Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. Please look at the RECENT ADDITIONS and PRICE REDUCTIONS at the top and bottom of the page. All items are guaranteed authentic for eternity! Thanks for supporting Forum with your PURCHASES! Welcome Guest. Please login or register. Point your mouse to a coin in RECENT ADDITIONS or PRICE REDUCTIONS on this page to see the the price. All items are guaranteed authentic for eternity! Thanks for supporting Forum with your PURCHASES!


FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board  |  Numismatic and History Discussions  |  History and Archeology (Moderator: David Atherton)  |  Topic: Shroud of Turin 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4  All Go Down Print
Author Topic: Shroud of Turin  (Read 35190 times)
Gavignano
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1488

"I check Forvm daily, and take a multivitamin."


« on: June 29, 2009, 06:49:59 pm »

Just using the AP source, Pope Benedict said "seem to conclude."
Wonderfully imprecise.
As far as the Shroud, I'm going to put myself out on a limb, and admit I've never been convinced its a forgery of the 13th, 14th century or whatever. Of course no one could ever "prove" it was Jesus, but I've never seen conclusive evidence that it isn't an image of a 1st-2nd century man who was crucified. And I love the evidence of the eyes - or should I say what looks like a nice Pilate lepton on one. My atheist/skeptic friend believes it to be nothing more than creative Photoshopping of an image which looks like a bug to him.......
Logged

"May all your campgates be Ticinums"
Sri_Sahi
Guest
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2009, 07:22:46 pm »

As far as the Shroud, I'm going to put myself out on a limb, and admit I've never been convinced its a forgery of the 13th, 14th century or whatever.

Have a good look at the images of Christ on the anonymous Byzantine folles of of the 10th-12th centuries or on icons of the period and then have a fresh look at the image on the shroud. If that doesn't do it, there are the radiocarbon dates taken on samples of the shroud itself... oh that's right, we threw out radiocarbon dating earlier in this thread because it yields impossible dates like 10,000 BC and we all know the earth is younger than that. D'oh! Smiley
Logged
ecoli
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


Every coin is sacred, every coin is great.


« Reply #2 on: June 30, 2009, 12:38:52 am »

As far as the Shroud, I'm going to put myself out on a limb, and admit I've never been convinced its a forgery of the 13th, 14th century or whatever.

Have a good look at the images of Christ on the anonymous Byzantine folles of of the 10th-12th centuries or on icons of the period and then have a fresh look at the image on the shroud. If that doesn't do it, there are the radiocarbon dates taken on samples of the shroud itself... oh that's right, we threw out radiocarbon dating earlier in this thread because it yields impossible dates like 10,000 BC and we all know the earth is younger than that. D'oh! Smiley

That's not called for.  There are real problems with carbon dating in that it can not distinguish between where the carbon was from...In this case, the shroud itself was exposed to smoke which has deposited additional carbon...
Logged

Sri_Sahi
Guest
« Reply #3 on: June 30, 2009, 01:06:35 am »


In this case, the shroud itself was exposed to smoke which has deposited additional carbon...


Here is the actual report on the shroud dating as published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature.
http://www.shroud.com/nature.htm
If you have concerns regarding methodology which the review panel missed, you may wish to submit your own paper for consideration.

And we wonder why archaeologists show so little respect for numismatists ...
Logged
areich
Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
Procurator Monetae
Caesar
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8800



WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 30, 2009, 04:37:35 am »

And we wonder why archaeologists show so little respect for numismatists ...

Who's 'we' and who is the numismatist here (that gets so little respect from archeologists)?
Logged

David Atherton
IMPERATOR
Caesar
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4348


The meaning of life can be found in a coin.


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 30, 2009, 05:20:32 am »


In this case, the shroud itself was exposed to smoke which has deposited additional carbon...


Here is the actual report on the shroud dating as published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature.
http://www.shroud.com/nature.htm
If you have concerns regarding methodology which the review panel missed, you may wish to submit your own paper for consideration.

And we wonder why archaeologists show so little respect for numismatists ...

Thanks for the link to the report! I never for a moment thought the shroud was Jesus'. I used to entertain the idea that there was a slim possibility it may have dated back to a burial from the first century, but this report pretty much nixes that idea too.

