Note that even one flower image on the Shroud (let alone between "twenty-eight" and "twenty-two" different species - see below) just adds to the problems of naturalistic explanations of the Shroud's image. How would a dead body generate light or other radiation to project not only his own image but that of flowers lying on his body onto the linen shroud covering his dead body? And why would, and how could a 14th century forger, in the words of the late Oxford physics Professor E.T. Hall, have "just got a bit of linen, faked it up and flogged it" to create a relic of Jesus, include photographic negative imprints (considering that photographic negatives did not exist until 1820, ~500 years later), not only of Jesus' body , but of flowers on Jesus' body, considering that the gospel accounts do not specifically mention flowers (although they are not inconsistent with there being flowers in the "spices" (Gk. aroomatoon) of John 19:40).
The presence of images of flowers on the Shroud of Turin was first mentioned in 1983 by a German physicist named Oswald Scheuermann in 1983 in a letter to Alan Whanger, then a Professor at Duke University Medical Center. However, it was not until two years later that Whanger, who had copies of high quality life-sized photographs of the Shroud taken by Giuseppe Enrie in 1931, himself noticed some flower images on the photographs. Whanger then began an intensive four-year search for more flower images on the Shroud, using Flora Palaestina.
Whanger claimed to have found on the Shroud, "twenty-eight" different species of "plants whose images are sufficiently clear and complete to make a good comparison with the drawings in Flora Palaestina" and of those, "Twenty grow in Jerusalem itself, and the other eight grow potentially within the close vicinity of Jerusalem" and "Twenty-seven of these twenty-eight bloom in March and April, which corresponds to the time of Passover and the Crucifixion" (my emphasis):
"While there are images of hundreds of flowers on the Shroud, many are vague or incomplete. We feel Alan has identified, tentatively but with reasonable certainty, twenty-eight plants whose images are sufficiently clear and complete to make a good comparison with the drawings in Flora Palaestina. Of these twenty-eight plants, twenty-three are flowers, three are small bushes, and two are thorns. All twenty-eight grow in Israel. Twenty grow in Jerusalem itself, and the other eight grow potentially within the close vicinity of Jerusalem, either in the Judean Desert or in the Dead Sea area or in both. All twenty-eight would have been available in Jerusalem markets in a fresh state. Many would have been growing along the roadside or in nearby fields, available for the picking. A rather unique situation exists in that within Jerusalem and the surrounding twelve miles, four geographic areas exist with their differing specific climates and flora. Nowhere else are so many different types of species found so close together. Of these twenty-eight plants, Frei, working from the sticky tape slides, had previously identified the pollens of twenty-five of the same or similar plants. Twenty-seven of these twenty-eight bloom in March and April, which corresponds to the time of Passover and the Crucifixion. There are at least seven small bouquets in addition to the various bunched flowers." (Whanger, M. & Whanger, A.D., "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House Publishers: Franklin TN, 1998, p.78).
Moreover, of the "twenty-eight plants ... Half are found only in the Middle East or other similar areas and never in Europe" and it "is hardly likely" that "the pollens were blown across the Mediterranean and deposited on the Shroud while it was on display in France or Italy":
"Some species of plants have wide geographic distribution. Using botanical references, Alan determined the ranges of the twenty-eight plants, noting whether they are found in central Europe, including France (botanical Zone I) or in the Mediterranean, including Italy (botanical Zone IV). Only three are found in central Europe. Nine are definitely found in Italy. Five more are found mostly in the eastern Mediterranean, which includes Israel, but might extend into Italy. Half are found only in the Middle East or other similar areas and never in Europe. Some skeptics have suggested that maybe the pollens were blown across the Mediterranean and deposited on the Shroud while it was on display in France or Italy. That is hardly likely, as many of these pollens are heavy pollens with prickly surfaces designed to be carried by insects, not by wind." (Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.78-79).
Therefore, this pollen from the ~14 species of plants which are "found only in the Middle East or other similar areas and never in Europe" is proof that the Shroud must have been at one time in exposed to the air of "Israel" and specifically "within the close vicinity of Jerusalem" and blooming "in March and April" which was "the time of Passover and the Crucifixion"!
