The Shroud of Turin (Italian: Sindone di Torino), also called the Holy Shroud (Italian: Sacra Sindone), is a piece of linen cloth that shows a faint image of a man's body on both sides. The image matches traditional descriptions of Jesus of Nazareth after his death by crucifixion, which is why Christians, especially members of the Catholic Church, have revered the shroud for centuries, believing it to be the cloth that held Jesus's image after his death. The image appears more clearly in black-and-white photographs than in its natural brown color, a discovery made in 1898 by Secondo Pia, who took the first photographs of the shroud. This negative image is linked to a Catholic devotion known as the Holy Face of Jesus.

The recorded history of the shroud begins in 1354, when it was displayed in the new collegiate church of Lirey, a village in north-central France. In 1389, the bishop of Troyes, Pierre d'Arcis, claimed the shroud was a fake. In 1453, the shroud was acquired by the House of Savoy and later placed in a chapel in Chambéry, where it was damaged by fire in 1532. In 1578, the Savoys moved the shroud to their new capital, Turin, where it has remained ever since. Since 1683, it has been kept in the Chapel of the Holy Shroud, designed by architect Guarino Guarini. This chapel is connected to the royal palace and the Turin Cathedral. After the death of King Umberto II of Italy in 1983, ownership of the shroud passed to the Catholic Church.

In 1978, scientist Walter McCrone examined samples taken from the shroud's surface using adhesive tape. He found that the image was painted with a diluted red ochre pigment in a gelatin medium and that the apparent bloodstains were painted with vermilion pigment in the same medium. McCrone's findings were challenged by other researchers, and the origin of the image remains debated. In 1988, three independent laboratories conducted radiocarbon dating, which showed the shroud dates to the Middle Ages, between 1260 and 1390.

The shroud's nature and history have sparked long debates among scholars and in the media. While experts accept the radiocarbon dating as valid, it continues to cause public discussion. Supporters of the shroud's authenticity often question the dating results, suggesting the tested samples may have been contaminated or taken from a repair to the original fabric. These theories, such as the medieval repair theory and bio-contamination theories, are not widely accepted by most experts. Today, the Catholic Church does not officially support or deny the shroud's status as a relic of Jesus.

Description

The shroud is a rectangle, measuring about 4.4 meters by 1.1 meters (14 feet 5 inches by 3 feet 7 inches). It is made of flax fibers woven in a special pattern called three-to-one herringbone twill. The most noticeable feature is a faint, brownish image showing the front and back of a man without clothing, with his hands crossed over his groin. The front and back views are centered on the cloth and face opposite directions. The front and back images of the head are close to the middle of the cloth.

The image appears as a pale yellow color on the fibers, showing a man with a beard, mustache, and long hair split in the middle. He is described as tall and muscular, with measurements ranging from 1.70 to 1.88 meters (5 feet 7 inches to 6 feet 2 inches). Reddish-brown stains on the cloth match the wounds described in the Bible about the crucifixion of Jesus.

The shroud was damaged in a fire in 1532 in a chapel in Chambéry, France. Burn holes and scorched areas on both sides of the linen were caused by contact with molten silver during the fire. To fix the damage, Poor Clare nuns attached 14 large triangular patches and 8 smaller ones to the cloth.

In May 1898, an Italian photographer named Secondo Pia was allowed to take the first photograph of the shroud on May 28, 1898. In 1931, another photographer, Giuseppe Enrie, photographed the shroud and produced similar results. In 1978, ultraviolet photographs of the shroud were taken.

History

There are no clear records about the Shroud of Turin before the 14th century. A burial cloth, which some historians believe was the Shroud, was owned by the Byzantine emperors but was lost during the Sack of Constantinople in 1204. Although many reports mention a burial cloth or image of Jesus being worshiped in different places before the 14th century, there is no proof these refer to the Shroud in Turin.

