Shroud: Hypothesis and conclusion
The Shroud: part 5
We begin, in this last part of our work on the Shroud, by examining the controversial and fascinating hypothesis that the man of the Shroud is the last Grand Master of the Templar Order, Jacques De Molay burned at the stake by Philip the Fair in 1317.
In the book "The key of Hiram" by Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas it is
explained just how the imprint of the dying body of De Molay was impressed on the cloth of the Shroud.
It reads:
"The one visible on the fabric was an incredibly silent image: reacting chemically with the incense used at the time as a whitening agent, rich in calcium carbonate, the lactic acid contained in the blood of the wounded had imprinted the physical features of de Molay on the shroud.The long nose, the hair left to grow up to the height of the shoulders with the parting in the center, the thick forked beard and the build of a healthy man, about one meter and eighty tall, everything fits perfectly with the known description of the last grand master of the Templars."
This hypothesis of De Molay's identity would fit very well to the examination of C14 carried out in 1988 which traces the Shroud to an era not earlier than 1260 AD. De Molay was in fact killed in 1317. But how would the coins be explained? the text "Nazarene", the pollen of Palestinian origin? and the question also remains as to whether the environmental conditions (cold and humid underground cell of Geoffrey de Charney's residence) in which De Molay was transferred are the same as those of the Palestinian tombs in which Jesus is presumed to have died.
And if we wanted to dwell on the image imprinted on the sheet, we cannot fail to highlight that, as can be seen from various iconographic representations, the Templars used the tonsure while the face of the shroud appears surrounded by thick hair! and it is still true that the tonsure is apical, that is at the apex of the head (which would not exclude the thick hair), but there are representations of De Molay's death that portray him with the typical fratina tonsure, that is no hair long.
But what really seems to dispel the hypothesis that the Grand Master of the Templars is represented in the Shroud cloth and therefore seems to totally discredit the amenity of the two authors of the Hiram Key is that the examinations on the Shroud, carried out by medical scientists legal and anatomopathologists, has shown that the musculature of the subject of the Shroud is that of a man in his thirties. The Grand Master, Jacques De Molay, was 67 years old when he was burned alive. Furthermore, the figure represents a rather slender man, while the Grand Master, from representations of the time, is much more than corpulent. Even the radiocarbon examination for the dating that places the Shroud between 1280 and 1340 would be contestable with the simple reasoning that the Shroud was already known at least in 1150.
Evidence that the Shroud already existed before the Middle Ages is given by the chronicles of 944 and earlier, which describe it very precisely; not to mention the many scientific tests that have shown that in the Holy Sheet there are oils, perfumed ointments, earth, pollen, seeds and anything else that can be traced back to its dating in Palestine at the time of Jesus; the examinations in polarized light and with all the most modern techniques have established that there is no painting or other methodology that could fix the image in that way: it is not possible to do it even now with the most modern techniques, let alone in the Middle Ages; all the analyzes made on the Shroud have shown that it wrapped the body of a dead man, not a living one.
Many then tried, in various laboratories around the world, to recreate what the Shroud is, but no one has ever succeeded, even with the most advanced technologies. Even assuming that linen, soaked in sweat and blood, then functioned as a photographic plate, an energy should have been released from the body that can be compared to that emitted by nuclear isotopes: and who has ever seen a corpse release in practice atomic energy ? So there is only one explanation for this phenomenon: supernatural.
Our group work on the subject of the Shroud ends here; even knowing that many questions will remain open, we believe we have given our contribution by trying to explain in the most organic way what was the subject of discussion and above all by reporting the data that emerged from the research without intervening and distorting what the speakers have wanted to exhibit.
But since the research is, especially on these issues, like a puzzle with no apparent end, I would like to add another piece that could give a very different connotation to the whole story.
Lastly, we mentioned the Templars and my consideration is on their part. The testimonies speak of the Mandylion as an extraordinarily precious relic, a relic that many consider to be the same thing as the Shroud of Turin and which fortunately escaped the fire during the capture of Byzantium by the Crusaders, it seems, thanks to Othon de La Roche who transferred the precious cloth to Athens and which he subsequently delivered to the powerful Order of the Knights of the Temple.
And it seems that it was the very image of the Mandylion that the Templars adored in great secrecy.
The adoration of a bearded face was easily exploited by the King of France Philip IV the Fair who on Friday 13 October 1307 ordered the arrest of the Templars, starting a systematic persecution made up of torture and condemnations to the stake for all reasons other related to the heralded defense of Christianity. Among the accusations there was also that of exercising demonic practices and idolatry of the face of what was called Baphomet. Could it have been the famous Mandylion instead? most scientists believe so but ...
I found something in the trial of the Templars that took place in Tuscany that struck me; here is the Latin text relating to the interrogation that took place against Brother Guido da Fiesole in Florence in 1308. The authentic document is taken from a document left to us by Mons Telesforo Bini regarding the trial of the Tempieri in Tuscany
Et dixit interrogatus quod dictum caput ..... (and he said questioned about what the chief is called ....) quod erat de metallo, et habebat faciem quasi humanam, capillos nigros et crispos, et non recordatur quod habuerit barbam, circa collum autem et gulam habebat deaurata.
Reconstruction commissioned by the BBC to Professor Richard Neave (pathologist at the University of Manchester) depicting the face of a first century Jew.
Well, a strange combination with the reconstruction made recently on the computer by a group of English researches who have recreated, for the British BBC network, what they believe to be the closest image to the face of Jesus of Nazareth, a face with plump cheeks, a dark complexion, a pronounced nose and frizzy black hair. The only exception is the beard!
And then the face adored by the Templars was that of Baphomet or of Christ? was it the face of the Shroud, as some or all else claim? and if it is not the Mandylion, what moved them to adore that Baphomet and not Jesus? in short, why did the Templars worship a face, which among other things they considered miraculous and similar to God, which from Brother Guido's description does not seem to be exactly that of the Shroud?
And why finally does Brother Guido define him as an "almost human face"?
