Sindonology (from the
Greek σινδών—sindon, the word used in the
Gospel of Mark to describe the type of the burial cloth of Jesus) is the formal study of the Shroud. The
Oxford English Dictionary cites the first use of this word in 1964: "The investigation ... assumed the stature of a separate discipline and was given a name, sindonology", but also identifies the use of "sindonological" in 1950 and "sindonologist" in 1953. Independent radiocarbon dating tests were carried out in 1988 at the
University of Oxford, the
University of Arizona and the
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, following years of discussion to obtain permission from the
Holy See. The tests were done on portions of a swatch taken from a corner of the shroud, and concluded with 95% confidence that the material dated to AD 1260–1390. The studies have all concluded that the data lack homogeneity, which might be due to unidentified abnormalities in the fabric tested, or to differences in the pre-testing cleaning processes used by the different laboratories. The most recent analysis (2020) found that adjusting the results from two of the labs by just ten years would be sufficient to resolve the inhomogeneity and a slightly larger adjustment of 88 years would make all of the results agree with one another statistically. McCrone (see
painting hypothesis) showed that these contain
iron oxide, and theorized that its presence was likely due to simple pigment materials used in medieval times.
Flowers and pollen A study published in 2011 by
Salvatore Lorusso of the
University of Bologna and others subjected two photographs of the shroud to detailed modern digital image processing, one of them being a reproduction of the photographic negative taken by Giuseppe Enrie in 1931. They did not find any images of flowers or coins or anything else on either image. The researchers stated that this may reflect historical trade connections, such as the import of linen or material from regions near the Indus Valley, rather than indicating a geographic origin of the cloth. The study also noted that the detected DNA reflects material accumulated over periods of handling and environmental exposure, and does not establish the age or history of the shroud. However, the researchers who studied the pollen directly had identified it as from
Gundelia tournefortii.
Anatomical forensics A number of studies on the anatomical consistency of the image on the shroud and the nature of the wounds on it have been performed, following the initial study by
Yves Delage in 1902. These anatomical anomalies and inconsistent proportions were suggested to be deliberate artistic interventions to preserve the modesty of the man depicted. Félix Ares noted a long list of anatomical anomalies in 2006. He found the arms asymmetrical, the fingers too long, the shoulders too small and the posture impossible. The feet are inconsistently depicted, with the front image showing them upwards while the back image shows the right sole resting against the cloth, which could not happen with the leg outstretched as depicted. Facial features are misplaced, and the hair is depicted at the same height and with the same force as the face, whereas on a horizontal body the hair should have rested on the ground at a much lower height. The body does not show either the natural curve of the back, nor pressure on prominent muscles from resting on a surface; Ares also theorized the empty space between the heads of both images should not exist, but show the top of the head. Furthermore, by measuring it three-dimensionally, he calculated the head to be impossibly small, beyond any known case of
microcephaly. Ares believed the image resembled the most a Gothic artistic representation, noting that "if we were to transfer this set of anomalies and deformities to a living being, we would obtain a grotesque scarecrow". In 2011, Antonio Lombatti noted several of these visual impossibilities in the body, such as the right footprint wrongly depicted in the shroud, and the locks of hair printed at the same height as the face, as if they were a solid structure, instead of resting on the ground. Lombatti further commented that the pressure from the body lying on the sheet should have caused the back image to be darker than the front image, which does not happen in the depiction of the shroud. The way the blood flows in rivulets from the head without mixing with the hair also struck him as more artistic than realistic. In 2018 an experimental Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (BPA) was performed to study the behaviour of blood flows from the wounds of a crucified person, and to compare this to the evidence on the Turin Shroud. The comparison between different tests demonstrated that the blood patterns on the forearms and on the back of the hand are not connected, and would have had to occur at different times, as a result of a very specific sequence of movements. In addition, the rivulets on the front of the image are not consistent with the lines on the lumbar area, even supposing there might have been different episodes of bleeding at different times. These inconsistencies suggest that the Turin linen was an artistic or didactic representation, rather than an authentic burial shroud.
Image and text analysis Image analysis Both art-historical
digital image processing and analog techniques have been applied to the shroud images. In 1976 scientists used imaging equipment from the American
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to analyze a photograph of the Shroud image and decoded the shroud image into a three-dimensional image. In 2020, a test was conducted by weaver Antoinette Merete Olsen, who attempted to replicate the shroud's weave and size using the simpler
warp-weighted loom of antiquity. Her results revealed that the Shroud of Turin must have been created on a treadle loom.
Hypotheses on image origin Numerous experimental attempts have reproduced individual characteristics of the Shroud's image on linen. At the same time, no method has yet been shown to replicate all of its macroscopic and microscopic properties simultaneously. As a result, the exact image-formation mechanism remains debated and unclear.