Logged

Cheers, David

My Gallery: http://tinyurl.com/2cgd8r
Congius
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1605



« Reply #6 on: June 30, 2009, 07:06:25 am »

The trouble with the image on the shroud, as the dating attests, is that it doesn't depict what we would expect of a man of Jesus ethnic background and time, but rather depicts what we expect him to look like - somewhat emanciapated and long-haired - by the artistic tradition of the "man of sorrows" that later developed.

However, if we look at the earliest images intended as Jesus in the Christian catacombs, depicted as the Good Shepard, then we see a healthy clean shaven young man with short hair. Whether this was specifically meant to be Jesus or was simply a continuation of repurposed pagan imagery is another question, but at least it attests to the lack of any other tradition at that time. Even if we believe these early depictions to have been deliberately ambiguous as to their Christian vs Pagan nature, it would seem to highlight that there was no alternate depiction of Jesus that was transmitted to later times. His image was therefore really a blank slate upon which an iconographic depiction was created based on theology rather than actual appearance.

New Scientist a number of years back published an attempt at reconstructing what a typical man of that ethnicity/age may have looked like based on modern forensics, depicting him with short hair based on scholarship as to that being the norm, and the result was a more of a rounder faced stocky build, obviously of middle eastern appearance rather than white skinned.

Ben
Logged
Noah
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1908


Viva Brasil! Pátria Amada!!


WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 30, 2009, 07:19:58 am »

Well, the likelihood that the shroud was that of Jesus was miniscule anyway (even if it did date to the time of Christ) considering that tens of thousands were crucified in the first century alone!  It should not matter to Christians anyway whether it was legit or not since it would not make one iota of difference in Christian belief of salvation.  It is just an object...period. 

As for archaeologists not respecting numismatists...what is that supposed to mean?  There are amateur numismatists AND archaelogists who make assumptions without scientific or empirical data.  Just the same, there are innumerable numismatists who know their craft well and can unequivocally contribute to the placement of artifacts and coins in historical perspective that many archeologists probably have no a clue about (Some of these specialists being members of Forvm).  Numismatists are specialists as many archaeologists are.  So, I can see why the statement was made, but I respectfully disagree.

Best, Noah
Logged

ecoli
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


Every coin is sacred, every coin is great.


« Reply #8 on: June 30, 2009, 12:14:46 pm »


And we wonder why archaeologists show so little respect for numismatists ...

Also not called for Wink

1) Testing of the shroud has nothing to do with coins...so any comments from this board are just interesting discussions.

2) Speaking for myself, I am an engineer with an interest in coins; if you generalize numismatists because of one of my opinions, then I think you have insulted a lot of people, in general, people with little blue and brown stars underneath their names.

3) You don't even really know my opinion...all I did was point out a possiblity of inaccuracy; does that warrant such a generalization?  For your information; the reason I said your first comment was not called for was because old earth/young earth discussion is not allowed here; by making a snide comment on a topic you know people who disagree can not answer is not, in terms of this board, nice.
Logged

ecoli
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


Every coin is sacred, every coin is great.


« Reply #9 on: June 30, 2009, 02:46:11 pm »

As far as the shroud...
 
Turin Shroud Carbon-Dating Flawed

Published on April 11, 2009

LONDON, ENGLAND

A prominent U.S. chemist who pronounced the Turin Shroud a fake came to believe it could have been the burial cloth of Jesus, a television documentary says.

Ray Rogers, a chemist from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, helped lead the Shroud of Turin Research Project in 1988.

Radio carbon-dating conducted in 1988 on threads of the shroud dated the making of the cloth to hundreds of years after the death of Jesus.

Those threads, however, proved to be part of a repair made to the shroud in the 16th century, Rogers said in a video made shortly before his death of cancer in March 2005.

"The worst possible sample for carbon dating was taken," Rogers said. "It consisted of different materials than were used in the shroud itself, so the age we produced was inaccurate."

Rogers said he continued investigating the shroud and began to believe it was genuine, The Daily Telegraph reported Saturday.

"I came very close to proving the shroud was used to bury the historic Jesus," Rogers said in the video.

http://www.shroud.com/c14debat.htm

and a little nice debate

oh noes... Wink
Logged

Will Hooton
Comitia Curiata II
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1028


SUSPIRIUM PUELLAM GULIELMUS THRAEX!


« Reply #10 on: June 30, 2009, 03:52:05 pm »

ecoli, excellent digging!

I have always held science and experiment to be a lively, dynamic debate, rather than  'I told you so' unchallengeable conclusions, made by a group of "peer reviewed" Ivy leaguers patting themselves on the back!  Wink
Logged

Noah
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1908


Viva Brasil! Pátria Amada!!


WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 30, 2009, 04:35:33 pm »

Nice bit of detective work to support yourself ecoli,

Robert, thanks for your detailed explanation on persecution.  It is clear that at first it was basically sporadic reactions to what was seen as a group of religious fanatics who were a nuisance in the empire rather than an all out threat worthy of imperial intervention and military action to eradicate.  That was for another time...

Best, Noah
Logged

Sri_Sahi
Guest
« Reply #12 on: June 30, 2009, 04:39:12 pm »


Ray Rogers, a chemist from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, helped lead the Shroud of Turin Research Project in 1988.


Funny, I don't see the surname Rogers among the 21 primary authors of the study or anywhere acknowledged in the body of the report. I did however find Roger's webpage, which is apology disguised as science. When we allow for the supernatural or fall into the trap of apology where the conclusion wags the data, we have left "science" behind.

My over-arching point here has been to emphasize the role that critical thought needs to play in our discussions. If I have been overly abrupt, I apologize, but such abruptness is often effective. The response to any assertion ("The earth is only 6000 years old", "The shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Christ", "The inscriptions on ancient Iberian coins are actually Hebrew", "Radiate minimi are Britain's dark ages currncy") must be "prove it!" Failing extraordinary proof equal to extraordinary claims, we must rely on Occam's razor and take the simplest explanation based on available data ("The earth is of great age as it appears", "The shroud is a medieval creation", "The inscriptions on Iberian coins are Iberian", "Radiate minimi are contemporary imitations") as our working hypothesis until real, reproducible evidence proves the contrary. Or so it seems to me.
Logged
Sri_Sahi
Guest
« Reply #13 on: June 30, 2009, 04:45:44 pm »

And we wonder why archaeologists show so little respect for numismatists ...

Who's 'we' and who is the numismatist here (that gets so little respect from archeologists)?

I take it you've missed the whole AIA vs ACCG thing?
Logged
ecoli
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


Every coin is sacred, every coin is great.


« Reply #14 on: June 30, 2009, 04:49:19 pm »


Ray Rogers, a chemist from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, helped lead the Shroud of Turin Research Project in 1988.


Funny, I don't see the surname Rogers among the 21 primary authors of the study or anywhere acknowledged in the body of the report. I did however find Roger's webpage, which is apology disguised as science. When we allow for the supernatural or fall into the trap of apology where the conclusion wags the data, we have left "science" behind.

My over-arching point here has been to emphasize the role that critical thought needs to play in our discussions. If I have been overly abrupt, I apologize, but such abruptness is often effective. The response to any assertion ("The earth is only 6000 years old", "The shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Christ", "The inscriptions on ancient Iberian coins are actually Hebrew", "Radiate minimi are Britain's dark ages currncy") must be "prove it!" Failing extraordinary proof equal to extraordinary claims, we must rely on Occam's razor and take the simplest explanation based on available data ("The earth is of great age as it appears", "The shroud is a medieval creation", "The inscriptions on Iberian coins are Iberian", "Radiate minimi are contemporary imitations") as our working hypothesis until real, reproducible evidence proves the contrary. Or so it seems to me.

->take the simplest explanation

That is subject to human opinion.  

I'm not commenting on other statements on your answer but as far as "The shroud is a medieval creation", did you click on the link I gave you?  That was from your site.  That statement seems to be a statement born of hubris on the part of scientists on the 1988 panel.

I apologize for misreading some responses and edited the above accordingly.
Logged

Gavignano
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1488

"I check Forvm daily, and take a multivitamin."


« Reply #15 on: June 30, 2009, 06:56:45 pm »

Sri - you should read my original post. I said no one has convinced me its not an image of a 1st or 2nd century crucified man. What you offered in response is not convincing to me:
1) the carbon dating. A strong argument has been made that the area tested on the cloth was corrupt. Perhaps the next piece tested, if there is one, will show it to be a 13th century forgery. Data not in yet.
2) the imagery piece is a piece of "circumstantial" evidence at best.  I wouldn't consider the "opposite" as particularly strong evidence it is a very early image (i.e., if it was a shorter, clean shaven man, that is hardly great evidence it could be Jesus).
As for peer review, Sri - I am in academia, and have actually done peer reviews. Really. I have learned a long time ago that no author, even the skeptic, is unbiased. That is why it really pays to hear all sides of a story.
Logged

"May all your campgates be Ticinums"
Congius
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1605



« Reply #16 on: June 30, 2009, 09:11:03 pm »

"I came very close to proving the shroud was used to bury the historic Jesus," Rogers said in the video.

