I think I understand your point, however are you suggesting that a mock crucifixion was preformed in (say) the 1200’s, for yet unknown reasons, which produced this artifact? The Shroud also includes pollen spores from the area around Israel and dates back to around the period of the original crucifixion.
I may have entirely misunderstood your point, if so my apologies in advance.
No problem.
From the same link:
“Skeptics have argued that the flower images are too faint for Danin’s determination to be definite, that an independent review of the pollen strands showed that one strand out of the 26 provided contained significantly more pollen than the others, perhaps pointing to deliberate contamination.[108] Skeptics also argue that Max Frei had previously been duped in his examination of the Hitler Diaries and that he may have also been duped in this case, or may have introduced the pollens himself.[109] J. Beaulieau has stated that Frei was a self-taught amateur palynologist, was not properly trained, and that his sample was too small.[110]”
Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Bretone, offers incense to the "holy blood" of the late pope John Paul II.
Where was it said that all the 'relic' fragments of the "True Cross" could form several dozen, if not hundreds, of life size crosses?
Relics are tools of propaganda and it would be foolish, nay, naive, to assume a forgery market didn't exist for the same.
You could also point out that the dorsal image has on the back side and under the feet on the front side, has dust that that has been identified as a type of limestone (Travertine Aragonite) whose composition is unique only to a small area found just east of Jerusalem. . . And is the Stone the tombs where Jesus was laid were carved out of the bed rock was formed. It is found no where else on earth with that unique signature. Could a medieval forger have known to have place microscopic traces of Travertine Aragonite in just those particular spots on the Shroud, where they would have been dropped off the feet of the body, and picked up off the hewn rock shelf on the back side of the cloth of ONLY the dorsal image??? And only be capable of being analyzed by 20th Century Microelectronspectroscopy???? What 13th Century forger would have thought of it????