 |
| Josephus |
 |
 |
| Glycon Coin |
 |
| Sylvia Browne and Montel Williams on The Montel Williams Show |
 |
| Mayan Glyphs |
 |
| Freud |
21. The building of adobe houses regulated into blocks that are separated by street and public squares and equipped by water and sewer systems.I am speechless. Does Thor Heyerdahl seriously think that learning to use mud to build shelters requires diffusion? Or that mixing it with straw and other binding agents is impossible to learn independently. We have mud building from very early on in the New World there is no need to assume diffusion. Besides the dwelling show a process of development. No sudden eruption of such dwellings. As for streets, sewers and water dispersal systems. Well those are simply natural and fairly obvious solutions to the problem of a lot of humans living together. After all there should be paths to walk among the dwelling, some sort of disposal system for all the human waste etc., created and of course people will need water. This of course especially important for people living in dry areas.
22. Long-distance supply of water for irrigation and public consumption through channels and elevated aqueducts, and the manufacture of uniform sections of pottery piping widened at one end to receive and enclose the narrow end of the next and higher pipe to form a continuous conduit.
23. Large-scale terrace agriculture with the use of animal manure and artificial irrigation for the cultivation of food crops and cotton for clothing.1
Well first of all the cotton of the New World is not “artificially” hybridized. The so-called hybridized form has existed for millions of years. Thor Heyerdahl claims this in order to provide an argument for the human borne spread of cotton and cloth manufacture. Second of all the making of cloth from cotton goes back to before 2000 B.C.E., maybe even 4000 B.C.E., in Peru which precludes pretty well diffusion and especially any diffusion by people from the Atlas region of North Africa c. 1200 B.C.E., which is Thor Heyerdahl’s main claim in the book. Given the above the further claims of similarity of whorl is not very helpful especially since the whorls are different. The whorls seem to have been in use in the Americas from early on. Diffusion seems to be precluded. As for dyeing the yarn. Since when is diffusion need to explain why people dye their clothing? The same thing for multicoloured fabrics. Of course Thor Heyerdahl ignores the differences between Peruvian textiles, with their intricate weave patterns and many, many colours with old world textiles. The two types of loom, not mentioned by Thor Heyerdahl are the back loom and the independent loom. Those are general types not specific types. Thor Heyerdahl ignores differences in detail. Further he ignores the fact that looms seem to have been in use from at least 2000 B.C.E., and probably 3000 B.C.E. Which effectively precludes diffusion. As per usual Thor Heyerdahl ignores also the evidence of the slow development of technique.24. The harvesting of the lint obtainable not from wild cotton but only from the artificially hybridized cultivated cotton; the spinning of those short fibers into yarn by twisting a stick threaded onto a specially shaped ceramic spinning whorl of identical size and form in both areas; the dyeing of the yarn; and the manufacture of the same two types of looms used to weave the yarn into polychrome fabric.
25. The similarity of cotton garments as pointed out by isolationists and diffusionists alike: the loincloth and cloak for men, and the dress with girdle and shoulder pin for women.
26. Identical types of leather and rope sandals.
27. The extremely important feather crown worn by warriors and men of rank (Characteristic of Mexican and Peruvian nobles, feather crowns are assumed by many to be a strictly American custom; it is nevertheless a characteristic headwear of the ancient Middle East, as shown in reliefs of Hittite warriors, as well as Egyptian illustrations of their sea-roving enemies, the mysterious Mediterranean “Sea People”)3
Sometimes Heyerdahl seems to display the most amazing inability to see humans as intelligent. Does he seriously believe that the idea of having a standing army requires diffusion! It is rather an obvious solution to the problem of protecting the state. The stuff about painted shields etc., and the use of tents all seem, well obvious! Finally why is Thor Heyerdahl once again comparing things that existed in the New World c. 1500 C.E., with things that existed in the Old World c. 1200 B.C.E? Thor Heyerdahl does not provide the evidence that these things existed in the New World c. 1200 B.C.E.28 The Complex organization and maintenance of standing armies, with the custom of giving the soldiers shields with painted symbols intended to identify their units, and the use of canvas tents in military camps.
29. The use of the sling as an important weapon, the corresponding types of both rope and band slings with the same kinds of cradle, slit, and finger hole.
30. Parallels and identities in tools and utensils, often pointed out in farming implements, and in carpenters’ and masons’ tools, in the instruments of artists, in the
hooks, nets, and weirs of the fisherman, in the merchants’ balances, and in the drums and wind instruments of musicians.