In 1353, the village of Lirey in north-central France received a small church built by a local feudal lord, a knight named Geoffroi de Charny. Charny died in 1356 during the Battle of Poitiers. Around 1355, Robert de Caillac, the dean of the church in Lirey, began showing a long fabric in the church that had an image of Jesus’s wounded body. Nicole Oresme, the Bishop of Lisieux, called the Shroud a fake, believing it was made by clergymen to raise money for their churches. In 1390, Bishop Pierre d'Arcis of Troyes wrote a long letter to Antipope Clement VII, stating the Shroud was a forgery and that a previous bishop had identified the artist who made it. Clement allowed the church in Lirey to display the Shroud as long as it was clear that it was an artistic image of Jesus’s suffering, not a true relic.

In 1415, during the Hundred Years' War, the Shroud was taken from Lirey to be kept safely at Montfort Castle. Marguerite de Charny, Geoffroi’s granddaughter, later took the Shroud to the church of Saint-Hippolyte, Doubs. Her refusal to return the Shroud to Lirey led to legal disputes. She displayed the Shroud in traveling exhibitions, including in Chimay and Mons. In 1453, Marguerite gave the Shroud to Louis, Duke of Savoy. For selling the Shroud and ignoring the rights of the church in Lirey, Marguerite was excommunicated by the Church in 1457.

The Shroud became a symbol of protection for the House of Savoy. By 1466, it was placed in the ducal chapel in Chambéry, the capital of the Savoyard state. In 1506, Pope Julius II allowed the Shroud to be worshiped as a true relic of Jesus. In 1532, a fire in Chambéry’s chapel damaged the Shroud when molten silver from a reliquary burned through the cloth, creating holes but leaving the image mostly intact. Poor Clare nuns later stitched patches over the holes. In 1578, Emmanuel Philibert, Duke of Savoy, moved the Shroud to Turin, the new capital of Savoy, where it has remained ever since.

Since the late 17th century, the Shroud has been displayed in a chapel designed by architect Guarino Guarini, attached to Turin Cathedral and the Royal Palace. In 1694, Sebastian Valfrè repaired the Shroud, improving on earlier patches by the Poor Clares. Further repairs were done in 1868 by Princess Maria Clotilde of Savoy. The Shroud was first photographed in 1898 during a public exhibition. It remained the property of the House of Savoy until 1983, when it was given to the Holy See by the will of King Umberto II of Italy.

On April 11, 1997, a fire, possibly caused by arson, threatened the Shroud. In 2002, the Holy See restored the Shroud, removing the cloth backing and thirty patches to allow the reverse side to be studied. A faint image of a body was found on the back of the Shroud in 2004. The Shroud was displayed publicly for the 18th time in Turin from April 10 to May 23, 2010, with over 2 million visitors.

On Holy Saturday, March 30, 2013, images of the Shroud were shared online and on television for the first time in 40 years. Roberto Gottardo of Turin’s diocese said high-definition images were released, allowing details not visible to the naked eye to be seen on tablets. Pope Francis urged people to view the Shroud with reverence but did not confirm its authenticity, as most previous popes had done.

The Shroud was displayed again in Turin Cathedral from April 19 to June 24, 2015. Viewing was free, but appointments were required.

Conservation

The Shroud has been restored several times, and steps have been taken to protect it from further harm. It is stored in a strong, bulletproof glass case covered with a layer of protection. The case is airtight and keeps the temperature and humidity at steady levels. Inside, the case is filled with a gas called argon (99.5%) and a small amount of oxygen (0.5%) to stop chemical changes. The Shroud is placed on a flat aluminum platform that moves smoothly on tracks and is kept inside the case. In 2002, a group called the Commission for the Conservation of the Shroud removed thirty triangular patches and a Holland cloth backing that had been added by nuns in 1534. Some people say this restoration caused damage to the Shroud.

Religious views

The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke describe how Joseph of Arimathea wrapped Jesus’s body in a "linen cloth" or "linen shroud" and placed it in a new tomb. The Gospel of John mentions that the body was wrapped in linen cloths with a large amount of myrrh and aloes.

After Jesus rose from the dead, the Gospel of John says that Simon Peter entered the tomb and saw the linen wrappings lying there, along with a cloth that had been on Jesus’s head. This cloth was not with the others but was rolled up separately. The Gospel of Luke states that Peter ran to the tomb, saw the linen cloths by themselves, and then went home, surprised by what had happened.

