Shroud of Turin

In Post #16 above, Blitz77 offers, "Mattingly proposes that the facial imprint was caused by bacteria-in this case he used bacteria called Staphylococcus epidermidis, which is commonly found on the skin ... after killing the bacteria, [Mattingly] then smeared the stuff on his skin (!) then applied a linen to the area, then allowing it to dry, then peeled it off-the bacterial imprint was similar in quality to that of the shroud. The bacteria in the shroud may have died, then gradually oxidised causing the stains."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Could a creative artist attempting to capitalize on relic merchandizing produce the shroud say in 1100 or 1400 CE have used a corpse to achieve the same effect as Mattingly did?
----------------------------------------------------------------------Blitz offers more: "Interestingly enough, near the facial imprint were two faint imprints; one of a coin that was minted around 29AD, during the reign of Emperor Tiberius, and another if a lepton (a copper piece) from the reign of Pontius Pilate."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coins historically have enjoyed extreme longivity both in circulation and in private collections. It certainly would not be unusual for a coin minted in the First Century to remain in circulation or in a private collection in the 14th or 15th Century. In fact, one can still purchase coins from biblical times and places for a relatively low prices.It's interesting that some folks have attempted to prove pre-Columbian European (particularly Roman, Greek, or Phoenician) exploration of North America based upon the discovery by 18th - 19th Century frontiersmen and explorers of European coins in the possession of Native Americans living in the interior regions of North America. This idea is debunked by the recorded use by 16th Century European navigators of bags of cheap ancient copper coinage (of which there was a glut) as ballast for trans-Atlantic voyages during the age of exploration. The navigators found that bags of copper coins sat more firmly in place than ballast rocks, did not absorb water like bags of sand, and were negotiable to Central American natives who valued copper as highly as they did gold.Wouldn't a creative relic producer use coins that would appear to validate the relic he was creating, thereby raising its value on the market? The two coins Blitz names would be relics in and of themselves for persons wanting something from the time and place of the revered individual, and a relics dealer would have access to such coins.
----------------------------------------------------------------------Blitz concludes, "Of course, you might be wondering why they'd bother putting coins near the eyes of the face- it was Jewish custom at the time of Jesus' death to place coins over both eyes of the corpse."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The custom of putting coins over both eyes of a corpse certainly is not soley a Jewish custom, nor is it a custom common only to the First Century.One also must consider that Roman coins were considered abhorant to Jews because they were imprinted with human busts and considered items of idolatry. The money changers working at the Temple in Jerusalem were there for the specific purpose of exchanging Roman and other idolatrous coinage for coins acceptable as offerings at the Temple. There is no way that an observant Jew of Jesus's day would put Roman coins on a Jewish corpse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's ...Pax.

MarkAustin and others have correctly pointed out that you cannot produce a "180-degree" facial image such as that on the Shroud by wrapping linen around approximately 270 degrees (ear to ear) of a corpse's scull. As MarkAustin says in Post #25, "Won't work. Same objection. This will, again, produce a panoramic view of the head - a 180/360 deg. image"However, one can obtain the "180-degree" image seen on the Shroud by laying a piece of damp linen on top of a bas relief image of a face and then rubbing the linen into the contours of the bas relief.What media is then used to stain the linen is an option of the artist (relics dealer). This is a method of obtaining an imprint similar to gravestone rubbings and really is not a whole lot different than limestone lithography.Bas relief sculptures were commonly produced and available from early Babylonian and Persian cultures and were a popular art form right on up and through the Middle Ages. The use of organic and mineral stains for artists' pigments was highly developed by the Renaissance.[This message has been edited by Abshalom, 01-07-2004]

