In Part 2 of my new Panel Review series in the Shroud Wars, I’m joined by reutrning guests Bob Rucker and Hugh Farey plus Joe Marino and Sudarium expert Mark Guscin.
In this episode, we focus on discussing my take on the following;
i) 1389 D’Arcis Memorandum and other surrounding Medieval historical documents (covered in my Shroud Solo Show Part 7 and in my Shroud Wars Debate Round 1 shows),
ii) The Art History & Numismatic coins argument (covered in my Shroud Solo show Part 2 and Shroud Wars Debate Round 2). And,
iii) The Sudarium of Oveido (covered in my Shroud Solo show Part 2 and Shroud Wars Debate Round 2).
YouTube Video = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC-Zo-VnNyY
Rumble Video = https://rumble.com/v1yajew-december-1-2022.html
Recommended Sources (for further study);
a) The 1389 D’Arcis Memorandum/Memo & Other Surrounding Medieval Historical Documents;
The Memo translated = https://priory-of-sion.com/biblios/links/memorandum.html
The Lord Henry of Poitiers, of pious memory, then Bishop of Troyes, becoming aware of this, and urged by many prudent persons to take action, as indeed was his duty in the exercise of his ordinary jurisdiction, set himself earnestly to work to fathom the truth of this matter. For many theologians and other wise persons declared that this could not be the real shroud of our Lord having the Saviour’s likeness thus imprinted upon it, since the holy Gospel made no mention of any such imprint, while, if it had been true, it was quite unlikely that the holy Evangelists would have omitted to record it, or that the fact should have remained hidden until the present time. Eventually, after diligent inquiry and examination, he discovered the fraud and how the said cloth had been cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist who had painted it, to wit, that it was a work of human skill and not miraculously wrought or bestowed. Accordingly, after taking mature counsel with wise theologians and men of the law, seeing that he neither ought nor could allow the matter to pass, he began to institute formal proceedings against the said Dean and his accomplices in order to root out this false persuasion.”
1389 MEMORANDUM OF PIERRE D’ARCIS SOURCES: Here is a link to the actual English translation of the Memo itself = https://www.priory-of-sion.com/biblios/links/memorandum.html.
i) Skeptical Side: Shroud skeptic Joe Nickell presented this evidence along with several supporting lines of evidence to buttress his argument that the Shroud is an artistic medieval fake, see first 20 mins or so here = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9FWjU3zHiQ.
ii) Pro-Shroud Side; For the counter-response by actual qualified historians (includes the various surrounding documents overlooked in my Podcast audio), see the article entitled “Deconstructing the “Debunking” of the Shroud” (this is a reply to the Shroud skeptical article above by Gary Vikan, so you can see the other articles as well) here = https://www.shroud.com/bar.htm#article. Also, see an 11 page article on the Lirey Controversy (Memo) and background information here = http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/ssi08part5.pdf.
PRO-MEMO BY GARY VIKEN = https://www.shroud.com/bar.htm#article AND REFUTING PAPER with list of all the Medieval letters and Memo by historians refuting this, “Deconstructing the “Debunking” of the Shroud” = https://www.shroud.com/bar.htm#scavone
My Previous Shows & Blogs on the Memo and Medieval Documents;
See YouTube video around the 40 min mark = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv0cgIw8hAo
b) Art History & Numismatic/coins Argument;
c) Sudarium of Oviedo;
Mark’s Books on the Shroud and Sudarium;
My Previous Show and Blog on the Sudarium;
*”The Sudarium of Oviedo in Relation to the Shroud of Turin – an English-language Bibliography” (https://www.academia.edu/45442417/The_Sudarium_of_Oviedo_in_Relation_to_the_Shroud_of_Turin_an_English_language_Bibliography)
Also make sure to See the Interview Questions & the Written Answers given in the show by César Barta himself;
Recommended Sources (for further study);
a) César Barta’s Sources;
His New 2022 Book, “The Sudarium of Oviedo: Signs of Jesus Christ’s Death” = https://www.amazon.com/Sudarium-Oviedo-Signs-Jesus-Christs/dp/9814968137
Barta, Cesar et al. “New coincidence between Shroud of Turin and Sudarium of Oviedo.” SHS Web of Conferences = https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276415604_New_coincidence_between_Shroud_of_Turin_and_Sudarium_of_Oviedo
2014 evidence using the Sudarium’s Pollen findings in comparison to the Shroud of Turin see the abstract = http://shroudresearch.net/abstracts.html#19
& 35 min YouTube presentation here =https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_Lg6BRI2Gw.