Further confirmation that the flower images are real is that in at least one case, the pollen of a plant, Cistus creticus (which according to the list, on pages 40-41 of Ian Wilson's "Evidence of the Shroud" of the 58 pollen species on the Shroud identified by Max Frei, is found growing wild in the "Mediterranean area" and "Jerusalem & environs" but not in "France, Italy") coincided with the discovery of an image of "the center of the same Cistus creticus flower" on the Shroud:
"Carefully examining one of the Frei slides, researcher Paul Maloney discovered a cluster of many pollens from the same plant. These pollens were identified by palynologist Dr. A. Orville Dahl as Cistus creticus. (Palynologists study live and fossil pollens, spores, and similar plant structures.) Years earlier, Frei had identified pollens from this same plant on his sticky tape slides. At the time he took the sticky tape samples, he was unaware of the images of flowers on the Shroud, but it so happened that the tape Maloney was observing had been taken over the center of the same Cistus creticus flower that Alan had already identified. Thus Frei, Maloney with Dahl, and Alan, all working separately and at different times and using different methods, found the presence of Cistus creticus on the Shroud. Since Alan used Frei's pollen identification list to search for flowers bearing those pollens, most of the flowers that we identified do have pollens that were present on the Shroud." (Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78).
In 1995 Whanger received confirmation from "Avinoam Danin, Professor of Botany at The Hebrew University" and author of the "Flora of Israel" online database, that some of the images on the Shroud are in fact "the flowers of Jerusalem" (my emphasis)!:
"In 1995, we went on a study tour in Israel with the Spanish Shroud research group Centro Espanol de Sindonologia. Before leaving for Israel, Alan called Avinoam Danin, Professor of Botany at The Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the world authority on the plants of Israel, to ask if we might be able to see him. We had known about him for a number of years. He very kindly invited us to his home, where we showed him a number of our photographs of the flower images. After about twenty seconds of looking at them, he exclaimed, `Those are the flowers of Jerusalem!' Imagine how pleased and excited we were to hear him say that! That's what we thought, but we are not trained in botany, and it was wonderful to hear an affirmation from such a highly respected professional botanist. Danin said that we needed plant specimens and pollens from species related to those tentatively identified in order to do comparison studies, and he began this collection in 1996." (Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.79-80).
Two years later in 1997, Prof. "Danin made a careful and detailed examination of" Whanger's "photographs and of the images on the Shroud" and "stated that he agrees with confidence with twenty-two of the twenty-eight plant identifications that we had made" and a further "three are probably correct and the other three are possibly correct" and in fact "One of the plants, Zygophyllum dumosum, grows only in Israel, Jordan, and Sinai" (my emphasis):
"In 1997 during a visit to our home, Danin made a careful and detailed examination of our photographs and of the images on the Shroud. He stated that he agrees with confidence with twenty-two of the twenty-eight plant identifications that we had made. Of the remaining six identifications, he said that three are probably correct and the other three are possibly correct, but he could not identify them with certainty because the images are too fragmentary. In no case did he totally disagree with our original tentative identification or fail to see some imaging. Moreover, he discovered a large number of additional flower images that we had not found. Having previously plotted the locations of multiple thousands of plant species in Israel, Danin was able to state that twenty-seven of the twenty-eight plants whose images are on the Shroud grow within five areas measuring five by five kilometers (three by three miles) immediately around Jerusalem and between Jerusalem and Jericho. The twenty-eighth plant is found at the south end of the Dead Sea. One of the plants, Zygophyllum dumosum, grows only in Israel, Jordan, and Sinai, with its northernmost boundary in the world being at the sea level sign on the highway between Jerusalem and Jericho. The image of this plant on the Shroud, according to Danin, shows both a winter leaf and the remnants of the stalk from the preceding year, proof that the plant was plucked in the spring. For Danin as a botanist, the presence of the image of this one plant is sufficient to establish Jerusalem as the place of origin of the Shroud of Turin." (Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.80).
