AMAZING PALAEOGRAPHIC DISCOVERY?

Fifteen years ago, we published a supplement on the Holy Shroud, under the above heading (CRC n^o 169, French edition, September 1981), devoted to a discovery by Piero Ugolotti and Father Aldo Marastoni. Numerical treatment of the images seems to confirm this discovery today (cf. André Marion and Anne-Laure Courage, Nouvelles découvertes sur le Suaire de Turin, Albin Michel, p. 172-230), although not decisively, in my opinion. Extreme prudence is still necessary until such time as we can have access to the Relic, in order to verify the real presence of these traces of writing on the Object itself.

So, I remain reticent as before, and find nothing to alter in the report you are about to re-read. I shall simply add an explanation suggested by the Abbé Georges de Nantes, all the more convincing in that it coincides precisely with the hypothesis proposed by Grégoire Kaplan, without any consultation between the two authors. We read in the Gospel according to Saint Matthew that the high priests and the Pharisees set seals on Christ’s tomb (Mt 27.65). IN NECEM and NAZARENOS may have been written on the seals by the official responsible for placing them, giving the name and state of the deceased: the "Nazarene", condemned "to death". Kaplan stresses the "legal character" of these inscriptions. If confirmed, they are more like insulting graffiti hastily scrawled by the murderers, in a cavalier manner expressing their total contempt for the "Nazarene" whom they have just put "to death".

On the occasion of the tests performed on the Relic by the scientists of the American team, in October 1978, Ray Rogers and Ronald London had pointed out that there are many strange little marks on the Shroud, which can probably be attributed to the molten silver of the Chambéry fire in 1532. "Shavings" and metallic products were observed in the radiographic analysis.

At the same time, in Italy, Piero Ugolotti was researching into the chemical composition of the imprint and made the same observation. Thinking that he was dealing with traces of writing, he consulted Fr. Aldo Marastoni, Professor of Ancient Literature at the Catholic University of Milan. The report of this detailed expertise appeared in Sindon (n^o 29, December 1980) written by Fr. Marastoni. I went to Milan to meet both of them, and I brought back ample palaeographic photographic documentation, some of which I have published here with their kind permission.

Figure 34: The sentence delivered by Pilate could immediately be enforced with no need for the imperial assent. But sentence was passed in the name of the Emperor, whose representative was the Procurator. This would explain the presence of the name TIBERIUS CÆSAR in the titulus damnationis. To the lower right, it is possible to distinguish the final E of IN NECE (see figure 35 – photo Ugolotti).

Above the right eyebrow, three Hebrew letters can be seen followed by a sign which Fr.Marastoni interprets as a punctuation mark, "indicating that the phrase ended with this word", since these two languages are read from right to left (figure 33). The Abbé Georges de Nantes, however, tends to see this fourth sign as a lamed. Whatever the case, these three (or four) letters form a word, or fragment of a word, Aramaic or Hebrew.

In the centre of the forehead, there are two fragments of words in lapidary Latin characters, perhaps "a double printing of the same signs" IB and IBER – "with the final R, but very uncertain, out of line and leaning towards the right", which it is very "tempting" to interpret as a remnant of TIBERIUS (figure 34).

Figure 35: The two Ns of IN NECE are traced without interval and they share a common bar: INNECE (photo Ugolotti).

On the left of the face, from the bottom upwards, it is possible to read "traced in 1st century AD uncial characters that are admirably clear, the words IN NECE". That is IN NECEM, for the final M was usually omitted in the common language. It signifies "TO DEATH" (figure 35).