31. Long range expeditions in search of special molluscs, highly valued for their red shells or for the red dye extracted from the snail.
32. Identical stages in the evolution of metallurgy. The same metals were sought, yet iron was ignored by the pre-European cultures here compared. Gold and silver were highly treasured, the ore was melted, hammered and molded in the same kind of pottery matrix to form figurines and jewelry sometimes with striking similarities. For the hardening of copper into bronze difficult prospecting was carried out often in remote areas, in search of the tin to produce the alloy.5
Regarding no. 33. It should be repeated that these inventions are rather obvious and further they do not appear in the New World until after 600 B.C.E., and then only in South America. Also they do not appear at all in Mesoamerica until after 800 C.E. This is long after the supposed arrival of Bronze welding invaders c. 1200 B.C.E. Once again Thor Heyerdahl “forgets” that the appearance of these traits does not synchronize very well with the Old World. Thor Heyerdahl compares traits from before 1200 B.C.E. to traits in the New World that appeared in some cases well over 1000 years later. Of course Thor Heyerdahl once again ignores all the signs of gradual development over time of these cultural traits.33. Short-handled bronze mirrors, pincers, and small ornamental bells as major products marking entry into the Bronze Age.
34. Gold filigree work of outstanding quality. The minutely detailed articles of adornment produced by the American high cultures equalled the masterpieces of the ancient Middle East and, like the best of the fine-meshed textiles, surpassed anything in contemporary Europe.
35. Extremely sophisticated ceramic art repeated in the same specialized forms as polychrome funeral ware. The conventional tripod vase, considered so characteristic of the Middle East that it is identified as Phoenician when encountered archaeologically on the Atlantic coast of Morocco or the Canary Islands, is equally symptomatic of the American high-culture area from Mexico to Peru. Characteristic of both areas are also the polychrome effigy vessels in the form of heads and objects of various kinds. Reappearing on both sides of the Atlantic, and well known in each area, is the ceramic vase in the form of a human foot truncated above the ankle and wearing a sandal; the constantly repeated jars in the form of fish, birds, and quadrupeds, with spout and loop handles on their backs; the ring-shaped vase in the form of a coiled-up snake carrying miniature jars on its back; and its composite clusters of fruits and globular jars joined by cross tubes into one common long-necked spout.
36. The great importance of an abnormally flat ceramic figurine representing a naked female goddess. Its universal characteristic is that the body and limbs were flat as a plate, whereas the head was represented in the round. From the Middle East the Phoenicians brought this figurine westward through the Mediterranean as a representation of their principal goddess, Tanit, the Earth Mother. With identical properties the same little female figurine is perhaps the most characteristic example of early ceramic art all the way from Mexico to Peru.7
36 is fascinating although he once again gives the alleged Old World source he does not give any specifics about the New World except very general claims that the trait is early and widespread. Well that could mean all sorts of things. Well it appears that this Earth mother figure did not appear among the Olmecs or among the cultures of Peru at this time. It appears that Thor Heyerdahl has in mind the culture of Teotihuacan and its Great Goddess. By failing to give specifics and making it difficult to check Thor Heyerdahl does not help himself. It also appears that this cultural trait is not widespread in the New World.8
37. Clay models of daily life. In both areas occur identical pottery figurines showing a kneeling woman grinding flour; a pregnant woman sitting in a straddling position with another holding her from behind and a third one in front receiving an emerging baby; and a ring of little figurines holding hands in a dance around a little central figure playing the flute.
38. Funeral ware in the shape of small animals rolling on wheels. Although it was widespread I the Middle East and brought westward by the Phoenicians at least as far as Ibiza, the American distribution seems to be restricted to the early Olmec horizon in Mexico.
39. Marked importance of short-handled stamp seals as well as cylindrical seals of terracotta, with surfaces incised with a variety of figurative or geometric motifs. Dipped in color the stamp seals used for printing symbols and designs and the cylinder seals for rolling them in continuous bands. The same special motif is sometimes repeated within both areas.
40. The custom of carving wooden figurines and sometimes also big stone statues with deep concavities in place of eyes, which were subsequently inlaid with sea shells surrounding a black obsidian pupil.9
Olmec Pendant
However, with Castaneda's increasing fame have come increasing doubts. Don Juan has no other verifiable witness, and Juan Matus is nearly as common a name among the Yaqui Indians as John Smith farther north. Is Castaneda real? If so, did he invent Don Juan? Is Castaneda just putting on the straight world?