After doing some more research regarding the alleged custom of putting coins on the eyelids of corpses, I came across this interesting conflicting report:"... Let's get back to the coin(s) dilemma. I would quote the greatest specialist in this field, Prof. L.Y. Rahamni (Chief Curator of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums):
"No coins of the period 50 B.C. to 70 A.D. were found in any tomb. In the first century Jewish Palestine. The placing of the coins was looked upon as idolatry; there was only a Greco-Roman custom according to which a coin was placed in the mouth of the deceased, so that he could pay Charon for conveying his shades across the Styx. Prof. N. Avigad of the Hebrew University, who excavated a great many of tombs of the period in question, in and around Jerusalem, and Mr. A. Kloner, District Archeologist, who has lately had a great practical experience in this field, confirmed to me this scarcity of even one coin in such tombs. If at all encountered inside a tomb, such a stray coin has been found in the debris and not even in the tomb's loculi. It may be added that no coins have been reported from inside a Jewish ossuary nor does such a custom exist at the time at all. No archeological or literary evidence exists from the 1st century A.D. fro a custom of covering the eyes of the deceased with coins, then the existence of such a custom from the same period must be denied."Compare that quote to the following quote and remember both are attributed to the same professor L. Y. Rahmani. Note however that the second citation spells his name Rahamni(???). BTAIM:"... This is in rather curious contrast to an article "Jason's Tomb" in the ISRAEL EXPLORATION JOURNAL, Vol. 17, No. 2 (1967), pp 61-100 written by L. Y. Rahmani who excavated this tomb in Jerusalem in 1956. In this tomb, which had been used over many years, Rahmani details finding a number of bronze coins. Five of these were from the Hasmonean period, two were from the Herodian period, and forty-six were from the time of the Procurators. Thirty-six of the coins were at the foot of the body remains and six from its middle. Seven of the coins were the "Julia" lepta of Pontius Pilate, the coin we identified over the left eye from 29 AD, and twenty-one of the coins were the lituus lepta from 30 AD, the type found over the right eye. I had previously cited the article by Dr.R Hachlili about her excavations in tombs in Jericho, where she found four coins, two of them lepta from 41-44 AD inside a skull. In a later article Hachlili and Killebrew report on coins being found in two skulls from Jericho and a number of coins found in tombs in the Jerusalem area ..."Anyway, for those of you who can make heads or tails outta this coins in the Shroud issue, here's the link: Doubts Concerning the Coins Over the Eyes

Mark Austin's Message #69 indicates, "The first historical evidence of the Shroud of Turin dates back to 1389, where it is first written about in a letter from the bishop of Troyes, France to Pope Clement VII."The letter from Bishop Pierre d'Arcis of Troyes appealing to the anti-pope Clement VII at Avignon expressing concern regarding the exhibition of the Shroud also indicates it's repository and display to relic-oogling pilgrims at Lirey as early as 1355:"According to the D'Arcis Memorandum, written more than thirty years later, the first known expositions of the Shroud are held in Lirey at around this time. Large crowds of pilgrims are attracted and special souvenir medallions are struck. A unique surviving specimen can still be found today at the Cluny Museum in Paris. Reportedly, Bishop Henri refused to believe the Shroud could be genuine and ordered the expositions halted. The Shroud was then hidden away." [See: http:Shroud History ]The same site offers other interesting information including that:In November 1389, the Bishop of Troyes appealed Clement VII concerning the exhibiting of the Shroud at Lirey. The bishop claimed the Shroud was attracting crowds of pilgrims.In January 1390, Clement VII wrote the bishop ordering him to keep silent on the Shroud, under threat of excommunication. The letter of warning was written the same day as Clement wrote the letter to Geoffrey II de Charny stating the conditions under which expositions could be allowed. That day he also wrote to other persons asking them to ensure that his orders are obeyed. What a great compromiser this pope!There are other sites on the Internet offering the argument that Pierre d'Arcis's allegations that the Shroud was a forgery were motivated by his anxiety regarding the competitive edge the Shroud represented for pilgrim money at Lirey compared to the Arcis's less impressive relics collection at Troyes.Bishop D'Arcis's letter to Clement VII also states that his predecessor, Bishop Henri of Poitiers had determined that the Shroud was a forgery because the image was not mentioned in the Gospels, that an investigation by Bishop Henri showed it to be a clever fake, and that an unidentified artist had confessed to the handiwork.However, neither D'Arcis nor Henri presented any evidence or named the forger, and there is no other evidence that Bishop Henri ever investigated the Shroud's authenticity.You may Google Henri of Poitiers and Pierre d'Arcis of Troyes for additional data that indicates at least to this Googler that the early history of the Shroud is stained by parish politics and the competition for pilgrim's pennies.Ah, that Demon Politics!