Replies

There are a lot of art historians who have discussed the exchange but so far I have found none that say raphael sent him a transparent painting.
The Durer painting in question is long gone but some examples of his work using the same method are still around
Moritz Thausing says the technique was often used by Durer on page 91 of his book and can been seen on what I think are these

These are examples of the technique. None of these appear to be done on what we now call byssus - or the fabric of Veronica's veil. It does not stand to reason to me that a transparent fabric so costly that basically only royalty could afford it would be sent to Durer.

I saw one historian claim that what was sent to Durer was actually drawings done by his student Romano. Giulio did complete unfinished works when Raphael died. One of the drawings sent to Durer ended up in the hands of Archduke Charles in Vienna.

As you can see in this translation:

http://books.google.com/books?id=f3xKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=vasari+durer+transparent+painting&source=bl&ots=tZeM59MMND&sig=R-sI1_xMsVBpTuqsN-A69KH3grk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eT33TpWwM4XqgAetyoGGAg&ved=0CDwQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=vasari%20durer%20transparent%20painting&f=false

Vasari called the fabric "exceedingly fine linen." Of course, it is a translation. But if you look at the other paintings using the same method that exist today - they do not look like byssus.

I am Still not discounting that it could have been done by Raphael or someone else . I just have doubts that it is the painting sent to Durer.

I found this video of Vigo talking about byssus. It is in Italian
http://www.comune.santantioco.ca.it/cms/il-bisso.html

If the questioned Veil is not real I am more inclined to think this was commissioned in secret by the Pope or some other person with money to help perpetuate the story and then it fell into the hands of the church in this small town rather than it is a costly fabric sent to Durer.

I do think it is significant that the Pope went to view it and prayed before it. Don’t know what it means but I think it is significant.

As I stated, the translated letter written by Raphael stated he was experimenting on both Cambric and Byssus... but he did not state what the self-portrait he was forwarding to Dürer was on... just that it was one of his transparent efforts. Whether this one is his or not is irrelevant. The number of congruencies is. There are only the number of congruencies one gets with ANY face when compared, male or female, with the Shroud face image IS. The SIZES are not even comparable. The only researcher who claimed it is the same as the Shroud is a pious nun who compared PHOTOGRAPHS of both... using a ruler and made no attempt to assure that both photographs were true life-size representations of the originals. When this is done, they do not match.

As I pointed out, the image on the Shroud has a full mustache and beard, the image on the Manoppello veil has a wispy mustache only at the corners of the mouth and a wispy beard... the beard of a younger man. Are you seriously proposing that Jesus, stopped for shave on the Via Delarosa, then grew a full beard and mustache after making the Veronica before being buried in the tomb? That is an absurd proposition to make. Either the Shroud image with its full beard is wrong or the Manoppello veil is NOT an image of Christ on the way to the cross. It can't be both.

AND, as I have pointed out multiple times, the pigments on the Manoppello veil are EASILY seen on microphotographs where ever there is image. It is a painting. Painted by whom is irrelevant.

I think, not believe, because of the over 60 congruencies with the face of Raphael, fewer than 40 with Dürer's face, and only six - seven with the Shroud's, that it is most likely the self portrait that Raphael sent to Dürer that we know of from the letters I read, in which he spoke of painting on either Byssus or cambric. That remains up in the air... to be determined when the Church authorities allow it to be dismounted from the double-sided glass and examined properly.