In 1543, John Calvin wrote in his book Treatise on Relics that the Shroud of Turin could not be genuine. He explained that Jewish burial customs involved wrapping the body up to the shoulders and binding the head with a separate cloth, not a single large piece of linen. Calvin argued that if the Shroud were real, it would not match these customs. He suggested that either the Gospel writer John gave a false account or others were dishonest about the Shroud’s authenticity.

The Shroud of Turin is the most famous religious relic believed to be Jesus’s burial cloth. It is kept in Italy and is respected by many Christian groups, including Baptists, Catholics, Lutherans, and others. Other churches in France and Italy also claim to hold pieces of Jesus’s burial cloths, but the Shroud of Turin has the most followers. The Catholic Church has not officially judged the Shroud’s authenticity but allows its veneration.

The concept of acheiropoieta (images believed to be made without human hands) has existed in Christianity since the 6th century. Examples include the Image of Edessa and the Image of Camuliana, which were icons of Jesus. Some modern images, like the Manoppello Image in Italy, are also considered acheiropoieta and linked to the tradition of the Veil of Veronica, where a cloth supposedly imprinted Jesus’s face. Another relic is the Sudarium of Oviedo, a bloodstained cloth believed to have covered Jesus’s head after his death.

Today, Catholic devotion to the "Holy Face of Jesus" is often connected to the image on the Shroud of Turin, first captured in a photograph taken in 1898 by Secondo Pia. This devotion began in 1844 and was promoted by a French man named Leo Dupont, who founded the "Archconfraternity of the Holy Face." Pope Leo XIII approved the devotion in 1885. A nun named Marie of St. Peter started the practice, and later, Saint Thérèse of Lisieux adopted the name "Thérèse of the Holy Face" when she joined a religious order.

In 1936, an Italian nun named Maria Pierina De Micheli claimed to have visions of Jesus and created a "Holy Face Medal" based on Pia’s photographs. Pope Pius XII approved this medal for private devotion. In 1940, De Micheli asked the Church in Milan for permission to make the medal, which was granted. The medal was used for protection during World War II. In 1958, Pope Pius XII officially linked the image on the Shroud to the devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus and established a yearly celebration called the "Feast of the Holy Winding Sheet of Christ" on Shrove Tuesday.

In 1389, a bishop claimed the Shroud was painted by a human artist, not made miraculously. Pope Clement VII later declared it was not the true Shroud but a painting. However, Pope Julius II later allowed its veneration. The Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano reported on Pia’s photograph in 1898 but did not comment on it.

In 1936, Pope Pius XII called the Shroud a "holy thing perhaps like nothing else." In 1998, Pope John Paul II referred to it as a "distinguished relic" and "a mirror of the Gospel." Pope Benedict XVI later described it as an "icon written with the blood of a whipped man, crowned with thorns, crucified."

Scientific analysis

Sindonology is the study of the Shroud of Turin. The word comes from the Greek "sindon," which describes the type of burial cloth mentioned in the Gospel of Mark. The Oxford English Dictionary first recorded the use of "sindonology" in 1964, though "sindonological" and "sindonologist" appeared earlier, in 1950 and 1953, respectively.

In 1898, Secondo Pia took photographs of the Shroud, allowing scientists to begin studying it. Over time, researchers from many fields, such as chemistry, biology, and image analysis, have proposed theories about the Shroud. These studies are grouped into three areas: analyzing the material (including chemical and historical aspects), examining biological and medical evidence, and studying the images on the cloth.

The first scientific team to examine the Shroud directly was in 1969–1973. Their goal was to help preserve the relic and decide how to test it. This led to the formation of an 11-member Turin Commission, which included scientists. In 1973, the team tested fabric samples from the Shroud.

In 1976, physicist John P. Jackson, thermodynamicist Eric Jumper, and photographer William Mottern used advanced image analysis tools from aerospace science to study the Shroud. In 1977, these three scientists and over 30 other experts formed the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP). In 1978, STURP gained direct access to the Shroud.

Also in 1978, Giovanni Tamburelli created a high-resolution 3D image of the Shroud using technology from CSELT. He also removed the image of what appeared to be blood from the face.