The same expression, in an identical handwriting, can be read on a horizontal line below the chin, but reversed, and again, on the right of the face, from top to bottom. These words inescapably recall, not so much the frenzied shouts of the crowds thronging around Pontius Pilate’s tribunal, as the magistrate’s sentence itself. "The words ‘He delivered him up to be crucified’ (Mk 15.15)", writes Blinzler, "must be interpreted as a paraphrase of the death sentence. Had the Evangelists been interested in the legal side of the action, they would have written: ‘He condemned him to die on the cross’ or else, in direct style: He proclaimed: IBIS IN CRUCEM." (Le Procès de Jésus, p. 384)

Finally, the three-dimensional photo of the face shows up, on the left, some Latin capital letters, juxtaposed to IN NECE, but of a different writing. They are (figure 36), from top to bottom : "An S at the end of a word, an empty space, an N, a space in which it is possible to make out the traces of an E, which we have not transcribed, given the uncertainty of the reading. There follow an A, a Z traced by an inexpert hand – the oblique line of the Z unfortunately goes from left to right –, then the letters ARE. These are unquestionably the remains of the word: NAZARENUS."

Figure 36: Saint John is the only one of the four Evangelists to write that the titulus fixed to the Cross bore the name "Nazarene" as applied to Jesus.: "And Pilate also wrote a title and put it upon the cross; it read: Jesus the Nazarene, King of the Jews." (Jn 19.19). But this disciple was the only one who was an eyewitness to the scene of the crucifixion. He, therefore, adds precision to the account of the synoptics (photo Ugolotti).

All this calls for further examination: confirmation of the reading through new photographs; microscopic and microchemical research into the pigmentation of these letters. But even now, with all due reservation, it seems to me that, with Father Marastoni, we can "exclude [the hypothesis] that these are graphic signs due to a fortuitous convergence of other factors".

As for the source of these inscriptions, the Professor remains perplexed: "For practical reasons, I would exclude the possibility of their being traced directly on the forehead of the condemned man. I am thinking of a ‘mitre’ of shame, made of some absorbent material (papyrus or cloth), a makeshift improvisation, displaying on its front the polyglot formula constituting the titulus damnationis. The transfer of some of these letters on to the forehead would result from the sweat. The double impression of IB - IBER is explained by the slight movements of the ‘mitre’ during the execution."

Figure 37: Framing the contours of the face, two longitudinal lines (dark here) separate the hair from the cheeks. A third line, a transversal line, separates the Face from the thorax. The three branches of the U have given rise to different hypotheses, none of them particularly satisfactory. Today, it seems that they bear the inscription IN NECE repeated three times. In examining the best photos, one can make out the characters discovered by Piero Ugolotti and Father Aldo Marastoni.

For INNECEM, one can imagine "that a ‘fork’ (furca) would have been placed around the face of the condemned man, and that its extremities would have been fixed to the cross beam of the patibulum". But then, that would "suppose... that the shroud was also in contact with the patibulum or, at least, in one of its parts? When? How?" Ugolotti has constructed a complete system of explanation which thoroughly upsets the traditional representation of the Crucifixion scene. I am not sure that I fully understood it when reading the report he addressed to the International Centre of Sindonology, a copy of which he kindly offered me. The future will tell, in the light of further research, how much can be retained of his construction [which, today, in 1997, seems to me to be more than doubtful].

It is sufficient for his glory to have been the first to have discovered these venerable traces of writing and to have affirmed their existence. This needs saying despite all opposition. The photographic documents exist, and they are authentic. The research continues. Other traces of writing, minuscule fragments of letters, perhaps Greek, can also be seen, but Father Marastoni cuts short all investigation on this point: "The photographic material I have does not allow me to make a worthwhile reading." But one cannot fail to make the arousing connection – yet another one! – with the testimony of Saint John, according to which "Pilate wrote a title (...) and it was written in Hebrew, in Greek and in Latin." (Jn 19.19-20).

At least, we can conclude, with Father Marastoni, that "the inscription NAZARENUS may constitute proof of an historical order, hitherto lacking, of the identity of the one who is called ‘the man of the Shroud’, and who would be Jesus of Nazareth, whilst the words TIBERIUS CÆSAR would corroborate this identification". That is a conclusion which, in its very prudence, is absolutely amazing because it corroborates and extends the conclusion of Father Filas.