But such endorsements and parallels do not in any way validate the more worldly claim to importance of Castaneda's books: to wit, that they are anthropology, a specific and truthful account of an aspect of Mexican Indian culture as shown by the speech and actions of one person, a shaman named Juan Matus. That proof hinges on the credibility of Don Juan as a being and Carlos Castaneda as a witness. Yet there is no corroboration—beyond Castaneda's writings-that Don Juan did what he is said to have done, and very little that he exists at all.7
I might be able to discuss the merits of Castaneda's books, (in my opinion minimal) if they had been published as fiction, and not as fact.The difference is that Castaneda does not present his Don Juan cycle as fiction but as unembellished documentary fact.9
Menzies' VoyagesA few years ago Gavin Menzies' book 1421 was published1 amidst a blaze of publicity and controversy, rather than discuss the “merits”, zero in my opinion, of Menzies’ worthless piece of pseudo-scientific garbage.2 I will briefly discuss what we know about how this piece of “scholarship” was manufactured.
I used the word manufactured quite deliberately above, because yes indeed this book was not “researched” or “written” it was manufactured quite deliberately and coldly to make the publisher, and yes the writer, boodles of cash, with of course absolutely no qualms, ethical, moral or simply prudent whatsoever.
Let us go through the steps by which this work of no value was manufactured from the bowels of a shameless publisher.
It all stated when Menzies and his wife traveled to China for their silver wedding anniversary. While visiting the Forbidden City in Beijing Menzies noticed that the dates of all sorts of buildings etc., was the date 1421. Which was the year the capital was moved from Nanjing to Beijing during the reign of the Yongle Emperor.4
Menzies decided to write a book about the year 1421 in China and the rest of the world. The result was a huge book of 1,500 pages. By this time Menzies had acquired an agent who told him that the manuscript has written was un-sellable. However his agent did have a few suggestions…5
In a very small part of the manuscript Menzies had a far out speculation about Admiral Zheng He’s subordinates exploring the world c. 1421. The agent suggested Menzies dump the rest of the book and expand that section massively.
And I then said to him, ‘Look, let's forget what was happening in France and Germany and Britain in the 15th century, let's just look at this one episode and let's make the whole book the story of how China discovered America.’6
Further it was decided to get the media involved in publicizing Menzies’ idea. The agent even decided to rewrite some of the chapters. So a public relations company was contacted and got involved and soon a story was published in the Daily Telegraph and further Menzies gave a talk at the Royal Geographical Society, (they will rent to anyone it seems). Soon major publishers were interested.7
The publisher finally selected was Transworld and one of its subsidiaries Bantam Books. They offered 500,000 pounds for the world rights to 1421. A problem was that despite the extensive expansion of that short section by Menzies the book was still only 190 pages and apparently was badly written and confusing to look at. So Bantam decided to “improve” the manuscript. Supposedly Menzies was told that he could not write.8
It was dry as dust. And Transworld said, "Well" - after they bought it, they said, "You know, this is a great book, potentially, but nobody's going to read it. You know, if you want to get your story over, you've got make it readable, and you can't write, basically." I mean, in a sort of polite way.9
So they had a large staff of supposedly 130 people work on “improving” the book including a ghost writer by the name of Neil Hanson. All the research remained Menzies however and despite the large resources devoted to “improving” the book, zero effort seems to have gone into checking out the books claims.10
As one of the publishers said:
It's very hard to prove that something is or is not correct. I mean, we do have to rely on our authors - we - we simply don't have the time. I mean, we work full - flat out publishing the books, bringing them to press, marketing them, publicising them, selling them - we can't possibly go through all our books and check every single one of them out for factual accuracy.11
Where does one begin with such bold faced cheek! The fact is they devoted extensive resources to “improving” the book, including hiring a ghost writer, and then to marketing the book. It would not have been all the difficult to have the book checked out by a few experts in maritime and Chinese history or to have hired a fact checker to check out a few things.
The bottom line is that the publisher could not be bothered to do anything that might throw a monkey wrench into their desire to earn mega-profits from this piece of dribble.
