years.
http://www.shroudofturin4journalists.com/article.pdf

Its interesting that the church doesn't show the Veronique to the public

the whole Holy Face of Jesus fascinates me for personal reasons

As I said Rodger
I have seen exactly what you referenced the shroud draped over the cross with the Holy Face of Jesus showing

at first thought it made me think of the Shroud of Turin but I think this may be different

Thereafter, the cloth not only maintained its status as Edessa's holy palladium,7 but it also served as the model for numerous copies which were similarly employed as palladia throughout the Eastern empire.8 The protective virtues of such images were described by Edward Gibbon as follows: "In the hour of danger or tumult their venerable presence could revive the hope, rekindle the courage, or repress the fury of the Roman legions".9 In the sixth century, Pope Gregory commissioned his own copy of the image and had it brought to Rome where it was subsequently invoked for protection by Popes of the eighth and ninth centuries.

from:

http://www.shroud.com/markward.htm


Seems there could be a few copies floating around.

Rodger the dodger,

Just reiterating what is said in the report in the link.

Do you dispute the claim made in that report? and I know you don't deign to provide reasoning and evidence for any of your positions but you might just on this occasion?

Good to see the ol' 'Hautecombe two-step' is still in operation!

Before this thread goes any further now might be a good time for a declaration of personal interest
So folks can understand why they are being dismissed so peremptorily.

Just a thought.

TD

oh dear, here we go again .......You can get treatment for paranoia you know TD , I have spoken to one of my colleagues here at work and he has given me the name of a good therapist in your area….check your pms

Wow! Look at you Tingra! Straight into the insults almost within the hour!
Its okay I forgive you.
But don't you think that if anyone has privileged or inside knowledge that can help move the discussion forward
from a position of authority then they should declare that interest rather than merely just dismiss and belittle ?
Or do you prefer to simply mock and abuse others and their opinions?

Check my PMs? Was that one of your charming comic exaggerations? After your last tirade of invective and obscenities you seemed to have suggested that we'd moved beyond PMs?
Maybe this is progress............................

TD

please dont destroy another thread TD .....its not fair on others.

i will bow out gracefully before the usual vicious circle ensues.......the floor is all yours.

Destroy the thread?
How can a plea for truth and honesty destroy the thread?
If anyone is in a position to know the truth about something due to their circumstances
then the thread would benefit from that expertise rather than simply mocking what some perceive as uninformed comment?

If it makes you feel braver and smarter by abusing me then feel free to continue, it always says far more about you than me.

Have a great weekend!

TD

my goodness Thomas, you edited that one quickly...very timely indeed.

On reflection there is no sense in gilding the lily is there?

Glad you turned up, where do you stand on the notion of declaring interest?
Do you think that if someone is actually in the enviable position of being able to speak on a subject from a
position of authority then it can only be a good thing and will help provide a definitive answer.

Or is it better to mock, abuse and belittle others whilst brandishing triumphalist tag lines ?

TD

...did i miss your contribution to this discussion ?

Well, actually this thread is only going over old ground that I participated in about 2 years ago but I take your point, it is interesting that this subject has been reopened in this way.

BTW Is that a vote for truth or abuse?
Please clarify!
TD

Hello Roger,
Is it a form of Patrician Tourettes that means you are unable to direct any comments towards me without being gratuitously offensive?
Its okay, I forgive you and have wouldn't dream of reciprocating because as everyone can see this is saying so much more about you than me. Its par for the course dealing with you and yours and some might see it as symptomatic of the mess you have made for yourself. In a sense its a kind of backhand compliment in that someone who seems so keen to portray themselves as urbane and cultivated is reduced to spluttering offensively at a mere post from me!

BTW seeing as you are here wouldn't you agree that, as a matter of principle, if anyone is in a position to provide definitive answers in a discussion of such weighty matters then a failure to do so might be seen as questionable?
So, by virtue of your connections, can you help us with regards to the Shroud?
Kind regards,
TD

Hotspur, when he says copied in that article he didn’t mean an exact copy….that would be impossible

1516 Copy of the Shroud Attributed to Albrecht Durer or Bernard van Orley

This copy is significant in that it shows the pattern of the so-called poker holes.

There were many painted copies of the shroud, and they are distinctively different in many ways from the actual Shroud of Turin.

They are painted
They sometimes confuse negative and positive images in their representations of the figures on the shroud
They are clearly marked at copies or documentation identifies them as such
they lack the essential 3D encoding of the shroud
They are not produced on herringbone twill linen with a variegated background

1568 Copy of the Shroud



Giovanni Battista's Famous Painting of the Shroud

This is perhaps the most famous painting of the Shroud of Turin from the sixteenth century.

There were many painted copies of the shroud and this very famous painting.



there are many many more copies like these and the mandylion

take the fifth Roger and keep shtum about the crista making the photograph

Wow Roger!
We've progressed to repeating ourselves in abusive PMs now have we?
I forgive you!
It is a little sad that someone so apparently erudite as your goodself doesn't have the courage of their convictions
to be rude in public and is reduced to private means!
But you didn't answer my question did you?
Do your connections allow you to contribute any concrete facts about the Shroud?
A simple 'Yes' or 'No' will surfice.
TD

OFFS......here we go again


the moral on the forum is low enough already.....you dont help

edited to add.....i wont give you the satisfaction of getting me banned