Also, the images are of "wilted flowers" which "would be between twenty-four and thirty-six hours old after picking" (there were ~36 hours between Jesus' burial at sundown on Friday night and His resurrection at sunrise on Sunday morning-Luke 23:50-24:3):
"The length of time between the picking of the flowers and the forming of the images can be reasonably determined by the degree of wilting and the corona discharge appearance of the images. The more fragile flowers show rather marked wilting within the first twenty-four hours. The more durable ones undergo considerable shrinking within a few days after picking. Both the general gross appearance of the wilted flowers and the appearance of the corona discharge images strongly suggest that most of the flowers whose images are on the Shroud would be between twenty-four and thirty-six hours old after picking. This finding corresponds well with the accepted physiologic and anatomic data from the Shroud which is that the images of the body were made between twenty-four and forty hours after death. Twenty-four hours is the time required for the observed blood clot separation. Forty hours is the time decomposition, which is not seen, would have begun to be grossly apparent." (Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.80-81).
Moreover, on the "right shoulder image there is the image of one end of a structure" of "at least six stems with thorn and flower clusters of a very thorny plant called Gundelia tournefortii" which "has a very limited geographic distribution, but is found in Jerusalem and the Dead Sea area" and may be part of "the crown of thorns" that "History records only one person ... wore ... -Jesus of Nazareth" (my emphasis):
"There are images of plants and flowers on the Shroud that were placed with the body for quite another reason, and which bear witness to the identity of the Man of the Shroud. These are the plants that were used in the mocking prior to the Crucifixion, the ones that make up the crown of thorns. They would have been bloody and in touch with the body at the time of death. On the anatomic right shoulder image there is the image of one end of a structure that goes up, around, down, and back again. Making up this structure are at least six stems with thorn and flower clusters of a very thorny plant called Gundelia tournefortii. This plant has a very limited geographic distribution, but is found in Jerusalem and the Dead Sea area. There is also a round flower and thorn cluster of another thorn species in the center of the structure, and there may be the image of yet a third kind of thorn. Alan duplicated the drawings of the thorns in Flora Palaestina, taped them together to form the structure whose images we see on the Shroud, then glued the resulting structure to a sheet of clear rigid plastic. We then placed this model of the crown of thorns on a lifesize photograph of the Shroud which shows the front, top, and back of the head to see how well the size of the crown and the position of the thorns would match the blood stains on the Shroud. The match is quite good. History records only one person who wore a crown of thorns-Jesus of Nazareth." (Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.84-85).
Indeed, the area where "Gundelia tournefortii, Zygophyllum dumosum and Cistus creticus" occur together is "the very narrow geographical region that ... is the mere twenty miles between Hebron and Jerusalem(my emphasis):
"For, whatever anyone else may make of Danin's botanical `eye', what cannot be emphasized enough is that the location-type evidence, even from the pollens alone, is quite overwhelming. As Uri Baruch found, there are some instances in which he cannot be as specific about plant species as Frei was, but instead refers to a plant type. Possibly Frei may have been a little over-enthusiastic in his identification in these cases, or (since his death robbed us of ever knowing his full insights), it may have been because he found a way to manipulate the specimen in order to see it better. Either way, such differences are essentially minor, and the sceptics' slurs on Frei's memory are proved to be unfounded. As Danin sums up, particularly from superimposing the known distribution sites of Gundelia tournefortii, Zygophyllum dumosum and Cistus creticus, together with three further specific pollen types confirmed to be on the Shroud, [Lomelosia prolifera, Cistus incanus-type and Cistus salvifolius-type] the very narrow geographical region that all these plants share in common is the mere twenty miles between Hebron and Jerusalem. [Danin, A., "Micro-traces of plants on the Shroud of Turin as geographical markers," in Scannerini, S. & Savarino, P., eds, "The Turin Shroud: Past, Present and Future," International scientific symposium, Turin, 2-5 March 2000," Effatà: Cantalupa, 2000, pp.495-500] So the conclusion is inescapable, in the very teeth of the radiocarbon dating, that at some time in its history the Turin Shroud positively must have been in the same environs in which Jesus of Nazareth lived and died." (Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, p.92).
