The Manoppello Veronica
Photograph ©2013 Matthias Henrich
Posted on 12/01/2014 8:03:48 PM PST by Swordmaker
In several recent e-mails, German viewer Matthias Henrich wrote us about the Manoppello and described some of the research he had been doing. He also asked if I could include some updated information about the Manoppello on Shroud.com. Here is a synopsis of his correspondence:
"I have sent the image of the face from the Shroud and the image of Manoppello to Mr. Kinn, a criminal inspector and expert at LKA Mainz/Germany (German State Police). I had asked him about the possibility of using biometry to compare the Shroud face and the Manoppello face. In the case of the Manoppello he said that the computer would throw this out as a painting. In the case of the Turin face the computer would recognize it as a real face, if the pattern of the cloth were removed by algorithmical mathematics. Then the face recognition software would be able to make a biometrical scan. With the face of Manopello it is not possible, because the software would identify this not as a photo of a face but as an artwork. And there are too many anatomical mistakes on the face of Manoppello, whereas the Shroud of Turin face is anatomically correct. With your research into the Shroud of Turin, could you also bring light to the Manoppello image? This would be a great help."
Matthias also was kind enough to take some of the anatomical mistakes he and Mr. Kinn observed and document them in a brief article he sent us, which we are including here for your information: Anatomical Errors - Comparing the Manoppello to the Shroud.
(Excerpt) Read more at shroud.com ...
One of the most interesting pieces of information I managed to find was in a chapter of Giorgio Vasari’s book19 on Raphael Sanzio’s life. There he tells of Raphael sending some of his drawings to Dürer, who promptly reciprocated: (ph.19)
“By these and other works the fame of Raphael spread to France and Flanders. Albert (Albrecht) Dürer, a remarkable German painter and author of some fine copper engravings, paid him the tribute of his homage and sent him his own portrait, painted in water-colours, on byssus, so fine that it was transparent, without the use of white paint, the white material forming the lights of the picture This appeared marvellous to Raphael, who sent back many drawings of his own which were greatly valued by Albert (Albrecht)...”After reading this passage I felt quite surprised as the description of the self-portrait which Dürer gave to Raphael matched in an amazing way the image on the Veil of Manoppello. Knowing the organoleptic uniqueness of the Holy Face, which according to current studies appears to be the only one in the world, I was rather astonished. Nevertheless, after this initial clue, I kept looking for more detailed information on the subject. As I needed the authoritative support of an expert, I sought the advice of Professor Rosella Gallo20 of the Academy of Fine Arts in Naples, and I informed her about my findings. She got back to me after a couple of days telling me that there was a further mention of the self- portrait in the second edition of Vasari’s “La Giuntina” in the chapter on the life of Giulio Romano. Here is the text: (ph.20)
“Among the numerous treasures in his house there was a portrait of Albert (Albrecht) Durer, by himself, on fine cambric, sent by him to Raphael, diligently executed in water-colours, and finished without using white lead, the fabric itself serving for the whites and the fine threads being used to represent the hairs of the beard, and when held up to the light it was transparent all over. Giulio, who valued it highly, showed it to me himself as a miracle once when I was on business at Mantua”This new passage by Vasari strengthened my belief that the object he described was none other than the Holy Face of Manoppello. I immediately started looking for further clues to corroborate my intuition. First thing, I needed to find out whether more detailed reference to this object existed in the work of Dürer. I perused all the most authoritative biographies of the artist and also catalogues of all the major museums and worldwide art collections containing works by Dürer, but the search was vain. None of the works by the artist matched Vasari’s description. Then there was a chronological issue. According to Father Da Bomba’s historical report, the veil landed in Manoppello in 1503. Father Pfeiffer believes, after his studies on the Roman Veronica, that it arrived there in 1608. Dürer was born in 1471 and died in 1528, while Raphael was born in 1483 and died in 1520. In 1515 Raphael sent him a drawing he made for the Battle of Ostia, on which Dürer himself noted down: “Raphael from Urbino, who was so highly regarded by the Pope, made these naked figures and sent them to Albrecht Dürer in Nuremberg, to show him some work by his hand”. I then tried to match the features on the veil with those in Dürer’s self-portraits, comparing the one made in 1500, and also the ones made in 1493 and 1498, but I found some discrepancies. After this careful iconographic analysis, I started to consider the possibility that Vasari might have made a mistake and the picture was actually a portrait of Raphael rather than Dürer’s self-portrait.I got hold of all the portraits and self-portraits of Raphael and I tried a new comparison. The first work I analyzed was the “Double Portrait”, kept in the Louvre in Paris (ph.21). The results of the comparison were astonishing. The consistency points between the two images were numerous: the hair, the beard, the shape of the eyes and the eyebrows.
If you want on or off the Shroud of Turin Ping List, Freepmail me.
It is a kindly looking face.
Thanks for the ping!
