1. The Shroud is a Single Linen Cloth with a Herringbone Weave
The Shroud is a linen burial cloth measuring 14 feet 3 inches by 3 feet 7 inches (4.4 x 1.1 meters), woven in a three-to-one herringbone twill pattern—a technique historically documented in the Roman era but uncommon in medieval Europe. Textile expert Mechthild Flury-Lemberg states:
“The linen of the Shroud is of high quality, woven in a three-to-one herringbone twill pattern, a method known from the Roman period.”¹
Additionally, the flax fibers exhibit Z-spun twisting, a feature consistent with textiles from the Near East but not with most medieval European fabrics.
2. The Shroud Bears a Front and Back Image of a Man
The cloth displays a full-body image of a crucified man, visible in both frontal and dorsal views. Even skeptical scholars acknowledge the anatomical accuracy. Dr. John Jackson, a physicist and STURP team leader, confirms:
“The Shroud displays an anatomically correct image of a man who has undergone crucifixion, including scourging, crowning with thorns, and nail wounds in the wrists and feet.”²
Forensic pathologists have confirmed that the body’s posture, wounds, and proportions align with real human anatomy, not artistic distortion.
3. The Image is Not Painted
The Shroud’s image contains no visible brushstrokes, pigments, or paint residues. Extensive spectroscopic analysis by the 1978 Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) ruled out artistic methods. Chemist Raymond N. Rogers states:
“There are no visible signs of paint, dye, or stain forming the image. Chemical tests show that the image color resides only on the outermost fibrils of the linen threads, a characteristic that would be difficult to achieve with medieval paint technology.”³
4. The Shroud Contains Real Human Blood
Biochemical tests confirm the presence of type AB human blood. Dr. Alan Adler and Dr. John Heller identified components such as hemoglobin, serum albumin, and bilirubin, which is produced in high amounts when a person undergoes severe trauma:
“The blood on the Shroud tests positive for serum albumin, hemoglobin, and bilirubin, indicating real blood from a tortured victim.”⁴
5. The Bloodstains Precede the Image
Microscopic analysis indicates that the blood was present before the image appeared, ruling out artistic forgery. Rogers explains:
“Bloodstains soaked into the cloth before the image appeared, suggesting that the body was wrapped before any possible image-formation process occurred.”⁵
6. The Shroud Matches the Sudarium of Oviedo
The Sudarium of Oviedo, a cloth believed to have covered Jesus’ head, contains bloodstains aligning with those found on the Shroud. Historian Mark Guscin notes:
“The bloodstains and facial markings on the Sudarium of Oviedo correspond exactly with those on the Shroud of Turin, indicating that both cloths were used on the same body.”⁶
7. The Shroud Has Historical Mentions Before the Medieval Period
Early Christian texts reference a burial cloth bearing Christ’s image, notably the Mandylion of Edessa. Ian Wilson states:
“Documents from the Byzantine period describe a cloth bearing the face of Christ, known as the Mandylion, which aligns with descriptions of the Shroud.”⁷
8. The Shroud’s Image Contains 3D Information
Unlike paintings, the Shroud’s image encodes three-dimensional relief data, revealed through image-processing techniques. Jackson affirms:
“Unlike traditional paintings, the Shroud’s image contains encoded depth information that, when processed, reveals a three-dimensional relief of the body.”⁸
9. No Known Reproduction Matches the Shroud’s Image
Despite numerous attempts, no artist or scientist has successfully recreated the Shroud’s image. Researcher Giulio Fanti states:
“Every attempt to replicate the image—including high-temperature scorching, chemical reactions, and artistic methods—has failed to duplicate all its physical and chemical characteristics.”⁹
10. The Shroud Contains Pollen from the Middle East
Botanical analysis detected pollen from species native to Jerusalem and Anatolia. Botanist Avinoam Danin confirms:
“The pollen spectrum on the Shroud of Turin includes plants found specifically in the region of Jerusalem and its surroundings.”¹⁰
11. The Bloodstains Exhibit Post-Mortem Wound Evidence
Forensic analysis of the Shroud’s bloodstains confirms characteristics of post-mortem blood flow, including the separation of blood serum from red blood cells, which occurs after death but not in fresh wounds. This indicates that the body wrapped in the Shroud had already died when the bloodstains were deposited. Dr. Pierre Barbet, a French surgeon and forensic expert, noted:
“The wounds seen on the Shroud are consistent with rigor mortis and the separation of blood and serum, indicating they are post-mortem stains rather than pre-mortem bleeding.”¹¹
This contradicts the idea of an artistic forgery since paint or dye cannot mimic actual blood clot retraction and serum separation.
12. The Image Resides Only on the Surface Fibers
Unlike pigment-based images or stains, the Shroud’s image is confined to the outermost fibrils of the linen fabric. This means it did not penetrate deeper into the fibers, a property that has puzzled scientists. Dr. Raymond Rogers conducted spectroscopic and chemical analyses and concluded:
“The image resides on a thin carbohydrate layer approximately 200-600 nanometers thick, affecting only the very surface fibrils and not penetrating the linen itself.”¹²
This property eliminates techniques such as painting, dyeing, or scorching, which all penetrate deeper into fibers.
13. The Image Lacks Brush Strokes or Artistic Application
Scientific examination under microscopes and spectral analysis has revealed that the Shroud’s image has no evidence of brush strokes, paint layering, or pigment accumulation—features that would be present in any known artistic method. Even Walter McCrone, a strong skeptic, was forced to admit:
“There is no evidence of brushwork in forming the image.”¹³
This rules out traditional artistic techniques such as tempera, fresco, or oil painting.