There is also evidence on 10th-3rd century coins and art that the Shroud existed then and that "Flower images (and other images)" on it were "more apparent early on" (which I will expand on in a later post: "8. Pre-14th century art based on the Shroud"):
"Flower images (and other images) on the Shroud are so very faint now. Were they likely more apparent early on? We feel the answer is definitely yes. The images on the Shroud have the appearance of a light scorch. The Shroud is linen, and linen yellows as it ages, but it does not continue to darken indefinitely. The yellowing darkens only so far and no further. Therefore as the Shroud ages, the background darkens but the images do not, and as the background darkens it becomes more nearly the same color as the images, in effect swallowing them up. It is not clear when the images of the flowers became so indistinct as to be essentially unperceived or ignored by onlookers. ... In any event, flowers congruent with those whose images are on the Shroud were portrayed in numerous works of art from the third through the tenth centuries having high PC [points of congruence] with the Shroud face image. Alan made a drawing of the flower images within the circular opening of the cloth covering of the Mandylion to use as reference. The congruence of the flowers is based more on their being in the right places than on close resemblance to the varieties identified on the Shroud. In many of the depictions, the flowers are stylized, and on the coins they are too small to have the shapes of different varieties. One of the earliest portraits of Christ from the third century in the Roman catacombs shows small flowers around the head patterned very much like the flower-banked face image in the Mandylion/Shroud. The same is true of a catacomb portrait of Christ from the fourth century which shows a number of flowers in the nimbus or halo. In the halo of the Pantocrator icon of 550 at Saint Catherine's Monastery there are many dozens of images of flowers which are highly congruent in placement with those on the Shroud. Even more striking is the very accurate placement of the flower images on the 692-695 gold solidus coins of Justinian II. ... Flowers were accurately portrayed on the gold coins of Constantine VII in 945 after the Mandylion had been brought in great ceremony to the Chapel of the Emperor in Constantinople. And there are many other portraits of Jesus which contain highly accurately placed depictions of flowers." (Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.81-82).
Even Ian Wilson, who was originally sceptical of Whanger's flower image claims, and even after viewing Whanger's photos first-hand, "saw little grounds for changing this opinion," yet when he, with Danin, saw the Shroud again at its March 2000 exhibition, it was "quite apparent" that the "flower images are not just an aberration of black-and-white photographs" and that "Faint flower-like shapes are quite definitely there on the cloth itself" and cannot "be dismissed as merely of the `faces in clouds' variety":
"In unison, both Whanger and Danin identify on Whanger's life-size black-and-white Shroud photos a Gundelia inflorescence on the man of the Shroud's right shoulder. The STURP ultraviolet photos had first shown up a striated feature in this area that was initially supposed to be a furrowing of the shoulder from the thongs of the scourge," and on the evidence of photographs alone I saw little grounds for changing this opinion. But at the March 2000 viewing of the Shroud I was very close to Danin as we were ushered into the Cathedral sacristy. Indeed, he had brought binoculars, and kindly lent me these while we both waited for those who were standing in front of us to give way Then, as we were able to get within touching distance of the Shroud, the spontaneity of his reaction was quite infectious. As his eyes focused on the shoulder area, in almost childlike delight he recognized, as only one of his so specialized botanical expertise could, the Gundelia inflorescence's presence on this. ... Quite obvious was that for Danin, the world's leading expert on the flora of Israel, here, on this piece of cloth displayed in a northern Italian Cathedral side-room, was utterly unqualified recognition of a plant that he positively knew to come from the environs of his own Jerusalem. And in my observing this recognition, I could only bow to his very special `eye' for such things - as he subsequently explained to me, a `gift' from his childhood. The natural daylight lighting Turin Cathedral's sacristy was clear and even, and as, during the two hours allotted to us, my eyes continued to rove the Shroud's surface, quite apparent was that flower images are not just an aberration of black-and-white photographs. Faint flower-like shapes are quite definitely there on the cloth itself, and while no doubt many can deservedly be dismissed as merely of the `faces in clouds' variety, the `hard' evidence of the pollens, combined with my first-hand observation of Danin's very special eye at work, now persuades me to believe that some at least are `real'." (Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, pp.91-92. Emphasis original)