In 1978, STURP scientists took 32 samples from the Shroud using adhesive tape. Eighteen samples came from areas with body or blood images, while 14 were from non-image areas. Walter McCrone, an expert in analyzing historical documents, studied the tape samples. He concluded that the body image was painted with red ochre (a type of iron oxide) mixed with collagen (gelatin). He also found that the "bloodstains" were made with vermilion (a red pigment from mercury sulfide), but no actual blood was present.

Other STURP members disagreed with McCrone’s findings, arguing that the image could not be explained by pigments. Mark Anderson, who worked with McCrone, later analyzed the samples and found they acted like organic material when tested with a laser. McCrone left STURP in 1980 after returning all samples to Ray Rogers.

John Heller and Alan Adler agreed with McCrone that the cloth contained iron oxide but argued that the iron itself was not the source of the image. They noted the iron’s purity and compared it to other ancient textiles.

After publishing his findings in 1980, McCrone continued to argue that the Shroud was painted in the 14th century and had no real blood. He claimed STURP members lacked expertise in analyzing historical artworks. For his work, McCrone received an award from the American Chemical Society in 2000.

Radiocarbon dating in 1988, conducted by scientists at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, showed the Shroud is medieval, dating to AD 1260–1390. This matches its first recorded appearance in church history. Some argued the sample tested might be a medieval repair patch, but these claims were scientifically disproven.

Recent studies have analyzed the radiocarbon data, finding inconsistencies that may stem from differences in how labs prepared the samples. Adjusting results by a few years could resolve some discrepancies.

The Shroud has reddish stains that look like blood. McCrone suggested these were made with iron oxide, a pigment used in medieval times. Skeptics argue forensic tests show the blood may not be human and could have come from someone who handled the Shroud. The neat blood patterns also raise doubts.

No scientific proof has confirmed the blood is from a human or primate.

In 2011, Salvatore Lorusso and others used digital image processing on photographs of the Shroud. They found no evidence of flowers, coins, or other objects.

In 2015, researchers Barcaccia et al. studied DNA from the Shroud and its backing cloth, collected during vacuuming in 1977 and 1988. They identified traces of 19 plant species, including those from Mediterranean regions, Central Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and China.

Fringe theories

Some people say they have seen images of flowers, coins over the eyes, writing, and other objects on the Shroud of Turin. However, a study from 2011 by Lorusso and others used modern digital image processing on two photographs of the shroud, one of which was a reproduction of a negative taken by Giuseppe Enrie in 1931. They found no clear images of flowers, coins, writing, or other objects in either photograph. They noted that the faint images were only visible when the contrast in the photographs was increased. They concluded that these signs might be caused by bumps in the fabric or changes in the texture of the Enrie negative during its development in 1931. The use of coins to cover the eyes of the dead was not common in 1st-century Judaea. Most scientists do not believe the coin images exist.

An image in the medieval Pray Codex (c. 1192–1195) has caused debate among some believers since 1978. Although the Pray Codex is older than the Shroud of Turin, some features in the drawing, like four L-shaped holes on a coffin lid, have led some to think it might represent a linen cloth. However, the image shows crosses on one side of what may be a shroud and an interlocking step pyramid pattern on the other side. There is no image of Jesus in the drawing. Critics argue that the image might not be a shroud but a rectangular tombstone, as seen in other religious artwork. A crumpled cloth is shown discarded on the coffin, and the text of the codex does not mention any miraculous image on the shroud.

Some people who believe the Shroud of Turin is authentic suggest the image was created by radiation at the "moment of resurrection." However, Alan Adler, a member of the STURP team, says this idea is not widely accepted by scientists because it contradicts the laws of physics. He notes that the darkening of the fabric could be caused by exposure to light and predicts the shroud may become darker over time, even though it is usually kept in the dark. Raymond Rogers criticized the radiation theory, stating that a corona discharge (plasma) in air would cause visible changes in linen, which are not seen in the shroud’s fibers. He said plasma or corona discharges did not help form the image. Even if ultraviolet radiation caused the image, it is unclear if it was natural, such as sunlight, applied unevenly to the cloth. Some have suggested an earthquake after Jesus’ death might have released neutrons that changed the shroud’s fabric through neutron capture.