Barta, Cesar. “New Discoveries on the Sudarium of Oviedo.” Presented at Shroud of Turin: The Controversial Intersection of Faith and Science International Conference October 9-12, 2014, Drury Plaza Hotel, St. Louis, Missouri. https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/stlbartapaper.pdf
OR YouTube video presentation here = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pny7WGyq8ZU&feature=youtu.be&list=UUSv7BD9sKjIcA24ct1Hz_Aw
b) Other Pro-Sudarium Papers;
Bennett, Janice. “The Sudarium of Oviedo and its Relationship with the Shroud of Turin.” Presented at 1st International Scientific Congress on the Holy Shroud in Panama — 30 June 2012 – 1 July 2012. https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/bennettpantxteng.pdf.
Sanchez, Hermosilla Alfonso. “Commonalities between the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo.” SHS Web of Conferences. https://www.shsconferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2015/02/shsconf_atsi2014_00007/shsconf_atsi2014_00007. html Sanchez, Jose,
Luis Fernandez. “The Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin: a question of authenticity” in Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the Acheiropoietos Images, ENEA – Frascati, Italy, 4-6 May 2010, pp. 171-177. http://www.acheiropoietos.info/proceedings/FernandezWeb.pdf.
Shroud Solo Series Part 2 SUDARIUM OF OVIEDO SOURCES: For detailed study on the Forensic comparisons made between the Shroud and the Sudarium see the following 3 sources = http://www.shroud.com/guscin.htm
(a 17-page report that is slightly more cautious in its conclusions).
c) Sudarium Skeptic Hugh Farey & Helpful OverLay Images;
His Blog =
d) General Dating of Shroud Overall;
e) Power Point Slides (Mine and Mark’s);
Update- Giulio Fanti has Mentioned His New 2021 Book on the Numismatic/coins argument =
UPDATE- A fan of the show, Paul Bishop, mentioned another great show, “The Stories Coins Can Tell With Justin Robinson” = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyIuJIr-w2Q
See Justin’s Website and work on this issue here = https://coinsandhistoryfoundation.org/2021/04/08/byzantine-coins-the-shroud-of-turin-and-the-holy-grail/
Paul said- “Great interviews. It was said that with regard to the Shroud people should stick within their sphere of expertise of which Hugh seems to have a very broad field. With specific regards to numismatics he briefly refers to the young man producing a book about copper coins. If I’m not mistaken he is referring to Justin Robinson, who is an expert in numismatics. I would here commend his interview with Guy Powell for a different view on the Justinian period coins and as to why the bronze coins were an even better example than the solidus coins shown by Hugh.”
UPDATE- JAN 3RD, 2023;
Joe Marino emailed me the Reference for Bishop D’Arcis’ immediate successor Bishop Louis Raguier who stated a total of 3 times that the Shroud was “Authentic” (See quote & Paper it was in- no orginal/primary docs were available online);
Bishop Pierre D’Arcis’ or Pierre d’Arcy bio = https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bdarcyp.html
|1377²||Appointed||Bishop of Troyes, France|
|18 Apr 1395||Died||Bishop of Troyes, France|
Note(s): ² Month Uncertain
Bishop Pierre d’Arcy (died ) Bishop of Troyes
BishopLouis Raguier bio = https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/braguiel.html
|23 Dec 1450||Appointed||Bishop of Troyes, France|
|3 Dec 1483||Resigned||Bishop of Troyes, France|
|19 Aug 1488||Died||Bishop Emeritus of Troyes, France|
Bishop Louis Raguier (died ) Bishop Emeritus of Troyes
“The skeptics never point out the fact that Clement imposed perpetual silence on d’Arcis about the matter, which suggests that his case was not strong, or that d’Arcis successor, Bishop Louis Raguier, maintained the Shroud’s authenticity in three official documents. Raguier is not to be believed at face value any more quickly than d’Arcis is, but if one is aiming for the truth, all important facts should be divulged, not just the ones favourable to one’s position.
The ref labelled  is: Clement J. McNaspy, ‘The Shroud of Turin”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 7 (1945):49.”
Hugh Farey provided me with two papers/sources by Ian Wilson (post his 2010 book) whereby he changed his mind on the Medallion/Pilgrim’s Badge to agree with Hugh Farey’s historical hypothesis via the research of what Ian calls the “Project Charny”;
“Hi Dale,Ian Wilson’s two recent articles, reversing the generally accepted order of the dates of the pilgrim badges and pinning the first exhibition of the Shroud to after the first Geoffrey de Charny’s death in September 1356 are:1). A (Very Tangled) Tale of Two Pilgrim Badges. https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n86part3.pdf2). Some Paradoxical Documents underpinning the Shroud’s ‘Middle’ History. https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n91part1.pdfBest wishes from Oz!Hugh”