One of the publishers did say:
What Gavin was claiming, was, of itself, a step away from orthodox history, and anything that says - that does - that is, can be, sensational, or certainly different. And we're always looking for things - as are lots of people - that really go up against conventional wisdom, and this is what I thought this book did.12
Roughly translated we saw this as a bit of sensationalistic clap-trap that would make us much boodle. Of course it was deliberately marked as sensationalistic and a “controversy” was manufactured out of whole cloth, by the publisher as a way of boosting sales of the book.13
Typical of the mindset of the publisher was the claim on the book that Menzies was born in China. He wasn’t; he was born in London.14
The book was published and quite predictably got a torrent of vicious reviews, but well over a million were sold, the book has been translated into many languages and will into the future make even more boodle for Menzies and his publishers.15
The result has been that Menzies is well known and is a sought after public speaker and his book and its equally worthless follow up 1434,16 are selling very well.
This book as been described as:
The most successful book of pseudohistory to appear since Ignatius Donnelly’s Atlantis: the Antidiluvian World over a hundred years earlier. The difference between the books is that when Donnelly wrote his research had some scientific and historical credibility based on the state of knowledge at the time. Menzies’ hypothesis and research has withered under the light of intelligent and informed criticism from the very beginning. His success has been the result of an extensive publicity and marketing campaign that ignored established scholarship and expert opinion in favour of sensationalistic and unwarranted speculation at every step of the way.17
It is clear that the publisher did not and does not care about the truth of Menzies absurd ideas, but cares very much about making acres of cash. By outrageous manipulation and yes “brazen effrontery” they have done precisely that.
1. Menzies, Gavin, 1421, Harper Perennial, New York, 2004.
2. For some critical reviews of Menzies see Findlay, Robert, How Not to (Re)Write World History, Journal of World History, v. 15. no. 2, June 2004, at Here, Hartz, Bill, Gavin’s Fantasy Land, at In the Hall of Maat, at Here,Dutch, Steven, 1421, at Steve Dutch Home Page, Here.,See also this website with lots of articles: The ‘1421’ Myth Exposed, at Here. The above is just some of the critical analysis on the web.
4. Fritze, Ronald H., Invented Knowledge, Reaktion Books, London, 2009, p. 99.
5. IBID. pp. 99-100. The agent’s name is Luigi Bonomi. I hope he enjoyed the money from his pact with the devil. See also Four Corners, Junk History, Broadcast on July 31, 2006, Transcript at Here.
6. Junk History.
7. Fritze. p. 100. The public relations company was Midas Public Relations. See Junk History also.
8. IBID.
9. Junk History.
10. IBID., Fritze, p. 100.
11. Junk History.
12. IBID.
13. IBID. Fritze, pp. 101-102.
14. Junk History.
15. Fritze, pp. 101-102.
16. Menzies, Gavin, 1434, Harper Perennial, New York, 2009. This book seems to be as much a calculated effort to make moolah as 1421. See The ‘1421’ Myth Exposed, above for some well deserved tearing apart of this book.
17 Fritze, p. 103.
Pierre Cloutier
Book CoverVon Daniken’s hypothesis may seem outrageous, to be sure, but what is even more outrageous is the idea that the profound achievements that took place in ancient cultures were merely the natural process of unassisted human development.3
Head of Christ from the Shroud of Turin[Letter to Pope Clement VII, 1389.]
The case, Holy Father, stands thus. Some time since in this diocese of Troyes the Dean of a certain collegiate church to wit, that of Lirey, falsely and deceitfully, being consumed with the passion of avarice, and not from any motive of devotion but only of gain, procured for his church a certain cloth cunningly painted, upon which by a clever sleight of hand was depicted the twofold image of one man, that is to say, the back and front, he falsely declaring and pretending that this was the actual shroud in which our Savior Jesus Christ was enfolded in the tomb and upon which the whole likeness of the Savior had remained thus impressed together with the wounds which He bore. This story was put about not only in the kingdom of France, but, so to speak, throughout the world, so that from all parts people came together to view it. And further to attract the multitude so that money might cunningly be wrung from them, pretended miracles were worked, certain men being hired to represent themselves as healed at the moment of the exhibition of the shroud, which all believed to be the shroud of our Lord. 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 Savior’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 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 law, seeing that he neither ought nor could allow the matter to pass, he began to institute formal proceedings against said Dean and his accomplices in order to root out this false presumption. They, seeing their wickedness discovered, his away the said cloth so that the Ordinary could not find it, and they kept it hidden afterwards for thirty-four years or thereabouts down to the present year. And now again the present Dean of the said church with fraudulent intent and for the purpose of gain, suggested as it is reported, to the Lord Geoffrey de Charny, Knight, and the temporal lord of the place, to have the said cloth replaced in the said church, that by a renewal of the pilgrimage the church might be enriched with the offerings made by the faithful. Acting upon the Dean’s