Danin presented this botanical evidence which indicates that the Shroud of Turin originated in the Jerusalem area before the 8th century to the 1999 XVI International Botanical Congress (which later was published in a "peer-reviewed publication," "Flora of the Shroud of Turin") which "disputes the validity of the claim that the Shroud was from Europe during the Middle Ages ... based on carbon-14 dating tests" and is positive evidence that "these species on the Shroud ... were placed with the body prior to the process that caused the formation of images on the cloth" after having been picked "in the months of March and April in the region of Jerusalem ," "between 3 and 4 p.m. on the day they were placed on the Shroud" (my emphasis):
"An analysis of pollen grains and plant images places the origin of the `Shroud of Turin,' thought by many to be the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth, in Jerusalem before the 8th Century. The authenticity of the Shroud has been debated for centuries, with a 1988 carbon dating process placing it in the Middle Ages. Botanist Avinoam Danin of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem determined the origin of the Shroud based on a comprehensive analysis of pollen taken from the Shroud and plant images associated with the Shroud. The review of plant and pollen evidence is being published by the Missouri Botanical Garden Press as Flora of the Shroud of Turin by Danin, Alan Whanger, Mary Whanger , and Uri Baruch. The peer-reviewed publication will be available in late summer. Danin presented his research findings at a lecture series held in conjunction with the XVI International Botanical Congress. More than 4,000 scientists from 100 countries are meeting in St. Louis this week to discuss the latest research on plants for human survival and improved quality of life. ... Danin's analysis suggests that flowers and other plant materials were placed on the Shroud of Turin, leaving pollen grains and imprints of plants and flowers on the linen cloth. In addition to the image of a crucified man, the cloth also contains faint images of plants. Tentatively identifying the plant images through a method of image comparison known as Polarized Image Overlay Technique (PIOT), Alan and Mary Whanger have reported that the flowers were from the Near East region and that the Shroud originated in early centuries. Analysis of the floral images by Danin and an analysis of the pollen grains by Uri Baruch identify a combination of certain species that could be found only in the months of March and April in the region of Jerusalem during that time. The analysis positively identifies a high density of pollen of the thistle Gundelia tournefortii which has bloomed in Israel between March and May for millennia. An image of the plant can be seen near the image of the man's shoulder. It has been hypothesized by the Whangers, who have researched the Shroud for decades, that this is the plant used for the `crown of thorns' on Jesus' head. ... Danin stated that this botanical research disputes the validity of the claim that the Shroud was from Europe during the Middle Ages, as many researchers had concluded in 1988 based on carbon-14 dating tests. .... Another plant seen in a clear image on the Shroud is of the Zygophyllum dumosum species, according to the paper. This is a native plant with an unusual leaf morphology, displaying paired leaflets on the ends of leaf petiole of the current year during the beginning of winter. Gundelia tournefortii and Zygophyllum dumosum coexist in a limited area, according to Danin, a leading authority on plants of Israel. The area is bounded by lines linking Jerusalem and Hebron in Israel and Madaba and Karak in Jordan. The area is anchored toward the Jerusalem-Hebron zone with the addition of a third species, Cistus creticus, identified as being placed on the Shroud through an analysis of pollen and floral imaging. `This combination of flowers can be found in only one region of the world,' Danin stated. `The evidence clearly points to a floral grouping from the area surrounding Jerusalem.' Danin stated that the evidence revealing these species on the Shroud suggests that they were placed with the body prior to the process that caused the formation of images on the cloth. ... Images of Capparis aegyptia flowers, which display a distinctive pattern during daylight hours, have also been seen on the Shroud. The process of buds opening ceases when the flowers are picked and no water is supplied. The images of these flowers on the Shroud suggest they were picked in the Judean Desert or the Dead Sea Valley between 3 and 4 p.m. on the day they were placed on the Shroud. The images of the flowers on the Shroud are also depicted in art of the early centuries, according to the upcoming publication. Early icons on some 7th century coins portray a number of flower images that accurately match floral images seen on the Shroud today, according to PIOT analysis by the Whangers. The researchers suggest that the faint images on the Shroud were probably clearer in earlier centuries. .... In 1983 faint floral images on the Shroud linen were noted by O. Scheuermann, and subsequently in 1985 by the Whangers. Botanist Avinoam Danin began collaborating with Shroud researchers Alan and Mary Whanger in 1995. They were joined by Israeli pollen expert Uri Baruch in 1998. ... While there have long been historical, literary, and artistic claims that the Shroud represents the authentic burial cloth of Jesus, there has been little scientific evidence to support this ..." (XVI International Botanical Congress, "Botanical Evidence Indicates `Shroud Of Turin' Originated In Jerusalem Area Before 8th Century, " Science Daily, August 3, 1999).
To be continued in part #7: "Dirt on the feet of the man on the Shroud closely matches that of Jerusalem tombs."
Posted: 5 June 2007. Updated: 17 October 2016.