The Sun has amped it up a notch, and has no doubt!

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/2370937/Turin-Shroud-WAS-used-to-bury-Jesus-says-expert.html

Got to wonder the headlines if they get ahold of this paper by Rogers...

http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/rogers7.pdf

Maybe it's not such a bad thing that the image looks more like Apollonius, a contemporary of Jesus (and who's miracles caused some consternation to early apologists), who's appearance we do at least know, not least from a contorniate in the Paris collection!

Ben
Logged
ecoli
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


Every coin is sacred, every coin is great.


« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2009, 09:31:16 pm »

Question: if Apollonius looked like this, why couldn't Jesus?  Is there a Jewish custom to be short shaven?
Logged

Congius
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1605



« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2009, 09:47:46 pm »

I don't remember the details of what the New Scientist article said about it other than some negative connotations of long hair (not a beard) - I can't recall if it was specifically religious, or maybe just cultural. Apollonius wasn't from so far away - Tyana in what is now Asian Turkey, although he seems to have spent much of his time travelling in India and elsewhere.

Ben

Logged
LordBest
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2008



« Reply #19 on: June 30, 2009, 09:47:51 pm »

As mentioned above, the earliest depictions of him show him clean shaven. Picture attached, I've lost the date for this one but I believe it is third-fourth century.
                                                                 LordBest. Cool

Question: if Apollonius looked like this, why couldn't Jesus?  Is there a Jewish custom to be short shaven?
Logged

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=10003

Young Fogey.

What Would Machiavelli Do?

Inter arma enim silent leges
- Cicero
ecoli
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


Every coin is sacred, every coin is great.


« Reply #20 on: June 30, 2009, 10:11:02 pm »

http://www.religionfacts.com/jesus/image_gallery.htm

Thank you Ben and LordBest.

I found this website which, if you disregard the first (?) images, others starting at 3rd centry have both clean shaven images and some bearded ones.

I wonder if early Christians really know what Jesus looked like.

Also, the apparent lack of images for the first 200 years or so, was it due to doctrine that one can not have an image of God?

thanks again!
Logged

PeterD
Procurator Caesaris
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1440


omnium curiositatum explorator


WWW
« Reply #21 on: July 01, 2009, 03:28:24 am »

For those in the UK, there is a programme on Channel 5, tonight 1st July at 8 pm, about the Turin Shroud entitled "The Da Vinci Shroud - revealed". Supposedly it discusses the idea that Leonardo created the image using primitive photography.
Logged

Peter, London

Historia: A collection of coins with their historical context http://www.forumancientcoins.com/historia
Will Hooton
Comitia Curiata II
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1028


SUSPIRIUM PUELLAM GULIELMUS THRAEX!


« Reply #22 on: July 01, 2009, 03:30:47 am »

As mentioned above, the earliest depictions of him show him clean shaven. Picture attached, I've lost the date for this one but I believe it is third-fourth century.
                                                                 LordBest. Cool

Question: if Apollonius looked like this, why couldn't Jesus?  Is there a Jewish custom to be short shaven?

How do we know that beardless depictions of the Christ arent depictions of him in his youth? Wink
Logged

Retrospectator
Consul
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 196



« Reply #23 on: July 01, 2009, 03:38:12 am »

Even if the Turin Shroud or the Sudarium of Oviedo etc. gave RCD tests of first century date there would still be believers and sceptics as there are today. Although I am also curious as regards their age of manufacture, at the end of the day it's a matter of faith. angel
Logged

I am something of an Inglese Italianato.
Paleologo
Consul
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


nulla die sine nummo.


« Reply #24 on: July 01, 2009, 04:54:47 am »

Failing extraordinary proof equal to extraordinary claims, we must rely on Occam's razor and take the simplest explanation based on available data

Totally agree.
Logged

Caminante, no hay camino
Se hace camino al andar
Pages: [1] 2 3 4  All Go Up Print 
FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board  |  Numismatic and History Discussions  |  History and Archeology (Moderator: David Atherton)  |  Topic: Shroud of Turin « previous next »
Jump to:  

Recent Price Reductions in Forum's Shop


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 1.612 seconds with 72 queries.