suggestion, who was thus treading the footsteps of his predecessor, the knight went to the Cardinal de Thury, your Holiness’ Nuncio and Legate in the French territory, and suppressing the facts that the said cloth at the time above referred to was asserted to be the shroud of our Savior, and that it bore the Savior’s likeness imprinted upon it, and that the Ordinary had taken action against the canons in order to stamp out the error which had arisen, and that said cloth for fear of the Ordinary had been hidden away, nay even, it is said, conveyed out of the diocese, he represented to the Cardinal that the said cloth was a picture or figure of the shroud, which many people came to visit out of devotion and which had previously been much venerated and resorted to in that church, but on account of the war and other causes, by the command of the Ordinary, had been placed for a long time in safer keeping, petitioning that he might be allowed to set up in the said church this picture or figure of the shroud which so many out of devotion desired to see, so that it might there be shown to the people and venerated by the faithful. Then the said Lord Cardinal, without entirely approving the petition, but probably acting on the facts before him and so far prudently, granted to the petitioner by Apostolic authority that without asking leave of the Ordinary or of any other person he might set up this picture or figure of the shroud of our Lord in the said church or in any other decent place. And under cover of this written authority the cloth was openly exhibited and shown to the people in the church aforesaid on great holidays, and frequently on feasts and at other times, with the utmost solemnity, even more than when the Body of Christ our Lord is exposed; to wit, by two priests vested in albs with stoles and maniples and using the greatest possible reverence, with lighted torches and upon a lofty platform constructed for this special purpose; and although it is not publicly stated to be the true shroud of Christ, nevertheless this is given out and noised abroad in private, and so it is believed by many, the more so, because, as stated above, it was on a previous occasion declared to be the true shroud of Christ, and by a certain ingenious manner of speech it is now in the said church styled not the sudarium but the sanctuarium, which to the ears of the common folk, who are not keen to observe distinctions, sounds much the same thing, and crowds of people resort there as often as it is shown or is expected to be shown, under the belief, or more truly the delusion, that it is the true shroud. Moreover, it is currently reported amongst them that it has been approved by the Apostolic See by means of the letters of the said Lord Cardinal.
Accordingly, most holy Father, perceiving this great scandal renewed amongst the people and the delusion growing to the peril of souls, observing also that the Dean of the said church did not keep within the terms of the Cardinal’s letters, obtained though they were by the suppression of the truth and the suggestion of what was false, as already explained, desiring to meet the danger as well as I could and to root out this false persuasion from the flock committed to me, after consultation with many prudent advisers, I prohibited the said Dean under pain of excommunication, by the very act sufficiently published [eo ipso latae], from exhibiting this cloth to the people until otherwise might be determined.
He, however, refusing obedience and lodging an appeal, in defiance of the prohibition went on with the exhibition as before. Moreover, the knight, maintaining and defending his behavior, by holding the said cloth with his own hands on a certain solemn feast, and showing it to the people with the observances above described, caused himself, by a royal warrant [salvagardia], to be put in formal possession and occupation of the said cloth and of the right of exhibiting it, and had this notified to me; and so under cover of the appeal as well as of the said royal warrant this delusion is shielded and propagated, to the contempt of the Church, scandal of the people, and peril of souls – all which I am powerless to remedy – nay more to defamation of my above-named predecessor who denounced the abuse in this time, and of myself who to the best of my poor ability am also anxious to take such prudent as I may. But Alas! The scandal is upheld and defended and its supporters cause it to be spread abroad among the people that I am acting through jealousy and cupidity and to obtain possession of the cloth for myself, just as similar reports were circulated before against my predecessor; while, on the other hand, others aver that I move too half-heartedly in the matter and that I make myself a laughing-stock by allowing the abuse to continue. But though I have earnestly and humbly cited the said knight and besought him that he would for a time suspend the exhibition of the said cloth until your Holiness could be consulted and should pronounce upon the matter, he paid no attention, or rather without my knowledge he had representations made to your Holiness in the same sense as those already made to the said Lord Cardinal, adding that I refused to defer to the said Cardinal’s letters, that I disregarded the appeal and went on launching inhibitions and sentences of excommunication against those who exhibited the cloth and against the people who came to venerate it. But with all deference to the author of representations, my action in thus proceeding against those who exhibited and venerated the cloth was in no wise derogatory to the said Lord Cardinal’s letters, obtained though they were surreptitiously. This authorization of his by no means