Another view by Paul Badde: ISBN 978-1-58617-515-3
Paul Badde is convinced it's genuine. "In 2010, this topic received worldwide media attention thanks to German journalist and author Paul Badde and his controversial book titled, The Face of God: The Rediscovery of the True Face of Jesus, in which he claimed, 'the image in Manoppello is clearly visible and, moreover, when laid over the image of the face of the Shroud of Turin forms a perfect match.'" But how then does he explain that it doesn't meet any of the the conditions for authenticity? It is mainly his conformational bias at work. The fact is that there are only 11 points of congruity between the Shroud and the Manoppello veil cited by all those who believe in its authenticity.
Marks of wounds include: a swelling of both eyebrows (1) and a crosscut of the left eyebrow (2), a triangular-shaped wound on the right cheek close to the nose (3), a swelling of the yoke bone below the left eye (4), a swelling below the right eye (5), the swollen nose and a deformation of the nose septum with the bruised cartilage (6), and a swelling of the upper lip (7). Other characteristic marks on the Shroud Face which can be easily identified in Figure 5 include: a forked beard (8), a hairless area between the lower lip and the beard (9), an enlarged left nostril (10), a few strands of hair at the top of the forehead (11), and maybe also a transverse streak across the forehead (12), which is however not clear in the images in Figure 4.
have looked at the 11 points every believer cites and they are about the level of seeing bunny rabbits in clouds and most of them are the results of his and other believer in the Manoppello veil's authenticity's wishful thinking, and most people literally cannot see them. That means that both the Shroud face and the image of Manoppello are Men's faces. That's about it. In reality, they are not even the same size with the Shroud face being about 5% larger. The comparisons were done with size adjusted photographs.
The scientific examination of computerized analysis that rejected the image as an art work, incapable of being analyzed biometrically is more proof. The anatomy is all wrong. Some of the evidence for example is that the eyebrows depicted on the Manoppello image "grow" the wrong direction for a human eyebrow.
No human eyebrow grows the way depicted on the image. The hairs on the image "flow" backwards, toward the eyes and the bridge of the nose, instead of away from the eyes, upward and toward the temples.
In a normal face or skull, the Axis of eyes are located exactly in the middle. . . with 50% of the head above, and 50% below. That is the case in the Shroud, but only about 35% of the Manappello image is above the eyes. No match. Poorly proportioned.
Then there are the problems with the image of the teeth. I manage a dental office. The teeth shown in the Manoppello image are completely unrealistic. They are not centered with the cupid's bow of the upper lip, the comparative width's of the four incisor teeth are incorrect for natural teeth, and there are no signs of the cuspid teeth (the canines) which should be prominent showing points on either side of the incisors. Further, what looks to be a double row of other teeth behind the first row, are actually the painted teeth of the obverse image showing through from the back side. Oops. Poor image registration.
It is obvious to any dentist. The ones in my office laughed when they saw them. AND, 353, microscopic examination of the Manopello Veronica fibers has found plenty of pigments, including white ocher for the whites of the eyes and the teeth. It's a painting.
The Shroud shows an image of a MAN with a full forked beard and mustache while this shows a wispy, wanna-be beard and mustache of a young teen-age boy. There are no comparisons of those facial hair features except that both have them. It is absurd to compare them and claim they are equivalent.
As i said, i believe it is probably an early work by a boy who later became a master artist, Raphael. Painting on Byssus or Cambric, a "canvas" that is so fine the brush or even a breath would move the material can account for much of the crudities. But it is not realistic. It is at best a cartoon.
"KA" is "Kriminalamt". What is the LKA? Landes?
It is basically a cartoon, with proportions so out of whack that I have doubts about Raphael having painted it, even as a young teen. It’s too corny looking to be the work of a future master, I think. He would have had a natural eye for proportion and realism that would be evident even in stuff he did as a kid.
Yes. State level as opposed to federal level (BKA).
Ping!
I almost have to agree with you. . . Except for the nature of the medium. You have to realize that while you are correct about the cartoonish appearance of the Manoppello Veil, it was created on a very fine Cambric cloth most likely spread out on a table while the artist was looking at his own reflection in a small mirror.
The way the head is held and the eyes look lend credence to this theory as the whites of the eyes only appear as seen on the veil when looking up slightly as the head is tilted down toward the table. Look at the eyes. Try it your self.
Painting on a very fine cloth. Think as fine as a silk stocking. It is anything but stiff. Breathe on it and it moves. Have you ever tried it? I have. The cloth moves as you brush any paint on it. It is almost impossible to maintain perspective and proportion as you paint. The cartoonish nature is almost automatic.
Also Yardstick, Rafael is one of those painters who did get better with age. In post number 1, there are two self portraits painted by Rafael. The first when he was in his early twenties, much closer to the age when he may have done the Veil, and the second a couple of years before his death in his mid thirties. The earlier one shows little attention to anatomically correct detail. . . and has a flat aspect. The later painting is far better and much more photographic in nature. . . the sign of a mature journeyman artist who had learned his craft.
An experimental photographer from Australia named Vincenzo Giovanni Ruello processed the Vatican Veronica Veil in 2011 revealing the second shroud, it can be seen here
http://gloria.tv/media/1cbGFGbq6Je
Unfortunately for Badde and Pfeiffer who released their book this recent discovery has totally debunked their theory of a frumpy cartoon character being the Veronica Veil. Whats striking about the video by Ruello is the cross of blood and the battered and tortured face of Christ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.