Painting According to
Walter McCrone, the technique used for producing the image on the shroud could well be the same as a medieval
grisaille method described in Sir
Charles Lock Eastlake's
Methods and Materials of Painting of the Great Schools and Masters (1847). Eastlake describes in the chapter "Practice of Painting Generally During the XIVth Century" a special technique of painting on linen using tempera paint, which produces images with unusual transparent features that McCrone compares to the image on the shroud. McCrone also argued that the current image on the shroud may be fainter than the original painting, due to the rubbing off of the ochre pigment from the tops of the exposed linen fibers over the course of several centuries of handling and exhibition of the fabric.
Acid pigmentation In 2009 Luigi Garlaschelli, professor of
organic chemistry at the
University of Pavia, stated that he had made a full-size reproduction of the Shroud of Turin using only medieval technologies. Garlaschelli placed a linen sheet over a volunteer and then rubbed it with an acidic pigment. The shroud was then aged in an oven before being washed to remove the pigment. He then added blood stains, scorches and water stains to replicate the original. Giulio Fanti, professor of mechanical and thermic measurements at the
University of Padua, commented that "the technique itself seems unable to produce an image having the most critical Turin Shroud image characteristics". Garlaschelli's reproduction was shown in a 2010
National Geographic documentary. Garlaschelli's technique included the bas-relief approach (described below) but only for the image of the face. The resultant image was visibly similar to the Turin Shroud, though lacking the uniformity and detail of the original.
Medieval photography The art historian Nicholas Allen has proposed that the image on the shroud could have been formed as early as the 13th century using techniques described in the 1011
Book of Optics. However, according to Mike Ware, a chemist and expert on the history of photography, Allen's proposal "encounters serious obstacles with regard to the technical history of the lens. Such claimants tend to draw upon the wisdom of hindsight to project a distorted historical perspective, wherein their cases rest upon a particular concatenation of procedures which is exceedingly improbable; and their 'proofs' amount only to demonstrating (none too faithfully) that it was not totally impossible." Among other difficulties, Allen's hypothesized process would have required that the subject (a corpse) be exposed in the sunlight for months.
Dust-transfer technique The scientists Emily Craig and Randall Bresee have attempted to recreate the likenesses of the shroud through the dust-transfer technique, which could have been done by medieval arts. They first did a carbon-dust drawing of a Jesus-like face (using collagen dust) on a newsprint made from wood pulp (which is similar to 13th- and 14th-century paper). They next placed the drawing on a table and covered it with a piece of linen. They then pressed the linen against the newsprint by firmly rubbing with the flat side of a wooden spoon. By doing this they managed to create a reddish-brown image with a lifelike positive likeness of a person, a three-dimensional image and no sign of brush strokes.
Bas-relief In 1978 Joe Nickell noted that the Shroud image had a three-dimensional quality and thought its creation may have involved a sculpture of some type. He advanced the hypothesis that a medieval rubbing technique was used to produce the image, and set out to demonstrate this. He noted that while wrapping a cloth around a sculpture with normal contours would result in a distorted image, Nickell believed that wrapping a cloth over a
bas-relief might result in an image like the one seen on the shroud, as it would eliminate wraparound distortions. For his demonstration, Nickell wrapped a wet cloth around a bas-relief sculpture and allowed it to dry. He then applied powdered pigment rather than wet paint (to prevent it soaking into the threads). The pigment was applied with a dauber, similar to making a rubbing from a gravestone. The result was an image with dark regions and light regions convincingly arranged. In a photo essay in
Popular Photography magazine, Nickell demonstrated this technique step-by-step. Other researchers later replicated this process. In 2005 the researcher Jacques di Costanzo constructed a bas-relief of a Jesus-like face and draped wet linen over it. After the linen dried, he dabbed it with a mixture of
ferric oxide and
gelatine. The result was an image similar to that of the face on the Shroud. The imprinted image turned out to be wash-resistant, impervious to temperatures of and was undamaged by exposure to a range of harsh chemicals, including
bisulphite, which, without the gelatine, would normally have degraded ferric oxide to the compound ferrous oxide. Instead of painting, it has been suggested that the bas-relief could also be heated and used to scorch an image onto the cloth. However researcher Thibault Heimburger performed some experiments with the scorching of linen, and found that a scorch mark is only produced by direct contact with the hot object—thus producing an all-or-nothing discoloration with no graduation of color as is found in the shroud.
Maillard reaction The
Maillard reaction is a form of non-enzymatic browning involving an amino acid and a reducing sugar. The
cellulose fibers of the shroud are coated with a thin
carbohydrate layer of starch fractions, various sugars, and other impurities. The potential source for amines required for the reaction is a decomposing body, and no signs of decomposition have been found on the Shroud. Rogers also notes that their tests revealed that there were no proteins or bodily fluids on the image areas. Also, the image resolution and the uniform coloration of the linen resolution seem to be incompatible with a mechanism involving diffusion. in
Tenerife (
Spain) ==Fringe theories==