conceded that the cloth could be exposed with publicity or venerated, but only that it might be restored to or lodged in the said church or some other decent place. And because they would not keep to the terms of the Cardinal’s permit therefore it was that I proceeded against them according to the ordinary forms of law, as in my duty I am bound, and not without much asking counsel, with the view of removing the scandal and the said popular delusion, believing that I should be gravely in fault if I connived at such abuses. Moreover, having to look to my own security in this matter, I was compelled, acting always upon the advice of prudent counselors, to have recourse to the aid of the secular arm, and this being more particularly because the said knight in the first instance had begun to place the matter in the hands of the civil authorities by causing himself to put in formal possession of the right of exhibiting the cloth by the King’s warrant, as said above, which seems a sufficiently absurd proceeding. Accordingly I took measures to have the cloth placed in the custody of the King’s officers, always with the same end in view, viz., that at least until I could bring the whole story to the notice of your Holiness there might for a time being be an end of these exhibitions. And in this request I prevailed without any difficulty with the court of the King’s Parliament when once they were fully informed of the superstitious origin of this shroud, of the use to which it was put, and of the delusion and scandal to which I have called attention. Indeed it is a wonder to all who know the facts of the case that the opposition which hampers me in these proceedings comes from the church, from which quarter I should have looked for the vigorous support, nay, rather have expected punishment if I had shown myself slothful or remiss. However, the knight above mentioned has been beforehand with me, and, having represented the matter as I have explained, has obtained from your Holiness a Brief in which the said Lord Cardinal’s letters are substantially confirmed ex certa scientia and permission is granted that in spite of all prohibitions and appeals, the said cloth my be shown and exposed for the veneration of the faithful; while, as I hear – for I have not been able to procure a copy of said Brief – perpetual silence is enjoined upon myself.
But whereas the canon law requires me to see that no man be imposed upon by false representations and documents for the purposes of gain, and because I am certain that this Brief was obtained by suggestion of what is false and suppression of the truth, and that otherwise it would never have been issued, while I was neither cited nor heard, especially as a the resumption ought to stand in my favor that I would not interfere in such a cause without reason, or disturb any man in any practice of devotion which was harmless and free from extravagance, I do most confidently trust that your Holiness will bear with me if in view of the foregoing facts I still oppose the said exposition until I have fuller instructions from your Holiness yourself, now better informed of the truth of the case. I would ask you then, most blessed Father, to vouchsafe to bestow your attention upon the foregoing statement and to take measures that such a scandal and delusion and abominable superstition may be put and end to both in fact and seeming, in such wise that this cloth be held neither for sudarium nor sanctuarium, nor for an image or figure of our Lord’s sudarium, since our Lord’s sudarium was nothing of the kind, nor, in fine, under any other ingenious pretext be exhibited to the people or exposed for veneration, but that to express horror of such superstition it be publicly condemned, the surreptitious letters above spoken of being recalled, or more truly declared null and void (for fear that the keen-eyed persecutors and detractors of the Church should rail at the Church’s discipline and say that a more prompt and efficacious remedy against scandals and impostures is found in the secular tribunals than in those of ecclesiastical authority). I offer myself here as ready to supply all information sufficient to remove any doubt concerning the facts alleged both from public report and otherwise, in order to exonerate myself and also to discharge my conscience in a matter which I have greatly at heart. Moreover, if health had allowed I should have presented myself personally to your Holiness to state my complaint to the best of my poor ability, for I am convinced that I cannot fully or sufficiently express in writing the grievous nature of the scandal, the contempt brought upon the Church and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and the danger to souls; still I do what I can, chiefly that I can, chiefly that I may be guiltless before God, leaving all else to the disposition of your Holiness, whom may the Almighty long preserve, &c.
Pierre D’ArcisBishop of Troyes3
Some time since in this diocese of Troyes the Dean of a certain collegiate church to wit, that of Lirey, falsely and deceitfully, being consumed with the passion of avarice, and not from any motive of devotion but only of gain, procured for his church a certain cloth cunningly painted, upon which by a clever sleight of hand was depicted the twofold image of one man, that is to say, the back and front, he falsely declaring and pretending that this was the actual shroud in which our Savior Jesus Christ was enfolded in the tomb and upon which the whole likeness of the Savior had remained thus impressed together with the wounds which He bore.
Eventually after diligent inquiry and examination, he discovered the fraud and how 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.
