Here’s what you’ll learn when you read this story:

• A recent study offers new insight into the origin of an object known as the Shroud of Turin.

• Many consider the sheet to be a holy relic, marked with the impression of a dying man they believe to be Jesus Christ.

• Using open-source 3D modeling software, one researcher showed that, had the cloth really been laid on a real human being, the impression it left would have looked markedly different than what is actually on the sheet

This story is a collaboration with Biography.com.

The Shroud of Turin has been the subject of fascination for both believers and skeptics alike since its existence was first recorded in the 14^th century.

The cloth in question appears to depict the face and body of an adult man with long hair and a beard—very similar to style in which Jesus Christ has traditionally been depicted since roughly the 6^th century A.D. This outline, while faintly apparent to the naked eye, becomes undeniable when viewed in a photographic negative. As such, there is little doubt now that the face people see on the Shroud of Turin is indeed a deliberate depiction, rather than a trick of the eye as some other ecstatic religious visions can sometimes prove to be. The question, instead, is how that impression got there to begin with.

Now, thanks to one determined researcher and some open-source software, we might finally have found the answer.

Those who believe in the authenticity of the relic suggest that it was the very cloth wrapped around the body of Jesus after his crucifixion, and his divine nature left this eternal impression of his visage.

But objections have long been raised against this hypothesis—and not just within the secular space. Perhaps the most famous denunciation of the Shroud of Turin came from John Calvin, the 16^th-century French theologian who became the namesake of Calvinism. In his Treatise on Relics, he responds almost mockingly to the assertions of the Shroud’s divine origins, asking:

“How is it possible that those sacred historians, who carefully related all the miracles that took place at Christ’s death, should have omitted to mention one so remarkable as the likeness of the body of our Lord remaining on its wrapping sheet? This fact undoubtedly deserved to be recorded.”

Calvin cites several Biblical reasons as to why this couldn’t have happened—from the fact that none of the disciples ever mentioned seeing such an impression on the shroud, to the fact that the Roman soldiers weren’t exactly on friendly terms with the Followers of Christ, so it’s unlikely they would have let them abscond with such a sacred item. Plus, he notes, St. John said that Jesus was buried “according to the manner of the Jews.” Were this in fact the case, the body and head would have been wrapped with two separate cloths, not one.

“In short,” Calvin concluded, “…either St John is a liar, or all those who boast of possessing the holy sudary are convicted of falsehood and deceit.”

Calvin didn’t go so far as to posit an alternative theory. Perhaps he didn’t want to speculate. Perhaps he was simply too busy to spend time on the subject—he did have a lot of writing to do (and at least one soon-to-be-set-on-fire heretic to testify against).

Or maybe he just didn’t have access to open-source software like Blender.

Thankfully, Cicero Moraes—a researcher and 3D designer from Brazil—did have that software handy. And he used it to test a theory first posited by Walter McCrone in the 1980s: that the image on the Shroud of Turin isn’t an impression at all, but rather “an inspired painting,” perhaps made in part by using a low-relief sculpture rather than a full three-dimensional figure.

At the core of this theory is one idea: had the cloth received its markings from a three-dimensional figure, the image of the face and body would appear flattened and distorted on the unfolded cloth.

To prove this, Moraes created a model in the software MakeHuman under the parameters “male, adult, ≈33 years old, thin and ≈1.80m tall.” Then, he transferred that model over to the free, open-source software Blender in order to refine the details to match the figure on the Shroud of Turin.

Moraes then compared how a fabric wrapped around that three-dimensional model would look (compared to one laid on a low-relief sculpture), and what type of pattern both would leave.

Moraes models demonstrated that, when a three-dimensional object does leave marks on a piece of fabric, those stains “generate a more robust and more deformed structure in relation to the source.” What you’re seeing when you look at an impression made of a human face on a piece of fabric is a flattening of a three-dimensional object.

If you were to take, say, a globe, slather it with ink, and wrap a cloth around it, when you unfolded that sheet, you’d find an image that looked a good deal different than the globe’s rounded shape.

But if you’d rather not get your perfectly good globe dirty, you could just watch the video Moraes’ made to accompany his study notes. Anyone can test this out for themselves by covering their face with a pigmented liquid and laying a fabric or paper towel over it.

The details of Moraes’ findings have been published in an article for Archaeometry, including acknowledgements of all of the software Moraes employed. It concludes that the image on the Shroud of Turin is almost certainly a work of medieval art, rather than an authentic impression from a dying man.

You Might Also Like