14. The Image Does Not Fluoresce Under UV Light, but the Bloodstains Do
Ultraviolet fluorescence photography has been used to examine the Shroud, revealing a distinct difference between the bloodstains and the body image. The blood fluoresces under UV light, a characteristic of real blood due to the presence of bilirubin, while the image itself does not fluoresce, ruling out heat scorching, chemical staining, or pigment-based application.
“The image itself does not exhibit fluorescence under ultraviolet light, but the bloodstains do, confirming that they contain metabolic products consistent with real blood.”¹⁴
This further demonstrates that the image formation process remains scientifically unexplained.
15. No Signs of Decomposition or Smudging Appear on the Shroud
If a body had remained wrapped in the Shroud long enough for decomposition, forensic science dictates that putrefaction stains, body fluids, and gas-induced fiber damage would be present. However, no such signs appear on the Shroud. Dr. Frederick Zugibe, a forensic pathologist, noted:
“There are no signs of decomposition fluids on the cloth, suggesting the body was not in it long enough for putrefaction to begin.”¹⁵
This suggests the body was removed from the cloth within a short period after death.
16. The Image Does Not Wrap Around the Body Like a Contact Print
If the Shroud had been wrapped tightly around a body, the image should show lateral distortion, much like the way a face pressed into fabric would appear stretched. However, the image appears orthogonally projected, as if it were transferred without direct pressure or smearing. Jackson et al. observed:
“The image is orthogonally projected rather than wrapping around, which would be expected if the cloth had been in prolonged contact with a body.”¹⁶
This characteristic does not match any known artistic or natural transfer processes.
17. The Wounds Are Consistent with Roman Crucifixion Methods
The injuries visible on the Shroud—nail piercings in the wrists and feet, scourge marks from a Roman flagrum, and a lance wound in the side—match historical and archaeological evidence of first-century Roman execution techniques. Dr. Matteo Borrini, a forensic anthropologist, states:
“The injuries seen on the Shroud are entirely consistent with first-century Roman crucifixion methods, including scourging with a flagrum and nailing in the wrists rather than the palms.”¹⁷
Unlike medieval depictions, which often show nails in the palms, forensic analysis confirms that nails driven through the wrists would have supported a crucified body’s weight—matching the Shroud’s anatomical details.
18. The Image Lacks Borders or Outlines
Medieval and Renaissance paintings typically contain clear borders, outlines, or shading techniques to define human figures. However, the Shroud’s image has no outlines, instead fading naturally into the fabric in a way that resembles a negative photographic exposure rather than a painting. STURP’s final report confirmed:
“The image does not exhibit any form of outlining or artificial enhancement, which would be expected in a painted or drawn image.”¹⁸
This property further separates the Shroud from known artistic techniques and remains a unique anomaly in historical relics.
Would you like to go beyond these 18 facts? Then please read my paper “Sacred Thread” free online where I cover 30 facts where the consensus of scholars, scientists, and historians agree with the consensus percentage for each. You can download and read it here.
If the Shroud is a forgery, how did a medieval artist encode forensic-level accuracy, 3D data, and a non-paint-based image on surface fibrils—none of which was detectable before modern science? I discuss this very fact here.
Footnotes
¹ Mechthild Flury-Lemberg, The Shroud of Turin: A Textile Study (Turin: Editrice ODPF, 2001).
² John P. Jackson, Eric J. Jumper, and William R. Ercoline, “Correlation of Image Intensity on the Turin Shroud with the 3-D Structure of a Human Body,” Applied Optics 23, no. 14 (1984).
³ Raymond N. Rogers, A Chemist’s Perspective on the Shroud of Turin (Lulu Press, 2008).
⁴ Alan D. Adler and John H. Heller, “A Chemical Investigation of the Shroud of Turin,” Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal 14, no. 3 (1981).
⁵ Rogers, A Chemist’s Perspective on the Shroud of Turin.
⁶ Mark Guscin, The Oviedo Cloth (Cambridge: Lutterworth Press, 1998).
⁷ Ian Wilson, The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ? (New York: Doubleday, 1978).
⁸ Jackson, Jumper, and Ercoline, “Correlation of Image Intensity”.
⁹ Giulio Fanti, “Turin Shroud: Compatibility Between a Digitized Body Image and a Computerized Anthropomorphous Manikin,” Journal of Imaging Science and Technology 54, no. 4 (2010).
¹⁰ Avinoam Danin, Botany of the Shroud: The Story of Floral Images on the Shroud of Turin (Israel: A.D. Publications, 2010).
¹¹ Pierre Barbet, A Doctor at Calvary: The Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ As Described by a Surgeon (New York: Image Books, 1953).
¹² Raymond N. Rogers, A Chemist’s Perspective on the Shroud of Turin (Lulu Press, 2008).
¹³ Walter C. McCrone, Judgment Day for the Turin Shroud (Chicago: McCrone Research Institute, 1996).
¹⁴ Sam Pellicori, “Spectral Properties of the Shroud of Turin,” Applied Optics 19, no. 12 (1980).
¹⁵ Frederick T. Zugibe, The Crucifixion of Jesus: A Forensic Inquiry (New York: M. Evans & Co., 2005).
¹⁶ John P. Jackson, Eric J. Jumper, and William R. Ercoline, “Correlation of Image Intensity on the Turin Shroud with the 3-D Structure of a Human Body,” Applied Optics 23, no. 14 (1984).
¹⁷ Matteo Borrini and Luigi Garlaschelli, “A BPA Approach to the Shroud of Turin,” Journal of Forensic Sciences 63, no. 4 (2018).
¹⁸ STURP Final Report, “Summary of Scientific Findings,” 1981.
Tom's Theology Blog 
Leave a comment